Cost Effectiveness Analysis

of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction

in the Flexible Pavement Material
Transportation Process Unit

Fajar Sri Handayani, Florentina Pungky Pramesti, and Ary Setyawan

Abstract The activity of material transportation regarding the project of road

construction indicated several negative impacts on the environment including the
greenhouse gas emissions release. In developing sustainable development strategy
especially in transportation infrastructure, it is necessary to find a strategy in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions of road construction cycle. This study aimed to estimate
and evaluate the greenhouse gas emissions reduction in the flexible pavement mate-
rial transportation process unit. The life cycle assessment was used to estimate the
emissions produced. The greenhouse gas emissions evaluation did not only underline
the reduction percentage, but also on the relative cost of the reduction. The approach
of cost effectiveness analysis concept was implemented to estimate the cost effective-
ness. The results showed that the greenhouse gas emissions in the dump trucks use
variation in the flexible pavement material transportation process unit ranged from
2.99% to 6.23%. Every alternative in emissions reduction showed the potential to
decrease the greenhouse gas emissions at a cost comparable to emissions that could
be reduced.

Keywords Cost effectiveness · Greenhouse gases · Flexible pavement

1 Introduction

Pavement construction activities have mostly used 22% of global energy consump-
tion, 25% of fossil fuels and 30% of global air pollution, namely greenhouse gases
[1]. Greenhouse gas emissions due to the projects of construction in Indonesia in the
period of 2009–2019 showed an estimate of 29,941,737 ton CO2 e of which 20% was
donated by the project of toll road construction, 39% was issued by the project of

F. S. Handayani (B) · F. P. Pramesti · A. Setyawan

Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta,
Indonesia
e-mail: fajarhani@ft.uns.ac.id
F. P. Pramesti
e-mail: f.p.pramesti@ft.uns.ac.id

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 771
S. A. Kristiawan et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
Rehabilitation and Maintenance in Civil Engineering, Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering 225,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-9348-9_68
772 F. S. Handayani et al.

national road construction, 17% was issued by provincial road construction project,
and 14% was resulted from the project of local road construction [2].
A significant impact on the environment has emerged regarding road construc-
tion and improvement activities. In anticipation, the government has given responses
by issuing a strategy in infrastructure development that is necessary as a strategy
of sustainable development or development implementing the principles of sustain-
ability.
The definition of sustainable development refers to meeting the present needs
development without restricting the future generations’ ability in fulfilling their
needs. This development form is a stable relationship between activity and nature
and therefore there is a good quality of life provided for the future generations.
Sustainable development is designed and built referring to the sustainability concept
which is a system indicating the capacity in order to support nature and the values
of human (ecology, economy, and equity) [3]. A sustainable road construction is a
road construction starting from the design, construction, maintenance, and rehabili-
tation stages using environmentally friendly, environmentally friendly measures and
applying sustainable principles [4].
One of the strategic methods in reducing the global warming potential on pavement
includes the development based on the environmental performance increase most
effectively by underlining the high potential impacts components. The benefit taken
in this system is that the fact showing small changes in high-impact components will
get a greater effect than low-impact components [5].
In the flexible pavement material production stage, the material extraction process
contributed 92.11% of greenhouse gas emissions from the total emissions during the
material production stage. In the flexible pavement construction phase, the material
transportation process to the project site accounted for 70.09% of the total emis-
sions generated during the construction phase [6]. Thus, the approach used to reduce
greenhouse gas emission in this article underlined the reduction opportunities in the
process unit of construction material transportation.
In order to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions on pavement, it needs a deep
understanding about how the cycle of life of a construction project affects the envi-
ronment. Similar to other products, road pavement also results in greenhouse gas
emissions throughout its service life starting from the stages of material production,
construction, operational and maintenance.
Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a method used to estimate the environmental
effects resulting from the application of materials, distribution/transportation,
construction, maintenance and congestion, during the road construction service life
[7].
In general, cost effectiveness analysis is applied in the fields of health and
medicine. It compares the costs and health effects of an intervention to assess the
extent to which the business can give economic value. In implementing the cost
effectiveness concept aiming to decrease the emissions of greenhouse gas at the
construction stage of road pavement, reductions alternative can be assessed not only
on the reduction potential but also on the relative costs acquired for the emissions
reduction efforts. Cost Effectiveness (CE) becomes a comparison of the additional
Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction … 773

