IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v18y2026i13p6771-d1982647.html

Circularity Assessment of GeoBarrier System as Sustainable Retaining Wall

Author

Listed:
  • Rezat Abishev

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, 53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave, Astana 010000, Kazakhstan)

  • Alfrendo Satyanaga

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, 53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave, Astana 010000, Kazakhstan)

  • Mert Guney

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, 53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave, Astana 010000, Kazakhstan
    The Environment and Resource Efficiency Cluster (EREC), Nazarbayev University, Astana 010000, Kazakhstan)

  • Marzhan Kabzhassarova

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, 53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave, Astana 010000, Kazakhstan)

  • Aswin Lim

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Parahyangan Catholic University, Bandung 40141, Indonesia)

  • Jong Kim

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, 53 Kabanbay Batyr Ave, Astana 010000, Kazakhstan)

Abstract

The growth of circular economy concepts has resulted in the need to develop methods for assessing circularity in geotechnical infrastructure systems. This paper proposes, for the first time, an initial framework for assessing circularity of geotechnical infrastructure systems and then uses it to assess the GeoBarrier System (GBS) as a case study. The framework considers five domains: water, energy, material, waste, and site quality. It was formulated based on a literature review, stakeholder requirements, and the case-specific characteristics of the GBS. Laboratory characterisation and numerical analyses were performed to assess the engineering performance of the system and support the circularity assessment. The results show that water circularity was the highest at 50.0%, meaning that half of the water in the system was effectively reused or recirculated. In contrast, energy circularity was absent due to the lack of renewable energy integration. Material and waste circularity performed at a moderate level, lower than water circularity, reflecting partial use of recycled materials and reuse of excavated soil. The site quality evaluation resulted in a score of 2.250, which, together with the other indicators, suggests an intermediate overall level of circularity performance. The assessment identified opportunities to improve circularity through greater on-site reuse of excavated waste, renewable energy integration, and improved site planning. The proposed framework is the first circularity/sustainability system specific to geotechnical infrastructure systems; therefore, apart from GBS, it is intended for potential applicability for evaluating circularity in other geotechnical systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Rezat Abishev & Alfrendo Satyanaga & Mert Guney & Marzhan Kabzhassarova & Aswin Lim & Jong Kim, 2026. "Circularity Assessment of GeoBarrier System as Sustainable Retaining Wall," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-23, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:13:p:6771-:d:1982647
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/13/6771/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/13/6771/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:18:y:2026:i:13:p:6771-:d:1982647. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.