Researchers have, for the first time, directly compared the sustainability of proprietary and non-proprietary ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) mixtures, revealing that non-proprietary options can match performance while significantly reducing cost and environmental impact.
Study: Comparative Sustainability Assessment of Proprietary and Non-Proprietary Ultra-High Performance Concrete Mixtures. Image Credit: studio2013/Shutterstock.com
Concrete is the world’s most widely used construction material after water, and one of the largest contributors to global greenhouse gas emissions. As infrastructure demands grow, the environmental cost of concrete has become impossible to ignore. This is where ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) comes in.
UHPC stands out for its exceptional strength, durability, and low permeability. These qualities make it ideal for structures exposed to harsh conditions, as it resists corrosion and abrasion better than conventional concrete. Thanks to its superior strength-to-weight ratio, UHPC allows for slimmer, lighter designs that use less material, boosting both structural efficiency and sustainability.
However, the picture isn’t entirely clear. While UHPC performs better structurally, its environmental footprint, particularly in terms of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and energy use, has not been fully quantified. That's especially true when comparing commercial (proprietary) UHPCs with open-source (non-proprietary) alternatives. Recent research has begun addressing this gap, using new materials, AI-assisted mix designs, and regionally sourced inputs to lower UHPC’s carbon footprint and cost.
Engineers and policymakers need a clear comparison to make informed decisions: How do proprietary and non-proprietary UHPCs really compare when it comes to sustainability?
About the Study
To answer that question, researchers conducted a detailed comparative sustainability assessment of ten UHPC mixtures—five proprietary (Ductal®, Cor-Tuf®, BSI®, CEMTEC®, CARDIFRC®) and five non-proprietary (UHPC-1 to UHPC-5). The study focused on three key factors: cost, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions.
Using published data, the team evaluated each mixture based on the specific materials used, their quantities, curing conditions, and compressive strength. Only mixtures that met a minimum strength of 120 MPa, in line with ACI 239R-18 guidelines, and that disclosed full material compositions, were included. This ensured a fair and transparent comparison.
To calculate energy use and emissions, the study examined every major component of UHPC, including:
- Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC)
- Silica micro-cement (SMC)
- Ultra-fine binders
- Quartz powder
- High-range water reducers
- Steel fibers
- Heat curing methods
Similarly, CO2 emissions were directly tied to the production of these components, especially OPC, SCMs, and steel fibers.
Key Findings
The results revealed a clear trade-off: Proprietary UHPCs generally offered higher compressive strength, but at significantly greater economic and environmental costs. Non-proprietary mixtures, in contrast, provided comparable structural performance while using less energy, generating fewer emissions, and costing less to produce.
One reason for this is material selection. Non-proprietary mixes often omit high-energy components like quartz powder and instead use locally available sands and binders. This reduces both material costs and emissions from transportation and processing.
While proprietary UHPCs may still be the better choice for specialized, high-performance applications, such as prestressed bridge elements or extreme load-bearing scenarios, non-proprietary options offer a more sustainable and cost-effective solution for typical infrastructure projects.
The study also highlights a broader point: Strength alone shouldn't dictate material choices. Sustainability metrics like embodied carbon, energy demand, and life-cycle cost need to be considered just as seriously during design and planning phases.
Why it Matters for Practice
This study arrives at a critical moment for the construction industry, which is under growing pressure to cut emissions without compromising quality or performance. As governments and contractors aim for net-zero targets, materials like UHPC will be part of the solution—but only if their environmental impacts are clearly understood and optimized.
By prioritizing sustainability alongside structural performance, engineers, designers, and decision-makers can make better-informed choices, ones that align with climate goals while keeping projects practical and cost-effective.
Still, the research doesn’t stop here. The authors emphasize the need for more comprehensive analyses, including regional emission factors, transportation-related impacts, and full life cycle assessments. Such data will help refine UHPC mix designs and push the industry toward truly low-carbon infrastructure solutions.
Journal Reference
Alsalman, A. et al. (2025). Comparative Sustainability Assessment of Proprietary and Non-Proprietary Ultra-High Performance Concrete Mixtures. Infrastructures, 10(9), 245. DOI: 10.3390/infrastructures10090245, https://www.mdpi.com/2412-3811/10/9/245
Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.