Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 16, pp 15779–15794 | Cite as

Methods for monitoring construction off-road vehicle emissions: a critical review for identifying deficiencies and directions

  • Samad M. E. SepasgozarEmail author
  • Heng Li
  • Sara Shirowzhan
  • Vivian W. Y. Tam
Review Article


The paper reviews the existing applications of sensing technologies for measuring construction off-road vehicle emissions (COVE) such as earthmoving equipment. The current literature presented different measurement methods and reported the results of utilisation of new technologies for measuring COVE. However, previous papers used different technology applications covering only a part of the monitoring process with its own limitations. Since technologies are advancing and offering novel solutions, there is an urgent need to identify the gaps, re-evaluate the current methods, and develop a critical agenda for automating the entire process of collecting emissions data from construction sites, and monitoring the emission contributors across cities. This paper systematically identifies relevant papers through a search of three key databases—Web of Science, Engineering Valley and Scopus—covering the publications in the last decade from 2008 to 2017. An innovative robust research method was designed to select and analyse the relevant papers. The identified papers were stored in a data set, and a thematic algorithm employed to find the clusters of papers which might be potentially relevant. The selected papers were used for further micro-thematic analysis to find key relevant papers on COVE, and the gap in the literature. A sample of relevant papers was found relevant to COVE and critically reviewed by coding and content analysis. This paper critically reviews the selected papers and also shows that there is a considerable gap in the applications of new technologies for measuring in-use COVE in real time based on real activities toward automated methods. This review enables practitioners and scholars to gain a concrete understanding of the gap in measuring COVE and to provide a significant agenda for future technology applications.


Construction off-road vehicle GIS Real-time On-site Emissions Sensor Building information modelling Information system Greenhouse gas Systematic review 



