A New CO2 Sequestration Process via Concrete Products Production

Yixin Shao, Xudong Zhou and Sean Monkman

Department of Civil Engineering McGill University Montreal, QC H3A 2K6
ABSTRACT: This paper investigates the possibility of using concrete building products to absorb carbon dioxide during their production and develop high early strength at the same time. Type 10 and Type 30 Portland cements were examined by their abilities to serve as C02 absorbents when exposed to carbon dioxide with 100% and 25% concentrations, the former simulating the recovered C02 and the latter representing the as-captured flue gas without processing. The reaction took place in a chamber under 0.5 MPa pressure, at ambient temperature and in a duration of two hours. C02 uptake was quantified by the direct mass gain and by infrared based carbon analyzer. The performance of carbonated concrete was evaluated by MOR and compressive strength. It was found that the C02 concentration played a critical role in C02 uptake. Two-hour carbonation using 100% C02 enabled the Portland cement to consume up to 16% of carbon dioxide, gain a strength equivalent to 2-month conventional curing and have an all-solid section in a 14 mm thickness. Carbonation with 25% C02 enabled a maximum 9.7% mass gain with lower strength and a partially solid section. Without reinforcing steels, carbonated concrete products can have better strength and durability due to the depletion of calcium hydroxide, and can be fabricated faster than the conventional steam curing. If the process can be shown technically and commercially viable, concrete building products will become more environmental friendly and shall contribute directly to the reduction in global greenhouse gas emission.
Keywords: C02 sequestration, carbonation, calcium carbonates, concrete products.

Introduction
A significant fraction of the C02 discharged to the atmosphere comes from industry point sources. Of the total emission in Canada, electricity and petroleum consumptions were responsible for 36% and industry production for 16%. The current strategy for C02 mitigation is focused on the removal, recovery and disposal of C02 at the point sources. The approaches include the geologic storage of C02 in oceans, aquifers and depleted oil wells, and mineral storage through carbonation.

improve the process and the system to cut the cost (Penner et al. 2004).

Geological sequestration is the storage of C02 in a range of underground geologic formations. The flue gas is captured, recovered to a high C02 concentration and injected into the storage site within an acceptable economic distance. Several geologic sequestration field experiments are currently in progress. The capacity ranges from 14 million tons net of C02 in deleting oil reservoir over 15-20 years (Mourtis 2003) to 2200 tons C02 over 42 days into a deleted oil field (NETL 2004).
Mineral carbonation has been developed to prepare stable carbonate products by reacting C02 with magnesium silicate minerals such as olivine and serpentine. It was estimated that the necessary raw materials are available in vast quantities, far exceeding the known fossil fuel reserves (Lackner et al. 1995). The reaction took place in an aqueous bicarbonate/chloride medium at a temperature of 180 0C, under a pressure of 150 atm, in one hour duration and using a finely ground mineral with 80% particles smaller than 37 ,um. Carbonation reaction efficiency reached about 60-80%. Carbon sequestration by mineral carbonation is inherently expensive and efforts are being made to
1-4244-0218-2/06/$20.00 C)2006 IEEE.

Calcium silicate minerals can serve the same purpose as magnesium silicates to convert carbon dioxide to calcium carbonates. However, natural minerals containing high reactive calcium content are rare. One of the popular man-made calcium silicate materials is Portland cement. Directly using Portland cement powder to bind C02 in a mineral carbonation process is not practically feasible. Nevertheless, if building products made of Portland cement can be used to mineralize carbon dioxide to a calcium carbonate through its production, the method of C02 disposal can gain both environmental and economical benefits.
The production of Portland cement is a C02 releasing process. If the released C02 can be captured, recovered and mineralized into the final concrete products, the emission from cement and concrete industry can be reduced considerably. Portland cement concrete is the most used man-made material. The annual consumption in North America is more than one ton per capita and the demand for cement is growing at an average annual rate of 1.5% (Worrell et al. 2001). Cement and concrete industry is promoting the use of supplementary cementitious materials, such as slag and fly ash, to reduce cement consumption and thus the emissions (Malhotra 1999). C02 mineralization by concrete products through their curing provides a different and new approach for direct sequestration.

