The Environmental Impact and Cost Analysis of Concrete Mixing Blast Furnace Slag Containing Titanium Gypsum and Sludge in South Korea

摘要

This study assessed the environmental effects and cost of the Industrial Waste addictive Blast Furnace Slag (W-BFS) using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and compared it to general BFS. The environmental impacts of W-BFS were as follows: 1.12 × 10 ?1 kg-CO 2 eq/kg, 3.18 × 10 ?5 kg-Ethylene eq/kg, 4.79 × 10 ?4 kg-SO 2 eq/kg, 7.15 × 10 ?4 kg-PO 4 3? eq/kg, 7.15 × 10 ?4 kg-CFC 11 eq/kg and 3.94 × 10 ?3 kg-Antimony eq/kg. Among the environmental impact category, GWP and AP were 9.28 × 10 ?2 kg-CO 2 eq/kg and 3.33 × 10 ?4 kg-SO 2 eq/kg at a raw material stage, accounting for 80% and 70% of total environmental impact respectively. In EP, POCP and ADP, in addition, raw material stage accounted for a great portion in total environmental impact because of “W” among input materials. In ODP, however, compared to the environmental impact of raw materials, oil, which was used in transporting BFS to the W-BFS manufacturing factory, was more influential. In terms of GWP, POCP and ODP, W-BFS was higher than general BFS. In terms of AP, EP and ADP, in contrast, the former was lower than the latter. In terms of cost, W-BFS (41.7 US$/ton) was lower than general BFS by about 17% because of the use of waste additives comprised of industrial wastes instead of natural gypsum ,which has been commonly used in general BFS. In terms of GWP and POCP, the W-BFS mixed (30%) concrete was lower than plain concrete by 25%. In terms of AP and EP, the former was lower than the latter by 30%. In terms of ADP, furthermore, W-BFS mixed (30%) concrete was lower than plain concrete by 11%. In aggregate-related ODP, however, almost no change was found. In terms of cost, when W-BFS was added by 10% and 30%, it was able to reduce cost by 3% and 7% respectively, compared to plain concrete. Compared to BFS-mixed concrete as well, cost could be saved by 1% additionally because W-BFS (US$41.7/ton) is lower than common cement (US$100.3/ton) by about 60% in terms of production costs.