Environmental and Cost Assessment of Full-Depth Reclamation versus Conventional Rehabilitation: A Case Study

Through life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA), this research compares the environmental and economic impacts of two pavement rehabilitation methods for low-volume roads: full-depth reclamation (FDR) and conventional bituminous pavement reconstruction (CBP-R). FDR involves recycling existing pavement materials with a cement-stabilized base and applying either a bituminous or paneled cement concrete (PCC) overlay. This study considered two FDR rehabilitation techniques: FDR with bituminous overlay and FDR with PCC overlay. The study examines a case study of the implementation of FDR on rural roads in Uttar Pradesh, India. LCA and LCCA encompass five key stages: material production, transportation, construction, use phase, and end-of-life phases. The findings of this study reveal that during material production and end-of-life phases, FDR with PCC overlay generates considerably higher CO2 emissions than other pavement rehabilitation methods. Conversely, in the material transportation, construction, and use phase, CBP-R exhibits higher CO2 emissions than FDR-based techniques. Results indicated that FDR with bituminous overlay reduces CO2 emissions by 55% and 48% and offers cost savings of up to 31% and 38%, compared with FDR with PCC overlay and conventional reconstruction, respectively. Eco-efficiency portfolio analysis identified FDR with bituminous overlay as the most sustainable rehabilitation strategy, effectively balancing low emissions and minimal costs. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis was carried out and highlighted the impact of fuel type, transport distance, and supplementary material on emission levels.