A Contemporary Comparison of Life Cycle Evaluations of Road Pavements in Australia-Asphaltic Concrete vs Portland Cement Concrete

Abstract

Life cycle cost analyses (LCC/A) have not typically been used for pavement optioneering for nearly 30 years in Australia, nor are they generally required in detailed design. To date, asphalt pavements were assumed to have lower construction costs but acknowledged as requiring regular maintenance (every 5 to 10 years), whereas concrete is well known to require less maintenance (typically at intervals of 10 to 20 years). Concrete is therefore characterised as being lower cost only in terms of its life cycle and consequently overlooked where construction costs are the focus of pavement options evaluation. However, with significant recent changes in road construction materials and processes, preconceptions around life cycle costs of asphalt and concrete pavements around the world should be reviewed. This paper reports on the findings of a study conducted by Arcadis which compared the life cycle costs of highway low- noise high-speed pavements - plain concrete (PCP), full depth asphalt (FDA) and asphalt over heavily bound (ACH). The study compared LCC of these pavements across a range of project- specific scenarios (resource availability, site complexity and traffic constraints) in addition to the impact of adopting international discount rates. With a new generation of pavement renewal now commencing in Australia (45 years after the first), this work also examined the viability of prolonging the service life of pavements in relation to its impact on life cycle costs, closures and environmental impact. This paper ultimately concludes best value of the various pavement scenario combinations by ranking and comparing all pavements options, and makes recommendations for future life cycle assessments.