Next Article in Journal
Predictive Analysis of Corrosion Dynamics in Prestressed Concrete Exposed to Chloride Environments
Previous Article in Journal
A Comprehensive Study on Unsupervised Transfer Learning for Structural Health Monitoring of Bridges Using Joint Distribution Adaptation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Infrastructures
Volume 9
Issue 8
10.3390/infrastructures9080132
infrastructures-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Technical Note

Materials Carbon Budget in Road Projects: A Case Study from The Greater Oslo Region

by
Moa Khair
1,
Patryk Strzalkowski
1,
Abdul Qaher Faizi
1,
Mustafa Gilo Barkal
1,
Ibrahim Fawakherji
1,
Martina Lima
2,
Mohammed Adeysey
2,
Diego Maria Barbieri
1,* and
Baowen Lou
3
1
Department of Built Environment, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 35, 0166 Oslo, Norway
2
AFRY Norway AS, Lilleakerveien 8, 0283 Oslo, Norway
3
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Høgskoleringen 7A, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Infrastructures 2024, 9(8), 132; https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9080132 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 4 July 2024 / Revised: 31 July 2024 / Accepted: 8 August 2024 / Published: 10 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Infrastructures)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The estimation of carbon dioxide emissions in relation to the life cycle of road pavements is pivotal to quantify their sustainability at the design stage. This preliminary study assesses the carbon budgets concerning the production of aggregates and asphalt to build a new roadway stretch located close to Oslo (Norway), leveraging digital tools and environmental product declarations. First, the software Trimble Novapoint estimates the necessary quantity take-offs. Afterwards, the amounts of CO2 generated during the production of the construction materials are appraised for the four main industries operating nearby. The results based on the corresponding environmental product declarations indicate that the carbon budgets show very small discrepancies among the considered suppliers.

1. Introduction

Traditionally, the design, construction, and maintenance of road pavements is mainly performed in view of technical and economic considerations [1,2]. At the same time, as the growing global population is facing the environmental burdens generated by anthropogenic activities [3], there is a shared consensus to curtail GreenHouse Gases (GHGs) and pollution in general [4,5]. Among the nations targeting such curtailment, Norway aims to achieve a 40% reduction in its GHG emissions compared to 1990 levels by 2030 [6]. In this context, transport agencies are increasingly shedding light on the sustainability aspects related to roads’ life cycles [7,8] and, in particular, on the emission of carbon dioxide, which is a major driver of the greenhouse effect and climate change [9,10]. In many countries, the quantification of CO2 is being spotlighted as a pivotal criterion for the public procurement of infrastructural projects by implementing various measures (e.g., carbon tax, emission trading system, CO2 performance ladder) [11,12,13].
The two main natural resources employed to build the layered structure of a road pavement are aggregates and bitumen. Aggregates alone typically constitute the lower unbound courses, while they are mixed with bitumen to create Asphalt Concrete (AC), namely the black-coloured material forming the upper bound courses. In Europe, the total production of AC has been as high as 300 million tons per year since 2008 [14]. In general, the production of road construction materials faces challenges related to their availability, costs, and performance. Further, this industrial sector has long been recognized for its substantial environmental impact due to the extensive use of energy-intensive processes [15,16], thus also encouraging the application of alternative and more sustainable technologies [17,18,19,20].
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) evaluates the environmental burden (e.g., atmospheric emissions, solid wastes, hazardous by-products) associated with all the life stages of a service, process, or product, spanning from raw material extraction to end-of-life disposal [21,22]. Therefore, this technique can highlight the life stages that are the sources of the most impactful emissions. Even if the implementation of LCA in civil engineering is still in its infancy compared to other industrial sectors [23], there is an increasing amount of research specifically revolving around its application to road infrastructures [24,25,26].
By presenting a case study conducted in the Norwegian municipality of Bærum, the overarching goal of this work is to assess the CO2 generated during the production stage of road construction materials (i.e., aggregates, AC) that can be supplied by the four major companies operating nearby. Leveraging the software Trimble Novapoint to estimate the necessary quantity take-offs and the Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) to assess the carbon budget pertaining to each industrial supplier, this preliminary work highlights the importance of implementing the most sustainable decisions during road design [27,28].

