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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Costs and carbon emissions for geopolymer pastes in comparison to ordinary portland cement
McLellan, B. C., Williams, R. P., Lay, J., van Riessen, A., & Corder, G. D. (2011) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.02.010 · Cited by 1,949
System Boundary Selection in Life-Cycle Inventories Using Hybrid Approaches
Suh, S., Lenzen, M., Treloar, G. J., Hondo, H., Horvath, A., Huppes, G., Jolliet, O., Klann, U., Krewitt, W., Moriguchi, Y., et al. (2004) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es0263745 · Cited by 1,025
Green house gas emissions due to concrete manufacture
Flower, D. J. M., & Sanjayan, J. G. (2007) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1065/lca2007.05.327 · Cited by 912
Global Patterns and Trends for Non‐Metallic Minerals used for Construction
Miatto, A., Schandl, H., Fishman, T., & Tanikawa, H. (2017) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1111/jiec.12471 · Cited by 154
Omar, W. M. S. W., Doh, J.-H., Panuwatwanich, K., & Miller, D. (2014) · Sustainable Cities and Society · doi:10.1016/j.scs.2013.06.002 · Cited by 139
Cited by
Shah, I. H., Miller, S. A., Jiang, D., & Myers, R. J. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-33289-7 · Cited by 417
A review of life cycle assessment of recycled aggregate concrete
Zhang, Y., Luo, W., Wang, J., Wang, Y., Xu, Y., & Xiao, J. (2019) · Construction and Building Materials · doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.078 · Cited by 294
A review on the impact of mining and mineral processing industries through life cycle assessment
Farjana, S. H., Huda, N., Parvez Mahmud, M. A., & Saidur, R. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.264 · Cited by 258
Ghadir, P., Zamanian, M., Mahbubi-Motlagh, N., Saberian, M., Li, J., & Ranjbar, N. (2021) · Transportation Geotechnics · doi:10.1016/j.trgeo.2021.100639 · Cited by 140
Life cycle assessment of alkali-activated materials: a systematic literature review
Nikravan, M., Firdous, R., & Stephan, D. (2023) · Low-carbon Materials and Green Construction · doi:10.1007/s44242-023-00014-6 · Cited by 93
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.