Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Asphalt mixtures emission and energy consumption: A review MARK

⁎
Liseane Padilha Thives, Enedir Ghisi
Federal University of Santa Catarina, Department of Civil Engineering, Florianópolis, SC 88040-900, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: The objective of this paper is to assess carbon dioxide emissions and energy consumption for the production of
Asphalt mixtures road pavements by means of a literature review. The construction of the main types of pavements requires
Hot mix asphalt energy and generates greenhouse gas emissions that impact the environment. Different types of asphalt
Warm mix asphalt mixtures such as cold mixtures, warm mixtures, asphalt rubber mixtures and mixtures with reclaimed asphalt
Asphalt rubber mixtures
pavement were assessed. The fuel used in the burners that heat and dry the aggregates is the main source of
Reclaimed asphalt pavement
Portland cement concrete
emissions. Also, the aggregates moisture content is an important parameter that influences the energy
Recycling consumption. On the other hand, the energy consumption and emissions to produce Portland cement mixtures
Energy consumption are related to the process of cement production. For both asphalt and Portland cement mixtures, the extraction,
Greenhouse gas emissions manufacturing and placement were also evaluated. Moreover, the energy consumption of the pavements
structures was evaluated. Pavements composed of Portland cement concrete consume more energy than hot mix
asphalt. But, warm mix asphalt technologies can save 20–70% of the energy consumption when compared to
hot mix asphalt, mainly due to the temperature reduction in the warm mix processes. In addition, the emissions
caused by different fuels used to produce pavement mixtures were compared. Asphalt mixtures and their
alternative technologies consumed less energy and emitted fewer gases than Portland cement mixtures. Carbon
dioxide emissions for hot mix asphalt and asphalt rubber mixtures can be 70% lower than emissions for
Portland cement concrete. Some alternatives to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in
asphalt mixtures production are the decrease of aggregates moisture content, reduction of the asphalt mixtures
production temperature and use of waste materials in pavement construction. Switching from hot mix to warm
mix technologies would reduce the carbon footprint generated by the asphalt industry.

1. Introduction pavement), rigid (Portland cement concrete pavement) and composite

This paper shows a literature review concerning energy consump-
tion and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions for the production of road
pavements. The basic road pavements techniques such as, hot mix
asphalt, warm mix asphalt, asphalt rubber mixtures, reclaimed asphalt
pavement, Portland cement concrete and recycling are investigated.
The entire production and construction process is taken into consid-
eration, i.e., extraction of aggregates, laying for the construction of a
new pavement, and rehabilitation.
Roads are built up in several layers, consisting of subgrade,
subbase, base and surface layer. These layers together constitute the
pavement. The pavement can be constructed from a wide variety of
materials and mixtures of materials consisting of gravel, stone, asphalt,
concrete or improved soils. The types of materials and thicknesses of
the pavement layers are determined according to the expected traffic
density [1].
There are three main types of pavements, i.e., flexible (asphalt
(flexible and rigid layers in the same pavement). So, the selection of a
type to be used on a road involves many factors such as traffic, material
performance, design and location. To the extent that the pavement
selection serves users by ensuring that they travel on road pavements
that are safe, smooth, quiet, durable, economical, and made of
sustainable materials, designers have to succeed in choosing the
appropriate type of pavement. Traditionally, processes for selecting a
type of pavement are generally used by departments of transportation,
responsible for roadway construction, to identify and select the most
durable, cost-effective, highest-performing pavement structure for a
new roadway [2].
The asphalt pavement takes asphalt (petroleum product) to cement
together the aggregates (sand and crushed rock). This mixture is
produced at the asphalt plant. In the field, the mixture is spread and
compacted on the roadbed. On the other hand, concrete pavement
takes Portland cement and water to glue the aggregates. In the field, the
concrete is placed into steel moulds until the curing. The World

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: liseane.thives@ufsc.br (L.P. Thives), enedir.ghisi@ufsc.br (E. Ghisi).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.087
Received 15 June 2015; Received in revised form 29 September 2016; Accepted 15 January 2017
1364-0321/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
Factbook [3] provides some information on people, government,
transportation and transnational issues for many countries. From this
reference, one can see that most pavements (paved roads) are
constituted of asphalt mixtures.
Magnum [4] states that Europe and North America have by far the
most extensive networks of paved roads and highways in the world. In
Europe, it is estimated that more than 90% of the 5.2 million km of
paved roads and highways are surfaced with asphalt materials. In the
United States, more than 92% out of 4 million km of roads and
highways are surfaced with asphalt. In addition, about 85% of airport
runways and 85% of parking areas in the United States are surfaced
with asphalt. Canada has about 415,000 km of paved roads, and
Mexico has about 178,000 km. For paved roads, the percentage of
asphalt roads in Canada is about 90% and in Mexico is 96%.
The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency [5], since
2006, states that CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use and industrial
processes (cement production) in China have been greater than the
emissions in the United States. Cement clinker production emits the
largest amount of CO2 among industrial processes, contributing to
about 4% of global CO2 emissions from fuel use and industrial
activities. In 2013, China produced 58.6% of the cement used world-
wide [54].
According to the World Bank [6], the road sector energy consump-
tion includes petroleum products, natural gas, electricity, renewable
fuels and waste. Fig. 1 shows the relation among urban population, CO2
emissions, paved roads, unpaved roads and road sector energy
consumption for some countries. In general, CO2 emissions appear to
exhibit a relationship with paved roads and population concentrated in
urban areas. The emissions are higher in countries that have more
paved roads. Although the United States have the greatest amount of
paved roads, China has the highest CO2 emissions (released by burning
fossil fuels in the process of producing and consuming energy).
Nearly 90% of paved roads in the world are made of asphalt
mixtures; the remaining 10% are comprised of either Portland cement
concrete or composites of hot mix asphalt over Portland cement
concrete or vice versa [7]. Once most of the paved roads in the world
are made of asphalt, this paper will focus on this material. Asphalt
pavement construction involves the manufacture and laying of road
construction materials. Construction of new roads frequently implies
interference with the environment, such as the alignment of the road
and mainly the necessity of huge amounts of natural aggregates needed
for construction. The road sector is a concern because roads consume
substantial amounts of materials [8].
Considering that the amount of paved roads tends to grow over the
years, special attention has to be given to decreasing energy consump-
tion and greenhouse gas emissions.
Energy is required to produce the heat used to manufacture hot mix
asphalt. Thus, reducing that amount of heat is one of the main targets
to reduce energy consumption, which in turn reduces greenhouse gas
emissions and environmental impact. Using low temperature asphalt
Fig. 1. Urban population, paved roads, unpaved roads, road sector energy consumption
and CO2 emissions for some countries. Based on [3,55].
474
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
techniques can reduce energy requirements, emissions and environ-
mental impact [9].
Usually, asphalt mixture plants consume energy in two forms: (i)
fossil fuel (petroleum distillation, natural gas, coal) to heat and dry the
aggregates; (ii) electricity purchased from the energy utilities to power
all other machinery (drum turning, conveyor belts, flight elevator). It
takes approximately 300,000 BTU to dry and heat the aggregates to
produce 1 t of hot mix asphalt, which constitutes about 7.6–11.4 l of
fuel oil or diesel, or about 2.5 to 3.5 therms of natural gas [10].
This paper focuses on energy consumption and CO2 emissions from
road pavements. The most used hot mix asphalt, such as conventional
mixtures, asphalt rubber mixture, warm mix asphalt and cold mixture
were analysed in order to assess energy consumption and gases
emissions during their production. In some cases, Portland cement
concrete materials were evaluated. The influence of the plant, the
aggregates moisture, and the type of fuel were also assessed.
The main objective of this paper was to assess energy consumption
and greenhouse gas emissions from asphalt mixtures production. Some
other objectives were also assessed, such as to: (i) evaluate the main
types of asphalt mixtures applied in flexible pavements; (ii) identify
types of mixtures that may reduce emissions and improve air quality.
2. Systematic review
Studies about emissions and energy consumption due to mixtures
production used on road pavement surfaces were surveyed. Researches
related to asphalt mixtures and Portland concrete mixtures published
from 1995 to 2016 were reviewed. The survey was conducted using
selected keywords (asphalt mixtures energy consumption; asphalt
mixtures emissions; Portland cement mixtures emissions; concrete
pavement energy consumption; hot mix asphalt production; concrete
pavements emissions) that resulted in 643 publications which were
selected by the following criteria: year of publication (from 1990‒2016)
in which 379 were discarded; repetitions (142 were discarded); and
relevance and relation to the topic (62 were discarded). This resulted in
60 selected articles. The number of publications considered in this
paper and their corresponding year of publication are summarized in
Fig. 2.
3. Road pavement types
Road pavement is a structure consisting of covered layers of
processed materials placed above the natural soil subgrade, whose
primary function is to distribute the vehicle loads to the subgrade.
There are two main groups of road pavement types, such as flexible
and rigid; and their combination generates a pavement called compo-
site (Fig. 3). Flexible pavements are those surfaced with asphalt
materials. These can be either in the form of pavement surface
treatments or hot mix asphalt. In flexible pavements, the total
pavement structure deflects due to traffic loads. On the other hand,
Fig. 2. Number of publications and corresponding year of publication.
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
Fig. 3. Types of road pavements.
rigid pavements are composed of Portland cement concrete and
substantially stiffer than the flexible ones due to the high modulus of
elasticity of the Portland cement concrete material [11].
Asphalt pavement or flexible pavement consists of the road
structure above the formation level which includes unbound and
asphalt-bound materials. In general, pavements are made of different
layers, such as hot mix asphalt layers, unbound road base, unbound
subbase and subgrade [12]. And rigid pavement structure is composed
of a hydraulic cement concrete surface course, an underlying base and,
if necessary, subbase courses [13].
Hot mix asphalt is a generic term that refers to many different types
of mixtures of aggregate and asphalt cement produced at elevated
temperatures in an asphalt plant. Usually, hot mix asphalt is divided
into three mixture categories according to the aggregate gradation used
in the mixture: dense-graded, open-graded, and gap-graded. Warm
mix asphalt is a variation of traditional hot mix asphalt. Warm mix
asphalt technologies are processes or additives for hot mix asphalt that
allow mixture production and placement to occur at temperatures
lower than those observed for conventional hot mixture asphalt.
Another approach to produce asphalt mixtures is through reuse of
the existing mixtures. Recycling hot mix asphalt material results in a
reusable mixture of aggregate and asphalt cement, called reclaimed
asphalt pavement [14].
Some polymers such as crumb rubber from waste tires, Styrene
Butadiene Styrene (SBS) and Ethylene Vinyl Acetate (EVA) can be
introduced in asphalt cement to improve the mechanical performance
of hot mix asphalt.
Rigid pavement surfaces are produced using hydraulic cement
concrete, which is a composite material that consists essentially of
cementation materials (Portland cement and supplementary cementa-
tion materials such as fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace
slag), aggregates (coarse and fine), and water and/or chemical admix-
tures. Portland cement concrete can be used as an overlay. Applying a
Portland cement concrete overlay on the surface of a hot mix asphalt
pavement is referred to as whitetopping [13]. When Portland cement
concrete is 0.127 m thick, it is called thin whitetopping pavement;
when its thickness is less than or equal to 0.102 m, it is called ultrathin
whitetopping pavement [15].
The pavement type selection should consider an adequate perfor-
mance with low costs [2]. In a comparison of costs for reconstructing
highways in Colorado, it was shown that, on the basis of initial cost,
asphalt pavements were 14% cheaper than concrete pavements [16]. A
study on the cost of pavement ownership in Kansas found that asphalt
pavements were 22% cheaper to build and 60% cheaper to maintain
over a 40-year period [17]. A comparison of asphalt and concrete
pavements in Ohio showed that asphalt pavements cost less to build
and require only small incremental investment in the form of overlays,
compared to the cost of reconstruction for concrete pavements. Asphalt
pavements were up to 20% cheaper to build and between 30% and 80%
cheaper to maintain [18].
As opposed to asphalt mixtures, Portland cement mixtures need no
drying of the aggregates prior to mixing because the extra moisture can
be accounted for as part of the mixture design. Hence, energy for
Portland cement mixtures production, excluding production of the raw
materials, is required primarily for transportation of the raw materials,
with a small portion for operating the aggregate crushing plant [7].
Sustainable development in flexible pavements strongly promotes
protection of the natural resources and use of recycled/waste materials
as aggregate or component where possible [19].
475
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
Recycling has important implications on the consumption of raw
materials and on the processing it takes to incorporate them into the
pavement. By reusing the asphalt binder in recycled (or reclaimed)
asphalt pavement, it is possible to consume less virgin binder, which
saves petroleum. The reuse of aggregate allows for less mining.
Furthermore, waste materials from other industries such as waste
shingles, slag, foundry sand, and tire rubber can be incorporated into
asphalt mixtures. New warm mix asphalt technologies can reduce the
temperatures required to produce and place the material, which
reduces fuel consumption and gas emissions [2]. However, some waste
materials will generate emissions, fumes and odour problems because
asphalt mixture is produced at high temperatures [20].
4. Asphalt mixtures production
Hot mix asphalt is a composite material whose major components
are aggregates (sand and coarse aggregates), filler and cement asphalt.
Sometimes, additives such as adhesion agents, modifiers or fibres are
incorporated to improve the performance of the product [21].
Asphalt cement is obtained from the petroleum refining process. To
produce hot mix asphalt, the asphalt cement is heated to ensure fluidity
to coat the aggregates. Aggregates are extracted from quarries, crushed,
and then transformed into a range of products (gravel, sand).
Asphalt mixtures are produced in a fixed plant or even in a mobile
mixing plant. Asphalt mixture plants can be classified according to
their mixing operation as: (i) batch mix plants, (ii) continuous mix (mix
outside dryer drum) plants, (iii) parallel flow drum-mix plants, and (iv)
counterflow drum-mix plants. About 85% of plants in the United States
present counterflow drum mixture design, while batch plants and
parallel flow drum mixture plants account for 10% and 5%, respec-
tively. Continuous mixture plants represent a very small fraction of the
plants in use (0.5%) [22].
During the asphalt mixture production, aggregates are conveyed
from stockpiles to dryers where they are heated to a temperature
between 150 and 170 °C. The aggregates are then mixed with the hot
asphalt cement. Finally, the asphalt mixture is directly delivered to
trucks and transported to a site construction [15].
Fuel for the burners that heat and dry the aggregates is the
dominant source of emissions, accounting for 80% of the total CO2
produced, while electricity accounts for 20%. Most of the thermal
energy is used to heat the aggregate. A 2% reduction in incoming
moisture content, implemented throughout the asphalt sector, would
save 8.7 kWh and 2.02 kg CO2 per ton of asphalt mixture. This suggests
that asphalt recipes that do not require being heated to high tempera-
tures will consume significantly less energy to be produced [23].
The aggregates moisture content is a very important parameter to
control the performance of an asphalt plant. It depends on the
extraction procedure at the quarry, on the manner that the aggregates
piles are protected from rainfall, and on how the front loader operator
picks the aggregates from the pile before charging them into the feeder
bins. The aggregates moisture content directly affects the energy
required for the drying process, i.e., an increase of 4% in the water
content implies a 60% increase in energy for drying the aggregates. One
way to partially overcome this increase in the energy consumption may
be decreasing the hot mix temperature, whenever this is possible. The
energy demand is about 2.62 kWh for an increase of 10 °C in the
mixture temperature, and 8.21 kWh for each 1% of moisture content
increase [21].
Another way to reduce the moisture content is by using solar
aggregate stockpiles. The solar stockpiles are designed to reach, during
the exposure period of mineral mixtures, superior thermal energy from
solar radiation [57]. In Croatia, an experiment was conducted in which
the temperature of the aggregates was measured every hour during 147
days. The aggregates were stocked into two storage models, i.e., one
with a thermally insulated external shell, and another with an unin-
sulated external shell. It was observed that the use of solar aggregate
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484

Table 1
Emission Factors Rating (EFR) from batch mix asphalt plants [24].

Process Emission (lb/t of asphalt mixture produced)

CO EFRc CO2 EFRc NOx EFRc SO2 EFRc

Natural gas-fired dryer 0.40 C 37 A 0.025 D 0.0046 E

Fuel oil-fired dryer 0.40 C 37 A 0.12 E 0.088 E
Waste oil-fired dryer 0.40 C 37 A 0.12 E 0.088 E
Coal-fired dryer NDa NAb 37 A NDa NDb 0.043 E

Note:
a
ND – no data available.
b
NA – not applicable.
c
EFR – Emission Factor Rating: the quality of the emission factors developed from analysis of the test data was rated using the criteria: A–Excellent, B–Above average, C–Average,
D–Below average, E–Poor.

stockpiles lead to a preheating of the aggregates and a reduction of the
moisture content [57].
In Brazil, the aggregates stockpiles are usually located in uncovered
areas, near the asphalt plant. Thus, following rainy days, more energy
is required to heat and dry the wet aggregates.
Asphalt mixture plants have two major categories of emissions:
ducted sources (those vented to the atmosphere through some type of
stack, vent, or pipe), and fugitive sources (those not confined to ducts
and vents but emitted directly from the source to the air). Dryers are
the most important ducted font of emissions from both batch mixture
and drum mixture plants [22]. Emissions from these fonts consist of
water (as steam evaporated from the aggregate), products of combus-
tion (CO2, NOx, SOx), CO, and small amounts of organic components.
The most significant ducted source of emissions of most pollutants
from batch asphalt mixture plants, parallel-flow drum-mix and coun-
terflow drum-mix plants is the rotary drum dryer. The dryer emissions
consist of water (as steam evaporated from the aggregate); products of
combustion and small amounts of organic compounds of various types.
The CO and organic compound emissions result from incomplete
combustion of the fuel [24]. Tables 1 and 2 present emission factors
for CO, CO2, NOx, and SO2 from batch mix asphalt plant and drum mix
asphalt plants, respectively.
The emissions from batch plants are, in general, higher than in
drum plants. In the batch plants, aggregates are dried and heated, and
then in a mixer blend aggregates and asphalt are mixed one batch at a
time, while in drum mix plants aggregates are dried and blended with
asphalt in a continuous process and in the same piece of equipment.
5. Asphalt mixtures types
Asphalt mixture is made of aggregates, asphalt cement and filler,
used for constructing and maintaining highways, roads, urban roads
and parking areas. Aggregates used for asphalt mixtures could be
crushed rock, sand, gravel or slags. Most commonly, asphalt cement is
used as a binder and hot mixture asphalt (or hot mix asphalt) is called
asphalt mixture or conventional mixture [12]. In this paper, the
adopted nomenclature to conventional mixture is hot mix asphalt.
According to EAPA [12], to provide the best performance due to the
different requirements, a great variety of hot mix asphalt can be
produced (high traffic, bad weather conditions), such as:
• Hot mix asphalt that is produced at a temperature between 150 and
170 °C (in general), in which, depending on the usage, a different
asphalt mixture can be used: porous asphalt, stone mastic asphalt,
mastic asphalt, asphalt concrete for very thin layers, asphalt con-
crete for ultra-thin layers, asphalt rubber mixtures, asphalt mixtures
with polymers;
• Warm mix asphalt that is produced at a temperature around 20–
40 °C lower than the equivalent hot mix asphalt. Less energy is
involved and, during the paving operations, the temperature of the
mixture is lower, resulting in improved working conditions for the
workers and an earlier opening of the road;
• Cold mixture that is produced without heating the aggregate. This is
only possible due to the use of a specific emulsion which breaks
either during compaction or during mixing. After breaking, the
emulsion coats the aggregate and increases its strength over time.
Cold mixtures are particularly recommended for light traffic roads.
Low-temperature mixtures represent substantial energy savings
and therefore mitigation of emissions. These mixtures include cold
mixture, half-warm mix and warm mix asphalt. Also, recycled asphalt
pavement seems promising at reducing natural resources extraction
[9].
According to Rubio et al. [25], hot mix asphalt can be classified
according to the manufacturing temperature used to produce it, i.e., (i)
cold mixture is manufactured at a temperature lower than 60 °C; (ii)
half-warm mix is made at less than 100 °C, usually from 70 to 95 °C;
(iii) warm mix asphalt is made at temperatures ranging from 110 to
140 °C. The cold mixture is not an alternative to hot mix asphalt
because its performance is less effective and its use is limited to the

Table 2
Emission Factors Rating (EFR) from drum mix asphalt plants [24].

Process Emission (lb/t of asphalt mixture produced)

CO EFRc CO2 EFRc NOx EFRc SO2 EFRc

Natural gas-fired dryer 0.13 B 33 A 0.26 D 0.0034 D

Fuel oil-fired dryer 0.13 B 33 A 0.055 C 0.011 E
Waste oil-fired dryer 0.13 B 33 A 0.055 C 0.058 B
Coal-fired dryer NDa NAb 33 A NDa NAb 0.19 E

Note:
a
ND – no data available.
b
NA – not applicable.
c
EFR – Emission Factor Rating: the quality of the emission factors developed from analysis of the test data was rated using the criteria: A–Excellent, B–Above average, C–Average,
D–Below average, E–Poor.

