A Proposal of Evaluation Method for Blended Cement Based on CO₂ Emissions and Compressive Strength
Source abstract
Abstract
The cement industry is a major contributor to global warming due to substantial CO₂ emissions, particularly during clinker production, the intermediate step in manufacturing Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). While blended cements incorporating supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) such as ground granulated blast-furnace slag powder (GGBS, SP) and limestone powder (LSP) have been used to reduce emissions, it remains difficult to directly compare the impact of reduced OPC content on both compressive strength and CO2 reduction. This study proposes a new index, carbon intensity per unit compressive strength (CIt.MPa), which integrates the CO2 emission factor of cement with the 28-day mortar compressive strength. To validate the concept, blended cements composed of OPC, SP, and LSP were produced and tested. Results show that while the CO2 emission factor decreased linearly with increasing SCM content, compressive strength was partially recovered due to the latent hydraulic reactivity of SP. The CIt.MPa index effectively differentiated cements with similar strength but lower carbon emissions, demonstrating its practical potential for concrete users in selecting eco-friendly cement. This approach provides a quantitative tool for balancing mechanical performance and sustainability, contributing to the development of greener concrete.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials · Smart Materials for Construction
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. ABNT-NBR 7215. (2019). Portland Cement—Determination of Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Test Specimens. Brazilian Association of Technical Standards.
2. Althoey, F., Ansari, W. S., Sufian, M., & Deifalla, A. F. (2023). Advancements in low-carbon concrete as a construction material for the sustainable built environment. Developments in the Built Environment, 16, Article 100284.10.1016/j.dibe.2023.100284 ↗
3. American Cement Association. (2021). Roadmap to carbon neutrality. https://www.cement.org/a-sustainable-future/roadmap-to-carbon-neutrality/
4. ASTM C109/C109M-20. (2021). Standard test method for compressive strength of hydraulic cement mortars (Using 2-in. Or (50 mm) Cube Specimens). ASTM International.
5. Barcelo, L., Kline, J., Walenta, G., & Gartner, E. (2014). Cement and carbon emissions. Materials and Structures, 47(6), 1055–1065. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-013-0114-510.1617/s11527-013-0114-5 ↗
6. Bederina, M., Makhloufi, Z., & Bouziani, T. (2011). Effect of limestone fillers the physic-mechanical properties of limestone concrete. Physics Procedia, 21, 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2011.10.00510.1016/j.phpro.2011.10.005 ↗
7. Bilodeau, A., & Malhotra, V. M. (2000). High-volume fly ash system: Concrete solution for sustainable development. Materials Journal, 97(1), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.14359/80410.14359/804 ↗
8. Briki, Y., Zajac, M., Haha, M. B., & Scrivener, K. (2021). Impact of limestone fineness on cement hydration at early age. Cement and Concrete Research, 147, Article 106515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.10651510.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106515 ↗
9. Cahyani, R. A. T., Rusdianto, Y., IOP Publishing. (2021). An overview of behaviour of concrete with granulated blast furnace slag as partial cement replacement. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 933(No. 1), Article 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/933/1/01200610.1088/1755-1315/933/1/012006 ↗
10. Canadell, J. G., Le Quéré, C., Raupach, M. R., Field, C. B., Buitenhuis, E. T., Ciais, P., & Marland, G. (2007). Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(47), 18866–18870. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.070273710410.1073/pnas.0702737104 ↗
11. Cantini, A., Leoni, L., De Carlo, F., Salvio, M., Martini, C., & Martini, F. (2021). Technological energy efficiency improvements in cement industries. Sustainability, 13(7), 3810. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1307381010.3390/su13073810 ↗
12. CEMBUREAU The European Cement Association. (2020). Cementing the European green deal, reaching climate neutrality along the cement and concrete value chain by 2050.
13. Cembureau. (2021). From ambition to deployment—Our 2050 roadmap. Brussels, Belgium: The European Cement Association. https://cembureau.eu/media/ulxj5lyh/cembureau-net-zero-roadmap.pdf
14. Circular Ecology Ltd. (2024). ICE (Inventory of Carbon & Energy) database - ICE cement, mortar and concrete model (Version 1.2). Accessed June 19, 2025.
