| Popis: |
The road infrastructure industry consumes elevated economic resources and generates vast environmental impacts on the planet. Nevertheless, the construction and maintenance of pavements are necessary to guarantee the economic growth of the communities. In this way, finding novel methods, materials, and techniques is essential to achieve a more sustainable industry. One of the most promising alternatives is the implementation of Perpetual Pavements (PPs). Contrary to the Conventional Flexible Pavements (CFPs) and Conventional Rigid Pavements (CRPs), the PPs are designed for a long service life (even superior to 50 years). During this time, the PPs do not require major Maintenance and Rehabilitation (M&R) activities. Due to this characteristic, PPs could present greater sustainability attributes than conventional pavement structures. However, minimal literature is focused on examining these hypotheses since the state-of-the-art has concentrated on studying the mechanical behavior of materials and layers for PPs laying. Moreover, it is most worrying that few investigations have done this in the context of developing countries, where it is more decisive to perform better decisions in terms of economic-environmental sustainability. Consequently, this research conducts a case study on Barranquilla city (Colombia) to estimate the environmental burdens and monetary costs associated with the life cycle of three pavement alternatives, i.e., a PP, a CFP, and a CRP. The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) methodologies were employed for these purposes. The results of this investigation demonstrated that PP provides less environmental damage and higher cost-efficiency than the CFP and CRP alternatives. Notably, the most significant contamination potential is provoked by the CRP structure. Meanwhile, the fewer financial profitability is caused by the CFP structure. Therefore, this study indicates that under the typical circumstances of underdeveloped nations, PPs are a more advantageous alternative than traditional ones regarding sustainability performance. |
