Accepted Manuscript

Environmental Impacts, Life Cycle Assessment and Potential Improvement Measures

for Cement Production: A Literature Review

Daniel Andrés Salas, Angel Diego Ramirez, Carlos Raúl Rodríguez, Daniel Marx
Petroche, Andrea Jael Boero, Jorge Duque-Rivera

PII: S0959-6526(15)01748-5
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.078
Reference: JCLP 6448

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 3 April 2015

Revised Date: 6 November 2015
Accepted Date: 24 November 2015

Please cite this article as: Salas DA, Ramirez AD, Rodríguez CR, Petroche DM, Boero AJ, Duque-
Rivera J, Environmental Impacts, Life Cycle Assessment and Potential Improvement Measures
for Cement Production: A Literature Review, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), doi: 10.1016/
j.jclepro.2015.11.078.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Word count: 8822

2 Environmental Impacts, Life Cycle Assessment and Potential Improvement Measures for Cement

3 Production: A Literature Review

4 Daniel Andrés Salasa, Angel Diego Ramireza,*, Carlos Raúl Rodríguezb, Daniel Marx Petrocheb, Andrea Jael

PT
5 Boeroa, Jorge Duque-Riveraa
a
6 Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Facultad de Ingeniería en Mecánica y Ciencias de la

RI
7 Producción, Campus Gustavo Galindo, Km 30.5 Vía Perimetral, P.O. Box 09-01-5863, Guayaquil, Ecuador
b
8 Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Facultad de Ingeniería en Ciencias de la Tierra, Campus

SC
9 Gustavo Galindo, Km 30.5 Vía Perimetral, P.O. Box 09-01-5863, Guayaquil, Ecuador
10 *Corresponding author: e-mail: aramire@espol.edu.ec, Telephone: +593(0)42269351, Fax:
11 +593(0)42852804

12 Abstract
U
AN
13 Cement constitutes one of the primary building materials. As cement manufacturing involves the use of
M

14 large amounts of raw materials and energy, an issue that arises is the necessity to assess its environmental

15 impact and analyze in which way the industry should proceed concerning best practices. Life Cycle
D

16 Assessment (LCA) has frequently been used in case studies around the globe as an environmental impact
TE

17 assessing tool. The present literature review serves for: (i) describing the environmental impacts, (ii)

18 clarifying the methodological approaches in LCA, and (iii) identifying the main alternatives to improve the
EP

19 environmental performance of cement production. Several available studies on the environmental

20 performance of manufacture and use of cement products were reviewed. These studies identified
C

21 improvement of energy efficiency, the use of alternative fuels, clinker substitution, and carbon capture and
AC

22 storage (CCS) as the main solutions for mitigating environmental impacts caused by cement production.

23 The first three options have been thoroughly analyzed, applied, and have shown improvement through the

24 years. CCS has a high improvement potential; however, it presents technical and economic barriers to its

25 implementation.

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Keywords: LCA; cement; sustainability; energy efficiency; greenhouse gas emissions; carbon footprint

3 Research Highlights

4 • Environmental impacts of cement production are reviewed

PT
5 Methodological choices vary among LCA studies

6 • Main alternatives for mitigation were identified

RI
7 • Mitigation: energy efficiency, alternative fuels, clinker substitution, CCS

SC
8

9 1 Introduction

U
10 Cement is a fine-powdered substance that, when mixed with water and aggregates, presents high adhesive
AN
11 (cementitious) properties. It is produced from limestone, clay, and sand; these raw materials provide lime,

12 silica, alumina and iron, the key ingredients required. Cement production consists of three main stages: raw
M

13 material preparation, clinker production, and cement preparation (International Energy Agency, 2009).

14 Raw meal preparation Limestone, clay, and other raw materials are quarried or mined and transferred to the
D

15 manufacturing plant, where they are crushed and milled. They are mixed in the right proportions to reach
TE

16 the required composition. The composition depends on the quality and properties that each particular

17 cement product demands.

EP

18 Clinker production The prepared composition is then fed into a kiln, usually after passing through a pre-
C

19 heater, where it is exposed to temperatures up to 1450°C. This process generates chemical and physical
AC

20 changes that transform the raw meal into clinker. This stage of the production is the most energy

21 demanding.

22 Cement preparation The clinker is blended and ground with additives and other mineral components such as

23 gypsum, slag, and fly ash that build up the required properties of the final product.

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Depending on the moisture content of the material, cement production may be classified into four types: dry,

2 semi-dry, semi-wet and wet. Dry and semi-dry processes are the most efficient and the most used nowadays

3 (Benhelal et al., 2013; Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger, 2014; Wang et al., 2013). This literature review

4 aims to (i) present the environmental impacts related to the cement industry worldwide, (ii) summarize

PT
5 previous Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodological approaches and results, and (iii) identify the

6 environmental performance improvement measures in the reviewed studies.

RI
7 In this study, previous studies regarding the environmental performance of cement products were reviewed.

The review focused on those studies related to the environmental performance of cement production and

SC
8

9 those which applied LCA for the analysis.

U
10
AN
11 2 Environmental impacts of cement production

12 On average, 1 ton of concrete is produced every year for every human being in the world (Lippiatt B, 2004).
M

13 Concrete is a composite material composed of cement, aggregates (sand, gravel, or crushed stone) and

14 water. Cement manufacturing implies the use of large amounts of raw materials and energy, (Hendrik G.
D

15 Oss, 2002), and its production accounts for 5% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions (C.A. Hendriks,
TE

16 2000). Due to vast urbanization, the use of cement has increased dramatically (Chen et al., 2014). Currently,

17 due to its raw material requirements, the concrete industry is a major consumer of limited natural resources
EP

18 like water, gravel, sand or crushed rock (Mefteh et al., 2013).

C

19 In 2013, global CO2 emissions due to fuel use and cement production were 36 Gt (9.9 Gt of C); this is 61%
AC

20 higher than in 1990 and 2.3% higher than in 2012. Additionally, global CO2 emissions were projected to

21 increase by 2.5% in 2014. China, the United States, the European Union, and India, accounted for 58% of

22 the global CO2 emissions in 2013, among all the CO2 emissions sources (Le Quéré et al., 2015). Before

23 industrialization, atmospheric CO2 concentration ranged between 200 and 280 ppm (Feely et al., 2004); it

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 reached 398 ppm by November 2014 (US Department of Commerce, n.d.), and it is projected to increase to

2 over 800 ppm by the end of the century (Feely et al., 2004).

3 Besides CO2, the cement industry accounts for significant emissions of carbon monoxide and heavy metals

4 (Lei et al., 2011). Human activities, such as mining and industrial processing, are the main sources of heavy

PT
5 metal contamination in the environment (Al-Dadi et al., 2014). Photochemical ozone formation, heavy

6 metals and carcinogens values due to cement production depend highly on the fuels and raw materials used

RI
7 and come mostly from energy production processes (electricity and fuel refining) (Josa et al., 2007).The

main impact of cement production on land quality comes from quarrying, waste disposal, storage of

SC
8

9 materials and atmospheric deposition (Al-Dadi et al., 2014). Acidification is mainly caused by SO2 and NOx

U
10 emissions, and its total value depends on the clinker content of cement. NOx emissions are also the main
AN
11 cause of eutrophication (Josa et al., 2007). The main sources of winter smog (small dust suspended

12 particles) are SO2, dust, and soot. Mining and preparation of energy resources, in the countries of origin,
M

13 influence disparities between the results regarding winter smog (Josa et al., 2007). Due to the manufacturing

14 of cement, the levels of naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) and 19 trace elements have wide
D

15 ranges, that depend on the mining origin of the raw materials (Al-Dadi et al., 2014).
TE

16 CO2 emissions are the main contributor to the global warming effect related to cement manufacture, ranging

17 between 98.8% and 100% of the total. Other gases, such as CH4 or N2O, have a smaller influence despite
EP

18 their higher characterization factors (Josa et al., 2007).

