Skip to content

Sustainability

Measuring embodied carbon in concrete: what the numbers leave out

A lower kgCO₂e per cubic metre is a good start. It is not the same as a lower-carbon structure.

Written by
Ser Civil
Published
Reading time
1 min read
Repeating concrete balconies forming a stepped facade
Contents
  1. The functional unit problem
  2. Three things to include
  3. A simple worked comparison

Cement production is responsible for roughly 7 to 8 percent of global CO₂ emissions, and concrete is the main reason. It is no surprise that the industry's first response has been to lower the carbon intensity of the mix itself, through supplementary cementitious materials such as slag, fly ash and calcined clays.

The functional unit problem

Most comparisons are expressed per cubic metre of concrete. But nobody owns a cubic metre of concrete. Owners own a bridge deck that must carry traffic for decades. A mix with 30 percent less carbon that needs replacing 15 years earlier may emit more over the life of the structure.

The right functional unit is not a volume of material but a service delivered over time.

Three things to include

  • Quantity: a stronger mix can reduce member sizes and total volume.

  • Durability: the expected service life under the actual exposure class.

  • Maintenance: the carbon cost of repairs, overlays and traffic disruption.

A simple worked comparison

Option

Mix intensity (kgCO₂e/m³)

Expected life

Carbon per year of service

Conventional deck

360

35 years

Baseline

Low-clinker deck

245

35 years

32% lower

Low-clinker with membrane

260

50 years

50% lower

The point is not that one option always wins. It is that a carbon comparison without a durability model is incomplete, and a durability model without carbon accounting misses half of the decision.

End of article

Sustainability