7. Conclusions

6.4.3 Characterization

Classification, assignment, and characterization.

Transportation Systems Analysis and Assessment

Figure 5.

impact factors.

assessment models.

6.4.4 Quantification

106

The process of characterization is to attribute different pollutants in the same category to the same indicator. For example, climate change includes not only carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) but also hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), etc. Through the results of natural science research, the global warming capacity of various greenhouse gases over a certain period of time (generally 100 years) is compared with carbon dioxide, thereby converting them into a certain amount of equivalent carbon dioxide, and summing up, the equivalent carbon dioxide emission (CO2e) is used to evaluate the global warming potential [51]. This convert is to multiply greenhouse gas emissions by a parameter that characterizes global warming to get equivalent CO2 emissions, and this parameter is called impact factors (IF). For other environmental impact categories, of course, there are corresponding evaluation indicators and

Some commonly used characteristic units are given in Figure 5, such as evaluating acidification potential by equivalent sulfur dioxide emissions and ozone hole potential by equivalent Freon emissions. It is noteworthy that the characteristic unit is not exclusive, some models evaluate the acidification threat by equivalent nitrogen dioxide emissions, and there are corresponding pollutant impact factors which are different from those used in equivalent sulfur dioxide emissions. This is also unmistakable and feasible, and this is the biggest difference between LCA impact

The process of quantification is the process of data processing of the equivalent indicators of each category. There are two common methods for this process: normalization methods and standardized methods. These two methods are essentially a linear transformation that transforms the data into more easily understood values

This chapter proposes a comprehensive evaluation idea of pavement life cycle economic cost and environmental impact based on the life cycle assessment framework, which is essentially equivalent to the environmental impact assessment method considering economic cost. The advantage of this method is that it considers both the economic cost and the environmental impact of the road and puts them in a unified framework for discussion and comparison. The results of comparison can be given more quickly and clearly in multiple schemes than in the selection, which is helpful for decision-makers to make choices.

Although LCCA and LCA have a large number of overlapped parts, some parts are independent of each other. For example, for the labor input of a certain project, economic inputs such as compensation and insurance must be considered, and it is difficult to quantify the environmental impact of labor input. It would therefore be inappropriate to consider only its economic costs and ignore its environmental impact. Therefore, it is suggested that a more comprehensive LCA system should include and is not limited to:


Transportation Systems Analysis and Assessment

References

Technology; 2010

Carlo Method. 1999

Pavements. 2001

134(6):236-245

pp. 290-321

Finland; 1996

1626:105-113

109

[1] Zhu Q. Pavement Project Life-Cycle Analysis Model and Application. Guangzhou: South China University of

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86854

[10] Berthiaume R, Bouchard C. Exergy analysis of the environmental impact of

Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering. 1999;23(1B):

[11] Mroueh UM, Eskola P, Laine Y, et al.

[12] Stripple H. Life Cycle Assessment of Road: A Pilot Study for Inventory Analysis. IVLB1210E. Swedish National

[13] Nisbet MA, Marceau ML, VanGeem MG, et al. Environmental life cycle inventory of portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete pavements. In: PCAR&D Serial No. 2489. Portland

paving material manufacture.

Life cycle assessment of road construction. In: Finnra Reports 17/ 2000. Finnish National Road Administration; 2000

Road Administration; 2001

Cement Association; 2001

Systems. 2005;11(1):9-20

129(1):25-31

01:3-15

[14] Park K, Hwang Y, Seo S, et al. Quantitative assessment of

environmental impacts on life cycle of highways. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 2003;

[15] Zapata P, Gambatese JA. Energy consumption of asphalt and reinforced concrete pavement materials and construction. Journal of Infrastructure

[16] Fang F. Analysis of economy and energy consumption of cement concrete

pavement and asphalt concrete pavement. East China Highway. 1984;

[17] Gu Q. Improve pavement smoothness save energy and reduce transport costs. Journal of Highway and

Transportation Research and Development. 1986;(01):19-22

[18] Ye G. Optimization design of fatigue and energy consumption of

187-196

Integrated Life Cycle Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment for Transportation…

[2] Walls III J, Smith MR. Life-cycle cost analysis in pavement design. In: Monte

International Conference on Managing

Department of Transportation. Journal of Transportation Engineering. 2008;

[5] Zhu Q et al. Application of real cost for life cycle cost analysis of American Pavement Engineering. Journal of China & Foreign Highway. 2010;30(2):94-98

[6] Landsberg DR, Steward R. Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings. Vol. 56-61. New York: State University of New York Press; 1980.

[7] Häkkinen T, Mäke lä K.

[8] Horvath A, Hendrickson C. Comparison of environmental implications of asphalt and steelreinforced concrete pavements. Transportation Research Record. 1998;

[9] Roudebush WH. Environmental value engineering assessment of concrete and asphalt pavement. In: PCAR&D Serial No. 2088a. Portland

Cement Association; 1999

Environmental impact of concrete and asphalt pavements. In: Environmental Adaption of Concrete. Research Notes 1752. Technical Research Center of

[3] Delwar M, Papagiannakis AT. Relative importance of user and agency

[4] Chan A, Keoleian G, Gabler E. Evaluation of life-cycle cost analysis practices used by the Michigan

costs in pavement LCCA. In:
