Sustainability evaluation of the artificial stone prepared by metal-contaminated sediment and travertine waste: comparative analysis across TOPSIS and AECIEI

Saeedi, Mohsen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04469-w
IF: 4.08
2024-01-20
Environment Development and Sustainability
Abstract:Finding alternative stone, like artificial stone, instead of travertine stone, a raw material, can prepare the building industry's requirements and improve environmental issues. Previous studies evaluated travertine stone's mechanical and durability performances, the filled travertine stone with epoxy resin, and ten mixed proportions of artificial stones under the same test setup. To find an alternative between recycled artificial stones and improved natural stones, a sustainability evaluation was conducted in this study. For this purpose, 12 indicators, including some new environmental, social, and economic indicators, are defined and determined for the first time, although the sustainability evaluation to select the option between sones for flooring and facades is conducted for the first time. Four environmental indicators, including CO 2 emission, reuse of waste, reuse of hazardous waste, and energy consumption, are calculated and determined, and four technical indicators, including compressive strength, resistance against salt attack, UV radiation, freezing–thawing cycles, and thermal-shock cycles, are considered as social indicators because their effect on the life quality of the users. Capital cost and benefit for avoiding stabilization and solidification of hazardous waste are calculated as economic indicators. Two multi-criteria decision analyses, including the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and the applied effect of changing intensity in each indicator (AECIEI), were used to sort the stones and select the best and worst options. The results of AECIEI were more accurate than TOPSIS because this method applies the effect of varying intensities of sustainability evaluation. Results illustrated that using the filled and polished travertine could be the worst option, and the recycled stone prepared by 312.5 kg/m 3 of hazardous sediment and 312.5 kg/m 3 of travertine sludge is the best option. Because of using 312.5 kg/m 3 of hazardous waste, 195.40 $/m 3 is saved due to avoiding the solidification and stabilization process with cement. This stone's mechanical and durability performance is acceptable and stronger than the natural travertine stone.
environmental sciences,green & sustainable science & technology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?