C

19 Wang et al. (2013) have identified five driving factors that induce changes in greenhouse gas (GHG)
AC

20 emissions derived from cement production: energy emission factor, energy structure, energy intensity,

21 cement production activity, and clinker production activity. Cement production activity and clinker

22 production activity are the dominant factors that increase GHG emissions.

23 The environmental impact per unit of cement production also depends on the plant production capacity

24 (Chen et al., 2014). A relatively high environmental burden was observed in the moderate-production

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 scenario in most impact categories compared to large- and small- production scenarios. In the same study,

2 which was carried out in China, it was also found that shaft kilns presented a higher environmental burden

3 than dry kilns in most impact categories.

4 Carbonation, a natural aging process for cement, consists in the reaction of CO2 (Dissolved in the concrete

PT
5 pore fluid) with calcium and calcium silicate hydrate to form calcite (Calcium Carbonate, CaCO3).

6 Carbonation during the use stage captures CO2 from the environment, therefore it can subtract CO2

RI
7 emissions from production and construction stages. At the end of concrete’s structural life, there is a greater

degree of carbonation, the calcium oxide that did not carbonate during the use stage can be carbonated after

SC
8

9 demolition. The CO2 capture during the use stage of Portland cement represents 22% of the total CO2

U
10 emissions, and if it is crushed and used as a grave-filling material, it reaches 47%. In blended cement, CO2
AN
11 intake is reduced proportionally to the replacement of Portland cement. Considering carbonation during the

12 use stage and after the demolition stage is crucial for obtaining reliable results in LCA (García-Segura et al.,
M

13 2013). For a constant strength, mixtures with limestone powder had lower carbonation depth than concretes

14 made with fly ash. (Proske et al., 2013).

D

15
TE

16 3 LCA of cement products manufacture

17 LCA is a tool for evaluating the environmental performance of a product (or service) during its life cycle.
EP

18 The life cycle of a product involves the processes that occur during resource extraction, production,
C

19 logistics, use, and, end of life (EN ISO 14044:2006, 2006). The ISO14040-14044 series specify four steps
AC

20 for LCA execution: definition of goal and scope, inventory analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation

21 (EN ISO 14044:2006, 2006):

22 Goal and scope definition: During this stage, the purpose of the study, the functional unit, and the system

23 boundaries are established. The functional unit is the reference unit of the analyzed system for which all the

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 environmental impacts are calculated. The definition of the functional unit and the system boundaries

2 depend on the intended use of the study.

3 Inventory analysis: In this stage the input and output data are collected, and an inventory of environmental

4 and resource relevant inputs and outputs is developed.

PT
5 Impact assessment: Here, the results obtained in the inventory analysis are used for assessing the

6 environmental impacts of the product using characterization models. Impact categories are chosen according

RI
7 to the purpose of the study and the criterion of the researcher.

Interpretation: With the information obtained from the previous phases, in this stage conclusions and

SC
8

9 recommendations are formulated.

U
10 LCA can be performed with a cradle-to-gate or a cradle-to-grave approach. Cradle-to-gate considers the raw
AN
11 material extraction and the manufacturing processes needed for the final product until it leaves the factory;

12 on the other hand, cradle-to-grave also includes product use and its end of life management.
M

13 LCA is used for several applications including (i) evaluating the material and energy efficiency of a system,

14 (ii) identifying the pollution shifts between processes, and (iii) providing benchmarks for improvements
D

15 (Owens, 1997). Also, LCA results can be used to identify potential improvements within the studied
TE

16 systems and to orientate political and technical decision-making (Strazza et al., 2011).

17 As cement has multiple applications in civil engineering after it leaves the production plant, a unique life
EP

18 cycle cannot be defined, and a cradle-to-gate approach is, therefore, preferred. A cradle-to-gate approach
C

19 would still be useful for further assessing of complete life cycles of final products, such as structural and
AC

20 non-structural concrete components (Chen et al., 2010a). According to Van den Heede and De Belie (2012),

21 as a cradle-to-grave approach would contemplate the demolition and waste phase, it would be preferable

22 when assessing environmental impacts of “green” concretes, because it can include workability and strength

23 that are taken into account by cradle-to-gate as well as the durability parameter.

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 The functional unit, when reviewing previous LCA of concrete products, was observed to vary from the

2 material level (e.g. when elaborating an LCA of Portland cement) to the structural level (e.g. for an LCA of

3 a structural beam) (Van den Heede and De Belie, 2012). The functional unit chosen should be carefully

4 defined because it influences the outcome significantly, as shown by Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger

PT
5 (2014), where the use of LCA for waste co-incineration in cement kilns was analyzed. The studies they

6 analyzed were divided into two groups: (i) the first group, which covers the use of waste derived fuels with

RI
7 1 t of cement as functional unit, and (ii) the second group, which analyzes thermal waste treatments, like co-

incineration, with 1 t of waste as functional unit. The reported results were highly dependent on the

SC
8

9 functional unit chosen. Functional units encountered in the literature review were: 1 t of cement or 1 t of

U
10 clinker (Li et al., 2014a, 2014b; Strazza et al., 2011), 1 tonne of cement or clinker (Feiz et al., 2014b;
AN
11 García-Gusano et al., 2014, 2013), 1 kg of cement or 1 kg of clinker (Chen et al., 2010a; Valderrama et al.,

12 2012), 1 m3 of concrete of a specific strength at the construction site (Knoeri et al., 2013), 1 t of waste
M

13 (Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger, 2014), 1 m3 of concrete used in a structure with a service life of 15 years

14 (Valipour et al., 2014), 1 t of Portland cement with 42.5 MPa of strength (Li et al., 2014a), the equivalent of
D

15 20 bags of Portland cement, each one approximately 45.4 Kg (Eatmon, 2009).

TE

16 Chen et al. ( 2014) compared the production between dry kilns of different capacities (high, moderate, and

17 small) using LCA. Observations indicated a relatively high environmental burden in the moderate-
EP

18 production scenario in most impact categories compared to the large- and small- production scenarios. The
C

19 large-production scenario presented the lowest environmental burden in all categories, except in Global
AC

20 Warming Potential (GWP), in which the small-production scenario had the lowest value. The relatively high

21 resource consumption and direct air emissions caused the previously mentioned results (Chen et al., 2014).

