Regional Harmonization Procedure for Prioritization of Recycled Material Specifications
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Master's Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Fall 2011 Regional harmonization procedure for prioritization of recycled material specifications Courtney Goldstein University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Goldstein, Courtney, "Regional harmonization procedure for prioritization of recycled material specifications" (2011). Master's Theses and Capstones. 656. https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis/656 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. REGIONAL HARMONIZATION PROCEDURE FOR PRIORITIZATION OF RECYCLED MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS BY COURTNEY GOLDSTEIN BS, University of New Hampshire, 2009 THESIS Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science In Civil Engineering September, 2011 UMI Number: 1504948 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI Dissertation Publishing UMI 1504948 Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 This thesis has been examined and approved. ^-V^1^ Thesis Director, Kevin H. Gardner, Professor of Civil Engineering David L. Gress, Professor of Civil Engineering Jfi%^-J JeffrevlS.^glton./AffilratUf e Professor of Civil Engineering OIL ff/|g?3 Date Table of Contents Table of Tables ii Table of Figures iii ABSTRACT iv LIST OF ABBREVIATION v CHAPTER 1.0 - INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Standardization Overview 2 1.2 Material Standardization Harmonization Overview 5 1.3 Focus on Recycled Industrial Materials 9 1.4 Objective of Thesis 13 CHAPTER 2.0 - THESIS FRAMEWORK 15 2.1 Thesis Framework 16 CHAPTER 3.0 - CASE STUDY: EPA REGION III MID-ATLANTIC STATES HARMONIZATION 18 3.1 Chapter Objectives 19 3.2 Methodology 20 3.3 Task 1: Recycled Materials Background 24 3.4 Task 2: Mid-Atlantic States Use, Specifications and Environmental Regulations 31 3.4 Task 3: Comparison and Analysis of Mid-Atlantic State's Material Specifications 38 3.5 Task 4: Facilitate Harmonization Specification Working Meeting 47 3.6 Case Study: Final Recommendation 53 3.7 Limitations 54 CHAPTER 4.0 - THE LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT 56 4.1 Introduction 57 4.2 Objective 58 4.3 LCA Framework 59 4.4 Case Study: Comparative Analysis of CFA, GGBFS and Virgin Material in a Concrete Deck 61 4.5 LCA Recommendations 82 4.6 Conclusions 85 4.7 Limitations/Challenges 85 CHAPTER 5.0 - THE RATING SYSTEM 87 5.1 Introduction and Chapter Objective 88 5.2 Prioritization System 89 5.3 Case Study: CFA and GGBFS in Concrete 90 5.4 Prioritization System Recommendations and Limitations 95 CHAPTER 6.0 - RECOMMENDATION 97 6.1 Overview 98 6.2 Step-by-Step Recommendation 100 6.3 Limitations to the Recommended Procedure 106 6.4 Future Work 109 7.0 References Ill Appendix A: Material/Application Fact Sheets 119 Appendix B: State-by-State Environmental Regulation Summaries and Comparison Matrix 151 Appendix C: Priority Short List 166 i APPENDIX D: PALATE DATA 171 Appendix D-1: PaLATE Parameters 171 Appendix D-2: PaLATE Sources 172 Appendix D-3: PaLATE Environmental Loading Emission Factors and Assumptions for Fuel & Material Transportation 173 APPENDIX E: CONCRETE MIX DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS 175 Appendix E-1: Industrial By-Product Mix Designs 175 Appendix E-2: Virgin Concrete Mix Assumptions 175 Appendix E-3: Calculation of Concrete Additive Mass % 176 Appendix E-4: Transportation Distances and Modes of Transit for Concrete Mix Materials 177 APPENDIX F: LCA DATA 178 Appendix F-1: LCI Material Environmental Loadings 178 Appendix F-2: LCA Aggregated Data CRC Handbook 180 APPENDIX G: GENERAL RATING SYSTEM 181 Table of Tables Table 1 Matrix of Materials and Applications Considering 22 Table 2 States Mentioning Bottom Ash in Road Specifications 38 Table 3 States Mentioning Fly Ash in Specifications 39 Table 4 Differences in Fly Ash in Concrete 40 Table 5 Differences in Fly Ash in Flowable Fill 40 Table 6 States Mentioning Foundry Sand in Road Specifications 41 Table 7 States Mentioning Asphalt Shingles in Road Specifications 42 Table 8 States Mentioning Scrap Tires in Road Specifications 42 Table 9 States Use of Scrap Tires in Embankments 43 Table 10 States Use of Steel Slag as Asphalt Concrete Aggregate 44 Table 11 States Mentioning Blast Furnace Slag 45 Table 12 Differences in GGBFS in Concrete 45 Table 13 Priority Short List of Materials/Applications for Specifications Harmonization 46 Table 14 Mix Designs of Concrete Cases for Functional Unit 62 Table 15 References for Environmental Loadings Considered 66 Table 16 Emission Factors due to Various Modes of Transportation 67 Table 17 Material Source Transportation Variables 68 Table 18 Overall Environmental Loadings of Each Case Mix, Cradle-to-Gate 69 Table 19 Environmental Loading Classification, Characterization and Valuation 80 Table 20 Significance Factors for Each Environmental Loading 81 Table 21 Weighted Environmental Emission Comparison of Concrete Mix Designs 82 Table 22 Allocated Emissions Ranking Between Phases 83 Table 23 Recycled Material Rating System Distributed by Regional State 89 Table 24 Case Study's Assumed Distances from a Representative Location in Each Considered .92 Table 25: Overall Rating System Results 94 II Table of Figures Figure 1 Current US Standardization Procedure 4 Figure 2 Material/Application Fact Sheet Template 22 Figure 3 Typical Roadway Life Cycle Phase Diagram (Santero 2009) 57 Figure 4 Typical LCA Flow Diagram 59 Figure 5 Project Site Map Deerfield/Epsom NH 62 Figure 6 Inputs and Outputs within the System Boundary 64 Figure 7 Sources for Error within EIO-LCA approach (Pacca 2002) 65 Figure 8 GWP (C02) Emission Distribution by Material: a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 70 Figure 9 Energy Consumption Distribution by Material: a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 71 Figure 10 NOx Emission Distribution by Material: a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 72 Figure 11 Particulate Matter Emission Distribution by only Material a) Production; b) Transportation 73 Figure 12 Overall PM Emission Distribution 73 Figure 13 CO Emission Distribution by Material a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 74 Figure 14 S02 Emission Distribution by Material a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 74 Figure 15 Production Lead and Mercury Emission Distribution 75 Figure 16 Transportation Lead and Mercury Emission Distribution 75 Figure 17 Overall Lead and Mercury Emissions 76 Figure 18 Material Production HTP Distribution 77 Figure 19 Material Transportation HTP Distribution 77 Figure 20 Overall HTP Distribution 78 Figure 21 Water Consumption during a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 78 Figure 22 RCRA Waste Generated during Material: a) Production, b) Transportation, c) Overall 79 in ABSTRACT By Courtney Goldstein University of New Hampshire, September, 2011 Widely varying recycled material requirements across state lines has been perceived as a significant barrier to greater use of recycled materials in highway construction by state contractors and industry. The goal of this thesis is to create a procedure to compile, compare, contrast and finally synthesize documents that support a priority list of recycled materials and applications for which material specifications can be harmonized among regional states in the US. This work compiled background research on selected materials and related regulations into standardized templates. The information analyzed was communicated with EPA, FHWA, and state representatives to approve a breakdown priority list and discussed through a working meeting to make an action plan toward regional harmonization. A life-cycle assessment was conducted in a representative state for the easiest recycled material to harmonize to determine the environmental benefits of use. A prioritization system was created to choose the first material/application specification to harmonize. IV LIST OF ABBREVIATION AASHTO - American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials ANSI - American National Standard Institute ASTM - American Society for Testing Materials BFS - Blast Furnace Slag BUD - Beneficial Use Determination CCB - Coal Combustion Byproducts C&D - Construction and Demolition CEN - European Committee for Standardization CENELEC - European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization CFA - Coal Fly Ash CO - Carbon Monoxide C02 - Carbon Dioxide DC - District of Columbia DEP - Department of Environmental Protection DEQ - Department of Environmental Quality DOT - Department of Transportation EC - European Community EPA - Environmental Protection Agency ETSI - European Telecommunications Standards Institute EU - European Union FHWA - Federal Highway Association HMA - Hot mix Asphalt HTP - Human Toxicity Potential GGBFS - Ground Granulated Blast Furnace