Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Review

Environmental impacts, life cycle assessment and potential

improvement measures for cement production: a literature review

s Salas a, Angel Diego Ramirez a, *, Carlos Raúl Rodríguez b,
Daniel Andre
Daniel Marx Petroche b, Andrea Jael Boero a, Jorge Duque-Rivera a
a
Escuela Superior Polit

ecnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Facultad de Ingeniería en Meca
nica y Ciencias de la Produccio

n, Campus Gustavo Galindo, Km 30.5 Vía
Perimetral, P.O. Box 09-01-5863, Guayaquil, Ecuador
b
Escuela Superior Polit

ecnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Facultad de Ingeniería en Ciencias de la Tierra, Campus Gustavo Galindo, Km 30.5 Vía Perimetral, P.O. Box
09-01-5863, Guayaquil, Ecuador

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cement constitutes one of the primary building materials. As cement manufacturing involves the use of
Received 3 April 2015 large amounts of raw materials and energy, an issue that arises is the necessity to assess its environ-
Received in revised form mental impact and analyze in which way the industry should proceed concerning best practices. Life
6 November 2015
Cycle Assessment (LCA) has frequently been used in case studies around the globe as an environmental
Accepted 24 November 2015
Available online 8 December 2015
impact assessing tool. The present literature review serves for: (i) describing the environmental impacts,
(ii) clarifying the methodological approaches in LCA, and (iii) identifying the main alternatives to
improve the environmental performance of cement production. Several available studies on the envi-
Keywords:
LCA
ronmental performance of manufacture and use of cement products were reviewed. These studies
Cement identified improvement of energy efficiency, the use of alternative fuels, clinker substitution, and carbon
Sustainability capture and storage (CCS) as the main solutions for mitigating environmental impacts caused by cement
Energy efficiency production. The first three options have been thoroughly analyzed, applied, and have shown improve-
Greenhouse gas emissions ment through the years. CCS has a high improvement potential; however, it presents technical and
Carbon footprint economic barriers to its implementation.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
1.1. Raw meal preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
1.2. Clinker production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
1.3. Cement preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
2. Environmental impacts of cement production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3. LCA of cement products manufacture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3.1. Goal and scope definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3.2. Inventory analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3.3. Impact assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3.4. Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
4. Improvement measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
4.1. Energy efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
4.2. Alternative fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.3. Material substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
4.4. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
4.5. Other improvement solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ593 (0)42269351; fax: þ593 (0)42852804.

E-mail address: aramire@espol.edu.ec (A.D. Ramirez).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.078
0959-6526/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122 115

5. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

1. Introduction concrete industry is a major consumer of limited natural resources

like water, gravel, sand or crushed rock (Mefteh et al., 2013).
Cement is a fine-powdered substance that, when mixed with In 2013, global CO2 emissions due to fuel use and cement pro-
water and aggregates, presents high adhesive (cementitious) duction were 36 Gt (9.9 Gt of C); this is 61% higher than in 1990 and
properties. It is produced from limestone, clay, and sand; these raw 2.3% higher than in 2012. Additionally, global CO2 emissions were
materials provide lime, silica, alumina and iron, the key ingredients projected to increase by 2.5% in 2014. China, the United States, the
required. Cement production consists of three main stages: raw European Union, and India, accounted for 58% of the global CO2
material preparation, clinker production, and cement preparation emissions in 2013, among all the CO2 emissions sources (Le Que
re


(International Energy Agency, 2009). et al., 2015). Before industrialization, atmospheric CO2 concentra-
tion ranged between 200 and 280 ppm (Feely et al., 2004); it
1.1. Raw meal preparation reached 398 ppm by November 2014 (US Department of
Commerce, n.d.), and it is projected to increase to over 800 ppm
Limestone, clay, and other raw materials are quarried or mined by the end of the century (Feely et al., 2004).
and transferred to the manufacturing plant, where they are crushed Besides CO2, the cement industry accounts for significant
and milled. They are mixed in the right proportions to reach the emissions of carbon monoxide and heavy metals (Lei et al., 2011).
required composition. The composition depends on the quality and Human activities, such as mining and industrial processing, are the
properties that each particular cement product demands. main sources of heavy metal contamination in the environment
(Al-Dadi et al., 2014). Photochemical ozone formation, heavy metals
1.2. Clinker production and carcinogens values due to cement production depend highly on
the fuels and raw materials used and come mostly from energy
The prepared composition is then fed into a kiln, usually after production processes (electricity and fuel refining) (Josa et al.,
passing through a pre-heater, where it is exposed to temperatures 2007). The main impact of cement production on land quality
up to 1450  C. This process generates chemical and physical comes from quarrying, waste disposal, storage of materials and
changes that transform the raw meal into clinker. This stage of the atmospheric deposition (Al-Dadi et al., 2014). Acidification is
production is the most energy demanding. mainly caused by SO2 and NOx emissions, and its total value de-
pends on the clinker content of cement. NOx emissions are also the
1.3. Cement preparation main cause of eutrophication (Josa et al., 2007). The main sources of
winter smog (small dust suspended particles) are SO2, dust, and
The clinker is blended and ground with additives and other soot. Mining and preparation of energy resources, in the countries
mineral components such as gypsum, slag, and fly ash that build up of origin, influence disparities between the results regarding winter
the required properties of the final product. smog (Josa et al., 2007). Due to the manufacturing of cement, the
Depending on the moisture content of the material, cement levels of naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) and 19
production may be classified into four types: dry, semi-dry, semi- trace elements have wide ranges, that depend on the mining origin
wet and wet. Dry and semi-dry processes are the most efficient and of the raw materials (Al-Dadi et al., 2014).
the most used nowadays (Benhelal et al., 2013; Galvez-Martos and CO2 emissions are the main contributor to the global warming
Schoenberger, 2014; Wang et al., 2013). This literature review aims effect related to cement manufacture, ranging between 98.8% and
to (i) present the environmental impacts related to the cement 100% of the total. Other gases, such as CH4 or N2O, have a smaller
industry worldwide, (ii) summarize previous Life Cycle Assessment influence despite their higher characterization factors (Josa et al.,
(LCA) methodological approaches and results, and (iii) identify the 2007).
environmental performance improvement measures in the Wang et al. (2013) have identified five driving factors that
reviewed studies. induce changes in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions derived from
In this study, previous studies regarding the environmental cement production: energy emission factor, energy structure, en-
performance of cement products were reviewed. The review ergy intensity, cement production activity, and clinker production
focused on those studies related to the environmental performance activity. Cement production activity and clinker production activity
of cement production and those which applied LCA for the analysis. are the dominant factors that increase GHG emissions.
The environmental impact per unit of cement production also
depends on the plant production capacity (Chen et al., 2014). A
2. Environmental impacts of cement production
relatively high environmental burden was observed in the
moderate-production scenario in most impact categories compared
On average, 1 ton of concrete is produced every year for every
to large- and small-production scenarios. In the same study, which
human being in the world (Lippiatt and Ahmad, 2004). Concrete is a
was carried out in China, it was also found that shaft kilns pre-
composite material composed of cement, aggregates (sand, gravel,
sented a higher environmental burden than dry kilns in most
or crushed stone) and water. Cement manufacturing implies the
impact categories.
use of large amounts of raw materials and energy (van Oss and
Carbonation, a natural aging process for cement, consists in the
Padovani, 2002), and its production accounts for 5% of global
reaction of CO2 (Dissolved in the concrete pore fluid) with calcium
anthropogenic CO2 emissions (Hendriks, 2000). Due to vast ur-
and calcium silicate hydrate to form calcite (Calcium Carbonate,
banization, the use of cement has increased dramatically (Chen
CaCO3). Carbonation during the use stage captures CO2 from the
et al., 2014). Currently, due to its raw material requirements, the
116 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122
environment, therefore it can subtract CO2 emissions from pro-
duction 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
demolition. The CO2 capture during the use stage of Portland
cement represents 22% of the total CO2 emissions, and if it is
crushed and used as a grave-filling material, it reaches 47%. In
blended cement, CO2 intake is reduced proportionally to the
replacement of Portland cement. Considering carbonation during
the use stage and after the demolition stage is crucial for obtaining
reliable results in LCA (García-Segura et al., 2013). For a constant
strength, mixtures with limestone powder had lower carbonation
depth than concretes made with fly ash (Proske et al., 2013).
3. LCA of cement products manufacture
LCA is a tool for evaluating the environmental performance of a
