Skip to content
Environment Dashboard

Data

Extra cost of cement clinker with CO2 capture, percent (CEMCAP)

How much CO2 capture raises the cost of making clinker in one modelled European cement plant, as the CEMCAP project states it: by 49 to 92 percent, depending on the capture technology.

Latest value

49%

A modelled European reference cement plant, 2014. Version Energies 12(3), 542 (2019).

As published

“In general, the cost of clinker increases with 49–92% from the 62.6 €/tclk in the reference cement plant when the investigated CO 2 capture technologies are implemented.”

Comparison of technologies for CO2 capture from cement production, part 2, cost analysis (CEMCAP), Section 4.1, p. 9. Checked word for word against the stored copy of the document every time the data is rebuilt.

Every value

Extra cost of cement clinker with CO2 capture, percent (CEMCAP), every published value
End of the stated rangePeriodValue (%)Status
Low endSection 4.1, p. 9: "In general, the cost of clinker increases with 49–92% from the 62.6 €/tclk in the reference cement plant when the investigated CO 2 capture technologies are implemented."201449final
High endSection 4.1, p. 9: "In general, the cost of clinker increases with 49–92% from the 62.6 €/tclk in the reference cement plant when the investigated CO 2 capture technologies are implemented."201492final

Where it comes from

Producer
Gardarsdottir, De Lena, Romano, Roussanaly, Voldsund, Pérez-Calvo, Berstad, Fu, Anantharaman, Sutter, Gazzani, Mazzotti and Cinti (SINTEF, Politecnico di Milano, ETH Zurich, Italcementi; the CEMCAP project); published in Energies (MDPI) · Comparison of technologies for CO2 capture from cement production, part 2, cost analysis (CEMCAP)
Version
Energies 12(3), 542 (2019)
File
https://www.research-collection.ethz.ch/server/api/core/bitstreams/b427f6c2-8368-4a12-b35c-80c1661bbc95/content
Fetched
2026-10-08 (by a person), 2,108,286 bytes
Fingerprint
sha256 50f05980ed4f097af1655f3a9160d32c188e11558188f55dfca2a1295b24b94d
Copies
No Wayback copy recorded yet.Our copy of the exact file
Cite the producer
Gardarsdottir, S.O.; De Lena, E.; Romano, M.; Roussanaly, S.; Voldsund, M.; Pérez-Calvo, J.-F.; Berstad, D.; Fu, C.; Anantharaman, R.; Sutter, D.; Gazzani, M.; Mazzotti, M.; Cinti, G. Comparison of Technologies for CO2 Capture from Cement Production—Part 2: Cost Analysis. Energies 2019, 12, 542. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12030542

What was done to it

  1. Read the text of the PDF (sha256 50f05980ed4f…). Found each of the 1 quoted statement(s) word for word on PDF page(s) 10, and the 3 context sentence(s) the scope relies on, before publishing.

    Code: pipeline/src/envdash/transforms/action/green_premium.py · code sha256 c2e591e4a0510a3d… · inputs 50f05980ed4f…

  2. Published each number exactly as printed, with its statement in the value's note. A range 'A-B%' is published as its low end A and high end B (dimension 'bound'); nothing was computed, rounded or combined with any other source.

    Code: pipeline/src/envdash/transforms/action/green_premium.py · code sha256 c2e591e4a0510a3d… · inputs 50f05980ed4f…

What it covers

Geography
A modelled European reference cement plant
Basis
One modelled best-available-technology European cement plant (3,000 tonnes of clinker a day, defined by ECRA), without CO2 capture and with each of six capture technologies, on one set of prices: coal 3 euros per gigajoule, electricity 58.1 euros per megawatt-hour, 8% discount rate, 91.3% capacity factor, all costs in 2014 euros, no carbon tax. The reference plant's direct cost is based on IEAGHG estimates. Capture covers most but not all of the plant's emissions. The period is the price base year (2014); the article was published in 2019.
Unit
percent more than the conventional route (%)