A Comparative Evaluation of Three Valorisation Pathways for Waste Electric Arc Furnace Slag to Improve Its Use as an Eco-Logical Binder
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Results and Discussion
2.1. Physicochemical Characterisation of the Raw Materials
2.1.1. Physical Properties
2.1.2. Chemical Composition
2.1.3. Mineralogical Phases
2.1.4. Leaching Behaviour
2.1.5. Pozzolanic Activity
2.1.6. Hydration Heat
2.2. Mechanical and Mineralogical Characterisation
2.2.1. Supplementary Cementitious Materials
2.2.2. Alkali Activation
2.2.3. Accelerated Carbonation
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Materials
3.2. Test Specimens
3.2.1. Cement-EAFS Specimens
3.2.2. Alkali-Activated EAFS Specimens
3.2.3. Carbon Accelerated Cement-EAFS Specimens
3.3. Methods
3.3.1. Particle Dimension
3.3.2. X-Ray Fluorescence
3.3.3. X-Ray Diffraction
3.3.4. Release of Dangerous Substances
3.3.5. Pozzolanicity
3.3.6. Isothermal Calorimetry
3.3.7. Mechanical Characterisation
4. Conclusions
- As supplementary cementitious material, the EAFS produced an increase in the compressive strength of hardened specimens at a cement replacement level of 10% (+4.2 MPa), while reduced losses in compressive strength were observed at replacement levels of 5%, 15%, and 20% (−5.8, −1.2, and −6.6 MPa, respectively). The calorimetric and XRD results further suggest that EAFS can act as a reagent source for limiting components of the cement hydration reactions and that an optimal ratio, from the stoichiometric point of view, between the amount of cement and EAFS seems to occur for cement replacement values close to 10%. Nevertheless, EAFS may be responsible for disruptive effects in the cement matrix due to nonreactive phases or an excess of unreacted particles.
- Using the alkali-activation route, moderate compressive strengths were developed. This can be explained by the presence of aluminosilicates and calcium in the composition of EAFS, which are known to form reaction products with binding properties in the presence of suitable alkaline activators. However, it was not possible to characterise the newly formed reaction products by XRD due to their likely amorphous structure. The results also show that higher amounts of alkaline activator led to higher compressive strengths (from 6.3 MPa at 14.3 wt.% activator to 10.4 MPa at 16.7 wt.% activator), suggesting that optimal stoichiometric conditions may be further studied to improve the mechanical properties of the hardened material obtained by this valorisation pathway.
- As expected, the accelerated carbonation process revealed an increase in the compressive strength of the cement control (from 47.0 MPa under normal curing to 55.6 MPa after accelerated carbonation at 28 days curing). Additionally, a very high compressive strength was maintained even with a replacement of 50% of cement and sand by ground EAFS and granulated EAFS, respectively (46.7 MPa after carbonation curing), suggesting that this process can be an alternative reaction pathway to explore the binding properties of EAFS. The XRD results also show that, with increasing EAFS content (from 0% to 50% replacement), most characteristic phases of hydrated cement progressively give rise to new phases associated with the reaction products of the cement–EAFS and EAFS–EAFS systems.
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Singh, R.L.; Singh, P.K. Global Environmental Problems. In Principles and Applications of Environmental Biotechnology for a Sustainable Future; Singh, R.L., Ed.; Springer: Singapore, 2017; pp. 13–41. [Google Scholar]
- Mathur, V.S.; Farouq, M.M.; Labaran, Y.H. The Carbon Footprint of Construction Industry: A Review of Direct and Indirect Emission. J. Sustain. Constr. Mater. Technol. 2021, 6, 101–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labaran, Y.H.; Mathur, V.S.; Muhammad, S.U.; Musa, A.A. Carbon Footprint Management: A Review of Construction Industry. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2022, 9, 100531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrew, R.M. Global CO2 Emissions from Cement Production, 1928–2018. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2019, 11, 1675–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cormos, C.C. Decarbonization Options for Cement Production Process: A Techno-Economic and Environmental Evaluation. Fuel 2022, 320, 123907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Council of the European Union. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives. Off. J. Eur. Union 2008, 312, 3–30. [Google Scholar]
- Council of the European Union. Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 Amending Directive 2008/98/EC on Waste (Text with EEA Relevance). Off. J. Eur. Union 2018, 150, 109–140. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: European Climate Pact, COM(2020) 788 Final. 9 December 2020. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=COM:2020:788:FIN (accessed on 22 January 2026).
