Back to Search Start Over

Life cycle analysis of environmental impacts of earthen materials in the Portuguese context: Rammed earth and compressed earth blocks.

Authors :
Fernandes, Jorge
Peixoto, Marco
Mateus, Ricardo
Gervásio, Helena
Source :
Journal of Cleaner Production. Dec2019, Vol. 241, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Publication Year :
2019

Abstract

In the Portuguese context, the life cycle assessment of building materials is still in its infancy. So far, there is only a small number of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) available, all target for industrially-based materials. Although vernacular earthen materials are seen as ecological materials, with low potential environmental impacts, there are no studies that allow to quantitatively compare these materials with conventional ones, according to the applicable standards. In the case of Portugal, there are no EPDs or studies for these materials and the studies available worldwide are hard to compare, since they not follow the same life-cycle assessment methodology. This paper aims at contributing to a better understanding about the environmental performance of earthen materials by presenting results from the life cycle assessment of Compressed Earth Blocks (CEBs) and Rammed earth, based on specific life cycle inventory values obtained from a producer company, following the guidance provided by the standard EN15804. Among other conclusions, results show that CEB and Rammed earth have a total Embodied Energy of 3.94 MJ/block and 596 MJ/1 m3 and a Global Warming Potential of 0.39 kg CO 2 eq/block and 47.5 kg CO 2 eq./1 m3, respectively. In a cradle-to-gate analysis of different walls, the use of earthen building elements can result in reducing the potential environmental impacts in about 50%, when compared to the use of conventional ones. Additionally, the advantages of using earthen materials are also discussed for the different building life-cycle stages, focusing on the possibility to recycle these materials in a closed-loop approach. Image 1 • RE and CEB have a higher environmental performance than conventional materials. • RE and CEB have about half the impacts of conventional materials in GWP and EE. • The use of lime as stabiliser represents >60% of impacts in all indicators. • RE and CEB can be returned to the natural environment at very small environmental cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
09596526
Volume :
241
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
138988120
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118286