Development of sustainable pervious concrete: effects of coal gangue and GGBS on strength, frost resistance, and carbon efficiency

Abstract

To explore the feasibility of recycling industrial waste as building materials, this study developed an environmentally friendly, low-carbon pervious concrete (PC). This study used coal gangue micro-powder (CGMP) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) as supplementary cementitious materials to partially replace cement. Coal gangue sand (CGS) was used as fine aggregate, while municipal solid waste incineration slag (MSWI) and natural crushed stone aggregate (NCA) were used as coarse aggregates. The study investigated the effects of single-doping of CGMP (proportions: 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%) and composite doping of CGMP and GGBS (total admixture amount of 30% with CGMP-to-GGBS ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 2:1) on the compressive, splitting tensile, and flexural strength, permeability, pore structure, and frost resistance of PC. Additionally, carbon dioxide (CO₂₎ emissions and cost analyses were conducted. The results showed that single-doping of CGMP led to a decline in the mechanical properties and a deterioration of the permeability of PC. When the two materials were co-doped at a ratio of 1:2, the specimens exhibited a synergistic improvement in mechanical properties, although the permeability decreased. The 7-day and 28-day compressive strengths were 19.8 MPa and 24.6 MPa, respectively, and the permeability coefficient was 1.9 mm/s. In terms of freeze–thaw resistance, increasing the proportion of GGBS in the composite doping of mineral admixtures could improve frost resistance. Furthermore, the loss rate of compressive strength proved to be the most sensitive indicator of freeze–thaw effects, making it the most suitable parameter for durability assessment. In terms of carbon efficiency, life cycle assessment (LCA) indicates that compared with normal concrete pavement (NCP), the life-cycle carbon emissions per cubic meter of PC pavement prepared by the G10S20 scheme (a composite doping scheme with a total admixture content of 30%, including 10% CGMP and 20% GGBS) are reduced by 14.28% (from 410.148 kg CO₂e to 351.577 kg CO₂e), and by 14.80% compared with normal pervious concrete pavement (NPCP). In addition, cost analysis confirms that the construction cost of G10S20 pavement is 22.38% lower than that of NCP and 14.46% lower than that of NPCP. This material can effectively alleviate urban waterlogging, mitigate the heat island effect, and has both low-carbon and economic advantages when applied in scenarios such as urban roads, squares, and park ground paving. It thus provides practical evidence for the promotion of sustainable building materials.

Keywords

Solid waste powder / Property modification / Pore structure analysis / Carbon dioxide emission reduction / Cost analysis

References

[1] Lineman M, Do Y, Kim JY, Joo GJ. Talking about climate change and global warming. PLoS ONE, 2015, 10(9e0138996

[2] Shrestha AB, Aryal R. Climate change in Nepal and its impact on Himalayan glaciers. Regional Environmental Change, 2011, 11: 65-77.

[3] Mimura N. Sea-level rise caused by climate change and its implications for society. Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Series B, Physical and Biological Sciences, 2013, 89(7): 281-301.

[4] Huang L, Krigsvoll G, Johansen F, Liu Y, Zhang X. Carbon emission of global construction sector. Renewable And Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2018, 81: 1906-1916.

[5] Akan MÖA, Dhavale DG, Sarkis J. Greenhouse gas emissions in the construction industry: An analysis and evaluation of a concrete supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 167: 1195-1207.

[6] Onat NC, Kucukvar M. Carbon footprint of construction industry: A global review and supply chain analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2020, 124109783

[7] Li, S., Liu, J., Yu, C., Li, Z., & Xie, W. (2024). Study on the performance of ternary blended cement with calcined clay and recycled concrete powder. Low-carbon Materials and Green Construction, 2(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44242-024-00035-9

[8] Wu H, Sun B, Liu Z, Yin J. Laboratory-simulated investigation on thermal behaviours of pervious concrete pavements. Road Materials And Pavement Design, 2017, 18(sup3): 97-108.

[9] Li H, Harvey JT, Holland TJ, Kayhanian M. The use of reflective and permeable pavements as a potential practice for heat island mitigation and stormwater management. Environmental Research Letters, 2013, 8(1015023

[10] Zhong R, Leng Z, Poon CS. Research and application of pervious concrete as a sustainable pavement material: A state-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice review. Construction and Building Materials, 2018, 183: 544-553.

[11] Lee MG, Tia M, Chuang SH, Huang Y, Chiang CL. Pollution and purification study of the pervious concrete pavement material. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 2014, 268): 04014035.

