Comparative life cycle assessment of three 2030 scenarios of the Brazilian cement industry
The cement industry is intensive in energy and feedstock use. It includes three main phases: raw materials and energy supply, transport, and manufacturing. The sector is known for its considerable environmental impacts. The increase in energy efficiency and the use of non-fossil fuels and raw materi...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Environmental monitoring and assessment 2022-03, Vol.194 (3), p.153-153, Article 153 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 153 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 153 |
| container_title | Environmental monitoring and assessment |
| container_volume | 194 |
| creator | Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro Castelo Branco, David Alves Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos |
| description | The cement industry is intensive in energy and feedstock use. It includes three main phases: raw materials and energy supply, transport, and manufacturing. The sector is known for its considerable environmental impacts. The increase in energy efficiency and the use of non-fossil fuels and raw materials are considered mature technologies in cement industries. We evaluate different environmental impacts of the production of 1 t of cement in four Brazilian scenarios. We compare one business-as-usual reference scenario (case 1) to three alternative 2030 carbon mitigation sectoral plan scenarios (cases 2, 3a, and 3b) that assume mature technologies. We analyze all 18 impact categories within the ReCiPe 2016 Life Cycle Assessment methodology. Results show reductions in 17 impact categories, ranging from no change in ozone depletion (case 2) to 39% reduction in fossil resource scarcity (case 3b). The effects on climate change decreased 14% in case 2 and 33% in cases 3a and 3b. The clinkerization process is the greatest contributor to atmospheric impacts, while raw material consumption to toxicity impacts. In contrast, there is no single main process contributing to resource depletion impacts. The changes in cement production lead to carbon emission reductions above expected levels and to reductions in other environmental impact categories modeled in ReCiPe 2016 method. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10661-022-09822-y |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2626892137</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2626114539</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-c7de4c61cc7d341b5b6b8c82ea8da7a6f69e9572f4aa61dc6434133825a9bab03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtKxDAUhoMozjj6Ai4k4MZNNZcmaZY6eAPBjW7chDQ91Q69jEkr1Kc3Tr2ACzc5Iec7fw4fQoeUnFJC1FmgREqaEMYSorN4jltoToXiCdNCb6M5oVIlkks9Q3shrAghWqV6F824oJwJKufoadk1a-ttX70BrqsSsBtdDdiGACE00Pa4K3H_4gEwI5zg4KC1vurC9A74wtv3qq5six1s-KothtD7cR_tlLYOcPBVF-jx6vJheZPc3V_fLs_vEseV6BOnCkidpC5eeEpzkcs8cxkDmxVWWVlKDVooVqbWSlo4mUaK84wJq3ObE75AJ1Pu2nevA4TeNFXcsq5tC90QDJNMZppRriJ6_AdddYNv43YbitJUcB0pNlHOdyF4KM3aV431o6HEfJo3k3kTzZuNeTPGoaOv6CFvoPgZ-VYdAT4BIbbaZ_C_f_8T-wECeo63</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2626114539</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative life cycle assessment of three 2030 scenarios of the Brazilian cement industry</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro ; Castelo Branco, David Alves ; Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira ; de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</creator><creatorcontrib>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro ; Castelo Branco, David Alves ; Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira ; de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</creatorcontrib><description>The cement industry is intensive in energy and feedstock use. It includes three main phases: raw materials and energy supply, transport, and manufacturing. The sector is known for its considerable environmental impacts. The increase in energy efficiency and the use of non-fossil fuels and raw materials are considered mature technologies in cement industries. We evaluate different environmental impacts of the production of 1 t of cement in four Brazilian scenarios. We compare one business-as-usual reference scenario (case 1) to three alternative 2030 carbon mitigation sectoral plan scenarios (cases 2, 3a, and 3b) that assume mature technologies. We analyze all 18 impact categories within the ReCiPe 2016 Life Cycle Assessment methodology. Results show reductions in 17 impact categories, ranging from no change in ozone depletion (case 2) to 39% reduction in fossil resource scarcity (case 3b). The effects on climate change decreased 14% in case 2 and 33% in cases 3a and 3b. The clinkerization process is the greatest contributor to atmospheric impacts, while raw material consumption to toxicity impacts. In contrast, there is no single main process contributing to resource depletion impacts. The changes in cement production lead to carbon emission reductions above expected levels and to reductions in other environmental impact categories modeled in ReCiPe 2016 method.