Life cycle assessment of earth-retaining walls: An environmental comparison

被引:64
作者
Pons, Joaquin J. [1 ]
Penades-Pla, Vicent [1 ]
Yepes, Victor [1 ]
Marti, Jose V. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Politecn Valencia, Inst Concrete Sci & Technol ICITECH, E-46022 Valencia, Spain
关键词
Life cycle assessment; Sustainability; Earth-retaining wall; ReCiPe; HYBRID HARMONY SEARCH; BEAM ROAD BRIDGES; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; GAS EMISSIONS; CONCRETE; OPTIMIZATION; CONSTRUCTION; DESIGN; COST; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.268
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Earth-retaining walls are one of the most common structures in civil engineering, a discipline of the construction sector, which is known to produce one of the highest environmental impacts. Therefore, developing cleaner design and construction practices could contribute to a more sustainable future for our planet. To make a step towards this goal, this study comprises the life cycle assessment (LCA) of the four most common earth-retaining walls built between 1 and 6 m of height: cantilever walls, gravity walls, masonry walls and gabion walls to obtain the best solutions for the environment. To assess the environmental impacts caused throughout their whole life-cycle including the production, construction, use and end of life phases, we used the OpenLCA software, the ecoinvent 3.3 database and the ReCiPe (H) method. The associated uncertainties have been considered and the results are provided in both midpoint and endpoint approaches. Our findings show that gabion and masonry walls produce the lowest global impact. On the one hand, gabion walls cause less damage to human health but on the other hand, masonry walls cause less damage to the ecosystems. Furthermore, gravity walls produce similar impacts to gabion and masonry walls between 1 and 3 m of height as well as fewer impacts than cantilever walls for a height of 4 m. In conclusion, gabion and masonry walls are preferable to concrete walls for heights between 1 and 6 m and cantilever walls should be used over gravity walls for greater heights than 4.5 m. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:411 / 420
页数:10
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], INT J LIFE CYCLE ASS
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1987, WORLD COM ENV DEV OU
[3]  
Arskog V., 2004, P INT WORKSH SUST DE
[4]   Identifying Improvement Potentials in Cement Production with Life Cycle Assessment [J].
Boesch, Michael Elias ;
Hellweg, Stefanie .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2010, 44 (23) :9143-9149
[5]   ICT for environment in life cycle applications openLCA - A new open source software for Life Cycle Assessment [J].
Ciroth, Andreas .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2007, 12 (04) :209-210
[6]   Empirically based uncertainty factors for the pedigree matrix in ecoinvent [J].
Ciroth, Andreas ;
Muller, Stephanie ;
Weidema, Bo ;
Lesage, Pascal .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2016, 21 (09) :1338-1348
[7]   Inclusion of carbonation during the life cycle of built and recycled concrete: influence on their carbon footprint [J].
Collins, Frank .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2010, 15 (06) :549-556
[8]   Sustainability assessment of earth-retaining wall structures [J].
Damians, Ivan P. ;
Bathurst, Richard J. ;
Adroguer, Eduard G. ;
Josa, Alejandro ;
Lloret, Antonio .
ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICS, 2018, 5 (04) :187-203
[9]   Optimization of reinforced concrete columns according to different environmental impact assessment parameters [J].
de Medeiros, Guilherme Fleith ;
Kripka, Moacir .
ENGINEERING STRUCTURES, 2014, 59 :185-194
[10]   Carbon implications of end-of-life management of building materials [J].
Dodoo, Ambrose ;
Gustavsson, Leif ;
Sathre, Roger .
RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2009, 53 (05) :276-286