costs incurred for the activities of emission reduction with a number of reduced
greenhouse gas emissions [8].
An analysis of greenhouse gas emissions on several material transportation alter-
native is necessary to be conducted to determine the emissions reductions percentage
that can be done. The determination of alternative choices of greenhouse gas emis-
sions is not only in the reduction percentage but also in the reduction relative costs.
Thus, this article aimed to estimate the percentage of greenhouse gas emissions reduc-
tion in the material transportation process unit and its cost effectiveness analysis, on
the road pavement construction project.

2 Methods

This research took a case study of regional road construction in Sukoharjo district.
The road construction was flexible pavement. The data used in the life cycle assess-
ment method consisted of primary data obtained from direct observations in the
field and secondary data obtained from the database of related agencies and the offi-
cial website of the database provider. Data on quarry locations for pavement material
materials, asphalt mixing plant locations, types of material transportation equipment,
types of heavy equipment and construction methods used were primary data, while
secondary data required were general project data, TRACI 2.1 conversion database,
and life cycle inventory database from previous research and the Ecoinvent database
[9].
The estimate stages of greenhouse gas emission in this research were the determi-
nation of the activities of each construction stage which was conducted, the factors
of emission per unit of activity, and the estimate of greenhouse gas emissions as the
results of multiplication of activity data and emission factors per unit of activity. The
flexible pavement construction activities of this case study included the production
process of flexible pavement material (asphalt, filler, sand, aggregate), the transporta-
tion of pavement material to the Asphalt Mixing Plant, the process at the asphalt
mixing plant, the transportation to the project site, and the laying process at the
project site. The emission data for pavement material factors in units of kgCO2 e per
kilogram-material in this calculation was based on the results of research by Chappat
[10], Blomberg [11] and Korre [12]. Energy use and specifications for asphalt mixing
plant were based on the results of Zapata’s research [13]. The emissions factor of
transportation and construction equipment in units of kgCO2 e per hour of tool use
was based on the ecoinvent database [14].
The estimate of greenhouse gas emissions reduction and costs was conducted on
three alternative variations in the capacity of dump trucks that were used, alternative
1 applied dump truck DT 10, alternative 2 applied dump truck DT 20, and alternative
3 applied dump truck DT 24. The Cost Efficiency estimate (CE) was calculated by
comparing the cost difference magnitude to reducing the greenhouse gas emissions
with greenhouse gas emissions reduction in each alternative.
774 F. S. Handayani et al.

3 Result and Discussion

The road pavement construction which is the case study in this research is the flexible
pavement construction of regency road sections with a road length of 1446 m, a road
width of 15.6 m and a pavement thickness of 0.4486 m consisting of 0.1486 m thick
base course, sub-base thickness course of 0.2 m and the thickness of the surface
course of 0.10 m.
The emission analysis stages reviewed in this study were the material production
stage and the construction stage. The material production and construction stages
were divided into several process units, namely the material production process unit,
material transportation to asphalt mixing plant (AMP), the mixing process at AMP,
transportation to the project site, and the on-site laying process.
The unit of the material production process is a material process occurring in
nature. This process sees the CO2e gas resulted from every material applied in the
process of production. The unit of material transportation process is the transporta-
tion process of a number of pavement material required to towards AMP. Greenhouse
gas emissions calculated in this process were vehicle emissions resulting from the
material transportation process to AMP. Material transportation in the form of aggre-
gate, sand and filler in this case study used a 7.5 ton dump truck with a transportation
effectiveness of 90%, which means a truck capacity of 6.75 tonnes. Transportation
of materials in the form of asphalt and binder used a tank truck with a capacity of
8.75 tons and the effectiveness of transporting was 90% meaning the capacity of the
truck was 7.785 tons. All trucks used are assumed to use a speed of 40 km/hour.
The mixing process unit is the process of mixing raw materials. In this mixing
activity, the amount of greenhouse gases emission that was released was due to the
asphalt mixing process in AMP. The transportation process unit to the project site
was the transportation activity from AMP to the project site. The distance from AMP
to the work site required a certain amount of fuel to be used for truck operations. The
use of this fuel resulted in the release of greenhouse gas emissions in the process of
moving asphalt from AMP to the project site.
The unit of the spreading process at the project site was the activity of spreading
the asphalt mixture at the project site. Heavy equipment used in the sub-base course
construction process included an asphalt finisher, motor grader, water tank and dump
truck. Heavy equipment used in the base course construction process included asphalt
finisher, pneumatic tire rollers, tandem rollers and dump trucks. Heavy equipment
used in the surface course construction process included asphalt finisher, pneumatic
tire rollers, tandem rollers and dump trucks.
The material production process in the form of aggregate, sand, asphalt, filler and
binder was calculated by multiplying the volume of material required by the material
emission factor. Material emission factors in units of kgCO2 e per ton and calculation
of emissions in the material production process can be seen in Table 1.
In the material transportation process unit to AMP, the emission calculation is done
by multiplying the time used for the transportation mode (hours) by the emissions
factor (kgCO2 e/hour). The time to use the transportation mode depends on the volume
Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction … 775

Table 1 Greenhouse gas emissions generated in the material production process unit
Material Volume Unit Emissions factor (kgCO2 e/ton) Usage (kg)
Aggregate 1997.83 Ton 10.0 19,978.32
Sand 459.89 Ton 2.5 19,978.32
Asphalt 60.68 Ton 285.0 1149.71
Filler 9.35 Ton 10.0 93.51
Asphalt binder 2.13 Litre 221.0 470.60

of material, the quarry distance to AMP, the volume of the dump truck, and the average
speed of the mode of transportation. The calculation of greenhouse gas emissions in
the material transportation process unit to AMP is presented in Table 2.
Material processing at AMP is in the form of mixing asphalt, aggregate, sand
and filler into a flexible pavement material mixture. The calculation of emissions in
the processing unit at AMP was done by multiplying the amount of time spent in
AMP by the AMP emission factor per hour. Based on the Ecoinvent 3.3 and TRACI
2.1 database, the emission factor in the processing unit at AMP was 119.0141 kg
CO2 e/hour. At an AMP capacity of 60 tonnes/hour with the use time in AMP in this
case study of 16.6 h , and therefore the greenhouse gas emissions produced in the
processing unit at AMP were 1975.63 kgCO2 e.
The calculation of greenhouse gas emissions in the asphalt spread process unit
at the project site is divided into 3 sub-process units, namely the base course, sub-
base course, and surface course. The calculation of greenhouse gas emissions at the

Table 2 Greenhouse gas emissions in the material transportation process to AMP

The unit of Distance to AMP The time length GHG emission GHG emission
material (km) (hour) factor (kgCO2 e)
transportation (kgCO2 e/hour)
process to AMP
The 33 488.4 5.06 463.99
transportation of
aggregate
The 33 113.85 5,06 2471.30
transportation of
sand
The 238 91.70 24.83 576.08
transportation of
asphalt
The 33 3.30 24.83 60.21
transportation of
filler
The 238 11.9 5.06 16.70
transportation of
a. binder
776 F. S. Handayani et al.

Table 3 Greenhouse gas emissions in the pavement construction process unit

Tool capacity Volume Tool use Emissions factor Greenhouse
(ton/hour)-(l/hour) (ton) (hour) (kgCO2 e/hour) gas emission
(kgCO2 e)
Motor grader 234.77 1015.20 4.32 24.80 107.25
Tandem roller 73.94 1015.20 13.73 24.80 340.54
Water tank 71.14 1015.20 14.27 5.06 72.20
Asphalt 4800.00 2248.13 0.47 3.58 1.68
distributor
Compressor 4800.00 2248.13 0.47 5.06 2.37
Asphalt finisher 72.79 994.80 13.67 24.80 338.98
Tandem roller 73.94 994.80 13.45 24.80 333.70
Pneumatic tire 172.34 994.80 5.77 24.80 143.17
roller

construction stage was carried out by multiplying the total time used by the heavy
equipment at each construction stage by the heavy equipment emission factor. Heavy
equipment used in the sub-base course construction process includes an asphalt
finisher, motor grader, water tank and dump truck. Heavy equipment used in the base
course construction process includes asphalt finisher, pneumatic tire rollers, tandem
rollers and dump trucks. Heavy equipment used in the surface course construction
process includes asphalt finisher, pneumatic tire rollers, tandem rollers and dump
trucks. The results of calculating the emission of construction heavy equipment in
the flexible pavement construction process unit are presented in Table 3.
The recapitulation of the greenhouse gas emissions calculation released in the flex-
ible pavement construction process using the DT 8 dump truck material transportation
unit in the material transportation process unit is presented in Table 4.
In this case study of flexible pavement construction, the estimate results of LCA
process in the scope from raw material to gate before the process of operation (cradle
to gate), the unit of material production process released greenhouse gas emissions
of 38,986.74 kgCO2 e or 79.52%, while the unit of transportation processes released
greenhouse gas emissions of 6727.51 kgCO2 e or 13.72% of total emissions. However,
when it is viewed from the process of LCA in the construction scope (gate to gate),
66.99% of emissions release was produced by the pavement material transportation
process towards the site location.
The greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy in this case study was conducted
by observing how much greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by applying
dump truck transportation tool with bigger bucket capacity, such as DT 10, 20, and
24. The assumption built that the bigger the dump truck bucket capacity, the lower
the repetitions number and the dump truck use time so the greenhouse gas emissions
can be reduced.
The efforts of reduction evaluated not only on the reduction percentage but also
on the relative costs incurred for the efforts of emissions production. The estimate
Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction … 777

Table 4 The recapitulation

Process unit Process sub unit GHG emission
of greenhouse gas emissions
(kgCO2 e)
in flexible pavement
Material production Asphalt 17,294.60
production
Aggregate 19,978.32
production
Sand production 1149.71
Filler production 93.51
Asphalt binder 470.60
production
Transportation to Asphalt 463.99
AMP transportation
Aggregate 2471.30
transportation
Sand 576.08
transportation
Filler 60.21
transportation
Asphalt binder 16.70
transportation
Mixing process Mixing process in 1975.63
AMP
Transportation to site Mixed asphalt 3130.88
transportation
Asphalt binder 8.35
transportation
Pavement Base course 520.01
construction Sub-base course 4.05
Surface course 815.85
Sum of emission 49,029.29

simulation results of greenhouse gas emissions in the material transportation process

unit to AMP by using means of transportation of alternatives 1, 2, and 3, the difference
in emissions, the emissions decrease percentage, the cost difference, and the effective
cost effectiveness are presented in Table 5.
The estimate results presented in Table 5 indicated that the dump trucks use
variation in the unit of sand and aggregate transportation resulted in greenhouse
gas emissions reduction by 2.99%, 4.74%, and 6.23% respectively. Alternative 3
produced the highest greenhouse gas emissions reduction. Having similar volume,
the use of means of transportation in large capacity will be able to lower repetition
and reduce the time of its use, and therefore the emissions that are produced will be
reduced.
778 F. S. Handayani et al.

