Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

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

Review

Global strategies and potentials to curb CO2 emissions in cement

industry
Emad Benhelal a, Gholamreza Zahedi a, *, Ezzatollah Shamsaei b, Alireza Bahadori c
a
Process Systems Engineering Center (PROSPECT), Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
b
Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
c
Southern Cross University, School of Environment, Science and Engineering, Lismore, NSW, Australia

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

Article history: Cement industry has been always among the largest CO2 emission sources. Almost 5e7% of global CO2
Received 5 January 2012 emissions are caused by cement plants, while 900 kg CO2 is emitted to the atmosphere for producing one ton
Received in revised form of cement. In this work, global strategies and potentials toward mitigation of CO2 emissions in cement plant
15 October 2012
have been discussed and the most promising approaches have been introduced. Moreover the barriers against
Accepted 22 October 2012
Available online 28 November 2012
worldwide deployment of such strategies are identified and comprehensively described. Three strategies of
CO2 reduction including energy saving, carbon separation and storage as well as utilizing alternative materials
in detail have been reviewed. In case of energy saving approaches, shifting to more efficient process for
Keywords:
Global warming
example from wet to dry process with calciner, shows the best results since potentially reduces up to 50% of
CO2 emissions required energy and mitigates almost 20% of CO2 emissions in the process. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is
Cement plant also considered as an effective way to avoid release of CO2. However economical and technical challenges still
CO2 mitigation play a remarkable obstacle against implementing such processes in the cement plant. As far as alternative
Alternative materials materials are the case, utilizing waste-derived fuel (WDF) and industrial by-products instead of conventional
fuels and materials result in the significant emission mitigation. Industrial wastes which can be used as both
fuel and raw material simultaneously mitigate emissions in cement plants and landfills.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
It is world widely accepted that global warming is indeed the
major environmental and economic threat in our time. Based on
the research done by Mahlia (2002) and Zhang et al. (2012), they
conclude that global warming is caused by the emissions of
greenhouse gases (GHGs) connected to human activities which
results in catastrophic consequences if not controlled and
mitigated.
Progressive emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) due to rapid
industrial extension and dramatic increase of public and individual
transportation has reached to an alarming level and is expected to
be enlarged even at a faster rate. The Department of Energy of
United States of America highlighted that by 2015, global carbon
emissions may be increased by 50% more than 1997 level. This
accumulation will lead to increase of global mean temperature
(GMT) in 21st century up to 5.8
C as high as current temperature if
this level of emissions continues as mention by Mahmoud et al.
(2009) and Dias and Arroja (2012).
The increase of GMT could give risks to unique and threatened
systems, risk of extreme weather events, and risk of large-scale
discontinuities as described below
 Risk to unique and threatened systems:
Increase in GMT above 1990 levels by 1
Ce2.5
C would lead
to the extinction of 20e30% of known plants and animals, poses
risks to many unique and threatened systems, including many
biodiversity hotspots (Smith et al., 2005).
 Risk of extreme weather events:
The increases in heat waves, intense precipitation events, and the
intensity of tropical cyclones are amongst the extreme weather events
which will happen if GMT continuously rises up (Climate Change,
2007a).
 Risk of large-scale discontinuity:

There is high confidence that global warming over many centuries

* Corresponding author. would lead to a sea level rise which is associated to loss of coastal area
E-mail addresses: grzahedi@cheme.utm.my, grzahedi@yahoo.com (G. Zahedi). and other impacts (Climate Change, 2007b; Rahman, et al., 2009).

0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.049
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161 143

All these expecting catastrophic events have urged industries

and governments to devote time and budget to study, discover and
implement promising strategies to diminish the accumulation of
GHGs emissions in the atmosphere. The Kyoto Protocol and
Copenhagen Conference were among recent global efforts of United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Under these agreements some countries were committed to reduce
their Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) emissions to the certain levels
(Zhang et al., 2012).
Carbon dioxide as shown in Table 1 is the most important and
abundant gas among all GHGs having the highest contribution in
global warming phenomenon. Thus finding promising approaches
to mitigate CO2 emissions is the priority of studies to subside the
threat of climate change.
Due to huge consumption of carbon intensive fuels and high rate
of chemical and petrochemical products, the major proportion of
CO2 emissions is originated by developed countries. As it is
demonstrated in Fig. 1, two third of global CO2 emissions in 2008 Fig. 1. Contribution of top 10 countries in global CO2 emissions in 2008 (adapted from
(19.1 Gt CO2) generated by just ten countries, while contribution of IEA (International Energy Agency) statistics, 2010).
China and the United States alone is 12.1 Gt CO2 which is about 41%
of world CO2 emissions.
1. Improving efficiency of the current vehicles.
Electricity and heat generation, transportation, industry and
2. Shifting from cars to public transportation
residential usage were the main CO2 producing sectors in 2008. As
3. Utilizing low or free carbon types of energy such as electricity,
illustrated in Fig. 2, only two sectors, electricity and heat generation
hydrogen, bio-fuels and solar instead of carbon intensive fuels.
and transportation were responsible for two third of global CO2
emissions in 2008.
Emissions in industry as the third largest sector are explained in
According to international energy agency (IEA), electricity and
Section 2, while a comprehensive description of cement process
heat generation sector was responsible for 41% of the global CO2
following by highlighting the sources of carbon dioxide emissions
emissions in 2008. It is mostly due to combustion of coal, the most
in this process include in Sections 3 and 4. Finally in Section 5
carbon intensive fossil fuel, emphasizing its share in global emis-
technical approaches and studies toward emissions mitigation in
sions. Between 2007 and 2008, total CO2 emissions by generation of
cement plant are discussed and the most promising strategies are
electricity and heat were stable. While consumption of coal
introduced.
remained constant, CO2 emissions from gas and oil grew by 3% and
4% (Fig. 3).
As the second largest sector, transportation has 22% of global 2. Industrial CO2 emissions
CO2 emissions share. Similar to electricity and heat generation
sector, high growth of emission by transportation is expected in the Almost 61% of global CO2 emissions are caused by industrial
future. By 2030 it is foreseen that transport demand will be activities (electricity and heat generation and other industries) (IEA
increased by 45% compared to current level (IEA statistics, 2010).
The emissions caused by this sector can be effectively controlled
by following approaches and policies;

Table 1
Tropospheric concentration and lifetime of greenhouse gases (GHGs) (adapted from
CDIAC, 2011).

Greenhouse gas Pre-1750 Recent Atmospheric

tropospheric tropospheric lifetime
concentration concentration (years)
Concentrations (ppm)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 280 388.5 100
Concentrations (ppb)
Methane (CH4) 700 1745/1870 12
Nitrous oxide (N2O) 270 322/323 114
Tropospheric ozone (O3) 25 34 hours-days
Concentrations (ppt)
CFC-11 Zero 240/242 45
CFC-12 (CCl2F2) Zero 533/535 100
CF-113 (CCl2FFClF2) Zero 76 85
HCFC-22 (CHClF2) Zero 190/217 12
HCFC-141b (CH3CCl2F) Zero 19/22 9.3
HCFC-142b (CH3CClF2) Zero 19/22 17.9
Halon 1211 (CBrCIF2) Zero 3.8/4.3 16
Halon 1301 (CBrCIF3) Zero 3.2/3.3 65
HFC-134a(CH2FCF3) Zero 49/60 14
Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) Zero 86/88 26
Methyl chloroform (CH3CCl3) Zero 8.6/8.9 5
Fig. 2. Proportion of different sources of energy consumption in global CO2 emissions
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) Zero 6.56/6.99 3200
in 2008 (adapted from IEA (International Energy Agency) statistics, 2010).
144 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Fig. 3. Global CO2 emissions by electricity and heat generation in 2007 and 2008
(adapted from IEA (International Energy Agency) statistics, 2010).
statistics, 2010) showing the significant impact of such processes
on climate change. Although the urgent request for energy and
emissions reduction is globally admitted, global industrial GHGs
emissions are being rapidly increased and it is expected to be
14 Gt CO2 by 2030 (Walsh and Thornley, 2012).
This emission is mostly due to combusting huge quantity of carbon
intensive fossil fuels to generate required power in the process.
In addition, some industrial processes have reactions which
chemically transform raw materials to waste gases such as CO2. These
processes include iron, steel and metallurgical coke production,
cement manufacturing process, ammonia production, lime produc-
tion, limestone and dolomite use (e.g., flux stone, flue gas desulfur-
ization, and glass manufacturing), soda ash production and
consumption, titanium dioxide production, phosphoric acid produc-
tion, ferroalloy production, silicon carbide production and consump-
tion, aluminum production, petrochemical production, nitric acid
production, lead and zinc production (Draft Inventory of U.S., 2011).
Considering USA as the second largest carbon producer country,
in 2009, three major emitting industrial productions are steel and
iron production, cement production and Ammonia production,
with the emissions of 42.6 Tg CO2 Eq, 29.4 Tg CO2 Eq and
11.8 Tg CO2 Eq (Draft Inventory of U.S., 2011).
Cement manufacturing has been always ranked in the list of the
main sources of carbon emissions among industrial activities. In this
process carbon dioxide is mainly generated by two sources including:
1) Combustion of huge amount of mainly fossil fuels
2) Decomposition of CaCO3 to CaO and CO2 as initial chemical
reaction (Benhelal et al., 2012).
The sources of CO2 emissions in cement plant in detail will be
discussed in Section 4.
3. Conventional cement production process
Cement production is a complex and highly energy intensive
process consisting of three production units, i.e., raw material
preparation, clinker production (pyro-processing) and clinker
grinding and blending as described below.
3.1. Raw material preparation
In this unit, raw materials which mainly consist of limestone,
magnesium carbonate, silica, alumina and iron oxide are firstly
crushed, grinded and then mixed. The powdered feed should reach
to grain size of 50 mm (Mujumdar et al., 2007) and desired
composition. Typical composition of feed is shown in Table 2.
3.2. Clinker production (pyro-processing)
Powdered feed after reaching a desire composition and size is
sent to the pre-heater as the first stage of pyro-processing unit
whereby the raw materials are pre-heated via a series of counter
current flue gas from the calciner. During pre-heating, as the
temperature approaches to 550
C, limestone and magnesium
carbonate begin to decompose to CaCO3, MgO and CO2. These
reactions continue in the calciner and finally complete at 960
C in
the kiln (Mintus et al., 2006).
The pre-heated materials then enter the calciner to further
increase the temperature and finally proceeded in to the kiln. Being
the main equipment of cement manufacturing, several other
physical and chemical processes occur in the kiln.
Between 900
C and 1200
C, one of the clinker components, C2S
is formed (Engin and Ari, 2005) and at 1200
C to 1280
C other
components such as C3S, C3A, C4AF are produced. Finally at
a temperature higher than 1280
C, solid clinker is melted to
produce a well mixed and nodular clinker (Mintus et al., 2006). The
list of chemical and physical reactions in cement production
process is tabularized in Table 3.
Clinker at 1450
C is then cooled to 100
C over the cooler stage
with ambient air before transferred to the final unit for grinding
and blending. The heated air from the coolers is reused in calciner
and the kiln, while excess air is release to the ambient. In the kiln,
the heated air stream is used as an air source for combustion
process and to provide a part of the required heat energy. The kiln
exhaust is then transferred to the calciner together with the heated
air stream from the coolers. Both these streams function as
a portion of the air source required for combustion process and
thermal energy for decomposition of limestone and magnesium
carbonate (Khurana et al., 2002). To preheat raw materials in pre-
heater stage, calciner exhaust is used and then is emitted as the
major source of heat losses in the process.
With the utilization of about 90% of the total energy required for
cement production (Holderbank Inc., 1993), the processes occur-
ring in pre-heater, calciner, kiln and coolers is identified as the core
of cement manufacturing process, generally known as pyro-
processing unit. Fig. 4 illustrates the clinker production or pyro-
processing unit in cement plant.
3.3. Clinker grinding and cement production
Hot clinker after being cooled by electrical fans is sent to
crushing and blending unit. Here, rough and big pieces of clinker
are powdered and then mixed with additives. Depending on the
availability of additives, cement standards and cement market,
specific quantity, type and composition of additives are added to
the powdered clinker. The proportion of clinker in cement is known
as “clinker factor (CF)” which is an important factor in technical and
marketing points of view.
Block diagram of cement production process starting from raw
material preparation to cement loading and transportation is
illustrated in Fig. 5.
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161 145

Table 2
Typical composition of cement raw materials.

Ref Composition (% wt)

CaO SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MgO K2O SO3 Na2O H2O Organics Loss of ignition
Kakali et al. (2003) 43.11 13.76 3.23 2.45 0.55 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.62
Engin and Ari (2005) 40.74 13.55 4.10 2.60 2.07 0.30 0.56 0.08 0.5 0.9 34.6
Galbenis and Tsimas (2006) 41.95 13.55 3.31 2.55 1.98 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.12
Kabir et al. (2010) 43.61 13.29 3.83 1.95 0.50 0.79 0.23 0.06 0.20 0.00 35.45
Benhelal et al. (2012) 41.51 14.03 3.39 2.54 2.59 0.57 0.30 0.24 0.00 0.00 34.83

4. Sources of CO2 generation in cement process
Cement manufacturing is considered to be one of the highest
carbon dioxide emitting industries in the world. The process emits
around 900 kg of CO2 for every ton of cement produced (Hasanbeigi
et al., 2010) which constitutes approximately 5e7% of the global
anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission (Chen et al., 2010).
Between 2000 and 2006 cement production was increased by
54% worldwide (Cement Technology Roadmap, 2009). Since 2006
and due to expected growth in population and global demand for
concrete as the major material for construction, cement production
is also anticipated to be annually enhanced by 0.8e1.2%, reaching to
3.7e4.4 billion tons in 2050 (IDB, 2010).
As the consequence of such significant growth in cement
production, CO2 emissions were also sharply risen up. While global
CO2 emissions from cement plant in 1990 was 576 million tons
(Boden et al., 2011b), the emissions were almost tripled and
reached to 1.88 billion tons in 2006. If this trend be continued
without any actions, the amount of CO2 emissions from global
cement industry is expected to hit 2.34 billion tons in 2050.
However, in a wishful target by IEA and through applying appro-
priate strategies such as energy efficiency, utilizing alternative
fuels, clinker substitution and CCS, this emissions may be reduced
and finally reach to 1.55 billion tons in 2050 (Cement roadmap
targets, 2009). The trend of global CO2 emissions by cement
industry from 1990 to 2050 is shows in Fig. 6. Top 10 countries with
highest contribution in CO2 emissions by cement plant in 2008 are
depicted in Fig. 7.
In order to trace carbon footprint in cement manufacturing
plant; process recognition and evaluation is an essential prereq-
uisite. As described before, cement process generally consists of
three units employing different types of energy. Initial unit
(crushing and grinding) which is involved in preparing the specific
size and proportion of raw materials is accomplished by particular
electrically operated mills and blenders. Second unit (pyro-pro-
cessing), which is known as the “heart of the process” obtains its
required energy by combustion of fuels, mainly fossil fuels in
calciner and the kiln. It also employs electrical air fans in coolers.
Finally in clinker grinding and blending, electricity is the source of
energy.
During the cement production process, CO2 is emitted by four
different sources. Combustion of fossil fuel in pyro-processing unit,
produces 40% of total emissions, while, another 10% is in result of
raw materials transportation and electricity generating consumed
by electrical motors and facilities. The rest which contributes the
highest proportion of emissions (almost 50%) is released during
decomposition of CaCO3 and MgCO3 to produce CaO and MgO as
the elementary chemical reactions in the process (Mahasenan et al.,
2002).
In addition to intensive fuel utilization, electricity consumption
and elementary chemical reactions described above, there are
many major and minor technical and management problems in the
plant which can influence plant performance, requiring additional
fuel and electricity consumption. These additional consumptions
can lead to significant thermal waste and in consequence remark-
able extra CO2 emissions. These indirect causes of extra emission
could be due to following reasons:
 Implementing low energy efficient process (e.g. wet or semi
wet) (Murray and Price, 2008).
 Lack of proper and regular maintenance and utilizing obsolete
and low energy efficient machines in the process (Saxena,
1995; IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D, 1999).
 Feeding low burnable raw meal to the preheater (Gouda, 1977).
 Utilizing environmentally improper and carbon intensive fuels
(Benhelal and Haslenda, 2011).
 Losses of large quantity of thermal heat through flue gas and
hot air streams (Khurana et al., 2002).
 Heat losses through facilities and instruments such as cooler
stack, kiln, calciner, cyclones and ducts’ shell (Engin and Ari,
2005; Kabir et al., 2010).
 Generating large amount of carbon dioxide mixed with flue
gases, which requires further energy to implement capture
process (Rodriguez et al., 2009; Benhelal et al., 2012).
To solve these problems, various noteworthy studies and
developments have been conducted during recent decades aimed
to increase energy savings, reduce fuel consumption and also
mitigate emissions caused by cement plant. These efforts which
will be discussed in detail in Section 5 include process integration,
optimization and energy efficiency approaches, heat recovery from
calciner, the kiln and cooler surfaces, energy reuse and steam
generation from the hot gas streams, maintenance, carbon capture
and storage as well as utilizing alternative fuels and materials.

Table 3
Chemical and physical reactions in cement production process (adapted from Mintus et al., 2006; Engin and Ari, 2005; Mujumdar and Ranade, 2006).

Reaction name Temperature range (
C) Reaction Heat of reaction (D HR) Location take place
Decalcination 550e960 CaCO3/CaO þ CO2 þ179.4 kJ mol1 Preheater, calciner, kiln
MgCO3 dissociation 550e960 MgCO3/MgO þ CO2 þ117.61 kJ mol1 Preheater, calciner, kiln
b-C2S formation 900e1200 2CaO þ SiO2/b-C2S 127.6 kJ mol1 kiln
C3S formation 1200e1280 b-C2S þ CaO/C3S þ16 kJ mol1 kiln
C3A formation 1200e1280 3CaO þ Al2O3/C3A þ21.8 kJ mol1 kiln
C4AF formation 1200e1280 4CaO þ Al2O3 þ Fe2O3/C4AF 41.3 kJ mol1 kiln
Liquid clinker formation >1280 Clinkersol/Clinkerliq þ600 kJ kg1 kiln
146 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161

Fig. 4. Schematic of pyro-processing unit of cement plant (Benhelal et al., 2012).

5. Strategies and potentials to curb CO2 emissions in cement
plant
Since the beginning of cement production in the large industrial
scale, several studies have been carried out aimed to reduce fuel
consumption, to optimize the process and in result to minimize
operating cost. Later and due to environmental threats and worries
of global warming phenomenon, international and local regulations
severely forced cement companies to devote more time and budget
to study and implement promising strategies to reduce pollution
emissions, especially carbon dioxide emissions in their plants.
In general three main strategic approaches toward carbon miti-
gation have been mostly studied during recent decades including;
 Strategy 1 e fuel and energy saving
 Strategy 2 e carbon separation and storage
 Strategy 3 e utilizing alternative materials
Followings are detail of such strategies carried out by academic
researchers and companies to directly or indirectly abate CO2
emissions in cement industry.
5.1. Strategy 1: fuel and energy saving
Reduction of fuel consumption specially fossil fuels as the most
air polluting sources can significantly contribute in abating global
emissions of pollutant gases, greenhouse gases and solid particles.
Fuel and energy saving is also an effective strategy to slow down
depletion of fossil fuels and letting the next generations to utilize
such valuable resources as we do. This target has been achieved by
different approaches including process modification, process inte-
gration, plant optimization, maintenance, insulation, energy
recovery and so on.
5.1.1. Employing more energy efficient processes (e.g. from wet to
semi wet or dry process)
Cement has been globally manufactured by three different
processes including wet, semi-wet and dry process. Wet process is
a process which uses raw materials containing typically 30e40%
moisture. This raw material stream is directly fed to the kiln
without any drying and preheating treatment. Therefore part of
total energy is consumed to evaporate the moisture content and to
prepare materials for calcination reactions. In semi-wet process
10e20% of water is removed before feeding to the kiln. In this
process feed materials are loaded onto a conveyer where they are
preheated by the kiln’s exhaust gases. Therefore feed materials
reach the kiln entrance containing up to 15e20% moisture. In
contrast, raw materials in a dry process are firstly dried, preheated
and then launched to the kiln. In this process calcination reaction is
mainly completed in a part called calciner before rotary kiln
(CEMBUREAU, 1997).

Fig. 5. Block diagram of cement production process.

 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Gt of CO2 Emissions
* Blue emission is defined as future emissions by considering application of mitigation technologies and policies.
** Baseline emission is defined as the expected emissions without applying any mitigation actions.
Fig. 6. Global CO2 emissions by cement plant from 1990 to 2050 (adapted from Boden
et al., 2011b; Cement roadmap targets, 2009).
As explained, while in a dry process the raw meal is firstly pre-
dried and even pre-calcinated before entering the rotary kiln, in the
case of a wet process, raw meal is fed with high moisture content
directly into a long rotary kiln. That is the reason of remarkable
difference between energy consumption in these two processes. It
is possible to save up to 50% of required energy (GNR, 2009) and to
reduce 20% of CO2 emissions by shifting to dry process with calciner
from wet process. With the clear reduction in the thermal energy,
dry process of the raw material required more electrical energy
compared to the wet process. However, the electrical energy only
needed to operate both raw materials (38%) and clinker crushing
and grinding (33%) equipment. The electrical energy also required
to run the auxiliary equipment such as kiln motors combustion air
blower and fuel supply (22%), which account to the total of 93% of
the energy consumption in the dry process (Madlool et al., 2011).
Fig. 8 shows the required energy in various cement processes in
2006 and energy saving which can be achieved by shifting from wet
process to alternative processes.
5.1.2. Reduction of thermal heat losses in pyro-processing unit
In a cement plant, 90% of total input energy is consumed in the
pyro-processing unit including pre-heater tower, calciner, kiln and
Fig. 7. Top 10 countries with highest CO2 emissions by cement plant in 2008 (adapted from Boden et al., 2011a).
147
coolers (Holderbank Inc., 1993). In this unit feed stream passing
through pre-heater, calciner and the kiln is gradually heated from
50
C to 1450
C and then by air coolers is cooled down to 100
C
(Khurana et al., 2002). These temperature variations of solid stream
(from 50
C to 1450
C and then from 1450
C to 100
C) are mainly
caused by chemical reactions as well as heat exchange with hot flue
gases in heating part (pre-heater, calciner and the kiln) then by
contacting with ambient air streams in cooling part (air coolers).
These two parts are responsible for the most of the thermal heat
losses in the process.
Energy is wasted in preheated tower through pipes, cyclones’
shell and also due to leaking air (Sögüt et al., 2010). Noticeable
amount of thermal energy is also lost in calciner and the kiln
through shell, surface and leakages. In addition to heat losses in
heating part, heat is also wasted in cooling part (air coolers). These
losses can be in result of leaking air as well as coolers’ surface. In
general heat losses in pyro-processing unit can lead to wasting up
to 20% of initial energy (Engin and Ari, 2005), resulting in the
release of 8% extra CO2 from cement plant.
Different approaches have been conducted in aim to reduce
these significant energy losses. In case of losses through shell and
surface, secondary shell as well as insulation layers have been
applied. While, in case of air leakages, proper sealing methods and
regulars monitoring and maintenance have been proposed and
implemented. As it is shown in Table 4, these approaches have
significantly reduced energy losses in the process.
5.1.3. Energy recovery from exhaust streams
Other remarkable sources of thermal heat losses in pyro-
processing unit are flue gas and hot air streams in heating and
cooling parts. Exhaust gases which are produced in the kiln are
used in calciner and pre-heater tower. This hot stream after pre-
heating raw materials is emitted at high temperature as a valu-
able source of energy. On the other section, a part of ambient air
after heat exchange with hot clinker, at relatively high tempera-
ture is released to the surrounding as the second source of thermal
heat.
To recover and reuse these sources of thermal energy which
waste up to 35% of total energy (Khurana et al., 2002), Different
technologies can be implemented depending on the volume and
temperature level of exhaust streams as well as location and the
need of the process (Schneider et al., 2011).
148 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Fig. 8. Energy consumption by different types of cement production process in 2006 (adapted from GNR, 2009).
In some works waste heat recovery systems have been proposed
to generate electricity from these two streams (Engin and Ari, 2005).
In the study done by Kabir et al. (2010), the waste heat can be recover
at a high pressure boiler where the pressurize steam then used to
drive the steam turbine in order to generate electricity at the desired
output value. These systems were able to produce 30e45 kWh/t-
clinker electricity in the big kilns (Schneider et al., 2011).
While in Japan and China the processes to generate electricity
are widely integrated to cement plants, due to rising electricity
prices, this integration is also expected to be applied in the rest of
the world (Schneider et al., 2011).
In the other cases exhaust streams have been used to produce
steam or hot water using in the process (Benhelal et al., 2011) and in
some else, these sources of energy is sent to the vicinity demand
side to provide a part of required thermal energy specially for
heating space (Sögüt et al., 2010).
In addition, the thermal energy waste especially from the
exhaust streams can also be applied to pre-heat the raw material
before entering the clinkering grinding process. This utilization of
the thermal energy waste will lead to more efficient grinding
process of the raw material as well as provided a high temperature
for drying the raw material that also results in less energy required
to evaporate the moisture content in it (Madlool et al., 2011).
5.1.4. Electrical energy savings
Electricity consumption contributes almost 5% of carbon dioxide
emissions in the cement plant (Benhelal et al., 2011). Electricity is
employed for crushing, grinding and mixing the raw materials, to
convey raw materials to pre-heater tower, to run the kiln’s motors and
cooling fans as well as to grind cold clinker to the powdered product.
Approximately 100 kWh/t-cement electricity is required in an effi-
cient cement plant. By considering coal as the main fuel, this electricity
demand results in production of up to 100 kg of CO2 per ton of cement
(Gartner and Macphee, 2011). Fig. 9 shows the proportion of different
parts of cement production process in electricity consumption.
Electricity saving in the process can be applied by very simple
actions such as turning off the extra lights and unused electrical
devices or by using high efficient and new motors. An example of
strategies toward electricity saving is utilizing adjustable speed
drivers. Typical drivers which are mostly the largest electricity
consumers in the cement process can be substituted by adjustable
drivers. This substitution can lead to electricity savings from 7% to
60% depend on the application and the load applied to the motors
as well as application in the process (Choate, 2003).
Besides that the electrical energy saving also can be achieved as
mention in Section 5.1.3 under the topic of energy recovery from
exhaust streams, where based on the previous study the heat waste
recovery system have been proposed to be use to generate electricity.
With the generated renewable electrical energy from the waste heat
recovery system, the electricity dependency for the cement industry
to the use of fossil fuels also can be reduce with a results in reduction
of CO2 emission to the environment. This co-saving methods offer
a winewin situation for both industry and environmentalist where it
not only reduce the CO2 emission but also give an opportunity for the
industry to utilize the electricity generation from the waste energy
recovery system for the internal electrical use that will reduce the
operating cost on the electrical energy.
5.1.5. Plant optimization
Plant optimization is a well-known approach to achieve same
quality and quantity of products with the lowest possible amount of
fuel consumption, pollution emissions and operation costs. Optimi-
zation in cement industry which is naturally a high energy consumer
is an inevitable request. It is theoretically and experimentally proven
that there are many minor problems in conventional cement plant.
These problems such as kiln seal leakage, cooler inefficiency, fuel
fineness, improper air and fuel ratio, air stream low temperature and
so on can lead to approximately 6% of heat losses (Ba Shammakh
et al., 2008). Therefore optimization strategies should be imple-
mented to minimize fuel consumption, pollution emissions and
eventually to minimize expenses of the cement industry.
As examples of these optimization methods are finding and
controlling the best and optimized air to fuel ratio and air stream
temperature. For example it is highly effective to increase the speed
of air fans or decrease fuel injection based on the level of oxygen in
the kiln or calciner. These actions alone can save 3e5% of energy
consumption in the process (Votorantim, 1994).
5.1.6. New pre-heater tower and kiln burners
The pre-heater tower which is consisted of cyclones and ducts is
highly important to preheat raw materials and to prepare them for
calcination reactions. Pressure drop caused by cyclones in this part
leads to increase of power consumption in the kiln fans resulting in
more electricity usage in the process. Utilizing new and optimized
types of cyclones is estimated to save 0.6e1.1 kWh/t-clinker elec-
tricity by reducing pressure drop (Jepsen and Christensen, 1998).
Using new and optimized models of burners can also result in
fuel saving. As examples of such burners are three or five-channel
Table 4
Recent studies and potentials to mitigate CO2 emissions in cement plant.
Author (s) year
Khurana et al. (2002)
Popescu et al. (2003)
Camdali et al. (2004)
Jankovic et al. (2004)
Rasul et al. (2005)
Engin and Ari (2005)
Touil et al. (2006)
Utlu et al. (2006)
Mujumdar et al. (2007)
Ba Shammakh et al. (2008)
Barker et al. (2009)
Wang et al. (2009)
Rodriguez et al. (2009)
Huntzinger and Eatmon (2009)
Approach
Investigated heat recovery from two main sources of thermal heat losses, i.e. flue
gas and hot air streams and producing steam using Waste Heat Recovery Steam
Generator (WHRSG).
Compared energy consumption and carbon dioxide emission during production
of belite cements and ordinary Portland cement (OPC).
Examined the applications of energy and exergy analyses for a dry system rotary
burner (RB) with pre-calcinations in a cement plant in Turkey.
Described the tools available for the analysis and optimization of cement grinding
circuits. The application of the Bond based methodology as well as Population
Balance Models (PBM) was presented using a case study.
Estimated heat losses through the kiln system and cooler. They also identified
thermal energy conservation opportunities.
Analyzed heat losses in the process. They also utilized WHRSG for steam production
by hot air stream, hot flue gas to preheat raw material and also secondary shell as
insulation layer for the kiln.
Performed the batch dry grinding tests of cement clinker in a ball mill to measure
the power input and to investigate the effects of operating conditions and material
environment on the specific energy.
Analyzed energy and exergy of a raw mill (RM) and raw materials preparation unit
in a cement plant in Turkey using the actual operational data.
Developed the separate models for pre-heater, calciner, rotary kiln and cooler and
coupled them together to build an integrated simulator Several ways for reducing
energy consumption were also computationally investigated.
Discussed the effective control strategies to mitigate emissions in cement plant. They
developed a mathematical programming model to determine the best cost effective
strategy to minimize the CO2 emission from cement plant.
Assessed the technologies that could be used for CO2 capture in cement plants, their
costs, and barriers to their use. The work covered new-build cement plants with
post-combustion and oxy-combustion CO2 capture.
Conducted exergy analysis and optimization approach using genetic algorithm (GA)
to find the most efficient case among different cogeneration systems including
single flash steam cycle, dual-pressure steam cycle, organic Rankine cycle (ORC)
and the Kalina cycle
aimed to reuse waste heat from the exhaust gas and air vent streams in cement plant.
Proposed a new process to produce carbon dioxide in pure form. In this process the
combustion and the calcination reactions take place in different chambers. As a result
flue gases produced due to fuel combustion and carbon dioxide generated from
decomposition of limestone are not mixed.
Employed LCA method to evaluate and compare the environmental impact and carbon
emission of four cement manufacturing processes: (1) the production of traditional
Portland cement, (2) blended cement (natural pozzolans), (3) cement where 100% of
waste cement kiln dust is recycled into the kiln process, and (4) Portland cement
produced when cement kiln dust (CKD) was used to sequester a portion of the
process related CO2 emissions.
Results Country
Implementing WHRSG indicated that it was possible to save up to 10% India
of initial energy consumption in the process.
It was concluded that the energy consumed during production of belite UK
cement was 500e540 kJ/kg less than producing the OPC.
It was estimated that heat losses by conduction, convection and radiation Turkey
from the RB are about 3% of the initial input energy. It was also found
that the energy and exergy efficiencies were about 97% and 64.4%.
Results showed that the using Barmac crusher can increase the cement Australia
circuit throughput by the rate of 10e20%. It was also estimated that the
overall energy efficiency of the circuit can also be improved in order
of 5e10%.
Study showed that about 1.264  105 US dollars per year could be saved by Indonesia
replacing industrial diesel oil with waste heat recovery from kiln and cooler
exhaust for drying of raw meal and fuel and preheating of combustion air.
Found that 40% of initial energy was lost in the process. They also estimated Turkey
E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
that by applying these proposals 15.6% reduction in energy losses could be
achieved.
It was found that Gypsum and pozzolanic tuff can improve energy efficiency France
by decreasing the specific energy for a given Blaine fineness if they used as
grinding additional compounds. In terms of breakage kinetics, it was
demonstrated that the energy efficiency of cement finish grinding could
be increased by reducing the initial rate of breakage.
Energy and exergy efficiencies of the RM were determined to be 84.3% Turkey
and 25.2%.
Study showed that optimum value of percentage calcination in calciner is India
about 70. Operating kiln with higher solid loading, lower rpm, lower tilt
and lower grate speed reduced energy consumption per unit production.
Moreover it was found that the use of secondary shell appeared to be a
promising method to reduce overall energy consumption.
Efficiency improvement measures were found to be effective options to Canada
meet emission reduction targets up to 10%. The model recommended
that fuel switching and carbon capture need to be implemented to
achieve more than 10% emission reduction. However, the cost of
cement production increases dramatically with an increase in
reduction target.
Results showed that Oxy-combustion offered the lowest cost solution UK
for CO2 capture at new-build cement plants costs was estimated to be
V40/t of CO2 avoided for a 1 Mt/y European cement plant.
The results of exergy analysis showed that thermal heat losses in turbine, China
condenser, and heat recovery vapor generator are relatively large and
optimization strategy indicated that the Kalina cycle could achieve the
best performance in cement plant.
Computer simulation by Aspen Hysis showed that by applying this new Spain
process it was possible to reduce 50% of carbon dioxide emission as
compare to the conventional process.
Analysis using Sima Pro 6.0 software proved that blended cements led to U.S.A.
the greatest environmental and carbon emission savings. The utilization
of CKD for sequestration showed acceptable mitigation of carbon emissions
as well as 5% reduction in environmental impact over the traditional
Portland cement. The recycling of CKD was found to have little
environmental savings over the traditional process.
(continued on next page)
149
Table 4 (continued )
Author (s) year
Sögüt et al. (2010)
Kabir et al. (2010)
Karbassi et al. (2010)
Cazacliu and Ventura (2010)
Ogbeide (2010)
Hasanbeigi et al. (2010)
Moya et al. (2011)
Benhelal et al. (2011)
Valderrama et al. (2012)
Benhelal et al. (2012)
Approach
Applied exergy analysis in a cement plant. Moreover a mathematical model was
developed in order to assess the possibility of using heat losses to supply thermal
energy for dwellings in the vicinity.
Conducted thermal energy audit analysis on the pyro-processing unit of the cement
plant. Moreover in order to enhance the energy performance and to reduce heat
losses, WHRSG and Secondary kiln shell were considered.
Investigated the role of Iranian cement industries and their contribution of
greenhouse gases contribution. Moreover the opportunity of replacing ball mill
with vertical mill was studied and the results of the energy saving and carbon
dioxide reduction were revealed.
Compared a dry batch and a central mixed plant in terms of technical, environmental
and economical aspects. To perform environmental and economical comparisons, a
new environmental indicator, called EADT (Environmental Amortization Duration
Time) was created.
Various modifications were evaluated in a cement Plant in Nigeria to study their
impact on the plant CO2 emissions. An economic model were also developed to
highlight the best selection strategy to reduce CO2 emissions with the least cost.
The potentials and costs of CO2 reduction in Thai cement industry were determined.
41 CO2 mitigation technologies were analyzed and the period of 2010e2025 was
chosen as the scenario period.
Carried out the cost-effectiveness analysis of some of the best available technologies
(BAT) that could result in energy consumption and CO2 emissions reduction in the
European Union’s (EU27) cement industry.
A cement plant was simulated to estimate heat losses and pollution emission in the
process. Also, a waste heat recovery system was introduced to use two main sources
of heat losses, i.e. flue gas and hot air streams and produce steam and power.
Studied the potential improvements of cement plant in Catalonia (Spain) by upgrading
the cement production lines. The former lines (L3, L4 and L5) were replaced by a new
line (L6) which was designed and constructed based on the best available techniques
(BAT) for the cement industry.
Proposed a new design of pyro-processing unit in a cement factory. In this case
decomposition reactions have been separated from other reactions which result in
pure carbon dioxide production.
150
Results Country
Analysis showed that 51% of the initial energy of the process was lost. Turkey
They proved that by using these losses instead of coal and natural gas it
was possible to decrease domestic coal and natural gas consumption by
51.55% and 62.62% and also to reduce CO2 emissions by 5901.94 kg/h
and 1816.90 kg/h.
It was found that flue gases and kiln shell lost 27.9% and 11.97% of initial Nigeria
thermal energy. It was also indicated that 5.30 MW of thermal energy
losses and also 14.10% of greenhouse gases can be reduced by applying
(WHRSG) and secondary kiln shell.
Investigation showed that carbon dioxide contribution from fuel oil based Iran
cement industries is almost 2.7 times higher than gas based cement factories.
The results of the replacement of ball mills with vertical roller mill of showed
that 720 million kWh of electricity can annually be reduced and during
12 years the overall CO2 mitigation would be around 4.3 million tons.
Results indicated that the EADT for CO2 and particles as well as energy France
consumption, were below 6 years, in the whole range of tested
environmental data.
E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
23.6 percent reduction of CO2 emissions per ton of cement produced was Nigeria
