IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v15y2011i5p2475-2486.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life cycle assessment of pentachlorophenol-treated wooden utility poles with comparisons to steel and concrete utility poles

Author

Listed:
  • Bolin, Christopher A.
  • Smith, Stephen T.

Abstract

A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) was done to identify the environmental impacts related to pentachlorophenol (penta)-treated wooden utility poles. Penta-treated utility poles commonly are used for electricity distribution and transmission, and telecommunications. In addition, this LCA has evaluated the opportunities to reduce the environmental impacts associated with penta-treated poles and has compared the penta-treated pole product to alternative products. A model of penta-treated utility pole life cycle stages was created and used to determine inputs and outputs during the pole production, treating, service life, and disposal stages. Pole production data are based on published sources. Primary wood preservative treatment data were obtained by surveying wood treatment facilities in the United States. Product service life and disposal inventory data are based on published data and professional judgment. Life cycle inventory inputs, outputs, and impact indicators for penta-treated utility poles were quantified per pole. In a similar manner, an inventory model was developed for the manufacture, service life, and disposal of the primary alternative products: steel and spun concrete utility poles. Impact indicator values, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, fossil fuel and water use, and emissions with the potential to cause acidification, smog, ecological toxicity, and eutrophication were quantified for each of the pole products. The GHG, fossil fuel use, acidification, water use, eutrophication, and ecological toxicity impact indicator values for penta-treated poles are less than those for concrete poles. The GHG, fossil fuel use, acidification, water use, and ecological toxicity impact indicator values for penta-treated poles are less than those for steel poles. The values are about equal for eutrophication. The smog impact from penta-treated poles is greater than the smog impact from both concrete and steel poles.

Suggested Citation

  • Bolin, Christopher A. & Smith, Stephen T., 2011. "Life cycle assessment of pentachlorophenol-treated wooden utility poles with comparisons to steel and concrete utility poles," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 2475-2486, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:15:y:2011:i:5:p:2475-2486
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364-0321(11)00068-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Salman, Abdullahi M. & Li, Yue & Bastidas-Arteaga, Emilio, 2017. "Maintenance optimization for power distribution systems subjected to hurricane hazard, timber decay and climate change," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 136-149.
    2. Umoh, Edwin A. & Lugga, Ahmad A., 2019. "Contextualizing hazard mitigation policy for electricity grids in the Sudan Sahel Region of Nigeria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 135-143.
    3. Nadine May & Edeltraud Günther & Peer Haller, 2019. "The sustainable use of wood as a regional resource—an ecological assessment of common and new processing technologies for wood poles [Die nachhaltige Nutzung von Holz als regionale Ressource - eine," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 177-201, December.
    4. Nadine May & Edeltraud Guenther & Peer Haller, 2017. "Environmental Indicators for the Evaluation of Wood Products in Consideration of Site-Dependent Aspects: A Review and Integrated Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-31, October.
    5. Ling-Chin, J. & Heidrich, O. & Roskilly, A.P., 2016. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) – from analysing methodology development to introducing an LCA framework for marine photovoltaic (PV) systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 352-378.
    6. Paraic C. Ryan & Mark G. Stewart, 2017. "Cost-benefit analysis of climate change adaptation for power pole networks," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 519-533, August.
    7. Hughes, William & Zhang, Wei & Cerrai, Diego & Bagtzoglou, Amvrossios & Wanik, David & Anagnostou, Emmanouil, 2022. "A Hybrid Physics-Based and Data-Driven Model for Power Distribution System Infrastructure Hardening and Outage Simulation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    8. Ryan, Paraic C. & Stewart, Mark G. & Spencer, Nathan & Li, Yue, 2014. "Reliability assessment of power pole infrastructure incorporating deterioration and network maintenance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 261-273.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:15:y:2011:i:5:p:2475-2486. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.