Thanks for watching! We’ve covered a lot about climate change, and not all the news is bad. For more of the policy solutions and innovations that can help save our planet, watch more coverage in our playlist here: ruclips.net/p/PLJ8cMiYb3G5dR1opfCsg8JmZSToyAWR5h
Total cement produced: From 2010 to 2020, the total cement production is 40 billion metric tons. Carbon created off of that: Using the emission factor of 1,370 pounds of CO2 per metric ton of cement (which is approximately 0.621422 metric tons of CO2 per metric ton of cement), the total CO2 emissions generated are 24.86 billion metric tons. Cost to capture and store: If it costs $10 per metric ton of CO2 to store, the total cost for storing 24.86 billion metric tons of CO2 would be: $10/tCO2 * 24,860,000,000 tCO2 = $248,600,000,000 So, the total cost to capture and store the CO2 emissions would be approximately $248.6 billion. Volume and comparison to the natural gas industry: If one metric ton of CO2 occupies 556.2 m³ of volume, the total volume of 24.86 billion metric tons of CO2 would be: 24,860,000,000 tCO2 * 556.2 m³/tCO2 = 13,823,972,000,000 m³ The total volume of CO2 emissions from cement production is approximately 13.82 trillion cubic meters. Natural Gas industry was 35 T cubic feet, so we can’t build an industry to store , CCS is not the answer , don’t spread misinformation , Read the IEA IRENA government reports, please hire consultants you’re teaching the youth (I’m only 25 btw)
*_Here's the solution to crumbling towers:_* *_SEA WATER._* *_Add sea water to the mix and it will harden for all eternity._* *_It's what the Greeks and Romans used._*
Why was my comment removed? Which covered the fact that concrete (limestone based) releases CO2 when it is made fluid during production, but subsequently takes back up that CO2 as the concrete solidifies. That is something that I have need seen being accounted for by this video.
I have worked a lot in this industry and can say that this video is very correct, they included pretty much everything in modern cement industry carbon reduction. However it should be mentioned that there is also a large natural difference in cement produced in different countries due to different properties in local materials. Also the "just use wood" is mostly marketing/lobbying from the wood industry. If we used as much wood as we did cement there would be no forests in just a few decades.
@@ЦзинКэ-ы5х it takes 20 to 30 years to grow a tree to full size. So no we cant "just" plant new forests. This doesnt even account for the huge ecosystem damage it would do.
@@Essentially_NobodyEvery part of the process is getting stronger for bioengineering better trees that grow faster and bigger. From selective breeding the seeds of the best, to university research like the Michigan Technological University poplar tree... trees are still in this race.
To the ones that are saying “we can just plant more!” We would still be destroying ecosystems in these forests. We can always plant more, very hard to recreate a ecosystem
Another issue with cement/concrete is that it tends to trap heat and slowly release it back to the surroundings even at night, which contributes to higher ambient temperatures in urban environments. This contributes to what is known as the "Urban Heat Island" effect.
arguably a good thing for cities in colder climates, but bad for cities in warmer climates which would subsequently have to rely on more air conditioning, further increasing the ambient temperature
Asphalt not that great either. It absorbs the sunlight better because it is black. Some cities are experimenting with painting (?) some of their roads with a lighter color to help with the heat island effect. So far it working, it doesn't drop the temperatures not very much, it adds up. If They also plant low water and/or drought resistant tree and/or plants, that also helps with the heat island effect. Extra: Would Solar panels would also make heat island effect even worse?
As a person living in tropical climate, I could agree, when most of house here use clay brick hold with cement. The heat inside the house during daylight is "little unbearable" unless you use a fan.
@elfrjz I've heard the boom in construction started with his rule, and he issued amnesty on many buildings that were not in accordance with safety standarts. He says he'll rebuild the most affected cities, but i dont see a point in building in the earthquake faults and red zones (there's a very concrete map). Why should they risk again, just help accomodate and relocate people to other regions that are safe...
@@Koksn_Todorov no one says that about japan. their buildings dont fall down, even during much stronger earthquakes. there is no issue building in earthquake prone areas. the only risk to people is buildings falling down. make the buildings safe, and that wont happen.
There is 2 problems with that: 1. Cities can be built safely in earthquake zones so building safe buildings is far more sensible than replaceing the entire population. 2. Entirety of Turkey is high-risk earthquake zone. There is simply nowhere to relocate.@@Koksn_Todorov
@@TheBoyer19 if we make the mistake of allowing the ALP back in for even one term, I have absolutely no faith that we will make that target. Even with Labor pulling off an extended period of power im not sure they are willing to keep mining & manufacturing companies in check.
@@pasta-and-heroini dont believe the liberals are even better. It's currently better than the previous liberal government but not doing enough suffice to say.
One big thing that wasn't mentioned is using concrete with high-tech additives like a small fraction of chopped glass or plastic fibers and even graphene to make it much stronger so you need less concrete and steel to make the same structure. There are other advanced techniques like foamed concrete that can reduce the weight, especially for floors where bending strength is the most important factor. As for fueling the cement-making process, I feel like there are a few net-zero options that should have been mentioned. The obvious one is green hydrogen, which can clearly reach the required temperatures without carbon emissions. As for electrification, electric arc furnaces like the ones used in steelmaking can easily reach the required temperatures, so it's not necessarily easy, but it's a solved problem. The other thing I wonder is why they wouldn't mention biomass to heat the kiln, since fly ash can replace some of the cement and you can get usable fly ash on site from biomass once everyone stops burning coal, which is the current source.
Thanks for that note, but isn’t biomass of worse carbon quality than coal or other fossil fuels? Maybe this is just semantics, but curious of your opinion
@@magnetotwister Biomass may release more carbon than fossil fuels, but the emissions consist of carbon that was already in the carbon cycle. The carbon in that biomass got there, one way or another, by biological processes that removed it from the atmosphere, and will, one way or another, make its way back into the atmosphere by some kind of decomposition, including burning. Whereas carbon from fossil fuels (and, incidentally, the limestone used in cement production) is not in the cycle, having been removed from the cycle long ago, and burning it reintroduces it.
@@beevee24never. They recognize it’s a better system but the sheer amount of changes that would need to happen to make the conversion makes it impractical to switch
This video seems to be released in tandem with Veritasium's video about cement. I'd like to think that these two videos explain two sides of the same story. Veritasium explaining the amazingness of concrete and how good it is, and this video explaining the side effects that we are experiencing due to our reliance on it. Overall, both are a good watch. Never just trust one source after all.
but hey, this video just says "your car CO2 savings is futile". IOn the other hand, what if raise temp way more and take denser and moist atmosphere? On the bad side - Canada will be warmer, on the worst side - alot of deserts disappear.
Veritasium was just talking about chemistry behind cement and where we use it. He said that cement is amazing (which is true), but his video is never meant for talking is cement good or bad. And he said something about carbon released in atmosphere.
As someone that works with concrete it’s obvious the reporters know nothing about concrete. Roughly 10% emissions globally isn’t bad for the MOST used substance in modern society. Wood doesn’t do anything that concrete does. How much more emissions do you think it would take for having to rebuild buildings all of the time. It’s way more I promise. Concrete is a miracle to mankind stop trying to mess with it. And btw what she was referring to when she states contractors like to “use more concrete even though it isn’t necessary” is referring to building code. Any contractor knows that the building code is the absolute bare minimum to be considered safe, not the recommended. No concrete is ever wasted due to companies bottom line. It’s always a matter of safety first always.
I’m a civil engineer and living in the Caribbean is very difficult to build without concrete with the amount of hurricanes We receive and with time those forces are getting stronger. Steel construction here could be done but it’s maintenance is expensive do to all the exposure to the sea. There are lots of places you can build without concrete but not the caribbean for now
"Recycled concrete" is just a cheaper filler. It still uses cement, which requires the same chemical process to create, and that chemical process itself slices a CO2 off of the molecule. There is no CO2 savings.
