Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Carbon footprint analysis of calcined gypsum production in the Czech

Republic

Jan Fort, Robert Cerný*

kurova 7, CZ-166 29 Prague,

Department of Materials Engineering and Chemistry, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Tha
Czech Republic

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sustainable development efforts aimed at substantial reduction of carbon dioxide emissions focused
Available online 2 January 2018 research activities in this field, among others, on a partial or full replacement of Portland cement by
environmental more friendly alternatives. Calcined gypsum can be considered as one of possible options
Keywords: in that respect. However, although the environmental impact is an important issue, gypsum was
Calcined gypsum production analyzed only rarely and sufficiently accurate data are still missing. In this paper, a carbon footprint
Environmental assessment
analysis of two types of gypsum ranging from cradle to gate according to ISO 14067 is presented. The
Carbon footprint
inventory data based on primary data obtained from the producers of natural gypsum and flue gas
Natural gypsum
Flue gas desulfurization gypsum
desulfurization gypsum in the Czech Republic are completed by the emission factors obtained from the
literature survey. The results of the carbon footprint analysis show that the carbon dioxide emissions
related to the manufacturing of calcined gypsum from flue gas desulfurization gypsum are 105.3 kg of
carbon dioxide/t, i.e., 25.2% lower than for the application of natural gypsum. Calcination is identified as
the most harmful process from the point of view of carbon dioxide generation for both raw materials; it
is responsible for 55% and 72% of total carbon dioxide emissions for natural gypsum and flue gas
desulfurization gypsum, respectively. The obtained information is essential for further design and
development of new types of composites meeting the requirements of sustainable development better
than today’s mainstream solutions.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction one of the main sources at the generation of emissions having

The growth of human population accompanied with a fast
development of industry and transportation in some parts of the
world during the last several decades brought new challenges to
the human society. The threat of acceleration of global warming led
to a greater concern on anthropogenic carbon emissions and their
influence on the global climate. In the light of concerns associated
with the depletion of fossil fuels, excessive energy consumption
and consequent increase of concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere, the sustainability principles became more important
(Mikulci
c et al., 2016). The importance of preservation of environ-
mental conditions intensified the efforts aimed at the achievement
of sustainable development principles, thus mitigation of negative
externalities of human activities (Dincer, 2000; Panwar et al., 2011).
From this point of view, the building industry can be perceived as
* Corresponding author.

E-mail address: cernyr@fsv.cvut.cz (R. Cerný).
negative impact on the environment (Bigerna et al., 2017). How-
ever, contrary to some other industrial and transportation sectors,
where great efforts towards a substantial decrease of carbon di-
oxide emissions were already exerted successfully, the
manufacturing processes of many building materials cannot be
considered yet as satisfactory from an environmental perspective
(Bains et al., 2017; Requia et al., 2017).
Carbon dioxide emissions related to cement production (Uwasu
et al., 2014; Cai et al., 2008) belong to the highest among building
materials. According to the data of the International Energy Agency
(IEA, 2008), the production of cement is responsible for ~8% of
world carbon dioxide emissions. The calcination process and
heating to desired temperatures generate, in average, 0.81 kg of CO2
per 1 kg of cement (Chen et al., 2010). In addition to the harmful
effects on the environment, cement production may also present
risks to the human health. The investigations of Garcia-Perez et al.
(2015) revealed a higher potential risk of dying from cancer in the
50-km radius from industrial activities, such as lime or cement
manufacturing. Negative human health consequences related to

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.002
0959-6526/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
796 
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802
the cement use (exposure to allergens, free crystalline silica, or
hexavalent chromium) pose a serious risk as well (Moretti et al.,
2017). Therefore, new strategies leading to limitations of negative
impacts of cement production were formulated (Summbell et al.,
2016) and new approaches aimed at progressive and advanced
techniques (Valderrama et al., 2012) or at the substitution of fuel
base (Fyffe et al., 2015; Rovira et al., 2010) were developed lately.
However, the barriers related to a longtime payback of invested
capital, short-run decision, and mistrust to the application of un-
proven technologies still present the main limits to the application
of more efficient innovations in the cement industry (Chen, 2009;
Pardo et al., 2011).
Utilization of materials with lower energy demanding produc-
tion, which could partially replace Portland cement in binders, can
be considered as one of the prospective ways towards mitigation of
environmentally harmful effects related to cement manufacturing
(Turk et al., 2015). Slag (Rosales et al., 2017), fly ash (Hannesson
et al., 2012), or sewage sludge (Pavlík et al., 2016) can be
mentioned as characteristic examples in that respect. Another
alternative can be found in a complete replacement of Portland
cement by a different material base, at least in some practical ap-
plications. Here, calcined gypsum or geopolymers belong to the
most prospective solutions.
The availability of raw gypsum on the market is relatively wide
at present, the main sources being natural gypsum quarried in
certain locations and various types of waste gypsum appearing as
by-products of some industrial activities, e.g., flue-gas-
desulfurization-, phospho-, titano-, and boro-gypsum. However,
despite the long history of its use, gypsum finds currently only a
limited application in the building industry, mostly in the form of
plaster boards or interior plasters. Its potential for future applica-
tions is though much greater, e.g., as a material of load-bearing
structures (Tesarek et al., 2007) or lightweight construction mate-
rial with properties similar to cellular concrete (Vimmrov a et al.,
2011).
The positive effects of gypsum application in construction on
the environment were recognized already years ago, but mostly it
was on a general level only. For instance, Guo and Shi (2008)
concluded that the production of gypsum is less demanding on
energy inputs due to the lower temperature of raw material calci-
nation, and the carbon dioxide emissions related to the raw ma-
terial decomposition are also reduced. Suare z et al. (2016) referred
to significant savings achieved by the utilization of waste gypsum.
The lower decomposition temperature accompanied with
decreased energy consumption was used by Ling and Kwan (2016)
as a supporting fact of their research.
The analyses of the environmental impact of gypsum produc-
tion published to date were relatively rare and mostly suffered from
the lack of primary data. Jimene z-Rivero and García-Navarro (2016)
in one of the very few studies on gypsum life cycle used therefore
generic data derived from the case studies on similar building
materials. The problems related to the absence of primary data
were though noticed also for the most frequently analyzed building
materials, such as concrete (Dong et al., 2015). The results on the
evaluation of environmental impact of Portland cement found in
the scientific literature can serve as another example in that
respect, they varied from 662 kg (Deja et al., 2010) to 950 kg (Ali
et al., 2011) of CO2/t. Dong et al. (2015) assigned the lack of pri-
mary data on concrete partially to the unwillingness of industrial
subjects to provide real data about environmental impacts of their
main operating activity. However, some more objective factors,
such as purity of the raw material, used technology, transportation,
and other regional particularities (Zhang and Wang, 2016) can play
an important role as well. Therefore, in order to provide a
comprehensive overview of environmental impacts, the local
factors, such as composition of the energy mix, fuel base,
manufacturing technologies and efficiency, the legal framework,
and composition of the raw materials should be taken into account
(De Wolf et al., 2017; Heidari et al., 2017).
In this paper, the environmental assessment of calcined gypsum
production in the Czech Republic is presented. The analysis in-
cludes two major sources of raw gypsum, namely natural gypsum
and flue gas desulfurization (FGD) gypsum; the minor gypsum
sources, such as titanogypsum, phosphogypsum, or fluorogypsum,
are not considered. The carbon footprint related to calcined gypsum
manufacturing is determined for both types of raw gypsum and
compared with Portland cement. Contrary to some previous studies
published by other investigators, the calculations are based on
primary data obtained from the particular producers, and the
regional factors are taken into account.
2. Materials
2.1. Natural gypsum
Natural gypsum is the primary source for the production of
sulfate binders in the country. The Koberice quarry located in the
northeast (Silesian) part of the Czech Republic represents its
exclusive source. The beginning of mining dates back to 1965. The
area of quarry reaches 65 ha and the thickness of gypsum layer is
about 35 m. The raw material contains 60e85% of calcium sulfate
dihydrate with an admixture of clay and small amount of anhydrite.
A detailed composition of mined rock is given in Table 1. The gyp-
sum was formed by sedimentation in a closed water bay. Initially,
together with fine particles, the gray-colored lower benches, which
contain about 50% micro- and macro crystalline gypsum, gradually
settled. Later, the upper level was characterized by coarser crystals
with a higher gypsum content of up to 90%. The last layer, over-
burden, is made up of only 60% by gypsum and the rest are clays,
loess, and humus loams.
Material processing starts in the quarry by mining of the raw
material and ends after the production of gypsum hemihydrate
(Fig. 1). Gypsum extraction methods are based on the utilization of
stall mining procedures, such as drilling and rock blasting.
Exhausted materials are consequently loaded on trucks and taken
away to the first stage of screening to remove mudstone and other
undesirable content. Afterwards, the material is crushed, finely
grounded, and placed into the stock, where it is naturally pre-dried.
After a certain time period, depending on the intensity of the
mining, the material is moved by the belt conveyors toward the
calcination furnace using natural gas as fuel. Currently, the
modernized kiln with utilization of the residual waste heat pro-
vides about 5e10% fuel consumption savings compared to the
outdated kiln used in the previous period. The fired gypsum is
further moved by belt conveyors, milled to fine particles and moved
to the final storage. Currently, the production of natural gypsum is
Table 1
Mineralogical and oxide composition of the natural gypsum rock.
Component Amount (mass %)
CaSO4$2 H2O 60e80
CaSO4 <0.5
Water <10
Loss of ignition <16
SiO2 8e16
SO3 28e37
CaO 24e36
MgO 0.2e1
Al2O3 <1
Fe2O3 <1.6
 
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802 797

Fig. 1. Natural gypsum processing.

