Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

Geomaterials in construction and their sustainability: understanding their role in modern society

R. PRˇ IKRYL1*, A´ .TO¨ RO¨ K2, M. THEODORIDOU3, M. GOMEZ-HERAS4 & K. MISKOVSKY5 1Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Science, Institute of Geochemistry, Mineralogy and Mineral Resources, Albertov 6, 128 43 Prague 2, Czech Republic 2Department of Construction Materials and Engineering Geology, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Sztoczek u. 2, H-1521 Budapest, Hungary 3Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Building Materials and Ledra Laboratories, School of Engineering, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus 4Department of Geomaterials, Institute of Geosciences (CSIC-UCM), Jose Antonio Novais 12, 28040 Madrid, Spain 5Envix Nord AB, Kylgra¨nd 6B, 906 20 Umea˚, Sweden *Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected])

Abstract: Inorganic raw materials, here termed geomaterials, derived from the Earth’s crust and used in construction after appropriate processing make a genetically and functionally varied group of mineral resources. Although their basic functions have remained almost unchanged for centu- ries, some new attributes, meanings and impacts on society are still emerging. Geomaterials for construction were among the first mineral raw materials exploited, processed and used by man. They helped in the development of technological and artistic skills of humankind. Accessibility, workability and serviceability are considered here as their main functional attributes, being con- nected with man’s skills to find their occurrence, extract and process them, and then use them in the correct way. However, serviceability is a more complex functional attribute as it also encom- passes durability of a material in construction. Durability, that is the ability to withstand the action of weathering/decay processes, is an expression of the dynamic interactions between material and the surrounding environment encompassing not only gradual adaptation of materials to current environmental conditions, but also interactions between materials in construction, the history of maintenance/conservation of the structure and the impact of a polluted environment. In the modern world, sustainable use of raw materials, specifically those exploited in the largest volumes such as geomaterials for construction, raises questions of reducing extraction of primary resources and thus minimizing impacts on natural systems, and also employment of materials and technologies to pro- duce less emission of deleterious substances in to the atmosphere. Use of secondary materials such as waste produced during extraction of primary raw materials and/or re-use of existing structural elements and re- or down-cycling can be considered as modern approaches to reducing the pressure on primary resources.

The use of mineral raw materials derived from inorganic raw materials, first specifically for the the uppermost parts of the Earth’s crust in construc- construction of dwellings/buildings, later also for tion is one of the features that distinguishes modern growing infrastructure (e.g. defence structures, man from his man-ape ancestors (see e.g. Ambrose roads, bridges, ports). 2001; Renfrew & Morley 2009; de la Torre 2011; From total amounts of mineral raw materials Sterelny 2011), but also makes him a significant (here including ores for metals, industrial minerals geomorphic agent (Hooke 2000; Ellis 2011). and rocks, fossil fuels and uranium as energy re- Despite the fact that the history of humankind is sources, and construction materials) derived annu- marked with long-term employment of various ally from the Earth’s crust for the fulfilment of types of rocks for making tools and weapons during enormous materials’ needs of the modern society the so-called Stone Age, it was only after the retreat (Rogich 1996; Baccini & Brunner 2012), raw mate- of last major glaciation that extracted rocks and soils rials for construction purposes make up the largest gradually became the first and the most widely used part (Fig. 1); the construction industry is thus the

From:Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Gomez-Heras, M., Miskovsky,K.&Theodoridou, M. (eds) 2016. Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 416, 1–22. First published online February 26, 2016, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.21 # 2016 The Author(s). Published by The Geological Society of London. All rights reserved. For permissions: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/permissions. Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

2 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

twentieth century (Aı¨tcin 2000) propelled the appe- tite for constructional aggregates. The annual global demand for construction aggregates is estimated to be as high as 40 Gt (Anonymous 2013), ranking it in the top position among all mineral raw materials (Smith & Collis 2001). The use of soils for brick production is estimated to be 7.2 Gt based on the reported world production of bricks (e.g. Heierli & Maithel 2008). Cement clinker production estimates were 3.57 Gt for 2014 (van Oss 2015). To produce this amount of clinker, more than 5.61 Gt of raw material, spe- cifically clay- and silica-rich limestone plus about 0.61 Gt of additives applied either prior or after burning, is needed. These three types of raw mate- rials, therefore, represent the most in-demand natural resources to be derived from the Earth’s Fig. 1. Relative proportions between amount and value crust, contributing to c. 60% of our requirements of raw materials extracted from the Earth in recent for mineral raw materials. However, compared times (based on the data mainly for 2013 and/or 2012 with other categories of mineral raw materials or earlier years if missing for 2013). The absolute required by modern society, such as fossil fuels for numbers (in billions of tonnes (Gt (Gigatonnes)), energy production or ores for metals, the research and in billions of US dollars) for each of displayed interest in deposits of construction raw materials categories of mineral raw materials – ores for metals, is less developed, probably owing to their remark- industrial minerals and rocks, energetic raw materials (fossil fuels plus uranium) and construction materials ably lower unit price (Fig. 2), although their signifi- are shown as well. In the case of materials that are cance for society is generally recognized (Van Loon used for more purposes (e.g. bauxite as ore for Al 2002). production but also raw material for refractories and Despite the recent dominance of aggregates, other uses, actual percentage has been accounted to Portland cement raw materials, and soils for brick each category, which is valid for calculation of the production in the extractive industry, the diversity value of production as it can be different for various of geomaterials used in construction is enormously uses). Data for most of the metallic ores and industrial widespread in terms of both the range of employed minerals and rocks are based on Minerals Yearbook materials and the conditions of their processing statistics published annually by the US Geological Survey (MCS 2015) and periodically by the British and/or functions (Table 1). Many traditional build- Geological Survey (Brown et al. 2015); data for ings and numerous cultural heritage objects have energetic materials are from the British Petroleum been constructed from different types of unburnt compendium (BP 2015). Data for construction soil (also termed ‘adobe’ and ‘rammed earth’), a materials are also derived from the Minerals Yearbook broad variety of natural stones (belonging to all statistics. For aggregates the figure comes from genetic groups and widely ranging in properties Anonymous (2013), for brick raw materials from from extremely soft and low-resistance varieties (Heierli & Maithel 2008) and for ceramic clays from to very hard, durable types that are hard to work) (Dondi et al. 2014). Note that prices may fluctuate a lot or fired clay-rich materials for bricks (structural during the period and also between various locations; therefore averages as used by the Minerals Yearbook ceramics). Blocks of natural stone or fired bricks and other indicated data sources have been used. must be stuck together using mortar, most com- monly based on a mixture of fine-grained aggregate such as natural sand and a binder. Hardening of the binder takes place when exposed to the air (quick largest consumer of mineral resources. This is due to lime) or water (hydraulic binders). All of these the enormous appetite for the development of new materials belong to the genetically, compositionally or the repair of existing infrastructure in its broad and technologically highly variable family of geo- sense of meaning (i.e. encompassing residential materials (Fookes 1991) and all of them can be and non-residential buildings, transport infrastruc- and are employed in construction (Table 1). Deep ture, etc.), which requires material inputs from understanding of raw materials, necessary for the crushed rocks plus natural sands/gravels and production of the above-mentioned construction which also needs large quantities of hydraulic bind- materials, as well as an insight into their manufac- ers (mostly Portland cement), if concrete is used for turing processes and in testing procedures of their construction. Specifically the dominance of the use key properties, are fundamental for interpreting of concrete that appeared in the course of the their behaviour in buildings, recognizing the causes Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 3

100000 Aggregates

Brick clays and soils 10000 Cement

1000 Gypsum Ceramic clays Dimension stone 100 Bitumens for asphalt

10 Pumice Lime Perlite 1 Diatomite Mica

0.1 Vermiculite

0.01

0.001 world production in 2013 (mil. metric tonnes)

0.0001

1E-005

1E-006 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 unit price (US$/kg)

Fig. 2. Relationship between unit value and annual production of mineral raw materials based on the same source of the data as used for construction of Figure 1 (orange squares are for construction materials, blue diamonds are for industrial minerals and rocks, black triangles are for energetic raw materials and grey dots are for metallic ores). Note that mineral raw materials used in construction account for the ‘cheapest’ (sensu low unit value) materials. If material provides multiple basic uses (e.g. as a source of metals and as industrial mineral), it is plotted twice according to price and amounts consumed by each end-use. Please note that bitumen used for asphalt is one of the oil fractions produced in refineries. In the case of some materials (such as ores for metals, but also some non-metallics and construction materials), there might be a significant difference in the extracted amounts of raw material and product (as is the case of cement and lime, for which the amount and price of final products are shown as there are no data for raw material), whilst real raw mineral production is shown for other materials (e.g. for aggregates, gypsum, etc.). of decay and planning repair/restoration strategies or ad hoc application of well-meant conservation for older structures. strategies can irreversibly destroy the original, Worldwide interest in traditional construction often valuable assemblage, if the interactions of materials has significantly increased during past materials or their long-term response to the environ- decades, as reflected by numerous recent textbooks, ment are ignored. Deep understanding of processes, specialized volumes and conferences focusing on their dynamics in our changing world, and the res- specific materials and/or processes affecting heri- ponse of diverse construction materials based on tage structures (Prentice 1990; Winkler 1994; their known properties can contribute to the better McNally 1998; Prˇikryl & Viles 2002; Siegesmund preservation of heritage structures. et al. 2002; Lorenz & Gwosdz 2003; Prˇikryl & This paper thus aims to introduce to some of the Siegl 2004; Prˇikryl & Smith 2007; Bos¸tenaru Dan aspects of diverse inorganic construction materials et al. 2010; Prˇikryl & To¨ro¨k 2010; Smith et al. that have been traditionally used, and are still 2010; To¨ro¨k&Prˇikryl 2010; Cassar et al. 2014; Per- applied, in many parts of the world. As with the eira et al. 2015). whole Special Publication, this paper does not However, the skills of exploiting, processing intend to present an exhaustive list of materials and/or using many traditional materials need to be and their properties, but focuses on wider aspects preserved for future generations. The same preser- of their use in the anthroposphere. Following the vation concern applies to structures built from approach adopted in the rest of this Special Publi- these traditional materials as improper maintenance cation, sustainability aspects are discussed first. 4 Table 1. Overview of main constructional inorganic (non-metallic) raw materials, their sources and functions