@@Prophes0r And other CO2 molecules from the atmosphere will recombine with the cement to make concrete. As long the concrete is heated with renewable energy sources it's net 0
@@cyan_oxy6734 Not exactly. Carbonization won't be complete. Not in a reasonable time-scale at least. We don't care if the concrete will EVENTUALLY fully carbonize in 1000 years. That is why there is research into mixing liquid CO2 directly into concrete as it's poured. Also, your argument would make EXACTLY the same statement about new cement. The only savings would be the transportation/mining of new rock. I'm not claiming recycled concrete is BAD. I'm pointing out that the people championing it either don't understand WHY it is "better", or they are just using marketing to lie to people. Recycled concrete is going to be nearly identical in environmental impact.
Despite the carbon emissions of concrete, would high-density housing in concrete skyscrapers be better than low-density urban sprawl? Considering the costs of building and maintaining roads and utilities, and the costs of transportation (public/private), maybe a single concrete apartment is better than an equivalent number of wooden houses just by the fact that everything is much closer together.
Don't get it in your head that skyscrapers are good though. Unless there's literally no space to expand, buildings don't need more than 10 stories. Buildings like the Village House are extremely efficient and eco-friendly
You have to consider where you are putting these high rises. People live in all sorts of places, plenty far away from each others and would rather stay there then be forced to live close to each other.
@@person8064 flawed logic. Urban sprawl is VERY bad for the environment. Where I live they keep building outwards cause they are using the same flawed logic as you. Cities need to build up, not out.
Another thing we have to be weary of when making concrete is sand. The world is starting to run out of the type of sand used in concrete and we should probably start looking for alternatives.
@s_ame1135 I'm a civil engineer so I have to know alot about cement and its necessary components, you can search up on RUclips or wiki you will be entertained for sure.
@@707_Jesse Congrats for being a Civil Engineer but I'm not talking to you. I'm talking to OP asking for a peer-reviewed journal of masonry sand running out.
This video is why I love Vox. You guys make great videos and articles by asking questions we probably would never ask ourselves. Then you introduce the topic well and build on it perfectly. I always learn something new here.
Συγχαρητήρια Χριστίνα χάρηκα που είδα Ελληνίδα στο vox και για αυτό προφανώς ευθύνεται η ποιοτητα της δουλειάς σου. Για άτομα σαν εσενα θα έπρεπε να υπερηφανευόμαστε 👌
I loved this video, BUT: Please don't keep repeating that the goal is to achieve zero emissions. That is an impossible standard. According to the IPCC, our planet removes 50% of the yearly emitted greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere (via forests, oceans, ...). But really, this was a very informative piece. I learned a lot. Thank you for your great work.
Thank you for discussing this very important topic but I wish you mentioned the devastating local environmental effects of sand mines and how our world (believe it or not) is quickly running out of viable sand
As a civil engineer (in training/EIT) a couple of things stood out as suss to me in this video. First, the claim of overuse of cement/concrete in infrastructure projects.. the amount of cement used for a project directly correlates to the cost of a project- more concrete more cost. Clients want the cheapest they can get, and us delivering a lower cost makes us look good and can get us more money. So the claim that we use more cement than needed is odd to me- I’d say we use just enough to make things “safe”, and even then contractors or designers may cut corners to reduce cost and that results in catastrophic failures and lots of death time and time again. Second, you mention the need for cement manufacturing to recoup energy, like heat waste. But in my experience working on power plant and manufacturing plants, they often already do. For example, waste heat is often used to power turbines which can power the plant itself. This is a cost saving measure, the companies are already incentivized to reuse that heat. You interview many experts in this video, but mot once did you interview a cement manufacturer on their excess waste/heat measures put in place, instead you just claim they need to do it.
As a watcher of this video, a couple of things stood out as suss to me in this comment. First, she doesn't suggest cutting *unnecessary components* in projects, which would indeed save costs. She suggests using *alternative materials* for components where concrete is not necessary for its compressive strength. They give the example of the new parliament building in Scotland. I.e. the substitutes are not always cheaper, but emit fewer greenhouse gases in their production. Second, she did not claim that concrete plants are not recouping energy from waste heat. She mentioned that capturing and storing the emitted carbon dioxide is in its infancy. She also mentioned that some concrete plants are now burning alternative fuels (like trash) to generate the heat. Basically, companies do what is cost-efficient and effective. They'll use less energy and material if it saves them money. If an alternative material costs more but emits less carbon, they won't use it unless they have a financial incentive to do so, like earning tax credits (carrot, the current trend) or avoiding a tax on the emissions (stick, less popular politically). That's the nature of business and society.
Carbon capture is such a weird technology. It barely seems to work in real life, but on paper is a good idea. As well it seems a like a bandaid solution for a mass trauma situation, more can be done by just planting trees to recapture carbon( u could also technically do this with cement although I wouldn’t rlly know how to). Overall tho cool to say our people(humans) innovate and find different ways to make our plant a better world.
@@lordofthepies Scientifically? Not much. Solarpunk emphasizes a return from humans dominating nature with machines to humans being nature's caretaker and gardener. It doesn't require any major scientific changes, more of a major cultural and political shift.
Hi there! I am a graduate architecture student and we are currently studying Hempcrete. I think it would be wonderful for you guys to cover this topic on a sustainable substitute! Our class would gladly share all of our research and experiments with you all at Vox!
Wow, the staff at Vox make the best, most informative, easy to understand, engaging, and visually impeccable videos. Great job and please keep it up. Even more: schools, get your students to watch them. They'll learn AND want to solve problems!
I'm an EIT at a Carbon capture company running a pilot with Lafarge Holcim. It's great to hear there is support for point source capture like in the case of cement. It's a lot more effective than direct air capture especially when considering industries required for modern society. The tech is there but companies, especially in Canada, don't have the funding to scale up capture plants like the initiatives in the States. Glad to see the processes I've been learning about are trying to be implemented globally
the issue with replacement material is that its effectiveness as building material varies a lot depending on the environment using wood and glass more than just decorations in places where it's hot and humid can cause a lot of headaches about maintenance as well as lifecycle emission
When she said the concrete contained cement that was the first time I realised they were different things. I didn’t even comprehend they were separate words before.
It's a super selfish reason but I must say I love living in a concrete building simply because I don't hear my neighbors, all of the wood-framed apartments I've lived in made it possible to hear every little footstep from above or every cabinet close next-door. As someone who often works from home, I enjoy the silence in my concrete building and I'd be reluctant to give it up. Hopefully they can find a way to make buildings with new materials that can also keep things quiet for its residents.
The biggest problem here is that Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) doesn't work. CCS always has missed its target. I hope CCS can be improved and actually work but relying on it right now will not work.
Thank you for this kind of videos. We know that there are a lot more things wasn't discussed here due to time constraint, but the idea was captured, to introduce the possibility that it can be lessen. Good video overall. 👌
As concrete sets it absorbs the 60% carbon portion, you referred to, that was lost in the quicklime manufacturing process. This strengthens the concrete gradually over the course of a month and more. Also, clinker is a hard baked mix of lime stone and clay/ash the heat is the issue that is the primary source of carbon. There are alternatives to concrete, which are sometimes called geopolymers.
I was about to mention this also. It takes a very long time though. Many decades ... So one solution is to design structures well, and keep them standing for as long as possible.
@@leopoldlaurenzstrobl7438 Over the lifetime, it takes up at most 20 % of the emissions; the rate is just too slow (it depends on t^0.5, so gets slower as a function of time).
You're only considering CO2 released during the production of the cement. There is a whole lot of carbon emission before and after - transportation, construction, machinery, maintenance, demolition and finally the end of life. The whole lifecycle is much bigger. That's part of the problem with carbon calculation which leads to an incomplete understanding of the challenges. It should be explicitly mentioned while showing the figures, which part of the lifecycle is considered.
Question, why is c02 such a bad thing? Don't plants use said compound? Why is it that all of sudden c02 is enemy number one? Especially when we know at 0.2% c02 concentration, all plant life dies. We've hovering around 0.4%
Finally the need for CCS is becoming main stream!! CCS and DACS has been known to be essential since 2018 or before from the IPCC report. Glad you guys are finally catching on
There is another low-hanging fruit that could get you there - nuclear. The typical (CANDU/LWR) reactors run at about 300C but there are plenty of designs that come close to 1000C. That won't get you the 1450C mentioned, but the 850C is quite doable with high-temperature reactors such as the HTGR. The rest of the savings could come from using different materials that need lower temperatures and/or having the reactor also generate electricity and/or hydrogen (from water) which could be burned as a fuel on-site to get the rest of the heat, eliminating the need for fossil input altogether.
Aye. Videos like these (and Veritasium's) all take time to research, film, produce, edit, etc. What almost certainly happened is both of them saw an article about cement around the same time and decided to make a video about cement independently
Carbon Cure Technologies is a Canadian company that captures carbon directly from the process of making cement and re-injects the carbon directly in to the cement marrix making it stronger. It is already commercialized and used in new buildings
"Lastly, cement industries will have to implement carbon capture & storage". No. The STATE must declare a law to force these industries to do it. Otherwise they won't do jack$hit just like they always did.
If it’s a reasonable solution small pressure should be able to convince people to come around. If gov needs to force it it’s probably not a great solution to start with
@@jeffreychen5130 how does s person make even one other person who is a stranger commit to a group to make sure they won't just murder them all? There inherently is a group mentality that you have to obey unless you will be penalized. What makes a society a society is a group of people who agree to obey an authority to make decisions for them all... else punishment be made against a non-participant. Punishment of money, lack of certification (outcasted), or imprisonment. What you're against, tHaT gOvErNmEnTs hAvE tO uSe fOrCe, is what is known as a requirement for S O C I E T Y to even exist.
@@IdealConscience no u missed the point, sometimes the govt can make bad decisions under pressure and they are not actually the best solution. if u force concrete companies to do smth sure they will, but it willnt be the best solution and its possible it may not be a solution at all. until science can come up with a way to make alternatives more competitive in the market i think the only route u can take is incentives to switch, u cannot mandate that everyone transition to a subpar solution
7:50 it could. but people didnt want to invest there and didn't want to change from skyscrapers to some other stuff, then the building industries kinda didn't want to change for that. The problem is not the material being green being carbon this and that, it's the people like always. People want some money instead of good things for the long terms. so this is what we got.
"...causes Limestone to release it's stored Carbon Dioxide." This statement implies something completely different than what is actually going on. Limestone isn't STORING CO2. The CO2 is part of the molecule's structure, like Oxygen is part of a water molecule. The CO2 isn't just in there ALONG with other stuff. It is PART of the limestone. Making cement is chemistry. We are breaking apart the limestone molecules into something else. And one of those parts we are breaking off is a CO2.
In my country saudi. Production of green concrete is considered a new industry. The government have been pushing the development of green concrete by investment and regulations. We are mostly focusing on using supplementary cementitious materials like the ones mentioned in the video. The video actually provides real solutions to this problem that are either being implemented or studied.
@@Mark-te5bf Electricity can be produced using renewable energy like wind, water or solar. Fossil fuels can not be be produced or consumed renewably in any scenario.
@@Mark-te5bf energy is carbon neutral in different areas of the world, here in quebec we produce all our energy with hydro, in scotland they produce all of it with wind, in the future, electric cars could be carbon neutral everywhere
enjoy having the cost of energy skyrocket because there isn't enough space for solar panels, there isn't any more wind, and not enough space for hydroelectric dams. Don't forget, you need power to run factories to make solar panels.
Good video, and thanks for mentioning our carbon capture project at Heidelberg Materials in Brevik, Norway. We aim to be operating by the end of next year and plan to capture 400,000 tons per year. That will really lower the footprint of concrete mixed with our cement.
Hempcrete. But we need to scale and institutionalize the machinery and production (e.g., decorticators, shipping, growing, etc.). It can be WAY cheaper and carbon negative, but not without the infrastructure.
@@HF7-AD I believe it’s a greater problem than you think. Ideally it isn’t a problem because of your reasons mentioned, but corrupt companies in India have been well documented to be stripping sand from many rural areas, further eroding river banks and such
Nuclear plants could be zero emission cement manufacturers that directly produce the high temps needed. Weird to not mention that we literally have the tech to do this at scale and have for like 80 years. You don’t even need to produce electricity and deal with those inefficiencies, you get all of the magic heat you need with no co2. Why on earth would you ignore this option? Like this isn’t rhetorical.
@@yourpapichulo8859 high-quality mass timber is actually just as if not more fire resistant than steel and concrete depending on the exact conditions because the char layer insulates thick beams really well in a fire.
@Zaydan Alfariz I didn't mean to imply it was economical (because I know it's not) or environmentally friendly (it often isn't), just that contrary to popular belief, fire isn't a problem for mass timber.
Hi there! I just stumbled upon your RUclips channel and I have to say, I'm really impressed! Your content is so engaging and informative, and I can tell you put a lot of effort into creating each video. I especially love how you approach your topics with a fresh perspective and always manage to bring something new to the table. Your channel is definitely one of my new favorites, and I can't wait to see what you come up with next. Keep up the amazing work
1. Replacing concrete with wood will cause fast deforestation. 2. The locations of the kiln where temperatures are lower electricity can be used. the high temperature areas can be heated using fossil fuels. 3. The CO2 produced can be collected as fly ash for use as binding material. 4. Concrete is porous and it can store the carbon emissions. 5. Smart RC design ideas will be very beneficial.
I'm a little surprised Roman Concrete wasn't mentioned 🤔 Scientists recently figured out what was so special about ancient Roman concrete compared to our own ans unlocked its recipe. It's self renewing. Now, Roman concrete won't do us any good in buildings, but for sidewalks and roads, it'll fix cracks in itself on a continuous basis. It's definitely not a 0 carbon emissions process. But the making if it emits less carbon, and with it being self renewing, it can help tide us over until we solve our concrete problem
We just need to create a green cement with nanoparticles to increase strength and reduce the need for so much Increasing recycling would also be efficient if there were a good way Because we can no longer use that much wood, iron is not a problem as we still have a lot
@@star_gem6069it’s not a load bearing material, so I’m about 90% of total volume applications you can’t use it. Maybe for some sidewalks, but you can’t use it for curbs. You can use it for free standing walls. You can use it as a veneer structure to absorb CO2. But the grand majority of concrete placed is for load bearing applications because that’s what the material is designed for
This is painfully optimistic. The countries that use the most cement are the ones least likely to implement carbon capture, developing countries. Do you really think countries like India, Peru, Cambodia,etc are going to slow development to implement a carbon capture project that high tech countries are decades away from mastering. Not to mention there is at least one cement plant beside every major city in the world. Imagine the work in building a pipe line to all these plants leading to a carbon capture facility somewhere hundreds of kilometers away. Cement will be one of the last industries we see go carbon neutral. The best we can do here in the foreseeable future is reduce emissions. Unfortunately the more likely outcome will be little to no change globally.
@@christuffer probably already are. Considering steel is fully recyclable there is a strong chance that the steel in many new builds already includes recycled steel from all sources.
