Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions with uncertainty analysis: A case study of asphaltic pavement in China

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137263Get rights and content

Abstract

There are a large number of complex uncertainties in the road life cycle assessment (LCA) analysis process and ignoring these uncertainties will lead to biased results and decision-making. To improve the accuracy of the quantification of carbon emissions (CEs) over the life cycle of pavements, a system for quantifying uncertainty was developed and a case study was conducted in conjunction with sensitivity analysis. The data quality index (DQI) combined with the beta distribution method was implemented to assess parameter uncertainty. The uncertainty of the model parameters was characterized using the results of slice sampling. The uncertainty in the shape of the model was described by the difference before and after the correction of the Hermite orthogonal polynomials. Various uncertainties are conveyed by the Monte Carlo simulation sampling method. To provide reliable emissions data, VISSIM and MOVES were used to calculate additional CEs from congestion. This study assesses the uncertainty of a specific road LCA case. The results show that uncertainty in model form has the greatest impact on results. The use and maintenance phases are key stages for improving the reliability of pavement life cycle CEs, with CEs and uncertainty contributions of around 90% and 94% respectively. The time-triggered conservation strategy has a 75% probability of dominance. This study provides a comprehensive theoretical basis for improving the quality of road LCA CE results, and also makes recommendations for the development of green and low-carbon road engineering.

Introduction

The targets of “peak carbon dioxide emissions” and “carbon neutrality” in China will be achieved by 2030 and 2060, respectively, which have prompted environmental managers and policy makers to take a comprehensive concern the carbon emissions (CEs) of products and services (Renard et al., 2021). As a fundamental component of transportation infrastructure, huge amounts of fund are continuously invested in road construction yearly (Singh et al., 2020; Pranav et al., 2022). By the end of 2021, the total mileage of highway in the country has reached 5,280,700 km, of which 1,356,000 km will be in the stage of preventive maintenance and 1,652,000 km will be in need of reparative maintenance (Ministry of Transportation and Communications, 2021). The maintenance and construction of the road network generally consumes a large amounts of virgin materials and equipment inputs (Li et al., 2019). Given the large volume and increasing scale of the environmental impact of roads, controlling the life cycle CEs of roads is a potential opportunity for environmental improvement.
Nevertheless, life cycle assessment (LCA), as an aid decision tool of road life cycle, exists extensive application prospects. LCA provides an accurate, consistent and repeatable measure of the resource consumption and environmental impacts of activities or products (Liu et al., 2020; Santos et al., 2015), which throughout the entire process of product acquisition from raw materials, production, use, end-of-life (EOL) treatment, recycling and final disposal (i.e., cradle to grave) (Zheng et al., 2021). The LCA consists of four phases in accordance with ISO 14044 standard, including goal and scope, life cycle inventory (LCI) analysis, environmental impact assessment and interpretation. The existing LCA methodology for highways has certain shortcomings, such as non-comparability and unreliable results, which limit its widespread application (Li et al., 2019). This is because various assumptions about the data sources used, the inputs, the processing, the model, and the analysis process lead to uncertainty in the LCA results (Dai et al., 2020). To improve the status quo, some researchers have tried to address system boundaries, the problem of comparability of functional units, deal with data quality and uncertainty, and standardize environmental indicators as breakthrough points for LCA optimization (Huang et al., 2021). It has been reported that data quality and uncertainty issues are most prominent in LCI phase (Yu et al., 2018). Missing, duplicate, incorrect or irrelevant data are the main sources of data quality problems, while some scholars argue that uncertainty is caused by poor definitions, data collection processes, and quantitative uncertainty (Yoo et al., 2019). Further, there are many other explanations for the sources of uncertainty that are based on dissimilar perspectives and will not be repeated here (Xu et al., 2019; Zheng et al., 2019).
To date, although a large number of studies and standards have clarified the importance of LCA uncertainty, they have not provided specific, detailed, and actionable methods for standardized uncertainty evaluation (Piao et al., 2022b; Trupia et al., 2017). Several authors have studied the quantification of LCA uncertainty at different stages of the road life cycle (Bressi et al., 2022; Piao et al., 2022a). At present, quantitative uncertainty analysis methods mainly include interval, fuzzy methods and probabilistic methods, of which probabilistic methods are the most widely used methods (Isukapalli et al., 2000; Kim, 2017). Uncertainty from analytical and sampling methods can be conveyed using probabilistic methods (Lloyd and Ries, 2007). The analytical method is capable of providing specific mathematical analytical formulae that facilitate the calculation of the uncertainty contribution of each component. The sampling method is more widely applicable, especially for model complex cases (Wang et al., 2021). The uncertainty analysis of the road LCA should be performed by selecting the appropriate analysis method according to the specific situation.
This study quantifies GHG emissions from different stages and processes throughout the complete life cycle of a road, analyzes the sources of uncertainty in the road LCI, and develops a universal and comprehensive uncertainty assessment system. The influence of the uncertainty at each stage on the LCI results is then clarified by combining sensitivity analysis, and the key factors affecting the uncertainty of the results are identified. Accordingly, suggestions are made to improve the quality of LCI calculation results, and recommendations are made to reduce GHG emissions from roads and improve environmental benefits. Ultimately, an analytical process and framework for the LCA and the assessment of the reliability of the results was established, and a comprehensive case study of GHG emissions from road life cycle was conducted to identify essential influencing factors and target recommendations for reducing emissions and mitigating uncertainty in the results.

