道路路面材料与改造技术的全生命周期成本分析与评价

A. Riekstiņš, V. Haritonovs, V. Straupe
{"title":"道路路面材料与改造技术的全生命周期成本分析与评价","authors":"A. Riekstiņš, V. Haritonovs, V. Straupe","doi":"10.7250/bjrbe.2020-15.510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With limited funding and a desire to reduce environmental impact, there is a lot of pressure on road Authorities to develop decision making policy to manage better, build and maintain the road network sustainability. One of the solutions is to use various life cycle analyses. Numerous tools are available for different analyses, but they usually evaluate the construction from one perspective (economical, environmental, or social). Therefore, it was decided to develop a tool, which combines economic (Life Cycle Cost Analysis) and environmental (Life Cycle Assessment) analyses. The given study presents the methodology of the self-developed calculation program, which compare full-depth road constructions. Paper also shows shortcomings when calculation does not include all life cycle processes. In this study, five different road pavement constructions and reconstruction plans were compared. The difference between these pavements was in the layer thickness, recycled asphalt content in asphalt layers and the use of cement or fly ash in the road base layers. The results showed that the full depth reclamation technology in comparison to the full-depth removal and replacement reduce emissions by 60% and costs by 50%.","PeriodicalId":297140,"journal":{"name":"The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Road Pavement Materials and Reconstruction Technologies\",\"authors\":\"A. Riekstiņš, V. Haritonovs, V. Straupe\",\"doi\":\"10.7250/bjrbe.2020-15.510\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With limited funding and a desire to reduce environmental impact, there is a lot of pressure on road Authorities to develop decision making policy to manage better, build and maintain the road network sustainability. One of the solutions is to use various life cycle analyses. Numerous tools are available for different analyses, but they usually evaluate the construction from one perspective (economical, environmental, or social). Therefore, it was decided to develop a tool, which combines economic (Life Cycle Cost Analysis) and environmental (Life Cycle Assessment) analyses. The given study presents the methodology of the self-developed calculation program, which compare full-depth road constructions. Paper also shows shortcomings when calculation does not include all life cycle processes. In this study, five different road pavement constructions and reconstruction plans were compared. The difference between these pavements was in the layer thickness, recycled asphalt content in asphalt layers and the use of cement or fly ash in the road base layers. The results showed that the full depth reclamation technology in comparison to the full-depth removal and replacement reduce emissions by 60% and costs by 50%.\",\"PeriodicalId\":297140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7250/bjrbe.2020-15.510\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7250/bjrbe.2020-15.510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

由于资金有限,并且希望减少对环境的影响,道路管理部门面临着很大的压力,需要制定决策政策,以更好地管理、建设和维护道路网络的可持续性。解决方案之一是使用各种生命周期分析。有许多工具可用于不同的分析,但它们通常从一个角度(经济、环境或社会)评估建筑。因此,决定开发一种结合经济(生命周期成本分析)和环境(生命周期评估)分析的工具。本文介绍了自行开发的全深度道路施工对比计算程序的方法。本文还指出了计算不包括所有生命周期过程时的缺点。在本研究中,比较了五种不同的道路路面建设和改造方案。这些路面的区别在于层厚、沥青层中再生沥青的含量以及路面基层中水泥或粉煤灰的使用。结果表明,与全深度去除和置换相比,全深度回收技术可减少60%的排放量,降低50%的成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Road Pavement Materials and Reconstruction Technologies
With limited funding and a desire to reduce environmental impact, there is a lot of pressure on road Authorities to develop decision making policy to manage better, build and maintain the road network sustainability. One of the solutions is to use various life cycle analyses. Numerous tools are available for different analyses, but they usually evaluate the construction from one perspective (economical, environmental, or social). Therefore, it was decided to develop a tool, which combines economic (Life Cycle Cost Analysis) and environmental (Life Cycle Assessment) analyses. The given study presents the methodology of the self-developed calculation program, which compare full-depth road constructions. Paper also shows shortcomings when calculation does not include all life cycle processes. In this study, five different road pavement constructions and reconstruction plans were compared. The difference between these pavements was in the layer thickness, recycled asphalt content in asphalt layers and the use of cement or fly ash in the road base layers. The results showed that the full depth reclamation technology in comparison to the full-depth removal and replacement reduce emissions by 60% and costs by 50%.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信