High-Volume Carbon Sequestration for Controlled Low-Strength Materials
Source abstract
Abstract
Crushed charcoal (biochar) was introduced into mortar as lightweight, high-carbon fine aggregate, at eight levels of sand replacement varying from 0 to 100% and up to 275% of cement content by mass. Carbon encapsulated in hardened mortar offset the carbon footprint of cement production and reduced demand for natural sand. Water content was increased to accommodate 125% biochar absorption and maintain workability. Mixture proportions affected water-cement ratio (w/c), fresh density, and compressive and splitting tensile strength of hardened mortar, with significantly diminished strength at increased biochar content. A net carbon benefit accrued when biochar content exceeded approximately 10% of the total aggregate mass or one-third of the cement mass. At this level, compressive strength is less than typically associated with structural concrete, but net sequestration of 800 kg carbon per m3 (1350 lb/yd3) could be realized at strength levels associated with controlled low-strength materials (CLSM). Multiple environmentally effective applications are suggested. © 2019, American Concrete Institute.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Advanced ceramic materials synthesis · Graphene research and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Nisbet, M. A.; Medgar, L. M.; and Van Geem, M. G., “Environmental Life Cycle Inventory of Portland Cement Concrete,” PCA R&D Serial No. 2137a, Report on Concrete: Sustainability and Life Cycle, PCA CD033, 2003.
2. Schokker, A., The Sustainable Concrete Guide—Strategies and Examples, U.S. Green Concrete Council, Farmington Hills, MI, 2010, 86 pp.
3. Choate, W. T., “Energy and Emission Reduction Opportunities for the Cement Industry,” BCS, Incorporated, prepared for Industrial Technologies Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Columbia, MD, 2003, 32 pp.10.2172/1218753 ↗
4. Cement Production Technology Improvement Compared to Factor 4 Objectives10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.031 ↗
5. Peduzzia, P., “Sand, Rarer Than One Thinks,” United Nations Environment Programme, Global Environmental Alert Service, Mar. 2014, 15 pp., https://na.unep.net/geas/archive/pdfs/GEAS_Mar2014_Sand_Mining.pdf
6. Langer, W. H., 2011, “Aggregate Resource Availability in the Conterminous United States,” U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1119, 87 pp., https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1119/pdf/OF11-1119_report_508.pdf
7. Choi, W. C.; Yun, H. D.; and Lee, J. Y., “Mechanical Properties of Mortar Containing Biochar from Pyrolysis,” Journal of the Korea Institute for Structural Maintenance Inspection, V. 16, No. 3, 2012, pp. 67-74.10.11112/jksmi.2012.16.3.067 ↗
8. Use of Biochar as Carbon Sequestering Additive in Cement Mortar10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.12.009 ↗
9. Gupta, S., and Kua, H. W., “Effect of Water Entrainment by Pre-Soaked Biochar Particles on Strength and Permeability of Cement Mortar,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 159, 2018, pp. 107-125.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.095 ↗
10. Novel Biochar-Concrete Composites: Manufacturing, Characterization and Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.319 ↗
11. Ahmad, S.; Tulliani, J. M.; Ferro, G. A.; Khushnood, R. A.; Restuccia, L.; Jagdale, P., “Crack Path and Fracture Surface Modifications in Cement Composites,” Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale (Fracture and Structural Integrity, V. 34, 2015.10.3221/IGF-ESIS.18.04 ↗
12. Biochar Now. LLC, Loveland. CO.
13. Control Laboratory, Watsonville, CA.
14. Policy Manual, Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI), Eugene, OR, http://www.omri.org/sites/default/files/app_materials/16PolicyManual_pubversion1F.pdf.
15. ASTM C136/C136M-14, “Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, doi: 10.1520/C0136_C0136M-14.10.1520/C0136_C0136M-14
16. ASTM C33/C33M-16, “Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016, doi: 10.1520/C0033_C0033M-1610.1520/C0033_C0033M-16
17. ASTM C330, “Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, doi:10.1520/C0330_C0330M-14.10.1520/C0330_C0330M-14
18. ASTM C1797, “Standard Specification for Ground Calcium Carbonate and Aggregate Mineral Fillers for Use in Hydraulic Cement Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017, doi: 10.1520/C1797-1710.1520/C1797-17
19. ASTM C128-15, “Standard Test Method for Relative Density (Specific Gravity) and Absorption of Fine Aggregate,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015. doi: 10.1520/C0128-15.10.1520/C0128-15
20. Cornell Nanobiotechnology Center and Cornell Institute of Biotechnology Imaging Facility, B46, Biotech Building, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853.
21. Lura, P., “Materials and Methods for Internal Curing,” Internal Curing of Concrete—State-of-the-Art Report of RILEM Technical Committee 196-ICC, K. Kovler and O. M. Jensen, eds., pp. 45-55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266142310_Materials_and_methods_for_internal_curing
22. Cheng, W., “Carbon Sequestration in Concrete,” MS thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, Apr. 2016.
23. ACI 213R-14, “Guide for Structural Lightweight-Aggregate Concrete,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2014, 53 pp.
24. Factors Determining the Potential of Biochar as a Carbon Capturing and Sequestering Construction Material: Critical Review10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001924 ↗
25. ASTM C150/C150M-16, “Standard Specification for Portland Cement,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016. doi: 10.1520/C0150_C0150M-16.10.1520/C0150_C0150M-16
26. ASTM C109-16, “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens),” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016, doi: 10.1520/C0109_C0109M-16A.10.1520/C0109_C0109M-16A
27. ASTM C1437-15, “Standard Test Method for Flow of Hydraulic Cement Mortar,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, doi: 10.1520/C1437-15.10.1520/C1437-15
28. AASHTO T 199-00, “Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by the Chace Indicator,” American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 2004.
29. ASTM C496/C496M-11, “Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016.
30. ASTM C39/C39M-16, “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016, doi: 10.1520/C0039_C0039M-16.10.1520/C0039_C0039M-16
31. Sabnis, G. M.; Harris, H. G.; White, R. N.; and Mirza, M. S., Structural Modeling ad Experimental Techniques, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1983, 585 pp.
32. Biochar Total Surface Area and Total Pore Volume Determined by N2 and CO2 Physisorption10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.023 ↗
33. ACI Committee 211, “Recommended Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal and Heavyweight Concrete (ACI 211.1-91),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1991.
34. ACI 209R-92, “Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage, and Temperature Effects in Concrete Structures,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1992, 47 pp.
35. Pinto, R. C. A., and Hover, K. C., “Frost and Scaling Resistance of High Strength Concrete,” RD 122, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 2001, 75 pp.
36. Wawrzeńczyk, J., and Molendowska, A., “Use of Microspheres as an Alternative Method of Concrete Air-Entrainment,” Budownictwo-Technologie-Architektura, 2011, pp. 51-55.
37. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary (ACI 318R-14),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2014, 520 pp.
38. ACI Committee 229, “Report on Controlled Low-Strength Materials (ACI 229R-13),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2013, 40 pp.
39. Peabody, A. W., Peabody’s Control of Pipeline Corrosion, second edition, 2001, NACE International, Houston, TX.
40. Hover, K. C., “Cathodic Protection Applied to Reinforcing Steel in Concrete,” Rehabilitation, Renovation, and Preservation of Concrete and Masonry Structures, SP-85, G. Sabnis, ed., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1985, pp. 175-208.
41. USEPA, Evaluation of Groundwater Extraction Remedies, vols. 1 and 2, EPA Office of Emergency and Remedial Responses, Washington, DC, 1989.
42. Permeable Reactive Barrier for Groundwater Remediation10.1016/j.jiec.2007.10.001 ↗