2. Methodology

2.1. Road Design and Digital Tools

A typical road structure is composed of multiple layers to effectively distribute the traffic loads acting on the surface to the natural subgrade soil. Starting from the top, the courses laid on the soil are commonly denominated as the wearing, binder, base, and subbase layers, and their respective thicknesses generally increase [1]. The construction materials employed in each layer must meet stringent physical, geometrical, and mechanical requirements to ensure a well-performing pavement structure [29,30]. In Norway, these criteria are set by the design code “N200” developed by the Norwegian Public Roads Administration (NPRA), which implements a mechanistic–empirical design approach following the workflow depicted in Figure 1 [31].
Such a design procedure initially considers the number of equivalent 10-ton axles corresponding to the Average Annual Daily Traffic of Heavy vehicles (AADTH) anticipated for the road lifespan. The material types and thicknesses of the wearing and binder layers are directly decided considering the traffic volume, whereas the thickness of the base layer is designed based on the chosen construction material. The wearing, binder, and base courses are then assigned “load distribution coefficients” (“lastfordelingskoeffisienter” in Norwegian), which are used to appraise the corresponding “base layer index” (“bærelagindeks”) (BI), assessed against a minimum threshold (BImin). Eventually, the subbase course is designed based on the subgrade type.
Building Information Modelling (BIM), which is a digital semantic representation of planned or existing built facilities [33], was initially applied to buildings [34] and, at a later stage, to transport infrastructures [35,36]. As BIM was implemented early in the Nordic countries, Norway currently exhibits a wide distribution spanning across public and private stakeholders, as well as education institutions [37,38]. When it comes to the public agencies related to transport infrastructure, it is worthwhile to stress that guidelines have come forth for both roadway [39] and railway [40] design. Currently, the digital tools developed by the software house Trimble are largely employed in Norway owing to their user-friendly working environment, cloud-based solutions, and attractive cost. As far as transport infrastructure engineering is concerned, Trimble Novapoint software can seamlessly develop georeferenced 3D models, perform various types of analyses (e.g., terrain, traffic, drainage), and share data with third parties in real time [41].

2.2. Environmental Product Declaration

From an LCA perspective, the life cycle of a road pavement can be broken down into four stages, which are further subdivided into modules: the production stage (A1–A3), the construction stage (A4–A5), the use stage (B1–B7), and the end-of-life stage (C1–C4) [21,22]. This study only focuses on the carbon dioxide emissions released during the production stage of road construction materials, namely aggregates and AC, as described in Section 1. The three corresponding modules A1, A2, and A3 deal with raw material supply, transport, and manufacturing, respectively (Figure 2).
An Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) is a document that quantifies the environmental impact of a product based on an LCA performed by an independent party [21,22], thus enabling an apples-to-apples comparison between the different commercial alternatives a consumer or client can choose from [42]. The EPDs referred to in this study are supplied by EPD-Norway [43], which is an accredited programme operator with an established system for the verification, registration, and publication of approximately 3000 EPDs which also cover construction products [44,45]. In this work, the content of the consulted documents only pertains to the evaluation of CO2 derived from modules A1, A2, and A3. Moreover, such quantification of carbon dioxide emissions may be subsequently imported into the VegLCA spreadsheet developed by NPRA to calculate the total carbon budget of road projects [46].
The database sources leveraged by EPD-Norway to create the EPDs used in this work derive from LCA.no [47], Eurobitume [48], and ecoinvent [49]. The production processes for the raw materials and energy flows accounting for less than 1% are not considered (such cut-off criterion does not apply to hazardous materials). Furthermore, even if this research only focuses on the assessment of CO2 as the central parameter for sustainability rating [46], it may be worth mentioning that EPDs also quantify other relevant pollutants such as stratospheric ozone depletion (kg CFC-11 eq), tropospheric photochemical oxidants (kg C2H4 eq), acidification of land and water (kg SO2 eq) and particulate matter (PM).

2.3. Case Study: “Gjønnes” Tunnel

The case study location is in the municipality of Bærum, which lies approximately 20 km west of Oslo. As illustrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4, the project involves building a road pavement inside the new tunnel “Gjønnes” connecting highway E18 to the road “Bærumsvei” in addition to creating an open area with roundabouts and junctions [50,51]. The twin-bore tunnel has a length of 1950 m, and its cross-section corresponds to the T9.5 profile, with two 3.5 m wide lanes in each direction [52]. The road is designed to have a lifespan of 20 years, with the AADTH value being equal to 1000 units.
This study appraises the carbon budget related to the production of road construction materials. In this regard, the four main industrial suppliers operating in the greater Oslo region are considered (Figure 5), namely NCC, Peab, Veidekke, and Velde, which are denominated as Supplier A, Supplier B, Supplier C, and Supplier D, respectively.

3. Results and Discussion

The road pavement is dimensioned according to the design procedure outlined in Section 2.1. The number of equivalent 10-ton axles anticipated during the road lifespan is between 3.5 and 10 million, which corresponds to traffic group “E” [31]. The construction materials used for the wearing and binder layers are Asphalt Concrete (AC, “asfaltbetong” in Norwegian). In this regard, the maximum aggregate size is 16 mm, and Polymer-Modifed Bitumen (PMB) is applied to enhance durability. The base layer comprises Asphalt Gravel (AG, “asfaltert grus”) with a particle dimension up to 16 mm. Lastly, the subbase layer is made of crushed rock (“pukk”) with an aggregate size between 4 mm and 90 mm. Table 1 summarizes the information regarding material type and thickness for each road layer [31]. It is worth highlighting that the material specifications deriving from the road pavement design code “N200” are in line with the European standards [54,55]. The software Trimble Novapoint automatically assesses the corresponding quantity take-offs.
Information about the environmental impact of the selected materials produced by the four suppliers is contained in the respective EPDs [43]. In this study, the emission factor refers to the amount of CO2 in kg generated during the production of one ton of material for modules A1 (raw material supply), A2 (transport), and A3 (manufacturing). As displayed in Table 2, the emission factor related to the production of AC, which entails a high energy demand to heat bitumen and aggregates, is one order of magnitude higher than for aggregates alone [56,57]. Further, it is possible to observe that the emission factors related to the subbase layer are similar (the difference between the maximum and minimum values is 0.57 kgCO2), whereas considerable variations can be observed for asphalt materials (the difference between the maximum and minimum values is 15.88 kgCO2 for AG and 20.60 kgCO2 for AC). The discrepancies between the values of the emission factors pertaining to the industrial suppliers can be naturally ascribed to all the different material and technological solutions (e.g., material sources, type of machinery), logistic choices (e.g., geographical location of the providers of raw materials, transport mode), and asset management plans (e.g., maintenance of production plants) that are implemented during the production process of the construction materials, as depicted in Figure 2.
By multiplying the emission factor for the quantity take-offs reported in Table 1 and summing the results for each road layer, the total CO2 emissions can be appraised for every industrial company, as detailed in Table 2. The mean value among all the companies is 1871 t, and the emissions generated by each of them are approximately within ± 8% (150 t) of the average amount. From an engineering point of view, the discrepancies are very small for the material quantities needed in this case study: this outcome documents that the carbon budgets related to the suppliers’ industrial production are similar. Therefore, a possible criterion that could cause the engineer to choose a specific supplier instead of another could be related to the CO2 released along the transport route between the production plant and the construction site (module A4 of construction stage). This matter could represent an interesting topic for future research.

4. Conclusions

Policymakers and engineers need to assess road projects against their environmental impacts in addition to technical and economic requirements to ensure that the road designs align with sustainability goals. In this regard, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a pivotal technique for ascertaining the carbon footprint associated with all the life cycle stages of a pavement.
This concise study has revolved around the creation of a new roadway stretching for more than 2 km in the municipality of Bærum in the greater Oslo region, Norway. The structural design has been carried out according to the Norwegian pavement design code “N200”, which is in line with European standards when it comes to material selection and designation. Further, the BIM software Trimble Novapoint has performed the project georeferencing and estimated the necessary quantity take-offs.
The main goal of this preliminary research was to achieve the quantification of the CO2 emissions generated during the production of road construction materials, namely aggregates and asphalt (LCA modules A1, corresponding to raw material supply, A2, corresponding to transport, and A3, corresponding to manufacturing). In this regard, this study considered the Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) pertaining to the main four industrial suppliers operating in the greater Oslo region. The average carbon budget was found to be 1871 t. The results show that the carbon budgets pertaining to all the companies are very similar for the material quantities needed in this case study.
Future research could encompass the other life cycle stages of roadways not addressed in this preliminary research, namely the construction, use, and end-of-life stages, in addition to considering transport distances. In this way, a more comprehensive carbon budget framework could shed light on the least sustainable stages, thus enabling the implementation of the most convenient technological or management strategies.

Author Contributions

M.K.: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. P.S.: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. A.Q.F.: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. M.G.B.: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. I.F.: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. M.L.: Conceptualization, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing—Review and Editing. M.A.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—Review and Editing. D.M.B.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. B.L.: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing—Original Draft. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Data Availability Statement

Dataset available on request from the authors.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors Martina Lima and Mohammed Adeysey were employed by the company AFRY Norway AS. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Thom, N. Principles of Pavement Engineering, 2nd ed.; ICE: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  2. Haas, R.; Hudson, W.R. Pavement Asset Management, 1st ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  3. Barbieri, D.M.; Lou, B.; Passavanti, M.; Hui, C.; Lessa, D.A.; Maharaj, B.; Banerjee, A.; Wang, F.; Chang, K.; Naik, B.; et al. Survey data regarding perceived air quality in Australia, Brazil, China, Ghana, India, Iran, Italy, Norway, South Africa, United States before and during COVID-19 restrictions. Data Br. 2020, 32, 106169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wiedenhofer, D.; Baumgart, A.; Matej, S.; Virág, D.; Kalt, G.; Lanau, M.; Tingley, D.D.; Liu, Z.; Guo, J.; Tanikawa, H.; et al. Mapping and modelling global mobility infrastructure stocks, material flows and their embodied greenhouse gas emissions. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 139742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Yoro, K.O.; Daramola, M.O. CO2 emission sources; greenhouse gases, and the global warming effect. In Advances in Carbon Capture, 1st ed.; Rahimpour, M.R., Farsi, M., Makarem, M.A., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 3–28. [Google Scholar]
  6. Regjeringen, Klimaendringer Og Norsk Klimapolitikk. 2024. Available online: https://www.regjeringen.no/no/tema/klima-og-miljo/innsiktsartikler-klima-miljo/klimaendringer-og-norsk-klimapolitikk/id2636812/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  7. Bryce, J.; Brodie, S.; Parry, T.; Lo Presti, D. A systematic assessment of road pavement sustainability through a review of rating tools. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 120, 108–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sha, A.; Jiang, W.; Wang, W.; Lou, B.; Cao, Y.; Jia, M. Design and prospect of new pavement materials for smart road. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2020, 65, 3259–3269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liu, N.; Wang, Y.; Bai, Q.; Liu, Y.; Wang, P.; Xue, S.; Yu, Q.; Li, Q. Road life-cycle carbon dioxide emissions and emission reduction technologies: A review. J. Traffic Transp. Eng. (Engl. Ed.) 2022, 9, 532–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Solomon, S.; Plattner, G.K.; Knutti, R.; Friedlingstein, P. Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 1704–1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Narassimhan, E.; Gallagher, K.S.; Koester, S.; Alejo, J.R. Carbon pricing in practice: A review of existing emissions trading systems. Clim. Policy 2018, 18, 967–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rietbergen, M.G.; Blok, K. Assessing the potential impact of the CO2 performance ladder on the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions in the Netherlands. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 52, 33–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Anthonissen, J.; Van Troyen, D.; Braet, J.; Van Den Bergh, W. Using carbon dioxide emissions as a criterion to award road construction projects: A pilot case in Flanders. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 102, 96–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. EAPA. Asphalt in Figures 2022; EAPA: Brussels, Belgium, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  15. Thives, L.P.; Ghisi, E. Asphalt mixtures emission and energy consumption: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 72, 473–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Praticò, F.G. Metrics for management of asphalt plant sustainability. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2017, 143, 04016116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Barbieri, D.M.; Hoff, I.; Mørk, M.B.E. Innovative stabilization techniques for weak crushed rocks used in road unbound layers: A laboratory investigation. Transp. Geotech. 2019, 18, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Barbieri, D.M.; Hoff, I.; Mørk, M.B.E. Organosilane and lignosulfonate as innovative stabilization techniques for crushed rocks used in road unbound layers. Transp. Geotech. 2020, 22, 100308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Attahiru, Y.B.; Aziz, M.M.A.; Kassim, K.A.; Shahid, S.; Wan Abu Bakar, W.A.; NSashruddin, T.F.; Rahman, F.A.; Ahamed, M.I. A review on green economy and development of green roads and highways using carbon neutral materials. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 101, 600–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Perkins, S. Realizing the roads of the future. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2024425118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. ISO 14044; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
