You are on page 1of 29

Seminar Report

On

Green Concrete

By: Under the guidance of

Abhinav Srivastava Mr. D. L. Parmar

S. R. No. 53/08 Associate Professor

3rd B. Tech. Civil Engineering. Dept. of Civil Engineering

Department of Civil Engineering

HARCOURT BUTLER TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE

KANPUR – 208002

February 2011
CERTIFICATE

It is certified that Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, student of 3 rd B. Tech. Civil Engineering

H. B. T. I., Kanpur has worked on the seminar titled ‗Green Concrete‘ under my

guidance and supervision. He has shown sincere efforts and keen interest during the

preparation of this seminar report.

My best wishes are with him.

(Dr. Deepesh Singh) (Mr. D. L. Parmar)

(Seminar Incharge) (Seminar Guide)


Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1. Environmental Goals ............................................................................................. 2

2. GENESIS ...................................................................................................................... 3

3. ADVANTAGES OF GREEN CONCRETE ................................................................... 7

4. METHODS TO PRODUCE GREEN CONCRETE........................................................ 8

4.1. Desirable properties in green concrete .................................................................... 8

4.2. Energy consumption during the production ............................................................ 8

4.2.1. Energy consumption in concrete mix design ................................................... 8

4.2.2. Energy consumption during cement and concrete production ....................... 10

4.3. Evaluation of inorganic wastes ............................................................................. 10

4.4. Different ways to produce Green concrete ............................................................ 11

5. RESULTS OF STUDIES BASED ON REPORTED LITERATURE ........................... 12

5.1. Green Concrete containing Marble sludge powder and Quarry rock dust .............. 12

5.1.1. Characterisation of waste ............................................................................. 12

5.1.2. Raw materials .............................................................................................. 13

5.1.3. Mix proportion of concrete:.......................................................................... 14

5.1.4. Results and Discussion ................................................................................. 15

5.1.5. Conclusions ................................................................................................. 16

5.2. Behaviour of different mixes to different environmental classes ........................... 17

5.3. Comparison between Conventional and Green Concrete ....................................... 19

6. LIMITATIONS OF GREEN CONCRETE .................................................................. 21

7. SCOPE IN INDIA ....................................................................................................... 22

8. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... 24

REFERENCES: .................................................................................................................. 26
1. INTRODUCTION

Green concrete is a revolutionary topic in the history of concrete industry. This was
first invented in Denmark in the year 1998. Green concrete has nothing to do with
colour. It is a concept of thinking environment into concrete considering every aspect
from raw materials manufacture over mixture design to structural design,
construction, and service life. Green concrete is very often also cheap to produce,
because, for example, waste products are used as a partial substitute for cement,
charges for the disposal of waste are avoided, energy consumption in production is
lower, and durability is greater. Green concrete is a type of concrete
which resembles the conventional concrete but the production or usage of such
concrete requires minimum amount of energy and causes least harm to the
environment.

The CO2 emission related to concrete production, inclusive of cement production, is


between 0.1 and 0.2 t per tonne of produced concrete. However, since the total
amount of concrete produced is so vast the absolute figures for the environmental
impact are quite significant, due to the large amounts of cement and concrete
produced. Since concrete is the second most consumed entity after water it
accounts for around 5% of the world‘s total CO2 emission (Ernst Worrell, 2001). The
solution to this environmental problem is not to substitute concrete for other materials
but to reduce the environmental impact of concrete and cement. Pravin Kumar et al,
2003, used quarry rock dust along with fly ash and micro silica and reported
satisfactory properties.

The potential environmental benefit to society of being able to build with green
concrete is huge. It is realistic to assume that technology can be developed, which can
halve the CO2 emission related to concrete production. With the large consumption of
concrete this will potentially reduce the world‘s total CO2 emission by 1.5-2%.
Concrete can also be the solution to environmental problems other than those related
to CO2 emission. It may be possible to use residual products from other industries in
the concrete production while still maintaining a high concrete quality. During the last
few decades society has become aware of the deposit problems connected with
residual products, and demands, restrictions and taxes have been imposed. And as it is
known that several residual products have properties suited for concrete production,
there is a large potential in investigating the possible use of these for concrete
production. Well-known residual products such as silica fume and fly ash may be
mentioned.

The concrete industry realised at an early stage that it is a good idea to be in front with
regard to documenting the actual environmental aspects and working on improving
the environment, rather than being forced to deal with environmental aspects due to
demands from authorities, customers and economic effects such as imposed taxes.
Furthermore, some companies in concrete industry have recognised that reductions in
production costs often go hand in hand with reductions in environmental impacts.
Thus, environmental aspects are not only interesting from an ideological point of
view, but also from an economic aspect.

1.1. Environmental Goals

Green Concrete is expected to fulfil the following environmental obligations:

 Reduction of CO2 emissions by 21 %. This is in accordance with the Kyoto


Protocol of 1997.
 Increase the use of inorganic residual products from industries other than the
concrete industry by approx. 20%.
 Reduce the use of fossil fuels by increasing the use of waste derived fuels in
the cement industry.
 The recycling capacity of the green concrete must not be less compared to
existing concrete types.
 The production and the use of green concrete must not deteriorate the working
environment.
 The structures do not impose much harm to the environment during their
service life.
2. GENESIS

Considering the time elapsed since the commencement of the use of concrete, green
concrete is very young a material. It was invented in 1998 in Denmark.