- Scrivener, K.L.; John, V.M.; Gartner, E.M. Eco-Efficient Cements: Potential Economically Viable Solutions for a Low-CO2 Cement-Based Materials Industry. Cem. Concr. Res. 2018, 114, 2–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Steel Association. Steel Industry Co-Products; World Steel Association: Brussels, Belgium, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Branca, T.A.; Colla, V.; Algermissen, D.; Granbom, H.; Martini, U.; Morillon, A.; Pietruck, R.; Rosendahl, S. Reuse and Recycling of By-Products in the Steel Sector: Recent Achievements Paving the Way to Circular Economy and Industrial Symbiosis in Europe. Metals 2020, 10, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parron-Rubio, M.E.; Perez-Garcia, F.; Gonzalez-Herrera, A.; Oliveira, M.J.; Rubio-Cintas, M.D. Slag Substitution as a Cementing Material in Concrete: Mechanical, Physical and Environmental Properties. Materials 2019, 12, 2845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tsakiridis, P.E.; Papadimitriou, G.D.; Tsivilis, S.; Koroneos, C. Utilization of Steel Slag for Portland Cement Clinker Production. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 152, 805–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryu, G.U.; Kim, H.J.; Yu, H.J.; Pyo, S. Utilization of Steelmaking Slag in Cement Clinker Production: A Review. J. CO2 Util. 2024, 84, 102842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dondi, G.; Mazzotta, F.; Lantieri, C.; Cuppi, F.; Vignali, V.; Sangiovanni, C. Use of Steel Slag as an Alternative to Aggregate and Filler in Road Pavements. Materials 2021, 14, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asmatulaev, B.A.; Asmatulaev, R.B.; Abdrasulova, A.S.; Levintov, B.L.; Vitushchenko, M.F.; Stolyarskiiv, O.A. Using Blast-Furnace Slag in Road Construction. Steel Transl. 2007, 37, 722–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sukmak, P.; Sukmak, G.; De Silva, P.; Horpibulsuk, S.; Kassawat, S.; Suddeepong, A. The Potential of Industrial Waste: Electric Arc Furnace Slag (EAF) as Recycled Road Construction Materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2023, 368, 130393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Ma, R.; Dong, B.; Ma, H.; Wang, Y.; Gao, M.; Sun, Y.; Jin, Y. Research Progress and Hotspots of Steel Slag Application in Road Construction: A Bibliometric Perspective. Infrastructures 2025, 10, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- López-Díaz, A.; Ochoa-Díaz, R.; Grimaldo-León, G.E. Use of BOF Slag and Blast Furnace Dust in Asphalt Concrete: An Alternative for the Construction of Pavements. DYNA 2018, 85, 24–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pasetto, M.; Baldo, N. Experimental Evaluation of High Performance Base Course and Road Base Asphalt Concrete with Electric Arc Furnace Steel Slags. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 181, 938–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, L.; Lei, B.; Lv, Z.; Zhao, H.; Jiang, W.; Wang, E. Microstructural Evolution and Damage Modeling of Steel Slag Asphalt Concrete under Combined Salt Freeze-Thaw Cycling and Cyclic Preloading Conditions. Int. J. Fatigue 2026, 204, 109338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branca, T.A.; Pistocchi, C.; Colla, V.; Ragaglini, G.; Amato, A.; Tozzini, C.; Mudersbach, D.; Morillon, A.; Rex, M.; Romaniello, L. Investigation of (BOF) Converter Slag Use for Agriculture in Europe. Metall. Res. Technol. 2014, 111, 155–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kimio, I. Steelmaking Slag for Fertilizer Usage. Nippon Steel Sumitomo Met. Tech. Rep. 2015, 109, 130–136. [Google Scholar]
- Yi, H.; Xu, G.; Cheng, H.; Wang, J.; Wan, Y.; Chen, H. An Overview of Utilization of Steel Slag. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2012, 16, 791–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goswami, V.; Deepika, S.; Sharma, P.; Kothamasi, D. Recycling Steel Slag as Fertiliser Proxy in Agriculture Is Good Circular Economy but Disrupts Plant Microbial Symbioses in the Soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 954, 176750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Connor, J.; Nguyen, T.B.T.; Honeyands, T.; Monaghan, B.; O’Dea, D.; Rinklebe, J.; Vinu, A.; Hoang, S.A.; Singh, G.; Kirkham, M.B.; et al. Production, Characterisation, Utilisation, and Beneficial Soil Application of Steel Slag: A Review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 419, 126478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghisman, V.; Muresan, A.C.; Buruiana, D.L.; Axente, E.R. Waste Slag Benefits for Correction of Soil Acidity. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 16042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, X.; Peng, Z.; Yan, J.; Li, Z.; Hwang, J.Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, G.; Jiang, T. Pyrometallurgical Recycling of Electric Arc Furnace Dust. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 149, 1079–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue, Y.; Hao, X.; Zhang, N. Recovery of Zinc and Iron from Steel Mill Dust—An Overview of Available Technologies. Materials 2022, 15, 4127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García, S.G.; Montequín, V.R.; Fernández, R.L.; Fernández, F.O. Evaluation of the Synergies in Cogeneration with Steel Waste Gases Based on Life Cycle Assessment: A Combined Coke Oven and Steelmaking Gas Case Study. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 217, 576–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.; Ghouleh, Z.; Mucci, A.; Bahn, O.; Provençal, R.; Shao, Y. Production of Cleaner High-Strength Cementing Material Using Steel Slag under Elevated-Temperature Carbonation. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 342, 130948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Cui, J.; Chen, Z.; Jing, X.; Liu, Y.; He, B.; Cang, D. Recycling of Carbonated Steel Slag in Building Materials: Recycling Pathways and Recent Advances. J. Build. Eng. 2025, 104, 112285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, K.; Aslani, F.; Dyskin, A.; Pasternak, E. Carbon-Negative Slag-Based Binders: A Review of Steel Slags. J. Build. Eng. 2026, 118, 115068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, N.; Deng, G.; Liao, W.; Ma, H.; Hu, C. Aqueous Carbonation of Steel Slags: A Comparative Study on Mechanisms. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2025, 155, 105838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, T.O.; Ul Haq, A.; Harun, M.Z.B.; Fanijo, E.O. Recent Advances in Fly Ash- and Slag-Based Geopolymer Cements. Sustainability 2025, 17, 11167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amer, I.; Abdelkhalik, A.; Mayhoub, O.A.; Kohail, M. Development of Sustainable Slag-Based Geopolymer Concrete Using Different Types of Chemical Admixtures. Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 2024, 18, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khair, S.; Rahman, S.A.; Shaikh, F.U.A.; Sarker, P.K. Evaluating Lithium Slag for Geopolymer Concrete: A Review of Its Properties and Sustainable Construction Applications. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2024, 20, e02822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hashem, F.S.; Salam, A.T.A.; Monir, D. Mechanical Properties and Durability of Slag Granite Geopolymer Cement Incorporated Zirconium Aluminum Layered Double Hydroxide. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 17824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gökçe, H.S. Durability of Slag-Based Alkali-Activated Materials: A Critical Review. J. Aust. Ceram. Soc. 2024, 60, 885–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brand, A.S.; Fanijo, E.O. A Review of the Influence of Steel Furnace Slag Type on the Properties of Cementitious Composites. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.-F.; Lin, H.-S.; Syu, J.-Y.; Lee, W.-H.; Huang, C.-H.; Tsai, Y.-K.; Shvarzman, A. Investigating the Static and Dynamic Mechanical Properties of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Incorporating Recycled Carbon Fiber and Modified Basic Oxygen Furnace Slag Aggregate. Recycling 2025, 10, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue, J.C.; Wang, W.C.; Wu, C.H.; Hong, T.J.; Chen, T.H.; Huang, C.Y. Deterioration Analysis and Expansion Behavior Prediction of Electric Arc Furnace Slag as Fine Aggregate in Mortar. J. Build. Eng. 2024, 85, 108717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rojas, N.; Bustamante, M.; Muñoz, P.; Godoy, K.; Letelier, V. Study of Properties and Behavior of Concrete Containing EAF Slag as Coarse Aggregate. Dev. Built Environ. 2023, 14, 100137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, Q.; Hua, S.; Yue, H. Effect of Spherical Electric Arc Slag on Solid Waste-Based 3D-Printed Concrete. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 11933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, A.J.; Hassan, M.S.; Al-Quraishi, H.; Sameer, H. Strength, Thermal and Environmental Analysis of Ultrahigh-performance Slag Concrete: Modelling and Optimization Approach. Eur. J. Environ. Civ. Eng. 2025, 29, 1848–1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.I.; Abbas, Y.M.; Abellan-Garcia, J.; Castro-Cabeza, A. Eco-Efficient Ultra-High-Performance Concrete Formulation Utilizing Electric Arc Furnace Slag and Recycled Glass Powder–Advanced Analytics and Lifecycle Perspectives. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2024, 32, 362–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yue, H.; Wang, X.; Hua, S.; Cui, S.; Lu, Q.; Qin, Y.; Guan, C.; Ren, X. Research on the Design and Multi-Dimensional Performance Enhancement of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete Based on Electric Arc Furnace Slag. Constr. Build. Mater. 2025, 486, 141943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, A.J.; Hassan, M.S.; Al-Quraishi, H. Synergistic Effect of Nano-Silica, Steel Slag, and Waste Glass on the Microstructure, Electrical Resistivity, and Strength of Ultra-High-Performance Concrete. Open Eng. 2025, 15, 20240105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.; Koh, T.; Pyo, S. Enhancing Flowability and Sustainability of Ultra High Performance Concrete Incorporating High Replacement Levels of Industrial Slags. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 123, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juenger, M.C.G.; Snellings, R.; Bernal, S.A. Supplementary Cementitious Materials: New Sources, Characterization, and Performance Insights. Cem. Concr. Res. 2019, 122, 257–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nodehi, M.; Taghvaee, V.M. Alkali-Activated Materials and Geopolymer: A Review of Common Precursors and Activators Addressing Circular Economy. Circ. Econ. Sustain. 2022, 2, 165–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Q.; Guo, M.Z.; Wang, L.; Ling, T.C. Use of Steel Slag as Sustainable Construction Materials: A Review of Accelerated Carbonation Treatment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 173, 105740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhoble, Y.N.; Ahmed, S. Review on the Innovative Uses of Steel Slag for Waste Minimization. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2018, 20, 1373–1382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Y.; Ling, T.C.; Shi, C.; Pan, S.Y. Characteristics of Steel Slags and Their Use in Cement and Concrete—A Review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 136, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Wang, D.; Zhuang, S. The Soundness of Steel Slag with Different Free CaO and MgO Contents. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 151, 138–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, G.; Wang, Y.; Gao, Z. Use of Steel Slag as a Granular Material: Volume Expansion Prediction and Usability Criteria. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 184, 555–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martins, A.C.P.; Franco de Carvalho, J.M.; Costa, L.C.B.; Andrade, H.D.; de Melo, T.V.; Ribeiro, J.C.L.; Pedroti, L.G.; Peixoto, R.A.F. Steel Slags in Cement-Based Composites: An Ultimate Review on Characterization, Applications and Performance. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 291, 123265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.K.; Vashistha, P.; Chandra, R.; Rai, A.K. Study on Leaching of Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) Slag for Its Sustainable Applications as Construction Material. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2021, 148, 1315–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Council of the European Union. Directive 2003/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2003 Amending for the 26th Time Council Directive 76/769/EEC Relating to Restrictions on the Marketing and Use of Certain Dangerous Substances and Preparations (nonylphenol, nonylphenol ethoxylate and cement) (Text with EEA relevance). Off. J. Eur. Union 2003, 178, 24–27. [Google Scholar]
- Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 Concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), Establishing a European Chemicals Agency, Amending Directive 1999/45/EC and Repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC. Off. J. Eur. Union 2018, 396, 1–849. [Google Scholar]
- EN 12457-2:2002; Characterisation of Waste—Leaching—Compliance Test for Leaching of Granular Waste Materials and Sludges—Part 2: One Stage Batch Test at a Liquid to Solid Ratio of 10 L/kg for Materials with Particle Size Below 4 mm (Without or With Size Reduction). European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2002.
