Analysis on differences of carbon dioxide emission from cement production and their major determinants

Tianming, Gao; Shen, Lei; Shen, Ming; Chen, Fengnan; Liu, Litao; Gao, Li

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.026

Cited by 153 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As seen in Table 3, the total material used in the clinker process is 4.69 kg/kg clinker, and the primary material sources are the cooling airdproducing total material of 2.33 kg/kg clinker (49.60%)dand raw meal (1.56 kg/kg clinker), accounting for 33.29% of the required material. The raw meal to clinker ratio (1.56) determined in this work is the lowest compared with that determined by Low (2005) (1.65), Atmaca and Yumrutaş (2014) (1.59), and Kapur et al (2009) (1.61); however, the raw meal to clinker ratio determined in this work was higher than that determined by Gao et al (2014) (1.51). The primary reason, as pointed out by Gao et al (2014), is the differences in clinker quality and energy intensity.…”

Section: Mass Balance In Clinker Production Systemcontrasting

confidence: 71%

“…The raw meal to clinker ratio (1.56) determined in this work is the lowest compared with that determined by Low (2005) (1.65), Atmaca and Yumrutaş (2014) (1.59), and Kapur et al (2009) (1.61); however, the raw meal to clinker ratio determined in this work was higher than that determined by Gao et al (2014) (1.51). The primary reason, as pointed out by Gao et al (2014), is the differences in clinker quality and energy intensity. The amount of waste gas discharged from the cooler according to this present study and that according to Atmaca and Yumrutaş (2014) are very similar; the amount of waste gas discharged from the pre-heater is remarkably different owing to leaking and lower utilization of this waste gas.…”

Section: Mass Balance In Clinker Production Systemcontrasting

confidence: 71%

“…With respect to environmental implications, Uwasu et al (2014) argued that it is of critical importance to control excessive cement demand. Gao et al (2014) found that replacing carbonatecontaining materials with non-carbonate materials and changing the clinker ratio are primary solutions for reducing natural resource consumption and process emissions. Over the years, the recycling of waste, such as building material waste (Oh et al, 2014), steel slag (Iacobescu et al, 2011), sugar filter mud (Li et al, 2014b), sewage sludge ash (Baeza-Brotons et al, 2014), tire rubber (Shu and Huang, 2014), into cement production has been generating increasing interest.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of material flow and consumption in cement production process

Tianming

Shen

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

Self Cite

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tCement production, which is highly dependent on the availability of natural resources, will face severe resource constraints in the future. This is especially true for the cement industry in China. Thus, the industry is focusing on reducing the consumption of natural resources at both the manufacturing and operational stages. The aim of this article is to improve the management of resources used in the cement production process and mitigate their environmental effects. First, material flow routes for the cement manufacturing process are established, after which three mass balances are built during the three production stages using actual plant data received from an existing cement manufacturing facility. Finally, the material efficiency of the units and stages as well as the waste recycle rates during these stages is calculated. The results show that approximately 2.48 t, 4.69 t, and 3.41 t of materials are required to produce a ton of the product in raw material preparation, clinker production, and cement grinding stages, and their waste rates are 63.31%, 74.12%, and 78.89%, respectively. The recycling rate of wastes during clinker production is remarkably higher than those during other manufacturing stages, wherein waste gases are directly discharged into the atmosphere. The material efficiency values for a raw mill, pyro-processing tower, rotary kiln, clink cooler, and cement mill are determined to be 36.69%, 34.24%, 39.24%, 29.76%, and 25.88%, respectively, whereas the waste recycling rates for these units are found to be 16.33%, 81.98%, 100.00%, 99.53%, and 0.00% respectively. These results will provide researchers with knowledge regarding the effectiveness and efficient use of natural resources in the cement sector. These important findings can also be used to influence the development of national and industrial policies in relation to the goal of achieving sustainable development in the cement industry.Crown

show abstract

Section: Mass Balance In Clinker Production Systemcontrasting

confidence: 71%

Section: Mass Balance In Clinker Production Systemcontrasting

confidence: 71%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of material flow and consumption in cement production process

Tianming

Shen

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

Self Cite

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After then, the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) default CO 2 emission factors were adopted in several estimations (Ke et al, 2012(Ke et al, , 2013Lei et al, 2011;Liu et al, 2015;Wang et al, 2013;Zhang et al, 2015a,b). However, different data sources are so discrepant with each other (Afsah and Aller, 2010) and there exits significant individual variations of different cement plants instead of a fixed emission factor (Gao et al, 2015). In light of this, Shen et al (2014) developed a factory-level measurement for cement emission factors primarily using onsite survey and sampling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the macro level, factors affecting CO 2 emissions in cement industry have been decomposed into energy factor effect, energy structure effect, energy intensity effect, cement production activity effect and clinker production activity effect (Kim and Worrell, 2002;Wang et al, 2013;Xu et al, 2012). In the perspective of plant-level, several scholars proceeded to explore factors and mechanism that affect CO 2 emission of cement production in a single plant (Gao et al, 2015;Gartner, 2004;Popescu et al, 2003). It is argued that the chemistry variations can lead to changes of specific energy consumption (Popescu et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the dynamic mechanism between cement CO2 emissions and clinker quality to realize low-carbon cement

Cao

Shen

Zhao

et al. 2016

Resources, Conservation and Recycling

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tTo devise low-carbon cement clinker product, in-depth knowledge about the variation mechanism of cement clinker CO 2 emissions is the prerequisite. The determinants of cement clinker CO 2 emissions in Chinese cement industry have been inquired by several researches recently. However, the impacts and abatement effect of clinker quality on cement clinker CO 2 emissions have not been identified yet. In technological sense, there lacks an integrated quantitative model that can elucidate the dynamic mechanism between cement clinker CO 2 emissions and clinker quality. To fill this gap, this paper devises a CO 2 emission accounting framework integrated with optimization model to explore the dynamic mechanism between cement clinker CO 2 emissions and clinker quality. Based on survey data of 2 typical cement clinker production lines in China, the accounting framework is validated with measured data. Through numerical simulation within this framework, a set of sensitivity analysis is conducted. The results indicate that if the target KH (lime saturation ratio) of both production lines climb from −5% to +5%, the process CO 2 emission factor will give rise to an increase of about 16.4 and 14.8 kg CO 2 /t clinker, respectively. With the same variation, the fuel CO 2 emission factors of two production lines will gain 17.2 and 13.7 kg CO 2 /t clinker, respectively. Obviously, controlled decrease of clinker quality can reduce CO 2 emission of clinker manufacturing. The results of sensitivity analysis are robust and highlight the remarkable role of clinker quality in both process and fuel emissions. Besides, the integrated framework can provide in-depth investigation into the dynamic mechanism between CO 2 emissions and the other determinants. Using this framework, cement plants or industry can develop optimal clinker quality standards on a quantitative basis to achieve low-carbon clinker.

show abstract

Embodied Carbon in Construction, Maintenance and Demolition in Buildings

Ding

2018

Embodied Carbon in Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis on differences of carbon dioxide emission from cement production and their major determinants

Cited by 153 publications

References 29 publications

Analysis of material flow and consumption in cement production process

Analysis of material flow and consumption in cement production process

Modeling the dynamic mechanism between cement CO2 emissions and clinker quality to realize low-carbon cement

Embodied Carbon in Construction, Maintenance and Demolition in Buildings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About