Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Roadway Drainage Systems

Diana M. Byrne, Marta K. Grabowski, Amy C.B. Benitez, Arthur R. Schmidt, Jeremy S. Guest

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

Abstract

Roadway drainage design has traditionally focused on cost-effectively managing water quantity; however, runoff carries pollutants, posing risks to the local environment and public health. Additionally, construction and maintenance incur costs and contribute to global environmental impacts. While life cycle assessment (LCA) can potentially capture local and global environmental impacts of roadway drainage and other stormwater systems, LCA methodology must be evaluated because stormwater systems differ from wastewater and drinking water systems to which LCA is more frequently applied. To this end, this research developed a comprehensive model linking roadway drainage design parameters to LCA and life cycle costing (LCC) under uncertainty. This framework was applied to 10 highway drainage projects to evaluate LCA methodological choices by characterizing environmental and economic impacts of drainage projects and individual components (basin, bioswale, culvert, grass swale, storm sewer, and pipe underdrain). The relative impacts of drainage components varied based on functional unit choice. LCA inventory cutoff criteria evaluation showed the potential for cost-based criteria, which performed better than mass-based criteria. Finally, the local aquatic benefits of grass swales and bioswales offset global environmental impacts for four impact categories, highlighting the need to explicitly consider local impacts (i.e., direct emissions) when evaluating drainage technologies.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages9261-9270
Number of pages10
JournalEnvironmental Science and Technology
Volume51
Issue number16
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 15 2017

Fingerprint

life cycle
drainage
evaluation
drainage system
Life cycle
environmental impact
cost
Environmental impact
Costs
stormwater
grass
project
culvert
economic impact
public health
pipe
drinking water
runoff
road
wastewater

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Chemistry(all)
  • Environmental Chemistry

Cite this

Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Roadway Drainage Systems. / Byrne, Diana M.; Grabowski, Marta K.; Benitez, Amy C.B.; Schmidt, Arthur R.; Guest, Jeremy S.

In: Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 51, No. 16, 15.08.2017, p. 9261-9270.

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

Byrne, Diana M. ; Grabowski, Marta K. ; Benitez, Amy C.B. ; Schmidt, Arthur R. ; Guest, Jeremy S./ Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Roadway Drainage Systems. In: Environmental Science and Technology. 2017 ; Vol. 51, No. 16. pp. 9261-9270
@article{47dd842e78d146e28b1da7d91463f13d,
title = "Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Roadway Drainage Systems",
abstract = "Roadway drainage design has traditionally focused on cost-effectively managing water quantity; however, runoff carries pollutants, posing risks to the local environment and public health. Additionally, construction and maintenance incur costs and contribute to global environmental impacts. While life cycle assessment (LCA) can potentially capture local and global environmental impacts of roadway drainage and other stormwater systems, LCA methodology must be evaluated because stormwater systems differ from wastewater and drinking water systems to which LCA is more frequently applied. To this end, this research developed a comprehensive model linking roadway drainage design parameters to LCA and life cycle costing (LCC) under uncertainty. This framework was applied to 10 highway drainage projects to evaluate LCA methodological choices by characterizing environmental and economic impacts of drainage projects and individual components (basin, bioswale, culvert, grass swale, storm sewer, and pipe underdrain). The relative impacts of drainage components varied based on functional unit choice. LCA inventory cutoff criteria evaluation showed the potential for cost-based criteria, which performed better than mass-based criteria. Finally, the local aquatic benefits of grass swales and bioswales offset global environmental impacts for four impact categories, highlighting the need to explicitly consider local impacts (i.e., direct emissions) when evaluating drainage technologies.",
author = "Byrne, {Diana M.} and Grabowski, {Marta K.} and Benitez, {Amy C.B.} and Schmidt, {Arthur R.} and Guest, {Jeremy S.}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1021/acs.est.7b01856",
volume = "51",
pages = "9261--9270",
journal = "Environmental Science and Technology",
issn = "0013-936X",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "16",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for Roadway Drainage Systems

AU - Byrne,Diana M.

AU - Grabowski,Marta K.

AU - Benitez,Amy C.B.

AU - Schmidt,Arthur R.

AU - Guest,Jeremy S.

PY - 2017/8/15

Y1 - 2017/8/15

N2 - Roadway drainage design has traditionally focused on cost-effectively managing water quantity; however, runoff carries pollutants, posing risks to the local environment and public health. Additionally, construction and maintenance incur costs and contribute to global environmental impacts. While life cycle assessment (LCA) can potentially capture local and global environmental impacts of roadway drainage and other stormwater systems, LCA methodology must be evaluated because stormwater systems differ from wastewater and drinking water systems to which LCA is more frequently applied. To this end, this research developed a comprehensive model linking roadway drainage design parameters to LCA and life cycle costing (LCC) under uncertainty. This framework was applied to 10 highway drainage projects to evaluate LCA methodological choices by characterizing environmental and economic impacts of drainage projects and individual components (basin, bioswale, culvert, grass swale, storm sewer, and pipe underdrain). The relative impacts of drainage components varied based on functional unit choice. LCA inventory cutoff criteria evaluation showed the potential for cost-based criteria, which performed better than mass-based criteria. Finally, the local aquatic benefits of grass swales and bioswales offset global environmental impacts for four impact categories, highlighting the need to explicitly consider local impacts (i.e., direct emissions) when evaluating drainage technologies.

AB - Roadway drainage design has traditionally focused on cost-effectively managing water quantity; however, runoff carries pollutants, posing risks to the local environment and public health. Additionally, construction and maintenance incur costs and contribute to global environmental impacts. While life cycle assessment (LCA) can potentially capture local and global environmental impacts of roadway drainage and other stormwater systems, LCA methodology must be evaluated because stormwater systems differ from wastewater and drinking water systems to which LCA is more frequently applied. To this end, this research developed a comprehensive model linking roadway drainage design parameters to LCA and life cycle costing (LCC) under uncertainty. This framework was applied to 10 highway drainage projects to evaluate LCA methodological choices by characterizing environmental and economic impacts of drainage projects and individual components (basin, bioswale, culvert, grass swale, storm sewer, and pipe underdrain). The relative impacts of drainage components varied based on functional unit choice. LCA inventory cutoff criteria evaluation showed the potential for cost-based criteria, which performed better than mass-based criteria. Finally, the local aquatic benefits of grass swales and bioswales offset global environmental impacts for four impact categories, highlighting the need to explicitly consider local impacts (i.e., direct emissions) when evaluating drainage technologies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027435210&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027435210&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1021/acs.est.7b01856

DO - 10.1021/acs.est.7b01856

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 9261

EP - 9270

JO - Environmental Science and Technology

T2 - Environmental Science and Technology

JF - Environmental Science and Technology

SN - 0013-936X

IS - 16

ER -