Reviews on Advanced Materials Science 2025; 64: 20250104

Research Article

Musa Adamu*, Mohammed Rihan Maaze, Ashwin Raut, Yasser E. Ibrahim, and Hani Alanazi*

A life cycle and environmental impact analysis of

sustainable concrete incorporating date palm ash
and eggshell powder as supplementary
cementitious materials
https://doi.org/10.1515/rams-2025-0104 applications due to its superior mechanical performance,
received January 30, 2025; accepted March 25, 2025 while Mix M8 was preferred for non-structural, environ-
Abstract: This study investigates the environmental and mentally sensitive applications. This study demonstrates
mechanical performance of eco-friendly concrete using the dual benefits of DPA and ESP in enhancing sustainability
date palm ash (DPA) and eggshell powder (ESP) as cemen- and performance, promoting eco-friendly construction
titious materials. Concrete mixes were made by substi- practices.
tuting conventional cement with DPA at varying levels Keywords: date palm ash, eggshell powder, sustainable
(10, 20, 30, and 40%) and adding ESP in dosages of 1, 2, 3, concrete, life cycle assessment
and 4%. Mechanical strengths and water absorption were
evaluated. The optimal mix, comprising 20% DPA and 2%
ESP, achieved a compressive strength of 57.53 MPa, demon-
strating advancement of 41% over the control mix while 1 Introduction
reducing water absorption by 22.96%. A life cycle assess-
ment, accomplished using ISO 14040 standards and ReCiPe Concrete is the most consumed manmade material and the
Midpoint (H) methodology, evaluated environmental second most consumed material after water. It is the most
impacts across 18 categories for 1 m3 of concrete. The results utilized manmade construction material due to its series of
revealed a significant reduction in global warming potential advantages over other construction materials like steel,
by up to 15.46%, with Mix M8 (40% DPA) demonstrating the timber, glass, and asphalt. With infrastructural develop-
most substantial environmental benefits. Further analysis ments and urbanization on the rise globally, the demand
highlighted reductions in acidification, ozone formation, for concrete is increasing progressively, and it is estimated
and resource scarcity. The analytical hierarchy process iden- that the average production of concrete has reached 1 m3
tified Mix M3 as the optimal design for structural per person per annum [1,2]. In terms of quantities, more
than 4.4 billion tons of concrete are consumed yearly, and
by 2050 this value is expected to project to 5.5 billion tons

* Corresponding author: Musa Adamu, Engineering Management
[3]. The constituent material for making normal concrete
Department, College of Engineering, Prince Sultan University, 11586, includes cement, aggregates, and water. Cement is the
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Structures and Materials Research Laboratory, main binder material, which, when hardened, solidifies
College of Engineering, Prince Sultan University, 11586, Riyadh, to form the composite (concrete), and it constitutes
Saudi Arabia, e-mail: madamu@psu.edu.sa between 12 and 15% of the total constituent materials
* Corresponding author: Hani Alanazi, Department of Civil and
[1,4]. Global cement consumption exceeds 3.27 billion
Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, Majmaah University,
Majmaah, 11952, Saudi Arabia, e-mail: hm.alanazi@mu.edu.sa tons in 2020, and it is forecasted to surpass 4.83 billion
Mohammed Rihan Maaze: School of Engineering, NICMAR University, tons by 2030 [5]. However, cement is the most environmen-
Pune, 411045, Maharashtra, India tally unsustainable material, as it is the main contributor
Ashwin Raut: Department of Civil Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah to the global CO2 linked with concrete production [6]. CO2
Education Foundation, Vaddeswaram, Guntur (Dt.), 522502, AP, India
emissions over time will concentrate in the environment
Yasser E. Ibrahim: Engineering Management Department, College of
Engineering, Prince Sultan University, 11586, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia;
and intensify the potential of global warming [7]. This
Structures and Materials Research Laboratory, College of Engineering, raises significant concerns among researchers and scien-
Prince Sultan University, 11586, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia tists about finding a solution or an alternative to cement to

Open Access. © 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
2  Musa Adamu et al.

promote sustainability. The global CO2 emissions from the concrete. This will reduce the overall cost of concrete since
cement industry range between 5 and 8%, and these emis- cement is the most costly ingredient and also reduce
sions mainly come from the high energy consumed during cement-related CO2 emissions indirectly by reducing the
the process of calcination and formulations. The large amount of cement produced [14,21]. DPA has also been
volume of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, in addi- found to be a good pozzolanic material, which, when used
tion to the huge volume of natural aggregates used, makes as a SCM, improves the mechanical properties and dur-
concrete not a sustainable material [3,8]. To address the ability performance of concrete and mortar [12,13,19,21,25].
challenges of cement in concrete, researchers are trying to DPA also promotes both the cost and environmental sustain-
find an alternative material to be used as supplementary ability of concrete; when used as an SCM in concrete, it
cementitious material (SCM) in concrete. This will lead to a reduces the cost and embodied CO2 emissions of the con-
significant reduction in the amount of cement consumed crete [14].
and consequently lower the greenhouse carbon emissions However, the main shortcoming of using DPA in con-
from cement production. Waste-derived materials from crete is that only a minimal proportion of cement (not
industries, such as fly ash, silica fume, and slag, have more than 10%) can be replaced without causing a reduc-
been utilized as SCMs in concrete and were proven to tion in the mechanical properties and durability perfor-
improve the performance of concrete [9,10]. Agricultural mance of the concrete, which might be due to the slower
waste is ground into a fine powder and utilized in concrete pozzolanic reaction of DPA [11,19]. To address this problem,
as SCMs, with date palm ash (DPA) and eggshell powder DPA can be used in conjunction with other strongly reac-
(ESP) being common examples [11–15]. Recent advance- tive SCMs, especially those that contain higher cementi-
ments in sustainable concrete technology, as highlighted tious properties (CaO), such as ESP [12].
by Elfadaly et al. [16], demonstrate innovative approaches ESP is obtained from waste eggshells. Eggs are one of
to enhancing the eco-friendliness of concrete utilizing rice the most consumed foods globally, as they are used in
and other pozzolanic material (pumice powder) as binder homes, bakeries, poultry farms, restaurants, and factories.
sources in geopolymer. Similarly, current research out- Eggshell waste can be collected from any of the mentioned
lined in Abdellatief et al. [17] emphasizes significant places and recycled [26]. It makes up 11–12% of the total
improvements in both the mechanical properties and weight of the egg, and a typical egg weighs between 50 and
environmental benefits of incorporating SCMs like sawdust 70 g. These eggshells are mainly dumped into the trash and
ash and ESP into concrete mixes. disposed into landfills, thereby attracting all sorts of
Agricultural waste ash has been reported to contain insects, snakes, birds, and rodents, which can be harmful
high amounts of silica, which is the main pozzolanic oxide to the environment and human health, promoting environ-
[18]. DPA is an agriculturally based SCM, which contains mental pollution [27,28]. Eggshell is a great source of
moderate pozzolanic and little cementing properties calcium, as its main chemical compound is calcium carbo-
[12,19]. DPA is a processed waste product from date palm nate/calcium oxide (CaCO3/CaO), which makes it a
trees. The waste includes the trunks, branches, leaves, potential material for use in cementitious composites as
mesh, and fronds of the tree. These wastes are burnt CaCO3 and aid in the production of more calcium silicate
down under high temperatures to obtain ash and further hydrate (CSH) gels. They are the major hydration products
refined into a fine powdered form for use as a substitute for enhancing the durability and strength of cementitious
material for cement in concrete [12,20,21]. The date palm composites [12,29,30]. ESP is reported to contain very high
tree is abundant in the Gulf countries, with Saudi Arabia cementitious properties (CaO), even higher than cement,
being the second-highest global date palm producer. and a specific amount of this compound is required for
Annually, more than 1 million tons of waste are produced strength development [30–32]. ESP has been reported to
from the date palm trees in Saudi Arabia [22,23]. Most of strengthen the properties of cementitious composites
these wastes are discarded into landfills without recycling, because of its abundant CaCO3, which helps in balancing
with few quantities used together with other biowaste to ettringite and monocarbonate dosages in the cementitious
produce animal feeds. The discarded date tree wastes matrix [26,33]. Usually, ESP, known for its high CaO con-
cause threats to the environment, such as water pollution, tent, is combined with pozzolanic materials containing
leaching, and soil degradation. Therefore, proper manage- moderate to high levels of silica (SiO2) and alumina
ment of this waste is vital to prevent these effects and (Al2O3) to give an excellent CaO–SiO2 reactivity and double
promote environmental sustainability [24]. One of the the compressive strength at an early age and significantly
ways of utilizing the date waste trees is by burning them improve dense gel formulation in the cement matrix [34].
and use as an SCM to produce sustainable, ecofriendly ESP has been blended with pozzolanic materials such as fly
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  3

