Nanotechnology in Eco-efficient Construction

Materials, Processes and Applications

Fernando Pacheco-Torgal, Maria Vittoria Diamanti, Ali Nazari, Claes Goran-Granqvist, Alina Pruna, Serji Amirkhanian

• Publisher: Woodhead Publishing
• Year: 2018
• eBook ISBN: 9780081026427
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Materials Science
• Index: Technology & Engineering

Covering the latest technologies, Nanotechnology in eco-efficient construction provides an authoritative guide to the role of nanotechnology in the development of eco-efficient construction materials and sustainable construction. The book contains a special focus on applications concerning concrete and cement, as nanotechnology is driving significant development in concrete technologies. The new edition has 14 new chapters, including 3 new parts: Mortars and concrete related applications; Applications for pavements and other structural materials; and Toxicity, safety handling and environmental impacts.Civil engineers requiring an understanding of eco-efficient construction materials, as well as researchers and architects within any field of nanotechnology, eco-efficient materials or the construction industry will find this updated reference to be highly valuable.- Addresses issues such as toxicity and LCA aspects- New chapters covering safety handling on occupational exposure of nanoparticles and the assessment of personal exposure to airborne nanomaterials- Discusses the effects of adding nano-particles on the durability and on the properties of geopolymers

1

Introduction to nanotechnology in eco-efficient construction

F. Pacheco-Torgal C-TAC Research Centre, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal

Abstract

This chapter briefly reviews recent developments in the field of nanotechnology. Patent production by top countries is reviewed. Some nanotech limitations are highlighted. The influence of nanotechnology on the development of eco-efficient construction and building materials and its contribution to the 2030 agenda of sustainable development are briefly addressed. A book outline is included.

Keywords

Eco-efficient construction; Nanotechnology; Patents; Sustainable development

1.1. Recent nanotechnology advancements and limitations

In the past decades, nanotechnology which is not considered a sector by itself but a highly dispersed multidisciplinary area has been on a rise not only in terms of papers and patents but also in terms of applications. A review on paper and patent production for the period 2000–16 shows that United States is the dominant player both in publications in top journals and also in patents although China has shown a relevant growth (Zhu et al., 2017). A recent survey has tracked the patent production in the field of nanotechnology (Ozcan and Islam, 2017), using the patent provider Thomson Innovation. The study shows that there are around 50,000 patent inventions, of which around 30,000 are owned by corporations, around 14,000 by inventors, around 11,000 by academia, and almost 2,000 by government. The shared patents explain the difference in the total. Of course, as Fig. 1 in the paper of Ozcan and Islam (2017) shows, different countries show different proportion of owners in the patent production. Inventors are the majority of the owners in United States. With regard to corporates, the United States and Japan have similar levels of patent ownership. France, for instance, has a higher proportion of government ownership, while in China its academia has the largest proportion. Of course it is important to take into account the method used for patent retrieval because the authors point out that there are some patents on the nanotechnology class that are not related to this field. Sabatier and Chollet (2017) using bibliometric data and a survey of French nanotechnology scientists showed that promoting ground-breaking, innovative research provides an important advantage for future scientific production. However, it is important not to overemphasize the importance of patents because van Raan (2017) showed that only a small amount of patents represent important, “radical,” technological breakthroughs. Also in an important essay, Archibugi (2017) mentioned that intellectual property rights may delay the diffusion of knowledge and that disruption by itself does not necessarily lead to progress or to greater economic efficiency, and if it is not properly managed it can lead not only to company losses, but to societal damages as well. In fact, Shapira and Youtie (2015) mentioned that many nanotech sales forecasts were adjusted downwards because some of the promised scale benefits are unlikely to be realized. On one hand complex nanomaterials may not be very environmental friendly and life cycle assessment (LCA) may require further investigations. Up to this date the recyclability of nanomaterials is not being adequately tackled, as well as their environmental impacts in the end-of-life stage (Pacheco-Blandino et al., 2012). On the other hand the toxicity of various nanomaterials for human health and for the environment is still under debate (Kim et al., 2016). Safety management of nanoparticles and nanomaterials is also a critical issue (Spitzmiller et al., 2013). Still the potentially revolutionary technologies may have limited impact upon macroeconomic performance, if they do not give rise to a new wave in terms of capital accumulation and public investment in infrastructure (Lundvall (2017). According to this author, countries and organizations promoting “experience based” knowledge and combining it with science-based knowledge are more innovative than those that only give attention to codified knowledge. He also states that learning from experience may feed wisdom and that learning societies where men and women are expected to contribute to the production and use of knowledge are to be preferred to societies where only small intellectual elites produce knowledge. An interesting case in this regard is that of Russia, a country that shows a declining share of nano papers in spite of an increase in research funding (Terekhov, 2017) and a rigid academic structure that does not allow newcomers nor does engage in collaborations with the private sector (Karaulova et al., 2017). Also important in the field of nanotechnology is the performance of Asian countries that Ludvall (2017) deems crucial for the world economic growth. China being the new world scientific powerhouse (Tollefson, 2018) also identified nanotechnology as a priority area in its national agenda of science and technology development (2006–20), and has increased R&D investment in the field. In fact, China has consequently emerged as one of the key global players in nanotechnology, producing the second largest number of nanotechnology papers after United States (Wang and Guan, 2010). China has made significant advances and currently has the fastest growing nanotechnology publications. However it still lags behind in publication in leading nanotechnology journals. An analysis of papers published in nano-related journals with an impact factor above 20 shows that USA published 1068 papers, Germany (221), UK (193), France (149), Japan (121), and China only produced 76 papers (Dong et al., 2016). Of course, this may change in the coming future because China’s one-thousand-talents plan (www.1000plan.org) to attract its overseas researchers has already recruited more than 2000 researchers, most of them trained in the USA (Gao et al., 2016). Still in China, the pathways from laboratory research to successful commercialization remain problematic. The Chinese nanotech industry is relatively weak in commercializing basic research and in its production of nanotechnology devices (Shapira and Wang, 2009; Zhang et al., 2017). As to India, the other Asian giant, although and according to the World Bank is now growing more than China and will be fifth largest world economy in 2018, the fact is that concerning nanotechnology India is still lagging behind several other countries (Momaya and Lalwani, 2017). It is a relevant fact that these authors are aware of the fact that technological innovations can have negative externalities thus confirming the position of Archibugi (2017) previously mentioned.

