Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Polymer-modified cementitious repair mortars improve adhesion and durability but usually increase cradle-to-gate (A1–A3) emissions. This study develops a performance-normalized embodied-carbon screening framework that compares repair materials on standardized functional units (1 m3, 1 kg dry mix, 1 m2 repair layer) and on declared repair functions. A database of 55 studies, 141 mixture records, and 243 endpoints was compiled, and 19 studies met predefined criteria for quantitative extraction. Two within-study case studies were analyzed, and emission factor and test-result uncertainties were propagated by Monte Carlo simulation. In epoxy-modified mortars (reconstructed inventory) exposed to sulfuric acid, modification reduced mass loss by 57.9–96.0% but increased emissions from 264 to 422–857 kg CO2e/m3; the 5% resin mixture had the lowest incremental carbon cost and the 20% mixture the lowest deterioration-rate-normalized GWP in >99% of simulations. In styrene–butadiene rubber mortars, the cationic latex reduced the chloride migration coefficient by 31.5% and, with a regional EPD, lowered the chloride-normalized GWP by 26%; this advantage is lost above a latex emission factor of 2.66 kg CO2e/kg. In a geopolymer benchmark, a declared desirability index ranked one of the same two mixtures first in all predefined scenarios. The framework supports screening rather than definitive ranking.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salman A. Alshamrani (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: