Today's sustainability-driven systems require a product or process to be environmentally beneficial as well as cost-effective. This study used life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA) to consider the economic and environmental feasibility of using a high content of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) in asphalt mixtures. The LCCA conducted in the study incorporated agency cost as well as the costs incurred by the user in the construction work zone. Initial construction as well as future maintenance and rehabilitation activities were considered in the analysis. The hybrid LCA took into account the material, construction, and maintenance and rehabilitation phases of the pavement life cycle. The results showed savings in terms of costs and energy use and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions with an increase in RAP content. On the basis of the LCCA and LCA performed under various performance scenarios, break-even performance levels were identified for mixtures with up to 50% RAP content. Break-even performance levels underscored the importance of achieving field performance for recycled mixtures equivalent to that for control virgin mixtures.Although the driving force behind the use of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) materials in asphalt pavements was increased crude oil prices, the potential environmental benefits of using RAP have increased its significance. The past decade has seen the pavement industry taking considerable strides toward the goal of sustainable pavement systems. One such step is the introduction of life-cycle assessment (LCA) in the pavement industry as a decision-making tool, along with the more traditional cost analysis tool, life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA). For pavement, LCCA is a decision tool that aids pavement designers and planners in identifying the most costeffective pavement construction or rehabilitation strategies on the basis of their life-cycle costs. In contrast, LCA is a technique that assesses environmental impacts associated with a pavement type or a rehabilitation strategy.There are a few studies related to LCCA of pavements in general (1-4), but very few compare costs associated with recycled and virgin mixtures. Visintine compared virgin mixtures with mixtures containing 30% and 40% RAP content (5). She reported net savings of 19% when 30% RAP was used and savings ranging from 30% to 36% when 40% RAP was used in the asphalt mixtures. In another study, based on data from FHWA's Long-Term Pavement Performance SPS-5 experiment in Texas, Moya et al. compared the field performance of pavement sections with and without RAP (6). LCCA conducted on those pavement sections showed that in the case of thick overlays, the long-term costs of using RAP in the mixture were similar to the costs of mixtures with no RAP. However, for thin pavement structures there was a clear economic benefit for not using RAP in the long run. RAP technology was not well developed when the Long-Term Pavement Performance study was conducted. Better understanding of the RAP material, superior...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.