Evaluation of Life Cycle Cost of Excavation and Trenchless Cured-in-Place Pipeline Technologies for Sustainable Wastewater Applications

被引:0
作者
Thakre, Gayatri [1 ]
Kaushal, Vinayak [1 ]
Karkhanis, Eesha [1 ]
Najafi, Mohammad [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Arlington, Civil Engn Dept, POB 19308, Arlington, TX 76019 USA
关键词
life cycle cost; construction cost; social cost; environmental cost; wastewater; sanitary sewer; sustainability; CONSTRUCTION; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.3390/su17052329
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Sanitary sewer pipelines frequently experience blockages, structural failures, and overflows, underscoring the dire state of U.S. wastewater infrastructure, which has been rated a D-, while America's overall infrastructure scores only slightly better at C-. Traditional open-trench excavation methods or excavation technology (ET) for replacing deteriorated pipes are notoriously expensive and disruptive, requiring extensive processes like route planning, surveying, engineering, trench excavation, pipe installation, backfilling, and ground restoration. In contrast, trenchless technologies (TT) provide a less invasive and more cost-effective alternative. Among these, cured-in-place pipe technology (CIPPT), which involves inserting resin-impregnated fabric into damaged pipelines, is widely recognized for its efficiency. However, a comprehensive life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) directly comparing ET and TT, accounting for the net present value (NPV) across installation, maintenance, and rehabilitation costs, remains unexplored. This study aims to establish an LCCA framework for both CIPPT and ET, specifically for sanitary sewer pipes ranging from 8 to 42 inches in diameter. The framework incorporates construction, environmental, and social costs, providing a holistic evaluation. The key costs for ET involve pipe materials and subsurface investigations, whereas TT's costs center around engineering and design. Social impacts, such as road and pavement damage, disruption to adjacent utilities, and noise, are pivotal, alongside environmental factors like material use, transportation, project duration, and equipment emissions. This comprehensive framework empowers decision makers to holistically assess economic and environmental impacts, enabling informed choices for sustainable sewer infrastructure renewal.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 72 条
[1]  
Ajdari E., 2016, Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emission during Cured-in-Place-Pipe (CIPP) Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
[2]  
Alaloul W.S., 2021, A Systematic Review, DOI [10.20944/preprints202103.0316.v1, DOI 10.20944/PREPRINTS202103.0316.V1]
[3]   Evaluation of testing methods for tracking CIPP liners' life-cycle performance [J].
Alam, S. ;
Matthews, J. ;
Sterling, R. ;
Allouche, E. ;
Selvakumar, A. ;
Condit, W. ;
Kampbell, E. ;
Downey, D. .
COGENT ENGINEERING, 2018, 5 (01)
[4]   A retrospective evaluation of the performance of liner systems used to rehabilitate municipal gravity sewers [J].
Alam, Shaurav ;
Sterling, Raymond L. ;
Allouche, Erez ;
Condit, Wendy ;
Matthews, John ;
Selvakumar, Ari ;
Simicevic, Jadranka .
TUNNELLING AND UNDERGROUND SPACE TECHNOLOGY, 2015, 50 :451-464
[5]  
Allouche E., National Database Structure for Life Cycle Performance Assessment of Water and Wastewater Rehabilitation Technologies (Retrospective Evaluation)
[6]  
Alsadi A., 2019, Evaluation of Carbon Footprint During the Life-Cycle of Four Different Pipe Materials
[7]  
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2021, Rep. MSR-TR-2017-16
[8]  
[Anonymous], Environmental Prices Handbook 2024: EU27 Version 2024
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2022, Practice for Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Plastic Pipe Used for Culverts, Storm Sewers, and Other Buried Conduits, DOI [10.1520/F1675-13R22, DOI 10.1520/F1675-13R22]
[10]  
Apeldoorn S., 2000, Comparing the Costs-Trenchless Versus Traditional Methods