Comparative Analysis of Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) vs. Traditional Building Materials for Energy-Efficient Green Building

This study evaluates a product that generates less pollution than traditional construction materials, focusing on its entire lifecycle from production to operational use. It highlights reductions in energy consumption and economic savings, emphasizing the environmental benefits of new materials. The research includes a case study of a five-story apartment, where autoclaved materials resulted in approximately 10% energy savings. During production, pressed bricks required 62 gigajoules to construct 100 square meters of wall, compared to 3.6 gigajoules for autoclaved blocks, indicating that pressed bricks consume 15.5 times more energy. Transportation also showed differences due to the lower weight of autoclaved blocks, with pressed bricks consuming 1.8 gigajoules of energy compared to 0.45 gigajoules for autoclaved materials. In implementation, the labor and time required for autoclaved materials were half that needed for brick walls in Iran. A high correlation (R²=0.92) was found between thermal conductivity and density for AAC. The production of pressed bricks, which demands very high temperatures, leads to a fivefold increase in fuel consumption. Additionally, because autoclaved blocks require less material per square meter, there is a tenfold increase in fuel consumption per square meter. The study underscores the substantial benefits of adopting autoclaved aerated concrete in construction, both in terms of environmental impact and energy efficiency, highlighting its potential for more sustainable and cost-effective building practices.