What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to assess the environmental impacts of various emulsified asphalt formulations used in the U.S.

February 12, 2026Sustainability7 citationsOpen Access

Environmental Analysis of Emulsified Asphalt Products in the United States: A Comparative Cradle-to-Gate Life Cycle Assessment

AOAmirhossein OstovarUniversity of Nevada, Reno EHElie Y. HajjUniversity of Nevada, Reno GMGhazal MehdizadehUniversity of Nevada, Reno

Key Points

The aim is to assess the environmental impacts of various emulsified asphalt formulations used in the U.S.
Cradle-to-gate Life Cycle Assessment applied to four cationic emulsions: CSS 1, CSS 1H, CRS 2, and CRS 2P.
Primary data collected from 17 manufacturing plants across the U.S.
Impact calculations and sensitivity analyses conducted using GaBi software.
CRS 2 and CRS 2P show lower environmental burdens compared to CSS 1 and CSS 1H.
Key factors influencing impact include asphalt binder content, emulsifier dosage, and latex additions.
Study provides updated LCA benchmarks, highlighting opportunities for improving environmental performance.

Abstract

Growing interest in reducing the environmental impacts of pavement preservation materials has increased the need for evaluations of emulsified asphalt. This study applies a cradle-to-gate Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to quantify and compare the environmental profiles of four widely used cationic emulsions in the United States: CSS 1, CSS 1H, CRS 2, and CRS 2P. The assessment incorporates primary data collected from 17 manufacturing plants across different regions, supported by information from suppliers and secondary datasets from the 2023 GaBi database. Impact calculations were performed using GaBi software, and sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine which formulation components most influence the results. Environmental impact categories in the study include global warming potential (GWP), particulate matter (PM2.5), photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP), and renewable and nonrenewable primary energy demand. The findings show that rapid-setting emulsions (CRS 2 and CRS 2P) generally exhibit lower environmental burdens than slow-setting emulsions (CSS 1 and CSS 1H). Differences in asphalt binder content, emulsifier dosage, and latex additions were identified as major contributors to environmental performance. By identifying key drivers of environmental impact, this study supports more sustainable material choices in pavement preservation. The results provide updated industry-specific LCA benchmarks for emulsified asphalt and highlight opportunities for environmental improvement through targeted adjustments to product formulations.

AI से पूछें

Bookmark

View Full Paper