lca of selected road bridges in norway - etsi project - …etsi.aalto.fi/etsi3/pdf/seminar/4d.pdfthe...

LCA of selectedroad bridges in Norway

Johanne HammervoldSenior [email protected]: 411 20661

www.misa.no

Outline

• Presentation of case bridges– Bridge types– Materials included

• Results– Totals– In more detail for global warming and acidification

• Conclusions

• MiSA case study– Comparison of three bridges for one bridge site

5/21/2012 MiSA standard presentation

2

The case bridges

5/21/2012

3

ETSI Stage III Final Seminar Malmö May 2012

• 21 concrete bridges– 6 box girder bridges, 4 girder bridges, 9 slab bridges

• 9 steel bridges– 6 girder bridges, 1 arch bridge, 1 box bridge, 1 slab bridge

• 5 timber bridges– 4 arch bridges, 1 of unknown design

Size parameters – Concrete bridges

5/21/2012

4

NAME TYPE Width Length Area SpansMax

hightUnit m m m2 No m

Brattfoss East bridge Concrete box girder 11 231 2 541Hillersvika bridge Concrete box girder 10.6 38.5 417 1 ca 10Hobekk bru Concrete box girder 10.5 160 3 395 3 ca 30Kjosevegen bru Concrete box girder 10.5 307 6 447 5 ca 60Seimsbrui bridge Concrete box girder 10.3 26 372Svelgjabrui bridge Concrete box girder 8.5 40 340Myklebust bridge Concrete girder 6.5 22 143Sifjordbotn bridge Concrete girder 6.5 14 91Stigagjel bridge Concrete girder 4 35 140Solli bridge Concrete girder 13 112 1 456 4 ca 15Gulliksrud bridge Concrete slab 12 183 2 196Henriksåsen bru Concrete slab 10.5 55 1 188 3 ca 15Hofsroed bru Concrete slab 10.5 103 2 201 3 ca 15Holten bridge Concrete slab 8.9 24 214Jordola bridge Concrete slab 8.9 24.5 218Selli bridge Concrete slab 14 30 420Solum bru Concrete slab 10.5 180 3 834 6 ca 25Struten bru Concrete slab 10.5 67 1 444 2 ca 25Kalnes bridge Concrete slab 10.25 60.19 800 3 ca 27


5/21/2012 ETSI Stage III Final Seminar Malmö May 2012

5



Austerstraumen bridge Steel girder 9.9 196 1 940Breivikeidet bridge Steel girder 8.1 35 284Klenevaagen bridge Steel girder 8.3 42.2 321 1 20Noetoey bridge Steel girder 6.5 106 689Vesterbukta bridge Steel girder 9.9 196 273Vesterstraumen bridge Steel girder 9.9 305 3 020Aasnes bridge Steel arch 9 111 1 120 1 ?Namsos bridge Steel box girder 11 360 3 960Spissoey bridge Steel slab 6.5 72 468

Size parameters – Steel and Timber bridges



Fretheim bridge Timber arch 6.05 37.9 230 1 ca 5Maasoer bridge Timber arch 754Ner-Hole bridge Timber arch 6.5 46.9 305 1 ca 8Nybergsund bridge Timber arch 1 139Borlange bridge Timber, unknown design 164

Materials includedin study

Amounts aremainly

based ontender documents

5/21/2012

6

Brattfoss East bridge x x x x x x x x x xHillersvika bridge x x x x x x x x x xHobekk bridge x x x x x x x x x x xKjosevegen bridge x x x x x x x xSeimsbrui bridge x x x x x x x x xSvelgjabrui bridge x x x x x x x x x xMyklebust bridge x x x x x x x x x xSifjordbotn bridge x x x x x x x x x xStigagjel bridge x x x x x x x x x xSolli bridge x x x x x x x x x x xGulliksrud bridge x x x x x x x x xHenriksaasen bridge x x x x x x x x x xHofsroed bridge x x x x x x x x x xHolten bridge x x x x x x x x x xJordola bridge x x x x x x x x x xSelli bridge x x x x x x x x x xSolum bridge x x x x x x x x x xStruten bridge x x x x x x x x x xKalnes bridge x x x x x x x x x x

Aasnes bridge x x x x x x x x x xNamsos bridge x x x x x x x x xAusterstraumen bridge x x x x x x x x x xBreivikeidet bridge x x x x x x x x xKlenevaagen bridge x x x x x x x x x xNoetoey bridge x x x x x x x x x xVesterbukta bridge x x x x x x x x x xVesterstraumen bridge x x x x x x x x x xSpissoey bridge x x x x x x x x x x

Fretheim bridge x x x x x x x x x x xMaasoer bridge x x x x x x x x x x x xNer-Hole bridge x x x x x x x x x x xNybergsund bridge x x x x x x x x xBorlange bridge x x x x x x x x

Bla

stin

g

Exc

avat

ion

Mac

hine

ry

Geo

text

ile

EPS

Cem

ent m

orta

r

Con

cret

e

Rei

nfor

cing

Mas

ticas

phal

t

Glu

lam

Saw

ntim

ber

Pres

erva

tive

tr.