22 Proske et al. (2013) analyzed some eco-friendly concrete mixes with reduced water and cement contents and

23 found that the allocation of environmental impacts to by-products, like fly ash and slag, decreases the GWP

24 reduction. The GWP without allocation was reduced approximately 35% in mixes with fly ash and

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 limestone and 60% in mixes with slag as clinker replacement. When using economic allocation on

2 Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCM), GWP lowered only 15% to 25% in fly ash mixes and 35%

3 to 45% in slag mixes.

4 Chen et al. (2010b) tested mass and economic allocation methods on waste products (Blast furnace slag and

PT
5 fly ash) used in cement industry for lowering clinker content. Mass allocation is constant over long periods

6 of time, but it induces large impacts on by-products (SCM). Economic allocation of these by-products

RI
7 enhances the fact that they were primarily waste, and should therefore not have the same environmental

burden as the main products, so it lowers their impacts, but it is unstable because of potential market

SC
8

9 fluctuations.

U
10 Among the reviewed literature, several authors utilized mass allocation (Eatmon, 2009), economic
AN
11 allocation (Feiz et al., 2014b), and system expansion (Knoeri et al., 2013). However, most studies do not

12 specify an allocation method (Chen et al., 2010a, 2014; García-Gusano et al., 2013; Li et al., 2014a, 2014b;
M

13 Valderrama et al., 2012; Valipour et al., 2014).

14 Feiz et al. (2014b) developed a simplified LCA model, in which fewer parameters than a full LCA were
D

15 analyzed. In order to simplify the LCA, three steps were followed: (i) elaborate the original attributional
TE

16 LCA, which included more than 50 input variables; (ii) test and identify which parameters were of special

17 importance, known as Key Performance Indicators (KPI), (those which provide most of the information),
EP

18 choosing 6 KPI; and (iii) create the simplified LCA based on the KPIs chosen. For the simplified LCA, only
C

19 six parameters were studied, resulting in a much simpler way to assess the GWP for the same case. The
AC

20 authors conducted a sensitivity analysis for the variation of the values of the KPIs and its relation to CO2

21 emissions. Then, the simplified model was tested. Results showed the simplified LCA had high accuracy

22 (just 4% difference with the original LCA). Also, the improvement of KPIs with higher impact contributed

23 more to reduce the overall CO2 emissions (Feiz et al., 2014b). Table 1 presents the general methodological

24 choices found in the reviewed studies. Table 2 shows a summary of quantitative results of the reviewed

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 LCA studies. Table 3 provides examples of impact categories results for LCA studies that presented this

2 information in consistent units.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

9
 Table 1

Reference Product/Description Country Functional Unit System Boundary Data collection Software Database

1 t of PC and 1t of On site, estimation with

(Li et al., Cement production
Portland cement China PC with 42.5MPa coefficients, mass and heat x x
2014a) and power station
strength equations

(Valderrama Implementation of BAT to cement Clinker production Ecoinvent v2.2

Spain 1 Kg of clinker Plant records SimaPro 7.2
et al., 2012) production in cement kiln and SimaPro
AC
(Eatmon, Comparison of PC with alternative
United States 200 100lb-bags of PC Cement production x SimaPro 6.0 SimaPro
2009) technologies
C
(García- Application of CO2 post-
SimaPro
Gusano et al., combustion capture to cement Spain 1 t of grey cement Cement production Previous studies Ecoinvent v2.2
7.3.3
2013) production
EP
(Chen et al., Cement production and variability Extraction and European Pollutant
France 1 Kg of PC SimaPro 7 Ecoinvent v2.0
2010a) between plants cement production Emission Register
TE
Resource productivity
(Strazza et al.,
2011)
enhancement, co-incineration,
D
Italy 1 t of cement Cement production On site SimaPro 7.1 x
LCA, plastic as alternative fuel M
Pollutants generated by cement
On site, statistics records,
(Chen et al., production: impacts and
China 1 t of PC Cement production monitoring data, previous x x
2014) improvement potential. Hybrid
studies
LCA.
AN
(Li et al., 1 t of PC and 1 t of
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Portland cement, clinker China Cement production On site x Ecoinvent v2.2

2014b) clinker
U
Atributional comparative LCA for
(Feiz et al., On site specific, plant
4 cement products, simplified Germany 1 t of cement Cement production SimaPro 7.3 Ecoinvent
2014b) records
LCA
SC
1 m3 of concrete Extraction,
(Valipour et Cement with zeolite in marine On site, field experiments,
Persian Gulf with 15 years of production and use x x
al., 2014) environments producer reports
service life phase
RI
From aggregates
extraction and
PT
(Knoeri et al., Comparative LCA: conventional
Switzerland 1 m3 of concrete building On site specific x Ecoinvent v2.2
2013) and recycled cement
dismantling to
construction site

