Article

Eco-Friendly Scheduling Model for Construction Projects

Utilizing Genetic Algorithms
Islam Elmasoudi 1 , Emad Elbeltagi 2 , Wael Alattyih 2, * and Hossam Wefki 3

1 Department of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt;
[email protected]
2 Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Qassim University, Buraydah 51452, Saudi Arabia;
[email protected]
3 Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Port Said University, Port Said 42526, Egypt;
[email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: An assessment of construction activities related to pollution needs to be conducted during

the planning of a given project. Such an assessment is essential to ensure that the resulting pol-
lution does not surpass the environmental threshold limits. This research provides an optimized
pollution-based scheduling model in construction projects by applying Genetic Algorithms (GAs).
The suggested approach figures out the pollution produced by gasses, noise, and dust for each activity
in the project. Then, the whole project’s duration is minimized by optimizing the project schedule
using GAs while keeping the different pollutants under threshold limits. In the developed model,
each pollutant is handled as a dummy resource and is incorporated into the schedule of construction
projects. When the emitted pollutants surpass the allowable limits, as per the given regulations, GAs
re-schedule the project tasks so that the pollution levels are reduced and redistributed. The proposed
framework is presented as being practically applicable through an actual case study. The results
show that the proposed GA model improves the pollution leveling process more efficiently than
the standard resource leveling technique in Microsoft Project, producing fewer pollution histogram
moments of the X and Y axes with 9.4% and 2.2%, respectively. Sensitivity analysis reveals that the
best solutions for this case study are obtained when population size, offspring generation, crossover
rate, and mutation rate equal 100, 50, 0.95, and 0.05, respectively. The model can aid in reducing
construction projects’ environmental impact during the project planning and construction stages,
Citation: Elmasoudi, I.; Elbeltagi, E.;
which benefits decision-makers and project planners.
Alattyih, W.; Wefki, H. Eco-Friendly
Scheduling Model for Construction
Projects Utilizing Genetic Algorithms.
Keywords: pollution; re-schedule; genetic algorithms; optimization; sustainability; construction
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164. https:// projects
doi.org/10.3390/su162411164

Academic Editor: Graziano Salvalai

Received: 19 November 2024 1. Introduction

Revised: 10 December 2024 The construction sector substantially contributes to environmental pollution concern-
Accepted: 11 December 2024 ing air, water, and soil quality, accounting for nearly 50% of carbon emissions worldwide [1].
Published: 19 December 2024
Reducing pollution emissions has drawn interest worldwide due to the implications of
global warning and mitigation measures. Building- and construction-related activities
aimed at meeting the growing population’s requirements are increasing pollution emis-
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
sions due to the extensive utilization of raw materials and their high energy consumption.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Environmental pollution during construction project execution is considered across the
This article is an open access article project life cycle. Therefore, evaluating environmental issues during the project scheduling
distributed under the terms and phase has become necessary. Usually, environmental considerations are disregarded in
conditions of the Creative Commons scheduling, and their widespread importance is identified in project completion time and
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// cost [2]. Air pollution is a significant issue that could impact animals, climate, plants, and
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ health. Less consideration is paid to air pollution caused by building construction projects
4.0/). than its merits. It is necessary to practice appropriate environmental management to reduce

Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162411164 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 2 of 19

construction site pollution. Emission evaluation and the control of air pollution are essential
to decrease the destructive impacts that construction sites generate. Two measures should
be considered for the most efficient control over air pollution: (1) the determination of
the primary emissions sources, and (2) the implementation of appropriate controls on the
source of emissions [3]. However, practical emission assessment approaches are crucial for
efficient air pollution management.
Many previous studies have tackled environmental-related issues in construction. For
instance, Hussain and Hussain [4] proposed a multi-objective optimization (MOO) model
to optimize greenhouse gasses (GHGs), resource leveling, and the overall project duration
using Gray Wolf optimization algorithms to aid decision-makers in reflecting project time
and environmental impacts trade-off. The proposed model can support researchers and
experts in obtaining realistic trade-offs between incompatible duration objectives, resource
optimization, and GHG emissions. Askarifard et al. [5] developed an MOO model using
the epsilon-constraint algorithm to minimize risks, costs, and socio-environmental impacts
on construction projects. Decision-makers can use the proposed model to make suitable
decisions for their projects’ schedules.
Panda et al. [6] introduced a smart and adaptive scheduling method for residential
energy management systems (REMSs) that are integrated with renewable energy sources
(RESs). This approach utilizes an Adaptive Salp Swarm Algorithm (ASSA) to prioritize
energy use, minimize peak loads, and align with consumer energy consumption pref-
erences. Kulejewski and Roslon [7] suggested utilizing metaheuristic algorithms and
artificial intelligence tools to enhance construction project scheduling while aligning with
sustainable development objectives. It emphasizes the significant influence of construc-
tion projects on shaping the built environment and their effects on natural ecosystems
and global economies. Additionally, a novel ecological indicator is introduced to as-
sess the sustainability of construction projects. Khahro et al. [8] explored how delays in
decision-making impact construction projects, especially large-scale ones, and presented
a sustainable decision-making model. This model highlights the importance of timely
and efficient decision-making processes to reduce delays that could negatively affect both
project performance and sustainability. Milat et al. [9] investigated the application of the
NSGA-II Genetic Algorithm to address resilient scheduling challenges in construction
projects. It aimed to develop baseline schedules that reduce project duration, maximize
profits, and improve the project’s ability to withstand unforeseen disruptions. Banihashemi
and Khalilzadeh [10] presented a parallel Data Environmental Analysis (DEA) technique
for assessing project tasks utilizing several execution methods to optimize the trade-off
between time, cost, quality, and environmental impacts. The results obtained revealed that
the best trade-off between the four objectives is accomplished when each activity employs
an effective execution method. Banihashemi et al. [11] developed a model for minimizing a
project’s time, expenses, and environmental effects that also assessed the physical, biologi-
cal, and social effects of project activities during the construction phase. The study findings
emphasized the importance of considering the environmental impacts of construction
activities. Sandanayake et al. [12] presented a comparison of impact evaluation methods to
measure the environmental consequences of various tasks through buildings’ execution
stages and classified the most emission-effective construction processes. Emission models
assessed emissions due to transportation, use of equipment, and material usage. The assess-
ment was performed at the activity level and utilized databases from different regions in
Australia. Ozcan-Deniz and Zhu [13] presented an MOO time–cost–environmental impact
trade-off model for the construction of highway projects. The findings demonstrated a
weak positive relationship between project duration and GHG emissions, a strong link
between time and cost, and a relatively helpful correlation between GHG emissions and
cost. A review of the emission factor specifications for calculating pollutants generated
from gasoline construction machinery has been presented by Zhang et al. [14]. The fol-
lowing studies illustrate how sustainability principles, such as resource efficiency and
lifecycle impact reduction, are integrated into modern engineering designs. He et al. [15]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 3 of 19

demonstrated the practical application of fuse replacement technology through shaking

table tests. This study emphasizes the potential of fuse elements to reduce lifecycle impacts
by minimizing material consumption and waste during the repair phase, which directly
supports pollution reduction objectives in construction. He et al. [16] investigated the
integration of fuse angles in steel frame connections, focusing on their role in enhancing
energy dissipation and facilitating post-earthquake repairs. The use of fuse technology
aligns with sustainability goals by improving the repairability of structures, thus extending
their lifespan and reducing the need for new materials.
In this study, emission factors from the Australian National Greenhouse Accounts
(AUS NGA), European Environmental Agency (EEA), Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-
mate Change (IPCC), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)
are examined. Marzouk et al. [17] developed a Building Information Modeling (BIM)
model to estimate six kinds of emissions. The model included emissions from construction
activities at the different project life cycle phases, including production, delivery, execu-
tion, operation, maintenance, and the stages of deconstruction and demolition. Then,
weighting criteria were obtained using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to evaluate
impact categories from both global and local perspectives. In another study, Li et al. [18]
proposed an integrated simulation optimization method to reduce the carbon dioxide
(CO2 ) generated by the construction activities, including different stages: (i) simulating
the construction procedure, (ii) quantifying emissions of CO2 , and (iii) optimizing labor
allocation. A model based on discrete event simulation (DES) was proposed to mimic the
construction process to evaluate and estimate the rate of CO2 released during the process.
Arocho et al. [19] proposed an approach for estimating gas emissions and examining the
pollution patterns and magnitudes for four construction projects. Barati and Shen [20]
studied the emission estimate for construction equipment. This study seeks to provide
an operational-level pollution mitigation system for on-road construction equipment to
reduce emissions produced per kilometer traveled. The three main operating elements
that significantly affect emissions are cargo, speed, and road slope. The engine size and
load impact on engine characteristics and emissions are also investigated. A model was
developed by Sandanayake et al. [21] to approximate pollutants during the construction
process by performing a quantitative process technique to calculate the emissions generated
by materials, transportation, and equipment usage. The outcomes were then assessed con-
cerning five impact classes. Wu et al. [22] investigated the existing conditions to mitigate
and supervise construction dust in China to provide visions for reducing the produced
dust contamination resulting from the construction sector. Critical sources of construction
dust generation were identified, and 11 associated protocols were extensively assessed
using various studies, on-site observation, surveys, and interviews with qualified experts.
Dong and Ng [23] presented a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach for aiding decision-
makers in examining how future construction projects in Hong Kong will affect the environ-
ment throughout the life of the project. The model comprehensively analyzed 18 environ-
mental effect divisions at the midpoint and endpoint levels. Abanda et al. [24] reviewed the
waste, GHG, and embodied energy computation methods for building projects. The models
were classified based on different types of input and output variables, the mathematical
approach and mechanism, the stage of construction at which the model was used, and
the input data inventory that the model used. In a comparative study based on 24 road
construction projects, Kim et al. [25] studied the generation of GHGs by various machines
used in different construction tasks. Chen et al. [26] examined environmental challenges
and their features in the construction industry. Then, using the Analytic Network Pro-
cess (ANP), environmental factors were used to develop two decision-making models for
environmental-based construction planning.
Most of the presented studies reviewed pollution problems qualitatively, lacking
guides for minimizing the pollutant levels allied with the construction industry. Also,
none of the previous studies accounted for dust, gasses, and noise pollution. Moreover,
most studies that list time as a constraint do not consider the dynamic characteristics of
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 4 of 19

construction-related activities. This includes changes in the criticality of tasks and vari-
ous types of relationships among activities. Accordingly, this study aimed to develop a
framework to reduce building construction pollution using GAs. For this purpose, firstly,
the suggested approach estimates the pollution produced by every task directly related to
gasses, noise, and dust in construction projects. Consequently, GAs optimize the project
schedule by minimizing the project duration while keeping the pollution under the given
threshold limits. Then, a real-life case study project is presented to display the applicability
of the suggested approach. This study introduces a groundbreaking approach to optimizing
construction project schedules by integrating environmental sustainability directly into the
scheduling process, employing Genetic Algorithms (GAs). The proposed model represents
a novel contribution to both the fields of construction management and environmental
sustainability, pushing the boundaries of traditional project scheduling practices by ad-
dressing the pressing need for eco-friendly construction practices. Traditional construction
scheduling primarily focuses on optimizing time, cost, and resource allocation without
taking environmental impact into account. The proposed model introduces a paradigm
shift by embedding sustainability criteria into the scheduling process. It moves beyond
merely optimizing project duration or costs and seeks to optimize projects for minimal
environmental impact. This integration is particularly novel, as it establishes a direct
relationship between project schedules and environmental sustainability.

2. Data and Methodology

In building construction projects, the amount of pollution emitted from each activity
may not surpass the specified limits as per the given regulation, but the total amount of
resultant project pollution may exceed the threshold limits. As such, the current study
presents a two-step quantitative approach to schedule construction projects to ensure that
the level of pollutants will not exceed the permissible limits throughout the construction
project. First, expected pollutants are estimated over the construction phase duration.
Secondly, project tasks are re-scheduled to change the pollution distribution if the pollution
level exceeds threshold limits at any particular moment.
The developed model utilizes GAs to optimize the project’s schedule while respecting
the maximum limits of construction pollutants. The advantages of the developed model are
as follows: (1) it considers noise, gasses, and dust pollutants; (2) it can be applied to different
construction projects (e.g., infrastructures, residential and industrial buildings, etc.); (3) it
takes into account the construction task’s dynamic nature; and (4) it extracts its data
from available commercial software packages for easier use. A real-life case study project
was used to demonstrate the steps of applying the proposed model and to discuss the
results obtained.
The suggested framework involves two main modules—the activity pollution module
(AP module) and the pollution-based scheduling optimization module (PBSO module). The
first module estimates the emissions of construction activities. This module involves three
sub-modules (noise, gasses, and dust) that calculate the pollution emissions generated from
individual tasks due to noise, gasses, and dust, respectively. The second module performs
the optimization procedure by employing GAs. Flowcharts that describe the computational
process of the developed AP and PBSO modules are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.
Pollutants in construction projects are typically categorized into three main types—gaseous
emissions, dust particles, and noise pollution. Each pollutant type is quantified based on
standard emission factors and construction activity characteristics, as
• Gaseous Emissions (CO2 , NOx ): The amount of gas emitted by construction machinery,
such as excavators, trucks, and cranes, is determined using emission factors derived
from global or regional databases. The emission factor is typically expressed in terms
of pollutants per unit of fuel consumption or work performed.
• Dust Particles (PM10 ): Dust is generated primarily by excavation activities, vehicle
movement, and material handling. The quantification of dust emissions is based on
models that consider factors like soil type, vehicle speed, and specific activity.
  Dust Particles (PM10): Dust is generated primarily by excavation activities, vehicle
movement, and material handling. The quantification of dust emissions is based on
models that consider factors like soil type, vehicle speed, and specific activity.
 Noise Pollution: Noise levels are typically measured in decibels (dB) and depend on
factors such as the type of machinery used, the intensity of the activity, and the du-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 ration of exposure. Noise emission values are usually obtained from machinery man- 5 of 19
ufacturers or environmental studies, which provide standardized dB levels for vari-
ous types of construction equipment.
Once pollutants are quantified, they are integrated into the construction scheduling
•model,Noise Pollution:
typically Noise
by associating levels
pollutant arewith
values typically measured
specific tasks in decibels
or activities in the con- (dB) and depend
on project.
struction factorsForsuch
eachas the type task
construction of machinery used,
(e.g., excavation, the intensity
concrete pouring, and of site
the activity, and the
preparation),
durationa pollutant emission Noise
of exposure. profile is created. This
emission profileare
values contains
usuallythe amount
obtained of from machinery
pollution generated by each task, expressed as a function of time, activity type, and ma-
manufacturers or environmental studies, which provide standardized dB levels for
chinery used. The Genetic Algorithm (GA) is used to optimize the construction schedule.
Pollutant levels types
various of construction
are treated as constraints orequipment.
objectives in the optimization process.

Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19

Figure 1.1.
Figure Flowchart of theof
Flowchart AP module.
the AP module.

Figure
Figure 2. Flowchart 2. Flowchart
of the developedof the
PBSOdeveloped
module.PBSO module.

2.1. Activity Pollution (AP) Module

The AP model is established to estimate the quantity of air pollution caused by build-
ing execution operations. This model has three sub-modules—noise, gasses, and dust. The
improvements performed in the activity pollution module are defined in the subsequent
subsections [27].
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 6 of 19

Once pollutants are quantified, they are integrated into the construction scheduling
model, typically by associating pollutant values with specific tasks or activities in the
construction project. For each construction task (e.g., excavation, concrete pouring, and
site preparation), a pollutant emission profile is created. This profile contains the amount
of pollution generated by each task, expressed as a function of time, activity type, and
machinery used. The Genetic Algorithm (GA) is used to optimize the construction schedule.
Pollutant levels are treated as constraints or objectives in the optimization process.

2.1. Activity Pollution (AP) Module

The AP model is established to estimate the quantity of air pollution caused by
building execution operations. This model has three sub-modules—noise, gasses, and
dust. The improvements performed in the activity pollution module are defined in the
subsequent subsections [27].

2.1.1. Dust Sub-Module

Mainly, the construction industry’s dust sources are caused by excavation, drilling
process, cut and fill, equipment movement, extensive transportation of materials, loading
and unloading of materials, outdoor materials’ packing, and production of concrete and
mortar. The dust sub-module computes dust emissions using the emission factors method.
Emissions from various sources are estimated using emission factor techniques. The dust
sub-module uses the US EPA’s empirical equations based on field measurements [28].

2.1.2. Gasses Sub-Module

Heavy equipment and machinery are the primary sources of emissions of harm-
ful gas in the construction industry. The majority of the primary pollutants emitted by
construction-related equipment’s combustion engines are covered in this module. These
pollutants include sulfur dioxides (SO2 ), nitrogen dioxides (NO2 ), carbon monoxide (CO2 ),
hydrocarbons (HCs), and particulate matter (PM10 ) less than 10 µm in aerodynamic diame-
ter. The emissions generated from a given piece of equipment (Ei) can be calculated using
Equation (1) [29]:
Ei = EFi × P × LF, (1)
where EFi is the emission i factor measured in g/(hp-hr); P is the horsepower of the
considered equipment; and LF is the equipment’s operation load factor.

2.1.3. Noise Sub-Module

Construction equipment is the primary source of noise in the building construction
sector. Furthermore, some tasks generate noise while they are being performed. The noise
sub-module estimates the noise level by identifying the equipment power, model type, and
manufacturer. A sound level meter measures noise, and decibels (dB) are the unit that is
typically used. The total sound level is not the sum of the sounds produced by each piece
of construction equipment when multiple pieces operate simultaneously. Decibels cannot
be directly added or multiplied because they are geometric values; however, the equivalent
sound level (Leq ) can be determined using Equation (2) [30].
Li
∑ N 10 10
Leq = 10Log i=1 , (2)
N
where Li is the source i sound level; N is the number of sound sources.

2.1.4. Dispersion Model

Table 1 presents Egypt’s Law No. 9 (2009), i.e., the allowable threshold level of
pollutants [31]. It is observable that the concentration of contaminants is expressed in
weight per volume under Egyptian standards. Furthermore, the dust and gas sub-module
emission values are expressed in rate units (i.e., weight per time). As such, it is not possible
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 7 of 19

to compare activity pollution values with the standards. Equation (3) employs a dispersion
model based on Gaussian diffusion to address this problem. The pollution rate can be
converted into concentration using the dispersion model.
2
" #
Q −( H 2 )
2σ
CX = e Z , (3)
π × U × σY × σZ

where CX is the ground level concentration at distance × downwind (g/m3 ); Q is the

pollutant quantity (g/s); U is the average wind speed (m/s); σY and σZ are the standard
deviations of horizontal and vertical wind direction, respectively (m); and H is the source
height (m).

Table 1. Egypt’s environmental law [31].

Harmful Gasses
Pollutant Dust Noise
CO * NO2 ** PM10 *** SO2 **** HCs *****
Max. limit (µg/m3 ) 10,000 400 400 350 600 10,000 105 (dB)
* CO (carbon monoxide): a colorless, odorless gas that is harmful when inhaled, particularly in high concentrations.
** NO2 (nitrogen dioxide): a toxic gas produced by combustion processes, especially from vehicles and industrial
emissions. *** PM10 (particulate matter): Fine particulate matter in the air that is 10 µm or smaller in diameter.
**** SO2 (sulfur dioxide): a gas produced primarily by the burning of fossil fuels. ***** HCs (hydrocarbons):
organic compounds found in vehicle emissions.

2.2. Pollution-Based Scheduling Optimization (PBSO) Module

Genetic Algorithms (GAs) are an effective tool for optimization that uses random
sampling and heuristic search methods [32]. Several science and engineering issues have
been efficiently solved using GAs [33–37]. In a huge problem domain like the one at hand,
GAs have also proven efficient for obtaining near-optimal solutions. Generally, a solution
for a given problem is coded in the form of a chromosome string. Every chromosome
denotes an individual or a solution that is superior or inferior to other chromosomes. The
merit of each solution (chromosome) is verified by assessing its robustness with respect to
an objective function.
The best chromosomes are selected to generate offspring chromosomes by exchanging
their information through crossover or mutation processes. The chromosomes generated are
evaluated and can only be reserved if they are fitter than the rest of the population (“survival
of the fittest”). Typically, many generations are carried out until the best chromosome is
obtained. Applying GAs for the problem at hand comprises the following steps: setting
the chromosome structure and its assessment method (identifying the objective function);
creating an initial random population; and applying the crossover and mutation to generate
offspring chromosomes [34]. As shown in Figure 3, the chromosome structure is composed
of j genes, with the number shown in the box being the arrangement of priorities for a
specific activity (activity number presented above the box); the whole number of project
activities is the chromosome length. As such, every chromosome acts as a proposed
solution for the problem. In this problem, users can set priority levels for each task in
most commercial resource-leveling software. The priority level indicates an activity’s
significance and its chance for leveling. Thus, the GA is implemented to resolve the
compound’s resource-leveling challenge. Note that, as shown in Figure 3, Pi is the priority
of activity j, Pi ϵ [1, 1000]. In Microsoft Project, the priority values correspond to the task
priority grades.
 as a proposed solution for the problem. In this problem, users can set priority levels for
each task in most commercial resource-leveling software. The priority level indicates an
activity’s significance and its chance for leveling. Thus, the GA is implemented to resolve
the compound’s resource-leveling challenge. Note that, as shown in Figure 3, Pi is the
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 priority of activity j, Pi ϵ [1, 1000]. In Microsoft Project, the priority values correspond8 to
of 19
the task priority grades.

