IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v18y2026i13p6622-d1979512.html

Sustainable Concrete Production Using Fly Ash and Recycled Glass Powder: Environmental and Mechanical Performance Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Ebru Dural

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Aydin 09100, Turkey
    Department of Technical Programs, Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, Bishkek 720038, Kyrgyzstan)

  • Gulmira Adzhygulova

    (Department of Technical Programs, Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, Bishkek 720038, Kyrgyzstan)

  • Gulnara Karadeniz

    (Department of Economics and Administration Programs, Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, Bishkek 720038, Kyrgyzstan)

  • Mehmet Karadeniz

    (Department of Electric and Electronics Engineering, Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, Bishkek 720038, Kyrgyzstan)

Abstract

Cement manufacturing is a major source of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions globally. Cement replacement materials are increasingly used to minimize the environmental impact of concrete production. In the present study, the mechanical and environmental performance of concrete mixtures containing fly ash and recycled glass powder as partial cement replacements at levels of 10%, 20%, and 30% were investigated. Workability, unit weight, compressive strength, and water permeability tests were conducted to evaluate the effects of replacements on concrete behavior. Carbon emissions decreased as the substitution ratio increased, with the highest reduction (28.9%) observed in the mixture containing 30% fly ash. Compressive strength values ranged from 21.9 to 27.0 MPa, indicating that all mixtures fell within the intended strength range. Two types of cement replacements—fly ash (FA) and recycled glass powder (GP)—were evaluated separately. Compared to GP mixtures, FA mixtures generally exhibited lower permeability (up to 50%) and better strength retention (up to 9.6 percentage points), though both materials contributed to reducing embodied carbon. The mixture containing 30% fly ash demonstrated the highest environmental efficiency, with a carbon intensity of 10.84 kg CO 2 /MPa, corresponding to a 19.2% reduction compared with the control. For recycled glass powder, the 20% replacement level offered the most balanced performance, while higher replacement ratios led to more pronounced strength losses. This study provides a direct comparison of FA and GP under identical mixture conditions using performance-normalized environmental indicators. The results indicate that, under the tested conditions, fly ash exhibits a better combination of carbon emission reduction and mechanical strength than recycled glass powder.

Suggested Citation

  • Ebru Dural & Gulmira Adzhygulova & Gulnara Karadeniz & Mehmet Karadeniz, 2026. "Sustainable Concrete Production Using Fly Ash and Recycled Glass Powder: Environmental and Mechanical Performance Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-33, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:13:p:6622-:d:1979512
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/13/6622/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/13/6622/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:13:p:6622-:d:1979512. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.