Abstract
Accelerated carbonization curing has been a technically feasible alternative to the conventional curing method in the production of recycled aggregate concrete blocks (RACB). However, the environmental impacts of the curing scenarios on production have not yet been studied. Therefore, the paper evaluated the environmental feasibility of curing methods to produce RACB based on the LCA framework. The system boundary from the cradle to the door was selected to compare the overall influence of accelerated carbonation curing methods (pressurized carbonation curing, wet carbonation curing) and traditional curing methods (standard curing, autoclave curing) on the environmental impact. CO2 absorption was calculated by the Kim and Chae carbonation model combined with experimental carbonation depth. Environmental emission calculated from the inventory database was distributed to ten midpoint indicators and three endpoint indicators by the CML 2016 baseline and ReCiPe endpoint method. The distribution of contributions to the environmental impacts of the four production stages (raw material processing stage, raw material transportation stage, block manufacture stage, and block curing stage) was subdivided to facilitate decision-making and improve the management of the block plant. A sensitivity analysis ultimately complements the effect of curing time on the environmental sustainability of RACB production. The results showed that the traditional curing method had a more significant environmental impact, while accelerated carbonization curing had a relatively lower environmental impact. Compared with standard curing, the GWP value of pressurized and wet carbonization curing decreased by 33.3% and 52.8%, respectively. The 1 m3 RACB showed the lowest GWP value of 254.7 kg CO2-eq under wet carbonization curing and the highest GWP value of 539.5 kg CO2-eq under standard curing. The CO2 absorption capacity of −73.0 kg CO2-eq and −99.3 kg CO2-eq was demonstrated by pressurized and wet carbonization curing, respectively. The ranking from all midpoint and endpoint indicators is standard curing > autoclaved curing > pressurized carbonization curing > wet carbonization curing. Contribution analysis based on midpoint indicators showed that the raw material handling stage has the highest percentage contribution. Cement is still the most significant contributor to the environmental impact, followed by significant energy consumption, while water consumption hardly negatively impacts the environment. The results of sensitivity analysis indicate that accelerated carbonation curing (especially wet carbonation curing) is less relevant to the variation of curing time, while conventional curing methods are strongly influenced by curing time.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call