Environmental implications of concrete industry practices in Cameroon: A life cycle

approach
Nimpa Giscard Desting *, Deodonne Kunwufne, Minane Jacques Rémy and Tinchie Donald

National Advanced School of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering and Urban Planning; University of Yaoundé I –
Cameroon.

Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

Publication history: Received on 07 March 2025; revised on 23 April 2025; accepted on 25 April 2025

Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/gjeta.2025.23.1.0138

Abstract
Rapid urbanization in sub-Saharan Africa is driving a sharp increase in concrete use, raising significant environmental
concerns. This study evaluates the environmental impacts of concrete production in Cameroon through a life cycle
assessment (LCA), with the aim of identifying effective strategies for impact reduction. The analysis is based on primary
data from 18 concrete batching plants across major urban centers, combined with national-level secondary data. It
follows ISO 14040 standards and applies the IMPACT 2002+ method within SimaPro 9.0. The functional unit is 1 m³ of
ready-mix concrete. Cement production accounts for the majority of impacts, contributing over 80% of greenhouse gas
emissions (347 kg CO₂-eq/m³ out of 427 kg CO₂-eq/m³), 57% of non-renewable energy use, and most human health
effects (168 DALYs/year). Clinker content is the main driver of emissions, while electricity use and transport distances
have smaller effects. Results related to human toxicity vary across impact assessment methods. By combining empirical
data with regional assumptions, this study addresses a gap in LCA research for emerging economies. It highlights the
need for clinker substitution, improved energy efficiency, and optimized logistics to reduce the environmental footprint
of concrete.

Keywords: Concrete industry; Cameroon; Life Cycle Assessment; cement production; Carbon Footprint; building
materials

1. Introduction
Concrete remains the cornerstone of modern construction, with global production surpassing 30 billion tonnes
annually, making it the most consumed man-made material by volume [1]. Its extensive use in both industrialized and
rapidly developing regions reflects an accelerating demand for resilient infrastructure, particularly in the face of
urbanization, demographic shifts, and climate adaptation imperatives [2, 3]. However, the environmental burden of
concrete production is considerable. Cement manufacturing, its most energy and emissions intensive component, is
alone responsible for approximately 7–8% of global anthropogenic CO₂ emissions, largely due to the calcination of
limestone and the combustion of fossil fuels during clinker production [4, 5].

The construction sector’s contribution to climate change, resource depletion, and ecosystem degradation has intensified
calls for sustainability-driven transformation, particularly in emerging economies where urban growth is most rapid [6,
7, 8]. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), standardized by ISO 14040 and ISO 14044, has emerged as the principal
methodological framework for evaluating environmental impacts across the entire life cycle of building materials, from
raw material extraction to end-of-life management [9, 10, 11]. Yet, despite LCA’s growing application in high-income
contexts, its deployment in sub-Saharan Africa remains limited due to insufficient regional life cycle inventory (LCI)
data and fragmented production systems [12, 13, 14].


Corresponding author: Nimpa Giscard Desting
Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0.
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

In the Cameroonian context, concrete production is undergoing rapid expansion driven by large-scale public
infrastructure initiatives and rising housing demand [15, 16]. However, the industry is characterized by a dual structure:
formal, industrial-scale batching plants with relatively advanced technologies coexist with informal, decentralized
mixing practices in peri-urban and rural settings. This heterogeneity leads to inconsistent quality control, variable
environmental performance, and a general lack of traceability in material flows. Compounded by an absence of reliable,
geographically contextualized life cycle inventory (LCI) datasets, the environmental implications of concrete production
in Cameroon remain poorly understood.

Addressing this knowledge gap is critical not only for national sustainability planning but also for contributing to global
decarbonization goals within the construction sector [17]. As environmental impacts of concrete vary significantly with
local energy mixes, raw material sourcing, and production technologies, context-specific LCA studies are essential for
generating actionable insights [18]. Furthermore, aligning such research with advanced LCA platforms and multi-impact
methods, such as IMPACT 2002+, ReCiPe, or Eco-Indicator 99, can enhance methodological rigor and support robust
decision-making frameworks [19].