The increasing awareness and activity to conserve the environment and the realisation
that concrete production too releases a considerable amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere
were strong initiatives to catalyse the genesis of Green Concrete.

In 1997, the Kyoto Conference took place, in which several countries, after
deliberating over the then environmental conditions laid down several guidelines
which would be the directive principles to the participating countries on their
environment related practices. The guidelines – Kyoto Protocol, as they are called,
needed the countries to cut down their CO2 emissions to a certain degree as assigned.
The given goal has to be achieved by the year 2012. Since then several countries
started to focus on several available options but Denmark focused on cement and
concrete production because approximately 2% of Denmark‘s total CO2 emission
stems from cement and concrete production.

Realising the necessity of such a technology and the prospects associated the Danish
government soon released a proposal. The proposal is in accordance with the
International and European Conventions and Protocol, with the nationally agreed
goals that comply with these. An important aspect is Denmark‘s obligation to reduce
the CO2-emission as previously mentioned. The proposal covers the following
environmental aspects: Greenhouse effect, depletion of the ozone layer,
photochemical oxidation, eutrophication, acidification, materials harmful to the
environment and health, water and resources. The above mentioned priorities were
included in a large Danish projects about cleaner technologies in the life cycle of
concrete products. Furthermore, priorities have been made for the other participating
countries, i.e. Greece, Italy, and The Netherlands, and for Europe and the
International World. Although there are differences in the political environmental
priorities, all agree that five environmental impacts given highest priority are:
 CO2
 Energy
 Water
 Waste
 Pollutants
These, coupled with the cost reduction benefits allured the concrete producers to
incorporate green concrete into their paradigm.

Cement and concrete may have an important role to play in enabling the developed
countries to fulfil their obligation to reduce the total CO2 emission by 21 %
compared to the 1990-level before 2012, as agreed at the Kyoto conference. This is
because the volume of concrete consumption is large. Approx. 1 m3 of concrete per
capita are produced annually globally. The CO2 emission related to concrete
production, inclusive of cement production, is between 0.1-0.2 tons per ton produced
concrete. This corresponds to a total quantity of CO 2 emission of 0.6 - 1.2 m tons per
year. Approximately 5% of world‘s total CO2 emission stems from cement and
concrete production.
The potential environmental benefit to society of being able to build with green
concrete is huge. It is realistic to assume that technology can be developed which can
halve the CO2 emission related to concrete production. With the large consumption of
concrete this will potentially reduce Denmark’s total CO2 emission by 0.5 %
(Glavind, 2000). The somewhat soft demands in the form of environmental
obligations result in rather specific technical requirements for the industry - including
the concrete industry. These technical requirements include among others new
concrete mix designs, new raw materials, and new knowledge (practical experience
and technical models) about the properties of the new raw materials and concrete mix
designs.

Due to growing interest in sustainable development engineers and architects were


motivated more than ever before to choose concrete that is more sustainable. However
this is not as straight forward as selecting an energy star rated appliance or a vehicle
providing high gas mileage. On what ―measurement‖ basis can engineers and
architects compare materials and choose one that is more sustainable or specify a
material in such a way as to minimize environmental impact?
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) seems to offer a solution. LCA considers materials
over the course of their entire life cycle including material extraction, manufacturing,
construction, operations, and finally reuse/recycling. LCA takes into account a full
range of environmental impact indicators—including embodied energy, air and water
pollution (including greenhouse gases), potable water consumption, solid waste and
recycled content just to name a few. Building rating systems such as LEED and
Green Globes are in various stages of incorporating LCA so that they can help
engineers and architects select materials based on their environmental performance or
specify materials in such a way as to minimize environmental impact.

Every 1 ton of cement produced leads to about 0.9 tons of CO2 emissions and a
typical cubic yard (0.7643 m3) of concrete contains about 10% by weight of cement.
There have been a number of articles written about reducing the CO 2 emissions from
concrete primarily through the use of lower amounts of cement and higher amounts of
supplementary cementitious material (SCM) such as fly ash and slag. Table 1 has
been developed based on data presented by Marceau et al, 2002.

Table 1 Total CO2 emissions for 1 cubic yard (yd3 )+ of concrete for different strength
classes and mixture proportions5

Total Breakdown of CO2 emissions for 1 yd3, %


Strength Mixture CO2 (0.76455 m3)
Ready
Class Proportions* emission
Mix Id
psi(kgf/cm2) lb/yd3(kg/m3) lb/yd3 Plant
Cement SCM Aggregate Transport
(kg/m3) Operations
564/0/0
1 5000(351) 528 (313) 96.8% 0% 0.6% 0.6% 2.0%
(335/0/0)
470/0/0 442
2 4000(281) 96.3% 0% 0.7% 0.7% 2.3%
(279/0/0) (262)
376/0/0 355
3 3000(210) 95.7% 0% 0.9% 0.8% 2.6%
(223/0/0) (211)
301/75/0 288
4 3000(210) 94.6% 0% 1.1% 1.0% 3.2%
(179/44/0) (171)
282/94/0 270
5 3000(210) 94.3% 0% 1.2% 1.1% 3.4%
(167/56/0) (160)
244/0/132 239
6 3000(210) 92.4% 1.2% 1.4% 1.2% 3.9%
(145/0/78) (142)
188/0/188 189
7 3000(210) 89.8% 2.1% 1.7% 1.6% 4.9%
(111/0/111) (112)
*564/0/0 signifies that the mixture contains 564 lb/yd3 cement, 0 lb/yd3 fly ash, 0 lb/yd3 slag
cement
#Transport costs is for material shipped to ready mix plant
+1 yd3 = 0.76455 m3
Source: Marceau et al, 2002
The following observations can be made:
 Since a cubic yard of concrete weighs about 2 tons, CO 2 emissions from 1
ton of concrete varies between 0.05 to 0.13 tons.
 Approximately 95% of all CO2 emissions from a cubic yard of concrete
are from cement manufacturing and so it is no wonder that much
attention is paid to using greater amounts of SCM hence use green
concrete.

