Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 360

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Hybrid life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, concrete and geopolymer concrete in Australia

Open access
Teh, Soo Huey, Wiedmann, Thomas, Castel, Arnaud, de Burgh, James·2017·Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract

Concrete is the second most used material after water and the production of cement is responsible for 5–8% of global carbon dioxide emissions. The development of low-carbon concretes is pursued worldwide to help the construction industry make its contribution to decarbonising the built environment and achieving carbon reduction targets agreed under the Paris Climate Agreement. However, there is uncertainty around the actual amount of greenhouse gas emissions that can be avoided by employing alternative types of concrete. This study quantifies the carbon footprint intensities of Australian cement and concrete production, including ordinary Portland cement, standard ordinary Portland cement concrete, blended cement-based concrete and geopolymer concrete production. For the first time, an input-output based hybrid life-cycle assessment method is used for these products. The main goal of this paper is therefore to make a methodological comparison between process-based and hybrid life cycle assessment using the Australian cement and concrete production as a case study. A comparison with published results from process-based life-cycle inventories as well as a decomposition of results into product categories is provided. The hybrid life cycle assessment resulted in higher greenhouse gas emissions for ordinary Portland cement and all types of concrete due to the methodology incorporating an economy-wide system boundary, which includes the emissions from upstream processes. For geopolymer concrete in particular, the results were also dependent on the method applied for allocating greenhouse gas emissions from fly ash and slag. The findings from this study are likely to inform the development of strategies and policies aimed at greenhouse gas reduction in the cement and concrete industries.

Overview

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.jclepro.2017.03.122

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 360

Metadata

Authors
Teh, S. H., Wiedmann, T., Castel, A., & de Burgh, J.
Venue
Journal of Cleaner Production
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-05
Volume
152
Pages
312-320
ISSN
0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2601274759
Cited by
360
References
5
FWCI
23.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hybrid life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, concrete and geopolymer concrete in Australia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.122
The paper
Teh, S. H., Wiedmann, T., Castel, A., & de Burgh, J. (2017). Hybrid life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, concrete and geopolymer concrete in Australia. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.122

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.