Construction material Type of natural Extraction Basic processing Major products Typical uses Downloaded from material Aggregates Crushed stone Any genetic type Blasting from Crushing and Granular material of Unbound materials for of solid rocks rock mass screening to variable gradation construction (base desired size course for roads, fractions railway ballast, common filler), coarse-grained filler

for concrete http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ Natural Unbound clastic Excavation of Screening to desired Granular material of Mostly fine-grained aggregates sediments unbound size fractions variable gradation filler for mortars and (also termed material (+washing off concrete sand and above or fines) gravel) below groundwater PR R. table ˇ IKRYL Dimension stone Solid magmatic, Various Machine cutting/ Cladding for walls and Nowadays mostly metamorphic techniques of splitting/sawing, floors, paving slabs or cladding, and/or

or sedimentary extraction of surface dressing; cubes, ashlars, paving; decorative AL. ET

rocks, dimensional alternatively structural elements elements, restoration byguestonSeptember27,2021 regularly blocks from stonemason or (e.g. door or window work, monumental jointed with rock mass in sculptural shaping frames), sculptures stone, sculptures, low density of quarries or and dressing nowadays less fractures underground common as building mines stone Unburnt constructional soils/clay-rich Soils rich in clay Extraction from Mixing with water, Dried bricks (adobe), Traditional construction materials minerals pedosphere moulding rammed earth material for by digging residential structures, for example Bricks/structural ceramics Soils rich in clay Surface Preparation of the Bricks and other Traditional structural minerals, excavation clay body structural elements, material for common clays from upper (stockpiling roofing tiles residential and parts of the including non-residential Earth’s crust disintegration by buildings, roofing (part of weathering, elements, etc. pedosphere crushing or clay-rich tempering sediments of (adding water), weathered mixing) moulding Downloaded from claystones/ and shaping, shales) drying, burning (950–11508C) Binders Unburnt Soils rich in clay Digging In some cases Mud for binding, less Low-performance minerals modification of commonly for binding in historical SUSTAINABILITY THEIR AND CONSTRUCTION IN GEOMATERIALS granulometry, plastering structures addition of http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ reinforcing elements (hairs, straw, etc.), mixing with water Organic Crude oil Derivative of crude Bitumen (also known as Binding material in materials extraction oil processing in asphalt, tar, etc.) ‘asphalt’ concrete (bitumens, oil refineries asphalts) as part of a crude oil Burnt Requiring air Calcitic or Limestone Crushing, burning Lime (also termed air Traditional binder for to set and dolomitic quarrying (900–11008C), lime, quick lime) mortars, often used byguestonSeptember27,2021 harden limestone mixing with water also for wall finishes (paints), etc. Able to set Calcitic Limestone and Crushing, blending Portland cement and Dominant binder in underwater limestone additives with additives other types of Portland with higher quarrying (SiO2,Al2O3, hydraulic cement; cement-based amount of Fe2O3) to achieve alternatively hydraulic concrete non-carbonate optimum binders (natural Natural hydraulic lime minerals chemistry, hydraulic lime, or natural cement burning of clinker natural cement) make very small part (1400–14508C), of global market rapid cooling, milling, blending with gypsum and other additives In the case of natural hydraulic lime or natural cement burning below 12508C 5 Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

6 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Secondly, the focus is on functional attributes of relationship but, as shown in Figure 3, more com- inorganic construction materials, starting with pos- plex relationships. sible early interactions between human and raw In our understanding of this issue, the material material resources for use in construction. Finally, requirements of society must overcome three con- the concepts of accessibility, workability and serv- flicting perceptions (Fig. 3) in order to secure iceability as three fundamental attributes of con- the availability of raw materials in a way that struction materials are examined. will not harm natural systems affected by extrac- tion or processing of these materials (Table 2). According to the sustainability concept (Holmberg Sustainability of geomaterials for 1998), nature’s functions and diversity must not be construction systematically: Sustainability concept in primary extraction † subject to increasing concentrations of sub- stances extracted from the Earth’s crust; industries † subject to increasing concentrations of sub- After the publication of the famous Brundtland’s stances produced by society; † definition of sustainable development as ‘develop- impoverished by over-harvesting or other forms ment that meets the needs of the present without of ecosystem manipulation; and † compromising the ability of future generations to used unfairly and inefficiently in meeting basic meet their own needs’ (World Commission on Envi- human needs worldwide. ronment and Development 1987), the term ‘sustain- As the extractive industries are related specifically ability’ has been one of the key phrases used not to the first point of the above criteria, the society try- only by governments, industries and non-govern- ing to meet the sustainability concept must drasti- mental organizations, but also by some scientists cally decrease its direct or indirect requirements over the subsequent decades (Barbier 1987; Le´le´ for extracted raw materials (Robert et al. 1997). 1991; Costanza & Patten 1995; Goodland 1995; Along with reduction of society’s material needs, Ayres 1996; Dovers et al. 1996; Tilton 1996; Howe good practice in primary extraction and raw material 1997; Robert et al. 1997; Shinya 1998; Wellmer & processing should also include (Cowell et al. 1999): Becker-Platen 2002; Behrens et al. 2007; Giljum et al. 2008). Sustainability quickly became an † minimizing the use of water resources; important issue in primary extractive industries † minimizing waste production; (Hodges 1995; Cooney 1996; Cragg 1998; Hilson † recycling waste products; & Murck 2000; Petrie 2007; Giurco & Cooper † increasing energy efficiency; 2012; May et al. 2012; Prior et al. 2012) as the use † reducing emissions; of non-renewable resources raises fundamental † rehabilitating ground disturbed during questions on: (a) access to the resources (i.e. quarrying; although materials are required at many places in † making provision for the cost of future rehabili- the anthroposphere, their occurrence is driven by tation; and genetic factors); (b) environmental impacts asso- † consulting local communities. ciated with the mining, processing and use of As in the case of large-scale mining activities of extracted materials; (c) social aspects of resource metallic ores or fossil fuels, the acceptability of utilization; and (d) the economic importance of min- exploitation of geomaterials for construction must ing activities (Kreijger 1987; Dorian & Humphreys be achieved on the local and/or smaller regional 1994; Cowell et al. 1999; Azapagic 2004). scales on which these materials are often consumed In the debate on sustainable use of natural as well (Hodges 1995; Table 2). Similar to the resources, the question of their exhaustibility is the extraction of metals or fossil fuels, the benefits key issue (Doran 2002; Behrens et al. 2007; Giljum (mineral rents) from extraction of construction raw et al. 2008). Scientists consider natural mineral materials must go back to local social and ecological resources to be exhaustible (therefore they are called benefits (Hodges 1995; Cowell et al. 1999). non-renewable), although some economists argue that, through the substitution of raw materials, recy- Resource management and efficiency cling of materials already used and technological progress, the life expectancy of resources might Sustainable use of natural resources, of which min- be so large that the debate on their depletion is erals and rocks are just one part, presents a great irrelevant (see Tilton 1996). However, as has challenge for growing populations (Solow 1993; been shown above, questions about the extraction Wellmer & Becker-Platen 2002; Behrens et al. of raw materials and their use in industry concern 2007; Giljum et al. 2008). Natural resources used not only the matter of the ‘availability–use’ by society underpin its development; however, in Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 7

Fig. 3. Relationship between Earth systems and anthroposphere, here depicted as two mutually interacting spheres encompassing the social system of human society and its material system – a technosphere. Earth systems provide habitat to species that are part of the biosphere (in this sense it encompasses humans as well). Separation of anthroposphere (Baccini & Brunner 2012) can be justified owing to the development of humankind and directed use of materials in order to develop complex society. Despite this separation from ‘natural’ Earth systems, functions of the anthroposphere are inevitably dependent on materials and other services derived from the Earth. the case of overconsumption, economic losses and and exports originating outside of the local econ- degradation of the environment occur (Munasinghe omy, ‘raw material consumption’ has been proposed 1999). The reasonable use of primary (sensu newly) as an alternative indicator (Schoer et al. 2012). A exploited raw materials or re-use of materials similar concept of ‘material efficiency’ relates to already present in the technosphere is thus one of the efficiency of the use of material in the industry the key issues for mineral industries (Mikesell and is defined as: ‘using less of a material to make 1994; Hodges 1995; Tilton 1996; Hilson & Murck a product or supply a service’ (Allwood et al. 2000; Azapagic 2004), and specifically for their 2013; Lifset & Eckelman 2013). use as building materials where they are employed In addition to the above-mentioned approaches in enormous volumes (Figs 1 & 2). to the evaluation of resources efficiency in the Efficiency of consumption of natural resources context of sustainability, this Special Publication (‘resource efficiency’) can be evaluated by several includes a paper presenting a novel approach termed indicators, among which ‘resource productivity’ ‘Best Available Concept’ (BAC) of aggregate pro- is the most recently used (Bleischwitz 2010). duction and use that is based on three principal ‘Resource productivity’ is considered to be a ratio inputs: (a) detailed knowledge of geology of the between gross domestic product and domestic mate- region in which the aggregate is produced; (b) pro- rial consumption. Resource productivity expresses, duction technology (processing of extracted raw therefore, the total amount of materials used by material); and (c) material technology (use of the the economy of a country (sum of raw materials product) (Danielsen & Kuznetsova 2015). This extracted from the territory and consumed by paper highlights some weak points of European domestic industry, plus physical imports minus mineral resources policy concerning resource man- physical exports). As this parameter does not agement, specifically in relation to aggregates, include upstream material use related to imports owing to missing classification tools and predictors Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

8 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Table 2. Overview of principal aspects of extractive industry for construction raw materials that have direct impact on sustainability (modified and expanded from Azapagic 2004)

