Comparative Analysis of the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of Structural Stone, Concrete and Steel Construction Materials

Jonathan Kerr, Scott Rayburg, Melissa Neave and John Rodwell
Additional contact information
Jonathan Kerr: Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia
Scott Rayburg: Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia
Melissa Neave: School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia
John Rodwell: Department of Management & Marketing, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, VIC 3122, Australia

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 15, 1-15

Abstract: The manufacturing and construction industries have always been large contributors to global CO 2 emissions, largely as a consequence of material choices. Two of the most commonly used building materials are concrete and steel, but both of these industries have been identified as large sources of atmospheric CO 2 . Therefore, reducing the use of these materials and finding alternatives to them that meet the engineering requirements of a design, while also minimizing emissions, is becoming increasingly important. Stone in its natural form is a zero-carbon emission material and has strong physical properties that make it a viable substitute for concrete and steel, across a range of applications. Yet research into the potential use of stone by the construction industry remains rare. The aim of this research is to investigate whether the use of stone as a building product is a feasible alternative in terms of carbon emissions. This study compares data from 11 Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) that provide Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) assessments of their considered product (i.e., types of dimensional stone, concrete, or steel). However, this research also highlights some shortcomings in the EPDs that point to a need for greater legitimate engagement with this tool, and for more consistency between the data being presented in EPDs. Global Warming Potential (GWP) data are compared between products to determine the difference in carbon emissions. The results indicate that GWP values for dimensional structural stone (135 kg.CO 2 /m 3 ) are 45–75% lower than the concrete products considered in this investigation (246–514 kg.CO 2 /m 3 ), and over 99% lower than certain steel products (22,294–29,202 kg.CO 2 /m 3 ). This research indicates that stone is demonstrably better in terms of its GWP, and that a more extensive use of structural stone represents a key opportunity for the construction industry to reduce its CO 2 emissions.

Keywords: sustainable buildings; green buildings; alternative construction materials; global warming potential (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9019/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9019/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9019-:d:869444

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().