Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector

doi:10.4236/lce.2011.23019

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Low Carbon Economy, 2011, 2, 152-158

doi:10.4236/lce.2011.23019 Published Online September 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/lce)

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on

Construction Sector

Nuki Agya Utama1*, Keiichi N. Ishihara1, Tetsuo Tezuka1, Qi Zhang1, Miguel Esteban2

1Graduate School Energy Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan; 2Graduate School Civil and Environmental, Waseda University,

Tokyo, Japan .

Email: *[email protected]

Received June 24th, 2011; revised July 28th, 2011; accepted August 8th, 2011.

ABSTRACT

Pollution sources in Indon esia have been classified into those from movable and unmovable so urces. Transportation of

goods and peop le throu gh water, air and land are the movable sources of pollution, these sources of pollution originate

mainly from gasoline and diesel combustion. This pap er will discuss the movable pollutio n, which will be referred to as

the embedded emissions from the transportation sector in buildings. The embedded emissions refer to the emissions,

which occur ind irectly throughout a building ’s lifetime (for instance, during manufacturing, transportation etc). This is

in contrast to the emissions normally considered for buildings, which usually only include those originating from its

usage during a certain life span. By using life cycle analysis tools the value of the impacts of the transportation sector

on building s can be q uantifie d. GEMIS 4.4 was used to simulate the emissions during the process of transporting mate-

rials as well as any other goods related to the construction of the building. The research however did not include the

transportation of materials after the demolition of the building to the landfill. The results show that the transportation

emissions from glass, sand, gypsum and concrete roof production have the highest emissions per kilogram of product.

Concrete roofs emit 1.82 × 10–4 kg CO2/kg, transporting raw material and glass products to customers emits 1.05 ×

10–3 kg NOx/kg, and transporting wood material 1.33 × 10–5 kg of particulates/kg. Furthermore, the future emissions

caused by this sector are also analysed in the present paper by compa ring four potential scenarios regarding different

types of future fuels that could be used by vehicles, including a (JCL) Jatropha Curcas L. based biodiesel scenario that

uses a perennial harvesting system, a (PME) Palm Methyl Ester based biodiesel both scenarios, Natural Gas Vehicles

(NGV) that could replace the current petroleum diesel engines and the business as usual (BaU) scenario.

Keywords: Transportation, Construction, Environmental Impacts, Materials

1. Introduction

Globally the construction industry is a major contributor

to socio-economic development and also a major user of

energy and natural resources. The construction industry

consumes 40% of the materials entering the global e-

conomy and generates 40% - 50% of the global output of

greenhouse gases and the agents of acid rain [1].

The energy used by the building sector can be grouped

into two categories. First, the embodied energy, or indi-

rect energy used to 1) Extract raw materials; 2) The pro-

duction of materials or components; 3) Transportation;

and 4) Construction. Second is the direct energy use dur-

ing the utilization of th e buildin g. In the UK, for example,

the embodied energy accounts for approximately 5% -

6% of the total, compared with 50% used for heating and

the remaining 44% for cooling, water heating, lighting,

power and other appliances. Different research has men-

tioned that energy uses during utilization can be seven

times greater than during the construction and the mate-

rial production ph ase [2-4]. Studies carried out in the UK

[5] and Indonesia [6,7] have calculated the embodied

energy and CO2 emissions for the main materials used in

the buildings (including transportation). For example,

UK timber emits 0.1 kg CO2/kg of product and utilizes

5.2 MJ/kg of product, corresponding to 0.05 kg CO2/kg

and 0.8 MJ/kg of energy for the case of Indonesia. Glass

and aluminium in the UK emits less CO2 and utilizes

more energy than in Indonesia, and for the case of con-

crete the UK emits more CO2 and utilizes more than half

more energy compared to that produced in Indonesia.

These studies also concluded that the lower the embodied

and operational energy used in the bu ilding, the lower th e

carbon dioxide (CO2) that is produced.