This study seeks to develop a comprehensive, locally calibrated Life Cycle Assessment of concrete production in
Cameroon. By leveraging empirical field data, stakeholder engagement, and advanced modeling techniques, it aims to
identify critical environmental hotspots, examine the implications of technological and logistical choices, and inform
pathways toward low-carbon, resource-efficient construction practices in the region.

2. Methodological framework of the LCA

2.1. Brief overview of the concrete industry in Cameroon

This section provides a detailed overview of the concrete industry in Cameroon, with a focus on the sourcing and
processing of raw materials as well as the production methods commonly employed across the country. Particular
attention is given to the technological infrastructure, production systems, and key organizational actors shaping the
sector.

2.1.1. Mapping the concrete production sector in Cameroon

A survey identified 18 operational concrete batching plants across multiple regions, including urban centers like
Yaounde, Douala, Bafoussam, Garoua, and Maroua. To illustrate the industrial landscape, Table 1 presents a summary
of the main concrete production companies identified during field investigations, including their geographic
distribution and operational status.

Table 1 Concrete batching plants identified in Cameroon

N° Identified concrete batching plants Geographic distribution Operational status

1 Cimencam Centre - Yaounde Operational – Under construction
2 KT&CO Centre - Yaounde Operational – Fixed plant
3 Cameroun Concentre Company Sarl (CMCC) Centre - Yaounde Operational – Fixed plant
4 Béton Construction et Carrière (BCC) Centre - Yaounde Operational – Fixed plant
5 Djemo BTP Centre - Yaounde Operational – Under construction
6 Alpha Beton Centre - Obala Operational – Fixed plant
7 Razel Cameroun Centre - NTUI Operational – Fixed plant
8 Cimencam Littoral - Douala Operational – Under construction
9 Goker Littoral - Douala Operational – Fixed plant
10 Les Bâtisseurs Réunis Littoral - Douala Operational – Fixed plant
11 Besix Cameroun Sarl Littoral - Douala Operational – Under construction
12 Béton Construction et Carrière (BCC) Littoral - Douala Operational – Fixed plant

348
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

13 Cameroon Concrete Company (CCC) Littoral - Dibamba Operational – Fixed plant

14 Kalfrelec Littoral - Dibamba Operational – Fixed & Mobile plant
15 CIMAF Ouest - Bafoussam Operational – Fixed plant
16 CIMAF Nord - Garoua Operational – Fixed plant
17 CIMAF Extrême Nord - Maroua Operational – Fixed plant
18 Dangote Est - Bertoua Operational – Fixed plant

2.1.2. Locally applied concrete manufacturing technologies

Field investigations revealed that local concrete production methods differ slightly across facilities, depending on their
equipment and operational practices. These plants are broadly categorized into fixed and mobile types, with all
surveyed facilities being fixed installations—except for Kalfrelec, which also operates a mobile unit.

Fixed batching plants generally include a cement silo with filtration, aggregate storage and dosing systems, weighing
equipment, a water supply unit, and a concrete mixer. Most plants utilize modern, sealed mixers to comply with
environmental standards, enhancing both product quality and emission control.

2.1.3. Local production process

The concrete production process observed at the surveyed plants follows standardized stages:

• Material dosing: Cement, aggregates, water, and admixtures are measured based on predefined mix designs;
• Mixing: The ingredients are homogenized in high-efficiency mixers, either in dry or wet form;
• Quality control: Regular sampling is performed to test properties such as compressive strength, water content,
and consistency;
• Delivery: The ready-mix concrete is transported to construction sites using rotating drum trucks to prevent
material segregation.

Mobile batching plants follow a similar production logic but offer greater logistical flexibility, particularly for remote or
temporary construction sites. Their use is increasing in response to infrastructure development in less accessible
regions.

In addition to industrial-scale production, concrete is also frequently prepared on-site by individual workers or small-
scale contractors. In such cases, raw materials are manually dosed and mixed directly at the construction site using
basic equipment, such as small drum mixers or, occasionally, manual tools. While this informal approach is widely
practiced for small to medium-scale projects, it often lacks rigorous quality control and adherence to environmental
standards.

