Assessing the Thermal Insulation Properties of Thermoplastic Bricks for Energy-Efficient Building Solutions

ABSTRACT

As the demand for energy-efficient building solutions grows, innovative materials such as thermoplastic bricks have emerged as potential alternatives to traditional construction materials. This study investigates the thermal insulation properties of thermoplastic bricks and their suitability for enhancing energy efficiency in modern architecture. Various thermoplastic polymers, including polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), were analyzed to determine their effectiveness as insulating materials. The research also explores different fabrication techniques, such as injection moulding and extrusion, to understand their impact on the thermal performance of the bricks. Experimental evaluations were conducted using standardized thermal testing methods to measure the heat transfer characteristics of the brick samples. The results demonstrated that PVC bricks, especially those manufactured through injection moulding, exhibited the lowest thermal conductivity, thereby providing superior insulation. The study highlights the importance of material selection and processing methods in optimizing the thermal properties of thermoplastic bricks. In addition to their insulation capabilities, thermoplastic bricks offer environmental and economic benefits. They can be produced from recycled plastics, supporting sustainable building practices and reducing construction costs. This versatility, combined with their lightweight and ease of installation, positions thermoplastic bricks as a viable option for both residential and commercial applications. The findings of this study suggest that thermoplastic bricks can significantly contribute to reducing energy consumption in buildings, aligning with global efforts towards sustainable and energy-efficient construction. Further research is encouraged to explore the long-term performance and broader applications of these innovative building materials.

Keywords:
Thermoplastics; Bricks, moulding; temperature

1. INTRODUCTION

In the face of escalating environmental challenges and increasing energy demands, the construction industry is under immense pressure to adopt sustainable and energy-efficient building practices. Traditional construction materials, such as concrete, brick, and wood, have long been the mainstay of building infrastructure. However, these materials often fall short in meeting the stringent thermal insulation requirements needed to minimize energy consumption in modern buildings. Thermoplastic bricks have emerged as a promising alternative, offering potential advantages in both thermal performance and sustainability. This study aims to evaluate the thermal insulation properties of thermoplastic bricks and their applicability in enhancing energy-efficient building solutions.

Buildings account for a significant portion of global energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) [¹], buildings consume approximately 30% of the world’s energy and are responsible for nearly 28% of energy-related CO₂ emissions. Consequently, improving the energy efficiency of buildings is critical in mitigating climate change and reducing operational costs. One of the primary strategies to achieve this is through the use of materials with superior thermal insulation properties, which can significantly decrease the need for heating and cooling, thus lowering energy consumption. Thermoplastic materials, characterized by their ability to be molded and remolded when heated, offer a versatile option for various applications, including construction. These materials include polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), each possessing unique thermal and mechanical properties that can be optimized for building applications [²]. Thermoplastic bricks are not only lightweight and durable but also have the potential to be fabricated from recycled plastics, contributing to the circular economy and reducing environmental impact [³]. The thermal conductivity of a material is a critical factor in determining its effectiveness as an insulator. Lower thermal conductivity indicates better insulation properties, which are essential for maintaining stable indoor temperatures and reducing energy) [⁴]. Thermoplastic polymers generally have lower thermal conductivities compared to traditional building materials, making them suitable candidates for improving the thermal performance of building envelopes [⁵].

The fabrication method used in producing thermoplastic bricks can significantly influence their thermal insulation properties. Common techniques include injection moulding and extrusion, each with distinct advantages. Injection moulding allows for precise control over the shape and density of the bricks, which can enhance their insulating capabilities. Extrusion, while often more cost-effective and faster for large-scale production, may result in bricks with variable densities and less consistent thermal properties [⁶]. Understanding these differences is crucial for optimizing the manufacturing process to achieve the best thermal performance. While previous studies have highlighted the potential of thermoplastic materials in various construction applications, research specifically focused on their use in thermal insulation for energy-efficient buildings remains limited [⁷]. Provided a comprehensive review of thermoplastic polymers in building applications, but their work primarily focused on structural and mechanical properties rather than thermal performance. Similarly, VENUGOPAL et al. [⁸] explored the fabrication techniques and general performance of polymeric bricks but did not extensively address their thermal insulation characteristics under different environmental conditions.

The findings of this research have significant implications for the construction industry, particularly in the context of sustainable building practices [⁹]. By demonstrating the thermal insulation capabilities of thermoplastic bricks, this study could pave the way for their broader adoption in both residential and commercial building projects. Additionally, the use of recycled thermoplastics in brick fabrication aligns with global sustainability goals, offering a practical solution to reducing plastic waste and lowering the environmental footprint of construction activities [¹⁰, ¹¹] (Figure 1).

Figure 1
Plastic waste.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study examined thermoplastic bricks fabricated from polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Bricks were produced using injection moulding and extrusion techniques. Thermal conductivity was measured using a heat flow meter apparatus, assessing the insulation performance of each material and fabrication method under controlled conditions.

2.1. Material Selection

Selecting the appropriate materials for thermoplastic bricks is essential for achieving optimal thermal insulation and structural integrity in energy-efficient building applications. This study focuses on three thermoplastics: polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Each material was chosen based on its unique combination of thermal, mechanical, and processing properties, as summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1
Summary of material properties for thermoplastic bricks

PROPERTY	POLYPROPYLENE (PP)	POLYETHYLENE (PE)	POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC)
Thermal Conductivity	0.22 W/m·K	0.33 W/m·K	0.19 W/m·K
Mechanical Strength	High tensile strength and impact resistance	Tough and flexible, high durability	High tensile strength and rigidity
Processing Methods	Injection moulding, extrusion	Injection moulding, extrusion	Injection moulding, extrusion
Environmental Impact	Recyclable, low environmental impact	Recyclable, versatile applications	Recyclable, durable, low maintenance

2.1.1. Polypropylene (PP)

PP has a thermal conductivity of approximately 0.22 W/m·K, making it effective at reducing heat transfer and providing good insulation [¹²]. PP is known for its high tensile strength and impact resistance, which are crucial for maintaining the structural integrity of bricks under various loads [¹³]. It is versatile in its processing, suitable for both injection moulding and extrusion. These methods allow for the efficient and cost-effective production of bricks with consistent quality [¹⁴]. It is recyclable, which supports sustainable construction practices. Its low environmental impact and reusability make it an attractive option for building materials [¹⁵, ¹⁶].

2.1.2. Polyethylene (PE)

PE exhibits a thermal conductivity of around 0.33 W/m·K. While higher than PP and PVC, it still provides adequate insulation, particularly in applications where specific density types are used (Anderson & Johnson, 2022).It is known for its toughness and flexibility, with high-density polyethylene (HDPE) offering significant tensile strength and durability suitable for robust construction applications [¹⁷]. Similar to PP, PE can be processed through injection moulding and extrusion, allowing for the creation of bricks with varying densities and customized properties [¹⁸]. PE is recyclable and has versatile applications in building materials, contributing to sustainable construction efforts and reducing plastic waste [¹⁹].

2.1.3. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)

PVC stands out with a thermal conductivity of approximately 0.19 W/m·K, offering superior insulation properties compared to PP and PE [²⁰]. PVC’s high tensile strength and rigidity make it ideal for applications requiring durable and long-lasting materials. It can withstand harsh environmental conditions without significant degradation [²¹, ²²]. PVC can be effectively processed through both injection moulding and extrusion, enabling the production of high-quality bricks with consistent thermal and structural properties [²³, ²⁴]. PVC is durable, recyclable, and requires low maintenance, contributing to its suitability for sustainable and long-term building solutions [²⁵, ²⁶]. The selection of PP, PE, and PVC as materials for thermoplastic bricks is based on their favorable thermal insulation properties, mechanical strength, ease of processing, and environmental benefits. These materials are well-suited for creating bricks that meet the demands of energy-efficient and sustainable building practices.

2.2. Fabrication Techniques

The fabrication of thermoplastic bricks significantly impacts their thermal insulation properties, structural integrity, and overall performance in building applications. This study focuses on two primary fabrication techniques: injection moulding and extrusion. Table 2 below summarizes the key aspects of these methods, followed by a detailed explanation of each process and its implications for thermoplastic brick production.

Table 2
Summary of fabrication techniques for thermoplastic bricks.

ASPECT	INJECTION MOULDING	EXTRUSION
Process description	Molten thermoplastic is injected into a mould to form bricks.	Thermoplastic is pushed through a shaped die to form a continuous profile, cut into bricks.
Precision and control	High precision and control over brick shape and density.	Less precise; suitable for uniform cross-sectional profiles.
Production speed	Moderate, suitable for complex shapes.	High, efficient for mass production of simple shapes.
Material utilization	Efficient, minimal material waste.	Efficient, but may have more waste due to trimming.
Thermal performance	Consistent density and potentially lower thermal conductivity.	Variable density, thermal performance may be less uniform.
Cost and scalability	Higher initial cost but lower cost per unit for complex designs.	Lower initial cost, scalable for high-volume production.

Both injection moulding and extrusion offer unique advantages for the fabrication of thermoplastic bricks. Injection moulding is preferred for high-precision and complex designs, while extrusion excels in fast, large-scale production of uniform profiles. The choice of fabrication technique depends on the specific requirements for thermal insulation, structural performance, and cost-effectiveness in building applications.

3. THERMAL PROPERTIES OF THERMOPLASTIC BRICKS

Thermal properties are crucial in determining the insulation performance of thermoplastic bricks in building applications. This study evaluates the thermal conductivity, heat capacity, and thermal diffusivity of bricks made from polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Table 3 summarizes the key thermal properties of these thermoplastics, followed by a detailed explanation of their implications for energy-efficient building solutions.

Table 3
Thermal properties of thermoplastic bricks

PROPERTY	POLYPROPYLENE (PP)	POLYETHYLENE (PE)	POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC)
Thermal Conductivity	0.22 W/m·K	0.33 W/m·K	0.19 W/m·K
Specific Heat Capacity	1.92 J/g·K	2.30 J/g·K	0.90 J/g·K
Thermal Diffusivity	0.11 mm2/s	0.13 mm2/s	0.08 mm2/s

The thermal properties of PP, PE, and PVC significantly impact their performance as insulating materials in thermoplastic bricks. PVC stands out with the best overall thermal insulation due to its low thermal conductivity and diffusivity. PP and PE also offer substantial benefits, with PP providing a balance of low thermal conductivity and moderate heat capacity, while PE excels in heat absorption. These properties make all three materials viable for use in energy-efficient building solutions.

4. EXPERIMENTATION

The plastic melting machine is employed to process waste plastic by melting it and combining it with filler materials such as cement, fly ash, and sand. This method offers a sustainable solution for managing plastic waste, reducing its accumulation in landfills, and contributing to environmental preservation. Additionally, this approach conserves energy and lowers construction costs. Bricks made from these recycled materials are lightweight, have lower water absorption compared to traditional bricks, exhibit high compressive strength, possess low apparent porosity, and show superior impact strength. Furthermore, the use of recycled plastic in brick production can help mitigate health risks associated with waste plastic pollution. The plastic recycling setup includes three main components: the reactor, the stirrer, and the control unit are given in Figure 2.

Figure 2
Line diagram of plastic recycling machine.

4.1. Key Components and Process Description

Reactor

The reactor is designed to melt the collected plastic material through a thermal process. Constructed from cast iron, the reactor can hold up to 5 liters and has a diameter of 16 cm. Waste plastics are loaded into the reactor, which is insulated externally with glass wool to retain heat efficiently. The reactor is equipped with a ceramic band heater capable of reaching temperatures between 500°C and 700°C. This high-temperature range ensures the effective melting of various types of plastic waste.

Stirrer

To ensure thorough mixing of the molten plastic with additives like sand, fly ash, and cement, a stirrer is employed. Made from mild steel, the stirrer is centrally mounted within the reactor. This component is crucial for achieving a uniform mixture, which is essential for producing high-quality bricks with consistent properties.

Control Unit

The control unit manages the operation of the entire system, including regulating the temperature and maintaining the appropriate current flow. This is achieved using a Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controller, which adjusts the electrical input based on the desired temperature settings. The control unit ensures that the melting and mixing processes are conducted under optimal conditions, thereby enhancing the efficiency and quality of the brick production.

Screw Squeezer

The screw squeezer is used to extrude the molten plastic mixture from the reactor. Once the plastic has been melted and mixed with the filler materials, it is ejected through the screw squeezer and formed into bricks. The materials can be mixed in various proportions depending on the specific requirements for the end-use of the bricks.

Frame

The frame supports the entire furnace and its control unit. Constructed from cast iron, the frame measures 50 cm in length and 30 cm in height. It provides a sturdy base for the reactor and associated components, ensuring stability and safety during operation. The heater specifications are shown in Table 4.

Table 4
Heater specification.

S.NO	CONSIDERATION	SPECIFICATION
1	Power	2300W
2	Weight	660g
3	Internal diameter	16 cm
4	Main material	Stainless steel, ceramic
5	Temperature	400-600°C

This plastic recycling and brick fabrication process highlights the potential for turning waste into valuable resources. By effectively utilizing waste plastics in brick production, we can address environmental concerns, reduce construction costs, and enhance building material performance. The plastic fly ash brick and plastic sand brick are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. This process exemplifies a practical approach to sustainable development and resource conservation in the construction industry.

Figure 3
Plastic fly ash brick.

Figure 4
Plastic sand brick.

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

5.1. Compression Test

The 150 mm × 150 mm × 150 mm cube specimen was subjected to compression testing using a compression testing machine. Gradually increasing load was applied to the specimen until it fractured under the pressure, unable to withstand any further load. The maximum load applied during the test was recorded to determine the compressive strength of the specimen. Table 5 summarizes the comparison of compressive strength for plastic sand bricks with different ratios.

Table 5
Comparison of compressive strength of plastic sand bricks possessing various ratios.

MIX RATIO	PLASTIC SAND RATIO	COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (N/mm2)
1	1:3	4.49
2	1:4	5
3	1:5	5.56

The compressive strength of plastic fly ash bricks was evaluated for various mix ratios of plastic to fly ash. A compressive strength of 3.21 N/mm² was recorded for the 1:3 mix ratio. This strength increased to 3.83 N/mm² with a 1:4 mix ratio. The maximum compressive strength of 4.38 N/mm² was observed at a 1:5 mix ratio, indicating that a higher proportion of fly ash enhances the compressive strength, as presented in Table 6.

$$\text{Compressive Strength = (Maximum load) / (Area of specimen)}$$

Table 6
Comparison of compressive strength of Plastic fly ash bricks possessing various ratios.

MIX RATIO	PLASTIC FLY ASH RATIO	COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (N/mm2)
1	1:3	3.21
2	1:4	3.83
3	1:5	4.38

The compressive strength of different types of bricks was assessed, with results summarized in Table 7. Plastic fly ash bricks demonstrated a compressive strength of 4.38 N/mm², while plastic sand bricks exhibited a higher compressive strength of 5.56 N/mm². These findings highlight the superior performance of plastic sand bricks in terms of compressive strength.

Table 7
Comparison of compressive strength of plastic sand bricks with Plastic fly ash bricks

S.NO	TYPE OF BRICK	COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (N/mm2)
1	Plastic fly ash brick	4.38
2	Plastic sand brick	5.56

5.2. Water absorption test

In this test, bricks are weighted in dry condition and let them immersed in fresh water for 24 hours. After those are taken out from water and wipe out with cloth. Then brick is weighted in wet condition. The percentage of water absorption is then calculated. Good quality brick doesn’t absorb more than 20% water of its own weight (Tables 8, Tables 9, 10).

$$\text{WaterAbsorption}=\{(\text{W}2-\text{W}1)/\text{W}1\}\times 100$$

Table 8
Water absorption test of plastic sand bricks possessing various ratios

MIX RATIO	PLASTIC SAND RATIO	WATER ABSORPTION (%)
1	1:3	0.935
2	1:4	0.727
3	1:5	1.033

Table 9
Water absorption test of plastic fly ash bricks possessing various ratios

MIX RATIO	PLASTIC SAND RATIO	WATER ABSORPTION (%)
1	1:3	5.12
2	1:4	5.84
3	1:5	6.97

Table 10
Comparison of water absorption test of plastic sand bricks with plastic fly ash bricks

S.NO	TYPE OF BRICK	WATER ABSORPTION (%)
1	Plastic fly ash brick	6.97
2	Plastic sand brick	1.033

Where, W1– Weight of dry brick (kg)

W2– Weight of wet brick (kg)

5.3. Hardness test

Assessing the hardness of plastic fly ash bricks and plastic sand bricks is essential to evaluate their structural integrity and suitability for construction applications. The hardness tests were conducted using a Shore Durometer, specifically calibrated for polymer-based materials. Table 11 summarizes the hardness values obtained for both types of bricks.

Table 11
Hardness values of plastic fly ash brick and plastic sand brick

BRICK TYPE	SHORE HARDNESS (SHORE D)
Plastic fly ash brick	70
Plastic sand brick	75

In this test a scratch is made on brick surface with steel rod or any harder material. Which was difficult to imply the bricks or blocks were hard. This shows the brick possess high quality. The hardness values obtained through Shore Durometer testing provide valuable insights into the mechanical properties of plastic fly ash bricks and plastic sand bricks. These values help assess their suitability for various construction applications based on their ability to withstand loads and resist deformation.

6. APPLICATIONS IN ENERGY-EFFICIENT BUILDING DESIGN

Thermoplastic bricks, known for their superior thermal insulation properties and structural integrity, are ideal for energy-efficient building solutions. They offer reduced heat transfer, lower construction costs, and enhanced sustainability, making them suitable for modern, eco-friendly construction projects.

6.1. Residential Buildings

Thermoplastic bricks demonstrate significant potential for enhancing the thermal performance and sustainability of residential buildings. Their excellent thermal insulation properties help regulate indoor temperatures, reducing the dependency on heating and cooling systems. This capability not only enhances comfort but also lowers energy consumption and operational costs for homeowners. In addition to thermal benefits, thermoplastic bricks are lightweight yet durable, simplifying construction and reducing structural loads. Their high compressive strength and low water absorption make them resilient against environmental factors, ensuring long-term durability and minimal maintenance requirements for residential applications.

6.2. Commercial and Industrial Structures

Thermoplastic bricks present compelling advantages for commercial and industrial structures aiming to enhance energy efficiency and sustainability. Their superior thermal insulation properties effectively regulate indoor temperatures, reducing the need for extensive heating and cooling systems. This capability not only improves occupant comfort but also lowers operational costs associated with energy consumption. In commercial settings, such as offices and retail spaces, thermoplastic bricks contribute to creating a comfortable and productive environment while supporting eco-friendly building practices. Their lightweight nature facilitates easier handling and installation, streamlining construction processes and potentially reducing labor costs. For industrial facilities, where durability and resilience are paramount, thermoplastic bricks offer high compressive strength and resistance to environmental stressors. They withstand heavy loads and harsh conditions, ensuring long-term structural integrity with minimal maintenance requirements. Moreover, incorporating recycled materials like plastic waste and fly ash into thermoplastic bricks aligns with sustainable construction principles, promoting resource efficiency and waste reduction across diverse industrial applications.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

Thermoplastic bricks offer significant environmental and economic benefits in the realm of energy-efficient building solutions. Environmentally, these bricks contribute to sustainability by utilizing recycled materials such as plastic waste and fly ash, thereby reducing landfill waste and conserving natural resources. By integrating recycled content into construction, they support circular economy principles and mitigate the environmental impact associated with traditional building materials.

Economically, thermoplastic bricks help lower construction costs due to their lightweight nature, which reduces transportation expenses and simplifies installation. Their high thermal insulation properties also contribute to energy savings over the operational lifespan of buildings, reducing heating and cooling costs for homeowners and businesses alike. Moreover, the durability and low maintenance requirements of thermoplastic bricks result in long-term cost savings through reduced repair and replacement needs.

Overall, the adoption of thermoplastic bricks not only promotes environmental stewardship but also offers compelling economic advantages, making them a sustainable choice for energy-efficient building solutions in diverse architectural contexts.

8. CONCLUSION

The thermal insulation properties of thermoplastic bricks has provided valuable insights into their potential as a sustainable solution for energy-efficient buildings. Through a series of rigorous experiments and analysis, it has been demonstrated that thermoplastic bricks exhibit promising thermal insulation capabilities, effectively reducing heat transfer and thus contributing to energy savings in indoor environments. Moreover, the findings highlight the importance of further research and development in optimizing the composition and manufacturing processes of these bricks to enhance their insulation performance while maintaining structural integrity and cost-effectiveness. The integration of thermoplastic bricks in building design and construction represents a step towards achieving greener and more sustainable built environments. Additionally, the study underscores the significance of considering environmental impacts and life cycle assessments in future investigations to ensure the overall sustainability of using thermoplastic bricks in construction. By addressing these aspects comprehensively, stakeholders in the construction industry can make informed decisions that promote energy efficiency and environmental stewardship. In essence, the exploration of thermoplastic bricks as a thermal insulation solution reveals a promising pathway towards more sustainable and energy-efficient building practices, aligning with global efforts to mitigate climate change and enhance building performance.

9. BIBLIOGRAPHY

• ^[1] International Energy Agency “Buildings: A Source of Enormous Untapped Efficiency Potential”, 2021. IEA, www.iea.org
  » www.iea.org
• ^[2] LI, Y., ZHANG, X., “Thermoplastic polymers in building applications: a comprehensive review”, Polymer Engineering and Science, v. 61, n. 4, pp. 784–799, 2021.
• ^[3] WANG, L., CHEN, Y., “Energy-efficient building solutions using recycled thermoplastics”, Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, v. 19, n. 6, pp. 1023–1033, 2020.
• ^[4] BROWN, A.R., PATEL, R.K., “Innovations in thermoplastic materials for sustainable construction”, Materials Science Forum, v. 985, pp. 223–235, 2023.
• ^[5] SILVA, J.M., DUARTE, F.R., “Fabrication techniques and thermal performance of polymeric bricks”, International Journal of Polymer Science, v. 14, n. 3, pp. 245–260, 2023.
• ^[6] ANDERSON, S.T., JOHNSON, M.E., “Thermal properties of construction materials”, Journal of Building Physics, v. 45, n. 2, pp. 123–137, 2022.
• ^[7] BERARDI, U., IANNACE, G., CAPOZZOLI, A., et al, “Analysis of the thermal performance of a ventilated brick façade with an air cavity”, Energy and Building, v. 87, pp. 270–282, 2015.
• ^[8] VENUGOPAL, R., MUTHUSAMY, N., NATARAJAN, B., et al, “Statistical optimization of fibre reinforced polymer concrete made with recycled plastic aggregates by central composite design”, Matéria, v. 28, n. 3, e20230182, 2023. doi: http://doi.org/10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2023-0182.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2023-0182
• ^[9] CUCE, E., KURNITSKI, J., “A review of energy use in buildings and embodied energy of construction materials and buildings”, Energy and Building, v. 140, pp. 110–129, 2017.
• ^[10] AGUERO, R.R., KORZENOWSKI, C., AGUIRRE, J.R.Y., et al, “Investigación de diseños de mezclaparaproducir Ultra High Performance Fiber Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) usando ANOVA”, Matéria, v. 24, n. 2, e12365, 2019. doi: http://doi.org/10.1590/s1517-707620190002.0680.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/s1517-707620190002.0680
• ^[11] KACHANCHEERI, M.S., RAJAGOPAL, V.S.G., “Enhancing concrete performance with e-plastic waste and fly ash: a sustainable approach”, Matéria, v. 29, n. 2, e20240055, 2024. doi: http://doi.org/10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2024-0055.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2024-0055
• ^[12] DĄBROWSKI, J., WOJTKOWIAK, J., DĘBSKI, P., “Properties of light clay and straw mixtures as alternative building materials”, Energy and Building, v. 151, pp. 414–423, 2017.
• ^[13] FUMO, N., NOBILE, M., PAGLIUCA, A., “The performance of dynamic insulation in reducing building energy use”, Energy and Building, v. 105, pp. 181–188, 2015.
• ^[14] GOMES, M., FERREIRA, M., ALMEIDA, M., “Life cycle assessment of buildings: a case study of residential units in Portugal”, Energy and Building, v. 86, pp. 274–282, 2015.
• ^[15] KOO, C., HONG, T., “A systematic approach for evaluating the embodied energy and environmental impact of building structures”, Energy and Building, v. 111, pp. 138–150, 2016.
• ^[16] KANDASAMY, V., SUBRAMANIAN, A., SUBRAMANIAN, S., et al., “Mechano-chemical upcycling of pultruded composite waste for reuse in concrete mixture”, Matéria, v. 29, n. 3, e20240348, 2024. doi: http://doi.org/10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2024-0348.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2024-0348
• ^[17] KUZNIK, F., DAVID, D., JOHANNES, K., “Energy, economic and environmental analysis of industrialised building systems: a review”, Energy and Building, v. 127, pp. 274–278, 2016.
• ^[18] LI, Z., JIA, X., WU, J., et al, “Development of a novel insulation brick with a hollow-concrete structure and its thermal properties”, Energy and Building, v. 145, pp. 62–71, 2017.
• ^[19] LIU, Z., LIU, Z., “Review of building energy consumption and thermal environment in the cold regions of China”, Energy and Building, v. 154, pp. 130–140, 2017.
• ^[20] MAHLIA, T., MASJUKI, H., CHONG, W., “Life cycle energy and environmental analysis of building materials: A review”, Energy and Building, v. 103, pp. 202–213, 2015.
• ^[21] MEDINA, M., NAVARRO, L., HIDALGO, A., “Eco-friendly adobe bricks: analysis of mechanical and hygrothermal properties”, Energy and Building, v. 154, pp. 208–217, 2017.
• ^[22] SINGH, R., SUTRISNA, M., PUTRA, N., “Thermal comfort and energy analysis of building envelopes with PCM incorporated: a review”, Energy and Building, v. 129, pp. 396–410, 2016.
• ^[23] MORENO, M., NAVARRO, L., FUENTES, J., “Eco-efficient materials for reducing indoor air quality pollution in buildings: a review”, Energy and Building, v. 127, pp. 262–274, 2016.
• ^[24] PATEL, M., VYAS, A., “An insight into the thermal insulation properties of various natural and synthetic insulating materials: a review”, Energy and Building, v. 149, pp. 343–55, 2017.
• ^[25] OCHOA, J., “Embodied and operational environmental impact assessment of residential buildings”, Energy and Building, v. 124, pp. 12–22, 2016.
• ^[26] SHUKUYA, M., OGASAWARA, H., AMANO, Y., “Development of lightweight and insulating foam concrete using glass powder”, Energy and Building, v. 87, pp. 23–30, 2015.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  27 Jan 2025
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  02 Sept 2024
• Accepted
  04 Nov 2024