Life cycle environmental impact assessment of a bridge with different strengthening schemes

被引:46
|
作者
Pang, Bo [1 ]
Yang, Pengchao [1 ]
Wang, Yuanfeng [1 ]
Kendall, Alissa [2 ]
Xie, Huibing [1 ]
Zhang, Yurong [1 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Jiaotong Univ, Sch Civil Engn, Beijing 100044, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Davis, CA 95616 USA
来源
关键词
Bridge engineering; Bridge maintenance; China; Eco-indicator; 99; Environmental impact; Life cycle assessment; SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT; CONSTRUCTION; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1007/s11367-015-0936-1
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
A large number of highway bridges have been constructed in China since 1980s. Most of the aging bridges are in need of strengthening, which will lead to consuming big amounts of material and energy resources, producing air emissions and solid waste. This paper made a life cycle assessment for a highway bridge with four different strengthening plans by using Eco-indicator 99 to figure a total environmental impact score of the bridge. Based on analyzing the life cycle assessment (LCA) investigations of bridges, the adopted LCA method for the highway bridge tracks materials and energy resources through the various stages of the bridge life cycle including production, transportation, construction, strengthening, and demolition, considering the impact of vehicle detours during strengthening construction, to calculate environmental impact for ecosystem quality, human health, energy, and resources. This is done for four strengthening schemes, which are traditionally compared based only on the basis of economic cost. In order to account for the variability of critical input variables, a Monte Carlo simulation was performed to estimate the variability of environmental scores associated with the transportation distance, the average fuel consumption for each vehicle, detouring distance, the structure closure period, and maintenance times. Ten thousand iterations were conducted based on previous studies. The analysis shows that the maintenance phase alone contributes about 66 % of the total environmental impact (including detouring stage 50 %, repaving bridge deck 12 %, strengthening 4 %), followed by material production stage (approximately 40 %). Of the four strengthening plans, plan 1 and plan 3 have relatively greater contributions in terms of environmental damage while the cost budgets are much lower. On the contrary, plan 2 and plan 4 have lower environmental burdens but cost much more. Sensitivity analysis shows that the damage to resources and ecosystem quality are more sensitive to the variation of parameters. A life cycle assessment for a highway bridge in China with four different strengthening plans is conducted by using Eco-indicator 99 to figure a total environmental impact score of the bridge. It determines that the maintenance phase contributes the most to the environment deterioration. This study also shows that the energy consumptions and pollutant emissions related to traffic disruption during maintenance operations should not be excluded. Regarding the strengthening plans, it can be concluded that the environmental impact of bonding carbon fiber-reinforced polymer is fewer than that of bonding steel plates.
引用
收藏
页码:1300 / 1311
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Life cycle environmental impact assessment of a bridge with different strengthening schemes
    Bo Pang
    Pengchao Yang
    Yuanfeng Wang
    Alissa Kendall
    Huibing Xie
    Yurong Zhang
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2015, 20 : 1300 - 1311
  • [2] Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact assessment
    Tukker, A
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2000, 20 (04) : 435 - 456
  • [3] Environmental life cycle assessment of reverse osmosis desalination: The influence of different life cycle impact assessment methods on the characterization results
    Zhou, Jin
    Chang, Victor W. -C.
    Fane, Anthony G.
    [J]. DESALINATION, 2011, 283 : 227 - 236
  • [4] ISO 14042 Environmental management • Life cycle assessment • life cycle impact assessment
    Sven -Olof Ryding
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 1999, 4 (6) : 307 - 307
  • [5] Life cycle assessment as a decision support tool for bridge procurement: environmental impact comparison among five bridge designs
    Du, Guangli
    Safi, Mohammed
    Pettersson, Lars
    Karoumi, Raid
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2014, 19 (12): : 1948 - 1964
  • [6] Life cycle assessment as a decision support tool for bridge procurement: environmental impact comparison among five bridge designs
    Guangli Du
    Mohammed Safi
    Lars Pettersson
    Raid Karoumi
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2014, 19 : 1948 - 1964
  • [7] Environmental Impact Comparison of Different Structure Systems Based on Life Cycle Assessment Methodology
    Xiong, Haibei
    Zhang, Chao
    Yeo, Jiangtao
    Zhao, Yang
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND BUILDING MATERIAL, PTS 1-4, 2012, 374-377 : 405 - +
  • [8] The Environmental Impact of Poplar Stand Management: A Life Cycle Assessment Study of Different Scenarios
    Cantamessa, Simone
    Rosso, Laura
    Giorcelli, Achille
    Chiarabaglio, Pier Mario
    [J]. FORESTS, 2022, 13 (03):
  • [9] Environmental impact assessment of different design schemes of an industrial ecosystem
    Singh, Aditi
    Lou, Helen H.
    Yaws, Carl L.
    Hopper, Jack R.
    Pike, Ralph W.
    [J]. RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2007, 51 (02) : 294 - 313
  • [10] Life Cycle Assessment of Environmental Impact of Steelmaking Process
    Liu, Huimin
    Li, Qiqiang
    Li, Guanguan
    Ding, Ran
    [J]. COMPLEXITY, 2020, 2020