Life cycle assessment of the environmental influence of wooden and concrete utility poles based on service lifetime
- 504 Downloads
Many applications of life cycle assessment do not consider the variability of the service lifetime of different structures, and this may be a relevant factor in an environmental impact assessment. This paper aims to determine the influence of the service lifetime on the potential environmental impacts of wooden and concrete poles in the electricity distribution system.
The estimation of service lifetime was conducted using the factorial method. The life cycle assessment was applied using SimaPro software and considered the entire life cycle of utility poles, from the extraction of raw materials to the final disposal. Then, an evaluation of the environmental impacts using the CML IA baseline method was performed. The study included the analysis of uncertainty using the Monte Carlo method.
Results and discussion
In general, the wooden poles had a lower potential environmental impact compared to the concrete poles. The result of the sensitivity analysis considering the variability of the chromated copper arsenate wood preservative retention rate suggests that the frequency of maintenance affects the service lifetime. Often, the comparison of products in the LCA perspective is carried out by considering similar useful lifetime services for the different alternatives, and this study shows that the environmental performance of products or services is directly proportional to the lifetime. It is a crucial parameter that has to be clarified in order to reduce uncertainty in the results.
Thus, some factors such as material quality, design adjustments and routine maintenance extend the service lifetime of a product or process and are shown to be effective ways to reduce environmental impacts. Therefore, the service lifetime has a significant influence on the development of the life cycle assessment. Comparative LCA studies are often sensitive to parameters that may even change the ranking of selected impact categories. All in all, from the sensitivity analysis highlighted in this study, the variability of lifetime service has proven to be one of the most prominent factors influencing comparative LCA results.
KeywordsFactorial method Life cycle assessment Life span Maintenance Wooden pole
The authors acknowledge the Brazilian funding agencies CNPq and CAPES for their financial support.
- ABNT Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas NBR 8456 (1984) Postes de eucalipto preservado para redes de distribuição de energia elétrica – especificação. ABNT, São PauloGoogle Scholar
- Aktas (2012) Impact of lifetime on US residential building LCA results. A Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(3):337–349. doi: 10.1007/s11367-011-0363-x
- Barton C (2014) CCA-treated wood. Reference Module in Biomedical Sciences. Encyclopedia of Toxicology, 3rd edn. pp 751–752Google Scholar
- Datla SV, Pandey MD (2006) Estimation of life expectancy of wood poles in electrical distribution networks. Struct Saf 28:304–319Google Scholar
- de Gonçalves JLM, Alvares CA, Higa AR et al (2013) Integrating genetic and silvicultural strategies to minimize abiotic and biotic constraints in Brazilian eucalypt plantations. For Ecol Manag 301:6–27Google Scholar
- Erlandsson M, Ödeen K, Edlud ML (1992) Environmental consequences of various materials in utility poles—a life cycle analysis. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IRG Annual Meeting of IRG, IRG Doc. No. WP/3726–92, StockholmGoogle Scholar
- Hage and Rufin (2016) Context analysis for a new regulatory model for electric utilities in Brazil. Energy Policy, 97;145–154. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.014
- Hertig C, Davies SJ (2008) Security supervision and management: the theory and practice of asset protection. Butterworth-HeinemannGoogle Scholar
- Hillier W, Murphey RJ, Dickinson DJ, Bell JNB (1997) The risk of life cycle impact assessment for preservative treated timber products. In: Proceedings of the WEI-Congress, WEI Document 2601, OsloGoogle Scholar
- IBGE (2015) Produção da extração vegetal e silvicultura. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/pesquisas/pesquisa_resultados.php?id_pesquisa=45. Accessed 23 Nov 2016
- IPCC (2006) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 4. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use. Available in: http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol4.html
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and frameworkGoogle Scholar
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14044 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—requirements and guidelinesGoogle Scholar
- International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15686 (2011) Buildings and constructed assets—service life planning (parts 1 to 10), GenevaGoogle Scholar
- Künniger T, Ritcher K (1995) Life cycle analysis of utility poles. A Swiss case study. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Wood Preservation Symposium: The Challenge - Safety and Environment. IRG/WP 95–50040Google Scholar
- Lebow S, Lebow P, Woodward B, Kirker G, Arango R (2015) Fifty-year durability evaluation of posts treated with industrial wood preservatives. For Prod J 65:307–313Google Scholar
- McDermott KA (2014) Thehome (as power plant) and its role in electric policy: past, present and future. Electr J 27:33–42Google Scholar
- Morrell J (2008) Disposal of utility poles in the western United States: a survey. Proceedings of the American Wood Protection Association 104:268–271Google Scholar
- Morrell J (2012) Protection of wood-based materials, 2nd edn. Handbook of Environmental Degradation of Materials. Elsevier Inc. doi: 10.1016/B978-1-4377-3455-3.00014-6
- Pope T (2004) Wood pole survivor rates by decay hazard zone initial inspection vs. recycle inspection. Proceedings of the American Wood Protection Association 100:255–262Google Scholar
- Preston AF, Jin L (2005) Wood-chemical interactions and their effect on preservative performance. Woodhead Publishing Limited. The Chemistry of Wood Preservation, pp 88–100Google Scholar
- Sedjo RA (2001) Wood materials used as a means to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG): an examination of wooden utility poles. North American Wood Pole Coalition. Technical BulletinGoogle Scholar