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. 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.
    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.

    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. Monia Niero & Charlotte L. Jensen & Chiara Farné Fratini & Jens Dorland & Michael S. Jørgensen & Susse Georg, 2021. "Is life cycle assessment enough to address unintended side effects from Circular Economy initiatives?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1111-1120, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    4. Benedetto, Graziella & Rugani, Benedetto & Vázquez-Rowe, Ian, 2014. "Rebound effects due to economic choices when assessing the environmental sustainability of wine," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 167-173.
    5. 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.
    6. Dimitropoulos, John, 2007. "Energy productivity improvements and the rebound effect: An overview of the state of knowledge," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6354-6363, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Ingolfur Blühdorn & Michael Deflorian, 2019. "The Collaborative Management of Sustained Unsustainability: On the Performance of Participatory Forms of Environmental Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Xie, Yang & Zilberman, David, 2015. "Water Storage Capacities versus Water Use Efficiency: Substitutes or Complements?," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205439, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. 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.
    13. Ornetzeder, Michael & Hertwich, Edgar G. & Hubacek, Klaus & Korytarova, Katarina & Haas, Willi, 2008. "The environmental effect of car-free housing: A case in Vienna," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 516-530, April.
    14. Galvin, Ray, 2014. "Estimating broad-brush rebound effects for household energy consumption in the EU 28 countries and Norway: some policy implications of Odyssee data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 323-332.
    15. Lin Fang & Fengping Wu & Yantuan Yu & Lin Zhang, 2020. "Irrigation technology and water rebound in China's agricultural sector," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 1088-1100, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Jonatan Pinkse & René Bohnsack, 2021. "Sustainable product innovation and changing consumer behavior: Sustainability affordances as triggers of adoption and usage," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 3120-3130, November.
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. Schiller, Frank, 2009. "Linking material and energy flow analyses and social theory," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1676-1686, April.

    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.