Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Technical and environmental performance of eggshell lime for soil

stabilization
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha a,⇑, Cecília Gravina da Rocha b, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo a, Nilo Cesar Consoli a
a
Graduate Program in Civil Engineering, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS 90035-190, Brazil
b
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, Australia

h i g h l i g h t s

 Physical-chemical and mineralogical characterization of eggshell limes.

 Eggshell lime is suitable for soil stabilization (strength and stiffness)
 Life cycle assessment to compare impacts of eggshell versus conventional limes.
 Elimination of limestone related processes reduces impacts for eggshell limes.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Searching for alternative materials to reduce the extraction of natural resources is key to a more sustain-
Received 5 July 2020 able world and relevant to construction and infrastructure projects in which large amounts of materials
Received in revised form 8 May 2021 are used. Eggshell is a solid waste that is rich in calcium carbonate and can potentially replace limestone
Accepted 12 May 2021
for lime production. This research examines the environmental impacts of eggshell limes and commer-
cially available limes using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). In addition, a physical–chemical and mineralog-
ical characterization of eggshell limes and an assessment of the strength and stiffness of a sandy soil
Keywords:
stabilized with ground glass and such limes are carried out. Results show that eggshell limes have
Eggshell waste
Quicklime
reduced impacts for aquatic ecotoxicity, terrestrial ecotoxicity and land occupation when compared to
Hydrated lime traditional limes as two processes (Quarrying of limestone and Limestone improvement) are eliminated.
Physical–chemical-mineralogical A reduction of 65.1% in damage to Ecosystem quality was observed for eggshell quicklime (versus quick-
characterization lime from limestone) and of 50% for eggshell hydrated lime (versus hydrated lime from limestone).
Soil stabilization Eggshell limes were found to have adequate physical–chemical-mineralogical characteristics for soil sta-
Environmental performance bilization applications, being composed by 97.0% calcium oxide and 2.0% magnesium oxide (quicklime)
and by 89.6% calcium hydroxide, 2.9% magnesium hydroxide and 5% calcium carbonate (hydrated lime).
Lastly, both limes improved the strength and stiffness of the studied soil by reacting with ground glass
(pozzolan).
Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction properties for construction and infrastructure projects), in which

Resource extraction creates considerable environmental
impacts particularly for infrastructure projects such as roads,
embankments, foundations that often require large quantities of
raw materials. Incorporating waste or by-products from other
industries with binding characteristics provides a mean to reduce
the consumption of such resources. [1]. This also applies to
geotechnical engineering (focused on the foundations and base
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: rodrigo.saldanha@ufrgs.br (R.B. Saldanha), cecilia.rocha@uts.
edu.au (C.G. da Rocha), 00296662@ufrgs.br (A.M.L. Caicedo), consoli@ufrgs.br
(N.C. Consoli).
calcium-based materials (e.g., lime), and Portland cement are com-
monly used for soil stabilization. Soil stabilization is a technique to
improve soils performance by (i) adding binders (usually cement or
lime) [2], (ii) changing the granulometry, (iii) increasing the soil
density [3], etc. Techniques with alternative (non-traditional)
materials have also been explored in the geotechnical field using
biologic approaches [4], biopolymer [5], gasification biochar [6],
bio-technological waste [7], and hydrated lime from industrial
waste [8] to replace traditional binders and avoid environmental
impacts.
Prior research has shown that alkaline materials such as cal-
cium hydroxide [9], quicklime [10] or sodium hydroxide [11],