ash [35,36], blast furnace slag [37,38], rice husk ash [39], rice between performance optimization and environmental
straw ash [40,41], silica fume [28], nano silica [26], palm oil responsibility while contributing to the global efforts to
fuel ash (POFA), bagasse ash [42], etc., and they all reported counteract the environmental effects of producing concrete.
significant improvements in both pozzolanic/hydration
reactions and enhancements in the properties of the con-
crete using the materials of the hybrid. Recently, Adamu
et al. [12] blended DPA with ESP in cement composite, in 2 Materials and methods
which 10–40% of cement was partially substituted with
DPA, and ESP was added as an additive to cementitious
2.1 Materials
materials in dosages of 1, 2, 3, and 4% by the weight of
the binder. The mechanical strengths improved with the
Type I cement was employed as the main binder, with a
incorporation of up to 20% DPA and 2% ESP, while the
specific gravity (SG) of 3.15 and a specific surface area of
durability in terms of pore volume and absorption
325 m2·kg−1. DPA was collected from a nearby farm in
enhanced with the addition of 30% DPA and 3% ESP.
unprocessed form. On the farm, date palm waste consisting
The development of sustainable construction mate-
of leaves, trunks, mesh, and branches was burnt in the
rials is imperative to address the environmental challenges
open. The raw DPA was further processed in the laboratory
associated with traditional cement-based concrete. While
to obtain the final product for use in concrete. Raw DPA
significant research has been conducted on SCMs, the
was placed in the furnace at a temperature of 600°C for 2 h
potential of combining agricultural waste products such
to eliminate any moisture and remove unburnt carbon
as DPA and ESP remains underexplored, particularly
from the ash [45,46]. DPA was ground using a high-pow-
regarding their synergistic effects on mechanical perfor-
ered grinder and subsequently sieved through a 150 μm
mance and environmental sustainability. Previous studies,
mesh, and the particles that passed were collected as the
including the work by Adamu et al. [12], have predomi-
processed DPA. DPA has a chemical composition, as shown
nantly concentrated on the mechanical properties of
in Table 1, which met the requirements of ASTM C618 [47]
DPA–ESP-based concrete, providing detailed experimental
for pozzolanic materials for concrete application. The SG of
insights but lacking a comprehensive evaluation of its sus-
DPA was found to be 2.14. The eggshell residues were
tainability, such as life cycle assessment (LCA). Thus, some
acquired from different sources within Riyadh, Saudi
studies have carried out LCA of concrete containing indus-
Arabia, which included poultry farms, restaurants, and
trial or agro-industrial pozzolanic materials. Onyelowe
bakery. After collection, the eggshells were thoroughly
et al. [43] carried out an LCA for concrete containing silica
washed to eliminate dirt and organic membranes. After
fume and fly ash as partial substitutes for cement. They
washing, the eggshells were ground to smaller particles
found that partially replacing cement with silica fume and
by hand and oven-dried for 24 h at a temperature of 100
fly ash lowered the environmental impact of the concrete
± 5°C to dry them completely and remove moisture. The
due to a reduction in cement usage. Onyelowe et al. [44]
eggshells were pulverized into a fine powder and sieved
reported a reduction in the environmental impact of fly
using a 63 μm mesh, and the particles that passed were
ash and rice husk ash as SCMs due to a reduction in cement
collected and utilized as ESP, with their properties listed in
use. By adopting a holistic LCA approach, this research
Table 1. The manufacturing process of DPA and SP waste
seeks to examine the dual impact of DPA and ESP on con-
crete’s durability, strength, and environmental sustain-
ability, thereby addressing the existing gap. The novelty
lies in utilizing a hybrid SCM system that not only optimizes Table 1: Chemical properties of DPA and ESP
mechanical properties but also minimizes the environ-
mental footprint, offering a sustainable and cost-efficient Oxides Values

solution to replace traditional cement. By exploring the Cement DPA ESP

optimal mix design of DPA–ESP-based concrete, assessing
Calcium oxide (%) 65.18 11.72 97.46
its mechanical and durability characteristics, and quanti- Silicon dioxide (%) 19.17 52.35 0.03
fying its life cycle impacts, this research extends the work Ferric oxide (%) 3.4 13.36 —
of Adamu et al. [12], addressing the need for a separate study Aluminum oxide (%) 5.39 6.27 0.02
to focus on sustainability aspects. The findings aim to pro- Magnesium oxide (%) 0.91 0.1 0.69
Sulfur trioxide (%) 3.51 1.50 0.35
vide a holistic understanding of the feasibility of DPA and
SG 3.15 2.14 2.39
ESP as sustainable construction materials, bridging the gap
4  Musa Adamu et al.

Figure 1: Manufacturing process of DPA and ESP waste.

powder is shown in Figure 1. River sand was obtained from 2.2 Mix design and proportioning
local suppliers and used as a fine aggregate. The aggre-
gate’s SG is 2.63, and its water absorption is 1.26%. The In this study, the procedure discussed in ACI 211.1R [49] was
coarse aggregate used was crushed gravel obtained from followed and implemented for designing the control (100%
a nearby quarry. The coarse aggregate has an SG of 2.67, OPC) cement, which is used as the reference mix for com-
particle size of 19 mm, and water absorption of 0.54%. The parison with all other mixes. DPA was used to substitute
particle size gradation of the fine and coarse aggregates is some fractions of the cement at different proportions (10,
presented in Figure 2, and they fall within the limits spe- 20, and 30%). The replacement procedure used the volume
cified by ASTM C33/C33M [48] for use in concrete. method due to the large variation between the SGs of OPC

Lower Limit (ASTM C33) Coarse Agg. Upper Limit (ASTM C33)
Fine Agg. Lower Limit (ASTM C33) Upper Limit (ASTM C33)
120
Cumulative Percentage Passing (%)

100

80

60

40

20

0
0.1 1 10
Particle Size (mm)

Figure 2: Particle size gradation of aggregates.

 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  5

(3.15) and the DPA (2.14). To enhance the pozzolanic reac- line with the ASTM C78/C78M [54] standard, concrete prisms
tivity in concrete, ESP was incorporated as an additive to of size 100 mm × 100 mm × 500 mm were prepared and cured
cementitious materials in several dosages (0, 1, 2, and 3% for 28 days to determine flexural strength. Finally, in line with
by weight) of the binders. To optimize the study and lower ASTM C642 [55], the water absorption of the concrete was
the number of required mixes, the response surface meth- tested on 100 mm cubes cured for 28 days.
odology (RSM) technique was applied. The Design Expert
software was utilized for the RSM process, and the central
composite design method was selected. A total of ten mixes,
including the control, were obtained using various combi-
3 LCA methodology
nations of DPA and ESP by the RSM, as shown in Table 2.
This procedure saves time and cost for the experiment and 3.1 Goal and scope definition
the study [12].
The LCA of DPA–ESP-based concrete was carried out using
IS0 14040, which involved four steps, as shown in Figure 3.
2.3 Specimen preparation and experimental The primary goal of this LCA was to assess the environ-
methodology mental impacts of producing 1 m3 of DPA–ESP-based con-
crete and to compare these impacts with conventional con-
In this study, the methodology explained in ASTM C192/C192M crete mixes. The study aimed to identify the significant
[50] for the batching and mixing of the concrete was followed. impact categories and primary contributors throughout
After mixing, the workability of the fresh concrete was deter- the concrete’s life cycle. The functional unit was defined
mined. The fresh concrete was cast into the specified molds as 1 m3 of concrete, providing a standard basis for com-
and allowed to harden in the laboratory. The concrete was paring the environmental performance of different mate-
extracted from the molds 24 h later and immersed in water rials and processes.
for curing prior to testing. Figure 4 illustrates the system boundaries, which fol-
The slump test, conducted in accordance with ASTM lowed a cradle-to-grave framework, encompassing all life
C143/C143M [51], was used to evaluate the workability of the cycle stages: raw material extraction, processing, transpor-
freshly prepared concrete. After 28 days of curing in water, tation, mixing, usage, and end-of-life management [56–58].
the compressive strength of the concrete was determined This included acquiring raw materials such as cement,
using 100 mm cubes, as per BS EN 12390-3 [52]. As per the river sand, aggregates, DPA, and ESP; processing DPA
requirements of BS EN 12390-6 [53], split tensile strength and ESP (drying, grinding, and sieving); mixing concrete;
testing was conducted on cylindrical concrete samples and handling end-of-life processes like demolition, waste
(200 mm height and 100 mm diameter) cured for 28 days. In management, and potential recycling or disposal.

Table 2: Mixture proportions [12,13]

Mix Variables (%) Quantities of each material (kg·m−3)

DPA ESP Cement DPA ESP Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate Water SP

M1 0 0 490 0.0 0.0 750 905 170 4.90

M2 30 1 343 113.4 4.6 750 905 170 4.61
M3* 20 2 392 75.6 9.4 750 905 170 4.77
M4 0 2 490 0.0 9.8 750 905 170 5.00
M5* 20 2 392 75.6 9.4 750 905 170 4.77
M6 10 1 441 37.8 4.8 750 905 170 4.84
M7 20 4 392 75.6 18.7 750 905 170 4.86
M8 40 2 294 151.2 8.9 750 905 170 4.54
M9* 20 2 392 75.6 9.4 750 905 170 4.77
M10 10 3 441 37.8 14.4 750 905 170 4.93
M11* 20 2 392 75.6 9.4 750 905 170 4.77
M12 20 0 392 75.6 0.0 750 905 170 4.68
M13 30 3 343 113.4 13.7 750 905 170 4.70

*DPA = date palm ash; ESP = eggshell powder.

6  Musa Adamu et al.

Figure 3: LCA as per ISO 14040.

3.2 Life cycle inventory (LCI) 50 km, and other materials such as cement, river sand, and
aggregates were transported 50 km to the production site. All
The LCI phase detailed quantifying all inputs and outputs transportation activities were included in the LCI using the
of producing 1 m3 of DPA–ESP-based concrete. The assess- “Light Commercial Vehicle (RoW) | Cut-off, S” dataset.
ment considered various mix designs (M1 to M14) with
different percentages of DPA and ESP, replacing portions
of conventional cement. 3.3 Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)
The inventories used in this analysis (Table 3) provide
a comprehensive overview of the materials, processing, The SimaPro v9.6 software and ReCiPe Midpoint (H) meth-
electricity consumption, and transportation considered in odology were used for the LCIA phase. The ReCIPe mid-
the LCA. The environmental burdens associated with pro- point (H) method assesses 18 environmental impacts and
cessing DPA and ESP were calculated based on their spe- offers a detailed evaluation of products or processes. The
cific energy consumption: DPA required 150 kW·h for methodology was selected based on its capacity to conduct
drying and 149.7 kW·h for grinding and sieving. In compar- an in-depth examination of environmental impacts at mid-
ison, ESP required 25 kW·h for drying and 72.83 kW·h for points and help point out areas that need improvements in
grinding and sieving. These processes were modeled using the emissions, resource use, and other types of environmental
“Electricity, high voltage (CN-SA) | Electricity production, hard burdens. Some limitations were recognized, such as using
coal, system S” dataset to account for electricity consumption. Ecoinvent v3.9 data that may not cover regional differences
Materials were transported using light commercial vehicles and assumptions that DPA and ESP are considered waste
over specified distances: DPA was transported 150 km, ESP materials with no previous environmental burdens.
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  7

Figure 4: Graphical representation and boundary condition adopted for LCA.

Additionally, transportation distances and processing of warming potential (GWP) was mainly influenced by cement
materials could change the results if these parameters vary. manufacturing. Due to their energy specifications, heavy con-
The research did not include any potential advantages of tributions also came from DPA and ESP processing.
recycling concrete at the end-of-life, reusing or reusing it Completeness and consistency checks confirmed the proper
again, which may improve the entire ecological footprint. inclusion of all relevant life cycle stages and inputs. In sub-
sequent sections, LCIA results interpretation and ancillary
improvement opportunities are discussed.

3.4 Interpretation

The LCA for DPA–ESP-based concrete, performed by ISO 3.5 Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and
14040 guidelines, included a complete analysis of the envir- one-way sensitivity analysis
onmental effects to discern relevant factors and ensure data
integrity and methodological coherence. By using the ReCiPe The selection of an optimal mix design for DPA–ESP-based
Midpoint (H) method analysis, it was found that global concrete requires a methodical approach to evaluating
8  Musa Adamu et al.

Table 3: Inventory for the LCA for the DPA–ESP-based concrete decision-making (MCDM) technique that aids in assigning
priority weights to these criteria and ranking the available
Inventory component Description alternatives accordingly. The AHP methodology involves
Cement, Portland {RoW} Market for cement, Portland structuring the decision problem into a hierarchy, con-
Sand {RoW} Market for sand structing a pairwise comparison matrix, normalizing the
Gravel, round {RoW} Market for gravel, round judgments, computing priority vectors, and ensuring con-
Tap water {RoW} Market for tap water sistency in decision-making.
Plasticizer for concrete Based on sulfonated melamine
The pairwise comparison matrix is a square matrix A,
formaldehyde {GLO} market for
plasticizer
where each element aij represents the relative importance
DPA Processed for concrete production of criterion i over criterion j, satisfying the following
ESP Processed for concrete production condition:
Electricity, high voltage Electricity production, hard coal,
(CN-SA) system S
1
aij = , ∀i , j , and aii = 1. (1)
Transportation of Light commercial vehicle (RoW) aji
materials
Normalization of this matrix is performed to ensure
comparability of the elements by dividing each entry by
the sum of its respective column:
multiple criteria, including technical performance, envir-
onmental impact, and economic feasibility, as shown in aij
Nij = . (2)
Figure 5. The AHP is a widely used multi-criteria ∑in= 1aij

Figure 5: Experimental methodology followed in the present study.

 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  9

The priority vector, representing the relative impor- where ski represents the performance score of the mix. The mix
tance weights of each criterion, is obtained by averaging design with the highest score is considered the optimal choice.
the values across the rows of the normalized matrix: To assess the robustness of the rankings, one-way sen-
1
n sitivity analysis is conducted by varying the weight of a
wi = ∑ Nij . (3) selected criterion while proportionally adjusting the
n j=1
others. If the weight of a particular criterion wi is modified,
To ensure the reliability of the judgments, a consistency the adjusted weight is given by
check is performed by first computing the weighted sum vector:
wi′ = wi + Δw , where 0 ≤ wi′ ≤ 1. (9)
n
Wi = ∑ aijwj . (4) The remaining weights are proportionally redistributed as
j=1
1 − wi′
The principal eigenvalue λmax is estimated using wj′ = wj × , ∀j ≠ i . (10)
1 − wi
n
1 Wi
λmax = ∑ . (5) The recalculated score for each mix design under the
n i = 1 wi new weight distribution is
Using λmax, the consistency index (CI) is calculated as n

λmax − n
Sk′ = ∑ wi′ × ski . (11)
CI = . (6) i=1
n−1
By analyzing the variation in ranking as a function of
The consistency ratio (CR) is then computed as Δw, the sensitivity of the decision model is assessed. If
CI small changes in the criterion weights result in significant
CR = , (7)
RI rank reversals, the model’s stability is questioned, and
where RI is the random index, a predefined value based on adjustments to the decision criteria may be necessary.
the number of criteria. A CR < 0.1 is considered acceptable;
otherwise, the pairwise comparisons need to be revised.
Following the derivation of weights, each mix design 4 Results and discussion
(M1 to M13) is evaluated against the technical, environ-
mental, and economic criteria using a decision matrix.
The overall score for each mix design is determined using 4.1 Experimental results
the weighted sum method:
n
The experimental results discussed in this study were
Sk = ∑ wi × ski , (8) already documented in Adamu et al. [12,13], and a sum-
i=1 mary is presented in Table 4 for reference and

Table 4: Experimental results [12,13]

Mix DPA (%) ESP (%) Slump (mm) Comp Split tensile Flexural Water
strength (MPa) strength (MPa) strength (MPa) absorption (%)

M1 0 0 90 40.92 3.38 5.73 3.18

M2 30 1 53 41.97 3.19 5.49 3.27
M3 20 2 65 57.53 4.19 7.23 2.45
M4 0 2 83 46.08 3.50 6.13 2.99
M5 20 2 60 59.49 4.01 6.75 2.57
M6 10 1 70 49.22 3.54 6.64 2.92
M7 20 4 38 44.17 3.33 5.03 3.05
M8 40 2 35 32.49 2.91 4.68 4.15
M9 20 2 60 58.04 3.86 7.05 2.61
M10 10 3 63 55.90 4.00 6.79 2.78
M11 20 2 58 63.25 3.73 6.86 2.72
M12 20 0 72 35.09 2.97 5.21 3.65
M13 30 3 40 44.68 3.58 5.41 3.05
M14 20 2 58 51.58 4.08 6.55 2.75
10  Musa Adamu et al.

understanding of the LCA. A reduction in concrete slump in this study. Figure 6(a–r) shows the characterized values
was observed with higher DPA replacement levels, likely of environmental impacts of materials due to the produc-
due to the coarse, irregular particle sizes of DPA, leading to tion of various concrete mixes. Across all mixes, cement
increased internal friction and a lower slump. Similarly, production is a dominant contributor to the GWP, with
adding ESP led to a reduction in the concrete slump caused contributions ranging from 45.8 to 64.4% of total emissions.
by the high surface area of ESP that absorbed excess water For instance, in the M2 mix, cement production accounts
during mixing and lowered workability. Replacing a por- for approximately 51.2% (325.79 kg CO2 eq) of the total
tion of the cement with DPA reduced the compressive, 636.6 kg CO2 eq emissions, while in the M4 mix, this
flexural, and split tensile strengths, as well as an increase increases to around 64.4% (465.42 kg CO2 eq) of the total
in water absorption. For example, in comparison to mix 1 722.84 kg CO2 eq emissions. The notable impact of cement
(0% DPA and 0% ESP), mix M12 (20% DPA and 0% ESP) has arises from its high-energy production process, involving
lower compressive, split tensile, and flexural strengths by limestone calcination and clinker production, which are
19.48, 12.3 and 9.05%, respectively, and has higher water key contributors to CO2 emissions.
absorption by 14.88%. The cause of this effect was related Transportation also plays a crucial role in the environ-
to the slower pozzolanic reaction of DPA during hydration, mental footprint, particularly in GWP, ozone formation, and
which hinders C–S–H formation and strength gain and ecotoxicity categories. For example, in the M6 mix, the trans-
increases porosity in the cement matrix. From Table 4, portation of aggregates and sand contributes about 20.2% to
the addition of ESP to the concrete mixes with or without the total GWP (139.95 kg CO2 eq out of 693.39 kg CO2 eq). In the
DPA led to enhancements in its mechanical strengths. For M3 mix, aggregate transportation alone accounts for approxi-
instance, comparing mix M1 (0% DPA and 0% ESP) with M4 mately 14.3% of the total GWP (94.05 kg CO2 eq out of 666 kg
(0% DPA and 2% ESP), the latter exhibits higher compres- CO2 eq). Transporting these heavy materials results in sub-
sive, split tensile, and flexural strengths by 5.73, 3.6, and stantial fuel consumption and emissions of greenhouse gases
6.98%, respectively, and lower water absorption by 6.08%. (CO2) and air pollutants (NOx, SO2, PM2.5).
The enhancements in the mechanical strengths and reduc- Alternative materials such as DPA and ESP show pro-
tion in water absorption were linked to the finer sizes and mising potential for reducing environmental impacts. In
the pore-filling effectiveness of ESP, and the high CaO in the M2 mix, the processing of DPA contributes 11.1%
the ESP promotes the pozzolanic and hydration reactions (70.54 kg CO2 eq) to the total GWP, whereas the M3 mix
and increases C–S–H formation and consequently densi- has a 7.1% (47.03 kg CO2 eq) contribution from DPA. For
fied microstructure and higher strengths. From Table 4, the M13 mix, incorporating DPA contributes only 7.1% of
blending up to 20% DPA with up to 4% ESP in the concrete the total GWP (47.03 kg CO2 eq out of 663.99 kg CO2 eq). In
led to improvements in mechanical strengths and water terms of terrestrial ecotoxicity, cement and aggregate pro-
absorption due to the combined effects of the DPA in terms duction are significant contributors, accounting for up to
of contributing more SiO2 and ESP contributing to the pro- 27.3 and 22.5%, respectively, of the total impact in the M6
duction of more Ca(OH)2, where these two compounds mix (610 kg 1,4-DCB eq out of 2231.15 kg 1,4-DCB eq).
react via pozzolanic reaction to form surplus C–S–H for While less impactful than cement or aggregate trans-
strength development. The findings in this study were port, plasticizers still contribute to multiple categories. For
similar to those of Hamada et al. [59], who reported example, in the M13 mix, plasticizers contribute about 1.0%
improvement in strengths and reduction in water when to the total GWP (6.6 kg CO2 eq out of 663.99 kg CO2 eq) but
POFA was blended with ESP. Rasid et al. [60] also reported have a more noticeable impact in toxicity categories, such
significant improvements in the mechanical and durability as contributing 9.5% to the freshwater ecotoxicity impact
performance of concrete when blends of POFA and ESP (0.476 kg 1,4-DCB eq out of 21.71 kg 1,4-DCB eq).
were used to partially substitute cement, where they found The analysis reveals that conventional materials like
that the combination of 15% POFA with 5% ESP yielded the cement and aggregates primarily contribute to the envir-
highest strengths. onmental impact. Alternative materials like DPA and ESP
can reduce these impacts across several categories. For
instance, in the M8 mix, including DPA and ESP helps
4.2 Environmental impact results reduce the impact of freshwater eutrophication to 3.1
and 1.2%, respectively, showing a potential for mitigating
The production and transportation of materials such as environmental harm. Optimizing the use of these materials
cement, Portland, aggregates, and sand significantly drive and improving transportation logistics could reduce the
the environmental impacts of the concrete mixes analyzed environmental footprint.
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  11

Global warming Potential (kg CO2 eq)(a) Stratospheric ozone depletion(kg CFC11 eq) (b)
740

1.29E-04
Global warming Potential (kg CO2eq)

720
1.28E-04
700
1.27E-04

680
1.26E-04

660 1.25E-04

640 1.24E-04

620 1.23E-04

1.22E-04
600
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes 2.14

Ozone formation, Human health(kg NOx eq)

8.9
2.12
Ionizing radiation(kBq Co-60 eq)

2.10
8.8
2.08
8.7
2.06

2.04
8.6
2.02

8.5 2.00

1.98
8.4
1.96

8.3 1.94
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes

Ionizing radiation(kBq Co-60 eq) (c) Ozone formation, Human health(kg NOx eq) (d)

Ozone formation, Terrestrial ecosystems(kg NOx eq)

Fine particulate matter formation(kg PM2.5 eq)(e) Ozone formation, Terrestrial ecosystems(kg NOx eq) (f)
0.700
Fine particulate matter formation(kg PM2.5 eq)

2.20
0.695
2.18

0.690 2.16

2.14
0.685
2.12
0.680
2.10

0.675
2.08

0.670 2.06

2.04
0.665
2.02
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes 0.083

Figure 6: Characterized values of all environmental impacts of DPA–ESP-based concrete.

12  Musa Adamu et al.

1.60

Freshwater eutrophication(kg P eq)

Terrestrial acidification(kg SO2 eq)

0.082

1.58
0.081

1.56 0.080

1.54 0.079

0.078
1.52

0.077
1.50

0.076
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes
(Terrestrial acidification(kg SO2 eq) (g) Freshwater eutrophication(kg P eq) (h)

Marine eutrophication(kg N eq) (i) Terrestrial ecotoxicity(kg 1,4-DCB) (j)

0.0105
2245

Terrestrial ecotoxicity(kg 1,4-DCB)

Marine eutrophication(kg N eq)

0.0104 2240

2235
0.0103

2230

0.0102
2225

2220
0.0101

2215

0.0100
2210

M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13

Mixes Mixes
21.90 29.85
Freshwater ecotoxicity(kg 1,4-DCB)

Marine ecotoxicity(kg 1,4-DCB)

29.80
21.85

29.75
21.80
29.70

21.75
29.65

21.70 29.60

21.65 29.55

29.50
21.60
29.45
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes
Freshwater ecotoxicity(kg 1,4-DCB) (k) Marine ecotoxicity(kg 1,4-DCB) (l)

Figure 6: (Continued)
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  13

Mineral resource scarcity(kg Cu eq) Human non-carcinogenic toxicity(kg 1,4-DCB)

Human carcinogenic toxicity(kg 1,4-DCB) (m) Human non-carcinogenic toxicity(kg 1,4-DCB) (n)
Human carcinogenic toxicity(kg 1,4-DCB)

25.2 555

554
25.1

553
25.0
552

24.9
551

24.8 550

549
24.7

548
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes 2.9
13.96
2.8
13.94
Land use(m2a crop eq)

13.92 2.7

13.90 2.6

13.88 2.5

13.86
2.4
13.84
2.3
13.82
2.2
13.80
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13
Mixes Mixes
Land use(m2a crop eq) (o) Mineral resource scarcity(kg Cu eq) (p)

Fossil resource scarcity(kg oil eq) (q) 3.60 Water consumption(m3) (r)
127.0
Fossil resource scarcity(kg oil eq)

3.58

126.5
W ater consum ption(m 3 )

3.56

126.0

3.54

125.5

3.52

125.0

3.50

124.5

3.48
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13 M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13

Figure 6: (Continued)
14  Musa Adamu et al.

4.3 Comparison of various mixes with a health impacts (1.96 kg NOx eq) and a 6.96% reduction in ter-
conventional mix restrial ecosystem impacts (2.03 kg NOx eq) compared to M1.
Mix M2 also shows a significant reduction, with 5.46% (human
The LCA results of the DPA–ESP-based concrete mixes high- health) and 5.29% (terrestrial ecosystems). M4, with no DPA,
light variations in environmental impacts across different mix shows a slight increase in both categories, demonstrating the
proportions. This discussion compares these mixes (M2, M3, importance of DPA content in minimizing these impacts.
M4, M6, M7, M8, M10, M12, and M13) to identify the optimal
mix design regarding environmental performance. Figure 6
4.3.5 Fine particulate matter formation
shows the comparison of mixes with conventional concrete

Mix M8 achieves a 4.01% reduction in fine particulate

4.3.1 GWP matter formation (Figure 6e) (0.67 kg PM2.5 eq) compared
to M1 (0.69 kg PM2.5 eq). Other mixes, such as M2 (0.67 kg
Among all mixes (Figure 6a), M8 shows the lowest GWP PM2.5 eq) and M6 (0.69 kg PM2.5 eq), show smaller reductions,
(609.15 kg CO2 eq), reflecting a 15.46% decrease compared to with 3.10 and 0.31% decreases, respectively. Mix M4 slightly
the conventional mix M1 (720.73 kg CO2 eq). This substantial increases, reinforcing the trend that higher DPA content cor-
decrease results from the higher proportion of DPA (40%), relates with reduced particulate matter emissions.
which replaces a considerable amount of cement, the pri-
mary contributor to CO2 emissions. Mixes M2 (636.60 kg CO2
4.3.6 Terrestrial and freshwater acidification
eq) and M13 (663.99 kg CO2 eq) also show a notable decrease
in GWP, with 11.67 and 7.87% reduction, respectively, com-
Mix M8 shows the most substantial decrease (Figure 6g and h)
pared to M1. Conversely, M4 (722.84 kg CO2 eq) shows a slight
in terrestrial acidification (1.50 kg SO2 eq) and freshwater
0.29% increase in GWP, primarily due to its lower DPA con-
eutrophication (0.0767 kg P eq), with 5.89 and 6.50% reduc-
tent (0%) and reliance on traditional cement proportions.
tion, respectively, compared to M1. Mixes with lower DPA
content, such as M4, show negligible improvements or slight
4.3.2 Stratospheric ozone depletion increases, highlighting the effectiveness of DPA in reducing
acidification and eutrophication impacts.
Stratospheric ozone depletion potential (Figure 6b) is rela-
tively consistent across all mixes, with a slight increase.
4.3.7 Ecotoxicity (terrestrial, freshwater, and marine)
Mix M8 exhibits a 4.83% increase compared to M1, the
highest among the mixes. This suggests that the variations
All mixes show relatively similar impacts on ecotoxicity,
in DPA and ESP content have minimal impact on ozone
with minimal variations (Figure 6j–l). Mix M8 shows slight
depletion potential.
decreases in terrestrial ecotoxicity (1.07% lower) and
marine eutrophication (3.89% lower) compared to M1,
4.3.3 Ionizing radiation while mixes like M4 show a slight increase. The differences
in ecotoxicity are less pronounced, suggesting that while
Mix M8 shows a 5.48% decrease in ionizing radiation DPA and ESP contribute to reduction in some categories,
(8.35 kBq Co-60 eq) compared to M1 (8.83 kBq Co-60 eq) they do not significantly impact ecotoxicity.
(Figure 6c). Other mixes, such as M2 (8.46 kBq Co-60 eq)
and M13 (8.58 kBq Co-60 eq), also demonstrate reductions,
4.19 and 2.91%, respectively. Mix M4 has the highest ionizing 4.3.8 Human toxicity (carcinogenic and
radiation potential (8.86 kBq Co-60 eq), slightly higher than non-carcinogenic)
M1, indicating less environmental benefit in this category.
Mix M8 has a 1.77% increase in human carcinogenic toxi-
city (25.13 kg 1,4-DCB) and a 0.81% increase in non-carcino-
4.3.4 Ozone formation (human health and terrestrial genic toxicity (553.05 kg 1,4-DCB) compared to M1 (Figure
ecosystems) 6m and n). These increases are relatively small but suggest
that using DPA and ESP could introduce minor risks that
Mix M8 again performs best in reducing ozone formation should be further explored. Mixes M2 and M6 show mar-
impacts (Figure 6d and f), with a 7.19% decrease in human ginally lower increases, indicating a potential trade-off
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  15

between reducing other environmental impacts and mana- M2 (3.51 m3) and M6 (3.56 m3) also show reduction but to
ging human toxicity levels. a lesser extent (1.90 and 0.38%). The trend demonstrates
that increased DPA content can lower water usage in concrete
production.
4.3.9 Resource use (land use, mineral, and fossil
resource scarcity)

Mix M8 shows (Figure 6p and q) the most significant reduc- 4.4 Summary of LCA results
tion in mineral resource scarcity, with a 21.08% decrease
(2.23 kg Cu eq) compared to M1. This is due to reduced reli- Mix M8, with the highest DPA content (40%), consistently
ance on cement, a significant mineral resource use driver. shows the lowest environmental impacts across most cate-
Fossil resource scarcity also shows a 1.45% decrease for M8. gories, including global warming, ozone formation, acidi-
Mix M2 shows a 15.85% decrease in mineral resource scarcity, fication, and resource use, demonstrating its potential as
while M4, with no DPA, shows minimal improvements. The the most sustainable mix. Other mixes, such as M2 and
land use data (Figure 6o) for different mixes range narrowly M13, also offer significant environmental benefits but to
from 13.82 to 13.93 m2, indicating minimal variation across the a lesser extent. Mix M4, with no DPA, often shows increases
mixes. Thus, land utilization is relatively uniform among all or minimal reductions in impacts, underscoring the impor-
mixes, suggesting that none significantly outperforms the tance of DPA and ESP in enhancing the environmental
others in minimizing land use impact. These results indicate performance of concrete. Although there are slight
that higher DPA and ESP contents are associated with more increases in human toxicity categories, these are relatively
efficient resource use. minor and may be manageable with proper processing and
handling of materials. Overall, DPA–ESP-based mixes, par-
ticularly M8, present a promising alternative for reducing
4.3.10 Water consumption the environmental footprint of concrete production.
The characterized environmental impacts presented
Water consumption (Figure 6r) is lowest for mix M8, showing in Figure 7 were normalized by the world population using
a 2.47% decrease (3.49 m3) compared to M1 (3.58 m3). Mixes the ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint (H) V1.08 method (Figure 8). This

Figure 7: Characterized values of environmental impacts for all relevant mixes. Note: GWP, terrestrial ecotoxicity, and HNCT are plotted against the
primary axis; the rest of the impacts are plotted against the secondary axis.
16  Musa Adamu et al.

Figure 8: Normalized values of environmental impacts for relevant mixes.

normalization allows for a more standardized comparison

across different processes by adjusting the impacts relative
to the global population. The data reveal that the most
significant environmental impacts are seen in categories
like “Human carcinogenic toxicity,” “Freshwater ecotoxi-
city,” and “Marine ecotoxicity.” These high values suggest
that the processes analyzed have notable contributions to
human health risks and ecosystem toxicity. Lower impact
values are noted for categories such as “Global warming”
and “Stratospheric ozone depletion,” indicating relatively
lesser contributions to these specific impacts.

4.5 Discussion on the selection of the

best mix

4.5.1 AHP methodology

AHP methodology was used to rank the mix designs (M1–M13)

against technical, environmental, and economic criteria. The
corresponding weights assigned are shown in Figure 9. AHP
framework was used to break down the comparison of mixes
into constituent parts and then logically combine them by
Figure 9: Pairwise matrix weights for the selection of best mix.
weighting and aggregating multiple criteria.
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  17

Figure 10: Weighted attributes assigned based on the pairwise matrix: (a) technical property and (b) environment and economic properties.

Using the Saaty scale, which forms the core of the AHP, when lower values are desirable (in the case of environ-
the technical and environmental properties of several mental properties related to GWP, fine particulate matter
mixes of concrete were then evaluated and compared. formation, ozone formation [human health], terrestrial
Pairs of each mix were compared using the ratios of values acidification, mineral resource scarcity, and fossil resource
for the technical properties of slump, compressive scarcity), inverse ratios were chosen. In this case, we deter-
strength, flexural strength, and split tensile strength, mined the ratio of the larger value to the smaller value for
where higher values are judged better. The ratio of the a series of mixes with minimal environmental impact. The
higher value to lower value was specifically calculated, resulting pairwise comparison matrices were developed
and these were subjected to the assignment of preferences using the Saaty scale: Values between 1 and 1.1 were
using the Saaty scale so that the mixes with the best tech- mapped back to 1 (equal preference), between 1.1 and
nical performance had the highest priorities. Conversely, 1.2–2 (slightly preferred), 1.2 and 1.3–3 (moderately
18  Musa Adamu et al.

preferred), 1.3 and 1.5–4 (strongly preferred), and values standout mix with the lowest environmental impact. Its
higher than 1.5 were mapped back to 5 (very strongly pre- reduced reliance on energy-intensive materials contrib-
ferred). Figure 10 shows the weighted criteria for the tech- uted significantly to its performance in this category.
nical, environmental, and economic properties. This struc- However, the adoption of M8 in critical structural applica-
tured methodology provided a robust basis for MCDM in tions would require careful deliberation, as its technical
concrete mix design since this transparent and consistent scores were not competitive with high-performing mixes
evaluation of mixes was based on both technical perfor- like M3 and M10. Mixes such as M12 and M13, which
mance and environmental sustainability. showed moderate environmental benefits, represent
The properties that were given higher importance viable alternatives for projects prioritizing sustainability
were the technical properties (0.493), such as compressive without compromising entirely on performance.
strength, flexural strength, split tensile strength, and water From the economic point (0.196) of view, the efficiency
absorption, since they are directly related to the perfor- of mixes from the perspective of performance versus cost
mance of buildings. Out of the five mixes, M3 was found was evaluated using cost–benefit analysis. Mix M8, owing
to have the highest compressive strength, therefore to its composition consisting of economic materials, was
making it the most appropriate mix for the structural the most cost-efficient and is an excellent candidate for
member that requires high mechanical and physical prop- cost-sensitive projects. M2 also achieved a high level of
erties. Flexural strength and split tensile strength, which economic viability yet appropriate technological attributes.
are the ability of the concrete to resist bending and Conversely, mixes such as M3 and M10, though they are
cracking, also showed great differences between the mixes. more costly, displayed better technical performance and
Of all the mixes, M10 presented a very good performance hence could be justified for use in projects where long-
in these attributes, thus showing its overall good technical term durability and structural integrity are more impor-
properties. These include M1 and M4, which, although not tant. Therefore, identifying the particular priorities of a
very strong in compressive strength, were very good in project makes clear the necessity to align the mix selection
workability and very crucial in handling and placing con- to minimize the cost/performance trade‐off.
crete during construction. The environmental attributes It was also observed (Figure 11) from the integration of
(0.311) were carefully considered to capture the sustain- the attributes within the AHP framework that M3 had the
ability aspects of the mixes. Criteria such as GWP, fine highest cumulative weighted attributes (0.143), especially
particulate matter formation, terrestrial acidification, and in compressive strength, flexural strength, and split tensile
resource scarcity were evaluated. Here, M8 emerged as a strength. With moderate environmental and economic

Cost Benefit Analysis Water consumption Fossil resource scarcity Mineral resource scarcity
Land use Terrestrial acidification Ozone formation, Human health Fine particulate matter formation
Global warming Potential Water Absorption (%) Split Tensile Strength (MPa)
Flexural Strength (MPa) Compressive Strength(MPa) Degree of Workability, Slump(mm)

0.14

0.12

0.10
Ranking Attributes

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00
M1 M2 M3 M4 M6 M7 M8 M10 M12 M13

Figure 11: Ranking of the mixes based on the analytical hierarchical process methodology.
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  19

attributes and possessing technical dominance, it is the attributes were shown by M1. This is a better mix for
most robust choice for structural applications. M10 stood operations such as handling and placement, where struc-
second with a strong performance in compressive strength tural strength is not. M12 scored moderately for all attri-
and flexural strength. Although lagging in technical attri- butes and is appropriate for projects that have balanced
butes, M2 was very competitive, with a balanced environ- priorities but do not excel at any one criterion. Compres-
mental and economic score. M4 was characterized as sive and flexural properties were shown for M13, but their
having a good balance across workability and moderate cumulative weighted attributes were relatively lower than
compressive strength technical attributes useful for appli- other mixes.
cations demanding moderate structural behavior coupled
with ease of handling. Technical attributes like flexural
strength and split tensile strength exhibited the competi- 4.5.2 Sensitivity analysis
tive performance of M6. It had a moderate environmental
and economic score, suggesting that it was a viable option A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the robust-
for mid-range applications. M2 exhibited good cost–benefit ness of the AHP results between five distinct cases by
attributes and tolerable environmental performance. Low varying the weightage of the criteria or changing the mix
on the technical scores than the top performer mixes, its pair comparison (uses of study). The priority rankings of
economic viability provided a good value proposition to the mixes shift as weights and comparisons change,
undertake such a project from the cost perspective. How- revealing the stability of the decision-making process
ever, due to the lower technical scores of M8, the option through this analysis. The sensitivity scenarios considered
was limited in application to only non-structural or envir- were based on the compressive strength, flexural strength,
onmentally driven projects. Good workability but lower cost–benefit analysis (M3 vs M10), technical vs economic
scores in other technical, environmental, and economic trade-offs, and cost–benefit analysis (M8 vs M10).

Figure 12: One-way sensitivity analysis of M3 vs M10 for compressive strength.

20  Musa Adamu et al.

Figure 13: One-way sensitivity analysis of M3 vs M10 for flexural strength.

Figure 14: One-way sensitivity analysis of M3 vs M10 for cost–benefit analysis.

 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  21

4.5.2.1 Case I: Sensitivity analysis of compressive rankings. However, M3’s overall dominance was threatened
strength when the weight shifted; however, owing to its technical
The most important observation from the compressive sensi- superiority, it continued to hold its place in the rankings.
tivity analysis is the stability of M3 dominance for comparison
pairs M3 and M10 (Figure 12). In comparison, by changing the
ratio of M3/M10, we always found M3 higher and concluded 4.5.2.3 Case III: Second analysis: cost–benefit analysis
the higher compressive strength of M3, which is its critical (M3 vs M10)
technical attribute. It is also observed that the design change The cost–benefit of M3 and M10 was in a balanced compe-
sensitivity of the decision was 55%, i.e., a small change in the titive situation regarding technical performance and eco-
weightage made M3 stand inferior to M10 in terms of ranking. nomic viability (Figure 14). The analysis showed that with
The overall hierarchy, however, remained consistent, with its 50% sensitivity, the economic weightage could change M10
high compressive strength keeping M3 in a top spot. toward M3’s rank. Nevertheless, M3’s technical advantages
still provided it an edge in cases where attributes of per-
formance were put first. Trade-offs between cost and per-
4.5.2.2 Case II: Sensitivity analysis for flexural strength formance highlighted the importance of matching mix
In this case, M3 vs M10 was varied with a focus on the flexural selection to project-specific requirements.
strength attribute (Figure 13). Its superior technical attributes
allowed M3 to once again retain its top position and prove its
resilience. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis indicated that 4.5.2.4 Case IV: technical vs economic attributes
the decision change sensitivity was 53%, meaning that The fourth sensitivity evaluated the trade‐offs between
weights to flexural strength greatly affected the overall final technical and economic (Figure 15) attributes by varying

Figure 15: One-way sensitivity analysis of technical vs economic trade-offs.

22  Musa Adamu et al.

Figure 16: One-way sensitivity analysis of cost–benefit analysis.

the weights between these two criteria. The analysis inherently excels in certain contexts and where each of
showed a 36.25% decision change sensitivity, with M3 these mixes should be used as they are designed. Due to
maintaining superiority in terms of technical conscious- M10’s well-known superior cost efficiency and sustain-
ness. However, if economic attributes received larger ability attributes, M8 challenged M10 in scenarios where
weightage, M10 and M8 were competitive alternatives. A economic and environmental concerns were of greater
green vertical line was shown in the sensitivity plot for this importance. The relative rankings of M8 and M10 were
case, indicating a point when weightage assigned to tech- found to be sensitive to moderate changes in weightage
nical and economic criteria was equal. This inflection point for this case (sensitivity of 33.75%). However, despite its
delineated the specific level of concentration at which tech- economic benefits, M8 was limited by being a lower-per-
nical and economic considerations started to revolve forming technology than M10, which remained strong in
around different priorities. Beyond this point, the promi- scenarios that emphasized structural attributes.
nence of cost-efficient mixes such as M8 increased, and
M3’s dominance slightly decreased as the technical attri-
butes decreased in importance. The presence of this ver- 5 Conclusion
tical line acted as a useful reference in making a clear
sense of the balance between these technical and economic This study demonstrates the potential of using DPA and
attributes and, hence, as a guideline for projects that place ESP as SCMs in concrete to improve sustainability and
different emphasis on both. performance. By optimizing mix designs, it was possible
to achieve substantial improvements in mechanical prop-
erties while significantly reducing environmental impacts.
4.5.2.5 Case V: Cost–benefit analysis (M10 vs M8) The findings highlight the value of DPA and ESP as eco-
Sensitivity analysis for cost–benefit comparison between friendly alternatives, suitable for various applications
M8 and M10 (Figure 16) showed that each of these mixes depending on structural and environmental priorities.
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  23

• Incorporating DPA and ESP into concrete mixes Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsi-
enhances mechanical properties, with 20% DPA and 2% bility for the entire content of this manuscript and
ESP achieving a compressive strength of 57.53 MPa, a 41% approved its submission.
improvement over the control mix.
• Environmental impacts, including GWP, acidification, Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of
and resource scarcity, were substantially reduced, with interest.
Mix M8 (40% DPA) showing a 15.46% lower GWP com-
pared to conventional concrete. Data availability statement: The datasets generated and/
• Mix designs with higher ESP content improved durability or analyzed during the current study are available from
and water resistance due to enhanced hydration and the corresponding author on reasonable request.
densified microstructure.
• The AHP identified Mix M3 as the optimal choice for
structural applications and Mix M8 as the most sustain- References
able option for non-structural uses.
• The study underscores the scalability and adaptability of [1] Pérez, O. F. A., V. S. Arrieta, J. H. G. Ospina, S. H. Herrera, C. F. R.
DPA and ESP for sustainable concrete production, balan- Rojas, and A. M. S. Navarro. Carbon dioxide emissions from
cing performance, cost, and environmental sustainability. traditional and modified concrete. A review. Environmental
Development, Vol. 52, 2024, id. 101036.
[2] Adesina, A. Recent advances in the concrete industry to reduce its
This study highlights the potential of DPA and ESP as
carbon dioxide emissions. Environmental Challenges, Vol. 1, 2020,
sustainable alternatives to traditional cement, addressing id. 100004.
environmental and cost challenges in construction. By [3] Munir, Q., M. Abdulkareem, M. Horttanainen, and T. Kärki.
reducing cement reliance and utilizing agricultural waste, A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of geopolymer
it promotes resource efficiency and aligns with circular concrete produced from industrial side streams in comparison with
traditional concrete. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 865, 2023,
economy principles. The LCA provides a practical perspective
id. 161230.
by quantifying environmental benefits, enabling informed [4] Robalo, K., H. Costa, R. do Carmo, and E. Júlio. Experimental
decisions on material selection, and identifying the most development of low cement content and recycled construction and
eco-friendly and cost-effective concrete mixes for specific demolition waste aggregates concrete. Construction and Building
applications. These findings support policymakers, industry Materials, Vol. 273, 2021, id. 121680.
professionals, and researchers in advancing sustainable con- [5] Hamada, H. M., A. Al-Attar, J. Shi, F. Yahaya, M. S. Al Jawahery, and
S. T. Yousif. Optimization of sustainable concrete characteristics
struction practices. To encourage large-scale adoption, regu-
incorporating palm oil clinker and nano-palm oil fuel ash using
latory standards, financial incentives, and public procure- response surface methodology. Powder Technology, Vol. 413, 2023,
ment strategies should be implemented. Governments id. 118054.
should develop standardized guidelines, offer tax benefits, [6] Jungclaus, M. A., S. L. Williams, J. H. Arehart, and W. V. Srubar III.
and integrate SCMs into public infrastructure projects. Whole-life carbon emissions of concrete mixtures considering
maximum CO2 sequestration via carbonation. Resources,
Awareness programs and industry–academia collaborations
Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 206, 2024, id. 107605.
can further drive acceptance. By incorporating circular [7] Shah, B., M. Shah, V. Shah, and M. Prajapati. An Anatomized study on
economy policies, policymakers can promote low-carbon, the progress and prospects of CO2 utilization technology. Case Studies
cost-effective, and sustainable construction practices. in Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Vol. 8, 2023, id. 100381.
[8] Munir, Q., S. Afshariantorghabeh, and T. Kärki. Industrial waste
pretreatment approach for 3D printing of sustainable building
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Prince
materials. Urban Science, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2022, id. 50.
Sultan University for supporting this research through the
[9] Papayianni, I. and E. Anastasiou. Production of high-strength
SEED project with grant number [SEED-2024-CE-174.]. The concrete using high volume of industrial by-products. Construction
authors would like to thank the Structures and Materials and Building Materials, Vol. 24, No. 8, 2010, pp. 1412–1417.
Research Laboratory at Prince Sultan University for their [10] Oyejobi, D., A. Firoozi, D. B. Fernandez, and S. Avudaiappan.
viable support. Integrating circular economy principles into concrete technology:
Enhancing sustainability through industrial waste utilization.
Results in Engineering, Vol. 24, 2024, id. 102846.
Funding information: This work was supported by the [11] Nasir, M. and W. Al-Kutti. Performance of date palm ash as a
research grants [SEED-2024-CE-174], Prince Sultan University, cementitious material by evaluating strength, durability, and
Saudi Arabia. characterization. Buildings, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2018, id. 6.
24  Musa Adamu et al.