Cop

per

Stee

l

Pow

der c

oatin

g

Zin

cco

atin

g

Asp

halt

mem

.

Tac

kco

at

Asp

halt

Concrete bridges

Steel bridges

Timber bridges

OM and EOL not included

Environmental performance

• Environmental performance of the bridges are measured by their potential impact to 5 selected environmental issues:– Global warming– Ozone depletion– Photochemical oxidation potential (smog)– Acidification– Eutrophication

• All results are given in emissions per m2 effective bridge area– Bridge area definition: length of bridge box multiplied by bridge width

(distance between the railings)• Results in two layers

– Total results for each category, comparison of the bridges– Results for global warming in more detail

5/21/2012

7


8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

GWP ODP PCOP AP EP

BrattfossHillersvikaHobekkKjosevegenSeimsbruiSvelgjabruiMyklebustSifjordbotnStigagjelSolliGulliksrudHenriksaasenHofsroedHoltenJordoelaSelliSolumStrutenKalnes

Kjosevegen: tall bridgeSelli: High amountblasting

Solli: EPS

Holten: High amounts concrete and reinforcing

Box

gird

erG

irder

Slab

All concrete bridges - 5 Impact categories

569

542 59

0

912

482 61

1

556 62

1 741

531

457 497 57

2

876

644

548

511 59

0

564

759 83

9

661 70

5

698 82

7

1052

804

555

277

1276

414 53

6 565

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400B

rattf

oss

Eas

t brid

ge

Hill

ersv

ika

brid

ge

Hob

ekk

bru

Kjo

seve

gen

bru

Seim

sbru

i brid

ge

Svel

gjab

rui b

ridge

Myk

lebu

st b

ridge

Sifjo

rdbo

tn b

ridge

Stig

agje

l brid

ge

Solli

brid

ge

Gul

liksr

ud b

ridge

Hen

rikså

sen

bru

Hof

sroe

d br

u

Hol

ten

brid

ge

Jord

ola

brid

ge

Selli

brid

ge

Solu

m b

ru

Stru

ten

bru

Kal

nes

brid

ge

Aus

ters

trau

men

brid

ge

Bre

ivik

eide

t brid

ge

Kle

neva

agen

brid

ge

Noe

toey

brid

ge

Ves

terb

ukta

brid

ge

Ves

ters

trau

men

brid

ge

Aas

nes

brid

ge

Nam

sos

brid

ge

Spis

soey

brid

ge

Fret

heim

brid

ge

Maa

soer

Brid

ge

Ner

-Hol

e B

ridge

Nyb

ergs

und

Brid

ge

Bor

lang

e B

ridge

CO2 emissions per effective surface area

5/21/2012

9


Concrete bridges Steel bridges Timber bridges

Box

gird

er

Gird

er

Slab

Gird

er

Box

gird

erSl

ab

Arc

h

Arc

h

Unk

now

nde

sign

av: 618 av: 612 av: 584 av:

748av: 626

569

542 59

0

912

482 61

1

556 62

1 741

531

457 497 57

2

876

644

548

511 59

0

564

759 83

9

661 705

698 82

7

1052

804

555

277

1276

414 53

6 565

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400B

rattf

oss

Eas

t brid

ge

Hill

ersv

ika

brid

ge

Hob

ekk

bru

Kjo

seve

gen

bru

Seim

sbru

i brid

ge

Svel

gjab

rui b

ridge

Myk

lebu

st b

ridge

Sifjo

rdbo

tn b

ridge

Stig

agje

l brid

ge

Solli

brid

ge

Gul

liksr

ud b

ridge

Hen

rikså

sen

bru

Hof

sroe

d br

u

Hol

ten

brid

ge

Jord

ola

brid

ge

Selli

brid

ge

Solu

m b

ru

Stru

ten

bru

Kal

nes

brid

ge

Aus

ters

trau

men

brid

ge

Bre

ivik

eide

t brid

ge

Kle

neva

agen

brid

ge

Noe

toey

brid

ge

Ves

terb

ukta

brid

ge

Ves

ters

trau

men

brid

ge

Aas

nes

brid

ge

Nam

sos

brid

ge

Spis

soey

brid

ge

Fret

heim

brid

ge

Maa

soer

Brid

ge

Ner

-Hol

e B

ridge

Nyb

ergs

und

Brid

ge

Bor

lang

e B

ridge


5/21/2012

10



av: 559 (618) av: 561 (584)av: 448

(626)

