Abstract:
Cement industry further going to grow at high speed with Government of India
giving boost to infrastructure projects and housing facilities. As per the World
business council for sustainable development (WBCSD, 2005) the cement industry
produces 5% of global man-made carbon dioxide, a major gas contributing to
climate change and responsible for global warming. A product called Ferrock was
created as a result, concentrating on the reduction of carbon emissions as well as the
utilization of waste materials for a better environment. This study examines this
product that moves in the direction of waste reduction and carbon neutrality. It
demonstrates the most effective use of iron ore waste powder obtained during the
mining process, which is often dumped outside of the mines and causes air
pollution, health risks, and bigger area use. By having a strength-gaining
mechanism that is unlike cement's and unique among cement supplements, the
product indirectly lowers the carbon dioxide discharged into the atmosphere. For
greater strength in terms of compression and tensile strengths and to achieve desired
qualities, ferrock is subjected to a curing process that includes carbonation and air
curing over a range of days. Because it uses waste effectively and has a negative
carbon footprint, ferrock is a more promising environmentally friendly binding
material.
Keywords: Ferrock, waste management, cement replacement, and carbon
negative are other related terms.
Page | 1
1. Introduction
Around 8% of all carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions worldwide are attributed to
cement manufacture. Given how these emissions add up to an increasing threat
from global climate change, the world's obsession with carbon-intensive products
and methods has intensified into a true epidemic. Concrete has historically played
a crucial role in the exponential growth of the world's largest cities and continues
to be the product of choice for more industrial development. To preserve a
competitive edge in a developing green market, contractors have been pushed to
consider alternate building materials as academics uncover more knowledge about
the environmental damage caused by the manufacture of concrete. In comparison
to OPC, the iron-based compound known as Ferrock has been shown to be less
expensive, stronger, and more flexible in building applications. It is composed of
95% recycled resources. Additionally, this special substance employs compressed
carbon dioxide to hasten the curing process and doesn't need additional heat to
catalyze its chemical reaction, making it a carbon-negative substitute for OPC.
Since Ferrock is still a secret blend, a lot of the material outlining its workings and
effects is written from an early stage of development. However, the information
that is readily available highlights a number of this material's advantageous traits.
The first of two white papers, which was written by Dr. David Stone, the inventor
of the substance, and a number of engineers from Arizona State University,
describes the flexural strength and general durability of the compound in
comparison to OPC. They came to the conclusion that "the critical crack tip
opening displacement (CTODC) and the fracture toughness of the iron-based
binders were significantly higher than those of the OPC matrices [2]." Porosity is
another advantageous property of the iron-based material in contrast to OPC,
which can be reviewed in Dr. Stone's second white paper titled, Pore- and Micro-
structural Characterization of a Novel Structural Binder based on Iron
Carbonation[3]. A brief essay by the Environmental Protection Agency titled,
Creating a Carbon-Negative Building Material from Recycled Glass, Steel Dust, and
Page | 2
Carbon Dioxide, provides additional details regarding the advantages of using
recycled materials as substitute ingredients for the production of binding
materials. Except for iron powder, all of the components required for the
manufacturing of Ferrock are common industrial products. A scientific paper titled,
Sustainability of Construction Materials, notably chapter because of its focus on
clinker material manufacturing, serves as the primary source of literature for fly
ash and silica fume used in this study. The technical features of composite
cements, other low clinker cement combinations, and their components are all
thoroughly reviewed in this chapter. It also examines the emissions connected to
these materials. The Natural Stone Council's limestone material fact sheet, which
includes a review of the products, applications, performance, physical attributes,
and environmental data concerning this material, offers information regarding the
environmental effects of limestone. More general data on the GWP, water, and
energy consumption consequences of limestone, silica fume, and fly ash were also
obtained from a separate study by Rod Jones, Michael McCarthy, and Moray
Newlands. Due of its duration in the general market, research materials on
Ordinary Portland Cement are much more accessible. Additionally, the
components of OPC are also conventional materials that have undergone in-depth
analysis, making their statistical information easily accessible. Reviewing section
will provide more details about the recent literature for Ferrock and OPC.
Page | 3
2. Carbon Footprint
Concrete is the most frequently used construction material in the world, being
consumed at a rate of 1 m3 per person year. Historically, concrete has been bound
together by ordinary Portland cement (OPC). On the other hand, OPC produces
carbon emissions that vary from 0.66 to 0.82 kg of CO2 for every kilogram
produced. According to Turner (2013), OPC accounts for between 5 and 7 percent
of worldwide CO2 emissions. The following have been identified as the primary
causes of the substantial contribution to CO2 emissions from the production of
OPC:
Limestone, one of the essential elements, is calcined, causing the creation and
release of CO2.
