This review paper presents a comparative evaluation of polymer, bacterial-based, alkali-activated, and geopolymer binders in regard to their production methods, mechanical properties, their environmental/life cycle assessment (LCA), and durability when exposed to deteriorating cycles (such as sulfates, acids, and high temperatures). The significance of this study is to compare the results of over 400 journal papers, which present an in-depth analysis of fresh and hardened state properties of various binders that are advocated in the literature. Historically, Portland cement is generally considered a binder that plays a major role in any cementitious composites because of its high availability, and relatively inexpensive cost. Despite its significant benefits, it is known that the manufacturing process of Portland cement is energy and carbon intensive, and the resulted material often has shortcomings when exposed to deteriorating causes such as sulfates, acids, and high temperatures. However, recent movement toward net-zero as well as ultra-high-performance practices has increased the need for a more sustainable and durable binding system. Based on the result of this paper, each binder presents specific advantages when compared to Portland cement for specific applications that can be a better choice for their ultra-high capabilities and ecological properties. This includes the significantly better performance of alkali-activated binders (specifically geopolymers), under high temperatures, or very rapid strength gain of polymer (e.g., epoxy, polyester, and vinyl ester) binders, making them great alternatives to Portland cement, for rapid repair and rehabilitation purposes. Similarly, bacterial concrete also have certain capabilities such as long term durability and the potential for a continued self-repair or self-healing. In terms of environmental impacts, however, polymer binders are heavily depedant on their source of energy (e.g., petroleum vs. bio-based resins) while alkali-activated concretes and geopolymers have activators' large contributions to overall LCA impact categories. For bacterial binders, the used urea and nutrition can play a key role in their LCA results. Finally, based on the highlighted capabilities of each binder, recommendations on performance-based or hybrid design methods and specifications for an optimized system are also provided. Novel areas in polymer, bacterial-based, alkali-activated, and geopolymer binders are also included.

中文翻译：

---

聚合物、细菌基和碱激活（也称为地质聚合物）粘合剂的比较评论：生产、机械、耐久性和环境影响（生命周期评估 (LCA)）

这篇综述论文对聚合物、细菌基、碱活化和地质聚合物粘合剂的生产方法、机械性能、环境/生命周期评估 (LCA) 以及暴露于劣化循环时的耐久性（例如如硫酸盐、酸和高温）。这项研究的意义在于比较了 400 多篇期刊论文的结果，这些论文对文献中提倡的各种粘合剂的新鲜状态和硬化状态特性进行了深入分析。从历史上看，波特兰水泥通常被认为是一种粘合剂，由于其高可用性和相对便宜的成本，在任何水泥基复合材料中发挥着重要作用。尽管具有显着的优点，但众所周知，波特兰水泥的制造过程是能源和碳密集型的，并且所得材料在暴露于硫酸盐、酸和高温等劣化原因时通常存在缺点。然而，最近向净零排放和超高性能实践的发展增加了对更可持续和耐用的绑定系统的需求。根据本文的结果，与特定应用的波特兰水泥相比，每种粘合剂都具有特定的优势，因其超高的性能和生态特性而成为更好的选择。这包括碱活化粘合剂（特别是地质聚合物）在高温下显着更好的性能，或聚合物（例如环氧树脂、聚酯和乙烯基酯）粘合剂非常快速的强度增益，使其成为波特兰水泥的绝佳替代品，可快速修复和康复目的。同样，细菌混凝土也具有某些功能，例如长期耐用性和持续自我修复或自我修复的潜力。然而，就环境影响而言，聚合物粘合剂严重依赖于其能源（例如，石油与生物基树脂），而碱活化混凝土和地质聚合物则具有活化剂，对整个 LCA 影响类别贡献很大。对于细菌结合剂，所使用的尿素和营养物质对其 LCA 结果起着关键作用。最后，根据每个绑定器的突出功能，还提供了有关基于性能或混合设计方法和优化系统规范的建议。聚合物、细菌基、碱活化和地质聚合物粘合剂等新领域也包括在内。