journal article·2025-06-03

Study on the performance optimization and carbon sequestration effects of carbon dioxide foam cement

Tugen Feng, Zixu Li, Guangxuan Qiao, Jian Zhang

Publisher page

Abstract

In civil engineering, CO2-cured foam cement slurry is used for carbon sequestration but faces challenges of high costs and low carbon fixation efficiency. This study investigates the effects of foaming agents, foam stabilizers, water-to-cement ratios, foam-slurry ratios, and admixtures on foam cement properties through orthogonal experiments and comprehensive testing. The findings demonstrate that utilizing CO2 as the gas source optimizes the pore structure and significantly enhances the 3-day compressive strength, achieving a 2.3-fold increase over air-foamed cement slurry. Microstructural analysis further reveals a 1.3-fold improvement in carbon fixation efficiency for CO2 foamed cement slurry, which can be elevated to 1.8 times with the incorporation of magnesium oxide. Therefore, CO2 foamed cement emerges as a material with considerable potential, capable of markedly enhancing carbon sequestration in construction applications. This study thus provides an advanced approach to the development of low-carbon building materials.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Concrete and Cement Materials Research · CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions · Magnesium Oxide Properties and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education for Geomechanics and Embankment Engineering, Hohai University

School of Civil Engineering and Surveying & Mapping Engineering, Jiangxi University of Science and Technology

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China

References (30)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/pr1107220610.3390/pr11072206 ↗
2. 10.1155/2014/38185410.1155/2014/381854 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.16802510.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168025 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.04.00610.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.04.006 ↗
5. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.754-755.45210.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.754-755.452 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13472210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.134722 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.12210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.122 ↗
8. Hu H, Xiong H, Luo W, et al. Optimization test study on stabilizing agent of foam mud (in Chinese). J Water Res Water Engg. 2012;(1):114–116.
9. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000353。10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000353。 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.02710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.027 ↗
11. 10.3390/ma1319432310.3390/ma13194323 ↗
12. 10.3390/cryst1010094810.3390/cryst10100948 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.10141410.1016/j.jobe.2020.101414 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.01.02010.1016/j.cemconres.2018.01.020 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.jcou.2021.10184910.1016/j.jcou.2021.101849 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.rser.2023.11368810.1016/j.rser.2023.113688 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12676010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.126760 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10757910.1016/j.jobe.2023.107579 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.energy.2019.02.12510.1016/j.energy.2019.02.125 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.06.00710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.06.007 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.06710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.067 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.03.00410.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.03.004 ↗
23. 10.1139/cgj-2012-036410.1139/cgj-2012-0364 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.10382610.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.103826 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.rser.2022.11298610.1016/j.rser.2022.112986 ↗
26. 10.1680/macr.2010.62.12.89510.1680/macr.2010.62.12.895 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.tust.2024.10573210.1016/j.tust.2024.105732 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10734210.1016/j.jobe.2023.107342 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10828610.1016/j.jobe.2023.108286 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2012.02.01710.1016/j.cemconres.2012.02.017 ↗