LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF NEW GROUND MATERIAL AND EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION METHODS CONSIDERING RECYCLING

Authors

  • Hideyuki Ito
  • Kento Aimono
  • Takahiro Fujii

Keywords:

Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Impact Assessment, Life Cycle Cost, New Ground Material

Abstract

In Japan, the conventional cut-and-fill method is often used in banking construction methods. However, this construction method is pointed out that it causes land subsidence and/or landslide in soft ground. For solving these problems, various new construction methods using the ground materials such as EPS (styrofoam), recycled foamed waste glass and expanded polystyrene beads have been developed as a new lightweight and workable composite geomaterials. These new construction methods are believed to be effective for construction on soft ground and landslide-prone areas. In existing researches of this field, they aimed to identify areas for improvement and the problems associated with the use of these new ground materials. However, there are few types of research that focused on negative impacts on land use, by exhausting air pollution and GHGs (Green House Gases) with recycling from the perspective of the environmental economics field. Thus, in this research, we compared conventional cut-and-fill method and some new ground materials such as the expanded polystyrol construction method using the new EPS geomaterial, the lightweight embankment construction method with EPS beads and the foamed waste glass construction method using embankment material with recycled waste by analyzing the negative impacts to land use considered ecosystem services and life cycle cost (LCC) including external cost by emissions of GHGs and air pollutants such as SOx and NOx using life cycle impact assessment analysis.

Downloads

Published

2019-08-28

How to Cite

Hideyuki Ito, Kento Aimono, & Takahiro Fujii. (2019). LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF NEW GROUND MATERIAL AND EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION METHODS CONSIDERING RECYCLING. GEOMATE Journal, 17(60), 49–55. Retrieved from https://geomatejournal.com/geomate/article/view/355