C02 mineralization in calcium silicate cement is realized through carbonation curing. Carbonation of cement occurs either naturally or in an engineered way. The naturally-occurring carbonation is a weathering process that happens between the atmospheric carbon dioxide and the hardened concrete. The weathering carbonation

of concrete decreases the pH value of concrete and initiates the corrosion of reinforcing steel, becoming a major concern to the durability of steel reinforced concrete structures. Extensive studies have been carried out to understand the mechanisms of carbonation and develop the preventive measures (Papadakis et al. 1989). Carbonation can also be used to accelerate the curing of concrete in an engineered way. The study was dated back to 1970's when the reactivity and strength development of hydraulic and non-hydraulic calcium silicates activated by carbon dioxide were systematically investigated (Young et al. 1974, Goodbrake et al. 1979). It was found that the carbonation products were primarily calcium carbonates and silica gel. The major chemical reactions of carbonation curing are described in Eqs. (1) and (2):

Table 1: Chemical composition of Portland cements Blaine CaO SiO2 A1203 MgO (M2/kg)| Type 10 63.1 19.8 4.9 2.0 373 Type 30 | 63.9 T 20.2 | 2.32 3.54 T 481 Table 2: Mixture proportion Cement Quartz C1 Type 10 0% C3 Type 10 0% C1Q Type 30 25% C3Q Type 30 25% I

Time 2 hr 2 hr 2 hr 2 hr

Concentration 100% & 25% 100% & 25% 100% & 25% 100% & 25%

3CaOoSiO2+3CO2+,uH20 2CaOoSiO2+2CO2+,uH20 -

SiO2*pH20+3CaCO3 SiO2*pH20+2CaCO3

(1)
(2)

Carbonation of concrete products through its early age curing provides a direct means to sequester carbon by converting the carbon to calcium carbonates, which are geologically stable, environmentally durable, and economically beneficial. For applications without reinforcing steel, the carbonated concrete products can perform better in achieving strength, durability and dimensional stability due to the near-complete depletion of calcium hydroxide. The rapid carbonation reaction with cementitious binders accelerates the strength development and shortens the time required for the production. It is best suited for manufactured concrete products, such as bricks and blocks, cement boards and precast concretes with non-metallic reinforcement.
This paper presents a preliminary study on the carbonation technology for CO2 uptake and fast strength gain through early age accelerated curing. Manufactured CO2 gas was used with different concentrations. The pure CO2 of 99.5% purity was considered as a gas of 100% concentration and was employed to simulate the recovered CO2 from exhaust gas at point sources. The 25% concentration was used to represent the ascaptured flue gas without processing. The carbonation time was fixed at two hours to make the process feasible for industry production and the properties of carbonated products were evaluated by their mass gain and strength development.

The carbonation curing set-up is shown in Figure 1. A carbon dioxide gas of 99.5% purity was used to simulate a recovered CO2 from flue gas at point sources and air was used to blend with CO2 to obtain a gas with 25% carbon dioxide concentration to represent the as-received flue gas. The pressure inside the chamber and the temperature inside one sample were recorded using Measurement Group data acquisition system (System 5000) with pressure transducer and Type T thermocouple. For the experiments using 100% C02, the CO2 gas cylinder was regulated to a constant pressure of 0.5 MPa (73 psi) to ensure a continuous supply of carbon dioxide for two hours and prevent the CO2 starvation due to its absorption by concrete. Vacuum was applied to the chamber before the CO2 injection. For 25% C02, multiple injection method was developed to compensate the low concentration. Three plate specimens were placed inside the chamber immediately after press-formed and exposed to carbon dioxide gas with different concentrations.
nnnzpr LV9usge

kReglator

Experimental
Two types of CSA Portland cements, Type 10 and Type 30, were used as C02 absorbents and their chemical compositions are shown in Table 1. The initial CO2 content in as-received cement was measured using infrared based CO2 analyzer. They were 0.54% for Type 10 and 1.78% for Type 30. Quartz sand with particle size ranging from 0.2 mm to 2 mm was employed as aggregates of 25% by weight. Water to cement ratio was kept constant at 0.15. The mixture proportions of four typical batches are shown in Table 2. Rectangular plate specimens of 14 mm thick, 76 mm wide and 127 mm long were prepared by press forming under a constant pressure of 8 MPa.

Figure 1: Carbonation setup

CO2 uptake is characterized as percent mass gain which was obtained based on the difference between the mass measured before carbonation and the mass after carbonation, in duration of two hours, taking dry dement binder as reference: (Mass)aft,C02 - (Mass)bef,C02 + (Mass)lost water %Mass gain:

(Mass)dry binder

(3)

The lost water was collected and added to the total mass as the water loss correction. The mass gain was also quantified by infrared based CO2 analyzer. The CO2 content determined by the carbon analyzer was based on total mass after carbonation, including dry binder, water, quartz aggregates and calcium carbonates. Therefore the

definition of mass gain would be different between direct weight increase by samples (Eq. 3) and infrared test results. Eq. (3) represents an average measurement while the infrared technique is a point analysis. Since infrared technology requires only 0.5 g powder for analysis, the results can still serve as an independent check for comparison. Powders were collected both on surface 1-mm layer and at the core to examine the uniformity of carbonation. Three-point bending tests at a span of 101 mm and compressive strength tests were performed right after two-hour carbonation to determine the modulus of rupture (MOR) and compressive strength (fc) of carbonated concrete specimens.

C02 uptake by cement in a concrete was readily achievable.

25
-

20

Mass gain (%) 0 C02 analyzer, surface (%) 0 C02 analyzer, core (%) 1

C02 = 100% concentration Time = 2 hours Cross section = all solid

.a)

15-

0.

.,1
5-

Results
Carbon uptake using recovered CO2 at 100% concentration
Figure 2 shows typical temperature and pressure curves of carbonation process using carbon dioxide gas of 100% concentration. While pressure was maintained at 0.5 MPa (5 bar) to guarantee a continuous supply of C02, the temperature had dropped gradually. The peak temperature was about 70 0C for all-cement batches (C1 and C3) and about 62 0C for concretes with 25% quartz (ClQ and C3Q).
80 70

o0
C1

C3

C1Q

C3Q

Figure 3: C02 uptake from recovered C02

0.55
Pressure

The strength gains of carbonated samples are shown in Figure 4 together with mass gains. While the moduli of rupture (MOR) were of close values for different batches, the compressive strengths were dependent on the cement content. The high the cement content, the more the absolute carbon dioxide was taken and the more the solids as calcium carbonates were formed to develop a load carrying capacity. The carbonated Type 30 cement gained higher two-hour strength than Type 10 cement because of its high early age reactivity.
tu
ICl
3C3

0.48

050
ax
40-

60

60

0.41

Temperature

0.34 0-

0.28 2 0.21 e
IL

: 50
in c' 40
0

C1Q C3Q

C02 = 100% concentration Time = 2 hours Cross section = all solid

30-

20

0.14 0.07
s
0

n)

10

ci

30-

U
1000 2000

en 20
r r

0.00
6000 7000

3000

4000

5000

8(8000

Time, (second)

1010
0

88 ~~7.5
.I......

7.1 8.4

Gain .%

.O (MPa

......

...rss ....tren.. v gt...... .h

....

..)

Figure 2: Temperature and pressure of carbonation using recovered C02

The C02 uptake by Portland cement in two-hour carbonation is summarized in Figure 3. The percent mass gain was the direct weight increase due to the absorption of C02 by cement in two hours. Type 30 cement batches took more C02 than Type 10 cement, suggesting that Type 30 cement was more reactive than Type 10 cement owing to its finer particle size and larger surface area. The use of 25% aggregates could slightly improve the uptake because of the increase in porosity of concrete. The C02 content at surface and in the core determined by infrared based C02 analyzer is given in Fig. 3 as C02 analyzer results. Although results were different from each other, they were in the same order of magnitude. In most cases, the surface layer contained high C02 content than the core. Nevertheless the C1 batch demonstrated it was possible to have higher C02 absorption in the core. The infrared analysis indicated that the C02 uptake was fairly uniform from the surface to the core in light of the use of 100% carbon dioxide and the average of surface and core was always lower than the direct mass gain, attributing to the different denominator used as reference in calculation. Overall, it was estimated that a 10 to 16%

Figure 4: Strength of carbonated concrete with 100%

C02

Figure 5: Microstructure of carbonated cement

The fracture surfaces of carbonated and hydrated samples were examined using a scanning electron microscope. Figure 5 shows a typical micrograph, obtained for the surface layer of carbonated Type 10 cement without aggregates (C10). Coatings of granular grains can be seen on the surface of cement particles and inside the pores with grain sizes ranging froml to 5 microns. These are the typical calcium carbonate crystals. The microstructure of hydrated Type 10 cement is displayed in Figure 6 for comparison. Apparently the hydrated cement contained calcium hydroxide and ettringite plates and showed more porous structure. The calcite growth in carbonated cement is beneficial to achieve a dense structure with reduced porosity.

Carbon uptake using simulated flue gas at 25% CO2 concentration

Figure 8 shows the temperature and pressure curves of concrete carbonated using a simulated flue gas of 25% C02 concentration. The maximum gas pressure was still kept at 0.5 MPa. Since the C02 concentration was low, the reaction between the cement and carbon dioxide was slow and the temperature peak was significantly reduced.
80, 0.55

70

0.48

Pressure
60
L-

0.41

50
40

0.34 X

(a

Temperatur

0.28 2 0.21 a

E 30
20 10
O 0

a-

0.14 0.07

&
1000

a
2000 3000

I
4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

0.00
9000

Time, (second)

Figure 8: Temperature and pressure of carbonation using simulated flue gas

The C02 uptakes by different measurements are given in Figure 9. The total mass gain using 25% concentration gas ranged from 7.2% to 9.3%, apparently less than that with 100% C02. Type 30 cement didn't show any benefits in C02 uptake at low concentration. The addition of aggregates worked favorably to Type 10 cement, but not to Type 30. The results from infrared C02 analysis implied that surface and core were carbonated to different levels. Consistently, the surface layers demonstrated high C02 contents which were close to the results using 100% concentration. Nevertheless the cores were poorly carbonated with very low carbon detected. It was interesting to notice that the average of C02 contents determined on surface and at the core was surprisingly close to the direct mass gain. The partial carbonation phenomenon is depicted in Figure 10 using phenolphthalein indicator.
25

Figure 6: Microstructure of hydrated cement

The X-ray diffraction patterns of carbonated Type 10 and Type 30 cement are displayed in Figure 7 together with calcite spectrum as reference. The powder samples were collected from the surface layer of 1 mm thick. For both carbonated cements, the presence of calcium carbonate in the form of calcite is clear. The diffraction peaks coincide perfectly with that of the calcite reference at 20 (CuKca) = 29.40 and 39.40. There is no evidence of existence of other forms of calcium carbonates such as aragonite (20 = 26.20) and vaterite (20 = 24.80). Since the samples were preserved in 100% alcohol immediately after the 2-hour carbonation and mechanical testing, the hydration of the cement had probably ceased. It is evident from the absence of the calcium hydroxide peak at 20 = 180 in the XRD patterns.

20

Type 10 and type 30 cement, after 2-hour carbonation

2,3 2,3
2,3

1: Calcite 2: C3S 3: C2S

o) 15
0..

CN

10

2,3
C30, surface 1 C10, surface
Calcite referenceA
10 20
PI

C1
)
30 40 50
60

C3

C1Q

C3Q

Figure 9: C02 uptake from simulated flue

concentration
2 Theta

gas with

25%

Figure 7: XRD patterns of carbonated cements

CO2 Sequestration through Concrete Production

Figure 10: Carbonated cement using 25% C02 The strength gain of carbonated concrete processed using 25% C02 concentration is shown in Figure 11. Compared to the two-hour strengths obtained with pure C02, concrete carbonated by flue gas could only have 50% of the flexural strength (MOR) and 20-25% of compressive strength, although the mass gain obtained by 25% diluted gas was more than half of that by pure CO2 gas. Obviously the crystallized solids created through carbonation curing were influenced significantly by the carbon dioxide concentration.
18 16
s
-

E C1

c) 14-

CO

" 12

NC3 ci Q ElC3Q
7.9

C02 = 25% concentration Time = 2 hours Cross section = not all solid

16.2 16.2

14.2 13 "7 "7 8.3 gZ

,

Ol 100
-8
(
U, U,

9.3 F7.2 zzzz7.2

72,,7.2
'7' ~Zz. u
R\m

6
4-

(m

3.5 3.2 3.3 3.1

20

'7W ////. <EEs

1<'i> m/W

/.sESY

WANN1 Y/X mm ///t

Compressive Strength (MPa)

Mass Gain (%)

MOR (MPa)

Figure 11: Strength of carbonated concrete with 25%

CO2

A 10-16% carbon dioxide uptake by cement via concrete production is readily achievable using concrete with varied aggregates through its carbonation curing. This percentage of uptake is calculated based on the cement binder used in the product. There are many concrete products which are excellent candidates for the process. One example is the concrete masonry units (CMU) which are mass produced at a rate of 3000 units/hour by a typical block manufacturing machine and steam-cured currently in a chamber at a temperature of 70 C for about 24 hours. The CMU can be treated in the same chamber using recovered CO2 from flue gas at ambient temperature to accelerate the strength gain and shorten the curing time. A standard concrete masonry unit (200 mm equivalent) contains about 1.36 kg (3 lb) cement. If only 10% CO2 uptake is assumed, one masonry unit can absorb about 0.136 kg carbon dioxide. One block machine operating for 16 hours per day produces 48,000 units, consuming 6.528 tons of CO2. For a production, using 10 block machines over 42 days, 2,742 tons of carbon dioxide can be sequestered, which is close to the scale of small geologic storage projects. However, the mass production of CMU will continue and its annual CO2 uptake can reach about 23,830 tons. Moreover, there is an incentive for the industry to get involved because of the accelerated curing which eliminates presetting time for steam-curing. If CO2 absorption can be enhanced to 20% or more, the capacity of the sequestration will be doubled. A 20% uptake of CO2 by concrete represents only 40% of its theoretical limit. Therefore a large window of opportunity exists to improve the technology for better sequestration. It is certain that an increased conversion of carbon dioxide to carbonates would result in stronger and more durable concrete products, as long as there is no steel reinforcement used in the concrete products.

Microstructure of carbonated cement using simulated flue gas of 25% concentration is shown in Figure 12. Although the C02 uptake is less when low concentration gas is used, the calcite crystals as reaction products are still clearly seen.

Conclusions
The preliminary study has demonstrated that concrete has the potential to absorb carbon dioxide through its early age curing. The technology can help alleviate a serious environmental problem associated with the greenhouse effect and global warming. It was found that a carbonated concrete could consume up to 16% CO2 in two-hour carbonation curing at 0.5 MPa pressure. Their strength developed in two-hour curing exceeded controls at 7 days or 60 days by conventional curing. For the maximum CO2 uptake, the most critical parameter is the CO2 concentration in the gas. The higher the carbon dioxide content, the more the calcium carbonates could be generated and the less the time and pressure are required to achieve the mass gain. Longer curing time promoted more CO2 absorption. However the carbonation duration had a threshold value over which the rate of mass gain would be substantially decreased because of the densified surface layers and the loss of moisture. A gas of 20-25% CO2 concentration represented a typical flue gas from cement kilns or thermal power plants. Although the low concentration could still partially harden the concrete in a reasonably short time and produce comparable performance to conventional curing in long run, the corresponding CO2 uptake was not substantial because of the lack of carbon dioxide in flue gas. An economical extraction process is needed to purify the flue gas and improve the efficiency

Figure 12: Microstructure of carbonated cement using 25% CO2 concentration

of C02 absorption by concrete. The technology has existed and is ready for concrete industry to use.

Biography
Yixin Shao is an associate professor of Department of Civil Engineering at McGill University, Montreal, Canada. His research is involved with carbonation behavior of calcium-carrying materials, building product development and CO2 sequestration using calcium silicate concrete.

Acknowledgment
The support by Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), St. Lawrence cement and CJS Technology is gratefully acknowledged.

References
Goodbrake, C. J., Young, J. F. and Berger R. L., (1979), "Reaction of Beta-Dicalcium Silicate and Tricalcium Silicate with Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapor", Journal of The American Ceramic Society, March, pp. 168-171.
Lackner, K.S., Wendt, C.H., Butt, D.P., Joyce Jr., E.L. and Sharp, D.H. 1995. Carbon dioxide disposal in carbonate minerals. Energy, 20: 1153-1170.
Malhotra, V. M. (1999), "Making Concrete Greener with Fly Ash", Concrete International, 21(5), may, pp 61-66.

Xudong Zhou is a M. Eng. graduate student in the Department of Civil Engineering at McGill University. His research is involved with carbonation processing of cement-based building products.
Sean Monkman is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Civil Engineering at McGill University and is currently working on the project on carbon uptake and strength gain in cement-slag blends. He received an MSc from the University of Waterloo and a BSc in Materials Science and Metallurgical Engineering from Queen's University.

Mourits, F. 2003. Capture and sequestration of greenhouse gases in Canada. Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa. NETL, (2004). Carbon sequestration: technology roadmap and program plan. National Energy Technology Laboratory, US Department of Energy.

Papadakis, V. G., Cayenas, C. G., Fardis, M. N., (1989) "A Reaction Engineering Approach to the Problem of Concrete Carbonation", AlChE Journal, 35(10), pp. 16391650. Penner, L., O'Connor, W.K., Dahlin, D.C., Gerdemann, S. and Rush, G.E. 2004. Mineral carbonation: energy costs of pre-treatment options and insights gained from flow loop reaction studies", Proceedings of 3rd Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration, CDROM, Washington, D. C.

Steinour, H.H. 1956. Some effects of carbon dioxide on mortar and concrete", J. American Concrete Institute, 30: 905-907.
Worrel, E., Price, L., and Martin, N. 2001. Carbon dioxide emissions from the global cement industry. Annual Review of Energy and Environment, 26: 303-329.

Young, J.F., Berger, R.L. and Breese, J. 1974. Accelerated curing of compacted calcium silicate mortars on exposure to CO2. Journal of The American Ceramic Society, 57: 394-397.