1 

2 

3  PAVEMENT PRESERVATION – A SOLUTION FOR SUSTAINABILITY

4 

5 
6  Susanne Chan
7  Pavement Design Engineer
8  Pavements and Foundations Section, Ministry of Transportation Ontario
9  1201 Wilson Avenue, Downsview, Ontario, M3M 1J8, phone 416-235-5311, fax 416-235-3919
10  Susanne.Chan@ontario.ca
11 
12  Becca Lane (Corresponding author)
13  Head, Pavements and Foundations Section
14  Pavements and Foundations Section, Ministry of Transportation Ontario
15  1201 Wilson Avenue, Downsview, Ontario, M3M 1J8, phone 416-235-3732, fax 416-235-3919
16  Becca.Lane@ontario.ca
17 
18  Tom Kazmierowski
19  Manager, Material Engineering and Research Office
20  Materials Engineering and Research Office, Ministry of Transportation Ontario
21  1201 Wilson Avenue, Downsview, Ontario, M3M 1J8, phone 416-235-3512, fax 416-235-3487
22  Tom.Kazmierowski@ontario.ca
23 

24  Word count: 3862

25  Submission date: July 31, 2010

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 1
 

1  ABSTRACT

2  The Ministry of Transportation Ontario (MTO) is dedicated to maintaining quality roadways in a sustainable
3  manner. MTO has implemented pavement preservation strategies in recent years to maximize cost savings in repair
4  operations and maintain pavement condition. Pavement preservation treatments are considered sustainable as they
5  improve pavement quality and durability, and extend pavement service life, while reducing energy consumption and
6  green house gas (GHG) emissions.
7  Pavement preservation is a proactive, planned strategy that extends the life of the pavement, providing a
8  cost effective solution for pavement management. This paper outlines the various pavement preservation treatments
9  utilized by MTO to achieve sustainability. These preservation treatments include: crack sealing, slurry seal, micro-
10  surfacing, chip seal, ultra-thin bonded friction course, fiber modified chip seal, hot mix patching and hot in-place
11  recycling (HIR).
12  Pavement sustainability is quantified by comparing the energy consumption and GHG emissions generated
13  using the PaLate software for various pavement preservation strategies, against typical rehabilitation and
14  reconstruction treatments. This paper presents the benefits of pavement preservation by considering the service life
15  of each treatment and calculating the associated energy consumption and GHG emissions per service year. The
16  results indicate that pavement preservation strategies provide a significant reduction in energy use and GHG
17  emissions when compared to traditional rehabilitation and reconstruction treatments.
18  Although pavement preservation is proven to be a cost effective solution, there are numerous challenges
19  and barriers to overcome. Some of the challenges and solutions are presented in the paper as well as the strategies to
20  promote pavement preservation for sustainability.

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 2
 

1  INTRODUCTION
2 
3  The Ministry believes that the protection of air, water, and land resources is necessary to sustain current and future
4  generations. A sustainable pavement can be defined as a safe, efficient, economic, environmentally friendly
5  pavement meeting the needs of present-day users without compromising those of future generations. The main
6  criteria established for a sustainable pavement are reducing the use of natural resources, energy consumption and
7  GHG emissions; and at the same time improving the safety and comfort to the travelling public (1).
8  Pavement preservation is a planned strategy that extends the life of the pavement while it is still in good
9  condition, and maintains the pavement at a high level of service with reduced overall energy and GHG emissions
10  throughout the pavement life cycle. This satisfies the criteria for sustainability, and pavement preservation is one of
11  the key solutions to pavement sustainability.
12 
13  PAVEMENT PRESERVATION TREATMENTS
14 
15  A pavement preservation treatment is a proactive, planned strategy applied in a timely manner to extend the life of
16  the pavement without adding structural strength to the pavement. The timeframe to apply pavement preservation is
17  early in the pavement’s life and once the pavement was deteriorated to a certain condition, a rehabilitation treatment
18  is required instead of applying the more sustainable pavement preservation treatment. The key to a successful
19  pavement preservation program is to apply the right treatment to the right road at the right time. Figure 1 below
20  shows graphically how pavement preservation can prolong the life of the pavement, maintain a high level of service
21  and delay the application of a costly rehabilitation strategy.

Preservation Treatments

Preventive

Rehabilitation

Reconstruction

22 
23  FIGURE 1 Effect of pavement preservation on pavement condition over time.
24 
25  There are a number of different preservation treatments utilized by the Ministry to achieve sustainability.
26  The following is a summary of the various pavement preservation treatments:
27 
28  Crack Sealing
29 
30  Crack sealing treatments are used to prevent water and debris from entering cracks in hot mix asphalt (HMA)
31  pavement. Limiting water infiltration protects the underlying pavement layers and reduces the detrimental effects of
32  freeze thaw cycles. Typically, crack sealing has an expected pavement extension life of 3 years and it is a cost
33  effective treatment to prolong the pavement life.
34 
35  Slurry Seal
36 
37  Slurry Seal is a thin cold slurry treatment applied to the entire HMA surface. Typically it is used to seal the
38  pavement surface, fill minor surface irregularities, address raveling and oxidation, and to improve friction. It

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 3
 

1  consists of a mixture of well-graded aggregate and slow setting emulsion and has an expected pavement extension
2  life of 3-5 years.
3 
4  Micro-surfacing
5 
6  Micro-surfacing is a premium, polymer-modified cold slurry paving system applied to the entire HMA surface.
7  Typically it is used to address raveling and oxidation, fill ruts and minor surface irregularities, and to improve
8  friction and ride. It consists of a mixture of dense-graded aggregate, asphalt emulsion, water and mineral fillers that
9  is typically placed 10-12 mm thick, with an expected pavement life extension of 7-9 years. Micro-surfacing is a
10  good example of preventive maintenance and the Ministry considers this treatment to be one of the most cost
11  effective preservation treatment.
12 
13  Chip Seal
14 
15  Chip seal is a mechanized spray patching application of asphalt and single-sized aggregate chips rolled onto the
16  pavement. Typically it is used to seal the pavement surface, enrich hardened or oxidized asphalt, and to improve
17  surface friction. It can be applied on a small patch area (Dynapatch) or the entire HMA surface, with an expected
18  pavement extension life of 4-6 years.
19 
20  Ultra-thin Bonded Friction Course
21 
22  Ultra-thin bonded friction course, also known as Nova Chip, is a thin HMA treatment that is applied to the entire
23  pavement surface. Typically it is used to address surface distress, seal the surface and increase surface friction. It
24  consists of gap-graded polymer-modified HMA placed about 10 to 20 mm thick on a heavy, polymer-modified
25  emulsified asphalt tack coat. This treatment has a relatively high initial cost and has shown limited use by the
26  ministry.
27 
28  Fiber Modified Chip Seal
29 
30  Fiber modified chip seal, also known as FiberMat, is a mechanized spray patch thin treatment that is applied over the
31  entire HMA surface. It is a similar process to regular chip seal with the addition of fiber to help prevent reflective
32  cracking. It consists of a single chip seal application incorporating chopped fibreglass strands in the polymer-
33  modified emulsion and a covering aggregate layer. Typically it is used to seal the surface to prevent water ingress
34  and control reflective cracking of the new overlay. This is a relatively new treatment utilized by the Ministry, and
35  the results and performance are being monitored.
36 
37  Hot In-place Recycling
38 
39  Hot in-place recycling (HIR) is used by the Ministry for pavements that are generally free of major structural
40  distress. It is used to address service distress, and improve surface friction and ride. For the HIR process, the
41  existing surface is heated and scarified in-place to a depth of 40-50 mm, rejuvenated and reprofiled to a new grade.
42  This operation is carried out with an HIR train in a continuous operation. HIR is considered a sustainable
43  preservation treatment since it recycles the existing HMA surface in-place, which minimizes material hauling to and
44  from site. This preservation treatment has an expected pavement life extension of 10-12 years, similar to a typical
45  one lift HMA overlay.
46 
47  Warm Mix Asphalt
48 
49  Warm Asphalt Mix (WMA) is an environmentally friendly alternative to HMA. WMA is produced at temperatures
50  about 50 oC lower than conventional HMA. Using less energy at lower temperatures during production results in up
51  to a 50% drop in emissions. WMA claims to have the following benefits: a greater ability to be transported over long
52  hauls, a quick opening to traffic, ability to be placed in thinner lifts; and potential to improve the performance of
53  transverse and longitudinal joints. Other benefits of using WMA include reduced exposure to fumes for workers
54  during placement and compaction of the WMA.
55 
56 

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 4
 

1  Quantities of Pavement Preservation Treatments

2 
3  Over the years, MTO has carried out many pavement preservation treatments to extend the pavement life. Table 1
4  below is the summary showing the quantities of the pavement preservation treatments that were carried out in the
5  past 10 years (from 1999 to 2009).
6 
7  TABLE 1 Summary of Ten Year’s Preservation Treatment Quantities
8 
9 
10 
11  Treatments Quantities (m2)
12 
13  Slurry Seal 586,834
14 
15  Micro-surfacing 5,253,256
16 
17  Chip Seal 1,037,592
18 
19  Fiber Modified Chip Seal 126,667
20 
21  Ultra-thin Bonded Friction Course 425,400
22 
23  Hot In-place Recycling 324,124
24 
25  Total 7,754,000
26 
27 
28  CASE STUDY: SUSTAINABILITY OF PRESERVATION TREATMENTS VERSUS MILL AND
29  OVERLAY
30 
31  This case study compares the environmental benefits in terms of energy and GHG emission reductions for selected
32  pavement preservation techniques versus traditional mill and overlay techniques.
33  Recently, MTO has been using the PaLATE software to calculate GHG emissions produced by various
34  road construction activities to assists decision-makers in evaluating the use of recycled materials in highway
35  construction. PaLATE, which stands for Pavement Life-cycle Assessment for Environmental and Economic Effect,
36  was developed at the University of California at Berkley (2). Material quantities and haul distances are entered for
37  specific treatments and the model calculates the emissions and energy consumption according to production,
38  transportation and processing.
39 
40  Quantifying Environmental Effects using PaLATE
41 
42  The following are the pavement preservation treatments selected in this case study for comparison with traditional
43  mill 50 mm and overlay 50 mm HMA:
44  • Mill 50 mm and overlay 50 mm with Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA)
45  • 50 mm Hot In-place Recycling (HIR)
46  • 10 mm Micro-surfacing
47  Based on a typical 7 metre wide 2-lane km highway pavement section, Table 2 below illustrates the energy
48  consumption and GHG emissions of the selected treatments generated by PaLATE and further verified with other
49  references (3).

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 5
 

1  TABLE 2 Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions of Various Preservation Treatments

2 

Treatments Energy (MJ) CO2 (tonne) NOx (kg) SOx (kg)

Mill 50mm, Pave 50 mm 674,925 35 307 9,581

Mill 50 mm, Pave 50 mm WMA 477,822 20 161 6,708

50 mm HIR 566,937 27 239 7,473

10 mm Micro-surfacing 56,451 2 45 1,970

3 
4  According to Table 2, the traditional mill and overlay treatment generated the greatest energy consumption
5  and GHG emissions compared to the other selected preservation treatments. Since the treatments have different
6  expected service lives, the expected service life should be factored into the energy consumption and GHG emissions
7  to normalize the data to allow for an appropriate comparison (3). Therefore, all the above treatments were further
8  broken down into the energy and emissions generated per year of service (Table 3). The annualized energy and
9  GHG emissions were calculated by dividing the information from Table 2 by the service life of each treatment.
10 
11  TABLE 3 Annualized Energy and GHG Emissions Generated
12 
Service
Treatments Energy (MJ) CO2 (tonne) NOx (kg) SOx (kg)
Life