achieved by the implementation of the best strategy. The results were
achieved mainly by applying a progressive approach prioritizing project
implementation effort and feasibility.
It was determined that the annual cost effective of CO2 mitigation during Thailand
chosen period was 3095 kt which was 15% of total CO2 emissions by Thai
cement industry in 2005. The total technical annual potential of CO2
reduction was also estimated to be 3143 kt which was about 15.2% of the
total CO2 emissions by Thai cement industry in 2005.
The results indicated that the possible thermal energy improvement in the Netherlands
clinker production, if all these BATs were implemented was 10%. It was also
showed that some of the technologies considered in the study were not cost
competitive at the moment. Although they are needed if the cement industry
is going to reduce its CO2 emissions significantly in the future.
Results showed that 34.28% of initial energy was lost in the base case, 48% of Iran
which was from flue gas and hot vent air streams. It was shown that adding
waste heat recovery systems would lower the temperature of stack gases
from 315
C to 100
C. This temperature gradient was capable to generate
32,642 kg/h of steam in process.
The significant improvements such as energy efficiency of the new kiln system Spain
and emission mitigation were achieved by the replacement. Analysis using
SimaPro 7.2 software showed that 5% of the impact of global warming could
be reduced by implementing new production line.
New process could significantly reduce 66% of CO2 emission and 2.3% of energy Malaysia
consumption compared to the existing process. As far as process economy is
concerned, novel design could annually achieve 20.7 million USD gross
incomes compared to the base case.
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Fig. 9. Percentages of electricity consumption in different parts of cement process
(adapted from Schneider et al., 2011).
burners which improve flexibility and intensity of the flame by
controlling the air flow in the channels, air velocities and adjust-
ment of burner position (Chatterjee, 2011). Employing these
burners can lead to a stable kiln operation, maximizing combustion
effectiveness, and reducing fuel consumption in the process (Ba
Shammakh et al., 2008).
5.1.7. Maintenance
It is obvious that a well structured and regular maintenance
program can highly result in plant performance improvement as
well as fuel consumption and emissions reduction. Among different
maintenance programs, preventive maintenance is one of the most
effective and valuable part which leads to more efficient process.
Regular maintenance can significantly contribute in energy saving
and consequently in curbing CO2 emissions (Saxena, 1995).
Actions such as regular leaking monitoring and control, corro-
sion control and reduction as well as periodical replacement of old
motors and machines can significantly increase the plant thermo
efficiency. It is evaluated that a simple air leakage at the kiln hood
could lead to approximately 46 kJ/kg-clinker energy losses (IEA
Greenhouse Gas R&D, 1999).
5.1.8. Barriers against energy efficiency and fuel saving
In order to implement energy saving approaches in cement
plant and to have an energy efficient process, identifying key
barriers is the main prerequisite. There are many barriers against
energy efficiency and fuel saving in cement plant which halt even
the cost effective technologies to be implemented. Followings are
the main limitations and barriers to increase energy efficiency in
global cement industry.
 Low energy prices:
Low energy price is one of the most important barriers against
implementing energy efficiency measures in the cement industry.
High energy price favors investors and stockholders to adopt
energy saving and CO2 emission mitigation in their plants. Due to
low energy prices, there is various energy saving improvements
151
that the EU industry is currently not following. Among them is heat
waste recovery which is integrated to a limited number of EU-27
cement plants. While in China there are 120 cement plants
equipped with cogeneration systems with a total capacity of
730 MW (Rainer, 2009).
 Limited capital investment:
Majority of energy saving approaches in the cement industry
require large capital investments. These costs include detecting
sources of energy losses, finding the best technology to recover
losses as well as purchasing and installing required equipments.
However most of the cement plants especially in developing coun-
tries have limited capital availability. Therefore they can only adopt
limited and less expensive number of energy efficiency measures.
 Production concerns:
Keeping equipments in operation and avoiding process to be
shut down is the highest priority in cement plant. Therefore, except
for the annual maintenance or due to very special cases, cement
plants never fully shut down. It is mainly because shut down stops
the production, wastes energy, time and budget and also damages
equipments like the ceramic insulation in the kiln. Therefore
cement plants do not have interest on any kind of energy saving
approaches which have the risk of process shut down.
 Facility uncertainty:
As explained, various energy efficiency strategies require
different types of equipments and facilities. Uncertainty over the
quality and performance of such facilities which results to overhaul
the project may halt any possible efficiency projects.
 Reliability concerns:
Maintaining a specific production rate and quality of cement has
the greatest priority in any cement plants. However some energy
efficiency approaches bring the risk of changing production rate or
producing cement with undesirable quality. For example, the
specific energy demand of high-pressure mills is comparatively
lower that the conventional mills, but cement from high-pressure
mills shows slightly different properties in term of its particle
size distribution (PSD)(Schneider et al., 2011). Therefore cement
companies are very concerned about the reliability and perfor-
mance of all new equipments and are not willing to take the risk of
employing new equipments.
 Limited time and number of staff:
Since time and the number of staff are limited, smaller energy-
efficiency projects are not considered to be worthy and mostly
are not pursued because they “are not worth the trouble.”(Coito
et al., 2005).
5.2. Strategy 2: CO2 separation and storage
Aside from the fuel and energy saving approach, carbon dioxide
capture and storage (CCS) approach also presents one of the few
opportunity into major reduction in CO2 emission into the envi-
ronment especially in cement industry. According to Barker et al.
(2009) in their studies, cement industry shows a good opportu-
nity in applying the CCS method due to the fact that in this industry
there are large point sources of CO2 with a high concentration in the
flue gas composition.
152 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
5.2.1. Post-combustion CO2 capture and storage
Against all approaches described, post combustion CO2 capture
and storage (CCS) is never actually reduces the generation of CO2.
The aim of this treatment is to separate, capture and to prevent CO2
from being released. CCS is a set of technologies which can
considerably mitigate CO2 emissions from industrial processes and
other stationary sources of CO2. It is a three-step process which
includes capture and compression of CO2 from flue gas stream,
transport of the captured CO2 (usually by pipeline system); and
storage of CO2 as described below.
5.2.1.1. Post-combustion CO2 capture. Post-combustion CO2
capture is considered as a promising strategy to abate CO2
emissions from cement industry in the medium term (SETIS,
2011). Whilst there are several commercially available solvent-
based capture processes implemented in oil refinery, natural
gas purification and power plants, there is also a great potential
for wide variety of processes employing solvents, solid sorbents,
and membranes to be applied in the other industries such as
cement in near future.
5.2.1.2. Transport of captured CO2. Transportation of CO2 from
capture facilities to the source of storage is the vital stage of CCS
process. Pipeline systems are expected to be the most reliable,
efficient and economic method of transporting CO2 for future
commercial CCS. This system including pipelines and compression
stations has similarity with other pipeline systems which have
been already developed, such as natural gas pipelines.
5.2.1.3. CO2 storage. Storage of captured CO2 is the last stage of CCS
process. Depending on the availability, capacity, suitability and
economy concerns, CO2 can be stored in various geologic forma-
tions, such as deep saline formations, oil and gas reservoirs, and
unmineable coal seams. At the moment large-scale CO2 injection
for sequestration purposes is occurring at various part of the world
(CCS Task Force Report, 2010).
5.2.2. Barriers and challenges of implementing post-combustion
CCS
In addition to weak and insufficient incentives for CO2 mitiga-
tion in general, there are also specific barriers and concerns against
extension of commercial CCS worldwide. Followings are 3 classifi-
cations of the main restrictions against implementation of global
CCS.
5.2.2.1. Technical. As described, CCS aims to remove CO2 from flue
gas stream and to avoid it from being released to the atmosphere.
This process is done by separating, transporting and finally storage
of CO2 in appropriate geologic formations. A research that has
been done by Barker et al. (2009) which they studied the appli-
cable of using two different type of CCS method applied onto the
cement production. One of the CCS method applied is the use of
post combustion process amine scrubbing using monoethanol-
amine (MEA). Through the studies, several technical difficulties
have been found to restrict the application of post combustion
process of CCS approach in a conventional cement plant where
more features need to be considered before it can be applied.
Different stages of CCS are challenging due to various technical
reasons as mentioned below:
 Due to low concentration of CO2 in flue gas, a high volume of
gas must be treated to separate CO2;
 Impurities mixed with CO2 (particulate matter, SOx, NOx and
etc.) can degrade the CO2 capture materials as well as results in
solvent degradation;
 Existing CO2 separation technologies deployed in power
plants result in up to 30 percent energy penalty where most of
the separation technologies required additional energy
requirement;
 Large auxiliary power load is required to compress captured
CO2 in low pressure (almost atmospheric pressure) to pipeline
pressure (about 2000 psia);
 CO2 pipelines require precise attention in various stages of
design, construction, control and monitoring (CCS Task Force
Report, 2010);
 Operational experience of large-scale CO2 injection is limited
and it is not globally available. In result there are no well
calibrated or accurate criteria to determine the capacity and
suitability of the sources of CO2 storage;
 The opportunities for CO2 storage are highly site-specific;
 Information on the availability, locations, suitability and
capacities of individual sinks are insufficient to develop
worldwide policies and investments on CCS process; and
 In general, the technical viability of CCS at the large scale is
uncertain and requires to be decisively demonstrated (One
North Sea, 2010).
5.2.2.2. Economic. Economic concerns are considered as the major
barriers against commercial CCS deployment. Followings are
various economic barriers which can hinder or delay extension of
CCS in global scale:
 CCS is a cost intensive process which requires high investment
to provide capital and operating cost. Based on avoided CO2
emissions, the cost of CO2 capture and storage is estimated to
be 24e75 V/t CO2. This cost is varied depending on the process
used, physical properties of exhaust stream and the amount of
captured CO2 (Schneider et al., 2011);
 Global cost-effective development of CCS requires employing,
training, and retaining a large number of professional
employees to design, build, install and to operate facilities (CCS
Task Force Report, 2010);
 The economic viability of CCS at a large scale is uncertain and
needs to be demonstrated;
 There is the lack of adequate and powerful economic incentives
for industries to justify intensive costs of CCS (One North Sea,
2010). Based on the latest research, development of CCS tech-
nologies which are currently being considered may double the
price of the cement (SETIS, 2011);
 World Scan results show that in 2020, CO2 prices may vary
between 20 V/tCO2 in a GRAND COALITION scenario (all
countries accept greenhouse gas targets from 2020) to 47 V/
tCO2 in an IMPASSE scenario (EU-27 continues its one-sided
emission trading system without the possibility to use the
Clean Development Mechanism) (van den Broek et al., 2011).
However these results are not precise and reliable enough to
make a stable framework for the investment on CCS;
 Implementation and development of CCS as the cost intensive
process in a long life span require a stable and long-term
investment environment. Currently and due to insufficient
international cooperation on climate change policy and
uncertainty about the future targets of emission mitigation,
however this environment is lacking (van den Broek et al.,
2011);
5.2.2.3. Policy, legislations and planning. Other barriers against
deployment of CCS are classified as the lack of certain and appro-
priate legislation, policy and planning. Moreover uncertainty over
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
public’s reaction can be another challenge sorted in this classifi-
cation. These challenges are described in the following:
 The lack of comprehensive climate change legislation and
policy to set a price on carbon and to motivate development of
CCS;
 Uncertainty regarding to public’s reaction against commercial-
scale CCS projects;
 The lack of comprehensive legal/regulatory framework for CCS
projects to facilitate project development, protect environment
and human health and to provide public confidence of the safe
and secure capture, transport and storage of CO2;
 Inadequate clarity of the long-term liability for CO2 seques-
tration, especially regarding to obligations for supervision
after closure and obligations for companies to compensate
losses or damages caused by the process (CCS Task Force
Report, 2010);
 Difficulty in planning for long life CCS for both governments
and industries due to uncertainty over the locations, capacities
and timings for CCS deployment (One North Sea, 2010);
Up to now and due to these barriers and challenges, no post-
combustion capture and storage process has been applied in
cement plant (Schneider et al., 2011) and a wide deployment CCS in
the cement industry is not foreseen before 2020 (SETIS, 2011).
5.2.3. Pure CO2 generation and internal separation
About 60% of CO2 in cement plant is directly generated by the
following reactions (Strazza et al., 2011):
CaCO3 /CaO þ CO2
MgCO3 / MgO þ CO2
During these reactions which occur in preheater, calciner and
the kiln, in addition to CaO and MgO as two main clinker
components, CO2 as the waste gas is also released. In cement
process, combustion reactions also occur in calciner and the kiln,
beside thermal energy, plenty of waste gases such as H2O, SOx, NOx
and CO2 are released. Since in conventional cement plant,
decomposition and combustion reactions occur in the same place,
therefore CO2 produced due to decomposition reactions (almost
60% of total CO2) is inevitably and unintentionally mixed with
combustion flue gases. In near future, this mixture of exhaust
gases including much CO2 should be sent to capture unit and
carbon dioxide must be separated and stored through energy
consuming and costly process. After 2020, implementation of
capture processes in cement plants is anticipated with significant
extent in the countries like China and India (Schneider et al.,
2011).
However in the newly proposed process, no combustion reac-
tions take place in the calciner. Therefore CO2 produced in the
calciner due to decomposition reactions, is in pure form and is not
mixed with other flue gas components. Actually in this new
process, CO2 separation is done inside the cement process and
almost 66% of total CO2 could be directly stored without any
capture process (Rodriguez et al., 2009; Benhelal et al., 2012).
Therefore no capture unit is required to be integrated with this
cement process and extra energy consumption, emissions and costs
of the capture process could be prevented. Currently this proposed
process is in detail design stage. In order to persuade cement
companies to implement it instead of conventional process,
a detailed economic evaluation should be carried out. Then the
process should be experimentally tested and the feasibility of
implementing such design as a real process must be evaluated.
153
Recent studies and potentials of CO2 emission mitigation in
cement plant have been summarized in Table 4.
5.3. Strategy 3: utilizing alternative materials
Fuel, raw materials and clinker substitution can also highly
contribute in emission mitigation in cement process. Various fuels
with different carbon content and heating value are being used in
pyro-processing unit depending on availability of resources and
economy of the plant.
Utilizing alternative fuels in cement production process is not
a new approach. Starting from past decade and as a promising
solution for environmental threats, energy crisis and economic
challenges, utilizing alternative fuels has rapidly extended and due
to prospect of the energy and environmental challenges, it is ex-
pected to increase even at the faster rate in the future.
As far as raw materials substitution is concerned, different
actions can be performed. Since raw materials burn ability,
composition and fineness are the critical properties which directly
affect energy consumption in pyro-processing unit, therefore
replacing conventional raw materials with proper raw materials as
well as other industries by-products, slag or sludge can consider-
ably contribute in emission reduction in cement plant. Followings
are two different approaches to reduce emissions in cement plant.
5.3.1. Alternative fuels utilization
The main part of fuel consumption and consequently CO2
production take place in pyro-processing unit. Utilizing low-carbon
content fuel with high hydrogen-to-carbon (H/C) ratio instead of
conventional fossil fuels can remarkably diminish the rate of CO2
(1) emissions in the process. Plenty of alternative fuels in different
phases are being used in global cement plants aim to obtain
economic and environmental achievements.
(2)
In addition to producing less amount of pollutant gases specially
CO2 in result of alternative fuels combustion, utilizing these fuels
can also indirectly lead to emissions reduction through improving
refractory utilization rate as well as reducing pressure loss in pre-
heater tower (Grosse-Daldrup and Scheubel, 1996).
These fuels generally include:
 Agricultural biomass residues
 Non-Agricultural biomass residues
 Petroleum based wastes
 Miscellaneous wastes and
 Chemical and hazardous wastes
Table 5 classifies various alternative fuels utilized in cement
plant, Fig. 10 shows the changes in CO2 emissions by utilizing
alternative fuels instead of coal (carbon emissions factor ¼ 0.68 t C/t
coal and LHV ¼ 26.3 GJ/t). Fig. 11 demonstrates the amount of
alternative fuels required to replace 1 ton coal.
Among all alternative fuels, utilizing waste-derived fuel (WDF)
in cement plant seems to be more environmental friendly since it
simultaneously reduces emissions from both cement plants and
landfills. In addition to generating fewer pollutants by using this
alternative fuel as a source of energy in cement industry; CO2
generation is considerably reduced as a result of waste reduction
in landfills. It is essential to note that this reduction is indirect,
because if WDF is not utilized in cement process as the main or
partial source of energy, it should be destroyed by incinerators or
must be sent to the landfills, generating further CO2 in addition to
CO2 generated by the fossil fuel that has not been replaced
(Fig. 12). Therefore it is scientifically foreseen that utilizing this
type of fuel will annually increase by the rate of 1% worldwide
(Kihara, 1999).
154 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161