3. ADVANTAGES OF GREEN CONCRETE

Green concrete has manifold advantages over the conventional concrete. Since it uses
the recycled aggregates and materials, it reduces the extra load in landfills and
mitigates the wastage of aggregates. Thus, the net CO2 emissions are reduced. The
reuse of materials also contributes intensively to economy. Since the waste materials
like aggregates from a nearby area and fly ash from a nearby power plant are not
much expensive and also transport costs are minimal.

Green concrete can be considered elemental to sustainable development since it is


eco-friendly itself. Green concrete is being widely used in green building practices. It
also helps the green buildings achieve LEED and Golden Globe certifications. Use
of fly ash in the concrete also increases its workability and many other properties like
durability to an appreciable extent. One of the practices to manufacture green concrete
involves reduction of amount cement in the mix, this practice helps in reducing the
consumption of cement overall. The use waste materials also solve the problem of
disposing the excessive amount industrial wastes.

There are several other advantages related to green concrete and can be summarized
as below:
a) Reduced CO2 emissions.
b) Low production costs as wastes directly substitute the cement.
c) Saves energy, emissions and waste water.
d) Helps in recycling industry wastes.
e) Reduces the consumption of cement overall.
f) Better workability.
g) Sustainable development.
h) Greater strength and durability than normal concrete.
i) Compressive strength and Flexural behaviour is fairly equal to that of the
conventional concrete.
j) Green concrete might solve some of the societies‘ problems with the use of
inorganic, residual products which should otherwise be deposited.

4. METHODS TO PRODUCE GREEN CONCRETE


4.1. Desirable properties in green concrete
Today, it is already possible to produce and cast very green concrete. Even a super
green type of concrete without cement but with, for example, 300 kg of fly ash instead
can be produced and cast without any changes in the production equipment. But this
concrete will not develop strength, and it will of course not be durable. Therefore, the
concrete must include aspects of performance like:
a) Mechanical properties (strength, shrinkage, creep, static behaviour etc.)
b) Fire resistance (heat transfer, etc.)
c) Workmanship (workability, strength development, curing, etc.)
d) Durability (corrosion protection, frost, new deterioration mechanisms, etc.)
e) Environmental impact (how green is the new concrete?).
Meeting these requirements is not an easy task, and all must be reached at the same
time if constructors are to be tempted to prescribe green concrete. A constructor
would not normally prescribe green concrete if the performance is lower than normal,
for example, a reduced service life. The new technology will therefore need to
develop concretes with all properties as near normal as possible.

4.2. Energy consumption during the production


4.2.1. Energy consumption in concrete mix design
The type and amount of cement has a major influence on the environmental properties
of a concrete. An example of this is shown in Figure 2, where the energy consumption
in mega joules per kilogram of a concrete edge beam through all its life cycle phases
is illustrated. The energy consumption of cement production make up more than
90% of the total energy consumption of all constituent materials and approximately
one-third of the total life cycle energy consumption. By selecting a cement type
with reduced environmental impact, and by minimizing the amount of cement, the
environmental properties of the concrete are drastically changed. This must, however,
be done while still taking account of the technical requirements of the concrete for the
type and amount of cement. One method of minimizing the cement content in a
concrete mix is by using packing calculations to determine the optimum
composition of the aggregate. A high level of aggregate packing reduces the cavities
between the aggregates, and thereby the need for cement paste. This results in better
concrete properties.
4
Energy Consumption (MJ/kg)

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5 Energy Consumption in cement
1 production
0.5 Other energy Consumption
0

Figure 2 Edge beam: total energy consumption through all the life cycle phases
Source: Obla, K. H., 2009

Another way of minimising the cement content in a concrete is to substitute parts of


the cement with other pozzolanic materials. It is common to produce concrete with
fly ash and/or micro silica. Both of these materials are residual products (from
production of electricity and production of silicon, respectively) and both have a
pozzolanic effect. Thus, a material with large environmental impact, i.e. the cement,
is substituted with materials with reduced environmental impacts. Although there is
no guideline given by the BIS on the addition of above components, the Danish
Standards have laid down certain restrictions as given in Table 2.
Table 2 Requirements for the contents of fly ash and microsilica according to the Danish
concrete materials standard (%)

Mild Moderate Average Extra average


Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental
Class Class Class Class
Max content
F+M from X 35 25 25
C+F+M (%)
Max content
M from X 10 10 10
C+F+M (%)
C: cement; F: fly ash; M: micro silica
Sources: ConcreteMaterials, DS 481 1998 [in Danish].