av: 748

569

542 59

0

912

482 61

1

556 62

1 741

531

457 497 57

2

876

644

548

511 59

0

564

759 83

9

661 705

698 82

7

1052

804

555

277

1276

414 53

6 565

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400B

rattf

oss

Eas

t brid

ge

Hill

ersv

ika

brid

ge

Hob

ekk

bru

Kjo

seve

gen

bru

Seim

sbru

i brid

ge

Svel

gjab

rui b

ridge

Myk

lebu

st b

ridge

Sifjo

rdbo

tn b

ridge

Stig

agje

l brid

ge

Solli

brid

ge

Gul

liksr

ud b

ridge

Hen

rikså

sen

bru

Hof

sroe

d br

u

Hol

ten

brid

ge

Jord

ola

brid

ge

Selli

brid

ge

Solu

m b

ru

Stru

ten

bru

Kal

nes

brid

ge

Aus

ters

trau

men

brid

ge

Bre

ivik

eide

t brid

ge

Kle

neva

agen

brid

ge

Noe

toey

brid

ge

Ves

terb

ukta

brid

ge

Ves

ters

trau

men

brid

ge

Aas

nes

brid

ge

Nam

sos

brid

ge

Spis

soey

brid

ge

Fret

heim

brid

ge

Maa

soer

Brid

ge

Ner

-Hol

e B

ridge

Nyb

ergs

und

Brid

ge

Bor

lang

e B

ridge


5/21/2012

11



Avg: 601 + 52 %- 24 %

Avg: 767 + 37 %- 28 %

Avg: 613 + 108 %- 55 %

Concrete bridges – Global Warming

5/21/2012

12

ETSI Stage III Final Seminar Malmö May 20120 200 400 600 800 1000

Brattfoss East bridge

Hillersvika bridge

Hobekk bru

Kjosevegen bru

Seimsbrui bridge

Svelgjabrui bridge

Myklebust bridge

Sifjordbotn bridge

Stigagjel bridge

Solli bridge

Gulliksrud bridge

Henriksaasen bru

Hofsroed bru

Holten bridge

Jordola bridge

Selli bridge

Solum bru

Struten bru

Kalnes bridge

kg CO2-eq /m2

Blasting

Excavation

Machinery

Geotextile

Epoxy

Cement mortar

Concrete

Reinforcing

Mastic asphalt

Steel

Powder coating

Zinc coating

Asphalt membrane

Tack coat

Asphalt

Steel bridges – Global Warming

5/21/2012

13


0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Austerstraumen bridge

Breivikeidet bridge

Klenevaagen bridge

Noetoey bridge

Vesterbukta bridge

Vesterstraumen bridge

Åsnes bru - stålbjelkebru

Namsos bridge

Spissoey bridge

kg CO2 eq/m2

Blasting

Excavation

Machinery

Concrete

Reinforcing

Steel

Powder coating

Zinc coating

Asphalt membrane

Tack coat

Asphalt

Timber bridges – Global Warming

5/21/2012

14


0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Fretheim bridge

Maasoer Bridge

Ner-Hole Bridge

Nybergsund Bridge

Borlange Bridge

kg CO2 eq/m2

ExcavationMachineryConcreteReinforcingGlue laminated timberSawn timberPreservative treatmentCopperSteelPowder coatingZinc coatingAsphalt membraneTack coatAsphalt

0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5

Brattfoss East bridgeHillersvika bridge

Hobekk bruKjosevegen bru

Seimsbrui bridgeSvelgjabrui bridgeMyklebust bridgeSifjordbotn bridge

Stigagjel bridgeGulliksrud bridgeHenriksåsen bru

Hofsroed bruHolten bridgeJordola bridge

Selli bridgeSolum bru

Struten bruNordre Bjoernstad bridge

Boerstad bridgeKalnes bridge

Solli bridge

kg SO2 - eq

Blasting

Excavation

Machinery

Geotextile

Epoxy

Cement mortar

Concrete

Reinforcing

Mastic asphalt

Glue laminated timber

Sawn timber

Preservative treatment

Copper

Steel

Powder coating

Zinc coating

Asphalt membrane

Tack coat

Asphalt

Concrete bridges – Acidification

5/21/2012

15


0 1 2 3 4

Aasnes bru

Namsos bridge

Austerstraumen bridge

Breivikeidet bridge

Klenevaagen bridge

Noetoey bridge

Vesterbukta bridge

Vesterstraumen bridge

Spissoey bridge

kg SO2 - eq

Blasting

Excavation

Machinery

Geotextile

Epoxy

Cement mortar

Concrete

Reinforcing

Mastic asphalt

Glue laminated timber

Sawn timber

Preservative treatment

Copper

Steel

Powder coating

Zinc coating

Asphalt membrane

Tack coat

Asphalt

Steel bridges – Acidification

5/21/2012

16


0 1 2 3 4 5

Fretheim bridge

Maasoer Bridge

Ner-Hole Bridge

Nybergsund Bridge

Borlange Bridge

kg SO2 - eq

BlastingExcavationMachineryGeotextileEpoxyCement mortarConcreteReinforcingMastic asphaltGlue laminated timberSawn timberPreservative treatmentCopperSteelPowder coatingZinc coatingAsphalt membraneTack coatAsphalt

