6D BIMによる鉄道分岐器・交差部のレジリエンスと気候変動適応の強化
Enhancing Resilience and Climate Change Adaptation of Railway Switches and Crossings Through 6D BIM (原題)
Kit Naylor, Ugur Mutlu, Brian Paynter, Patrick Vallely, S. Kaewunruen
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本研究は3D BIMとISO準拠のLCA・LCCを統合し、鉄道分岐器・交差部における15の気候適応策の埋込排出量・エネルギー・資本コストを評価した。恒久構造対策は埋込GHGを最大114%、材料費を74%増加させる一方、一時的対策は初期エネルギーを50%以上削減するが、材料劣化とガルバニック腐食により累積炭素ペナルティを生む。低排出と高レジリエンスは必ずしも相関せず、本枠組みは決定的スクリーニングツールとして機能する。
English
This study integrates 3D BIM with ISO-compliant LCA and LCC to assess embodied emissions, energy, and capital costs of 15 climate adaptation strategies for railway switches and crossings. Permanent interventions raise embodied GHG by up to 114% and material costs by 74%, while temporary measures cut initial embodied energy by over 50% but incur cumulative carbon penalties from degradation and galvanic corrosion. Low emissions do not guarantee geomechanical resilience, so the framework serves as a deterministic screening tool.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
鉄道インフラの適応策における埋込炭素とコストのトレードオフを定量化する点は、日本企業のTCFD/SSBJ適応計画やインフラ老朽化対策の投資判断に示唆を与える。ただし開示制度との直接接続は弱く、主に建設・鉄道セクターの実務向け。
In the global GX context
This paper contributes to the growing literature on climate adaptation and infrastructure resilience by quantifying the embodied carbon and cost trade-offs of adaptation measures, relevant to TCFD/ISSB physical risk disclosure and transition finance for transport infrastructure. It highlights the resilience-versus-emissions paradox that global operators and investors must navigate.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:BIMとLCA/LCCを統合した適応策評価手法の実証例として、インフラ気候リスク研究に有用。
🏢実務担当者:鉄道・建設のサステナビリティ担当は、適応策の埋込炭素とコストのトレードオフを投資判断に活用できる。
🏛政策担当者:インフラ適応政策において、レジリエンスと排出削減の両立を図る評価枠組みの必要性を示唆。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Climate change accelerates the degradation of railway switches and crossings (S&C), forcing network operators to deploy localized adaptation interventions. The secondary environmental and economic penalties of these proactive measures remain unquantified, creating a severe resilience-versus-emissions paradox. This study integrates a 3D building information model (BIM) with an ISO-compliant, cradle-to-gate life-cycle assessment (LCA) and life-cycle costing (LCC) framework. The digital model extracts deterministic volumetric data to evaluate the embodied emissions, embodied energy, and capital material costs of 15 climate adaptation strategies targeting extreme heat, landslides, snow, and flooding. Results indicate that permanent structural interventions, such as subgrade grouting, increase baseline embodied greenhouse gas emissions by up to 114% and capital material costs by 74%. Temporary interventions, including chemical de-icing and thermal coatings, yield initial embodied energy reductions exceeding 50% relative to permanent structural counterparts. However, these reactive measures generate cumulative carbon penalties through rapid material degradation and the secondary galvanic corrosion of primary steel assets. Because low embodied emissions do not inherently correlate with superior geomechanical resilience, this framework operates exclusively as a deterministic screening tool. Final infrastructure deployment decisions require integrating these primary environmental and capital matrices with concurrent structural finite element modelling to comprehensively evaluate adaptation efficacy.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- semanticscholar https://doi.org/10.3390/su18189487first seen 2026-09-19 05:44:30 · last seen 2026-09-21 05:13:28
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。