4.2.2. Energy consumption during cement and concrete production


It is also possible to reduce the environmental impact of concrete by reducing the
environmental impact of cement and concrete production. As regards concrete
production, experience with the reduction of primarily water consumption, energy
consumption and waste production is available. Even though the contribution of
concrete production to the environmental profile of concrete is minor, it does
contribute, and is important environmentally and economically to the single concrete
producer. By selecting a cement type with reduced environmental impacts and by
minimising the amount of cement the concrete‘s environmental properties are
drastically changed. This must, however, be done whilst still taking account of the
technical requirements of the concrete for the type and amount of cement.
Denmark‘s cement manufacturer, Aalborg Portland, prioritises development of
cements with reduced environmental impacts.

4.3. Evaluation of inorganic wastes


The materials, which have been judged as useable for concrete production and
selected for further development, are shown in Figure 1. The judgement was based on
an evaluation concerning both concrete technology and environmental aspects.
Inorganic residual products from the concrete industry (e.g. stone dust and concrete
slurry) and products which pose a huge waste problem to society and which are in
political focus (e.g. combustion ash from water-purifying plants, smoke waste from
waste combustion and fly ash from sugar production) have been given highest
priority.
Stone dust. Stone dust is a residual product from the crushing of aggregates. It is an
inert material with a particle size between that of cement and sand particles. Stone
dust is expected to substitute part of the sand.

Concrete slurry. Concrete slurry is a residual product from concrete production, i.e.
washing mixers and other equipment. The concrete slurry is can be either a dry or wet
substance, and can be recycled either as a dry powder or with water. In the case of
recycling of the dry material, it is necessary to process it to powder. The concrete
slurry can have some pozzolanic effect, and might therefore be used as a substitute for
part of the cement or for other types of pozzolanic materials such as fly ash.

Combustion ash from water-purifying plants. This type of combustion ash has the
same particle size and shape as fly ash particles. The content of heavy metals in the
slurry is expected to be approximately at the same level as for fly ash. The slurry can
also have some pozzolanic effect.

Smoke waste from waste combustion. This smoke waste can have some pozzolanic
effect. The content of heavy metals is significantly higher than that of ordinary fly
ash. Furthermore, the content of chlorides, fluorides and sulphates can result in
negative effects in connection with reinforcement corrosion, retardation and possible
thaumasite reactions. Further processing will be necessary before its use in concrete.

4.4. Different ways to produce Green concrete


1. To increase the use of conventional residual products:
To minimise the clinker content, i.e. by replacing cement with fly ash, micro
silica in larger amounts than are allowed today
2. By developing new green cements and binding materials, i.e. by increasing
the use of alternative raw materials and alternative fuels, and by
developing/improving cement with low energy consumption
3. Concrete with inorganic residual products :(stone dust, crushed concrete as
aggregate in quantities and for areas that are not allowed today) and cement
stabilised foundation with waste incinerator slag, low quality fly ash or
other inorganic residual products. Firstly, an information-screening of
potential inorganic residual products is carried out. The products are described
by origin, amounts, particle size and geometry, chemical composition and
possible environmental impacts.

A pictorial representation of the methods is shown as below,

•sewage sludge.
incineration ash
residual •stone dust, concrete
products frm
other
slurry
industries •combustion ash from
water purifying plants

Conventional concrete, conventional


conventional cement, fly
cement, fly •large qty of fly ash
ash, micro
ash silica

cement with
reduced •mineralised cement
environmental •limestone addition
impact

Fig. 1 A chart depicting the methods to develop green concrete

5. RESULTS OF STUDIES BASED ON REPORTED LITERATURE


5.1. Green Concrete containing Marble sludge powder and Quarry rock dust
(Hameed, 2009)

In 2009, M. Shahul Hameed and A. S. S. Sekar, conducted a study on green concrete


replacing the conventional materials, except cement, with marble sludge powder and
quarry rock dust.

5.1.1. Characterisation of waste


The physical characteristics of the waste are furnished in Table-3. The fineness
modulus of marble sludge powder and quarry rock dust is comparable to that of fine
sand of 2.2 to 2.6. The coefficient of uniformity for fine sand is generally should be
less than 6. Similarly the coefficient of gradation should be between 1 and 3 for fine
sand.
Table 3 Physical characteristics of marble sludge powder, quarry rock dust and river
sand.

Bulk Coefficient Coefficient


Moisture Fineness Effective
Sample Density of of
Content (%) modulus size (mm)
Code (kg/m3) uniformity gradation
Wet Dry
Marble
sludge 23.35 1.59 1118 2.04 0.17 1.58 1.37
powder
Quarry
24.25 2.10 1750 2.35 0.22 4.50 2.20
rock dust
Sand 25.00 2.50 1430 2.20 0.20 6.00 2.00
Sources: Hameed and Sekar, 2009
Table 4 Chemical characteristics of marble sludge powder, quarry rock dust, river sand
and Portland cement.