Access through your organization

Check access to the full text by signing in through your organization.

Access through your organization

Section snippets

Goal

The main goal of this paper is to quantify the GHG emissions and uncertainties for each phase and process of the road life cycle based on process LCA (P-LCA). The phases considered include material production and processing during the materialization phase, the use of mechanical equipment during the construction phase, the degradation of pavement performance leading to additional resource consumption by motor vehicles during the use phase, materials and construction machinery during the repair

Material materialization phase

The coefficient of variation (CV) is a common metric for evaluating uncertainty (Kim et al., 2013). The CE and CV of each material were calculated according to the materials inventory as shown in Fig. 4. The lime produces the highest GHG emissions with 41,174.68 kg CO2eq, followed by SBS modified asphalt with 5.132 kg CO2eq. The emissions from aggregates are close to those of the base asphalt, which from lignin fibers and mineral powder are the least. It can be seen from Fig. 4(b) that there is

Discussion

Taking the use phase as an example, the use phase and life cycle CE were calculated after improving the data quality of AL and CEF as shown in Fig. 14. The integrated DQI was used as the data quality evaluation index, and the data values were held constant to observe the effect of each 0.5 increase in DQI on the results., it is clear from Fig. 14 that improving the quality of the CEF and AL data has similar effect on improving the final CE results. Specifically, a 0.5 increase in the integrated

Conclusions and suggestion

This study conducted a LCA of GHG emissions with uncertainty analysis for a specific pavement case. The conclusions and contribution are listed as follows.
  • a.
    In this study, the uncertainties in the ALs and CEFs are divided into parameter, model, and scenario selection uncertainties. The qualitative, semi-quantitative and quantitative analysis methods are combined to develop an uncertainty analysis system. Beta distribution was used to characterize the parameter uncertainty. Bayesian inference and

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Qi Liu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Supervision. Mingmao Cai: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation. Bin Yu: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition. Shuying Qin: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Supervision. Xiaochun

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China: [Grant Number 51878039, 52078034], Jiangsu transportation science and technology project: [Grant Number 2020Y19-1(1)]. The authors greatly appreciate National Demonstration Center for Experimental Road and Traffic Engineering Education (Southeast University) in Nanjing, China.

References (35)

  • M. Huang et al.

    LCA and LCCA based multi-objective optimization of pavement maintenance

    J. Clean. Prod.

    (2021)
  • R. Heijungs et al.

    Numerical approaches towards life cycle interpretation five examples

    Int J LCA

    (2001)
  • S.S. Isukapalli et al.

    Efficient sensitivity/uncertainty analysis using the combined stochastic response surface method and automated differentiation: application to environmental and biological systems

    Risk Anal.

    (2000)
  • Specifications for Maintenance Design of Highway Asphalt Pavement

    (2018)
  • D.J. Kennedy et al.

    Data quality

    Int. J. LCA

    (1996)
  • Y.J. Kim

    Monte Carlo vs. fuzzy Monte Carlo simulation for uncertainty and global sensitivity analysis

    Sustainability

    (2017)
  • D. Kim et al.

    Life cycle assessment of cheese and whey production in the USA

    Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.

    (2013)
  • Cited by (31)

    • Life cycle assessment of urban road networks: Quantifying carbon footprints and forecasting future material stocks

      2024, Construction and Building Materials
      Citation Excerpt :

      Regular maintenance is performed on the road surface with the time-based method, while the IRI guides the condition-based method, prompting maintenance when it exceeds a certain threshold. Previous research [27] comparing these two methods' impacts on greenhouse gas emissions found notable advantages of the time-based maintenance strategy over the IRI-based one. In reference to the "Code for Design of Urban Road Engineering" (CJJ 37–2012) [29], the specified design life stands at 15 years for expressways and arterial roads with asphalt pavements in urban settings, and 10 years for collector and branch roads.

    • Carbon emissions quantification and different models comparison throughout the life cycle of asphalt pavements

      2024, Construction and Building Materials
      Citation Excerpt :

      Fig. 1 illustrates an example of the established quantification process of CEs for an asphalt pavement's entire lifecycle. The kernel of the quantification model lies in the multiplication of activity levels with CEFs [26]. Therefore, the computation of the activity levels of individual unit processes during various phases is the crucial aspect:

    • Heterogeneity of the impact of energy production and consumption on national greenhouse gas emissions

      2024, Journal of Cleaner Production
      Citation Excerpt :

      1. Avoiding point analysis in favor of supply chain (Karlsson et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2021) and life-cycle analysis of products, enterprises, etc. (Liu et al., 2023; Guo et al., 2022). Life-cycle analysis (LCA, LCC and similar approaches) is a critical sustainability methodology that provides a holistic view of the generated effects (Mandegari et al., 2023; Larsen et al., 2022; Alejandrino et al., 2022).

    • Probability, Statistics and Life Cycle Assessment: Guidance for Dealing with Uncertainty and Sensitivity

      2024, Probability Statistics and Life Cycle Assessment Guidance for Dealing with Uncertainty and Sensitivity
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text