IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i5p2329-d1607104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Life Cycle Cost of Excavation and Trenchless Cured-in-Place Pipeline Technologies for Sustainable Wastewater Applications

Author

Listed:
  • Gayatri Thakre

    (Civil Engineering Department, The University of Texas at Arlington, P.O. Box 19308, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

  • Vinayak Kaushal

    (Civil Engineering Department, The University of Texas at Arlington, P.O. Box 19308, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

  • Eesha Karkhanis

    (Civil Engineering Department, The University of Texas at Arlington, P.O. Box 19308, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

  • Mohammad Najafi

    (Civil Engineering Department, The University of Texas at Arlington, P.O. Box 19308, Arlington, TX 76019, USA)

Abstract

Sanitary sewer pipelines frequently experience blockages, structural failures, and overflows, underscoring the dire state of U.S. wastewater infrastructure, which has been rated a D-, while America’s overall infrastructure scores only slightly better at C-. Traditional open-trench excavation methods or excavation technology (ET) for replacing deteriorated pipes are notoriously expensive and disruptive, requiring extensive processes like route planning, surveying, engineering, trench excavation, pipe installation, backfilling, and ground restoration. In contrast, trenchless technologies (TT) provide a less invasive and more cost-effective alternative. Among these, cured-in-place pipe technology (CIPPT), which involves inserting resin-impregnated fabric into damaged pipelines, is widely recognized for its efficiency. However, a comprehensive life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) directly comparing ET and TT, accounting for the net present value (NPV) across installation, maintenance, and rehabilitation costs, remains unexplored. This study aims to establish an LCCA framework for both CIPPT and ET, specifically for sanitary sewer pipes ranging from 8 to 42 inches in diameter. The framework incorporates construction, environmental, and social costs, providing a holistic evaluation. The key costs for ET involve pipe materials and subsurface investigations, whereas TT’s costs center around engineering and design. Social impacts, such as road and pavement damage, disruption to adjacent utilities, and noise, are pivotal, alongside environmental factors like material use, transportation, project duration, and equipment emissions. This comprehensive framework empowers decision makers to holistically assess economic and environmental impacts, enabling informed choices for sustainable sewer infrastructure renewal.

Suggested Citation

  • Gayatri Thakre & Vinayak Kaushal & Eesha Karkhanis & Mohammad Najafi, 2025. "Evaluation of Life Cycle Cost of Excavation and Trenchless Cured-in-Place Pipeline Technologies for Sustainable Wastewater Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:5:p:2329-:d:1607104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/2329/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/2329/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vitor Sousa & Inês Meireles, 2018. "The Influence of the Construction Technology in Time-Cost Relationships of Sewerage Projects," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(8), pages 2753-2766, June.
    2. 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.
    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. Aleksandra Jamrozik & Jan Ziaja & Sławomir Wysocki, 2025. "Improving Energy Efficiency in the Management of Drilling Waste from Trenchless Gas and Power Pipeline Construction Through the Implementation of Photovoltaic Panels and Circular Economy Principles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-27, February.

    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:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:5:p:2329-:d:1607104. 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.