Climate change and global warming are pressing issues exacerbated by the rapid expansion of the
world's population and its housing needs. Traditional construction materials contribute significantly to
environmental degradation through the generation of dust, solid waste, hazardous gases, and high
energy consumption. In response, this study focuses on exploring environmentally sustainable
alternatives, with a particular emphasis on compressed stabilized earth blocks (CSEB). CSEBs are
masonry units formed by compacting soil, stabilizers, and water. This research investigates various
CSEB compositions incorporating 8% Cement and 15% Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag
(GGBS), alongside either Sugarcane Bagasse Ash (SBA) or Rice Husk Ash (RHA), conforming to
grading zone-II specifications outlined in IS 383. The study evaluates the compressive strength, water
absorption, and dry density of CSEBs from eight different mix compositions after 21 days of curing.
Results indicate that CSEBs formulated with a mix composition containing 20% SBA or RHA exhibit
the most promising performance, meeting the requirements outlined in Indian standards. These findings
underscore the potential of CSEBs as an environmentally friendly alternative in construction practices,
offering a sustainable solution to mitigate the adverse impacts of traditional building materials on the
environment.

1. Kumar N, Barbato M. Effect of sugarcane baggase fibre on the properties of compressed and stabilized earth blocks. Const Building Mater. 2022:315. 2. Sitton JD, Zenali Y, Heidarian WH, Storey BA. Effect of mix design on compressed earth block strength. Const Building Mater. 2018; 158:124–131. 3. Sekhar DC, Nayak S. Utilization of granulated blast furnace slag and cement in the manufacture of compressed stabilized earth blocks. Const Building Mater. 2018; 166:531–536. 4. Murmu A, Patel A. Toward sustainable brick production: An overview. Const Building Mater. 2018; 165:112–125. 5. Nagaraj HB, Shreyasvi C. Compressed stabilized earth blocks using iron mine spoil waste–An explorative study. International High-Performance Built Environment Conference – A Sustainable Built Environment Conference 2016 Series (SBE16), Procedia Engineering. 2016;180:1203–1212. 6. Nagaraj HB, Sravan MV, Arun TG, Jagadish KS. Role of lime with cement in long-term strength of Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks. Int J Sustain Built Environ. 2014;3:54–61. 7. Tausif E Elahi a, Azmayeen Rafat Shahriar b, Islam MS. Engineering characteristics of compressed earth blocks stabilized with cement and fly ash. Const Building Mater. 2021;277:122367s. 8. James J, Pandian PK, Deepika K, Manikanda VJ, Manikandan V, Manikumaran P. Cement stabilized soil blocks admixed with sugarcane bagasse ash, J. Eng. 2016;2016:1–9. 9. Naseer AA, Shah AA. Economical stabilization of clay for earth buildings construction in rainy and flood prone areas. Constr Build Mater. 2015;77:154–159. 10. Elahi TE, Shahriar AR, Alam Md. K, Isaac Md. ZA. Effectiveness of sawdust ash and cement for fabrication of compressed stabilized earth blocks. Const Building Mater. 2020; 259:120568. 11. Akinwumi, Domo-Spiff AH, Salami A. Marine plastic pollution and affordable housing challenge: Shredded waste plastic stabilized soil for producing compressed earth bricks. Case Studies Const Mater. Elsevier. 2019;11:e00241. 12. IS-1725. Soil based blocks used in general building construction. Bur. Indian Stand. 1982. 13. Danso H. Martinson DB, Ali Muhammad, Williams JB. Mechanisms by which the inclusion of natural fibres enhance the properties of soil blocks for construction. J Compos Mater. 2017;0(0):1– 11. 14. Binod Khadka. Manjip Shakya. Comparative compressive strength of stabilized and unstabilized rammed earth. Mater Struct. 2016;49:3945–3955. 15. Muntohar AS. Engineering characteristics of the compressed-stabilized earth brick, Constr. Build. Mater. 2011; 25:4215–4220. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.conbuildmat.2011.04.061. 16. Reddy BVV, Kumar PP. Cement stabilised rammed earth. Part B: Compressive strength and stress– strain characteristics. Mater. Struct. 2011; 44:695–707. 17. Walker P, Stace T. Properties of some cement stabilised compressed earth blocks and mortars. Mater Struct. 1997;30:545–551. 18. Palanisamy P, Kumar PS, Effect molarity in geopolymer earth brick reinforced with fibrous coir wastes using sandy soil and quarry dust as fine aggregate. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cscm.2018.01.009. 19. Zhang Z, Wong YC, Arulrajah A, Horpibulsuk S. A review of studies on bricks using alternative materials and approaches. Construct. Build. Mater. 2018;188:1101e1118. 20. Islam MS, Elahi TE, Shahriar AR, Nahar K, Hossain TR. Strength and durability characteristics of cement-sand stabilized earth blocks, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2020;32(5):04020087. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003176. 21. Malhotra SK, Tehri SP. Development of bricks from granulated blast furnace slag. Constr Build Mater. 1996;10:191–193. 22. Madurwar MV, Mandavgane SA, Ralegaonkar RV. Use of sugarcane bagasse ash as brick material. Curr Sci. 2014;107:1044–1051. 23. Oyekan Gl. Effect of Admixtures on the Compressive Strength of Sandcrete Blocks. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences. 2008;6:451–454. 24. Oyetola EB, Abdullahi M. The use of rise husk Ash in low-cost sandcrete blocks production. Leonardo Electron J Practices Tech. , 2006 January–June;8: 58–70. 25. IS 1725–1982. Indian standard specification for soil based blocks used in general building construction. 26. IS 1077: 1992. Indian standard common burnt clay building bricks – specification. 27. IS 3495: (Parts 1 to 4): 1992. Methods of tests of burnt clay building bricks. 28. Auroville Earth Institute (earth-auroville.com). 29. Yawale AD, Patankar SV. Performance of GGBS and SBA in compressed stabilized earth blocks. Fiber Reinforced Polymeric Materials and Sustainable Structures. 2023 Feb;257–267.