Investigating the Environmental Properties and Energy Consumption of Geopolymer Concrete as A Sustainable Material

Document Type : Original Article


Research and development department of Exir Sanat Siman Sabz Company, Karaj, Iran


Concrete is the second most widely used material in the construction industry after water due to its special properties. But the Portland cement production process also has major drawbacks, with one ton of Portland cement producing about a ton of carbon dioxide. Hence the need to use an alternative to Portland cement seems necessary. On the other hand, the production of new materials with environmental impacts less than the priorities will be one of the goals of sustainable development in future cities. In recent years, geopolymer has emerged as a sustainable, environmentally friendly material and an alternative to Portland cement. Geopolymers are materials such as ceramics with multidimensional three-dimensional structures that consist of the chemical activation of solids containing aluminum and silica at relatively low temperatures. Industrial waste or by-products can be used to produce geopolymer concrete and use it in construction. The present paper examines the feasibility of using geopolymer technology in sustainable materials for sustainable urban development to reduce the emission of environmental pollutants. The findings and results of this article show that geopolymer concretes have superior mechanical and chemical properties compared to conventional concrete, consume much less energy than concrete made with conventional Portland cement, and also provide significant environmental benefits.


[1]- Finlayson, D., 2001, Sustainable development: Economics and policy. 
[2]- DESA, U., 2018, Population Division. 2016. International Migration Report 2015, A Global Assessment.‏
[3]- Branscomb, L. M., 2006, Sustainable cities: Safety and security, Technology in Society, 28(1-2), 225-234.‏
[4]- Mohammadi Ashnani, M., Mohammadi Ashnani, A., and Hasani, E., 2018, A p roposal for a comparative assessment p rocess and e nvironmental p lanning for s ustainable r ural d evelopment in Iran, Village and Development, 11(1), 77-100. (Persian)
[5]- Yasnolob, I., Chayka, T., Gorb, O., Demianenko, N., Protas, N., & Halinska, T., 2018, The innovative model of energy efficient village under the conditions of sustainable development of ecological territories.‏
[6]- Sagbansua, L., & Balo, F., 2017, A novel simulation model for development of renewable materials with waste-natural substance in sustainable buildings, Journal of Cleaner Production, 158, 245-260.‏
[7]- Luhar, S., Luhar, I., & Gupta, R., 2020, Durability performance evaluation of green geopolymer concrete, European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 1-49.‏
[8]- Esparham, A., Hosseni, M. H., Mousavi Kashi, A., Emami, F., & Moradikhou, A. B., 2020, Impact of Replacing Kaolinite with Slag, Fly Ash and Zeolite on the Mechanical Strengths of Geopolymer Concrete Based on Kaolinite, Building Engineering & Housing Science, 13(24), 9-15.‏
[9]- Davidovits, J., 1993, From ancient concrete to geopolymers, Arts Metiers Mag, 180, 8-16.‏
[10]- Esparham, A., & Moradikhou, A. B., 2021, Factors Influencing Compressive Strength of Fly Ash-based Geopolymer Concrete, Amirkabir Journal of Civil Engineering, 53(3), 21-21.‏
[11]- Esparham, A., Moradikhou, A. B., Andalib, F. K., & Avanaki, M. J., 2021, Strength characteristics of granulated ground blast furnace slag-based geopolymer concrete. Advances in concrete construction, 11(3), 219-229.‏
[12]- Xu, H., & Van Deventer, J. S. J., 2000, The geopolymerisation of alumino-silicate minerals, International journal of mineral processing, 59(3), 247-266.‏
[13]- Esparham, A., & Moradikhou, A. B., 2021, A Novel Type of Alkaline Activator for Geopolymer Concrete Based on Class C Fly Ash, Advance Researches in Civil Engineering, 3(1), 1-13.‏
[14]- Esparham, A., Moradikhou, A. B., & Mehrdadi, N., 2020, Introduction to synthesise method of Geopolymer concrete and corresponding properties, Journal of Iranian Ceramic Society, 4(64), 13-24.‏
[15]-Esparham, A., Moradikhou, A. B., & Jamshidi Avanaki, M., 2020, Effect of Various Alkaline Activator Solutions on Compressive Strength of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Concrete. Journal of civil Engineering and Materials Application, 4(2), 115-123.‏
[16]- Hosseini, M. H., Mousavi Kashi, A., Emami, F., & Esparham, A., 2020, Effect of Simple and Hybrid Polymer Fibers on Mechanical Strengths and High-temperature Resistance of Metakaolin-based Geopolymer Concrete, Modares Civil Engineering journal, 20(2), 0-0.‏
[17]- Moradikhou, A. B., Esparham, A., & Avanaki, M. J., 2019, Effect of Hybrid Fibers on Water absorption and Mechanical Strengths of Geopolymer Concrete based on Blast Furnace Slag, Journal of civil Engineering and Materials Application, 3(4), 195-211.‏
[18]- Esparham, A., & Moradikhou, A. B., 2021, A Novel Type of Alkaline Activator for Geopolymer Concrete Based on Metakaolin, Journal of civil Engineering and Materials Application, 5(2), 14-30.‏
[19]- Davidovits, J., 2008, They Built the Pyramids, published by Institute Geopolymer, Saint Quentin, France.‏
[20]-Nabi Javid, M., & Esparham, A., 2021, A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) in quantifying environmental impacts of OPC and PFA concrete products, Civil and Project Journal, 3(2), 22-31.‏
[21]-Van den Heede, P., & De Belie, N., 2012, Environmental impact and life cycle assessment (LCA) of traditional and ‘green’concretes: Literature review and theoretical calculations, Cement and Concrete Composites, 34(4), 431-442.‏
[22]- Suhr, M., Klein, G., Kourti, I., Gonzalo, M. R., Santonja, G. G., Roudier, S., & Sancho, L. D., 2015, Best available techniques (BAT) reference document for the production of pulp, paper and board. Eur. Comm, 906.‏
[23]- Chevalier, B., Reyes, T., & Laratte, B., 2011, Methodology for choosing life cycle impact assessment sector-specific indicators. Paper presented at the DS 68-5: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Impacting Society through Engineering Design, Vol. 5: Design for X/Design to X, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08. 2011.  
[24]- Dreyer, L. C., Niemann, A. L., and Hauschild, M. Z., 2003, Comparison of three different LCIA methods: EDIP97, CML2001 and Eco-indicator 99 – Does it matter which one you choose?, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 8(4), 191–200.
[25]- Consultant, P. E., 2013, SimaPro Database Manual Methods Library, Netherlands: Product Ecology Consultant’s Report, Version, 2.
[26]- Richtlinie, V. D. I., 1997, 2222: Methodisches Entwickeln von Lösungsprinzipien, Berlin–Wien–Zürich: Beuth-Verlag.‏
[27]- Weil, M., Dombrowski, K., & Buchwald, A., 2009, Life-cycle analysis of geopolymers. In Geopolymers (pp. 194-210). Woodhead Publishing.
[28]- Esparham, A., 2020, Factors Influencing Compressive Strength of Metakaolin-based Geopolymer Concrete, Modares Civil Engineering journal, 20(1), 53-66.‏
[29]- Menzel, U., 1991, Heat treatment of concrete, Concrete plant + precast technology, 12, 92–96.
[30]-Esparham, A., & Ghalatian, F., 2022, The features of geopolymer concrete as a novel approach for utilization in green urban structures, Journal of Composites and Compounds, 4(11), 89-96.
[31]- Esparham, A., 2022, A review of the features of geopolymer cementitious composites for use in green construction and sustainable urban development, Central Asian Journal of Environmental Science and Technology Innovation, 3(3), 64-74.
[32]- Damineli, B. L., Kemeid, F. M., Aguiar, P. S., & John, V. M., 2010, Measuring the eco-efficiency of cement use, Cement and Concrete Composites, 32(8), 555-562.‏