Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

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

Evaluation of environmental disturbance indicator using

functional performance and life cycle assessment of ferrochrome
waste concrete
Prasanna Kumar Acharya a, Sanjaya Kumar Patro b, *
a
School of Civil Engineering, Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology, Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology, Burla, Odisha, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper reports on environmental disturbance indicators (EDI) using functional performance-
Life cycle assessment based life cycle assessment (LCA) on concrete prepared using waste materials from the ferro­
Environmental disturbance indicator chrome industry. The study is made on six concrete mixes with and without waste materials like
Concrete ferrochrome ash (FCA) and air-cooled ferrochrome slag (ACFS). Lime-activated FCA is used for
Global warming partial replacement of cement up to 47% and ACFS for total replacement of natural coarse
Carcinogens
aggregate. The study examines the sustainability of concrete mixes made with ferrochrome waste
Aquatic acidification
materials by LCA through the weighting schemes applied to five environmental impacts such as
Terrestrial ecotoxicity
Respiratory inorganic aquatic acidification (AA), carcinogens (CAR), global warming (GW), terrestrial ecotoxicity (TE)
and respiratory inorganic (RI). The results of LCA based on the performance in terms of strength
and durability indicated benefits in EDI of 46%. The robustness and independence of EDI results
were checked through six different weighting schemes and the difference between these varied
from 2.87 to 2.40%. The present work also includes the EDI-based study on the best-case and
worst-case scenarios that describe the transportation of waste materials from the nearest and
farthest plant. The results of such a study indicated that there is a difference of 4–11% between
best-case and worst-case transportation scenarios. The contribution of various ingredients of
concrete to the environment was checked through contribution analysis using OpenLCA software,
where the results showed that cement is the top contributor. Lime and superplasticizer are the
2nd and 3rd contributors. Among the six concrete mixes made with and without ferrochrome
waste materials, the normal concrete mix was found most unsustainable. There exists a good
relationship between functional unit-based EDI values and scenario-based impact values. Results
revealed that the concrete produced using ferrochrome waste materials have low EDI compared
to conventional concrete.

1. Introduction
Global warming, climate change and greenhouse gas emissions are some of the most discussed issues around the globe now. It is
reported that during mid of 18th century when the industrial revolution was conceived, the carbon dioxide concentration in the air was
nearly 280 ppm. It increased at a rate of 0.15 ppm per year and rose to 310 ppm by mid of 20th century which was the time of the 2nd

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: pkacharya64@yahoo.co.in (P.K. Acharya), litusanjay@yahoo.com (S.K. Patro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105788
Received 6 September 2022; Received in revised form 22 December 2022; Accepted 22 December 2022
Available online 30 December 2022
2352-7102/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

world war. After this, there was a sudden rise in carbon concentration at the rate of 1.25 ppm per year and became 365 ppm in the year
2000 [1]. It is reported [2] that more than one-fifth of total worldwide carbon emission is from industrial processes that including
metallurgical processes. Paris international legal treaty adopted by 196 nations tells that global warming should be preferably 1.5 ◦ C.
To achieve this goal there should be a fall of 45% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 in comparison to the level of 2010. There is a
target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. There is a huge demand for construction materials due to the rapid development
of infrastructures. Industrial processes in steel and cement production are reported to be challenging from the emissions of the
greenhouse gas point of view. The industrial process free of emissions for such materials is presently not available at the industry level
[2]. It is said that the cement industry is a major contributor to the emissions of carbon dioxide. Cement concrete at this age is
considered the most used building material for infrastructures like highways, bridges and buildings [3]. Cement concrete is said to be a
versatile, strong and durable material from a technical performance point of view [4]. It is described as a good solution in comparison
to other popular building materials like timber and steel from an economic point of view [5]. Reporting its social performance Teixeira
et al. [6] have mentioned that nearly 5% of the job market is associated with the concrete-making industry. As such despite the better
technical, economical and social performance, the environmental performance of concrete is said to be negative [7,8]. It is also
associated with the extraction and depletion of 50 billion tonnes of natural aggregates every year [9].
The annual global production of cement concrete is reported at the rate of 3.8 tonnes/person amounts to nearly 25 billion tonnes
and its consumption is found next to water [10]. The carbon contribution of cement production is said to be 10% of total anthropogenic
carbon dioxide emissions [11] and the same is estimated as more than 50% of total carbon emissions due to all building activities of the
construction industry. For the reduction of the impact on the environment, there is a need of greening both cement and concrete
industries. This can be achieved through different efforts like recycling waste materials, preparation of green concrete and designing
concrete structures for longer service life. Green concrete can be prepared using alternative aggregates of waste stream materials
instead of natural aggregates t [12]. The authors [13] considering 590 concrete mixes reported that due to the addition of supple­
mentary cementitious materials in concrete mix designs, there is a large reduction in carbon emissions that contributes less to global
warming. It is reported that due to the use of fly ash (FA) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) there is a sizable reduction
in carbon emissions. This benefit is below the strength grade of concrete 40 MPa where there is more possibility of replacement of
cement [13]. The authors [14] have reported that the problem of natural aggregate depletion can be solved by using alternatives to
aggregates in concrete making. The environmental behavior of concrete made with recycled aggregates as alternative aggregates have
better environmental performance in comparison to normal concrete despite the use of admixture and involvement of more operations
like crushing of recycled aggregates.
The utilization of waste materials in any process does not mean that the process is friendly to the environment. The system
developed with waste materials as secondary source materials should be checked from a life cycle perspective and the environmental
performance should be better than business [15]. At this time, the environmental impact of any material is judged by its impact on
greenhouse gas emissions and climate change thereof. In this regard, to reduce the environmental impact, efforts are being made by
researchers for several decades to develop alternatives to cement concrete mixes which are said to be greener, cost-effective and
sustainable [16]. The environmental disturbance indicator (EDI) is said [16] to be the result of methodology for combining LCA
outputs with the functional performance of concrete products. Thus the EDI allows for the comparison of diverse concrete constituents
based on environmental impact through life cycle assessment and functional performance. Sanjuan et al. [17,18] reported that the
production of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) emits CO2 of roughly 825–890 kg per tonne of cement clinker. The authors have re­
ported that due to the adoption of supplementary cementitious materials and the production of blended cement thereof, the CO2
emissions is reduced to 630 kg/tonne of cement. The cement quantity can be further reduced by employing suitable design mix
methods like the particle packing method [19,20]. Limestone dust can be used as a filler material [12]. In recent past, researchers
explored on replacement of a large quantity of cement using particle packing methodology [21]. For reduction in clinker-based cement
production and CO2 emissions thereof, there is the requirement of huge alternative cementitious materials apart from commonly used
SCMs like FA and GGBFS [11]. As per the report of UN Environment [11], it is predicted that by 2050, the available FA and GGBFS can
meet the requirements of only 15–25% of cement production. Apart from these two commonly used materials many authors of the past
have tried and reported on the use of various types of ashes such as coal bottom ash, pulverized fuel ash, black rice husk ash, sugar cane
bagasse ash, sewage sludge ash in concrete as supplementary cementitious materials. The findings of these past researches [22–29]
showed that the use of these ashes in concrete not only reduces the environmental burden but also improves the concrete properties.
The authors reported that life cycle assessment is a systematic process under a standardized framework for assessing the envi­
ronmental footprint of a product on various impact categories [30,31]. When this impact is associated with a product right from the
extraction of resources to the factory gate is known as the cradle-to-gate approach. Life cycle inventory is a step during the calculation
process of life cycle assessment involving the energy and resource flow within the boundary of execution [30]. Life cycle inventory is
generated from process modeling and data estimation methods [31]. LCA is the evaluation and compilation of inputs, outputs and
environmental impacts of a product throughout its life. It is told that LCA can be used for the assessment of different mix designs [32].
LCA of a product is assessed through cradle-to-gate, cradle-to-grave and cradle–to–cradle analyses. The analysis of the first one is
limited to the production of a system/material, the second one includes all stages of life and the third one covers recycling/reuse of all
content materials at the end of the life of a product. In the case of concrete mostly the analysis is limited to cradle-to-gate [33,34]. The
carbon footprint of concrete is reported as 300 kg CO2-eq/m3 out of which 90% is associated with Portland cement production [35].
Tait and Cheung [36] indicated that utilization of 30% of fly ash in concrete can reduce 35% of embodied emissions whereas 60% use
of ground granulated blast furnace slag can reduce 70%. Heede et al. [37] reported that the global warming potential of concretes
made of high-volume fly ash and combined use of fly ash and silica fume is lower than OPC-made concrete in the range of 60–76%.
Ingrao et al. [38] investigated the utilization of basalt aggregate in the production of concrete and its impact on the environment. The

2
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

authors claimed that per cubic meter of produced concrete consumes 37.37 kg of crude oil and releases 465 kg of CO2 thus affecting the
damage categories related to ‘Resources” and “Climate change”. Due to the emissions of aluminum and zinc to the tune of 29.6 g and
251 mg per cubic meter of concrete the damage category of “Ecosystem quality” is affected. The human health category is also affected
due to the release of particulates of 2.7 kg of less than 2.5 mm size per cum of concrete. Huang et al. [39] reported that steam-cured
conventional concrete made of OPC has a GWP of 419 kg CO2-eq. It is pertinent to mention that nearly 30% of these estimated
emissions can be avoided by employing various binders in place of OPC and curing through the CO2 mineral carbonation process. The
authors also reported that a reduction in the production and use of OPC is a key factor in reducing the environmental burden. Li et al.
[40] reported on the preparation of concrete using aggregates made of demolished concrete blocks, wherein it is reported that the
energy consumption and global warming potential are found to be 46 and 50% of normal concrete. It is reported [41] that the concrete
made with the combined use of fly ash as a cement alternative and recycled aggregate as a natural aggregate alternative has better
performance in terms of quality and environmental impact when compared to concrete made with the solo use of fly ash and recycled
aggregate in all transportation scenarios. Bennett et al. [13] have reported that apart from a volumetric basis a realistic functional unit
should be considered for comparison of the environmental impacts of concretes. The researchers [13] also reported that the waste
materials that are supposed to be used in concrete making need to be transported from the location of their generation. The trans­
portation of bulky waste materials over a long distance may be a cause of huge carbon emissions.
To meet a part of the future need for SCM, this paper focuses on the development of an alternative SCM system and environmental
impact analysis thereof based on a combination of ferrochrome ash, limestone powder and superplasticizer. Further, green concrete is
produced in combination with an FCA-based SCM system and ACFS coarse aggregate. FCA and ACFS are two waste materials obtained
from the ferrochrome industry. FCA looks like and bears the characteristics of cement while ACFS looks like and bears the charac­
teristics of natural coarse aggregate. The production of ferrochrome is reported to be up to 9.5 million tonnes globally subjected to an
increase of nearly 3% per annum. Both types of slag materials (ACFS and WCFS) up to 1.2 tonnes and FCA up to 0.03 tonne are
collected from each tonne production of ferrochrome [42]. Heavy leaching of chromium from raw FCA is reported by Ref. [43].
However, this material when used in concrete as supplementary cementitious material, the leaching of chromium and other heavy
metals are arrested in the Calcium-Silicate-Hydrate gel matrix [42,43]. ACFS is obtained from the smelting process of the ferrochrome
industry. For cooling the slag materials, two types of processes are followed, one is water cooling and the second is air cooling. The
water-cooled slag is fine and can be used as fine aggregate, whereas the air-cooled one is coarse, 10–20 mm in size and can be used as
coarse aggregate.
Authors of the present study have reported positive results in their earlier publications on various functional properties of concrete
using lime-activated FCA up to 40% along with natural coarse aggregate [44–47]. The authors reported that there is an increase in
mechanical properties like compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, bond strength, flexural strength and modulus of elasticity
on the use of FCA up to 40%. There is also improvement in durability like water permeability, sorptivity, abrasion resistance, sulphate
resistance and acid resistance in concrete prepared with FCA. The lime-activated FCA concrete also showed better performance in the
development of microstructure examined in terms of bonds between paste and aggregates, degree of hydration and reduction in micro
voids. Acharya and Patro [42,43] have also investigated the positive effects of ACFS as coarse aggregate on the strength and durability
of concrete made on a cent percent substitution of virgin coarse aggregates. The authors [42,43] have indicated that the leaching of
hexavalent chromium from raw FCA is 130 mg/L, which is too high against the regulatory limit of 5 mg/L when examined using the
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) test. The same from ACFS was found at < 0.02 mg/L, which is far below the reg­
ulatory limit of 5 mg/L. But when FCA and ACFS are used in concrete, the leaching of chromium and other heavy metals are arrested in
the Calcium- Silicate - Hydrate gel matrix and the leaching of hexavalent chromium is found to be 0.293 mg/L that is far below the limit
of 5 mg/L. Due to heavy leaching, FCA may not be suitable for any other use other than cement concrete. FCA contains residual
chromium. The Toxicity of chromium ranges from pulmonary to derma logical problems. Heavy chromium VI leaching is reported
from raw FCA but the leaching of chromium is immobilized when used in concrete. As such prepared concrete becomes risk-free. The
risk of contact of FCA with human skin during the preparation of concrete can be eliminated by using an automated and fully enclosed
process [42]. The influence of the presence of oxides like potassium oxide and chlorine in FCA needs to be investigated to estimate the
durability of ferrochrome waste-made concrete.
Authors have conducted extensive research on the mechanical performance, environmental compatibility and durability of fer­
rochrome waste concrete and have reported the outcomes [42–47]. Authors have reported [46] the performance of ferrochrome waste
materials on various concrete mix proportions representing various strength grades of concrete that are required for the execution of
different items of building work. The authors have also evaluated and reported on the applicability of such concrete in building works
through structural performance evaluation [48,49]. The structural performances of ferrochrome waste-made reinforced concrete
beams evaluated through the characteristics like load carrying capacity, cracking load, deflection, crack pattern, ductility and failure
pattern were found to be better than normal concrete beams.
The literature review indicated that technical performance related to the strength and durability of FCA concrete made using
natural coarse aggregate [44–47] and with ACFS coarse aggregate [42,43] are reported. Leaching characteristics of heavy metals from
FCA-ACFS waste-made concrete are also reported [42,43]. But reports on the environmental impacts through life cycle assessment of
ferrochrome waste (FCA and ACFS) concrete are scarce to date which is identified as a gap in existing knowledge. Secondly, most of the
LCA studies reported on normal concrete and/or waste-made concrete are based on physical characteristics like volume (one cum) or
mass (one kg) as the functional unit. Thus important functional performances like strength and durability are said to be neglected
during the LCA analysis. As such there is a need for LCA to combine functional properties which have been identified as the second gap
in the existing knowledge under the present area of study. There is a need to consider the impact of transportation of waste materials
and their distance thereof while ascertaining the environmental impacts of waste-made concrete which is considered as the third gap

3
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

under the present area of study.

To bridge the above-narrated gap, this work focuses on three major objectives. The first one targets a methodology combining LCA
outputs with functional performance in terms of environmental disturbance indicator (EDI). The second aims to analyze and compare
critically the performance of alternative concrete constituents like FCA and ACFS based on their environmental and functional per­
formance. The third one covers a sensitivity analysis including best and worst-case transportation scenario analyses. The proposed EDIs
are supposed to be derived from the environmental and functional performance of waste-made concrete, get compared with normal
concrete and get validated using various weighting schemes. Secondly, the study considers to critically compare the sustainability of
the use of alternative materials of concrete replacing partly/wholly the traditional/natural materials based on their functional and
environmental performance. Thirdly, it targets to analyze and compare the EDIs in terms of best-case and worst-case scenarios based
on the transportation of waste materials from the nearest and farthest operating plants producing ferrochrome waste materials.
Fourthly, it analyzes the contribution of each ingredient of normal and ferrowaste concrete to various environmental impact cate­
gories. Finally, it evaluates the contribution of different concrete mixes containing various dosages of waste materials to various
environmental impact categories.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Concrete mixtures
A total of six concrete mixtures named NC, NCS, FWC1, FWC2, FWC3 and FWC4 were prepared using a mix proportion of
1:2:4:0.45:0.005 (1 part cementitious material, 2 parts fine aggregates, 4 parts coarse aggregates, 0.45 part water and 0.005 part
superplasticizer). The normal concrete mix was designed using 330 kg of cement and other materials were used based on the afore­
mentioned proportions. Three binders such as ordinary Portland cement (OPC), FCA and lime were used in different mixes. The
properties of cement and FCA are reported in Tables 1 and 2. River bed sand as fine aggregate was used in all mixes. Two types of coarse
aggregates were used namely 20 mm graded virgin granite coarse aggregate and ACFS coarse aggregates. The properties of such coarse
aggregates and fine aggregates are reported in Table 3 and Fig. 1. Concrete mix NC meant for normal concrete was made of all
traditional materials like OPC, natural coarse aggregate and natural fine aggregate. The properties of the superplasticizer are presented
in Table 4. Concrete mix NCS meant for concrete was made of OPC, ACFS as coarse aggregate and natural fine aggregate. Concrete
mixes FWC1, FWC2, FWC3, and FWC4 are meant for ferrochrome waste blended concrete that contained 10, 20, 30 and 40% of FCA
respectively in replacement of cement, 7% lime in substitution of cement and 100% ACFS as coarse aggregate on substitution of virgin
coarse aggregate. The details of mixed ingredients are presented in Table 5. With a target of the potential use of FCA in concrete
production and to derive the best properties from ferrochrome waste concrete, lime addition in small quantities were required. Due to
the replacement of cement by FCA, the lime saturation factor got reduced in blended mixtures. As such an optimized dosage of 7% lime
was introduced in the system on replacement cement to fetch the lime deficiency in blended mixtures based on our past study [50]. The
fineness of FCA is reported to be almost 1.75 times more than cement [42]. Due to greater fineness, the blended mixtures containing
FCA demanded more water and suffered from workability. To make the concrete mixes workable a dosage of 0.5% of superplasticizer
was required. Here for the life cycle assessment concrete mix, NC is treated as a base case scenario.

2.2. System boundary

Fig. 2 reflects the system boundary of the cradle-to-gate approach for normal and ferrochrome waste blended concrete. In the
present study system boundary of cradle-to-gate of normal concrete is called a base case scenario. Every process consists of input and
output data on energy consumption, raw material consumption, emissions/pollution to air, and pollution to landmass and pollution to
water that is related to activities, water treatment, plasticizer production, aggregate production, cement production, batching plant
operation etc. Water treatment includes extraction, processing and supply. Cement production includes processes like transportation
and extraction of raw materials; cement manufacturing that includes mixing of materials, clinker preparation through pyroprocessing,
grinding and transportation of produced materials. Aggregate manufacture includes the processes like extraction, processing for
converting to required sizes and transportation. Concrete plant operations include mixing ingredients, batching and transporting the
concrete material to the project site. Transportation of waste materials involves the carriage of ACFS and FCA from the plant to the
concrete batching plant site.

2.3. Functional unit

The functional unit of the LCA study provides the basis for the evaluation of inputs and outputs and compares the results based on
the equivalent functional performance of various products. The performance of structural concrete is characterized by its strength and
durability parameters measured at 28 days. In the past, researchers adopted different parameters as functional units (FU). The re­
searchers like Zhang et al. [51] and Panesar et al. [52] preferred to adopt the properties of concrete as the functional units. The authors
considered the impact of service life and durability (rapid chloride permeability and chloride diffusion coefficient) of concrete on the

Table 1
Elemental analysis of OPC and FCA.

Compound (%) Al2O3 SiO2 MgO CaO Cr2O3 Fe2O3 Na2O + K2O SO3 Cl ZnO Cr+6

OPC 5.65 21.07 1.16 63.24 – 4.05 0.65 2.15 0.006 –

FCA 11.10 19.60 15.60 4.22 12.40 6.06 15.80 1.92 9.40 2.59

4
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

Table 2
Properties of binding materials.

Properties OPC FCA Requirements

Comp. Strength (MPa):

3 days 35.7 Min. 23
7 days 44.7 Min. 23
28 days 57.1 Min. 43 and max. 58
Setting time (min):
Initial 127 Min. 30
Final 218 Max. 600
Soundness (mm) 0.7 Max. 10
Standard consistency (%) 28.1
Fineness (Blaine’s permeability method) (m2/kg) 326 571 Min. 225
Particles retained on 45-μm sieve (wet sieving) (%) 24 6.50
Density (g/cm3) 3.1 2.24

Table 3
Properties of aggregates.

Property Natural coarse aggregate ACFS coarse aggregate Fine aggregate

Water absorption (%) 0.20 0.63 0.73

Specific gravity 2.83 2.84 2.70
Impact value (%) 15.30 11.00 –
Elongation index (%) 13.50 10.50 –
Flakiness index (%) 18.50 9.83 –
Abrasion resistance 18.60 18.19 –
Crushing value (%) 20.10 17.89 –

Fig. 1. Particle size gradation of different aggregates.

Table 4
Properties of superplasticizer.

Properties Observed value

Specific gravity 1.077

pH value 6.5
Chloride content (%) <0.1
Volumetric mass (kg/l) 1.09
Alkali content (g/l) <1.5
Appearance Light yellow

estimated impact of the unit volume of concrete. Marinkovi et al. [12] reported that when the environmental impact of concrete is
assessed based on material substitution; the FU should be based on material properties. Visintin et al. [53] reported that recycled
aggregate concrete when the functional unit is based on durability, strength and volume shows an almost equal mean emissions factor
in comparison to a functional unit based on only volume. But the former has a wide range. Among various strength and durability

5
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

Table 5
Ingredients of different concrete mixtures.

Binders Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate Water Super- plastisizer

Cement FCA Lime Sand Natural ACFS

kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg

NC 330 0 0 660 1320 0 149 1.65

NCS 330 0 0 660 0 1320 149 1.65
FWC1 274 33 23 660 0 1320 149 1.65
FWC2 241 66 23 660 0 1320 149 1.65
FWC3 208 99 23 660 0 1320 149 1.65
FWC4 175 132 23 660 0 1320 149 1.65

Fig. 2. System boundary for LCA of normal and blended concrete.

parameters, compressive strength (CS) and water permeability (WP) are two important functional parameters. Since the permeability
of concrete that facilities ingress of moisture, oxygen, chloride and carbon dioxide is a measure cause of corrosion of embedded steel,
this durability property is considered in the present study for the calculation of functional units in this study using equation (1) as
suggested by Panesar et al. [16]. The 28 days’ compressive strength and water permeability of various concrete mixes with and without
ferrochrome waste materials are presented in Table 6.
CS alternate material WP base material
FUj = x Eq. 1
CS base material WPalternate material

where “j” corresponds to each mix containing ferrochrome waste material. The calculated FU is presented in Table 6.

2.4. Life cycle inventory

The life cycle inventory (LCI) that represents the inputs and outputs throughout the life cycle of the system/product was computed

Table 6
Functional parameters of concrete mixes.

Functional parameters Unit NC NCS FWC1 FWC2 FWC3 FWC4

Base 1 2 3 4 5

28d–Compressive strength (Acharya and Patro) [42] MPa 51.22 51.80 59.30 56.00 54.20 52.90
12
28d–Water permeability (Acharya and Patro) [43] Co-efficient of permeability x 10− m/s 0.070 0.065 0.050 0.056 0.059 0.062
FUj 1.000 1.089 1.621 1.367 1.255 1.166

6
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

based on a base case scenario of conventional concrete made of OPC, virgin coarse aggregate and river bed sand as a fine aggregate
using Open LCA software version 10.3 (www.openlca.org) [54]. The data for unit processes were taken from the Ecoinvent database
version 3.7 (www.nexusopenlca.org) [54] available with said software. In this study, FCA and ACFS were obtained as waste materials.
FCA requires no further processing and is directly mixed with cement. Similarly, ACFS is directly used as a concrete coarse aggregate
without any pre-processing. As such for these two materials only transportation from the ferrochrome plant to the concrete batching
plant is considered while computing the environmental impacts.

2.5. Life cycle impact assessment methodology

For the compilation of life cycle impact (LCI) data and impact assessment thereof openLCA software with Ecoinvent database
version, 3.7 (www.nexusopenlca.org) was used in this study. The impact evaluation was carried out with Impact 2002+. The eval­
uation method was considered effective as it presents 15 different midpoint categories which are majorly classified into 4 endpoint
categories, thereby giving a range of data for the study. As openLCA is an input and output-based software the life cycle inventory
development executes the attachment of the environmental parameters which when evaluated via the dialog box by selecting the
assessment method derives the results. As per ISO 14040 [32], life cycle impact assessment (LICA) was carried out in five steps: (i)
selection of impact categories and category indicators (ii) allocation of LCI results to various impact categories (iii) estimation of
category indicator results (iv) calculation of the magnitude of category indicator (v) transformation of indicator results with the help
numerical factors. Five impact categories such as (i) aquatic acidification (AA)(ii) carcinogens (CAR), (iii) global warming(GW), (iv)
terrestrial ecotoxicity (TE), and (v) respiratory inorganics (RI) were considered for analysis. Aquatic acidification is the process that
lowers the pH value below the range of 6.5–8.5 making the aqua life difficult to function. Carcinogens explain the capability to
contribute to cancer growth. Global warming is the process by which the average temperature of the earth rises due to the effect of
greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, etc. Such gasses absorb energy, reduce the rate of release of energy to space and
behave like a blanket over the earth. The study on the contribution towards contamination of soil and groundwater thereof that affect
land-dependent organisms is known as terrestrial ecotoxicity. Respiratory organics cover human health hazards due to the emissions of
precursors and particulate matter.

2.6. Life cycle assessment-interpretation

This section explains the methodology used for the interpretation of LCA results in terms of EDI which combines the environmental
impacts with the functional performance (unit) to indicate a combined measure of environmental-technical performance. The EDI of
normal concrete here named NC is compared with that of ferrochrome waste material blended concrete mixtures to provide quick
information on whether the waste-made concretes are beneficial. The EDI of NC is taken as 1. Equation (2) as suggested by Panesar
et al. [16] which is given below is used for the calculation of EDI for various concrete mixes.
∑
5
LCIA resultimpact category i,alternate material j 1
EDIj = x Weighting x Eq. 2
i=1
LCIA resultimpact category i,base material FU

where I = 1 to 5 related to impact category.

J = 1 to 5 related to alternate waste materials concrete.
FU = functional unit as calculated based on equation (1).
And Weighting is the LCIA fraction taken for each impact category.
Equation (2) describes the life cycle impact results of each impact category of blended concretes herein called alternate materials
are divided by corresponding results of normal concrete, herein called base material. The result so obtained herein called the LCIA
fraction is multiplied by the “weighting” scheme, summed and divided by the functional unit (FU). An initial weighting of
0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20 was applied to impact categories such as aquatic acidification, carcinogens, global warming, non-renewable
energy and respiratory inorganics to combine these categories. Five other weightings as presented in Table 7 were also applied to
examine the sensitivity of the results. A higher EDI indicates higher environmental disturbance leading to lower environmental
performance.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. EDI results
The results of LCIA of concrete mixes with and without ferrochrome waste materials calculated for different categories are

Table 7
Weighting scheme.

Weighting scheme Aquatic acidification Carcinogens Global warming Terrestrial ecotoxicity Respiratory inorganic

1 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20

2 0.60 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
3 0.10 0.60 0.10 0.10 0.10
4 0.10 0.10 0.60 0.10 0.10
5 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.60 0.10
6 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.60

7
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

presented in Table 8. The results of EDI calculated using equation (2) based on weighting 0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20 is presented in
Fig. 3. The EDIs of waste-made concrete mixes are normalized to the results of conventional concrete mix herein called base mix. Thus
the EDI of the base mix is taken as 1.
The results show the concrete mixes containing ferrochrome waste materials as alternative constituents of concrete have lower EDI
than normal concrete (NC). Due to the substitution of virgin coarse aggregate with ACFS coarse aggregate, there is more than a 14%
reduction in EDI. The reduction is due to waste utilization which eliminated the processes like quarrying, transportation of quarried
materials to crushers and crushing to required sizes. ACFS is a produced waste material that required only the transportation to plant
site. The percentage of reduction in EDI in concrete mixes FWC1, FWC2, FWC3 and FWC4 are estimated to be nearly 46, 37, 43 and
46%. These mixes contained two waste materials like ACFS and FCA. Cement is said to be the most contributing material as far as
environmental impact is concerned and more replacement of cement provides environmental benefits. Results showed that mix FWC1
that contained 100% ACFS, 7% lime and 10% FCA (where 17% of cement has been replaced by FCA and lime) has lees EDI in
comparison to mixes FWC2 (where 27% of cement has been replaced by 20% FCA and 7% lime) and FWC3 (where 37% of cement has
been replaced by 30% FCA and 7% lime). This has happened because of the higher functional performance of FWC1interms of
compressive strength and water permeability, which establishes its long-term integrity. Replacement of cement 17–47% by 10–40%
FCA and 7% lime has brought benefits to the environment. The concrete mix FWC4 has a similar EDI to FWC1. The mix FWC4 contains
the highest dosage of FCA and its functional parameters in terms of strength and durability are more or less nearer to normal concrete
(NC). On the other hand, it has the lowest EDI. From the results, it is clear that both FWC1 and FWC4 are said to be sustainable concrete
mixes with nearly half of the environmental impact when compared with normal concrete. The mix FWC1 is said to be the most
preferred sustainable material from the technical point of view while FWC4 is the preferred sustainable material from the potential
waste management point of view.