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-6369</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-2959</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10661-022-09822-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35132516</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Animals ; Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution ; Brazil ; Carbon ; Carbon emissions ; Categories ; Cement ; Cement industry ; Climate Change ; Climate effects ; Concrete ; Construction Industry ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Ecology ; Ecotoxicology ; Emissions ; Emissions control ; Energy ; Energy efficiency ; Environment ; Environmental impact ; Environmental Management ; Environmental Monitoring ; Environmental science ; Fossil fuels ; Impact analysis ; Industry ; Life cycle ; Life cycle analysis ; Life cycle assessment ; Life cycles ; Mitigation ; Monitoring/Environmental Analysis ; Ozone ; Ozone Depletion ; Pollutants ; Raw materials ; Resource depletion ; Toxicity</subject><ispartof>Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2022-03, Vol.194 (3), p.153-153, Article 153</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022</rights><rights>2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.</rights><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-c7de4c61cc7d341b5b6b8c82ea8da7a6f69e9572f4aa61dc6434133825a9bab03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-c7de4c61cc7d341b5b6b8c82ea8da7a6f69e9572f4aa61dc6434133825a9bab03</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9242-1288 ; 0000-0002-9053-7033 ; 0000-0003-1736-9827 ; 0000-0001-5352-4850</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10661-022-09822-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10661-022-09822-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35132516$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castelo Branco, David Alves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative life cycle assessment of three 2030 scenarios of the Brazilian cement industry</title><title>Environmental monitoring and assessment</title><addtitle>Environ Monit Assess</addtitle><addtitle>Environ Monit Assess</addtitle><description>The cement industry is intensive in energy and feedstock use. It includes three main phases: raw materials and energy supply, transport, and manufacturing. The sector is known for its considerable environmental impacts. The increase in energy efficiency and the use of non-fossil fuels and raw materials are considered mature technologies in cement industries. We evaluate different environmental impacts of the production of 1 t of cement in four Brazilian scenarios. We compare one business-as-usual reference scenario (case 1) to three alternative 2030 carbon mitigation sectoral plan scenarios (cases 2, 3a, and 3b) that assume mature technologies. We analyze all 18 impact categories within the ReCiPe 2016 Life Cycle Assessment methodology. Results show reductions in 17 impact categories, ranging from no change in ozone depletion (case 2) to 39% reduction in fossil resource scarcity (case 3b). The effects on climate change decreased 14% in case 2 and 33% in cases 3a and 3b. The clinkerization process is the greatest contributor to atmospheric impacts, while raw material consumption to toxicity impacts. In contrast, there is no single main process contributing to resource depletion impacts. The changes in cement production lead to carbon emission reductions above expected levels and to reductions in other environmental impact categories modeled in ReCiPe 2016 method.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</subject><subject>Brazil</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Carbon emissions</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Cement</subject><subject>Cement industry</subject><subject>Climate Change</subject><subject>Climate effects</subject><subject>Concrete</subject><subject>Construction Industry</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Emissions control</subject><subject>Energy</subject><subject>Energy efficiency</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Environmental Management</subject><subject>Environmental Monitoring</subject><subject>Environmental science</subject><subject>Fossil fuels</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Industry</subject><subject>Life cycle</subject><subject>Life cycle analysis</subject><subject>Life cycle assessment</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Mitigation</subject><subject>Monitoring/Environmental Analysis</subject><subject>Ozone</subject><subject>Ozone Depletion</subject><subject>Pollutants</subject><subject>Raw materials</subject><subject>Resource depletion</subject><subject>Toxicity</subject><issn>0167-6369</issn><issn>1573-2959</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtKxDAUhoMozjj6Ai4k4MZNNZcmaZY6eAPBjW7chDQ91Q69jEkr1Kc3Tr2ACzc5Iec7fw4fQoeUnFJC1FmgREqaEMYSorN4jltoToXiCdNCb6M5oVIlkks9Q3shrAghWqV6F824oJwJKufoadk1a-ttX70BrqsSsBtdDdiGACE00Pa4K3H_4gEwI5zg4KC1vurC9A74wtv3qq5six1s-KothtD7cR_tlLYOcPBVF-jx6vJheZPc3V_fLs_vEseV6BOnCkidpC5eeEpzkcs8cxkDmxVWWVlKDVooVqbWSlo4mUaK84wJq3ObE75AJ1Pu2nevA4TeNFXcsq5tC90QDJNMZppRriJ6_AdddYNv43YbitJUcB0pNlHOdyF4KM3aV431o6HEfJo3k3kTzZuNeTPGoaOv6CFvoPgZ-VYdAT4BIbbaZ_C_f_8T-wECeo63</recordid><startdate>20220301</startdate><enddate>20220301</enddate><creator>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro</creator><creator>Castelo Branco, David Alves</creator><creator>Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira</creator><creator>de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9242-1288</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9053-7033</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1736-9827</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5352-4850</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220301</creationdate><title>Comparative life cycle assessment of three 2030 scenarios of the Brazilian cement industry</title><author>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro ; Castelo Branco, David Alves ; Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira ; de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-c7de4c61cc7d341b5b6b8c82ea8da7a6f69e9572f4aa61dc6434133825a9bab03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</topic><topic>Brazil</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Carbon emissions</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Cement</topic><topic>Cement industry</topic><topic>Climate Change</topic><topic>Climate effects</topic><topic>Concrete</topic><topic>Construction Industry</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Emissions control</topic><topic>Energy</topic><topic>Energy efficiency</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Environmental Management</topic><topic>Environmental Monitoring</topic><topic>Environmental science</topic><topic>Fossil fuels</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Industry</topic><topic>Life cycle</topic><topic>Life cycle analysis</topic><topic>Life cycle assessment</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Mitigation</topic><topic>Monitoring/Environmental Analysis</topic><topic>Ozone</topic><topic>Ozone Depletion</topic><topic>Pollutants</topic><topic>Raw materials</topic><topic>Resource depletion</topic><topic>Toxicity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castelo Branco, David Alves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Environmental monitoring and assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Palermo, Giuseppe Cernicchiaro</au><au>Castelo Branco, David Alves</au><au>Fiorini, Ana Carolina Oliveira</au><au>de Freitas, Marcos Aurélio Vasconcelos</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative life cycle assessment of three 2030 scenarios of the Brazilian cement industry</atitle><jtitle>Environmental monitoring and assessment</jtitle><stitle>Environ Monit Assess</stitle><addtitle>Environ Monit Assess</addtitle><date>2022-03-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>194</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>153</spage><epage>153</epage><pages>153-153</pages><artnum>153</artnum><issn>0167-6369</issn><eissn>1573-2959</eissn><abstract>The cement industry is intensive in energy and feedstock use. It includes three main phases: raw materials and energy supply, transport, and manufacturing. The sector is known for its considerable environmental impacts. The increase in energy efficiency and the use of non-fossil fuels and raw materials are considered mature technologies in cement industries. We evaluate different environmental impacts of the production of 1 t of cement in four Brazilian scenarios. We compare one business-as-usual reference scenario (case 1) to three alternative 2030 carbon mitigation sectoral plan scenarios (cases 2, 3a, and 3b) that assume mature technologies. We analyze all 18 impact categories within the ReCiPe 2016 Life Cycle Assessment methodology. Results show reductions in 17 impact categories, ranging from no change in ozone depletion (case 2) to 39% reduction in fossil resource scarcity (case 3b). The effects on climate change decreased 14% in case 2 and 33% in cases 3a and 3b. The clinkerization process is the greatest contributor to atmospheric impacts, while raw material consumption to toxicity impacts. In contrast, there is no single main process contributing to resource depletion impacts. The changes in cement production lead to carbon emission reductions above expected levels and to reductions in other environmental impact categories modeled in ReCiPe 2016 method.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>35132516</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10661-022-09822-y</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9242-1288</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9053-7033</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1736-9827</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5352-4850</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0167-6369 |
| ispartof | Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2022-03, Vol.194 (3), p.153-153, Article 153 |
| issn | 0167-6369 1573-2959 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2626892137 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Animals Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution Brazil Carbon Carbon emissions Categories Cement Cement industry Climate Change Climate effects Concrete Construction Industry Earth and Environmental Science Ecology Ecotoxicology Emissions Emissions control Energy Energy efficiency Environment Environmental impact Environmental Management Environmental Monitoring Environmental science Fossil fuels Impact analysis Industry Life cycle Life cycle analysis Life cycle assessment Life cycles Mitigation Monitoring/Environmental Analysis Ozone Ozone Depletion Pollutants Raw materials Resource depletion Toxicity |
| title | Comparative life cycle assessment of three 2030 scenarios of the Brazilian cement industry |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T03%3A05%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20life%20cycle%20assessment%20of%20three%202030%20scenarios%20of%20the%20Brazilian%20cement%20industry&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20monitoring%20and%20assessment&rft.au=Palermo,%20Giuseppe%20Cernicchiaro&rft.date=2022-03-01&rft.volume=194&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=153&rft.epage=153&rft.pages=153-153&rft.artnum=153&rft.issn=0167-6369&rft.eissn=1573-2959&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10661-022-09822-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2626114539%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2626114539&rft_id=info:pmid/35132516&rfr_iscdi=true |