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123648
0950-0618/Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
combined with a pozzolanic material (e.g., fly ash, natural poz-
zolana, and ground glass) produce a binder (calcium silicate
hydrate and calcium aluminate silicate), potentially applicable to
soil stabilization. Horpibulsuk et al. [12] obtained satisfactory
results in strength by adding a pozzolanic soil and lime to a prob-
lematic soil in Thailand. Sharma and Sivapullaiah [13] combined
industrial waste (fly ash and blast furnace slag) with lime to stabi-
lize an expansive soil. Consoli et al. [14] used carbide lime and
ground glass for stabilizing a sandy soil and a clayey sand and
found that durability, strength and stiffness improved. This suggest
that lime is an important activator material for ground improve-
ment applications.
Lime has been extensively used as an alkaline activator of poz-
zolana for binder formation. Yet, the calcination process for obtain-
ing calcium oxide (CaO) has a high environmental impact due to
high energy consumption and CO2 production for converting
CaCO3 (limestone) to CaO (quicklime) [15]. In order to address this
problem, a number of sustainability studies have been focused on
(i) the efficiency of calcination processes and how these can be
improved or (ii) environmental-friendly energy sources for such
process. An example is the use of alternative fuels for recirculation
and recovery of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions [16]. In spite of
that, limestone extraction and processing remains a key environ-
mental problem [17] as it creates forests stripping, water deple-
tion, soil and air pollution, depletion of natural flora and fauna,
reduction of biodiversity, landscape changes, and degradation of
agricultural land [18].
In this context, searching for new materials and optimizing the
use of existing ones to improve soils properties become key. Egg-
shells are a source of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) that when prop-
erly calcined can be transformed into quicklime (CaO) and later
into hydrated lime (CaOH2) [19]. According to FAO [20], egg pro-
duction in the world in 2016 was approximately 81 million tons.
Considering that 10% of such mass accounts for shells [21], the
annual production for that year can be equated to 8.1 million tons.
Converting such material from a waste (normally disposed of in
landfills) into a by-product for soils stabilization provides an eco-
nomic and environmental opportunity.
Eggshells have been used for correcting soils pH, animal feed-
ing, and for removing heavy metals from contaminated water
and soil [22]. In the construction sector, calcium oxide (CaO) from
eggshells has been used as hydrated lime [Ca(OH)2] for mortars
[23] and for stabilizing a clay soil with blast furnace slag [24]. Cal-
cium Carbonate (CaCO3) from eggshell, unprocessed, was also used
as a partial substitute (up to 30% by weight) of Portland cement for
producing soil–cement bricks [25]. Maduabuchi et al. [26] applied
Calcium Carbonate (CaCO3) from eggshell powder (without calci-
nations) as a raw material for a lateritic soil stabilization. Shekha-
wat et al. [27] use eggshell powder and fly ash with an alkaline
activator solution to create a sustainable building material with
potential application for road base/subgrade. Ferraz et al. [28] per-
formed the characterization of limes [Ca(OH)2 and CaO] from egg-
shells and proposed that this waste becomes a partial substitute
for limestone in buildings construction. The referred authors also
indicated potential environmental benefits in using eggshells for
lime production, but no further details on such potential benefits
were presented. Bensaifi et al. [24] applied hydrated eggshell lime
and blast furnace slag to stabilize a soil in Algeria and showed that
calcined eggshell activated blast furnace slag can be used as an
effective binder for stabilizing clay soils. Recently, Consoli et. al.
[29,30] studied and patented a mixture of quick and hydrated egg-
shell lime with glass powder for soil stabilization. The referred
authors found that eggshell lime has satisfactory characteristics
for geotechnical practices and its combination with ground glass
forms a novel binder. A few recent studies have investigated egg-
shell limes and their use for different civil engineering applica-
2
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
tions. However, the environmental benefits of replacing
traditional limes for this new material requires a more detailed
examination.
LCA is an environmental management technique and standard-
ized method [31,32] focused on environmental impacts of a pro-
duct or a service over its lifecycle, which can also be applied in
waste-resource recycling. For example, Lee et al. [33] applied LCA
to compare the environmental impacts of eggshell and oyster shell
waste used to soil pH correction. This eliminates the extraction of
limestone and the landfilling of eggshell waste, but increases
energy consumption, which is needed for calcination. Zhang et al.
[34] proposed a LCA-base framework to evaluate cement manufac-
turing using of carbide slag for reducing CO2 emissions. Navia et al.
[35] found that contaminated soils can be reused in cement man-
ufacturing to decrease its environmental impact. Gutiérrez et al.
[15] used LCA to evaluate the environmental impacts of commer-
cial lime production in Cuba and found that calcination, fuel con-
sumption, electricity, and limestone extraction are main
processes contributing to such impacts. Jiang et al. [16] point out
that in the future, the environmental focus will shift towards lime-
stone extraction and mineral production.
As detailed in previous paragraphs, a few recent studies have
examined the potential of using eggshell lime for soil stabilization
from a technical viewpoint by examining the mechanical perfor-
mance of admixtures involving such waste. Yet, the environmental
benefits of eggshell waste for geotechnical applications remains
unexplored. This research seeks to address this gap by performing
a cradle to gate comparative analysis of eggshell limes (quicklime
and hydrated limes) and commercially available limes (from lime-
stone). In addition, a complete physical–chemical and mineralogi-
cal characterization of the eggshell limes and results of their
mechanical performance in the stabilization of a sandy soil are also
presented.
2. Research method
2.1. Characterization, strength and stiffness
2.1.1. Characterization of eggshell lime
This study examines four limes (quicklime and hydrated)
obtained from limestone and eggshell: (i) calcitic quicklime (con-
ventional), (ii) calcitic hydrated lime (conventional), (iii) eggshell
quicklime (alternative), and (iv) eggshell hydrated lime (alterna-
tive). Quicklime and hydrated calcitic limes (from limestone) were
bought at a local store and eggshell limes were produced (calcina-
tion and hydration) in a laboratory. Shells, which were collected in
local restaurants in Porto Alegre (southern region Brazil), were
manually crushed, passed through a 2.0 mm sieve, and dried in
the oven at 100 °C for 24 h. Batches of 200 g of crushed eggshells
were calcined in an oven at a constant temperature of 1000 °C
resulting in eggshell quicklime (EQL). The loss of mass during cal-
cination was approximately 40%. EQL was hydrated in water for
24 h and then dried at 60 °C (48 h) to produce eggshell hydrated
lime (EHL).
Limes were evaluated in terms of physical, mineralogical and
chemical composition considering the soil stabilization standard
ASTM C977 [36]. Four procedures were used for physical character-
ization: (i) specific gravity: ASTM D854 [37]; (ii) specific surface
area (using BET nitrogen adsorption); (iii) Fineness (ASTM C977
[36]); and (iv) Scanning Electron Microscopy (microscope with sur-
face imaging and energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry).
Three procedures were used for chemical and mineralogical
characterization: (i) Thermogravimetric (1 g lime specimens and
a heating rate of 10 °C/min from room temperature up to
1000 °C); (ii) X-ray diffraction (Anode material = Cu, 0.05° step size
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
and, and 5°less than2h less than 75° range); and (iii) Chemical
compounds (using X-ray fluorescent spectrometry).
2.1.2. Strength and stiffness of sand-eggshell lime blends
The examined soil is classified as poorly graded sand with silt
[38]. The calcitic limes (conventional) used meet the requirements
of established standards [36] for quicklime and hydrated limes in
soil stabilization [39]. Strength (ASTM D5102 [40]) and stiffness
(ASTM D2845 [41]) tests were used to assess the mechanical per-
formance of alternative limes (involving alkaline activation of
ground glass) for soils stabilization.
Optimum moisture content (11%) and maximum dry unit
weight (16.5 kN/m3) were established for specimens moulding
based on Proctor tests [42]. 20% of ground glass (alternative poz-
zolan) and three different contents for four limes studied (3, 5,
and 7%) were used. Consoli et al. [43] showed that stabilizing a
sandy soil using conventional lime (3, 5, and 7%) and ground glass
(25%) improves its mechanical performance.
All materials (sand, ground glass, lime and water) were weighed
according to defined proportions. Samples were statically moulded
in a tripartite mould (height 100 mm and diameter 50 mm) in
three layers to reach the established dry density. Moisture and
dry unit weight were checked for validation of samples according
to established specifications. Samples were packed in individual
plastic bags and stored in a room with controlled temperature
(23 °C) for 7 days. After curing, samples were submerged in a water
container for 24 h to reduce potential matrix suction effects during
unconfined compression strength tests.
Unconfined compression strength tests were performed at a
displacement rate of 1.14 mm/min and maximum loads were
recorded. Results were obtained by averaging results of triplicates.
Initial shear module of artificially cemented soils were determined
by ultrasonic pulse velocity tests. This test was performed using a
Fig. 1. System boundaries of limes production.
3
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
Portable Ultrasonic Non-Destructive Digital Indicating Tester (Pun-
dit) equipment. Pundit equipment has a resolution of 0.1 ls and
time measurements can range from 0.1 to 9,999 ls. Post informa-
tion processing was carried out in Pundit Lab+Ò software [44].
2.2. Environmental performance - life cycle Assessment
2.2.1. Goal and scope definition
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was used to evaluate the environ-
mental impacts of conventional hydrated lime (CHL), conventional
quicklime (CQL), eggshell hydrated lime (EHL), and eggshell quick-
lime (EQL). The goal of this LCA is to quantify and compare life
cycle impacts of conventional limes (from limestone) and eggshell
limes. The study scope is cradle to gate and involves four processes
for CHL and CQL (Fig. 1): (i) Quarrying of limestone; (ii) Limestone
improvement (crushed and washed); (iii) Quicklime production;
and (iv) Hydrated lime production. The two last processes also
apply to CQL and EQL. 1 t of quicklime (CQL or EQL) or 1 t of
hydrated lime (CHL and EHL) were considered as functional units.
Quarrying of limestone and Limestone Improvement are substi-
tuted by eggshell transportation for EQL and EHL (Fig. 1). As for cal-
cination, eggshells limes were considered to directly replace
limestone as a raw material. Grinding processes were not consid-
ered for eggshell (source of CaCO3) due to its fragile structure
and thickness. (i) Eggshell cleaning and (ii) potential alterations
in calcination processes (due to limestone replacement by egg-
shells) were not considered in the LCA due to the lack of available
data. An average transportation distance of 100 km was estab-
lished to account for diffuse locations of eggshell sources such as
restaurants, food companies, and egg-protein factories. Additional
distances (150 km, 200 km, and 250 km) were also examined to
assess the effect of varying distances on environmental impacts.
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al. Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648

2.2.2. Life cycle inventory
SimaPro software and Ecoinvent database were used to access
inventory data for processes embedded in the four systems consid-
ered (Fig. 1). Tables 1 and 2 summarize the inventory data for con-
ventional quicklime and hydrated limes and for eggshell quicklime
and hydrated limes. Global datasets were used for all inventory
data, enabling a comprehensive view of impacts and avoiding
regionalization of impacts [45]. Datasets inform input quantities
such as energy, raw material, processed material, water and out-
puts that impact water, soil and air for difference processes. The
same input flows (gate to gate) for quicklime and hydrated lime
production was considered for both conventional and eggshell
limes.
1.7 t of raw material for every 1 t of quicklime produced and
0.76 t of quick lime for every 1 t of hydrated lime produced were
considered for eggshell and conventional limes. A truck with 9 t
(12 m3) material capacity with 220 HP and autonomy of 8 km
per litre (L) of Diesel was considered for eggshells transportation.
Inventory of diesel production and diesel burned in build machines
included: 2.38 L (85.32 MJ) for 100 km, 3.57 L (134.4 MJ) for
150 km, 4.75 L (170.24 MJ) for 200 km and 5.95L (213.24 MJ) for
250 km. Distance from waste locations to processing facilities is
a relevant parameter for LCA. Christof and Esther [46] noticed that
transportation distances above 15 km for recycled concrete can
result in higher environmental impacts than conventional
concrete.
cation of a combined midpoint/damage approach, linking all types
of inventory results in fifteen midpoint categories (impact cate-
gories) combined in four endpoints damage categories
(IMPACT2002 + v2.15 from SimaPro software). Impact categories
(midpoints) use the reference substance obtained from inventory
data to measure environmental impacts. These contribute to one
or more damage categories (endpoints): (i) human health, (ii)
ecosystem quality, (iii) climate change, and (iv) resources. Such
categories are measured, respectively, in (i) DALY, (ii) PDF-square
meter per year, (iii) kg CO2-eq and (iv) MJ, where DALY = Disability
adjusted life years, PDF = Potentially Disappeared Fraction of spe-
cies [48].
For example, Resources (endpoint) uses (i) mineral extraction
and (ii) non-renewable energy as midpoints [40]. Energy consump-
tion (MJ) involved in mineral extraction is summed to non-
renewable energy (already in MJ) to create the end point
(Resources). Human health uses concentrations of certain elements
with chronic toxicological effects (e.g., Chloroethylene into air-eq
and Chlorofluorocarbon-11 into air-eq) measured by Carcinogens
and Ozone layer depletion (midpoints). Such concentrations are
used to estimate life years lost and human disabled effects mea-
sured by DALY [48,49,50].
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Characterization

2.2.3. Impact evaluation and interpretation of results 3.1.1. Physical

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) method links each input Standard ASTM C977 [36] establishes fineness limits for
and output within the product system to corresponding environ- hydrated lime in soil stabilization: maximum percentages retained
mental impacts. In this study, IMPACT2002 + method was used in sieves #30 (0.60 mm) equal to 3% and 25% for sieves #200
through SimaPro software. This method proposes a practical appli- (0.075 mm). Results for eggshell hydrated lime in this study have

Table 1
Inventory database for conventional quicklime and hydrated limes.

Products (Output flow) Input flow Value Specific Dataset

Quicklime and Hydrated Lime
Quarrying of Limestone 1.7 t Kellenberger, D., limestone quarry operation, RoW (Rest-of-World) Allocation,
ecoinvent database version 3.5. [47]
Limestone 1.7 t Kellenberger, D., limestone production, crushed, washed, RoW Allocation,
improvement ecoinvent database version 3.5.[47]
Quicklime production 1t Kellenberger, D., quicklime production, in pieces, loose, RoW Allocation,
ecoinvent database version 3.5. [47]
Hydrated lime 1t Kellenberger, D., lime production, hydrated, loose weight, RoW Allocation,
production ecoinvent database version 3.5. [47]

Table 2
Inventory data for eggshell quicklime and hydrated limes.

Products (Output Input flow Value Specific Dataset Change

flow)
Eggshell Quicklime Diesel 2.38 L (100 km); 3.57 L System, market for diesel, Global
and Eggshell production (150 km); 4.75 L (200 Allocation, ecoinvent database version
Hydrated Lime km); 5.95 L (250 km) 3.5. [47]
Transportation 100 km (85.32 MJ); Kellenberger, D., diesel, burned in
150 km (134.40 MJ); building machine, Global Allocation,
200 km (170.24 MJ); ecoinvent database version 3.5. [47]
250 km (213.24 MJ)
Quicklime 1t Kellenberger, D., quicklime Quarrying of limestone and Limestone improvement
production production, in pieces, loose, RoW processes (Table 1) were removed from the system.
Allocation, ecoinvent database version
3.5. [47]
Hydrated lime 1t Kellenberger, D., lime production, Quarrying of limestone and Limestone improvement
production hydrated, loose weight, RoW processes (Table 1) were removed from the system.
Allocation, ecoinvent database version Modified quicklime production was added in Hydrated
3.5. [47] lime production chain.

4
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al. Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648

Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy for (a) quicklime and (b) hydrated lime from eggshell.

zero retained (sieve #30) and 35% retained (sieve #200). These linked to not performing the grinding in this experiment. Milling
results meet the limit of 3% of sieve #30, but not the limit of 25% is usually made for commercial limes production. Eggshell grinding
of sieve #200. will increase specific surface areas and materials’ finesses, improv-
Eggshell quicklime has a granulometry of less than 2 mm meet- ing its soil stabilization properties.
ing specifications of quicklime standards for soil stabilization [36].
For exothermic reactions of quicklime in water, temperature rise 3.1.2. Mineralogical and chemical
was verified when materials were hydrated in the ratio 1:4 Fig. 3 present X-ray diffraction (XRD) results for eggshell quick-
(solid/liquid). Temperature increased to 58 °C in 10 min and above lime and eggshell hydrated lime. They show calcium oxide (CaO),
30 °C in 20 min as established by standard [36]. Quicklime
provides satisfactory levels of free CaO to react with water in soil
stabilization processes.
EQL has a specific surface area (SSA) of 4.06 m2/g and EHL has
SSA of 4.80 m2/g. SSA is an important property because it indicates
available contact areas of lime for chemical reactions. Ferraz et al.
[28] found a lower value for eggshell lime with 1.4 m2/g reducing
its reactivity compared to conventional limes. Calcitic limes have
values between 11 m2/g and 18 m2/g [51]. Specific gravity of EQL
and EHL grains were 2.48 g/cm3 and 2.09 g/cm3, determined by
ASTM D854 test [29] using kerosene instead of water. Physical
characteristics of eggshell quick and hydrated lime may vary
according to methods used to grind shells, among other reasons
[52].
Fig. 2a and 2b show scanning electron microscopy (SEM) results
for EQL and EHL. Fig. 1a shows quicklime morphology, which
reveals a unique porous mass with micro textural homogeneity,
similar to commercial quicklime [53]. SEM results (Fig. 1b) reveal
that EHL consists of clusters with irregular surface, and hexagonal
forms are typical of hydrated lime [54]. Eggshell limes have com-
patible morphological characteristics for generating products sim-
ilar to calcitic limes. Its smaller specific surface and fineness are Fig. 3. X-ray diffraction (XRD) of quicklime and hydrated lime from eggshell.

