Role of the use phase and pavement-vehicle interaction in comparative pavement life cycle assessment as a function of context

While many pavement life cycle assessment (LCA) studies has been performed over the last decade, one of the most important advances and challenges is quantifying the impacts of various components during the use phase of pavements. The goal of this research is to understand the role of the use phase, particularly pavement-vehicle interaction (PVI), in pavement LCAs, and how use phase impacts vary by context. The authors have performed comparative pavement LCAs on two pavement design alternatives for multiple scenarios that encompass a range of locations and traffic levels. The pavement LCA model is probabilistic and the use phase element includes excess fuel consumption from both deflection-induced and roughness-induced PVI. Results from the scenario analysis demonstrate that the use phase can contribute nearly 60% of a pavement’s life cycle environmental impact and that PVI is the predominant element in the use phase. Scenario analysis results also indicate that the use phase is very context dependent. Traffic volume, climate, and vehicle speed etc. are some of the important contextual factors. This work reinforces the importance of the use phase and consideration of a life cycle perspective in comparative pavement LCAs.

[1]  Ambrose Dodoo,et al.  Carbon implications of end-of-life management of building materials. , 2009 .

[2]  Kurt D Smith,et al.  Towards Sustainable Pavement Systems: A Reference Document , 2015 .

[3]  E. Olivetti,et al.  Environmental life-cycle assessment. , 2017, Nature materials.

[4]  B. Lagerblad.  Carbon Dioxide Uptake during Concrete Life Cycle - State of the Art , 2005 .

[5]  Arghavan Louhghalam,et al.  Pavement infrastructures footprint: The impact of pavement properties on vehicle fuel consumption , 2014 .

[6]  T. Häkkinen,et al.  Environmental adaption of concrete: Environmental impact of concrete and asphalt pavements , 1996 .

[7]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  Hybrid Life-Cycle Inventory for Road Construction and Use , 2004 .

[8]  Ulf Hammarström,et al.  Rolling resistance model, fuel consumption model and the traffic energy saving potential from changed road surface conditions , 2012 .

[9]  Mehdi Akbarian,et al.  Mechanistic Approach to Pavement–Vehicle Interaction and Its Impact on Life-Cycle Assessment , 2012 .

[10]  Nicholas Santero,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Pavements: A Critical Review of Existing Literature and Research , 2010 .

[11]  Imad L. Al-Qadi,et al.  Pavement Life Cycle Assessment Framework , 2016 .

[12]  Francis Gerard Collins,et al.  Inclusion of carbonation during the life cycle of built and recycled concrete: influence on their carbon footprint , 2010 .

[13]  Eul-Bum Lee,et al.  Life cycle energy consumption and GHG emission from pavement rehabilitation with different rolling resistance , 2012 .

[14]  N Soliman,et al.  A methodology for sustainable mechanistic-empirical pavement design , 2017 .

[15]  Arpad Horvath,et al.  Comparison of Environmental Implications of Asphalt and Steel-Reinforced Concrete Pavements , 1998 .

[16]  Gerardo W Flintsch,et al.  Analysis of rolling resistance models to analyse vehicle fuel consumption as a function of pavement properties , 2014 .

[17]  A. Horvath,et al.  Global warming potential of pavements , 2009 .

[18]  Karim Chatti,et al.  Simulation of Cumulative Annual Impact of Pavement Structural Response on Vehicle Fuel Economy for California Test Sections , 2016 .

[19]  Randolph Kirchain,et al.  Comparative pavement life cycle assessment with parameter uncertainty , 2013 .

[20]  H Stripple,et al.  LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF ROAD: A PILOT STUDY FOR INVENTORY ANALYSIS. SECOND REVISED EDITION , 2001 .

[21]  Karim Chatti,et al.  Calibration of HDM-4 Models for Estimating the Effect of Pavement Roughness on Fuel Consumption for U.S. Conditions , 2010 .