- Council of the European Union. 2003/33/EC: Council Decision of 19 December 2002 Establishing Criteria and Procedures for the Acceptance of Waste at Landfills Pursuant to Article 16 of and Annex II to Directive 1999/31/EC. Off. J. Eur. Union 2002, 11, 27–49. [Google Scholar]
- Council of the European Union. Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 Laying down Basic Safety Standards for Protection against the Dangers Arising from Exposure to Ionising Radiation, and Repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom. Off. J. Eur. Union 2014, 13, 1–73. [Google Scholar]
- EN 196-5:2011; Methods of Testing Cement—Part 5: Pozzolanicity Test for Pozzolanic Cement. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2011.
- Donatello, S.; Tyrer, M.; Cheeseman, C.R. Comparison of Test Methods to Assess Pozzolanic Activity. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kramar, S.; Ducman, V. Evaluation of Ash Pozzolanic Activity by Means of the Strength Activity Index Test, Frattini Test and DTA/TG Analysis. Teh. Vjesn. 2018, 25, 1746–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mostafa, N.Y.; Brown, P.W. Heat of Hydration of High Reactive Pozzolans in Blended Cements: Isothermal Conduction Calorimetry. Thermochim. Acta 2005, 435, 162–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, X.; Liu, J.; Zhao, Y.; Zhao, J.; Li, Z.; Sun, Y.; Qiu, J.; Zheng, P. Mechanical Activation of Steel Slag to Prepare Supplementary Cementitious Materials: A Comparative Research Based on the Particle Size Distribution, Hydration, Toxicity Assessment and Carbon Dioxide Emission. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 60, 105200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Roy, D.M.; Langton, C.A. Early Stage Hydration of Slag-Cement. Cem. Concr. Res. 1983, 13, 277–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ge, Z.; Wang, K.; Sandberg, P.J.; Ruiz, J.M. Characterization and Performance Prediction of Cement-Based Materials Using a Simple Isothermal Calorimeter. J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 2009, 7, 355–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amin, M.S.; El-Gamal, S.M.A.; Abo-El-Enein, S.A.; El-Hosiny, F.I.; Ramadan, M. Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Blended Cement Pastes Containing Electric Arc Furnace Slag with and without Silica Fume. HBRC J. 2015, 11, 321–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vàzquez Ramonich, E.; Barra, M. Reactivity and Expansion of Electric Arc Furnace Slag in Their Application in Construction. Mater. Constr. 2001, 51, 137–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Roslan, N.H.; Ismail, M.; Khalid, N.H.A.; Muhammad, B. Properties of Concrete Containing Electric Arc Furnace Steel Slag and Steel Sludge. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 28, 101060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qasrawi, H.; Shalabi, F.; Asi, I. Use of Low CaO Unprocessed Steel Slag in Concrete as Fine Aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 1118–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sedira, N. Novel Waste-Based Alkali-Activated Binders by Combining Mining and Other Mineral Waste. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Mo, L.; Zhang, F.; Deng, M.; Jin, F.; Al-Tabbaa, A.; Wang, A. Accelerated Carbonation and Performance of Concrete Made with Steel Slag as Binding Materials and Aggregates. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2017, 83, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Q.; Liu, J.; Qi, L. Effects of Temperature and Carbonation Curing on the Mechanical Properties of Steel Slag-Cement Binding Materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 124, 999–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Ceukelaire, L.; Van Nieuwenburg, D. Accelerated Carbonation of a Blast-Furnace Cement Concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 1993, 23, 442–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Gerven, T.; Van Baelen, D.; Dutré, V.; Vandecasteele, C. Influence of Carbonation and Carbonation Methods on Leaching of Metals from Mortars. Cem. Concr. Res. 2004, 34, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EN 197-1:2011; Cement Composition, Specifications and Conformity Criteria for Common Cements. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2011.
