Asadollahfardi, G; Katebi, A; Taherian, P and Panahandeh, A (2021) Environmental life cycle assessment of concrete with different mixed designs. International Journal of Construction Management, 21(7), pp. 665-676. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
To identify proper types of concrete with favourable mechanical and durability properties is necessary, which imposes minimum pollution into the environment. We collected information, based on the literature and consulting companies, by evaluating one cubic meter of five different types of concrete, including microsilica, Geopolymer, micro–nano bubble, nanosilica and using only ordinary Portland cement (OPC). After using a life cycle inventory (LCI) phase, according to the life cycle assessment (LCA) for cradle to gate, we applied SimaPro8.1 software using the collected information. The results indicated that global warming indicator in Geopolymer concrete was much lower than the other concretes and indicated a reduction of nearly 26% in comparison with ordinary Portland cement in concrete. Also, the global warming indicator increased approximately 56%, 17% and 38% in microsilica, nanosilica and micro–nano bubble concrete in comparison with OPC concrete, respectively. Common harmful environmental impacts that were associated with ecosystem damage, ecosystem quality, human health, climate change and global warming potential (GWP), human toxicity, acidification and eutrophication were observed in microsilica concrete, while OPC was the most environmentally friendly concrete in production stage due to its lowest level of environmental burdens.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | concrete; geopolymer; LC ordinary portland cement; life cycle inventory ; microsilica; micro-nano bubble; nanosilica |
| Index terms: | pollution, ordinary Portland cement, eutrophication, climate change, geopolymer concrete, environmentally friendly, environmental impact, life cycle assessment, human health, life cycle, global warming, durability, inventory |
| Subjects: | inventory management, materials science, building materials, environmental health, climate science, environmental impact, material degradation and durability, public and environmental health, value management, sustainable design |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Health and Safety, Supply Chain Management, Project Management, Construction Materials |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here