Estimating CO2 Emission Savings from Ultrahigh Performance Concrete: A System Dynamics Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ordinary Portland cement concrete (OPC) is the world’s most consumed commodity after water. However, the production of cement is a major contributor to global anthropogenic CO2 emissions. In recent years, ultrahigh performance concrete (UHPC) has emerged as a strong contender to replace OPC in diverse applications. UHPC has much higher mechanical strength, and thus less material is used in a structural member to resist the same load. Moreover, it has a much longer service life, reducing the long-term need for repair and replacement of aging civil infrastructure. Thus, UHPC can enhance the sustainability of cement and concrete. However, there is currently no robust tool to estimate the sustainability benefits of UHPC. This task is challenging considering that such benefits can only be captured over the long-term since variables, such as population growth and cement demand per capita, become more uncertain. In addition, the problem of CO2 emissions from cement and concrete is a complex system affected by time-dependent feedback. The System Dynamics (SD) method has specifically been developed for modeling such complex systems. Accordingly, a SD model was developed in this study to test various pertinent policy scenarios. It is shown that UHPC can reduce cumulative CO2 emissions of cement and concrete—over the studied simulation period—by more than 17%. If supplementary cementitious materials are further deployed in UHPC and new technologies permit reducing the carbon footprint per unit mass of cement, emission savings can become more substantial. The model offers a flexible framework where the user controls various inputs and can extend the model to account for new data, without the need for reconstruction of the entire model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".