Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment of Low-Carbon Transition in Asphalt Pavement Maintenance: A Multi-Scale Case Study Under China’s Dual-Carbon Target
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Against the backdrop of China’s “dual-carbon” initiative, this study innovatively applies a process-based life cycle assessment (PLCA) methodology, meticulously tracking energy and carbon flows across material production, transportation, and maintenance processes. By comparing six asphalt pavement maintenance technologies in Xinjiang, the research reveals that milling and resurfacing (MR) exhibits the highest energy consumption 250,809 MJ/103 m2) and carbon emissions (15,095.67 kg CO2/103 m2), while preventive techniques like hot asphalt grouting reduce emissions by up to 87%. The PLCA approach uncovers a critical insight: 40–60% of total emissions originate from the raw material production phase, with cement and asphalt identified as primary contributors. This granular analysis, unique in regional road maintenance research, challenges traditional assumptions and emphasizes the necessity of upstream intervention. By contrasting reactive and preventive strategies, the study validates that early-stage maintenance aligns seamlessly with circular economy principles. Tailored to a local arid climate and vast transportation network, the study concludes that prioritizing preventive maintenance, adopting low-carbon materials, and optimizing logistics can significantly decarbonize road infrastructure. These region-specific strategies, underpinned by the novel application of PLCA, not only provide actionable guidance for local policymakers but also offer a replicable framework for sustainable road development worldwide, bridging the gap between scientific research and practical decarbonization efforts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".