Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Different Portland Cement Types in South Africa

Abstract

Cement has long been recognized as an energy- and emission-intensive construction material. Cement production has recently experienced significant growth despite its high energy consumption, resource usage, and carbon emissions. This study aims to assess and compare the life cycle assessment (LCA) of traditional Portland cement (CEM I) to those of three blended cement types (CEM II/B-L, CEM II/B-V, and CEM III/A), which assume mature technologies for reducing carbon emissions in South Africa, using LCA in compliance with ISO/TS 14071 and 14072. As its scope, the study employs the “cradle to gate” method, which considers the raw materials, fuel usage, electricity, transportation, and clinkering stages, using 1 kg of cement as the functional unit. The LCA analyses were performed using SimaPro 9.1.1.1 software developed by PRé Consultants, Amersfoort, Netherlands and impact assessments were conducted using the ReCiPe 2016 v1.04 midpoint method in order to compare all 18 impact categories of 1 kg of cement for each cement type. The assessment results show reductions in all impact categories, ranging from 7% in ozone depletion and ionizing radiation (CEM II/B-L) to a 41% reduction in mineral resource scarcity (CEM III/A). The impacts of global warming were reduced by 14% in the case of CEM II/B-L, 29% in the case of CEM II/B-V and 35% in the case of CEM III/A. The clinkering process was identified as the primary cause of atmospheric impacts, while resource depletion impacts were attributed to raw materials, fuels, and electricity processes, and toxicity impacts were primarily caused by raw materials. Alternative materials, like fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS), can significantly help to reduce environmental impacts and resource consumption in the cement industry.

Keywords

• life cycle assessment
• blended cement
• clinker substitution
• greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction
• environmental impacts