Figure 3. Chromosome formation.

Figure 3. Chromosome formation.
Once a chromosome (i) is assessed, the project activities’ priority values are assigned
Once aa chromosome
to create new schedule(i) is assessed,
with duration the project
Di and activities’profile
a histogram priority
forvalues are assigned
each resource (j). The
tomerit
createofathat
newschedule
schedule with duration Di and a histogram profile for each resource
is then determined by the relative progress it shows over the original (j).
The merit of that schedule is then determined by the relative progress it shows
schedule, as calculated by an objective function that has two variables for duration and over the
original
moments;schedule, as calculated
Equation (4) [38]: by an objective function that has two variables for dura-
tion and moments; Equation
  (4) [38]:
Di n
h  
ωd + ∑ j=1 ω jR MxjiR R
+ Myji R
/( Mxj0 + Myj0R
], (4)
( D)0 + [( + )/( + )], (4)
R
MM x : daily resource usage moment around the x-axis (shows resources fluctuation);
xR: daily resource usage moment around the x-axis (shows resources fluctuation);
R
Mxji : the moment of resource usage in day j (fluctuation) for a given schedule (string i);
: the moment of resource usage in day j (fluctuation) for a given schedule (string i);
Mxj0 R : the initial M R value day j;
x
: the initial MxR value day j;
M R : the moment of resource throughout its period of utilization;
My :ythe moment of resource throughout its period of utilization;
R

Myji R : resource utilization moment around y-axis determined by a schedule i in day j;

: resource utilization moment around y-axis determined by a schedule i in day j;
Myj0 R: initial MyM
: initial R
R value in day j; j;
y value in day
DiD: new
i : new project
projectduration
duration determined
determined bybyschedule
schedule string
stringi; i;
D0D : 0initial
: initialproject
projectduration;
duration;
: weight
ω: dweight forfor project
project duration;
duration;
ω: jRleveling
: leveling weight
weight of of a resource
a resource in in day
day j; j;
N:N: working
working days.
days.
By changing
By changing the theweights,
weights,thethe fitness
fitness function
function (Equation
(Equation(4)) (4))allows
allowsthe
theuser
usertoto
perform
per-
various resource leveling heuristics, such as minimizing
form various resource leveling heuristics, such as minimizing resource fluctuations, resource fluctuations, decreas-
de-
ing resource
creasing resourceusage
usagetime,
time,ororminimizing
minimizingboth both resource
resource fluctuation
fluctuation andandduration.
duration.After
After
the
the problem
problem initialization,
initialization, thethe developed
developed GAs'GAs’ evolutionary
evolutionary process
process takes
takes place.
place. Popu-
Popula-
tion size is a significant parameter influencing the solution and the processing time it it
lation size is a significant parameter influencing the solution and the processing time
needs. Once the population (m chromosomes) has been created, the fitness of each chromo-
some (k) is assessed utilizing Equation (4); consequently, its relative fitness is evaluated
(Equations (5) and (6)) [34].
m
Total f itness = ∑k=1 f itnessk , (5)

Relative f itness = f itnessk /total f itness, (6)

Thus, the merit of each chromosome is proportionate to its relative fitness (total merits
of all chromosomes equal one). Either crossover or mutation is used in the reproduction
operation. Crossover (marriage) is the more prevalent method and can be performed by
randomly picking two parent chromosomes, substituting their data, and creating offspring.
The probability of selecting a given chromosome is proportionate to its relative merit. This
guarantees that superior chromosomes have a greater chance of remaining chosen. Also,
exchanging data between the two selected chromosomes is achieved randomly to generate
an offspring. On the other hand, mutation is performed by picking up one chromosome
randomly and then modifying some of its contents. Such operation helps inject new genetic
information and breaks the tendency for stagnation in the evolutionary procedure, avoiding
local minima. As soon as either technique creates an offspring, it is assessed and can be
kept if its fitness is better than others in the population.
 procedure, avoiding local minima. As soon as either technique creates an offspring, i
assessed and can be kept if its fitness is be er than others in the population.

Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 3. Procedure Automation and Example Application 9 of 19

The proposed model is implemented on a commercial spreadsheet program, usi

its macro programming,
3. Procedure Automationtoand automate
Example its modules and facilitate its use. The process w
Application
implemented as partmodel
The proposed of a comprehensive
is implemented onpollution-based schedule
a commercial spreadsheet planning
program, usingtechniq
The developed system involved
its macro programming, to automatesubstantial
its modulesprogramming
and facilitate itstouse.
codeThethe GA was
process process. T
implemented
implemented as part of a comprehensive
pollution-based scheduling pollution-based schedule planning
system encompasses technique.
five worksheets, as f
The developed system involved substantial programming to code the GA
lows: (1) the main interface, which is used to access the various options (Figure 4); (2) process. The
implemented pollution-based scheduling system encompasses five worksheets, as follows:
user (1)
input data sheet, which is used to store the project’s activities data; (3) a pollut
the main interface, which is used to access the various options (Figure 4); (2) the user
moduleinputsheet that computes
data sheet, which is usedthe
to amount of noise,
store the project’s gas, and
activities data;dust pollution
(3) a pollution resulting fr
module
each sheet
project activity; the
that computes (4)amount
GA optimization sheet
of noise, gas, and to optimize
dust pollution thefrom
resulting project schedule wh
each project
activity; (4) GA optimization sheet to optimize the project schedule
ensuring that the level of pollution for the project’s activities does not surpass while ensuring that
the allow
the level of pollution for the project’s activities does not surpass the allowable limit; and
ble limit; and (5) GA optimization result sheet for storing all optimization solutions a
(5) GA optimization result sheet for storing all optimization solutions and optimization
optimization
convergence convergence
charts. charts.

Figure 4. Main
Figure screen.
4. Main screen.

In this
In this study,study, thepollution-based
the pollution-based module
module is applied on an on
is applied administrative building in
an administrative building
New Burg El Arab City, Egypt, to illustrate the potential of the pollution-based scheduling
Newmodel.
Burg El Arab City, Egypt, to illustrate the potential of the pollution-based scheduli
It is a four-segment, three-story building with a 2500 m2 floor area, as shown in
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FORmodel. It is5. aThe
four-segment, three-story building with
withaseveral
2500 m 2 floor area, as shown
PEER REVIEW
Figure project comprises 125 construction activities possible 10 of 19
alternatives
Figure 5. The project comprises 125 construction activities with several possible alter
or construction priorities [27].
tives or construction priorities [27].

Figure5.5.Case
Figure Casestudy
studybuilding.
building.