Economic aspects Environmental aspects Social aspects

Positive Contribution to GDP and wealth Possibility to create funds to Creation of creation prevent pollution or for site employment Costs, sales, and profits rehabilitation after abandonment Education of Distribution of revenues to of exploitation site employees and skill stakeholders and wealth to the development company and society Wealth distribution Investments (capital, employees, Relationship with local communities) communities Negative Loss of benefits from other Loss of biodiversity Corruption and/or possible uses of the site where is Loss of soil (usable for agriculture, bribery the material extracted (e.g. forestry or other) Loss of habitat agriculture, forestry, Landscape degradation Impact on tourism, etc.) Generation of noise and dust during archaeological sites excavation and/or processing Health and safety Generation of solid and other types of waste Use of energy Emissions on local level Contribution to global warming Impact on hydrosphere (excavation under groundwater table) Potential leakage of effluents, leachates, hydrocarbons, etc. Use of water Impact from transport of the value of mineral resources. This is in contrast composition and technological performance. GIS- to other land uses and stems from generally limited based techniques are also useful in the evaluation societal understanding or perspective of mining of historical quarry areas and variability of the use and quarrying. of building materials in specific environments, as As well as the above-mentioned paper, another shown in the example of the Ile-de-France cuesta contribution to this Special Publication highlights (Turmel et al. 2015). the importance of the societal attitude towards our dependence on materials derived from the Earth’s Energy issues crust (Garcia-Rodriguez et al. 2015). By linking the contribution of local geological factors to the Exploitation and processing of raw materials in development of specific architectural features in the general, and specifically of some geomaterials Sierra de Guadarrama (Spain), the authors suggest used in construction, consume enormous amounts an interesting educational approach to increasing of energy and contribute significantly to emissions societal awareness on conservation of our heritage of deleterious or hazardous substances to the atmo- as a whole, which includes the landscape from which sphere. Energy consumed during the extraction and the raw materials have been extracted in order to processing of geomaterials for construction and build valuable local architectural heritage. associated emissions of pollutants such as carbon Despite their classification as non-renewable dioxide is regarded as being ‘embodied’ within resources, in very specific cases aggregates can materials (Hammond & Jones 2008a). A route to be considered as partly renewable as shown by more sustainable utilization of construction materi- Pfleiderer et al. (2015). The paper presents alluvial als is thus inevitably linked to trials to decreasing fans, valley fills and debris cones from Alpine areas the amount of energy consumed during their pro- as economically interesting sources of aggregates duction, as well as substantially lowering deleteri- that are formed through erosion and accumulation in ous emissions. morphologically exposed regions. Pfleiderer et al. Sustainable use of construction materials also (2015) demonstrate that GIS-based techniques means the re-adoption of traditional materials can help in the rapid assessment of the quality of requiring less energy during preparation. In this material for estimation of possible petrographic sense, unburnt soils (adobe and/or rammed earth) Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 9 represent the most environmentally friendly con- Venkatarama Reddy & Jagadish 2003). It is the struction raw materials (Pacheco-Torgal & Jalali energy need and the total energy consumption of a 2012). They may be available at the site (so minimal material over its entire life cycle. The embodied transport is required) and the energy required for energy is closely related to the CO2 coefficients their extraction and application is very low, as of a given material. Unfortunately, very limited they are normally handcrafted. Structures built data is available for natural stone and geomate- from unburnt soil can survive for decades or even rials. Previous studies suggest that the embodied centuries if built and maintained properly, as docu- energy of various stone types is between 0.1 and mented by many world heritage structures including 5.9 MJ kg21 (Alshboul & Alzoubi 2008; Crishna the Old Wall City of Shibam and the Old City of et al. 2011). The embodied CO2 in these stone 21 Sanaa (Yemen), the Old Towns of Timbuktu and products is 0.006–0.62 kg CO2 kg . The wide Djenne´ including its Great Mosque (Mali), the range of values was later clarified and it was found Potala Palace in Lhasa (Tibet), parts of the Great that, for the UK stone industry, a source-to-site Wall in China and Huaca de la Luna (Peru) (for analysis provided an embodied CO2 value for 21 details see e.g. Van Beek & Van Beek 2013 and ref- sandstone of 64 kg CO2 t , while for slate it was 21 erences therein). Finally, unburnt soil material is 232 kg CO2 t (Crishna et al. 2011). The stone completely reusable. The soil can be used for the itself is a sustainable material compared with same purpose or can be returned to the ground and other construction materials since it has a lower used again in agriculture after demolition of an old embodied carbon than almost all other materials. structure. The adoption of modern analytical proce- In comparison with concrete, sandstone in the 21 dures that allow for better understanding of the UK has half of the kg CO2 t value, and even gran- properties and behaviour of soils as constructional ite and marble (Hammond & Jones 2008a) have materials is discussed in this Special Publication lower values than ‘general concrete’ (Crishna by Costa et al. (this volume, in press) with exam- et al. 2011). Cement itself has a much higher kg 21 ples from Portugal. CO2 t value than stone itself, while for clay bricks Other geomaterials used in construction are the generated CO2 is at least double than for most much more energy-demanding, not only for extrac- natural stones (Fig. 4). From the various forms of tion but also for processing, either in a physical stone products, aggregate was proved to be one (mechanical) way or through structural/composi- of the most sustainable materials since the embodied 21 tional changes that occur from burning. Lowering CO2 is only 5 kg CO2 t , which is coupled to a low the energy demand for the production of construc- energy need – 0.1 MJ kg21 (Hammond & Jones tion materials thus requires critical attention in an 2008b). increasingly energy-demanding modern society (Ortiz et al. 2009). There is particular concern Secondary use: re-use, recycling, over the use of inorganic binders and, specifically, down-cycling or abandonment Portland cement, the most widespread hydraulic binder used in modern society (Schneider et al. Secondary use of materials has received great 2011). Production of Portland cement is the most attention in recent times (Graedel et al. 2015), energy-intensive process of all manufacturing given that construction materials make up more industries as it accounts for more than 80% of the than 70% of total amount of extracted primary min- energy used in the production of non-metallic mate- eral raw materials (Fig. 1). According to numerous rials and for 12–15% of the total energy consump- recent studies (Gavilan & Bernold 1994; Bossink tion of a country (e.g. Worrell et al. 2001; & Brouwers 1996; Formoso et al. 2002; Ekanayake Madlool et al. 2011). Moreover, the burning of & Ofori 2004; Stahel 2013; Wu et al. 2014; Ajayi cement clinker is a 100% CO2-emitting process et al. 2015), any form of secondary use of disused without any possibility for reabsorption of part of and/or dismantled construction could relieve our the released CO2 by carbonation reactions as is reliance on raw materials extracted from primary common for air lime and/or natural hydraulic lime resources. It should also allow society to reduce or other types of hydraulic binders. Production of the energy required in the production of construc- 1 ton of Portland cement produces about 1 ton of tion materials from primary resources, minimize CO2 and other greenhouse gases (Naik 2008), con- waste production and decrease the requirement for tributing to about 5% of world CO2 emissions landfill that contains inert waste. (e.g. Worrell et al. 2001; Madlool et al. 2011). Although having several different forms, the secondary use of materials is often identified as Embodied energy recycling, specifically of metals that are recycled through metallurgical processes (Reck & Graedel Embodied energy is a good measure of how green 2012; Ayres & Peiro´ 2013) or some non-metallics and how sustainable a material is (Harris 1999; such as glass, which can be fused and re-used for Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

10 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Fig. 4. Embodied carbon associated with stone, cement, concrete and brick (data from Hammond & Jones 2008b; Crishna et al. 2011). production of a new glass exhibiting the same prop- replicated. In this Special Publication, both these erties (Krivtsov et al. 2004). aspects of re-use of traditional construction materi- In the case of dismantled construction materials, als from antiquity to modern times are carefully dis- their secondary use potential covers (Thormark cussed by Frangipane (2015). 2001): (a) re-use of the material (i.e. finding a new When a material is recycled, it is expected that use for dismantled structural elements such as a the same functional properties will be achieved. burnt brick or a natural stone paving cube, which The recycling of many non-metallics and most can be used for the similar purpose without repro- construction raw materials presents a more difficult cessing); (b) recycling of the material (material task and for most of them it is not physically possi- from a demolished structure is used as a raw mate- ble (Table 3). This is generally due to the fact that rial for production of a new construction material many of the products manufactured from them having similar functional properties to the original); rely on their physical properties rather than their and (c) downcycling (secondary use of the material elemental (chemical) composition, as is the case from a demolished structure with lower functional for metals. Inorganic binders (without any differ- value than the original; Table 3). Combustion, ence between non-hydraulic and hydraulic ones) which is the last possibility mentioned by Thormark can serve as a typical example as they undergo a (2001), is not considered here as it is not relevant to series of chemical reactions during setting and inorganic raw materials. hardening in mortar or concrete. As a result, they Re-use, in a physical sense, represents the rou- are intimately interlocked with the filler and can tine adoption of materials and/or products, specifi- be neither extracted from the mortar or concrete nor cally in societies or economies that cannot afford re-used owing to the structural/physical changes waste and that generate little surplus (Brilliant & that occurred during setting/hardening. Re-use or Kinney 2011). In industrial and post-industrial soci- recycling of constructional binders is thus unrea- eties, specifically of the richest ‘Western’ countries listic. The only possibility is to down-cycle the during the twentieth century, re-use gained a nega- demolished concrete by crushing and use it as a tive connotation with implications of backwardness low-grade aggregate. and social marginality (Brilliant & Kinney 2011). Moreover, most construction materials are sub- However, during the last few decades, the nega- ject to decay during their service life and if dis- tively charged meaning of re-use has altered with mantled could not provide the same functional a more positive moral value being ascribed to the properties as new materials. Although considered word. The previous ‘psychology of abundance’ unwanted phenomena, weathering/decay processes and ‘throwaway spirit’ has, at least partially, been are a normal part of the life of rocks when exposed replaced with trials to maximize re-use and engage to conditions that are different from that existing with recycling or down-cycling instead of having a during their formation. When the decay exceeds cer- waste-generation strategy. As noted by Brilliant & tain level, the functional properties of the material Kinney (eds. 2011), re-use means not only valori- rapidly deteriorate. The material cannot be used zation of a material in a physical sense but also pre- any more, and as a consequence it can be neither serving something that cannot be simply or entirely re-used/recycled nor down-cycled. Downloaded from Table. 3. Secondary use potentials of inorganic raw materials used in construction. For the definitions of the meaning of re-use, recycling and down-cycling see main text