- EN 933-1:2012; Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates—Part 1: Determination of Particle Size Distribution—Sieving Method. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2012.
- EN 1097-3:1998; Tests for Mechanical and Physical Properties of Aggregates—Part 3: Determination of Loose Bulk Density and Voids. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 1998.
- EN 1097-6:2022; Tests for Mechanical and Physical Properties of Aggregates—Part 6: Determination of Particle Density and Water Absorption. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2022.
- Roisnel, T.; Rodríguez-Carvajal, J. WinPLOTR: A Windows Tool for Powder Diffraction Pattern Analysis. Mater. Sci. Forum 2001, 378–381, 118–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EN 12457-4:2002; Characterisation of Waste—Leaching—Compliance Test for Leaching of Granular Waste Materials and Sludges—Part 4: One Stage Batch Test at a Liquid to Solid Ratio of 10 L/kg for Materials with Particle Size below 10 mm (Without or With Size Reduction). European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2002.
- ASTM C1702-17; Standard Test Method for Measurement of Heat of Hydration of Hydraulic Cementitious Materials Using Isothermal Conduction Calorimetry. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017.
- EN 12390-3:2019; Testing Hardened Concrete—Part 3: Compressive Strength of Test Specimens. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2019.











| Properties | EAFS | S0/4 |
|---|---|---|
| Loose bulk density (g/cm3) [EN 1097-3] | 1.76 | 1.51 |
| Voids (%) [EN 1097-3] | 34.57 | 42.80 |
| Particle density (g/cm3) [EN 1097-6] | 3.72 | 2.65 |
| 24 h water absorption (%) [EN 1097-6] | 10.2 | 0.1 |
| Parameter | EAFS | CEM-II 42.5 | S0/4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Na2O | 0.17 | – | – |
| MgO | 5.50 | 1.31 | 0.14 |
| Al2O3 | 9.69 | 3.52 | 13.9 |
| SiO2 | 16.5 | 14.7 | 82.2 |
| P2O5 | 0.33 | 0.14 | – |
| SO3 | 0.24 | 2.40 | 0.06 |
| Cl | – | 0.03 | 0.02 |
| K2O | – | 0.85 | 2.40 |
| CaO | 30.1 | 51.5 | 0.74 |
| TiO2 | 0.72 | 0.33 | – |
| MnO | 5.67 | – | – |
| Fe2O3 | 30.4 | 3.09 | 0.32 |
| BaO | 0.24 | – | – |
| Others | – | 0.23 | 0.01 |
| LOI | – | 21.9 | 0.27 |
| Parameter (Unit) | EAFS | LOQ 1 | Maximum Value 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH (25 °C) | 10.1 | --- | --- |
| Electric cond. (25 °C, mS/cm) | 0.119 | --- | --- |
| Chloride (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 40 | 800 |
| Fluoride (mg/kg) | 10 | 4 | 10 |
| Sulphate (mg/kg) | 64 | 40 | 1000 |
| Phenol index (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.5 | 1 |
| TDS (mg/kg) | 1070 | 1000 | 4000 |
| As (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.1 | 0.5 |
| Ba (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 5.0 | 20 |
| Cd (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.01 | 0.04 |
| Cr (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.2 | 0.5 |
| Cu (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.4 | 2 |
| Hg (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Mo (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.2 | 0.5 |
| Ni (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.1 | 0.4 |
| Pb (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.1 | 0.5 |
| Sb (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.02 | 0.06 |
| Se (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.02 | 0.1 |
| Zn (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.2 | 4 |
| DOC 3 (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 250 | 500 |
| Total content | |||
| TOC 4 (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 250 | 30,000 |
| Mineral Oil C10–C40 (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 100 | 500 |
| BTEX 5 (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.1 | 6 |
| PCB 6 (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 0.5 | 1 |
| PAH 7 (mg/kg) | <LOQ | 10 | 100 |
| Material | 8 Days | 15 Days | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [OH−] mmol/L | [CaO] mmol/L | Theoretical Max. [CaO] mmol/L | [CaO] reduction % | [OH−] mmol/L | [CaO] mmol/L | Theoretical Max. [CaO] mmol/L | [CaO] Reduction % | |
| EAFS | 52.5 | 12.8 | 9.3 | – | 52.4 | 12.5 | 9.4 | – |
| CEM-II 42.5 | 56.3 | 11.6 | 8.5 | – | 55.5 | 11.1 | 8.6 | – |
| MK | 45.0 | 7.8 | 11.7 | 33.3 | 45.9 | 7.8 | 11.3 | 31.0 |
| Sample Reference | Setting Time (h) | Setting Time Delay Relative to the Control (h) | Hydration Heat (J/g Cement) | Hydration Heat Variation Relative to the Control (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEM-II 42.5 (control) | 10.03 | – | 276.3 | – |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 5% EAFS | 10.42 | 0.39 | 294.3 | 6.48 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 10% EAFS | 10.71 | 0.68 | 313.0 | 13.28 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 15% EAFS | 10.76 | 0.73 | 339.6 | 22.91 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 20% EAFS | 11.04 | 1.01 | 361.1 | 30.69 |
| Sample Reference | Compressive Strength (MPa) | Flexural Strength (MPa) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 Days | 28 Days | 7 Days | 28 Days | |
| SCM-0% EAFS (control) | 34.8 ± 0.92 | 47.0 ± 0.93 | 7.00 ± 0.33 | 9.50 ± 0.35 |
| SCM-5% EAFS | 30.6 ± 0.79 | 41.2 ± 1.63 | 6.50 ± 0.53 | 8.70 ± 0.20 |
| SCM-10% EAFS | 39.1 ± 0.68 | 51.2 ± 2.37 | 7.60 ± 0.13 | 8.50 ± 0.69 |
| SCM-15% EAFS | 34.9 ± 2.96 | 45.8 ± 3.16 | 7.50 ± 0.67 | 8.70 ± 1.18 |
| SCM-20% EAFS | 29.7 ± 2.30 | 40.4 ± 2.64 | 6.50 ± 0.20 | 7.90 ± 0.13 |
| Sample Reference | Compressive Strength (MPa) | Flexural Strength (MPa) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 Days | 28 Days | 7 Days | 28 Days | |
| AA (control) 1 | – | – | – | – |
| AA-5EAFS | 4.50 ± 0.25 | 10.4 ± 0.57 | 1.30 ± 0.12 | 4.00 ± 0.23 |
| AA-6EAFS | 3.70 ± 0.40 | 6.30 ± 0.79 | 1.00 ± 0.20 | 3.20 ± 0.21 |
| Sample Reference | Compressive Strength (MPa) | Flexural Strength (MPa) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 Days | 28 Days | 7 Days | 28 Days | |
| AC-0% EAFS (control) | 46.1 ± 1.44 | 55.6 ± 2.71 | 7.60 ± 0.60 | 7.40 ± 0.55 |
| AC-50% EAFS | 46.2 ± 1.42 | 46.7 ± 2.13 | 7.60 ± 1.13 | 7.10 ± 0.13 |
| AC-100% EAFS | 8.60 ± 2.09 | 10.2 ± 1.98 | 2.90 ± 0.03 | 2.80 ± 0.41 |
| ICDD | Compound | Structure | AC-0% EAFS (Control) | AC-25% EAFS | AC-50% EAFS | AC-75% EAFS | AC-100% EAFS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01-086-0174 | Calcite, syn | CaCO3 | × | × | × | × | – |
| 01-086-0402 | Hatrurite, syn | Ca3SiO5 | × | × | × | – | × |
| 00-044-1481 | Portlandite, syn | Ca(OH)2 | × | × | × | – | – |
| 01-083-2465 | Quartz | SiO2 | × | × | × | – | – |
| 01-072-0646 | Ettringite | 3CaO·Al2O3·3CaSO4·32H2O | × | × | × | – | – |
| 00-030-0226 | Brownmillerite, syn | Ca2(Al,Fe)2O5 | × | × | × | – | – |