Fe O MnO Na O MgO KO Al O CaO SiO


2 3 2 2 2 3 2
Test
Sample % % % % % % % %
method
Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt. Wt.
Marble
sludge 11.99 0.08 2.08 8.74 2.33 4.45 1.58 64.86
powder
IS:
Quarry rock
1.22 0.07 3.0 0.33 5.34 13.63 1.28 75.25 4032-
dust
1968
River Sand 1.75 0.03 1.37 00.77 1.23 10.52 3.21 80.78
Portland
0.55 0.85 0.85 2.15 0.85 5.50 63.50 21.50
cement

Source: Hameed and Sekar, 2009

5.1.2. Raw materials


Cement: Ordinary Portland Cement (43 Grade) with 28 percent normal consistency
2
with specific surface 3300 cm /g conforming to IS: 8112-1989 was used.

Marble Sludge Powder: Marble sludge powder was obtained in wet form directly
taken from deposits of marble factories. It was observed that the marble sludge
powder had a high specific surface area; this could mean that is addition should confer
more cohesiveness to mortars and concrete. Specific gravity of the marble sludge
powder is 2.212.
100
90
80
70
% of finer

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
8.616 6.112 4.351 3.106 2.218 1.597 1.184 0.845 0.604 0.176
Particle Size X10-3 mm

Figure 3. Hydrometer Analysis for marble sludge powder


Source: Hameed and Sekar, 2009

Quarry rock dust: The specific gravity of the quarry rock dust is 2.677. Moisture
content and bulk density of waste are less than the sand properties.

Fine aggregate: Medium size sand with a modulus of fineness = 2.20; Specific
gravity 2.677, normal grading with the silt content 0.8%.

Coarse aggregate: Crushed stone with a size of 5-20 mm and normal continuous
grading was used. The content of flaky and elongated particles is <3%, the crushing
index ≤6% and the specific gravity 2.738.

Water: The qualities of water samples are uniform and potable.

Super plasticizer: A superplasticizer based on refined lingo Sulphonates, ‗Roff


Superplast 320‘ was used to get and preserve the designed workability.

5.1.3. Mix proportion of concrete:


For durability studies the Indian standard mix proportion (by weight) use in the mixes
of conventional concrete and green concrete were fixed as (Cement: River
sand/marble sludge + stone dust: coarse agg) 1:1.81:2.04, 1:1.73:2.04 after several
trials. Based on properties of raw materials, two different mix proportions were taken.
Mix A is the controlled concrete using river sand and Mix B is the green concrete
using industrial waste (50% quarry rock dust and 50% marble sludge powder) as fine
aggregate. The water/cement ratio for both two mixes was 0.55% by weight. Water
reducing admixture was used to improve the workability and its dose was fixed as 250
ml/50kg of cement.

5.1.4. Results and Discussion


 Workability:
Table 5 Workability comparisons

V-funnel time in
Mix Slump in mm Slump flow in mm
sec
Mix A 210 420 23
Mix B 255 657 14
Source: Hameed and Sekar, 2009
 Compressive and Split tensile strength:
The 150 mm size concrete cubes, concrete cylinder of size 150 mm diameter and 300
mm height were used as test specimens to determine the compressive strength and
split tensile strength respectively. The results of standard cubes and cylinders are
compiled:
Table 6 Avg. Compressive and Split tensile strength of concrete

Average Compressive Strength 2


Mix
2 Split Tensile Strength in N/mm
in N/mm
3 Days 7 days 28 days 3 days 7 days 28 days
Mix A 15.45 18.33 36.85 2.40 2.60 4.62
Mix B 13.54 19.52 40.35 2.15 2.98 5.02
Source: Hameed and Sekar, 2009
 Durability and Resistance to Sulphate attack
Table 7 Percentage of weight loss

Percentage of weight loss


% of water 28 days 90 days 150 days
absorption Na2SO4 Na2SO4 Na2SO4
Mix
after 28 H2SO4 H2SO4 H2SO4
and and and
days
MgSO4 MgSO4 MgSO4
Mix A 2.85 1.65 2.10 2.20 2.65 2.95 3.15
Mix B 3.74 1.15 0.80 1.95 1.10 2.10 1.80
Source: Hameed and Sekar, 2009
The resistance to sulphate attack was studied by storage of standard prism specimens
were immersed in standard condition for 28 and 90 days and 150 days in testing baths
(containing 7.5 percent MgSO4 and 7.5 percent Na2SO4 by weight of water). From the
above table it can be deduced that the durability of Green concrete under sulphate is
higher to that of conventional concrete. This is due to that the active SiO2 in marble
powder and quarry rock dust can react with the Ca (OH) 2 in concrete to form
secondary calcium silicate hydrate and make it chemically stable and structurally
dense, the impermeability of concrete is enhanced as well. In addition, the marble
powder can reduce the content of calcium aluminates in cementitious material,
leading to increase of sulphate resistance of concrete.

