Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
6864029
Reference Type
Journal Article
Title
Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Bridges
Author(s)
Hammervold, J; Reenaas, M; Brattebo, H; ,
Year
2013
Is Peer Reviewed?
Yes
Journal
Journal of Bridge Engineering
ISSN:
1084-0702
Publisher
ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
Location
RESTON
Page Numbers
153-161
DOI
10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000328
Web of Science Id
WOS:000316547900007
Abstract
This paper presents a detailed comparative environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) case study of three built bridges in Norway. To encompass a wide scale of bridge designs, the analysis dealt with a steel box girder bridge, a concrete box girder bridge, and a wooden arch bridge. This study presents the first LCA of road bridges using a standardized bridge classification. The LCA includes a wide range of pollutants and a high level of detail in life cycle material and energy consumption. Findings here and from earlier LCAs on bridges are together used as bases for general recommendations on conducting LCAs on bridges. The study shows that it is the production of materials for the main load-carrying systems (i.e., the bridge superstructure) and the abutments that accounts for the main share of the environmental impacts, as these parts require large quantities of materials, with a limited number of materials being the important ones. The construction phase accounts for relatively fewer impacts. The use phase contributes more significantly, mainly because of resurfacing with asphalt. Use of building equipment and transport of personnel in all the life cycle phases are of minor importance, as are the use of formwork, mastic, blasting, and the end-of-life incineration of wood. The environmental issues of global warming, abiotic depletion, and acidification are found to be the most important given the assumptions made in this study. A comparison of the three bridges shows that the concrete bridge alternative performs best environmentally on the whole, but when it comes to global warming, the wooden bridge is better than the other two. The results support the idea that it is possible to decide upon environmentally effective design alternatives, at a fair level of accuracy, at different stages of the bridge design process, a target that is now becoming more and more emphasized in the bridge-engineering sector. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000328. (C) 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Tags
OPPT REs
•
OPPT_Asbestos, Part I: Chrysotile_Supplemental Search
LitSearch: Sept 2020 (Undated)
WoS
Legacy Uses
Health Outcomes
Additional Legacy Terms
Exposure
Additional Legacy Terms
Suggested Legacy References
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity