Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of benchmark concrete products in Australia

  • REGIONAL TOPICS FROM AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

A comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study was performed to investigate the environmental impacts associated with the manufacture of fourteen benchmark concrete products in Australia including concrete, mortar, grout and render. This study provides datasets for the reference cementitious construction materials which aid the construction industry to evaluate the environmental impact of construction more consistently. In addition, an appropriate formulation for the manual calculation of the environmental impacts of customised concrete mix-designs was investigated.

Methods

Benchmark products were defined based on the average mix-design currently applied by the concrete industry and in compliance with the Australian cement and concrete standards. Normal and special grade concretes with strength in the range of 20 MPa to 100 MPa, mortars type M1 to M4, as well as grout and render were defined. The cradle-to-gate LCA model for each product was defined based on the ISO Standards 14040 and 14044 frameworks and in conjunction with modules A1 to A4 of European Standard EN 15804. GaBi software program version 7.2.2 was applied to ensure consistency and reproducibility of the environmental impacts for each product. The major impact classes were determined and discussed using Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) CML 2001 classification.

Results and discussion

Results showed that in all cases cement had the highest contribution to the impacts of concrete products. Using less cement in concrete products either by substitution of it with supplementary cementitious products or manufacturing cement with increased mineral additions has the potential to reduce environmental impacts. It was found that the Global Warming Potential (kg CO2-Eq per cubic metre) of the products ranged from 209 to 521 kg. Other regional environmental impacts, such as acidification, ozone layer depletion, and eutrophication, were also investigated and reported for each product. It was found that acidification was in the range of 0.670 to 1.609 kg SO2-Eq, and eutrophication was in the range of 0.108 to 0.259 kg Phosphate-Eq per cubic metre of concrete products in Australia.

Conclusions

Establishing the industry reference point for cementitious products supports sustainability in production and enables tracking of future changes in the emissions of cementitious construction materials to ensure that concrete products are the responsible choice for construction. The decrease of cement clinker content through increasing mineral (limestone) addition is strongly suggested. In addition, the reported method for approximating environmental impacts of other concretes with customised mix-designs was found accurate and applicable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AS 1379 (2007) Specification and supply of concrete. Australian Standard, Sydney, Australia

  • AS 3600 (2009) Concrete Structures. Australian Standard, Sydney, Australia

  • AS 3972 (2010) General purpose and blended cements. Australian Standard, Sydney, Australia

  • ATILH (2002) Environmental inventory of French cement production. Paris: Association Technique des Liants Hydrauliques (Hydraulic Binder Industries Union)

  • Boesch ME, Hellweg S (2010) Identifying improvement potentials in cement production with life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 44:9143–9149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boesch ME, Koehler A, Hellweg S (2009) Model for cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of clinker production. Environ Sci Technol 43:7578–7583

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carmeuse Lime & Stone (2015) Energy Consumption for Limestone to Lime in EAF. In: Carmeuse Lime & Stone. http://www.carmeusena.com/calculator/energy-consumption-for-limestone-to-lime-in-eaf. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Cement Australia (2015) Resource conservation. In: Sustainable development. http://www.cementaustralia.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/website/cement/home/sustainable-development/resource-conservation/alternative-fuel/. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Cement Industry Federation (CIF) (2014) Statistics 2014. http://www.cement.org.au/Portals/0/Documents/Fast Facts/CIF Fast Facts 2014.pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Cement Industry Federation (CIF) (2013) Cement Industry Federation Industry Report 2013. http://www.cement.org.au/Portals/0/Documents/CIF Publications/2013 CIF Industry Report (Med Res).pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Chen C, Habert G, Bouzidi Y et al (2010a) LCA allocation procedure used as an incitative method for waste recycling: an application to mineral additions in concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:1231–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen C, Habert G, Bouzidi Y, Jullien A (2010b) Environmental impact of cement production: detail of the different processes and cement plant variability evaluation. J Clean Prod 18:478–485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crossin E (2015) The greenhouse gas implications of using ground granulated blast furnace slag as a cement substitute. J Clean Prod 95:101–108

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Department of the Environment - Australia (2014) National Greenhouse Accounts Factors

  • Flower DJM, Sanjayan JG (2007) Green house gas emissions due to concrete manufacture. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12:282–288

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • GaBi - CML 2001 (2013) Description of the CML 2001 Method. In: PE International (thinkstep). http://www.gabi-software.com/international/support/gabi/gabi-lcia-documentation/cml-2001/

  • García-Gusano D, Garraín D, Herrera I et al (2015) Life cycle assessment of applying CO2 post-combustion capture to the Spanish cement production. J Clean Prod 104:328–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant T (2015) Life Cycle Inventory of Cement & Concrete produced in Australia. Melbourne, Australia

  • Habert G, D’Espinose De Lacaillerie JB, Roussel N (2011) An environmental evaluation of geopolymer based concrete production: reviewing current research trends. J Clean Prod 19:1229–1238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heidrich C, Hinczak I, Ryan B (2005) Supplementary cementitious materials (SCM’s) potential to lower greenhouse gas emisions in Australia. Concrete, In, pp 67–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobday RE (2006) Energy related environmental impact of buildings, technical synthesis report annex 31: International energy agency buildings and community systems

  • Huang Y, Bird R, Heidrich O (2009) Development of a life cycle assessment tool for construction and maintenance of asphalt pavements. J Clean Prod 17:283–296

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huntzinger DN, Eatmon TD (2009) A life-cycle assessment of Portland cement manufacturing: comparing the traditional process with alternative technologies. J Clean Prod 17:668–675

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • International Energy Agency (2007) Tracking Industrial Energy Efficiency and CO2 Emissions. Paris, France

  • ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework. Switzerland

  • ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines. Switzerland

  • Japan Cement Association (JCA) (2015) Energy consumption for cement production. http://www.jcassoc.or.jp/cement/2eng/e_01a.html. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Josa A, Aguado A, Cardim A, Byars E (2007) Comparative analysis of the life cycle impact assessment of available cement inventories in the EU. Cement Concrete Res 37:781–788

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Josa A, Aguado A, Heino A et al (2004) Comparative analysis of available life cycle inventories of cement in the EU. Cement Concrete Res 34:1313–1320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Nie Z, Cui S et al (2014) The life cycle inventory study of cement manufacture in China. J Clean Prod 72:204–211

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maier PL, Durham S (2012) Beneficial use of recycled materials in concrete mixtures. Constr Build Mater 29:428–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marceau ML, Nisbet M a, Vangeem MG (2006) Life Cycle Inventory of Portland Cement Manufacture

  • Marinković S, Radonjanin V, Malešev M, Ignjatović I (2010) Comparative environmental assessment of natural and recycled aggregate concrete. Waste Manag 30:2255–2264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi I, Khabbaz H (2015) Shrinkage performance of crumb rubber concrete (CRC) prepared by water-soaking treatment method for rigid pavements. Cement Concrete Comp 62:106–116

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi I, Khabbaz H, Vessalas K (2014) In-depth assessment of crumb rubber concrete (CRC) prepared by water-soaking treatment method for rigid pavements. Constr Build Mater 71:456–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi I, Khabbaz H, Vessalas K (2016) Enhancing mechanical performance of rubberised concrete pavements with sodium hydroxide treatment. Mater Struct 49:813–827

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi I, South W (2015) Decision-making on increasing limestone content of general purpose cement. J Adv Concr Technol 13:528–537

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi I, South W (2016a) The influence of the higher limestone content of general purpose cement according to high-strength concrete test results and construction field data. Mater Struct 49:4621–4636

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi IJ, South W (2016a) General purpose cement with increased limestone content in Australia. ACI Mater J 113:335–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi J, South W (2016b) Effect of up to 12% substitution of clinker with limestone on commercial grade concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials. Constr Build Mater 115:555–564

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi J, South W (2016c) Effects of Intergrinding 12% limestone with cement on properties of cement and mortar. J Adv Concr Technol 14:215–228

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi J, South W, Chalmers D (2015) Towards a More Sustainable Australian Cement and Concrete Industry. In: Proceedings of the 27th Biennial National Conference of the Concrete Institute of Australia in conjunction with the 69th RILEM Week “Construction Innovations, Research into Practice.” Concrete Institute of Australia, Melbourne, Australia, pp 596–603

  • Nisbet MA, Marceau ML, VanGeem MG (2002) Environmental Life Cycle Inventory of Portland Cement Concrete

  • PE International (thinkstep) (2016) GaBi Version: 7.2.2.28, DB version: 6.115 [Computer software]. In: PE International (thinkstep). http://www.gabi-software.com/australia/index/. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Petek Gursel A, Masanet E, Horvath A, Stadel A (2014) Life-cycle inventory analysis of concrete production: a critical review. Cement Concrete Comp 51:38–48

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Prusinski JR, Marceau ML, Vangeem MG (2004) Life cycle inventory of slag cement concrete. International Conference on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete, pp 1–26

  • Renouf M, Grant T, Sevenster M et al. (2015) Best Practice Guide for Life Cycle Impact Assessment ( LCIA ) in Australia ALCAS Impact Assessment Committee. In: ALCAS Impact Assessment Committee. http://auslci.com.au/Documents/Best_Practice_Guide_V2_Draft_for_Consultation.pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Sjunnesson J (2005) Life Cycle Assessment of Concrete. In: Lund University. http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func = downloadFile&recordOId = 4468239&fileOId = 4469176. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • The European Committee for Standardization (CEN) (2012) BS EN 15804: Sustainability of construction works–Environmental product declarations–Core rules for the product category of construction products

  • Treloar G, Fay R, Ilozor B, Love P (2001) Building materials selection: greenhouse strategies for built facilities. Facilities 19:139–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN CPC 375 (2013) Product Category Rules Concrete. In: World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). www.wbcsdcement.org/pdf/pcr1302_CPC_375_Concrete_1_0.pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2016

  • Valderrama C, Granados R, Cortina JL et al (2012) Implementation of best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-cycle assessment study. J Clean Prod 25:60–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Heede P, De Belie N (2012) Environmental impact and life cycle assessment (LCA) of traditional and “green” concretes: literature review and theoretical calculations. Cement Concrete Comp 34:431–442

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Worrell E, Martin N, Price L (2000) Potentials for energy efficiency improvement in the US cement industry. Energy 25:1189–1214

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zabalza Bribián I, Valero Capilla A, Aranda Usón A (2011) Life cycle assessment of building materials: comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Build Environ 46:1133–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cement Concrete & Aggregates Australia (CCAA), PO Box 124, Mascot, NSW, 1460, Australia

    James Mohammadi & Warren South

Authors
  1. James Mohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Warren South
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Mohammadi.

Ethics declarations

Disclaimer and statement of application

This article has been prepared for the purpose of providing a harmonised framework for determining the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for concrete products. The products assessed represent general commercial applications used in market, but should not be taken to represent a specific product.

The data used to inform the LCA is based on aggregated information that is not specific to any industry product, brand, or company. For this reason, LCA results contained in this article should only be interpreted as informative data. These informative LCA results should only be compared against other research that has the same boundary of assumptions for calculating LCAs and should not be used for other purposes such as advertising, marketing or legislating against or in favour of any specific products.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Barbara Nebel

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 620 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 386 kb)

ESM 3

(DOCX 426 kb)

ESM 4

(DOCX 873 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohammadi, J., South, W. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of benchmark concrete products in Australia. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22, 1588–1608 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1266-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1266-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation