CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,040Climate Change Policy and EconomicsEnergy Efficiency and ManagementIron and Steelmaking Processes

Technologies and policies to decarbonize global industry: Review and assessment of mitigation drivers through 2070

Open access
Rissman, Jeffrey, Bataille, Chris, Masanet, Eric, Aden, Nate, Morrow, William R., Zhou, Nan, Elliott, Neal, Dell, Rebecca +22 more·2020·Applied Energy
DOI 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114848
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Fully decarbonizing global industry is essential to achieving climate stabilization, and reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050–2070 is necessary to limit global warming to 2 °C. This paper assembles and evaluates technical and policy interventions, both on the supply side and on the demand side. It identifies measures that, employed together, can achieve net zero industrial emissions in the required timeframe. Key supply-side technologies include energy efficiency (especially at the system level), carbon capture, electrification, and zero-carbon hydrogen as a heat source and chemical feedstock. There are also promising technologies specific to each of the three top-emitting industries: cement, iron & steel, and chemicals & plastics. These include cement admixtures and alternative chemistries, several technological routes for zero-carbon steelmaking, and novel chemical catalysts and separation technologies. Crucial demand-side approaches include material-efficient design, reductions in material waste, substituting low-carbon for high-carbon materials, and circular economy interventions (such as improving product longevity, reusability, ease of refurbishment, and recyclability). Strategic, well-designed policy can accelerate innovation and provide incentives for technology deployment. High-value policies include carbon pricing with border adjustments or other price signals; robust government support for research, development, and deployment; and energy efficiency or emissions standards. These core policies should be supported by labeling and government procurement of low-carbon products, data collection and disclosure requirements, and recycling incentives. In implementing these policies, care must be taken to ensure a just transition for displaced workers and affected communities. Similarly, decarbonization must complement the human and economic development of low- and middle-income countries.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114848

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Challenges remain in validating Digital Twin results across different real-world settings.

    “Several studies [25][26][27][28][29][30] have demonstrated these benefits, yet challenges remain in validating the results across different realworld settings.”

    From Analysis of Digital Twin Applications in Energy Efficiency: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [27]

    Section 5.2 discusses digital manufacturing and additive manufacturing, but not Digital Twins or validation of their results across real-world settings. Searches for “digital twin validation real-world settings” and “digital twins” found no passage addressing that challenge; the broader RD&D barriers in section 6.2.3 do not establish it. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Real-time monitoring and optimization of HVAC systems in smart buildings reduce energy consumption by up to 30%.

    “HVAC systems in smart buildings: Real-time monitoring and optimization reduce energy consumption by up to 30%;”

    From Analysis of Digital Twin Applications in Energy Efficiency: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [27]

    Section 4.3.2 reports 10–30% energy savings from controlling industrial boilers to match steam demand, not from monitoring or optimizing HVAC in smart buildings. Section 4.3.1 discusses sensors and process controls for industrial energy efficiency. Searches for HVAC, smart buildings, real-time monitoring, and 30% savings found no passage addressing the claimed HVAC result; page numbers were unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 131

  1. U.S. Geological Survey. Minerals yearbook. vol. 1. Washington, D.C.; 2018.
  2. Robertson GL. Food packaging: principles and practice. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group; 2006.
  3. Bolinger M, Seel J. Utility-scale solar: empirical trends in project technology, cost, performance, and PPA pricing in the United States -2018 Edition; 2018.
  4. Bui M, Adjiman CS, Bardow A, Anthony EJ, Boston A, Brown S, et al. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward. Energy Environ Sci 2018;11:1062-176. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7EE02342A. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Kramer GJ, Haigh M. No quick switch to low-carbon energy. Nature 2009;462:568-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/462568a. · DOI
  6. Gutowski TG, Allwood JM, Herrmann C, Sahni S. A Global assessment of manu- facturing: economic development, energy use, carbon emissions, and the potential for energy efficiency and materials recycling. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2013;38:81-106. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-041112-110510. · DOI
  7. Jongsung S, Lee KH. Sustainable concrete technology. Civ Eng Dimens 2015;17:158-65. https://doi.org/10.9744/ced.17.3.158-165. · DOI
  8. Miller SA, Horvath A, Monteiro PJM. Readily implementable techniques can cut annual CO2 emissions from the production of concrete by over 20%. Environ Res Lett 2016;11:074029. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/7/074029. · DOI
  9. Miller SA, Horvath A, Monteiro PJM. Impacts of booming concrete production on water resources worldwide. Nat Sustain 2018;1:69. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41893-017-0009-5. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Monteiro PJM, Miller SA, Horvath A. Towards sustainable concrete. Nat Mater 2017;16:698-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4930. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Miller SA, John VM, Pacca SA, Horvath A. Carbon dioxide reduction potential in the global cement industry by 2050. Cem Concr Res 2018;114:115-24. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.08.026. · DOI
  12. Mehta PK, Monteiro PJM. Concrete microstructure, properties, and materials. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2006.
  13. John VM, Damineli BL, Quattrone M, Pileggi RG. Fillers in cementitious materials -experience, recent advances and future potential. Cem Concr Res 2018;114:65-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.09.013. · DOI
  14. Lothenbach B, Scrivener K, Hooton RD. Supplementary cementitious materials. Cem Concr Res 2011;41:1244-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2010.12. 001. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Cheung J, Roberts L, Liu J. Admixtures and sustainability. Cem Concr Res 2018;114:79-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.04.011. · DOI
  16. Juenger MCG, Siddique R. Recent advances in understanding the role of supple- mentary cementitious materials in concrete. Cem Concr Res 2015;78:71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.03.018. · DOI
  17. Provis JL. Alkali-activated materials. Cem Concr Res 2018;114:40-8. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.009. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Gartner E, Sui T. Alternative cement clinkers. Cem Concr Res 2018;114:27-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.002. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Miller SA, Myers RJ. Environmental impacts of alternative cement binders. Environ Sci Technol 2020;54:677-86. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b05550. · DOI
  20. Zajac M, Skibsted J, Skocek J, Durdzinski P, Bullerjahn F, Ben Haha M. Phase assemblage and microstructure of cement paste subjected to enforced, wet car- bonation. Cem Concr Res 2020;130:105990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cemconres.2020.105990. · DOI
  21. Andersson R, Fridh K, Stripple H, Häglund M. Calculating CO2 uptake for existing concrete structures during and after service life. Environ Sci Technol 2013;47:11625-33. https://doi.org/10.1021/es401775w. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Fischedick M, Roy J, Abdel-Aziz A, Acquaye A, Allwood J, Ceron J-P, et al. Industry. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change (fifth assessment report), Cambridge, U.K.: IPCC; 2014. p. 739-810.
  23. Allwood JM, Cullen JM. Sustainable materials without the hot air. Cambridge, England: UIT Cambridge Ltd.; 2015.
  24. DeRousseau MA, Kasprzyk JR, Srubar WV. Computational design optimization of concrete mixtures: a review. Cem Concr Res 2018;109:42-53. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.cemconres.2018.04.007. · DOI
  25. Fan C, Miller SA. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions for prescribed concrete compressive strength. Constr Build Mater 2018;167:918-28. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.02.092. · DOI
  26. Kourehpaz P, Miller SA. Eco-efficient design indices for reinforced concrete members. Mater Struct 2019;52:96. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-019-1398-x. · DOI
  27. Habert G, Arribe D, Dehove T, Espinasse L, Le Roy R. Reducing environmental impact by increasing the strength of concrete: quantification of the improvement to concrete bridges. J Clean Prod 2012;35:250-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2012.05.028. · DOI
  28. Cai W, Wan L, Jiang Y, Wang C, Lin L. Short-lived buildings in china: impacts on water, energy, and carbon emissions. Environ Sci Technol 2015;49:13921-8. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b02333. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Miller SA. The role of cement service-life on the efficient use of resources. Environ Res Lett 2020;15:024004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab639d. · DOI
  30. Zhang Q, Xu J, Wang Y, Hasanbeigi A, Zhang W, Lu H, et al. Comprehensive as- sessment of energy conservation and CO2 emissions mitigation in China's iron and steel industry based on dynamic material flows. Appl Energy 2018;209:251-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.084. · DOI
  31. Griffin PW, Hammond GP. Industrial energy use and carbon emissions reduction in the iron and steel sector: a UK perspective. Appl Energy 2019;249:109-25. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.148. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Chen Q, Gu Y, Tang Z, Wei W, Sun Y. Assessment of low-carbon iron and steel production with CO2 recycling and utilization technologies: a case study in China. Appl Energy 2018;220:192-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03. 043. · DOI
  33. Fischedick M, Marzinkowski J, Winzer P, Weigel M. Techno-economic evaluation of innovative steel production technologies. J Clean Prod 2014;84:563-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.063. · DOI
  34. Bataille C, Åhman M, Neuhoff K, Nilsson LJ, Fischedick M, Lechtenböhmer S, et al. A review of technology and policy deep decarbonization pathway options for making energy-intensive industry production consistent with the Paris Agreement. J Clean Prod 2018;187:960-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.107. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Smil V. Still the iron age. Elsevier; 2016. 10.1016/C2014-0-04576-5. · DOI
  36. Weigel M, Fischedick M, Marzinkowski J, Winzer P. Multicriteria analysis of pri- mary steelmaking technologies. J Clean Prod 2016;112:1064-76. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.132. · DOI
  37. Vogl V, Åhman M, Nilsson LJ. Assessment of hydrogen direct reduction for fossil- free steelmaking. J Clean Prod 2018;203:736-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2018.08.279. · DOI
  38. Otto A, Robinius M, Grube T, Schiebahn S, Praktiknjo A, Stolten D. Power-to-steel: reducing CO2 through the integration of renewable energy and hydrogen into the German steel industry. Energies 2017;10:451. https://doi.org/10.3390/ en10040451. · DOI
  39. Wiencke J, Lavelaine H, Panteix P-J, Petitjean C, Rapin C. Electrolysis of iron in a molten oxide electrolyte. J Appl Electrochem 2018;48:115-26. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10800-017-1143-5. · DOI
  40. Piketty M-G, Wichert M, Fallot A, Aimola L. Assessing land availability to produce biomass for energy: the case of Brazilian charcoal for steel making. Biomass Bioenergy 2009;33:180-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.06.002. · DOI
  41. Sonter LJ, Barrett DJ, Moran CJ, Soares-Filho BS. Carbon emissions due to de- forestation for the production of charcoal used in Brazil's steel industry. Nat Clim Change 2015;5:359-63. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2515. · DOI
  42. Rubin ES, Davison JE, Herzog HJ. The cost of CO2 capture and storage. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 2015;40:378-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015. 05.018. · DOI · Paper page
  43. Wittich K, Krämer M, Bottke N, Schunk SA. Catalytic dry reforming of methane: insights from model systems. ChemCatChem 2020;n/a. 10.1002/cctc.201902142. · DOI
  44. Bühler F, Guminski A, Gruber A, Nguyen T-V, von Roon S, Elmegaard B. Evaluation of energy saving potentials, costs and uncertainties in the chemical industry in Germany. Appl Energy 2018;228:2037-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. apenergy.2018.07.045. · DOI
  45. Wyman C, Yang B. Cellulosic biomass could help meet California's transportation fuel needs. Calif Agric 2009;63:185-90.
  46. Alonso DM, Hakim SH, Zhou S, Won W, Hosseinaei O, Tao J, et al. Increasing the revenue from lignocellulosic biomass: maximizing feedstock utilization. Sci Adv 2017;3:e1603301. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1603301. · DOI
  47. Huckestein B, Plesnivy T. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Kunststoffrecyclings. Chemie in unserer Zeit 2000;34:276-86. 10.1002/1521-3781(200010) 34:5 < 276::AID-CIUZ276 > 3.0.CO;2-Q. · DOI
  48. Singh S, Sharma S, Umar A, Mehta SK, Bhatti MS, Kansal SK. Recycling of waste poly(ethylene terephthalate) bottles by alkaline hydrolysis and recovery of pure nanospindle-shaped terephthalic acid; 2018. info: 10.1166/jnn.2018.15363. · DOI
  49. Caballero BM, de Marco I, Adrados A, López-Urionabarrenechea A, Solar J, Gastelu N. Possibilities and limits of pyrolysis for recycling plastic rich waste streams rejected from phones recycling plants. Waste Manage 2016;57:226-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.01.002. · DOI
  50. Bender M, Roussiere T, Schelling H, Schuster S, Schwab E. Coupled production of steel and chemicals. Chem Ing Tech 2018;90:1782-805. https://doi.org/10.1002/ cite.201800048. · DOI
  51. Jones E, Qadir M, van Vliet MTH, Smakhtin V, Kang S. The state of desalination and brine production: a global outlook. Sci Total Environ 2019;657:1343-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.076. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Sun DT, Gasilova N, Yang S, Oveisi E, Queen WL. Rapid, selective extraction of trace amounts of gold from complex water mixtures with a metal-organic frame- work (MOF)/polymer composite. J Am Chem Soc 2018;140:16697-703. https:// doi.org/10.1021/jacs.8b09555. · DOI
  53. Ritter SK. Putting distillation out of business in the chemical industry. Chem Eng News 2017;95:18-21.
  54. Boot-Handford ME, Abanades JC, Anthony EJ, Blunt MJ, Brandani S, Dowell NM, et al. Carbon capture and storage update. Energy Environ Sci 2013;7:130-89. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3EE42350F. · DOI · Paper page
  55. Alcalde J, Flude S, Wilkinson M, Johnson G, Edlmann K, Bond CE, et al. Estimating geological CO2 storage security to deliver on climate mitigation. Nat Commun 2018;9:2201. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04423-1. · DOI · Paper page
  56. Supekar SD, Skerlos SJ. Reassessing the efficiency penalty from carbon capture in coal-fired power plants. Environ Sci Technol 2015;49:12576-84. https://doi.org/ 10.1021/acs.est.5b03052. · DOI
  57. Lelieveld J, Klingmüller K, Pozzer A, Pöschl U, Fnais M, Daiber A, et al. Cardiovascular disease burden from ambient air pollution in Europe reassessed using novel hazard ratio functions. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1590-6. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz135. · DOI
  58. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Negative emissions technologies and reliable sequestration: a research Agenda. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2018. 10.17226/25259. · DOI · Paper page
  59. Lechtenböhmer S, Nilsson LJ, Åhman M, Schneider C. Decarbonising the energy intensive basic materials industry through electrification -implications for future EU electricity demand. Energy 2016;115:1623-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. energy.2016.07.110. · DOI
  60. Gorre J, Ortloff F, van Leeuwen C. Production costs for synthetic methane in 2030 and 2050 of an optimized Power-to-Gas plant with intermediate hydrogen storage. Appl Energy 2019;253:113594https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113594. · DOI
  61. Leeson D, Mac Dowell N, Shah N, Petit C, Fennell PS. A Techno-economic analysis and systematic review of carbon capture and storage (CCS) applied to the iron and steel, cement, oil refining and pulp and paper industries, as well as other high purity sources. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 2017;61:71-84. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ijggc.2017.03.020. · DOI
  62. Abbas HF, Wan Daud WMA. Hydrogen production by methane decomposition: a review. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010;35:1160-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijhydene.2009.11.036. · DOI
  63. Ashik UPM, Wan Daud WMA, Abbas HF. Production of greenhouse gas free hy- drogen by thermocatalytic decomposition of methane -a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;44:221-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.025. · DOI
  64. Dagle RA, Dagle V, Bearden MD, Holladay JD, Krause TR, Ahmed S. An overview of natural gas conversion technologies for co-production of hydrogen and value- added solid carbon products. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); 2017. 10.2172/1411934. · DOI
  65. Deng X, Wang H, Huang H, Ouyang M. Hydrogen flow chart in China. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010;35:6475-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.03. 051. · DOI
  66. Young JL, Steiner MA, Döscher H, France RM, Turner JA, Deutsch TG. Direct solar- to-hydrogen conversion via inverted metamorphic multi-junction semiconductor architectures. Nat Energy 2017;2:17028. https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy. 2017.28. · DOI
  67. Sokol KP, Robinson WE, Warnan J, Kornienko N, Nowaczyk MM, Ruff A, et al. Bias-free photoelectrochemical water splitting with photosystem II on a dye-sen- sitized photoanode wired to hydrogenase. Nat Energy 2018;3:944. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41560-018-0232-y. · DOI
  68. Stoppel L, Fehling T, Sler TG, Baake E, Wetzel T. Carbon dioxide free production of hydrogen. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng 2017;228:012016. 10.1088/1757-899X/ 228/1/012016. · DOI
  69. Bartels JR, Pate MB, Olson NK. An economic survey of hydrogen production from conventional and alternative energy sources. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010;35:8371-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.04.035. · DOI
  70. Nikolaidis P, Poullikkas A. A comparative overview of hydrogen production pro- cesses. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;67:597-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. rser.2016.09.044. · DOI · Paper page
  71. Zheng J, Liu X, Xu P, Liu P, Zhao Y, Yang J. Development of high pressure gaseous hydrogen storage technologies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2012;37:1048-57. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.02.125. · DOI
  72. Dodds PE, Demoullin S. Conversion of the UK gas system to transport hydrogen. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2013;38:7189-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene. 2013.03.070. · DOI
  73. Melaina MW, Antonia O, Penev M. Blending hydrogen into natural gas pipeline networks: a review of key issues. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2013.
  74. Shinnar R. The hydrogen economy, fuel cells, and electric cars. Technol Soc 2003;25:455-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2003.09.024. · DOI · Paper page
  75. Marbán G, Valdés-Solís T. Towards the hydrogen economy? Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:1625-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.12.017. · DOI
  76. Lechtenböhmer S, Schneider C, Yetano Roche M, Höller S. Re-industrialisation and low-carbon economy-can they go together? Results from Stakeholder-Based Scenarios for Energy-Intensive Industries in the German State of North Rhine Westphalia. Energies 2015;8:11404-29. https://doi.org/10.3390/en81011404. · DOI
  77. Lena ED, Spinelli M, Romano MC. CO2 capture in cement plants by "Tail-End" calcium looping process. Energy Proc 2018;148:186-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.egypro.2018.08.049. · DOI
  78. Leonelli C, Mason TJ. Microwave and ultrasonic processing: now a realistic option for industry. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 2010;49:885-900. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cep.2010.05.006. · DOI
  79. U.S. Department of Energy. Innovating clean energy technologies in advanced manufacturing. Quadrennial Technology Review 2015, Washington, D.C.; 2015. p. 184-225.
  80. Shen F, Zhao L, Du W, Zhong W, Qian F. Large-scale industrial energy systems optimization under uncertainty: a data-driven robust optimization approach. Appl Energy 2020;259:114199https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114199. · DOI
  81. U.S. Department of Energy. Innovating clean energy technologies in advanced manufacturing. Quadrennial Technology Review 2015, Washington, D.C.; 2015. p. 90.
  82. Lovins AB. How big is the energy efficiency resource? Environ Res Lett 2018;13:090401https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aad965. · DOI
  83. Masanet E, Walker ME. Energy-water efficiency and U.S. industrial steam. AIChE J 2013;59:2268-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.14148. · DOI
  84. Bühler F, Zühlsdorf B, Nguyen T-V, Elmegaard B. A comparative assessment of electrification strategies for industrial sites: case of milk powder production. Appl Energy 2019;250:1383-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.05.071. · DOI
  85. Zhang J, Zhang H-H, He Y-L, Tao W-Q. A comprehensive review on advances and applications of industrial heat pumps based on the practices in China. Appl Energy 2016;178:800-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.049. · DOI
  86. Hertwich EG, Ali S, Ciacci L, Fishman T, Heeren N, Masanet E, et al. Material efficiency strategies to reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with build- ings, vehicles, and electronics-a review. Environ Res Lett 2019;14:043004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab0fe3. · DOI · Paper page
  87. Cao Z, Shen L, Løvik AN, Müller DB, Liu G. Elaborating the history of our ce- menting societies: an in-use stock perspective. Environ Sci Technol 2017;51:11468-75. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b03077. · DOI
  88. Fremstad A, Underwood A, Zahran S. The environmental impact of sharing: household and urban economies in CO2 emissions. Ecol Econ 2018;145:137-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.024. · DOI
  89. Kelly JC, Sullivan JL, Burnham A, Elgowainy A. Impacts of vehicle weight re- duction via material substitution on life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions. Environ Sci Technol 2015;49:12535-42. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03192. · DOI
  90. Kim HC, Wallington TJ. Life-cycle energy and greenhouse gas emission benefits of lightweighting in automobiles: review and harmonization. Environ Sci Technol 2013;47:6089-97. https://doi.org/10.1021/es3042115. · DOI · Paper page
  91. Cotteleer M, Joyce J. 3D opportunity: additive manufacturing paths to perfor- mance, innovation, and growth. Deloitte Insights; 2014. https://www2.deloitte. com/insights/us/en/deloitte-review/issue-14/dr14-3d-opportunity.html [ac- cessed February 26, 2019].
  92. Wohlers Associates. Wohlers associates publishes 23rd edition of its 3D printing and additive manufacturing industry report; 2018. https://wohlersassociates. com/press74.html [accessed February 26, 2019].
  93. Huang R, Ulu E, Kara LB, Whitefoot KS. Cost minimization in metal additive manufacturing using concurrent structure and process optimization. Cleaveland, OH: American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2017, p. V02AT03A030. 10.1115/ DETC2017-67836. · DOI · Paper page
  94. Huang R, Riddle ME, Graziano D, Das S, Nimbalkar S, Cresko J, et al. Environmental and economic implications of distributed additive manufacturing: the case of injection mold tooling. J Ind Ecol 2017;21:S130-43. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/jiec.12641. · DOI
  95. Lazarov BS, Sigmund O, Meyer KE, Alexandersen J. Experimental validation of additively manufactured optimized shapes for passive cooling. Appl Energy 2018;226:330-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.05.106. · DOI
  96. Huang R, Riddle M, Graziano D, Warren J, Das S, Nimbalkar S, et al. Energy and emissions saving potential of additive manufacturing: the case of lightweight aircraft components. J Clean Prod 2016;135:1559-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2015.04.109. · DOI · Paper page
  97. Tollefson J. The wooden skyscrapers that could help to cool the planet. Nature News 2017;545:280. https://doi.org/10.1038/545280a. · DOI
  98. Pittau F, Lumia G, Heeren N, Iannaccone G, Habert G. Retrofit as a carbon sink: the carbon storage potentials of the EU housing stock. J Clean Prod 2019;214:365-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.304. · DOI
  99. Heeren N, Mutel CL, Steubing B, Ostermeyer Y, Wallbaum H, Hellweg S. Environmental impact of buildings-what matters? Environ Sci Technol 2015;49:9832-41. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01735. · DOI · Paper page
  100. Cooper SJG, Giesekam J, Hammond GP, Norman JB, Owen A, Rogers JG, et al. Thermodynamic insights and assessment of the 'circular economy'. J Clean Prod 2017;162:1356-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.169. · DOI
  101. Daehn KE, Cabrera Serrenho A, Allwood JM. How will copper contamination constrain future global steel recycling? Environ Sci Technol 2017;51:6599-606. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00997. · DOI · Paper page
  102. Sekhri P. Harvesting the plastic we have sowed: costs and challenges in, and a novel application of blockchain for implementing extended producer responsi- bility in Chile. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2018.
  103. Goulder LH, Parry IWH, Williams III RC, Burtraw D. The cost-effectiveness of al- ternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting. J Public Econ 1999;72:329-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(98)00109-1. · DOI
  104. Spulber DF. Effluent regulation and long-run optimality. J Environ Econ Manage 1985;12:103-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(85)90021-X. · DOI
  105. Bataille C, Åhman M, Neuhoff K, Nilsson LJLJ, Fischedick M, Lechtenböhmer S, et al. A review of technology and policy deep decarbonization pathway options for making energy intensive industry production consistent with the Paris Agreement. J Clean Prod 2018;187:960-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.107. · DOI · Paper page
  106. Harvey H, Orvis R, Rissman J. Designing climate solutions: a policy guide for low- carbon energy. 1st ed. Washington, D.C.: Island Press; 2018.
  107. Fowlie M, Reguant M. Challenges in the measurement of leakage risk. AEA Papers Proc 2018;108:124-9. https://doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20181087. · DOI · Paper page
  108. Branger F, Quirion P, Chevallier J. Carbon leakage and competitiveness of cement and steel industries under the EU ETS: much ado about nothing. EJ 2017;37. https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.37.3.fbra. · DOI · Paper page
  109. Fowlie M, Reguant M, Ryan SP. Market-based emissions regulation and industry dynamics. J Polit Econ 2016;124:249-302. https://doi.org/10.1086/684484. · DOI
  110. Koch N, Fuss S, Grosjean G, Edenhofer O. Causes of the EU ETS price drop: re- cession, CDM, renewable policies or a bit of everything?-new evidence. Energy Policy 2014;73:676-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.06.024. · DOI · Paper page
  111. Pahle M, Burtraw D, Flachsland C, Kelsey N, Biber E, Meckling J, et al. Sequencing to ratchet up climate policy stringency. Nat Clim Change 2018;8:861-7. https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0287-6. · DOI · Paper page
  112. Worrell E, Laitner JA, Ruth M, Finman H. Productivity benefits of industrial en- ergy efficiency measures. Energy 2003;28:1081-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0360-5442(03)00091-4. · DOI
  113. Price L. Voluntary agreements for energy efficiency or GHG emissions reduction in industry: an assessment of programs around the world. ACEEE Summer Study Energy Efficiency Ind 2005:1-12. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.2013.17. · DOI
  114. Younger M, Morrow-Almeida HR, Vindigni SM, Dannenberg AL. The built en- vironment, climate change, and health: opportunities for co-benefits. Am J Prev Med 2008;35:517-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.017. · DOI
  115. Allwood JM, Ashby MF, Gutowski TG, Worrell E. Material efficiency: a white paper. Resour Conserv Recycl 2011;55:362-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. resconrec.2010.11.002. · DOI · Paper page
  116. Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla KK. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy Build 2010;42:1592-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild. 2010.05.007. · DOI · Paper page
  117. Miller SA, Horvath A, Monteiro PJM, Ostertag CP. Greenhouse gas emissions from concrete can be reduced by using mix proportions, geometric aspects, and age as design factors. Environ Res Lett 2015;10:114017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748- 9326/10/11/114017. · DOI
  118. Scheuer C, Keoleian GA, Reppe P. Life cycle energy and environmental perfor- mance of a new university building: modeling challenges and design implications. Energy Build 2003;35:1049-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(03) 00066-5. · DOI
  119. Kurtis KE. Innovations in cement-based materials: addressing sustainability in structural and infrastructure applications. MRS Bull 2015;40:1102-9. https://doi. org/10.1557/mrs.2015.279. · DOI
  120. Krabbe O, Linthorst G, Blok K, Crijns-Graus W, van Vuuren DP, Höhne N, et al. Aligning corporate greenhouse-gas emissions targets with climate goals. Nat Clim Change 2015;5:1057-60. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2770. · DOI
  121. Akbarnezhad A, Xiao J. Estimation and minimization of embodied carbon of buildings: a review. Buildings 2017;7:5. https://doi.org/10.3390/ buildings7010005. · DOI
  122. Wu P, Low SP, Xia B, Zuo J. Achieving transparency in carbon labelling for con- struction materials -lessons from current assessment standards and carbon labels. Environ Sci Policy 2014;44:11-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.07.009. · DOI