  1. Abdi A, Taghipour S, Khamooshi H (2018) A model to control environmental performance of project execution process based on greenhouse gas emissions using earned value management. Int J Proj Manag 36(3):397–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abolhasani S, Frey HC, Kim K, Rasdorf W, Lewis P, Pang S-H (2008) Real-world in-use activity, fuel use, and emissions for Nonroad construction vehicles: a case study for excavators. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 58(8):1033–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahn CR, Lee SH, Pena-Mora F (2012) Monitoring System for Operational Efficiency and Environmental Performance of Construction Operations, Using Vibration Signal Analysis, translated by West Lafayette, IN, United States: American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), pp 1879–1888Google Scholar
  4. Ahn CR, Lewis P, Golparvar-Fard M, SangHyun L (2013) Integrated framework for estimating, benchmarking, and monitoring pollutant emissions of construction operations. J Constr Eng Manag 139(12):A4013003 (11 pp.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aksnes DW, Schneider JW, Gunnarsson M (2012) Ranking National Research Systems by citation indicators. A comparative analysis using whole and fractionalised counting methods. Journal of Informetrics 6(1):36–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson TR, Hawkins E, Jones PD (2016) Co2, the greenhouse effect and global warming: from the pioneering work of Arrhenius and Callendar to Today's earth system models. Endeavour 40(3):178–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barati K, Shen X (2016) Operational level emissions modelling of on-road construction equipment through field data analysis. Autom Constr 72:338–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cao L, Caldeira K (2010) Atmospheric carbon dioxide removal: long-term consequences and commitment. Environ Res Lett 5(2):024011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cao T, Durbin TD, Russell RL, Cocker DR, Scora G, Maldonado H, Johnson KC (2016) Evaluations of in-use emission factors from off-road construction equipment. Atmos Environ 147:234–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carmichael DG, Mustaffa NK (2018) Emissions and production penalties/bonuses associated with non-standard earthmoving loading policies. Construction Innovation 18(2).
  11. Dallasega P, Rauch E, Linder C (2018) Industry 4.0 as an enabler of proximity for construction supply chains: a systematic literature review. Comput Ind 99:205–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duvvuri S (2019) Gis Based Management System for Flood Forecast Applications, translated by Springer, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  13. Gupta R (2009) Moving towards low-carbon buildings and cities: experiences from Oxford, UK. Int J Low Carbon Technol 4(3):159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gupta R, Kapsali M (2016) Evaluating the ‘as-Built’ performance of an eco-housing development in the UK. Build Serv Eng Res Technol 37(2):220–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gupta A, Cemesova A, Hopfe CJ, Rezgui Y, Sweet T (2014) A conceptual framework to support solar Pv simulation using an open-Bim data exchange standard. Autom Constr 37:166–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guttikunda SK, Calori G (2013) A Gis based emissions inventory at 1 km × 1 km spatial resolution for air pollution analysis in Delhi, India. Atmos Environ 67:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haggis SF, Hansen TA, Hicks KD, Richards RG, Marx R (2009) In-use evaluation of fuel economy and emissions from coal haul trucks using modified Sae J1321 procedures and Pems. SAE Int J Commer Veh 1(1):210–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hallmark SL, Wang B, Sperry R (2013) Comparison of on-road emissions for hybrid and regular transit buses. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 63(10):1212–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heidari B, Marr LC (2015) Real-time emissions from construction equipment compared with model predictions. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 65(2):115–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hirano Y, Ihara T, Yoshida Y (2016) Estimating residential CO2 emissions based on daily activities and consideration of methods to reduce emissions. Build Environ 103:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Iacovidou E, Purnell P, Lim MK (2018) The use of smart technologies in enabling construction components reuse: a viable method or a problem creating solution? J Environ Manag 216:214–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jang W-S, Kim J-S, Kong BS, Lee D-C, Kim B-S (2014a) Experimental Analysis to Characterizing Co2 Emission of Roller, translated by Taiyuan, China: Trans Tech Publications, pp 452–455Google Scholar
  23. Jang WS, Kim JS, Kong BS, Lee DC, Kim BS (2014b) Experimental analysis to characterizing Co2 emission of roller. Adv Mater Res 898:452–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jukic D, Carmichael DG (2016) Emission and cost effects of training for construction equipment operators: a field study. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment 5(2):96–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jun H, Lim N, Kim M (2015) BIM-based carbon dioxide emission quantity assessment method in Korea. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering 14(3):569–576.
  26. Kagawa S, Suh S, Hubacek K, Wiedmann T, Nansai K, Minx J (2015) Co2emission clusters within global supply chain networks: implications for climate change mitigation. Glob Environ Chang 35:486–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim BS, Jang WS, Lee DE (2015) Analysis of the CO2 emission characteristics of earthwork equipment. KSCE J Civ Eng 19(1):1–9.
  28. Li L, Chen K (2017) Quantitative assessment of carbon dioxide emissions in construction projects: a case study in Shenzhen. J Clean Prod 141:394–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li B, Fu F, Zhong H, Luo H (2012) Research on the computational model for carbon emissions in building construction stage based on Bim. Struct Surv 30(5):411–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Li T, Wu J, Dang A, Liao L, Xu M (2019a) Emission pattern mining based on taxi trajectory data in Beijing. J Clean Prod 206:688–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Li Y, Zheng J, Dong S, Wen X, Jin X, Zhang L, Peng X (2019b) Temporal variations of local traffic Co2 emissions and its relationship with Co2 flux in Beijing, China. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 67:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lidelöw S, Mácsik J, Carabante I, Kumpiene J (2017) Leaching behaviour of copper slag, construction and demolition waste and crushed rock used in a full-scale road construction. J Environ Manag 204:695–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lim TK, Gwak HS, Kim BS, Lee DE (2016) Integrated carbon emission estimation method for construction operation and project scheduling. KSCE J Civ Eng 20(4):1211–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mah D, Manrique JD, Yu H, Al-Hussein M, Nasseri R (2011) House construction Codn2/Dn footprint quantification: a Bim approach. Constr Innov 11(2):161–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mambo DA, Efthekhari M, Steffen T (2013). Occupancy-driven supervisory control strategies to minimise energy consumption of airport terminal building. In: Hakansson A., Höjer M., Howlett R., Jain L. (eds) Sustainability in Energy and Buildings. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 22. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, p 479-489.
  36. Martin NP, Bishop JD, Boies AM (2017) How well do we know the future of Co2 emissions? Projecting fleet emissions from light duty vehicle technology drivers. Environ Sci Technol 51(5):3093–3101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miller AL, Habjan MC, Park K (2007) Real-time estimation of elemental carbon emitted from a diesel engine. Environ Sci Technol 41(16):5783–5788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Muñoz J, Olzak S, Soule SA (2018) Going green: environmental protest, policy, and Co2 emissions in US states, 1990–2007, translated by Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar
  39. Oesterreich TD, Teuteberg F (2016) Understanding the implications of digitisation and automation in the context of industry 4.0: a triangulation approach and elements of a research agenda for the construction industry. Comput Ind 83:121–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pacheco P, da Fonseca APA, Resende A, Campos R (2010) Sustainability in bridge construction processes. Clean Techn Environ Policy 12(1):75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pao H-T, Chen C-C (2019) Decoupling strategies: Co2 emissions, energy resources, and economic growth in the group of twenty. J Clean Prod 206:907–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peng C (2016) Calculation of a building’s life cycle carbon emissions based on Ecotect and building information modeling. J Clean Prod 112:453–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Perianes-Rodriguez A, Waltman L, van Eck NJ (2016) Constructing bibliometric networks: a comparison between full and fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics 10(4):1178–1195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ren Z, Chrysostomou V, Price T (2012) The measurement of carbon performance of construction activities: a case study of a hotel construction project in South Wales. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment 1(2):153–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sandanayake M, Zhang G, Setunge S (2016) Environmental emissions at foundation construction stage of buildings—two case studies. Build Environ 95:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sandanayake M, Zhang G, Setunge S, Luo W, Li CQ (2017) Estimation and comparison of environmental emissions and impacts at foundation and structure construction stages of a building—a case study. J Clean Prod 151:319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sandhu G, Frey H (2012) Real-world measurement and evaluation of duty cycles, fuels, and emission control technologies of heavy-duty trucks. Transp Res Rec 2270:180–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sandhu G, Frey H (2013) Effects of errors on vehicle emission rates from portable emissions measurement systems. Transp Res Rec 2340:10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sardroud JM, Limbachiya MC (2010) Utilization of advanced data storage technology to conduct construction industry on clear environment. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 42:795–800Google Scholar
  50. Schiefelbein J, Rudnick J, Scholl A, Remmen P, Fuchs M, Müller D (2019) Automated urban energy system modeling and thermal building simulation based on Openstreetmap data sets. Build Environ 149:630–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sepasgozar S, Blair J (2019) Measuring non-road diesel emissions in the construction industry:a synopsis of the literature. Int J Confl Manag 1-16.
  52. Sepasgozar S, Lim S, Shirowzhan S, Kim Y, Nadoushani ZM (2015) Utilisation of a new terrestrial scanner for reconstruction of as-built models: a comparative study, translated by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Department of Construction Economics & Property, 1Google Scholar
  53. Sepasgozar SM, Wang C, Shirowzhan S (2016) Challenges and Opportunities for Implementation of Laser Scanners in Building Construction, translated by Sattineni, A., AUBURN, ALABAMA, USA, pp 742–751Google Scholar
  54. Sepasgozar S, Shirowzhan S, Wang CC (2017) A scanner technology acceptance model for construction projects. Procedia Eng 180:1237–1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sepasgozar SM, Davis SR, Li H, Luo X (2018a) Modeling the implementation process for new construction technologies: thematic analysis based on Australian and US practices. J Manag Eng 34(3):05018005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sepasgozar SM, Davis SR, Loosemore M (2018b) Dissemination practices of construction sites’ technology vendors in technology exhibitions. J Manag Eng 34(6):04018038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sepasgozar SM, Forsythe P, Shirowzhan S (2018c) Evaluation of terrestrial and mobile scanner technologies for part-built information modeling. J Constr Eng Manag 144(12):04018110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shafiq N, Nurrudin MF, Gardezi SSS, Kamaruzzaman AB (2015) Carbon footprint assessment of a typical low rise office building in Malaysia using building information modelling (Bim). International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development 6(3):157–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shirowzhan S, Lim S (2014) Autocorrelation statistics-based algorithms for automatic ground and non-ground classification of Lidar data, translated by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Department of Construction Economics …, 1Google Scholar
  60. Shirowzhan S, Trinder J (2017) Building classification from Lidar data for spatio-temporal assessment of 3D urban developments. Procedia Eng 180:1453–1461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shirowzhan S, Sepasgozar SME, Zaini I, Wang C (2017) An Integrated Gis and Wi-Fi Based Locating System for Improving Construction Labor Communications, translated by pp 1052–1059Google Scholar
  62. Shirowzhan S, Sepasgozar S, Liu C (2018a) Monitoring physical progress of indoor buildings using mobile and terrestrial point clouds. In: Construction Research Congress 2018, 2018/05/16Google Scholar
  63. Shirowzhan S, Sepasgozar SME, Li H, Trinder J (2018b) Spatial compactness metrics and constrained voxel automata development for analyzing 3d densification and applying to point clouds: a synthetic review. Autom Constr 96:236–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thomas J, Harden A (2008) Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 8(1):45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tight M, Bristow A, Pridmore A, May A (2005) What is a sustainable level of Co2 emissions from transport activity in the UK in 2050? Transp Policy 12(3):235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tsiakmakis S, Fontaras G, Dornoff J, Valverde V, Komnos D, Ciuffo B, Mock P, Samaras Z (2019) From lab-to-road & vice-versa: using a simulation-based approach for predicting real-world Co2 emissions. Energy 169:1153–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wang F, Li Z, Zhang K, Di B, Hu B (2016) An overview of non-road equipment emissions in China. Atmos Environ 132:283–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Watts WF, Gladis DD, Schumacher MF, Ragatz AC, Kittelson DB (2010) Evaluation of a portable photometer for estimating diesel particulate matter concentrations in an underground limestone mine. Ann Occup Hyg 54(5):566–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Weiss F, Baloh P, Pfaller C, Cetintas EC, Kasper-Giebl A, Wonaschütz A, Dimitrov M, Hofko B, Rechberger H, Grothe H (2018) Reducing paving emissions and workers’ exposure using novel mastic asphalt mixtures. Build Environ 137:51–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zavala M, Huertas JI, Prato D, Jazcilevich A, Aguilar A, Balam M, Misra C, Molina LT (2017) Real-world emissions of in-use off-road vehicles in Mexico, 1–15Google Scholar
  71. Zhang G, Sandanayake M, Setunge S, Li C, Fang J (2017) Selection of emission factor standards for estimating emissions from diesel construction equipment in building construction in the Australian context. J Environ Manag 187:527–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Built EnvironmentUniversity of New South Wales SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Hong Kong Polyethene UniversityHung HomHong Kong
  3. 3.School of Computing, Engineering and MathematicsWestern Sydney UniversityPenrithAustralia
  4. 4.College of Civil EngineeringShenzhen UniversityShenzhenChina

Personalised recommendations