lower, as compared to the previous decades, which is due to the
increasing use of industrial gypsum. The annual production of
natural gypsum in this quarry varies from 20 to 25 thousand tones.
2.2. Flue gas desulfurization gypsum
FGD gypsum represents one of the major sources for calcined
gypsum manufacturing on a world scale (Lee et al., 2011). It can be
perceived as a waste product formed during combustion of coal. If
the coal has a high sulfur content, it is released during high tem-
perature combustion and forms a part of flue gas in the form of
sulfur dioxide. Efforts to mitigate the negative impact of coal
combustion on the environment result in desulfurization of the flue
gases in power stations and heating plants in large quantities.
Desulfurization is carried out in a dry way by fluid combustion in
such a way that limestone or dolomite is fed to the fuel and the
desulfurization process takes place already in the boiler (Fig. 2). The
hot combustion gases are first separated from solid particles in the
electrostatic precipitator and with an initial temperature of 180
C
enter the regenerative heat exchanger where they are cooled to
about 140
C. This dose of thermal energy is going into the absorber,
where desulfurization itself takes place. The absorber is a vertical
vessel with a circular cross section of ~15 m in diameter and
30e40 m in height. At the top, there are placed 3e4 shower planes
formed by a pipe network with special limestone suspension
nozzles. It contains very pure (98%) and finely ground
(d ¼ 0.09 mm) limestone which is converted to an aqueous sus-
pension with 25% CaCO3 before use. The flue gases are introduced
into the middle portion of the so-called absorption zone, the rising
ones are washed with a “spray” absorption agent and the reaction
of SO2 and CaCO3 takes place. Purified exhaust gases at 60
C leave
the absorber back to the heat exchanger, where they are reheated to
95
C to be fed into the chimney. The resulting suspension is
accumulated at the bottom, where the oxidation air is being
injected. A part of the absorber serves also as an indicator of
composition. The pH value reveals if the mixture still contains some
remaining limestone; in that case the sludge is introduced again
into the device (Guo and Shi, 2008). The produced gypsum has
excellent properties. It is characterized by large compact crystals
and high chemical purity (98%). The final humidity is about 10%.

Fig. 2. FGD gypsum processing.

798 
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802

3. Methods
Mining
The environmental assessment of gypsum manufacturing in the
Czech Republic was done using the calculation of carbon footprint
in accordance with ISO 14067 (2013), where technical specification
of carbon emissions is given. This document is based on ISO 14040 Transportation
(2006), 14044 (2006), 14020 (2000), and 14025 (2006) standards
which are often used for the environmental product declaration
and assessment of the environmental impact. Carbon labeling ac-
cording to ISO 14067 (2013) provides a modern and improved Milling and storage
analysis, as compared to PAS 2050 (2011) or WRI/WBCSD: The GHG
protocol (2011).
Based on ISO 14067 (2013), the application of carbon footprint
methods in this paper was done in the following steps: Calcination

a) Description of the studied product, intended application,

mapping of the manufacturing processes and the reasons for
carrying out the carbon footprint analysis.
Homogenization
b) Collection of data from the primary sources or usage of
generic data. Definition of the boundary conditions related to
the geographical scope, as well as the product system.
Storage
Description of the data quality, time boundary, allocation
procedures, and limitations. Definition of the functional unit
which shall be consistent with the goal and scope of the Fig. 3. Calcined gypsum production scheme for natural gypsum as raw material.
analysis. The primary purpose of the functional unit can be
perceived in provision of reference to which the inputs and
outputs are related.
c) Estimation of carbon footprint based on the energy con- Separation
sumption and transport distances related to the functional
unit. The result should express the global warming potential
as the index based on radiative properties of GHGs
measuring the radiative forcing of a unit mass of a given well- Dewatering
mixed GHGs in the present-day atmosphere over a chosen
time horizon, relative to that of carbon dioxide.
d) Interpretation and comparison of obtained results. Identifi-
cation of the most environmental harmful processes and
Transportation
stating the relevant limitations of variety potential uses.
Formulation of conclusions.
Calcination
3.1. Boundary conditions and functional unit

Processes involved from cradle to gate of manufacturing of Homogenization

calcined gypsum from natural gypsum and FGD gypsum were taken
into account according to the particular processing schemes (Figs. 3
and 4). The functional unit for carbon footprint evaluation was 1 ton
of calcined gypsum. Storage
3.2. Material and energy consumption inventory
Fig. 4. Calcined gypsum production scheme for FGD gypsum as raw material.

The data necessary for the particular inventories were obtained

directly from the producer companies, in order to get a compre-
hensive and real overview of the manufacturing processes and their
relation to the environment. Individual manufacturing processes
were involved and the obtained data were compared within a long-
term period to provide adequate and valid outputs. Transportation
of raw material within manufacturing processes was estimated for
small distances up to 5 km thanks to the beneficial location of the
production site close to the material source (quarry for natural
gypsum and coal combustion power plant for FGD gypsum). The
transportation of the finished material was neglected within this
study due to storage capacities in the manufacturing area. All
trucks, tractors and other machines were powered by diesel fuel
and their consumption was estimated using long-term consump-
tion records. The energy consumption of electrically powered
machines was based on the energy declaration provided by ma-
chine producers, coupled with the evidence of the factory energy
consumption records.
The gathered information on the raw material consumption, the
fuel/energy consumption and the production process is summa-
rized in Tables 2 and 3 in the form of material and energy con-
sumption flows.
The emission factors, thus carbon dioxide related to the fuel
consumption in certain life cycles and for transportation, were
determined on the basis of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC, 2006) devoted to the estimation of ratio factors be-
tween various fuel consumption of produced GHGs, namely of
74.1 kg CO2/GJ.
 