While cement production does contribute to CO2 emissions, concrete, its primary end-product, offers multiple benefits to humanity. Concrete's durability and low maintenance make it a cost-effective and resilient building material, essential for modern infrastructure. Furthermore, advances in cement technology, such as carbon capture and utilization, can mitigate its environmental impact. Ultimately, the advantages of concrete in constructing long-lasting and energy-efficient structures should not be overshadowed by the emissions associated with cement production.
No one is saying that cement isn't great for what it does or that we need to completely replace it. This is a discussion about how we need to change it BECAUSE it is so necessary.
There are a lot of buildings (due to code) where you literally can't design it using wood. There are also a lot of safety things being pushed that require me to design using near 10x the amount of concrete than the structure needs on a day to day basis. I understand there is an importance in saving lives during major storm events, but at what point is it overkill.
A few advantages of concrete over wood: -reduced flammability -greater manipulation for more complex designs -uniform & predictable strength properties (wood grains are unidirectional) -higher buildings for more people -modularity I think is easier with concrete, but I could be wrong with that. Just thinking of lego bricks Wood can actually be used in some high rises, there are treatments for wood to allow it to be inflammable up to a degree
@@magnetotwister and also: -reduced noise -reduced vibrations -its a great heatsink (cooler during the day/warmer during the night=small AC/heating bills
More people need to see this, as a Canadian people dont understand how polluting and horribly designed our suberbs are. Its just roads, roads, and more roads
Replacing concrete with structural stone is also a solution with high potential, after all it is the aggregate glued together by cement that gives concrete it's strength. It is however compared to concrete much more sustainable, stone is abundant and it's extraction is already done using electric tools. Using the technology of post tensioning high spans of up to 20m can be archieved with slender profiles. For example basalt has a compressive stength 5x stronger than even the best concrete.
What if that 30-story building became three 10-story buildings? How would that affect the amount of concrete used, positively or negatively? (I realize that's not an option everywhere, but for the places where it is I think it's a question worth asking.)
First Veritasium makes a video about cement and then Vox makes one, i am guessing Kurzgesagt gonna be next. There must be a billionaire funding all these indirect marketing campaigns for their own experimental cement alternative. It has become really hard trusting educational videos on RUclips.
The way this works is this; Article in a Journal, paper, etc comes out regarding the science behind concrete. Multiple RUclips channels notice because it's their job to pay attention to these kinds of things. Said channels get to work working on their separate, independent videos. Videos take time to research, conduct interviews, produce, edit, etc. So the multiple channels post their independent videos on RUclips around the same time. RUclips viewers happen to notice because someone watching Channel A for their content is also likely to watch Channel B for their similar content. Happens alllllll the time. I notice it with my dozen or so educational channels, dozen-ish history channels, several gaming channels, etc
The problem with wood is that ,in order to replace even a third of current cement demand , we might accelerate deforestation. Trees take time and space to grow, so to keep prices resonable and maintain supply, high demand for wood would definitely lead to deforestation in most parts of the world
@elfrjz Got some stats to back up your random claim of the difference between luxury condos and public housing? In either situation I'm pretty sure labor and finishing costs vastly outstrips the material cost of cement.
@Zaydan Alfariz the cost of CEMENT is not the same as the cost of concrete blocks. The cost of the materials is tiny in comparison to the cost of a building.
@Zaydan Alfariz the recent shortage of cement? You realise that the cement market is massively oversupplied? Possibly there were temporary issues with the supply chain.
Why can't we just use stone and brick like in the past? Too expensive? One unrelated thing that that might fix is architecture considering how far into the dump architecture has gotten since we started using modern materials.
I understand the climate change angle here , but many people in developing economies cannot afford to buy houses already, and when there will be a 90% increase in the cement prices , their cost of living will go up more. We need more innovation to reduce the price of eco-cement products. Great video !
The major issue with cement lies in its significant contribution to global carbon emissions during production, posing environmental concerns. To address this problem, researchers are exploring alternative eco-friendly materials, such as bio-cement and geopolymers, as well as developing innovative technologies to capture and utilize CO2 emissions during cement production.
Thanks for watching! We’ve covered a lot about climate change, and not all the news is bad. For more of the policy solutions and innovations that can help save our planet, watch more coverage in our playlist here: ruclips.net/p/PLJ8cMiYb3G5dR1opfCsg8JmZSToyAWR5h
Total cement produced:
From 2010 to 2020, the total cement production is 40 billion metric tons.
Carbon created off of that:
Using the emission factor of 1,370 pounds of CO2 per metric ton of cement (which is approximately 0.621422 metric tons of CO2 per metric ton of cement), the total CO2 emissions generated are 24.86 billion metric tons.
Cost to capture and store:
If it costs $10 per metric ton of CO2 to store, the total cost for storing 24.86 billion metric tons of CO2 would be:
$10/tCO2 * 24,860,000,000 tCO2 = $248,600,000,000
So, the total cost to capture and store the CO2 emissions would be approximately $248.6 billion.
Volume and comparison to the natural gas industry:
If one metric ton of CO2 occupies 556.2 m³ of volume, the total volume of 24.86 billion metric tons of CO2 would be:
24,860,000,000 tCO2 * 556.2 m³/tCO2 = 13,823,972,000,000 m³
The total volume of CO2 emissions from cement production is approximately 13.82 trillion cubic meters.
Natural
Gas industry was 35 T cubic feet, so we can’t build an industry to store , CCS is not the answer , don’t spread misinformation , Read the IEA IRENA government reports, please hire consultants you’re teaching the youth (I’m only 25 btw)
Kuala Lumpur and Malaysia : 💀
Climate change is not real. It's natural condition so let it go let's live a life.
*_Here's the solution to crumbling towers:_*
*_SEA WATER._*
*_Add sea water to the mix and it will harden for all eternity._*
*_It's what the Greeks and Romans used._*
Why was my comment removed? Which covered the fact that concrete (limestone based) releases CO2 when it is made fluid during production, but subsequently takes back up that CO2 as the concrete solidifies. That is something that I have need seen being accounted for by this video.
I have worked a lot in this industry and can say that this video is very correct, they included pretty much everything in modern cement industry carbon reduction. However it should be mentioned that there is also a large natural difference in cement produced in different countries due to different properties in local materials. Also the "just use wood" is mostly marketing/lobbying from the wood industry. If we used as much wood as we did cement there would be no forests in just a few decades.
Good point about the wood
C'mon, dude, we can plant a giant amount of trees.
@@ЦзинКэ-ы5х it takes 20 to 30 years to grow a tree to full size. So no we cant "just" plant new forests. This doesnt even account for the huge ecosystem damage it would do.
@@Essentially_NobodyEvery part of the process is getting stronger for bioengineering better trees that grow faster and bigger. From selective breeding the seeds of the best, to university research like the Michigan Technological University poplar tree... trees are still in this race.
To the ones that are saying “we can just plant more!” We would still be destroying ecosystems in these forests. We can always plant more, very hard to recreate a ecosystem
Another issue with cement/concrete is that it tends to trap heat and slowly release it back to the surroundings even at night, which contributes to higher ambient temperatures in urban environments. This contributes to what is known as the "Urban Heat Island" effect.
arguably a good thing for cities in colder climates, but bad for cities in warmer climates which would subsequently have to rely on more air conditioning, further increasing the ambient temperature
They also don't hear up very quickly
So, buildings, during the day don't have to use that much sir conditioning
Asphalt not that great either.
It absorbs the sunlight better because it is black.
Some cities are experimenting with painting (?) some of their roads with a lighter color to help with the heat island effect.
So far it working, it doesn't drop the temperatures not very much, it adds up.
If They also plant low water and/or drought resistant tree and/or plants, that also helps with the heat island effect.
Extra:
Would Solar panels would also make heat island effect even worse?
As a person living in tropical climate, I could agree, when most of house here use clay brick hold with cement. The heat inside the house during daylight is "little unbearable" unless you use a fan.
@elfrjz I did. And yes, nice cold.
Thank you for pointing out the importance of correct cement use in earthquakes, we suffered from that a lot in Turkey
@elfrjzI don't have any love for Erdogan, but how old were the buildings that collapsed?
@elfrjz I've heard the boom in construction started with his rule, and he issued amnesty on many buildings that were not in accordance with safety standarts. He says he'll rebuild the most affected cities, but i dont see a point in building in the earthquake faults and red zones (there's a very concrete map). Why should they risk again, just help accomodate and relocate people to other regions that are safe...
@@Koksn_Todorov no one says that about japan. their buildings dont fall down, even during much stronger earthquakes. there is no issue building in earthquake prone areas. the only risk to people is buildings falling down. make the buildings safe, and that wont happen.
There is 2 problems with that:
1. Cities can be built safely in earthquake zones so building safe buildings is far more sensible than replaceing the entire population.
2. Entirety of Turkey is high-risk earthquake zone. There is simply nowhere to relocate.@@Koksn_Todorov
I believe all these companies and countries that are saying net zero by 2030 are going to keep pushing that date further and further into the future
Because it's impossible. We CANNOT under any reasonable circumstance achieve net carbon zero without killing several billion people.
Where have you heard net zero by 2030? They've made 'pledges' by 2060, which they'll likely still not make
@@person8064 Australia is pledging net zero by 2030
@@TheBoyer19 if we make the mistake of allowing the ALP back in for even one term, I have absolutely no faith that we will make that target. Even with Labor pulling off an extended period of power im not sure they are willing to keep mining & manufacturing companies in check.
@@pasta-and-heroini dont believe the liberals are even better. It's currently better than the previous liberal government but not doing enough suffice to say.
I finally know why cement trucks are not called concrete trucks!
Really? Do u have any concrete evidence?
@@fanOfMinecraft-UAs_channel They are generally called aggregates which has size ranges from silt and sand to pebbles and boulders.
@@bapak321bapak 😂😂🤣
...why?
@@bapak321bapak lol nice
One big thing that wasn't mentioned is using concrete with high-tech additives like a small fraction of chopped glass or plastic fibers and even graphene to make it much stronger so you need less concrete and steel to make the same structure.
There are other advanced techniques like foamed concrete that can reduce the weight, especially for floors where bending strength is the most important factor.
As for fueling the cement-making process, I feel like there are a few net-zero options that should have been mentioned.
The obvious one is green hydrogen, which can clearly reach the required temperatures without carbon emissions. As for electrification, electric arc furnaces like the ones used in steelmaking can easily reach the required temperatures, so it's not necessarily easy, but it's a solved problem.
The other thing I wonder is why they wouldn't mention biomass to heat the kiln, since fly ash can replace some of the cement and you can get usable fly ash on site from biomass once everyone stops burning coal, which is the current source.
Informative comment. Thanks for taking the time to write it
I've worked with graphene from different companies in cement and I'm not convinced it is not a scam
Thanks for that note, but isn’t biomass of worse carbon quality than coal or other fossil fuels? Maybe this is just semantics, but curious of your opinion
@@magnetotwister Biomass may release more carbon than fossil fuels, but the emissions consist of carbon that was already in the carbon cycle. The carbon in that biomass got there, one way or another, by biological processes that removed it from the atmosphere, and will, one way or another, make its way back into the atmosphere by some kind of decomposition, including burning. Whereas carbon from fossil fuels (and, incidentally, the limestone used in cement production) is not in the cycle, having been removed from the cycle long ago, and burning it reintroduces it.
Biomass is less efficient than coal or natural gas though.
Thanks for using the metric system and Celsius. So all the world can understand it.
When will the USA finally realize that the metric system is he best system!
@@beevee24never. They recognize it’s a better system but the sheer amount of changes that would need to happen to make the conversion makes it impractical to switch
This video seems to be released in tandem with Veritasium's video about cement. I'd like to think that these two videos explain two sides of the same story. Veritasium explaining the amazingness of concrete and how good it is, and this video explaining the side effects that we are experiencing due to our reliance on it.
Overall, both are a good watch. Never just trust one source after all.
Veritasium >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nah Vox jacks content look it up huge story on youtube
but hey, this video just says "your car CO2 savings is futile".
IOn the other hand, what if raise temp way more and take denser and moist atmosphere? On the bad side - Canada will be warmer, on the worst side - alot of deserts disappear.
Veritasium was just talking about chemistry behind cement and where we use it. He said that cement is amazing (which is true), but his video is never meant for talking is cement good or bad. And he said something about carbon released in atmosphere.
@@andrejbartulin Yeah he just mentioned it, nothing much, I mean it wasn't really the point of his video to begin with.
As someone that works with concrete it’s obvious the reporters know nothing about concrete. Roughly 10% emissions globally isn’t bad for the MOST used substance in modern society. Wood doesn’t do anything that concrete does. How much more emissions do you think it would take for having to rebuild buildings all of the time. It’s way more I promise. Concrete is a miracle to mankind stop trying to mess with it. And btw what she was referring to when she states contractors like to “use more concrete even though it isn’t necessary” is referring to building code. Any contractor knows that the building code is the absolute bare minimum to be considered safe, not the recommended. No concrete is ever wasted due to companies bottom line. It’s always a matter of safety first always.
As a final year Civil Engineering student
I loved this episode😌
I’m a civil engineer and living in the Caribbean is very difficult to build without concrete with the amount of hurricanes We receive and with time those forces are getting stronger.
Steel construction here could be done but it’s maintenance is expensive do to all the exposure to the sea.
There are lots of places you can build without concrete but not the caribbean for now
Recycled concrete could also be added to the equation.
unfourtunetely it doesn't significantly reduce emitted co2, as fresh cement has to be used no matter if recycled concrete or not
Germany already does that, they have several concrete recycling facilities.
"Recycled concrete" is just a cheaper filler.
It still uses cement, which requires the same chemical process to create, and that chemical process itself slices a CO2 off of the molecule.
There is no CO2 savings.
@@Prophes0r And other CO2 molecules from the atmosphere will recombine with the cement to make concrete. As long the concrete is heated with renewable energy sources it's net 0
@@cyan_oxy6734 Not exactly. Carbonization won't be complete. Not in a reasonable time-scale at least. We don't care if the concrete will EVENTUALLY fully carbonize in 1000 years. That is why there is research into mixing liquid CO2 directly into concrete as it's poured.
Also, your argument would make EXACTLY the same statement about new cement. The only savings would be the transportation/mining of new rock.
I'm not claiming recycled concrete is BAD.
I'm pointing out that the people championing it either don't understand WHY it is "better", or they are just using marketing to lie to people.
Recycled concrete is going to be nearly identical in environmental impact.
Despite the carbon emissions of concrete, would high-density housing in concrete skyscrapers be better than low-density urban sprawl?
Considering the costs of building and maintaining roads and utilities, and the costs of transportation (public/private), maybe a single concrete apartment is better than an equivalent number of wooden houses just by the fact that everything is much closer together.
It depends on many factors, but, in general, high-rise and mid-rise are better, than urban sprawl.
This, plus single-family homes in most countries are built of concrete and brick anyway, not wood.
Don't get it in your head that skyscrapers are good though. Unless there's literally no space to expand, buildings don't need more than 10 stories. Buildings like the Village House are extremely efficient and eco-friendly
You have to consider where you are putting these high rises. People live in all sorts of places, plenty far away from each others and would rather stay there then be forced to live close to each other.
@@person8064 flawed logic. Urban sprawl is VERY bad for the environment. Where I live they keep building outwards cause they are using the same flawed logic as you.
Cities need to build up, not out.
Another thing we have to be weary of when making concrete is sand. The world is starting to run out of the type of sand used in concrete and we should probably start looking for alternatives.
sahara sand
@C KH / Personal desert sand is too round and has no edges due to being weathered so you can't use it for making concrete
source?