Mill 50mm, Pave 50 mm 10 Yrs 67,493 3.5 30.7 958

Mill 50 mm, Pave 50 mm WMA 10 Yrs 47,782 2.0 16.1 671

50 mm HIR 10 Yrs 56,694 2.7 23.9 747

10 mm Micro-surfacing 7 Yrs 8,064 0.3 6.4 281

13 
14  According to Table 3, micro-surfacing is the most sustainable pavement preservation techniques among the
15  four treatments. It emits the least GHG and consumes the least amount of energy. It is important to note that the
16  other preservation treatment options are also more sustainable when compared to the traditional mill and overlay
17  techniques. Figures 2 to 4 illustrate the various GHG emissions of the selected treatments.
18  According to Figure 2, micro-surfacing emits approximately 6% of the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) compared to
19  traditional mill and overlay 50 mm. With the data presented in Table 1 and 2, if MTO were to perform a traditional
20  mill and overlay instead of micro-surfacing over the past 10 years (from Table 1: 5,253,256 m2, which is equal to
21  750 2-lane km), there would have been 24,765 tonnes of additional CO2 emissions released.
22  For a more appropriate comparison, the data should be annualized by factoring in the expected service life.
23  Using the information from Table 3, 10 years of CO2 emissions for mill and overlay would be (3.5 t/year x 10 years)
24  35 tonnes, whereas 10 years of CO2 emissions for micro-surfacing would be (0.3 t/year x 10 years) 3 tonnes.
25  Therefore, substituting the microsurfacing quantities in Table 1 with mill and overlay, the 10 years of CO2 emissions
26  when using mill and overlay would be 24,015 tonnes more than the emissions from micro-surfacing.
27 

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 6
 

1 
2  40
3 
4  35
5 
6 
Tonne / 2-lane km 30 CO2 Emissions
7  25
8 
9  20
10 
11  15
12 
10
13 
14  5
15 
16  0
17  Mill & Pave 50 Mill & Pave 50 50 mm HIR 10 mm
18  mm mm (WMA) Microsurfacing
19  Treatments
20 
21 
22  FIGURE 2 Carbon dioxide emissions for selected treatments.
23 
24  0.35
25 
26  0.30
27 
28  0.25 NOX Emissions
Tonne / 2-lane km

29 
0.20
30 
31  0.15
32 
33  0.10
34 
35  0.05
36 
0.00
37 
38  Mill & Pave 50 Mill & Pave 50 50 mm HIR 10 mm
39  mm mm (WMA) Microsurfacing
40 
Treatments
41 
42 
43  FIGURE 3 Nitrogen oxide emissions for selected treatments.
44 
45  According to Figure 3, micro-surfacing emits approximately 15% of the Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) when
46  compared to traditional mill and overlay 50 mm. Using the quantities from Table 1 and the GHG emissions from
47  Table 2, if MTO were to have performed a traditional mill and overlay instead of micro-surfacing over the past 10
48  years, there would have been 197 tonnes additional NOx emissions released.
49  These results can be annualized by factoring in the expected service life. Using the information from Table
50  3, 10 years of NOx emissions for mill and overlay would be (30.7 kg/year x 10 years) 307 kg, whereas 10 years of
51  NOx emissions for micro-surfacing would be (6.4 kg/year x 10 years) 64 kg. Therefore, substituting the
52  microsurfacing quantities in Table 1 with mill and overlay, the 10 years of NOx emissions when using mill and
53  overlay would be 182 tonnes more than the emissions from micro-surfacing.
54 
55 
56 