3.2. Process-based contribution analysis

To estimate the life cycle processes of normal concrete and ferrochrome waste concrete concerning environmental impacts and to
translate the difference between these mixes under each impact category, the contribution of materials to the complete life cycle
impacts of each process is analyzed. The LCA study of the concrete mixes presented has been carried out on a laboratory scale. All the
materials in requisite quantities were machine mixed using a laboratory pan mixture. Due to the limitation of documented data for
machinery in LCI, actual real-life data for the mixer machine available in the laboratory was considered in the calculations for
electricity consumption. The mixer machine used in the laboratory that is capable of mixing 200 kg of materials at a time is driven by a
2 hp motor. Based on actual observation, considering an average time of 10 min for loading, mixing and unloading per batch of
concrete, electrical energy consumption for the production of 1 m3 concrete was estimated to be 2.98 kW. Figs. 4 and 5 show the
contribution of materials, transport and electricity to the environmental impacts.
From the analysis, it is observed that cement contributes much to aquatic acidification in both types of mixes with and without
waste materials. Due to the loading of FCA of 40% in FWC4, the contribution of cement was reduced by nearly 12%, but due to the
inclusion of lime to enhance the functional performance, it showed an impact of nearly 5%. Combining the effect of FCA and lime, it
can be said that the overall contribution was reduced by 7% due to the use of supplementary cementitious materials in place of cement.
Similarly, the impact of coarse and fine aggregates on aquatic acidification got reduced by nearly 28% in ferrochrome waste concrete
(FWC4) due to the substitution of virgin coarse aggregate by ACFS. The analysis showed a positive impact of FCA and ACFS on the
impact category of aquatic acidification. Matching our results authors [14] have reported that the acidification potential of concrete
made with recycled alternative aggregate even if it contains chemical admixture is reported to be less which may be attributed to the
development of better chemical composition in concrete matrix and reduction in occupation of land.
Analyzing the contribution of concrete ingredients it is observed that superplasticizer being a chemical contributes much next to
cement to impact category carcinogens. Lime is also contributing much to this impact category. Considering the combined contribution
of lime, cement and FCA as binding materials, is seen that there is nearly 7% environmental benefit due to the use of FCA as sup­
plementary binding material in replacement of cement up to 47%. Natural coarse aggregate has little contribution to carcinogens for a
similar reduction in the contribution is felt due to the substitution of virgin coarse aggregate by ACFS in concrete mix FWC4. This little
reduction is again compensated when the contribution of natural fine and coarse aggregate is taken combined into account. There is
the almost one-fifth amount of the contribution by superplasticizers which are considered unsustainable next to cement as far as
carcinogens are considered. As such alternatives to superplasticizers may make concrete more sustainable.
When the contribution of concrete ingredients used in concrete with and without ferro-waste materials is examined, it is observed
that cement is the principal contributor to global warming. Reducing cement quantity by 40% by FCA, the contribution can be lowered

Table 8
Life cycle assessment impacts.

Impact category Aquatic acidification Carcinogens Global warming Terrestrial ecotoxicity Respiratory inorganics

Unit kg SO2 eq kg C2H3Cl eq kg CO2 eq kg TEG soil kg PM2.5 eq

NC 1.108 0.286 341.333 119.146 0.166
NCS 0.967 0.280 322.952 106.310 0.145
FWC1 0.881 0.298 301.556 105.393 0.135
FWC2 0.856 0.292 292.454 102.749 0.131
FWC3 0.721 0.259 242.340 88.117 0.112
FWC4 0.642 0.240 212.861 79.510 0.100

8
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

Fig. 3. EDI results of normal and ferrochrome waste concrete using weighting scheme 1

Fig. 4. Contribution of various processes of the mix- NC.

Fig. 5. Contribution of various processes of the mix- FWC4.

by around 15%. But the use of lime has a negative contribution. The contribution of lime production to global warming is observed
more than cement. In concrete mix FWC4, the use of 7% lime replacing an equal amount of cement has an overall contribution of 12%.
Considering the overall contribution of all binding materials that consist of lime, cement and FCA, it is calculated that there is only a
1% benefit when compared to the solo use of cement in normal concrete. The benefit achieved due to the use of FCA is compensated by

9
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

lime. As such lime production is proved to be more unsustainable as far as global warming is considered. Hence use of lime as binding
material should be minimized from an environmental point of view. The combined contribution of aggregates (coarse and fine) was
reduced by 29% in Ferro-waste concrete (FWC4) due to the use of ACFS as coarse aggregate.
On examination of the contribution of concrete to the impact category of respiratory inorganics, it is seen that cement alone
contributes nearly 70%. However, the use of FCA reduced the contribution by up to 9%. Considering the impact of lime, as a whole,
there is nearly a 3% benefit due to alternative binders like FCA and lime. The contribution of inert materials in normal concrete was
estimated at around 22% and the same was reduced by 4% with the use of alternate coarse aggregates like ACFS. In the case of the
terrestrial ecotoxicity impact category, the contribution of cement is also the highest whereas lime and superplasticizer are the second
and third highest. The percentage of contribution which was lowered due to the use of FCA is made up of lime.

3.3. Weightings-based analysis

The EDI calculated using weighting 0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20 for impact categories like aquatic acidification, carcinogens, global
warming, terrestrial ecotoxicity and respiratory inorganics as presented in Fig. 3 was validated and elaborated through a sensitivity
analysis using various weighting schemes as detailed in Table 7. Evaluating EDI using different weighting systems helps to prioritize
the impact categories for the interpretation of green indicator results. Weighting may not be considered for a final verdict on envi­
ronmental performance but gives additional input into the process [55]. The results obtained using different weighting schemes are
said to be robust and independent when there are no significant changes in results. Insignificant changes in results provide insights into
the interpretation of results from different perspectives. The results of this sensitive study using different weightings may be in the
interest of the audience with different views on the values of certain environmental systems and processes.
The results of sensitivity analysis using different weighting schemes on the various environmental categories as presented in Fig. 6
shows that the trend of results is the same as the trend of results presented in section 3.1. Due to the application of various weightings,
there is not much change in the relative performance of different mixtures made with and without ferrochrome waste materials which
establishes the robustness of the results. The sensitivity analysis showed that all concrete mixes with ferrochrome waste materials
(NCS, FWC1, FWC2, FWC3 and FWC4) had better environmental performance in comparison to conventional concrete (NC). The
sensitivity analysis also established FWC1 as the most sustainable material concerning environmental and technical performance. Next
to FWC1, the mix FWC4 is found to be sustainable from the potential waste (FCA and ACFS) utilization point of view. FWC4 has almost
similar EDI to FWC1when examined using various weighting schemes.
The difference between EDI based on weighting scheme 1 (0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20:0.20) and all other alternative weighting schemes
(2,3,4,5 and 6) was calculated in percentage and is presented in Table 9. The table shows that there is a little variation in results that
ranged between 2.87 and − 2.40% irrespective of differences in weighting schemes. Panesar et al. [16] using five weighting schemes on
environmental impacts like acidification, global warming potential, resource depletion and water depletion of concrete mixtures made
of fly ash, silica fume and limestone have reported that the variation ranged between 3.23 and 3.45%. Hence the results of the present
study are found in line with that of Panesar et al. [16].

3.4. Global warming potential analysis

It is observed from the results of the impact study and comparison thereof that cement contributes much to global warming in
comparison to other ingredients of concrete. From the literature study [56] it is understood that the substitution of cement with various
supplementary materials reduces the contribution to global warming. In the present study also it is observed that concrete mixes
containing supplementary cementitious material like FCA have lower EDIs in comparison to normal concrete. Since global warming is
the most discussed issue nowadays, the authors were interested to examine the contribution of ferrochrome waste concrete to global
warming using weighting schemes 1 and 4. The results are presented in Fig. 7 which demonstrates that the more the replacement of
cement, the more the reduction in global warming. When the weighting scheme is changed from 0.20 to 0.60, concrete mixes with

Fig. 6. EDI results for various mixes using different weighting schemes.

10
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

Table 9
Variation in EDI results based on various weighting schemes.

Weighting scheme % difference compared to weighting scheme 1 for different mixes

NCS FWC1 FWC2 FWC3 FWC4

2 − 0.078 − 0.120 − 0.120 − 0.112 − 0.105

3 0.012 0.051 0.054 0.077 0.095
4 1.191 − 0.010 − 0.118 − 0.831 − 1.397
5 − 2.406 0.061 0.279 1.726 2.876
6 − 0.015 − 0.019 − 0.019 − 0.016 − 0.014

higher cement replacement materials achieve a similar decrease in EDIs and global warming potential ratio % calculated by taking the
ratio of global warming potential of ferrochrome waste concrete to that of normal concrete. The results of weighting 1, got merged with
that of weighting 4, which established the consistency of results measured in a sensitivity analysis.

3.5. Best and worst-case transportation scenario analysis

The transportation distance between plant-producing waste materials and the concrete batch mix plant herein called ‘lead’ plays an
important role in the determination of environmental impacts [13,41] and EDI thereof. Therefore a sensitivity study was done on EDI
considering the changes in transportation distances. For this purpose, the best and worst-case scenarios were followed for the pro­
curement of waste material (FCA and ACFS) through transportation by trucks. In best and worst-case scenario analysis, normal
concrete (NC) is taken as the base case considering the actual transportation distance of natural coarse aggregate from a distance of 45
KM, fine aggregate from a distance of 15 KM and binding materials from a distance of 5 KM. Thereafter the EDI values of normal
concrete in the best and worst case are normalized to 1. The best case is based upon a probability where the transportation distance of
ferrochrome waste materials is the minimum as per the location of the waste-generating plant. For the development of inventory,
lorry-based transportation was considered where the transportation distance was considered up to the laboratory. The state of Odisha
(India) has a good number of ferrochrome plants scattered over the state. The nearest and farthest ferrochrome industries from our
laboratory are 35 and 205 KM respectively. As such, the leads of 35 and 205 km were considered for the best-case and worst-case
transport scenarios respectively. Table 10 shows the EDIs in best and worst-case transport scenarios. There is no significant differ­
ence in EDIs between the best and worst transport scenarios and the same is estimated to be up to 11% in a mix containing a high
volume of waste materials like 47% of FCA and 100% ACFS. This compromise in EDI up to 11% may not be treated with much in­
fluence when potential waste utilization is obtained.

3.6. Product-based scenario analysis

Fig. 7 explains the product-based comparison of the contribution scenario of normal concrete and Ferro-waste concrete mixes to
different impact categories. Comparing the contribution of each mix to aquatic acidification, it is seen that the normal concrete mix
contributes more than all other mixes. Aquatic acidification explains the process by which aquatic ecosystems become more acidic.
Due to acidification, the pH value of the aquatic ecosystems goes down below the level where most living organisms function. It has an
adverse impact on aquatic life. Acid-sensitive organisms do not manage with increased acidity beyond a pH value of 8.5. Acidification
also supports the release of toxic metals from soils into the water. The major substances that contribute to the acidification of air are
NOx, and SO2 and those for water are H2S and H2SO4. The mixing ratio of aggregate was found to have a substantial impact on
acidification. That is why when ACFS aggregates were used in the mix NCS, the acidification decreased by around 12% in comparison
to mix NC which was made with natural coarse aggregates. The reason behind this is that the production of natural coarse aggregates
that involved mining, transportation and crushing emits much NOx which could be eliminated due to the use of waste material like
ACFS. The use of FCA up to 40% also reduced acidification. It is seen that in mixes FWC1-FWC4 containing FCA 10–40% in place of
cement, there is 22–52% less impact on acidification. From this, it is derived that in addition to the benefit (12%) achieved due to the
use of alternative coarse aggregate in the shape of ACFS, there is a benefit of 10–40% due to FCA alone which is found to be similar to
the dosage of FCA. Kim and Chae [57] using blast furnace slag as cement replacing material and recycled coarse aggregates as an
alternative to coarse aggregate have almost reported similarly.
Scenario analysis of different mixes on impact category carcinogen shows that there is a benefit of nearly 3% in the mix NCS in
comparison to NC due to the substitution of virgin coarse aggregate by ACFS. The benefit is found at nearly 35% in mix FWC4 when
FCA is used at 40%. Thus it can be concluded that cement contributes much to carcinogens. Cement dust causes chronic obstructive
lung disease, lung infection, pneumoconiosis, restrictive lung disease, and carcinoma of the lungs, stomach and colon. Cement contains
hexavalent chromium, which is treated as a human carcinogen. Koh et al. [58] have reported that there is a strong relationship between
exposure to cement factories and the risk of stomach and/or rectal cancers.
From the results of the scenario analysis, it is observed that normal concrete is contributing much to global warming. This is due to
the highest quantity of cement used in normal concrete (NC). The production of each tonne of cement emits a nearly equal amount of
CO2 to the atmosphere and contributes much to global warming. As the cement quantity went on reducing in mixes FWC1-FWC4 due to
loading of FCA 10–40%, the impact on global warming got reduced by 13–42%. The impact on global warming is found 5% less in mix
NCS compared to NC due to the substitution of natural coarse aggregates by ACFS which may be related to the emissions of CO2 during
the processes of extraction and production of coarse aggregate. The present analysis on the impact of natural aggregates and
replacement of that with ACFS on global warming which is estimated to be as little as 5% is somehow matching with the reports of Kim

11
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

Fig. 7. Global warming potential of concrete mixes using different weighting schemes.

Table 10
Sensitivity analysis of best and worst-case transport scenarios.

NC NCS FWC1 FWC2 FWC3 FWC4

EDI for the best-case scenario 1.00 0.856 0.545 0.628 0.572 0.545
EDI for the worst-case scenario 1.00 0.893 0.590 0.679 0.628 0.605
% difference between best and worst-case scenarios 0 4.40 8.31 8.26 9.92 11.26

and Chae [57] where the authors have reported that the mixing ratio of aggregates has little impact on global warming.
Respiratory inorganics belong to the impact category which includes the adverse human health effects due to emissions of par­
ticulate matter (PM) and its precursors like NOx, SOx, and NH3. The emissions of PM are due to the extraction, transportation, crushing
and grinding of raw materials associated with the production of cement and aggregates. From the scenario analysis of different mixes
and their contribution to impact category RI, it is learned that mix NC contributes much as it contains the entire quantity of binder as
OPC and natural aggregates as coarse aggregates. NCS though containing the same amount of OPC as NC contributes less in comparison
to NC as it contains ACFS- waste-made coarse aggregates. Since the OPC quantity is reduced in mixes FWC1-FWC4, these have less
contribution.
Terrestrial ecotoxicology is the study related to environmental pollutants that affect land-dependent organisms and their envi­
ronment. In this regard as far as concrete is concerned, cement, lime and plasticizers are said to be the major contributors. Due to the
replacement of cement in mixes FWC1-FWC4 by waste stream material like FCA, the contribution of these mixes is found less in
comparison to NC and NCS as presented in Fig. 8.

Fig. 8. Scenarios comparison between normal and Ferro-waste concrete.

12
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

4. Conclusions
Based on the experimental works conducted and various analyses made for assessment of the environmental impact of ferrochrome
waste concrete in terms of environmental disturbance indicators following conclusions are made.

• The performance-linked functional unit is found nearly 9–62% more in the case of Ferro-waste concrete in comparison to normal.
This is due to the better performance of concrete mixes made with FCA and ACFS measured in terms of compressive strength and
water permeability.
• The environmental disturbance indicator of ferrochrome waste-made concrete is calculated as 14–46% less than normal concrete.
This achievement is studied to be due to the substitution of coarse aggregate by ACFS and cement by FCA. The more the cement
replacement, the less the environmental disturbance indicator. The result shows that cement is the most intensive ingredient among
all the materials of concrete.
• The variation in results of the environmental disturbance indicator was found insignificant that ranging between 2.87 and − 2.40%
when calculated using five different weighting schemes. As such the results are said to be robust and independent which provides
insights into the interpretation of results from different perspectives.
• The global warming potential when checked through sensitivity analysis using different weightings of 0.2 and 0.6 is reduced by 5%
due to the substitution of virgin coarse aggregate by ACFS and a further 37% due to the replacement of cement with 40% FCA.
• The difference between the environmental disturbance indicators calculated based on sensitivity analysis, taking best and worst-
case transport scenarios in the count is not significant and ranged between 4 and 11%.
• The contribution of different ingredients of concrete when checked using a contribution analysis, the OPC is found to be the top
contributor to impact categories like aquatic acidification, carcinogens, global warming, terrestrial ecotoxicity and respiratory
inorganic. Next to OPC lime and superplasticizer are found to be 2nd and 3rd top contributors.
• The contribution of various mixes made with and without ferro-waste materials when learned through product-based scenario
analysis, is observed that normal concrete is found to contribute most to impact categories like aquatic acidification, carcinogens,
global warming, terrestrial ecotoxicity and respiratory inorganic. The contribution is reduced with the use of waste stream
materials.
The present study has some limitations such as the functional unit has been derived based on performance like strength
(compressive) and durability (Water permeability) parameters. The results of the study may vary for the same mixes if any other
functional unit like volume (1 cubic meter) or weight (1 kg) is considered. The result may also vary if other parameters of strength and
durability are considered in the derivation of the functional unit. This study was carried out considering the cradle-to-gate system
boundary; the outcome may vary considering other system boundaries like a cradle to cradle and cradle-to-grave. The LCA dataset used
in this study to develop the inventory may not be fully wholesome. Since the dataset used may not correspond to a global presence in
actual terms, the inherent development of the inventory data may not be faultless without considering the local factors. The current
study is focused on a laboratory scale of work; the impact on an industrial scale with geographical proximities has not been included in
this study.
In the past, researchers have adopted different system boundaries and functional units according to their preferences and scope of
work. There is no consensus on data for each phase of a product. Thus, it is required to develop and standardize an internationally
accepted guideline on LCA methodology to create a robust database. It should be focused on region-specific curation of data
considering the local factors like methodology, energy mix and distance, so that LCA can have a major implication via its incorporation
in various types of studies.
It is necessary to find EDI considering other important durability studies like chloride permeability and alkali-silica reaction. The
EDI based on long-term properties and various mix proportions considering different strength grades of concrete including the industry
scale of production need to be evaluated. Further study may be conducted assigning weighting to mechanical properties and durability
separately.

Credit author statement

Prasanna K. Acharya: Methodology, experimentation, data collection and analysis, original draft, editing; Sanjaya K. Patro:
Conceptualization, Supervision, review and final approval.

Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

13
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

References
[1] C. Shi, A.F. Jimenez, A. Palomo, New cements for the 21st century: the pursuit of an alternative to Portland cement, Cement Concr. Res. 41 (2011) 750–763.
[2] G. Saevarsdottir, T. Magnusson, H. Kvande, Reducing the carbon footprint: primary production of aluminum and silicon with changing energy systems,
J. Sustain Metall. 7 (2021) 848–857, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40831-021-00429-0.
[3] P.V.D. Heeda, N.D. Belie, Environmental impact and life cycle assessment (LCA) of traditional and ‘green’ concretes: literature review and theoretical
calculations, Cement Concr. Compos. 34 (2012) 431–442.
[4] R. Kurda, J.D. Silvestre, J. De Brito, Life cycle assessment of concrete made with high volume of recycled concrete aggregates and fly ash, Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 139 (2018) 407–417.
[5] A. Souto-Martinez, E.A. Delesky, K.E.O. Foster, W.V. Srubar Iii, A mathematical model for predicting the carbon sequestration potential of ordinary portland
cement (OPC) concrete, Construct. Build. Mater. 147 (2017) 417.
[6] E.R. Teixeira, R. Mateus, A.F. Camoes, L. Bragança, F.G. Branco, Comparative environmental life-cycle analysis of concretes using biomass and coal fly ashes as
partial cement replacement material, J. Clean. Prod. 112 (2016) 2221–2230.
[7] H. Hafez, K. Kudra, N. Al-Ayish, T. Garcia-Segura, W.M. Cheung, B. Nagaratnam, A whole life cycle performance-based ECOnomic and ECOlogical assessment
framework (ECO2) for concrete sustainability, J. Clean. Prod. 292 (2021), 16060, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126060.
[8] S. Yuli, G. Dabo, Z. Heran, O. Jiamin, L. Yuan, M. Jing, M. Zhifu, L. Zhu, Z. Qiang, China CO2 Emission Accounts 1997e2015, vol. 5, Scientific Data, 2018.
[9] T. Ding, J. Xiao, V.W.Y. Tam, A closed-loop life cycle assessment of recycled aggregate concrete utilization in China, Waste Manag. 56 (2016) 367–375.
[10] WBCSD, The cement sustainability initiative 2009 World Bus. Counc. Sustain. Dev. (2016) 01-42.Last Accessed http://www.wbcsdcement.org/pdf/CSI-
RecyclingConcrete-Full Report.pdf.
[11] Un Environment, K.L. Scrivener, Vanderley M. John, E.M. Gartner, Eco efficient cements: potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO2 cement based
materials industry, Cement Concr. Res. 114 (2018) 2–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.03.015.
[12] S. Marinkovi_c, V. Carevi_c, J. Draga, The role of service life in life cycle assessment of concrete structures, J. Clean. Prod. 290 (2021), 125610, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125610.
[13] B. Bennett, P. Visintin, T. Xie, Global warming potential of recycled aggregate concrete with supplementary cementitious materials, J. Build. Eng. 52 (2022),
104394.
[14] N. Serres, S. Braymand, F. Feugeas, Environmental evaluation of concrete made from recycled concrete aggregate implementing lifecycle assessment, J. Build.
Eng. 5 (2016) 24–33.
[15] P.J. Joyce, A. Bjorklund, Using life cycle thinking to assess the sustainability benefits of complex valorization pathways for bauxite residue, J. Sustain Metall. 5
(2019) 69–84, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40831-019-00209-x.
[16] D.K. Panesar, K.E. Seto, C.J. Churchill, R. Zhang, Life cycle assessment and environmental disturbance indicators to evaluate the sustainability of concrete mix
designs, Indian Concr. J. 94 (2) (2020), 09-17.
[17] M.A. Sanjuan, C. Andrade, P. Mora, A. Zarogoza, Carbon dioxide uptake by cement based materials: a Spanish case study, Appl. Sci. 10 (2020) 339, https://doi.
org/10.3390/app10010339.
[18] M.A. Sanjuan, C. Argiz, P. Mora, A. Zarogoza, Carbon dioxide uptake in road map 2050 of the Spanish cement industry, Energies 10 (2020) 3452, https://doi.
org/10.3390/en13133452.
[19] S. Sunayana, S.V. Barai, Recycled aggregate concrete incorporating fly ash: comparative study on particle packing and conventional method, Construct. Build.
Mater. 156 (2017) 376e386, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.08.132.
[20] S.A.A.M. Fennis, J.C. Walraven, Using particle packing technology for sustainable concrete mixture design, Heron 57 (2012) 73–101.
[21] V.M. John, B.L. Damineli, M. Quattrone, R.G. Pileggi, Fillers in cementitious materials -experience, recent advances and future potential, Cement Concr. Res.
114 (2018) 65e78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.09.013.
[22] E. Menéndez, A.M. Álvaro, M.T. Hernández, J.L. Parra, New methodology for assessing the environmental burden of cement mortars with partial replacement of
coal bottom ash and fly ash, J. Environ. Manag. 133 (2014) 275–283.
[23] B. Chatveera, P. Lertwattanaruk, Durability of conventional concrete containing black rice husk ash, J. Environ. Manag. 92 (1) (2011) 59–66.
[24] W. Tangchirapat, T. Saeting, C. Jaturapitakkul, K. Kiattikomol, A. Siripanichgorn, Use of waste ash from palm oil industry in concrete, Waste Manag. 27 (1)
(2007) 81–88.
[25] B. Jurič, L. Hanžič, R. Ilić, N. Samec, Utilization of municipal solid waste bottom ash and recycled aggregate in concrete, Waste Manag. 26 (12) (2006)
1436–1442.
[26] Kunal, R. Siddique, A. Rajor, Use of cement kiln dust in cement concrete and its leachate characteristics, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 61 (10) (2012) 59–68.
[27] S. Caijun, M. Christian, B. Ali, Utilization of copper slag in cement and concrete, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 52 (10) (2008) 1115–1120.
[28] E.M.R. Fairbairn, B.B. Americano, G.C. Cordeiro, T.P. Paula, M.M. Silvoso, Cement replacement by sugarcane ash: CO2 emission reduction and pollution for
carbon credits, J. Environ. Manag. 91 (9) (2010) 1864–1871.
[29] D. Nakic, D. Vouk, N. Stirmer, M. Serdar, Management of sewage sludge – new possibilities involving partial cement replacement, Gradevinar 70 (4) (2018)
277–286.
[30] W. Wei, P.B. Samuelsson, A. Tilliander, R. Gyllenram, P.G. Jonsson, Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions during erromolybdenum production,
J. Sustain Metall. 6 (2020) 103–112, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40831-019-00260-8.
[31] M. Rinne, P. Halli, J. Aromaa, M. Lundstrom, Alternative method for treating electric arc furnace dust: simulation and life cycle assessment, J. Sustain Metall. 8
(2022) 913–926, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40831-022-00531-x.
[32] International Organization for Standardization 14040, Environmental Management-Life Cycle Assessment-Principles and Framework, ISO, Geneva, 2006.
[33] D.N. Huntzinger, T.D. Eatmon, A life-cycle assessment of Portland cement manufacturing: comparing the traditional process with alternative technologies,
J. Clean. Prod. 17 (2009) 668–675.
[34] M.L. Marceau, M.A. Nisbet, M.G. VanGeem, Life cycle inventory of Portland cement concrete, Portland Cement Assoc. SN3011 (2007), 01-127.
[35] G. Habert, J.B. D’espinose De Lacaillerie, N. Roussel, An environmental evaluation of geopolymer based concrete production: reviewing current research trends,
J. Clean. Prod. 19 (2011) 1229–1238.
[36] M.W. Tait, W.M. Cheung, A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of three concrete mix designs, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 21 (6) (2016) 847–860.
[37] P.V. Heede, M.D. Keersmaecker, A. Elia, A. Adriaens, N.D. Belie, Service life and global warming potential of chloride exposed concrete with high volumes of fly
ash, Cement Concr. Compos. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.03.020.
[38] C. Ingrao, A.L. Giudice, C. Tricase, C. Mbohwa, R. Rana, The use of basalt aggregates in the production of concrete for the prefabrication industry:
environmental impact assessment, interpretation and improvement, J. Clean. Prod. (2014) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.002.
[39] H. Huang, T. Wang, B. Kolosz, J. Andresen, S. Garcia, M. Fang, M.M. Maroto-Valer, Life-cycle assessment of emerging CO2 mineral carbonation-cured concrete
blocks: comparative analysis of CO2 reduction potential and optimization of environmental impacts, J. Clean. Prod. 241 (2019), 118359, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118359.
[40] J. Li, J. Zhang, S. Ni, L. Liu, L.F. Walubita, Mechanical performance and environmental impacts of self compacting concrete with recycled demolished concrete
blocks, J. Clean. Prod. 293 (2021), 126129, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126129.
[41] R. Kurda, J de Silvestre Brito, D. Jose, A comparative study of the mechanical and life cycle assessment of high-content fly ash and recycled aggregates concrete,
J. Build. Eng. 29 (2020), 101173.
[42] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Utilization of ferrochrome wastes such as ferrochrome ash and ferrochrome slag in concrete manufacturing, Waste Manag. Res. 34
(2016) 764–774.
[43] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Bond permeability and acid resistance characteristics of ferrochrome waste concrete, ACI Mater. J. 115 (3) (2018), 01-10.

14
P.K. Acharya and S.K. Patro Journal of Building Engineering 65 (2023) 105788

[44] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Effect of lime and ferrochrome ash (FA) as partial replacement of cement on strength, ultrasonic pulse velocity and permeability of
concrete, Construct. Build. Mater. 94 (2015) 448–457.
[45] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Acid resistance, sulphate resistance and strength properties of concrete containing ferrochrome ash (FA) and lime, Construct. Build.
Mater. 120 (2016) 241–250.
[46] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Use of ferrochrome ash and lime dust in concrete preparation, J. Clean. Prod. 131 (2016) 237–246.
[47] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Strength, sorption and abrasion characteristics of concrete using ferrochrome ash (FCA) and lime as partial replacement of cement,
Cement Concr. Compos. 74 (2016) 16–25.
[48] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Flexural behavior of ferrochrome ash concrete beams, Indian Concr. J. 90 (7) (2016) 36–43.
[49] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Flexural behavior of reinforced cement concrete beams made with air-cooled ferrochrome slag coarse aggregate, Indian Concr. J. 95 (2)
(2021), 01-08.
[50] P.K. Acharya, S.K. Patro, Effect of lime on mechanical and durability properties of blended cement based concrete, J. Inst. Eng.: Series A. 27 (2) (2016) 71–79.
[51] Y. Zhang, J. Junzhi Zhang, W. Luo, J. Jiandong Wang, J. Jiale Shi, H. Zhuang, Y. Wang, Effect of compressive strength and chloride diffusion on life cycle CO2
assessment of concrete containing supplementary cementitious materials, J. Clean. Prod. 218 (2019) 450–458, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.335.
[52] D.K. Panesar, K.E. Seto, C.J. Churchill, Impact of the selection of functional unit on the life cycle assessment of green concrete, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 22 (2017)
1969e1986, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1284-0.
[53] P. Visintin, T. Xie, B. Bennett, A large-scale life-cycle assessment of recycled aggregate concrete: the influence of functional unit, emissions allocation and carbon
dioxide uptake, J. Clean. Prod. (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119243.
[54] Open LCA software version 10.3 (www.openlca.org).
[55] M. Bengtsson, B. Steen, Weighting in LCA Approaches and Applications, Environmental, 2000.
[56] D.K. Panesar, Developments in the Formulation and Reinforcement of Concrete, Woodhead Publishing, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102616-
8.00003-4.
[57] T.H. Kim, C.U. Chae, Environmental impact analysis of acidification and eutrophication due to emissions from the production of concrete, Sustainability 8 (578)
(2016) 1–20, https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060578.
[58] D.H. Koh, T.W. Kim, S.H. Jang, H.W. Ryu, Dust exposure and the risk of cancer in cement industry workers in Korea, Am. J. Ind. Med. 56 (2013) 276–281.

15