IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v33y2008i3p160-167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geologic vs. geographic constraints on cement resources

Author

Listed:
  • Kendall, Alissa
  • Kesler, Stephen E.
  • Keoleian, Gregory A.

Abstract

This study evaluates the importance of geologic and geographic factors in constraining the location of limestone mining operations for the production of cement in the Great Lakes region of the United States. Cities and their infrastructure require abundant cement, which is manufactured from limestone and other quarry products, but expansion of cities limits the locations of these operations. Possible locations of limestone and cement operations are controlled by geologic factors including distribution and mineralogy of geologic formations as well as depth of overburden, and geographic factors including location of wetlands, cities, and other surface features that preclude development of quarries and manufacturing operations. Overlay analysis was used to evaluate the importance of these factors. Results show that, although limestone underlies about a third of the region, almost 50 percent of this limestone is unavailable for quarrying due to coverage by the built environment, protected natural areas, or excessive overburden thickness. When characteristics such as limestone quality are also accounted for, accessible resources shrink to as little as 2 percent of the total land area. Although the remaining 2 percent of land area may supply local needs for some years, geologic factors clearly must be included in long-term regional land use planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Kendall, Alissa & Kesler, Stephen E. & Keoleian, Gregory A., 2008. "Geologic vs. geographic constraints on cement resources," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 160-167, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:33:y:2008:i:3:p:160-167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4207(08)00026-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Campbell, Gary A. & Roberts, Mark, 2003. "Urbanization and mining: a case study of Michigan," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1-2), pages 49-60.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emmanuel Hache & Marine Simoën & Gondia Sokhna Seck & Clément Bonnet & Aymen Jabberi, 2020. "The impact of future power generation on cement demand: An international and regional assessment based on climate scenarios," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 163, pages 114-133.
    2. Cary, Michael & Stephens, Heather M., 2024. "Economic, environmental, and technical gains from the Kyoto Protocol: Evidence from cement manufacturing," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Weike & Meng, Jia & Tian, Xiaoli, 2020. "Does de-capacity policy enhance the total factor productivity of China's coal companies? A Regression Discontinuity design," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    2. Jaeger, William K., 2006. "The hidden costs of relocating sand and gravel mines," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 146-164, September.
    3. Brown, Teresa & McEvoy, Fiona & Ward, John, 2011. "Aggregates in England—Economic contribution and environmental cost of indigenous supply," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 295-303.
    4. Li, Nannan & Gu, Zhenjing & Albasher, Gadah & Alsultan, Nouf & Fatemah, Ambreen, 2023. "Nexus of financial management, blockchain, and natural resources: Comparing the impact on environmental sustainability and resource productivity," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:33:y:2008:i:3:p:160-167. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.