[12] Adamu, M., H. Alanazi, Y. E. Ibrahim, and M. Abdellatief. egg shell powder and nano-silica. Journal of Materials Research and
Mechanical, microstructural characteristics and sustainability Technology, Vol. 24, 2023, pp. 7162–7188.
analysis of concrete incorporating date palm ash and eggshell [27] Chen, Y. K., Y. Sun, K. Q. Wang, W. Y. Kuang, S. R. Yan, Z. H. Wang,
powder as ternary blends cementitious materials. Construction and et al. Utilization of bio-waste eggshell powder as a potential filler
Building Materials, Vol. 411, 2024, id. 134753. material for cement: Analyses of zeta potential, hydration and
[13] Adamu, M., Y. E. Ibrahim, and H. Alanazi. Optimization of sustainability. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 325, 2022,
sustainable concrete properties modified with blends of date palm id. 126220.
ash and eggshell powder using response surface methodology. [28] Sohu, S., N. Bheel, A. A. Jhatial, A. A. Ansari, and I. A. Shar.
Developments in the Built Environment, Vol. 17, 2024, id. 100359. Sustainability and mechanical property assessment of concrete
[14] Adamu, M. and Y. E. Ibrahim. Environmental sustainability and incorporating eggshell powder and silica fume as binary and
cost-benefit analysis of concrete containing date palm ash and ternary cementitious materials. Environmental Science and Pollution
eggshell powder: A response surface methodology approach. Case Research, Vol. 29, No. 39, 2022, pp. 58685–58697.
Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Vol. 9, 2024, [29] Nandhini, K. and J. Karthikeyan. Sustainable and greener concrete
id. 100636. production by utilizing waste eggshell powder as cementitious
[15] Chong, B., R. Othman, P. Ramadhansyah, S. Doh, and X. Li. material–A review. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 335,
Properties of concrete with eggshell powder: A review. Physics and 2022, id. 127482.
Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, Vol. 120, 2020, id. 102951. [30] Xuan, M.-Y., R.-S. Lin, T.-B. Min, and X.-Y. Wang. Carbonation
[16] Elfadaly, E., A. M. Othman, M. H. Aly, W. A. Elgarhy, and treatment of eggshell powder concrete for performance
M. Abdellatief. Assessing performance and environmental benefits enhancement. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 377, 2023,
of high-performance geopolymer mortar incorporating pumice id. 130814.
and rice straw ash. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy, Vol. 44, [31] Maglad, A. M., M. A. O. Mydin, S. S. Majeed, B. A. Tayeh, and D. E.
2025, id. 101918. Tobbala. Exploring the influence of calcinated eggshell powder on
[17] Abdellatief, M., Y. M. Ahmed, M. Taman, E. Elfadaly, Y. Tang, and lightweight foamed concrete: A comprehensive study on freshness,
A. A. Abadel. Physico-mechanical, thermal insulation properties, mechanical strength, thermal characteristics and transport
and microstructure of geopolymer foam concrete containing properties. Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 87, 2024, id. 108966.
sawdust ash and egg shell. Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 90, [32] Yuan, X., W. Xu, A. H. AlAteah, and S. A. Mostafa. Evaluation of the
2024, id. 109374. performance of high-strength geopolymer concrete prepared with
[18] Kuswa, F. M., H. P. Putra, Prabowo, A. Darmawan, M. Aziz, and recycled coarse aggregate containing eggshell powder and rice
H. Hariana. Investigation of the combustion and ash deposition husk ash cured at different curing regimes. Construction and
characteristics of oil palm waste biomasses. Biomass Conversion and Building Materials, Vol. 434, 2024, id. 136722.
Biorefinery, Vol. 14, No. 19, 2024, pp. 24375–24395. [33] Hamada, H. M., B. A. Tayeh, A. Al-Attar, F. M. Yahaya,
[19] Al-Kutti, W., A. S. Islam, and M. Nasir. Potential use of date palm K. Muthusamy, and A. M. Humada. The present state of the use of
ash in cement-based materials. Journal of King Saud University- eggshell powder in concrete: A review. Journal of Building
Engineering Sciences, Vol. 31, No. 1, 2019, pp. 26–31. Engineering, Vol. 32, 2020, id. 101583.
[20] Al-Kutti, W., M. Nasir, M. A. M. Johari, A. S. Islam, A. A. Manda, and [34] Khalid, N. H., N. N. Rasid, A. R. Sam, Z. A. Majid, N. Basar, M. A.
N. I. Blaisi. An overview and experimental study on hybrid binders Caronge, et al. Evaluation of eggshell lime as green accelerator on
containing date palm ash, fly ash, OPC and activator composites. palm oil fuel ash concrete production: Effect of thermal treatment.
Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 159, 2018, pp. 567–577. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 411, 2024, id. 134352.
[21] Thomas, B. S., J. Yang, K. H. Mo, J. A. Abdalla, R. A. Hawileh, and [35] Teara, A. and D. S. Ing. Mechanical properties of high strength
E. Ariyachandra. Biomass ashes from agricultural wastes as concrete that replace cement partly by using fly ash and eggshell
supplementary cementitious materials or aggregate replacement powder. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts a/b/c, Vol. 120,
in cement/geopolymer concrete: A comprehensive review. Journal 2020, id. 102942.
of Building Engineering, Vol. 40, 2021, id. 102332. [36] Kumar, P. C., T. Shanthala, K. Aparna, and S. V. Babu. Experimental
[22] Yearbook, F. S. World food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture investigation on the combined effect of fly ash and eggshell
Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Vol. 15, 2022. powder as partial replacement of cement. In Sustainable Building
[23] Akasha, I., L. Campbell, J. Lonchamp, and S. R. Euston. The major Materials and Construction: Select Proceedings of ICSBMC 2021,
proteins of the seed of the fruit of the date palm (Phoenix Springer, 2022, pp. 371–378.
dactylifera L.): Characterisation and emulsifying properties. Food [37] Yadav, V. H. and H. Eramma. Experimental studies on concrete for
Chemistry, Vol. 197, 2016, pp. 799–806. the partial replacement of cement by egg shell powder and GGBS.
[24] Faiad, A., M. Alsmari, M. M. Ahmed, M. L. Bouazizi, B. Alzahrani, and International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 4,
H. Alrobei. Date palm tree waste recycling: treatment and No. 11, 2017, pp. 144–150.
processing for potential engineering applications. Sustainability, [38] Chong, B. W., R. Othman, R. P. Jaya, X. Li, M. R. M. Hasan, and
Vol. 14, No. 3, 2022, id. 1134. M. M. A. B. Abdullah. Meta-analysis of studies on eggshell concrete
[25] Blaisi, N. I. Environmental assessment of utilizing date palm ash as using mixed regression and response surface methodology.
partial replacement of cement in mortar. Journal of Hazardous Journal of King Saud University-Engineering Sciences, Vol. 35, No. 4,
Materials, Vol. 357, 2018, pp. 175–179. 2023, pp. 279–287.
[26] Zaid, O., S. R. Z. Hashmi, M. H. El Ouni, R. Martínez-García, J. de [39] Jhatial, A. A., W. I. Goh, K. H. Mo, S. Sohu, and I. A. Bhatti. Green and
Prado-Gil, and S. E. A. Yousef. Experimental and analytical study of sustainable concrete–the potential utilization of rice husk ash and
ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete modified with egg shells. Civil Engineering Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2019, pp. 74–81.
 Life cycle and environmental impact analysis of sustainable concrete  25

[40] Hakeem, I. Y., M. Amin, I. S. Agwa, M. H. Abd-Elrahman, O. M. O. [49] American Concrete Institute. Standard practice for selecting
Ibrahim, and M. Samy. Ultra-high-performance concrete properties proportions for normal, heavyweight, and mass concrete, ACI 211.1R,
containing rice straw ash and nano eggshell powder. Case Studies Michigan, USA, 2002.
in Construction Materials, Vol. 19, 2023, id. e02291. [50] American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard practice for
[41] Oliko, C., C. K. Kabubo, and J. N. Mwero. Rice straw and eggshell making and curing concrete test specimens in the laboratory, ASTM
ash as partial replacements of cement in concrete. Engineering, C192/C192M, West Conshohocken, USA, 2014.
Technology & Applied Science Research, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2020, [51] American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard test method
pp. 6481–6487. for slump of hydraulic-cement concrete, ASTM C143/C143M, West
[42] Amin, M., M. M. Attia, I. S. Agwa, Y. Elsakhawy, K. Abu El-hassan, Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2012.
and B. A. Abdelsalam. Effects of sugarcane bagasse ash and nano [52] British Standards European Norm. Testing hardened concrete.
eggshell powder on high-strength concrete properties. Case Studies Compressive strength of test specimens, BS EN 12390-3, London,
in Construction Materials, Vol. 17, 2022, id. e01528. United Kingdom, 2009.
[43] Onyelowe, K. C., A. M. Ebid, A. Riofrio, A. Soleymani, H. Baykara, [53] British Standards European Norm. Testing hardened concrete -
D. P. Kontoni, et al. Global warming potential-based life cycle Tensile splitting strength of test specimens, BS EN 12390-6, London,
assessment and optimization of the compressive strength of fly United Kingdom, 2009.
ash-silica fume concrete; environmental impact consideration. [54] American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard test method
Frontiers in Built Environment, Vol. 8, 2022, id. 992552. for flexural strength of concrete (using simple beam with third-point
[44] Onyelowe, K. C., A. M. Ebid, H. A. Mahdi, A. Soleymani, H. Jahangir, loading), ASTM C78/C78M, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2015.
and F. Dabbaghi. Optimization of green concrete containing fly ash [55] American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard test method
and rice husk ash based on hydro-mechanical properties and life for density, absorption, and voids in hardened concrete, ASTM C642,
cycle assessment considerations. Civil Engineering Journal, Vol. 8, West Conshohocken, PA, United States, 2013.
No. 12, 2022, pp. 3912–3938. [56] Almadhi, A., A. Abdelhadi, and R. Alyamani. Moving from linear to
[45] Thomas, B. S., S. Kumar, and H. S. Arel. Sustainable concrete circular economy in Saudi Arabia: life-cycle assessment on plastic
containing palm oil fuel ash as a supplementary cementitious waste management. Sustainability, Vol. 15, No. 13, 2023, id. 10450.
material–A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, [57] Mazzetto, S. Comparative life cycle assessment of traditional and
Vol. 80, 2017, pp. 550–561. modern materials in heritage building restoration: A case study
[46] Chinnu, S., S. Minnu, A. Bahurudeen, and R. Senthilkumar. from Ushaiger Village. Sustainability, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2024, id. 25.
Influence of palm oil fuel ash in concrete and a systematic [58] Al Omar, S. and A. Abdelhadi. Comparative life-cycle assessment of
comparison with widely accepted fly ash and slag: A step towards steel and GFRP rebars for procurement sustainability in the
sustainable reuse of agro-waste ashes. Cleaner Materials, Vol. 5, construction industry. Sustainability, Vol. 16, No. 10, 2024, id. 3899.
2022, id. 100122. [59] Hamada, H., B. Tayeh, F. Yahaya, K. Muthusamy, and A. Al-Attar.
[47] American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard specification Effects of nano-palm oil fuel ash and nano-eggshell powder on
for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural pozzolan for use in concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 261, 2020, id. 119790.
concrete, ASTM C618, West Conshohocken, PA, United States, 2015. [60] Rasid, N. N. A., N. H. A. Khalid, A. Mohamed, A. R. M. Sam, Z. A.
[48] American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard specification Majid, and G. F. Huseien. Ground palm oil fuel ash and calcined
for concrete aggregates, ASTM C33/C33M, West Conshohocken, PA, eggshell powder as SiO2–CaO based accelerator in green concrete.
USA, 2023. Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 65, 2023, id. 105617.