15. Damineli, B. L., Kemeid, F. M., Aguiar, P. S., & John, V. M. (2010). Measuring the eco-efficiency of cement use. Cement and Concrete Composites, 32(8), 555–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2010.07.00910.1016/j.cemconcomp.2010.07.009 ↗
16. Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI). (2016a). Global Cement Database on CO₂ and Energy Information, GNR: Cement plant power consumption for grey and white cement world-weighted average all plants 2016 coverage 19%.
17. Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI). (2016b). Global cement database on CO₂ and energy information, GNR: Clinker to cementitious ratios world-weighted average all plants 2016 coverage 19%.
18. Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI). (2016c). Global cement database on CO₂ and energy information, GNR: Gross CO₂ emissions, CO₂ emission per tonne of clinker world-weighted average all plants 2016 coverage 19%.
19. Dávila, J. G., Sacchi, R., & Pizzol, M. (2023). Preconditions for achieving carbon neutrality in cement production through CCUS. Journal of Cleaner Production, 425, Article 138935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.13893510.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138935 ↗
20. European Cement Research Academy (ECRA). (2008). Release and uptake of carbon dioxide in the life cycle of cement (Technical Report No. TR-ECRA 0004/2008).
21. Evans, L., & Mutter, M. (2019). Environmental ranking of cement. Cement and its Applications, 4, 24–27. Accessed June 19, 2025.
22. Flower, D. J., & Sanjayan, J. G. (2007). Greenhouse gas emissions due to concrete manufacture. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12, 282–288. https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2007.05.32710.1065/lca2007.05.327 ↗
23. Gao, T., Shen, L., Shen, M., Chen, F., Liu, L., & Gao, L. (2015). Analysis on differences of carbon dioxide emission from cement production and their major determinants. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103, 160–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.02610.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.026 ↗
24. Gao, T., Shen, L., Shen, M., Liu, L., & Chen, F. (2016). Analysis of material flow and consumption in cement production process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 553–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.05410.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.054 ↗
25. Gartner, E., & Sui, T. (2018). Alternative cement clinkers. Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.00210.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.002 ↗
26. Hendriks, C. A., Worrell, E., de Jager, D., Blok, K., & Riemer, P. (2004). Emission reduction of greenhouse gases from the cement industry, greenhouse gas control technologies conference. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008043018-8/50150-810.1016/B978-008043018-8/50150-8 ↗
27. IEA. (2018). Technology roadmap—Low-carbon transition in the cement industry. IEA. Accessed June 19, 2025.
28. Ishak, S. A., & Hashim, H. (2015). Low carbon measures for cement plant—A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103, 260–274.10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.003 ↗
29. Juenger, M. C., & Siddique, R. (2015). Recent advances in understanding the role of supplementary cementitious materials in concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, 78, 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.03.01810.1016/j.cemconres.2015.03.018 ↗
30. Kajaste, R., & Hurme, M. (2016). Cement industry greenhouse gas emissions–management options and abatement cost. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 4041–4052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.05510.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.055 ↗
31. Kang, M., & Kang, S. (2022). Energy intensity efficiency and the effect of changes in GDP and CO2 emission. Energy Efficiency, 15(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-021-10002-z10.1007/s12053-021-10002-z ↗
32. Khozin, V., Khokhryakov, O., & Nizamov, R. (2020, July). A «carbon footprint» of low water demand cements and cement-based concrete. In IOP conference series: Materials science and engineering (Vol. 890, No. 1, p. 012105). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/890/1/01210510.1088/1757-899X/890/1/012105 ↗
33. Latawiec, R., Woyciechowski, P., & Kowalski, K. J. (2018). Sustainable concrete performance—CO2-emission. Environments, 5(2), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments502002710.3390/environments5020027 ↗
34. Li, C., Li, J., Ren, Q., Zheng, Q., & Jiang, Z. (2023). Durability of concrete coupled with life cycle assessment: Review and perspective. Cement and Concrete Composites, 139, Article 105041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2023.10504110.1016/j.cemconcomp.2023.105041 ↗
35. McCarthy, M. J., & Dhir, R. K. (2005). Development of high volume fly ash cements for use in concrete construction. Fuel, 84(11), 1423–1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2004.08.02910.1016/j.fuel.2004.08.029 ↗
36. Meijssen, M., Becattini, V., & Mazzotti, M. (2024). Integrated carbon capture and utilization in the cement industry: A comparative study. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 12(7), 2709–2718. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c0708110.1021/acssuschemeng.3c07081 ↗
37. Mikulčić, H., Klemeš, J. J., Vujanović, M., Urbaniec, K., & Duić, N. (2016). Reducing greenhouse gasses emissions by fostering the deployment of alternative raw materials and energy sources in the cleaner cement manufacturing process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.14510.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.145 ↗
38. Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea (KR). (2021). National GHG Inventory. Accessed June 10, 2025
39. Müller, H. S., Haist, M., & Vogel, M. (2014). Assessment of the sustainability potential of concrete and concrete structures considering their environmental impact, performance and lifetime. Construction and Building Materials, 67, 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.01.03910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.01.039 ↗
40. Nie, S., Zhou, J., Yang, F., Lan, M., Li, J., Zhang, Z., & Sanjayan, J. G. (2022). Analysis of theoretical carbon dioxide emissions from cement production: Methodology and application. Journal of Cleaner Production, 334, Article 130270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.13027010.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130270 ↗
41. Papadakis, V. G., & Tsimas, S. (2002). Supplementary cementing materials in concrete: Part I: Efficiency and design. Cement and Concrete Research, 32(10), 1525–1532.10.1016/S0008-8846(02)00827-X ↗
42. Paustian, K., Ravindranath, N. H., & van Amstel, A. R. (Eds.). (2006). 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories: Vol. 4. Agriculture, forestry and other land use, Part 2. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Accessed June 19, 2025.
43. Schneider, M. (2015). Process technology for efficient and sustainable cement production. Cement and Concrete Research, 78, 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.05.01410.1016/j.cemconres.2015.05.014 ↗
44. Schneider, M. (2019). The cement industry on the way to a low-carbon future. Cement and Concrete Research, 124, Article 105792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.10579210.1016/j.cemconres.2019.105792 ↗
45. Scrivener, K. L., John, V. M., & Gartner, E. M. (2018). Eco-efficient cements: Potential economically viable solutions for a low-CO2 cement-based materials industry. Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 2–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.03.01510.1016/j.cemconres.2018.03.015 ↗
46. Sezer, G. İ. (2012). Compressive strength and sulfate resistance of limestone and/or silica fume mortars. Construction and Building Materials, 26(1), 613–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.06.06410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.06.064 ↗
47. Shi, C., Jiménez, A. F., & Palomo, A. (2011). New cements for the 21st century: The pursuit of an alternative to Portland cement. Cement and Concrete Research, 41(7), 750–763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2011.03.01610.1016/j.cemconres.2011.03.016 ↗
48. Shukla, P. R., Skea, J., Slade, R., Al Khourdajie, A., van Diemen, R., & Malley, J. (Eds.). (2022). Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press.
49. Sim, S., Oh, J., & Jeong, B. (2015). Measuring greenhouse gas emissions for the transportation sector in Korea. Annals of Operations Research, 230, 129–151.10.1007/s10479-013-1452-y ↗
50. Suresh, D., & Nagaraju, K. (2015). Ground granulated blast slag (GGBS) in concrete–a review. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 12(4), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.9790/1684-1246768210.9790/1684-12467682 ↗
51. Vieira, D. R., Calmon, J. L., & Coelho, F. Z. (2016). Life cycle assessment (LCA) applied to the manufacturing of common and ecological concrete: A review. Construction and Building Materials, 124, 656–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.07.12510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.07.125 ↗
52. Wang, D., Shi, C., Farzadnia, N., Shi, Z., Jia, H., & Ou, Z. (2018). A review on use of limestone powder in cement-based materials: Mechanism, hydration and microstructures. Construction and Building Materials, 181, 659–672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.06.07510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.06.075 ↗
53. Watari, T., Cao, Z., Hata, S., & Hansai, K. (2022). Efficient use of cement and concrete to reduce reliance on supply-side technologies for net-zero emissions. Nature Communications, 13, 4158. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31806-210.1038/s41467-022-31806-2 ↗
54. Weisser, D. (2007). A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies. Energy, 32(9), 1543–1559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.01.00810.1016/j.energy.2007.01.008 ↗
55. Worrell, E., Price, L., Martin, N., Hendriks, C., & Meida, L. O. (2001). Carbon dioxide emissions from the global cement industry. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 26(1), 303–329. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.26.1.30310.1146/annurev.energy.26.1.303 ↗