Onthe
On themain
mainmenu
menuofofthetheintegrated
integratedpollution-based
pollution-basedscheduling
schedulingmodel
model(Figure
(Figure4),4),
firstly,the
firstly, theuser
userselects
selectsthe
the“Project
“ProjectData”
Data”button
bu onandandinputs
inputsthe
thenames,
names,duration,
duration,relation-
relation-
ships,and
ships, andequipment
equipmentusedusedfor foreach
eachactivity.
activity.The
Themain
mainequipment
equipmentused
usedand
andthe
therelated
related
projectactivities
project activitiesare
aregiven
givenininTable
Table2 2[27].
[27].
After defining all project activities, the user may push the “Activity Pollution (AP)
Module” bu on to estimate the pollution that results from the project’s activities due to
noise, gasses, and dust. The pollution module is coded using Visual Basic for Application
(VBA) programming language in Microsoft Excel. Also, easy-to-use interfaces are devel-
oped to enable the calculation of the emissions of the noise, gasses, and dust generated
from each activity, as well as data entry and sorting. The user has the ability to add equip-
ment to a given activity or modify/edit assigned equipment. Finally, the findings will be
shown in the output interface following the input of the appropriate parameters for every
emission. The calculated daily emissions of noise, gasses, and dust pollution generated
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 10 of 19

Table 2. The main tasks and machinery used in the case study.

Activity Utilized Equipment Number Manufacturer

Caterpillar, Peoria, IL, USA
Loader (Caterpillar 966H) 1
Excavation Mercedes Actros,
Truck (Mercedes Actros 4040) 2
Stuttgart, Germany
Caterpillar, Peoria, IL, USA
Loader (Caterpillar 966H) 1
Backfilling Mercedes Actros,
Truck (Mercedes Actros 4040) 1
Stuttgart, Germany
Caterpillar, Peoria, IL, USA
Loader (Caterpillar 966H) 1
Mercedes Actros,
Soil Replacement Compaction Truck (Mercedes Actros 4040) 2
Stuttgart, Germany
Compactor (Caterpillar CS533E) 1
Caterpillar, Peoria, IL, USA
Mercedes Actros,
Formworks Truck (Mercedes Actros 4040) 1
Stuttgart, Germany
Mercedes Actros,
Reinforcement Truck (Mercedes Actros 4040) 1
Stuttgart, Germany
Truck mixer (Volvo FM400) 2 Volvo, Gothenburg, Sweden
PC * pouring for foundation
Pump (Schwing S43SX) 1 Schwing, Herne, Germany
Truck mixer (Volvo FM400) 1 Volvo, Gothenburg, Sweden
RC * pouring for foundation Pump (Schwing S43SX) 1 Schwing, Herne, Germany
Vibrator (Honda) 2 Honda, Tokyo, Japan
Truck mixer (Volvo FM400) 1 Volvo, Gothenburg, Sweden
RC * pouring for columns Pump (Schwing S43SX) 1 Schwing, Herne, Germany
Vibrator (Honda) 2 Honda, Tokyo, Japan
Truck mixer (Volvo FM400) 1 Volvo, Gothenburg, Sweden
RC * pouring for Beams and slabs Pump (Schwing S43SX) 1 Schwing, Herne, Germany
Vibrator (Honda) 2 Honda, Tokyo, Japan
* Note—PC: plain concrete; RC: reinforced concrete.

After defining all project activities, the user may push the “Activity Pollution (AP)
Module” button to estimate the pollution that results from the project’s activities due to
noise, gasses, and dust. The pollution module is coded using Visual Basic for Application
(VBA) programming language in Microsoft Excel. Also, easy-to-use interfaces are devel-
oped to enable the calculation of the emissions of the noise, gasses, and dust generated from
each activity, as well as data entry and sorting. The user has the ability to add equipment to
a given activity or modify/edit assigned equipment. Finally, the findings will be shown in
the output interface following the input of the appropriate parameters for every emission.
The calculated daily emissions of noise, gasses, and dust pollution generated from the main
activities involved in the proposed case study project are listed in Table 3 [27].
Then, each pollutant is entered as a pseudo resource and is specified for each activity
in MS Project software 2021. Accordingly, the module becomes ready for the scheduling
optimization process. Due to the user-friendly and integration programmability abilities,
Microsoft Project and Excel software have been selected for this study’s implementation
of the GA procedures. The ability of MS Project to allow users to specify the priorities of
their activities also helped with the GA process execution. The optimization processes were
programmed using Excel and Microsoft Project’s macro language, and the case study’s
optimum schedule was then determined.
Once the user pushes the “Pollution-Based Scheduling Optimization Module (PBSO
Module)” button, the user is asked to enter the desired population size, the number of
offspring chromosomes to be produced throughout the evolutionary procedure, and the
duration and moments of the proposed weights. Therefore, the evolutionary procedure
begins by creating the population. During the generation of each chromosome in the
population, each chromosome is exported to MS Project. Hence, the software makes a
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 11 of 19

resource-constrained schedule to respect the allowable limit for each pollutant based on
the priority of the imported chromosome from the GAs and calculates the new project
duration and moments. After that, MS Project automatically exports these results to Excel
to calculate chromosome fitness (Equation (4)). After creating the whole population, the
evolutionary process starts to optimize the project schedule. Once the specified number of
offspring chromosomes are generated, the evolution process stops, and the user may view
the results of the runs by pushing the “Runs results” button.

Table 3. Estimated emissions resulting from the main tasks.

Pollution Rate (µg/m3 )

Activity Noise (dB)
HCs CO NO2 PM10 SO2 Dust
Excavation 278.2 2542.4 237.8 179.4 102.7 3728.4 99
Backfilling 289.3 2753.2 284.4 199.3 88.9 4265.2 97
Soil Replacement Compaction 198.4 2236.6 172.3 146.9 78.6 2589.4 102
Formwork erection 67.3 843.4 34.4 36.9 33.6 925.4 90
Steel reinforcement fixing 67.3 843.4 34.4 36.9 33.6 925.4 90
PC pouring (foundation) 258.7 2359.4 175.9 155.6 88.4 2438.9 103
RC pouring (foundation) 263.3 2653.2 180.7 136.4 98.3 1020.9 105
RC pouring (columns) 263.3 2653.2 180.7 136.4 98.3 1020.9 105
RC pouring (slabs) 263.3 2653.2 180.7 136.4 98.3 1020.9 105

4. Case Study Results and Analysis

MS Project’s preliminary solution to the unconstrained resource schedule for the
case study project (composed of 125 tasks) produced a schedule of 94 calendar days and
a total pollution, Mt, of 2.69 × 109 , with an Mx and My of 2.66 × 109 and 2.26 × 107 ,
respectively. The level of emission associated with the initial schedule of activities is shown
in Figure 6a–g.
Figure 6a–g show that during some periods, the accumulated level of pollutants
exceeds its specified maximum value. Consequently, it is necessary to re-schedule the
project to reduce the pollution levels below the limit (i.e., pollution-based schedule).
The experimental results in Figure 7a–g show that pollution levels from construction
are dispersed below the maximum allowable level of each pollutant when standard resource
leveling in MS Project was performed. Therefore, the pseudo-resource strategy to reduce
construction pollution during the project scheduling stage is viable. Nonetheless, the total
construction duration is 121 days, around 27% extended compared to the original schedule;
Mx = 1.60 × 109 , My = 4.10 × 107 , and Mt = 1.64 × 109 for all pollutants.

4.1. Sensitivity Analysis of the GA Optimization Module

Several experiments were performed to set out the optimization model parameters
including the number of generations (G), population size (S), crossover rate (C), and
mutation rate (M). In all experiments, the weightings in (Equation (4)) are given an equal
value of half, i.e., (ωd = 0.5 and ω jR = 0.5).

4.1.1. Analyzing Offspring Generation Size

The effectiveness of the PBSO module has been tested in several studies using various
values for the number of offspring generations (G). The outcomes (Figure 8) show that
solutions are sensitive to offspring generations. For this case study, the best solutions are
achieved at G = 50.
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 12 of 19

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g)
Figure 6. Pollution emission distribution in unconstrained pollution schedule: (a) nitrogen dioxide;
Figure 6. Pollution emission distribution in unconstrained pollution schedule: (a) nitrogen dioxide;
(b) carbon monoxide; (c) sulfur dioxide; (d) particulate ma er; (e) hydrocarbons; (f) dust; (g) noise.
(b) carbon monoxide; (c) sulfur dioxide; (d) particulate matter; (e) hydrocarbons; (f) dust; (g) noise.
Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 19
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 13 of 19

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g)
Figure 7. Pollution emission distribution in standard MS Project resource leveling: (a) nitrogen di-
Figure 7. Pollution emission distribution in standard MS Project resource leveling: (a) nitrogen
oxide; (b) carbon monoxide; (c) sulfur dioxide; (d) particulate ma er; (e) hydrocarbons; (f) dust; (g)
dioxide; (b) carbon monoxide; (c) sulfur dioxide; (d) particulate matter; (e) hydrocarbons; (f) dust;
noise.
(g) noise.
 achieved Theateffectiveness
G = 50. of the PBSO module has been tested in several studies using various
values for the number of offspring generations (G). The outcomes (Figure 8) show that
solutions
Fitness are sensitive to offspring generations. For this case study, the best
2.20 2024, G=10
solutions are
Sustainability 16, 11164 14 of 19
achieved at G = 50.
2.15 G=30

2.10
2.20 Fitness G=10
G=50
2.05
2.15 G=30
G=100
2.00
2.10
G=50
G=200
1.95
2.05
1.90 G=100
2.00
1.85 G=200
1.95
1.80
1.90
1.75
1.85
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

1.80 No. of Cycles

1.75
Figure08. The5effect 10
of offspring
15 generation
20 25 size30on GA
35convergence.
40 45 50 55

No. of Cycles
4.1.2. Analyzing Population Size
Figure 8. The effect of offspring generation size on GA convergence.
Figure 8. The effect
Population sizeof is
offspring generation size on
problem-dependent and GA convergence.
should be determined through experi-
mentation [39]. When 4.1.2. Analyzing
the number Population Size
of generations equals 50 in each cycle, the population
4.1.2.
size Analyzing
is changed Population
to choose Population Size
the bestsize solution
is problem-dependent
(minimum andMx
should
andbe My
determined through experimen-
with acceptable project
tation [39]. When the number of generations equals 50 in each cycle, the population size is
delay).Population
In all experiments,
changed the system
size is toproblem-dependent
choose was set(minimum
the best solution to stop
and when
should
Mx ten
beMy
and successive
determined
with acceptable cyclesdelay).
through
project of the
experi-
objective
mentation function were
[39]. When
In not number
the improved.
all experiments, The best
of generations
the system was solution
set to whenisten
equals
stop obtained
50 in each at
successive a population
cycle,
cycles ofthe size
the population
objective
ofsize
100is(Figure
changed function were not improved. The best solution is obtained at
9). to choose the best solution (minimum Mx and My with acceptable project a population size of 100
(Figure 9).
delay). In all experiments, the system was set to stop when ten successive cycles of the
objective function were not improved. The best solution is obtained at a population pop 25 size
Fitness
of 100 (Figure 9).
1.99 pop 50
pop 75
1.97
pop 100
1.95 pop 25
pop 125
1.93 Fitness pop 50
1.99 pop 150
1.91 pop 75
1.97 pop 175
1.89 pop 100
1.95 pop 200
pop 125
1.87
1.93 pop 225
pop 150
1.85 pop 250
1.91 pop 175
1.83
1.89 pop 200
1.81
1.87 pop 225
1.79
1.85 pop 250
1.77
1.83
1.75
1.81
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
1.79
No. of Cycles
1.77
1.75 Figure 9. The effect of population size on GA convergence.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

No. of Cycles
 Figure 9. The effect of population size on GA convergence.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 15 of 19

4.1.3. Crossover and Mutation Values

Numerous tests have
4.1.3. been conducted
Crossover and MutationtoValues
assess the optimization module’s function-
ing counter to differentNumerous
crossover and
tests mutation
have rate values.
been conducted to assessFigure 10 illustrates
the optimization that
module’s the
functioning
counter to different crossover and mutation rate values. Figure
solutions are overly susceptible to crossover and mutation rates. The appropriate solu- 10 illustrates that the
solutions are overly susceptible to crossover and mutation rates. The appropriate solutions
tions are obtained for this case study at S = 100, G = 50, C = 0.95, and M = 0.05.
are obtained for this case study at S = 100, G = 50, C = 0.95, and M = 0.05.

2.20 Fitness C=0.95 & M =0.05

2.15 C=0.9 & M=0.1

2.10
C=0.85 & M =0.15
2.05
C=0.8 & M=0.2
2.00
C=0.75 & M =0.25
1.95

1.90

1.85

1.80

1.75
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

No. of Cycles

Figure
Figure 10. The effect of 10. The and
crossover effectmutation
of crossover and mutation
ratios on GA ratios on GA convergence.
convergence.
4.2. Comparative Analysis
4.2. Comparative AnalysisAfter comparing the leveled schedules for GAs and MS Project, it is evident that the
After comparingGA the
leveled schedule
leveled providesfor
schedules better
GAs smoothing
and MSfor all pollutant
Project, distribution
it is evident thathistograms
the
than the standard schedule leveled by MS Project (Figure 11a–g). Also, the duration of the
GA leveled schedule provides be er smoothing for all pollutant distribution histograms
GA-leveled schedule is 120 days, which is shorter than the schedule leveled by MS Project.
than the standard schedule
Mx, My, andleveled
Mt forby
theMS Project
leveled GAs(Figure
are 1.45 11a–g). Also,
× 109 , 4.01 × 10the duration
7 , and 1.49 × 10of9 , the
which is
GA-leveled schedule is 120
lower thandays, which isofshorter
the moments thanleveled
the schedule the schedule leveled
by MS Project (Mx,byMy,MSandProject.
Mt reduced
Mx, My, and Mt forby 9.4%,
the 2.2%, GAs
leveled and 9.2%, respectively).
are 1.45 Based
× 109, 4.01 on7,the
× 10 andexperiments,
1.49 × 109,itwhich
can be concluded
is lower that
than the moments of the schedule leveled by MS Project (Mx, My, and Mt reduced by of
the PBSO module can re-schedule the project activities, leading to the redistribution
pollutants that meet the pollution limits, while maintaining the minimum project duration.
9.4%, 2.2%, and 9.2%, respectively). Based on the experiments, it can be concluded that the
The GA optimizer enhances the leveling function of MS Project, enabling users to identify
PBSO module can re-schedule the project
the optimal settings of task activities,
priorities in leading to the redistribution of pollu-
resource leveling.
tants that meet the pollution limits,
Developing while maintaining
a pollution-based schedule the minimum
model, as such,project
involvesduration. The
creating a systematic
approach to manage and reduce pollution through planning
GA optimizer enhances the leveling function of MS Project, enabling users to identify the and operational adjustments.
The proposed model provides a pollution prevention plan, including compliance with
optimal se ings of task priorities in resource leveling.
environmental regulations, time savings, and accordingly improved workplace safety. The
results showed the ability of the proposed PBSO model to develop schedules that respect
pollution limits as per the regulations while minimizing the total project duration.

(a) (b)
 than the moments of the schedule leveled by MS Project (Mx, My, and Mt reduced by
9.4%, 2.2%, and 9.2%, respectively). Based on the experiments, it can be concluded that the
PBSO module can re-schedule the project activities, leading to the redistribution of pollu-
tants that meet the pollution limits, while maintaining the minimum project duration. The
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 GA optimizer enhances the leveling function of MS Project, enabling users to identify the
16 of 19
optimal se ings of task priorities in resource leveling.

Sustainability 2024, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 19

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g)
Figure 11. Pollution emission distribution in the PBSO module: (a) nitrogen dioxide; (b) carbon
Figure 11. Pollution emission distribution in the PBSO module: (a) nitrogen dioxide; (b) carbon
monoxide; (c) sulfur dioxide; (d) particulate ma er; (e) hydrocarbons; (f) dust; (g) noise.
monoxide; (c) sulfur dioxide; (d) particulate matter; (e) hydrocarbons; (f) dust; (g) noise.
Developing aand
5. Conclusions pollution-based schedule model, as such, involves creating a systematic
Future Extensions
approach to manage and reduce pollution through planning and operational adjustments.
Construction activities release pollutants that must be quantified throughout project
The proposed model provides a pollution prevention plan, including compliance with
construction. This is vital to ensure that the resulting pollution does not surpass the
environmental regulations, time savings, and accordingly improved workplace safety.
environmental threshold limits. As such, this study presented a framework employing
The results showed the ability of the proposed PBSO model to develop schedules that
respect pollution limits as per the regulations while minimizing the total project duration.

5. Conclusions and Future Extensions

Construction activities release pollutants that must be quantified throughout project
construction. This is vital to ensure that the resulting pollution does not surpass the envi-
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 17 of 19

Genetic Algorithms (GAs) to reduce the pollution caused by building construction. The
presented framework’s methodology is based on estimating the pollution that results from
project activities and predicting the dispersion of total pollution levels caused by noise,
gasses, and dust during construction operations. The project activities are re-scheduled
using the GA-based leveling technique, which considers pollution emissions as pseudo
resources. The GA module allows users to minimize pollution by changing project task
priorities. According to experimental findings, GA-improved resource leveling outperforms
MS Project’s conventional approach. Sensitivity analysis reveals that the best solutions for
this case study are obtained at a population size, number of generations, crossover rate,
and mutation rate equal to 100, 50, 0.95, and 0.05, respectively.
This study provides significant insights into optimizing construction project schedul-
ing using GAs, focusing on pollution reduction. Based on the content, here is a conclusion
in key points summarizing the most important results:
• Pollution Reduction in Construction Projects: the research introduced an innovative
model that integrates GAs to optimize scheduling in construction projects, with a
focus on minimizing pollution generated from gasses, dust, and noise.
• Efficiency of GAs: the model demonstrated that GAs can effectively handle the com-
plexities of scheduling while considering environmental constraints, resulting in
reduced environmental impacts during the construction process.
• Environmental Compliance: the research emphasized the importance of adhering to
environmental regulations, demonstrating how the model ensures that pollution does
not exceed legal thresholds during the construction phases.
• Real-life Project Applicability: the model was applied to a case study, showing practical
potential in real-world construction projects where minimizing environmental impact
is a critical concern.
Based on the results obtained, the proposed approach can be employed to control
construction pollution. Furthermore, environmental organizations can employ the devel-
oped method to guarantee that the pollution emitted during the construction period of a
given project is within the permitted values. Also, construction practitioners can use the
proposed method to respect the regulations issued by concerned authorities, at the same
time optimizing project durations. Despite the perceived benefits of the developed model,
it can only be used to redistribute the emitted pollutants over a project duration through
the re-scheduling of the project activities, so that the pollution level will not exceed the
specified limits. However, to reduce the overall amount of emitted pollutants, other meth-
ods should be followed, such as the use of alternative construction technologies and/or
employing new materials. The experimental validation of the proposed approach was
limited to a single case study. Future work could explore integrating pollution-reducing
technologies or cleaner construction practices into the model to lower emissions at the
source. More precise methods, such as real-time monitoring and data-driven approaches,
could be incorporated into the model to enhance its accuracy and adaptability. In addition,
upcoming studies should extend the approach to various construction projects, different
geographic locations, different scales to test its generalizability, multiple objective functions
including cost and resource availability, and integrate weather conditions. Lastly, the
pollutants thresholds utilized aligned with the environmental regulations set by Egypt’s
Law No. 9 (2009) for construction pollution. These thresholds were applied for the case
study to illustrate the practical application of the model in a specific regulatory context.
In future implementations of the model, a customizable framework could be introduced
where pollutant threshold values can be easily adjusted to reflect local regulations. This
would enable the model to be applied in different countries or regions with their specific
environmental standards.
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 18 of 19

