Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Life cycle assessment of Portland cement production in Myanmar

  • BUILDING COMPONENTS AND BUILDINGS
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Cement manufacturing is associated with global and local environmental issues. Many studies have employed life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental impacts from cement production and investigate measures to improve environmental performance. However, there have not been any scientific studies assessing the impacts of the Myanmar cement industry on the environment. In this study, environmental impacts of the Myanmar cement industry were evaluated using LCA and key contributors to major environmental impacts were identified.

Methods

This study follows the principles outlined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO 14040:2006 and ISO 14044:2006) to conduct LCA of the cement industry in Myanmar. The functional unit considered is 1 tonne of Portland cement, and a cradle-to-gate analysis was conducted. The input data (raw materials, energy, electricity, and transportation) were collected from 8 cement plants in Myanmar, but data about raw material extraction were adapted from the literature. The output data (emissions to air) were estimated based on the IPCC guidelines, the EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebooks and the US EPA Detonation of explosives; an AP-42 update. LCAs of specific cement plants were implemented, and both midpoint environmental impacts and endpoint damage categories were assessed based on the ReCiPe 2016 method.

Results and discussion

The results showed that major environmental impacts from the Myanmar cement industry include climate change, photochemical oxidant formation damaging ecosystem quality, fine particulate matter formation, terrestrial acidification and fossil resource scarcity. They were assessed to account for about 80, 0.5, 18, 0.6 and 0.4% of the overall environmental burdens from cement manufacturing, respectively. Human health damage was the most affected category. Key contributors to these major impacts were found to be CO2, NOx, SO2 and PM2.5 emissions, mostly from the clinker production step. In order to mitigate these environmental impacts and initiate sustainable development in this industrial sector in Myanmar, appropriate mitigation options, including fuel and energy saving, and the use of alternative fuels and materials need to be considered.

Conclusion

Through this study, the contribution of the Myanmar cement industry to environmental impacts in a life cycle perspective was investigated and key environmental hotspots were identified in order to suggest mitigation options for the sustainable development of this industrial sector. Based on the study results, some improvement measures should be considered, which include upgrading the cement manufacturing process, increasing the share of clinker substitutes, utilizing alternative fuels, optimizing energy efficiency and implementing energy recovery technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ali MB, Saidur R, Hossain MS (2011) A review on emission analysis in cement industries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15(5):2252–2261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Amrina E, Vilsi AL (2015) Key performance indicators for sustainable manufacturing evaluation in cement industry. Procedia CIRP 26:19–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benhelal E, Zahedi G, Shamsaei E, Bahadori A (2013) Global strategies and potentials to curb CO2 emissions in cement industry. J Clean Prod 51:142–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boesch ME, Hellweg S (2010) Identifying improvement potentials in cement production with life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 44:9143–9149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Çankaya S, Pekey B (2019) A comparative life cycle assessment for sustainable cement production in Turkey. J Environ Manag 249:109362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cembureau_The European Cement Association (2018) 2018 Activity report. https://cembureau.eu/media/1818/ actvity-report-2018.pdf. Accessed 28 January 2020

  • Chen W, Hong J, Xu C (2014) Pollutants generated by cement production in China, their impacts, and the potential for environmental improvement. J Clean Prod 103:61–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damtoft JS, Lukasik J, Herfort D, Sorrentino D, Gartner EM (2008) Sustainable development and climate change initiatives. Cem Concr Res 38:115–127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Devi KS, Lakshmi VV, Alakanandana A (2017) Impacts of cement industry on environment—an overview. Asia Pac J Res I(LVII):156–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Ditsele O (2010) Application of life cycle assessment to estimate environmental impacts of surface coal mining. Master Thesis, Missouri University of Science and Technology. http://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_ theses/ 4801. Accessed 20 January 2020

  • European Commission (2013) Best available techniques (BAT) reference document for the production of cement, lime and magnesium oxide. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/reference-reports/best-available-techniques-bat-reference-document-production-cement-lime-and-magnesium-oxide. Accessed 8 December 2019

  • European Environmental Agency (2019) EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eeaguidebook-2019. Accessed 19 October 2019

  • Feiz R, Ammenberg J, Baas L, Eklund M, Helgstrand A, Marshall R (2015) Improving the CO2 performance of cement, part I: utilizing life-cycle assessment and key performance indicators to assess development within the cement industry. J Clean Prod 98:272–281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gan VJL, Chan CM, Tse KT, Lo IMC, Cheng JCP (2017) A comparative analysis of embodied carbon in high-rise buildings regarding different design parameters. J Clean Prod 161:663–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Gusano D, Herrera I, Garrain D, Lechon Y, Cabal H (2015) Life cycle assessment of the Spanish cement industry: implementation of environmental-friendly solutions. Clean Techn Environ Policy 17:59–73

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gursel AP (2014) Life cycle assessment of concrete: decision-support tool and case study application. PhD Dissertation, University of California. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5q24d64s. Accessed 30 March 2020

  • Gutierrez AS, Eras JJC, Gaviria CA, Caneghem JV, Vandecasteele C (2017) Improved selection of the functional unit in environmental impact assessment of cement. J Clean Prod 168:463–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong J, Li X (2011) Environmental assessment of sewage sludge as secondary raw material in cement production—a case study in China. Waste Manag 31:1364–1371

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huntzinger DN, Eatmon TD (2009) A life-cycle assessment of Portland cement manufacturing: comparing the traditional process with alternative technologies. J Clean Prod 17:668–675

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2006) IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/ Accessed 26 September 2018

  • Josa A, Aguado A, Heino A, Byars E, Cardim A (2004) Comparative analysis of available life cycle inventories of cement in the EU. Cem Concr Res 34:1313–1320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Josa A, Aguado A, Cardim A, Byars E (2007) Comparative analysis of the life cycle impact assessment of available cement inventories in the EU. Cem Concr Res 37:781–788

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karstensen KH, Saha PK (2017) Current cement production and potential for coprocessing of wastes in Myanmar. International Cement Review:104–106. https://www.sintef.no/en/publications/publication/?pubid=CRIStin+1567344. Accessed 10 Apr 2019

  • Kittipongvises S (2017) Assessment of environmental impacts of limestone quarrying operations in Thailand. Environ Clim Technol 20:67–83

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Cui S, Nie Z, Gong X, Wang Z, Itsubo N (2015) The LCA of Portland cement production in China. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:117–127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marceau ML, Nisbet MA, VanGeem MG (2006) Life cycle inventory of Portland cement manufacture. SN2095b. Portland Cement Association, Skokie

    Google Scholar 

  • Md. Hossain U, Poon CS, Lo IMC, Cheng JCP (2017) Comparative LCA on using waste materials in the cement industry: a Hong Kong case study. Resour Conserv Recycl 120:199–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulcic H, Klemes JJ, Vujanovic M, Urbanicc K (2016) Reducing greenhouse gases emissions by fostering the deployment of alternative raw materials and energy sources in the cleaner cement manufacturing process. J Clean Prod 136(B):119–132

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Myanmar’s Initial National Communication Report (2012) Ministry of Environmental Conservation and Forestry. https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/submissions/indc/SubmissionPages/submissions.aspx. Accessed 19 April 2019

  • Myanmar Statistical Yearbook (2018) Ministry of Planning and Finance. https://www.mmsis.gov.mm/sub_menu/statistics/fileDb.jsp. Accessed 5 Feb 2020

  • Morsali S (2016) Emissions from Portland cement production using life cycle assessment inventory and method. Environmental and Energy Economics 1(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.eee.20160101.11

  • Moya JA, Pardo N, Mercier A (2010) Energy efficiency and CO2 emissions: prospective scenarios for the cement industry. JRC-IE Scientific and Technical Reports. European Commission, the Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.2790/25732

  • Nagrockienė D, Girskas G, Skripkiūnas G (2017) Properties of concrete modified with mineral additives. Constr Build Mater 135:37–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norgate T, Haque N (2010) Energy and greenhouse gas impacts of mining and mineral processing operations. J Clean Prod 18:266–274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ReCiPe (2016) v1.1 Characterization and normalization factors. https://www.rivm.nl/documenten/recipe2016cfsv 1120180117. Accessed 18 April 2019

  • Rosyid A, Boedisantoso R, Iswara AP (2020) Environmental impact studied using life cycle assessment on cement industry. IOP C Ser Earth Env 506:012024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/506/1/012024

  • Song D, Yang J, Chen B, Hayat T, Alsaedi A (2016) Life-cycle environmental impact analysis of a typical cement production chain. Appl Energy 164:916–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spielmann M, Bauer C, Dones R, Tuchschmid M (2007) Transport services. Ecoinvent report No. 14. Swiss Center for Life Cycle Inventories, Dubendorf

  • Stafford FN, Raupp-Pereira F, Labrincha JA, Hotza D (2016) Life cycle assessment of the production of cement: a Brazilian case study. J Clean Prod 137:1293–1299

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suárez S, Roca X, Gasso S (2016) Product-specific life cycle assessment of recycled gypsum as a replacement for natural gypsum in ordinary Portland cement: application to the Spanish context. J Clean Prod 117:150–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang Q, Chen X, Xia X, Wang L, Wang H, Jin L, Yan Z (2018) Scenario study on PM emission reduction in cement industry. IOP C Ser Earth Env 111:012014 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/111/1/012014/meta. Accessed 5 Feb 2020

  • Electric Power Annual 2018 (2019) US Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/. Accessed 5 Feb 2020

  • US EPA (1979) Detonation of explosives; an AP-42 update. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9100A0MG.TXT. Accessed 18 October 2019

  • Valderrama C, Granados R, Cortina JL, Gasol CM, Guillem M, Josa A (2012) Implementation of best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-cycle assessment study. J Clean Prod 25:60–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Zhu Q, Geng Y (2013) Trajectory and driving factors for GHG emissions in the Chinese cement industry. J Clean Prod 53:252–260

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yong-Long L, Jing G, Gui-Zhen H (2015) Industrial transformation and green production to reduce environmental emissions: taking cement industry as a case. Adv Clim Chang Res 6:202–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zabalza I, Valero A, Aranda A (2011) Life cycle assessment of building materials: comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Build Environ 46:1133–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on the research work funded by the Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, Center of Excellence on Energy Technology and Environment at King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand. Also, sincere gratitude is expressed to the Thailand International Cooperation Agency (TICA) for the financial support provided under the Thailand International Postgraduate Programme. Cement plants in Mandalay region, Myanmar, are also gratefully acknowledged for their active participation in providing invaluable data for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Sebastien Bonnet or Shabbir H. Gheewala.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Holger Wallbaum

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 21 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tun, T.Z., Bonnet, S. & Gheewala, S.H. Life cycle assessment of Portland cement production in Myanmar. Int J Life Cycle Assess 25, 2106–2121 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01818-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01818-5

Keywords

Navigation