See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283206129

Life Cycle Assessment of concrete manufacturing in small isolated states: the

case of Cyprus

Article  in  International Journal of Sustainable Energy · October 2015

DOI: 10.1080/14786451.2015.1100197

CITATIONS READS

16 14,295

4 authors, including:

Angeliki Kylili Demetris Nicolaides

Frederick University Frederick University
44 PUBLICATIONS   1,548 CITATIONS    44 PUBLICATIONS   438 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Paris Fokaides
Frederick University
137 PUBLICATIONS   2,847 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A Concept for promotion of sustainable retrofitting and renovation in Early Stages (ACES) View project

Mix Design, Mechanical Properties and Impact Resistance of UHPFRCCs View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Demetris Nicolaides on 02 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Sustainable Energy

ISSN: 1478-6451 (Print) 1478-646X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gsol20

Life Cycle Assessment of concrete manufacturing

in small isolated states: the case of Cyprus

Chrystalla Chrysostomou, Angeliki Kylili, Demetris Nicolaides & Paris A.

Fokaides

To cite this article: Chrystalla Chrysostomou, Angeliki Kylili, Demetris Nicolaides &
Paris A. Fokaides (2015): Life Cycle Assessment of concrete manufacturing in small
isolated states: the case of Cyprus, International Journal of Sustainable Energy, DOI:
10.1080/14786451.2015.1100197

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2015.1100197

Published online: 20 Oct 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 6

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gsol20

Download by: [Dr Paris Fokaides] Date: 16 November 2015, At: 19:51
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2015.1100197

Life Cycle Assessment of concrete manufacturing in small isolated

states: the case of Cyprus
Chrystalla Chrysostomou, Angeliki Kylili, Demetris Nicolaides and Paris A. Fokaides
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Frederick University, Nicosia, Cyprus

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an effective and valuable methodology for Received 28 July 2015
identifying the holistic sustainable behaviour of materials and products. It Accepted 20 September 2015
is also useful in analysing the impact a structure has over the course of its
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

KEYWORDS
life cycle. Currently, there is no sufficient knowhow regarding the life cycle Life Cycle Assessment;
performance of building materials used in the case of small isolated states. concrete; manufacturing
This study focuses on the LCA of the production of concrete for the process; environmental
investigation of its environmental impact in isolated island states, using impact
the case of Cyprus as an example. Four different scenarios for the
production of 1 tonne of concrete are examined: (i) manufacturing of
concrete by transporting raw materials from different locations around
the island, (ii) manufacturing of concrete using alternative energy
resources, (iii) manufacturing of concrete with reduced transportation
needs, and (iv) on-site manufacturing of concrete. The results, in terms
of environmental impacts of concrete produced, indicated that the use
of renewable electricity instead of fossil-fuelled electricity in isolated
states can drastically improve the environmental performance of the
end product. Also, the minimisation of transportation distances and the
use of locally available resources can also affect, to a degree, the
environmental impact of concrete production.

Abbreviations: AP: Acidification Potential; CRC: Completely Recyclable

Concrete; GWP: Global Warming Potential; HFO: Heavy Fuel Oil; LCA: Life
Cycle Assessment; LCI: Life Cycle Inventory; LCIA: Life Cycle Impact
Assessment; MPA: Mineral Products Association; ODP: Ozone Depletion
Potential; POCP: Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential; PV:
Photovoltaics

1. Introduction
Concrete is a fundamental material in the construction industry and since the late 1970s concrete
structures have represented the dominant building construction, given that there are no modern sus-
tainable alternatives that can entirely replace its use (Kjellsen, Guimaraes, and Nilsson 2005). It pro-
vides a durable and strong structure to almost all types of construction infrastructure including
bridges, ports, tunnels, hydropower dams, and buildings. Buildings over 1500 years old are living
examples of the strength and durability of concrete. Worldwide, enormous quantities of concrete
are employed in the building construction industry annually. In the USA alone, approximately
900 million tonnes of concrete are used every year for construction projects (Ramsey et al. 2014).
However, with the increasing interest in the aspects of buildings’ energy efficiency and embodied
energy, its environmental performance as a construction material has been put under the

CONTACT Paris A. Fokaides eng.fp@frederick.ac.cy

© 2015 Taylor & Francis
 2 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.

microscope. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a systematic set of procedures for compiling and exam-
ining the inputs and outputs of materials, the energy, and the associated environmental impacts
directly attributable to the functioning of a product or a service system throughout its life cycle.
The underlying principle of conducting LCA is to determine alternative routes for improving the
environmental performance of the material or the system during its lifetime, so that more informed
– or more environmentally friendly – decisions can be taken regarding the production, usage, or dis-
posal of the material.
This paper focuses on the LCA of the production of concrete for the investigation of its environ-
mental impact in isolated island states. Section 2 examines the existing literature on the LCA of con-
struction materials, discussing the fundamentals of the LCA methodology and defining the different
stages of the concrete production process. For the investigation of the environmental impact of the
concrete production process in isolated island states, Cyprus has been chosen as a case study. The
methodology followed in this work is described in detail in Section 3. Section 4 is engaged with
the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) of the LCA, and presents the primary data used for the development
of the scenarios for the case study. Specific results are discussed in Section 5, while some additional
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

scenarios are also developed for the upgrading of the environmental performance of concrete pro-
duction. Finally, the last section of this paper presents some significant conclusions regarding the
environmental impact of concrete production in isolated island states, emerging from the findings
of this study.

2. Literature review
2.1. LCA stages
According to the principles described in the ISO 14040 standard (ISO 2006), LCAs are prepared and
conducted in four main phases. The Goal and Scope Definition phase defines the focus of the study
as well as the key objectives it attempts to fulfil. Additionally, the functional unit, the system bound-
aries, the data requirements, the limitations, and assumptions to be considered are also thoroughly
described. The second phase is the LCI, which represents the data collection portion of an LCA. Data
and details regarding the inputs and outputs, including raw materials, energy, emissions to air, and
transport, for each step in the product or system under investigation, are recorded in this phase. The
Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) phase aims at the definition of the potential environmental
impact of the examined product or system throughout its entire life cycle, and can also assist in
detecting significant reference points for improvement on its environmental performance. The
Interpretation of the Results is the last phase of the LCA and engages with the reporting of the find-
ings from the LCI and the LCIA phases in relation to the initial intended Goal and Scope Definition
towards reaching specific conclusions and recommendations.

2.2. LCA of construction materials

Sustainability is a crucial factor for the construction industry, and as a result a variety of method-
ologies and tools have been developed in an attempt at its measurement. One of the most widely
employed methodologies is LCA. LCA provides better decision support when optimising environ-
mentally benign design solutions that consider the impacts caused during the entire lifetime of
the building. Therefore, the quality of buildings in a long-term perspective can be improved.
Some LCAs of tools and software exist that can be used to assess buildings such as Green Guide,
Athena, and Gabi.
ATHENA: The Athena Sustainable Materials Institute is the pioneer of whole-building LCA and
works with product manufacturers, trade associations, green building associations, and architectural
and engineering firms to help quantify environmental impacts and to demystify and assist with LCA.
Athena Sustainable Materials Institute assessed in terms of a range of performance measures: Global
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 3

Warming Potential (GWP), Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Ozone Depletion

Potential, Human Health Respiratory Effects Potential, Fossil Fuel Depletion, and Photochemical
Ozone Creation.
GREEN GUIDE: To produce the Green Guide, LCA was employed to examine a broad range of
environmental impacts for different construction approaches. It is now part of BREEAM, an accre-
dited environmental rating scheme for buildings. The Green Guide assesses the following environ-
mental impact categories: GWP, Water Extraction, Mineral Resource Extraction, Ozone Depletion
Potential, Human Toxicity, Ecotoxicity to Freshwater and Land, Nuclear Waste, Waste Disposal,
Fossil Fuel Depletion, Eutrophication Potential, Photochemical Ozone Creation, and Acidification
Potential.
Based on the literature review of Athena and Green Guide LCA Systems regarding building
materials we conclude by examining eight most crucial impact categories through the Gabi software,
in which seven of the eight categories are common with the Athena and Green Guide LCA system.
In this study, the LCA of selected building materials in Cyprus and the Holistic Evaluation System
will be conducted according to the LCIA – CML 2001 by employing Gabi software (Gabi 2013). The
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

overview of the considered most crucial impact categories within the LCA of building material cat-
egories, characterisation model, and unit is given in Table 1.
The aim of conducting an LCA of a construction material is to find an optimal production process
that would result in the lowest possible environmental burdens. This is achieved by adopting life
cycle approaches, either ‘cradle-to-grave’, ‘cradle-to-gate’, ‘cradle-to-cradle’, or ‘gate-to-gate’.
Figure 1 illustrates the stages of the ‘cradle-to-grave’ approach – raw material acquisition, manufac-
turing, building use or operations, and recycling or waste management. Inputs may consist of raw
materials and energy, and outputs of atmospheric emissions, waterborne wastes, solid wastes, and
other waste streams (Lemay 2011). In particular for concrete, the ‘cradle-to-grave’ stages involve
the extraction of raw materials and the manufacturing of Portland cement, also adding aggregates
and sand along the way. The LCA of the concrete production process also includes stops along
the remaining LCA stages for delivery and transportation of the product, use, maintenance, and
repair of the product as part of the construction. Finally the disposal or recycling/reuse of the con-
crete when the building comes to the end of its useful life is also considered.
A number of studies exist in literature regarding the LCA of construction materials. Ede et al.
(2014) conducted an LCA for the investigation of the environmental impacts of using concrete
and timber to construct a duplex residential building. The findings of their work indicated that
the timber construction was more eco-friendly in terms of carbon emissions and climate change

Table 1. Impact categories according to the CML 2001 impact method.

Impact category indicators Characterisation model Unit
Global warming potential This value deals with all greenhouse gases (arises from emissions of CO2, and kg CO2-Eq.
methane) that may cause the earth’s temperature to rise and have negative
effect on the ecosystem, human health, and material welfare.
Acidification potential This impact is caused by deposition of acidifying pollutant on soil, water, kg SO2-Eq.
organisms, ecosystems, and materials such as sulphur and nitrogen.
Eutrophication potential This category covers all impacts of high environmental levels of macronutrients kg phosphate-
(phosphorous and nitrogen) causing high biomass production in aquatic and Eq.
terrestrial ecosystems; for example air pollutants, wastewater, etc.
Ozone depletion potential This impact arises with the increased ultraviolet radiation from the sun which kg R11-Eq.
depletes the ozone layer when CFCs and HCFCs reach the stratosphere.
Abiotic depletion elements This category describes the reduction of the global amount of non-renewable kg Sb-Eq.
raw materials. It covers the availability of natural elements in general.
Abiotic depletion fossil This category indicator is related to the use of fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural MJ
gas) lost from reserves.
Human toxicity potential This category covers the impact on human health of all toxic substances emitted kg DCB-Eq.
to air, water, and soil.
Photochemical ozone This impact is caused by releases of hydrocarbons to atmosphere that produce kg Ethene-Eq.
creation potential ozone and can arise at any stage of the life cycle.
 4 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Figure 1. Life cycle stages, inputs, and outputs for the LCA of construction materials.

potential by approximately 7%. Also, Sterner (2010) presented the LCA of a brick bearing wall
based on a case study of a building in Ohio. Sterner concluded that the manufacturing of brick is
an energy-intensive process leading to high embodied energy, although this could be weighed
against its long operational lifetime. Giama and Papadopoulos (2015) presented the environ-
mental impacts deriving from the environmental evaluation analysis of the most widely used
construction materials, on the basis of two environmental assessment methodologies – the
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and the Carbon Footprint Analysis – also discussing their link
with ecolabelling. The LCA of steel production through the integrated steel production and elec-
tric arc furnace routes was examined by Burchart-Korol (2013) for the case of Poland. The
specific study concluded the greater impact on greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel con-
sumption in the national electric arc furnace route was electricity consumption, and thus further
developed additional alternative fuel scenarios, where the impact was found to be reduced by
almost 5% for the case of the GWP impact category.

2.3. Stages of concrete production

In the concrete production line, there is a series of different processes and stages the raw
materials have to undergo in order to reach the final product. The concrete production line starts
with the extraction of the raw materials, and continues with the manufacturing of cement, aggre-
gates, sand, and different admixtures, the processes of which are illustrated in Figures 2–5,
respectively. The specific stages for the concrete production process are described in detail in
this section.

2.3.1. Cement production process

Extraction – Transport: Cement is a hydraulic binder, which hardens when mixed with water. Its
main constituents are limestone and clay which are extracted in large quarries with the use of explo-
sives. The raw materials are loaded into a dumper and transported to the factory for processing.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 5
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Figure 2. Cement-manufacturing process.

Crushing and milling: The raw materials are reduced to a size of less than 10 mm in diameter
through crushing, and even further through milling. The milling furnace dries the raw material
and extracts sulphur dioxide (SO2) from the ground material to leave a fine powder or ‘raw mix’.
Preheating – Kiln – Cooling: The raw mix is preheated up to 850°C before it enters the kiln, where
it is heated with a high flow burner. At 1500°C, the raw mix burns to produce ‘clinker’. The clinker
leaves the kiln to tumble onto a grate and is rapidly cooled with air fans.
Grinding: Clinker is grinded with gypsum and other mineral components to produce finished
cement.
Storage – Packing – Dispatch: The cement is conveyed to silos, from where it is shipped in bulk
form or in bags by trucks.

2.3.2. Sand and aggregates production process

Extraction – Transport: For sand production, limestone, clay, sand, and aggregates are quarried
using explosives. The raw materials are loaded into a dumper and transported to the factory for
processing.
Primary/Secondary Crushing – Grinding: The raw materials are reduced in size by primary and
secondary crushing, followed by grinding in order to get limestone sand to 0–3.5 mm diameter.
Washing – Transport: The sand washing equipment removes dust and stone powder so that the
quality of the sand is improved. Sand and aggregates are then transferred to storage.

2.3.3. Admixtures
Admixtures are used in concrete to control and enhance its properties and performance as a con-
struction material. Most admixtures are supplied in ready-to-use form, while the ratio concrete to
admixtures is 1:6 × 10−4. Admixtures required in the production of concrete include:

Figure 3. Sand-manufacturing process.

 6 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.

Figure 4. Aggregates-manufacturing process.

Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Figure 5. Concrete-manufacturing process.

. Normal setting integral waterproofer, which prevents concrete from deteriorating by reducing its
permeability.
. Synthetic high-range water-reducing and set-retarding polymer, which provides extra workabil-
ity, compaction, and durability to the concrete.
. High-performance super plasticiser and high-range water reducer, which achieves reduction of
water up to 45% for high early strength and lower permeability of concrete.
. Integral crystalline waterproofing admix, which generates a non-soluble crystalline formation
throughout the pores and capillary tracts of the concrete such that the concrete becomes perma-
nently sealed against the penetration of water or liquids from any direction.

2.3.5. Concrete production process

Mixing & Transport: For the production of most grades of concrete (C20–C25), cement, sand, aggre-
gates, and admixtures are mixed together with water, which is typically locally extracted. Concrete is
transported to the construction sites using trucks.

2.4. Environmental performance of concrete

The main advantage of using concrete as construction material is its high thermal mass (Struble and
Godfrey 2004). This property of concrete improves the thermal stability of buildings, enables the bet-
ter regulation of the indoor temperatures, reduces the energy required for space cooling and heating,
and achieves reductions in the overall energy costs of buildings. In effect, carbon dioxide greenhouse
gas emission reductions are achieved during the operational phase of buildings. Furthermore, after
the end of the useful life of buildings, concrete debris can be used to produce aggregate for new con-
crete production, or as a sub-base (e.g. road construction) or surface material in other constructions.
Concrete also absorbs CO2 through a process known as carbonation, which remains locked and is
not released at the end of its life. Accordingly, the interest in the topic of concrete carbonation is
now increasing to include its positive contribution to the environmental performance of concrete.
A study conducted by De Saulles (2013) concluded that the initial embodied CO2 of cement leaving
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 7

its manufacturing facilities will be reduced by approximately 18% by the end of a 160-year period as a
consequence of carbonation. Schepper et al. (2014) conducted the LCA of Completely Recyclable
Concrete (CRC) in an attempt to improve its environmental performance. The finding suggested
that incorporating CRC in new cement manufacturing could significantly reduce the GWP of the
final product.
However, concrete is also closely linked to adverse environmental impacts. In particular, the main
contributor has been reported to come from the production of Portland cement. Portland cement is
the product of an industry that is not only energy-intensive but also responsible for large emissions
of CO2. Even in small percentages of 13.8% cement in the concrete mix, the CO2 emission amounts
are crucial. In fact, 1 tonne of Portland cement clinker releases a tonne of CO2 into the atmosphere
(Malhotra 2004). Furthermore, the extraction of the raw materials for the manufacturing of aggre-
gates is criticised for its considerable amounts of energy requirements, as well as its adverse impact
on the ecology of forested areas and riverbeds (Mehta 2001). Furthermore, demolished concrete con-
stitutes a problem worldwide. About 200 million tonnes of construction and demolition waste is gen-
erated every year in Europe (European Concrete Platform ASBL 2009). In the case of Cyprus, the
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

recycling of construction wastes is still found at very low levels despite the imposed legislations.
As a result, the large amounts of construction waste ending up in landfill sites are becoming an
increasingly disturbing problem due to the small size of the island (Nicolaides, Kanellopoulos,
and Petrou 2011).

3. Methodology
In this study, the LCA of concrete production for the case of Cyprus will be conducted according to
the LCIA – CML 2001 by employing Gabi software (Gabi 2013) and based on the principles
described in the ISO 14040. Accordingly, the impact categories to be investigated are listed below:
. GWP (Climate Change)
. Acidification potential (AP)
. Ozone layer depletion potential (ODP)
. Photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP)
The stages of the process chain of concrete included in the scope of the study comprise the extrac-
tion of the raw materials, their transportation to the facilities, the crushing, milling, grinding, firing,
cooling, washing, and other processes the raw materials undergo, as well as their final mixing and
transportation to designated sites of the five provinces of Cyprus. The consumption of materials
and energy for the construction of the employed machinery and infrastructure are excluded from
the study. The functional unit is defined to facilitate the comparison of the environmental impacts
of the different scenarios to be developed. Thus, a consistent functional unit for this work would be
the production of 1 metric tonne (t) of the final product. The Baseline Scenario assumes that cement
is transported by 7-tonne-capacity trucks from the Vasilikos quarry to the concrete production facil-
ity in Aradippou, sand from the Xylofagou area, aggregates from Larnaca, and admixtures from the
Strovolos industrial area. At the cement manufacturing facility, the raw materials are mixed with
water, which is locally extracted. The ready-mix of concrete is then loaded in truck mixers and deliv-
ered at three construction sites (Site 1, Site 2, and Site 3), which were assumed to be found at specific
locations at three provinces of Cyprus (Table 2) and in amounts that are analogous to the size of each
province (Figure 5).
The input and output data used for the LCA of concrete manufacturing for the case of Cyprus are
based on information provided by local concrete producers – Roadtec Industries Ltd and Mouzouris
Ltd – and by data obtained from literature sources. The LCI for the Baseline Scenario and the Sankey
diagram of the mass balances for the production of 1 tonne of concrete are presented in Table 3 and
Figure 6, respectively.
 8 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.

Table 2. Coordinates of selected construction sites.

Site Latitude xi (Easting-UTM, m) Longitude yi (Northing-UTM, m)
Site 1 35°07′ 32.92′′ N 533,487.00 33°22′ 03.13′′ E 3,887,057.00
Site 2 34°56′ 13.00′′ N 553,806.00 33°35′ 21.08′′ E 3,866,209.00
Site 3 35°02′ 01.34′′ N 583,176.00 33°54′ 42.70′′ E 3,877,161.00

4. Results and discussion

4.1. The LCIA: Baseline Scenario
Table 4 presents the results of the LCIA for the Baseline Scenario for each of the impact categories
under investigation. The table also provides details for the contribution of each stage of the manu-
facturing process of concrete – extraction, manufacturing, and transportation of the cement, sand,
and aggregates, the acquisition of the admixtures, and the manufacturing and transportation of con-
crete in particular. Based on the results, the sand extraction and processing are the greatest contri-
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

butors for climate change, acidification, and photochemical ozone creation, closely followed by
concrete manufacturing and transportation and cement extraction and processing. It is noteworthy
that concrete manufacturing and transportation have the largest impact on the ODP impact category
with 1.5 kg of R11-equivalent, against 1.4 kg of R11-equivalent for the sand extraction and proces-
sing. Regarding the environmental impacts, those from the admixtures’ acquisition is minimal, as a
result of their manufacturing not being included within the system boundaries of this study. Since
admixtures are typically imported to Cyprus in a ready-made form, only the impact of their trans-
portation to the concrete manufacturing was considered. Energy consumption is an equally impor-
tant environmental parameter to be considered in the interpretation of the results of the LCA.
Similarly to the LCIA for the impact categories, sand extraction and processing is the most
energy-intensive stage of the whole production line, consuming a total of 919 MJ, followed by con-
crete manufacturing and transportation, which uses 900 MJ, and cement extraction and manufactur-
ing with 659 MJ. It is also important to highlight the fact that almost all the energy comes from non-
renewable energy resources, since Cyprus heavily relies on imported Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) (Poul-
likkas, Hadjipaschalis, and Kourtis 2010; Fokaides and Kylili 2014). The dependence of small isolated
states on imported fossil fuels is typical – in fact, the absence of indigenous energy resources, the
limited infrastructure of energy delivery, the lack of storage, and the flexibility of the power genera-
tors to meet seasonal needs promote further the domination of fossil fuels in isolated states (Fokaides
et al. 2014).

4.2. Additional scenarios

4.2.1. LCI: alternatives scenarios
Based on the results of the LCIA of the Baseline Scenarios, additional scenarios were developed and
examined for the reduction of the environmental impact and the energy intensity of the concrete
production line:
. Scenario 1: Alternative energy scenario, in which electricity from HFO is replaced by renewable
electricity from solar photovoltaics (PV), where this is realistically possible.
. Scenario 2: Sand and aggregates are quarried from the same site and transported together to the
concrete-manufacturing facilities (Figure 7).
. Scenario 3: The raw materials, except for the admixtures, are extracted locally – within a 1 km
radius area of the concrete-manufacturing facilities (Figure 8).

The LCIs of the alternative scenarios for the concrete production line are summarised in Table 5
against the Baseline Scenario. Regarding Scenario 1, where renewable electricity is used, the carbon
dioxide emissions are significantly decreased to less than 5% of the value for the Baseline Scenario.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 9

Table 3. LCI for the Baseline Scenario.

Process Inputs Unit Amount
Cement production (138 kg)
Raw materials’ extraction Materials
Explosives kg 21
Crushing and milling Materials kg
Clay kg 42
Limestone kg 165
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ 720
Transportation
Transport (ELCD) km 1
Preheating Materials
Raw mix kg 210
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ 900
Kiln Materials
Raw mix kg 210
Energy
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Electricity from HFO MJ 1000

Cooling Materials
Clinker kg 210
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ 720
Grinding Materials
Clinker kg 131
Gypsum kg 5.52
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ 720
Sand production (340 kg)
Raw materials’ extraction Materials
Explosives kg 0.015
Primary and secondary crushing Materials
Clay kg 47.6
Limestone kg 198
Stone, gravel kg 85
Other dust kg 6.8
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ/t 720
Grinding Materials
Limestone Sand 0–3.5 mm kg 337
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ/t 720
Washing Materials
Water kg 68
Limestone Sand 0–3.5 mm Kg 340
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ/t 540
Aggregates’ production (441 kg)
Raw materials’ extraction Materials
Explosives kg 0.066
Crushing Materials
Clay kg 257
Limestone kg 61.70
Stone, gravel kg 110
Other dust kg 8.82
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ/t 720
Grinding Materials
Aggregates kg 441
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ/t 720
Concrete production (441 kg)

(Continued)
 10 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.

Table 3. Continued.
Process Inputs Unit Amount
Mixing Materials
Cement kg 138
Sand kg 340
Aggregates kg 441
Water kg 80
Admixtures kg 0.6
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ/t 3113
Transportation
Transport (ELCD) of cement km 45
Transport (ELCD) of sand km 36
Transport (ELCD) of aggregates km 20
Transport (ELCD) of admixtures km 39
Concrete distribution (1000 kg)
Distribution to sites Transportation
Transport (ELCD) to Site 1 km 36
Transport (ELCD) to Site 2 km 1
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Transport (ELCD) to Site 3 km 45

Process Outputs Unit Amount
Concrete production and distribution (1000 kg)
All processes Materials
Concrete kg 1000
Emissions
Inorganic emissions to air
Carbon dioxide (CO2) kg 805
Carbon dioxide (biotic) kg 0.24
Nitrogen triflouride (NF3) kg 5.65 × 10−7
Nitrous oxide (N2O) kg 2.27
Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) kg 1.4 × 10−8
Organic emission to air (group VOC)
Methane (CH4) kg 17.9

Table 4. LCIA for the Baseline Scenario.

Impact categories
GWP (kg CO2- AP [kg SO2- ODP (kg R11- POCP (kg Ethene-
Processes Equiv.) Equiv.) Equiv.) Equiv.)
Cement extraction and processing 213.64 1.99 0.75 0.56
Sand extraction and processing 228.74 2.13 1.43 0.60
Aggregate extraction and processing 158.06 1.47 0.55 0.41
Admixture acquisition 5.64 × 10−3 4.75 × 10−5 2.46 × 10−4 7.44 × 10−6
Concrete manufacturing and 224.31 2.08 1.53 0.59
transportation
Total 824.79 7.67 4.26 2.16

The inorganic and organic emissions in Scenarios 2 and 3 are observed to remain the same as the
Baseline Scenario.

4.2.2. The LCIA: alternative scenarios

The results of the LCIA of the four scenarios under investigation for each of the impact categories are
presented in Table 6. Across all the investigated impact categories, the impact from Scenario 1 is
observed to be drastically reduced. In accordance with the dramatic reduction in the carbon dioxide
emissions, a similar reduction is also indicated in the impact results of the GWP category for the con-
tribution of the concrete production line – in particular the GWP impact is reduced by more than 95%
in Scenario 1. Additionally, using renewable electricity for powering the raw material processing and
concrete-manufacturing facilities manages to minimise the environmental impacts related to acidifi-
cation and photochemical ozone creation, both of which are types of pollutions relating to the
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY

Figure 6. Sankey diagram of mass balances for the production of 1 tonne of concrete.

11
 12 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.

Figure 7. Concrete-manufacturing process for Scenario 2.

Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Figure 8. Concrete-manufacturing process for Scenario 3.

troposphere. More specifically, the use of renewable energy sources in Scenario 1 achieves the
reduction of the AP of the Baseline Scenario to 2% of its value and the POCP to 1% of its value in
the Baseline Scenario. However, the ODP is doubling in the case of the renewable energy scenario
(Scenario 1). The reasoning for the OPD increase in this case is found in the infrastructure of the differ-
ent PV modules and in particular the electricity consumption of production of mono-silicon wafers.
The production of PV modules is allocated over their life time to the electricity generation from solar
energy, while the most relevant emissions are R114 (Dichlorotetrafluoroethane). Scenarios 2 and 3,
whose transportation distances vary in comparison to the Baseline Scenario indicate insignificant
reductions in the GWP and ODP impact categories. On the contrary, the impact categories directly
linked to pollution in the troposphere, namely acidification and photochemical ozone creation,
show notable reductions. Scenarios 2 and 3 lower the AP by 12% and the POCP by 83% in comparison
to the Baseline Scenario. Table 6 also quantifies the impact from transportation for each investigated
scenario. Scenario 2, by assuming the quarry of sand and aggregates from the same site, attains a 5%
reduction in the carbon emissions due to transportation, while Scenario 3, which assumes the local
extraction of raw materials, achieves a noticeable 15% reduction compared to the Baseline Scenario.
The results confirm that the manufacturing of concrete is a major environmental concern for iso-
lated island states. Fossil-fuelled electricity puts an enormous environmental burden on the atmos-
phere, both locally and globally. The combustion of fossil fuels for electricity generation for the
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 13

Table 5. Life Cycle Inventories of alternative scenarios against the Baseline Scenario.
Amount
Process Inputs Unit Baseline Scenario Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
All processes Raw materials
Cement kg 138 138 138 138
Sand kg 340 340 340 340
Aggregates kg 441 441 441 441
Admixtures kg 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
Water kg 80 80 80 80
Energy
Electricity from HFO MJ 3113 3113 3113
Electricity from renewables MJ 3113
Transportation
Transport (ELCD) km 140 140 120 40
Process Outputs Unit Amount
Baseline Scenario Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
All processes Materials
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

Concrete kg 1000 1000 1000 1000

Emissions
Inorganic emissions to air
Carbon dioxide (CO2) kg 805 31 805 805
Carbon dioxide (biotic) kg 0.238 3.77 0.238 0.238
Nitrogen triflouride (NF3) kg 5.65 × 10−7 3.07 × 10−3 5.65 × 10−7 5.65 × 10−7
Nitrous oxide (N2O) kg 2.27 0.29 2.27 2.27
Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) kg 1.4 × 10−8 1.57 × 10−6 1.4 × 10−8 1.4 × 10−8
Organic emission to air (group VOC)
Methane (CH4) kg 17.9 1.71 17.9 17.9

Table 6. LCIA of alternative scenarios against the Baseline Scenario.

Impact categories
GWP (kg CO2- AP (kg SO2- ODP (kg R11- POCP (kg Ethene- Impact from transportation
Equiv.) Equiv.) Equiv.) Equiv.) (kg CO2-Equiv.)
Baseline 824.79 7.67 4.26 2.16 0.061
Scenario
Scenario 1 33.35 0.15 8.52 0.02 0.061
Scenario 2 824.75 6.74 4.01 0.36 0.058
Scenario 3 824.74 6.74 4.01 0.36 0.046

industrial sector is confirmed to be one of the largest sources of CO2 emissions. In fact, the environ-
mental impact from electricity is so big that it overshadows the environmental benefits from mini-
mising the transportation distances within the concrete production lines (Table 6).

5. Conclusions
The environmental concerns directly linked to the construction industry induce the employment of
state-of-the-art methodologies for achieving the lowest possible environmental burdens and increas-
ing the level of sustainability of the construction. This paper conducts LCA of the concrete-
manufacturing process in small isolated states. Within this context, four different scenarios have
been developed and compared according to their environmental performance against four atmos-
pheric impact categories, GWP, AP, ODP, and POCP in particular. The findings of this study con-
cluded that the alternative energy scenario, where electricity was provided by solar PV, was superior
in terms of environmental performance. The specific scenario achieved more than 95% reductions in
the CO2 emissions and its GWP impact. Additionally, using renewable electricity for powering the
 14 C. CHRYSOSTOMOU ET AL.

raw-material-processing and concrete-manufacturing facilities manages to minimise the environ-

mental impacts related to acidification and photochemical ozone creation. Furthermore, the impact
categories directly linked to pollution in the troposphere –acidification and photochemical ozone
creation – show notable reductions in the scenarios where transportation distances were almost
eliminated. These scenarios dropped the AP by 12% and the POCP by 83%. It is important to
note that no single scenario is considered the optimal one or the only solution to the environmental
problems related to the construction industry; however this study should provide some indications
to the policy-makers and the related key stakeholders. Finally, further work can be performed on the
environmental performance of concrete production line by conducting cradle-to-cradle LCA, where
CRC will be considered. The recycle of concrete and the reuse as aggregates have the potential to
significantly reduce the embodied energy of concrete as a construction material.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

ORCID
Paris A. Fokaides http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4112-3819

References
Burchart-Korol, D. 2013. “Life Cycle Assessment of Steel Production in Poland: A Case Study.” Journal of Cleaner
Production 54: 235–243.
De Saulles, T. 2013. “Carbonation from an Environmental Perspective.” In Sustainable Construction. MPA – The
Concrete Centre. https://www.concretecentre.com/pdf/AR_Concrete_carbonation_April%202013.pdf.
Ede, A. N., S. O. Adebayo, E. I. Ugwu, and C. Emenike. 2014. “Life Cycle Assessment of Environmental Impacts of
Using Concrete or Timber to Construct a Duplex Residential Building.” Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering 11 (2): 62–72.
European Concrete Platform ASBL. 2009. Sustainable Benefits of Concrete. http://www.ermco.eu/documents/ermco-
documents/ecp_book_sustainable_benefits_of_concrete.pdf.
Fokaides, P. A., and A. Kylili. 2014. “Towards Grid Parity in Insular Energy Systems: The Case of Photovoltaics (PV) in
Cyprus.” Energy Policy 65: 223–228. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.045.
Fokaides, P. A., A. Kylili, A. Pyrgou, and C. J. Koroneos. 2014. “Integration Potentials of Insular Energy Systems to
Smart Energy Regions.” Energy Technology & Policy: An Open Access Journal 1 (1): 70–83. doi: 10.1080/
23317000.2014.969455.
GaBi. 2013. Software-System and Databases for Life Cycle Engineering. Version 6. Stuttgart, Echterdignen: PE
International.
Giama, E., and A. M. Papadopoulos. 2015. “Assessment Tools for the Environmental Evaluation of Concrete, Plaster
and Brick Elements Production.” Journal of Cleaner Production 99: 75–85.
ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2006. “ISO 14040:2006– Environmental Management- Life
Cycle Assessment-Principles and Framework.” ISO/TC 207 - Environmental management, July 1. http://www.iso.
org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=37456
Kjellsen, K. O., M. Guimaraes, and A. Nilsson. 2005. CO2 Uptake during the Concrete Life Cycle: The CO2 Balance of
Concrete in a Life Cycle Perspective. Oslo, Norway: Nordic Innovation Centre.
Lemay, L. 2011. “Life Cycle Assessment of Concrete Buildings.” Concrete Sustainability Report. National Ready Mix
Concrete Association. Accessed October 2011. http://www.nrmca.org/sustainability/.
Malhotra, V. M. 2004. “Role of Supplementary Cementing Materials and Superplastcizers in Reducing Greenhouse
Gas Emissions.” Paper presented at proceeding of ICFRC international conference on fiber composites, high-per-
formance concrete, and smart materials, 489–499. Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, India, January.
Mehta, P. K. 2001. “Reducing the Environmental Impact of Concrete.” Concrete International. http://maquinamole.
net/EcoSmartconcrete.com/docs/trmehta01.pdf.
Nicolaides, D., A. Kanellopoulos, and M. Petrou. 2011. “Concrete Engineering for Excellence and Efficiency.” Paper
presented at the proceedings of the fib symposium, 297–300. Czech Republic: Prague, June 2011.
Poullikkas, A., I. Hadjipaschalis, and G. Kourtis. 2010. “The Cost of Integration of Parabolic Trough CSP Plants in
Isolated Mediterranean Power Systems.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (5): 1469–1476. doi:10.1016/j.
rser.2010.01.003.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 15

Ramsey, D., A. Ghosh, A. Abbaszadegan, and J. Choi. 2014. Life Cycle Assessment of Pre-cast Concrete vs. Cast-in-place
Concrete. Phoenix, AZ: University of Arizona state, School of Sustainable Engineering and the build environment.
Schepper, M. D., P. V. D. Heede, I. V. Driessche, and N. D. Belie. 2014. “Life Cycle Assessment of Completely
Recyclable Concrete.” Materials 7 (8): 6010–6027. doi:10.3390/ma7086010.
Sterner, C. S. 2010. “Life Cycle Assessment of a Brick Bearing Wall: Using Longworth Hall, Cincinnati, Ohio, as a Point
of Departure.” http://www.carlsterner.com/research/files/Life_Cycle_Assessment_of_a_Brick_Bearing_Wall_2010.
pdf.
Struble, L., and J. Godfrey. 2004. “How Sustainable is Concrete?” International workshop on sustainable development
and concrete technology. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 201–211.
Downloaded by [Dr Paris Fokaides] at 19:51 16 November 2015

View publication stats