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 7
 

1 
2  12.00
3 
4 
10.00
5  SO2 Emissions
6 
7  8.00
Tonne / 2-lane km

8 
9  6.00
10 
11  4.00
12 
13  2.00
14 
15  0.00
16  Mill & Pave 50 Mill & Pave 50 50 mm HIR 10 mm
17  mm mm (WMA) Microsurfacing
18 
19  Treatments
20 
21  FIGURE 4 Sulphur dioxide emission on selected treatments.
22 
23  According to Figure 4, micro-surfacing emits approximately 20% of the Sulphur Dioxide (SOx) compared
24  to traditional mill and overlay 50 mm. Again using the quantities and GHG emissions information from Table 1 and
25  2, if MTO were to have performed a traditional mill and overlay instead of micro-surfacing over the past 10 years,
26  there would have been 5,708 tonnes more SOx emissions released.
27  Again, we annualized these results by factoring the expected service life into the calculation. Using the
28  information from Table 3, 10 years of SOx emissions for mill and overlay would be (958 kg/year x 10 years) 9580
29  kg, whereas 10 years of SOx emissions for micro-surfacing would be (281 kg/year x 10 years) 2810 kg. Therefore,
30  substituting the micro-surfacing quantities in Table 1 with mill and overlay, the 10 years of SOx emissions when
31  using mill and overlay would be 5,080 tonnes more than the emissions from micro-surfacing.
32 
33  Economic Assessment of Preservation Treatment
34 
35  As part of the definition of sustainability, it is also important to look at the economic side of the preservation
36  treatments. Table 4 below illustrates the approximate cost associated with the preferred preservation technique
37  (micro-surfacing) versus the traditional mill and overlay technique.
38 
39  TABLE 4 Annualized Costs Savings for Micro-surfacing vs. Mill and Overlay
40 
Treatments Unit Cost (m2) Expected Service Life Unit Cost / Service Life /Year
Micro-surfacing $7.00 7 years $1.00
Mill and Overlay $15.09 10 years $1.51
41 
42  According to Table 4, micro-surfacing has an initial 53% cost reduction compared to mill and overlay.
43  After factoring in the expected service life of the treatment, the annualized unit cost for micro-surfacing has a 34%
44  cost reduction compared to mill and overlay.
45  Over the past 10 years, MTO has constructed 5,253,256 m2 (Table 1) of micro-surfacing. If MTO were to
46  have performed a traditional mill and overlay instead of micro-surfacing over the past 10 years, $42,500,000 more
47  would have been spent on initial construction.
48  From a life cycle costing perspective, using the information from Table 1 and the annualized unit cost from
49  Table 4, the 10 years construction cost for mill and overlay would be (5,253,256 m2 x $1.51/ m2 x 10 years)
50  $79,271,630, whereas the 10 years construction cost for micro-surfacing would be (5,253,256 m2 x $1.00/m2 x 10
51  years) $52,532,560. Therefore, the 10 years life cycle cost using mill and overlay would be $26,739,070 more than
52  the cost of micro-surfacing.
53 

