GeoCongress 2008 · 2008 · 22 citations · 1 references
ManagementEnvironmental EngineeringEnvironmental SciencesEnvironmental EconomicsEnvironmental Impact AssessmentLife Cycle AssessmentBuilding Life-cycle AssessmentEnvironmental Cost-benefit AnalysisLife Cycle Impact AssessmentLife-cycle Energy AnalysisLifecycle AssessmentRetaining WallsEnergy ConsumptionEnvironmental Life Cycle AssessmentLife-cycle Cost EstimationLifetime Cost AnalysisLifetime EstimationProject Evaluation CriteriaReinforced ConcreteReinforced Concrete Retaining Walls
A case study at the site of a creek restoration project within the Presidio in San Francisco, California is presented that analyzes the life-cycle environmental impact between a conventional reinforced concrete retaining wall compared with a bioengineered slope. Evaluation criteria were based on overall life-cycle costs (planning, design, construction, operations/maintenance, however decommissioning was not evaluated) and the magnitude of environmental impact. For our study, environmental impact was characterized based on total energy consumption (TJ) and associated Global Warming Potential (GWP, CO2Equivalent). The magnitude of environmental impact was calculated using the online Economic Input Output Life Cycle Analysis (EIO-LCA) tool. We found that biostabilization methods had about one-half the environmental impact as compared with utilization of conventional reinforced concrete retaining walls. However, the total (design) lifetime cost for biostabilization was found to be higher than that of the reinforced concrete wall (due mainly to maintenance costs where we assumed that the bioengineered slope would be actively maintained).
1