@s_ame1135 I'm a civil engineer so I have to know alot about cement and its necessary components, you can search up on RUclips or wiki you will be entertained for sure.
@@707_Jesse Congrats for being a Civil Engineer but I'm not talking to you. I'm talking to OP asking for a peer-reviewed journal of masonry sand running out.
This video is why I love Vox. You guys make great videos and articles by asking questions we probably would never ask ourselves. Then you introduce the topic well and build on it perfectly. I always learn something new here.
Συγχαρητήρια Χριστίνα χάρηκα που είδα Ελληνίδα στο vox και για αυτό προφανώς ευθύνεται η ποιοτητα της δουλειάς σου. Για άτομα σαν εσενα θα έπρεπε να υπερηφανευόμαστε 👌
@Zaydan Alfariz copy paste it into good translate
6:45 "the cost of concrete is a very small fraction of the build" Ok well now im questioning all the dainty littlw info graphs you zoomed around
All skyscrapers and houses must be made out of pizza from now on...
I second this
We must never have real progress. Pizza can lift billions out of poverty.
I will pay my first 10k for this
Doughnt be silly
I loved this video, BUT: Please don't keep repeating that the goal is to achieve zero emissions. That is an impossible standard. According to the IPCC, our planet removes 50% of the yearly emitted greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere (via forests, oceans, ...).
But really, this was a very informative piece. I learned a lot. Thank you for your great work.
Thank you for discussing this very important topic but I wish you mentioned the devastating local environmental effects of sand mines and how our world (believe it or not) is quickly running out of viable sand
Sand mines are not finishing soon, 100 000 years at least
As a civil engineer (in training/EIT) a couple of things stood out as suss to me in this video.
First, the claim of overuse of cement/concrete in infrastructure projects.. the amount of cement used for a project directly correlates to the cost of a project- more concrete more cost. Clients want the cheapest they can get, and us delivering a lower cost makes us look good and can get us more money. So the claim that we use more cement than needed is odd to me- I’d say we use just enough to make things “safe”, and even then contractors or designers may cut corners to reduce cost and that results in catastrophic failures and lots of death time and time again.
Second, you mention the need for cement manufacturing to recoup energy, like heat waste. But in my experience working on power plant and manufacturing plants, they often already do. For example, waste heat is often used to power turbines which can power the plant itself. This is a cost saving measure, the companies are already incentivized to reuse that heat. You interview many experts in this video, but mot once did you interview a cement manufacturer on their excess waste/heat measures put in place, instead you just claim they need to do it.
Yeah, I found out that this video is lacking the holistic view
As a watcher of this video, a couple of things stood out as suss to me in this comment.
First, she doesn't suggest cutting *unnecessary components* in projects, which would indeed save costs. She suggests using *alternative materials* for components where concrete is not necessary for its compressive strength. They give the example of the new parliament building in Scotland. I.e. the substitutes are not always cheaper, but emit fewer greenhouse gases in their production.
Second, she did not claim that concrete plants are not recouping energy from waste heat. She mentioned that capturing and storing the emitted carbon dioxide is in its infancy. She also mentioned that some concrete plants are now burning alternative fuels (like trash) to generate the heat.
Basically, companies do what is cost-efficient and effective. They'll use less energy and material if it saves them money. If an alternative material costs more but emits less carbon, they won't use it unless they have a financial incentive to do so, like earning tax credits (carrot, the current trend) or avoiding a tax on the emissions (stick, less popular politically). That's the nature of business and society.
Carbon capture is such a weird technology. It barely seems to work in real life, but on paper is a good idea. As well it seems a like a bandaid solution for a mass trauma situation, more can be done by just planting trees to recapture carbon( u could also technically do this with cement although I wouldn’t rlly know how to). Overall tho cool to say our people(humans) innovate and find different ways to make our plant a better world.
Reject ecomodernism, embrace ecosocialism and degrowth.
@@GTAVictor9128 solarpunk is also one way we could change
@@person8064 I won't lie, I honestly have no clue what solarpunk people are genuinely scientifically championing.
@@GTAVictor9128 If it ain’t broke y fix it. We can develop it to work better but it’s not as profitable as trees and not as easy to manage as trees.
@@lordofthepies Scientifically? Not much. Solarpunk emphasizes a return from humans dominating nature with machines to humans being nature's caretaker and gardener. It doesn't require any major scientific changes, more of a major cultural and political shift.
Carbon capture is really meant for these hard-to-decarbonise industries
Hi there! I am a graduate architecture student and we are currently studying Hempcrete. I think it would be wonderful for you guys to cover this topic on a sustainable substitute! Our class would gladly share all of our research and experiments with you all at Vox!
@@Dino2GunZ True
Hempcrete is not load bearing
@ i’m not talking about using it as a structural substitute
@ it’s primarily substituting the plastics we use for insulation
@@moonlitnomad4017 could you provide more detail?
Wow, the staff at Vox make the best, most informative, easy to understand, engaging, and visually impeccable videos. Great job and please keep it up. Even more: schools, get your students to watch them. They'll learn AND want to solve problems!
I'm an EIT at a Carbon capture company running a pilot with Lafarge Holcim. It's great to hear there is support for point source capture like in the case of cement. It's a lot more effective than direct air capture especially when considering industries required for modern society. The tech is there but companies, especially in Canada, don't have the funding to scale up capture plants like the initiatives in the States. Glad to see the processes I've been learning about are trying to be implemented globally
Another dream that probably will never come true 😎
the issue with replacement material is that its effectiveness as building material varies a lot depending on the environment
using wood and glass more than just decorations in places where it's hot and humid can cause a lot of headaches about maintenance as well as lifecycle emission
😊😊😊,,,,,,,,
Blue Crete.
Absolutely fire video, with good sources, balanced approaches. Nice one team Vox!
When she said the concrete contained cement that was the first time I realised they were different things. I didn’t even comprehend they were separate words before.
Very nice video, and also technically careful! Congrats and keep going!
It's a super selfish reason but I must say I love living in a concrete building simply because I don't hear my neighbors, all of the wood-framed apartments I've lived in made it possible to hear every little footstep from above or every cabinet close next-door. As someone who often works from home, I enjoy the silence in my concrete building and I'd be reluctant to give it up. Hopefully they can find a way to make buildings with new materials that can also keep things quiet for its residents.
Carbon capture is prohibitively expensive. It is simply a lot easier to compensate with reforestation and ocean seeding to promote coral growth.
The biggest problem here is that Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) doesn't work. CCS always has missed its target. I hope CCS can be improved and actually work but relying on it right now will not work.
Nothing works until it works. That's why we need to prove it.
Thank you for this kind of videos. We know that there are a lot more things wasn't discussed here due to time constraint, but the idea was captured, to introduce the possibility that it can be lessen. Good video overall. 👌
As concrete sets it absorbs the 60% carbon portion, you referred to, that was lost in the quicklime manufacturing process. This strengthens the concrete gradually over the course of a month and more. Also, clinker is a hard baked mix of lime stone and clay/ash the heat is the issue that is the primary source of carbon. There are alternatives to concrete, which are sometimes called geopolymers.
I was about to mention this also. It takes a very long time though. Many decades ... So one solution is to design structures well, and keep them standing for as long as possible.
@@leopoldlaurenzstrobl7438 Over the lifetime, it takes up at most 20 % of the emissions; the rate is just too slow (it depends on t^0.5, so gets slower as a function of time).
its a shame they did not talk about this
Amazing informational video with serious potential.
You're only considering CO2 released during the production of the cement. There is a whole lot of carbon emission before and after - transportation, construction, machinery, maintenance, demolition and finally the end of life. The whole lifecycle is much bigger.