5.1.5. Conclusions
All the experimental data shows that the addition of the industrial wastes improves the
physical and mechanical properties. These results are of great importance because this
kind of innovative concrete requires large amounts of fine particles. Due to its high
fineness of the marble sludge powder it provided to be very effective in assuring very
good cohesiveness of concrete. From the above study, it is concluded that the quarry
rock dust and marble sludge powder may be used as a replacement material for fine
aggregate.
 The chemical compositions of quarry rock dust and marble sludge powder are
comparable with that of cement.
 The replacement of fine aggregate with 50% marble sludge powder and 50%
Quarry rock dust (Green concrete) gives an excellent result in strength aspect
and quality aspect. The results showed that the M4 mix induced higher
compressive strength, higher splitting tensile strength. Increase the marble
sludge powder content by more than 50% improves the workability but affects
the compressive and split tensile strength of concrete.
 Green concrete induced higher workability and it satisfy the self compacting
concrete performance which is the slump flow is 657mm without affecting the
strength of concrete. Slump flow increases with the increase of marble sludge
powder content. V-funnel time decreases with the increase of marble sludge
powder content
 Test results show that these industrial wastes are capable of improving
hardened concrete performance.
 Green concrete enhancing fresh concrete behaviour and can be used in
architectural concrete mixtures containing white cement.
 The water absorption of green concrete is slightly higher than conventional
concrete.
 The durability of green concrete under sulphate is higher to that of
conventional concrete. From the results after 90-day immersion, the mortar
specimens with green concrete in 7.5% sulphate solution have similar effect
with those immersed for 28 days, but for those in 7.5% magnesium sulphate,
the influence of addition on anti corrosion factor is not obvious.
The combined use of quarry rock dust and marble sludge powder exhibited excellent
performance due to efficient micro filling ability and pozzolanic activity. Therefore,
the results of this study provide a strong recommendation for the use of quarry rock
dust and marble sludge powder as fine aggregate in concrete manufacturing.

5.2. Behaviour of different mixes to different environmental classes


In another study to analyse the behaviour of different compositions in various
environmental classes was conducted at The Danish Centre for Resource Saving
Concrete Structures. In this test several different mixes were prepared and exposed
to different environmental conditions. The control parameters for the mixes were a
slump of approximately 100 mm and, for the aggressive environment, an air
content of 5.5%. The different green concrete mixes and their respective
environmental conditions are tabulated as below:

Table 8 Passive environmental class

Control PV1 PV2 PV3 PV4


Cement Content(kg) 148 120 101 85 61
Content of Fly Ash (%) 24 50 50 60 70
Content of Micro Silica (%) 6 - 6 6 6
CO2 reduction - 18 31 41 57
Water/Cement 0.71 0.78 0.80 0.70 0.74

Table 9 Aggressive environmental class

Control AV1 AV2 AV3 AV4 AV5


Cement Content(kg) 309 274 272 219 190 189
Content of Fly Ash (%) 9 9 18 30 40 40
Content of Micro Silica (%) 5 5 5 5 5 5
CO2 reduction - 33 33 46 54 54
Water/Cement 0.37 0.421 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Source: Glavind and Munch-Petersen, 2000
Tables 7 and 8 show concrete mixes tested with high-volume fly ash for the passive
and aggressive environmental classes. In the passive environmental class the fly ash
content was increased from 24 to 70%, resulting in a reduction of CO2 emission from
18 to 57%. In the aggressive environmental class the fly ash content was increased
from 9 to 40% resulting in a reduction of CO2 emission from 33 to 54%. AV5 is a
modified version of AV4 with increased air content.

Strength development is shown in Figures 4 and 5. The figures show that PV4,
which has a fly ash content of 70%, has strength that is far too low: it appears that the
fly ash content must not exceed approximately 60%. Even so, the strength
development is still too slow. As regards the concrete in the aggressive environmental
class, the strength development is similar for all concrete types. However, preliminary
testing indicates that the high-volume fly ash concrete might have problems with frost
resistance.

35

30
Compressive Strength (MPa)

25

20 Control
PV1
15
PV2
10 PV3
PV4
5

0
48 168 672 1344
Time (h)

Figure 4. Strength development for high volume fly ash concrete in the passive environmental class.
Source: Glavind, 2000

Passive: Dry atmosphere with no risk of corrosion.


Aggressive: Moist atmosphere, with significant alkaline and/or chloride influence on
the concrete surface or where there is risk of water saturation combined with frost.
70

Compressive Strength (MPa) 60

50
Control
40
AV1
30 AV2
AV3
20
AV4
10 AV5

0
48 168 672 1344
Time (h)

Figure 5. Strength development for high volume fly ash concrete in the active environmental class
Source: Glavind, 2000

5.3. Comparison between Conventional and Green Concrete


After enough development of Green concrete, the question arose about its relevance
before conventional concrete. Lesser environmental impact was one thing but other
properties like durability and resistance to fire etcetera were suspected and under
heavy scrutiny. Several tests thus carried out clearly showed that green concrete was
not a bad bargain indeed.

An environmental screening has been performed for a column presenting the different
design principles as described in Table 7 (green concrete columns defined as A, B, C).
For comparison, the same environmental screening has been performed for a
reference column (traditional concrete column defined as R), which is similar to
column A, except that the green concrete type being substituted by a traditional
concrete suitable for aggressive environment. The objective of the screening is to
identify significant resource consumption and environmental loads of traditional
concrete/design compared to green concrete/design occurring during the entire
service life, this includes the environmentally viewed most critical maintenance/repair
stage. The performed lifecycle screenings quantify material usage (consumption of
concrete) as well as CO2 emissions generated at the involved stages during the
lifecycle of the columns.
Table 10. A Comparison between Conventional and Green Concrete

Source: http:// www.madisonvelocity.blogspot.com

The environmental parameters related to the working environment have not been
included. The results of the environmental screening for the 3 green concrete
columns (A, B, C) and the traditional concrete column (R) is presented in Table 3
with regard to the CO2-emission and in Table 4 with regard to the consumption
of concrete.