5
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
magnesium oxide (MgO) and portlandite [Ca(OH)2] as predomi-
nant minerals for EQL; and portlandite [Ca(OH)2], calcite (CaCO3)
and magnesium peroxide (MgO2) as predominant minerals for
EHL. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) results of EQL in Fig. 4
show two distinct peaks (DTG), corresponding to calcium hydrox-
ide decomposition [Ca(OH)2] and calcium carbonate (CaCO3)
degradation. The total mass loss of 3.5% occurred in two different
temperature ranges: (i) a mass loss of 1.1%, between temperatures
of 385 °C and 570 °C, attributed to Ca(OH)2 degradation, and (ii)
mass loss of 2.3%, between temperatures of 570 °C and 800 °C,
attributed to calcium carbonate (CaCO3) degradation. Stoichiomet-
rically, EQL consists of 4.6% Ca(OH)2 and 5.2% CaCO3.
TGA results of EHL in Fig. 4 show three distinct peaks (DTG),
which correspond to the decomposition of magnesium hydroxide
[Mg(OH)2], Ca(OH)2 and the degradation of CaCO3, respectively. A
total mass loss of 25.2% occurred in three different temperature
ranges. The initial mass loss in the 320°-385 °C range, due to the
loss of Mg(OH)2 decomposition, was about 0.9%. During the test
in the temperature range of 385 °C to 570 °C, the loss in mass is
attributed to the decomposition of Ca(OH)2 [55], and was about
21.8%. With the additional increase in temperatures above
575 °C, the loss in mass was 2.2%, attributed to the degradation
of calcium carbonate and which also corresponds to the amount
of CO2 present in the sample. CO2 contents in EHL meets the stan-
dard of 5% established in ASTM C977 [36]. Stoichiometrically,
hydrated eggshell lime consists of 2.9% Mg(OH)2, 89.6% Ca(OH)2
and 5% CaCO3. Saldanha [39] reported 81.0% of Ca(OH)2 and
9.40% of CaCO3 in their studies with calcitic lime. This indicates
that EHL used in this study has more Ca(OH)2 for alkali-
activation. Low CaCO3 contents (5%) gives a high quality of
hydrated lime and indicates that calcination procedures of eggshell
limes were satisfactory. Moropoulou et al. [56] found that calcina-
tion temperatures are important in quick lime reactivity and con-
sequently for hydrated limes.
Based on X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF), main chemical
components for EQL are: 97% calcium oxide, 2.4% magnesium
oxide, and less than 1% of metal oxides, such as Fe2O3, Al2O3,
SiO2 and SrO. This same test identified chemical components for
EHL: 97.0% calcium oxide, 2.0% magnesium oxide, and less than
Fig. 4. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) of quicklime and hydrated lime from
eggshell.
6
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
1% of each metal oxide, such as Fe2O3, Al2O3, SiO2 and SrO. Such
results show that both limes meet the minimum amount of at least
90% calcium oxide (CaO) for soil stabilization purposes according
ASTM C977 [36]. High calcium contents of eggshell limes are
directly correlated with high contents of this component in the
raw material source. Eggshell waste is mainly composed of calcium
carbonate with values of up to 94% of this component and is a
source of Ca+ [57].
3.1.3. Mechanical performance of eggshell lime-sand-ground glass
blends
Fig. 5 presents comparative results of unconfined compressive
strength (UCS) and shear modules (G0) for the stabilized sand with
ground glass (GG) for conventional (calcitic) quicklime and
hydrated lime (CQL and CHL), and eggshell quicklime and hydrated
lime (EQL and EHL). Increasing lime content raises both UCS and G0
for all four limes examined. Mechanical response also depends on
the type of lime: strength and stiffness were greater when eggshell
limes were used. Such differences can be partially explained by Ca
(OH)2 and CaO contents in eggshell limes. As detailed in previous
sections, eggshell limes have a large amount of calcium oxide
and calcium hydroxide that benefit reactions between the poz-
zolanic material and lime in binders formation. Eggshell limes also
have a uniform morphology, as shown in Fig. 2, indicating it is
mainly formed by calcium hydroxide or oxides which explains
the satisfactory performance for soil stabilization. EHL showed a
Fig. 5. Effect of quicklime and hydrated lime from eggshell on unconfined
compressive strength and initial shear modulus of sand-ground glass-lime blends.
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al. Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648