[12] Huang J, Luo Z, Khan MBE. Impact of aggregate type and size and mineral admixtures on the properties of pervious concrete: An experimental investigation. Construction and Building Materials, 2020, 265120759

[13] Tarangini, D., Kiranmaye, B. R., Sravana, P., & Rao, P. S. (2021). Mix design challenges of porous concrete pavements modified with mineral admixtures. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 1091, No. 1, p. 012054). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1091/1/012054

[14] Li, T., Tang, X., & Xia, J. (2024). Functional characteristics of sustainable pervious cement concrete pavement modified by silica fume and travertine waste. Ceramics–Silikáty, 68(4), 582–597. https://doi.org/10.13168/cs.2024.0057

[15] Wu D, Chen T, Hou D, Zhang X, Wang M, Wang X. Utilization of coal gangue powder to improve the sustainability of ultra-high performance concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 2023, 385131482

[16] Liu B, Shi J, Liang H, Jiang J, Yang Y, He Z. Synergistic enhancement of mechanical property of the high replacement low-calcium ultrafine fly ash blended cement paste by multiple chemical activators. Journal of Building Engineering, 2020, 32101520

[17] De Weerdt K, Kjellsen KO, Sellevold E, Justnes H. Synergy between fly ash and limestone powder in ternary cements. Cement and Concrete Composites, 2011, 331): 30-38.

[18] Wang, P. X., Huang, H. C., Gui, M. M., Quan, M., Liu, J., & Ye, J. W. (2014). Study on influencing factors and mechanical properties of road pervious concrete materials. Concrete and Cement Products, (3), 1–4. (in Chinese) https://doi.org/10.19761/j.1000-4637.2014.03.001

[19] Zhou, L., Fan, Z. Q., An, S. X., Ma, S. C., Zuo, T., Jin, C. T., & Liu, C. K. (2018). Effect of mineral admixtures on the performance of pervious concrete. Concrete and Cement Products, 9, 1–5. (in Chinese) https://doi.org/10.19761/j.1000-4637.2018.09.001

[20] Park CK, Noh MH, Park TH. Rheological properties of cementitious materials containing mineral admixtures. Cement and Concrete Research, 2005, 35(5): 842-849.

[21] Ding Y, Ahmad MR, Chen B, Yu X. Ground granulated blast furnace slag-modified magnesium phosphate cement used as grouting material: Workability, mechanical property and corrosion resistance optimization. Journal of Building Engineering, 2024, 96110450

[22] Zhang S, Ding J, Guo C, Gao P, Wei X. Utilization of waste marine dredged clay in preparing controlled low strength materials with polycarboxylate superplasticizer and ground granulated blast furnace slag. Journal of Building Engineering, 2023, 76107351

[23] Lothenbach B, Scrivener K, Hooton RD. Supplementary cementitious materials. Cement and Concrete Research, 2011, 41(12): 1244-1256.

[24] Scrivener KL, Juilland P, Monteiro PJ. Advances in understanding hydration of Portland cement. Cement and Concrete Research, 2015, 78: 38-56.

[25] Zhu, H. F., Lou, L., Zhang, D. S., & Mao, M. J. (2024). Evaluation and analysis of pervious concrete performance based on pore structure characteristics. Ningxia Engineering Technology, 23(2), 146–153+159. (in Chinese) https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7244.2024.02.009

[26] Qiao Y, Sun W, Jiang J. Damage process of concrete subjected to coupling fatigue load and freeze/thaw cycles. Construction and Building Materials, 2015, 93: 806-811.

[27] Yan W, Wu Z, Niu F, Wan T, Zheng H. Study on the service life prediction of freeze–thaw damaged concrete with high permeability and inorganic crystal waterproof agent additions based on ultrasonic velocity. Construction and Building Materials, 2020, 259120405

[28] Zhao, S. Y., Li, Y., Kang, X. M., & Fan, Y. H. (2020). Experimental study on frost resistance of recycled micronized concrete. Industrial Construction, 50(11), 112–118+96. (in Chinese) https://doi.org/10.13204/j.gyjzG19122606

[29] Khan M, Cao M, Hussain A, Chu SH. Effect of silica-fume content on performance of CaCO3 whisker and basalt fiber at matrix interface in cement-based composites. Construction and Building Materials, 2021, 300124046

[30] Vardhan K, Goyal S, Siddique R, Singh M. Mechanical properties and microstructural analysis of cement mortar incorporating marble powder as partial replacement of cement. Construction and Building Materials, 2015, 96: 615-621.

