## 5 Data Processing and Definition of the EAR Index
### Definition of the Performance Coefficients  
As already briefly discussed at the beginning of this section, in order to correctly assess the environmental impact of a generic bituminous mixture, it is necessary to also consider its performance. In fact, even if a benefit in terms of emissions and consumption can be \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Absolute Value (\(\mathbf{v_{m}}\))** & **Weighting Factor (\(\mathbf{w_{i}}\))** & **Normalization Value (\(\mathbf{v_{n}}\))** & **Relative Impact (\(\mathbf{I_{i}}\%\))** & **Weighted Value (\(\mathbf{v_{w}}\))** \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Emissions—Category [A]**} \\ \hline GWP & \(6.15\cdot 10^{1}\) & 3.00 & \(8.86\cdot 10^{1}\) & 69\% & 2.08 \\ ODP & \(6.70\cdot 10^{-6}\) & 1.00 & \(5.12\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 0\% & 0.00 \\ AP & \(3.25\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 1.00 & \(4.35\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 75\% & 0.75 \\ POCP & \(1.68\cdot 10^{-2}\) & 1.00 & \(7.39\cdot 10^{-2}\) & 23\% & 0.23 \\ EP & \(5.24\cdot 10^{-2}\) & 1.00 & \(1.07\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 49\% & 0.49 \\ ADPE & \(3.10\cdot 10^{-5}\) & 1.00 & \(2.36\cdot 10^{-4}\) & 13\% & 0.13 \\ ADPF & \(3.19\cdot 10^{3}\) & 2.00 & \(3.39\cdot 10^{3}\) & 94\% & 1.88 \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Total for emissions-A = 55.59**} \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Use of resources—Category [B]**} \\ \hline PERE & \(5.60\cdot 10^{1}\) & 0.00 & \(5.39\cdot 10^{2}\) & - & - \\ PERM & \(1.76\cdot 10^{0}\) & 1.43 & \(6.40\cdot 10^{1}\) & 3\% & 1.39 \\ PERT & \(5.78\cdot 10^{1}\) & 1.43 & \(6.03\cdot 10^{2}\) & 10\% & 1.29 \\ PERERE & \(7.80\cdot 10^{2}\) & 0.00 & \(3.28\cdot 10^{3}\) & - & - \\ PENRM & \(2.56\cdot 10^{3}\) & 1.43 & \(2.78\cdot 10^{3}\) & 92\% & 1.32 \\ PENRT & \(3.33\cdot 10^{3}\) & 1.43 & \(5.75\cdot 10^{3}\) & 58\% & 0.83 \\ SM & \(1.57\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 1.43 & \(4.34\cdot 10^{2}\) & 0\% & 1.43 \\ RSF & \(7.76\cdot 10^{-4}\) & 1.43 & \(1.91\cdot 10^{0}\) & 0\% & 1.43 \\ NRSF & \(1.15\cdot 10^{-2}\) & 1.43 & \(1.13\cdot 10^{2}\) & 0\% & 0.00 \\ FW & \(2.16\cdot 10^{0}\) & 0.00 & \(2.45\cdot 10^{0}\) & - & - \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Total use of resources-B = 76.80**} \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Output flows and waste—Category [C]**} \\ \hline HWD & \(3.32\cdot 10^{-3}\) & 1.00 & \(6.43\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 1\% & 0.01 \\ NHWD & \(9.21\cdot 10^{0}\) & 1.00 & \(1.98\cdot 10^{9}\) & 0\% & 0.00 \\ RWD & \(0.00\cdot 10^{0}\) & 1.00 & \(1.91\cdot 10^{-2}\) & 0\% & 0.00 \\ CRU & \(0.00\cdot 10^{0}\) & 0.00 & 0.00 & - & - \\ MFR & \(4.64\cdot 10^{-2}\) & 2.50 & \(6.70\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 7\% & 2.33 \\ MER & \(0.00\cdot 10^{0}\) & 2.50 & \(3.40\cdot 10^{-1}\) & 0\% & 2.50 \\ EEE & \(0.00\cdot 10^{0}\) & 2.00 & \(3.40\cdot 10^{0}\) & 0\% & 2.00 \\ EET & \(0.00\cdot 10^{0}\) & 0.00 & \(0.00\cdot 10^{0}\) & - & - \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Total output flows and waste-C = 68.32**} \\ \multicolumn{5}{c}{**EAR = 62.17**} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Example of evaluated EAR index for the different impact categories related to the wearing mixture from the Norwegian market (Norge wearing, ref. third column of Table 6). The relative impact is reported as a percentage value. obtained for the whole production process, it is still necessary to verify that the service life and the mechanical characteristics of the mixture are equal or higher than the traditional mixtures already adopted. To do this, a series of parameters have been identified that allow the definition of corrective performance coefficients to be applied to the EAR index defining a _corrected_ EAR index indicated as \(EAR_{\text{c}}\). The main effort in the definition of these performance coefficients was represented by the identification of models that allow quantifying the most significant performance aspects for each type of mixture starting from the _pre-qualification_ data of the materials.