Author Contributions: Data collection, formal analysis, methodology, and writing—original draft
preparation: I.E.; conceptualization, methodology, supervision, validation, and writing—original
draft: E.E.; resources, visualization, and writing—review and editing: W.A. and H.W. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data is contained within the article.
Acknowledgments: The Researchers would like to thank the Deanship of Graduate Studies and
Scientific Research at Qassim University for financial support (QU-APC-2024).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Dsilva, J.; Zarmukhambetova, S.; Locke, J. Assessment of Building Materials in the Construction Sector: A Case Study Using Life
Cycle Assessment Approach to Achieve the Circular Economy. Heliyon 2023, 9, e20404. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Faghih, A.; Safari, H.; Zandieh, M.; Arbabi, H. Environmental Pollutions Assessment by a New Project Scheduling Model under a
Fuzzy Environment. Environ. Energy Econ. Res. 2022, 6, 1–19.
3. Marzouk, M.; Madany, M.; Abou-Zied, A.; El-Said, M. Handling construction pollutions using multi-objective optimization.
Constr. Manag. Econ. 2008, 26, 1113–1125. [CrossRef]
4. Hussain, A.; Hussain, I. Modeling and Multi-Objective Optimization of Time, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Resources for
Sustainable Construction Projects. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2023, 39, 269–284. [CrossRef]
5. Askarifard, M.; Abbasianjahromi, H.; Sepehri, M.; Zeighami, E. A Robust Multi-Objective Optimization Model for Project
Scheduling Considering Risk and Sustainable Development Criteria. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 11494–11524. [CrossRef]
6. Panda, S.; Samanta, I.S.; Rout, P.K.; Sahu, B.K.; Bajaj, M.; Blazek, V.; Prokop, L.; Misak, S. Priority-Based Scheduling in Residential
Energy Management Systems Integrated with Renewable Sources Using Adaptive Salp Swarm Algorithm. Results Eng. 2024, 23,
102643. [CrossRef]
7. Kulejewski, J.; Rosłon, J. Optimization of Ecological and Economic Aspects of the Construction Schedule with the Use of
Metaheuristic Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence. Sustainability 2023, 15, 890. [CrossRef]
8. Khahro, S.H.; Shaikh, H.H.; Zainun, N.Y.; Sultan, B.; Khahro, Q.H. Delay in Decision-Making Affecting Construction Projects: A
Sustainable Decision-Making Model for Mega Projects. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5872. [CrossRef]
9. Milat, M.; Knezić, S.; Sedlar, J. Application of a Genetic Algorithm for Proactive Resilient Scheduling in Construction Projects.
Designs 2022, 6, 16. [CrossRef]
10. Banihashemi, S.A.; Khalilzadeh, M. Time-Cost-Quality-Environmental Impact Trade-off Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Problem with DEA Approach. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2021, 28, 1979–2004. [CrossRef]
11. Banihashemi, S.A.; Khalilzadeh, M.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Antucheviciene, J. Investigating the Environmental Impacts of Construction
Projects in Time-Cost Trade-off Project Scheduling Problems with CoCoSo Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method. Sustainability
2021, 13, 10922. [CrossRef]
12. Sandanayake, M.; Zhang, G.; Setunge, S. A comparative method of air emission impact assessment for building construction
activities. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2018, 68, 1–9. [CrossRef]
13. Ozcan-Deniz, G.; Zhu, Y. Multi-objective optimization of greenhouse gas emissions in highway construction projects. Sustain.
Cities Soc. 2017, 28, 162–171. [CrossRef]
14. Zhang, G.; Sandanayake, M.; Setunge, S.; Li, C.; Fang, J. Selection of Emission Factor Standards for Estimating Emissions from
Diesel Construction Equipment in Building Construction in the Australian Context. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 187, 527–536.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. He, X.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Ke, K. Fuse Replacement Implementation by Shaking Table Tests on Hybrid Moment-Resisting Frame.
J. Build. Eng. 2024, 95, 110232. [CrossRef]
16. He, X.; Chen, Y.; Ke, K.; Shao, T.; Yam, M.C.H. Development of a Connection Equipped with Fuse Angles for Steel Moment
Resisting Frames. Eng. Struct. 2022, 265, 114503. [CrossRef]
17. Marzouk, M.; Abdelkader, E.M.; Al-Gahtani, K. Building Information Modeling-Based Model for Calculating Direct and Indirect
Emissions in Construction Projects. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 152, 351–363. [CrossRef]
18. Li, H.X.; Zhang, L.; Mah, D.; Yu, H. An Integrated Simulation and Optimization Approach for Reducing CO 2 Emissions from
On-Site Construction Process in Cold Regions. Energy Build. 2017, 138, 666–675. [CrossRef]
19. Arocho, I.; Rasdorf, W.; Hummer, J.; Lewis, P. Time and Cost Characterisation of Emissions from Non-Road Diesel Equipment for
Infrastructure Projects. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2017, 10, 123–134. [CrossRef]
20. Barati, K.; Shen, X. Optimal Driving Pattern of On-Road Construction Equipment for Emissions Reduction. Procedia Eng. 2017,
180, 1221–1228. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2024, 16, 11164 19 of 19

21. Sandanayake, M.; Zhang, G.; Setunge, S. Environmental emissions at foundation construction stage of buildings–Two case studies.
Build. Environ. 2016, 95, 189–198. [CrossRef]
22. Wu, Z.; Zhang, X.; Wu, M. Mitigating construction dust pollution: State of the art and the way forward. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112,
1658–1666. [CrossRef]
23. Dong, Y.H.; Ng, S.T. A Life Cycle Assessment Model for Evaluating the Environmental Impacts of Building Construction in Hong
Kong. Build. Environ. 2015, 89, 183–191. [CrossRef]
24. Abanda, F.H.; Tah, J.H.M.; Cheung, F.K.T. Mathematical Modelling of Embodied Energy, Greenhouse Gases, Waste, Time–Cost
Parameters of Building Projects: A Review. Build. Environ. 2013, 59, 23–37. [CrossRef]
25. Kim, B.; Lee, H.; Park, H.; Kim, H. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Onsite Equipment Usage in Road Construction. J. Constr. Eng.
Manag. 2012, 138, 982–990. [CrossRef]
26. Chen, Z.; Li, H.; Wong, C.T.C. EnvironalPlanning: Analytic Network Process Model for Environmentally Conscious Construction
Planning. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2005, 131, 92–101. [CrossRef]
27. Elmasoudi, I.; Ibrahim, M.G.; Tokimatsu, H.; Elbeltagi, E. Environmental Impact Assessment Model for Buildings’ Construction
Activities. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2022, 22, 849–860. [CrossRef]
28. US EPA. AP-42: Compilation of Air Emissions Factors. In In Unpaved Roads; Chapter 13.2.2; US EPA: Washington, DC, USA, 2006.
29. US EPA. Exhaust and Crankcase Emission Factors for Nonroad Engine Modeling-Compression-Ignition. In S.l.:EPA-420-R-10-018
NR-009d; US Environ Prot Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; pp. 1–141.
30. Godish, T. Air Quality, 4th ed.; LEWIS Publisher: Chicago, IL, USA, 1997.
31. EEAA. Egyptian Promulgating Law No.9: Maximum Threshold Limit of Pollutant According to Environmental Regulations; EEAA: Cairo,
Egypt, 2009.
32. Goldberg, D.E. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning, 1st ed.; Addison Wesely: San Francisco, CA, USA,
1989.
33. Asadi, E.; da Silva, M.G.; Antunes, C.H.; Dias, L.; Glicksman, L. Multi-Objective Optimization for Building Retrofit: A Model
Using Genetic Algorithm and Artificial Neural Network and an Application. Energy Build. 2014, 81, 444–456. [CrossRef]
34. Hegazy, T.; Elbeltagi, E. EvoSite: Evolution-based model for site layout planning. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 1999, 13, 198–206. [CrossRef]
35. Mousavi-Avval, S.H.; Rafiee, S.; Sharifi, M.; Hosseinpour, S.; Notarnicola, B.; Tassielli, G.; Renzulli, P.A. Application of Multi-
Objective Genetic Algorithms for Optimization of Energy, Economics and Environmental Life Cycle Assessment in Oilseed
Production. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 804–815. [CrossRef]
36. Mahmod, W.E.; Watanabe, K. Modified Grey Model and its application to groundwater flow analysis with limited hydrogeological
data: A case study of the Nubian Sandstone, Kharga Oasis, Egypt. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2014, 186, 1063–1081. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
37. Mahmod, W.E.; Watanabe, K.; Zahr-Eldeen, A.A. Analysis of groundwater flow in arid areas with limited hydrogeological data
using the Grey Model: A case study of the Nubian Sandstone, Kharga Oasis, Egypt. Hydrogeol. J. 2013, 21, 1021–1034. [CrossRef]
38. Hegazy, T. Optimization of resource allocation and leveling using genetic algorithms. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 1999, 125, 167–175.
[CrossRef]
39. Chan, K.C.; Tansri, H. A Study of Genetic Crossover Operations on the Facilities Layout Problem. Comput. Ind. Eng. 1994, 26,
537–550. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.