Self-healing concrete has emerged as an innovative solution to the challenges faced bytraditional concrete, particularly its tendency to crack under load and environmentalimpact. This degree project focuses on comparing two main methods of self-healing:autogenous and autonomous self-healing. Autogenous self-healing relies on the concrete'snatural chemical reactions and is based on optimized mix composition to repair cracks,while autonomous self-healing involves active additives, such as bacteria, to initiate therepair process.To conduct this study, a literature review method is employed. A literature review is aresearch method that summarizes and analyzes results from several previous studies on aspecific topic, enabling a comprehensive assessment of the research field and thegeneration of conclusions. This method is particularly suitable for this study as itcombines data from various sources, providing a higher degree of credibility andgeneralizability.The purpose of this degree project is to examine these two methods, comparing andanalyzing the environmental, economic, and technical aspects of autogenous andautonomous self-healing concrete. Through an extensive literature review and life cycleanalysis, the research aims to provide a deeper understanding of the potential of selfhealingconcrete to revolutionize the construction industry and contribute to a moresustainable future.This study investigates the impact of autogenous and autonomous self-healing concretetechnologies on crack repair and durability. Both techniques promote healing by formingcrystalline calcium carbonate (CaCO₃) on crack surfaces, but bacteria-based autonomousconcrete is found to be six times more effective than autogenous concrete. The resultsindicate that self-healing concrete can have a longer lifespan and better mechanicalproperties compared to regular concrete, primarily by healing cracks and reducingcorrosion risks.In the autonomous method, the best results for adding bacterial cells were achieved usingexpanded clay and melamine for encapsulating Bacillus cohnii and Bacillus sphaericusbacteria, respectively, resulting in crack healing up to 1240 μm and 970 μm after 28 days.Meanwhile, the autogenous method, using crystalline additives, could heal cracks up to400 μm, though for cracks wider than 300 μm, efficiency dropped to only 20%.This work indicates that the autonomous technique is significantly more expensive thanthe autogenous one. In the least expensive cases, bacteria-based autonomous concrete,excluding concrete production costs, can cost up to 60 EUR/m³, while SAP-basedautogenous concrete, excluding concrete production costs, is approximately 9 EUR/m³.Regarding the mechanical properties of concrete, particularly compressive strengthrecovery after healing, bacteria-based autonomous concrete has shown up to a 44%improvement in compressive strength. In contrast, autogenous concrete with alternativebinders and crystalline additives has at best demonstrated an 11% improvement.Concentration and nutrients in the autonomous method are crucial to the mechanicalproperties of the concrete, which in some cases can lead to a decrease in compressivestrength capacity by up to 21%. Optimal strength for bacteria-based concrete was achievedat a concentration of 10⁵ cells/ml.When examining carbon dioxide emissions from the production of these methods, theautogenous method has shown higher emissions compared to the autonomous method.This is mainly due to higher cement consumption to compensate for the reduction in theconcrete's mechanical properties when using alternative binders and mineral additives.