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 8
 

1  Aggregate Conservation Assessment on Preservation Treatment

2 
3  As part of the definition of sustainability, it is also important to assess the savings of natural resources in
4  preservation treatments. Table 5 below illustrates the approximate aggregate tonnages associated with the preferred
5  preservation technique (micro-surfacing) versus the traditional mill and overlay technique for a 2-lane-km highway.
6 
7  TABLE 5 Annualized Aggregate Consumption For Micro-surfacing vs. Mill and Overlay
8 
Treatments Weight Expected Service Life Weight / Service Life/ Year
Micro-surfacing 140 t 7 years 20 t
Mill and Overlay 831 t 10 years 83 t
9 
10  According to Table 5, the aggregate savings for using micro-surfacing versus mill and overlay is 691
11  tonnes per 2-lane km, which is approximately 83% aggregate savings.
12  Over the past 10 years, MTO has constructed 5,253,256 m2 (Table 1) of micro-surfacing. If MTO were to
13  have performed a traditional mill and overlay instead of micro-surfacing over the past 10 years, there would have
14  been (691 tonnes x 750 2-lane km) 518,250 tonnes more aggregate consumed.
15  Life cycle aggregate consumption can be calculated using the information from Table 1 and the aggregate
16  weight from Table 5; 10 years aggregate consumption for mill and overlay would be (83 t/year x 10 years) 830
17  tonnes, whereas 10 years aggregate consumption for micro-surfacing would be (20 t/year x 10 years) 200 tonnes.
18  Therefore, the 10 years aggregate consumption when using mill and overlay would be (630 tonnes x 750 2-lane km)
19  472,500 tonnes more when compared to micro-surfacing.
20 
21  CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES
22 
23  Pavement preservation is a proactive pavement management strategy used to extend the life of the pavement while
24  the pavement is still in good condition. There is a perception that the public will not support a move away from the
25  “worst-first” strategy of fixing the poorest performing pavement first. As such, there are many barriers to promoting
26  pavement preservation to the public and senior management when the funding is limited. Research, innovation,
27  technology transfer, training and education are all important components to promote pavement preservation for
28  sustainability. The following activities are some of the important initiatives to be considered for implementing more
29  sustainable pavements:
30  • Build on current industry/ministry partnerships in the development of improved specifications and
31  design/construction procedures
32  • Encourage continued innovation by the province's pavement preservation contractors
33  • Support dedicated research programs to advance the technology
34  • Increase technology transfer at the provincial and national levels to accelerate adoption of pavement
35  preservation concepts
36  The following subsection illustrates some of the strategies used by MTO to overcome the barriers to
37  provide a way of recognizing sustainability in pavement projects.
38 
39  Quantifying Pavement Sustainability
40 
41  MTO uses numerous innovative pavement preservation technologies that conserve aggregates, reduce GHG
42  emissions, and minimize energy consumption. A key MTO sustainability strategy is to implement these
43  technologies on a larger scale and encourage their use province wide. These technologies support a “zero waste”
44  approach and will assist in meeting the GHG reduction commitments while addressing the triple-bottom-line: Social,
45  Economic, and Environmental (SEE).
46  In order to promote pavement sustainability, it is necessary to quantify the benefits of the treatment by
47  utilizing life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) to evaluate the most cost effective treatment and utilize methodologies such
48  as PaLATE to evaluate the environmental impacts. Currently, MTO is exploring the opportunity to include GHG
49  emission modelling and energy consumption requirements of pavement treatment strategies under an environmental
50  benefits component of LCCA. This will effectively incorporate environmental benefits into the pavement
51  preservation and rehabilitation decision making process.
52 

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 9
 

1  MTO Green Pavement Rating System

2 
3  Currently, MTO is developing an Ontario based Green Pavement Rating System to quantify and encourage
4  pavement sustainability. There are a few existing green rating systems readily available or under development.
5  MTO Green Pavement Rating System is primarily based on the Green Roads (Washington State) and GreenLITES
6  (New York State) rating systems, but customized for Ontario. The LEED® certification program and Alberta’s
7  rating system were also assessed during the development. The main difference between MTO’s Green Pavement
8  Rating System and other systems is it focuses specifically on the pavement component rather than the entire road.
9  Using a simple, points based rating system, MTO Green Pavement Rating System is designed to assess the
10  “greenness” of pavement designs or constructed pavements, both flexible and rigid structures. Assigning a rating to
11  the pavement design will enable the ministry to incorporate more sustainable technologies in pavements and
12  encourage industry to do the same. Assigning a rating to constructed pavements eliminates design assumptions and
13  allows for incorporation of construction components and contractor innovation that cannot be estimated at the time
14  of design (4).
15  In the proposed rating system, pavements will be assessed within four categories (Table 6).
16 
17  TABLE 6 Four Categories in MTO Green Pavement Rating System
18 
Category Goal Points

To optimize sustainable designs. These include

Pavement Design long life pavements, permeable pavements, noise
8
Technologies mitigating pavements, and pavements that
minimize the heat island effect.

