An integrated multi-agent framework for optimizing time, cost and environmental impact of construction processes

Environmentally conscious construction has received a significant amount of research attention during the last decades. Even though construction literature is rich in studies that emphasize the importance of environmental impact during the construction phase, most of the previous studies failed to combine environmental analysis with other project performance criteria in construction. This is mainly because most of the studies have overlooked the multi-objective nature of construction projects. In order to achieve environmentally conscious construction, multi-objectives and their relationships need to be successfully analyzed in the complex construction environment. The complex construction system is composed of changing project conditions that have an impact on the relationship between time, cost and environmental impact (TCEI) of construction operations. Yet, this impact is still unknown by construction professionals. Studying this impact is vital to fulfill multiple project objectives and achieve environmentally conscious construction. This research proposes an analytical framework to analyze the impact of changing project conditions on the relationship of TCEI. This study includes green house gas (GHG) emissions as an environmental impact category. The methodology utilizes multi-agent systems, multi-objective optimization, analytical network process, and system dynamics tools to study the relationships of TCEI and support decision-making under the influence of project conditions. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is applied to the evaluation of environmental impact in terms of GHG. The mixed method approach allowed for the collection and analysis of qualitative and quantitative data. Structured interviews of professionals in the highway construction field were conducted to gain their perspectives in decision-making under the influence of certain project conditions, while the quantitative data were collected from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for highway resurfacing projects. The data collected were used to test the framework. The framework yielded statistically significant results in simulating project conditions and optimizing TCEI. The results showed that the change in project conditions had a significant impact on the TCEI optimal solutions. The correlation between TCEI suggested that they affected each other positively, but in different strengths. The findings of the study will assist contractors to visualize the impact of their decision on the relationship of TCEI.

Public perception of carbon capture and storage in relation to hydraulic fracturing: content analyses, survey results, and policy proposals

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can contribute significantly to addressing the global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions problem. Despite widespread political support, CCS remains unknown to the general public. Public perception researchers have found that, when asked, the public is relatively unfamiliar with CCS yet many individuals voice specific safety concerns regarding the technology. We believe this leads many stakeholders conflate CCS with the better-known and more visible technology hydraulic fracturing (fracking). We support this with content analysis of media coverage, web analytics, and public lobbying records. Furthermore, we present results from a survey of United States residents. This first-of-its-kind survey assessed participants’ knowledge, opinions and support of CCS and fracking technologies. The survey showed that participants had more knowledge of fracking than CCS, and that knowledge of fracking made participants less willing to support CCS projects. Additionally, it showed that participants viewed the two technologies as having similar risks and similar risk intensities. In the CCS stakeholder literature, judgment and decision-making (JDM) frameworks are noticeably absent, and public perception is not discussed using any cognitive biases as a way of understanding or explaining irrational decisions, yet these survey results show evidence of both anchoring bias and the ambiguity effect. Public acceptance of CCS is essential for a national low-carbon future plan. In conclusion, we propose changes in communications and incentives as programs to increase support of CCS.