IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v13y2024i1p12-d1319615.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Trenchless and Excavation Technologies in the Restoration of a Sewage Network and Their Carbon Footprints

Author

Listed:
  • Tomáš Chorazy

    (Institute of Municipal Water Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Purkyňova 651/139, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Petr Hlavínek

    (Institute of Municipal Water Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Purkyňova 651/139, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Jakub Raček

    (Institute of Municipal Water Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Purkyňova 651/139, 612 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik

    (Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Systems, Faculty of Civil, Environmental Engineering and Architecture, Rzeszow University of Technology, Al. Powstancow Warszawy 6, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak

    (Department of Water Supply and Sewerage Systems, Faculty of Civil, Environmental Engineering and Architecture, Rzeszow University of Technology, Al. Powstancow Warszawy 6, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Šárka Keprdová

    (Institute of Technology of Building Materials and Components, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Veveří 331/95, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Zdeněk Dufek

    (Institute of Construction Economics and Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Veveří 331/95, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The restoration of aging sewer networks is a fundamental remediation approach with the aim of renewing or improving existing systems. Remediation methods include repair, renovation, and replacement (renewal). The restoration of a sewer network itself can be performed using either excavation or trenchless technologies. While these technologies offer various advantages, they also present disadvantages. The choice of a restoration technology depends on numerous parameters, including economic factors and local conditions (such as the construction of the existing sewage network, available working space, traffic load, and environmental safety restrictions). In addition to the parameters influencing the choice of restoration technology, recent considerations have been given to constraints related to greenhouse gas emissions and the corresponding carbon footprint. Carbon footprint serves as an indicator of the restoration activity’s dependence on fossil fuels, both during implementation and operation. In the 21st century, concerns regarding carbon footprints have rapidly escalated. The reduction in carbon footprints is a crucial objective from both an economic and an ecological point of view. This article specifically addresses the prospects of monitoring the carbon footprint concerning the partial restoration of a sewer network within the historical core of the city of Brno, located in the Czech Republic. This aspect constitutes the unique and innovative contribution of the paper. The intensity of the energy demand of excavation and trenchless technologies is utilized as a direct measure of the carbon footprint of each technology. The comparative assessment demonstrates that the trenchless technology used achieves a reduction of 59.2% in CO 2 emissions compared to the excavation technology. The carbon footprint of Variant 1 (trenchless technology) is 9.91 t CO 2 eq., while the carbon footprint of Variant 2 (excavation technology) is 24.29 t CO 2 eq. The restoration of open pipelines produces more emissions due to the higher energy consumption, making it more expensive in terms of fuel costs, waste disposal costs, and the corresponding environmental hazards.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomáš Chorazy & Petr Hlavínek & Jakub Raček & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik & Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Šárka Keprdová & Zdeněk Dufek, 2024. "Comparison of Trenchless and Excavation Technologies in the Restoration of a Sewage Network and Their Carbon Footprints," Resources, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:1:p:12-:d:1319615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/1/12/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/1/12/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D. Beale & D. Marlow & S. Cook, 2013. "Estimating the Cost and Carbon Impact of a Long Term Water Main Rehabilitation Strategy," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(11), pages 3899-3910, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Petit-Boix & David Sanjuan-Delmás & Carles Gasol & Gara Villalba & María Suárez-Ojeda & Xavier Gabarrell & Alejandro Josa & Joan Rieradevall, 2014. "Environmental Assessment of Sewer Construction in Small to Medium Sized Cities Using Life Cycle Assessment," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(4), pages 979-997, March.
    2. Ahmed Sattar & B. Gharabaghi & Edward McBean, 2016. "Prediction of Timing of Watermain Failure Using Gene Expression Models," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(5), pages 1635-1651, March.
    3. Ahmed M. A. Sattar & B. Gharabaghi & Edward A. McBean, 2016. "Prediction of Timing of Watermain Failure Using Gene Expression Models," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(5), pages 1635-1651, March.

    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:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:1:p:12-:d:1319615. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.