To optimize the usage/reusage of recycled

Materials & Resources materials and to minimize material transportation 13
distances.

To minimize energy consumption and GHG

Energy & Atmosphere 10
emissions.

Innovation & To recognize innovation and exemplary efforts

4
Design Process made to foster sustainable pavement designs.

Maximum Total: 35
19 
20    Each category is further broken down to address specific objectives, with corresponding points assigned to
21  each subcategory. Each category is divided into two to four subcategories as illustrated in Figure 5 below.
22 

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 10
 

1 
2  FIGURE 5 MTO Green Pavement Rating System overview.
3 
4  Specific objectives within these subcategories must be met in order to achieve the maximum points
5  available. Proposed rating levels for the MTO Green Pavement Rating System projects are bronze (7-10 points),
6  silver (11-14 points), gold (15-19 points), and trillium (20+ points).
7  The following are some of the recommended options developed for the use of this proposed rating system
8  at the design and construction stages (4):
9  • Score pavement designs using MTO Green Pavement Rating System – no change to pavement design
10  selection process
11  • Calculate a Green Discounted Life Cycle Cost (GDLCC) for projects based on the MTO Green
12  Pavement Rating System.
13  • Set a target for each ministry Region to obtain a specified number of Gold Level green pavement
14  designs per year.
15  • Score as-constructed pavements using MTO Green Pavement Rating System.
16  • Implement a Green Paver of the Year award based on the “greenest” pavement constructed in a year
17  using the MTO Green Pavement Rating System.
18  Currently the proposed rating system is being fine-tuned, including internal and external consultation.
19  Ultimately, the rating system initiative is to enhance the sustainability of Ontario’s transportation infrastructure
20  through designing and selecting the most economical and environmental-friendly pavement treatment alternatives.
21 
22  CONCLUSIONS
23 
24  There is an increased focus on sustainable asset preservation, both at the provincial and municipal levels. Pavement
25  preservation and rehabilitation treatments applied at the right time can significantly extend the pavement life and
26  result in improved network performance over time.
27  Pavement preservation solutions satisfy the definition of sustainable pavements. It begins with the concept
28  that the treatments are cost-effective and they are applied when the pavement is still in a relatively good condition.
29  Pavement preservation treatments are thinner, placed faster, less disruptive, involve less contract administration,
30  produce less GHG emissions and consume less energy. With a coordinated pavement preservation/rehabilitation
31  program, the value of the road network will increase. Implementation of sustainable asset management principles
32  and performance measures are critical to addressing our infrastructure investment requirements and environmental
33  stewardship obligations over the long-term.

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.

 Susanne Chan, Becca Lane, Tom Kazmierowski 11
 

1  REFERENCES
2 
3  (1) Alkins, A., Lane, B., and Kazmierowski, T. “Sustainable Pavements – Environmental, Economic and
4  Social Benefits of In-situ Pavement Recycling”. Transportation Research Board 87th Annual Conference
5  Proceedings, Washington D.C., January 2008.
6  (2) Horvath, A. “A Life-Cycle Analysis Model and Decision-Support Tool for Selecting Recycled Versus Virgin
7  Materials for Highway Applications”. Final report for RMRC Research Project No. 23. University of
8  California at Berkeley, 2004.
9  (3) Chehovits, J. and Galehouse, L. “Energy Usage and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Pavement Preservation
10  Processes for Asphalt Concrete Pavements”. Transportation Research Board 89th Annual Conference
11  Proceedings, Washington D.C., January 2010.
12  (4) “GreenPave: Ontario's First Pavement Sustainability Rating System”. Road Talk – Ontario’s
13  Transportation Technology Transfer Digest, Winter 2010, Volume 16, Issue 1.

TRB 2011 Annual Meeting Paper revised from original submittal.