Responding to sustainability challenge and cost implications in highway construction projects

Highway construction often requires a significant capital input; therefore it often causes serious financial implications for developers, owners and operators. The recent industry-wide focus on sustainability has added a new dimension to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the economical scale of ‘going green’. Comprehensive analysis of the whole-of-life highway development that responds to sustainability challenges is one of the primary concerns for stakeholders. Principles of engineering economics and life cycle costing have been used to determine the incremental capacity investments for highway projects. However, the consideration of costs and issues associated with sustainability is still very limited in current studies on highway projects. Previous studies have identified that highway project investments are primarily concerned with direct market costs that can be quantified through life cycle costing analysis (LCCA). But they tend to ignore costs that are difficult to calculate, as those related to environmental and social elements. On a more positive note, these studies proved that the inclusion of such costs is an essential part of the overall development investment and a primary concern for decision making by the stakeholders. This paper discusses a research attempt to identify and categorise sustainability cost elements for highway projects. Through questionnaire survey, a set of sustainability cost elements on highway projects has been proposed. These cost elements are incorporated into the extension of some of the existing Life Cycle Costing Analysis (LCCA) models in order to produce a holistic financial picture of the highway project. It is expected that a new LCCA model will be established to serve as a suitable tool for decision making for highway project stakeholders.

The importance of environmental issues and costs in Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) for highway projects

Sustainability has been increasingly recognised as an integral part of highway infrastructure development. In practice however, the fact that financial return is still a project’s top priority for many, environmental aspects tend to be overlooked or considered as a burden, as they add to project costs. Sustainability and its implications have a far-reaching effect on each project over time. Therefore, with highway infrastructure’s long-term life span and huge capital demand, the consideration of environmental cost/ benefit issues is more crucial in life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA). To date, there is little in existing literature studies on viable estimation methods for environmental costs. This situation presents the potential for focused studies on environmental costs and issues in the context of life-cycle cost analysis. This paper discusses a research project which aims to integrate the environmental cost elements and issues into a conceptual framework for life cycle costing analysis for highway projects. Cost elements and issues concerning the environment were first identified through literature. Through questionnaires, these environmental cost elements will be validated by practitioners before their consolidation into the extension of existing and worked models of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA). A holistic decision support framework is being developed to assist highway infrastructure stakeholders to evaluate their investment decision. This will generate financial returns while maximising environmental benefits and sustainability outcome.

An analysis of holding cost impact on housing affordability in relation to midsized Greenfield residential property developments in South East Queensland

The position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian situation counters the experience demonstrated in many other parts of the world in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis, with residential housing prices proving particularly resilient. A seemingly inexorable housing demand remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by high levels of population growth fuelled by immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand level ensures problems related to housing affordability continue almost unabated. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability relates to holding costs. Although only one contributor in the housing affordability matrix, the nature and extent of holding cost impact requires elucidation: for example, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely - and in some instances completely ignored. In addition, ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements that comprise holding costs, thereby affecting the assessment of their relative contribution. Such anomalies may be explained by considering that assessment is conducted over time in an ever-changing environment. A strong relationship with opportunity cost - in turn dependant inter alia upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates - adds further complexity. By extending research in the general area of housing affordability, this thesis seeks to provide a detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs specifically in the context of midsized (i.e. between 15-200 lots) greenfield residential property developments in South East Queensland. With the dimensions of holding costs and their influence over housing affordability determined, the null hypothesis H0 that holding costs are not passed on can be addressed. Arriving at these conclusions involves the development of robust economic and econometric models which seek to clarify the componentry impacts of holding cost elements. An explanatory sequential design research methodology has been adopted, whereby the compilation and analysis of quantitative data and the development of an economic model is informed by the subsequent collection and analysis of primarily qualitative data derived from surveying development related organisations. Ultimately, there are significant policy implications in relation to the framework used in Australian jurisdictions that promote, retain, or otherwise maximise, the opportunities for affordable housing.