product (or service) during its life cycle. The life cycle of a product
involves the processes that occur during resource extraction, pro-
duction, logistics, use, and, end of life (EN ISO 14044:2006, 2006).
The ISO14040-14044 series specify four steps for LCA execution:
definition of goal and scope, inventory analysis, impact assessment,
and interpretation (EN ISO 14044:2006, 2006):
3.1. Goal and scope definition
During this stage, the purpose of the study, the functional unit,
and the system boundaries are established. The functional unit is
the reference unit of the analyzed system for which all the envi-
ronmental impacts are calculated. The definition of the functional
unit and the system boundaries depend on the intended use of the
study.
3.2. Inventory analysis
In this stage the input and output data are collected, and an
inventory of environmental and resource relevant inputs and out-
puts is developed.
3.3. Impact assessment
Here, the results obtained in the inventory analysis are used for
assessing the environmental impacts of the product using charac-
terization models. Impact categories are chosen according to the
purpose of the study and the criterion of the researcher.
3.4. Interpretation
With the information obtained from the previous phases, in this
stage conclusions and recommendations are formulated.
LCA can be performed with a cradle-to-gate or a cradle-to-grave
approach. Cradle-to-gate considers the raw material extraction and
the manufacturing processes needed for the final product until it
leaves the factory; on the other hand, cradle-to-grave also includes
product use and its end of life management.
LCA is used for several applications including (i) evaluating the
material and energy efficiency of a system, (ii) identifying the
pollution shifts between processes, and (iii) providing benchmarks
for improvements (Owens, 1997). Also, LCA results can be used to
identify potential improvements within the studied systems and to
orientate political and technical decision-making (Strazza et al.,
2011).
As cement has multiple applications in civil engineering after it
leaves the production plant, a unique life cycle cannot be defined,
and a cradle-to-gate approach is, therefore, preferred. A cradle-to-
gate approach would still be useful for further assessing of com-
plete life cycles of final products, such as structural and non-
structural concrete components (Chen et al., 2010a). According to
Van den Heede and De Belie (2012), as a cradle-to-grave approach
would contemplate the demolition and waste phase, it would be
preferable when assessing environmental impacts of “green” con-
cretes, because it can include workability and strength that are
taken into account by cradle-to-gate as well as the durability
parameter.
The functional unit, when reviewing previous LCA of concrete
products, was observed to vary from the material level (e.g. when
elaborating an LCA of Portland cement) to the structural level
(e.g. for an LCA of a structural beam) (Van den Heede and De
Belie, 2012). The functional unit chosen should be carefully
defined because it influences the outcome significantly, as shown
by Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger (2014), where the use of LCA
for waste co-incineration in cement kilns was analyzed. The
studies they analyzed were divided into two groups: (i) the first
group, which covers the use of waste derived fuels with 1 t of
cement as functional unit, and (ii) the second group, which an-
alyzes thermal waste treatments, like co-incineration, with 1 t of
waste as functional unit. The reported results were highly
dependent on the functional unit chosen. Functional units
encountered in the literature review were: 1 t of cement or 1 t of
clinker (Li et al., 2014a, 2014b; Strazza et al., 2011), 1 tonne of
cement or clinker (Feiz et al., 2014b; García-Gusano et al., 2013,
2014), 1 kg of cement or 1 kg of clinker (Chen et al., 2010a;
Valderrama et al., 2012), 1 m3 of concrete of a specific strength
at the construction site (Knoeri et al., 2013), 1 t of waste (Galvez-
Martos and Schoenberger, 2014), 1 m3 of concrete used in a
structure with a service life of 15 years (Valipour et al., 2014), 1 t
of Portland cement with 42.5 MPa of strength (Li et al., 2014a),
the equivalent of 20 bags of Portland cement, each one approx-
imately 45.4 kg (Eatmon, 2009).
Chen et al. (2014) compared the production between dry kilns of
different capacities (high, moderate, and small) using LCA. Obser-
vations indicated a relatively high environmental burden in the
moderate-production scenario in most impact categories compared
to the large- and small-production scenarios. The large-production
scenario presented the lowest environmental burden in all cate-
gories, except in Global Warming Potential (GWP), in which the
small-production scenario had the lowest value. The relatively high
resource consumption and direct air emissions caused the previ-
ously mentioned results (Chen et al., 2014).
Proske et al. (2013) analyzed some eco-friendly concrete mixes
with reduced water and cement contents and found that the allo-
cation of environmental impacts to by-products, like fly ash and
slag, decreases the GWP reduction. The GWP without allocation
was reduced approximately 35% in mixes with fly ash and lime-
stone and 60% in mixes with slag as clinker replacement. When
using economic allocation on Supplementary Cementitious Mate-
rials (SCM), GWP lowered only 15e25% in fly ash mixes and
35e45% in slag mixes.
Chen et al. (2010b) tested mass and economic allocation
methods on waste products (Blast furnace slag and fly ash) used in
cement industry for lowering clinker content. Mass allocation is
constant over long periods of time, but it induces large impacts on
by-products (SCM). Economic allocation of these by-products en-
hances the fact that they were primarily waste, and should there-
fore not have the same environmental burden as the main products,
so it lowers their impacts, but it is unstable because of potential
market fluctuations.
Among the reviewed literature, several authors utilized mass
allocation (Eatmon, 2009), economic allocation (Feiz et al., 2014b),
and system expansion (Knoeri et al., 2013). However, most studies
 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122 117

