M. Lee and D.

Basu / Sustainability Assessment of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls 833

view. Two tasks are required to conduct MCA: (i) identify objectives and tradeoffs
among the objectives, and (ii) assign weights to criteria depending on their relative
importance in decision-making. Weights are assigned with a subjective approach,
which requires careful judgment [4]. Scores or rankings are allocated to each
alternative according to the results of analyses. The scores for each alternative are then
weighted to calculate the final score. The alternative with the lowest final score
(highest ranking) is considered to be the most sustainable solution according to the
criteria set by the decision makers.

3. Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls

Mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are internally stabilized retaining structures
in which stability is attained by reinforcement such as soil nails, geogrids, and metallic
strips [9]. In this paper, MSE walls are designed in a simple way such that there is
enough information to apply the sustainability assessment framework. Two alternatives
for MSE walls are designed for the same applied loads and the assessment is carried
out with a comparative approach. The sustainability aspects of MSE walls reinforced
with steel strips and geogrids are evaluated and compared.
Details regarding the design procedure and calculations for the two MSE walls are
excluded in this paper because of lack of space as the primary purpose of the paper is to
demonstrate the sustainability assessment framework. It is assumed that the MSE walls
are installed in dry homogeneous sands. Pre-cast concrete panels are used as the facing
of the walls. Two different types of reinforcement are used - steel strips and geogrids.
The steel strips are 65-grade galvanized, 50mm wide and 4mm thick. The geogrids are
made of uniaxial high density polyethylene (HDPE). Based on design calculations, the
amount of materials required to construct both types of MSE walls is quantified. The
estimated volume of sands, cement (concrete) for the facing, steel strips, and length of
geogrids are 560 m3, 11.38 m3, 0.12 m3, and 231.34 m, respectively. Figure 1 illustrates
the schematic diagram of MSE walls.

Figure 1. MSE Wall Designs with Steel Strips and Geogrids

834 M. Lee and D. Basu / Sustainability Assessment of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls

4. Sustainability Assessment of MSE Walls

In this section, the use of the sustainability assessment framework through application
to MSE walls is outlined. The material quantification estimated from design
calculations is used as an input to the sustainability assessment. Some information may
be omitted because it is trivial for presenting the demonstration.

4.1. Life Cycle Assessment

4.1.1. Scope and Goal Definition

The goal of this life cycle assessment (LCA) is to identify the environmental impacts
associated with mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls reinforced with steel strips
and geogrids. The primary application of the assessment is to compare alternative
designs of MSE walls in terms of global environmental impacts and to determine the
most environmentally-friendly option. The assessment can also be used for education
purpose to demonstrate the application of LCA to geotechnical projects, and it can be
adapted to other projects of interest.
Processes from extraction of raw materials to the end of manufacturing are
considered; other phases such as transportation, construction, maintenance, demolition,
and waste management are not considered as part of the life cycle due to insufficient
data. The inputs to the life cycle processes include use of construction materials, such
as sandy soil, concrete, steel, and geogrids, depending on the reinforcement alternative.
The outputs are quantified by airborne emissions. Categories of environmental impacts
considered in this assessment are global warming, acidification, ecotoxicity, and human
health.

4.1.2. Inventory Analysis

Embodied energy required to manufacture MSE walls are considered as the inputs to
the life cycle processes. Embodied energy can be computed by multiplying the mass of
material and its respective embodied energy intensity. The embodied energy intensity
for each type of material are obtained from Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE)
database version 2.0 [10]. The result of input inventory analysis is shown in Figure 2.

180000
160000
TotalEmbodiedEnergy(MJ)

140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
SteelStripDesign GeogridDesign

Figure 2. Total Embodied Energy of MSE Wall Designs

 M. Lee and D. Basu / Sustainability Assessment of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls 835

The total embodied energy required to manufacture MSE walls with steel strips and
geogrids are 161,822 MJ and 130,342 MJ, respectively.
A number of chemical agents are released to air because of manufacture of cement,
concrete, steel, and geosynthetics. For example, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxides, nitrous
oxides, etc. are emitted to air from concrete manufacturing. The list of air emissions
generated due to process activities are extracted from the database provided by [11].
The mass of air emissions are computed by multiplying mass of the material and the
corresponding emission factors obtained from databases provided by [11] and [12]. The
result of output inventory analysis is not presented in this paper because of limited
space available.

4.1.3. Environmental Impact Analysis

As per the scope of this LCA, the selected impact categories are global warming,
acidification, ecotoxicity, and human health. Normalization factors are obtained from
[13] to normalize the quantities of chemical agents into relevant environmental impact.
The most important impact category in this assessment is global warming, and it is
found that the MSE walls with steel strips and geogrids release 1,865,802 g and 18,414
g of equivalent CO2, respectively. Due to excessive amount of data, the analysis results
for other environmental impacts are not provided in this paper. The results of
environmental impact analysis for global warming are illustrated in Figure 3.

10000000

1000000
(gofEquivalentCarbonDioxide)
GlobalWarmingPotential

100000

10000

1000

100

10

1
SteelStripDesign GeogridDesign

Figure 3. Global Warming Potential of MSE Wall Designs

4.2. Cost-Benefit Analysis

For this particular project, it is not possible to quantify societal benefits unless there is
a comprehensive understanding of economic and social values of the local area
supported by sufficient data. In this case, the economic feasibility of each alternative
design is examined and the social benefits can be presumed qualitatively. For cost
analysis, the cost of construction materials required to manufacture the MSE walls is
estimated. Other project costs, such as transportation and labour, are not estimated due
to insufficient data. Material costs are based on quotes received from suppliers. The
costs associated with soil and concrete panels ($4,000) are equal for both alternatives.
As for reinforcement, steel strips costs approximately $730, and geogrids costs $408