Review

The carbon footprint of construction industry: A review of direct and indirect emission

Volume: 6 Number: 3 September 30, 2021
EN

The carbon footprint of construction industry: A review of direct and indirect emission

Abstract

The construction industry is considered to be among the major sectors that contribute significantly toward the emission of GHGs in our environment, which have a major effect on the climate change, and is approximately responsible for about 19 percent of the overall GHG emission globally, rendering it a pollution hotspot requiring urgent mitigation measures. Unfortunately, there are few studies on this subject to help construction companies meet their low-carbon targets. As a result, this paper reviewed the contributions of researchers across the globe towards carbon dioxide and other GHGs emissions from the industry. After a systematic review of some of these studies, it was found that the majority of researchers focused primarily on a specific feature of the construction industry, a case study of a particular country/city or region, using the Life Cycle Assessment approach. And, even those who have studied similar aspects such as cement or steel, have all used different methodologies, units, and techniques of reporting. As such, a comparison between the findings of the literature is unrealistic. Despite this, the scope of the emission from the construction industry is remarkably clear, and the carbon findings can be found throughout the literature.

Keywords

References

  1. [1] Baradan, B. Yazıcı, H. Aydın, S. (2015). “Beton”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Yayınları, No. 334, İzmir, p. 428.
  2. [2] Rashad, A. M. (2014). Recycled waste glass as fine aggregate replacement in cementitious materials based on Portland cement. Construction and building materials, 72, 340-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.08.092
  3. [3] Rodier, L., & Savastano Jr, H. (2018). Use of glass powder residue for the elaboration of eco-efficient cementitious materials. Journal of Cleaner Production, 184, 333-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.269
  4. [4] Gutiérrez, A. S., Eras, J. J. C., Gaviria, C. A., Van Caneghem, J., & Vandecasteele, C. (2017). Improved selection of the functional unit in environmental impact assessment of cement. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 463-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.007
  5. [5] Tamanna, N., Sutan, N. M., Lee, D. T. C., & Yakub, I. (2013, July). Utilization of waste glass in concrete. In Proceedings of the 6th International Engineering Conference, Energy and Environment (ENCON 2013), Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia (pp. 2-4).
  6. [6] Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., & Jullien, A. (2010). Environmental impact of cement production: detail of the different processes and cement plant variability evaluation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(5), 478-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.014
  7. [7] Omprakaash, P., Vanitha, S., Samuel, J., & Rajkumar, S. (2015). Identifying the sustainability of concrete by partial replacement of cement with glass powder, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 10 (1), 563-571.
  8. [8] Raju, S., & Kumar, P. R. (2014). Effect of using glass powder in concrete. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 31, 21-427.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Civil Engineering

Journal Section

Review

Publication Date

September 30, 2021

Submission Date

May 1, 2021

Acceptance Date

July 13, 2021

Published in Issue

Year 2021 Volume: 6 Number: 3

APA
Labaran, Y. H., Mathur, V. S., & Farouq, M. M. (2021). The carbon footprint of construction industry: A review of direct and indirect emission. Journal of Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies, 6(3), 101-115. https://doi.org/10.29187/jscmt.2021.66

Cited By