ABSTRACT
Despite its durability, exposing concrete to excessive changes in temperature causes it to crack. To seal these cracks, repair systems, which can be categorized as active repair and passive self-repairing systems, can be applied. In this study, the potential environmental benefits of passive repair systems were evaluated by comparing traditional mortar filled concrete against two types of self-healing concrete (SHC), namely SHC with Bacillus subtilis and SHC with superabsorbent polymers and superplasticizer. Life cycle assessment (LCA) revealed that cement production has the highest contribution across all repair systems, accounting for 62.1% to 81.1% of the overall impact. The polymer based SHC is the most damaging, especially in terms of resource consumption, while the mortar filled concrete has the lowest impact among the three. The bacteria based SHC performs better than mortar filling in categories like terrestrial, marine, and freshwater ecotoxicity. However, active repair is generally better for thicker concrete components.