1.2. Nanotech-based materials for eco-efficient construction

Since 2013 when the first edition of this book was published, the number of publications in the field of nanotech-based eco-efficient construction materials saw a huge rise. Back then, a search on the Scopus database showed only a few publications. Now the same search returns several hundred. Of course let us not forget that in practical terms there are several and confusing definitions of what constitutes a nanomaterial and about the requirements to identify nano-enabled products. Some products are advertised as having nanoenabled features, something that is simply not true, while others fail to disclose the fact that they have nanoparticles or were obtained by nanomanipulation (Jones, 2016). Also, in the introduction chapter of the first edition it was argued that too little nanotech efforts were put in important construction materials like concrete, the material most consumed by the construction industry. Scopus now shows that nanotech concrete–related publications have risen around 500%. Of course, some publications have exaggerated the promises of nanotechnology in the field of construction industry, failing to produce evidence that support such claims. Hanus and Harris (2013) wrote that “Nanotechnology has the potential to reduce the environmental impact and energy intensity of structures, as well as improve safety and decrease costs associated with civil infrastructure,” but no reference is given to back this statement. Also no cost data is given concerning the use of nanoparticles in concrete and in Section 2.2 the authors wrote that “The cost of CNTs is currently prohibitively high to allow for the use of CNT/cement composites” thus contradicting their initial claim. They also mention that the future implementation of advanced structural health monitoring systems will increase as the technology matures and associated costs decrease. However, this is just an expectation, which is very far from the cost decrease of current infrastructure mentioned in the introduction. Also they confirm that high cost is reported to be a main drawback for the use of carbon nanotubes (CNT) sensors in concrete. They also mention that self-cleaning hydrophobic paints are potentially valuable in the construction industry for the reduction of costs associated with maintaining building walls and façades, but again no data is given concerning any possible life cycle cost comparison. Instead, the authors prefer to “focus on up-front build costs over long-term cost, performance, sustainability and safety.” However, instead of blaming the construction industry because of the so-called “focus on up-front build costs over long-term cost, performance, sustainability and safety,” it would make more sense to highlight the fact that so far nanotechnology research has given very little importance to the factors that are important for the construction industry and that show a gap between what researchers consider important and what the construction industry needs. Taalbi (2017) showed that solving real-life problems was a source of innovation for several industries, meaning that it is not understandable that those engaged in nanotech for the construction industry have given so little attention to cost, because on the five criteria that identify the emerging technologies of great impact (Archibugi, 2017) the first one is precisely “drastic reduction in costs.” The contribution of nanotechnology for sustainability and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development that are related to the construction industry are also very important. Infrastructure resilience is the n...

Table of contents

• Cover image
• Title page
• Table of Contents
• Copyright
• List of contributors
• 1. Introduction to nanotechnology in eco-efficient construction
• Part One. Mortars and concrete related applications
• Part Two. Applications for pavements and other infrastructure materials
• Part Three. Applications for building energy efficiency
• Part Four. Photocatalytic applications
• Part Five. Toxicity, safety handling and environmental impacts
• Index