Balancing Sustainability and Cost in Concrete Production: LCA of Foam, Geopolymer, Slag, and Agricultural Waste Concretes

Cradle-to-gate LCA (IMPACT2002+ method, compliant with ISO 14040/44) compares the environmental and economic performance of nine concrete mixes, including concretes made with foam, geopolymer, metakaolin, slag, and rice husk ash. Significant differences are observed in global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), and particulate emissions. Foam concrete has the lowest environmental impact, with a negligible carbon footprint and minimal resource use, making it ideal for nonstructural applications. In contrast, despite being marketed as low-carbon, geopolymer and metakaolin concretes exhibit high GWP and AP due to the energy-intensive nature of their alkali activators and the production of calcined clays. These materials also incur substantial costs due to the energy-intensive production processes, including the use of activators, making them less economically competitive. Slag and rice husk ash concretes strike a balance between sustainability and cost-effectiveness, emerging as viable alternatives, especially in regions with abundant industrial byproducts. They provide reduced environmental impacts at an affordable cost. The study suggests that foam concrete is the most environmentally sustainable option, offering significant CO2 reduction and cost benefits, particularly for nonstructural uses. While PCC remains the industry standard with the lowest environmental impact, GPC and MK, though economically competitive, require further standard formulations before their cost and environmental evaluations can be finalized. Self-healing concrete, although promising for long-term durability, presents high initial costs. Hemp concrete, while renewable and environmentally beneficial, has limited application due to its high processing energy requirements compared to foam concrete. This analysis guides the selection of concrete materials based on both cost-effectiveness and environmental impact, recommending foam concrete for low-strength applications and supplementary cementitious materials for general use, aligning concrete production with climate targets.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Published
2025-09-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c05321
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.06

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Balancing Sustainability and Cost in Concrete Production: LCA of Foam, Geopolymer, Slag, and Agricultural Waste Concretes

Muhammad Tamoor, Chunwei Zhang
9 citations
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
9.06
article

Balancing Sustainability and Cost in Concrete Production: LCA of Foam, Geopolymer, Slag, and Agricultural Waste Concretes

Muhammad Tamoor, Chunwei Zhang
article en
9 citations

Abstract

Cradle-to-gate LCA (IMPACT2002+ method, compliant with ISO 14040/44) compares the environmental and economic performance of nine concrete mixes, including concretes made with foam, geopolymer, metakaolin, slag, and rice husk ash. Significant differences are observed in global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), and particulate emissions. Foam concrete has the lowest environmental impact, with a negligible carbon footprint and minimal resource use, making it ideal for nonstructural applications. In contrast, despite being marketed as low-carbon, geopolymer and metakaolin concretes exhibit high GWP and AP due to the energy-intensive nature of their alkali activators and the production of calcined clays. These materials also incur substantial costs due to the energy-intensive production processes, including the use of activators, making them less economically competitive. Slag and rice husk ash concretes strike a balance between sustainability and cost-effectiveness, emerging as viable alternatives, especially in regions with abundant industrial byproducts. They provide reduced environmental impacts at an affordable cost. The study suggests that foam concrete is the most environmentally sustainable option, offering significant CO2 reduction and cost benefits, particularly for nonstructural uses. While PCC remains the industry standard with the lowest environmental impact, GPC and MK, though economically competitive, require further standard formulations before their cost and environmental evaluations can be finalized. Self-healing concrete, although promising for long-term durability, presents high initial costs. Hemp concrete, while renewable and environmentally beneficial, has limited application due to its high processing energy requirements compared to foam concrete. This analysis guides the selection of concrete materials based on both cost-effectiveness and environmental impact, recommending foam concrete for low-strength applications and supplementary cementitious materials for general use, aligning concrete production with climate targets.

ACS Sustainable Chemistry & EngineeringVol. 13(36)
Shenyang University of Technology (CN), Division of Biological Infrastructure (US)
Department of Science and Technology of Shandong Province, National Natural Science Foundation of China, Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
9.06
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.