Page 272 - New Trends in Eco efficient and Recycled Concrete

per Transport sensitivity (Continued)
aspects No Yes Yes No Yes No

LCA beneficial Yes (except ADP) No (except CMR) Yes (20% C high grade RA); Dependent (50% C high grade RA)

relevant RAC Yes Yes Yes

the ODP, AP, EP, POCP, PE-Re and PE-NRe and CMR and Eco- indicator WU, WG, GWP, AP, aP, wP, POCP and ODP, HT, FWAET, POCP, AP
of Impact category ADP, GWP, Eco-indicator 99 GWP, CED CML, EDIP 99 CED, ADP, ODP, EP ADP, GWP, MAET, TET, and EP
indication

with LCI data Case specific 1 Ecoinvent database Case specific 1 Ecoinvent database Case specific 1 CNMLCA database Excel Ecoconcrete database Case specific 1 Ecoinvent database 1 bibliography Case specific 1 Ecoinvent database 1 bibliography
review,

literature Exclusions Transport, use and end-of-life phases Use and end-of-life phases superplasticizer Use, maintenance and end-of-life phases; RA production only takes into account crushing and screening operations

this Water, .
in LCA type Att Att Att Att Att Att
considered boundaries Closed-loop LCA ( includes transport of waste at end-of- Closed-loop LCA grave

references System Cradle-to- gate life) Cradle-to- reinforcement Cradle-to- gate Cradle-to- gate

bibliographical Functional unit 1m 3 (fixed 28 days’ compressive strength) 1m 3 (specific weight equal to 2400 kg/m 3 ) 1 m 3 (specific dosage for 30 MPa) 1 m 2 solid slab 0,25 m thick and with a ratio of 70 kg/ m 3 1m 3 (30 MPa at 28 days) 1m 3

key Aggregate Literature compilation F (10%) and F 1 C(40- 80-100%) C (50-100%) F (30-100%) C (20-50- 100%) C (20-65- 100%)
the type
of different
overview Goal NAC vs RAC NAC vs RAC NAC vs RAC NAC vs RAC NAC vs RAC NAC vs RAC ( dosage methods)

Summarizing Geographic area Portugal Italy China Portugal France Spain

9.4
Table reference Reference Braga et al. (2017) Colangelo et al. (2018) Ding et al. (2016) Evangelista and de Brito (2007) Fraj and Idir (2017) Jimenez et al. ´ (2015)