Construction material Possible secondary use potential

Re-use Recycling Down-cycling SUSTAINABILITY THEIR AND CONSTRUCTION IN GEOMATERIALS Aggregates Crushed stone In very specific cases possible if Partially possible if Generally possible by using demolished

primarily used unbound, and if originally used unbound concrete in which has been used as filler, http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ not contaminated or degraded and if not degraded by use final use will be low-grade aggregate, by use (e.g. recycled railway attention must be paid to some deleterious ballast) reaction such as alkali-silica reaction Natural aggregates In very specific cases possible if In most of the cases not Same as for crushed stone if used in concrete, primarily used unbound, and if applied down-cycling of mortars if making part of not contaminated or degraded the bulk demolished rubble by use Dimension stone In some cases possible if not In some cases possible (e.g. In many cases possible to produce smaller affected by weathering (e.g. cut newly produced products products fitting the category of dimension paving cubes) by processing larger stone or crushed stone elements

disused blocks) byguestonSeptember27,2021 Unburnt constructional soils/clay-rich In most of the cases possible Not relevant but possible Not necessary in most of the cases materials Bricks/structural ceramics In some cases possible if not Impossible In case of degraded elements can be crushed affected by weathering and if and used as low-grade aggregate (if mixed the bricks can be extracted from with mortar and other construction material) the demolished structure or as traditional pozzolanic additive to air lime (cocciopesto) Binders Unburnt In most cases possible Not relevant but possible Not necessary in most cases Burnt Requiring air Impossible Impossible Rarely as low-grade aggregate if making part to set and of demolished rubble harden Able to set Impossible Impossible Commonly as lower-grade aggregate being a underwater part of demolished, crushed and screened concrete structures 11 Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

12 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

As there are many factors affecting the proper- a material occurring nearby, even of lower quality, ties of materials in construction that are approaching was preferred to a more durable one that had to be their end-of-life, the assessment of demolished transported over several tens of kilometres. There- material represents a critical issue as discussed by fore, the use of very local resources of raw materials Herbst & Meng (2015). Considering the large for construction underpins the appearance of amounts of waste generated from demolished struc- historical urban/village areas (Ergenc¸ et al. 2015; tures worldwide, holistic approaches including Garcia-Rodriguez et al. 2015) and can be consi- careful planning of dismantling/demolition, pro- dered an important sustainable approach allowing cessing of demolished material and the search for decreased impact of raw material consumption at new applications that can significantly contribute least from the point of view of reduced negative to decreasing our dependence on primary resources impacts from long-distance transport (Morel et al. and increasing the sustainability of the whole con- 2001). Transport of the material over larger dis- struction sector. tances was practised only if local geological condi- tions did not provide suitable material (Dubelaar & Nijland 2015) or if a material of certain properties, Valuation of processing waste such as aesthetic qualities, was sought (Tu˚mova´ An important part of the waste in the construction et al. 2016). Even in very recent times, most aggre- industry is also generated through the processing gates can be transported economically over a rela- of newly extracted primary materials. Dimension tively short distances (e.g. by truck no more than stone can serve as a typical example: the amount 50 km from the quarry site). of extracted material worldwide was estimated to Once the material was identified as accessible at be 125 Mt in 2012 (Dolley 2015). The sludge gener- the site, it had to be extracted and processed in a cer- ated by diamond blades or gang saws amounts tain manner. The birth of processing of geomaterials to several millions tonnes worldwide annually. into structural elements or functional products (e.g. Despite an intensive search for potential industrial burnt inorganic binders) that can be employed in a applications of this waste as an additive in concrete built environment or for sculptures presents one of (Almeida et al. 2007a, b) and/or a raw material for the least explored features of the history of human- synthesis of refractories (Cheng et al. 2002) or other kind. At least in the case of natural stone, these skills materials (Cheng & Hsu 2006), residual sludge from were most probably acquired based on previous dimension stone processing is still treated as waste experience of extraction and manufacturing of (Barrientos et al. 2010) that must be sent to landfill harder rocks used for chipping stone tools and/or (Karaca et al. 2012). Dino et al. (2015) argue that, weapons. However, the range of materials used in owing to the effort to minimize waste production construction and the variety of processing methods during the processing of valuable raw materials, also mean that many new ‘discoveries’ had to residual sludge from dimension stone processing appear in a period foregoing the invention of pottery can be used in several interesting applications firing and/or metal smelting. such as landfill proofing or cover, filler for civil The first important ‘invention’ related to inor- engineering works or as artificial soil for the rehabil- ganic construction materials was the discovery of the itation of disused quarries, which is an excellent possibility of extracting larger pieces – blocks of application of the ‘cradle-to-cradle’ principle. certain dimensions; connection of ‘blocky stone’ and ‘dimension’ led to the denomination of ‘natural stone’ as ‘dimension stone’ more recently (Currier Functional attributes of inorganic 1960). These rough blocks of natural stone could be further processed by cutting or carving in order construction materials to receive a desired shape. In the most prominent (Pre)historic context cases, the final 3D product (‘object’) was not only cut/carved to attain certain dimensions and/or All traditionally employed inorganic construction dressed on the surface, but also decorated with raw materials are derived from the surface or near carved 3D reliefs, or the whole block was sculpted. subsurface of the Earth’s crust. Since the dawn of Interestingly, this invention is first documented on a the development of construction skills, accessibil- larger scale from Go¨bekli Tepe, an archaeological ity, workability and serviceability (Fig. 2) have site located in what is now southern Turkey, in an been distinct attributes that favour some geomateri- area that is acknowledged as being the northern als over others. The occurrence of a specific material margin of the so-called Fertile Crescent in which close to dwellings was significant in terms of the the great transition from nomadic hunter-gatherer to energy required to transport the material once settled agricultural societies took place (e.g. Bar- extracted. For ordinary structures, the hauling dis- Yosef & Belfer-Cohen 1989; Hayden 1998). tance was the most important parameter and often According to a detailed archaeological survey of Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 13 the site, the development of numerous circular with water and then by reaction with atmospheric structures with embodied T-shaped pillars from CO2, allowing it harden), the material gained new local natural stone occurred from the tenth to the properties that made it suitable for binding granular eighth millennia BCE, that is, at a very beginning elements in mortar, for binding together larger con- of the Holocene (Schmidt 2000, 2010). Moreover, structional elements or even for painting walls. a true monumental statue, the so-called totem pole. The above-mentioned examples provide evi- 1.92 m long and of average diameter of 30 cm. dence that the first practical technological skills carved from the same variety of limestone, was even (sensu Hayden 1998) of modern man were probably excavated at the site (Ko¨ksal-Schmidt & Schmidt associated with the use and processing of raw con- 2010). In the context of construction materials and structional materials than with later inventions their history, the site seems to be extremely impor- of pottery firing and/or metal smelting. Without tant for several reasons: the local stone (a type of attempting to denigrate the importance of these dense, compact limestone) was extracted in the later ‘prestige’ technological inventions (Hayden form of extremely large blocks (the largest pillars 1998), it was precisely the use of construction raw are up to 6 m high and their weight is expected to materials that paved the way for modern man to be as much as 20 tonnes) and this is the first docu- develop his knowledge of how to process inorganic mented example of this technique; the blocks of materials. stone were extracted from a nearby quarry (several hundred metres from the sanctuaries) in a very skil- General thinking on fundamental attributes ful way and, once extracted rough blocks were of geomaterials for construction carefully sculpted and decorated with numerous ornaments and/or animals (Peters & Schmidt If a certain material is to be used in construction, it 2004). Although the original purpose of the site is must be (a) easily available, (b) workable and (c) not known, it is interpreted as being a sanctuary serviceable (Fig. 5). The first of these attributes (‘mountain cathedral’ according to Schmidt 2000, means that, in the case of inorganic materials used 2010) where the cult of the dead was probably main- for constructional purposes, the raw materials are tained (Dietrich et al. 2012). Another interesting derived from the Earth, mostly from its uppermost finding linked to the site is that the huge structures parts known as the Earth’s crust (various kinds of erected here were probably built solely for spiritual solid rocks), or in some case the very thin layer reasons as no signs of any settlement in the area that results from the interactions between litho- have been found. sphere, atmosphere and biosphere that is termed Another important ‘innovation’ is linked to the pedosphere, from which soils for construction the discovery of methods of production and modes are dug. Only if the material is available in sufficient of utilization of inorganic binders, of which air quality and quantity from the surface (open-air oper- (quick) lime was the first. Although we do not ation – quarrying) or near the surface (underground have direct dated evidence as to where this first hap- operation – mining, a less common operation for pened, this technique is again linked to the broader construction raw materials in comparison with area of the Middle East and the Fertile Crescent. other types of raw materials such as metallic ores, Importantly, the first documented uses of air lime non-metallics and energetic materials; see e.g. Ken- as a burnt material prepared by the intentional burn- nedy 1990), can it be claimed to be available (Mason ing of a natural raw material (calcitic limestone) et al. 2011). However, there are some other pos- happened several thousand years before the firing sible restrictions that might hamper operations of pottery and/or the smelting of ores for metals. in an otherwise promising area, such as the protec- Similar to the previously mentioned case of extrac- tion of a site for nature conservation reasons, pro- tion and carving of natural stone blocks, the burning perty concerns and/or other uses. Environmental of lime and its use in construction is of the upmost protection in areas with abandoned quarries for importance. In a broader context of acquiring valuable historical types of natural stone presents technological skills, it can be acknowledged as the serious problems (Prˇikryl 2009) as natural stone beginning of pyrotechnology (Kingery et al. needed for replacement on deteriorated cultural 1988), that is, the intentional use of fire for the pro- heritage objects where it had previously been used duction of new materials from natural ones. From may not be available and there can be difficulties the material point of view, the burning of natural with the use of alternative types of natural stone materials into a new material was an extraordinarily that exhibit different properties. Nor is it always important invention because it means that early man appropriate to use artificial materials (replacement had to recognize that the original material had mortar) for refilling the missing parts of natural undergone a kind of transformation by the means stone objects. of fire. From this recognition and the subsequent When the material is available for extraction and processing (in the case of air lime after mixing the extraction is allowed at specific sites, the second Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

14 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Fig. 5. Concept of relationships between accessibility, workability and serviceability of raw materials and their products in construction. Accessibility is understood as an ability of man to find the sources (mineral deposits) of raw material that have been formed by various genetic processes in the Earth’s crust; therefore Earth systems dominated this attribute. Workability is primarily driven by man’s skills to process material once extracted to attain desired composition, properties and/or dimensions; however, the physical and chemical nature of the raw material must be respected. Serviceability means fulfilment of desired structural and/or aesthetic functions and ability to maintain them for certain period of time; this attribute is controlled by mutual interactions between composition of the material, its properties, mode of processing before use and environmental sensu lato conditions at the site of use (these are responsible for gradual decay of the material). of three fundamental attributes of construction (2015) that highlights differences between methods materials must exist, specifically the knowledge of of preparation of cement-based and air lime-based how to extract it and how to process the extracted mortars. raw material to obtain the desired properties before In contrast to the previous two functional attri- its use in construction. Whilst the accessibility butes, the serviceability of materials used in con- depends mainly on the Earth’s processes plus on struction is a different issue. In a broad sense, humankind’s ability to find the material and to serviceability can be understood as a combination extract it, the workability is a reflection of man’s of numerous properties (both fundamental ones, of ability to understand the properties of the raw mate- physical nature, and technical ones, which are rial and the knowledge/craftsmanship to process it dependent on the mode of utilization) that secure in order to achieve the desired composition and the stability of the structure (e.g. bridge, building) physical properties (i.e. the ability of humans to or of an object (e.g. statue) in a certain environment transform the raw material into a new one by apply- over a desired period of time (the concept of design ing certain technologies, such as brick firing or shap- life). Understanding the complexity of relationships ing rough blocks of dimension stone into ashlars, between various petrographical characteristics and paving/cladding slabs or even statues). Workability physical and/or technological properties is impor- also represents an important aspect of correct condi- tant to secure the stability and proper function of tioning and preparation of materials prior to their the construction and also to provide sufficient dura- use, as shown in the example of mortar preparation bility (Calia et al. 2015; Johansson et al. 2015; from an experimental study by Arizzi & Cultrone Modestou et al. 2015; Va´zquez et al. 2015). Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 15

Although serviceability is used here as the more general term, durability is a very close synonym. Often simplified as equal to weathering resistance or technical serviceability (Frohnsdorff & Masters 1980; Soronis 1992; Lewry & Crewdson 1994; Tur- kington 1996), the desired functional property of a supposed durable material, often in the requirement of certain varieties of natural stone used in monu- ments, was to last for ever and thus to transmit the glory or the genius of the commander to the follow- ers. To fulfil this function, the material must retain its shape and appearance (Sims 1991), thus main- taining the material’s structural and aesthetic func- tions (Andrew 2002). The ability to withstand the action of weathering processes is vital for artisti- cally carved surfaces where the loss of even minute surface layers can result in the fatal destruction of the artistic meaning of the whole object. Specifically for prestigious structures such as sanctuaries, pal- aces, defence fortifications and sculptures, the lon- gevity of the materials from which these were built or manufactured was, along with aesthetic appearance, the key function. In this sense, durabil- ity was and still is considered as the principal func- tional property of construction materials, although it cannot be directly measured or predicted from any single test procedure (Prˇikryl 2013). The develop- ment of approaches that will allow better and less invasive determination of the durability of construc- tional materials is of the most importance even in the present time. These approaches include the inno- vation of laboratory techniques, as shown in the approach presented by Hamed et al. (2015),in which innovative experimental chambers allow the Fig. 6. Possible scenarios of the change of functional combined effect of salt crystallization and tempera- properties of geomaterials in construction during their ture on porous stone to be simulated. The resistance service life. Although investors builders, and owners of natural stone to weathering is also significantly expect behaviour according to steady-state equilibrium driven by combined petrophysical and petrographic scenario (a structure lasting forever), many parameters as documented by Calia et al. (2015), experimental studies confirm that materials and et al. structures follow a dynamic metastable equilibrium that Dubelaar & Nijland (2015), Ergenc¸ (2015) satisfactorily explains rapidly and incidentally and Va´zquez et al. (2015). occurring destruction of material owing to decay (based on and modified after Smith 1996; Prˇikryl 2013). Prevention and mitigation of decay The decay of construction materials has long been (2015) focused on the very specific problem of the recognized as a critical issue in their serviceability, decay of glazed decorative and structural ceramic owing to both the increased maintenance cost of elements used on historical buildings in Budapest infrastructure and/or the loss of cultural heritage (Hungary). By detailed analytical study, they (Smith et al. 2008; To¨ro¨k&Prˇikryl 2010). Mitiga- found three distinct types of pollutants (dust parti- tion of decay includes understanding the mecha- cles), differing in composition and size. These parti- nisms of decay/weathering (Fig. 6), prevention of cles were found to be significant not only for nuclei the causes of decay, the search for efficient materials promoting further sulphation processes, but also as to be used in conservation and finding the correct sources of contaminants providing species for dele- approaches to restoration (Prˇikryl 2007; Smith & terious water-soluble salts causing decay of struc- Prˇikryl 2007). tural ceramics. These results are in agreement with The search for the sources of decay is a serious the previous reports on stone deterioration in Buda- issue in the urban environment with multiple pollu- pest, where the role of soluble ions (McAlister et al. tion sources (Smith et al. 2008, 2011). Baricza et al. 2008) and dust (To¨ro¨k & Rozgonyi 2004; To¨ro¨k Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

16 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL. et al. 2011) as the main controlling factors of decay In this paper, these multiple aspects are dis- was emphasized. cussed in the form of the major factors of the use Extension of the service life of materials in a of geomaterials for construction that encompasses construction can help both to reduce the demand ‘sustainability’ and ‘functionality’. The sustainabil- for new materials and also to preserve cultural her- ity aspect of geomaterials for construction is con- itage structures. For the latter, materials that will not nected to the optimum employment of functional harm the environment, will not accelerate the decay (technical) properties in specific applications (e.g. and will be compatible with the original materials to prolong the life of construction or to decrease are preferred. Employment of TiO2-based materials energetic demand of buildings) and with the use of can serve as an example of such an approach as their the right material and the optimum processing tech- use not only contributes to air purification, but also nologies to minimize environmental impacts (e.g. increases the self-cleaning and self-disinfecting by decreasing energy demand during processing, capacities of construction materials by photocata- using technologies minimizing release of CO2 or lytic oxidation reaction (Chen & Poon 2009). generating zero to very little waste). Kapridaki & Maravelaki (2015) present the poten- With respect to the functionality of geomaterials tial of TiO2 –SiO2–PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane)- for construction, three basic attributes have been based nanocomposites to be used as hydrophobic examined: accessibility workability, and service- agents in the field of monument conservation. Mate- ability. These attributes are mutually interrelated, rials used in the conservation of cultural heritage and only if all of them are fulfilled can the material must also be removable. An experimental study on be considered usable for construction. Accessibility the famous Pendelikon marble shows how different is considered to be a reflection of man’s ability to types of nanostructured coatings contribute to its find the resources (mineral deposits) of raw materi- protection (Stefanidou et al. 2015). als that have been formed by various genetic proces- For seriously decayed structures, conservation ses in the Earth’s crust. Workability is primarily inevitably involves either some replacement, if the driven by human skills to process the materials original material is available, or the use of repair once extracted to attain the desired composition, rendering mortars for completion of missing parts. properties and/or dimensions, whilst recognizing Compatibility with the replacement materials has that the physical and chemical nature of the pro- been discussed extensively in the scientific literature cessed raw material dominates the process. Work- over the past decade (Maravelaki-Kalaitzaki et al. ability significantly influences serviceability as 2005; Van Balen et al. 2005; Faria et al. 2008; Quist well, which is how the desired structural and/or 2009; Prˇikryl et al. 2011; Schueremans et al. 2011). aesthetic functions are fulfilled and the ability to In this Special Publication Arizzi et al. (2015) maintain them for certain period of time. Consider- present a case study of the Vargas Palace in Gra- ing the time period during which the material nada, Spain that brings insight into how to proceed is used, durability becomes important, reflecting with the evaluation of the effectiveness of repair mutual interactions between the composition of rendering mortars both in the laboratory and on the material, its properties, the mode of processing the real site. The case study shows that a successful before use and the environmental conditions at the strategy must involve understanding the properties site of use. Understanding these complex inter- of the repair material (lime mortar), its mode of relationships should help not only in the sustainable application (render), the requirements for specific use of primary resources of geomaterials but also environmental conditions during its application in the preservation of heritage structures built and finally the interaction of the repair mortar with from them. the stone substrate. Based on this study, it is evident that porosity and the pore space characteristics of Preparation of this paper partially benefited from financial repair mortar are critical in terms of allowing the support from the Czech Science Foundation (project no. substrate to breath and to escape any deleterious 13-13967S ‘Experimental study of crack initiation and substances such as moisture or water-soluble salts. crack damage stress thresholds as critical parameters influ- encing the durability of natural porous stone’). Financial support from OPPK project CZ.2.16/3.1.00/21516 is Conclusions also acknowledged. The research of the second author (A´ .T.) is supported by the Hungarian National Science Geomaterials suitable for constructional purposes Fund (grant no. K116532). represent a broad group of mineral raw materials that were formed by various genetic processes, exhibit diverse composition and properties and References thus are suitable for many applications. In order to Aı¨tcin, P.C. 2000. Cements of yesterday and today: con- use them properly, they require a full understanding crete of tomorrow. Cement and Concrete Research, of their multiple facets and properties. 30, 1349–1359. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 17

Ajayi, S.O., Oyedele, L.O., Bilal, M., Akinade, O.O., Barbier, E.B. 1987. The concept of sustainable eco- Alaka, H.A., Owolabi, H.A. & Kadiri, K.O. 2015. nomic development. Environmental Conservation, Waste effectiveness of the construction industry: 14, 101–110. understanding the impediments and requisites for Baricza,A´ ., Bajno´czi, B., To´th, M., Ka´ldos,R.& improvements. Resources, Conservation and Recy- Szabo´,Cs. 2015. Characterisation of particulate mat- cling, 102, 101–112. ter in attic and settled dusts collected from two build- Allwood, J.M., Ashby, M.F., Gutowski, T.G. & Wor- ings in Budapest, Hungary. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k, rell, E. 2013. Material efficiency: providing material A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskov- services with less material production. Philosophical sky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomate- Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Math- rials in Construction Practice. Geological Society, ematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 371, London, Special Publications, 416. First published 20120496. online March 16, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/ Almeida,N.,Branco,F.,de Brito,J.&Santos,J.R. SP416.14 2007a. High-performance concrete with recycled stone Barrientos, V., Delgado, J., Navarro, V., Juncosa, R., slurry. Cement and Concrete Research, 37, 210–220. Falco´n,I.&Va´zquez , A. 2010. Characterization Almeida, N., Branco,F.&Santos, J.R. 2007b. Recy- and geochemical–geotechnical properties of granite cling of stone slurry in industrial activities: application sawdust produced by the dimension stone industry to concrete mixtures. Building and Environment, 42, of O Porrin˜o (Pontevedra, Spain). Quarterly Journal 810–819. of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 43, Alshboul, A.A. & Alzoubi, H.H. 2008. Analysis of 141–155. embodied energy requirements for natural dimension Bar-Yosef,O.&Belfer-Cohen, A. 1989. The origins of stone production in Jordan. Architectural Science sedentism and farming communities in the Levant. Reviews, 51, 124–132. Journal of World Prehistory, 3, 447–498. Ambrose, S.H. 2001. Paleolithic technology and human Behrens, A., Giljum, S., Kovanda,J.&Niza, S. 2007. evolution. Science, 291, 1748–1753. The material basis of the global economy: worldwide Andrew, C. 2002. Perception and aesthetics of weathered patterns of natural resource extraction and their impli- stone fac¸ades. In: Prˇikryl,R.&Viles, H.A. (eds) cations for sustainable resource use policies. Ecologi- Understanding and Managing Stone Decay. The Karo- cal Economics, 64, 444–453. linum Press, Prague, 331–339. Bleischwitz, R. 2010. International economics of ANONYMOUS 2013. World Construction Aggregates. Indus- resource productivity–Relevance, measurement, empi- try Study with Forecasts for 2017 & 2022. Study 3078. rical trends, innovation, resource policies. International The Freedonia Group, Cleveland. Economics and Economic Policy, 7, 227–244. Arizzi,A.&Cultrone, G. 2015. Inadequacy of different Bossink, B.A.G. & Brouwers, H.J.H. 1996. Construction methods of assessing the correct dosages during the waste: quantification and source evaluation. Journal elaboration of air-hardening lime mortars. In: Prˇikryl, of Construction Engineering and Management, 122, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M. 55–60. & Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Bos¸tenaru Dan, M., Prˇikryl,R.&To¨ro¨k,A´ . (eds) Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological 2010. Materials, Technologies and Practice in Historic Society, London, Special Publications, 416. First pub- Heritage Structures. Springer, Dordrecht. lished online March 18, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/ BP 2015. BP Statistical Review of World Energy June SP416.1 2015, http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview Arizzi, A., Molina,E.&Cultrone, G. 2015. Repair Brilliant,R.&Kinney, D. (eds) 2011. Reuse Value: rendering mortars for the restoration of the Vargas Pal- Spolia and Appropriation in Art and Architecture ace in Granada (Spain): a comparative study of the from Constantine to Sherrie Levine. Ashgate, Farnham. mortar behaviour in the laboratory and on site. In: Brown, T.J., Wrighton, C.E. et al. 2015. World Min- Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez- eral Production 2009–13. British Geological Survey, Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use Keyworth, Nottingham. of Traditional Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Calia, A., Lettieri, M., Mecchi,A.&Quarta, G. 2015. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, The role of the petrophysical characteristics on the 416. First published online March 18, 2015, http:// durability and conservation of some porous calcaren- doi.org/10.1144/SP416.2 ites from Southern Italy. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Ayres, R.U. 1996. Statistical measures of unsustainability. Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky, Ecological Economics, 16, 239–255. K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials Ayres, R.U. & Peiro´, L.T. 2013. Material efficiency: rare in Construction Practice. Geological Society, London, and critical metals. Philosophical Transactions of the Special Publications, 416. First published online Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical March 20, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.10 and Engineering Sciences, 371, 20110563. Cassar, J., Winter, M.G., Marker, B.R., Walton, Azapagic, A. 2004. Developing a framework for sus- N.R.G., Entwisle, D.C., Bromhead, E.N. & Smith, tainable development indicators for the mining and J.W.N. (eds) 2014. Stone in Historic Buildings: Char- minerals industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12, acterization and Performance. Geological Society, 639–662. London, Special Publications, 391. Baccini,P.&Brunner, P.H. 2012. Metabolism of the Chen,J.&Poon, C.S. 2009. Photocatalytic construction Anthroposphere: Analysis, Evaluation, Design. MIT and building materials: from fundamentals to applica- Press, Cambridge, MA. tions. Building and Environment, 44, 1899–1906. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

18 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Cheng, T.W. & Hsu, C.W. 2006. A study of silicon car- Dondi, M., Raimondo,M.&Zanelli, C. 2014. Clays and bide synthesis from waste serpentine. Chemosphere, bodies for ceramic tiles: reappraisal and technological 64, 510–514. classification. Applied Clay Science, 96, 91–109. Cheng, T.W., Ding, Y.C. & Chiu, J.P. 2002. A study Doran, J.W. 2002. Soil health and global sustainability: of synthetic forsterite refractory materials using translating science into practice. Agriculture, Ecosys- waste serpentine cutting. Minerals Engineering, 15, tems and Environment, 88, 119–127. 271–275. Dorian, J.P. & Humphreys, H.B. 1994. Economic Cooney, J.P. 1996. Global mining: three priorities in a impacts of mining: a changing role in the transitional politically challenging world. Industry and the Envi- economies. Natural Resources Forum, 18, 17–30. ronment (UNEP IE/PAC), 19, 56. Dovers, S.R., Norton, T.W. & Handmer, J.W. 1996. Costa, C.S., Rocha,F.&Velosa, A.L. In press. Sustain- Uncertainty, ecology, sustainability and policy. Biodi- ability in earthen heritage structures. In: Prˇikryl, R., versity and Conservation, 5, 1143–1167. To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.& Dubelaar,W.&Nijland, T.G. 2015. Early Cretaceous Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Obernkirchen and Bentheim Sandstone from Germany Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological used as dimension stone in the Netherlands: geology, Society, London, Special Publications, 416, http:// physical properties, architectural use and comparative doi.org/10.1144/SP416.22 weathering. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodori- Costanza,R.&Patten, B.C. 1995. Defining and dou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) predicting sustainability. Ecological Economics, 15, Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials in Con- 193–196. struction Practice. Geological Society, London, Spe- Cowell, S.J., Wehrmeyer, W., Argust, P.W. & Rob- cial Publications, 416 . First published online March ertson, J.G.S. 1999. Sustainability and the primary 16, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.13 extraction industries: theories and practice. Resources Ekanayake, L.L. & Ofori, G. 2004. Building waste Policy, 25, 277–286. assessment score: design-based tool. Building and Cragg, A.W. 1998. Sustainable development and mining: Environment, 39, 851–861. opportunity or threat to the industry. CIM Bulletin, 91, Ellis, E.C. 2011. Anthropogenic transformation of the ter- 45–50. restrial biosphere. Philosophical Transactions of the Crishna, N., Banfill, P.F.G. & Goodsir, S. 2011. Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical Embodied energy and CO2 in UK dimension stone. and Engineering Sciences, 369, 1010–1035. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55, Ergenc¸, D., Saltık, E.N.C. & Topal, T. 2015. Antique 1265–1273. stone quarries in Turkey: a case study on tuffs in the Currier, L.W. 1960. Geological Appraisal of Dimension- Temple of Apollon Smintheus. In: Prˇikryl, R., stone Deposits. Geological Survey Bulletin 1109. To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.& Danielsen, S.W. & Kuznetsova, E. 2015. Resource Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional management and a best available concept for aggre- Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological gate sustainability. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Society, London, Special Publications, 416. First pub- Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskov- lished online September 18, 2015, http://doi.org/10. sky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Geoma- 1144/SP416.17 terials in Construction Practice. Geological Society, Faria, P., Henriques,F.&Rato, V. 2008. Comparative London, Special Publications, 416. First published evaluation of lime mortars for architectural conserva- online March 19, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/ tion. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 9, 338–346. SP416.7 Fookes, P.G. 1991. Geomaterials. Quarterly Journal of de la Torre, I. 2011. The origins of stone tool technology Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 24, 3–15. in Africa: a historical perspective. Philosophical Formoso, C.T., Soibelman, L., De Cesare,C.&Isatto, Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biolog- E.L. 2002. Material waste in building industry: main ical Sciences, 366, 1028–1037. causes and prevention. Journal of Construction Engi- Dietrich, O., Heun, M., Notroff, J., Schmidt,K.& neering and Management, 128, 316–325. Zarnkow, M. 2012. The role of cult and feasting in Frangipane, A. 2015. From spolia to recycling: the reuse the emergence of Neolithic communities. New evi- of traditional construction materials in built heritage dence from Go¨bekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey. and its role in sustainability today. A review. In: Antiquity, 86, 674–695. Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez- Dino, G.A., Lasagna, M., Clemente,P.&De Luca, Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use D.A. 2015. Laboratory characterisation and pilot site of Traditional Geomaterials in Construction Practice. tests of residual sludge from dimension stones for Geological Society, London, Special Publications, civil and environmental applications. In: Prˇikryl, R., 416. First published online April 17, 2015, http:// To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.& doi.org/10.1144/SP416.12 Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Frohnsdorff,G.&Masters, L.W. 1980. The meaning of Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological durability and durability prediction. In: Sereda, P.J. & Society, London, Special Publications, 416. First pub- Litvan, G.G. (eds) Durability of Building Materials lished online March 16, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/ and Components. American Society for Testing and SP416.9 Materials, West Conshohocken, PA. ASTM STP 691, Dolley, T.P. 2015. Stone, dimension. In: 2013 Minerals 17–30. Yearbook. US Department of Interior, US Geological Garcia-Rodriguez, M., Garcı´a-Rodriguez,M.& Survey, Reston, VA. Gomez-Heras, M. 2015. Sierra de Guadarrama Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 19