Extending life-cycle costing (LCC) analysis for sustainability considerations in road infrastructure projects

Sustainable development is about making societal investments. These investments should be in synchronization with the natural environment, trends of social development, as well as organisational and local economies over a long time span. Traditionally in the eyes of clients, project development will need to produce the required profit margins, with some degrees of consideration for other impacts. This is being changed as all citizens of our society are becoming more aware of concepts and challenges such as the climate change, greenhouse footprints, and social dimensions of sustainability, and will in turn demand answers to these issues in built facilities. A large number of R&D projects have focused on the technical advancement and environmental assessment of products and built facilities. It is equally important address the cost/benefit issue, as developers in the world would not want to loose money by investing in built assets. For infrastructure projects, due to its significant cost of development and lengthy delivery time, presenting the full money story of going green is of vital importance. Traditional views of life-cycle costing tend to focus on the pure economics of a construction project. Sustainability concepts are not broadly integrated with the current LCCA in the construction sector. To rectify this problem, this paper reports on the progress to date of developing and extending contemporary LCCA models in the evaluation of road infrastructure sustainability. The suggested new model development is based on sustainability indicators identified through previous research, and incorporating industry verified cost elements of sustainability measures. The on-going project aims to design and a working model for sustainability life-cycle costing analysis for this type of infrastructure projects.

Developing a life-cycle costing analysis model for sustainability enhancement in road infrastructure project

With increasing pressure to provide environmentally responsible infrastructure products and services, stakeholders are putting significant foci on the early identification of financial viability and outcome of infrastructure projects. Traditionally, there has been an imbalance between sustainable measures and project budget. On one hand, the industry tends to employ the first-cost mentality and approach to developing infrastructure projects. On the other, environmental experts and technology innovators often push for the ultimately green products and systems without much of a concern for cost. This situation is being quickly changed as the industry is under pressure to continue to return profit, while better adapting to current and emerging global issues of sustainability. For the infrastructure sector to contribute to sustainable development, it will need to increase value and efficiency. Thus, there is a great need for tools that will enable decision makers evaluate competing initiatives and identify the most sustainable approaches to procuring infrastructure projects. In order to ensure that these objectives are achieved, the concept of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA) will play significant roles in the economics of an infrastructure project. Recently, a few research initiatives have applied the LCCA models for road infrastructure that focused on the traditional economics of a project. There is little coverage of life-cycle costing as a method to evaluate the criteria and assess the economic implications of pursuing sustainability in road infrastructure projects. To rectify this problem, this paper reviews the theoretical basis of previous LCCA models before discussing their inability to determinate the sustainability indicators in road infrastructure project. It then introduces an on-going research aimed at developing a new model to integrate the various new cost elements based on the sustainability indicators with the traditional and proven LCCA approach. It is expected that the research will generate a working model for sustainability based life-cycle cost analysis.

Incorporating sustainability measures in life-cycle financial decision making for highway construction

Public awareness and the nature of highway construction works demand that sustainability measures are first on the development agenda. However, in the current economic climate, individual volition and enthusiasm for such high capital investments do not present as strong cases for decision making as the financial pictures of pursuing sustainability. Some stakeholders consider sustainability to be extra work that costs additional money. Though, stakeholders realised its importance in infrastructure development. They are keen to identify the available alternatives and financial implications on a lifecycle basis. Highway infrastructure development is a complex rocess which requires expertise and tools to evaluate investment options, such as environmentally sustainable features for road and highway development. Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is a valuable approach for investment decision making for construction works. However, LCCA applications in highway development are still limited. Current models, for example focus on economic issues alone and do not deal with sustainability factors, which are more difficult to quantify and encapsulate in estimation modules. This paper reports the research which identifies sustainability related factors in highway construction projects, in quantitative and qualitative forms of a multi-criteria analysis. These factors are then incorporated into past and proven LCCA models to produce a new long term decision support model. The research via questionnaire, model building, analytical hierarchy processes (AHP) and case studies have identified, evaluated and then processed highway sustainability related cost elements. These cost elements need to be verified by industry before being integrated for further development of the model. Then the Australian construction industry will have a practical tool to evaluate investment decisions which provide an optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

Measuring costs of sustainability issues in highway infrastructure : perception of stakeholders in Australia

With increasing pressure to deliver environmentally friendly and socially responsible highway infrastructure projects, stakeholders are also putting significant focus on the early identification of financial viability and outcomes for these projects. Infrastructure development typically requires major capital input, which may cause serious financial constraints for investors. The push for sustainability has added new dimensions to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the cost front. Comprehensive analysis of the cost implications of implementing place sustainable measures in highway infrastructure throughout its lifespan is highly desirable and will become an essential part of the highway development process and a primary concern for decision makers. This paper discusses an ongoing research which seeks to identify cost elements and issues related to sustainable measures for highway infrastructure projects. Through life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA), financial implications of pursuing sustainability, which are highly concerned by the construction stakeholders, have been assessed to aid the decision making when contemplating the design, development and operation of highway infrastructure. An extensive literature review and evaluation of project reports from previous Australian highway projects was first conducted to reveal all potential cost elements. This provided the foundation for a questionnaire survey, which helped identify those specific issues and related costs that project stakeholders consider to be most critical in the Australian industry context. Through the survey, three key stakeholders in highway infrastructure development, namely consultants, contractors and government agencies, provided their views on the specific selection and priority ranking of the various categories. Findings of the survey are being integrated into proven LCCA models for further enhancement. A new LCCA model will be developed to assist the stakeholders to evaluate costs and investment decisions and reach optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

Managing financial implications for sustainable highway infrastructure delivery

Highway construction works have significant bearings on all aspects of sustainability. As they typically involve huge capital funds, stakeholders tend to place all interests on the financial justifications of the project, especially when embedding sustainability principles and practices may demand significant initial investment. Increasing public awareness and government policies demand that infrastructure projects respond to environmental challenges and people start to realise the negative consequences of not to pursue sustainability. Stakeholders are now keen to identify sustainable alternatives and financial implications of including them on a whole lifecycle basis. Therefore tools that aid the evaluation of investment options, such as provision of environmentally sustainable features in roads and highways, are highly desirable. Life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) is generally recognised as a valuable approach for investment decision making for construction works. However to date it has limited application because the current LCCA models tend to focus on economic issues alone and are not able to deal with sustainability factors. This paper reports a research on identifying sustainability related factors in highway construction projects, in quantitative and qualitative forms of a multi-criteria analysis. These factors are then incorporated into existing LCCA models to produce a new sustainability based LCCA model with cost elements specific to sustainability measures. This presents highway project stakeholders a practical tool to evaluate investment decisions and reach an optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

Strategies for minimising the whole of life cycle cost of reinforced concrete bridge exposed to aggressive environments

n design of bridge structures, it is common to adopt a 100 year design life. However, analysis of a number of case study bridges in Australia has indicated that the actual design life can be significantly reduced due to premature deterioration resulting from exposure to aggressive environments. A closer analysis of the cost of rehabilitation of these structures has raised some interesting questions. What would be the real service life of a bridge exposed to certain aggressive environments? What is the strategy of conducting bridge rehabilitation? And what are the life cycle costs associated with rehabilitation? A research project funded by the CRC for Construction Innovation in Australia is aimed at addressing these issues. This paper presents a concept map for assisting decision makers to appropriately choose the best treatment for bridge rehabilitation affected by premature deterioration through exposure to aggressive environments in Australia. The decision analysis is referred to a whole of life cycle cost analysis by considering appropriate elements of bridge rehabilitation costs. In addition, the results of bridges inspections in Queensland are presented

Selected elements of housing affordability impacting otherwise potentially sustainable communities

It is widely held that strong relationships exist between housing, economic status, and well being. Therefore, recent events emerging from the United States, culminating in widespread housing stock surpluses in that country and others, threaten to destabilise many aspects related to individuals and community. However, despite global impact, the position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian position provides a strong contrast whereby continued strong housing demand generally remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by strong levels of immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand ensures elements related to housing affordability continue to gain prominence. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability – particularly new housing development – relates to holding costs. These costs are in many ways “hidden” and cannot always be easily identified. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires elucidation. In its simplest form, it commences with a calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. However, there is significantly more complexity for major new developments - particularly greenfield development. Analysis suggests that even small shifts in primary factors impacting holding costs can appreciably affect housing affordability. Those factors of greatest significance not only include interest rates and the rate of inflation, but even less apparent factors such as the regulatory assessment period. These are not just theoretical concepts but real, measurable price drivers. Ultimately, the real impact is felt by the one market segment whom can typically least afford it – new home, first home buyers. They can be easily pushed out of affordability. This paper suggests the stability and sustainability of growing, new communities require this problem to be acknowledged and accurately identified if the well being of such communities is to be achieved.

Holding cost model for Greenfield Housing developments

Presentation provided to a PhD Colloquium between two Australian and one Malaysian University providing the opportunity to inform and critique progress of students concerning their selected topic. This presentation essentially involves "The conceptualisation, sensitivity and measurement of holding costs and other selected elements impacting housing affordability" as provided by Gary Owen Garner of QUT, with research objectives thus: 1. To establish the nature and composition of holding costs over time, as related to residential property in Australia, and internationally. 2. To examine the linkages that may exist between various planning instruments, the length of regulatory assessment periods, and housing affordability. 3. To develop a model that quantifies the impact of holding costs on housing affordability in Australia, with a particular focus on the consequences of extended assessment periods as a component of holding costs. Thus, provide clarification as to the impact of holding costs on overall housing affordability.

Holding and opportunity cost theory in a property development context

This paper focuses on the varying approaches and methodologies adopted when the calculation of holding costs is undertaken, focusing on greenfield development. Whilst acknowledging there may be some consistency in embracing first principles relating to holding cost theory, a review of the literature reveals considerable lack of uniformity in this regard. There is even less clarity in quantitative determination, especially in Australia where there has been only limited empirical analysis undertaken. Despite a growing quantum of research undertaken in relation to various elements connected with housing affordability, the matter of holding costs has not been well addressed regardless of its part in the highly prioritised Australian Government’s housing research agenda. The end result has been a modicum of qualitative commentary relating to holding costs. There have been few attempts at finer-tuned analysis that exposes a quantified level of holding cost calculated with underlying rigour. Holding costs can take many forms, but they inevitably involve the computation of “carrying costs” of an initial outlay that has yet to fully realise its ultimate yield. Although sometimes considered a “hidden” cost, it is submitted that holding costs prospectively represent a major determinate of value. If this is the case, then considered in the context of housing affordability, it is therefore potentially pervasive.

The conceptualisation, sensitivity and measurement of holding costs and other selected elements impacting housing affordability (Literature review and research methodology for confirmation of PhD candidature)

It is widely held that strong relationships exist between housing, economic status, and well being. This is exemplified by widespread housing stock surpluses in many countries which threaten to destabilise numerous aspects related to individuals and community. However, the position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian position provides a distinct contrast whereby seemingly inexorable housing demand generally remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by high levels of immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand ensures elements related to housing affordability continue to gain prominence. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability – particularly new housing development – relates to holding costs. These costs are in many ways “hidden” and cannot always be easily identified. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires elucidation. In its simplest form, it commences with a calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. However, there is significantly more complexity for major new developments - particularly greenfield property development. Preliminary analysis conducted by the author suggests that even small shifts in primary factors impacting holding costs can appreciably affect housing affordability – and notably, to a greater extent than commonly held. Even so, their importance and perceived high level impact can be gauged from the unprecedented level of attention policy makers have given them over recent years. This may be evidenced by the embedding of specific strategies to address burgeoning holding costs (and particularly those cost savings associated with streamlining regulatory assessment) within statutory instruments such as the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy, and the South East Queensland Regional Plan. However, several key issues require investigation. Firstly, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely. In fact, it is not only variable, but in some instances completely ignored. Secondly, some ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs, thereby affecting the assessment of their relative contribution. Perhaps this may in part be explained by their nature: such costs are not always immediately apparent. Some forms of holding costs are not as visible as the more tangible cost items associated with greenfield development such as regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others. Holding costs are also more difficult to evaluate since for the most part they must be ultimately assessed over time in an ever-changing environment, based on their strong relationship with opportunity cost which is in turn dependant, inter alia, upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates. By extending research in the general area of housing affordability, this thesis seeks to provide a more detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs, and in so doing determine the size of their impact specifically on the end user. This will involve the development of soundly based economic and econometric models which seek to clarify the componentry impacts of holding costs. Ultimately, there are significant policy implications in relation to the framework used in Australian jurisdictions that promote, retain, or otherwise maximise, the opportunities for affordable housing.

An enhanced procedure for the rapid digestion of high silicate archeological specimens followed by ICP-MS determination of traces of rare earth elements (REE's)

A straightforward procedure for the acid digestion of geological samples with SiO2 concentrations ranging between about 40 to 80%, is described. A powdered sample (200 mesh) of 500 mg was used and fused with 1000 mg spectroflux at about 1000 degreesC in a platinum crucible. The molten was subsequently digested in an aqueous solution of HNO3 at 100 degreesC. Several systematic digestion procedures were followed using various concentrations of HNO3. It was found that a relationship could be established between the dissolution-time and acid concentration. For an acid concentration of 15% an optimum dissolution-time of under 4 min was recorded. To verify that the dissolutions were complete, they were subjected to rigorous quality control tests. The turbidity and viscosity were examined at different intervals and the results were compared with that of deionised water. No significant change in either parameter was observed. The shelf-life of each solution lasted for several months, after which time polymeric silicic acid formed in some solutions, resulting in the presence of a gelatinous solid. The method is cost effective and is clearly well suited for routine applications on a small scale, especially in laboratories in developing countries. ICP-MS was applied to the determination of 13 Rare Earth Elements and Hf in a set of 107 archaeological samples subjected to the above digestion procedure. The distribution of these elements was examined and the possibility of using the REE's for provenance studies is discussed.