superior performance in stabilizing the studied soil, despite its
inferior surface area and fineness (outside what is recommended
in the standard [36]). Eggshell quicklime had superior mechanical
results than conventional quicklime due to its chemical,
morphological and mineralogical characteristics. These initial
results suggest that the studied eggshell limes are suitable for soil
stabilization. Although Fig. 5 indicates that such limes provide
superior performance, it is important to recall that they were cre-
ated in a laboratory environment. Further assessments of eggshell
limes produced in a large industrial scale are needed to corroborate
these initial results.
3.2. Environmental performance
3.2.1. Characterized mid-point impacts
Table 3 and Fig. 6 show the fifteen impacts for 1 ton of lime in
quantities (kg of material or energy) or in percentages. The impact
of the lime with the highest impact (conventional quicklime) for
each category was considered to be 100% and the impact of the
other limes was calculated proportionally (Fig. 6). For example,
conventional quicklime (CQL) generated 3.21 kg of chloroethylene
in the air-eq for the carcinogenic category (Table 3), while eggshell
hydrated lime (EHL) generated 2.38, resulting in a relative impact
of 74% (2.38 divided by 3.21) for EHL.
Eggshell limes have lower environmental impacts for all mid-
point categories, especially for mineral extraction, land occupation,
territorial ecotoxicity, and aquatic ecotoxicity (Fig. 6). This is
because eggshell limes do not require limestone extraction (Quar-
rying of limestone) and processing (Limestone improvement), reduc-
ing inputs from technosphere for industrial process (e.g., electricity
and diesel) and inputs from environment (e.g. occupation/transfor-
mation of mineral extraction site, water and forest transforma-
tion). Elimination of these inputs reduces the emissions of
reference substances (output), creating a lower environmental
impact. Exploration, extraction, and use of minerals will increase
in the future bringing significant environmental impacts [17]. As
a result, reducing their use is key for a sustainable development
[58].
Mineral extraction had results of 10.7% for eggshell hydrated
lime and 97.1% for conventional hydrated lime. Likewise, eggshell
quicklime impact is 11.35% versus 100% for conventional lime.
Eliminating the energy supply (e.g., diesel consumed by machines)
involved in limestone quarrying and improvement lowers impacts
for this category. Although, diesel consumption (required for egg-
shells transportation) was added, its impacts are still minor com-
pared to the fuel required for limestone quarrying and
improvement. Similarly, eggshell limes do not involve mineral
extraction (i.e., quarrying was excluded for eggshell limes), gener-
ating a lower impact on land occupation. Lee et al. [33] also found a
reduced environmental impact in LCA analysis of eggshell limes
production. However, the energy consumption for calcination still
accounts for a significant impact on life cycle for eggshell limes.
Categories with similar impacts for alternative and conven-
tional limes include ozone layer depletion, respiratory organics,
global warming, and non-renewable energy. Using eggshells as a
raw material did not considerably reduce emissions of Chlorofluo-
rocarbon, Ethylene, Carbon dioxide and energy (MJ). This is
because a major portion of these chemical components and of
the energy consumed are related to calcination and hydration pro-
cesses, which do not change for conventional and alternatives
limes. Converting CaCO3 into CaO via calcination is an energy-
intensive step often provided by sources hazardous to the environ-
ment [59]. This explains minor reductions in impact for such cate-
gories when comparing alternative and conventional limes (i.e.,
EQL versus CQL and EHL versus CHL). More environmentally sus-
tainable energy sources are needed to reduce calcination impacts.
Eggshell limes performed better than conventional limes for a
number of categories: carcinogens, non-carcinogens, respiratory
inorganics, ionizing radiation, terrestrial acidification/ nitrification,
aquatic acidification and aquatic eutrophication. This is because
alternatives limes systems do not use equipment/machines,
energy, land occupation, burning of fossil fuels and natural
resources (specially limestone) in quarrying and improvement pro-
cess of limestone. As a result, eggshell limes have reductions in
impact for the above-listed categories. Hydrated limes (alternative
and conventional) also have lower impacts compared to quick-
limes because they need a smaller amount of quicklime in their
production chain. Hydrated lime needs 0.76 kg of quicklime for
producing 1 kg of this hydrated material. As a result, conventional
or alternative hydrated lime are more environmentally friendly
options compared to quicklimes.
3.2.2. Characterized end-point impacts
Table 4 and Fig. 7 show four damage categories for 1 t for the
four limes examined in quantities and percentages. The impact of
conventional quicklime was considered to be 100% in the end-
point impacts. Each category with a reduction in impact, less than
100%, represents superior environmental performance compared

Table 3
Environmental impacts for 1 ton of EHL, CHL, EQL and CQL.

Impact category Unit Eggshell Hydrated Lime Conventional Hydrated Eggshell Quicklime Conventional Quicklime
(EHL) Lime (CHL) (EQL) (CQL)
Carcinogens kg C2H3Cl eq 2.381 2.558 2.997 3.216
Non-carcinogens kg C2H3Cl eq 1.387 1.852 1.652 2.237
Respiratory inorganics kg PM2.5 eq 0.182 0.204 0.218 0.252
Ionizing radiation Bq C-14 eq 1868.241 2306.808 2381.492 2910.712
Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 5.01 5.04 6.43 6.51
(1 0 5)
Respiratory organics kg C2H4 eq 0.079 0.084 0.099 0.108
Aquatic ecotoxicity kg TEG water 6062.717 22759.306 6964.580 28659.898
Terrestrial ecotoxicity kg TEG soil 2118.153 6468.423 2562.835 8206.057
Terrestrial acid/nutrification kg SO2 eq 3.497 3.752 4.258 4.736
Land occupation m2org.arable 0.256 0.960 0.282 1.184
Aquatic acidification kg SO2 eq 0.980 1.031 1.212 1.298
Aquatic eutrophication kg PO3-
4 eq 0.025 0.028 0.031 0.035
Global warming kg CO2 eq 900.002 905.894 1160.296 1169.914
Non-renewable energy MJ primary 4451.897 4532.049 5662.709 5799.002
Mineral extraction MJ surplus 0.108 0.983 0.115 1.013

7
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al. Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648

Fig. 6. Comparison between eggshell limes and conventional limes for environmental impact potential categories (midpoints).

Table 4
Damage impact category for conventional and alternative limes.

Damage Categories Unit Eggshell Hydrated Lime (EHL) Hydrated Lime Conventional (HLC) Eggshell Quicklime (EQL) Quicklime Conventional (CQL)
Human health DALY (x10-4) 1.39 1.56 1.66 1.93
Ecosystem quality PDF-m2-y 20.98 57.26 25.36 72.56
Climate change kg CO2-eq 900.00 905.89 1160.30 1169.91
Resources MJ 4452.01 4533.03 5662.82 5800.01

Fig. 7. Comparison between alternative and conventional limes for damage categories (endpoints).

8
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
Fig. 8. Influence of transport distance (100 km, 150 km, 200 km and 250 km) for quicklime (a) and hydrated lime (b) production.
to quicklime. Impacts for other limes were calculated proportion-
ally, as described in the previous section.
Climate change and Resources have similar trends (Fig. 7) despite
the fact that eggshell limes have a substantial decrease in mineral
extraction (a midpoint for these two impact categories). This is
because Resources is also composed of impacts generated by non-
renewable energy that apply to calcinations and hydration pro-
cesses of conventional and also eggshell limes. Approximately
68–80% of CO2 emissions for lime production arise from calcination
[60]. The energy consumption for Quarrying of limestone and Lime-
stone improvement processes is about 130 times less than the one
for quicklime production [47]. Consequently, excluding these two
processes (Quarrying of Limestone and Limestone improvement) does
not create major changes in Energy.
For Human health, the following ranking was observed (ranging
from the highest to the lowest impact): conventional quicklime,
eggshell quicklime, conventional hydrated limes, eggshell
9
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
hydrated lime. Using eggshell as a raw material reduces the emis-
sion of harmful elements (e.g., carcinogenic and particulate) from
mining and processing of limestone, which in turn reduces impacts
in Human health. Bronchitis and emphysema are human diseases
directly related to particulates from limestone mining/quarrying
activity and limestone processing [61].
Ecosystem quality had the highest reduction in impact for alter-
native limes compared to conventional limes. Eggshell hydrated
lime has superior performance (28.9%) with a reduction in ecosys-
tem quality compared to conventional hydrated lime (78.9%) and
quicklime (100%). Eggshell hydrated lime reduced the impact by
50% compared to commercial hydrated lime. The midpoints of
aquatic ecotoxicity, terrestrial ecotoxicity, and land occupation
contribute to the endpoint Ecosystem Quality damage. These impact
categories were largely reduced with eggshell limes production
(Fig. 6), explaining the substantial difference in results. The pro-
cesses of extracting and improving a raw material (Quarrying of
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
Limestone and Limestone improvement) were key contributing fac-
tors for ecosystem quality impacts. In eggshell limes production
these processes were avoided. This finding is aligned with previous
studies showing that mining processes (generally for all ore types)
promote soil degradation and alteration in water quality [62]; gen-
erate toxic waste and air pollution [63]; among other hazardous
effects to the environment [57].
Fig. 8 (a and b) shows the impacts for different distances. Egg-
shell limes have similar impacts (regardless of transportation dis-
tances), but a significant reduction in Ecosystem quality persists.
Overall, augmenting transportation distances slightly increase
impacts for all four damage categories, with alternatives limes
exceeding the impact of conventional limes in some cases. This is
because transportation impacts are low compared to limes produc-
tion impacts. Transport distance of construction components can-
not be neglected as they can account for 5% to 10% of impacts,
depending on distances and materials weight [64]. Alternatives
limes transported for 250 km yield higher impacts than conven-
tional limes for Climate Change and Resources. This is because die-
sel consumption promotes increased CO2 emissions and energy use
(MJ) than conventional limes chain production.
EHL (transported for 250 km) has a higher impact than CHL for
Human health [Fig. 8(a and b)]. The inverse is observed for quick-
lime: EQL transported for 250 km has a lower impact than CQL.
This is due to the fact that quicklime, as seen in previous sections,
has greater impact than hydrated lime due to materials quantities:
1 kg for versus 0.76 kg of quicklime to produce 1 kg of hydrated
lime. As a result, diesel consumption for 250 km was not enough
to overcome the impact of conventional quicklime for Human
health.
Lastly, Ecosystem quality for eggshell limes remains lower than
for conventional limes. As a result, reductions in Potentially Disap-
peared Fraction of species (PDF) for eggshell limes production is
greater than increases in diesel consumption production for this
category. Finally, diesel production and its burning in vehicles
result in harmful pollutants that impact all categories of damage.
However, damage to Ecosystem for eggshell limes remains below
conventional limes. Using alternative fuels (e.g., biodiesel) [65]
and more efficient vehicles [66] can result in lower impact for
transport, increasing the attractiveness of alternative limes from
an environmental viewpoint.
4. Conclusions
The eggshell limes examined here are similar to conventional
limes in terms of morphological and chemical characteristics. Cal-
cium oxide (CaO), magnesium oxide (MgO) and portlandite [Ca
(OH)2] are dominant minerals for eggshell quicklime (EQL), which
is composed with 97% of calcium oxide (CaO). Portlandite [Ca
(OH)2], calcite (CaCO3) and magnesium peroxide (MgO2) are pre-
dominant minerals for EHL, which consists of 89.6% calcium
hydroxide [Ca(OH)2] and 5.0% Calcium carbonate (CaCO3). Such
compositions meet the standards required for commercial limes
in soil stabilization [36]. Such satisfactory morphological and
chemical aspects are also reflected in the mechanical results
obtained. Eggshell limes provide higher levels of strength and stiff-
ness compared to conventional limes in the stabilization of a gran-
ular soil with ground glass (within the parameters and ranges
considered).
This suggests that eggshells limes are suitable for alkali-
activation of pozzolanic material in soil stabilization. From an envi-
ronmental viewpoint, eggshell limes created major reduction in
impacts for Ecosystem quality since they do not involve Quarrying
of limestone and Limestone improvement, which are required for tra-
ditional limes. Impacts of eggshell limes surpassed the impacts for
10
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
conventional limes when transported for 250 km for Human health,
Climate change and Resources. For this same distance, EQL
overcomes the impacts of CQL for Climate change and Resources.
Eggshell limes maintained a considerable reduction compared to
conventional limes for Ecosystem quality. As a result, the use of egg-
shell, even for distances up to 250 km, promotes ecosystem
preservation.
Eggshell limes also have lower environmental impacts for all
midpoint categories compared to conventional limes. In a similar
trend, eggshell limes have a better environmental performance
for all damage categories. The findings presented here also raise
points to be considered in future research. First, cleaning and
milling were not performed in the processing and preparation of
eggshells, and for that reason, were not included in the LCA. Incor-
porating such processes and assessing the effect of such changes in
the results presented here should be the focus of future studies.
Secondly, the same energy consumption required for limestone
calcination was also considered for eggshell calcination. Further
studies should determine if adjustments on such consumption
are necessary and whether substantial changes in the environmen-
tal impacts reported here would apply.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to explicit their appreciation to FAPERGS/
CNPq 12/2014 – PRONEX (Project # 16/2551-0000469-2), MCT-
CNPq (Editais Universal, INCT, Universal & Produtividade em Pes-
quisa) and MEC-CAPES (PROEX) for the support to the research
group.
References
[1] S.E. Aprianti, A huge number of artificial waste material can be supplementary
