Factors in Deciding to Speed Up Construction Work Are Schedule Cost and CO2 Emissions

Abstract

This research aimed to study the life cycle assessment, critical path, and analytical hierarchy process, as well as the advantages/disadvantages of adopting the life cycle assessment and critical path methods (CPMs). The results of this study were used to develop preventative measures to decrease construction pollution; constitute data for further study analogous cost, time, and CO2; and suggest alternatives to accelerate structural work. The study was conducted in the Bangkok Metropolitan Region, Thailand, and data from various sources were analyzed to identify the most effective construction methods to reduce time, cost, and CO2. According to the study, construction costs and CO2 must be decreased once construction work needs to be accelerated. The decrease in construction time, cost, and CO2 are the factors that determine the speed at which construction work progresses. The CPM is the most suitable for choosing construction crash time and time cost trade-off to optimal time, cost, and CO2. A value of 0.027 and an RI obtained by opening a random consistency index (CI) table, n = 3, will result in a value of 0.58. The results showed that alternative 1 had the highest overall score, making it the choice that considers both cost and construction time, which tests the CI by using a CI.