## 3 Life Cycle Inventory
### Construction  
There are three main construction methods for the installation of a dynamic wireless power transfer (DWPT) system: trench-based construction; full lane construction and full lane prefabricated construction. Trench-based construction consists in creating a trench in an existing motorway, installing the system, then backfilling and laying an asphalt surface layer. This method is regarded as the quickest and cheapest option, but it can cause reflective cracking on the surface. Full lane construction consists in removing the full bound layer from the lane, installing the units and cables and then surfacing with asphalt. A third option consists in replacing the upper layer of a traditional road with a full lane-width prefabricated section containing the entire system, and a possible finishing with asphalt surfacing. Trench construction is the quickest installation option and the one with the lowest initial cost. It would only require one lane closure, and relatively few vehicle movements would be required, as the excavation and fill volumes are low. However, it requires two longitudinal joints in the centre of the lane and therefore higher future maintenance and whole life costs are likely. On the other hand, full lane construction only requires a single longitudinal joint [54; 55], and the whole life costs are therefore likely to be lower than trench construction. Even though it requires 2 lanes of traffic management and relatively high vehicle movements, this aspect may be mitigated, if planned along with regular maintenance operations of the pavement. The prefabricated option is the one with the highest initial cost, and there are some concerns about the disruption caused by the transport of the system to the site [54]. Full lane construction could be one of the most feasible methods, for structural and economic reasons and it is therefore the one that has been considered in the analysis. A list of the operations that have to be considered for the full lane construction method is reported hereafter:  
* Removal of the wear and binder layers, e.g., using a jack hammer and cold planer (milling machines). This can be similar to the normal road surface rehabilitation procedure that involves the replacement of the surface layer every few years. * Installation of E-Road solutions: WPT components (charging unit and the associated connection pipework) delivered to the site in precast form. * Covering with asphalt and the application of a tack coat to ensure adequate bonding between the layers. The production of the pavement materials and the use of onsite equipment were considered to model these phases. The amount of pavement materials was obtained from the e-road design reported in Figure 4, while the fuel consumption of the machinery was obtained from datasheets available on the manufacturers' websites. A machine with a milling width of 2 m and a weight of 28.9 t was chosen, with a construction fuel consumption of 52 L/h. The time required for the removal of the surface layers is a function of the milling depth, and it was obtained from the manufacturer's datasheet. Thus, the fuel consumption required to mill 1 km of road to a milling depth of 13 cm was derived as the milling speed and the hourly consumption multiplied by two, since the full width of the lane (3.65 m) requires the machine to pass twice. The emissions due to diesel burned in the milling machine were obtained using the EcoInvent \"Diesel, burned in agricultural machinery GLO\" dataset. The wear from machinery use was disregarded. Before the deposition of the coils and the new layers, the use of a sweeping machine is required to remove debris. In order to model the use of the sweeping machine, the performances of a commercially available machine, with a weight of 1.8 tonnes, were analysed. A machine with a nominal power of 205 kW and with a sweeping width of 4 metres on average consumes 15 L/h, and the sweeping speed is 2.5 km/h. The fuel necessary to clean one kilometre was calculated assuming a diesel density of 0.835 kg/L.