Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
4 min of reading 
0 comments 
Even With Limitations, Roman Concrete Impresses With Durability and Can Inspire Sustainable Solutions for Modern Construction Challenges
The concrete used in Ancient Rome remains strong after more than two thousand years. Present in aqueducts, bridges, and temples, it piques the curiosity of scientists seeking solutions to make construction more sustainable.
A new study showed that, even with limitations, this ancient material can inspire pathways for the future.
Durability as an Advantage
Published in the journal iScience, the study analyzed whether Roman concrete would be more sustainable than modern concrete.
-
A Raia: the giant border between Portugal and Spain, which is 1,214 km long, features a bridge of only 6 meters, and has over 700 years of history.
-
Artist transforms trash into art and changes lives in an emotional documentary that reveals social inclusion, overcoming, and human impact in Brazil
-
Without concrete, without traditional cleaning, and without common separation, a block made of recycled plastic transforms problematic waste into a rigid piece for walls and structures.
-
A century-old convent hidden in Tijuca almost went to the ground, but was transformed into a condominium with an open church, preserved ruins, monastic corridors, and a common area that seems straight out of a European film.
The researchers found that the ancient recipe requires almost the same amount of energy and water to produce.
In addition, carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions are also similar — and in some cases even higher.
Even so, the authors believe that the durability of Roman concrete can be an important differentiator.
“Sustainability goes hand in hand with durability,” states Daniela Martinez, an engineer at the Universidad del Norte in Colombia.
A Current Problem: Pollution From Modern Concrete
Producing concrete in a more environmentally friendly way is a global challenge. Currently, the cement industry is responsible for about 8% of human CO₂ emissions and consumes 3% of all the energy used on the planet. Therefore, seeking alternatives has become urgent.
Martinez explains that the goal was to understand if ancient methods could help. “We were interested in how we could draw lessons from their methods to inform some of the climate mitigation challenges we face today in our built environment,” she says.
Differences in the Formulas
Both ancient and modern concrete use limestone as a base. When heated to very high temperatures, limestone releases CO₂ and turns into calcium oxide, which is mixed with other materials and water.
The Romans added local stones, pozzolana (a type of volcanic ash), and recycled rubble to the mix. Modern concrete, on the other hand, mixes cement with sand and gravel.
The researchers compared various ancient recipes using mathematical models. They assessed the consumption of water, limestone, and energy, as well as pollutant emissions.
They also analyzed how different energy sources — such as biomass, wood, and renewable sources — affect the outcome.
Mixed Results
The conclusion was surprising. Roman concrete, produced with current technologies, does not generate less CO₂ than modern concrete.
In some cases, it even pollutes more. “Contrary to our initial expectations, adopting Roman formulations with current technology may not yield substantial reductions in emissions or energy demand,” states Martinez.
For this reason, she believes that using biomass or renewable energy in modern kilns would be a more effective way to reduce environmental impact.
Air Pollution and Public Health
Despite this, the study brought a positive point. Roman concrete emits fewer air pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides and sulfur.
These gases are harmful to human health. The reduction of these substances varies from 11% to 98%, with the best results achieved when using renewable energy.
Roman Concrete: A Long-Term Advantage
Another advantage of Roman concrete is its longevity. Modern structures, such as highways, bridges, and buildings, require constant maintenance. In contrast, Roman monuments remain standing after centuries.
“When we take into account the lifespan of concrete, that’s where we start to see benefits,” says Martinez. Engineer Sabbie Miller, from the University of California, Davis, agrees.
For her, more durable materials help reduce the production of new resources and thus decrease environmental impact.
Challenges in Comparisons
Even with so much data, comparing ancient concrete with modern concrete is not simple. The concrete we use today has only existed for about 200 years. Roman concrete did not use steel bars, which are common in modern construction.
“The corrosion of steel reinforcements is the primary cause of concrete deterioration, so comparisons must be made very carefully,” states Paulo Monteiro, an engineer at the University of California, Berkeley.
The researchers intend to deepen their studies. They want to better understand how each type of concrete behaves under different conditions.
Martinez believes there is still much to learn from the Romans. “If we can incorporate their strategies into our modern and innovative ideas, we can create a more sustainable built environment.”
With information from TechXplore.
Be the first to react!