10
*PC= Portland cement * BAT=Best Available Technologies
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2 Summary of quantitative results of LCA available in the literature
Reference Study description
A comparative analysis between China and Japan
cement industry was executed, as Japan is regarded
(Li et al., as a good example to achieve better environmental
2014a) performance and both use the same cement
production technology: new suspension preheater
(NSP). Two functional units were used, with and
without considering strength.
The replacement of former cement production
(Valderram
lines in Cemento Molins was analyzed. The new
a et al.,
production line was designed and constructed
2012)
considering the BAT for the cement industry.
A comparative LCA was made for four cement
U
manufacturing processes: traditional PC, blended
(Eatmon, cement (BC), cement with 100% of Cement Kiln
2009) Dust (CKD) recycled into the kiln process, and
AN
cement with CKD used to sequester part of the
CO2 emissions. The Eco-indicator95 was used to
assess the environmental impacts.
M
D
Three cement production scenarios for the Spanish
TE
industry were analyzed and compared. The present
scenario (2010BASE), the 2030BASE projected
(García-
scenario, where BAT are applied, and the
Gusano et
2030PCC projected scenario with CO2 post-
EP
al., 2013)
combustion.
C
AC
The environmental performance of an Italian plant
(Strazza et
that uses recovered plastics as an alternative fuel
al., 2011)
was analyzed. The caloric substitution of the fuel
was 22%. The data correspond to the year 2006.
Results of the study
When considering strength, the relative change
of the impact values between China and Japan
were affected. GWP variation was 2.51% for
Portland Cement (PC) and 13.58% for PC
considering strength. For Acidification (AP)
28.23% and 42.22%, for Photochemical Oxidant
Formation (POCP) 29.47% and 43.60%, for
PT
Eutrophication (EP) 26.27% and 40.10% and for
Human toxicity (HTP) 17.52% and 30.45%
The percentage of reduction for the first trimester
RI
of 2011 in the considered impact categories was
5% for GWP, 15% for AP, 17% for EP, 14% for
Abiotic Depletion (ADP), 14% for Ozone
SC
Depletion (ODP), 10% for Fresh Water
Ecotoxicity (FETP), and 10% for Photochemical
oxidation.
The BC presented the lowest values (Eco-
indicator95) in most impact categories. GWP
value for BC was 0.069, compared with 0.088,
0.088 and 0.084 of PC, recycled CKD and CO2
sequestration.
The application of BAT to the 2030 BASE leads
the reductions in all impact categories when
compared with the 2010BASE. The lowest
reduction is GWP with 22%, and the largest one
is ionizing radiation with 94%. The 2030PCC,
when compared with 2030BASE, entails further
reductions of 15% in GWP, 27% in ODP and
11% in ADP, but worsens the rest of the impact
categories. This is due to the introduction of a
combined heat power plant required for CO2
capture, which entails the major contribution in
most impact categories such as, GWP, Human
Toxicity with cancer effects (HTPce), Human
Toxicity with no cancer effects (HTPnce),
Particulate Matter (PM), Photochemical Ozone
Formation (POF), AP, Terrestrial Eutrophication
(TEP), and Marine Eutrophication (MEP).
GWP was reduced 2%, AP in 27%m POCP in
1%m EP in 30% and ODP in 18%. Besides this,
no pejorative signals were identified.
11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
A hybrid LCA was conducted to study the
(Chen et al., environmental impacts and potential for
2014) improvement of pollutants generated by the
cement industry in China. Four cement production
scenarios were considered: large, moderate, and
small production capacity with dry rotary kilns,
and other with shaft kiln.
(Feiz et al., The GWP of clinker and three cement products
2014b) produced in CEMEX Cluster West in 2009 was
assessed. The analyzed cement products were:
92% clinker cement (CEMI I), 50% clinker BC
with Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GBFS) (CEM
III/A), and 27% clinker with GBFS (CEM III/B).
(Valipour
The application of different zeolite replacement
et al., 2014)
levels to the cement content (10%, 20%, and 30%)
was analyzed.
U
(Knoeri et
AN
A comparative LCA between 12 conventional
al., 2013)
concrete (CC) and their corresponding recycled
concrete (RC) was carried out. The applications of
these concrete mixes were structural (indoor and
M
outdoor) and lean concrete.
(García-
Gusano et An LCA of the Spanish cement industry in 2010 is
D
al., 2014) carried out and five improvement scenarios are
analyzed: thermal efficiency (E1), electrical
efficiency (E2), material substitution (E3), fossil
TE
fuel substitution (E4) and an ideal scenario with all
the improvements together (E5)
EP
The CO2 emissions of a recycled cement building
C
(García-
column made with PC and BC containing Blast
Segura et
Furnace Slag (BFS) and Fly Ash (FA) were
AC
al., 2013)
evaluated, including carbonation assessment
during service life and after demolition. It was
determined if the reduction in production
emissions of BC compensates for the reduced
durability and CO2 capture due to carbonation.
Compared with large and small production
scenarios, moderate production, and shaft kiln
scenarios exhibited relatively high environmental
burden in most categories. For example, GWP
was of 734 and 693 Kg CO2eq. for large and
small scenarios, and 802 and 1000 Kg CO2eq. for
moderate and shaft kiln scenarios.
The GWP per tonne of cement was 850 Kg CO2
eq. for clinker, 779 for CEM I, 452 for CEM
PT
III/A and 265 for CEM III/B respectively. It is
important to note that these results do not include
any allocation of the impact, from the iron/steel
RI
industry, of the GBFS.
Using zeolite in concrete improves durability.
For 10, 20 and 30% replacement, GWP index
was reduced in 60.3%, 69.7% and 64.3%
SC
respectively. Replacements of 10 and 20% led to
higher compressive strength at 28 days, while
30% decreased it, compared to the conventional
concrete. Results show that the optimum
replacement is 20%.
For structural applications, RC mixtures show
around 30% reduction in environmental impacts
for ecoindicator 99, ecological scarcity and ADP,
while GWP remains similar. Lean RC presented
benefits from 88 to 104% for ecoindicator 99 and
from 80 to 92% for ecological scarcity.
In the ideal scenario E5, reductions in GWP,
HTPce, POF, AP, and Fresh Water
Eutrophication (FEP) were 21, 30, 45, 49 and
15%. E1 entails a reduction of 2-6% in all impact
categories. E2, reductions of 8-11%. E3, 10-13%
reductions. E4 present 37%, 33%, 7% and 5%
reductions in AP, POF, GWP, and HTPce; but
FEP increased 10%.
BC with high replacement rates (50% and 80%
BFS and 35% FA) decrease service life about
10%. BC with 80% BFS captures 20% of the
CO2 captured by PC during use and after
demolition. PC captures up to 47% of CO2
emissions when recycled while cement with 35%
FA and 80% BFS capture 41% and 20%
respectively, so complete carbonation should be
assured. BC with 80% BFS emits 70% less GHG
than PC production, but when considering life
service, this value drops to 20%. This production
emissions reduction compensates the reduced
durability and CO2 capture. For obtaining
reliable LCA results, carbonation should be
considered during use stage and after demolition.
12
 1
Table 3 Examples of life cycle impact assessment results in the literature a

GWP AP EP HTP ADP ODP

Reference Results per: b Type of result
Kg CO2eq Kg SO2eq PO4 eq Kg 1.4DB eq Kg Sb-eq Kg CFC-11

(Li et al., e
1t of PC PC-China 798.732 1.467 0.35 1.994
2014a)

(Valderram Old prod. Lines PC 987 2.55 0.372 3.34

a et al., 1000 Kg of PC
2012) BAT prod. Lines PC 938 2.16 0.31 2.88
AC
Case study 782 3.49 0.504 76 0.243 4.20E-05
(Chen et al.,
C
1000 Kg of PC
2010a)
France mean (ATILH) 899 2.24 0.297 59.5 0.243 4.20E-05
EP
Clinker 850

PC 92% clinker 779

(Feiz et al.,
1 tonne of cement
TE
2014b)
Blended 50% clinker w. GBFS
D 452

Blended 27% clinker w. GBFS 265

Dry kiln Large production scenario

M 734 0.89 c 0.0102 c 1.28E-06

Dry kiln Moderate production scenario 801 2.54 c 0.0103 c 1.59E-06

(Chen et al.,
1 ton of PC
AN
2014)
Dry kiln Small production scenario 693 0.98 c 0.00986 c 1.29E-06
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Shaft kiln
U
1000 3.82 c 0.0136 c 1.54E-06

2010-BASE 799 3.4 4.37E-05

(García-
SC
Gusano et 1 t of cement 2030-BASE 620 1.64 2.28E-05
al., 2013)
2030-PCC 530 4.73 1.67E-05
RI
(García- 1 tonne of clinker 929 3.93 d
Gusano et Spanish industry
PT
al., 2014) 1 tonne of cement 799 3.4 d
a
Results between studies are not comparable as objectives and methods are different for each one

13
b c d e
1 t = 1 tonne = 1000 Kg , 1 ton= 1016 Kg Aquatic Mole H+ eq Kg C6H4Cl2eq
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 4 Improvement measures

2 The International Energy Agency (IEA) focuses on four categories of improvement measures available for

3 the cement industry regarding CO2 emissions reduction (International Energy Agency, 2009): energy

4 efficiency, alternative fuels, clinker substitution, and carbon capture and storage (CCS). Among the

PT
5 reviewed literature, solutions regarding the first three categories are the most widely analyzed as they have

6 been thoroughly developed through the years (Benhelal et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2014; Eatmon, 2009; Feiz

RI
7 et al., 2014b; Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger, 2014; García-Gusano et al., 2014, 2013; García-Segura et

al., 2013; Knoeri et al., 2013; Lei et al., 2011; Proske et al., 2013; Valderrama et al., 2012; Valipour et al.,

SC
8

9 2014; Van den Heede and De Belie, 2012).

