IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i5p2022-d1348770.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Environmental Assessment of Three Excavated Soil and Rock (ESR) Treatment Methods: A Case Study in Shenzhen City

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Bai

    (The Institute for Sustainable Development, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macao SAR 999078, China)

  • Yi Ma

    (Guangzhou Greenstone Carbon Technology Co., Ltd., Guangzhou 510000, China)

  • Qingbin Song

    (Faculty of Innovation Engineering, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macao SAR 999078, China)

  • Zhijun Hu

    (Construction First Group, The Fifth Construction Co., Ltd., Beijing 100024, China)

  • Yanqiu Li

    (Construction First Group, The Fifth Construction Co., Ltd., Beijing 100024, China)

  • Huabo Duan

    (School of Environmental Science & Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China)

Abstract

This study aimed to quantitatively assess the environmental impacts of different methods used for treating excavated soil and rock (ESR) in Shenzhen, namely landfilling, sintering, and non-sintering, using the life cycle assessment (LCA) method. The findings indicate that recycling ESR through sintering or non-sintering processes offers more sustainable alternatives than landfilling. The recycled products derived from ESR can effectively replace traditional building materials, thereby reducing their environmental impacts. However, when comparing the environmental impacts of sintering and non-sintering processes, the latter demonstrated more significant impacts, particularly in terms of global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), and eutrophication potential (EP). Furthermore, it is worth noting that the environmental impacts of the sintering processes are influenced by fuel type and exhaust gas emissions, with natural gas combustion yielding more substantial overall environmental benefits. Moreover, ESR landfilling poses constraints on sustainable development and land resource occupation. This study contributes to a better understanding of the environmental impacts associated with ESR landfilling and recycling, provides management departments with optimal ESR management suggestions, and alleviates environmental pressure from urban development.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Bai & Yi Ma & Qingbin Song & Zhijun Hu & Yanqiu Li & Huabo Duan, 2024. "Life Cycle Environmental Assessment of Three Excavated Soil and Rock (ESR) Treatment Methods: A Case Study in Shenzhen City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2022-:d:1348770
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2022/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2022/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah E. Hale & Antonio José Roque & Gudny Okkenhaug & Erlend Sørmo & Thomas Lenoir & Christel Carlsson & Darya Kupryianchyk & Peter Flyhammar & Bojan Žlender, 2021. "The Reuse of Excavated Soils from Construction and Demolition Projects: Limitations and Possibilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Primož Jelušič & Süleyman Gücek & Bojan Žlender & Cahit Gürer & Rok Varga & Tamara Bračko & Murat V. Taciroğlu & Burak E. Korkmaz & Şule Yarcı & Borut Macuh, 2023. "Potential of Using Waste Materials in Flexible Pavement Structures Identified by Optimization Design Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Luisa Barbieri & Luca Lanzoni & Roberta Marchetti & Simone Iotti & Angelo Marcello Tarantino & Isabella Lancellotti, 2024. "Shot-Earth as Sustainable Construction Material: Chemical Aspects and Physical Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-19, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2022-:d:1348770. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.