cementitious material (SCM) for concrete production – a review part II, J.
Cleaner Prod. 142 (2017) 4178–4194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2015.12.115.
[2] O.G. Ingles, J.B. Metcalf, Soil stabilization: Principles and practice,
Butterworths, Sidney, Australia, 1972.
[3] N.C. Consoli, A.D. Rosa, R.B. Saldanha, Variables governing strength of
compacted soil-fly ash-lime mixtures, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 23 (4) (2011) 432–
440, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000186.
[4] Z. Hosseinpour, G. Najafpour-Darzi, N. Latifi, M.H. Morowvat, K.N. Manahiloh,
Synthesis of a biopolymer via a novel strain of Pantoea as a soil stabilizer,
Transp. Geotech. 26 (2021) 100425.
[5] H. Dehghan, A. Tabarsa, N. Latifi, Y. Bagheri, Use of xanthan and guar gums in
soil strengthening, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 21 (1) (2019) 155–165.
[6] J.M. Williams, F. Vahedifard, N. Latifi, Mechanical, Chemical, Hydraulic, and
Microstructural Properties of Buckshot Clay Amended with Gasification
Biochar, J. Environ. Eng. 146 (11) (2020) 04020123.
[7] N. Hassan, W.H.W. Hassan, A.S.A. Rashid, N. Latifi, N.Z.M. Yunus, S.
Horpibulsuk, H. Moayedi, Microstructural characteristics of organic soils
treated with biomass silica stabilizer, Environmental Earth Sci. 78 (12)
(2019) 367.
[8] N. Latifi, F. Vahedifard, E. Ghazanfari, A. Rashid, S. Ahmad, Sustainable usage of
calcium carbide residue for stabilization of clays, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 30 (6)
(2018) 04018099, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002313.
[9] I. Phummiphan, S. Horpibulsuk, T. Phoo-ngernkham, A. Arulrajah, S.-L. Shen,
Marginal lateritic soil stabilized with calcium carbide residue and fly ash
geopolymers as a sustainable pavement base material, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 29 (2)
(2017), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001708.
[10] A. Al-Swaidani, I. Hammoud, A. Meziab, Effect of adding natural pozzolana on
geotechnical properties of lime-stabilized clayey soil, J. Rock Mech. Geotech.
Eng. 8 (5) (2016) 714–725, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.04.002.
[11] N.C. Consoli, M.S. Carretta, H.B. Leon, H.C. Scheuermann Filho, L.F. Tomasi,
Strength and stiffness of ground waste glass–carbide lime blends, J. Mater. Civ.
Eng. 31 (10) (2019) 6019010, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-
5533.0002862.
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
[12] S. Horpibulsuk, C. Phetchuay, A. Chinkulkijniwat, Soil stabilization by calcium
carbide residue and fly ash, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 24 (2) (2012) 184–193, https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000370.
[13] A.K. Sharma, P.V. Sivapullaiah, 2016. Ground granulated blast furnace slag
amended fly ash as an expansive soil stabilizer. Soils and Foundations.
https://doi.org 10.1016/j.sandf.2016.02.004.
[14] N.C. Consoli, D. Winter, H.B. Leon, H.C. Scheuermann Filho, Durability,
strength, and stiffness of green stabilized sand, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
144 (9) (2018) 04018057, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-
5606.0001928.
[15] A.S. Gutiérrez, J. Van Caneghem, J.B. Cogollos Martínez, C. Vandecasteele,
Evaluation of the environmental performance of lime production in Cuba, J.
Cleaner Prod. 31 (2012) 126–136, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2012.02.035.
[16] B. Jiang, D. Xia, B. Yu, R. Xiong, W. Ao, P. Zhang, L. Cong, An environment-
friendly process for limestone calcination with CO2 looping and recovery, J.
Cleaner Prod. 118147 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118147.
[17] S. Kittipongvises, Assessment of environmental impacts of limestone
quarrying operations in Thailand, Environ. Climate Technol. 20 (1) (2017)
67–83, https://doi.org/10.1515/rtuect-2017-0011.
[18] R.E. Lamare, O.P. Singh, Limestone mining and its environmental implications
in Meghalaya, India, ENVIS Bulletin Himalayan Ecology 24 (2016) 87–100.
[19] D.A. Oliveira, P. Benelli, E.R. Amante, A literature review on adding value to
solid residues: Egg shells, J. Cleaner Prod. 46 (2013) 42–47, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.09.045.
[20] FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2018. Food and
agriculture organization of the united nations. gateway to poultry production
and products: Production. Retrieved December 16th, 2018 from http://
www.fao.org/poultry-production-products/production/en/ (accessed
September 2019).
[21] L. Boron, Calcium citrate from eggshell: Bioavailability and use as a food
supplement M.Sc. dissertation, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina,
Florianópolis, Brazil (in Portuguese), 2004.
[22] Y.S. Ok, S.S. Lee, W.-T. Jeon, S.-E. Oh, A.R.A. Usman, D.H. Moon, Application of
eggshell waste for the immobilization of cadmium and lead in a contaminated
soil, Environ. Geochem. Health 33 (2011) 31–39, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10653-010-9362-2.
[23] K. Beck, X. Brunetaud, J.-D. Mertz, M. Al-Mukhtar, On the use of eggshell lime
and tuffeau powder to formulate an appropriate mortar for restoration
purposes, Geological Society Special Publications 331 (1) (2010) 137–145,
https://doi.org/10.1144/SP331.12.
[24] E. Bensaifi, F. Bouteldja, M.S. Nouaouria, P, Breul,, Influence of crushed
granulated blast furnace slag and calcined eggshell waste on mechanical
properties of a compacted marl, Transp. Geotech. 20 (2019), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.trgeo.2019.100244 100244.
[25] M.C. Amaral, F.B. Siqueira, A.Z. Destefani, J.N.F. Holanda, Soil-cement bricks
incorporated with eggshell waste, Waste Res. Manage. 166 (WR3) (2013) 137–
141, https://doi.org/10.1680/warm.12.00024.
[26] M.N Maduabuchi, F.O Obikara, 2018. Effect of egg shell powder (ESP) on the
strength properties of cement-stabilization on Olokoro lateritic soil. J. Waste
Manage Xenobiotic 2018, 1(1): 000103. https://doi.org/10.23880/oajwx-
16000103.
[27] P. Shekhawat, G. Sharma, R.M. Singh, Strength behavior of alkaline activated
eggshell powder and flyash geopolymer cured at ambient temperature, Constr.
Build. Mater. 223 (2019) 1112–1122, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2019.07.325.
[28] E. Ferraz, J.A.F. Gamelas, J. Coroado, C. Monteiro, F. Rocha, Eggshell waste to
produce building lime: Calcium oxide reactivity, industrial, environmental and
economic implications, Mater. Struct. 51 (5) (2018), https://doi.org/10.1617/
s11527-.
[29] N.C. Consoli, A.M.L. Caicedo, R.B. Saldanha, H.C. Scheuermann Filho, C.J.M.
Acosta, Eggshell produced limes: innovative materials for soil stabilization, J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 32 (11) (2020) 06020018, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
MT.1943-5533.0003418.
[30] N.C. Consoli, A.M.L. Caicedo; R.B. Saldanha; H.C. Scheuermann Filho; D.E.
Lourenço 2019. Agente Cimentante, Processo de Produção de Agente
Cimentante, Uso de Agente Cimentante. Brazil. (Patent number BR 10 2019
023593 4)
[31] ISO, International standard ISO 14040: Environmental management - life
cycle assessment - principles and frameworks, (International Organization for
Standardization), Geneva (CH), 2006.
[32] ISO, International standard ISO 14044: Environmental management - life
cycle assessment - requirements and guidelines, (International Organization
for Standardization), Geneva (CH), 2006.
[33] M. Lee, W.-S. Tsai, S.-T. Chen, Reusing shell waste as a soil conditioner
alternative? A comparative study of eggshell and oyster shell using a life cycle
assessment approach, J. Cleaner Prod. 265 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2020.121845 121845.
[34] J. Zhang, G. Liu, B. Chen, D. Song, J. Qi, X. Liu, Analysis of CO2 emission for the