476
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
Table 3
Base conditions for reference hot mix asphalt [35].
Materials Conditions
Aggregates initial water content 2%
Sand initial water content 5%
Filler initial water content 1%
Aggregates temperature initial: 15 °C, final: 155 °C
Sand and filler temperature initial: 15 °C, final: 155 °C
Asphalt temperature initial:160 °C, final: 160 °C
rehabilitation of deteriorated pavement with a low vehicle traffic load.
On the other hand, warm mix asphalt and half-warm mix have their
performance similar or comparable to hot mix asphalt.
Warm mix asphalt uses technological advances such as warm mix
asphalt foam, Aspha-min®, Sasobit® and Evoterm that reduce the
temperature of compaction and production. By using these mixtures,
the reduction of CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases is expected
because the temperature needed to produce and compact warm mix
asphalt is lower than that for hot mix asphalt [26].
6. Energy consumption and emissions
6.1. Energy consumption
In general, energy consumption occurs during two main phases of
pavement construction, i.e., materials production and construction.
The materials production phase includes the extraction and initial
processing of aggregates, asphalt, cement, and other supplementary
materials such as crumb rubber or cement admixtures. The processes
within this phase include raw material acquisition, transport of raw
materials from and to the plant, and material manufacture. The
transport of manufactured materials from and to the construction site
is usually considered into the construction phase [27].
Santero et al. [28] state that the life cycle of pavement is divided
into five phases, i.e., (1) raw materials and production, (2) construc-
tion, (3) use, (4) maintenance, and (5) end-of-life. Each phase is
comprised of various components; each one represents a unique
interaction between pavements and the environment. Each phase
represents a portion of energy consumption and emissions, in order
to obtain the final product, i.e., the road pavement.
According to Park et al. [29], construction involves manipulation
and use of large quantities of natural and man-made materials. Also,
the construction and operation of infrastructure are great energy
consumers. Thus, the wide variety of materials used in construction
work, as well as fuel and electricity used for construction of machinery
and recycling plants have a significant environmental impact.
The production process for the most common material for paving
roads, i.e., hot mix asphalt, consumes energy to heat the asphalt and
aggregates at high temperatures. For many modified asphalts mixtures,
the modification process requires continuous agitation and heating of
the asphalt in the tank. The elevated temperatures not only increase
energy consumption significantly, but also lead to the release of fumes
during mixing and lay down processes [9].
An alternative to decrease energy consumption is the use of waste
materials in infrastructure construction and rehabilitation. When an
asphalt pavement reaches the end of its design life, the road surfacing
is milled, creating a milling waste material known as reclaimed asphalt
pavement. The reclaimed asphalt pavement materials contain aggre-
gate and asphalt that are transported to an asphalt plant for recycling
[30]. Since aggregate materials are non-renewable natural resources,
the primary benefit of using reclaimed asphalt pavement is to reduce
demand for extraction of new aggregate and disposal of waste materials
in landfill [31].
According to Chiu et al. [31], there are energy consumption
concerns regarding the use of recycled asphalt mixtures because an
477
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
extra heating unit has to be installed in the plant to effectively blend the
recycled materials. The balance between possible extension of the
project life and possible increase of eco-burden may be evaluated.
Another alternative is to reduce temperature. Some technologies
were developed using waxes, commonly referred to as warm mix
additives, which enable to mix and compact the mixtures at lower
temperatures, therefore, leading to less energy consumption. Another
methodology is the use of emulsifier agents to create emulsions of
asphalt in water. This approach is usually referred to as cold mixtures,
in which the asphalt is mixed with water using a foaming process [32].
Therefore, some asphalt pavements and Portland cement pave-
ments were compared according to their energy consumption and
emissions.
Zaumanis [26] estimated energy savings of 5% when comparing
warm mix asphalt with hot mix asphalt. Theoretical calculations
indicate that a temperature reduction of 28 °C should result in
petroleum fuel savings of 11% [33].
Moisture contents in aggregates and recycled materials can have a
significant effect on fuel consumption when producing warm mix
asphalt or hot mix asphalt. This is evidenced by the higher fuel savings
for warm mix asphalt technologies as only a portion of the aggregate is
dried. In a study performed in the United States it was concluded that
fuel usage increases 10% for every 1% increase in stockpile moisture
content [34].
Bueche and Dumont [35] evaluated, in Switzerland, the energy
consumption for asphalt mixture production comparing warm mix
asphalt with reference hot mix asphalt and the efficiency of asphalt
plants. Table 3 shows the conditions for the calculation of the reference
hot mix asphalt energy consumption.
For the reference hot mix asphalt, the total energy needed to heat
and dry the components was 182 MJ/t. The total energy consumption
was divided among the components of asphalt mixture. Sand 0/2 mm
(water evaporation (5%) and sand heating (155 °C)) consumes the
highest portion of the total energy (33%). From the total energy (33%),
54% was used to evaporate sand moisture and 46% to heat sand [35].
Based on the same study, Table 4 shows the energy consumption to
evaporate water from filler and sand. Energy savings of up to 14% were
obtained for sand with 1% moisture content compared to the reference
case (5% moisture content). Consequently, significant savings were
obtained using dry sand.
Bueche and Dumont [35] analysed the aggregates initial and final
temperature and the conclusions were:
• Aggregates initial temperature of 5 °C increases the energy con-
sumption by 3% in comparison with the reference case (initial
temperature of 15 °C);
• Aggregates initial temperature of 25 °C decreases the energy con-
sumption by 3% in comparison with the reference case;
• An increase of 25 °C in the aggregates final temperature (180 °C)
requires 12% more energy than for the reference case (155 °C).
Heating the aggregates up to 210 °C increases the energy consump-
tion by 26%;
• On average, 1% of moisture content reduction implies in a decrease
of 3.5% in energy consumption.
Table 4
Effect of sand 0/2 mm moisture content on the energy consumption for hot mix asphalt
[35].
Moisture content (%) Energy savings (%)
5 (Reference) –
4 4
3 7
2 11
1 14
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
Table 5
Energy savings for reference hot mix asphalt and warm mix asphalt technologies production [35].
Mixture types Reference
Reference hot mix asphalt REF
Warm mix asphalt with Fischer-Tropsch wax addition ET-C
Warm mix asphalt with chemical tension-active additive ET-P
Half-warm mix with control of the moisture content EST
Half-warm mix EBT
According to Bueche and Dumont [35], some techniques to produce
warm mix asphalt were selected and additional half-warm mix was also
tested to compare to the reference hot mix asphalt. Table 5 shows the
mixtures tested and their corresponding energy savings. It can be
observed that:
• The warm mix asphalt processes ET-C, ET-P and EST present
similar energy consumption. In comparison with the reference hot
mix asphalt, energy savings ranged from 12% to 13%;
• From a theoretical point of view, the energy savings due to the
production of warm mix asphalt are rather moderated;
• The EBT process presents the highest energy savings (43%) because
in such mixture (half-warm mix) there is no need to dry and heat
filler and sand.
In order to assess the asphalt plant efficiency, energy consumption
from seven typical Swiss plants was analysed. For hot mix asphalt
plants, the energy consumption ranged from 84 kWh/t to 118 kWh/t;
the average energy consumption was 99 kWh/t (356 MJ/t). For warm
mix asphalt, the average energy consumption was 63 kWh/t (226 MJ/t)
[35]. Therefore, a warm mix asphalt plant can save 25%‒47% energy
compared to hot mix asphalt plants.
The energy consumption for different processes of warm mix
asphalt technologies compared to hot mix asphalt has been studied
by many researchers. In general:
• 20% to 70% of energy is saved in the production process because less
heating is necessary [10];
• Up to 30% energy savings can be obtained in pavement compaction
of warm mix asphalt due to lower asphalt viscosity [36].
Zaumanis et al. [26] compared different mixtures in order to assess
the potential for energy savings. In their study, in which reclaimed
asphalt pavement was used in the mixture, the amount of aggregates
(granite) was reduced. As a result, the energy demand for production
and compaction of hot mix asphalt increased because it is usually
necessary to provide more heating energy and additional compaction
force in order to compensate for stiffer asphalt in the reclaimed asphalt
pavement. The energy consumption and compaction force of warm mix
asphalt were left in the same level as the reference hot mix asphalt due
to the asphalt viscosity reduction in this technology. Hot mix asphalt
and warm mix asphalt using reclaimed asphalt pavement were assessed
and the results are shown in Table 6.
The introduction of 20% of reclaimed asphalt pavement into hot
Table 6
Mixtures and processes compared to reference hot mix asphalt [26].
Mixtures/Process Energy usage in the asphalt plant (%)
Hot mix asphalt (reference) 100
Warm mix production process – 20% 80
Warm mix production process – 50% 50
Warm mix compaction – 20% 100
Warm mix compaction – 20%, Production – 20% 80
Hot mix asphalt with 20% of reclaimed asphalt pavement 125
Warm mix with 40% of reclaimed asphalt pavement 100
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
Properties Energy savings (%)
– –
Wax content fixed to 3%/mass of asphalt 12
Chemical additive content has been fixed to 0.4%/mass of asphalt 12
Production requires a vegetal flux at a rate of 0.4%/mass asphalt 13
Filler and sand 0/4 without heating 43
mix asphalt requires additional heating energy for obtaining the
necessary asphalt viscosity. When warm mix technology takes 40% of
reclaimed asphalt pavement, it is possible to reduce the energy
consumption by 14% compared to hot mix asphalt with 20% of
reclaimed asphalt pavement and by 10% compared to hot mix asphalt
(reference). The results also show possible energy savings of 7% when
the production energy is reduced by 20% (Table 6); and energy savings
of 18% when the production energy is reduced by 50%. The highest
energy consumption was required for transport, asphalt mixtures and
asphalt production for all mixtures.
Zaumanis et al. [26] also evaluated the energy consumption for
different mixtures and energy sources. The main sources were diesel
and natural gas. They concluded that the type of mixture and the
production process depend, almost entirely, on non-renewable energy
sources; thus different mixture compositions mostly affect the use of
natural gas. As CO2 and other greenhouse gases are generated when
using natural gas, switching from hot mix to warm mix technologies
has a direct effect in the reduction of carbon footprint generated by the
asphalt industry.
Kristjánsdóttir et al. [10] stated that the warm mix asphalt
represents a way to reduce production and mixing temperatures by
decreasing mixture viscosity. In warm mix asphalt, the heat is reduced
and the asphalt viscosity reduction is assisted through three forms: (i)
introducing water, chemicals or wax as an additional lubricant in the
mixing process; (ii) foaming the asphalt; (iii) combining the asphalt
with water or other chemicals as in an emulsion.
Sol-Sánchez et al. [61] analysed the manufacturing process in a
batch plant and the mechanical performance of warm mix asphalt
compared to hot mix asphalt. The authors concluded that once the
mixing time to produce warm mix asphalt was slightly increased (to
obtain an aggregate coating), the reduction of the flame intensity of the
dryer drum led to a reduction in energy consumption. In addition,
lower emissions of CO2 and NOx were observed; and the mechanical
performance evaluated in the laboratory was similar for both mixtures.
Table 7 presents some warm mix technologies and their character-
istics compared to hot mix asphalt production (at 160 °C) based on
researches performed by Kristjánsdóttir et al. [10]; Koenders et al.
[37]; Hurley and Prowell [38]; Prowell and Hurley [39]; Larsen et al.
[40]; Naidoo [41]; and Davidson [42]. It can be seen that the different
warm mix technologies are capable of reducing the mixture tempera-
ture and also the emissions.
Chappat and Bilal [43] evaluated the energy consumption for
different pavement structures. The authors made some considerations:
Warm mix additive (%) Compaction effort (%)
0 100
3 100
3 100
3 80
3 80
0 125
3 100
478
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
Table 7
Characteristics of different warm mix technologies compared to hot mix asphalt [10].
Technology WMA foam
Technology/Recommended 2-part process: soft asphalt added first
addition rate then hard, foamed asphalt
Advertised mixing temperature 43 – 63 °C
reduction
Reduced emissions 30 – 98%
• Laying takes into account the energy consumed in order to lay the
material in the field;
• Transport takes into account the energy consumed to transport the
constituents and mixtures from the plants to the field;
• Production takes into account the energy consumed to manufacture
mixtures in a plant;
• Aggregates take into account the energy consumed to extract and
manufacture aggregates at the quarry;
• Binders take into account the energy consumed to extract and
transport raw materials and manufacture binders (asphalt, cement);
• The lifespan of the structures is 30 years.
The authors concluded that cold mixtures consume less energy than
the other types, although such mixtures could present a reduced
mechanical performance. Portland cement mixtures present high
energy consumption. The use of reclaimed asphalt (20%) in hot mix
asphalt reduced the energy consumption.
Gambatese and Rajendram [44] studied ways to minimise energy
consumption, and recycling to reduce waste. They conducted a research
using waste from Portland cement pavement and from hot mix asphalt.
The energy consumption and material waste collected was separated
according to the mixture and the different life phases. Portland cement
concrete and hot mix asphalt consumed 4.58 MJ and 3.78 MJ,
respectively, in the three phases of the road lifespan (extraction,
manufacturing and placement). The study was conducted to estimate
the amount of energy consumed in Portland cement concrete pavement
(PCC-Energy) and hot mix asphalt pavement (HMA-Energy), and the
amount of waste generated from extraction of raw materials through
the end of construction for these two pavements (PCC-Waste and
HMA-Waste). The extraction of raw materials and the placement of
Portland concrete accounted for only 6% of the total energy consump-
tion in Portland cement concrete. The remaining 94% of the energy
consumption was due to the manufacturing process. The extraction of
raw materials and the placement of hot mix asphalt accounted for 9%
of the total energy consumption while 91% was consumed in the
manufacturing process.
Kucukvar and Tatari [45] also studied the energy consumption for
Portland cement pavement and hot mix asphalt. They evaluated the
energy consumption on the basis of materials extraction and proces-
sing, transportation of pavement materials to mixing plant, mixing
plant operations, transportation of mixtures to the construction site,
and placement of the pavements. The authors concluded that the
energy consumption for Portland cement concrete is greater than for
hot mix asphalt. Portland cement concrete requires more energy
compared to hot mix asphalt possibly due to differences in fuel
consumption of different pavement materials [45].
Hot mix asphalt has a higher Ecological Cumulative Energy
Consumption ratio than Portland cement concrete because it depends
more on non-renewable resources, including asphalt, crushed stone,
and diesel. Such non-renewable resources require substantial energy to
make them available in the ecological system. In addition, the loading
ratio representing the relative dependence of a pavement system on
non-renewable resources is higher for hot mix asphalt indicating that
hot mix asphalt consumes more non-renewable resources than
Portland cement concrete. As a result, hot mix asphalt is more
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
Aspha-Min® Sasobit® Evoterm
Zeolite (21% water) 0.3% by Paraffin wax 0.8 to 0.3% by Emulsion (70% asphalt with
mixture weight weight of asphalt additives)
30 °C 18 – 54 °C 50 – 75 °C
75 – 90% – 40 – 60 °C
sustainable in terms of energy and industrial energy consumption [45].
Thenoux et al. [46] assessed, in Chile, three different structural
pavement rehabilitation alternatives, such as asphalt overlay; recon-
struction; cold in-place recycling with foamed asphalt. They also
developed a methodology in order to evaluate the energy consumption.
An asphalt overlay (alternative 1) generally consists of applying a new
layer of asphalt concrete on top of an existing road way. Reconstruction
(alternative 2) consists of replacing the existing distressed pavement,
including granular layers with a new pavement structure. Recycling
with foamed asphalt (alternative 3) is a technique that consists of
reclaiming 100% of the existing pavement materials, aiming to form a
new pavement layer. This is achieved by pulverizing the distressed
layers (asphalt and granular layers) and adding foamed asphalt,
Portland cement and/or limestone with a recycling machine. The
foamed asphalt is produced by mixing a low amount of cold water
with a mass of hot asphalt (160–180 °C). Once the pavement is
recycled and compacted, a thin hot mix asphalt layer is placed over
the recycled layer [46]. In order to include different scenarios, three
traffic conditions and five soil support conditions, from poor support
(50 MPa) to good support (150 MPa) were evaluated. In all scenarios,
the energy consumption for the pavement recycled with foamed asphalt
was lower than the other rehabilitation alternatives. The energy
consumption ratio between reconstruction and recycling varied be-
tween 2.5:1.0 and 3.4:1.0 depending on the design thickness required.
The design thickness depends on soil support and design traffic.
Chong et al. [58] predicted the energy consumption by means of
theoretical models and then validated such prediction using data
collected from six asphalt plants during 75 asphalt mixtures production
events. Aggregates temperature and moisture content were the most
important factors in determining fuel consumption. The intermittent
operation that occurs in drum plants also resulted in higher energy
consumption compared to continuous operation (batch plants).
6.2. Emissions
The wide variety of materials used in pavement construction, as
well as fuel and electricity used for construction machinery and
recycling plants has a significant environmental impact. The environ-
mental impacts include emissions to air, discharges into water, and the
generation of solid wastes [29].
Kucukvar and Tatari [45] studied the atmospheric emissions for
Portland cement pavement and hot mix asphalt. They concluded that
Portland concrete pavement emits approximately 2.6 more atmosphere
pollution than hot mix asphalt. The life cycle emission phases suggest
that materials production and transportation are the dominant phases
of atmospheric emissions for both pavement designs possibly due to
the extraction and processing of raw materials and energy use in these
phases and processes.
However, according to Santero et al. [28], from an energy and air
emissions standpoint, the transportation impacts associated with the
long distances between source and use locations are also important.
Typically, transportation accounts for only a fraction of the energy
consumption of the materials and construction phases; an increase in
distance will in turn increase the proportion of impact attributable to
transportation, perhaps significantly. Aggregates constitute the vast
479
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
majority of mass of pavement materials (roughly 95% for asphalt, 80%
for concrete, and 100% for aggregate base), so any change in their
transportation distances will dominate the transportation component
of the life cycle.
Bueche and Dumont [35] calculated the CO2 emissions as a
function of energy used to produce hot mix asphalt. Results show that
asphalt plants based only on gas emit the lowest amount of CO2. On the
other hand, plants based only on electricity should be avoided as they
emit the greatest amount of CO2 (117% more than asphalt plants based
only on gas).
The main greenhouse gases in the field of road construction are
carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4). As the
contribution of these gases is not the same, their GWP (Greenhouse
Warming Potential) is expressed as a CO2 equivalent (the GWP of N2O
is 310; the GWP of CH4 is 21) [22].
Flexible pavements have a low carbon footprint compared to rigid
pavements. While a certain amount of CO2 is generated in the
production of raw materials and mixture production, it is far lower
than the amount generated in the production of Portland cement
concrete when one considers the amount of CO2 released while
manufacturing cement [10].
Chappat and Bilal [43] estimated the CO2 emissions for material
production and laying for different pavement structures. The impact of
Portland cement concrete in terms of CO2 equivalent is greater than for
other mixtures. The CO2 emissions from warm mix asphalt and hot mix
asphalt were similar. Cold mixture presented lower emissions com-
pared to the others. This is due to the type of asphalt (emulsion) and to
the fact that there is no need to heat the mixture materials.
In Michigan, United States, Stout and Carlson [47] studied the
emissions due to the addition of crumb rubber to asphalt cement and
compared the data to emissions derived from the manufacture of non-
modified asphalt concrete. The comparative operating conditions for
conventional hot mix asphalt and asphalt rubber mixture are listed in
Table 8. The results of measurements are shown in Table 9. Emissions
of O2, N2, CO2, NOx and SO2 from the production of asphalt rubber
mixtures are somewhat similar to those for hot mix asphalt (ranging
from +0.5 to ‒10.7%). However, emissions of CO and CH4 are much
lower for asphalt rubber mixture, i.e., ‒39.7% and ‒61.7%, respectively.
Sousa et al. [48] compared the energy consumption and CO2
emissions when asphalt rubber mixtures were used. There are mainly
three processes to use the scrap tires to prevent waste tire piles from
accumulation and exposing the ecosystem, as alternative daily cover, as
tire derived fuel, and as crumb rubber modifier in asphalt rubber.
However, the potential energy used or saved in tire processing has to be
analysed. Table 10 summarises the energy consumption in the
processes. Besides the potential energy savings gained by crumb rubber
used as a modifier, it should be noted that this process can improve the
highway assets.
Sousa et al. [48], based on the IEA model [49], also estimated the
CO2 emissions. According to this model, 156,425 lbs CO2 emissions per
one million BTUs of energy produced by diesel fuel took place. Given
that the majority of BTU savings when asphalt rubber products are
used come from diesel burning equipment it is a reasonable assump-
Table 8
Composition for the production of mixtures [47].
Operating data/Conditions/ Hot mix Asphalt rubber
Measurements asphalt mixture
Mixture production rate (t/h) 351 357
Dry aggregate rate 330 333
Asphalt content (%) 5.75 6.84
Crumb rubber content (%) – 10
Materials moisture content (%) 4.17 5.21
Fuel consumption (gal/h) 655 690
Mixture temperature (°C) 147 158
480
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
Table 9
Emissions measured during the production of the mixtures shown in Table 8 [47].
Emissions Hot mix asphalt Asphalt rubber mixture Variation (%)
O2 (%) 12.75 12.10 ‒5.1
N2 (%) 81.46 81.88 +0.5
CO2 (%) 6.00 6.48 +8.0
CO (ppm) 430.50 259.50 ‒39.7
NOx (ppm) 139.30 124.40 ‒10.7
SO2 (ppm) 74.40 76.70 +3.1
CH4 (ppm) 27.70 10.60 ‒61.7
Table 10
Comparison of kilo-Joule gain/loss per kg of rubber for three scrap tire disposals [48].
Tire derived material kJ (gain/loss)/kg rubber
Alternative daily cover −1,837
Tire derived fuel +31,399
Crumb rubber modifier in asphalt +310,267 to +566,109
tion to use CO2 reductions corresponding to this fuel. Table 11 shows
that the total CO2 savings reach 154 t per mile of lane if asphalt rubber
is used as a gap graded mixture. However, if asphalt rubber as an open
graded is used over pavements replacing 3 in. of hot mix asphalt then
CO2 savings reach 343 t per mile of lane.
In Taiwan, Chiu et al. [31] compared three recycled materials
(recycled asphalt mixtures, asphalt rubber, Glassphalt) with conven-
tional hot mix asphalt to provide a decision making regarding the
selection of recycled materials on rehabilitating pavements. The
research focused on the use of recycled materials. Only the milling/
overlaying method was investigated. The quantity of recycled materials
used was evaluated based on the assumption of a one-lane road and a
milling/overlaying of 5 cm pavement thickness. The total volume of
pavement for this pavement unit was 132.5 m3/km. For density of
2.3 g/cm3, the total mass of the recycled materials used was 304.75 t.
They used a round number of 300 t as the mass of the recycled
materials used per lane-kilometre. The quantity of the raw materials
required for the asphalt pavement can be found based on the mixture
design. On the other hand, the heat source, electricity required, and
energy source for the machinery still need studies for the actual asphalt
mixtures plants. The results of this investigation are shown in Table 12.
The energy used in asphalt mixture plants includes the electricity
required for the plants to operate, and the fuel (the plants use heavy
oil) for heating the aggregates. The machineries include the carriers in
the plants and road shapers, pavers, and graders on site and are
evaluated by the diesel fuel consumed.
In their research, Chiu et al. [31] used a Netherlands method that
applied one index to represent the environmental impact of a product
or a manufacturing process. The index is based on the concept of an
ecological footprint, named Eco-indicator 99.
The Eco-indicator 99 takes data from inventory analysis and
transforms the data into three categories in a unified way (human
health, ecological quality, and resources consumption). These three
quantities are then combined in a weighted manner, as follows: 40% for
human health; 40% for ecological quality and 20% for resources
consumption. The resulting number is used to indicate the average
burden every 1000 Europeans impose on the environment in a year.
Thus, the ecological footprint of 1000 Europeans is 1 point [50].
As a result, to rehabilitate asphalt pavement using conventional hot
mix asphalt, the material and energy required is equivalent to an eco-
burden of 3.45 kpoints per lane-kilometre. The use of recycled asphalt
mixtures can reduce the eco-burden in 23%. Using asphalt rubber will
increase the eco-burden in 16%. The eco-burden remains essentially
the same (less than 1% lower) using Glassphalt as an alternative.
An analysis on the contribution from various sources during
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484

Table 11
CO2 savings per mile of lane using asphalt rubber strategies [48].

Variables Using 2 in. of asphalt rubber gap graded instead of 4 in. of Using 1 in. of asphalt rubber open graded instead of 3 in. of
hot mix asphalt hot mix asphalt

BTU/lb crumb rubber 91,286 203,000

lbs of crumb rubber/mile 23,793 23,793
BTU/mile 2,171,925,961 4,829,885,964
lbs CO2/million BTU (diesel) 156,425 156,425
ton CO2 saved/mile 154 343

rehabilitation indicates that the majority of eco-burden comes from
two sources, the asphalt and the heat required, no matter which
material is used. The percentage is 39–48% for the asphalt and 42–
50% for energy. Both are much higher than the percentages for sand,
stone, electricity, and transportation. The service life of the conven-
tional hot mix asphalt and recycled is 6 years; asphalt rubber has a 9-
year service life whereas Glassphalt has only 5 years. Considering a 40
year life cycle to compare the eco-burden for each material, the eco-
burden for conventional hot mix asphalt is 23.03 kpoints; both recycled
asphalt mixture and asphalt rubber mixture reduce the eco-burden in
23%, and the Glassphalt increases the eco-burden in 19%. Thus, the
asphalt rubber mixture was the best alternative.
White et al. [15] evaluated the impact of road material production
and road construction of four different pavement types on climate
change (global warming) potentials. Five categories of road pavement
surface production were evaluated in terms of CO2 emissions. The
surface mixtures evaluated were composed of:
• Portland Cement Concrete: consisting of roughly 40% gravel, 39%
sand, 13% Portland cement and 8% water;
• Portland cement concrete with fly ash: consisting of 40% gravel, 39%
sand, 4% fly ash from coal combustion for electricity generation, 9%
Portland cement and 8% water;
• Hot mix asphalt: consisting of 95% gravel and sand, and 5% asphalt
cement;
• Asphalt rubber: this is an asphalt mixture with crumb rubber
modified asphalt cement. The crumb rubber content is typically
about 1.6% per total weight of mixture. The mixture contains 6.4%
asphalt cement and 92% aggregates.
The results shown in Table 13 confirm that emissions from
mixtures using Portland cement concrete are more severe when
compared to asphalt mixtures. Table 14 shows the CO2 equivalent
values for the mixtures production phase. Table 13 demonstrates that
for the components used in the main two pavement mixtures, Portland
cement and asphalt cement, the total kg CO2 equivalent/kg substance
ranged from 0.8207 (Portland cement) to 0.4260 (asphalt cement),
which represents a reduction around 48.1%.
For mixtures production (Table 14), the Portland cement mixtures
presented greater total CO2 emissions (0.1055 kg CO2 equivalent %
weight) in comparison to fly ash and Portland cement concrete
(0.0743 kg CO2 equivalent % weight), hot mix asphalt (0.0238 kg
CO2 equivalent % weight) and asphalt rubber (0.0299 kg CO2 equiva-
lent % weight).
Rubio et al. [25] measured air pollutants during the manufacturing
and paving processes. The objective was to analyse the environmental
benefits derived from a cleaner production technology for manufactur-
ing asphalt mixtures. Two mixtures were tested: (i) hot mix asphalt and
(ii) half-warm mix. Hot mix asphalt was produced at a conventional
discontinuous plant (batch asphalt plant) and the aggregates were
heated at 180 °C and the binder (asphalt cement) at 160 °C. As for the
half-warm mix asphalt, the aggregates were heated at 100 °C and the
binder (emulsion) at 60 °C. The combustion gases measured were CO,
NOx, O2, and CO2. The use of half-warm mix compared to hot mix
asphalt can reduce CO2 emissions in 58.5%, NOx in 66.7%, CO in
91.9% and SO2 in 99.9%.
Similarly, Berndt [62] studied the influence of concrete mix design
on CO2 emissions for building wind turbine foundations. The replace-
ment of recycled concrete aggregate with natural aggregate led to a
moderate reduction in CO2 emissions.
Chowdhury et al. [51] evaluated the emissions from industrial
products such as coal fly ash and coal bottom ash that are used in
Portland cement concrete. Emissions from recycled concrete pavement
were also assessed. These materials are used as a full or partial
replacement of natural aggregates. Conventional air pollutants gener-
ated from material production are shown in Table 15. Emissions from
material production for recycled concrete pavement were higher than
for natural aggregates. Emissions of CO, CO2 and NOx from transpor-
tation were relatively high (67%, 46% and 54% of total emissions) for
natural aggregates and not significant for recycled concrete pavement.
Huang et al. [52] recommend that the emissions and energy
consumption from road pavements should include the comparison of

Table 12
Inventory data for alternative materials [31].

Consumption per 1 Mg (106grammes) paving materials Hot mix asphalt (conventional) Recycled asphalt Asphalt rubber Glassphalt
mixtures mixture

Raw material Crushed stone (kg) 450 300 650 450

Sand (kg) 500 250 270 400
Asphalt cement (kg) 50 35 65 50
Ground tire rubber (kg) 0 0 16 0
RAP – Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement 0 415 0 0
(kg)
Waste glass (kg) 0 0 0 100
Energy consumed Electricity (kWh) 2.35 4.25 2.75 2.35
Fuel (heavy oil) 12 10 13 12
Diesel 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77

Transportation 40 Mg truck for an average km transportation

Performance (year) 6 6 9 5

481
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484

Table 13
Components used in pavement mixtures of kg CO2 equivalent [15].

Components Emissions (kg CO2 equivalent/kg of component)

Carbon dioxide, fossil Methane, fossil Carbon monoxide, fossil Dinitrogen monoxide Total kg CO2 eq./kg substance

Portland cement 0.8048 0.0151 0.0008 0 0.8207

kg CO2 eq./kg, gravel 0.0027 0.0001 0 0 0.0028
kg CO2 eq./kg, sand 0.0023 0.0001 0 0 0.0025
kg CO2 eq./kg, fly ash 0 0 0 0 0
kg CO2 eq./kg, asphalt cement 0.3817 0.0041 0.0010 0.0023 0.4260

Table 14 Table 16
Kg CO2 equivalent values for mixtures production [15]. Greenhouse gases from initial construction [53].

Mixtures Materials % Weight kg CO2 kg CO2 Reduction Road types CO2e for Portland CO2e for hot mix Reduction (%)
production equiv./kg equiv. % of CO2 cement concrete (t/ asphalt (t/km)
weight emission km)
(%)
Residential 295 65 78.0
Portland Gravel 0.4 0.0028 0.0011 Collector 686 170 75.2
Cement Sand 0.394 0.0025 0.0010 Freeway 1497 347 76.8
Concrete Portland 0.126 0.8207 0.1034
cement
Total 0.1055 – conditioning systems; they were measured in terms of carbon dioxide
Fly ash and Gravel 0.4 0.0028 0.0011
equivalent (CO2e). Table 16 shows that the greenhouse gases emitted
PCC Sand 0.394 0.0025 0.0010
Portland 0.088 0.8207 0.0722 for hot mix asphalt pavement were 75.2–78.0% lower than the green-
cement house gases for a Portland cement concrete pavement. The life-cycle
Fly ash 0.38 0 0 greenhouse gas emissions for three options were also assessed. Even
Total 0.0743 29.6
though the greenhouse gas emissions from initial construction for the
Hot mix Aggregate 0.95 0.0026 0.0025
asphalt Asphalt 0.05 0.426 0.0213 perpetual pavement are greater than for conventional pavement (hot
cement mix asphalt), it still has lower greenhouse gas emissions over the 50-
Total 0.0238 77.4 year life cycle. The greenhouse gas emissions for hot mix asphalt
Asphalt Aggregate 0.92 0.0026 0.0024 pavement were 68.9% lower than for Portland cement concrete
rubber Crumb 0.016 0.0126 0.0002
pavement. The analyses showed that hot mix asphalt pavement has a
rubber
Asphalt 0.064 0.426 0.0273 far lower carbon footprint, which means that these pavement types are
cement the most sustainable choice.
Total 0.0299 71.7 Peng et al. [56] evaluated carbon emissions during asphalt mixture
production. The production was divided into heating aggregates,
asphalt heating, and mixing process, which resulted, respectively, in
Table 15
67%, 14%, and 12% of total carbon emissions.
Conventional air pollutants generated from material production [51].
Sharma and Lee [63] incorporated Ca(OH)2 in the zeolite (CaZ) to
Material Air pollutants generated (kg) Emissions from produce warm mix asphalt in order to investigate energy savings and
material production reduction of CO2 emissions. It was observed that the CaZ additive could
and transportation (%) reduce the mixing temperature up to 60 °C for conventional hot mix
SO2 CO NOx CO2 SO2 CO NOx CO2
asphalt and 20 °C for conventional warm mix asphalt. With 6 wt%
additive in the asphalt mix, CO2 emissions were reduced in approxi-
Natural 29 5 49 8,487 88 33 44 54 mately 93%, and energy savings of up to 24,831 GJ/year were obtained
aggre- for the production of 140,000 t/year of asphalt concrete.
gate
Fly ash 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100
Table 17 shows the results of a research performed in Portugal [59].
Bottom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Natural gas was considered the most environmentally friendly fuel as it
ash emits less CO2 into the atmosphere. Using natural gas instead of
Recycled 50 99 457 20,315 96 93 91 80 electricity would decrease CO2 emissions in 65% while using either oil
con-
or diesel instead of electricity would decrease such emissions in 50‒
crete
pave- 51%.
ment Costa et al. [59] stated that in asphalt mixtures production, stocking
aggregates under a roof, on a sloping and impervious surface, control-
ling combustion feed, allowing heat loss reduction and converting all
different pavement compositions and materials usage such as recycled fossil fuels to natural gas significantly reduces the energy consumed,
materials with virgin aggregates, different recycled materials, different
laying or recycling techniques and maintenance options, etc. Table 17
Brown [53] examined and compared the carbon footprint of CO2 emissions from fuel combustion during mixtures production [59].
pavements (hot mix asphalt and Portland concrete) for typical roads
(residential, collector, and freeway) constructed in Ontario, Canada. Fuel HMA (kg CO2) WMA (kg CO2)

The study also looked at the carbon footprint of an equivalent asphalt Electricity 33.32 27.18
freeway pavement built as a perpetual pavement (50 year-life cycle). Fuel oil 16.70 13.63
Greenhouse gases studied were carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide Diesel 16.28 13.28
(N2O), methane (CH4) and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) leakage from air‒ Natural gas 11.70 9.55

