Research Progress on Low-Carbon Technologies and Assessment Methods in Cement Industry

Abstract:

As one of the pillar industries for social development and economic construction, cement manufacture is energy and carbon-intensive, whose greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions account for more than 6% of total global man-made GHG emission annually. With the growing attention on the problem of global warming, researching and promoting low-carbon manufacturing technologies to reduce GHG emissions have become the main trend in the development of cement industry under the new era. This article sorted out the low-carbon technologies for cement production reported in recent years, introduced the mainstream methods of GHG accounting and assessment such as life cycle assessment (LCA) and carbon footprint analysis (CFA), meanwhile reviewed the articles in the field of low-carbon technology and assessment methods in cement production, moreover, discussed the merits and demerits of various assessment methods and applicable fields, in order to provide suggestions and supports for low-carbon transformation of cement industry.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 1035)
• Pages: 933-943
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.1035.933
• Online since: June 2021
• Authors: Hai Tao Zhao, Yu Liu*, Xiao Qing Li, Li Wei Hao
• Keywords: Assessment Methods, Cement, Greenhouse Gas, Low-Carbon Technology

References

[1] Liu Zuoyi, Trilogy of China's Cement Industry Development in the 21st Century, China Building Materials. 10 (2019) 99-105 (in Chinese).

[2] Federico Orsini, Paola Marrone, Approaches for a low-carbon production of building materials: A review, Journal of Cleaner Production, 241 (2019) 1-14.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118380

[3] SUN Haiquan, Research and development of technologies of decreasing energy consumption in cement plant, Cement. 07 (2017) 7-12 (in Chinese).

[4] Gao Changming, The technical path of my country's cement industry's low-carbon transformation——Comments on the Technical Roadmap for Low-carbon Transformation of Cement Industry, newly released by the United Nations, Cement. 001 (2019) 4-8 (in Chinese).

[5] Siti Aktar Ishak, Haslenda Hashim, Low carbon measures for cement plant – a review, Journal of Cleaner Production. 103 (2015) 260-174.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.003

[6] Kathrin Volkart, Christian Bauer, Céline Boulet. Life cycle assessment of carbon capture and storage in power generation and industry in Europe, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 16 (2013) 91-106.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.03.003

[7] Zeng Xianjun, Chen Peng, Wang Yaping, Progress in cement production technology from calcium carbide slag at home and abroad, China Cement. 09 (2018) 79-85 (in Chinese).

[8] LIU Jing, WANG Lan, Instance analysis on application of alternative materials to reduce CO2 emissions from cement industry, New Building Materials. 007 (2017) 97-99.

[9] GB 175-2007: Common Portland Cement, National Standards of the People's Republic of China. (2007) (in Chinese).

[10] Wang Zhaojia, Low-carbon cement clinker: the hope for sustainable development of the cement industry, China Building Materials News. 029 (2012-08-21) (in Chinese).

[11] Wei Liying, Wang Lan, Yan Bilan, New progress in low-carbon cement research at home and abroad, Cement. 12 (2014) 1-3 (in Chinese).

[12] Dienemann W, Schmitt D, Bullerjahn F, et al, Belite-Calciumsulfoaluminate-Ternesite (BCT) - A new low-carbon clinker Technology, Cement International. 11 4 (2013):100-106,108-109.

[13] Building Materials,china Building Materials, LC~3——A new type of low-carbon cement, Jiangsu Building Materials, S2 (2019) 129.

[14] GB/T32151.8-2015: Requirements of the greenhouse gas emission accounting and reporting-part 8: Cement enterprise, National Standards of the People's Republic of China. (2015) (in Chinese).

[15] CNCA/CTS0017-2014: General Portland Cement Low-Carbon Products Evaluation Method and Requirements, China Quality Certification Centre, (2014) (in Chinese).

[16] Li Jinmei, Yin Jingyu, Wu Qingtao, et al, Cement industry carbon emission calculation basis comparison and case analysis, China Cement. 08 (2017) 83-86 (in Chinese).

[17] Liu Jing, Wang Lan, Wei Wenming, Calculation of carbon emission reduction effect of cement clinker produced by calcium carbide slag, China Cement. 07 (2016) 83-85 (in Chinese).

[18] Yin Jingyu, Li Jinmei, Han Guanghui, Wei Jianxun, Wei Xia, The verification points and application examples of ordinary Portland cement low-carbon product certification, China Cement. 09 (2017) 112-113 (in Chinese).

[19] Yang Li Ning, Fu Xiangzhao, Cement carbon footprint study with Chongqing as a case, China Cement. 8 (2016) 87-92 (in Chinese).

[20] ISO 14067: Carbon footprint of products-requirements and guidelines for quantification and communication, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. (2013).

[21] Soo Huey Teh, Thomas Wiedmann, Arnaud Castel, James de Burgh, Hybrid life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, concrete and geopolymer concrete in Australia, Journal of Cleaner Production. 152 (2017) 312-320.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.122

[22] Shen W, Cao L, Li Q, et al, Is magnesia cement low carbon? Life cycle carbon footprint comparing with Portland cement, Journal of Cleaner Production. 131 (2016) 20-27.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.082

[23] Ping L , Zhao G , Lin X , et al. Feasibility and Carbon Footprint Analysis of Lime-Dried Sludge for Cement Production[J]. Sustainability, 2020, 12(6):2500.

DOI: 10.3390/su12062500

[24] Pillai R G, Gettu R, Santhanam M, et al, Service life and life cycle assessment of reinforced concrete systems with limestone calcined clay cement (LC3), Cement and Concrete Research. 118 (2019) 111-119.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.11.019

[25] Chan C C S, Thorpe D, Islam M, An evaluation carbon footprint in fly ash based geopolymer cement and ordinary Portland cement manufacture, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM). (2016).

DOI: 10.1109/ieem.2015.7385647

[26] ISO 14040 2006: Environmental management Life cycle assessment Principles and framework, International, Organization for Standardization. (2006).

[27] César Valderrama, Ricard Granados, José Luis Cortina, et al, Implementation of best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-cycle assessment study[, Journal of Cleaner Production. 25 (2011) 60-67.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.11.055

[28] Sui X, Zhang Y, Shao S, et al, Exergetic life cycle assessment of cement production process with waste heat power generation, Energy Conversion & Management. 88 (2014) 684-692.

DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2014.08.035

[29] Y. Liu, J. Cui, S. Cui, et al, Life cycle assessment of beneficial use of domestic waste for cement production in China, Materials Research Innovations. 18 (2014) S4-62-S4-66.

DOI: 10.1179/1432891714z.000000000651

[30] Stephen P. Holt, Nicole D. Berge, Life-cycle assessment of using liquid hazardous waste as an alternative energy source during Portland cement manufacturing: A United States case study, Journal of Cleaner Production. 195 (2018) 1057-1068.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.214

[31] Diego García-Gusano, Daniel Garraín, Israel Herrera, et al, Life Cycle Assessment of applying CO 2 post-combustion capture to the Spanish cement production, Journal of Cleaner Production. 104 (2015) 328-338.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.056

[32] Cui Jiaping. Ecological design and process optimization of low-carbon cement, Beijing University of Technology. (2015) (in Chinese).

[33] Hisham Hafez, Rawaz Kurda, Wai Ming Cheung, Brabha Nagaratnam, Comparative life cycle assessment between imported and recovered fly ash for blended cement concrete in the UK, Journal of Cleaner Production. 244 (2020) 1-9.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118722

[34] Li Y, Liu Y, Gong X, et al, Environmental impact analysis of blast furnace slag applied to ordinary Portland cement production, Journal of Cleaner Production. 120 (2016) 221-230.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.071

[35] Y Cancio Díaz, S Sánchez Berriel, I R Sánchez Machado, et al, Eco-efficiency assessment of conventional OPC/PPC replacement by LC3 in Cuban residential buildings, IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ence. 323 (2019) 1-6.

DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/323/1/012129