Skip to main content

A comparative Life Cycle Assessment of utility poles manufactured with different materials and dimensions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Advances on Mechanics, Design Engineering and Manufacturing

Abstract

In the production of utility poles, used for transmission, telephony, telecommunications or lighting support, for many years, the steel has almost entirely replaced wood. In recent years, however, new composite materials are a great alternative to steel. The questions are: is the production of composite better in terms of environmental impact? Is the lifecycle of composite pole more eco-sustainable than lifecycle of steel pole? Where is the peak of pollution inside the lifecycle of both of technologies? In the last years, in order to deal with new European polices in environmental field, a new approach for the impact assessment has been developed: the Life Cycle Assessment. It involves a cradle-to-grave consideration of all stages of a product system. Stages include the extraction of raw material, the provision of energy for transportation and process, material processing and fabrication, product manufacture and distribution, use, recycling and disposal of the wastes and the product itself. A great potentiality of the Life Cycle assessment approach is to compare two different technologies designed for the same purpose, with the same functional unit, for understanding which of these two is better in terms of environmental impact. In this study, the goal is to evaluate the difference in environmental terms between two different technologies used for the production of poles for illumination support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Fava, J., Denison, R., Curran, M., Vigon, B.W., Selke, S., Barnum, J.: A technical framework for life-cycle assessment. , Pensacola - Florida (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Klöpffer, W.: Life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 4, 223–228 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., Pennington, D., Suh, S.: Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment. J. Environ. Manage. 91, 1–21 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Vigon, B.W., Jensen, A. a.: Life cycle assessment: data quality and databases practitioner survey. J. Clean. Prod. 3, 135–141 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baumann, H., Rydberg, T.: Life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 2, 13–20 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Maurice, B., Frischknecht, R., Coelho-Schwirtz, V., Hungerbühler, K.: Uncertainty analysis in life cycle inventory. Application to the production of electricity with French coal power plants. J. Clean. Prod. 8, 95–108 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Heijungs, R.: Identification of key issues for further investigation in improving the reliability of life-cycle assessments. J. Clean. Prod. 4, 159–166 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Puri, P., Compston, P., Pantano, V.: Life cycle assessment of Australian automotive door skins. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 14, 420–428 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  9. European Standard ISO: Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework. (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  10. European Standard ISO: Environmental management -- Life cycle assessment -- Requirements and guidelines. (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bolin, C.A., Smith, S.T.: LCA of pentachlorophenol-treated wooden utility poles with comparisons to steel and concrete utility poles. Renew. S. Energy Rev. 15, 2475–2486 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  12. CML - Department of Industrial Ecology: CML-IA Characterisation Factors, universiteitleiden.nl/en/research/research-output/science/cml-ia-characterisation-factors

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandro Barone .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Barone, S., Cucinotta, F., Sfravara, F. (2017). A comparative Life Cycle Assessment of utility poles manufactured with different materials and dimensions. In: Eynard, B., Nigrelli, V., Oliveri, S., Peris-Fajarnes, G., Rizzuti, S. (eds) Advances on Mechanics, Design Engineering and Manufacturing . Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45780-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45781-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics