Environmental Impact Assessment of the Fabrication of Pipe Rehabilitation Materials
Publication: Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 11, Issue 1
Abstract
With the consistent increase in the global population, sustainable construction has become a trend that will need to be practiced in perpetuity. The three main factors of sustainable construction that should be considered during planning and design of new projects are direct cost, social costs, and environmental impacts. Direct costs are regularly evaluated, and social costs are coming under more scrutiny, but the environmental sustainability of construction is a big issue due to increasing concerns about global climate change and carbon emissions. If reducing carbon emissions is a target, it is first essential to quantify the environmental impacts of any potential project to set the target to achieve. In the pipeline industry, carbon footprint analyses for the construction phase have been performed regularly to identify less-carbon-intensive methods. The pipeline industry, however, has yet to evaluate the environmental sustainability of its construction materials during the fabrication stages. The objective of this study is to calculate and analyze the environmental sustainability, as determined by carbon footprint and embodied energy, of 30 m (100 ft) of pipeline during the fabrication stages (material extraction, material production, and pipe manufacturing). This study focuses on three commonly used types of pipe/pipeline: prestressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP), PVC, and cured-in-place pipe (CIPP). This paper focuses on a large-diameter 90-cm (36-in.) sewer pressure pipe operating at 689 kPa (100 psi) internal pressure. Results show the environmental sustainability of PCCP to be lower than PVC and CIPP. The second phase of this project will focus on the environmental impacts for each material during construction and operation to determine the overall environmental footprint of each material.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
ASTM. 2002. Standard practice for determining dimensions of ‘Fiberglass’ (Glass-fiber-reinforced thermosetting resin) pipe & fittings. ASTM D3567. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2009. Standard practice for rehabilitation of existing pipelines and conduits by the inversion and curing of a resin-impregnated tube. ASTM 1216. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2012. Standard specification for poly (Vinyl Chloride)(PVC) plastic drain. waste, and vent pipe and fittings. ASTM D2665. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2002. Design and installation of polyvinyl chloride pipe. 2nd ed. AWWA M23. Denver: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2008. Concrete pressure pipe. 3rd ed. AWWA M9. Denver: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2014a. Design prestressed concrete cylinder pipe. ANSI/AWWA C304-14. Denver: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2014b. Design prestressed concrete pressure pipe, steel cylinder type. ANSI/AWWA C301. Denver: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2016. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pressure pipe and fabricated fittings, 14 in. through 48 in. ANSI/AWWA C900. Denver: AWWA.
Chilana, L. 2011. “Carbon footprint analysis of a large diameter water transmission pipeline installation.” M.S. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Texas at Arlington.
Chilana, L., A. Bhatt, M. Najafi, and M. Sattler. 2016. “Comparison of carbon footprints of steel versus concrete pipelines for water transmission.” J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 66 (5): 518–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2016.1154487.
Du, F., G. J. Woods, D. Kang, K. E. Lansey, and R. G. Arnold. 2013. “Life cycle analysis for water and wastewater pipe materials.” J. Environ. Eng. 139 (5): 703–711. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000638.
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2014. Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID2014). Washington, DC: EPA.
Filion, Y. R., H. L. MacLean, and B. W. Karney. 2004. “Life-cycle energy analysis of a water distribution system.” J. Infrastruct. Syst. 10 (3): 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2004)10:3(119).
Hammond, G., and C. Jones. 2011. Inventory of carbon and energy (ICE), version 2.0. Bath, UK: Sustainable Energy Research Team, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Univ. of Bath.
Khan, L. R., and K. F. Tee. 2015. “Quantification and comparison of carbon emissions for flexible underground pipelines.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 42 (10): 728–736.
Krock, R., and G. Middleton. 2013. The role of PVC resins in sustainable design. Washington, DC: Vinyl Institute.
Kyung, D., D. Kim, S. Yi, W. Choi, and W. Lee. 2017. “Estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from sewer pipeline system.” Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 22 (12): 1901–1911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1288-9.
Manda, R. 2014. “Performance of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe (PCCP) in water applications.” M.S. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Texas at Arlington.
Martins, J., E. Freire, and H. Hemadipour. 2009. “Applications and market of PVC for piping industry.” Polímeros 19 (1): 58–62. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-14282009000100014.
Matthews, J. C., E. N. Allouche, and R. L. Sterling. 2015. “Social cost impact assessment of pipeline infrastructure projects.” Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 50 (Jan): 196–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.10.001.
Matthews, J. C., A. Selvakumar, R. L. Sterling, and W. Condit. 2014. “Innovative rehabilitation technology demonstration and evaluation programs.” Tunnelling Underground Space Technol. 39: 73–81.
Moore, W., and N. N. Dig. 2011. Non-styrene options for cured in place pipe. Cleveland: North American Society for Trenchless Technology.
Romer, A., G. Bell, and R. Ellison. 2007. “Failure of prestressed concrete cylinder pipe.” In Proc, ASCE Pipelines, 1–17. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Teimouri Sendesi, S. M., et al. 2017. “Worksite chemical air emissions and worker exposure during sanitary sewer and stormwater pipe rehabilitation using cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP).” Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 4 (8): 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00237.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
©2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 19, 2018
Accepted: Feb 12, 2019
Published online: Oct 8, 2019
Published in print: Feb 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Mar 8, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.