Table 1
General methodological choices in LCA studies of cement production.

Reference Product/description Country Functional unit System boundary Data collection Software Database

(Li et al., 2014a) Portland cement China 1 t of PC and Cement production On site, estimation with x x
1 t of PC with and power station coefficients, mass and
42.5 MPa strength heat equations
(Valderrama Implementation of BAT to Spain 1 kg of clinker Clinker production Plant records SimaPro 7.2 Ecoinvent
et al., 2012) cement production in cement kiln v2.2 and
SimaPro
(Eatmon, 2009) Comparison of PC with United 200 100 lb-bags Cement production x SimaPro 6.0 SimaPro
alternative technologies States of PC
(García-Gusano Application of CO2 Spain 1 t of gray cement Cement production Previous studies SimaPro 7.3.3 Ecoinvent
et al., 2013) postcombustion capture to v2.2
cement production
(Chen et al., 2010a) Cement production and France 1 kg of PC Extraction and European Pollutant SimaPro 7 Ecoinvent
variability between plants cement production Emission Register v2.0
(Strazza et al., 2011) Resource productivity Italy 1 t of cement Cement production On site SimaPro 7.1 x
enhancement, co-incineration,
LCA, plastic as alternative fuel
(Chen et al., 2014) Pollutants generated by cement China 1 t of PC Cement production On site, statistics x x
production: impacts and records, monitoring
improvement potential. Hybrid data, previous studies
LCA.
(Li et al., 2014b) Portland cement, clinker China 1 t of PC and 1 t Cement production On site x Ecoinvent
of clinker v2.2
(Feiz et al., 2014b) Attributional comparative LCA Germany 1 t of cement Cement production On site specific, plant SimaPro 7.3 Ecoinvent
for 4 cement products, records
simplified LCA
(Valipour et al., 2014) Cement with zeolite in marine Persian 1 m3 of concrete Extraction, On site, field x x
environments Gulf with 15 years of production and use experiments, producer
service life phase reports
(Knoeri et al., 2013) Comparative LCA: conventional Switzerland 1 m3 of concrete From aggregates On site specific x Ecoinvent
and recycled cement extraction and v2.2
building
dismantling to
construction site

PC ¼ portland cement.
BAT ¼ Best Available Technologies.

do not specify an allocation method (Chen et al., 2010a, 2014;
García-Gusano et al., 2013; Li et al., 2014a, 2014b; Valderrama
et al., 2012; Valipour et al., 2014).
Feiz et al. (2014b) developed a simplified LCA model, in which
fewer parameters than a full LCA were analyzed. In order to
simplify the LCA, three steps were followed: (i) elaborate the
original attributional LCA, which included more than 50 input
variables; (ii) test and identify which parameters were of special
importance, known as Key Performance Indicators (KPI), (those
which provide most of the information), choosing 6 KPI; and (iii)
create the simplified LCA based on the KPIs chosen. For the
simplified LCA, only six parameters were studied, resulting in a
much simpler way to assess the GWP for the same case. The au-
thors conducted a sensitivity analysis for the variation of the
values of the KPIs and its relation to CO2 emissions. Then, the
simplified model was tested. Results showed the simplified LCA
had high accuracy (just 4% difference with the original LCA). Also,
the improvement of KPIs with higher impact contributed more to
reduce the overall CO2 emissions (Feiz et al., 2014b). Table 1 pre-
sents the general methodological choices found in the reviewed
studies. Table 2 shows a summary of quantitative results of the
reviewed LCA studies. Table 3 provides examples of impact cate-
gories results for LCA studies that presented this information in
consistent units.
2009): energy efficiency, alternative fuels, clinker substitution,
and carbon capture and storage (CCS). Among the reviewed liter-
ature, solutions regarding the first three categories are the most
widely analyzed as they have been thoroughly developed through
the years (Benhelal et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2014; Eatmon, 2009;
Feiz et al., 2014b; Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger, 2014; García-
Gusano et al., 2013, 2014; García-Segura et al., 2013; Knoeri et al.,
2013; Lei et al., 2011; Proske et al., 2013; Valderrama et al., 2012;
Valipour et al., 2014; Van den Heede and De Belie, 2012).
Mature technologies, as described by Feiz et al. (2014a), like
energy efficiency improvement or the use of alternative fuels and
materials are usually cheaper and easier to apply. Less feasible
measures such as cement with no clinker content or carbon
sequestration have a high potential for improvement in the future.
Clinker substitution is a mature technology, it still presents high
CO2 emissions reduction potential (Feiz et al., 2014a).
It has been shown that almost all options with high improve-
ment potential require cooperation with other organizations
(Ammenberg et al., 2014). The improvement measure categories
defined by IEA (2009) were chosen to classify the results, as most
improvement measures found in the reviewed studies fit into one
of these categories.
4.1. Energy efficiency

4. Improvement measures Improving energy efficiency entails the implementation of the

Best Available Technologies (BAT) when possible. Regarding BAT
The International Energy Agency (IEA) focuses on four cate- implementation, the most significant improvements are related to
gories of improvement measures available for the cement industry energy efficiency measures in the kiln system, that is, reducing the
regarding CO2 emissions reduction (International Energy Agency, amount of fuel needed for producing the same quantity of clinker
118 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122

Table 2
Summary of quantitative results of LCA available in the literature.