That's part of the problem with carbon calculation which leads to an incomplete understanding of the challenges. It should be explicitly mentioned while showing the figures, which part of the lifecycle is considered.
Question, why is c02 such a bad thing? Don't plants use said compound? Why is it that all of sudden c02 is enemy number one? Especially when we know at 0.2% c02 concentration, all plant life dies. We've hovering around 0.4%
Finally the need for CCS is becoming main stream!!
CCS and DACS has been known to be essential since 2018 or before from the IPCC report. Glad you guys are finally catching on
There is another low-hanging fruit that could get you there - nuclear. The typical (CANDU/LWR) reactors run at about 300C but there are plenty of designs that come close to 1000C. That won't get you the 1450C mentioned, but the 850C is quite doable with high-temperature reactors such as the HTGR. The rest of the savings could come from using different materials that need lower temperatures and/or having the reactor also generate electricity and/or hydrogen (from water) which could be burned as a fuel on-site to get the rest of the heat, eliminating the need for fossil input altogether.
Cement is amazing and I hope we find clean, effective alternatives or ways to improve existing materials.
Is it just a coincidence that this video came out just after veritasium posted a video on cement
Aye. Videos like these (and Veritasium's) all take time to research, film, produce, edit, etc.
What almost certainly happened is both of them saw an article about cement around the same time and decided to make a video about cement independently
आई लाइक दिस वान
Carbon Cure Technologies is a Canadian company that captures carbon directly from the process of making cement and re-injects the carbon directly in to the cement marrix making it stronger. It is already commercialized and used in new buildings
We should just use legos😂
Lol… I’m sure the plastic in legos is somehow bad for the environment. 🤷🏼♂️
@@relevantinformation6655well, plastics are a byproduct of fossil fuel production
@@senorelroboto2 ya just can’t win... In the words of musician Joe Jackson “Everything gives you cancer…”
@@relevantinformation6655 yeah, you just hope it's something like squamous cell cancer and not pancreatic.
thank you vox for all the interesting videos
"Lastly, cement industries will have to implement carbon capture & storage".
No. The STATE must declare a law to force these industries to do it. Otherwise they won't do jack$hit just like they always did.
Exactly. The libertarian delusion that markets self regulate is absurd.
If it’s a reasonable solution small pressure should be able to convince people to come around. If gov needs to force it it’s probably not a great solution to start with
@@jeffreychen5130 how does s person make even one other person who is a stranger commit to a group to make sure they won't just murder them all?
There inherently is a group mentality that you have to obey unless you will be penalized. What makes a society a society is a group of people who agree to obey an authority to make decisions for them all... else punishment be made against a non-participant. Punishment of money, lack of certification (outcasted), or imprisonment. What you're against, tHaT gOvErNmEnTs hAvE tO uSe fOrCe, is what is known as a requirement for S O C I E T Y to even exist.
@@IdealConscience no u missed the point, sometimes the govt can make bad decisions under pressure and they are not actually the best solution. if u force concrete companies to do smth sure they will, but it willnt be the best solution and its possible it may not be a solution at all. until science can come up with a way to make alternatives more competitive in the market i think the only route u can take is incentives to switch, u cannot mandate that everyone transition to a subpar solution
7:50 it could. but people didnt want to invest there and didn't want to change from skyscrapers to some other stuff, then the building industries kinda didn't want to change for that.
The problem is not the material being green being carbon this and that, it's the people like always. People want some money instead of good things for the long terms. so this is what we got.
"...causes Limestone to release it's stored Carbon Dioxide."
This statement implies something completely different than what is actually going on.
Limestone isn't STORING CO2. The CO2 is part of the molecule's structure, like Oxygen is part of a water molecule.
The CO2 isn't just in there ALONG with other stuff. It is PART of the limestone.
Making cement is chemistry. We are breaking apart the limestone molecules into something else. And one of those parts we are breaking off is a CO2.
In my country saudi. Production of green concrete is considered a new industry. The government have been pushing the development of green concrete by investment and regulations. We are mostly focusing on using supplementary cementitious materials like the ones mentioned in the video. The video actually provides real solutions to this problem that are either being implemented or studied.
Meanwhile, veritasium : look im being buried in concrete 🥳
Best video in a long time
if only we can harness the power of diatoms for construction, the world would be a much, much better place
This video, it's very important for the people.
Let's talk about battery power cars next 🤓
Well they still pollute in different ways
Where does electricity come from?
Worse for the environment maybe?, hard to repair yourself, more dangerous. You can’t even hear them coming. Ban everything.
@@Mark-te5bf Electricity can be produced using renewable energy like wind, water or solar.
Fossil fuels can not be be produced or consumed renewably in any scenario.
@@Mark-te5bf energy is carbon neutral in different areas of the world, here in quebec we produce all our energy with hydro, in scotland they produce all of it with wind, in the future, electric cars could be carbon neutral everywhere
enjoy having the cost of energy skyrocket because there isn't enough space for solar panels, there isn't any more wind, and not enough space for hydroelectric dams.
Don't forget, you need power to run factories to make solar panels.
Good video, and thanks for mentioning our carbon capture project at Heidelberg Materials in Brevik, Norway. We aim to be operating by the end of next year and plan to capture 400,000 tons per year.
That will really lower the footprint of concrete mixed with our cement.
Veritasium put out an interesting video last week explaining cement!
Hempcrete.
But we need to scale and institutionalize the machinery and production (e.g., decorticators, shipping, growing, etc.). It can be WAY cheaper and carbon negative, but not without the infrastructure.
Not even a mention to how we're running out of viable sand to make concrete? I suppose that ought to be its own video.
That's not actually a problem, brick, stone and even old concrete can be ground down into usable arids
@@HF7-AD I believe it’s a greater problem than you think. Ideally it isn’t a problem because of your reasons mentioned, but corrupt companies in India have been well documented to be stripping sand from many rural areas, further eroding river banks and such
@@magnetotwister that's a problem but it's not the same problem I was talking about, those companies should be fined
Nuclear plants could be zero emission cement manufacturers that directly produce the high temps needed. Weird to not mention that we literally have the tech to do this at scale and have for like 80 years. You don’t even need to produce electricity and deal with those inefficiencies, you get all of the magic heat you need with no co2. Why on earth would you ignore this option? Like this isn’t rhetorical.
isn't wood expensive than cement?
Imagine the fire 😂
Yes
@@yourpapichulo8859 high-quality mass timber is actually just as if not more fire resistant than steel and concrete depending on the exact conditions because the char layer insulates thick beams really well in a fire.
@@thamiordragonheart8682 never gonna happen
@Zaydan Alfariz I didn't mean to imply it was economical (because I know it's not) or environmentally friendly (it often isn't), just that contrary to popular belief, fire isn't a problem for mass timber.
Good clay and limestone are getting more expensive and harder to procure. So that kinda throws a wrench in this plan.
Hi there! I just stumbled upon your RUclips channel and I have to say, I'm really impressed! Your content is so engaging and informative, and I can tell you put a lot of effort into creating each video. I especially love how you approach your topics with a fresh perspective and always manage to bring something new to the table. Your channel is definitely one of my new favorites, and I can't wait to see what you come up with next. Keep up the amazing work
Bro it’s a company channel, not hers
MORE PEOPLE NEED TO BE EDUCATED ON THIS MATTER.
Be like Superpower India and adopt open defecation. no need cement for toilets.
1. Replacing concrete with wood will cause fast deforestation.
2. The locations of the kiln where temperatures are lower electricity can be used. the high temperature areas can be heated using fossil fuels.
3. The CO2 produced can be collected as fly ash for use as binding material.
4. Concrete is porous and it can store the carbon emissions.
5. Smart RC design ideas will be very beneficial.
I'm a little surprised Roman Concrete wasn't mentioned 🤔
Scientists recently figured out what was so special about ancient Roman concrete compared to our own ans unlocked its recipe. It's self renewing.
Now, Roman concrete won't do us any good in buildings, but for sidewalks and roads, it'll fix cracks in itself on a continuous basis.
It's definitely not a 0 carbon emissions process. But the making if it emits less carbon, and with it being self renewing, it can help tide us over until we solve our concrete problem
We just need to create a green cement with nanoparticles to increase strength and reduce the need for so much
Increasing recycling would also be efficient if there were a good way Because we can no longer use that much wood, iron is not a problem as we still have a lot
I know that Hempcrete is a thing that could be looked at as an alternative.
I really wished they would've talked about it :/
@@star_gem6069it’s not a load bearing material, so I’m about 90% of total volume applications you can’t use it.
Maybe for some sidewalks, but you can’t use it for curbs. You can use it for free standing walls. You can use it as a veneer structure to absorb CO2.
But the grand majority of concrete placed is for load bearing applications because that’s what the material is designed for
This is painfully optimistic. The countries that use the most cement are the ones least likely to implement carbon capture, developing countries. Do you really think countries like India, Peru, Cambodia,etc are going to slow development to implement a carbon capture project that high tech countries are decades away from mastering. Not to mention there is at least one cement plant beside every major city in the world. Imagine the work in building a pipe line to all these plants leading to a carbon capture facility somewhere hundreds of kilometers away. Cement will be one of the last industries we see go carbon neutral. The best we can do here in the foreseeable future is reduce emissions. Unfortunately the more likely outcome will be little to no change globally.
We must make sidewalks using recycled bottles and old shoes
And buildings out of used baked bean cans.
@@christuffer probably already are. Considering steel is fully recyclable there is a strong chance that the steel in many new builds already includes recycled steel from all sources.
So interesting, thank you for the great content
Thank you Vox for using Celsius. The world doesn't revolve around USA
No, it revolves around London though. Specifically Greenwich
Using ton, metric ton and mile in same sentence hurt me a lot.
While cement production does contribute to CO2 emissions, concrete, its primary end-product, offers multiple benefits to humanity. Concrete's durability and low maintenance make it a cost-effective and resilient building material, essential for modern infrastructure. Furthermore, advances in cement technology, such as carbon capture and utilization, can mitigate its environmental impact. Ultimately, the advantages of concrete in constructing long-lasting and energy-efficient structures should not be overshadowed by the emissions associated with cement production.
Why is this comment phrased like a concrete industry press release?
No one is saying that cement isn't great for what it does or that we need to completely replace it. This is a discussion about how we need to change it BECAUSE it is so necessary.
@@HeadsFullOfEyeballs yeah..sure it is!
Amazingly clear video for a someone who doesn't know anything about this. Great work !
It’s easier said and nearly impossible to do. The market is aggressive and competition is extremely fierce.
and thats where the government plays its role
So bottom line is that the cost is prohibitive. The technology is sufficient, but no one will follow these techniques because of their cost.
There are a lot of buildings (due to code) where you literally can't design it using wood. There are also a lot of safety things being pushed that require me to design using near 10x the amount of concrete than the structure needs on a day to day basis. I understand there is an importance in saving lives during major storm events, but at what point is it overkill.
A few advantages of concrete over wood:
-reduced flammability
-greater manipulation for more complex designs
-uniform & predictable strength properties (wood grains are unidirectional)
-higher buildings for more people
-modularity I think is easier with concrete, but I could be wrong with that. Just thinking of lego bricks
Wood can actually be used in some high rises, there are treatments for wood to allow it to be inflammable up to a degree
@@magnetotwister and also:
-reduced noise
-reduced vibrations
-its a great heatsink (cooler during the day/warmer during the night=small AC/heating bills
and how much wood do we have to use to start being worse than concrete due to deforestation?
More people need to see this, as a Canadian people dont understand how polluting and horribly designed our suberbs are. Its just roads, roads, and more roads
We definitely need to do better at curbing emissions. Let's hope that the concrete industry can get it together to reduce emissions.
We gotta ban buildings
This is hysteria.
@Zaydan Alfariz China is just going to under cut the West.
They probably made this video in one of those high rise concrete buildings.
Replacing concrete with structural stone is also a solution with high potential, after all it is the aggregate glued together by cement that gives concrete it's strength. It is however compared to concrete much more sustainable, stone is abundant and it's extraction is already done using electric tools. Using the technology of post tensioning high spans of up to 20m can be archieved with slender profiles. For example basalt has a compressive stength 5x stronger than even the best concrete.
How about we carve out INSIDE the big stones and use the space? And we can call it…cave?
0:26 Mumbai ❤
Return to mud huts.
Very insightful!
These vidoes are a bit random, yet SO informational!
Who thought it's GTA from the thumbnail 😅
What if that 30-story building became three 10-story buildings? How would that affect the amount of concrete used, positively or negatively? (I realize that's not an option everywhere, but for the places where it is I think it's a question worth asking.)
awareness is the beginning of large scale changes
First Veritasium makes a video about cement and then Vox makes one, i am guessing Kurzgesagt gonna be next. There must be a billionaire funding all these indirect marketing campaigns for their own experimental cement alternative.
It has become really hard trusting educational videos on RUclips.
As we clearly know- there are no billionaires lobbying for current high-carbon construction practices 😢
Oh yeah for sure, "Big Anti-Cement" is probably behind this all.
They probably cooperate with Big Pharma too
The way this works is this;
Article in a Journal, paper, etc comes out regarding the science behind concrete.
Multiple RUclips channels notice because it's their job to pay attention to these kinds of things.
Said channels get to work working on their separate, independent videos.
Videos take time to research, conduct interviews, produce, edit, etc.
So the multiple channels post their independent videos on RUclips around the same time.
RUclips viewers happen to notice because someone watching Channel A for their content is also likely to watch Channel B for their similar content.
Happens alllllll the time. I notice it with my dozen or so educational channels, dozen-ish history channels, several gaming channels, etc
The problem with wood is that ,in order to replace even a third of current cement demand , we might accelerate deforestation. Trees take time and space to grow, so to keep prices resonable and maintain supply, high demand for wood would definitely lead to deforestation in most parts of the world
I also love how the cost of the building is going to almost double if not more!
The cost of the concrete would double, which they mention is a minor cost compared to everything else that goes into a building like that.
@elfrjz Got some stats to back up your random claim of the difference between luxury condos and public housing? In either situation I'm pretty sure labor and finishing costs vastly outstrips the material cost of cement.
@Zaydan Alfariz the cost of CEMENT is not the same as the cost of concrete blocks. The cost of the materials is tiny in comparison to the cost of a building.
@Zaydan Alfariz the recent shortage of cement? You realise that the cement market is massively oversupplied? Possibly there were temporary issues with the supply chain.
Why can't we just use stone and brick like in the past? Too expensive? One unrelated thing that that might fix is architecture considering how far into the dump architecture has gotten since we started using modern materials.
As a slab of cement, I apologize for my inconvenience I've caused
i thought this was a gta video from the thumbnail
China this China that... that's America for you🎉
America is jealous of China.
@elfrjz Doesn't China build empty ghost cities...
I understand the climate change angle here , but many people in developing economies cannot afford to buy houses already, and when there will be a 90% increase in the cement prices , their cost of living will go up more. We need more innovation to reduce the price of eco-cement products. Great video !
trying to fix a problem without seeing its root (profit incentive economy) is just the same as blaming the fire but forgetting who torched them
The major issue with cement lies in its significant contribution to global carbon emissions during production, posing environmental concerns. To address this problem, researchers are exploring alternative eco-friendly materials, such as bio-cement and geopolymers, as well as developing innovative technologies to capture and utilize CO2 emissions during cement production.