[31] International Organization for Standardization. (2006). ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines. Geneva: ISO.

[32] Hoxha E, Passer A, Mendes Saade MR, Trigaux D, Shuttleworth A, Pittau F, Habert G. Biogenic carbon in buildings: A critical overview of LCA methods. Buildings & Cities, 2020, 1(1): 504-524.

[33] Liu M, Jia S, Liu X. Evaluation of mitigation potential of GHG emissions from the construction of prefabricated subway station. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 236117700

[34] Liu M, Jia S, Li P, Liu X, Zhang Y. Predicting GHG emissions from subway lines in the planning stage on a city level. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 259120823

[35] Zhang Y, Luo W, Wang J, Wang Y, Xu Y, Xiao J. A review of life cycle assessment of recycled aggregate concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 2019, 209: 115-125.

[36] Tait MW, Cheung WM. A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2016, 21: 847-860.

[37] Bostanci SC, Limbachiya M, Kew H. Use of recycled aggregates for low carbon and cost effective concrete construction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 189: 176-196.

[38] Xiao J, Zhang H, Tang Y, Deng Q, Wang D, Poon CS. Fully utilizing carbonated recycled aggregates in concrete: Strength, drying shrinkage and carbon emissions analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 377134520

[39] Kelechi SE, Adamu M, Mohammed A, Obianyo II, Ibrahim YE, Alanazi H. Equivalent CO₂ emission and cost analysis of green self-compacting rubberized concrete. Sustainability, 2021, 14(1): 137.

[40] Kim T, Chae CU. Evaluation analysis of the CO₂ emission and absorption life cycle for precast concrete in Korea. Sustainability, 2016, 8(7): 663.

[41] Zhao J, Wang A, Zhang Z, Dai JG, Liu K, Wang Y, Sun D. Hybrid fiber reinforced ultra-high performance coal gangue geopolymer concrete (UHPGC): Mechanical properties, enhancement mechanism, carbon emission and economic analysis. Journal of Building Engineering, 2024, 96110428

[42] Zafar I, Rashid K, Tariq S, Ali A, Ju M. Integrating technical-environmental-economical perspectives for optimizing rubber content in concrete by multi-criteria analysis. Construction and Building Materials, 2022, 319125820

[43] Liu JC, Hossain MU, Ng ST, Ye H. High-performance green concrete with high-volume natural pozzolan: Mechanical, carbon emission and cost analysis. Journal of Building Engineering, 2023, 68106087

[44] Singh M, Choudhary K, Srivastava A, Singh Sangwan K, Bhunia D. A study on environmental and economic impacts of using waste marble powder in concrete. Journal of Building Engineering, 2017, 13: 87-95.

[45] Saha S, Sau D, Hazra T. Economic viability analysis of recycling waste plastic as aggregates in green sustainable concrete. Waste Management, 2023, 169: 289-300.

[46] Panesar DK, Kanraj D, Abualrous Y. Effect of transportation of fly ash: Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites, 2019, 99: 214-224.

[47] Younis A, Ebead U, Judd S. Life cycle cost analysis of structural concrete using seawater, recycled concrete aggregate, and GFRP reinforcement. Construction and Building Materials, 2018, 175: 152-160.

[48] Shi X, Mukhopadhyay A, Zollinger D, Grasley Z. Economic input-output life cycle assessment of concrete pavement containing recycled concrete aggregate. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 225: 414-425.

[49] Shaker, M. R., Bhalala, M., Kargar, Q., & Chang, B. (2020). Evaluation of alternative home-produced concrete strength with economic analysis. Sustainability, 12(17), 6746. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176746

[50] Demissew, A. (2022). Comparative Analysis of Selected Concrete Mix Design Methods Based on Cost‐Effectiveness. Advances in Civil Engineering, 1, 4240774. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4240774

[51] Aktas, C. B., & Bilec, M. M. (2012). Impact of lifetime on US residential building LCA results. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,17(3), 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-011-0363-x

[52] Wang, J., Pan, K., Sha, C., Wang, Z., Sun, Y., & Kang, Y. (2024). Carbon emission calculation and uncertainty analysis of asphalt concrete during the production stage. Construction and Building Materials,447, Article 138007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.138007

[53] Li S, Han G, Du B, Jiang Z, Sun L. Carbon emissions assessment of ultra-high performance concrete in construction industry: Calculation method and case study. Energy and Buildings, 2025, 329115260

Funding

Ningxia University(NXYLXK 2021A03)

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

The Author(s)