Environmental and Economic Life-Cycle Assessment of Municipal Water-Storage Options: Infrastructure Refurbishment versus Replacement

Eckelman, Matthew J.; Altonji, Matthew; Clark, Anthony; Jenkins, M.; Lakin, Brian

doi:10.1061/(asce)is.1943-555x.0000191

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Impacts may include any aspect that either has a negative, or positive effect due to the construction, use, or demolition of the infrastructure. Several frameworks exist to compute the LCA of a system, one of which is provided by Eckelman et al, (2014). This example used environmental and economic assessment methods specific to a water storage facility.…”

Section: Life Cycle Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Impacts, or metrics that are measured could include environmental impacts due to the extraction and production of materials, construction, vehicle use, operation and maintenance, demolition or rehabilitation at the end of the life cycle. Several frameworks exist to compute the LCA of a system, one of which is provided by Eckelman et al, (2014) to show an example of how to compute the LCA for a given system. This example used environmental and economic assessment methods specific to a water storage facility.…”

Section: Life Cycle Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, the example provided by Eckelman et al, (2014) was to show how the LCA method can analyse any type of infrastructure, using pre-determined weighted input values specific to the project goals. Each factor is measured and related in a cost/benefit analysis, then weighed against competing alternatives.…”

Section: Life Cycle Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Unified Risk-Based Framework for Assessing Sustainability and Resiliency of Civil Infrastructure

Robbins¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graduate College. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge Dr. Chittoori for his efforts in making this thesis possible. Without his guidance or understanding, I would not have been afforded the opportunity to research this topic, which is a construct of my own accord. v ABSTRACT As of February 2019, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has reported since 1880 the average global temperature has increased 1°C, withthe warmest year on record being 2016. As the years continue to pass, it is becoming more evident that climate change is occurring, which is known to be a catalyst for climatic weather events. Statistically speaking, these events are more prevalent, and catastrophic exemplified as hurricanes, earthquakes, flooding, and fires. In addition to the increase of potentially catastrophic events, society as a whole has become more conscientious in the use and preservation of natural resources, waste generation, and energy consumption. As the overall population continues to grow, the need for safe, secure and sustainable infrastructure increases. Civil infrastructure must be assessed to measure the level at which it will withstand impact from a catastrophic event, as well as how it is utilizing precious resources and energy.In consideration of these previously mentioned issues, several federal agencies, companies, and researchers have put forth an effort to measure and quantify the ability of civil infrastructure to withstand climatic catastrophes. Also, metrics to quantify sustainable construction are increasingly used as a common tool for infrastructure design and development. Most sustainability metrics consider the qualities of a system that revolve around the concept of sustainable development but fail to consider the resiliency of that system. Sustainability assessments are often discrete and will focus on one particular aspect or measure. Resiliency metrics are often overly complex and do not vi fully encapsulate the quality in a way that is pragmatic or useful to practitioners and engineers, or simply neglect sustainable construction methods.Proposed here is a framework that attempts to unify sustainability and resiliency assessment of geotechnical infrastructure, by considering the risk of failure given the probability of a catastrophic event. The framework is developed for use on geotechnical engineered systems, specifically an earthen dam used for flood control. A Bayesian analysis is used to determine the probability of failure given the occurrence of a catastrophic event, in conjunction with both a resiliency assessment, and sustainability assessments. This is to ensure that the sustainability index is jointly dependent upon the changes in resiliency given the occurrence of a catastrophic event. Two separate failure modes that are possible at the location of the earthen dam were modeled to determine the flexibility of the framework. Failure modes include seismic events, and rapid-drawdown and both were modeled with their associated probabilities. Results from the assessment ...

show abstract

Section: Life Cycle Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Life Cycle Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%