  123. UN Environment Program. Global review of sustainable public procurement 2017; 2017.
  124. Zaman AU, Lehmann S. Urban growth and waste management optimization to- wards 'zero waste city'. City, Cult Soc 2011;2:177-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ccs.2011.11.007. · DOI
  125. Bezdek RH, Wendling RM. The jobs impact of GHG reduction strategies in the USA. Int J Global Warm 2014;6:380. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGW.2014. 066046. · DOI
  126. Montt G, Wiebe KS, Harsdorff M, Simas M, Bonnet A, Wood R. Does climate action destroy jobs? An assessment of the employment implications of the 2-degree goal. Int Labour Rev 2018;157:519-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/ilr.12118. · DOI
  127. de la Rue du Can S, Khandekar A, Abhyankar N, Phadke A, Khanna NZ, Fridley D, et al. Modeling India's energy future using a bottom-up approach. Appl Energy 2019;238:1108-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.065. · DOI
  128. Dasgupta S, Roy J. Understanding technological progress and input price as dri- vers of energy demand in manufacturing industries in India -ScienceDirect. Energy Policy 2015;83:1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.03.024. · DOI
  129. Dasgupta S, van der Salm F, Roy J. Designing PAT as a climate policy in India: issues learnt from EU-ETS. Nature economy, and society: understanding the lin- kages. New Delhi, India: Springer; 2015. p. 315-28.
  130. Roy J, Dasgupta S, Ghosh D, Das N, Chakravarty D, Chakraborty D, et al. Governing national actions for global climate change stabilization: examples from India. Climate change governance and adaptation: case studies from South Asia, Boca. Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2018.
  131. National Development and Reform Commission. Review of the eleventh five-year plan: top-1000 program exceeded targets; 2011. http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2011- 09/30/content_1960586.htm [accessed February 5, 2019].

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rissman, J., Bataille, C., Masanet, E., Aden, N., Morrow, W. R., Zhou, N., Elliott, N., Dell, R., Heeren, N., Huckestein, B., Cresko, J., Miller, S. A., Roy, J., Fennell, P., Cremmins, B., Koch Blank, T., Hone, D., Williams, E. D., de la Rue du Can, S., Sisson, B., Williams, M., Katzenberger, J., Burtraw, D., Sethi, G., Ping, H., Danielson, D., Lu, H., Lorber, T., Dinkel, J., & Helseth, J.
Affiliations
  • Simon Fraser University (CA)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • World Resources Institute (US)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • ClimateWorks Foundation (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • BASF (Germany) (DE)
  • United States Department of Energy (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Asian Institute of Technology (TH)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Shell (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • World Business Council for Sustainable Development (CH)
  • Aspen Global Change Institute (US)
  • Resources For The Future (US)
  • Energy and Resources Institute (IN)
  • Children's Investment Fund Foundation (GB)
Corresponding author
Rissman, Jeffrey
ORCID
Venue
Applied Energy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
266
Pages
114848
ISSN
0306-2619 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114848
OpenAlex
W3013534207
Cited by
1,040
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 161 · 2025: 200 · 2024: 234 · 2023: 198 · 2022: 139 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 15
FWCI
94.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Applied Energy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy Efficiency and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Iron and Steelmaking Processes
Keywords
industrial decarbonization, net-zero emissions, CO2 capture, energy efficiency, electrification, cement industry, iron and steel industry, cement additives, circular economy, material efficiency, carbon pricing, border carbon adjustment, emission standards, just transition, low- and middle-income countries, climate policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review