Sustainable Marine Structures

Lifecycle Cost Management for Offshore Marine Renewable Energy Wind Infrastructure: An Integrated Model Using Circular Economy Principles

Suleiman Ibrahim Mohammad

Electronic Marketing and Social Media, Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Zarqa University, Zarqa 13115, Jordan

Badrea Al Qrain

Department of Business Administration, College of Business and Economics, Qassim University, Qassim, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia

Sultan Alaswad Alenazi

Department of Marketing, College of Business, King Saud University, Riyadh 11362, Saudi Arabia

Asokan Vasudevan

Faculty of Business and Communications, INTI International University, Nilai 71800, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia

Anber Abraheem Shelash

Digital Marketing Department, Faculty of Administrative and Financial Sciences, University of Petra, Amman 11196, Jordan

Imad Ali

Operations & Supply Chain , GNIOT Institute of Management Studies, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201310, India

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36956/sms.v7i3.2506

Received: 20 July 2025 | Revised: 25 July 2025 | Accepted: 12 August 2025 | Published Online: 16 September 2025

---

Abstract

As offshore wind infrastructure becomes more important to global efforts to reduce carbon emissions, it is becoming more important to connect lifecycle cost management with circular economy (CE) principles. When looking at the long-term costs of infrastructure, traditional lifecycle cost models often fail to account for residual value recovery, material circularity, or environmental externalities. This study creates a unified analytical framework that adds CE strategies to lifecycle cost modelling for offshore wind systems, such as turbines, substructures, moorings, and floating platforms.  The method uses multi-objective optimization and system dynamics simulation along with net present value (NPV) modelling, material flow analysis, and carbon-adjusted cost accounting. We modelled project-level datasets over 25 years to look at the trade-offs between economic and environmental factors in both linear and circular lifecycle scenarios. We use Python, MATLAB, and OpenLCA to look at key metrics like the Material Circularity Indicator (MCI), estimates of residual value, and internalized carbon costs. The results show that circular infrastructure strategies greatly lower lifecycle costs while also increasing material recovery and carbon efficiency. Scenario simulations showed that CE-based configurations could cut costs by up to 18% and emissions over the life of the product by 22%. Regression and sensitivity analyses showed that MCI, CAPEX, and circular design strategies are good at predicting residual value and long-term economic performance. This study adds a new, evidence-based model for making decisions about infrastructure that takes into account financial, environmental, and material circularity.

Keywords: Offshore Wind Infrastructure; Environmental Externalities; Carbon Cost Internalization; Sustainable Infrastructure

---

References

[1] Kirchherr, J., Yang, N.H.N., Schulze-Spüntrup, F., et al., 2023. Conceptualizing the Circular Economy (Revisited): An Analysis of 221 Definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 194, 107001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107001

[2] Lavallais, C., Dunn, J.B., 2023. Developing Product Level Indicators to Advance the Nitrogen Circular Economy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 198, 107167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107167

[3] Lonca, G., Lesage, P., Majeau-Bettez, G., et al., 2020. Assessing Scaling Effects of Circular Economy Strategies: A Case Study on Plastic Bottle Closed-Loop Recycling in the USA PET Market. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 162, 105013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105013

[4] Realyvásquez-Vargas, A., Maldonado-Macías, A.A., 2018. Measuring the Complex Construct of Macroergonomic Compatibility: A Manufacturing System Case Study. Complexity. 2018(1), 7374307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7374307

[5] Jani, H.K., Kachhwaha, S.S., Nagababu, G., et al., 2022. A Brief Review on Recycling and Reuse of Wind Turbine Blade Materials. Materials Today: Proceedings. 62, 7124–7130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.02.049

[6] Jensen, P.D., Purnell, P., Velenturf, A.P.M., 2020. Highlighting the Need to Embed Circular Economy in Low Carbon Infrastructure Decommissioning: The Case of Offshore Wind. Sustainable Production and Consumption. 24, 266–280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.07.012

[7] Animah, I., Shafiee, M., Simms, N.J., et al., 2018. Selection of the Most Suitable Life Extension Strategy for Ageing Offshore Assets Using a Life-Cycle Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 24(3), 311–330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/jqme-09-2016-0041

[8] Desterbecq, C., Tubeuf, S., 2023. Inclusion of Environmental Spillovers in Applied Economic Evaluations of Healthcare Products. Value in Health. 26(8), 1270–1281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2023.03.008

[9] Alaloul, W.S., Altaf, M., Musarat, M.A., et al., 2021a. Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost Analysis in Infrastructure Projects: A Systematic Review. preprints.org. preprints202103.0316.v1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202103.0316.v1

[10] Singla, H.K., 2020. Does VAIC Affect the Profitability and Value of Real Estate and Infrastructure Firms in India? A Panel Data Investigation. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 21(3), 309–331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/jic-03-2019-0053

[11] Johnston, C., Henderson, J.D., Guo, J., et al., 2024. Unraveling the Impacts: How Extreme Weather Events Disrupt Wood Product Markets. Earth’s Future. 12(9), e2024EF004742. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ef004742

[12] Baars, J., Rajaeifar, M.A., Heidrich, O., 2022. Quo Vadis MFA? Integrated Material Flow Analysis to Support Material Efficiency. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 26(4), 1487–1503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13288

[13] Juarez-Quispe, J., Rojas-Chura, E., Vigil, A.J.E., et al., 2025. Advancing Sustainable Infrastructure Management: Insights from System Dynamics. Buildings. 15(2), 210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15020210

[14] Zhao, B., Yu, Z., Wang, H., et al., 2024. Data Science Applications in Circular Economy: Trends, Status, and Future. Environmental Science and Technology. 58(15), 6457–6474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c08331

[15] Karlovšek, J., Meath, C., Miles-Mwangangi, L., et al., 2023. Implementing Circular Economy Principles in Infrastructure Procurement to Support Circular Supply Chains. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 31(11), 4645–4658. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-09-2022-0908

[16] Walzberg, J., Carpenter, A., Heath, G., 2021. Exploring PV Circularity by Modelling Socio-Technical Dynamics of Modules’ End-of-Life Management. In Proceedings of The 2021 IEEE 48th Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA, 20–25 June 2021; pp. 0041–0043. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/pvsc43889.2021.9518638

[17] Ryter, J., Fu, X., Bhuwalka, K., et al., 2022. Assessing Recycling, Displacement, and Environmental Impacts Using an Economics-Informed Material System Model. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 26(3), 1010–1024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13239

[18] Tashkeel, R., Rajarathnam, G.P., Wan, W., et al., 2021. Cost-Normalized Circular Economy Indicator and Its Application to Post-Consumer Plastic Packaging Waste. Polymers. 13(20), 3456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13203456

[19] Reslan, M., Last, N., Mathur, N., et al., 2022. Circular Economy: A Product Life Cycle Perspective on Engineering and Manufacturing Practices. Procedia CIRP. 105, 851–858. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.02.141

[20] Aher, G., Sandberg, M., Boudjadar, J., et al., 2025. Informing Circularity-Focused Design Optimization Using Parametric Life-Cycle Engineering Simulation Models. Smart and Sustainable Manufacturing Systems. 9(1), 11–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1520/ssms20240018

[21] Mollaei, A., Byers, B.S., Christovan, C., et al., 2023. A Global Perspective on Building Material Recovery Incorporating the Impact of Regional Factors. Journal of Cleaner Production. 429, 139525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139525

[22] Clinckspoor, G.L., Martínez, A., Ferraro, R., 2021. Review of the Main Regulatory Instruments Related to Electronic Waste, from a Global North and South Perspective. Actualidad Jurídica Ambiental. 109, 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56398/ajacieda.00304 (in Spanish)

[23] Liu, J., Hu, L., Wang, Y., et al., 2019. Integrated Life Cycle Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment for Transportation Infrastructure: A Review. In: de Luca, S., Di Pace, R., Djordjevic, B. (eds.). Transportation Systems Analysis and Assessment. IntechOpen: London, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.86854

[24] Ivanov, O.L., Honfí, D., Santandrea, F., et al., 2019. Consideration of Uncertainties in LCA for Infrastructure Using Probabilistic Methods. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 15(6), 711–724. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2019.1572200

[25] Kaim, A., Strauch, M., Völk, M., 2020. Using Stakeholder Preferences to Identify Optimal Land Use Configurations. Frontiers in Water. 2, 579087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2020.579087

[26] Gunantara, N., 2018. A Review of Multi-Objective Optimization: Methods and Its Applications. Cogent Engineering. 5(1), 1502242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1502242

[27] Li, Q.X., Mao, Y., Liu, Y., et al., 2020. Modeling of Integrated Energy System of Offshore Oil and Gas Platforms Considering Couplings Between Energy Supply System and Oil and Gas Production System. IEEE Access. 8, 157974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.3020135

[28] Classi, C.C., Nowicki, D., Mansouri, M., et al., 2018. A Systems Thinking Approach to Managing Sustainment Phase Redesign Planning. Engineering Management Journal. 30(1), 68–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2017.1418598

[29] Velenturf, A.P.M., 2021. A Framework and Baseline for the Integration of a Sustainable Circular Economy in Offshore Wind. Energies. 14(17), 5540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en14175540

[30] Singh, S., Babbitt, C.W., Gaustad, G., et al., 2021. Thematic Exploration of Sectoral and Cross-Cutting Challenges to Circular Economy Implementation. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy. 23, 915–936. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-02016-5

[31] Wang, Z.J., Yang, D.Y., Frangopol, D.M., Jin, W., 2019. Inclusion of Environmental Impacts in Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Bridge Structures. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure. 5(4), 252–267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23789689.2018.1542212

[32] Bento, N., Gianfrate, G., Aldy, J.E., 2020. National Climate Policies and Corporate Internal Carbon Pricing. The Energy Journal. 42(5), 89–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.42.5.nben

[33] Nadalipour, Z., Khoshkhoo, M.H.I., Eftekhari, A.R., 2019. An Integrated Model of Destination Sustainable Competitiveness. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal Incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness. 29(4), 314–335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/cr-12-2017-0086

[34] Sommer, V., Walther, G., 2020. Recycling and Recovery Infrastructures for Glass and Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic Waste from Wind Energy Industry: A European Case Study. Waste Management. 121, 265–275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.12.021

[35] Judijanto, L., Nampira, A.A., Auliani, R., et al., 2025. A Bibliometric Review of Renewable Energy Financing and Sustainable Development. West Science Social and Humanities Studies. 3(4), 570–582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58812/wsshs.v3i04.1854