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector153

Transportation itself is responsible for 27% of Indone-

sia’s total emissions in 2006, making it the second larg est

CO2 emitter, after industry, and is predicted to become

the largest source by 2030 [8]. Five to ten percent of the

overall country’s emissions relate directly or indirectly to

transportation in the building sector (calculated from the

GDP and construction sector in th e country) [9].

The Indonesian Ministry of the Environment predicts

that by 2015 the amount of CO2 emitted will increase to

up to 3.5 million tons/year compare to 957,000 tons in

1998. SO2 emissions by that date will also increase to up

to 2.4 times their present rate (4900 tons/year) and PM10

will rise to more than 2.7 times the curren t level of 6300

tons/year [10]. These increases will result mainly from an

increase in the consumption of gasoline and diesel fuel.

The building related industry, and especially the trans-

port of materials using diesel engines contributes most of

the GWP (Global Warming Potential) of Indonesia, and

is also responsible for the acidification of certain areas.

On top of the substances mentioned above, the transpor-

tation sector also emits other hazardous substances, such

as lead, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, chrome, and other

hazardous air pollutants [10].

Biofuels, which are alternative fuels that can replace

diesel, have been increasing in importance in recent

times, and although they can have positive benefits, they

can also negatively affect land use, contribute to defor-

estation, and influence food production. The following

figure shows the percentage increase in the price of sev-

eral food stocks resulting from the development of the

first generation of biofuels. The comparison shows dif-

ferent scenarios developed by the International Institute

for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) [11] using the

future projection of agriculture production by the Inter-

national Energy Agency (IEA) and also shows a refer-

ence scenario, which assumes that biofuels feedstock

demand is kept constant after 2008. The result shows that

there is a real potential for biofuels to compete with food

production. One of their scenarios (TAR-VI) for 2020

assumes that the second generation biofuels will be

commercially available in 2015 and the deployment will

be gradual, and that the mandatory, voluntary or in-

dicative targets for biofuels use announced by major de-

veloped and developing countries will be implemented

by 2020 (as projected by IEA in its WEO 2008). This

scenario results in a 50 percent increase in coarse grain

price, 30 percent increase of wheat and other food (non

rice, wheat, protein feed and grains) and 12 percent in-

crease in the price of rice. Therefore it is important to

analyze the real environmental and socio-economical

impact of biofuels as well as the cost. Another alternative

fuels have less environmental impact (in terms of green-

house gas emissions) are natural gas. Worldwide the

growth in the number of natural gas vehicles (NGV) has

been remarkable, around 30% on average since 2000,

with Asian nations being responsible for more than 53%

of this growth [12].

For buildings, the transporting of construction materi-

als from quarry to site or from factory to site are impor-

tant parts of the construction process. Environmental

analyses of the impact of transportation systems on the

environment from the cradle to the grave are rare [13]

especially when they are related to the construction sec-

tor. One study which has been carried out for transporta-

tion in the construc tion sector compares the use of diesel

fuel and biodiesel in cement mixers using portable emis-

sion measurement systems shows no significant change

in CO2 and NO but a significant decrease in CO, hydro-

carbon and PM emissions [14]. (Life Cycle Assessment

based research for transportation and construction done

by Huang in China [15] shows that the higher the engine

capacity the lower the CO and NMVOC released into the

environment.

The present paper will assess the environmental bur-

den from transportation as part of the construction proc-

ess. It will include material flows from quarry to site, and

also show some future prediction on how the use of al-

ternative fuels such as biodiesels and natural gas vehicle

(NGV) would impact the environmental burden of con-

struction. The economic analysis will also include meas-

uring the potential for replacing the current oil based

machines with NGV by using a learning curve analysis.

However this paper will only concern itself with trans-

portation related to the build ing sector, leaving the rest of

the transportation sector as a subject for futur e research.

2. Methodology

The present research used Life Cycle Analysis tools to

assess the potential impact on the environment of the

transportation activities of the building sector in Indone-

sia. The life cycle assessment method considers the proc-

ess analysis and combination between primary and sec-

ondary databases. There were two types of data used in

the study. The primary data was obtained by direct meas-

urement from selected factories or by questioning rele-

vant individuals in each of the factories. The secondary

database was mostly taken from GEMIS 4.4 (Global

Emission Model for Integrated Systems) a comprehen-

sive life cycle database, which covers processes for en-

ergy (fossil, nuclear, renewable), materials (metals, min-

erals, food, plastics, etc), and transport (person and

freight), as well as recycling and waste treatment proc-

esses [16]. Figure 1 shows the boundar ies of th e resear ch ,

which considers all asp ects of the transportation.

The functional unit of hauling per kilogram product in

ilometer distance basis has been used; the direct meas k

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector

154

Figure 1. Framework of research on transportation influence as part of the overall construction processes.

urement as well as interview had been delivered in the

quarry, factories (and or small industries), construction

site as well as the retailing process of the products. The

collected information included as the amount of goods

that can be produced in a certain time, type of vehicles

used, the efficiency of the vehicles, number of vehicles

(approximate number on the road), type of fuel, year

when each vehicle was produced, number of vehicles

used (vehicle used in the construction sector), types of

the roads, the efficiency of the packaging (in order to

find the average amount of product that could be deliv-

ered) and any other data related to the transportation

process, includes the transportation within the compound

(in case of the large industrial compounds such as cement

and gypsum plants). The secondary data contained in-

formation such as the emission from each type of the

combustion process of the fuel, which was obtained by

using GEMIS 4.4.

3. Result and Discussion

Glass, concrete roofs, aluminium, cement and gypsum

accounted for the largest emissions per kg of each mate-

rial compared to other materials in the buildings. Factors

relating to the level of emissions in transporting these

materials include the type of vehicle, efficiency of the

vehicle, distance from the quarry to factory, factory to

storage and storage to construction sites. The present

work also takes into account the transportation of the

secondary production materials, such as concrete blocks

and roofs, which also need cement and sand.

Figure 2 shows that an accumulated of 0.547 kg CO2

eq/kg (100 years impact) occurs in one year from the

transporting the building materials. An accumulated of

0.00146 k g SO2 eq/kg products, the impact would be the

increases of acid rain potential regionally, and 0.00092

kg particulates/kg products, will increase the potential of

human toxic reactions (as these particulates affect human

health through the respirator y syste m).

Emission from transporting glass, concrete roofs and

aluminium are higher than for other materials, as the raw

materials have to be taken further than in the other cases.

The alumina for instance is currently imported from Aus-

tralia, and silica in this case is transported by sea, which

emits up to 3 times more SO2 than road transport and 6

times more than railways [17]. For primary production

materials such as sand and wood, the emissions from

transportation occur mainly between the quarry and the

temporary storage. For the case of wood, sea transporta-

tion is used to carry it from wild forests to the construc-

tion sites or storage. For the case of sand, most of the

quarries are located in rural areas while the majority of

he construction sites are in cities, explaining the sub- t

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector155

Figure 2. Main emission from transportation sector in some of the building materials (kg emission/kg products).

stantial emissions for transporting this material. Cement,

which has the highest embodied energy during produc-

tion, accounts for far less emissions in terms of transpor-

tation, as the production plants are typically located

nearby quarries (gypsum and clay), as is the case with

gypsum.

3.1. Scenarios for Future Transportation System

The utilization of biofuels as well as NGV for transp orta-

tion shows a promising future. As the demand for trans-

portation in the construction sector increases, an increase

in the usage of fuel types which have lower emissions

will also be beneficial to the environment. However, the

problem with natural gas is the cost in modifying the

engine, which can be con si de rabl e .