U
10 Mature technologies, as described by Feiz et al. (2014a), like energy efficiency improvement or the use of
AN
11 alternative fuels and materials are usually cheaper and easier to apply. Less feasible measures such as

12 cement with no clinker content or carbon sequestration have a high potential for improvement in the future.
M

13 Clinker substitution is a mature technology, it still presents high CO2 emissions reduction potential (Feiz et

14 al., 2014a).
D

15 It has been shown that almost all options with high improvement potential require cooperation with other
TE

16 organizations (Ammenberg et al., 2014). The improvement measure categories defined by IEA (2009) were

17 chosen to classify the results, as most improvement measures found in the reviewed studies fit into one of
EP

18 these categories.
C

19
AC

20 4.1 Energy efficiency

21 Improving energy efficiency entails the implementation of the Best Available Technologies (BAT) when

22 possible. Regarding BAT implementation, the most significant improvements are related to energy

23 efficiency measures in the kiln system, that is, reducing the amount of fuel needed for producing the same

24 quantity of clinker (Valderrama et al., 2012). They studied the upgrades made in a Spanish cement plant and

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 compared the current and the former clinker manufacturing impacts. The implementation of BAT led to a

2 reduction of all the impact categories considered in the study. The main improvements were: increasing

3 efficiency in dosing and grinding of raw materials, emissions reduction in the cyclone tower, less noise in

4 the grate cooler, higher capacity of the kiln filter, and higher efficiency and fewer emissions in the kiln

PT
5 system. These improvements led to a reduction in electricity and heat usage, thus a reduction in the

6 environmental impact translated to a more sustainable production and economic benefits (Valderrama et al.,

RI
7 2012).

Shifting from wet to dry processes for calcination leads to better environmental performance, reducing the

SC
8

9 required energy up to 50% and mitigating almost 20% of CO2 emissions (Benhelal et al., 2013). Galvez and

U
10 Shoenberger (2014) indicate there is a great reduction of thermal energy consumption when using semi-dry
AN
11 and dry systems instead of wet or semi-wet ones (Morrow III et al., 2014). For China’s cement industry, the

12 wide application of dry production processes and efficiency improvement led to a decrease in the GHG
M

13 emissions fraction coming from the combustion of raw coal from 36.5% of the total in 2005 to 33.5% in

14 2009. However, the fraction of GHG emissions from CaCO3 breakdown increased from 50.3% to 52% in the
D

15 same time period. Both raw coal combustion and CaCO3 breakdown, along with electricity, were found to
TE

16 be the main sources of GHG emissions of Chinese cement industry (Wang et al., 2013). For India’s cement

17 industry, which mostly uses dry rotary kilns, it was found that increased production of blended cement and
EP

18 kiln shell heat loss reduction by improving the refractories. These are the two most cost-effective fuel-
C

19 saving measures. The implementation of high-efficiency raw mill fans and high-efficiency motors are the
AC

20 two most cost-effective measures regarding electricity savings. Moreover, the largest electricity saving

21 potential depends on waste heat electricity generation and the use of vertical roller mill instead of ball mill

22 for finish grinding (Morrow III et al., 2014). The replacement of old shaft kilns by precalciner kilns would

23 reduce particulate matter (PM), CO and SO2 emissions (Lei et al., 2011).

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 García-Gusano et al. (2014) evaluated improvement scenarios for the Spanish cement industry. The

2 improvement scenarios were: thermal efficiency (from 3536 MJ/t to 3300 MJ/t clinker), electrical efficiency

3 (from 130 kWh/t to 106 kWh/t cement), material substitution (clinker-to-cement ratio from 0.8 to 0.7), fossil

4 fuel substitution (alternative fuels share from 15.8% to 50% of energy), and an ideal scenario, which

PT
5 included all the aforementioned. Most significant improvements are associated with energy consumption,

6 including redesigning the kiln and renewal of the mills (García-Gusano et al., 2014). Material and fuels

RI
7 substitution scenarios were found to be the best options to achieve impact reductions. Feeding the cement

mill with materials previously considered waste, such as fly ashes, blast furnace slag, non-calcined

SC
8

9 limestone or silica sands, alongside the clinker, would lead to reductions greater than 10% in each impact

U
10 category when reducing the clinker-to-cement ratio from 0.8 to 0.7 (García-Gusano et al., 2014). Replacing
AN
11 fossil fuels with alternative ones reduced GWP, Human Toxicity Potential with cancer effects,

12 Photochemical Ozone Formation, and Acidification Potential impact categories, but increased Fresh Water
M

13 Eutrophication. The implementation of the ideal scenario would lead to reductions from 21% in GWP up to

14 49% in Acidification Potential. Thus, a fuel shift would be needed for improving contamination rates
D

15 (García-Gusano et al., 2014).

TE

16 Hasanbeigi et al. (2013) analyzed the effects of implementing 23 efficiency measures in the Chinese cement

17 industry from 2010 to 2030 and estimated cost-effective energy savings of 247 TWh and CO2 emissions
EP

18 reductions of 138 Mt associated with this savings in this period.

C

19 The annual growth rate of energy consumption in China’s cement industry was lower than the cement
AC

20 output growth rate due to the application of energy efficient processes, such as new suspension preheater

21 kilns and waste heat recovery power generation (Jing Ke, 2012). Heat recovery has been shown to be able to

22 save up to 20% of fuel consumption and to mitigate up to 8% of CO2 emissions (Benhelal et al., 2013).

23 China’s cement industry will continue growing because of rising urbanization until building and

24 infrastructure construction reaches the level of developed countries. The demand for cement is expected to

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 decrease significantly after this level has been reached. At this point, the demand will be much lower than

2 the cement construction capacity and a serious capacity surplus may occur. This possibility could force the

3 cement industry to improve efficiency and reduce costs. Therefore, this capacity surplus may act as a

4 market-driven energy efficiency measure. These results suggest that policies that promote energy efficiency

PT
5 are the most important measure for reducing the cement production energy and emissions intensity (Jing Ke,

6 2012).

RI
7

4.2 Alternative fuels

SC
8

9 Alternative fuels usually include agricultural and non-agricultural biomass residues, petroleum-based

U
10 wastes, miscellaneous wastes, and chemical and hazardous wastes (Benhelal et al., 2013).
AN
11 Cement production enables the use of waste for substituting raw materials and traditional fuels. According

12 to Strazza et al. (2011), the use of waste derived fuels results in a reduction of environmental impact and
M

13 fuel costs. According to the same authors, combustion of alternative fuels is an ideal method for recovering

14 heating power from waste. The use of recovered plastics as an alternative fuel with a caloric substitution of
D

15 22% in an Italian cement plant, when compared with the average Italian plant that considers a caloric
TE

16 substitution of 4%, showed a reduction of the environmental load in every impact category. The reduction

17 ranged from 1% in photochemical oxidation to 30% for eutrophication (Strazza et al., 2011). Using waste
EP

18 derived fuel is environmentally friendly since it reduces emissions from both cement plants and landfills at
C

19 the same time according to Benhelal et al. (2013).