cement manufacturing with alternative raw materials: A LCA-based
framework, Energy Procedia 61 (2014) 2541–2545, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.egypro.2014.12.041.
[35] R. Navia, B. Rivela, K.E Lorber, R, Méndez, 2006. Recycling contaminated soil as
alternative raw material in cement facilities: Life cycle assessment. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 48(4), 339–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resconrec.2006.01.007
11
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
[36] ASTM, 2018. Standard specification for quicklime and hydrated lime for soil
stabilization. ASTM C977, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/
C0977-03.
[37] ASTM, 2014. Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water
pycnometer. ASTM D854, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/
D0854-14.
[38] ASTM, 2006. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM
D2487. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. https://doi.org/10.1520/D2487-17.
[39] R.B. Saldanha, H.C. Scheuermann Filho, J.E.C. Mallmann, N.C. Consoli, K.R.
Reddy, Physical–mineralogical–chemical characterization of carbide lime: An
environment-friendly chemical additive for soil stabilization, J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
30 (6) (2018) 06018004, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-
5533.0002283.
[40] ASTM, 2009. Test methods for unconfined compressive strength of compacted
soil-lime mixtures. ASTM D5102, West Conshohocken, PA.
[41] ASTM, 2008. Standard test method for laboratory determination of pulse
velocities and ultrasonic elastic constants of rock. ASTM D2845. West
Conshohocken, PA.
[42] ASTM, 2012. Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics
of soil using standard effort (600 kN-m/m3). ASTM standard D698. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://doi.org/10.1520/D0698-12E02.
[43] N.C. Consoli, D. Winter, H.B. Leon, H.C. Scheuermann Filho, Durability,
strength, and stiffness of green stabilized sand, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
144 (9) (2018) 4018057, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-
5606.0001928.
[44] Pundit Lab (2013) Pundit Lab/Pundit Lab+ ultrasonic instrument–operating
instructions. Proceq SA. http://www.abmbv.nl/files/
proceq_pundit_lab_operating_instructions_en.pdf, 2013. (accessed 10 March
2019).
[45] I.P. Damians, R.J. Bathurst, E.G. Adroguer, A. Josa, A. Lloret, Environmental
assessment of earth retaining wall structures, Environmental Geotechnics 4
(6) (2017) 415–431, https://doi.org/10.1680/jenge.15.00040.
[46] K. Christof, Sanyé-Mengua Esther, 2013. Comparative LCA of recycled and
conventional concrete for structural applications. Buildings and Building
Materials, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, [online] 18(5),
909–918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0544-2.
[47] G. Wernet, C. Bauer, B. Steubing, J. Reinhard, E.Moreno-Ruiz, B. Weidema,
2016. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology.
Buildings and Building Materials: The International Journal of Life Cycle
Assessment, [online] 21(9), 1218–1230. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/
s11367-016-1087-8.
[48] S. Humbert, M. Margni, O. Jolliet, 2005. IMPACT 2002+: User guide. Industrial
Ecology & Life Cycle Systems Group, GECOS, Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology Lausanne (EPFL).82Q.
[49] O. Jolliet, M. Margni, R. Charles, S. Humbert, J. Payet, G. Rebitzer, R. Rosenbaum,
IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology, Int. J. Life
Cycle Assess. 8 (6) (2003) 324–330, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02978505.
[50] M. Goedkoop, R. Spriensma, The Eco-indicator 99: A damage-oriented method
for life cycle assessment, methodology report, second edition., Pre-
Consultants, Amersfoort (NL), Netherlands, 2000.
[51] F.A. Cardoso, H.C. Fernandes, R.G. Pileggi, M.A. Cincotto, V.M. John, Carbide
lime and industrial hydrated lime characterization, Powder Technol. 195 (2)
(2009) 143–149, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2009.05.017.
[52] C. Rodriguez-Navarro, E. Ruiz-Agudo, M. Ortega-Huertas, E. Hansen,
Nanostructure and irreversible colloidal behavior of Ca(OH)2: Implications in
cultural heritage conservation, Langmuir 21 (24) (2005) 10948–10957, https://
doi.org/10.1021/la051338f.
[53] I.L Eades, P.A. Sandberg, 1970. Characterization of the properties of
commercial lime by surface area measurements and scanning electron
microscopy. The Reaction Parameters of Lime, ASTM STP 472, American
Society for Testing and Materials, pp. 3-24.
[54] P.K. Mehta, P.J. Monteiro, Concrete: Microstructure, properties and materials,
3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, London, 2006.
[55] T. Kim, J. Olek, 2012. Effects of sample preparation and interpretation of
thermogravimetric curves on calcium hydroxide in hydrated pastes and
mortars. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, 2290(1), 10–18. doi:10.3141/2290-02.
[56] A. Moropoulou; A. Bakolas; E. Aggelakopoulou, 2013. The effects of
limestone characteristics and calcination temperature to the reactivity
of the quicklime. 31(4), 633–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0008-8846(00)
00490-7.
[57] E.M. Rivera, M. Araiza, W. Brostow; V. M. Castaño; J.R. Dı´az-Estrada, R
Hernández; J. R. Rodrı́guez, 1999. Synthesis of hydroxyapatite from eggshells.
41(3), 0–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-577x(99)00118-4
[58] S.K. Haldar, J. Tišljar, Hazards of minerals–rocks and sustainable development,
Introd. Mineral. Petrology 305–323 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-
12-408133-8.00010-9.
[59] R. Molinder, T.P. Comyn, N. Hondow, J.E. Parker, V. Dupont, In situ X-ray
diffraction of CaO based CO2 sorbents, Energy Environ. Sci. 5 (10) (2012)
8958e8969, https://doi.org/10.1039/C2EE21779A.
[60] F. Schorcht, I. Kourti, B.M. Scalet, S. Roudier, L.G. Sancho, Best available
techniques (BAT) reference document for the production of cement, lime and
magnesium oxide, industrial emissions directive 2010/75/EU, Publications
Office of the European Union, Integrated Pollution Prevention and control,
Luxembourg, 2013. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/
JRC83006/clm_published_def.pdf (Accessed 02/05/2020).
Rodrigo Beck Saldanha, Cecília Gravina da Rocha, Andrés Maurício Lotero Caicedo et al.
[61] E. Petavratzi, S. Kingman, I. Lowndes, Particulates from mining operations: A
review of sources, effects and regulations, Miner. Eng. 18 (12) (2005) 1183–
1199, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mineng.2005.06.017.
[62] M. Galetakis, G. Alevizos, K. Leventakis, Evaluation of fine limestone quarry by-
products, for the production of building elements – An experimental approach,
Constr. Build. Mater. 26 (1) (2012) 122–130, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2011.05.011.
[63] T. Norgate, N. Haque, Using life cycle assessment to evaluate some
environmental impacts of gold production, J. Cleaner Prod. 29–30 (2012)
53–63, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.042.
12
Construction and Building Materials 298 (2021) 123648
[64] D. Kellenberger, H.-J. Althaus, Relevance of simplifications in LCA of building
components, Build. Environ. 44 (4) (2009) 818–825, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2008.06.002.
[65] E.A. Nanaki, C.J. Koroneos, Comparative LCA of the use of biodiesel, diesel and
gasoline for transportation, J. Cleaner Prod. 20 (1) (2012) 14–19, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.07.026.
[66] M. Rexeis, S. Hausberger, Trend of vehicle emission levels until 2020 –
Prognosis based on current vehicle measurements and future emission
legislation, Atmos. Environ. 43 (31) (2009) 4689–4698, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.034.