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802 799

Table 2 Table 5
Life cycle inventory of calcined gypsum production: natural gypsum as raw material. Comparison of cumulative carbon footprint of calcined gypsum production (cradle
to gate).
Process description Energy consumption Fuel type
per ton Process description Fuel type CO2 emissions/t of gypsum

Gypsum quarrying 6.5 l Diesel Natural gypsum FGD gypsum

Transportation to the separator 1.3 l Diesel
Gypsum quarrying Diesel 20.7 e
and crusher
Transportation to the Diesel 4.1 3.8
Crushing of raw material 36.3 kWh Electricity
separator and crusher
Transport to storage 8.6 kWh Electricity
Crushing Electricity 21.2 13.0
Transport to the calcination 3.5 kWh Electricity
Transport to storage Electricity 5.0 3.4
kiln from storage
Transport to the calcination Electricity 2.0 2.8
Calcination 40 m3 Natural gas
kiln from storage
Homogenization and transport 18.6 kWh Electricity
Calcination Natural gas 76.3 73.6
to the final storage
Homogenization and Electricity 10.8 8.8
transport to the final storage
Total 140.2 105.3
Table 3
Life cycle inventory of calcined gypsum production: FGD gypsum as raw material.

Process description Energy consumption Fuel type 4. Results and discussion

per ton

Separation and dewatering 24.3 kWh Electricity Table 5 shows the cumulative carbon footprint of calcined
of FGD gypsum gypsum production from natural gypsum and FGD gypsum.
Transport to storage 6.3 kWh Electricity Apparently, while the total greenhouse gas emissions related to the
Transport to the calcination 2.1 kWh Electricity
kiln from storage
processing of natural gypsum were 140.7 kg CO2/t of produced
Calcination 63 kg Mixture of fossil calcined gypsum, for FGD gypsum they were 25.2% lower. This
and alternative fuels difference could be assigned, in general, to easier processing
Homogenization and 15.4 kWh Electricity technologies of FGD gypsum.
transport to the final
Fig. 5 presents the share of the particular manufacturing stages
storage
on total carbon dioxide emissions. The highest environmental in-
fluence could be assigned to the calcination of gypsum in the kiln
(more than 50%), for both natural gypsum and FGD gypsum as raw
Emissions related to the calcination of raw gypsum at temper-
materials. Burning of a substantial amount of natural gas during
atures up to 180
C in the rotary calcination kiln powered by natural
this process can be perceived as a significant factor generating
gas were determined on the basis of the environmental declaration
greenhouse gas emissions and damaging the ozone layer. Taking
of the particular kiln from its producer. Provided data were further
into account the previous studies of various authors, the combus-
discussed with the kiln maintenance and recalculated according to
tion of fossil fuels is also accompanied with other negative exter-
the real natural gas consumption during the manufacturing process
nalities, such as production of formaldehyde, benzene, and other
of calcium hemihydrate with calcination temperature about 150
C
substances (Jiaqiang et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2018).
as the main product, namely about 57.3 kg CO2/GJ.
For natural gypsum as the raw material, the second most sig-
The secondary emission related to the usage of the electricity
nificant environmental burden was mining from the quarry. The
grid was calculated on the basis of the knowledge of the Czech
use of various machinery powered mainly by diesel fuel partici-
energy mix with the dominant share of combustion of fossil fuels
pated in the greenhouse gases (GHGs) production by about 15%.
and nuclear power plants. The secondary production of carbon
Crushing and separation of raw materials posed the third most
dioxide emissions generated by consumption of electricity from the
energy demanding process accompanied with excessive GHGs
grid were estimated on the basis of the of the WNA Report (2010) in
emissions, having only a slightly lower share than mining.
relation to the Czech electricity mix. Thus, the carbon dioxide
On the other hand, for FGD gypsum dewatering of the material
emissions coming from electricity consumption were determined
obtained from the desulfurization procedure and its separation
as the weighted average of particular energy sources, namely
from the other residual compounds was the second most important
49.3 kg CO2/GJ. The Czech national energy mix used for electricity
process from an environmental point of view. The energy expended
production is given in Table 4.
here depended on the employed technology (hydrocyclones, in-
dustrial centrifugas, and belt filters); the process was responsible
for ~13% of cumulative amount of carbon dioxide. However, hereby
formed calcium sulfate dihydrate with up to 10% of water had a
Table 4 significantly lower demand on homogenization, as compared to
Czech energy mix. natural gypsum processing.
Energy source Share [%]
Mining and crushing were thus responsible for the major part of
differences between the carbon dioxide emissions related to
Renewable 10.11
manufacturing of calcined gypsum from natural gypsum and FGD
Sun 2.77
Wind 0.63 gypsum.
Water 1.15 The total share of transportation between particular production
Biomass 5.57 stages counted for natural gypsum processing only 8%, for FGD
Fossil 59.53 gypsum even less, and it was minor compared to the others. This
Lignite 43.91
Black coal 6.97
fact could be assigned in the case of natural gypsum to building the
Natural gas 8.4 whole manufactory in a close neighborhood of the quarry, for FGD
Others 0.25 gypsum to the absence of transportation from the quarry. The ho-
Nuclear 30.36 mogenization of calcium sulfate hemihydrate and transportation to
800
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802
160
140
120
kg CO2/t of gypsum
100
80
60
40
20
0 Gypsum quarring
NG
Fig. 5. Comparison of carbon footprint of natural gypsum (NG) and FGD gypsum production.
the storage had a share of about 7e8% for both natural gypsum and
FGD gypsum processing.
Summarizing the results of the environmental assessment, the
utilization of FGD gypsum is in the conditions of the Czech Republic
beneficial and the need for the replacement of natural gypsum is
obvious. However, in many countries the production of FGD gyp-
sum is significantly limited and moreover, according to the
worldwide carbon dioxide emissions restrictions (Desai et al.,
2015), the operation of power plants based on the combustion of
fossil fuels with excessive sulfur content can be restricted in the
mid or long-time horizon. The consideration about carbon dioxide
taxation in relation to the fulfillment of restriction targets became
more actual in near future (Thao and Du, 2015). Implementation of
the tax pricing as an instrument for moderation of carbon dioxide
emission can significantly increase prices of many materials, thus
decrease their utilization (Sathre and Gustavsson, 2007; He et al.,
2015).
As the main regional factors related to the environmental
assessment of calcined gypsum production in the Czech Republic,
the used machinery, the purity of the raw material, and in partic-
ular the composition of the electricity mix, could be considered.
The major share of the electricity comes in the Czech Republic from
combustion of fossil fuels (60%), mostly lignite. Nuclear power
plants contribute with about 30%, and the rest, i.e., only 10%, is
supplied by the renewable power plants, despite the high sub-
ventions for alternative and renewable energy sources. The com-
bustion of lignite is accompanied with excessive carbon dioxide
emission, as compared to the other sources, even with other fossil
fuels. Whilst production of 1 kWh from combustion of natural gas is
responsible for ~0.2 kg CO2, the combustion of lignite produces
~0.36 kg CO2 per kWh (WNA Report, 2010). Compared to the other
sources of energy, the coal combustion energy plants are 10 times
more harmful to the environment than nuclear power plants and
about 50 times than renewable energy sources from the carbon
dioxide production point of view (WNA Report, 2010). Therefore,
the collection of regionally focused inventories and other