Table 5 Recapitulation of GHG emission, percentage of reductions and cost effectiveness

Process unit Existing GHG emission (kgCO2 e) Alt. 3
Alt. 1 Alt. 2
Asphalt production 17,294.60 17,294.60 17,294.60 17,294.60
Aggregate production 19,978.32 19,978.32 19,978.32 19,978.32
Sand production 1149.71 1149.71 1149.71 1149.71
Filler production 93.51 93.51 93.51 93.51
Asphalt binder production 470.60 470.60 470.60 470.60
Asphalt transportation 463.99 463.99 463.99 463.99
Aggregate transportation 2471.30 2229.183 2087.25 1962.02
Sand transportation 576.08 517.64 484.242 459.20
Filler transportation 60.21 60.21 60.21 60.21
Asphalt binder transportation 16.70 16.70 16.70 16.70
Mixing process in AMP 1975.63 1975.63 1975.63 1975.63
Mixed asphalt transportation 3130.88 3130.88 3130.88 3130.88
Asphalt binder transportation 8.35 8.35 8.35 8.35
Base course 520.01 520.01 520.01 520.01
Sub-base course 4.05 4.05 4.05 4.05
Surface course 815.85 815.85 815.85 815.85
GHG emission (kgCO2 e) 49,029.79 48,729.23 48,553.90 48,403.63
 emission (kgCO2 e) 300.56 475.89 626.16
Percentage of reductions (%) 2.99 4.74 6.23
 cost (IDR*1000) 7000 13,000 21,000
CE (IDR*1000/kgCO2 e) 23.29 27.32 33.54

The strategy of emissions reduction by using large capacity dump trucks will also
reduce the biggest emissions. However, this strategy needs the biggest effective cost.
Therefore, when it is seen from the cost effectiveness value (CE), alternative 3 has
highest cost effectiveness value. In this case study, if evaluated from its CE value,
alternative 1 is the most effective alternative strategy for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions in the pavement material transportation process unit.

4 Conclusion

The greenhouse gas emissions in the dump trucks use variation in the unit of material
transportation process towards AMP ranged from 2.99% to 6.23%. Based on the
cost effectiveness value, the dump trucks DT 10 use was the most effective strategy
alternative of greenhouse gas emissions reduction in the unit of pavement material
transportation. Every emissions reduction alternative has the potential in lowering
Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction … 779

greenhouse gas emissions and need a cost which is comparable with the emissions
reduced.

References

1. Resmi CS, Satyakumar M (2011) Sustainable pavement: the green pavement for future.
National Technological Congress, Kerala, College of Engineering Trivandrum
2. The Word Bank Group (2011) Green gas emission mitigation in road construction and
rehabilitation. A toolkit for developing countries, Washington DC
3. Muench ST, Anderson JL, Hatfield JP, Koester JR, Soderlund M (2011) Greenroads manual.
V1.5. University of Washington
4. Santero NJ, Horvath A (2009) Global warming potential of pavements. Environ Res Lett
4(034011):1–7
5. Handayani FS, Pramesti FP, Wibowo MA, Setyawan A (2017) Strategy toward sustainable
local road network infrastructure. MATEC Web of Conf EACEF 138(07007):1–8
6. Handayani FS, Pramesti FP, Wibowo MA, Setyawan A (2019) Estimating and reducing the
release of greenhouse gases in local road pavement contructions. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol
9(5):1709–1715
7. Yu B, Qin L (2012) Life cycle assessment of pavement: Methodology and case study. Transp
Res Part D 17(5):380–388
8. Santero NJ, Loijos A, Ochsendorf J (2013) Greenhouse gas emissions reduction opportunities
for concrete pavements. J Ind Ecol 17(6):1–10
9. USEPA (2012) Tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental
impacts (TRACI) users guide tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and ther
environmental impacts
10. Chappat M, Bilal J (2003) The environmental road of the future: life cycle analysis, Energy
Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Colas Group
11. Blomberg T (2011) Life cycle inventory: bitumen. (Second Edi). Brussels, European Bitumen
Association
12. Korre A, Durucan S (2009) Life cycle assessment of aggregates. EVA025 Final Report
13. Zapata P, Gambatese JA (2005) Energy consumption of asphalt and reinforced concrete
pavement materials and construction. J Infrastruct Syst 11(1):9–20
14. Wernet G, Bauer C, Steubing B, Reinhard J, Moreno-Ruiz E, Weidema B (2016) The ecoinvent
database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21(9):1218–1230