Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Emissions and Circular Economy in Conventional and Geopolymer Precast Concrete
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70716/reswara.v4i3.629Keywords:
life cycle assessment, geopolymer concrete, circular economy, carbon emissions, fly ashAbstract
The construction sector accounts for approximately 37% of global carbon emissions, largely due to Portland cement production. Accelerated infrastructure development on Lombok Island has surged precast concrete demand, increasing the regional carbon footprint. This study compares the environmental impacts of conventional precast concrete against fly ash-based geopolymer concrete using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) integrated with circular economy analysis. A cradle-to-gate boundary (Modules A1-A3) with a 1 m³ functional unit of K-350 concrete was modeled in OpenLCA using the CML-IA method. Primary data came from a West Lombok precast producer; the geopolymer mix was literature-based. Results indicate the conventional precast footprint is 381.71 kg CO₂-eq/m³, dominated by cement (90.40%). Substituting 90% cement with Jeranjang power plant fly ash reduced emissions by 49.15% to 194.10 kg CO₂-eq/m³, despite burden shifting to alkali activators (66.86% contribution). Binder circularity achieved 90%, with a fly ash supply-to-demand ratio of ~530%. A 2025–2029 projection shows potential avoidance of 20,027 tons CO₂-eq and absorption of 27,179 tons of fly ash. Sensitivity analysis confirms model robustness (±0.14%). Transitioning to geopolymer concrete is a highly recommended decarbonization strategy for West Nusa Tenggara.
References
Agustiningtyas, R. S., Takaguchi, H., Kubota, T., Alfata, M. N. F., & Surahman, U. (2025). Comparative analysis of life cycle inventory of cement and ready-mix concrete production in Indonesia. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 27(1), 488–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-024-02135-x
Andrew, R. M. (2019). Global CO2 emissions from cement production, 1928-2018. Earth System Science Data, 11(4), 1675–1710. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1675-2019
Bajpai, R., Choudhary, K., Srivastava, A., Sangwan, K. S., & Singh, M. (2020). Environmental impact assessment of fly ash and silica fume based geopolymer concrete. Journal of Cleaner Production, 254, Article 120147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120147
Bianco, I., Ap Dafydd Tomos, B., & Vinai, R. (2021). Analysis of the environmental impacts of alkali-activated concrete produced with waste glass-derived silicate activator – A LCA study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 316, 128383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128383
Dewi, E. S., Darayani, D. H., & Iskandar, O. (2024). Utilization of Fly Ash and Bottom Ash Waste of PLTU Jeranjang on Geopolymer Paving. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1321(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1321/1/012042
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2021, May 26). Completing the picture: How the circular economy tackles climate change. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/completing-the-picture
Ghafoor, M. T., Ali, S., Imran, M., & Saeed, M. (2025). Impact of sodium hydroxide molarity on mechanical properties of fly ash–slag-based geopolymer concrete. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Structures and Buildings, 178(4), 402–411. https://doi.org/10.1680/jstbu.24.00169
Hardjito, D., & Rangan, B. V. (2005). Development and properties of low-calcium fly ash-based geopolymer concrete (Research Report GC1, Faculty of Engineering, Curtin University of Technology). https://espace.curtin.edu.au/handle/20.500.11937/5594
Imtiaz, L., Kashif-Ur-rehman, S., Alaloul, W. S., Nazir, K., Javed, M. F., Aslam, F., & Musarat, M. A. (2021). Life cycle impact assessment of recycled aggregate concrete, geopolymer concrete, and recycled aggregate-based geopolymer concrete. Sustainability, 13(24), Article 13515. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413515
International Energy Agency. (2023). Energy Technology Perspectives 2023. https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2023
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2021). Indonesia Long-Term Strategy for Low Carbon and Climate Resilience 2050 (Indonesia LTS-LCCR 2050). https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Indonesia_LTS-LCCR_2021.pdf
Meshram, R. B., & Kumar, S. (2022). Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of geopolymer cement manufacturing with Portland cement in Indian context. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 19(6), 4791–4802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-021-03336-9
Nagaraju, T. V., Bahrami, A., Azab, M., & Naskar, S. (2023). Development of sustainable high performance geopolymer concrete and mortar using agricultural biomass—A strength performance and sustainability analysis. Frontiers in Materials, 10, Article 1128095. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2023.1128095
Nurruddin, M. F., Sani, H., Mohammed, B. S., & Shaaban, I. (2018). Methods of curing geopolymer concrete: A review. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 5(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2018.01.005
Passuello, A., Rodríguez, E. D., Hirt, E., Longhi, M., Bernal, S. A., Provis, J. L., & Kirchheim, A. P. (2017). Evaluation of the potential improvement in the environmental footprint of geopolymers using waste-derived activators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166, 680–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.007
Pavithra, P., Srinivasula Reddy, M., Dinakar, P., Hanumantha Rao, B., Satpathy, B. K., & Mohanty, A. N. (2016). A mix design procedure for geopolymer concrete with fly ash. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.041
Petrus, H. T. B. M., Olvianas, M., Shafiyurrahman, M. F., Pratama, I. G. A. A. N., Jenie, S. N. A., Astuti, W., Nurpratama, M. I., Ekaputri, J. J., & Anggara, F. (2022). Circular Economy of coal fly ash and silica geothermal for green geopolymer: Characteristic and kinetic study. Gels, 8(4), Article 233. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels8040233
Salas, D. A., Ramirez, A. D., Ulloa, N., Baykara, H., & Boero, A. J. (2018). Life cycle assessment of geopolymer concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 190, 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.09.123
Sbahieh, S., McKay, G., & Al-Ghamdi, S. G. (2023). Comprehensive analysis of geopolymer materials: Properties, environmental impacts, and applications. Materials, 16(23), Article 7363. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16237363
Shi, X., Zhang, C., Liang, Y., Luo, J., Wang, X., Feng, Y., Li, Y., Wang, Q., & Abomohra, A. E. F. (2021). Life cycle assessment and impact correlation analysis of fly ash geopolymer concrete. Materials, 14(23), Article 7375. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14237375
Tang, W., Pignatta, G., & Sepasgozar, S. M. E. (2021). Life-cycle assessment of fly ash and cenosphere-based geopolymer material. Sustainability, 13(20), Article 11167. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011167
United Nations Environment Programme. (2022). 2022 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction. https://globalabc.org/resources/publications/2022-global-status-report-buildings-and-construction
Yahya, Z., Abdullah, M. M. A. B., Hussin, K., Ismail, K. N., Razak, R. A., & Sandu, A. V. (2015). Effect of solids-to-liquids, Na2SiO3-to-NaOH and curing temperature on the palm oil boiler ash (Si + Ca) geopolymerisation system. Materials, 8(5), 2227–2242. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma8052227
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Fatoni Uhrowi, Jauhar Fajrin, I Ketut Budastra, Martin Anda (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.




