This LCA used data from a previous LCA done by Chester and Horvath (2012) on the proposed California High Speed Rail, and furthered the LCA to look into potential changes that can be made to the proposed CAHSR to be more resilient to climate change. This LCA focused on the energy, cost, and GHG emissions associated with raising the track, adding fly ash to the concrete mixture in place of a percentage of cement, and running the HSR on solar electricity rather than the current electricity mix. Data was collected from a variety of sources including other LCAs, research studies, feasibility studies, and project information from companies, agencies, and researchers in order to determine what the cost, energy requirements, and associated GHG emissions would be for each of these changes. This data was then used to calculate results of cost, energy, and GHG emissions for the three different changes. The results show that the greatest source of cost is the raised track (Design/Construction Phase), and the greatest source of GHG emissions is the concrete (also Design/Construction Phase).

Hemcrete is an alternative, environmentally‐friendly building material gaining adherents in Great Britain and other European countries. It is an attractive choice as a building material because it is made from a renewable resource, hemp, a hardy plant that is a close, but non‐hallucinogenic relative of marijuana. This plant is relatively easy to cultivate, requires little in the way of pesticides or fertilizers, and almost all parts can be used for various products from paper to textiles to food.

Hemcrete is made from a mixture of lime, water, and the fibrous outer portion of the hemp plant called the “hurd” or “shive”. When mixed, it is worked and placed much like conventional concrete ‐ hence the name. However, that is where the similarities with concrete end. Hemcrete is not comparable to concrete on a strength basis, and is better described as an alternative insulation product. When built into walls of sufficient thickness, Hemcrete offers high thermal efficiency, and has strong claims to being carbon negative. The purpose of this study
was to evaluate this claim of carbon negativity, and to compare these environmentally friendly qualities against conventional fiberglass batt insulation.

Our model was constructed using two identically sized “walls” measuring eight feet square by one foot in depth, one insulated using Hemcrete, and the other using fiberglass. Our study focused on three areas: water usage, cost, and carbon dioxide emissions. We chose water
usage because we wanted to determine the feasibility of using Hemcrete in the Phoenix metropolitan region where water is a troubled resource. Secondly, we wished to evaluate the claim on carbon negativity, so CO2 equivalents throughout the production process were measured. Finally, we wished to know whether Hemcrete could compete on a cost basis with more conventional insulation methods, so we also built in a price comparison.

Since the cultivation of hemp is currently unlawful in the United States, this study can help determine whether these restrictions should be relaxed in order to allow the construction of buildings insulated with Hemcrete.