Table 11. Comparison of coloumns and respective CO 2 emissions

Column R Column A Column B Column C


Traditional
Increased Stainless steel Stainless steel
design +
Design solution concrete cover + reinforcement + cladding + green
traditional
green concrete green concrete concrete
concrete
Kg CO2 per year 300 200 86 80
Source: http:// www.madisonvelocity.blogspot.com

Table 12. Sources of CO2 emission for four types of columns


Design solution Column R Column A Column B Column C
Concrete: 5102 5733 5102 5102
construction (Kg)
Concrete: 1533 2442 0 0
maintenance
(Kg)
Total kg concrete 6635 8175 5102 5102
Source: http:// www.madisonvelocity.blogspot.com
9000

8000
7000
Concrete Consumption Kg

6000
5000 Concrete: Maintenance
4000 Concrete Construction

3000
2000

1000
0
Column R Column A Column B Column C

Figure 7: Chart depicting the concrete consumptions of the columns


Source: http:// www.madisonvelocity.blogspot.com

This comparison demonstrates that column B (stainless steel reinforcement) and


column C (stainless steel cladding) present the most environmental-friendly
design solutions both with regard to the CO2 emissions and the consumption of
concrete. An even more environmental-friendly solution is if the selected concrete
at column C would be substituted by a more environmental-friendly (greener)
concrete type provided that the steel cladding assures the long-term protection of
the reinforced concrete.

6. LIMITATIONS OF GREEN CONCRETE

Although green concrete seems very promising when it comes to an environment


friendly sustainable development, the cardinal concern is its durability. Refutations
are being constantly raised regarding the service life of structures made with green
concrete. Further the split tension of green concrete has been found much less than
that of conventional concrete. Another challenge before green concrete is that of a
market. Until the properties of green concrete are at par with the conventional
concrete, green concrete is unlikely to find many customers.
Several researchers have argued that green concrete can be made durable by using
stainless steel reinforcements, but the predicament is that by using stainless steel
concrete the cost of the construction increases considerably. Even after this, green
concrete is not as durable as the conventional concrete.

The limitations of using green concrete can be summarised as below:

a) By using stainless steel, cost of reinforcement increases.


b) Structures constructed with green concrete have comparatively less life
than structures with conventional concrete.
c) Split tension of green concrete is less than that of conventional
concrete.
d) Not as durable as conventional concrete.

Given these limitations coupled with the urgent need of reduction in green house gas
emissions, has sparked off a number of researches across the globe to make green
concrete more durable and bring it up to the mark with conventional concrete.

7. SCOPE IN INDIA

Green concrete is a revolutionary topic in the history of concrete industry. Concrete is


an indispensible entity for a developing country like India which desperately needs a
continuously expanding infrastructure. India is the second largest producer of
cement in the world. Further India would be facing an exponential growth in the
concrete demand by 2011 (Schumacher, 1999).
Table 13 Projected Cement Demand

Cement Demand (Mt/annum)


Year GDPtotal GDPindustry GDPconstruction GDPaverage
2001 103.0 107.6 106.2 105.6
2006 139.5 148.7 150.8 146.3
2011 186.9 204.2 210.4 200.5
Source: Shumacher (1999)

Being produced in voluminous quantities in India, the concrete industry has a


considerable part in the net CO2 emissions from the country. The net CO2 emissions
from the construction agency are greater than any other industry.
Operation of
Operation of business
building, 10.20% facilities, 9.90%

Construction
work, 1.30%

Transportation for
construction, 5.00
%
Other
Industries, 62.70%
Production of
materials for
construction, 10.9
0%

Figure 8. Energy consumption of construction and building in India


Source: Carbon di oxide Information Analysis Centre

In order to act in a responsible manner towards a sustainable development of the


nation, Green concrete is the need of the hour. India being a developing country
produces concrete in gargantuan quantities which result in huge volumes of CO 2
being emitted into the atmosphere each year. The total energy consumption (a rough
estimate of the net CO2 emissions) during the manufacture of cement in India is
tabulated as below:

Table 14 Fuel Consumption in the Indian Cement Industry 1991-1993

Fuel Units 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94


Electricity GWh 4800.52 6420.97 6754.60
Coal Mt 10.8 11.7 11.1
Petroleum
Mt 0.293 0.296 0.291
Products
Total Cement
Mt 53.6 54.1 58.0
Production
Source: TERI (1996)
The above statistics, though old, can be used as a guideline since the technological
advancements have been scarce. As not much has been done and not much can be
done to reduce these consumptions, the only alternative left is that of a green concrete,
which will reduce the net CO2 emissions in the whole life cycle of concrete.
Thus we can deduce that, for a greener future, India needs to adopt Green concrete
into practise as soon as possible. The other advantageous factor is its economy.
As green concrete is made with concrete wastes and recycled aggregates, which are
cheaper than conventional substitutes, and also with most of the industries facing
problems with their waste disposal, put it out of the question to discard it.

Another type of green concrete, pervious concrete, is also a precious entity when it
comes to storm water management and rain water harvesting. Using pervious concrete
we can easily tame the run-off and harness it for future uses in relatively dry areas,
which would have otherwise drained away. With the alarmingly increasing cases of
droughts each year pervious concrete would prove to be a utilitarian tool. (Wikipedia)

The above facts clearly state a wide and promising scope of Green Concrete in the
near future.

