Sustainable ceramics derived from solid wastes: a review

74Citations
Citations of this article
185Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Wastes from different manufacturing processes and energy generation unite are attributed to the ecological and health issues. Instead of land-filling, the waste can be recycled or reused to convert marketable value-added products with high ecologic and economic interest. Ceramics are attracting particularly in waste recycling perceptions. From this eco-friendly propensity, in the last two decades, an increasing number of studies have demonstrated the possibility to use alternative ingredients in the place of conventional raw materials (e.g., most common ternary clay-quartz-feldspar system) for the fabrication of ceramics. Researchers are trying to incorporate the wastes and industrial by-products like fly ash (FA), rice husk ash (RHA), blast furnace slag (BFS), sludge, glass waste, polished tile waste, eggshell and others for making different ceramics. The present review is aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of the recent waste-derived ceramics including refractories, glasses, whitewares, oxide and non-oxide ceramics with the correlation of waste incorporation limits, manufacturing routes, and properties of the ceramics. The investigation reveals that ceramic industries have huge potential to utilize the wastes as substitution of the natural raw materials. The waste to value-added ceramics conversion not only solves the disposal problems but also conserves the natural resources.

Author supplied keywords

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hossain, S. S., & Roy, P. K. (2020). Sustainable ceramics derived from solid wastes: a review. Journal of Asian Ceramic Societies. Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/21870764.2020.1815348

Readers over time

‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25020406080

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 42

67%

Researcher 12

19%

Lecturer / Post doc 7

11%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 36

62%

Materials Science 9

16%

Chemical Engineering 7

12%

Design 6

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0