Reference Study description Results of the study

(Li et al., 2014a) A comparative analysis between China and Japan cement industry was
executed, as Japan is regarded as a good example to achieve better
environmental performance and both use the same cement production
technology: new suspension preheater (NSP). Two functional units were
used, with and without considering strength.
(Valderrama The replacement of former cement production lines in Cemento Molins
et al., 2012) was analyzed. The new production line was designed and constructed
considering the BAT for the cement industry.
(Eatmon, 2009) A comparative LCA was made for four cement manufacturing processes:
traditional PC, blended cement (BC), cement with 100% of Cement Kiln
Dust (CKD) recycled into the kiln process, and cement with CKD used to
sequester part of the CO2 emissions. The Eco-indicator95 was used to
assess the environmental impacts.
(García-Gusano Three cement production scenarios for the Spanish industry were
et al., 2013) analyzed and compared. The present scenario (2010BASE), the
2030BASE projected scenario, where BAT are applied, and the 2030PCC
projected scenario with CO2 post-combustion.
(Strazza et al., 2011) The environmental performance of an Italian plant that uses recovered
plastics as an alternative fuel was analyzed. The caloric substitution of
the fuel was 22%. The data correspond to the year 2006.
(Chen et al., 2014) A hybrid LCA was conducted to study the environmental impacts and
potential for 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., 2014b) The GWP of clinker and three cement products 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 et al., 2014) The application of different zeolite replacement levels to the cement
content (10%, 20%, and 30%) was analyzed.
(Knoeri et al., 2013) A comparative LCA between 12 conventional concrete (CC) and their
corresponding recycled concrete (RC) was carried out. The applications
of these concrete mixes were structural (indoor and outdoor) and lean
concrete.
(García-Gusano An LCA of the Spanish cement industry in 2010 is carried out and five
et al., 2014) improvement scenarios are analyzed: thermal efficiency (E1), electrical
efficiency (E2), material substitution (E3), fossil fuel substitution (E4)
and an ideal scenario with all the improvements together (E5)
(García-Segura The CO2 emissions of a recycled cement building column made with PC
et al., 2013) and BC containing Blast Furnace Slag (BFS) and Fly Ash (FA) were
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.
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 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 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 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 2030BASE 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.
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 CO2 eq. for large and small scenarios, and 802 and
1000 kg CO2 eq. 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 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 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%
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 2e6% in all impact categories. E2, reductions of 8e11%.
E3, 10e13% 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.

(Valderrama et al., 2012). They studied the upgrades made in a
Spanish cement plant and compared the current and the former
clinker manufacturing impacts. The implementation of BAT led to a
reduction of all the impact categories considered in the study. The
main improvements were: increasing efficiency in dosing and
grinding of raw materials, emissions reduction in the cyclone
tower, less noise in the grate cooler, higher capacity of the kiln filter,
and higher efficiency and fewer emissions in the kiln system. These
improvements led to a reduction in electricity and heat usage, thus
a reduction in the environmental impact translated to a more
 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122 119

Table 3
Examples of life cycle impact assessment results in the literature.a

Reference Results perb: Type of result GWP AP EP HTP ADP ODP

kg CO2 eq kg SO2 eq PO4 eq kg 1.4DB eq kg Sb-eq kg CFC-11

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

(Valderrama et al., 2012) 1000 kg of PC Old prod. Lines PC 987 2.55 0.372 3.34
BAT prod. Lines PC 938 2.16 0.31 2.88
(Chen et al., 2010a) 1000 kg of PC Case study 782 3.49 0.504 76 0.243 4.20E05
France mean (ATILH) 899 2.24 0.297 59.5 0.243 4.20E05
(Feiz et al., 2014b) 1 tonne of cement Clinker 850
PC 92% clinker 779
Blended 50% clinker w. GBFS 452
Blended 27% clinker w. GBFS 265
(Chen et al., 2014) 1 ton of PC Dry kiln large production scenario 734 0.89c 0.0102c 1.28E06
Dry kiln moderate production scenario 801 2.54c 0.0103c 1.59E06
Dry kiln small production scenario 693 0.98c 0.00986c 1.29E06
Shaft kiln 1000 3.82c 0.0136c 1.54E06
(García-Gusano et al., 2013) 1 t of cement 2010-BASE 799 3.4 4.37E05
2030-BASE 620 1.64 2.28E05
2030-PCC 530 4.73 1.67E05
(García-Gusano et al., 2014) 1 tonne of clinker Spanish industry 929 3.93d
1 tonne of cement 799 3.4d
a
Results between studies are not comparable as objectives and methods are different for each one.
b
1 t ¼ 1 tonne ¼ 1000 kg, 1 ton ¼ 1016 kg.
c
Aquatic.
d
Mole Hþ eq.
e
kg C6H4Cl2 eq.

