Abstract

Built in 1941, the Progreso Pier was the first concrete structure in the world built with nickel-containing stainless steel reinforcement. The Pier has been in service for over 70 years without any significant repair or maintenance activities. The aim of this study was to understand the environmental and economic implications of selecting nickel-containing stainless steel reinforcement using the Progreso Pier as the case study. A combined environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) study was conducted. The analysis considered the potential environmental impacts and the net present cost of the stainless steel reinforced structure from cradle to grave and compared it to the same structure using conventional carbon steel. The results indicated that while using stainless steel reinforcement resulted in a marginally higher environmental impact after initial construction, this is offset by the increased service life and, hence, less frequent maintenance and reconstruction activities. Relative to the as-built stainless steel reinforcement design, the environmental impacts of the carbon steel reinforced design are between 69 and 79 % higher over the analysis period. Similar observations were made for the other investigated impact categories. The cost implications of using stainless steel reinforcement show economic benefits that are complementary to the environmental benefits. Similar to the LCA, the service life benefits outweigh the higher unit costs for stainless steel, assuming a discount rate of 0.01 % as the baseline scenario. The carbon steel reinforced design has a net present cost that is 44 % higher than the as-built stainless steel reinforcement design. The crossover point for the two designs occurs at year 50, which corresponds to the reconstruction activity. A sensitivity analysis shows that the results and conclusions are sensitive to the choice in discount rate: Rates 3 % and lower produce net present costs that are lower for the as-built design; rates 4 % and higher produce net present costs that are lower for the alternative design. The study demonstrates how LCA and LCC are complementary tools that can be used in decision-making for sustainable construction. The Progreso Pier exemplifies the importance of considering the entire life cycle with service life and recycling as well as long-term life cycle impacts of infrastructure projects from an environmental and economic perspective.

Highlights

  • While the life cycle assessment (LCA) of stainless steel and the life cycle cost (LCC) implications of its application have been investigated in the past (ISSF 2013; Norgate et al 2007; SASSDA 2012; Val and Stewart 2003), a side-by-side application of both LCA and LCC based on the same, comparative case studies using consistent assumptions has been scarce so

  • The study at hand sets out to provide a combined comparative assessment using life cycle assessment and life cycle costing for the application of stainless steel as structural reinforcements in a marine environment to demonstrate the value of stainless steel products from an environmental as well as from a cost perspective

  • & The unit material cost of stainless steel rebar is higher than carbon steel rebar, resulting in higher activity costs for initial construction, maintenance and reconstruction

Read more

Summary

Introduction

While the life cycle assessment (LCA) of stainless steel and the life cycle cost (LCC) implications of its application have been investigated in the past (ISSF 2013; Norgate et al 2007; SASSDA 2012; Val and Stewart 2003), a side-by-side application of both LCA and LCC based on the same, comparative case studies using consistent assumptions has been scarce soInt J Life Cycle Assess (2016) 21:1637–1644 far. While the life cycle assessment (LCA) of stainless steel and the life cycle cost (LCC) implications of its application have been investigated in the past (ISSF 2013; Norgate et al 2007; SASSDA 2012; Val and Stewart 2003), a side-by-side application of both LCA and LCC based on the same, comparative case studies using consistent assumptions has been scarce so. The Progreso Pier is a saltwater pier located in Yucatan, Mexico It consists of two segments: the original pier, which is 2.1 km in length and was built in 1941, and a roughly 4.4 km additional segment, which was built in the 1980s. The construction stretches roughly 6.5 km from the shore and is the longest pier in the world The subject of this analysis is the original 2.1-km pier, excluding the later addition. The addition is excluded due to lack of construction and inspection data (referenced reports are specific to the original span), as well as to simplify the analysis to a single construction project

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call