High energy consumption is involved in the manufacturing process, which includes
heating raw materials to temperatures around 1400°C in a revolving kiln. Because
of the chemical liberation of CO2 caused by the calcination of limestone, variations
in the source of limestone, and the use of calorific wastes as a fuel substitute in
cement kilns, the estimation of CO2 due to cement manufacturing is a more
challenging problem. 0.82 kg of CO2/kg has been reported as the emission factor
for the manufacturing of cement. The estimate takes into account all connected
transportation, including the freight of cement to concrete batching facilities, as
well as the emissions produced by raw material mining, cement manufacturing,
and all associated transportation. According to (Laurent Barcelo et al., 2013), the
cement sector is a significant source of CO2 emissions, accounting for 5-7% of all
man-made CO2 emissions. The decarbonation of limestone is the primary source
of CO2 emissions in the cement making process. The manufacturing of blended
cements with fly ash and GGBS can minimize CO2 emissions, according to (Ernst
Worrell et al., 2001). By doing this, we can lower the CO2 emissions caused by
both the fuel and the process. M. Schneider et al. (2011) noted that it can be
difficult to meet quality, performance, and cost requirements while also reducing
the consumption of energy and raw materials. The innovative use of industrial
waste, such as flyash and GGBS, in cement manufacturing provides a solution to
the environmental crisis and the issue of waste disposal. According to an analysis
by Nurdeen M. Altwair et al. (2010), using "Green concrete" to build structures
Page | 4
avoids the detrimental effects of the cement industry. In order to produce greener
concrete, as much cement as feasible must be replaced with supplemental
cementitious materials, particularly those that are by-products of industrial
operations such fly ash, rice husk ash, silica fumes, etc. According to Chen Li et al.
(2011), the CO2 emission is made up of emissions from fuel, electricity, and raw
materials. The total CO2 emissions are 0.66 tons per ton of cement, with direct
CO2 emissions per ton of cement clinker being 0.8 tons. The process of
particularization is the opposite of generalization. After obtaining a workable
customized chain, it is detailed into the matching mechanical device in a skeleton
drawing.
Page | 5
3. Literature Review
In this study, David Stone et al. report on the pore and micro structure
characteristics of a novel binding material based on the carbonation of leftover
metallic iron powder. The main component of the binder is metallic iron powder,
which is followed by silica and alumina additions that help favorablereaction
product production. The bulk of concrete applications can be met using
compressive strengths. Mercury intrusion porosimetry is used to analyze the
material's pore structure, and electron microscopy is utilized to characterize the
material's microstructure. With an increase in carbonation time from 1 day to 4
days, there is a reduction in both the total porosity and the average pore size.
The prospect of carbonating used metallic iron powder to create environmentally
friendly concrete binders is explored in this paper by Sumanta Das et al. The key
idea of this study was that metallic iron will, in the presence of aqueous CO2, react
under regulated conditions to produce complex iron carbonates with binding
properties. The specimens carbonated for 4 days show mechanical properties that
are comparable to those of companion regular Portland cement systems, which are
most frequently used as the binder in building and infrastructure construction. The
compressive and flexural strengths of optimized iron-based binder systems increase
with carbonation duration.
Ali and Koranne investigated how stone dust and fly ash interacted with expansive
soil and how that affected the properties of the soil. They demonstrated a notable
improvement in the properties of expansive soil as well as a considerable reduction
in swelling nature when fly ash and stone dust are combined in equal amounts.
According to research by Surya R, Ferrock is a green concrete that reduces CO2
emissions by 30%. Utilizing green concrete products will not only lessen
environmental impact and CO2 emissions but also save production costs.
Through trials, Nivedita M. created Ferrock using various ratios of basic
components. Cement can be replaced partially or entirely with ferrock. The results
of experimental research on the CO2 curing process were recommended to be
optimal with carbon curing lasting 4 days and air curing lasting 3 days.
A lasting advance in the building sector would result from Kotla Janardhan
Reddy's compression testing, which revealed that Ferrock concrete was stronger
than OPC. By substituting a partial component for cement in concrete, it will also
help the environment.
Page | 6
In this essay, Shivani A.B. examined the environmental effects of both Ferrock and
OPC, focusing in particular on their involvement in carbon pollution, water use,
and energy consumption. Contrary to OPC, which can only be water cured, Ferrock
cement concrete was CO2 as well as water cured. Concrete made with Ferrock
cement benefits more from CO2 curing than water curing. Ferrock is a superior
partial material to cement in concrete in terms of environmental sustainability.
Page | 7
4. Ferrock
When David Stone was a PhD student, he experimented with iron rust and the
modifications it makes to original material. It was during this time that he
developed this exclusive blend. Iron dust, a byproduct of the iron industry that
cannot be recycled traditionally and cannot be economically extracted to yield iron,
is the main component. As the iron dust dries, it combines with carbon dioxide and
other particles to generate Ferrock[1], which is a matrix made of iron carbonate.