482
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
the CO2 emitted and the amount of other harmful gases and dust
released.
Paranhos et al. [60] studied the best mixing conditions in asphalt
plants, i.e., mixtures production with less energy consumption and
fewer emissions. A research was conducted on two similar asphalt
plants (mobile and fixed units) using different fuels: oil and natural gas.
The authors stated that there are many parameters to be controlled
when asphalt mixtures are being produced, such as mix design, fuel
type, burner flow rate, fuel consumption, air temperature, aggregates
moisture, asphalt temperature and rate of production. Plants powered
by natural gas emitted half the amount of CO2, nine times less NOx and
eighteen times less CO than plants powered by oil. For NOx and CO2
emissions, small plants are desirable instead of large plants as high
rates of production increase emissions. However, if asphalt tempera-
ture increases, NOx and CO2 emissions decrease. As for oil, only
temperatures were the important parameters for controlling CO2
emissions.
7. Conclusions
This paper has presented a literature review concerning the energy
consumption and carbon dioxide emissions for the production of road
pavements. In recent decades, an understanding of how roads infra-
structure can negatively impact the ecosystem has grown. So, efforts
have been made to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions of
materials used in road pavements.
The emissions in asphalt mixture plants come mainly from the
dryers. In general, batch plants emit more pollutants than the drum
ones. The aggregates moisture content is an important parameter to
control the performance of an asphalt plant and directly affects the
energy required for the drying process. Portland cement concrete
consumes more energy and industrial energy than hot mix asphalt.
Depending on the production temperature of the asphalt mixtures, the
energy consumption can be significantly reduced. The use of warm mix
technologies can reduce energy consumption compared to hot mix
asphalt, mainly due to the reduction of the mix temperature production
and placement. Thus, emissions are reduced as well.
The wide variety of materials used in pavement construction, as
well as fuel and electricity used for construction machinery and
recycling plants, have significant environmental impacts such as
emissions to air, discharges into water, and generation of solid wastes.
Portland concrete pavement emits more atmosphere pollution than hot
mix asphalt. Asphalt plants based only on gas emit the lowest amount
of CO2. On the other hand, plants based on electricity should be
avoided as they emit the greatest amount of CO2. Flexible pavements
have a low carbon footprint compared to rigid pavements. While a
certain amount of CO2 is generated in the production of raw materials
and mixture production, it is far lower than the amount generated in
the production of Portland cement concrete when one considers the
amount of CO2 released while manufacturing cement.
References
[1] Bjørn J. Building rural roads. International Labour Organization; ILO Regional
Office for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok. Available from: 〈http://www.ilo.org/
wcmsp5/groups/public/@asia/@robangkok/documents/genericdocument/wcms_
103551.pdf〉, 2008 [accessed 15.04.14].
[2] APA. Asphalt Pavement Alliance. Pavement type selection. Lanham, MD, USA.
Available from: 〈http://www.asphaltroads.org/assets/_control/content/files/
pavement_type_selection_july_2010.pdf〉, 2010 [accessed 12.02.15].
[3] CIA. Central Intelligence Agency. The world factbook web portal. Available from:
〈https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/rankorder/
2085rank.html〉, 2013 [accessed 20.10.13].
[4] Mangum M. Asphalt Paving Sector Presentation. In: Health effects of occupational
exposure to emissions from asphalt/ bitumen Symposium. Dresden, Germany;
2006.
[5] PBL. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Energy and climate
change web portal. Available from: 〈http://www.pbl.nl/en/topics/energy-and-
climate-change〉, 2013 [accessed 30.05.14].
483
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
[6] World Bank Group. PM10, country level web portal. Available from: 〈http://data.
worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.PM10.MC.M3/countries?Display=default〉,
2014[accessed 30.05.14].
[7] Zapata P, Gambatese JA. Energy consumption of asphalt and reinforced concrete
pavement materials and construction. J Infrastruct Syst 2005;11:9–20.
[8] Birgisdóttir K, Pihl KA, Bhander G, Hauschild MZ, Cristensen TH. Environmental
assessment of roads construction with and without bottom ash from municipal solid
waste incineration. Transp Res Int J Part D: Transp Environ 2006;11(5):358–68.
[9] Miller TD, Bahia H. Sustainable asphalt pavements: technologies, knowledge gaps
and opportunities. Madison, USA: Modified Asphalt Research Center and
University of Wisconsin; 2009.
[10] Kristjánsdóttir O, Muench ST, Michael L, Burke G. Assessing the potential for
warm mix asphalt technology adoption. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board
2006;1040:91–9.
[11] Brasil. Departamento Nacional de Infra-Estrutura de Transportes. Diretoria de
Planejamento e Pesquisa. Coordenação Geral de Estudos e Pesquisa. Instituto de
Pesquisas Rodoviárias. Manual de pavimentação [Paving Manual]. 3rd ed. Rio de
Janeiro, Brasil (in Portuguese); 2006.
[12] EAPA. European Asphalt Pavement Association. Driving ahead with sustainable
asphalt roads web portal. Available from: 〈http://www.eapa.org/asphalt.php?
C=78〉, 2014 [accessed 12.02.14].
[13] TxDot. Texas Department of Transportation. Pavement design guide, Section 4,
pavement types. Available from: 〈http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/
pdm/pavement_types.htm〉, 2011 [accessed 13.09.13].
[14] Al-Quadi I, Elseifi M, Carpenter SH. Reclaimed asphalt pavement – a literature
review [ISSN: 0197-9191]. Illinois, USA: Illinois Center of Transportation (ICT);
2007.
[15] White P, Golden S, Biligiri KP, Kaloush K. Modelingclimate change impacts of
pavement production and construction. Resour, Conserv Recycl 2010;54:776–82.
[16] CTL/Thompson . Asphalt vs. concrete: a pavement cost comparison study of
reconstructing major highway corridors in Colorado. Centennial, Colorado, USA:
Asphalt Pavement Association; 2002.
[17] Cross SA, Parsons RI. Evaluation of expenditures on rural interstate pavements in
Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas, USA: Kansas University Transportation Center; 2002.
[18] Gibboney WB. Flexible and rigid pavement costs on the Ohio interstate highway
system. Final Report. Columbus, Ohio, USA; 1995.
[19] van de Ven MFC, Molenaar AAA, Poot MR. Asphalt mixtures with waste materials:
possibilities and constraints. In: Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Asphalt
Pavements for Southern Africa. KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa; 2011.
[20] Kandhal PS. Waste materials in hot mix asphalt – an overview [Report 92-06].
Alabama, USA: National Center for Asphalt Technology Auburn University (NCAT);
1992.
[21] Peinado D, Vega M, García-Hernando N, Marugán-Cruz C. Energy and energy
analysis in asphalt plant's rotary dryer. J Appl Therm Eng 2011;21:1039–49.
[22] EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Hot mix asphalt plants emission assess-
ment report. NC, USA; 2000.
[23] CT Carbon Trust Industrial. Energy efficiency accelerator: guide to the asphalt
sector. London, England; 2010.
[24] RTI International. Emission factor documentation for AP-42 section 11.1 hot mix
asphalt plants. Final report prepared for United States Environmental Protection
Agency, NC, USA; 2004.
[25] Rubio MC, Moreno F, Echevarría MJM, Martínez G, Vásquez JM. Comparative
analysis of emissions from the manufacture and use of hot and half-warm mix
asphalt. J Clean Prod 2013;41:1–6.
[26] Zaumanis M. Warm mix investigation. Kgs. Lyngby: DK: Master of Science,
Technical University of Denmark; 2010.
[27] Wang T, Lee I-S, Kendall A, Harvey J, Lee E-B, Kim C. Life cycle energy
consumption and GHG emission from pavement rehabilitation with different
rolling resistance. J Clean Prod 2012;33:86–96.
[28] Santero NJ, Masanet E, Horvath A. Life-cycle assessment part I: critical review.
Resour, Conserv Recycl 2011;55:801–9.
[29] Park K, Hwang Y, Seo S. Quantitative assessment of environmental impacts on life
cycle of highways. J Constr Eng Manag 2003;129:25–31.
[30] Jamshidi A, Hamzah MO, Shahadan Z. Selection of reclaimed asphalt pavement
sources and contents for asphalt mix production based on asphalt binder
rheological properties, fuel requirements and greenhouse gas emissions. J Clean
Prod 2012;23:20–7.
[31] Chiu C-T, Hsu T-H, Yang W-F. Life cycle assessment on using recycled materials for
rehabilitation asphalt pavements. Resour Conserv Recycl 2008;52:545–56.
[32] Tabatabaee HA, Bahia HU. Lyfe cycle energy and cost assessment method for
modified asphalt pavements. In: Proceedings of the 15th Meeting of the EURO
Working Group on Transportation, vol. 54. Paris, France; 2012. p. 1220‒31.
[33] Cervarich M. Foaming the asphalt: new warm-mix technique challenges conven-
tional wisdom, 12. USA: National Asphalt Pavement Association; 2007. p. 23–42.
[34] Prowell BD, Hurley GC, Frank B. Warm mix asphalt: best practices 2nd ed. Quality
Improvement Series 125. Lanham, MD, USA: National Asphalt Pavement
Association; 2011.
[35] Bueche N, Dumont AG. Energy in warm mix asphalt. In: Proceedings of the 5th
Eurasphalt & Eurobitume Congress, Istanbul, Turkey; 2012.
[36] Drüschner L. Experience with warm mix asphalt in Germany. Hovedemne på
forbundsudvalgsmøde i Sønderborg. Sønderborg, Denmark; 2009.
[37] Koenders B, Stoker D, Bowen C, de Groot P, Larsen O, Hardy D, Wilms K.
Innovative process in asphalt production and placement to obtain lower operating
temperatures. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Eurasphalt & Eurobitume Congress,
Barcelona, Spain; 2000.
[38] Hurley GC, Prowell BD. Evaluation of Aspha-min® zeolite for use in warm mix
L.P. Thives, E. Ghisi
asphalt. AL, USA: National Center for Asphalt Technology Report 05-04, Auburn
University; 2005.
[39] Prowell BD, Hurley GC. Starting to warm. Roads Bridges 2005;42:9–20.
[40] Larsen OR, Moen Ø, Robertus C, Koenders BG. WAM foam asphalt production at
lower operating temperatures as an environmental friendly alternative to HMA. In:
Proceedings of the 3rd Eurasphalt & Eurobitume Congress, Vienna; 2004.
[41] Naidoo P, Fischer-Tropsch H. Wax chemistry in warm mix asphalt applications. In:
Proceedings of the Petersen Asphalt Research Conference, USA; 2005.
[42] Davidson JK. Evotherm trial. Toronto, ON, Canada: McAsphalt Engineering
Services Research Centre; 2005.
[43] Chappat M, Bilal J. Energy consumption & greenhouse gas emissions. Sustainable
development – the environmental road of the future. Paris, France: Colas Group;
2003.
[44] Gambatese JA, Rajendran S. Sustainable roadway construction: energy consump-
tion and material waste generation of roadways. Construction Research Congress
2005. San Diego, California, USA: ASCE – American Society of Civil Engineering;
2005.
[45] Kucukvar M, Tatari O. Ecologically based hybrid life cycle analysis of continuously
reinforced concrete and hot-mix asphalt pavements [part D]. Transp Res Board
2012;17:86–90.
[46] Thenoux G, González A, Dowlinga R. Energy consumption comparison for different
asphalt pavements rehabilitation techniques used in Chile. Resour, Conserv Recycl
2007;49:325–39.
[47] Stout D, Carlson DD. Stack emissions with asphalt rubber. Proceedings of Asphalt
Rubber, Brasília, Brazil; 2003.
[48] Sousa J, Way GB, Carlson DD. Energy and CO2 savings using asphalt rubber mixes.
Shanghai, China: Sustainable development in China's Asphalt Pavement China;
2007.
[49] WBCSD. World Business Council for Sustainable Development. IEA/SMP Model
Documentation and Reference Case Projection. WBCSD web portal, 2004. Available
from: 〈http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/mobility/smp-model-document.
pdf〉, [accessed 12.02.14].
[50] MHSPE. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. Eco-
484
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 72 (2017) 473–484
indicator 99 manual for designers – a damage oriented method for life cycle
assessment, Netherlands; 2000.
[51] Chowdhury R, Apul D, Fry T. A life cycle based environmental impacts assessment
of construction materials used in road construction. Resour, Conserv Recycl
2010;54:250–5.
[52] Huang Y, Bird R, Heidrich O. Development of a life cycle assessment tool for
construction and maintenance of asphalt pavements. J Clean Prod
2009;17:283–96.
[53] Brown A. Carbon footprint of HMA and PCC pavements. Proceedings of
International Conference on Perpetual Pavements, Columbus, Ohio; 2009.
[54] The European Cement Association. Available from: 〈http://www.cembureau.be/
sites/default/files/World2.JPG〉, [accessed 22.09.16].
[55] Central Intelligence Agency. Available from: 〈https://www.cia.gov/library/
publications/resources/the-world-factbook/〉, [accessed 22.09.2016].
[56] Peng B, Cai C, Yin G, Li W, Zhan Y. Evaluation system for CO2 emission of hot mix
asphalt. J Traffic Transp Eng 2015;2:116–24.
[57] Androjic I, Kaluder G. Usage of solar aggregate stockpiles in the production of hot
mix asphalt. Appl Therm Eng 2016;108:131–9.
[58] Chong D, Wang Y, Chen L, Yu B. Modeling and validation of energy consumption in
asphalt mixture production. Am Soc Civ Eng J Constr Eng Manag 2016. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001189.
[59] Costa AA, Benta A. Economic and environmental impact study of warm mix asphalt
compared to hot mix asphalt. J Clean Prod 2016;112:2308–17.
[60] Paranhos RS, Petter CO. Multivariate data analysis applied in hot-mix asphalt
plants. Resour, Conserv Recycl 2013;73:1–10.
[61] Sol-Sánchez M, Moreno-Navarro F, García-Travé G, Rubio-Gámez MC. Analyzing
industrial manufacturing in-plant and in-service performance of asphalt mixtures
cleaner technologies. J Clean Prod 2016;121:56–63.
[62] Berndt ML. Influence of concrete mix design on CO2 emissions for large wind
turbine foundations. Renew Energy 2015;83:608–14.
[63] Sharma A, Lee B-K. Energy savings and reduction of CO2 emission using Ca(OH)2
incorporated zeolite as an additive for warm and hot mix asphalt production.
Energy, Article in Press. 〈http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.03.085〉; 2016.