Homogenization and
transport to the final
storage
Calcination
Trasport to the calcination
kiln from storage
Transport to storage
Crushing
Transportation to the
separator and crusher
FGD
geographically specific data was very important for the analyses
presented in this paper. This was obvious, e.g., in a comparison with
the study of Lee et al. (2011) where the calculation of the envi-
ronmental footprint of gypsum industry in the USA was presented.
The substitution of natural gypsum by FGD gypsum resulted, ac-
cording to Lee et al. (2011), in huge cumulative energy savings on
the national level when the USA energy mix was considered. The
calculations in this paper performed for the Czech energy mix
showed significantly lower savings.
The comparison of the environmental impact of calcined gyp-
sum with Portland cement as the most frequently used binder in
the building industry clearly favors both calcined gypsum binders
analyzed in this paper. While carbon dioxide emissions related to
the production of calcined gypsum were 140 kg CO2/t for natural
gypsum and 105 kg for FGD gypsum as raw material, the CO2
emissions at Portland cement production varied from 662 to 950 kg
of CO2/t (Table 6), depending on the regional and technological
factors, such as the purity of raw materials, manufacturing tech-
niques, transport distances, used fuel base, and different national
energy mixes.
Considering the ambitious carbon dioxide emission targets of
the European Union and the contribution of cement industry to the
total CO2 emissions, the application of calcined gypsum as an
alternative binder in some applications in the building industry can
be perceived as a promising option (Lee et al., 2016; Vasconcelos
et al., 2015; Baspinar and Kahraman, 2011). Apparently, gypsum is
not able to provide an efficient solution for such a wide range of
applications as cement but many promising possibilities of gypsum
utilization were already found during the last decades (Degirmenci,
2008; Garg and Jain, 2010; Zhou et al., 2012). The environmental
impact of calcined gypsum manufacturing, which can be at least
five to six times (for natural gypsum and FGD gypsum as raw ma-
terials, respectively) lower than for Portland cement, gives a clear
evidence of the great potential of calcined gypsum binders from the
sustainability point of view.
 