The following reaction steps are recognized for this process:
Fe + 2CO2 + H2O Fe2++ 2HCO3- + H2
Fe2++ 2HCO3 FeCO3+ CO2+H2O
Finally, the net reaction is:
Fe + CO2 + H2O FeCO3+H2
Even though the fundamental reaction scheme appears clear and simple, the
reaction's kinetics and the rate at which the product is formed are sometimes too
slow to be of any use for advantageous industrial applications. In order to manage
corrosion rates, dissolving agents (organic) that have a high reducing power and
complexing capacity must be used since they have the potential to increase the
rate of iron corrosion. Here, for optimum binding and performance needs, we
employ ingredients like metakoalin, limestone, flyash, and iron dust. The optimal
combination of materials, according to the literature that is currently accessible, is
iron dust (60%), fly ash (20%), metakoalin (12%), and limestone (8%). Fully cured
samples had between 8 and 11% of collected CO2 by weight, according to analysis
(atomic absorption spectroscopy). In contrast to Portland cement, which during
production is a significant generator of CO2 and other air pollutants, ferrock is
"carbon negative." Contrary to cement, which utilizes water during the process of
acquiring strength, or curing, raw components are only moved between locations
and mixed here.
Page | 8
5. Technical Properties
Ferrock has similar functional characteristics in terms of its fresh-state behavior
and workability, in addition to its special chemical characteristics as a carbon sink
that produces valuable hydrogen gas as a byproduct. Additionally, the iron-based
binder cures in a smaller amount of time than OPC; it takes 4 days for carbonation
versus 28 days for hydration for cement to set. Based on the quality of the
compressed carbon dioxide, the curing process for Ferrock may theoretically be
sped up even more. [13]
A comparison with the pore structure of 28-day-cured OPC pastes defines
additional characteristics by demonstrating that, whereas the overall pore volume
was lower in iron-carbonated binders, the critical pore sizes were bigger. This
explains why the permeability of Ferrock at 4 days after carbonation (k = 2.5 x 10-
16 m2) is much higher than at 28 days after cement paste curing (k = 6.17 x 10-
20)[14].
Additionally, investigations demonstrate that the iron-based binder is chemically
stable in saltwater settings and does not degrade. Results actually demonstrate
that Ferrock has the ability to incorporate some salt, particularly chlorine ions, into
the mineral structure. This ability to trap some harmful pollutants, including
arsenic, appears to exist. [2]
Page | 9
6. Raw Materials
Ferrock is a binding substance that was primarily developed to replace cement. In
order to obtain the product's binding property, cement-like components were
employed, and trials were conducted to achieve the same. In order to create ferrock,
secondary materials including metakaolin, fly ash, limestone, and oxalic acid were
combined with the main ingredient, iron powder.
By weight, the percentage of material :-
Waste metallic iron powder with a median particle size of 19.03 m makes about
60% of the iron powder.
Fly Ash or Ground Glass Particles 20% Class F Fly Ash Meeting ASTM C 618
10% Limestone Powder that complies with ASTM C 568 and has a mean particle
size of 0.7 m
Metakaolin 8% in accordance with ASTM C 618
2% Weak Oxalic Acid Oxalic acid has been utilized as a catalyst in earlier studies.
Page | 10
7. Curing Process
After the samples were maintained for carbon dioxide curing in plastic bags with
100% carbon dioxide at ambient temperature, they were replenished every 12
hours to maintain saturation for 1 to 4 days. Sumanta Das et al. (2014) carried out
the process by demoulding right away after the compaction. The samples were
then left in room-temperature air for 1 to 30 days to allow any remaining moisture
to evaporate. To find the ideal mix of carbon curing length and air curing
durations, Sumanta Das et al. (2014) conducted an experiment similar to the one
described above. After 4 days of carbon curing and 3 days of air curing, they saw
that there was no discernible increase in compressive strength. A
thermogravimetric analysis was used to establish the maximum time for
carbonation. Beginning with one day of carbon curing, which demonstrated very
poor mechanical strength, various carbonation durations were constructed and
experimentally evaluated. They also performed experiments with lower carbon
curing durations and higher air curing durations, however it was found that air
curing was only successful with higher carbon curing durations since the average
pore size shrank as carbonation duration increased. And when the specimens were
air-cured for a longer period of time and carbonated for longer periods of time, a
considerable improvement in strength was seen. This is because, during the initial
days of carbonation, larger pores exert less internal moisture pressure during
compression tests, and as a result, moisture loss during air curing after shorter
periods of carbonation does not have a significant impact on internal pressure,
which in turn does not affect compressive strength. Pore size is smaller and more
sensitive to compressive strength and moisture loss during air curing at higher
carbonation levels. Sumanta Das et al. (2014) carried out the curing of beams by
first keeping the polythene molds in the carbon curing, and after the mould is
removed, the samples are kept in 100% carbon curing for 5 days with refilling
carbon dioxide every 12 hours, and then allowed to air cure for days to let the
moisture evaporate. They deemed this healing period to be appropriate because
no major alterations were seen after it.