2.2. Concrete industry LCA in Cameroon

2.2.1. Objectives and Scope of the Study

This study assesses the environmental impact of Cameroon’s concrete industry using a life cycle assessment (LCA)
approach, with the aim of identifying key impact sources and informing more sustainable construction practices. As
concrete production expands across sub-Saharan Africa due to rapid urbanization, Cameroon faces growing
environmental challenges linked to raw material extraction, processing, and transport, particularly across diverse and
informal production systems.

The functional unit selected is 1 m³ of ready-mix concrete, a standard reference commonly used in LCA studies to
evaluate environmental impacts in relation to structural performance [20, 21, 22].

System boundaries were defined based on field data, encompassing raw material extraction, processing, transport,
concrete production, and delivery to construction sites. Key inputs include cement, aggregates, water, and admixtures.
Transport over long distances and variable infrastructure contributes significantly to fuel consumption and emissions.
Concrete mixing involves controlled dosing to ensure structural performance, while time-sensitive delivery under local
climatic conditions adds further environmental pressure. The system is modeled following ISO 14040, distinguishing
input and output flows across each elementary process.

349
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

This research highlights the need for regionalized LCA approaches in areas with distinct production practices. Given
that cement activities contribute to over 8% of global CO₂ emissions [20], the findings could inform national strategies
to reduce the environmental impact of the construction sector in Cameroon and similar regions.

2.2.2. Life Cycle Inventory Approach

The inventory modeling drew on multiple sources: primary data from site visits, secondary data from relevant
literature, and context-specific assumptions based on national practices. Concrete production volumes were estimated
from the average daily outputs reported by the surveyed plants, as presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Daily production of the surveyed concrete plants

Concrete plants Proposed Compressive Typical use cases Average daily

formulation strength quantities
ranges (MPa) (m³)
Béton Construction et Carrières (BCC) B12 / B40 12 to 40 Small foundations, non- 328
structural works,
Razel – BEC, Douala 200
all structural uses up to
Razel – BEC, Mfou special structures 190
Cameroon Concentre Company 230
Les Bâtisseurs Réunis B15 / B35 15 to 35 Foundations, slabs, beams, 275
standard columns, multi-
Kalfrelec 164
story buildings
Goker 180
KT&CO 160
Cameroon Concrete Company (CCC) B20 / B40 20 to 40 From Slabs, beams, to 190
bridges
Under Constructionᵃ B15 / B30 15 to 30 Foundations, slabs, beams, 825
columns
Not Visitedᵇ 950
Total 3,692
ᵃ Plants under construction and nearly operational as observed during field visits. Three in particular, whose production is estimated based on that
of Les Bâtisseurs Réunis, given their strong technological profile similarity. ᵇ This group includes the three CIMAF plants (West, North, Far North),
the DANGOTE plant in the East, and Alpha Béton in Obala, which were not accessible. Their production is estimated based on that of Cameroon
Concrete Company.

The proportions of aggregates, water, and admixtures used in the mixes were determined from formulation data
provided by these facilities, which are detailed in Table 3.

Table 3 Mix proportions formulated by the concrete plants visited

Concrete plant Mix Composition per Unit Volume (Kg/m³)

Mix 1 Mix 2 Mix 3
Cement FA CA Water Cement FA CA Water Cement FA CA Water
Les Bâtisseurs Réunis 200 800 1140 180 350 720 1180 180 450 735 1200 180
Kalfrelec 200 800 1140 170 350 725 1180 170 400 730 1200 170
Cameroun Concrete 300 705 1166 180 350 720 1103 180 450 735 1135 180
Company (CCC)
KT&CO 250 700 1160 180 350 720 1100 180 450 735 1135 180
Béton Construction et 300 705 1166 180 350 720 1103 180 450 735 1135 180
Carrières (BCC)

350
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

Goker 200 700 1140 175 350 720 1170 175 450 735 1200 175
Razel – BEC, Douala 300 750 1175 180 350 720 1190 180 450 735 1200 180
Razel – BEC, Mfou 300 750 1175 180 350 720 1190 180 450 735 1200 180
Cameroun Concentre 300 705 1166 180 350 720 1103 180 450 735 1135 180
Company (CMCC)
FA = Fine Aggregates CA = Coarse Aggregates Further specifications regarding the types and dosages of admixtures are outlined in Table 4.

Table 4 Admixture proportion added per unit volume in the surveyed concrete plants

Concrete plant Type of admixtures used and quantity per unit volume (l/m³)
Plasticizer Superplasticizer Retarder Accelerator
Mix Mix Mix Mix
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Les Bâtisseurs Réunis 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Kalfrelec 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Cameroun Concrete Company (CCC) 0 0 0 1,78 1,90 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
KT&CO 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Béton Construction et Carrières (BCC) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Goker 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Razel – BEC, Douala 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Razel – BEC, Mfou 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Cameroun Concentre Company (CMCC) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Finally, transport distances from raw material sources to concrete plants were measured, with variations linked to
resource distribution and infrastructure availability, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Supply distances for cement, aggregates, and admixtures

Concrete plants Supply distances (Km)

Cement Fine Aggregates Coarse Admixtures
(Km) (Km) Aggregates (Km) (Km)
Les Bâtisseurs Réunis 20 70 70 30
Kalfrelec 30 60 40 30
Cameroun Concrete Company (CCC) 20 50 40 25
KT&CO 10 10 10 10
Béton Construction et Carrières (BCC) 35 15 15 5
Goker 10 60 25 15
Razel – BEC, Douala 25 65 60 25
Razel – BEC, Mfou 50 5 5 25
Cameroun Concentre Company (CMCC) 25 5 5 5
Average distances (Km) 25 40 40 25

351
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

In cases where primary data were unavailable, reasonable assumptions were made to fill gaps and streamline the
analysis. Specifically, this study assumes a constant population growth rate of 2.64% annually from 2021 to 2023, with
an average household size of four. The proportion of new housing built with permanent materials (49.8% in 2014) is
assumed to remain unchanged [23]. Concrete batching plants are assumed to be supplied by local water utilities, and
among new constructions using site-mixed concrete, 25% are two-story building and 75% are single-story. Concrete is
dosed at 350 kg/m³.

The study focuses on small-scale residential construction, excluding large-scale projects. With a projected population of
28.6 million in 2023, this results in approximately 189,000 new households. By applying these assumptions and
considering the growth of the middle class, concrete demand estimates are derived, as presented in Tables 6 and Table
7.

Table 6 Concrete structural elements and volumes for the single-story model

Structural elements Description Number and dimensions of concrete Required concrete

elements volume (m³)
Foundation Continuous strip footing, 15 cm Footing cast along: 2×13.88 m + 2.32
thick and 20 cm high 2×7.89 m and 3×7.89 m + 2×5.2 m
Columns Columns with a height of 2.8 m 16 columns, cross-section: 15×15 cm 1.008
Tie beam (reinforced Tie beam along load-bearing Tie beam cast along: 2×13.88 m + 1.74
concrete ring beam) walls, 15×15 cm 2×7.89 m and 3×7.89 m + 2×5.2 m
Septic tank slabs¹ Upper and lower slabs, 15 cm Slabs over 2×2 m×3 m 1.8
thick, for 3 septic tank chambers
Total 6.868
¹ The local sanitation system used is an individual on-site treatment system, consisting of three septic tank chambers and a soakaway pit.

Table 6 presents the estimation for the usable concrete volume required for the construction of structural elements in
a single-story dwelling, which is calculated to be 6.868 m³. Based on the assumptions made, the total volume required
is accordingly calculated as:

Vt1 = 189,073 × 49.8% × 6.868 × 75% = 485,009.68 m³.

Moreover, Table 7 shows the estimation for the usable concrete volume required for the structural elements of a two-
story dwelling.

Table 7 Concrete elements specification and volume for two-story Model

Structural Description Number and dimensions of concrete Required

elements elements concrete volume
(m³)
Foundation Isolated footings, 15 cm thick 20 footings, each: 0.15 m × 0.45 m × 0.6 0.81
m
Ground floor Columns with a height of 3.8 m 24 columns, cross-section: 15 × 15 cm 2.052
columns (up to footing)
Tie beam (reinforced Tie beam along load-bearing Total length: 80.86 m × 0.15 × 0.15 m 1.16
concrete ring beam) walls, 15 × 15 cm
First floor columns Columns with a height of 2.8 m 26 columns, cross-section: 15 × 15 cm 1.638
Staircases Casting of 2 ramps and steps Dimensions: 2 × 1.175 m × 0.15 m × 7 m 2.4675
Septic tank slabs¹ Upper and lower slabs, 15 cm Slabs over 2 × 2 m × 3 m 1.8
thick, for 3 septic tank chambers
Total 9.9275
The locally used sanitation system is an individual on-site system consisting of three septic tank chambers and a soakaway pit.

352
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

This volume is estimated at 9.9275 m³. Based on the adopted assumptions, the total concrete volume is calculated as
follows:

Vt2 = 189,073 × 49.8% × 9.9275 × 25% = 233,689.26 m³

By integrating empirical data with context-specific assumptions, this life cycle inventory offers a realistic representation
of concrete production in Cameroon and helps bridge a crucial gap in regional LCA data availability. Similar approaches
are recommended by global frameworks such as ISO 14044 for settings lacking robust inventories [24], highlighting the
value of local data collection in improving LCA accuracy in emerging economies.

Based on the total volume previously determined, the quantities of raw materials required per functional unit (FU), as
well as the corresponding annual totals, are presented in Table 8.

Table 8 Annual total quantities of raw materials

Material Process Quantity per FU (t) Annual total (t)

Cement Extraction 0.35 656,003.229
Fine Aggregates Extraction 0.72 1,349,492.357
Coarse Aggregates Extraction 1.15 2,155,439.181
Water Extraction 0.18 337,373.089
Additives Extraction 0.016 29,988.720

The life cycle inventory (LCI) was established using data collected from key industry stakeholders, along with
calculations informed by earlier assumptions. In addition to these, several methodological considerations were
integrated into the process. First, for raw material extraction, input-output data for cement production were drawn
from a scientific study conducted in Zimbabwe [25] and from Petek et al. [26]. Data related to the extraction and use of
chemical additives were taken from Petek [27]. Second, the inventory data related to water extraction and distribution
were sourced from a model developed by a local utility in South Africa and incorporated into the SimaPro software.
Third, transport-related emissions were estimated based on average fuel consumption, assumed to be 35 liters per 100
kilometers, according to field interviews with drivers. Additionally, it was considered that engine oil levels decrease by
approximately 2 liters every 100 km.

Transportation modes were differentiated based on material type: semi-trailers (44 tonnes) were used for cement, 28-
tonne trucks for aggregates and additives, and 15 m³ mixer trucks for ready-mixed concrete. An average transport
distance of 50 km was assumed across all materials.

Once consolidated, these data enabled the development of a normalized inventory per functional unit, which serves as
the basis for emission calculations in the Cameroonian concrete industry, as presented in Table 9.

Table 9 Activity data per FU for emissions in Cameroonian concrete industry

Life cycle stage Unit Value Life cycle stage Unit Value
Raw material extraction and production Raw material transportation
Cement production Cement transport
Input Diesel kg 0.0585
Clinker kg 315.875 Lubricant kg 0.0036
Gypsum kg 16.625 Aggregate transport
Electricity kWh 13.16 Diesel kg 0.785
Output Lubricant kg 0.048
Cement kg 350 Admixture transport

353
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

Aggregate production Diesel kg 0.0042

Input Lubricant kg 0.00024
Diesel kg 1.762 Concrete production
Output Input:
Fine Aggregates kg 720 Cement kg 350
Coarse Aggregates kg 1150 Fine Aggregates kg 720
Admixture Production Coarse Aggregates kg 1150
Input Admixtures kg 16
Electricity kWh 5.28 Water kg 180
Output Electricity kWh 3.059
Plasticizer kg 4 Output
Superplasticizer kg 4 Concrete m³ 1
Retarder kg 4 Concrete transportation
Accelerator kg 4 Diesel kg 0.604
Solid Waste kg 0.008 Lubricant kg 0.015

2.2.3. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methodology

The Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) was carried out using SimaPro 9.0 software, implementing the IMPACT 2002+
method. This integrated approach combines mid-point and end-point modeling, enabling the characterization and
damage assessment of various environmental impact categories associated with concrete production processes.

