IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jworld/v2y2021i4p30-504d680935.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Concrete vs. Ceramic Blocks: Environmental Impact Evaluation Considering a Country-Level Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Lucas R. Caldas

    (Civil Engineering Program (PEC), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil
    Graduate Program in Architecture (PROARQ), FAU, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro 21941-901, Brazil)

  • Francesco Pittau

    (Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (ABC), Politecnico di Milano, Via G. Ponzio 31, 20133 Milan, Italy)

  • Roberto Schaeffer

    (Centre for Energy and Environmental Economics (CENERGIA), Energy Planning Programme (PPE), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil)

  • Anna K. E. B. Saraiva

    (Civil Engineering Program (PEC), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil)

  • Rayane de L. M. Paiva

    (Civil Engineering Program (PEC), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil)

  • Romildo D. Toledo Filho

    (Civil Engineering Program (PEC), COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Cidade Universitária, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil)

Abstract

In continental countries, building materials are often moved over long distances from factories to building sites. This is especially important when quality and performance certification systems are required for the building materials’ acquisition. In this scenario, the transportation phase tends to have a great contribution to building materials’ environmental impacts. Taking into consideration that countries such as China, India, and Brazil, i.e., continental countries, are expecting the largest future housing demand, the issue of transportation will have a crucial role in environmental impacts. Through a Brazilian case study, the present work investigates the potential environmental impacts of structural masonry made of concrete and ceramic blocks certified by the Brazilian Quality Program. A cradle-to-site Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) is carried out while considering a country-level approach using data from the literature and Ecoinvent. The results show that ceramic blocks are preferable for most states and scenarios. Human Health and Ecosystem Quality are the two categories most affected by transportation, and they can reach more than 96% and 99%, respectively. The efficiency of the building material transportation system plays an important role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. A shift in building components from concrete to ceramic blocks has the potential to mitigate between 154 and 229 Mt CO2-eq between 2020 and 2050. The methodological approach used in this work can be applied to other building materials and other countries, especially those of continental dimensions that are expected to have a significant future housing demand.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucas R. Caldas & Francesco Pittau & Roberto Schaeffer & Anna K. E. B. Saraiva & Rayane de L. M. Paiva & Romildo D. Toledo Filho, 2021. "Concrete vs. Ceramic Blocks: Environmental Impact Evaluation Considering a Country-Level Approach," World, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-23, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jworld:v:2:y:2021:i:4:p:30-504:d:680935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4060/2/4/30/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4060/2/4/30/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cabeza, Luisa F. & Rincón, Lídia & Vilariño, Virginia & Pérez, Gabriel & Castell, Albert, 2014. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 394-416.
    2. Chau, C.K. & Leung, T.M. & Ng, W.Y., 2015. "A review on Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Energy Assessment and Life Cycle Carbon Emissions Assessment on buildings," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 395-413.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joaquin Humberto Aquino Rocha & Andréia Arenari de Siqueira & Marco Antonio Barbosa de Oliveira & Lucas da Silva Castro & Lucas Rosse Caldas & Nathalie Barbosa Reis Monteiro & Romildo Dias Toledo Filh, 2022. "Circular Bioeconomy in the Amazon Rainforest: Evaluation of Açaí Seed Ash as a Regional Solution for Partial Cement Replacement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patricia González-Vallejo & Radu Muntean & Jaime Solís-Guzmán & Madelyn Marrero, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of Dwelling Construction in Romania and Spain. A Comparative Analysis with the OERCO2 Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    2. Ana Ferreira & Manuel Duarte Pinheiro & Jorge de Brito & Ricardo Mateus, 2022. "Embodied vs. Operational Energy and Carbon in Retail Building Shells: A Case Study in Portugal," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Mastrucci, Alessio & Marvuglia, Antonino & Leopold, Ulrich & Benetto, Enrico, 2017. "Life Cycle Assessment of building stocks from urban to transnational scales: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 316-332.
