Meeting industrial decarbonization goals: a case study of and roadmap to a net-zero emissions cement industry in California

Abstract

Recent decarbonization policies are expected to significantly impact high greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting industries, as they will be forced to find ways to operate with a lower environmental footprint. Due to the energy required for the kilns and the unavoidable chemical-derived emissions during manufacturing, in addition to its high global consumption levels, the cement industry is anticipated to be among the early industries affected. California State Bill (SB 596) is one of the first rigorous legislative measures that sets emissions from cement production to net-zero by 2045. As such, a case study on California cement production is evaluated here. While several groups have developed cement technology roadmaps with GHG mitigation strategies, these roadmaps do not consider concomitant environmental impacts, such as those that can influence local populations, thus limiting potential implementation from a policy perspective. Here, we examine several GHG emissions mitigation strategies and show the greatest reduction in GHG emissions from an individual measure during cement production to be from implementing carbon capture storage for cement kiln flue gas (87%), use of alternative clinkers (78%), or use of alkali-activated materials (88%). Yet even if GHG emissions are reduced, use of high-polluting energy sources could increase risks to human health impacts. Further, the efficacy of these decarbonization measures is lowered if multiple measures are implemented simultaneously. Finally, we examine the potential to meet net-zero emissions, focusing on California production due to recent legislation, and find a pathway to 96% GHG emissions reduction. Notably, these reductions do not reach goals to hit zero emissions, suggesting direct air capture mechanisms will need to be implemented.

Paving the way for sustainable decarbonization of the European cement industry

“…Relative to a business-as-usual development of the sector, 15 decarbonization options (Table 1) made of individual measures (for example, alternative fuels such as biomass, natural gas or hydrogen; technological improvements; clinker substitution; CCS; carbon capture for production of electrofuels (e-fuels)) and their combinations (for example, alternative fuels and CCS) are assessed and their climate change mitigation potential quantified and compared. The analysis includes other environmental aspects at risks of trade-offs with mitigation 9,13,17,36 , such as fossil fuel use, water depletion and human health, and an overview of the techno-economic challenges of each option, with an evaluation of technology maturity and costs. The mix of plant technologies currently used for clinker production in each European country is considered, with the associated specific emission factors of air pollutants and plant requirements of energy, fuel and water inputs.…”