Table 5
Various alternative fuels utilized in global cement industry.

Alternative fuel Energy content Carbon content Carbon emissions DCO2 (t/t coal Water content Substitution Ref
(LHV) (GJ/t dry) (% wt dry) factor (t C/t)b replaced)c (%) rate (%)
Agricultural biomass residue
Rice husks 13.2e16.2 38.8 0.35 2.5 10 35 Mansaray and Ghaly (1997)
Jenkins et al. (1998)
Demirbas (2003)
Wheat straw 15.8ae18.2 44.9e48.8 0.42 2.5 7.3e14.2 20 Jenkins et al. (1998)
Demirbas (2003)
McIlveen-Wright et al. (2007)
Corn stover 9.2e15.4 42.5 0.28 2.5 9.4e35 20 Demirbas (2003)
Mani et al. (2004)
Asia Development Bank (2006)
Sugarcane leaves 15.8a 39.8 0.34 2.5 <15 20 Jorapur and Rajvanshi (1997)
Sugarcane bagasse 14.4e19.4 44.1 0.39 2.5 10e15 20 Li et al. (2001)
Asian Development Bank (2006)
Rape seed stems 16.4 45.2 0.39 2.5 12.6 20 Murray and Price (2008)
Hazelnut shells 17.5a 52.9 0.48 2.5 9.2 20 Demirbas (2003)
Palm nut shells 11.9a e 0.36 2.5 e 20 Lafarge Malayan Cement Bhd
(2005)
Non-Agricultural biomass
Dewatered sewage sludge 10.5e29 30e53.92 0.08 2.5 75 20 Fytili and Zabaniotou (2006)
IPCC (2006)
Murray et al. (2008)
Dried sewage sludge 10.5e29 e 0.24 2.5 20 20 Fytili and Zabaniotou (2006)
IPCC (2006)
Murray et al. (2008)
Paper sludge 8.5 e 0.2 2.5 70 20 Maxham (1992)
IPCC (1996)
European Commission (EC) (2004)
Paper 12.5e22 47.99 0.42 2.5 e 20 Jenkins et al. (1998)
European Commission (EC) (2004)
a
Sawdust 16.5 46.9 0.38 2.5 20 20 Resource Management Branch
(1996)
Demirbas (2003)
Waste wood 15.5e17.4 50 0.34 2.5 33.3 20 Li et al. (2001)
McIlveen-Wright et al. (2007)
Animal waste (bone, fat, .) 16e19 34 0.29 2.5 15 20 Zementwerke (2002)
European Commission(EC) (2004)
Chemical and hazardous wastes
Spent solvent Avg: 25 47.7 0.40 0.95 16.5 e Seyler et al. (2005)
Pain residue 16.3 41e51 0.42 0.06 9 e Vaajasaari et al. (2004)
Saft (2007)
Obsolete pesticide 37 e e e e 57 Karstensen et al. (2006)

Alternative fuel Energy content Carbon content Carbon emissions DCO2 (t/t coal replaced)c Substitution rate (%) Ref
(LHV) (GJ/t dry) (% wt dry) factor (t C/t)b
Petroleum based wastes
Tires 28e37 e 0.56 0.8 <20 ICF Consulting (2006)
Polyethylene 46 71 0.70 1.0 Unavailable Subramanian (2000)
ICF Consulting (2005)
Polypropylene 46 71 0.70 1.0 Unavailable Subramanian (2000)
ICF Consulting (2005)
Polystyrene 41 71 0.70 0.9 Unavailable Subramanian (2000)
ICF Consulting (2005)
Waste oils 21.6 46 0.44 0.5 Unavailable Mokrzycki et al. (2003)
IPCC (2006)
Petroleum coke 19e34 78.24 0.78 0.2 Up to 100 Kaplan and Nedder (2001)
Mokrzycki et al. (2003)
Kaantee et al. (2004)

Alternative fuel Energy content Carbon content Carbon emissions DCO2 (t/t coal Water content Substitution Ref
(LHV) (GJ/t dry) (% wt dry) factor (t C/t)b replaced)c (%) rate (%)
Miscellaneous wastes
Automobile shredder residue 16.5 46.2 0.44 0.05 2 2 Mirabile et al. (2002)
(ASR)
Carpet residue polypropylene 28 56.9 0.57 0.54 0.2 Unavailable Smith et al., 2005
Carpet residue nylon 17 42.2 0.42 0.15 0.9 Unavailable Smith et al., 2005
Textile 16.3 44.6 0.42 0.0 6 30 Ye et al. (2004)
Landfill gas 19.7 0.30 1.0 Unavailable Asian Development Bank
(2006)
Municipal solid waste (MSW) 12e16 40 0.26e0.36 0.4 10e35 Up to 30 European Commission(EC)
(2004)
IPCC (2006)
a
Lower heating value (LHV) calculated based on reported higher heating value (HHV).
b
Carbon emission factors are estimated based on calculation method in Murray and Price (2008).
c
Biomass is assumed to be carbon-neutral; negative values for change in CO2 represent a net reduction and positive values represent a net addition of CO2 emissions.
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161 155

Fig. 10. Differences of CO2 emissions by utilizing alternative fuels compare to coal (adapted from Murray and Price, 2008).

5.3.2. Reusing industrial by-products as raw material and clinker
substitute
Reusing industrial by-products is considered as the most
promising and practical solution to reduce accumulation of by-
products unintentionally produced by industries. Commonly
industries treat by-products as the waste and send them to the
landfills or incinerators. Alternatively these by-products can be
mixed with raw materials and fed to cement process. Moreover
these wastes can be substitute with clinker and compose a portion
of final cement.
Fly ash is an example of such materials which mainly
produced in fossil fuel power plants. In case of fly ash, the by-
product not only contributes to reduce raw materials and
energy requirement in the process but also is able to improve
concrete durability through replacing by a portion of clinker. In
this case the organic part is burnt and acts as the source of
thermal energy and the mineral part is integrated into the process
and contributes as raw material and additive (Ba Shammakh
et al., 2008; Damtoft, 1998).
Blast furnace slag is another example of materials which can be
utilized as a portion of feed. It is a non-metallic by-product
produced in iron and steel production process which is consisted of
silicates, alumina-silicates, and calcium-alumina-silicates. There-
fore by utilizing this material as a portion of feed, besides
improving raw material burnability it reduces need of limestone
and in consequence mitigates CO2 emissions due to limestone
decomposition (Collins and Ciesielski, 1994). Slag can be also
substituted by clinker and reduce specific amount of clinker in the
final cement. Since clinker production is an intensive energy
consuming and emitting process, by replacing clinker with fly ash,
slag or other by-products, proportion of clinker in cement is
reduced and for a specific quantity of cement, lesser amount of

Fig. 11. Amount of alternative fuels required to replace 1 ton of coal (adapted from Murray and Price, 2008).
156 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Fig. 12. CO2 reduction by utilizing WDF in cement plant (adapted from Murray and Price, 2008).
clinker is used. It is resulted in fewer amount of emissions compare
to cement with full or high proportion of clinker. Thus one of the
prominent approaches toward emission mitigation in cement plant
is to decrease the ratio of clinker in cement named as clinker factor
(CF) and substituting a portion of clinker with proper materials.
While In 2003, the world average CF was 0.85 (Harder, 2006), it was
0.75 in South America as the lowest and 0.92 in North America as
the highest proportion. In 2010, the world CF reached to 0.77 and
the long term prediction of the “Cement Technology Roadmap
2009” is 0.71 (Schneider et al., 2011).
Table 6 summarizes recent global studies and potentials of
utilizing alternative materials in cement plant.
5.3.3. Barriers against utilizing alternative materials
Currently, the most promising strategy to reduce CO2 emissions
in cement industry is utilizing alternative materials as clinker
substitutes, alternative fuels and raw materials. However the
following barriers and restrictions are expected to limit widespread
and continual utilization of such alternative materials in cement
industry:
 Availability of raw materials
Limitation of the regional and global availability of appropriate
materials is considered as the first challenge of widespread utili-
zation of alternative materials in cement plants. For instance global
production of granulated blast furnace slag and fly ashes in 2008
and 2007 was about 1 billion tonnes per year which is not sufficient
for worldwide and high rate of usage in cement industry (Schneider
et al., 2011).
 Properties of produced cements
Due to higher particle sizes, material densities and transport
characteristics of alternative fuels, the burning behavior of the
most alternative fuels significantly differs from the conventional
fossil fuels. Therefore utilizing alternative fuels can have consid-
erable influences on the clinker properties such as the burning
grade, the porosity of the granules, the crystal size and reactivity
of clinker.
Moreover ashes produced by alternative fuels have different
quantity and composition compared to the fossil fuels ashes. These
ashes can create unusual components into the kiln. Phosphorous is
an example of such materials that can lower early strength or
longer setting times of the produced cement (Puntke and
Schneider, 2008).
Furthermore using alternative materials to substitute clinker in
cement influences strength development of cement over time. In
this case strength development is slower compared to cement
composed of pure clinker (Schneider et al., 2011).
 Technical challenges
Generally, when high amount of alternative fuels are utilized,
the production process and the materials have to be precisely
monitored. It requires adequate comprehensive production control
which must be applied in the process.
Moreover utilizing alternative fuels requires the adaptation of
the combustion process. In this case and in order to optimize the
burning behavior of the fuels and the burning conditions for the
clinker, controlling the flame shape is a vital action (Wirthwein and
Emberger, 2010).
 Economic concerns
If the economy of using alternative materials is concerned, the
cost of purchasing, treating, and transportation of raw materials
from the sources to cement plant are critical items. Moreover as
described above in order to use alternative materials it is compul-
sory to adjust some parts of the process. These adjustments impose
additional expenses to companies which must be taken in account.
Therefore in case of availability and possibility of utilizing alter-
native materials as fuel, feed or even additive, economy of this
substitution must be precisely evaluated.
 National standards and market acceptance
Local waste markets and permitting conditions may be other
barriers to delay utilizing higher rates of alternative materials in
cement industry. Furthermore in some countries and regional
markets there is still incompatibility between the national stan-
dards and the properties of cement produced by alternative
materials. It may also hinder production of such type of cement in
a large rate of production.
Table 6
Recent studies and potentials of utilizing alternative materials in cement industry.
Author (s) year
Kikuchi (2001)
Mokrzycki et al. (2003)
Prisciandaro et al. (2003)
Kakali et al. (2003)
Gartner (2004)
Gabel and Tillman (2005)
Pipilikaki et al. (2005)
Kolovos (2006)
Navia et al. (2006)
Bernardo et al. (2007)
Puertas et al. (2008)
Conesa et al. (2008)
Zabaniotou and Theofilou
(2008)
Fairbairn et al. (2010)
Approach
Reported a technology for producing cement from incineration ash of municipal
solid waste, incineration ash of sewage sludge and other wastes such as
aluminum dross and copper slag.
Studied ecological and economical features of utilizing alternative fuels made
from waste, called PASi and PASr in the Lafarge Cement Polska S.A. group.
Statistically analyzed the experimental results of the emission of alternative
fuels replaced with conventional fuel in two different cement plants in Italy
using Statistical Student’s t-tests, stepwise linear regression models and
factor analysis.
Investigated the possibility to adding small amounts of minerals in the cement
raw mix to accelerate the sintering reactions and improve the reactivity of the
cement raw mix.
Studied the feasibility of replacing Portland cements with alternative hydraulic
cements that could result in lower total CO2 emissions per unit volume of
cement produced.
Simulated nine scenarios of using recovered materials and alternative fuels.
Investigated the possibility of using tire derived fuel (TDF) as supplemental
alternative fuel in cement plant. Quality measurements were carried out by
using different qualitative analytical techniques such as, X-ray diffraction
(XRD), X-ray fluorescence (XRF) and optical microscopy in two series of
raw mill, clinker and fuel samples with and without the use of TDF. In
this specific study TDF used as the 6% of the total fuel.
Performed a laboratory scale simulation, aimed to investigate the possibility
of partially substituting ordinary cement raw mix with waste ammunition
materials (WAM)
Evaluated the utilization of spent volcanic soil in the cement industry as an
alternative raw material using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology.
Studied substitution of oil well-derived drilling waste and an electric arc furnace
(EAF) slag generated in a steel plant by both limestone and clay in the kiln feed.
Explored the reactivity and burn ability of cement raw mixes containing fired
red or white ceramic wall tile wastes and combinations of these two as
alternative raw materials.
Analyzed the emission of different pollutants when partially substitute the
typical fuel with tire and two types of sewage sludge. Six scenarios including
one blank (no sewage sludge) and five different else with increasing amount
of sludge and/or tires were considered. In each case emission of CO2, Dioxins
and furans, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and other hydrocarbons,
heavy metals, HCl and HF, CO, NOx and other parameters of the stack were
analyzed through more than 1 year data.
Studied possibility and the advantages of utilization municipal sewage sludge
as a partial alternative fuel at a cement plant in Cyprus in order to consume
unused wastes traditionally considered an environmental problem as
renewable fuel that not only produces energy, but reduces pollutants emissions
as well.
Carried out a simulation to estimate the potential of CO2 emission reductions in
cement plant by using sugar cane bagasse ash (SCBA) as partial raw material in
industrial scale.
Results Country
It was concluded that process did not cause secondary pollution. Consequently, Portugal
50% of raw materials for cement production can be obtained from incineration
ash of municipal solid waste.
They showed that combusting these fuels would result on permissible values of Poland
emissions. The results also confirmed that utilizing these alternative fuels is both
environmentally-friendly and profitable to cement industry and society.
Results achieved indicated that if less than 20% of regular fuel is replaced with tire, Italy
stack emissions (NOx, SO2 and CO mainly) were slightly increased, but remaining
almost always below the law imposed limit. In contrast and in the case of waste
oils, polluted gas emissions were significantly decreased.
It was concluded that the added mineral improved the burn ability of the cement Greece
raw mixture without affecting considerably the hydration rate and cement
properties.
Based on the analysis, it was indicated that the best low-CO2 alternative cementing France
systems is cements which is made by natural/artificial pozzolans for stabilizing
hydrated calcium sulfates.
E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Simulations results showed that emissions of CO2, NOx, SO2, CO, VOC, CH4 and dust Sweden
could be mitigated up to 80% due to use of recovered material and alternative fuel.
It was found that there was no apparent problems can be occurred in result of Greece
utilizing TDF as a supplemental fuel in the clinker burning.
It was found that the three used WAM blends, remarkably improved the burn ability Greece
of the cement raw mixture, without affecting considerably the hydration rate and
the cement properties
It was proven that the use of spent volcanic soil would allow the development of Chile
cement production in a more sustainable way, slightly improving the economy of
the process. In term of economy utilizing spent volcanic soil can result in the
savings of 0.23$ for each ton of clinker production.
It was concluded that reduction of thermal energy requirement through improving Italy
raw mix burn ability and mitigation of CO2 by reduction of carbonated source of
lime can be achieved if they partially be replaced by feed.
The results showed that the new raw mixes containing this kind of waste had higher Spain
reactivity and burn ability than a conventional mix, resulted in reduction of fuel
consumption and emission.
Was found that the emission of PAHs and dioxins seems to increase with the amount Spain
of tires fed to the kiln, probably due to the fed point used for this waste.
They reported that heavy metal concentrations in gas amounted to only 16% of the Cyprus
allowable levels and dioxin/furans amounted to only 6% of the allowable levels. It
was also estimated that the saving out of using 7.5% wet sludge in this plant as
supplementary fuel can reach to 8.0 euro/h.
It was estimated that the emissions reduction using the methodology of UNFCCC Brazil
would be 519.3 kilo tons of CO2 per year.
(continued on next page)
157
 158 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161

6. Conclusion

Tanzania
Australia

Malaysia
Country

The significant industrial CO2 emissions released impose an

Iran

immeasurable impact on the environment. Its atmospheric

concentration was substantially enlarged over the past decades
from 1.1% per year for 1990e1999, to 3.5% per year for 2000e2007
reduced to nearly 100%. In addition to environmental benefits, economical analyses

Results indicated that geo-polymer concrete has potential for 44e64% reduction in

It was indicated that replacing coal with sawmill charcoal powder in cement plant
Changing the fuel source from fuel oil to natural gas resulted in CO2 emission rate

and eventually reached to 394.35 ppm in May 2011. With the

Simulations results showed that fuel oil was the second largest pollution emitter
after coal since produced 31,400 kg/h CO2 and was the first SO2 producer. It was

reduced 455e495 kg of CO2 Eq MWh1 resulting in 83e91% abatement of GHGs

greenhouse gas emissions and 7% lower to 39% higher cost compared with OPC.

SO2 emission as compare to burning coal, utilizing natural gas mitigated 45.64%
also found that while using PKS reduced 46.16% of CO2, 73% of NO2 and 68% of

increase in the CO2 emissions to the environment for the past

to decrease from 118,693 to 115,367 kg/h. Also emission of NO2 and SO2 was

decades that contribute to the global warming phenomenon, more

research was done to overcome this problem. Beside that these
emissions strictly forced governments around the world to discuss
promising approaches toward emission control and mitigation that
could be applied by all industries that facing the same CO2 emis-
sions problem especially for the cement industry.
of carbon emission and produced neither NO2 nor SO2.

Cement plant has been always among industries which generate

plenty of CO2 aside from other sectors such as electricity and heat
generation sector and transportation sector. In addition to CO2
generation due to fossil fuels combustion in the cement production,
carbon dioxide is also produced as by-product during decomposi-
suggested change of fuel for this plant.

tion reactions. Moreover in conventional plants various near

optimal design and operation lead to extra and undesired emis-
sions of CO2 into the environment. Therefore, this analysis was
done with objectives to clearly review all the factors that need to be
taken into consideration in implementing the strategic approaches
on reducing the CO2 emission to the environment by the cement
industries.
First of all the global strategies and potentials toward CO2
emissions.

emissions reduction in cement plant were discussed, compared and

Results

then the most promising approaches were introduced. Moreover

the barriers against widespread and global deployment of such
strategies were identified and comprehensively described thor-
oughly. Based on the analysis of the cement production process as
emissions in cement plant by replacing coal with charcoal powder was estimated.
The use of natural gas as an alternative to the current energy source, fuel oil, in

well as factors contributing to the CO2 emissions throughout the

simulated by Aspen HYSYS. Fuel substitution scenarios by replacing coal with
Compared the cost and greenhouse gas emission impact of Ordinary Portland
a cement plant in Iran was studied in two cases, associated with and without

fuel oil, natural gas, and palm kernel shell separately were also carried out to
Pyro-processing unit of the conventional cement manufacturing process was

whole process, three strategic approaches of carbon reduction was

By cradle-to-grave approach the impact of converting sawmill residues into
charcoal powder was assessed. Moreover potential for reduction of GHGs

discussed. The three strategic approaches are energy saving

approach, carbon separation and storage approaches as well as
utilizing alternative materials approach were reviewed to identify
factors that will affecting the implementation process.
First of all in case of energy saving, it was indicated that shifting
to more efficient process for example from wet to dry process
having calciner, was the best option since potentially reduced up to
50% of required energy and mitigated almost 20% of CO2 emissions
Cement (OPC) and geo-polymers in Australian.

in the process as well as increase the efficiency of the grinding

process. Other promising and effective way of mitigation in this
classification was heat recovery from exhaust streams which saved
up to 20% of fuel and in consequence mitigated 8% of CO2 emissions.
evaluate the pollution reduction.

Through the analysis, it is realized that the heat recovery system

waste heat recovery system.

also applicable not only to reduce the CO2 emission but also offers
an opportunity in reducing the energy consumption for the whole
cement production process. The heat recovery system can be use to
generate electricity which can replace dependency on fossil fuels
for electricity generation. Reduction in fossil fuel dependency also
gives an opportunity to reduce the CO2 emission to the environ-
Approach

ment indirectly through the electrical energy generation from fossil

fuels process. In addition the heat waste also can be use as heating
sources for preparing the raw material before the clinkering
process.
CCS is also considered as an effective way which is potentially
Benhelal and Haslenda
McLellan et al. (2011)
Benhelal et al. (2011)

able to separate and store major proportion of CO2 produced in the

Table 6 (continued )

plant. However, up to now and due to various barriers and chal-

Author (s) year

lenges especially in term of economic factors and legislation

Sjølie (2012)

applied, no post-combustion capture and storage process has been

(2011)

applied in the cement industry. Widespread cost-effective

deployment of CCS will occur only if the technology is commer-
cially available and a stable, comprehensive and supportive policy
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161 159

framework is in place. This global development is not foreseen References

before 2020 otherwise an appropriate action was done by both
government and industries to utilize the CCS approach in reducing Asian Development Bank, 2006. Small Scale Clean Development Mechanism Project
Handbook. Asian Development Bank, Philippines.
the CO2 emissions. Ba Shammakh, M., Caruso, H., Elkamel, A., Croiset, E., Douglas, P.L., 2008. Analysis
As far as utilizing alternative materials is concerned, reusing and optimization of carbon dioxide emission mitigation options in the cement
industrial by-products and WDF resulted in the greatest contribu- industry. American Journal of Environmental Sciences 4 (5), 482e490.
Barker, D.J., Turner, S.A., Napier-Moore, P.A., Clark, M., Davison, J.E., 2009. CO2
tion to abate CO2 emissions. Industrial wastes utilized as fuels, raw capture in the cement industry. Energy Procedia 1, 87e94.
materials and clinker substitutes, significantly contribute in emis- Benhelal, E., Haslenda, H., 2011. Technical cement process simulation and envi-
sion reduction since they simultaneously curb CO2 emissions from ronmental advantages of alternative fuels utilization. In: UMIES Conference,
12e14 July 2011, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Paper No., 29.
two sources, cement plants and landfills. However based on the Benhelal, E., Azin, R., Jafari Raad, S.M., 2011. Techno-economical and environmental
analysis done, even the alternative materials were proved chemi- study of utilizing alternative fuel and waste heat reuse in a cement plant.
cally can be used in the cement production, a further studies Energy Science and Technology 2 (1), 25e34.
Benhelal, E., Zahedi, G., Haslenda, H., 2012. A novel design for green and economical
specifically need to be done in order to ensure the utilization of the
cement manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production 22, 60e66.
alternative materials are applicable and suitable for a stable cement Bernardo, G., Marroccoli, M., Nobili, M., Telesca, A., Valenti, G.L., 2007. The use of oil
production. well-derived drilling waste and electric arc furnace slag as alternative raw mate-
rials in clinker production. Resources. Conservation and Recycling 52, 95e102.
It has been observed that although three strategic approaches
Boden, T., Marland, G., Andres, B., 2011a. National CO2 Emissions from Fossil-fuel
described have great contribution and potential to abate CO2 emis- Burning, Cement Manufacture, and Gas Flaring: 1751e2008. Carbon Dioxide
sions in global cement industry, however technical, economic and Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Ten-
legal challenges still play as remarkable obstacles against wide- nessee, U.S.A.. cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp030/nation.1751_2008.ems (accessed
02.04.12.).
spread implementation of such approaches. By eliminating or Boden, T., Marland, G., Andres, B., 2011b. Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil-fuel
reducing the impact of such barriers, CO2 mitigation strategies can be Burning, Cement Manufacture, and Gas Flaring: 1751e2008. Carbon Dioxide
applied in the large scale and cement industry can get closer to zero Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Ten-
nessee, U.S.A.. cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp030/global.1751_2008.ems (accessed
emission targets. Thus, an urgent action needs to be taken either by 02.04.12.).
the government, industry or even by the researcher community to Camdali, U., Erisen, A., Celen, F., 2004. Energy and exergy analyses in a rotary burner
ensure a full utilization of the strategic approaches reviewed. with pre-calcinations in cement production. Energy Conversion and Manage-
ment 45, 3017e3031.
Cazacliu, B., Ventura, A., 2010. Technical and environmental effects of concrete
Acknowledgments production: dry batch versus central mixed plant. Journal of Cleaner Production
18, 1320e1327.
CCS Task Force Report, 2010. www.fe.doe.gov/programs/sequestration/ccstf/
First author would like to acknowledge Dr. Muhammad Khur- CCSTaskForceReport2010.pdf (accessed 19.06.12.).
ram Zahoor, University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, CDIAC (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Centre), 2011. cdiac.ornl.gov (accessed
05.02.11.).
Pakistan and Mr. Ho Wai Shin, University Technology Malaysia
CEMBUREAU, the European Cement Association, 1997. Alternative Fuels in Cement
for their helps. Financial support of University Technology Manufacture.
Malaysia under grant no. Q.J130000.2444.00G54 is also gratefully Cement roadmap targets, 2009. International Energy Agency (IEA), www.iea.org/
acknowledged. papers/2009/Cement_Roadmap_targets_viewing.pdf (accessed 02.04.12.).
Cement Technology Roadmap, 2009. Carbon Emissions Reductions up to 2050.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and Interna-
Nomenclature tional Energy Agency (IEA). October 2010.
Chatterjee, A.K., 2011. Chemistry and engineering of the clinkerization process e
incremental advances and lack of breakthroughs. Cement and Concrete
ASR Automobile shredder residue Research 41 (7), 624e641.
CCS Carbon capture and storage Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., 2010. Environmental impact of cement
production: detail of the different processes and cement plant variability
CF Clinker factor evaluation. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (5), 478e485.
EADT Environmental Amortization Duration Time Choate, T.W., 2003. Energy and emission reduction opportunities for the cement
EAF Electric arc furnace industry, industrial technologies program, U.S Department of energy. Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy 14, 24e29.
Eq Equivalent
Climate Change, 2007a. Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of
GA Genetic algorithm Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
GMT Global mean temperature Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge Univ. Press; 2007. pp. 211e272.
HHV Higher heating value Climate Change, 2007b. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I
to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
IEA International energy agency Change. Cambridge Univ. Press; 2007. pp. 747e785.
LCA Life cycle assessment Coito, F., Powell, F., Worrell, E., Price, L., Friedmann, R., 2005. Case Study of the
LHV Lower heating value California Cement Industry. Environmental Energy Technologies Division. U.S.A.
ies.lbl.gov/iespubs/59938.pdf (accessed 18.06.12.).
MSW Municipal solid waste Collins, R.J., Ciesielski, S.K., 1994. Recycling and Use of Waste Materials and By-
ORC Organic Rankine cycle products in Highway Construction. National Cooperative Highway Research
PAHs Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Program Synthesis of Highway Practice 199. Transportation Research Board,
Washington, DC, U.S.A.
ppb Parts per billion Conesa, J.A., Gálvez, A., Mateos, F., Martín-Gullón, I., Font, R., 2008. Organic and
ppt Parts per trillion inorganic pollutants from cement kiln stack feeding alternative fuels. Journal of
PSD Particle size distribution Hazardous Materials 158, 585e592.
Damtoft, J.S., 1998. Use of fly ash and other waste materials as raw feed and energy
SCBA Sugar cane bagasse ash source in the Danish cement industry. International Symposium on Sustainable
TDF Tire derived fuel Development of Cement and Concrete Industry, Ottawa, Canada, CANMET/ACI,
UNFCCCUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate pp. 95e105.
Demirbas, A., 2003. Sustainable co-firing of biomass with coal. Energy Conversion
Change
and Management 44 (9), 1465e1479.
WAM Waste ammunition materials Dias, A.C., Arroja, L., 2012. Comparison of methodologies for estimating the carbon
WDF Waste-derived fuel footprint e case study of office paper. Journal of Cleaner Production 24, 30e35.
WHRSG Waste Heat Recovery Steam Generator Draft Inventory of U.S, February 15, 2011. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks:
1990-2009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A..
XRD X-ray diffraction www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads11/US-GHG-Inventory-
XRF X-ray fluorescence 2011-Complete_Report.pdf (accessed 20.06.11.).
160 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
EC (European Commission), 2004. Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) Meth-
odology: Towards an Upgrade in 2004.
Engin, T., Ari, V., 2005. Energy auditing and recovery for dry type cement rotary kiln
systems e a case study. Energy Conversion and Management 46 (4), 551e562.
Fairbairn, E.M.R., Americano, B.B., Cordeiro, G.C., Paula, T.P., Toledo Filho, R.D.,
Silvoso, M.M., 2010. Cement replacement by sugarcane bagasse ash: CO2
emissions reduction and potential for carbon credits. Journal of Environmental
Management 91, 1864e1871.
Fytili, D., Zabaniotou, A., 2006. Utilization of sewage sludge in EU application of old
and new methods e a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12
(1), 116e140.
Gabel, K., Tillman, A.M., 2005. Simulating operational alternatives for future cement
production. Journal of Cleaner Production 13, 1246e1257.
Galbenis, C.T., Tsimas, S., 2006. Use of construction and demolition wastes as raw
materials in cement clinker production. China Particuology 4 (2), 83e85.
Gartner, E., 2004. Industrially interesting approaches to “low-CO2” cements.
Cement and Concrete Research 34 (9), 1489e1498.
Gartner, E.M., Macphee, D.E., 2011. A physico-chemical basis for novel cementitious
binders. Cement and Concrete Research 41 (7), 736e749.
GNR (Getting the Numbers Right), 2009. Cement Industry Energy and CO2 Perfor-
mance. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the Cement
Sustainability Initiative (CSI). www.nbi.org.za/./cement_industry_energy___
co2_numbersl.pdf (accessed 02.04.12.).
Gouda, G.R., 1977. Cement raw materials and their effect on fuel consumption. Rock
Products, Chicago 80 (10), 60e64.
Grosse-Daldrup, H. Scheubel, B., 1996. Alternative Fuels and Their Impact on the
Refractory Linings. Refra technik Report, No. 45.
Harder, J., 2006. Development of clinker substitutes in the cement industry.
Zement-Kalk-Gips 59 (2), 58e64.
Hasanbeigi, A., Menke, C., Price, L., 2010. The CO2 abatement cost curve for the
Thailand cement industry. Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (15), 1509e1518.
Holderbank Inc., 1993. Heat Balance of Kiln and Coolers and Related Topics, Cement
Seminar: Comminution Engineering, Process Technology.
Huntzinger, D.N., Eatmon, T.D., 2009. A life-cycle assessment of portland cement
manufacturing: comparing the traditional process with alternative technolo-
gies. Journal of Cleaner Production 17, 668e675.
ICF Consulting, 2005. Determination of the Impact of Waste Management Activities
on Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 2005 Update. Environment Canada and Natural
Resources Canada, Toronto, p. 163.
ICF Consulting, 2006. Life-cycle Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors for Scrap Tires. US
Environmental Protection Agency, p. 8.
IDB (Inter-American Development Bank), 2010. Cement Manufacturing Plant
Guidelines, An Approach to Reconciling the Financing of Cement Manufacturing
Plants with Climate Change Objectives. idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.
aspx?docnum¼35601768 (accessed 02.04.12.).
IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D, 1999. The Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from
the Cement Industry. Report Number PH3/7, pp. 25e49.
IEA (International Energy Agency) statistics, 2010. CO2 Emissions from Fuel
Combustion Highlights. www.iea.org/co2highlights (accessed 12.11.10.).
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 2006. Emissions Factor
Database.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), 1996. Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories, vol. 3.
