This comparative study highlights energy consumption and carbon footprint of innovative construction materials, suggesting sustainability benefits of reed fiber-reinforced concrete.
This study compares the performance data of innovative construction materials, represented by reed fiber-reinforced concrete, with those of conventional ordinary concrete. Using a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) model and a sustainable development model, this paper investigates the energy consumption and environmental impact of different building materials throughout their life cycles. Key parameters analyzed include density, flexural-tensile strength, compressive strength, energy consumption, and carbon footprint of reed fiber-reinforced concrete versus conventional concrete. The results indicate that both non-metallic fibers (e.g., reed fibers) and metallic fibers can effectively enhance the mechanical properties of structural concrete. Model calculations reveal the following comparative data‐‐Reed fiber-reinforced concrete: Cost 380 CNY/m 3 , Energy consumption 25 kWh/m 3 , Carbon footprint 80 kg CO 2 /m 3 . Conventional concrete: Cost 450 CNY/m 3 , Energy consumption 35 kWh/m 3 , Carbon footprint 100 kg CO 2 /m 3 . The findings demonstrate that reed fiber-reinforced concrete exhibits superior sustainability in terms of cost efficiency, energy savings, and reduced carbon emissions, providing critical insights for future material selection in construction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: