Abstract
The utilization of industrial and agricultural waste materials can be an alternative as cementitious material to reduce the carbon dioxide (CO2) emission from cement production and will lower other environmental impact. In recent years, more research has been done using life cycle assessment (LCA) on construction material production to understand the energy usage and its environmental impacts to find the possible low energy usage and green building alternatives. Several LCA studies have been reviewed in this paper that mainly are the concretes and cementitious material. Hence, this study will provide new perspectives of the methodology used in the environmental assessment by researchers in the world that compare to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) LCA standards (ISO 14040:2006 and ISO 14044:2006). Comparing LCA studies to ISO guidelines ensures that all of the important factors in LCA are achieved, and the lack of use of these guidelines will impair the qualities of life cycle interpretation and data assessment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Nwankwo CO, Bamigboye GO, Davies IEE et al (2020) High volume Portland cement replacement: a review. Constr Build Mater 260
Singh N, Bhardwaj A (2019) Reviewing the role of coal bottom ash as an alternative of cement. Constr Build Mater 233:117276
Zain H, Abdullah MMAB, Hussin K et al (2017) Review on various types of geopolymer materials with the environmental impact assessment. MATEC Web Conf 97
Huber F, Laner D, Fellner J (2018) Comparative life cycle assessment of MSWI fly ash treatment and disposal. Waste Manag 73:392–403
Li J, Xiao F, Zhang L, Amirkhanian SN (2019) Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of recycled solid waste materials in highway pavement: a review. J Clean Prod 233:1182–1206
Tosti L, van Zomeren A, Pels JR et al (2020) Life cycle assessment of the reuse of fly ash from biomass combustion as secondary cementitious material in cement products. J Clean Prod 245(118937):1–10
Zhao Y, Yu M, Xiang Y (2020) A sustainability comparison between green concretes and traditional concrete using an energy ternary diagram. J Clean Prod 256
Khoshnava SM, Rostami R, Zin RM et al (2020) The role of green building materials in reducing environmental and human health impacts. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(7)
Balaguera A, Carvajal GI, Albertà J et al (2018) Life cycle assessment of road construction alternative materials: a literature review. Resour Conserv Recycl 132:37–48
Morsali S (2017) Emissions from Portland cement production using life cycle assessment inventory and method. Environ Energy Econ 1(1):1–8
Colangelo F, Forcina A, Farina I et al (2018) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of different kinds of concrete containing waste for sustainable construction. Buildings 8(5):1–12
Caldas LR, Da Gloria MYR, Pittau F et al (2021) Environmental impact assessment of wood bio-concretes: Evaluation of the influence of different supplementary cementitious materials. Constr Build Mater 268:121146
Vargas F, Lopez M, Rigamonti L (2020) Environmental impacts evaluation of treated copper tailings as supplementary cementitious materials. Resour Conserv Recycl 160:104890.
Irshidat MR, Al-nuaimi N, Ahmed W et al (2021) Feasibility of recycling waste carbon black in cement mortar production: environmental life cycle assessment and performance evaluation. Constr Build Mater 296:123740
Lu H, Masanet E, Price L (2009) Evaluation of life-cycle assessment studies of Chinese cement production. Challenges and Opportunities. California
Hernandez P, Oregi X, Longo S et al (2018) Life-cycle assessment of buildings. In: Handbook of energy efficiency in buildings: a life cycle approach. Elsevier Inc., 207–261 pp.
Vargas F, Rigamonti L (2020) Environmental evaluation of treated tailing as supplementary cementitious material. Proc CIRP 90:280–284
Arrigoni A, Panesar DK, Duhamel M et al (2020) Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials: cut-off vs. substitution. J Clean Prod 263:121465
Huseien GF, Shah KW (2020) Durability and life cycle evaluation of self-compacting concrete containing fly ash as GBFS replacement with alkali activation. Constr Build Mater 235:117458
Li J, Zhang W, Li C, Monteiro PJM (2020) Eco-friendly mortar with high-volume diatomite and fly ash: performance and life-cycle assessment with regional variability. J Clean Prod 261:121224
Tait MW, Cheung WM (2016) A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs. Int J Life Cycle Assess 847–860
Tosti L, van Zomeren A, Pels JR et al (2020) Life cycle assessment of the reuse of fly ash from biomass combustion as secondary cementitious material in cement products. J Clean Prod 245
Crossin E (2012) Comparative life cycle assessment of concrete blends
Acknowledgements
This work was supported and funded by the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS/1/2019/WAB05/UTM/02/7) and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia under UTMShine Signature Grant (Q.J130000.2451.07G91).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Jan, S.L.M., Hussien, N., Lim, N.H.A.S., Haasan, C.H.C., Zaidi, N.S. (2022). Life Cycle Assessment on Alternatives Concretes and Cementitious Materials. In: Awang, M., Ling, L., Emamian, S.S. (eds) Advances in Civil Engineering Materials. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 223. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8667-2_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8667-2_34
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-8666-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-8667-2
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)