AC

20

21 4.3 Material substitution

22 The calcination process (clinker production) accounts for approximately 58% of the total impact of cement

23 production in the category climate change (García-Gusano et al., 2014). Waste and supplementary

24 cementing materials such as fly ash, blast furnace slag, silica fume, rice husk ash, and metakaolin can be

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 used as partial replacements for Portland cement. These materials have shown to improve properties of the

2 mix and are less energy intensive than cement (Berndt, 2009). Replacing a portion of clinker with fly ash

3 reduces energy requirements and improves concrete durability (Benhelal et al., 2013).

4 Lei et al. (2011) indicated that the potential for CO2 emissions reduction by clinker substitution is likely to

PT
5 be larger than reductions by thermal efficiency improvement and alternative fuels use.

6 Blended cement use waste products or other aggregates to replace Portland cement to reduce embodied

RI
7 GHG emissions (García-Segura et al., 2013). For the India’s cement industry, the increased production of

blended cement is one of the most cost-effective fuel-saving measures (Morrow III et al., 2014).

SC
8

9 Ammenberg et al. (2014) found that increased share of blended cement is one of the most powerful options

U
10 available for improving the CO2 performance of cement.
AN
11 Berndt (2009) assessed the improvement in sustainability due to partial replacement of cement with fly ash,

12 blast furnace slag, and recycled concrete aggregate, for wind turbine foundations. Improvement the
M

13 sustainability of concrete by reducing the amount of cement is due to the subsequent reduction in clinker

14 content in the concrete mix. A conventional mix with no material substitution and four mixes with different
D

15 grades of substitution, ranging from 50% to 70% of cement, were considered. Recycled concrete aggregates
TE

16 were also used with slag-modified and conventional concrete (Berndt, 2009).

17 Due to the higher carbonation rate coefficients, blended cement replaced with blast furnace slag, or fly ash,
EP

18 at a high proportion (50% and 80% blast furnace slag and 35% fly ash) suffered a reduction of
C

19 approximately 10% in their service life. This loss of durability of cement with high replacement rates
AC

20 yielded increased CO2 yearly emissions than lower replacement rates (García-Segura et al., 2013). The use

21 of fly ash for replacing Portland cement led to a lower material emission factor than the use of blast furnace

22 slag. The former needs less processing after being collected, but the latter can attain larger cement

23 replacements, thus greater reductions could be achieved (García-Segura et al., 2013).

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Proske et al. (2013) found that the loss of compressive strength, due to cement clinker reduction, could be

2 compensated by decreasing water volume and using fly ash and blast-furnace slag. Compared with

3 conventional concrete the same carbonation depth on concretes with reduced clinker content is achievable

4 only by providing higher compressive strength (Proske et al., 2013).

PT
5 Cement with low clinker content is considered to be a low environmental impact cement due to less

6 embodied energy and less embodied CO2 emissions. The effect of substituting high impact with low impact

RI
7 cement is highly significant (Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger, 2014). For this reason, considerable

improvements can be achieved by changing consumption patterns (Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger, 2014),

SC
8

9 especially in those places where most of cement consumption is Portland cement. During clinker

U
10 production, fine particulates of unburned and partially burned raw material known as cement kiln dust
AN
11 (CKD) are collected. Eatmon (2009) compared the ordinary Portland cement production composed of 95%

12 clinker, with three other cement production technologies: (i) blended cement, (ii) cement with 100% waste
M

13 CKD recycled, and (iii) Portland cement with CKD used to sequester a portion of the process-related CO2

14 emissions. The blended cement has the lowest global warming potential (Eatmon, 2009).
D

15 The use of green concrete, containing natural zeolite in a marine environment in the Persian Gulf, was
TE

16 analyzed by Valipour et al. (2014). In this case, cement content was restricted to a maximum and minimum

17 value because of the chloride-induced corrosion of the embedded steel due to the aggressive marine
EP

18 environment. Results showed the use of zeolite in concrete decreased the GWP and led to higher
C

19 compressive strength when the replacement was between 10% and 20%. The use of zeolite resulted in
AC

20 concrete with low chloride permeability as well.

21

22 4.4 Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

23 CCS does not reduce CO2 generation; it separates, captures, and stores CO2 preventing it from being

24 released. Carbon capture would be one of the few opportunities for getting major CO2 emissions reduction

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 in the cement industry. However, it presents a series of barriers, both technical and economical for being

2 implemented (Benhelal et al., 2013). Moreover, an LCA elaborated for CO2 post-combustion capture for

3 the Spanish cement production concluded that, besides its enormous cost and slow implementation, CCS is

4 challenged by the competition with more feasible solutions such as applying BAT, substituting clinker or

PT
5 replacing fossil fuels (García-Gusano et al., 2013).

RI
7 4.5 Other improvement solutions

SC
8 The CKD can be incorporated back into the kiln depending on its composition and regional standards, or

9 disposed or stored (Eatmon, 2009). CKD was identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as

U
10 hazardous waste but would remain as non-hazardous waste when the management standards described by
AN
11 EPA are met (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999). Lowering the clinker sintering temperature

12 would lead to a reduction in petroleum coke consumption in the kiln and CO2 emissions. In a study by
M

13 Castañón (2014), it was shown that decreasing the sintering temperature from 1450°C to 1400°C does not

14 result in significant decrease of one of the most important quality parameters of clinker, the content of Alite
D

15 (Ca3SiO5). This decrease of 50°C resulted in energy and costs savings.

TE

16 Controlling the combustion of coal and the thermal degradation of limestone by using a numerical model,

17 such as computational fluid dynamics, as an investigation tool for improving the sustainability of cement
EP

18 production was analyzed by Mikulčić et al. (2015). They proved that such numerical modeling can assist in
C

19 the improvement parameters like temperatures or particle residence time in the calcination process, in a way
AC

20 that it can facilitate the reduction of pollutant emissions and contribute to a more sustainable cement

21 production (Mikulčić et al., 2015).

22 Ammenberg et al. (2014) analyzed the effects of industrial symbiosis for the site-specific case of the

23 CEMEX Cluster West production system in Germany. For this, the CO2 emissions of traditional linear

24 cement production systems had to be compared with more synergistic alternatives. The 2009 production

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 system, which represented the situation during the study, can be seen as more synergistic than the

2 production system of 1997 since it implied a greater relation with steel industry (more use of slag) and more

3 use of alternative fuels and renewable energy. The GWP of Cluster West clinker production in 2009 was 9%

4 lower than in 1997 (Feiz et al., 2014b).

PT
5

6 5 Discussion

RI
7 Industrialization and urbanization greatly drive the growing demand for cement products. Current

production levels result in important requirements of raw materials and energy resources by this sector.

SC
8

9 Also, this results in major environmental impacts. The environmental impacts caused by cement production

U
10 are associated with mining and quarrying, waste disposal, materials storage, fuels and raw materials
AN
11 production, plant production capacity, clinker production, clinker content of the cement mix, technology,

12 industrial practices, and the level of industrial synergy. Clinker production is the highest energy demanding
M

13 process and the highest emissions contributor. Emissions arising from clinker production, impact air quality

14 and climate change. Currently, cement manufacturing is responsible for 5% of global CO2 emissions caused
D

15 by human activity (C.A. Hendriks, 2000).

