CARBON FOOTPRINT REDUCTION IN LATERITE-BASED STABILISED BLOCKS BY USING RICE HUSK ASH IN PARTIAL CEMENT REPLACEMENT.

Daniel N. Nwaigwe, Frank N. Williams, Kelvin C. Okolie, Obumneme G. Okolie

Abstract


The construction sector remains a significant source of CO2 emissions worldwide due to activities such as cement production.  The potential of rice husk ash (RHA), a by-product of agricultural waste, to partially substitute cement in stabilised laterite blocks for environmentally friendly walling applications is examined in this study.  Lateritic soil was stabilised with 6% and 10% cement by dry weight of soil, with cement largely substituted by RHA at 0–40%. A cradle-to-gate embodied carbon assessment was considered to evaluate CO? savings relating to the partial replacement of RHA. Carbon footprint analysis indicated a decrease of up to ~40% in embodied CO? at 40% RHA replacement with cement when RHA is viewed as a zero-burden agricultural waste, and a 12–17% reduction when accounting for controlled combustion emissions.  10–20% RHA replacement appears to provide the best mix between mechanical performance, durability, and carbon reduction when experimental performance and environmental studies are combined.  The findings support the feasibility of RHA as a low-carbon supplemental cementitious material for inexpensive, climate-responsive, and resource-efficient walling units in developing regions.

 

KEYWORDS: Rice Husk Ash (RHA), Lateritic soil, CO2 emissions and Carbon footprint



Full Text:

PDF

References


Alhassan, M., & Mohammed, M. (2007). Effect of rice husk ash on cement stabilized laterite. Leonardo Electronic Journal of Practices and Technologies, 11(11). https://doi.org/10.3402/leap.v11i11.12345.

Andrew, R. M. (2018). Global CO? emissions from cement production. Earth System Science Data, 10, 195–217.

Bamshad, O., & Ramezanianpour, A. M. (2024). Optimising concrete for circularity: A comparative life cycle assessment of geopolymer and ordinary concrete. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-XXXX-X.

British Standards Institution. (1990). BS 1377-2:1990 – Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. Part 2: Classification tests. British Standards Institution.

Bui, D. D., Hu, J., & Stroeven, P. (2005). Particle size effect on the pozzolanic activity of rice husk ash in cement paste. Cement and Concrete Composites, 27, 357–363.

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, 478–485.

Ecoinvent Centre. (2019). Ecoinvent database v3. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories.

Flower, D. J. M., & Sanjayan, J. G. (2007). Greenhouse gas emissions due to concrete manufacture. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12, 282–288.

Gautam, N. R., Patil, R. N., & Dhawad, P. D. (2019). Experimental study investigation of rice husk ash on concrete. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2104, Issue 1, Article 030049). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5100476.

Gursel, A. P., & Ostertag, C. P. (2016). Life-cycle assessment of high-strength concrete mixtures with copper slag. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 28, 04015095.

Habeeb, G. A., & Mahmud, H. B. (2010). Study on properties of rice husk ash and its use as cement replacement material. Materials Research, 13(2), 185–190. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-14392010000200015.

Habert, G., D’Espinose de Lacaillerie, J. B., & Roussel, N. (2011). An environmental evaluation of geopolymer-based concrete production: Reviewing current status and perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 1229–1238.

Heath, A., Paine, K., & McManus, M. (2014). Minimising the global warming potential of clay-based geopolymers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 78, 75–83.

Henry, C. S., & Lynam, J. G. (2020). Embodied energy of rice husk ash for sustainable cement production. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering, 2, 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2020.100004.

International Energy Agency (IEA). (2023). World energy outlook: Electricity emission factors. IEA.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2006). ISO 14044: Environmental management—Life cycle assessment—Requirements and guidelines. ISO.

IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Cambridge University Press.

Karim, M. R., Zain, M. F. M., Jamil, M., & Lai, F. C. (2013). Fabrication of a non-cement composite binder by using slag, palm oil fuel ash and rice husk ash with sodium hydroxide as an activator. Construction and Building Materials, 49, 894–902.

Kua, H. W., & Wong, K. S. (2008). Evaluation of the environmental impacts of construction. Building and Environment, 43, 163–175.

Montazeri, P., Bamshad, O., Aghililotf, M., & Singh, P. (2025). Mechanical and durability-based life cycle assessment of rice husk ash-containing concrete. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 23, e05241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2025.e05241.

Nair, D. G., Fraaij, A., Klaassen, A. A., & Kentgens, A. P. (2008). A structural investigation relating to the pozzolanic activity of rice husk ashes. Cement and Concrete Research, 38, 861–869.

Ojerinde, A. M., Ajao, A. M., Ogunbayo, B. F., Stevenson, V., & Latif, E. (2018). The partial replacement of Ordinary Portland cement with rice husk ash to stabilize compressed earth blocks for affordable building materials. In PLEA 2018: Smart and Healthy within the 2-degree Limit (International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture). Hong Kong.

Okafor, F. O., & Okonkwo, U. N. (2009). Effects of rice husk ash on some geotechnical properties of lateritic soil. Nigerian Journal of Technology, Vol. 28 No.1.

Olorunfemi, K. O., Odeyemi, S. O., & Adisa, M. A. (2025). Development of high-performance concrete using guinea corn and rice husk ashes as replacement for silica fume. Next Sustainability, 6, 100203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nextsust.2025.100203.

Olumodeji, A. O., & Oluborode, K. D. (2023). Evaluation of compressive strength and abrasive properties of rice husk ash–cement compressed stabilized earth bricks. Nigerian Journal of Technology, 42(2). https://doi.org/10.4314/njt.v42i2.5.

Olutoge, F. A., Booth, C. A., Olawale, O. M., & Alebiosu, T. O. (2018). Compressed stabilized earth blocks: A review of factors influencing strength and durability. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 10, 128–136.https:// doi.org /10.1016/ j.eti. 2018.01.006.

Purton, M. (2024, September 13). Cement is a big problem for the environment. It can be made more sustainable. MENA-Forum. https://mena-forum.com/cement-problem-environment/

Spielmann, M., Bauer, C., Dones, R., & Tuchschmid, M. (2007). Transport services (ecoinvent report No. 14). Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories.

Suárez Silgado, S. S., Calderón Valdiviezo, L., & Betancourt Quiroga, C. (2024). Life cycle analysis and economic evaluation of cement and concrete mixes with rice husk ash: Application to the Colombian context. Materiales de Construcción, 74(353), e335. https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2024.350723.

Ubi, S. E., Nkra, P. O., & Agbor, R. B. (2021). Stabilization of earth block using rice husk ash as partial replacement in cement. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 40(12), 12–22. https://doi.org/10.9734/cjast/2021/v40i1231464.

Valdivia, S., Ugaya, C., Sonnemann, G., & Hildenbrand, J. (2013). A UNEP/SETAC approach toward a life cycle sustainability assessment—Our contribution to Rio+20. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18, 1673–1685.

WBCSD/CSI. (2011). Cement CO? and energy protocol: CO? accounting and reporting standard for the cement industry. World Business Council for Sustainable Development


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2022-2025. Department of Civil Engineering, Nnamdi Azikiwe University. All Rights Reserved.. 

Powered by Myrasoft Systems Ltd.(http://www.myrasoft.com.ng)