Dynamic behaviour of bio-based and recycled materials for indoor environmental comfort

Romano, Abbie; Brás, Ana; Grammatikos, Sotirios; Shaw, Andy; Riley, Michael W.

doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.02.126

Cited by 38 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, these considerations should be verified: the performance of the composites widely varies depending on the complementary components (binders, additives) and the production method. Future As Collet [56] and Romano et al [72] reported, hygroscopicity properties widely affect the thermal behaviour of the composites and the control of the dynamic moisture changes. MBV values show the potential of bio-aggregates as hygric regulators [58].…”

Section: Water Absorption and Sorption/desorption Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Furthermore, the measurement method (opening and closing of the climatic chamber) might have determined an error that has to be taken into consideration. As Romano et al [72] reported, the difference between the biowastes might depend on a micro-capillary network formation that is created during water molecules sorption/desorption. Table 7 reported MBV values [g/(m 2 •% RH)] and the classification provided by Rode et al [49]: Negligible: MBV = 0.0-0.2; Limited: MBV = 0.2-0.5; Moderate: MBV = 0.5-1.0; Good: MBV = 1.0-2.0; Excellent: MBV ≥ 2.0.…”

Section: Water Absorption and Sorption/desorption Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Collet [56] and Romano et al [72] reported, hygroscopicity properties widely affect the thermal behaviour of the composites and the control of the dynamic moisture changes. MBV values show the potential of bio-aggregates as hygric regulators [58].…”

Section: Water Absorption and Sorption/desorption Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bio-Wastes as Aggregates for Eco-Efficient Boards and Panels: Screening Tests of Physical Properties and Bio-Susceptibility

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Screening tests were developed or adapted from RILEM recommendations, standards and past studies, and carried out to characterize some agro-industrial wastes and to assess their feasibility as aggregates for eco-efficient building composites. Spent coffee grounds, grape and olive press waste and hazelnut shells were used, as well as maritime pine chips as control material. Particle size distribution, loose bulk density, thermal conductivity and hygroscopicity properties were analysed. The selected bio-wastes did not show good thermal insulation properties if compared with some bio-wastes already studied and used for thermal insulation composites. Values of loose bulk density and thermal conductivity were between 325.6–550.5 kg/m3 and 0.078–0.107 W/(m·K); moisture buffering values higher than 2.0 g/(m2·%RH). Biological susceptibility to mould and termites were also tested, using not yet standardized methods. The low resistance to biological attack confirms one of the greatest drawbacks of using bio-wastes for building products. However, final products properties may be changed by adding other materials, pre-treatments of the wastes and the production process.

show abstract

Section: Water Absorption and Sorption/desorption Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Water Absorption and Sorption/desorption Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bio-Wastes as Aggregates for Eco-Efficient Boards and Panels: Screening Tests of Physical Properties and Bio-Susceptibility

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, nonrenewable materials such as expanded polystyrene (EPS) contribute to an immediate increase in global warming potential (GWP), for example through their energy‐intensive production process (Pittau et al, 2019). Bio‐based insulation materials can help mitigate depletion of nonrenewable resources and also contribute to the passive control of indoor air conditions (temperature and humidity) via hygroscopicity (Romano et al, 2019; Torres‐Rivas et al, 2018). They are non‐irritant, rendering them more user‐friendly, and being biodegradable lead to less pollution when disposed of (Lawrence, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative life cycle assessment of bio‐based insulation materials: Environmental and economic performances

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insulation materials decrease the final energy consumption of buildings. In Germany, fossil and mineral insulations dominate the market despite numerous life cycle assessments (LCAs) showing that bio‐based insulations can offer environmental benefits. Evaluating the results of such LCAs is, however, complex due to a lack of comparability or costs considered. The objective of this study is comparing bio‐based insulations under equal conditions to identify the most environmentally friendly and cost‐efficient material. For this purpose, a comparative LCA and life cycle costing (LCC) were conducted from “cradle to grave” for four bio‐based and two nonrenewable insulations. The bio‐based insulation materials evaluated were wood fiber, hemp fiber, flax, and miscanthus. The nonrenewable insulations were expanded polystyrene (EPS) and stone wool. Key data for the LCA of the bio‐based insulations were obtained from preceding thermal conductivity measurements under ceteris paribus conditions. Eighteen environmental impact categories were assessed, and direct costs were cumulated along the life cycle. Results show that the most environmentally friendly bio‐based insulation materials were wood fiber and miscanthus. A hotspot analysis found that, for agriculturally sourced insulations, cultivation had the largest environmental impact, and for wood fiber insulation, it was manufacturing. The use phase (including installation) constituted a cost hotspot. The environmental impacts of end‐of‐life incineration were strongly influenced by the fossil components of the materials. Overall, bio‐based insulations were more environmentally friendly than EPS and stone wool in 11 impact categories. The LCC found EPS and miscanthus insulation to be most cost‐efficient, yet market integration of the latter is still limited. It can be concluded that miscanthus biomass is an environmentally and economically promising bio‐based insulation material. Comparability of the environmental performance of the bio‐based insulations was increased by applying the same system boundary and functional unit, the same impact assessment methodology, and the preceding ceteris paribus thermal conductivity measurements.

show abstract

“…Also, previous research articles have demonstrated the prospective use of industrial wastes for different construction applications [33,46,47]. As alternative material studies are now clearly a priority for decreasing energy consumption and solving waste management problem, several studies have shown that the use of such wastes in the development of unfired earth building materials can meet this environmental challenge [33,48,49]. Therefore, researchers have made considerable efforts to partially substitute soil or clay with specific agro and non-agro waste materials to produce sustainable unfired earth blocks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of agro and non-agro waste materials for unfired earth blocks construction: A review

Jannat

Hussien

Abdullah

et al. 2020

Construction and Building Materials

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The production process of conventional building materials consumes a high amount of energy which has a negative impact on the environment. The use of locally available materials and upgradation of traditional techniques can be a good option for sustainable development. Consequently, earth has attracted the attention of the researchers as a building construction material for its availability and lower environmental impact. On the other hand, in developing countries waste disposal from the agricultural and industrial sectors raises another serious concern. The scientists have introduced such waste additives into the earth matrix to improve its performance. Therefore, the present paper reviews the state-of-the-art of research on the effects of these various agro and non-agro wastes in the production of unfired earth blocks. This study is divided into three sections: The first section outlines the different types of waste materials and earth blocks considered in the selected papers. The second part deals in depth with the test results of the different properties (density, water absorption, compressive strength, flexural strength and thermal conductivity) of unfired earth blocks containing waste materials. The last section analyses and compares the results with the current earth-building construction standards. The literature survey presents that the waste materials have a clear potential to partly replace earth by complying with certain requirements. Moreover, the application of such wastes for the development of building construction materials provides a solution that decreases energy usage as well as contributes to effective waste management. Future research on establishing guidelines and standards for the development and production of these sustainable unfired earth building materials is recommended.

show abstract

Dynamic behaviour of bio-based and recycled materials for indoor environmental comfort

Cited by 38 publications

References 33 publications

Bio-Wastes as Aggregates for Eco-Efficient Boards and Panels: Screening Tests of Physical Properties and Bio-Susceptibility

Bio-Wastes as Aggregates for Eco-Efficient Boards and Panels: Screening Tests of Physical Properties and Bio-Susceptibility

Comparative life cycle assessment of bio‐based insulation materials: Environmental and economic performances

Application of agro and non-agro waste materials for unfired earth blocks construction: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About