Characterization was performed by applying the mid-point factors embedded in IMPACT 2002+ to the inventory data
compiled in the previous phase. This step covered fifteen mid-point categories, including but not limited to human
toxicity (carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic), respiratory effects, ionizing radiation, aquatic and terrestrial ecotoxicity,
ozone layer depletion, acidification, eutrophication, land occupation, climate change, and resource depletion.

Damage assessment was subsequently performed by aggregating midpoint scores into four main damage categories:
human health, ecosystem quality, climate change, and resource availability. This was achieved using the damage factors
defined by Jolliet et al. [28] and Baidai [29].

To evaluate the robustness of the selected impact assessment method, a sensitivity analysis was carried out. This
involved comparing the results obtained using IMPACT 2002+ with those derived from the Eco-Indicator 99 (H) method.
The comparison focused on the relative contributions of each life cycle stage to the various impact categories, allowing
for an assessment of methodological consistency and reliability.

All characterization and damage modeling steps followed standardized LCIA procedures and employed default
methodological parameters provided by SimaPro, unless stated otherwise

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Characterization and damage scores of concrete production in Cameroon

Based on the inventory data provided in the previous section, the calculation of environmental impact categories was
carried out using the SimaPro software, applying the integrated impact assessment methodology, Impact 2002+. Table
10 reports the mid-point characterization scores across all life cycle stages.

Subsequently, by applying the characterization factors detailed in Table 10 to these scores, the damage scores
corresponding to the various mid-point impact categories were derived, as presented in Table 11.

354
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

3.2. Sensitivity analysis

The sensitivity analyses presented here focus on verifying the robustness of the IMPACT 2002+ method and examining
various process parameters in the study.

3.2.1. Sensitivity analysis of the assessment method

A sensitivity analysis was performed by comparing the IMPACT 2002+ method with the Eco-Indicator 99 (H) method.
Table 12 shows the percentage contribution of each life cycle phase to the various impact categories.

It was observed that only the carcinogenic human toxicity category exhibits inconsistencies across the different phases
of the process. A reversal of trends is noted in this category. According to the IMPACT 2002+ method, the phase of
adjuvant production has the highest harmful influence, estimated at 59%, followed by the cement production phase at
39.9%, while water production is the least harmful, contributing only 0.2%. In contrast, in the Eco-Indicator 99 method,
the cement production phase has the greatest harmful impact at 72.4%, followed by the adjuvant production phase at
11.8%, and water production remains the least harmful at 0.1%.

For the other categories, the results are very similar between the two methods, and in some cases, the results are
identical, such as for acidification and eutrophication.

This sensitivity analysis indicates that, overall, the modeling is robust

355
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362
Table 10 Characterization scores for all life cycle phases of the concrete industry in Cameroon

