Comparison of carbon footprints of steel versus concrete pipelines for water transmission

References

• American Water Works Association. 2004. M11 Steel Pipe: A Guide for Design and Installation, 4th ed. Denver, CO: AWWA.
   Google Scholar
• American Water Works Association. 2005. AWWA Manual C200, Standard for Steel Water Pipe. Denver, CO: AWWA.
   Google Scholar
• American Water Works Association. 2007. Standard for Design of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe. ANSI/AWWA c301-92. Denver, CO: AWWA.
   Google Scholar
• American Water Works Association. 2008. AWWA M9 Concrete Pressure Pipe, 3rd ed. Denver, CO: AWWA.
   Google Scholar
• American Water Works Association. 2011. Water Transmission and Distribution, 4th ed., Denver, CO: AWWA.
   Google Scholar
• American Water Works Association. 2012. AWWA Manual C205, Cement–Mortar Protective Lining and Coating for Steel Water Pipe 4 In. (100 mm) and Larger. Denver, CO: AWWA.
   Google Scholar
• CUIRE (Center for Underground Infrastructure Research and Education). 2013. Performance investigation of different large diameter water pipe materials. http://www.uta.edu/ce/cuire/CUIRE%20Report%20for%20Performance%20Investigation%20of%20Different%20Large%20Diameter%20Water%20Pipe%20Materials%20.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, S.C., and S.W. Diegel. 2010. Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 29. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy Center for Transportation Analysis Engineering Science & Technology Division. http://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml.
   Google Scholar
• Dey, P.K. 2006. Integrated project evaluation and selection using multiple-attribute decision-making technique. Int. J. Production Econ. 103(1): 90–103. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.11.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filion, Y.R., H.L. MacLean, and B.W. Karney. 2004. Life-cycle energy analysis of a water distribution system. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 10(3): 120–130. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2004)10:3(119)
   Google Scholar
• Freedonia Group, Inc. 2013. World water pipe. Study number 3004. www.freedonia.com
   Google Scholar
• Hammond, G., and C. Jones. 2011. Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE), Version 2.0. Sustainable Energy Research Team. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath. www.bath.ac.uk/mech-eng/sert/embodied
   Google Scholar
• McPherson, D. 2009. Choice of pipeline material: PVC or DI using a life cycle cost analysis. ASCE National Pipeline Conference, San Diego, CA, 1342–54.
   Google Scholar
• Najafi, M., and S. Gokhale. 2005. Trenchless Technology: Pipeline and Utility Design, Construction and Renewal. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Najafi, M., ed. 2003. New pipeline technologies, security and safety, two-volume. Proc. International Pipeline Conference, July 13–16, 2003, Baltimore, MD. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Nathanson, J.A. 2014. Water supply system. Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/technology/water-supply-system ( accessed September 2, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• National Grid. 2011. Felindre to Tirley pipeline. http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Gas/Pipelines/milfordhaven/fs5 ( accessed July 10, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Piratla, K.R., S.T. Ariaratnam, and A. Cohen. 2011. Estimation of CO2 emissions from the life cycle of a potable water pipeline project. J. Manage. Eng. 28( 1, special issue: Engineering Management for Sustainable Development): 22–30. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehan, R., and M. Knight. 2007. Do trenchless pipeline construction methods reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Preliminary report. Waterloo, ON, Canada: Centre for the Advancement of Trenchless Technologies, Waterloo University.
   Google Scholar
• Sihabuddin, S., and S. Ariaratnam. 2009. Quantification of carbon footprint on underground utility projects. Construction Research Congress, 618–627. doi:10.1061/41020(339)63
   Google Scholar
• Tarrant Regional Water District. 2010. http://www.trwd.com (personal communication).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Emission facts: Average carbon dioxide emissions resulting from gasoline and diesel fuel. Washington, DC: Office of Transportation and Air Quality, EPA420-F-05-001.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2015a. eGRID2012 GHG Annual Output Emission Rates. http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/egrid2012_ghgoutputrates_0.pdf, ( accessed January 17, 2016).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2015b. Understanding global warming potentials. http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gwps.html ( accessed January 17, 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, G., and H. Brattebo. 2011. Energy consumption, costs and environmental impacts for urban water cycle services: Case study of Oslo (Norway). Energy 36(2): 792–800. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.12.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Water Organization. 2014. Millions lack safe water. http://water.org/water-crisis/water-facts/water ( accessed August 5, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Worldsteel Association. 2014. Fact sheet: Energy use in the steel energy. https://www.worldsteel.org/publications/fact-sheets/content/02/text_files/file0/document/fact_energy_2014.pdf ( accessed January 18, 2016).
   Google Scholar