Timber bridges – Acidification

5/21/2012

17


Bridges in highway project; Sky - Langangen


18

Bridge Width Length Effectivesurfacearea

Spans Max hight

Struten 10.5 m 67 m 1 444 m2 2 ~ 25 m

Solum 10.5 m 180 m 3 834 m2 6 ~ 25 m

Hofsroed 10.5 m 103 m 2 201 m2 3 ~ 15 m

Henriksaasen 10.5 m 55 m 1 188 m2 3 ~ 15 m

Kjosevegen 10.5 m 307 m 6 447 m2 5 ~ 60 m

Hobekk 10.5 m 160 m 3 395 m2 3 ~ 30 m

3395

6447

1188

2201

3834

1444

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Hobekk bru

Kjosevegen bru

Henriksaasen bru

Hofsroed bru

Solum bru

Struten bru

Kg CO2-eq / m2

Kjosevegen bridge


19

Heightca 60 m

Hobekk bridge


20

Heightca 30 m

Solum bridge


21

Heightca 25 m

Henriksaasen bridge


22

Heightca 15 m

Struten bridge


23

Heightca 25 m

Hofsroed bridge


24

Heightca 15 m

Conclusions

5/21/2012

25


• Steel, concrete, reinforcing overall most important– Asphalt – Glue laminated wood– Machinery– Blasting– EPS (small amounts but high impact to ODP)

• Too much variations within bridge classes, and too few case bridges, to conclude on average values– But can say something about tendencies

• Concrete: average 601 kg CO2-eq / m2 (+52 %, -24 %)• Steel: average 767 CO2-eq / m2 (+37 %, -28 %)• Timber: average 613 CO2-eq / m2 (+108 %, -55 %)

Conclusions

5/21/2012

26


• Environmental performance rankings varies for the categories – Trade-off necessary

• Possibilities to influence environmental performance– Bridge type choice– Design choices– Demands to suppliers of the most important materials

Three alternative bridge designs over Øla riverMisa study, for Reinertsen and the NPRA

5/21/2012

27


• This study is part of an ongoing planning process for a new highway project in Norway– Bridge in study part of a side road

• Comparison of environmental performance of:– A concrete slab bridge– A steel grated bridge– A slab bridge of timber

• Size requirements for bridge solution: – Length: 65 m– Width: 5 m

Relative results – 5 categoriesMisa study, for Reinertsen and the NPRA

5/21/2012

28


1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00

0,88 0,77

0,40

0,77 0,80

1,00

0,55

0,76 0,73 0,76

0,51

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

GWP ODP PCOP AP EP

Concrete bridge Steel bridge Timber bridge

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Steel bridge Concrete bridge Timber bridge

EOL treatment

Maintenance

Material transport

Equipment

Superstructure

Bridge deck

Pillars and foundation

Abutments

Building pit

Results per m2 effective bridge area – Global WarmingMisa study, for Reinertsen and the NPRA

5/21/2012

29


Sim

ilar

358

276

199

300

213170

050

100150200250300350400

Concrete bridge Steel bridge Timber bridge

ton

CO

2 eq

State-of-art 60% scrap, 40% fly ash, low-energy production

Sensitivity analysis, global warming

State-of-art Scenario

Scrap use in steelproduction

37 % scrap 60 % scrap

Fly ash use in concreteproduction

20 % fly ash 40 % fly ash

Low-energy production State-of-art 20 % increase in energy efficiency

5/21/2012

30

16 % 15 %23 %

Conclusions

• Timber bridge performs best– All categories except ozone layer depletion

• Steel bridge second– Exept ODP and EP– 4 – 49 % higher results than timber bridges – 23 % for GWP

• Concrete bridge– 14 – 45 % higher results than timber bridges– 45 % for GWP

• Sensitivity– 15 – 23 % improvement (GWP)

5/21/2012

31


Conclusions

• Improvement of environmental performance– Choice of bridge type– Demands to material supplier or choice of

supplier

• Freedom of choice?– Requirement to bridge design related to

• Traffic• Bridge site• economics• Aestetics


32

a systems perspective to environmental researchand consulting

www.misa.no

5/21/2012

33

lca of selected road bridges in norway - etsi project - …etsi.aalto.fi/etsi3/pdf/seminar/4d.pdfthe...

Documents