Jankovic, A., Valery, W., Davis, E., 2004. Cement grinding optimization. Minerals
Engineering 17, 1075e1081.
Jenkins, B.M., Baxter, L.L., Miles Jr., T.R., Miles, T.R., 1998. Combustion properties of
biomass. Fuel Processing Technology 54 (1e3), 17e46.
Jepsen, O.L., Christensen, K.P., 1998. Improving fuel consumption and emissions by
means of modern cooler, cyclone and calciner technology. In: Proceedings of
WABE International Symposium on Cement and Concrete, Montreal, Canada,
pp. 5e15.
Jorapur, R., Rajvanshi, A., 1997. Sugarcane leaf-bagasse gasifiers for industrial
heating applications. Biomass and Bioenergy 13 (3), 141e146.
Kaantee, U., Zevenhove, R., Backman, R., Hupa, M., 2004. Cement manufacturing
using alternative fuels and the advantages of process modeling. Fuel Processing
Technology 85, 293e301.
Kabir, G., Abubakar, A.I., El-Nafaty, U.A., 2010. Energy audit and conservation
opportunities for pyro-processing unit of a typical dry process cement plant.
Energy 35 (3), 1237e1243.
Kakali, G., Tsivilis, S., Kolovos, K., Choupa, K., Perraki, T., Perraki, M., Stamatakis, M.,
Vasilatos, Ch, 2003. Use of secondary mineralizing raw materials in cement
production. The case study of a stibnite ore. Materials Letters 57, 3117e3123.
Kaplan, E., Nedder, N., 2001. Petroleum coke utilization for cement kiln firing. In:
Cement Industry Technical Conference, IEEE-IAS/PCA. Vancouver, BC, Canada,
pp. 251e263.
Karbassi, A.R., Jafari, H.R., Yavari, A.R., Hoveidi, H., Sid Kalal, H., 2010. Reduction of
environmental pollution through optimization of energy use in cement
industries. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 7
(1), 127e134.
Karstensen, K., Kinh, N., Thang, L., Viet, P., Tuan, N., Toi, D., Hung, N., Quan, T.,
Hanh, L., Thang, D., 2006. Environmentally sound destruction of obsolete
pesticides in developing countries using cement kilns. Environmental Science &
Technology 9, 577e586.
Khurana, S., Banerjee, R., Gaitonde, U., 2002. Energy balance and cogeneration for
a cement plant. Applied Thermal Engineering 22, 485e494.
Kihara, Y., 1999. Co-processing of waste in cement kilns (in Portuguese): Seminar on
Sustainable Development and Construction Recycling, Organized by Technical
Committee of IBRACON CT-206-Environment, São Paulo, Brazil, pp. 35e43.
Kikuchi, R., 2001. Recycling of municipal solid waste for cement production: pilot-
scale test for transforming incineration ash of solid waste into cement clinker.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 31, 137e147.
Kolovos, K.G., 2006. Waste ammunition as secondary mineralizing raw material in
Portland cement production. Cement & Concrete Composites 28, 133e143.
Lafarge Malaysian Cement Bhd, 2005. Monitoring Report for Replacement of Fossil
Fuel by Palm Kernel Shell Biomass in the Production of Portland Cement.
Selangor, Malaysia: 35.
Li, J., Zhuang, X., DeLaquil, P., Larson, E., 2001. Biomass energy in China and its
potential. Energy for Sustainable Development 5 (4), 66e81.
Madlool, N.A., Saidur, R., Hossain, M.S., Rahim, N.A., 2011. A critical review on
energy use and savings in the cement industries. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 15, 2042e2060.
Mahasenan, N., Smith, S., Humphreys, K.K., 2002. The Cement Industry and Global
Climate Change: Current and Potential Future Cement Industry CO2 Emissions.
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Battelle, Richland, WA 99352, U.S.A.
Mahlia, T.M.I., 2002. Emissions from electricity generation in Malaysia. Renewable
Energy 27, 293e300.
Mahmoud, A., Shuhaimi, M., Abdel Samed, M., 2009. A combined process integra-
tion and fuel switching strategy for emissions reduction in chemical process
plants. Energy 34, 190e195.
Mani, S., Tabil, L.G., Sokhansanj, S., 2004. Grinding performance and physical
properties of wheat and barley straws, corn stover and switch grass. Biomass
and Bioenergy 27 (4), 339e352.
Mansaray, K., Ghaly, A., 1997. Physical and Thermochemical Properties of Rice Husk.
Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects 19 (9),
989e1004.
Maxham, J., 1992. Conversion of Paper Mill Sludge into Papermaking Pulp and Filler
Products. Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance, North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, p. 14.
McIlveen-Wright, D.R., Huang, Y., Rezvani, S., Wang, Y., 2007. A technical and
environmental analysis of co-combustion of coal and biomass in fluidized bed
technologies. Fuel 86 (14), 2032e2042.
McLellan, B.C., Williams, R.P., Lay, J., van Riessen, A., Corder, G.D., 2011. Costs and
carbon emissions for geopolymer pastes in comparison to ordinary portland
cement. Journal of Cleaner Production 19 (9e10), 1080e1090.
Mintus, F., Hamel, S., Krumm, W., 2006. Wet process rotary cement kilns: modelling
and simulation. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 8, 112e122.
Mirabile, D., Pistelli, M.I., Marchesini, M., Falciani, R., Chiappelli, L., 2002. Thermal
valorisation of automobile shredder residue: injection in blast furnace. Waste
Management 22 (8), 841e851.
Mokrzycki, E., Bochen  czyk, A.U., Sarna, M., 2003. Use of alternative fuels in the
Polish cement industry. Applied Energy 74 (1e2), 101e111.
Moya, J.A., Pardo, N., Mercier, A., 2011. The potential for improvements in energy
efficiency and CO2 emissions in the EU27 cement industry and the relationship
with the capital budgeting decision criteria. Journal of Cleaner Production 19,
1207e1215.
Mujumdar, K.S., Ranade, V.V., 2006. Simulation of rotary cement kilns using
a one dimensional model. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 84
(A3), 165e177.
Mujumdar, K.S., Ganesh, K.V., Kulkarni, S.B., Ranade, V.V., 2007. Rotary Cement Kiln
Simulator (RoCKS): integrated modeling of pre-heater, calciner, kiln and clinker
cooler. Chemical Engineering Science 62, 2590e2607.
Murray, A., Price, L., 2008. Use of Alternative Fuels in Cement Manufacture: Analysis
of Fuel Characteristics and Feasibility for Use in the Chinese Cement Sector.
Energy and Resources Group and Environmental Energy Technologies Division,
UC Berkeley, U.S.A.. ies.lbl.gov/iespubs/LBNL-525E.pdf (accessed 10.10.11.).
Murray, A., Horvath, A., Nelson, K., 2008. Hybrid life-cycle environmental and cost
inventory of sewage sludge treatment and end-use scenarios: a case study from
China. Environmental Science & Technology 42 (9), 3163e3169.
Navia, R., Rivela, B., Lorber, K.E., Mendez, R., 2006. Recycling contaminated soil as
alternative raw material in cement facilities: life cycle assessment. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling 48, 339e356.
Ogbeide, S.O., 2010. Developing an optimization model for CO2 reduction in cement
production process. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review 3
(1), 85e88.
One North Sea, 2010. A study into North Sea cross-border CO2 transport and
storage, Final Main Report For: The Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and
Energy and The UK Foreign and Common wealth Office, On behalf of: The North
Sea Basin Task Force www.npd.no/en/Publications/Reports/One-North-Sea/.
Pipilikaki, P., Katsioti, M., Papageorgiou, D., Fragoulis, D., Chaniotakis, E., 2005.
Use of tire derived fuel in clinker burning. Cement & Concrete Composites
27, 843e847.
Popescu, C.D., Muntean, M., Sharp, J.H., 2003. Industrial trial production of low
energy belite cement. Cement & Concrete Composites 25, 689e693.
Prisciandaro, M., Mazziotti, G., Veglio, F., 2003. Effect of burning supplementary
waste fuels on the pollutant emissions by cement plants: a statistical analysis of
process data. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 39, 161e184.
Puertas, F., García-Díaz, I., Barba, A., Gazulla, M.F., Palacios, M., Gómez, M.P.,
Martínez-Ramírez, S., 2008. Ceramic wastes as alternative raw materials for
Portland cement clinker production. Cement & Concrete Composites 30,
798e805.
 E. Benhelal et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 51 (2013) 142e161
Puntke, S., Schneider, M., 2008. Effects of phosphate on clinker mineralogy and
cement properties. Cement International 6 (5), 80e93.
Rahman, A., Suarez, A., Van Ypersele, J.P., 2009. Assessing dangerous climate change
through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
“reasons for concern”. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America 106 (11), 4133e4137.
Rainer, N., 2009. Burning technology. In: Proceedings of the 6th International VDZ
Congress. Process Technology of Cement Manufacturing. Duesseldorf, Germany.
30 Sep-2 Oct 2009.
Rasul, M.G., Widianto, W., Mohanty, B., 2005. Assessment of the thermal perfor-
mance and energy conservation opportunities of a cement industry in
Indonesia. Applied Thermal Engineering 25, 2950e2965.
Resource Management Branch, 1996. Composting Factsheet. British Columbia
Ministry of Agriculture Food and Fisheries, Abbotsford, BC, Canada.
Rodriguez, N., Alonso, M., Abanades, J.C., Grasa, G., Murillo, R., 2009. Analysis of
a process the capture the CO2 resulting from the pre-calcination of the lime-
stone feed to cement plant. Energy Procedia 1, 141e148.
Saft, R., 2007. Life cycle assessment of a pyrolysis/gasification plant for hazardous
paint waste. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12 (4), 230e238.
Saxena, J.P., 1995. Productivity improvements through reduction in Kiln downtime.
World Cement 26 (3), 64e68.
Schneider, M., Romer, M., Tschudin, M., Bolio, H., 2011. Sustainable cement
production e present and future. Cement and Concrete Research 41 (7),
642e650.
SETIS (Strategic energy technologies information system), 2011. Energy Efficiency
and Carbon Dioxide Emission Reduction in the Cement Industry. setis.ec.
europa.eu/newsroom/library/technology-map-chapters/energy-efficiency-and-
carbon-dioxide-emission-reduction-in-the-cement-industry (accessed
19.06.12.).
Seyler, C., Hellweg, S., Monteil, M., Hungerbühler, K., 2005. Life cycle inventory for
use of waste solvent as fuel substitute in the cement industry e a multi-input
allocation model. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 10 (2),
120e130.
Sjølie, H.K., 2012. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from households and
industry by the use of charcoal from sawmill residues in Tanzania. Journal of
Cleaner Production 27, 109e117.
Smith, J.B., Schneider, S.H., Oppenheimer, M., Yohe, G.W., Hare, W., Mastrandrea,
M.D., Patwardhan, A., Burton, I., Morlot, J.C., Magadza, C.H.D., Füssel, H.M.,
Pittock, A.B., Realff, M., Lemieux, P., Lucero, S., Mulholland, J., Smith, P., 2005.
Characterization of transient puff emissions from the burning of carpet waste
charges in a rotary kiln combustor. In: IEE 47th Cement Industry Technical
Conference, May 15e20, 2005, Kansas City, U.S.A., pp. 1e10.
161
Sögüt, Z., Oktay, Z., Karakoç, H., 2010. Mathematical modeling of heat recovery from
a rotary kiln. Applied Thermal Engineering 30, 817e825.
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. Journal of
Cleaner Production 19 (14), 1615e1621.
Subramanian, P.M., 2000. Plastics recycling and waste management in the US.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 28 (3e4), 253e263.
Touil, D., Belaadi, S., Frances, C., 2006. Energy efficiency of cement finish grinding in
a dry batch ball mill. Cement and Concrete Research 36, 416e421.
Utlu, Z., Sogut, Z., Hepbasli, A., Oktay, Z., 2006. Energy and exergy analyses of a raw
mill in a cement production. Applied Thermal Engineering 26, 2479e2489.
Vaajasaari, K., Kulovaara, M., Joutti, A., Schultz, Eija, Soljamo, K., 2004. Hazardous
properties of paint residues from the furniture industry. Journal of Hazardous
Materials 106 (2e3), 71e79.
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. Journal of Cleaner Production 25, 60e67.
van den Broek, M., Veenendaal, P., Koutstaal, P., Turkenburg, W., Faaij, A., 2011.
Impact of international climate policies on CO2 capture and storage deployment
illustrated in the Dutch energy system. Energy Policy 39, 2000e2019.
Votorantim, 1994. Expert system automatically 25 rows of cement (in Portuguese).
Ores/Minerals Magazine 196, 28e29.
Walsh, C., Thornley, P., 2012. Barriers to improving energy efficiency within the
process industries with a focus on low grade heat utilisation. Journal of Cleaner
Production 23 (1), 138e146.
Wang, J., Dai, Y., Gao, L., 2009. Exergy analyses and parametric optimizations for different
cogeneration power plants in cement industry. Applied Energy 86, 941e948.
Wirthwein, R., Emberger, B., 2010. Burners for alternative fuels utilisation: opti-
misation of kiln firing systems for advanced alternative fuel co-firing. Cement
International 8 (4), 42e46.
Ye, T., Azevedo, J., Costa, M., Semiao, V., 2004. Co-combustion of pulverized coal,
pine shells, and textile wastes in a propane-fired furnace: measurements and
predictions. Combustion Science and Technology 176 (12), 2071e2104.
Zabaniotou, A., Theofilou, C., 2008. Green energy at cement kiln in cyprus e use of
sewage sludge as a conventional fuel substitute. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 12, 531e541.
Zementwerke, V., 2002. Environmental Data of the German Cement Industry 2001.
German Cement Works Association, p. 52.
Zhang, X.F., Zhang, S.Y., Hu, Z.Y., Yu, G., Pei, C.H., Sa, R.N., 2012. Identification of
connection units with high GHG emissions for low-carbon product structure
design. Journal of Cleaner Production 27, 118e125.