  22. ISO 14040; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
  23. Inyim, P.; Pereyra, J.; Bienvenu, M.; Mostafavi, A. Environmental assessment of pavement infrastructure: A systematic review. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 176, 128–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Aryan, Y.; Dikshit, A.K.; Shinde, A.M. A critical review of the life cycle assessment studies on road pavements and road infrastructures. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 336, 117697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Azarijafari, H.; Yahia, A.; Ben Amor, M. Life cycle assessment of pavements: Reviewing research challenges and opportunities. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 2187–2197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Santero, N.J.; Masanet, E.; Horvath, A. Life-cycle assessment of pavements. Part I: Critical review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 801–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Plati, C. Sustainability factors in pavement materials, design, and preservation strategies: A literature review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 211, 539–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hu, W.; Shu, X.; Huang, B. Sustainability innovations in transportation infrastructure: An overview of the special volume on sustainable road paving. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 235, 369–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Barbieri, D.M.; Hoff, I.; Mørk, M.B.E. Mechanical assessment of crushed rocks rerived from tunnelling operations. In Sustainable Civil Infrastructures; Cheng, W.-C., Yang, J., Wang, J., Eds.; Springer: Hangzhou, China, 2019; pp. 225–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Barbieri, D.M.; Hoff, I.; Mork, H. Laboratory investigation on unbound materials used in a highway with premature damage. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on the Bearing Capacity of Roads, Railways and Airfields (BCRRA 2017), Athens, Greece, 28–30 June 2017; Loizos, A., Al-Qadi, I.L., Scarpas, A.T., Eds.; Airfields, Taylor & Francis: Athens, Greece, 2017; pp. 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. NPRA. Håndbok N200 Vegbygging; Vegdirektoratet: Oslo, Norway, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  32. Barbieri, D.M.; Lou, B.; Dyke, R.J.; Wang, X.; Chen, H.; Shu, B.; Gazder, U.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Tingle, J.S.; Hoff, I. Design and sustainability analyses of road base layers stabilized with traditional and nontraditional additives. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 372, 133752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Eastman, C.; Teicholz, P.; Sacks, R.; Liston, K. BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors, 1st ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  34. Volk, R.; Stengel, J.; Schultmann, F. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for existing buildings—Literature review and future needs. Autom. Constr. 2014, 38, 109–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bazán, Á.M.; Alberti, M.G.; Álvarez, A.A.; Trigueros, J.A. New perspectives for BIM usage in transportation infrastructure projects. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Costin, A.; Adibfar, A.; Hu, H.; Chen, S.S. Building Information Modeling (BIM) for transportation infrastructure—Literature review, applications, challenges, and recommendations. Autom. Constr. 2018, 94, 257–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bui, N.; Merschbrock, C.; Munkvold, B.E.; Hjelseth, E. Role of an innovation community in supporting BIM deployment: The case of buildingsmart Norway. WIT Trans. Built Environ. 2019, 192, 329–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lassen, A.K.; Hjelseth, E.; Tollnes, T. Enhancing learning outcomes by introducing BIM in civil engineering studies –experiences from a university college in Norway. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan. 2018, 13, 62–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. NPRA. Håndbok V770 Modellgrunnlag; Vegdirektoratet: Oslo, Norway, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  40. Bane NOR. Krav Til Informasjonsmodellering (KIM). 2022. Available online: https://www.banenor.no/kim (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  41. Trimble. Trimble Novapoint. 2024. Available online: https://www.novapoint.com/products/novapoint (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  42. ISO 14025; Environmental labels and Declarations—Type III Environmental Declarations—Principles and Procedures. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2006.
  43. EPD-Norway. 2024. Available online: https://www.epd-norge.no/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  44. ISO 15804; Sustainability of Construction Works. Environmental Product Declarations. Core Rules for the Product Category of Construction Products. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2019.
  45. ISO 21930; Sustainability in Buildings and Civil Engineering Works. Core Rules for Environmental Product Declarations of Construction Products and Services. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2017.
