Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
2016-06-06
1
Christofer SkaarSenior researcher, SINTEF Building and InfrastructureAdjunct associate professor, NTNU
Morten BergemProject design manager, JM Norge AS
Pål Drevland JakobsenAssociate professor, NTNU
Environmental impact: TBM versus D&B
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 2
Overview
Goal&
scope
Inventory analysis
Impactassessment
Interpre-tation
ApplicationsProcess improvement,product development,
planning,procurement,
etc.
TBM Drill & blast
1: Methodology
2: LCA model
3: Results
4: Implications
A B
Feasibility Concept study/design
Detailed design
Execution / excavation
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 3
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Goal&
scope
Inventory analysis
Impactassessment
Interpre-tation
ApplicationsProcess improvement,product development,
planning,procurement,
etc.
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 4
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Goal&
scope
Inventory analysis
Impactassessment
Interpre-tation
ApplicationsProcess improvement,product development,
planning,procurement,
etc.
Goal & scope: Function
Transportation system?Road infrastructure? Tunnel?
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 5
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Goal&
scope
Inventory analysis
Impactassessment
Interpre-tation
ApplicationsProcess improvement,product development,
planning,procurement,
etc.
Goal & scope: Function
Apples or oranges?Comparisons must be fair
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 6
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Goal&
scope
Inventory analysis
Impactassessment
Interpre-tation
ApplicationsProcess improvement,product development,
planning,procurement,
etc.
Goal & scope: Function
A B
Functional unit: 1 km main tunnel
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 7
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
Goal&
scope
Inventory analysis
Impactassessment
Interpre-tation
ApplicationsProcess improvement,product development,
planning,procurement,
etc.
TBM
Drill & blast
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 8
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 9
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• 2 technologies:• TBM• D&B
• 3 levels of rock supportfor each technology:• No support (low)• Medium support• High support
• In total: 6 scenarios
10
Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) vs. Drilling and Blasting (D&B)
Global warming potential per tunnel length (0-1 km)
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• 2 technologies:• TBM• D&B
• 3 levels of rock supportfor each technology:• No support (low)• Medium support• High support
• In total: 6 scenariosNOTE: The medium and high rock support scenarios are technologyspecific. The material types and amounts differ for TBM and for D&B.
11
Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) vs. Drilling and Blasting (D&B)
Global warming potential per tunnel length (0-1 km)
High levelRock support with 1) very strictrequirements on water ingress and tunnel lining and/or 2) in
very poor rock conditions withheavy rock support is needed for
the whole tunnel length.
Low levelNo rock support
Medium levelRock support in demanding hard rock conditions, crossing severalweakness zones and with strictrequirements of water ingress
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• 2 technologies:• TBM• D&B
• 3 levels of rock supportfor each technology:• No support (low)• Medium support• High support
• In total: 6 scenarios
12
Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) vs. Drilling and Blasting (D&B)
Global warming potential per tunnel length (0-1 km)
0 kmTBM has higher initial impact due to heavier machinery and longer
transportation distance.
Break even, D&B vs TBMLow support: 700 meter
Medium support: 880 meterHigh support: TBM always highest
SlopeRock support is the main cause
Adit tunnels are minor cause
GWP rate of change:ΔTBM high > ΔD&B high
ΔTBM medium < ΔD&B mediumΔTBM low < ΔD&B low
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 13
Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) vs. Drilling and Blasting (D&B)
Global warming potential Acidification potential
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 14
Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) vs. Drilling and Blasting (D&B)
Global warming potential Acidification potential
NB! Beware of differences in scale and units.1 kg CO2 is not equal to 1 kg of SO2 (apples and oranges).Global warming is not directly comparable to acidication.
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 15
Core components, global warming: TBM versus D&B
Global warming AcidificationOzone depletion Eutrophication
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• Estimate the environmental performance compared to
the old road, railroad etc.• Validate feasibility
• Documentation• Collection of material
and energy data
• Procurement / supplier selection
• Validate concept study/design
• Concept studies with environmental focus
• Ranking of various con-cepts (tunnel align-ments, bridge vs. tunnel etc.)
16
Implications: Project stage
Feasibility Concept study/design
Detailed design
Execution / excavation
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• Project level• Electricity source? (4000 kWh per meter)• Excavation: Loading and hauling?• Rock support: Cement and steel consumption?• Supplier selection: Environment as procurement criteria?
(cement, steel, explosives possible with EPD. Why not TBM?)
17
Implications: Improvement potential
Environmental product declarations can be made for:
SteelCement
Explosives
Why not for TBM?
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• Project level• Electricity source? (4000 kWh per meter)• Excavation: Loading and hauling?• Rock support: Cement and steel consumption?• Supplier selection: Environment as procurement criteria?
(cement, steel, explosives possible with EPD. Why not TBM?)• Scope: What is the function your system?
• Tunnel → waste to landfill• Tunnel and by-products → less waste to landfill
• Construction aggregate• From muck to mineral: Glass, concrete, steel, etc.
18
Implications: Improvement potential
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn
• Key parameters• Tunnel length and type of rock support• Beware: Specific projects may vary significantly
• GWP as a proxy indicator for life cycle environmental impact• Correlates well with many impact categories• But not all, e.g. acidification
• Improvement potential can be found at all levels
Think of function and system scope
19
Conclusions, TBM vs D&B
Teknologi for et bedre samfunn 20
Questions?