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802
Table 6
Worldwide comparison of CO2 emissions per ton of cement.
Country CO2 emission/t Reference
of cement [kg]
USA 950 Ali et al., 2011
China 503e996 Lei et al., 2011, Cao et al., 2016
Canada 832 Ali et al., 2011
Mexico 872 Ali et al., 2011
Japan 766 Li et al., 2015
Germany 779 Feiz et al., 2015
Italy 641e964 Moretti and Caro, 2017
Spain 799 García-Gusano et al., 2015
Poland 578e871 Deja et al., 2010,
 ski and Buczkowski, 2017
Iglin
5. Conclusions
The carbon footprint analysis of calcined gypsum production in the
Czech Republic was performed to assess its environmental impact.
Two major sources of raw gypsum in the region, namely natural
gypsum and FGD gypsum, were considered. Based on the primary
data gathered from the material producers, a regionally based com-
parison of the two major manufacturing processes and a comparison
of particular processes related to each raw material was done.
The results of the environmental assessment showed for FGD
gypsum as the raw material a carbon footprint of 105.3 kg CO2/t of
calcined gypsum, which was 25.2% lower than for natural gypsum.
Calcination was identified as the most harmful process from the
point of view of carbon dioxide generation for both materials; it
was responsible for 55% and 72% of total CO2 emissions for natural
gypsum and FGD gypsum, respectively.
The remaining manufacturing processes participated in the
production of carbon dioxide in lower extent only. During the
processing of natural gypsum, the quarrying and crushing of raw
material constituted the second most important environmental
burden (~30% of total CO2 emissions). At the FGD gypsum treat-
ment, 13% of cumulative amount of carbon dioxide was generated
due to dewatering and separation of original material from other
compounds in the absorber tank. The total share of transportation
between the particular production stages counted for natural
gypsum only 8%, for FGD gypsum even less. The homogenization of
calcium sulfate hemihydrate and transportation to the storage had
a share of about 7e8% for both natural gypsum and FGD gypsum.
Summarizing the data describing the environmental footprint of
calcined gypsum production from various sources obtained in this
paper, it can be concluded that calcined gypsum, considering the
carbon dioxide generation, can be perceived as significantly
friendlier than most current binders. In a comparison with Portland
cement, the carbon dioxide emissions calculated for natural gyp-
sum and FGD gypsum as raw materials were found to be at least
5e6 times lower. It should also be noted that the application of FGD
gypsum as a waste product in the building industry instead of its
landfilling brings another benefit to the environment and presents
an essential factor for the sustainable waste disposal according to
the EU Landfill directives. The obtained data can be further utilized
for a complex design of new multicomponent binders with satis-
factory functional properties and lower environmental burden.
Acknowledgement
This research has been supported by the Czech Science Foun-
dation, under project No 16-01438S.
References
Ali, M.B., Saidur, R., Hossain, M.S., 2011. A review on emission analysis in cement
801
industries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 2252e2261. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2011.02.014.
Bains, P., Psarras, P., Wilcox, J., 2017. CO2 capture from the industry sector. Prog.
Energy Combust. 63, 146e172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.07.001.
Baspinar, M.S., Kahraman, E., 2011. Modifications in the properties of gypsum
construction element via addition of expanded macroporous silica granules.
Construct. Build. Mater. 25 (8), 3327e3333. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2011.03.022.
Bigerna, S., Bollino, C.A., Micheli, S., Polinori, P., 2017. Revealed and stated prefer-
ences for CO2 emissions reduction: the missing link. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 68, 1213e1221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.020.
Cai, W., Wang, C., Chen, J., Wang, K., Zhang, Y., Lu, X., 2008. Comparison of CO2
emissions scenarios and mitigation opportunities in China’s five sector in 2020.
Energy Pol. 36, 1181e1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.11.030.
Cao, Z., Shen, L., Zhao, J., Liu, L., Zhong, S., Sun, Y., Yang, Y., 2016. Toward a better
practice for estimating the CO2 emission factors of cement production: an
experience from China. J. Clean. Prod. 139, 527e539. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2016.08.070.
Chen, C., Habert, G., Bouzidi, Y., Jullien, A., 2010. Environmental impact of cement
production: detail of the different processes and cement plant variability
evaluation. J. Clean. Prod. 18, 478e485. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2009.12.014.
Chen, Y., 2009. Does a regional greenhouse gas policy make sense? A case study of
carbon leakage and emissions spillover. Energy Econ. 31 (5), 667e675. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.02.003.
De Wolf, C., Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A., 2017. Measuring embodied carbon dioxide
equivalent of buildings: a review and critique of current industry practice.
Energy Build. 140, 68e80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.01.075.
Degirmenci, N., 2008. Utilization of phosphogypsum as raw and calcined material in
manufacturing of building products. Construct. Build. Mater. 22 (8), 1857e1862.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.04.024.
Deja, J., Ulliasz-Bochenczyk, A., Mokrzycki, E., 2010. CO2 emissions from Polish
cement industry. Int. J. Greenh. Gas. Con. 4 (4), 583e588. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.02.002.
Desai, M.A., Rogers, J.V., Smith, K.R., 2015. Applications of a joint CO2 and CH4
climate debt metric: insights into global patterns and mitigation priorities.
Global Environ. Chang. Times 35, 176e189. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.gloenvcha.2015.08.001.
Dincer, I., 2000. Renewable energy and sustainable development: a crucial review.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 4 (2), 157e175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-
0321(99)00011-8.
Dong, H., Ng, T.S., Kwan, H.K., Wu, S.K., 2015. Substituting local data for overseas life
cycle inventories e a case study of concrete products in Hong Kong. J. Clean.
Prod. 87, 414e422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.005.
Feiz, R., Ammenberg, J., Baas, L., Eklund, M., Helgstrans, A., Marschall, R., 2015.
Improving the CO2 performance of cement, part I: utilizing life-cycle assess-
ment and key performance indicators to assess development within the cement
industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2015 (98), 282e291. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2014.01.083.
Fyffe, J.R., Breckel, A.C., Townsend, A.K., Webber, M.E., 2015. Use of MFR residue as
alternative fuel in cement production. Waste Manag. 47, 276e284. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.05.038.
García-Gusano, D., Garraín, D., Herrera, I., Cabal, H., Lecho n, Y., 2015. Life cycle
assessment of applying CO2 post-combustion capture to the Spanish cement
production. J. Clean. Prod. 104, 328e338. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2013.11.056.
Garcia-Perez, J., Lopez-Abente, G., Castello , A., Gonzalez-Sanchez, M., Fern andez-
Navarro, P., 2015. Cancer mortality in towns in the vicinity of installations for
the production of cement, lime, plaster, and magnesium oxide. Chemosphere
128, 103e110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.01.020.
Garg, M., Jain, N., 2010. Waste gypsum from intermediate dye industries for pro-
duction of building materials. Construct. Build. Mater. 24 (9), 1632e1637.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.02.029.
Guo, X.L., Shi, H.S., 2008. Thermal treatment and utilization of flue gas desulphu-
rization gypsum as an admixture in cement and concrete. Construct. Build.
Mater. 22, 1471e1476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.04.001.
Hannesson, G., Kuder, K., Shogen, R., 2012. The influence of high volume of fly ash
and slag on the compressive strength of self-consolidating concrete. Construct.
Build. Mater. 30, 161e168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.11.046.
He, P., Zhang, W., Xu, X., Bian, Y., 2015. Production lot-sizing and carbon emissions
under cap-and-trade and carbon tax regulations. J. Clean. Prod. 103, 241e248.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.102.
Heidari, M.D., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Mobli, H., Omid, M., Rafiee, S., van Zelm, R., 2017.
Regionalised life cycle assessment of pasta production in Iran: damage to
terrestrial ecosystems. J. Clean. Prod. 159, 141e146. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2017.05.073.
IEA, 2008. CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion. International Energy Agency, Paris,
France, p. 512.
 ski, B., Buczkowski, R., 2017. Development of cement industry in Poland e
Iglin
history, current state, ecological aspects. A review. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 702e720.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.139.
IPCC, 2006. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories,
pp. 1e89. Reference Manual Estimated Emission Factors for US Non-Road Mo-
bile Sources, Table 1-47.
ISO 14020, 2000. Environmental Labels and Declarations. General Principles.
802 
J. For t, R. Cerný / Journal of Cleaner Production 177 (2018) 795e802
International Organization for Standardization, Geneve.
ISO 14025, 2006. Environmental Labels and Declarations. Environmental Labeling
Type III, Principles and Procedures. International Organization for Standardi-
zation, Geneve.
ISO 14040, 2006. Environmental Management. Life Cycle Assessment. Principles
and Framework. International Organization for Standardization, Geneve.
ISO 14044, 2006. Environmental Management. Life Cycle Assessment. Re-
quirements and Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization,
Geneve.
ISO/TS 14067, 2013. Greenhouse Gases. Carbon Footprint of Products. Requirements
and Guidelines for Quantification and Communication (Technical Specifica-
tions). International Organization for Standardization, Geneve.
Jiaqiang, E., Peng, Q., Pham, M., Zhao, D., Deng, Y., Le, D., Zuo, W., Zhu, H., Liu, T.,
Zhang, Z., 2017. Effect of different technologies on combustion and emissions of
the diesel engine fueled with biodiesel: a review. Renew. Sust. Dev. 80,
620e647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.250.
Jimene z-Rivero, A., García-Navarro, J., 2016. Indicators to measure the management
performance of end-of-life gypsum: from deconstruction to production of
recycled gypsum. Waste Biomass. Valor. 7, 913e927. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12649-016-9561-x.
Lee, J.C., Bradshaw, S.L., Edil, T.B., Benson, C.H., Quantifying the benefits if flue gas
desulfurization gypsum in sustainable wallboard production, in World of Coal
Ash Conference, May 9-12, 2011, Denver, USA.
Lee, J.W., Jang, Y.I., Park, W.S., Kim, S.W., 2016. A study on mechanical properties of
porous concrete using cementless binder. Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 10,
527e537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40069-016-0166-3.
Lei, Y., Zhang, Q., Nielsen, C., He, K., 2011. An inventory of primary air pollutants and
CO2 emissions from cement production in China, 1990e2020. Atmos. Environ.
45, 147e154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.09.034.
Li, Ch, Cui, S., Nie, Z., Gong, X., Wang, Z., Itsubo, N., 2015. The LCA of Portland cement
production in China. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20, 117e127. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11367-014-0804-4.
Ling, S.K., Kwan, A.K.H., 2016. Adding limestone fines as cementitious paste
replacement to lower carbon footprint of SCC. Construct. Build. Mater. 111,
326e336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.072.
Mikul ci
c, H., Klemes, J.J., Vujanovi c, M., Urbaniec, K., Dui c, N., 2016. Reducing
greenhouse gasses emissions by fostering the deployment of alternative raw
materials and energy sources in the cleaner cement manufacturing process.
J. Clean. Prod. 136, 119e132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.145.
Moretti, L., Caro, S., 2017. Critical analysis of the life cycle assessment of the Italian
cement industry. J. Clean. Prod. 152, 198e210. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2017.03.136.
Moretti, L., Di Mascio, P., Bellagamba, S., 2017. Environmental, human health and
socio-economic effects of cement powders: the multicriteria analysis as Deci-
sion Methodology. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. 14 (6), 645. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph14060645.
Pavlík, Z., Fort, J., Za leska
, M., Pavlíkova , M., Trník, A., Medved, I., Keppert, M.,