  46. NPRA. Bruk av VegLCA. 2024. Available online: https://www.vegvesen.no/fag/fokusomrader/klima-miljo-og-omgivelser/utslipp-av-klimagasser/bruk-av-veglca/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  47. LCA.no. 2024. Available online: https://support.lca.no/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  48. Eurobitume. The Bitumen Life Cycle Inventory. 2024. Available online: https://eurobitume.eu/bitumen-life-cycle-inventory/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  49. Ecoinvent. Ecoinvent Database. 2024. Available online: https://ecoinvent.org/database/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  50. NPRA. Anleggsarbeider Fornebukrysset-Strand—Entreprise E102. 2024. Available online: https://www.vegvesen.no/vegprosjekter/europaveg/e18vestkorridoren/lysaker-ramstadsletta/fornebukrysset-strand-e102/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  51. NPRA. Gjønnestunnelen—Entreprise E105. 2024. Available online: https://www.vegvesen.no/vegprosjekter/europaveg/e18vestkorridoren/lysaker-ramstadsletta/gjonnestunnelen---e105/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  52. NPRA. Håndbok N500 Vegtunneler; Vegdirektoratet: Oslo, Norway, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  53. OpenStreetMap. 2024. Available online: www.openstreetmap.org (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  54. ISO 13108-1; Bituminous Mixtures. Material Specifications. Part 1: Asphalt Concrete. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2016.
  55. ISO 13108-21; Bituminous Mixtures. Material Specifications. Part 21: Factory Production Control. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2016.
  56. Hanson, C.; Noland, R.; Cavale, K. Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of materials used in road construction. Transp. Res. Rec. 2012, 2287, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Peng, B.; Cai, C.; Yin, G.; Li, W.; Zhan, Y. Evaluation system for CO2 emission of hot asphalt mixture. J. Traffic Transp. Eng. (Engl. Ed.) 2015, 2, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Infrastructures 09 00132 g001
Figure 1. Road pavement design workflow according to the design code “N200”, adapted from [32].
Figure 1. Road pavement design workflow according to the design code “N200”, adapted from [32].
Infrastructures 09 00132 g001
Infrastructures 09 00132 g002
Figure 2. LCA production stage and corresponding modules A1, A2, and A3.
Figure 2. LCA production stage and corresponding modules A1, A2, and A3.
Infrastructures 09 00132 g002
Infrastructures 09 00132 g003
Figure 3. Location of the road project [53].
Figure 3. Location of the road project [53].
Infrastructures 09 00132 g003
Infrastructures 09 00132 g004
Figure 4. General overview of the project, obtained with the use of Trimble Novapoint (tunnel structure in yellow, open areas in green and red).
Figure 4. General overview of the project, obtained with the use of Trimble Novapoint (tunnel structure in yellow, open areas in green and red).
Infrastructures 09 00132 g004
Infrastructures 09 00132 g005
Figure 5. Location of the asphalt plants pertaining to the industrial suppliers [53].
Figure 5. Location of the asphalt plants pertaining to the industrial suppliers [53].
Infrastructures 09 00132 g005
Table 1. Overview of construction materials and their thicknesses and quantities.
Table 1. Overview of construction materials and their thicknesses and quantities.
Road LayerConstruction MaterialThickness (cm)Quantity (ton)
WearingAC 16 PMB511,549
BinderAC 16 PMB511,549
BaseAG 161234,959
SubbaseCrushed rock 4/902573,989
Table 2. Emission factors and total CO2 emissions for different material suppliers.
Table 2. Emission factors and total CO2 emissions for different material suppliers.
Road
Layer		Supplier ASupplier BSupplier CSupplier D
Emission Factor aCO2
Emission b		Emission Factor aCO2
Emission b		Emission Factor aCO2
Emission b		Emission Factor aCO2
Emission b
Wearing37.4043246.9054226.3030435.89414
Binder37.4043246.9054226.3030435.89414
Base19.4968118.1663534.041 19025.66897
Subbase2.321712.111562.681982.34173
TOTAL 1716 1874 1995 1899
a kg of CO2 released during production of one ton of material (LCA modules A1, A2, A3). b total tons of CO2 considering the material quantities reported in Table 1.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Khair, M.; Strzalkowski, P.; Faizi, A.Q.; Barkal, M.G.; Fawakherji, I.; Lima, M.; Adeysey, M.; Barbieri, D.M.; Lou, B. Materials Carbon Budget in Road Projects: A Case Study from The Greater Oslo Region. Infrastructures 2024, 9, 132. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9080132

AMA Style

Khair M, Strzalkowski P, Faizi AQ, Barkal MG, Fawakherji I, Lima M, Adeysey M, Barbieri DM, Lou B. Materials Carbon Budget in Road Projects: A Case Study from The Greater Oslo Region. Infrastructures. 2024; 9(8):132. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9080132

Chicago/Turabian Style

Khair, Moa, Patryk Strzalkowski, Abdul Qaher Faizi, Mustafa Gilo Barkal, Ibrahim Fawakherji, Martina Lima, Mohammed Adeysey, Diego Maria Barbieri, and Baowen Lou. 2024. "Materials Carbon Budget in Road Projects: A Case Study from The Greater Oslo Region" Infrastructures 9, no. 8: 132. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9080132

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop