MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402565360 · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143717

Impacts of alternative fuel combustion in cement manufacturing: Life cycle greenhouse gas, biogenic carbon, and criteria air contaminant emissions

2024· article· en· W4402565360 on OpenAlexafffund
Vaidehi Pitre, Helen La, Joule Bergerson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cleaner Production · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta InnovatesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEmissions Reduction AlbertaLafarge Canada
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceFugitive emissionsWaste managementCombustionLife-cycle assessmentCementCarbon fibersEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringChemistryProduction (economics)Materials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Waste products destined for landfills with high calorific value are increasingly being explored for potential use in a variety of industries. One example is the potential use of these wastes in cement kilns to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cement production. This study develops a cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) model to estimate the GHG emissions, criteria air contaminants (CAC), and the impact of biogenic carbon accounting methods in biomass-containing alternative fuels (AFs) on life cycle GHG emissions when replacing natural gas with AFs at a cement facility. The proposed AF mixture includes landfill wastes like construction and demolition waste, asphalt shingles, tire fluff, carpet, textiles, and plastics. While many LCAs assume the biogenic fraction's climate impact is carbon-neutral, its actual effects depend on a range of new methods being proposed to account for the climate impacts associated with biogenic carbon. The findings of this study demonstrate a reduction of approximately 7–13% in life cycle GHG emissions. The preliminary estimates suggest that the change to CACs will likely not be materially different from the current use of natural gas. It also emphasizes the importance of accounting for the biogenic fraction in biomass-based AFs, indicating a potential overall reduction of up to 7.2% in life cycle GHG emissions when the biogenic fraction is treated as carbon-neutral. While factoring in the benefits of shorter rotation and longer storage periods results in a 12.7% reduction in life cycle GHG emissions. The LCA model developed in this study holds the potential for broad application among cement facilities that are considering fossil to alternative fuels as part of their GHG emission reduction strategies. • Cement manufacturing contributes ∼8% of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). • Waste materials offer great potential as alternatives to fossil fuels in cement kilns. • A 7–13% decrease in GHGs comes from replacing 50% natural gas with alternative fuels. • GHGs from alternative fuels (AFs) are sensitive to biogenic carbon accounting. • Crediting rotation and storage in biomass-based alternative fuels reduces GHGs by 13%.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cleaner ProductionSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207