Koutsoukos, P.G., Cerný, R., 2016. Energy-efficient thermal treatment of sewage
sludge for its application in blended cements. J. Clean. Prod. 112 (1), 409e419.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.072.
Panwar, N.L., Kaushik, S.C., Kothari, S., 2011. Role of renewable energy sources in
environmental protection: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (3),
1513e1524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.11.037.
Pardo, N., Moya, J.A., Mercier, A., 2011. Prospective on the energy efficiency and CO2
emissions in the EU cement industry. Energy 36, 3244e3254. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2011.03.016.
PAS 2050, 2011. Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas
Emissions of Goods and Services. British Standards Institution, London.
Requia, W.J., Adams, M.D., Arain, A., Koutrakis, P., Ferguson, M., 2017. Carbon dioxide
emissions of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles: a life-cycle analysis in eight Ca-
nadian cities. Renew. Sust. Dev. 78, 1390e1396. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2017.05.105.
Rosales, J., Cabrera, M., Agrela, F., 2017. Effect of stainless steel slag waste as a
replacement for cement in mortars. Mechanical and statistical study. Construct.
Build. Mater. 142, 444e458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.082.
Rovira, J., Mari, M., Nadal, M., Schuhmacher, M., Domingo, J.L., 2010. Partial
replacement of fossil fuel in a cement plant: risk assessment for the population
living in the neighborhood. Sci. Total Environ. 408, 5372e5380. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.060.
Sathre, R., Gustavsson, L., 2007. Effects of energy and carbon taxes on building
material competitives. Energy Build. 39, 488e494. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.enbuild.2006.09.005.
Suarez, S., Roca, X., Gasso, S., 2016. Product-specific life cycle assessment of recycled
gypsum as a replacement for natural gypsum in ordinary Portland cement:
application on the Spanish context. J. Clean. Prod. 117, 150e159. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.044.
Summbell, D.L., Barlow, C.Y., Cullen, J.M., 2016. Potential reduction of carbon
emissions by performance improvement: a cement industry case study. J. Clean.
Prod. 135, 1327e1339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.155.
rek, P., Drchalov
Tesa a, J., Kolísko, J., Rovnaníkova 
, P., Cerný, R., 2007. Flue gas
desulfurization gypsum: study of basic mechanical, hydric and thermal prop-
erties. Construct. Build. Mater. 21, 1500e1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2006.05.009.
Thao, X., Du, D., 2015. Forecasting carbon dioxide emissions. J. Environ. Manag. 160,
39e44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.06.002.
Turk, J., Coti
c, Z., Mladenovi 
c, A., Sajna, A., 2015. Environmental evaluation of green
concretes versus conventional concrete by means of LCA. Waste Manag. 45,
194e205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.06.035.
Uwasu, M., Hara, K., Yabar, H., 2014. World cement production and environmental
implications. Environ. Dev. 10, 36e47. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.envdev.2014.02.005.
Valderrama, C., Granados, R., Cortina, J.L., Gasol, C.M., Guillem, M., Josa, A., 2012.
Implementation of best available techniques in cement manufacturing: a life-
cycle assessment study. J. Clean. Prod. 25, 60e67. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2011.11.055.
Vasconcelos, G., Lourenco, P.B., Camoes, A., Martins, A., Cunha, S., 2015. Evaluation
of the performance of recycled textile fibres in the mechanical behaviour of a
gypsum and cork composite material. Cement Concr. Compos. 58, 29e39.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2015.01.001.
Vimmrov 
a, A., Keppert, M., Svoboda, L., Cerný, R., 2011. Lightweight gypsum com-
posites: design strategies for multi-functionality. Cement Concr. Compos. 33,
84e89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2010.09.011.
WNA Report, 2010. Comparison of Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various
Electricity Generation Sources. World Nuclear Association, London.
Zhang, W., Sun, Q., Yang, X., 2018. Thermal effects on arsenic emissions during coal
combustion proces. Sci. Total Environ. 612, 582e589. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scitotenv.2017.08.262.
Zhang, X., Wang, F., 2016. Assessment of embodied carbon emissions for building
construction in China: comparative case studies using alternative methods.
Energy Build. 130, 330e340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.08.080.
Zhou, J., Gao, H., Shu, Z., Wang, Y., Yan, Ch, 2012. Utilization of waste phospho-
gypsum to prepare non-fired bricks by a novel HydrationeRecrystallization
process. Construct. Build. Mater. 34, 114e119. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2012.02.045.