Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional Concrete to Ash Concrete

Abstract:

In the present work, the environmental impacts of the concrete made with woody fly ash that presented compressive strength like the conventional concrete were evaluated and compared using the Life Cycle Assessment methodology. The impact assessment method used was the “CML-IA baseline” implemented in SimaPro software. The results showed that concrete with fly ash had a lower impact than conventional concrete in all the impact categories under study and may be classified as an eco-material (eco-concrete) considering that the environmental issues that are minimized are waste reduction, reduce of landfill problems and resource saving by the utilization of recycled materials.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 897)
• Pages: 151-157
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.897.151
• Online since: August 2021
• Authors: José Ferreira*, Elisabete Silva, Idalina Domingos, Luiza Silva, Isabel Brás
• Keywords: Ash, Circular Economy, Concrete, Eco-Materials, Life Cycle Assessment

References

[1] R. Heijungs and J.B. Guinée: An Overview of the Life Cycle Assessment Method—Past, Present, and Future, In: Curran, M.A. (Ed.), Life Cycle Assessment Handbook: A Guide for Environmentally Sustainable Products p.15–42, Beverly: Scrivener Publishing, (2012).

DOI: 10.1002/9781118528372.ch2

[2] International Standard Organisation: ISO 14040:2006, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment–principles and framework, International Standard Organisation (eds), Geneva, Switzerland, (2006).

[3] International Standard Organisation: ISO 14044:2006, Environmental management - Life cycle assessment-requirements and guidelines, International Standard Organisation (eds), Geneva, Switzerland, (2006).

DOI: 10.3403/30290345

[4] D.R. Vieira, J.L. Calmon and F.Z. Coelho: Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to the manufacturing of common and ecological concrete: A review, Construction and Building Materials 124 (2016) 656-666.

DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.07.125

[5] Y. Zhang, W. Luo, J. Wang, various authors: A review of life cycle assessment of recycled aggregate concrete, Construction and Building Materials 209 (2019) 115-125.

DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.078

[6] T.P. da Costa, P. Quinteiro, L.A.C. Tarelho, various authors: Environmental assessment of valorisation alternatives for woody biomass ash in construction materials, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 148 (2019) 67–79.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.04.022

[7] A. Yazdanbakhsh, L.C. Bank, T. Baez, various authors: Comparative LCA of concrete with natural and recycled coarse aggregate in the New York City area, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 23 (2018), 1163-1173.

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-017-1360-5

[8] M.W. Tait and W.M. Cheung: A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 21 (2016) 847-860.

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-016-1045-5

[9] M.U. Hossain, C.S. Poon, I.M.C. Lo, various authors: Evaluation of environmental friendliness of concrete paving eco-blocks using LCA approach, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 21(2016) 70-84.

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-015-0988-2

[10] C. Knoeri, E. Sanyé-Mengual and H.J. Althaus: Comparative LCA of recycled and conventional concrete for structural applications, Int J Life Cycle Assess 18 (2013) 909-918.

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-012-0544-2

[11] PRé Consultants: SimaPro Database Manual - Methods Library, (2020).

[12] D. Kellenberger, H.J. Althaus, N. Jungbluth, various authors: Life Cycle Inventories of Building Products, Final report Ecoinvent data V2.0 Nº7, EMPA Dubendorf, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Dubendorf, CH, (2007).

[13] J. Guinée, M. Gorrée, R. Heijungs, various authors: Handbook on life cycle assessment, Operational guide to the ISO standards, Part III: Scientific background, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, (2002).