Biodiesel is a fuel made by a chemical reaction be-

tween alcohol and vegetable oil, and most of the bio-

diesel used today in Indonesia is made from CPO (Crude

Palm Oil). It is then blended with petroleum diesel in

ratios of five per cent (B5), ten percent (B10) or pure

(100%, or B100). These alternative fuels can be used

with existing eng ines with little or no modification to the

engine or the fuel system [18].

The number of non-passengers vehicles in the sector

reached 549,708 in 2009 (baseline). The amount of CO2

eq in the sector reached 2.9 million tons of CO2 eq

(based on the number of construction sector related vehi-

cles [19] and the total CO2 eq in the transportation sector

in Indonesia calculated from [8]. The average distance

for hauling material in 2008 was 233.2 km and the aver-

age amount of CO2 eq per ton of product was 2.54 × 10–1

kg. By using Equation 1, the amount of CO2 eq in a cer-

tain year can be calculated, and it is also possible to es-

timate future emissions,

2 (n)()()2()

TOT COeqVEHAVG.VEHA VG.CO

 n



(1)

TOT CO2 eq(n) is the total CO2 eq emissions from ve-

hicles in the selected sector in a certain year of (n), VEH(n)

to the number of vehicles in year (n), the AVG.VEH(n)

reflects the average distance (km) of the vehicles in year

(n) and the AVG.CO2(n) is the average amount of CO2 eq

in a certain year per ton of product.

A total of four different scenarios were developed. The

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector

156

first one was the BAU (business as usual) scenario, with

information mainly based on current data from the Indo-

nesian statistical bureau [19] and the predictions and as-

sumptions developed by Purnomo [8]. The second is the

JCL (Jatropha Curcas L) scenario, which was based on

information on an assessment using LCA (Life Cycle

Assessment) approach [20]. The third scenario was the

PME (Palm Methyl Ester) or palm oil based assessment

scenario, which also includes the cultivation process up

to the use phase of the fuel [21]. The fourth scenario is

the NGV (Natural Gas Vehicle) scenario, were the in-

formation regarding CO2 eq emissions were based on

information from the International Natural Gas Vehicles

[12].

The reduction in CO2 emissions from JCL compared

to petrol diesel is significant [20]. Almost 80 per cent of

CO2 reduction can be achieved through a perennial cul-

tivation system for jatropha, where the plant is allowed to

grow for 20 years (instead of cutting it down each year),

as it requires less energy and fertilizer during the cultiv a-

tion and plantation processes. In comparison, the use of

PME resulted in 79.5 per cent less CO2 emissions than

diesel [21] and the utilization of natural gas would also

result in 18 percent less CO2 eq emissions [12].

The scenarios assume that the number of vehicles us-

ing alternatives fuels will only start to ch ange from 2013,

and increase by 5 percent each year up to 2025. The

number of trucks has been estimated to increase from 5.8

million to 17.6 million by 2025 [19], and this increase in

truck usage will result in a d ecrease in the cost of install-

ing NGV systems due to the “technology learning curve”,

as shown in Figure 3. This in turn will lower the barriers

in the uptake of NGV, as cost can be a significant barrier

for business to switch from regular fuel to NGV. By us-

ing this learning curve, the estimated cost of NGV could

be as low as US $2700 by 2025, and then steadily con-

tinue to drop in price up to 2040, costing on average

around US $2600 compared to US $3000 at present. The

infrastructure cost for all of these scenarios however is

not included.

Figure 4 shows the result of the future CO2 emissions

based on each of the transportation growth scenarios. The

figure expained th at the CO2 potential emission reduction

is the highest when all non-passenger transportation sys-

tem (including industrial sector) change to PME bio-

diesel, and would account for only 1.6% of the overall

CO2 emission from all the transportation sector in the

country (compare to 11% if there are no changes). The

transportation related buildings sector will also be af-

fected, and up to 20 - 60 million tons CO2 could be

eliminated. The overall impact analysis of biodiesel

should also be considered, since production of biodiesel

is not entirely without environmentally problems, which

can have up to double the impact potential during pro-

duction compared to regular diesel fuel, especially in

terms of the acidification and eutrophication potential

[22]. However, when considering the cost of NGV vehi-

cles, the cost of changing vehicle from diesel fuel to

NGV should also be taken into account, and this would

amount up to US $3000 extra for each vehicle, apart

from the cost of adapting petrol stations to the storage of

natural gas.