| 01-083-0460 | Larnite | Ca2SiO4 | × | × | × | – | – |
| 00-041-1475 | Aragonite | CaCO3 | – | × | × | – | – |
| 00-004-0690 | Gehlenite | Ca2Al2SiO7 | – | × | × | × | × |
| 00-006-0615/ 00-003-0968/ 01-075-1550 | Wüstite | FeO | – | × | × | × | × |
| 01-075-1610 | Magnetite | Fe3O4 | – | – | × | × | × |
| 01-071-1663 | Calcite, magnesian | Mg0.1Ca0.9CO3 | – | – | – | × | × |
| 00-034-1350 | Calcium, magnesian | Ca5MgSi3O12 | – | – | – | × | × |
| 00-049-0442 | Calcium silicate | Ca3SiO5 | – | – | – | – | × |
| Valorisation Pathway | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCM) |
|
|
| Alkali Activation (AA) |
|
|
| Accelerated Carbonation (AC) |
|
|
| Sample Reference | Quantities per Batch (g) for Three 256-cm3 Specimens | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEM-II 42.5 | EAFS (Ground) | S0/4 | Water | |
| SCM-0% EAFS (control) | 450.0 | 0.0 | 1350 | 225 |
| SCM-5% EAFS | 427.5 | 22.5 | 1350 | 225 |
| SCM-10% EAFS | 405.0 | 45.0 | 1350 | 225 |
| SCM-15% EAFS | 382.5 | 67.5 | 1350 | 225 |
| SCM-20% EAFS | 360.0 | 90.0 | 1350 | 225 |
| Sample Reference | Quantities per Batch (g) for Three 256-cm3 Specimens | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EAFS (Ground) | EAFS (Original) | Activator | Water | |
| AA-EAFS (control) | 450 | 1350 | 0 | 360 |
| AA-5EAFS | 450 | 1350 | 360 | 0 |
| AA-6EAFS | 450 | 1350 | 300 | 60 |
| Sample Reference | Quantities per Batch (g) for Three 256-cm3 Specimens | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEM-II 42.5 | EAFS (Ground) | EAFS (Original) | S0/4 | Water | |
| AC-0% EAFS (control) | 450 | 0 | 0 | 1350 | 225 |
| AC-50% EAFS | 225 | 225 | 675 | 675 | 225 |
| AC-100% EAFS | 0 | 450 | 1350 | 0 | 225 |
| Sample Reference | CEM-II 42.5 (g) | EAFS (Ground) (g) | Water (g) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEM-II 42.5 (control) | 40 | 0 | 20 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 5% EAFS | 38 | 2 | 20 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 10% EAFS | 36 | 4 | 20 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 15% EAFS | 34 | 6 | 20 |
| CEM-II 42.5 + 20% EAFS | 32 | 8 | 20 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Machini, B.; Simões, D.; Humbert, P.; António, J.; Almeida, J. A Comparative Evaluation of Three Valorisation Pathways for Waste Electric Arc Furnace Slag to Improve Its Use as an Eco-Logical Binder. Recycling 2026, 11, 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling11020025
Machini B, Simões D, Humbert P, António J, Almeida J. A Comparative Evaluation of Three Valorisation Pathways for Waste Electric Arc Furnace Slag to Improve Its Use as an Eco-Logical Binder. Recycling. 2026; 11(2):25. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling11020025
Chicago/Turabian StyleMachini, Bruno, Diogo Simões, Pedro Humbert, Julieta António, and João Almeida. 2026. "A Comparative Evaluation of Three Valorisation Pathways for Waste Electric Arc Furnace Slag to Improve Its Use as an Eco-Logical Binder" Recycling 11, no. 2: 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling11020025
APA StyleMachini, B., Simões, D., Humbert, P., António, J., & Almeida, J. (2026). A Comparative Evaluation of Three Valorisation Pathways for Waste Electric Arc Furnace Slag to Improve Its Use as an Eco-Logical Binder. Recycling, 11(2), 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling11020025