Page | 11
8. Advantages
1. Ferrock is primarily an environmentally friendly martial. Additionally, the
generation of hydrogen gas as a by-product of Ferrock manufacturing gives an
intriguing prospect for additional applications of this material, particularly as the
energy industry searches for alternative fuel sources. Hydrogen gas is one of the
best fuels for facilitating the switch away from fossil fuels due to its ability to
burn cleanly.
2. By controlling the curing conditions with a repeatable precast technique, it is
possible to extract the effluent hydrogen more easily. The precast building could
be put inside a vacuum-sealed chamber where a CO2 source would catalyze the
chemical reaction. The H2 gas that was released would then be drawn via the
chamber's ducting and compressed into useable cylinders. The commercial
potential for Ferrock is made to appear endless by offering it as a potential
producing source for this high-value fuel.
Page | 12
9. Conclusions
An overview of the development, properties, advantages and disadvantages of using
Ferrock in place of concrete has been outlined. Further, based on the literature
study, the following general conclusions have been drawn.
1. With a 30% decrease in CO2 emissions from the concrete industry, green
concrete has a lower impact on the environment.
2. The heat and fire resistance of green concrete is excellent.
3. Concrete recycling has resulted in greater usage of waste materials by the
industry, including ceramic wastes and aggregatesby 30%.
4. Green concrete is therefore more energy-efficient and cost-effective.
Therefore, it is certain that using concrete products like green concrete in the
future will not only minimize CO2 emissions and environmental impact but also be
cost-effective to produce. We can not only achieve environmentally friendly and
sustainable concrete but also achieve a green concrete industry.
Page | 13
10. REFERENCES
1. David Stone. Unpublished work titled "Top Ten List of Characteristics for
Ferrock TM —a New Green Building Material."
2. Das S. et al. "Flexural Fracture Response of a Novel Iron Carbonate Matrix-
Glass Fiber Composite and Its Comparison to Portland Cement-based
Composites." Science Direct. Building Materials and Construction, n.d. 2017-02-
27, Web
3. Das S. et al. "Pore and Micro-structural Characterization of a Novel Structural
Binder Based on Iron Carbonation." Science Direct. Resources Characterization,
December 2014. 2017-02-27, Web
4. Ali M. S. and Koranne S. S. (2011) "Performance Analysis of Expansive Soil
Treated With Granite Dust and Fly Ash", EJGE, Vol. 16, Bund. I, pp. 973-982.
5. "Ferrock: A Carbon Negative Sustainable Concrete," International Journal of
Sustainable ConstructionEngineering and Technology, Vol.11, 26 July, pp. 90–
98. Niveditha M, Y M Manjunath, and Setting H S Prasanna.
6. S. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering, and
Technology, Vol. 8, May, pp. 220–302, "Experimental Study on Ferrock,"
Karuppasamy, Kethepalli Dinesh Kumar, and Kotla Janardhan Reddy (2021).
7. Seema B.S. and Vijayakumar Y.M., "Review on Carbondioxide Curing of
Concrete," International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and
Technology, Vol. 5, July, pp. 171-174.
8. M. Kanta Rao and Naga Satish Kumar, "Evaluation of Strength Properties of the
Concrete Prepared from Class F Flyash," in Earth and Environmental Science,
Vol. 982, September, pp. 125–137.
9. Yogesh Pawar and Shrikant Rajendra Kate (2021), "Curing of Concrete: A
Review," International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 7,
August, p. 1820–1824.
10. "Development of Carbon Negative Concrete by Using Ferrock," International
Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology, Vol. 12, July
2020, pp. 111–119
11. Shanmugasundaram, Gokul Vvs, and Mouli PrashanthPrakasam,
"Investigation on Ferrock Based Mortar and Environmentally Friendly
Concrete," International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol.
6, September, pp. 467-469.
Page | 14
12. D.S. In 2019, Vijayan, Dinesh Kumar, S. Aravindan, and ThattilShreelakshmi
Janarthanan published "Evaluation of Ferrock: A Greener Substitute to Cement."
13. A information sheet on limestone materials produced by the Natural Stone
Council.
14. EPA. The project is titled "Creating a Carbon Negative Building Material
from Recycled Glass, Steel Dust, and Carbon Dioxide (Tohono O'odham
Community College)". Tribal ecoAmbassadors' 2013–2014 Program Report.
15. ENGINEERING INTRODUC. 2012. "Process of making cement."
Page | 15
