Center for Earth Systems Engineering and Management
A collection of scholarly work published by and supporting the Center for Earth Systems Engineering and Management (CESEM) at Arizona State University.
CESEM focuses on "earth systems engineering and management," providing a basis for understanding, designing, and managing the complex integrated built/human/natural systems that increasingly characterize our planet.
Works in this collection are particularly important in linking engineering, technology, and sustainability, and are increasingly intertwined with the work of ASU's Global Institute of Sustainability (GIOS).
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Structural analysis (Engineering)
- All Subjects: Waste minimization
Healthcare infection control has led to increased utilization of disposable medical devices, which has subsequently led to increased adverse environmental effects attributed to healthcare and its supply chain. In dental practice, the dental bur is a commonly used instrument that can either be reused or used once and then disposed. To evaluate the disparities in environmental impacts of disposable and reusable dental burs, a comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) was performed. The comparative LCA evaluated a reusable dental bur (specifically, a 2.00mm Internal Irrigation Pilot Drill) reused 30 instances versus 30 identical burs used as disposables.
The LCA methodology was performed using framework described by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040 series. Sensitivity analyses were performed with respect to ultrasonic and autoclave loading. Findings from this research showed that when the ultrasonic and autoclave are loaded optimally, reusable burs had 40% less of an environmental impact than burs used on a disposable basis. When the ultrasonic and autoclave were loaded to 66% capacity, there was an environmental breakeven point between disposable and reusable burs. Eutrophication, carcinogenic impacts, non-carcinogenic impacts, and acidification were limited when cleaning equipment (i.e., ultrasonic and autoclave) were optimally loaded. Additionally, the bur’s packaging materials contributed more negative environmental impacts than the production and use of the bur itself. Therefore, less materially-intensive packaging should be used. Specifically, the glass fiber reinforced plastic casing should be substituted for a material with a reduced environmental footprint.
The current study conducts a comparative LCA of two alternative structural retrofit/ strengthening techniques - steel jacketing, and the carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) retrofit. A cradle-to-gate system boundary is used for both techniques. The results indicated that the CFRP retrofit technique has merits over the conventional steel jacketing in all three impact categories covered by this study. This is primarily attribute to the much less material consumption for CFRP retrofit as compared to steel jacketing for achieving the same load carrying capability of the retrofitted bridge structures. Even though the transoceanic transportation of carbon fiber has been taken into account in this study, the energy consumption and environmental impacts of CFRP transportation is still much smaller than steel due to it light weight property. The impacts of CFRP retrofit are mainly focused in the material manufacturing phase, which implies that the improvements in the carbon fiber manufacturing technology could potentially further reduce the environmental impacts of CFRP retrofit.