sustainable production and economic benefits (Valderrama et al.,
2012).
Shifting from wet to dry processes for calcination leads to better
environmental performance, reducing the required energy up to 50%
and mitigating almost 20% of CO2 emissions (Benhelal et al., 2013).
Galvez-Martos and Schoenberger (2014) indicate there is a great
reduction of thermal energy consumption when using semi-dry and
dry systems instead of wet or semi-wet ones (Morrow et al., 2014).
For China's cement industry, the wide application of dry production
processes and efficiency improvement led to a decrease in the GHG
emissions fraction coming from the combustion of raw coal from
36.5% of the total in 2005 to 33.5% in 2009. However, the fraction of
GHG emissions from CaCO3 breakdown increased from 50.3% to 52%
in the same time period. Both raw coal combustion and CaCO3
breakdown, along with electricity, were found to be the main sources
of GHG emissions of Chinese cement industry (Wang et al., 2013). For
India's cement industry, which mostly uses dry rotary kilns, it was
found that increased production of blended cement and kiln shell
heat loss reduction by improving the refractories. These are the two
most cost-effective fuel-saving measures. The implementation of
high-efficiency raw mill fans and high-efficiency motors are the two
most cost-effective measures regarding electricity savings. More-
over, the largest electricity saving potential depends on waste heat
electricity generation and the use of vertical roller mill instead of ball
mill for finish grinding (Morrow et al., 2014). The replacement of old
shaft kilns by precalciner kilns would reduce particulate matter (PM),
CO and SO2 emissions (Lei et al., 2011).
García-Gusano et al. (2014) evaluated improvement scenarios
for the Spanish cement industry. The improvement scenarios were:
thermal efficiency (from 3536 MJ/t to 3300 MJ/t clinker), electrical
efficiency (from 130 kWh/t to 106 kWh/t cement), material sub-
stitution (clinker-to-cement ratio from 0.8 to 0.7), fossil fuel sub-
stitution (alternative fuels share from 15.8% to 50% of energy), and
an ideal scenario, which included all the aforementioned. Most
significant improvements are associated with energy consumption,
including redesigning the kiln and renewal of the mills (García-
Gusano et al., 2014). Material and fuels 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 limestone
or silica sands, alongside the clinker, would lead to reductions
greater than 10% in each impact category when reducing the
clinker-to-cement ratio from 0.8 to 0.7 (García-Gusano et al., 2014).
Replacing fossil fuels with alternative ones reduced GWP, Human
Toxicity Potential with cancer effects, Photochemical Ozone For-
mation, and Acidification Potential impact categories, but increased
Fresh Water Eutrophication. The implementation of the ideal sce-
nario would lead to reductions from 21% in GWP up to 49% in
Acidification Potential. Thus, a fuel shift would be needed for
improving contamination rates (García-Gusano et al., 2014).
Hasanbeigi et al. (2013) analyzed the effects of implementing 23
efficiency measures in the Chinese cement industry from 2010 to
2030 and estimated cost-effective energy savings of 247 TWh and
CO2 emissions reductions of 138 Mt associated with this savings in
this period.
The annual growth rate of energy consumption in China's
cement industry was lower than the cement output growth rate
due to the application of energy efficient processes, such as new
suspension preheater kilns and waste heat recovery power gener-
ation (Jing Ke, 2012). Heat recovery has been shown to be able to
save up to 20% of fuel consumption and to mitigate up to 8% of CO2
emissions (Benhelal et al., 2013). China's cement industry will
continue growing because of rising urbanization until building and
infrastructure construction reaches the level of developed coun-
tries. The demand for cement is expected to decrease significantly
after this level has been reached. At this point, the demand will be
much lower than the cement construction capacity and a serious
capacity surplus may occur. This possibility could force the cement
industry to improve efficiency and reduce costs. Therefore, this
capacity surplus may act as a market-driven energy efficiency
measure. These results suggest that policies that promote energy
efficiency are the most important measure for reducing the cement
production energy and emissions intensity (Jing Ke, 2012).
4.2. Alternative fuels
Alternative fuels usually include agricultural and non-
agricultural biomass residues, petroleum-based wastes,
120 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122
miscellaneous wastes, and chemical and hazardous wastes
(Benhelal et al., 2013).
Cement production enables the use of waste for substituting
raw materials and traditional fuels. According to Strazza et al.
(2011), the use of waste derived fuels results in a reduction of
environmental impact and fuel costs. According to the same au-
thors, combustion of alternative fuels is an ideal method for
recovering heating power from waste. The use of recovered plas-
tics as an alternative fuel with a caloric substitution of 22% in an
Italian cement plant, when compared with the average Italian
plant that considers a caloric substitution of 4%, showed a
reduction of the environmental load in every impact category. The
reduction ranged from 1% in photochemical oxidation to 30% for
eutrophication (Strazza et al., 2011). Using waste derived fuel is
environmentally friendly since it reduces emissions from both
cement plants and landfills at the same time according to Benhelal
et al. (2013).
4.3. Material substitution
The calcination process (clinker production) accounts for
approximately 58% of the total impact of cement production in the
category climate change (García-Gusano et al., 2014). Waste and
supplementary cementing materials such as fly ash, blast furnace
slag, silica fume, rice husk ash, and metakaolin can be used as
partial replacements for Portland cement. These materials have
shown to improve properties of the mix and are less energy
intensive than cement (Berndt, 2009). Replacing a portion of
clinker with fly ash reduces energy requirements and improves
concrete durability (Benhelal et al., 2013).
Lei et al. (2011) indicated that the potential for CO2 emissions
reduction by clinker substitution is likely to be larger than re-
ductions by thermal efficiency improvement and alternative fuels
use.
Blended cement use waste products or other aggregates to
replace Portland cement to reduce embodied 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 et al., 2014). Ammenberg
et al. (2014) found that increased share of blended cement is one
of the most powerful options available for improving the CO2 per-
formance of cement.
Berndt (2009) assessed the improvement in sustainability due
to partial replacement of cement with fly ash, blast furnace slag,
and recycled concrete aggregate, for wind turbine foundations.
Improvement the sustainability of concrete by reducing the
amount of cement is due to the subsequent reduction in clinker
content in the concrete mix. A conventional mix with no material
substitution and four mixes with different grades of substitution,
ranging from 50% to 70% of cement, were considered. Recycled
concrete aggregates were also used with slag-modified and con-
ventional concrete (Berndt, 2009).
Due to the higher carbonation rate coefficients, blended cement
replaced with blast furnace slag, or fly ash, at a high proportion
(50% and 80% blast furnace slag and 35% fly ash) suffered a reduc-
tion of approximately 10% in their service life. This loss of durability
of cement with high replacement rates yielded increased CO2
yearly emissions than lower replacement rates (García-Segura
et al., 2013). The use of fly ash for replacing Portland cement led
to a lower material emission factor than the use of blast furnace
slag. The former needs less processing after being collected, but the
latter can attain larger cement replacements, thus greater re-
ductions could be achieved (García-Segura et al., 2013).
Proske et al. (2013) found that the loss of compressive strength,
due to cement clinker reduction, could be compensated by
decreasing water volume and using fly ash and blast-furnace slag.
Compared with conventional concrete the same carbonation depth
on concretes with reduced clinker content is achievable only by
providing higher compressive strength (Proske et al., 2013).
Cement with low clinker content is considered to be a low
environmental impact cement due to less embodied energy and
less embodied CO2 emissions. The effect of substituting high
impact with low impact 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), especially in those pla-
ces where most of cement consumption is Portland cement.
During clinker production, fine particulates of unburned and
partially burned raw material known as cement kiln dust (CKD)
are collected. Eatmon (2009) compared the ordinary Portland
cement production composed of 95% clinker, with three other
cement production technologies: (i) blended cement, (ii) cement
with 100% waste CKD recycled, and (iii) Portland cement with CKD
used to sequester a portion of the process-related CO2 emissions.
The blended cement has the lowest global warming potential
(Eatmon, 2009).
The use of green concrete, containing natural zeolite in a marine
environment in the Persian Gulf, was analyzed by Valipour et al.
(2014). In this case, cement content was restricted to a maximum
and minimum value because of the chloride-induced corrosion of
the embedded steel due to the aggressive marine environment.
Results showed the use of zeolite in concrete decreased the GWP
and led to higher compressive strength when the replacement was
between 10% and 20%. The use of zeolite resulted in concrete with
low chloride permeability as well.
4.4. Carbon capture and storage (CCS)
CCS does not reduce CO2 generation; it separates, captures, and
stores CO2 preventing it from being released. Carbon capture would
be one of the few opportunities for getting major CO2 emissions
reduction in the cement industry. However, it presents a series of
barriers, both technical and economical for being implemented
(Benhelal et al., 2013). Moreover, an LCA elaborated for CO2 post-
combustion capture for the Spanish cement production
concluded that, besides its enormous cost and slow implementa-
tion, CCS is challenged by the competition with more feasible so-
lutions such as applying BAT, substituting clinker or replacing fossil
fuels (García-Gusano et al., 2013).
4.5. Other improvement solutions
The CKD can be incorporated back into the kiln depending on its
composition and regional standards, or disposed or stored (Eatmon,
2009). CKD was identified by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) as hazardous waste but would remain as non-hazardous
waste when the management standards described by EPA are
met (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999). Lowering the
clinker sintering temperature would lead to a reduction in petro-
leum coke consumption in the kiln and CO2 emissions. In a study by
Castan~o
n and García-Granda (2014), it was shown that decreasing
the sintering temperature from 1450  C to 1400  C does not result
in significant decrease of one of the most important quality pa-
rameters of clinker, the content of Alite (Ca3SiO5). This decrease of
50  C resulted in energy and costs savings.
Controlling the combustion of coal and the thermal degradation
of limestone by using a numerical model, such as computational
fluid dynamics, as an investigation tool for improving the sustain-
ability of cement production was analyzed by Mikul ci