(Madrid, Spain): bridging the gap between geology and Holmberg, J. 1998. Backcasting: a natural step in opera- architecture. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodori- tionalising sustainable development. Greener Manage- dou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) ment International, 23, 30–52. Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials in Hooke, R.L. 2000. On the history of humans as geomor- Construction Practice. Geological Society, London, phic agents. Geology, 28, 843–846. Special Publications, 416. First published online Howe, C.W. 1997. Dimensions of sustainability: geo- March 16, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.11 graphical, temporal, institutional, and psychological. Gavilan, R.M. & Bernold, L.E. 1994. Source evaluation Land Economics, 73, 597–607. of solid waste in building construction. Journal of Johansson, E., Misˇkovsky´, K., Bergknut,M.& Construction Engineering and Management, 120, Sˇachlova´,Sˇ. 2015. Petrographic characteristics of 536–552. intrusive rocks as an evaluation tool of their technical Giljum, S., Behrens, A., Hinterberger, F., Lutz,C.& properties. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, Meyer, B. 2008. Modelling scenarios towards a sus- M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) tainable use of natural resources in Europe. Environ- Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials in mental Science and Policy, 11, 204–216. Construction Practice. Geological Society, London, Giurco,D.&Cooper, C. 2012. Mining and sustainability: Special Publications, 416. First published online Octo- asking the right questions. Minerals Engineering, 29, ber 19, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.19 3–12. Kapridaki,C.&Maravelaki, N. 2015. TiO2-SiO2- Goodland, R. 1995. The concept of environmental sus- PDMS nanocomposites with self-cleaning properties tainability. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, for stone protection and consolidation. In: Prˇikryl, 26, 1–24. R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras, Graedel, T.E., Harper, E.M., Nassar, N.T. & Reck, M. & Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Tradi- B.K. 2015. On the materials basis of modern society. tional Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geolog- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, ical Society, London, Special Publications, 416. First 112, 6295–6300. published online March 11, 2015, http://doi.org/10. Hamed, A.A., Aly, N., Gomez-Heras,M.&Alvarez 1144/SP416.6 de Buergo, M. 2015. New experimental method to Karaca, Z., Pekin,A.&Deliormanlı, A.H. 2012. Clas- study the combined effect of temperature and salt sification of dimension stone wastes. Environmental weathering. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodori- Science and Pollution Research, 19, 2354–2362. dou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky,K. Kennedy, B.A. (ed.) 1990. Surface Mining. SME, Littleton. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials Kingery, D.W., Vandiver, P.B. & Prickett, M. 1988. in Construction Practice. Geological Society, The beginnings of pyrotechnology, part II: production London, Special Publications, 416. First published and use of lime and gypsum plaster in the Pre-Pottery online September 28, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/ Neolithic Near East. Journal of Field Archaeology, SP416.18 15, 219–243. Hammond, G.P. & Jones, C. 2008a. Embodied energy and Ko¨ksal-Schmidt,C¸. & Schmidt, K. 2010. The Go¨bekli carbon in construction materials. Proceedings of the Tepe ‘Totem Pole’. A first discussion of an autumn Institution of Civil Engineers, Energy, 161, 87–98. 2010 discovery (PPN, Southeastern Turkey). Neo- Hammond, G.P. & Jones, C. 2008b. Inventory of Carbon Lithics, 10, 74–76. and Energy (ICE). Version 1.6a, University of Bath. Kreijger, P.C. 1987. Ecological properties of building Harris, D.J. 1999. A quantitative approach to the assess- materials. Materials and Structures, 20, 248–254. ment of the environmental impact of building materi- Krivtsov, V., Wa¨ger, P.A., Dacombe, P., Gilgen, P.W., als. Building and Environment, 34, 751–758. Heaven, S., Hilty, L.M. & Banks, C.J. 2004. Analy- Hayden, B. 1998. Practical and prestige technologies: the sis of energy footprints associated with recycling of evolution of material systems. Journal of Archaeolog- glass and plastic – case studies for industrial ecology. ical Method and Theory, 5, 1–55. Ecological Modelling, 174, 175–189. Heierli,U.&Maithel, S. 2008. Brick by Brick: Le´le´, S.M. 1991. Sustainable development: a critical the Herculean Task of Cleaning up the Asian Brick review. World Development, 19, 607–621. Industry. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooper- Lewry, A.J. & Crewdson, L.F.E. 1994. Approaches to ation, Natural Resources and Environment Division, testing the durability of materials used in the construc- Berne. tion and maintenance of buildings. Construction and Herbst,T.&Meng, B. 2015. Concept for a holistic sus- Building Materials, 8, 211–222. tainability assessment of the end-of-life phase of Lifset,R.&Eckelman, M. 2013. Material efficiency in a masonry. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, multi-material world. Philosophical Transactions of M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sus- the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical tainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials in Construc- and Engineering Sciences, 371, 20120002. tion Practice. Geological Society, London, Special Lorenz,W.&Gwosdz, W. 2003. Manual on the Publications, 416. First published online March 11, geological-technical assessment of mineral construc- 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.5 tion materials. Geologisches Jahrbuch, Sonderhefte Hilson,G.&Murck, B. 2000. Sustainable development Reihe H, Heft SH, 15, 1–498. in the mining industry: clarifying the corporate per- Madlool, N.A., Saidur, R., Hossain, M.S. & Rahim, spective. Resources Policy, 26, 227–238. N.A. 2011. A critical review on energy use and savings Hodges, C.A. 1995. Mineral resources, environmental in the cement industries. Renewable and Sustainable issues, and land use. Science, 268, 1305–1312. Energy Reviews, 15, 2042–2060. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

20 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Maravelaki-Kalaitzaki, P., Bakolas, A., Karatasios, Pfleiderer, S., Heinrich, M., Rabeder, J., Reitner, H., I. & Kilikoglou, V. 2005. Hydraulic lime mortars for Untersweg,T.&Wimmer-Frey, I. 2015. Application the restoration of historic masonry in Crete. Cement of a new method for rapid quality assessment of renew- and Concrete Research, 35, 1577–1586. able aggregate resources in alpine regions. In: Mason, L., Prior, T., Mudd,G.&Giurco, D. 2011. Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez- Availability, addiction and alternatives: three criteria Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use for assessing the impact of peak minerals on society. of Traditional Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 958–966. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, May, D., Prior, T., Cordell,D.&Giurco, D. 2012. Peak 416. First published online March 2, 2015, http:// minerals: theoretical foundations and practical applica- doi.org/10.1144/SP416.8 tion. Natural Resources Research, 21, 43–60. Prentice, J.E. 1990. Geology of Construction Materials. McAlister, J.J., Smith, B.J. & To¨ro¨k,A´ . 2008. Transi- Chapman & Hall, London. tion metals and water-soluble ions in deposits on a Prior, T., Giurco, D., Mudd, G., Mason,L.&Behrisch, building and their potential catalysis of stone decay. J. 2012. Resource depletion, peak minerals and the Atmospheric Environment, 42, 7657–7668. implications for sustainable resource management. MCS 2015. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2015.US Global Environmental Change, 22, 577–587. Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Prˇikryl, R. 2007. Understandingthe earth scientist’s role in Reston, VA. the pre-restoration research of monuments: an over- McNally, G.H. 1998. Soil and Rock Construction Materi- view. In: Prˇikryl,R.&Smith, B.J. (eds) Building als. E & FN Spon, London. Stone Decay:FromDiagnosis to Conservation. Geolog- Mikesell, R.F. 1994. Viewpoint: sustainable develop- ical Society, London, Special Publications, 271, 9–21. ment and mineral resources. Resources Policy, 20, Prˇikryl, R. 2009. Geomorphosites and quarries. In: Rey- 83–86. nard,E.&Coratza, P. (eds) Geomorphosites. Pfeil, Modestou, S., Theodoridou, M., Fournari,R.&Ioan- Mu¨nchen, 225–233. nou, I. 2015. Physico-mechanical properties and dura- Prˇikryl, R. 2013. Durability assessment of natural stone. bility performance of natural building and decorative Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydro- carbonate stones from Cyprus. In: Prˇikryl, R., geology, 46, 377–390. To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.& Prˇikryl,R.&Smith, B. (eds) 2007. Building Stone Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Decay. Geological Society, London, Special Publica- Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological tions, 271. Society, London, Special Publications, 416. First pub- Prˇikryl,R.&Siegl, P. (eds) 2004. Architectural and lished online March 13, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/ Sculptural Stone in Cultural Landscape. Charles Uni- SP416.3 versity in Prague. The Karolinum Press, Prague. Morel, J.C., Mesbah, A., Oggero,M.&Walker,P. Prˇikryl,R.&To¨ro¨k,A´ . (eds) 2010. Natural Stone 2001. Building houses with local materials: means to Resources for Historical Monuments. Geological Soci- drastically reduce the environmental impact of con- ety, London, Special Publications, 333. struction. Building and Environment, 36, 1119–1126. Prˇikryl,R.&Viles, H. (eds) 2002. Understanding and Munasinghe, M. 1999. Is environmental degradation an Managing Stone Decay. The Karolinum Press, Prague. inevitable consequence of economic growth: tunneling Prˇikryl, R., Novotna´, M., Prˇikrylova´, J., Weishaup- through the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecological tova´,Z.&Sˇtˇastna´, A. 2011. Physical and mechani- Economics, 29, 89–109. cal properties of the repaired sandstone ashlars in the Naik, T.R. 2008. Sustainability of concrete construction. facing masonry of the Charles bridge in Prague Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Con- (Czech Republic) and analytical study for the causes struction, 13, 98–103. of its rapid decay. Environmental Earth Sciences, 63, Ortiz, O., Castells,F.&Sonnemann, G. 2009. Sustain- 1623–1639. ability in the construction industry: a review of recent Quist, W.J. 2009. Replacement of natural stone in conser- developments based on LCA. Construction and Build- vation of historic buildings. Heron, 54, 251–278. ing Materials, 23, 28–39. Reck, B.K. & Graedel, T.E. 2012. Challenges in metal Pacheco-Torgal,F.&Jalali, S. 2012. Earth construc- recycling. Science, 337, 690–695. tion: lessons from the past for future eco-efficient con- Renfrew,C.&Morley, I. (eds) 2009. Becoming Human: struction. Construction and Building Materials, 29, Innovation in Prehistoric Material and Spiritual Cul- 512–519. ture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Pereira, D., Marker, B.R., Kramar, S., Cooper, B.J. & Robert, K.H., Daly, H., Hawken,P.&Holmberg,J. Schouenborg, B.E. (eds) 2015. Global Heritage 1997. A compass for sustainable development. Inter- Stone: Towards International Recognition of Building national Journal of Sustainable Development and and Ornamental Stones. Geological Society, London, World Ecology, 2, 79–92. Special Publications, 407. Rogich, D.G. 1996. Material use, economic growth, Peters,J.&Schmidt, K. 2004. Animals in the symbolic and the environment. Nonrenewable Resources, 5, world of Pre-Pottery Neolithic Go¨bekli Tepe, south- 197–210. eastern Turkey: a preliminary assessment. Anthropo- Schmidt, K. 2000. Go¨bekli Tepe, southeastern Turkey: a zoologica , 39, 179–218. preliminary report on the 1995–99 excavations. Pale´- Petrie, J. 2007. New models of sustainability for the orient, 26, 45–54. resources sector: a focus on minerals and metals. Pro- Schmidt, K. 2010. Go¨bekli Tepe–the Stone Age Sanc- cess Safety and Environmental Protection, 85, 88–98. tuaries. New results of ongoing excavations with a Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

GEOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION AND THEIR SUSTAINABILITY 21

special focus on sculptures and high reliefs. Docu- Stefanidou, M., Matziaris,K.&Karagiannis,G. menta Praehistorica, 37, 239–256. 2015. Efficacy to weathering and re-treatability of Schneider, M., Romer, M., Tschudin,M.&Bolio,H. composite protective nano-structured coating onto 2011. Sustainable cement production – present and Pendelikon marbles. In: Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., The- future. Cement and Concrete Research, 41, 642–650. odoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky,K. Schoer, K., Weinzettel, J., Kovanda, J., Giegrich,J.& (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials in Lauwigi, C. 2012. Raw material consumption of the Construction Practice. Geological Society, London, European Union – concept, calculation method, and Special Publications, 416. First published online results. Environmental Science and Technology, 46, April 17, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.4 8903–8909. Sterelny, K. 2011. From hominins to humans: how sapi- Schueremans, L., Cizer,O¨ ., Janssens, E., Serre´,G.& ens became behaviourally modern. Philosophical Van Balen, K. 2011. Characterization of repair mor- Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sci- tars for the assessment of their compatibility in restora- ences, 366, 809–822. tion projects: research and practice. Construction and Thormark, C. 2001. Conservation of energy and natural Building Materials, 25, 4338–4350. resources by recycling building waste. Resources, Shinya, W.M. 1998. Canada’s new minerals and metals Conservation and Recycling, 33, 113–130. policy – advancing the concept of sustainable develop- Tilton, J.E. 1996. Exhaustible resources and sustainable ment in the minerals and metals industry. Resources development: two different paradigms. Resources Pol- Policy, 24, 95–104. icy, 22, 91–97. Siegesmund, S., Weiss,T.&Vollbrecht, A. (eds) 2002. To¨ro¨k,A´ .&Prˇikryl, R. 2010. Current methods and Natural Stone, Weathering Phenomena, Conservation future trends in testing, durability analyses and prove- Strategies and Case Studies. Geological Society, Lon- nance studies of natural stones used in historical mon- don, Special Publications, 205. uments. Engineering Geology, 115, 139–142. Sims, I. 1991. Quality and durability of stone for construc- To¨ro¨k,A´ .&Rozgonyi, N. 2004. Mineralogy and mor- tion. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, 24, phology of salt crusts on porous limestone in urban 285–297. environment. Environmental Geology, 46, 323–339. Smith, B.J. 1996. Scale problems in the interpretation of To¨ro¨k ,A´ ., Licha, T., Simon,K.&Siegesmund, S. 2011. urban stone decay. In: Smith, B.J. & Warke, P.A. Urban and rural limestone weathering; the contribution (eds) Processes of Urban Stone Decay. Donhead, Lon- of dust to black crust formation. Environmental Earth don, 3–18. Sciences, 63, 675–693. Smith, B.J. & Prˇikryl, R. 2007. Diagnosing decay: the Tu˚mova´, H., Augenti, A., Kucharˇova´, A., Cirelli,E.& value of medical analogy in understanding the weath- Prˇikryl, R. 2016. Late Antique marble trade – new ering of building stones. In: Prˇikryl,R.&Smith,B. insights obtained from stone artefacts from the San (eds) Building Stone Decay. Geological Society, Lon- Severo complex (Ravenna, Italy). In: Prˇikryl, R., don, Special Publications, 271,1–8. To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.& Smith, B.J., Gomez-Heras,M.&McCabe, S. 2008. Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Understanding the decay of stone-built cultural Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Geological heritage. Progress in Physical Geography, 32, Society, London, Special Publications, 416. First pub- 439–461. lished online January 13, 2016, http://doi.org/10. Smith, B.J., Gomez-Heras, M., Viles, H.A. & Cassar,J. 1144/SP416.20 (eds) 2010. Limestone in the Built Environment. Turkington, A.V. 1996. Stone durability. In: Smith, B.J. Present-Day Challenges for the Preservation of the & Warke, P.A. (eds) Processes of Urban Stone Decay. Past. Geological Society, London, Special Publica- Donhead, London, 19–31. tions, 331. Turmel, A., Fronteau,G.et al. 2015. GIS-based vari- Smith, B.J., McCabe, S., McAllister, D., Adamson, C., ability of building materials towards the Ile-de-France Viles, H.A. & Curran, J.M. 2011. A commentary on cuesta (Paris Basin, France): inventory, distribution, climate change, stone decay dynamics and the ‘green- uses and relationship with the environment. In: ing’ of natural stone buildings: new perspectives on Prˇikryl, R., To¨ro¨k,A´ ., Theodoridou, M., Gomez- ‘deep wetting’. Environmental Earth Sciences, 63, Heras,M.&Miskovsky, K. (eds) Sustainable Use 1691–1700. of Traditional Geomaterials in Construction Practice. Smith, M.R. & Collis, L. (eds) 2001. Aggregates. Sand, Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Gravel and Crushed Rock Aggregates for Construction 416. First published online March 25, 2015, http:// Purposes, 3rd edn. Geological Society, London, Engi- doi.org/10.1144/SP416.16 neering Geology Special Publications, 17. Van Balen, K., Papayianni, I., Van Hees, R., Binda,L. Solow, R. 1993. An almost practical step toward sustain- & Waldum, A. 2005. Introduction to requirements for ability. Resources Policy, 19, 162–172. and functions and properties of repair mortars. Materi- Soronis, G. 1992. The problem of durability in building als and Structures, 38, 781–785. design. Construction and Building Materials, 6, Van Beek, G.W. & Van Beek, O. 2013. Glorious Mud!: 205–211. Ancient and Contemporary Earthen Design and Con- Stahel, W.R. 2013. Policy for material efficiency – sus- struction in North Africa, Western Europe, the Near tainable taxation as a departure from the throwaway East, and Southwest Asia. Smithsonian Institution society. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Soci- Scholarly Press, Plymouth. ety of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engi- Van Loon, A.J. 2002. The complexity of simple geology. neering Sciences, 371, 20110567. Earth-Science Reviews, 59, 287–295. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021

22 R. PRˇ IKRYL ET AL.

Van Oss, H.G. 2015. Cement. In: Mineral Commodity Wellmer, F.W. & Becker-Platen, J. 2002. Sustainable Summaries 2015. US Department of Interiors, US Geo- development and the exploitation of mineral and logical Survey, Reston, VA, 38–39. energy resources: a review. International Journal of Va´zquez, P., Mene´ndez, B., Denecker,M.F.C.&Tho- Earth Sciences, 91, 723–745. machot-Schneider, C. 2015. Comparison between Winkler, E.M. 1994. Stone in Architecture, 3rd revised petrophysical properties, durability and use of two lime- edn. Springer, Berlin. stones of the Paris region. In: Prˇikryl,R.,To¨ro¨k,A´ ., WORLD COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT Theodoridou, M., Gomez-Heras,M.&Miskovsky, 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, K. (eds) Sustainable Use of Traditional Geomaterials Oxford. in Construction Practice. Geological Society, London, Worrell, E., Price, L., Martin, N., Hendriks,C.& Special Publications, 416. First published online Meida, L.O. 2001. Carbon dioxide emissions from March 16, 2015, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP416.15 the global cement industry 1. Annual Review of Energy Venkatarama Reddy, B.V. & Jagadish, K.S. 2003. and the Environment, 26, 303–329. Embodied energy of common and alternative building Wu, Z., Ann, T.W., Shen,L.&Liu, G. 2014. Quantifying materials and technologies. Energy and Buildings, 35, construction and demolition waste: an analytical 129–137. review. Waste Management, 34, 1683–1692.