8. CONCLUSIONS

The overview of the present state of affairs regarding concrete types with reduced
environmental impact has shown that there is considerable knowledge and experience
on the subject. The Danish and European environmental policies have motivated the
concrete industry to react, and will probably also motivate further development of the
production and use of concrete with reduced environmental impact. The somewhat
vague environmental requirements that exist have resulted in a need for more specific
technical requirements, and the most important goal is to develop the technology
necessary to produce and use resource saving concrete structures, i.e. green concrete.
This applies to structure design, specification, manufacturing, performance, operation,
and maintenance.

In 1994 cement industry consumed 6.6 EJ of primary energy, corresponding with 2%


of world energy consumption. Worldwide 1126 Mt CO2 or 5% of the CO2 production
originates from cement production. The carbon intensity of cement making amounts
to 0.81 kg CO2/kg cement. In India, North America, and China the carbon intensity is
about 10% higher than on average. Specific carbon emissions range from 0.36 kg to
1.09 kg CO2/kg cement mainly depending on type of process, clinker/cement ratio and
fuel used.

The potential environmental benefit to society of being able to build with green
concrete is huge. It is realistic to assume that the technology can be developed, which
can halve the CO2 emission related to concrete production, and with the large energy
consumption of concrete and the following large emission of CO 2 this will mean a
potential reduction of total CO2 emission by 2% (Obla 2009).

Seventeen different energy efficiency improvement options are identified. The


improvement ranges from a small percentage to more than 25% per option, depending
on the reference case (i.e type of process, fuel used) and local situation. The use of
waste instead of fossil fuel may reduce CO2 emissions by 0.1 to 0.5 kg/kg cement
(varying from 20 to 40%). An end-of-pipe technology to reduce carbon emissions
may be CO2 removal. Probably the main technique is combustion under oxygen while
recycling CO2 (Hendriks, 2004). However, considerably research is required to all
unknown aspects of this technique.

It is important to keep a holistic cradle to cradle perspective when it comes to the use
of a material. Based on a research Gajda et al. concluded that occupant energy use
accounts for 99% of life cycle energy use of a single family home. Less than 1% of
the life cycle energy used in that home was due to manufacturing cement and
producing concrete. The global cement industry accounts for approximately 5% of
global CO2 emissions. So whatever way one looks at it focusing on just the
production of concrete accounts for a very small percent of overall CO2 emissions.
This is not to say that progress should not be made in reducing the CO2 emissions
from concrete as produced. However one should keep in mind that whatever CO2
emission reductions that are possible will still account for at best a 2% global CO2
reduction (assuming a challenging 21% reduction in global CO2 emissions from
cement manufacture from now on).
REFERENCES:

1. Au Youn Thean Seng http://www.madisonvelocity.blogspot.com/


2. Carbon di oxide Information Analysis Centre, http://cdiac.ornl.gov/
3. Concrete Materials, DS 481:1998 [in Danish].
4. Gajda, J., VanGeem, Martha G., Marceau, Medgar L., ―Environmental Life
Cycle Inventory of Single Family Housing‖, SN2582a, Portland Cement
Association, Skokie, IL, PCA, 2002, www.cement.org
5. Glavind M. and Munch-Petersen C., ―‗Green‘ Concrete in Denmark‖,
Structural Concrete, 1(1), March 2000.
6. Green Globes, The Green Building Initiative, Portland, Oregon,
http://www.thegbi.org/
7. Hendriks, C. A., Worrell, E., de Jager, D., Blok, K. and Riemer P., ―Emission
Reduction of Greenhouse Gases from the Cement Industry‖, Conference
Paper- Cement, 2004, http://www.ieagreen.org.uk/
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/Pervious_Concrete
9. http://www.enercon.com/
10. http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/news/news102008.html
11. http://www.greenconcretedenmark.dk/
12. http://www.perviousblog.com/
13. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), U.S. Green
Building Council, Washington, DC, http://www.usgbc.org/
14. Medgar L. Marceau, Michael A. Nisbet, and Martha G. VanGeem, ―Life
Cycle Inventory of Portland Cement Concrete‖, SN3011, Portland Cement
Association, Skokie, IL, PCA, 2002, www.cement.org
15. Obla, K. H., ―What is Green Concrete?‖, Point of view, The Indian Concrete
Journal, 24(4):26-28, April 2009.
16. Pravin K., Kaushik S.K. ―SCC with crusher sludge, fly ash and micro silica.‖
The Indian Concrete Journal. 79(8): 32-37, August 2005.
17. Shahul Hameed, M. and Sekar, A. S. S., ―Properties of Green Concrete
containing quarry rock dust and marble sludge powder as fine aggregate‖
ARPN journal of engineering and applied sciences, 4(4), June 2009.
18. Shumacher, K. and Sathaye J., ―India‘s Cement Industry: Productivity, Energy
Efficiency and Carbon Emissions‖, Energy Analysis Program, Environmental
Energy Technologies Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,
Berkeley, July 1999.
19. TERI, 1996: Teri Energy Data Directory and Yearbook 1996/97, Tata Energy
Research Institute, New Delhi, India: Pauls Press.

You might also like