Assessment of Seismic Damage of Buildings and Related Environmental Impacts

Sustainable development has only recently started examining the existing infrastructure, and a key aspect of this is hazard mitigation. To examine buildings under a sustainable perspective requires an understanding of a building's life-cycle environmental costs, including the consideration of associated environmental impacts induced by earthquake damage. Damage repair costs lead to additional material and energy consumption, leading to harmful environmental impacts. Merging results obtained from a seismic evaluation and life-cycle analysis for buildings will give a novel outlook on sustainable design decisions. To evaluate the environmental impacts caused by buildings, long-term impacts accrued throughout a building's lifetime and impacts associated with damage repair need to be quantified. A method and literature review for completing this examination has been developed and is discussed. Using software Athena and HAZUS-MH, this study evaluated the performance of steel and concrete buildings considering their life-cycle assessments and earthquake resistance. It was determined that code design-level greatly effects a building repair and damage estimations. This study presented two case study buildings and found specific results that were obtained using several premade assumptions. Future research recommendations were provided to make this methodology more useful in real-world applications. Examining cost and environmental impacts that a building has through, a cradle-to-grave analysis and seismic damage assessment will help reduce material consumption and construction activities from taking place before and after an earthquake event happens.

Decentralized or centralized production : impacts to the environment, industry, and the economy

Since product take-back is mandated in Europe, and has effects for producers worldwide including the U.S., designing efficient forward and reverse supply chain networks is becoming essential for business viability. Centralizing production facilities may reduce costs but perhaps not environmental impacts. Decentralizing a supply chain may reduce transportation environmental impacts but increase capital costs. Facility location strategies of centralization or decentralization are tested for companies with supply chains that both take back and manufacture products. Decentralized and centralized production systems have different effects on the environment, industry and the economy. Decentralized production systems cluster suppliers within the geographical market region that the system serves. Centralized production systems have many suppliers spread out that meet all market demand. The point of this research is to help further the understanding of company decision-makers about impacts to the environment and costs when choosing a decentralized or centralized supply chain organizational strategy. This research explores; what degree of centralization for a supply chain makes the most financial and environmental sense for siting facilities; and which factories are in the best location to handle the financial and environmental impacts of particular processing steps needed for product manufacture. This research considered two examples of facility location for supply chains when products are taken back; the theoretical case involved shoe resoling and a real world case study considered the location of operations for a company that reclaims multiple products for use as material inputs. For the theoretical example a centralized strategy to facility location was optimal: whereas for the case study a decentralized strategy to facility location was best. In conclusion, it is not possible to say that a centralized or decentralized strategy to facility location is in general best for a company that takes back products. Each company’s specific concerns, needs, and supply chain details will determine which degree of centralization creates the optimal strategy for siting their facilities.

Estimating greenhouse gas emissions of highway construction and rehabilitation to support pavement life cycle assessment

Highway infrastructure plays a significant role in society. The building and upkeep of America’s highways provide society the necessary means of transportation for goods and services needed to develop as a nation. However, as a result of economic and social development, vast amounts of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) are emitted into the atmosphere contributing to global climate change. In recognizing this, future policies may mandate the monitoring of GHG emissions from public agencies and private industries in order to reduce the effects of global climate change. To effectively reduce these emissions, there must be methods that agencies can use to quantify the GHG emissions associated with constructing and maintaining the nation’s highway infrastructure. Current methods for assessing the impacts of highway infrastructure include methodologies that look at the economic impacts (costs) of constructing and maintaining highway infrastructure over its life cycle. This is known as Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA). With the recognition of global climate change, transportation agencies and contractors are also investigating the environmental impacts that are associated with highway infrastructure construction and rehabilitation. A common tool in doing so is the use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Traditionally, LCA is used to assess the environmental impacts of products or processes. LCA is an emerging concept in highway infrastructure assessment and is now being implemented and applied to transportation systems. This research focuses on life cycle GHG emissions associated with the construction and rehabilitation of highway infrastructure using a LCA approach. Life cycle phases of the highway section include; the material acquisition and extraction, construction and rehabilitation, and service phases. Departing from traditional approaches that tend to use LCA as a way to compare alternative pavement materials or designs based on estimated inventories, this research proposes a shift to a context sensitive process-based approach that uses actual observed construction and performance data to calculate greenhouse gas emissions associated with highway construction and rehabilitation. The goal is to support strategies that reduce long-term environmental impacts. Ultimately, this thesis outlines techniques that can be used to assess GHG emissions associated with construction and rehabilitation operations to support the overall pavement LCA.

FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT UNDER HISTORICAL AND PREDICTED LAND USE CHANGE USING CONTINUOUS HYDROLOGIC MODELING

Current procedures for flood risk estimation assume flood distributions are stationary over time, meaning annual maximum flood (AMF) series are not affected by climatic variation, land use/land cover (LULC) change, or management practices. Thus, changes in LULC and climate are generally not accounted for in policy and design related to flood risk/control, and historical flood events are deemed representative of future flood risk. These assumptions need to be re-evaluated, however, as climate change and anthropogenic activities have been observed to have large impacts on flood risk in many areas. In particular, understanding the effects of LULC change is essential to the study and understanding of global environmental change and the consequent hydrologic responses. The research presented herein provides possible causation for observed nonstationarity in AMF series with respect to changes in LULC, as well as a means to assess the degree to which future LULC change will impact flood risk. Four watersheds in the Midwest, Northeastern, and Central United States were studied to determine flood risk associated with historical and future projected LULC change. Historical single framed aerial images dating back to the mid-1950s were used along with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and remote sensing models (SPRING and ERDAS) to create historical land use maps. The Forecasting Scenarios of Future Land Use Change (FORE-SCE) model was applied to generate future LULC maps annually from 2006 to 2100 for the conterminous U.S. based on the four IPCC-SRES future emission scenario conditions. These land use maps were input into previously calibrated Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) models for two case study watersheds. In order to isolate effects of LULC change, the only variable parameter was the Runoff Curve Number associated with the land use layer. All simulations were run with daily climate data from 1978-1999, consistent with the 'base' model which employed the 1992 NLCD to represent 'current' conditions. Output daily maximum flows were converted to instantaneous AMF series and were subsequently modeled using a Log-Pearson Type 3 (LP3) distribution to evaluate flood risk. Analysis of the progression of LULC change over the historic period and associated SWAT outputs revealed that AMF magnitudes tend to increase over time in response to increasing degrees of urbanization. This is consistent with positive trends in the AMF series identified in previous studies, although there are difficulties identifying correlations between LULC change and identified change points due to large time gaps in the generated historical LULC maps, mainly caused by unavailability of sufficient quality historic aerial imagery. Similarly, increases in the mean and median AMF magnitude were observed in response to future LULC change projections, with the tails of the distributions remaining reasonably constant. FORE-SCE scenario A2 was found to have the most dramatic impact on AMF series, consistent with more extreme projections of population growth, demands for growing energy sources, agricultural land, and urban expansion, while AMF outputs based on scenario B2 showed little changes for the future as the focus is on environmental conservation and regional solutions to environmental issues.