IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i20p10968-d659565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Cement Production with Marble Waste Sludges

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio Ruiz Sánchez

    (Department of Structure Mechanics and Hydraulic Engineering, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Ventura Castillo Ramos

    (Department of Inorganic Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • Manuel Sánchez Polo

    (Department of Inorganic Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

  • María Victoria López Ramón

    (Department of Inorganic and Organic Chemistry, Faculty of Experimental Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • José Rivera Utrilla

    (Department of Inorganic Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain)

Abstract

The construction industry has a considerable environmental impact in societies, which must be controlled to achieve adequate sustainability levels. In particular, cement production contributes 5–8% of CO 2 emissions worldwide, mainly from the utilization of clinker. This study applied Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology to investigate the environmental impact of cement production and explore environmental improvements obtained by adding marble waste sludges in the manufacture of Portland cement. It was considered that 6–35% of the limestone required for its production could be supplied by marble waste sludge (mainly calcite), meeting the EN 197-1:2011 norm. Energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission data were obtained from the Ecovent database using commercial LCA software. All life cycle impact assessment indicators were lower for the proposed “eco-cement” than for conventional cement, attributable to changes in the utilization of limestone and clinker. The most favorable results were achieved when marble waste sludge completely replaced limestone and was added to clinker at 35%. In comparison to conventional Portland cement production, this process reduced GHG emissions by 34%, the use of turbine waters by 60%, and the emission of particles into the atmosphere by 50%. Application of LCA methodology allowed evaluation of the environmental impact and improvements obtained with the production of a type of functional eco-cement. This approach is indispensable for evaluating the environmental benefits of using marble waste sludges in the production of cement.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio Ruiz Sánchez & Ventura Castillo Ramos & Manuel Sánchez Polo & María Victoria López Ramón & José Rivera Utrilla, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Cement Production with Marble Waste Sludges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:20:p:10968-:d:659565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/20/10968/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/20/10968/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edgar G. Hertwich, 2005. "Consumption and Industrial Ecology," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(1‐2), pages 1-6, January.
    2. Edgar G. Hertwich, 2005. "Consumption and the Rebound Effect: An Industrial Ecology Perspective," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(1‐2), pages 85-98, January.
    3. Huijbregts, Mark A.J. & Hellweg, Stefanie & Frischknecht, Rolf & Hungerbuhler, Konrad & Hendriks, A. Jan, 2008. "Ecological footprint accounting in the life cycle assessment of products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 798-807, February.
    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. Samuel Oghale Oweh & Peter Alenoghena Aigba & Olusegun David Samuel & Joseph Oyekale & Fidelis Ibiang Abam & Ibham Veza & Christopher Chintua Enweremadu & Oguzhan Der & Ali Ercetin & Ramazan Sener, 2024. "Improving Productivity at a Marble Processing Plant Through Energy and Exergy Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-30, December.
    2. Jonathan Kerr & Scott Rayburg & Melissa Neave & John Rodwell, 2022. "Comparative Analysis of the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of Structural Stone, Concrete and Steel Construction Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Olurotimi Oguntola & Steven Simske, 2023. "Continuous Assessment of the Environmental Impact and Economic Viability of Decarbonization Improvements in Cement Production," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, August.

    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. Vincent Sennes & Jacques Breillat & Francis Ribeyre & Sandrine Gombert, 2009. "Local policies for reducing the ecological impact of households: the case study of a suburban area in France," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 1031-1049, October.
    2. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    3. Ouyang, Jinlong & Long, Enshen & Hokao, Kazunori, 2010. "Rebound effect in Chinese household energy efficiency and solution for mitigating it," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5269-5276.
    4. Steinberger, Julia K. & van Niel, Johan & Bourg, Dominique, 2009. "Profiting from negawatts: Reducing absolute consumption and emissions through a performance-based energy economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 361-370, January.
    5. Uddin, Main & Wang, Liang Choon & Smyth, Russell, 2021. "Do government-initiated energy comparison sites encourage consumer search and lower prices? Evidence from an online randomized controlled experiment in Australia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 167-182.
    6. Vita, Gibran & Lundström, Johan R. & Hertwich, Edgar G. & Quist, Jaco & Ivanova, Diana & Stadler, Konstantin & Wood, Richard, 2019. "The Environmental Impact of Green Consumption and Sufficiency Lifestyles Scenarios in Europe: Connecting Local Sustainability Visions to Global Consequences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Yosuke Shigetomi & Keisuke Nansai & Shigemi Kagawa & Susumu Tohno, 2016. "Influence of income difference on carbon and material footprints for critical metals: the case of Japanese households," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Jouni Korhonen & Thomas P. Seager, 2008. "Beyond eco‐efficiency: a resilience perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(7), pages 411-419, November.
    9. Shigemi Kagawa & Seiji Hashimoto & Shunsuke Managi, 2015. "Special issue: studies on industrial ecology," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(3), pages 361-368, July.
    10. Barkemeyer, Ralf & Young, C. William & Chintakayala, Phani Kumar & Owen, Anne, 2023. "Eco-labels, conspicuous conservation and moral licensing: An indirect behavioural rebound effect," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    11. Jaehn, Florian & Meissner, Finn, 2022. "The rebound effect in transportation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    12. Belaïd, Fateh & Youssef, Adel Ben & Lazaric, Nathalie, 2020. "Scrutinizing the direct rebound effect for French households using quantile regression and data from an original survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    13. Kagawa, Shigemi & Nansai, Keisuke & Kudoh, Yuki, 2009. "Does product lifetime extension increase our income at the expense of energy consumption?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 197-210.
    14. Andrews, Clinton J. & Krogmann, Uta, 2009. "Technology diffusion and energy intensity in US commercial buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 541-553, February.
    15. Figge, Frank & Thorpe, Andrea Stevenson, 2019. "The symbiotic rebound effect in the circular economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 61-69.
    16. Bauer, Christian & Hofer, Johannes & Althaus, Hans-Jörg & Del Duce, Andrea & Simons, Andrew, 2015. "The environmental performance of current and future passenger vehicles: Life cycle assessment based on a novel scenario analysis framework," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 871-883.
    17. Nentjes, Andries & de Vries, Frans P. & Wiersma, Doede, 2007. "Technology-forcing through environmental regulation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 903-916, December.
    18. Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2020. "Wenn die Telekommunikation den Verkehr so gut ersetzen kann, warum gibt es dann immer mehr Staus?," Forschungsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Reutter, Ulrike & Holz-Rau, Christian & Albrecht, Janna & Hülz, Martina (ed.), Wechselwirkungen von Mobilität und Raumentwicklung im Kontext gesellschaftlichen Wandels, volume 14, pages 167-195, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    19. Smetschka, Barbara & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Egger, Claudine & Haselsteiner, Edeltraud & Moran, Daniel & Gaube, Veronika, 2019. "Time Matters: The Carbon Footprint of Everyday Activities in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Annika Carlsson Kanyama & Jonas Nässén & René Benders, 2021. "Shifting expenditure on food, holidays, and furnishings could lower greenhouse gas emissions by almost 40%," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(6), pages 1602-1616, December.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:20:p:10968-:d:659565. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.