TE

16 LCA is a suitable tool for analyzing the environmental impacts of products and services. It has frequently

17 been used to identify environmental impact hot spots, and to assess improvement measures in the cement
EP

18 production industry. Most LCA studies regarding cement production have been elaborated using a cradle-to-
C

19 gate approach, which means the system boundaries are limited to raw materials extraction, material
AC

20 processing, clinker production, cement mixing, and storage. Transport between these processes is also

21 normally considered. The cradle-to-gate approach is usually adequate when the purpose is to characterize or

22 to test improvement measures associated with cement production. This is particularly relevant as cement has

23 multiple uses after it leaves the plant. When studying concrete, a cradle-to-grave approach may be more

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 useful as the application is normally known. For example, the analysis of a structural beam could be

2 addressed in this direction.

3 The definition of the functional unit depends on the study scope and objectives. When using a cradle-to-gate

4 approach the functional unit is normally a single unit of mass of cement (or clinker) produced, such 1 kg

PT
5 cement or 1 ton of cement. When including the application, the final cement product can be the functional

6 unit. The latter should be used when using a cradle-to-grave approach.

RI
7 Allocation methods influence the results of LCA studies. In most of the studies, the allocation method is not

specified. This occurs because there are no relevant issues for allocation when no by-products are used to

SC
8

9 substitute either clinker or fuels in cement production. When by-products are used to replace fuels or

U
10 clinker, allocation could influence the results. However, this situation is not normally shown in the
AN
11 literature. For example, when by-products like fly ash and blast furnace slag, both used for reducing the

12 clinker content of cement and thus reducing its environmental burden; the results vary depending on the
M

13 allocation method as shown by Proske et al. (2013) and Chen et al. (2010b). Mass allocation induces large

14 impacts on by-products. Economic allocation enhances the fact that by-products were considered as waste
D

15 and lowers their environmental impact as the main product takes most of the burden.
TE

16 There are four types of improvement measures for cement manufacture: energy efficiency improvement,

17 alternative fuels use, clinker substitution and CCS. Research thoroughly developed improvement measures
EP

18 related to energy efficiency and alternative fuels. They are considered mature technologies and thus easy to
C

19 apply. The implementation of BAT implies the upgrade to the latest technologies. The upgrade of
AC

20 technology to BAT, such as shifting from wet to dry calcination processes, upgrading or redesigning of

21 machinery and equipment, waste heat recovery power generation, improves energy efficiency and thus the

22 environmental performance of cement products. Clinker production is a hotspot within the whole production

23 chain. Efficiency measures in the kiln system and substitution of clinker (using fly ash, blast furnace slag,

24 non-calcined limestone, and other by-products that otherwise would be considered waste) achieve the

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 greatest impact reductions. Some clinker substitution materials in the right amounts can even improve

2 properties of the concrete mixes. The use of alternative fuels from waste, biomass residues or recovered

3 plastics reduces environmental impacts from both cement plants and landfills. CCS presents major CO2

4 emissions reduction opportunities, but its implementation presents both technical and economical barriers,

PT
5 and it is challenged by the previously mentioned mature measures. Other improvement measures that

6 include industrial symbiosis practices, e.g. synergies between steel and cement industry, present great

RI
7 improvement potentials.

SC
8

9 6 Conclusions

U
10 Several case studies around the world assessed the environmental impacts of cement production. The
AN
11 reviewed literature identified hot spots and potential improvement measures in the cement industry. These

12 measures are energy efficiency, alternative fuel use, material substitution, and CCS. Improvement measures
M

13 focusing on the first three solutions are regarded as mature technologies, as they have been thoroughly

14 studied and applied. These mature technologies are relatively low-cost and technically feasible for applying.
D

15 On the other hand, carbon capture and storage presents a higher improvement potential, but shows several
TE

16 barriers to its implementation, both technical and economical.

17 The application of the best available technologies and using dry processes are the most effective measures
EP

18 regarding energy efficiency. Cement production allows the use of fuel from waste. Material substitution has
C

19 resulted in environmental impact mitigation in several studies. Fly ash, blast furnace slag, palm oil waste,
AC

20 recycled concrete, zeolite, and other materials have been used for manufacturing blended cement.

21 The information reviewed here will serve as the basis for future development of the LCA of the cement

22 production in Ecuador.

23 Acknowledgements

24 This paper is based on work funded by Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Ecuador.

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 References

2 Al-Dadi, M.M., Hassan, H.E., Sharshar, T., Arida, H.A., Badran, H.M., 2014. Environmental impact of
3 some cement manufacturing plants in Saudi Arabia. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 302, 1103–1117.
4 doi:10.1007/s10967-014-3383-8
5 A. M. Castañón, S.G.G., 2014. Energy and Environmental Savings via Optimisation of the Production
6 Process at a Spanish Cement Factory. J. Clean. Prod. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.028

PT
7 Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., Eklund, 2014. Improving the CO2 performance of cement, part III: the relevance
8 of industrial symbiosis and how to measure its impact. J. Clean. Prod.
9 doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.086
10 Benhelal, E., Zahedi, G., Shamsaei, E., Bahadori, A., 2013. Global strategies and potentials to curb CO2

RI
11 emissions in cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. 51, 142–161. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.049
12 Berndt, M.L., 2009. Properties of sustainable concrete containing fly ash, slag and recycled concrete
13 aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 23, 2606–2613. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.02.011

SC
14 C.A. Hendriks, 2000. Emission reduction of greenhouse gases from the cement industry.
15 Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., 2010a. Environmental impact of cement production: detail of
16 the different processes and cement plant variability evaluation. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 478–485.

U
17 doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.014
18 Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., Ventura, A., 2010b. LCA allocation procedure used as an
AN
19 incitative method for waste recycling: An application to mineral additions in concrete. Resour.
20 Conserv. Recycl. 54, 1231–1240. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.04.001
21 Chen, W., Hong, J., Xu, C., 2014. Pollutants generated by cement production in China, their impacts, and
22 the potential for environmental improvement. J. Clean. Prod. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.048
M

23 Eatmon, T.D., 2009. A life-cycle assessment of Portland cement manufacturing: comparing the traditional
24 process with alternative technologies. J. Clean. Prod., Present and Anticipated Demands for Natural
25 Resources: Scientific, Technological, Political, Economic and Ethical Approaches for Sustainable
D

26 Management 17, 668–675. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.007

27 EN ISO 14044:2006, 2006. Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and
TE

28 Guidelines.
29 Feely, R.A., Sabine, C.L., Lee, K., Berelson, W., Kleypas, J., Fabry, V.J., Millero, F.J., 2004. Impact of
30 anthropogenic CO2 on the CaCO3 system in the oceans. Science 305, 362–366.
31 doi:10.1126/science.1097329
EP

32 Feiz, R., Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., 2014a. Improving the CO2 performance of cement, part II: framework
33 for assessing CO2 improvement measures in the cement industry. J. Clean. Prod.
34 doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.103
Feiz, R., Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., Eklund, M., Helgstrand, A., Marshall, R., 2014b. Improving the CO2
C

35
36 performance of cement, part I: utilizing life-cycle assessment and key performance indicators to
assess development within the cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.083
AC

