The blue and grey water footprint of construction materials, Steel, cement and glass

P.W. Gerbens-Leenes; Arjen Hoekstra; Ruben Bosman

doi:10.1016/j.wri.2017.11.002

The blue and grey water footprint of construction materials, Steel, cement and glass

P.W. Gerbens-Leenes, Arjen Hoekstra, Ruben Bosman

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

79 Citations (Scopus)

509 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Numerous studies have been published on water footprints (WFs) of agricultural products, but much less on WFs of industrial products. The latter are often composed of various basic materials. Already the basic materials follow from a chain of processes, each with its specific water consumption (blue WF) and pollution (grey WF). We assess blue and grey WFs of five construction materials: chromium-nickel unalloyed steel, unalloyed steel, Portland cement (CEM I), Portland composite cement (CEM II/B) and soda-lime glass. Blue and grey WFs are added up along production chains, following life cycle inventory and WF accounting procedures. Steel, cement and glass have WFs dominated by grey WFs, that are 20 to 220 times larger than the blue WFs. For steel, critical pollutants are cadmium, copper and mercury; for cement, these are mercury or cadmium; for glass, suspended solids. Blue WFs of steel, cement and glass are mostly related to electricity use.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-12
Number of pages	12
Journal	Water Resources and Industry
Volume	19
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wri.2017.11.002
Publication status	Published - Jun-2018

Keywords

Water footprint; Life Cycle Assessment; Steel; Cement; Glass; Industrial water use

Access to Document

10.1016/j.wri.2017.11.002Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

The blue and grey water footprint of construction materials: Steel, cement and glassFinal publisher's version, 1.47 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{6f662477ee474af7992de401df2f4817,

title = "The blue and grey water footprint of construction materials, Steel, cement and glass",

abstract = "Numerous studies have been published on water footprints (WFs) of agricultural products, but much less on WFs of industrial products. The latter are often composed of various basic materials. Already the basic materials follow from a chain of processes, each with its specific water consumption (blue WF) and pollution (grey WF). We assess blue and grey WFs of five construction materials: chromium-nickel unalloyed steel, unalloyed steel, Portland cement (CEM I), Portland composite cement (CEM II/B) and soda-lime glass. Blue and grey WFs are added up along production chains, following life cycle inventory and WF accounting procedures. Steel, cement and glass have WFs dominated by grey WFs, that are 20 to 220 times larger than the blue WFs. For steel, critical pollutants are cadmium, copper and mercury; for cement, these are mercury or cadmium; for glass, suspended solids. Blue WFs of steel, cement and glass are mostly related to electricity use. ",

keywords = "Water footprint; Life Cycle Assessment; Steel; Cement; Glass; Industrial water use",

author = "P.W. Gerbens-Leenes and Arjen Hoekstra and Ruben Bosman",

year = "2018",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1016/j.wri.2017.11.002",

language = "English",

volume = "19",

pages = "1--12",

journal = "Water Resources and Industry",

issn = "2212-3717",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The blue and grey water footprint of construction materials, Steel, cement and glass

AU - Gerbens-Leenes, P.W.

AU - Hoekstra, Arjen

AU - Bosman, Ruben

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - Numerous studies have been published on water footprints (WFs) of agricultural products, but much less on WFs of industrial products. The latter are often composed of various basic materials. Already the basic materials follow from a chain of processes, each with its specific water consumption (blue WF) and pollution (grey WF). We assess blue and grey WFs of five construction materials: chromium-nickel unalloyed steel, unalloyed steel, Portland cement (CEM I), Portland composite cement (CEM II/B) and soda-lime glass. Blue and grey WFs are added up along production chains, following life cycle inventory and WF accounting procedures. Steel, cement and glass have WFs dominated by grey WFs, that are 20 to 220 times larger than the blue WFs. For steel, critical pollutants are cadmium, copper and mercury; for cement, these are mercury or cadmium; for glass, suspended solids. Blue WFs of steel, cement and glass are mostly related to electricity use.

AB - Numerous studies have been published on water footprints (WFs) of agricultural products, but much less on WFs of industrial products. The latter are often composed of various basic materials. Already the basic materials follow from a chain of processes, each with its specific water consumption (blue WF) and pollution (grey WF). We assess blue and grey WFs of five construction materials: chromium-nickel unalloyed steel, unalloyed steel, Portland cement (CEM I), Portland composite cement (CEM II/B) and soda-lime glass. Blue and grey WFs are added up along production chains, following life cycle inventory and WF accounting procedures. Steel, cement and glass have WFs dominated by grey WFs, that are 20 to 220 times larger than the blue WFs. For steel, critical pollutants are cadmium, copper and mercury; for cement, these are mercury or cadmium; for glass, suspended solids. Blue WFs of steel, cement and glass are mostly related to electricity use.

KW - Water footprint; Life Cycle Assessment; Steel; Cement; Glass; Industrial water use

U2 - 10.1016/j.wri.2017.11.002

DO - 10.1016/j.wri.2017.11.002

M3 - Article

SN - 2212-3717

VL - 19

SP - 1

EP - 12

JO - Water Resources and Industry

JF - Water Resources and Industry

ER -

The blue and grey water footprint of construction materials, Steel, cement and glass

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Cite this