IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i20p8731-d1495198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balancing Environmental Impact and Practicality: A Case Study on the Cement-Stabilized Rammed Earth Construction in Southeast Rural China

Author

Listed:
  • Shan Dai

    (School of Architecture, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China)

  • Wenfeng Bai

    (Faculty of Architecture and City Planning, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650032, China)

  • Jing Xiao

    (Faculty of Architecture and City Planning, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650032, China)

Abstract

Construction using earth materials demonstrates ecological sustainability using locally sourced natural materials and environmentally friendly demolition methods. In this study, the environmental impact of adding cement to soil materials for rammed earth farmhouse construction in rural China was investigated and comparatively simulated using the One Click LCA database, focusing on the conflict between sustainability objectives and the practical aspects of cement addition. By analyzing how the addition of cement aligns with local construction practices and addressing the debate surrounding the inclusion of cement in rammed-earth construction, our objective is to provide insights into achieving a balance between the environmental impact and the pragmatic considerations of using cement in earthen building practices. Three local structure scenarios are evaluated via simulations: cement-stabilized rammed earth wall, fired brick wall, and a localized reinforced concrete frame structure. The quantitative environmental impacts are assessed, and the qualitative differences in adaptation, economic sustainability, and other factors are examined in the context of present-day development in rural China. The results show that the use of cement-stabilized rammed earth wall-supported structures is associated with higher embodied carbon emissions compared to structures supported by reinforced concrete frames and enclosed by brick walls; however, these emissions are lower than those for brick wall-supported structures while effectively meeting the structural requirements. In addition, the use of cement-stabilized earth for perimeter walls simplifies material management and disposal throughout the building’s life cycle, and the cost-effectiveness of cement has been found to be substantially greater than that of reinforced concrete frames and brick structures, improving economic viability and social acceptability, especially among low-income communities in rural areas

Suggested Citation

  • Shan Dai & Wenfeng Bai & Jing Xiao, 2024. "Balancing Environmental Impact and Practicality: A Case Study on the Cement-Stabilized Rammed Earth Construction in Southeast Rural China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:20:p:8731-:d:1495198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/20/8731/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/20/8731/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xu, Yiqing & Yao, Yang, 2015. "Informal Institutions, Collective Action, and Public Investment in Rural China," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 371-391, May.
    2. Tian Han & Qiong Huang & Anxiao Zhang & Qi Zhang, 2018. "Simulation-Based Decision Support Tools in the Early Design Stages of a Green Building—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Petrovic, Bojana & Myhren, Jonn Are & Zhang, Xingxing & Wallhagen, Marita & Eriksson, Ola, 2019. "Life cycle assessment of a wooden single-family house in Sweden," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lai, Weizheng, 2024. "The effect of education on voter turnout in China's rural elections," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 230-247.
    2. He, Quqiong & Pan, Ying & Sarangi, Sudipta, 2018. "Lineage-based heterogeneity and cooperative behavior in rural China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 248-269.
    3. Huang, Lulu & Liu, Qiannan & Tang, Yugang, 2024. "Long-term economic impact of disasters: Evidence from multiple earthquakes in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Yongjun Tang & Qi Li & Fen Zhou & Mingjia Sun, 2024. "Does Clan Culture Promote Corporate Natural Resource Disclosure? Evidence from Chinese Natural Resource-Based Listed Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 192(1), pages 167-190, June.
    5. Younghun Choi & Takuro Kobashi & Yoshiki Yamagata & Akito Murayama, 2021. "Assessment of waterfront office redevelopment plan on optimal building energy demand and rooftop photovoltaics for urban decarbonization," Papers 2108.09029, arXiv.org.
    6. Tang, Can & Zhao, Zhong, 2022. "Informal institution meets child development," MERIT Working Papers 2022-032, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Bei Luo & Terence Tai-Leung Chong, 2017. "Entrepreneurial activities and institutional environment in China," Economic and Political Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 179-194, April.
    8. Tihamér Tibor Sebestyén, 2024. "Evaluation of the Carbon Footprint of Wooden Glamping Structures by Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-27, March.
    9. Liu, Feifei & He, Xinming & Wang, Tao, 2023. "In the name of the family: The effect of CEO clan culture background on firm internationalization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    10. Huang, Liangxiong & Ma, Minghui & Wang, Xianbin, 2022. "Clan culture and risk-taking of Chinese enterprises," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    11. Skarbek, David, 2016. "Covenants without the Sword? Comparing Prison Self-Governance Globally," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 845-862, November.
    12. Tang, Can & Zhao, Zhong, 2023. "Informal institution meets child development: Clan culture and child labor in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 277-294.
    13. Ghada Elshafei & Silvia Vilcekova & Martina Zelenakova & Abdelazim M. Negm, 2021. "Towards an Adaptation of Efficient Passive Design for Thermal Comfort Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-23, August.
    14. Zygmunt Stanula & Marek Wieruszewski & Adam Zydroń & Krzysztof Adamowicz, 2023. "Optimizing Forest-Biomass-Distribution Logistics from a Multi-Level Perspective—Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Elżbieta Broniewicz & Karolina Dec, 2022. "Environmental Impact of Demolishing a Steel Structure Design for Disassembly," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-16, October.
    16. Chen, Na & Yang, Huan, 2024. "From rural to urban: Clan, urbanization and trust," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    17. Sha, Wenbiao, 2023. "The political impacts of land expropriation in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    18. Fang Xu & Xiaoru Zhang & Di Zhou, 2023. "Do rural clan‐based networks reduce the risk of a return to poverty? Evidence from China," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(5), pages 856-883, July.
    19. Singh, Manav Mahan & Singaravel, Sundaravelpandian & Geyer, Philipp, 2021. "Machine learning for early stage building energy prediction: Increment and enrichment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    20. Suwen Zheng & Chunhui Ye & Yunli Bai, 2023. "Does Supervision Down to the Countryside Level Benefit Rural Public Goods Supply? Evidence on the Extent of Households’ Satisfaction with Public Goods from 2005 to 2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-34, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:20:p:8731-:d:1495198. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.