37
38 Galvez-Martos, J.-L., Schoenberger, H., 2014. An analysis of the use of life cycle assessment for waste co-
39 incineration in cement kilns. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 86, 118–131.
40 doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.02.009
41 García-Gusano, D., Garraín, D., Herrera, I., Cabal, H., Lechón, Y., 2013. Life Cycle Assessment of
42 applying CO2 post-combustion capture to the Spanish cement production. J. Clean. Prod.
43 doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.056
44 García-Gusano, D., Herrera, I., Garraín, D., Lechón, Y., Cabal, H., 2014. Life cycle assessment of the
45 Spanish cement industry: implementation of environmental-friendly solutions. Clean Technol.
46 Environ. Policy 17, 59–73. doi:10.1007/s10098-014-0757-0

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 García-Segura, T., Yepes, V., Alcalá, J., 2013. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of blended cement
2 concrete including carbonation and durability. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 19, 3–12.
3 doi:10.1007/s11367-013-0614-0
4 Hasanbeigi, A., Morrow, W., Masanet, E., Sathaye, J., Xu, T., 2013. Energy efficiency improvement and
5 CO2 emission reduction opportunities in the cement industry in China. Energy Policy 57, 287–297.
6 doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.053
7 Hendrik G. Oss, A.C.P., 2002. Cement Manufacture and the Environment: Part I: Chemistry and
8 Technology. J. Ind. Ecol. - J IND ECOL 6, 89–105. doi:10.1162/108819802320971650

PT
9 International Energy Agency, 2009. Cement Technology Roadmap.
10 Jing Ke, N.Z., 2012. Potential energy savings and CO2 emissions reduction of China’s cement industry.
11 Energy Policy 45. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.03.036

RI
12 Josa, A., Aguado, A., Cardim, A., Byars, E., 2007. Comparative analysis of the life cycle impact assessment
13 of available cement inventories in the EU. Cem. Concr. Res. 37, 781–788.
14 doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.02.004
Knoeri, C., Sanyé-Mengual, E., Althaus, H.-J., 2013. Comparative LCA of recycled and conventional

SC
15
16 concrete for structural applications. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18, 909–918. doi:10.1007/s11367-012-
17 0544-2
18 Lei, Y., Zhang, Q., Nielsen, C., He, K., 2011. An inventory of primary air pollutants and CO2 emissions

U
19 from cement production in China, 1990–2020. Atmos. Environ. 45, 147–154.
20 doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.09.034
AN
21 Le Quéré, C., Moriarty, R., Andrew, R.M., Peters, G.P., Ciais, P., Friedlingstein, P., Jones, S.D., Sitch, S.,
22 Tans, P., Arneth, A., Boden, T.A., Bopp, L., Bozec, Y., Canadell, J.G., Chini, L.P., Chevallier, F.,
23 Cosca, C.E., Harris, I., Hoppema, M., Houghton, R.A., House, J.I., Jain, A.K., Johannessen, T.,
24 Kato, E., Keeling, R.F., Kitidis, V., Klein Goldewijk, K., Koven, C., Landa, C.S., Landschützer, P.,
M

25 Lenton, A., Lima, I.D., Marland, G., Mathis, J.T., Metzl, N., Nojiri, Y., Olsen, A., Ono, T., Peng, S.,
26 Peters, W., Pfeil, B., Poulter, B., Raupach, M.R., Regnier, P., Rödenbeck, C., Saito, S., Salisbury,
27 J.E., Schuster, U., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Segschneider, J., Steinhoff, T., Stocker, B.D., Sutton,
D

28 A.J., Takahashi, T., Tilbrook, B., van der Werf, G.R., Viovy, N., Wang, Y.-P., Wanninkhof, R.,
29 Wiltshire, A., Zeng, N., 2015. Global carbon budget 2014. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 7, 47–85.
TE

30 doi:10.5194/essd-7-47-2015
31 Li, C., Cui, S., Nie, Z., Gong, X., Wang, Z., Itsubo, N., 2014a. The LCA of portland cement production in
32 China. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20, 117–127. doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0804-4
33 Li, C., Nie, Z., Cui, S., Gong, X., Wang, Z., Meng, X., 2014b. The life cycle inventory study of cement
EP

34 manufacture in China. J. Clean. Prod. 72, 204–211. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.048

35 Lippiatt B, A.S., 2004. Measuring the life-cycle environmental and economic performance of concrete: the
36 BEES approach. Int. Workshop Sustain. Dev. Concr. Technol. Beijing.
C

37 Mefteh, H., Kebaïli, O., Oucief, H., Berredjem, L., Arabi, N., 2013. Influence of moisture conditioning of
38 recycled aggregates on the properties of fresh and hardened concrete. J. Clean. Prod. 54, 282–288.
AC

39 doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.05.009
40 Mikulčić, H., Vujanović, M., Duić, N., 2015. Improving the sustainability of cement production by using
41 numerical simulation of limestone thermal degradation and pulverized coal combustion in a cement
42 calciner. J. Clean. Prod., Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems 88,
43 262–271. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.011
44 Morrow III, W.R., Hasanbeigi, A., Sathaye, J., Xu, T., 2014. Assessment of energy efficiency improvement
45 and CO2 emission reduction potentials in India’s cement and iron & steel industries. J. Clean. Prod.
46 65, 131–141. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.022

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Owens, J.W., 1997. Life-Cycle Assessment: Constraints on Moving from Inventory to Impact Assessment.
2 J. Ind. Ecol. 1, 37–49. doi:10.1162/jiec.1997.1.1.37
3 Proske, T., Hainer, S., Rezvani, M., Graubner, C.-A., 2013. Eco-friendly concretes with reduced water and
4 cement contents — Mix design principles and laboratory tests. Cem. Concr. Res. 51, 38–46.
5 doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2013.04.011
6 Strazza, C., Del Borghi, A., Gallo, M., Del Borghi, M., 2011. Resource productivity enhancement as means
7 for promoting cleaner production: analysis of co-incineration in cement plants through a life cycle
8 approach. J. Clean. Prod. 19, 1615–1621. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.05.014

PT
9 US Department of Commerce, N., n.d. ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas
10 Reference Network [WWW Document]. URL
11 http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/global.html (accessed 1.31.15).

RI
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999. Management standards proposed for cement kiln dust waste.
13 Valderrama, C., Granados, R., Cortina, J.L., Gasol, C.M., Guillem, M., Josa, A., 2012. Implementation of
14 best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-cycle assessment study. J. Clean. Prod. 25,
60–67. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.11.055

SC
15
16 Valipour, M., Yekkalar, M., Shekarchi, M., Panahi, S., 2014. Environmental assessment of green concrete
17 containing natural zeolite on the global warming index in marine environments. J. Clean. Prod. 65,
18 418–423. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.055

U
19 Van den Heede, P., De Belie, N., 2012. Environmental impact and life cycle assessment (LCA) of
20 traditional and “green” concretes: Literature review and theoretical calculations. Cem. Concr.
AN
21 Compos. 34, 431–442. doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2012.01.004
22 Wang, Y., Zhu, Q., Geng, Y., 2013. Trajectory and driving factors for GHG emissions in the Chinese
23 cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. 53, 252–260. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.001
24
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

26