Figure 3. Current and predicted (t CO2 eq/t product) BAU and scenarios, includes NGV installation cost estimation (US $).

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector157

Figure 4. 2025 net CO2 emission (ton) from transportation

sector in Indonesia.

4. Conclusions

Transportation emissions in the buildings sector should

be given serious consideration in order to reduce green-

house gas production in Indonesia. The environmental

impact assessment carried out showed that building ma-

terials accounted approximately for 0.53 kg of CO2 per

kg of building material products.

A potential reduction in future greenhouse gas emis-

sions, and particularly CO2 in the transportation related

building sector, could come from the introduction of a

shift in the engine (case of NGV) or fuel type (case of

Biodiesel). Replacing the current gasoline vehicles with

NGV ones will reduce the potential CO2 emissions by

122,000 ton CO2/tons product in 2025 and 375,000 in

2040. Replacing the current fuel with biodiesel from jat-

ropha would reduce CO2 emissions by up 126,000 ton

CO2/tons product in 2025 and 388 in 2040. By replacing

diesel fuel with PME 28,600 ton CO2/tons product can be

eliminated in 2025 and 87,800 ton CO2/tons product

compared with the BAU scenario.

With regards to the cost the use of biodiesel is more

appealing than NGV, however since the comparison

should also take into account the overall environmental

performance, biodiesel has the disadvantage of having a

higher acidification and eutrophication potential com-

pared to diesel fuel. Another disadvantage of biodiesel is

the change of land use and the performance of its net

GHG emission as predicted by IIASA [11]. Although

NGV causes less acidification and eutrophication com-

pared to biodiesel, its higher GWP and the cost of adapt-

ing the infrastructure are a significant problem for the

development of this technology, which also suffers from

the fact of being a non-renewable resource.

It is not easy to decide which should be the future fuel

of preference for the transportation sector, especially

when the overall impact to th e enviro n ment as well as the

cost benefit is taken into account. However, the ultimate

decision should be taken by considering the implications

of all the technologies and the lo cal potential of each one

rather than nation al or regional level adjustment.

REFERENCES

[1] CIWMB, “Designing with Vision: A Technical Manual

for Materials Choices in Sustainable Construction,” Cali-

fornia Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento,

2000.

[2] T. Hirano, S. Kato, S. Murakami, T. Ikaga, Y. Shiraishi

and H. Uehara, “A Study on a Porous Residential Build-

ing Model in Hot and Humid Regions: Part 2—Reducing

the Cooling Load by Component-Scale Voids and the

CO2 Emission Reduction Effect of the Building Model,”

Building and Environment, Vol. 41, 2006, pp. 33-44.

doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.01.016

[3] B. L. P. Peoportier, “Life Cycle Assessment Applied to

the Comparative Evaluation of Single Family Houses in

the French Context,” Energy and Building, Vol. 33, No. 5,

2001, pp. 443-450. doi:10.1016/S0378-7788(00)00101-8

[4] T. Randall, “Environmental Design: An Introduction for

Architects and Engineers,” 2nd Edition, E & FN Spon

Press, London, 1999.

[5] M. Asif, T. Muneer and R. Kelle, “Life Cycle Assess-

ment: A Case Study of a Dwelling Home in Scotland,”

Building and Environment, Vol. 42, No. 3, 2007, pp. 139 1-

1394.

[6] N. A. Utama and S. H. Gheewala, “Life Cycle Energy of

Single Landed Houses in Indonesia,” Energy and Build-

ings, Vol. 40, No. 10, 2008, pp. 1911-1916.

[7] N. A. Utama and S. H. Gheewala, “Influence of Material

Selection on Energy Demand in Residential Houses,”

Materials & Design, Vol. 30, No. 6, 2009, pp. 2173-2180.

[8] A. Purnomo, “Panel on Climate Change,” ASEM Devel-

opment Conference—Towards Sustainable Development,

Manila, 20-21 April 2009.

[9] Indonesian Statistical Bureau (BPS), “Construction Sec-

tor,” 2009 (accessed 2 October 2010).

http://www.bps.go.id/tab_sub/view.php? tabel=1&datar=1&

id_subyek=04&notab=1

[10] Indonesian Ministry of Environment (KLH), “Indonesian

Environmental Status,” 2005 (accessed 4 May 2006).

http://www.menlh.go.id/tebaru/soe/artikel.php?article_id

=495

[11] International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (II-

ASA), “Biofuels and Food Security—Implications of an

Accelerated Biofuels Production,” OFID Pamphlet Series,

Vol. 38, 2009.

[12] International Association for Natural Gas Vehicle (IANGV),

“Average Natural Gas Vehicle Growth by Region,” 2010

(accessed 4 January 2010).

http://www.iangv.org/tools-resources/statistics.html

[13] M. E. Bouwman and H. C. Moll, “Environmental Analy-

ses of Land Transportation Systems in the Netherlands,”

Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Envi-

ronment, Vol. 7, No. 5, 2002, pp. 331-345.

doi:10.1016/S1361-9209(02)00002-0

[14] H. C. Frey and K. Kim, “In-Use Measurement of the Ac-

Transportation’s Impact Assessment on Construction Sector

158

tivity, Fuel Use, and Emissions of Eight Cement Mixer

Trucks Operated on Each of Petroleum Diesel and Soy-

Based B20 Biodiesel,” Transportation Research Part D:

Transport and Environment, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2009, pp.

585-592. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2009.08.004

[15] Y. Huang, R. Bird and M. Bell, “A Comparative Study of

the Emissions by Road Maintenance Works and the Dis-

rupted Traffic Using Life Cycle Assessment and Micro-

Simulation,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport

and Environment, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2009, pp. 197-204.

doi:10.1016/j.trd.2008.12.003

[16] OEKO (Öko-Institut), “Stammdatenbasis zum GEMIS-

Projekt, Kontinuierliche Fortschreibung und Erweiterung

der GEMIS-Datenbasis für Energi e,” Stoffe und Transport,

1989.

[17] N. A. Utama, “Sustainable Sourcing Material in Construc-

tion,” Master’s Thesis, London South Bank University,

London, 2003.

[18] United States National Biodiesel Boards, “Biodiesel In-

formation,” 2010 (accessed 4 October 2010).

http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/faqs/

[19] Indonesian Statistical Bureau (BPS), “Number of Trans-

portation Based on Type 1998-2008,” 2009 (accessed 3

May 2010).

http://dds.bps.go.id/tab_sub/view.php?tabel=1&daftar=&i

d_subyek=17&notab=12

[20] K. Prueksakorn and S. H. Gheewala, “Energy and Green-

house Gas Implications of Biodiesel Production from

Jatropha curcas L.,” The 2nd Joint International Con-

ference on Sustainable Energy and Environment, Bang-

kok, 21-23 November 2006.

[21] S. Pleanjai, S. H. Gheewala and S. Garivait, “Greenhouse

Gas Emissions from Production and Use of Palm Methyl

Ester in Thailand,” International Journal of Global Warm-

ing, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2009, pp. 418-431.

[22] S. Sampattagul, C. Suttibut, S. Yucho and T. Kiatsiriroat,

“Life Cycle Management of Jatropha Bio-Diesel Produc-

tion in Thailand,” The 3rd International Conference on

Life Cycle Management, Zurich, 27-29 August 2007.