Document Type : CASE STUDY


1 Department of Lands and Architectural Studies, Faculty of Engineering Kyambogo University, Kyambogo, Uganda

2 Department of Construction Economics and Management, School of Built Environment, College of Engineering, Design, Art and Technology, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda


BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The effect of infrastructure equipment is taking a toll on the health and economic well-being of residents all around the world. This is mainly because it contributes to ambient air pollution, noise, and vibration in the surroundings.  The study aimed at analyzing the effects of the road infrastructure equipment on the surroundings in Uganda. The emissions of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, hydrocarbons, and particulate matter were analyzed.
METHODS: Six road infrastructure equipment were sampled consisting of an excavator, roller, grader, concrete mixer, tamper, and wheel loader, obtained from a case study project in Kampala city, Uganda. The diesel exhaust air emissions were computed and analyzed using the emissions rate equation model for non-road equipment, developed by Environmental Protection Agency.  This was based on the horsepower and power rating of the equipment. Noise and vibrations levels were obtained using a sound level meter, seismometers, and accelerators, while following the National Environment Regulations.
FINDINGS: The greenhouse gas of carbon dioxide was the most predominant accounting for 84.1 percent of the total emissions. The grader was the highest emitter of this greenhouse gas, at 1,531.5 g/h, representing 37.1%. The lowest air pollutant emission was nitrogen dioxide at 1.43 g/h for the concrete mixer, representing 1.4%.  Overall, the equipment emitted more greenhouse gases than air criteria pollutants at 88.8% and 11.2% respectively. The highest criteria air pollutant was particulate matter at 100.5 g/h, emitted by the grader.  Most of the emissions met the standards stipulated by Environmental Protection Agency, for reducing emissions back to the environment, except particulate matter. However, the concentrations of some pollutants like carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide did not satisfy the limits required for ambient air quality that is safe for workers. All the equipment had noise levels way above the recommended 70.00 decibel, except for the wheel loader. Only the excavator produced vibrations higher than permissible vibration limit by 4%.
CONCLUSION: The criteria air pollutants of carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter emitted by the equipment were all not safe to the workers. They exceeded the permissible limits of 50 ppm, 5 ppm, and 0.02 g/kW/h respectively. This partly shows why ambient air pollution had been reported in urban centers in Uganda. The study shows the need for strengthening the regulations and monitoring of the construction equipment being used, in order to protect the surroundings.

Graphical Abstract

Impact of road infrastructure equipment on the environment and surroundings


  • The two GHGs of CO2 and HC amounted for approximately 88.8% of total air pollutants produced by sampled equipment;
  • It justifies the necessity of assessing the effects of emissions, noise pollution, and vibrations from road construction equipment on the environment and the surroundings;
  • Most equipment produced more sound levels higher than maximum permissible noise levels for roads and road construction of 70 dB except the wheel loader.


Main Subjects

Open Access

©2022 The author(s). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit:

Publisher’s Note

GJESM Publisher remains neutral concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Citation Metrics & Captures

Google Scholar Scopus Web of Science PlumX Metrics Altmetrics Mendeley |

Current Publisher

GJESM Publisher

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.