c et al. (2015).
They proved that such numerical modeling can assist in the
 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122
improvement parameters like temperatures or particle residence
time in the calcination process, in a way that it can facilitate the
reduction of pollutant emissions and contribute to a more sus-
tainable cement production (Mikul ci

c et al., 2015).
Ammenberg et al. (2014) analyzed the effects of industrial
symbiosis for the site-specific case of the CEMEX Cluster West
production system in Germany. For this, the CO2 emissions of
traditional linear cement production systems had to be compared
with more synergistic alternatives. The 2009 production system,
which represented the situation during the study, can be seen as
more synergistic than the production system of 1997 since it
implied a greater relation with steel industry (more use of slag) and
more use of alternative fuels and renewable energy. The GWP of
Cluster West clinker production in 2009 was 9% lower than in 1997
(Feiz et al., 2014b).
5. Discussion
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. Also, this results in major environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts caused by cement production are associ-
ated with mining and quarrying, waste disposal, materials storage,
fuels and raw materials production, plant production capacity,
clinker production, clinker content of the cement mix, technology,
industrial practices, and the level of industrial synergy. Clinker
production is the highest energy demanding process and the
highest emissions contributor. Emissions arising from clinker pro-
duction, impact air quality and climate change. Currently, cement
manufacturing is responsible for 5% of global CO2 emissions caused
by human activity (Hendriks, 2000).
LCA is a suitable tool for analyzing the environmental impacts
of products and services. It has frequently been used to identify
environmental impact hot spots, and to assess improvement
measures in the cement production industry. Most LCA studies
regarding cement production have been elaborated using a cradle-
to-gate approach, which means the system boundaries are limited
to raw materials extraction, material processing, clinker produc-
tion, cement mixing, and storage. Transport between these pro-
cesses is also normally considered. The cradle-to-gate approach is
usually adequate when the purpose is to characterize or to test
improvement measures associated with cement production. This
is particularly relevant as cement has multiple uses after it leaves
the plant. When studying concrete, a cradle-to-grave approach
may be more useful as the application is normally known. For
example, the analysis of a structural beam could be addressed in
this direction.
The definition of the functional unit depends on the study scope
and objectives. When using a cradle-to-gate approach the func-
tional unit is normally a single unit of mass of cement (or clinker)
produced, such 1 kg cement or 1 ton of cement. When including the
application, the final cement product can be the functional unit.
The latter should be used when using a cradle-to-grave approach.
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 substitute either clinker or fuels in cement
production. When by-products are used to replace fuels or clinker,
allocation could influence the results. However, this situation is not
normally shown in the literature. For example, when by-products
like fly ash and blast furnace slag, both used for reducing the
clinker content of cement and thus reducing its environmental
burden; the results vary depending on the allocation method as
shown by Proske et al. (2013) and Chen et al. (2010b). Mass
121
allocation induces large impacts on by-products. Economic alloca-
tion enhances the fact that by-products were considered as waste
and lowers their environmental impact as the main product takes
most of the burden.
There are four types of improvement measures for cement
manufacture: energy efficiency improvement, alternative fuels
use, clinker substitution and CCS. Research thoroughly developed
improvement measures related to energy efficiency and alterna-
tive fuels. They are considered mature technologies and thus easy
to apply. The implementation of BAT implies the upgrade to the
latest technologies. The upgrade of technology to BAT, such as
shifting from wet to dry calcination processes, upgrading or
redesigning of machinery and equipment, waste heat recovery
power generation, improves energy efficiency and thus the
environmental performance of cement products. Clinker pro-
duction is a hotspot within the whole production chain. Efficiency
measures in the kiln system and substitution of clinker (using fly
ash, blast furnace slag, non-calcined limestone, and other by-
products that otherwise would be considered waste) achieve
the greatest impact reductions. Some clinker substitution mate-
rials in the right amounts can even improve properties of the
concrete mixes. The use of alternative fuels from waste, biomass
residues or recovered plastics reduces environmental impacts
from both cement plants and landfills. CCS presents major CO2
emissions reduction opportunities, but its implementation pre-
sents both technical and economical barriers, and it is challenged
by the previously mentioned mature measures. Other improve-
ment measures that include industrial symbiosis practices, e.g.
synergies between steel and cement industry, present great
improvement potentials.
6. Conclusions
Several case studies around the world assessed the environ-
mental impacts of cement production. The reviewed literature
identified hot spots and potential improvement measures in the
cement industry. These measures are energy efficiency, alternative
fuel use, material substitution, and CCS. Improvement measures
focusing on the first three solutions are regarded as mature tech-
nologies, as they have been thoroughly studied and applied. These
mature technologies are relatively low-cost and technically feasible
for applying. On the other hand, carbon capture and storage pre-
sents a higher improvement potential, but shows several barriers to
its implementation, both technical and economical.
The application of the best available technologies and using dry
processes are the most effective measures regarding energy effi-
ciency. Cement production allows the use of fuel from waste. Ma-
terial substitution has resulted in environmental impact mitigation
in several studies. Fly ash, blast furnace slag, palm oil waste, recy-
cled concrete, zeolite, and other materials have been used for
manufacturing blended cement.
The information reviewed here will serve as the basis for future
development of the LCA of the cement production in Ecuador.
Acknowledgments
This paper is based on work funded by Escuela Superior

cnica del Litoral, ESPOL, Ecuador.
Polite
References
Al-Dadi, M.M., Hassan, H.E., Sharshar, T., Arida, H.A., Badran, H.M., 2014. Environ-
mental impact of some cement manufacturing plants in Saudi Arabia.
J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 302, 1103e1117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10967-014-
3383-8.
122 D.A. Salas et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 113 (2016) 114e122
Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., Eklund, 2014. Improving the CO2 performance of cement,
part III: the relevance of industrial symbiosis and how to measure its impact.
J. Clean. Prod. 98, 145e155.
Benhelal, E., Zahedi, G., Shamsaei, E., Bahadori, A., 2013. Global strategies and po-
tentials to curb CO2 emissions in cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. 51, 142e161.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.049.
Berndt, M.L., 2009. Properties of sustainable concrete containing fly ash, slag and
recycled concrete aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater 23, 2606e2613. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.02.011.
Castan ~o

n, A.M., García-Granda, S., 2014. Energy and environmental savings via
optimisation of the production process at a Spanish cement factory. J. Clean.
Prod. 98, 47e52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.028.
Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., 2010a. Environmental impact of cement
production: detail of the different processes and cement plant variability
evaluation. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 478e485. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2009.12.014.
Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., Ventura, A., 2010b. LCA allocation pro-
cedure used as an incitative method for waste recycling: an application to
mineral additions in concrete. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 54, 1231e1240. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.04.001.
Chen, W., Hong, J., Xu, C., 2014. Pollutants generated by cement production in China,
their impacts, and the potential for environmental improvement. J. Clean. Prod.
103, 61e69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.048.
Eatmon, T.D., 2009. A life-cycle assessment of Portland cement manufacturing:
comparing the traditional process with alternative technologies. J. Clean. Prod.
17, 668e675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.04.007. Present and
anticipated demands for natural resources: scientific, technological, political,
economic and ethical approaches for sustainable management.
EN ISO 14044:2006, 2006. Environmental Management e Life Cycle Assessment e
Requirements and Guidelines.
Feely, R.A., Sabine, C.L., Lee, K., Berelson, W., Kleypas, J., Fabry, V.J., Millero, F.J., 2004.
Impact of anthropogenic CO2 on the CaCO3 system in the oceans. Science 305,
362e366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1097329.
Feiz, R., Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., 2014a. Improving the CO2 performance of cement, part
II: framework for assessing CO2 improvement measures in the cement industry.
J. Clean. Prod. 98, 282e291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.103.
Feiz, R., Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., Eklund, M., Helgstrand, A., Marshall, R., 2014b.
Improving the CO2 performance of cement, part I: utilizing life-cycle assess-
ment and key performance indicators to assess development within the
cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. 98, 272e281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2014.01.083.
Galvez-Martos, J.-L., Schoenberger, H., 2014. An analysis of the use of life cycle
assessment for waste co-incineration in cement kilns. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
86, 118e131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.02.009.
García-Gusano, D., Garraín, D., Herrera, I., Cabal, H., Lecho
n, Y., 2013. Life cycle
assessment of applying CO2 post-combustion capture to the Spanish cement
production. J. Clean. Prod. 104, 328e338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2013.11.056.
García-Gusano, D., Herrera, I., Garraín, D., Lecho
n, Y., Cabal, H., 2014. Life cycle
assessment of the Spanish cement industry: implementation of environmental-
friendly solutions. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 17, 59e73. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s10098-014-0757-0.
García-Segura, T., Yepes, V., Alcal
a, J., 2013. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of
blended cement concrete including carbonation and durability. Int. J. Life Cycle
Assess. 19, 3e12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0614-0.
Hasanbeigi, A., Morrow, W., Masanet, E., Sathaye, J., Xu, T., 2013. Energy efficiency
improvement and CO2 emission reduction opportunities in the cement industry in
China. Energy Policy 57, 287e297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.053.
Hendriks, C.A., 2000. Emission Reduction of Greenhouse Gases from the Cement
Industry.
International Energy Agency, 2009. Cement Technology Roadmap.
Jing Ke, N.Z., 2012. Potential energy savings and CO2 emissions reduction of China's
cement industry. Energy Policy 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.enpol.2012.03.036.
Josa, A., Aguado, A., Cardim, A., Byars, E., 2007. Comparative analysis of the life cycle
impact assessment of available cement inventories in the EU. Cem. Concr. Res.
37, 781e788. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.02.004.
Knoeri, C., Sanye
-Mengual, E., Althaus, H.-J., 2013. Comparative LCA of recycled and
conventional concrete for structural applications. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 18,
909e918. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0544-2.
Le Que
r e

, C., Moriarty, R., Andrew, R.M., Peters, G.P., Ciais, P., Friedlingstein, P.,
Jones, S.D., Sitch, S., Tans, P., Arneth, A., Boden, T.A., Bopp, L., Bozec, Y.,
Canadell, J.G., Chini, L.P., Chevallier, F., Cosca, C.E., Harris, I., Hoppema, M.,
Houghton, R.A., House, J.I., Jain, A.K., Johannessen, T., Kato, E., Keeling, R.F.,
Kitidis, V., Klein Goldewijk, K., Koven, C., Landa, C.S., Landschützer, P., Lenton, A.,
Lima, I.D., Marland, G., Mathis, J.T., Metzl, N., Nojiri, Y., Olsen, A., Ono, T., Peng, S.,
Peters, W., Pfeil, B., Poulter, B., Raupach, M.R., Regnier, P., Ro€denbeck, C., Saito, S.,
Salisbury, J.E., Schuster, U., Schwinger, J., Se
f e

rian, R., Segschneider, J.,
Steinhoff, T., Stocker, B.D., Sutton, A.J., Takahashi, T., Tilbrook, B., van der
Werf, G.R., Viovy, N., Wang, Y.-P., Wanninkhof, R., Wiltshire, A., Zeng, N., 2015.
Global carbon budget 2014. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 7, 47e85. http://dx.doi.org/
10.5194/essd-7-47-2015.
Lei, Y., Zhang, Q., Nielsen, C., He, K., 2011. An inventory of primary air pollutants and
CO2 emissions from cement production in China, 1990e2020. Atmos. Environ.
45, 147e154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.09.034.
Li, C., Cui, S., Nie, Z., Gong, X., Wang, Z., Itsubo, N., 2014a. The LCA of portland
cement production in China. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20, 117e127. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0804-4.
Li, C., Nie, Z., Cui, S., Gong, X., Wang, Z., Meng, X., 2014b. The life cycle inventory
study of cement manufacture in China. J. Clean. Prod. 72, 204e211. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.048.
Lippiatt, B., Ahmad, S., 2004. Measuring the life-cycle environmental and economic
performance of concrete: the BEES approach. In: Int. Workshop Sustain. Dev.
Concr. Technol. Beijing.
Mefteh, H., Kebaïli, O., Oucief, H., Berredjem, L., Arabi, N., 2013. Influence of mois-
ture conditioning of recycled aggregates on the properties of fresh and hard-
ened concrete. J. Clean. Prod. 54, 282e288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2013.05.009.
Mikul ci

c, H., Vujanovi
c, M., Dui
c, N., 2015. Improving the sustainability of cement
production by using numerical simulation of limestone thermal degradation
and pulverized coal combustion in a cement calciner. J. Clean. Prod. 88,
262e271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.011. Sustainable develop-
ment of energy, water and environment systems.
Morrow III, W.R., Hasanbeigi, A., Sathaye, J., Xu, T., 2014. Assessment of energy ef-
ficiency improvement and CO2 emission reduction potentials in India's cement
and iron & steel industries. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 131e141. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.022.
Owens, J.W., 1997. Life-cycle assessment: constraints on moving from inventory to
impact assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 1, 37e49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/
jiec.1997.1.1.37.
van Oss, Hendrik G., Padovani, A.C., 2002. Cement manufacture and the environ-
ment: part I: chemistry and technology. J. Ind. Ecol. 6, 89e105. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1162/108819802320971650.
Proske, T., Hainer, S., Rezvani, M., Graubner, C.-A., 2013. Eco-friendly concretes with
reduced water and cement contents d mix design principles and laboratory tests.
Cem. Concr. Res. 51, 38e46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2013.04.011.
Strazza, C., Del Borghi, A., Gallo, M., Del Borghi, M., 2011. Resource productivity
enhancement as means for promoting cleaner production: analysis of co-
incineration in cement plants through a life cycle approach. J. Clean. Prod. 19,
1615e1621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.05.014.
US Department of Commerce, N., n.d. ESRL Global Monitoring Division e Global
Greenhouse Gas Reference Network [WWW Document]. http://www.esrl.noaa.
gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/global.html (accessed 01.31.15.).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999. Management Standards Proposed for
Cement Kiln Dust Waste.
Valderrama, C., Granados, R., Cortina, J.L., Gasol, C.M., Guillem, M., Josa, A., 2012.
Implementation of best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-
cycle assessment study. J. Clean. Prod. 25, 60e67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2011.11.055.
Valipour, M., Yekkalar, M., Shekarchi, M., Panahi, S., 2014. Environmental assess-
ment of green concrete containing natural zeolite on the global warming index
in marine environments. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 418e423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2013.07.055.
Van den Heede, P., De Belie, N., 2012. Environmental impact and life cycle assess-
ment (LCA) of traditional and “green” concretes: literature review and theo-
retical calculations. Cem. Concr. Compos. 34, 431e442. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2012.01.004.
Wang, Y., Zhu, Q., Geng, Y., 2013. Trajectory and driving factors for GHG emissions in
the Chinese cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. 53, 252e260. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.001.