Smith, S (2003) Life cycle assessment of civil engineering projects. PhD thesis, University of Bath, UK.
Abstract
The thesis investigates the application of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology to civil engineering projects, providing a critical evaluation of LCA methodology. In this context two particular aspects of civil engineering are studied: roads and wastewater treatment projects. The thesis demonstrates that LCA is generally applicable to civil engineering projects in these two areas, providing a useful environment evaluation tool. However, the degree to which the application of LCA is successful depends on the type of application. Notably, comparative based LCAs were more problematic than informative, attribution based LCAs, with problems with the applicability spanning all the stages of LCA from Goal Scope and Definition to Interpretation. As well as testing the applicability of the LCA tool, the thesis, through the utilisation of the LCA methodology, quantified the environmental impacts from a road and wastewater treatment projects and identified where these impacts occurred over their whole life i.e. construction, operation, maintenance, and demolition. This provided valuable insights into the complex environmental interactions over the whole life of roads and wastewater treatment projects.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | civil engineering; environmental impact; life cycle; civil engineer |
| Index terms: | life cycle, testing, interaction, evaluation tool, life cycle assessment, civil engineer, methodology, environmental impact |
| Subjects: | research methods, behavioral psychology, value management, environmental impact, profession, evaluation and assessment methods, professional practice |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here