    4. Kong, Minjin & Ji, Changyoon & Hong, Taehoon & Kang, Hyuna, 2022. "Impact of the use of recycled materials on the energy conservation and energy transition of buildings using life cycle assessment: A case study in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Rosaria E.C. Amaral & Joel Brito & Matt Buckman & Elicia Drake & Esther Ilatova & Paige Rice & Carlos Sabbagh & Sergei Voronkin & Yewande S. Abraham, 2020. "Waste Management and Operational Energy for Sustainable Buildings: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-21, July.
    6. ZhiWu Zhou & Julián Alcalá & Víctor Yepes, 2020. "Environmental, Economic and Social Impact Assessment: Study of Bridges in China’s Five Major Economic Regions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-33, December.
    7. Kun Lu & Xiaoyan Jiang & Vivian W. Y. Tam & Mengyun Li & Hongyu Wang & Bo Xia & Qing Chen, 2019. "Development of a Carbon Emissions Analysis Framework Using Building Information Modeling and Life Cycle Assessment for the Construction of Hospital Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Vidhyalakshmi Chandrasekaran & Jolanta Dvarioniene & Ausrine Vitkute & Giedrius Gecevicius, 2021. "Environmental Impact Assessment of Renovated Multi-Apartment Building Using LCA Approach: Case Study from Lithuania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Duan, Zhuocheng & de Wilde, Pieter & Attia, Shady & Zuo, Jian, 2025. "Challenges in predicting the impact of climate change on thermal building performance through simulation: A systematic review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 382(C).
    10. Jiaojiao Yang & Ting Wang & Yujie Hu & Qiyun Deng & Shu Mo, 2023. "Comparative Analysis of Research Trends and Hotspots of Foreign and Chinese Building Carbon Emissions Based on Bibliometrics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-24, June.
    11. Martínez-Rocamora, A. & Solís-Guzmán, J. & Marrero, M., 2016. "LCA databases focused on construction materials: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 565-573.
    12. Hossein Omrany & Veronica Soebarto & Ehsan Sharifi & Ali Soltani, 2020. "Application of Life Cycle Energy Assessment in Residential Buildings: A Critical Review of Recent Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-30, January.
    13. Fenner, Andriel Evandro & Kibert, Charles Joseph & Woo, Junghoon & Morque, Shirley & Razkenari, Mohamad & Hakim, Hamed & Lu, Xiaoshu, 2018. "The carbon footprint of buildings: A review of methodologies and applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1142-1152.
    14. Insub Choi & JunHee Kim & DongWon Kim, 2020. "LCA-Based Investigation of Environmental Impacts for Novel Double-Beam Floor System Subjected to High Gravity Loads," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, November.
    15. Anand, Chirjiv Kaur & Amor, Ben, 2017. "Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 408-416.
    16. Burek, Jasmina & Nutter, Darin W., 2019. "A life cycle assessment-based multi-objective optimization of the purchased, solar, and wind energy for the grocery, perishables, and general merchandise multi-facility distribution center network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 1427-1446.
    17. Sierra-Pérez, Jorge & Rodríguez-Soria, Beatriz & Boschmonart-Rives, Jesús & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2018. "Integrated life cycle assessment and thermodynamic simulation of a public building’s envelope renovation: Conventional vs. Passivhaus proposal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1510-1521.
    18. Mastrucci, Alessio & Marvuglia, Antonino & Benetto, Enrico & Leopold, Ulrich, 2020. "A spatio-temporal life cycle assessment framework for building renovation scenarios at the urban scale," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    19. Wang, Tao & Seo, Seongwon & Liao, Pin-Chao & Fang, Dongping, 2016. "GHG emission reduction performance of state-of-the-art green buildings: Review of two case studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 484-493.
    20. Seunguk Na & Inkwan Paik, 2019. "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Costs with the Alternative Structural System for Slab: A Comparative Analysis of South Korea Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, September.

    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:jworld:v:2:y:2021:i:4:p:30-504:d:680935. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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 (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.