Impact category Unit Admixture Water Portland Aggregate Raw Concrete Concrete Total
production extraction and cement production material mixing transport
distribution production transport
Human toxicity (carcinogenic) kg C₂H₃Cl eq 1.95 7.44×10⁻³ 1.02 5.05×10⁻² 7.75×10⁻² 1.42×10⁻¹ 6.32×10⁻² 3.32
Human toxicity (non- kg C₂H₃Cl eq 7.14×10⁻¹ 9.59×10⁻³ 5.93 3.82×10⁻² 3.60×10⁻¹ 6.75×10⁻¹ 3.01×10⁻¹ 8.03
carcinogenic)
Respiratory effects kg PM₂.₅ eq 3.19×10⁻² 3.08×10⁻⁴ 1.69×10⁻¹ 1.96×10⁻² 2.31×10⁻² 8.44×10⁻³ 1.95×10⁻² 2.72×10⁻¹
(inorganics)
Ionizing radiation Bq C-14 eq 1.21×10² 9.70×10⁻¹ 3.40×10² 5.03 2.21×10¹ 2.23×10¹ 1.81×10¹ 5.29×10²
Ozone layer depletion kg CFC-11 eq 9.50×10⁻⁸ 2.07×10⁻⁹ 1.20×10⁻⁶ 1.02×10⁻⁷ 1.71×10⁻⁷ 4.29×10⁻⁸ 1.34×10⁻⁷ 1.75×10⁻⁶
Respiratory effects (organics) kg C₂H₄ eq 2.70×10⁻² 7.04×10⁻⁵ 4.16×10⁻² 1.26×10⁻² 1.79×10⁻² 2.26×10⁻³ 1.39×10⁻² 1.15×10⁻¹
Aquatic ecotoxicity kg TEG eq (water) 4.41×10² 4.10 1.47×10³ 9.54×10¹ 6.94×10² 2.48×10² 5.83×10² 3.53×10³
Terrestrial ecotoxicity kg TEG eq (soil) 1.66×10² 1.74 1.07×10³ 3.14×10¹ 6.95×10² 1.43×10² 5.93×10² 2.70×10³
Terrestrial kg SO₂ eq 5.87×10⁻¹ 7.03×10⁻³ 4.83 4.78×10⁻¹ 6.31×10⁻¹ 1.76×10⁻¹ 5.40×10⁻¹ 7.25
acidification/eutrophication
Land occupation m² organic arable land 2.26×10⁻¹ 2.73×10⁻³ 2.54 4.35×10⁻¹ 1.02 3.03×10⁻¹ 8.73×10⁻¹ 5.41
Aquatic acidification kg SO₂ eq 1.80×10⁻¹ 2.32×10⁻³ 1.13 6.71×10⁻² 1.07×10⁻¹ 6.03×10⁻² 9.03×10⁻² 1.63
Aquatic eutrophication kg PO₄³⁻ eq 3.90×10⁻³ 5.58×10⁻⁵ 4.14×10⁻² 2.11×10⁻⁴ 1.38×10⁻³ 1.42×10⁻³ 1.14×10⁻³ 4.95×10⁻²
Climate change kg CO₂ eq 3.62×10¹ 2.47×10⁻¹ 3.47×10² 7.48 1.37×10¹ 1.11×10¹ 1.14×10¹ 4.27×10²
Non-renewable energy MJ primary 1.11×10³ 3.30 2.29×10³ 1.09×10² 2.15×10² 7.35×10¹ 1.69×10² 3.97×10³
Mineral extraction MJ surplus 6.07×10⁻¹ 2.51×10⁻³ 7.97 4.34×10⁻² 1.61×10⁻¹ 1.21 1.32×10⁻¹ 1.01×10¹

356
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

Table 11 Environmental damage per life cycle stage of concrete production in Cameroon

Impact category Unit Admixture Water Portland Aggregate Raw Concrete Concrete Total
production extraction cement production material mixing rransport
and production transport
distribution
Human toxicity [DALY / kg vinyl chloride] 5.47×10⁻⁶ 2.08×10⁻⁸ 2.87×10⁻⁶ 1.41×10⁻⁷ 2.17×10⁻⁷ 3.99×10⁻⁷ 1.77×10⁻⁷ 9.29×10⁻⁶
(carcinogenic)
Human toxicity (non- [DALY / kg vinyl chloride] 2.00×10⁻⁶ 2.68×10⁻⁸ 1.66×10⁻⁵ 1.07×10⁻⁷ 1.01×10⁻⁶ 1.89×10⁻⁶ 8.42×10⁻⁷ 2.25×10⁻⁵
carcinogenic)
Respiratory effects [DALY / kg PM₂.₅] 2.23×10⁻⁵ 2.15×10⁻⁷ 1.18×10⁻⁴ 1.37×10⁻⁵ 1.62×10⁻⁵ 5.91×10⁻⁶ 1.37×10⁻⁵ 1.90×10⁻⁴
(inorganics)
Ionizing radiation [DALY / Bq Carbon-14] 2.55×10⁻⁸ 2.04×10⁻¹⁰ 7.13×10⁻⁸ 1.06×10⁻⁹ 4.63×10⁻⁹ 4.68×10⁻⁹ 3.81×10⁻⁹ 1.11×10⁻⁷
Ozone layer [DALY / kg CFC-11] 9.97×10⁻¹¹ 2.17×10⁻¹² 1.26×10⁻⁹ 1.07×10⁻¹⁰ 1.80×10⁻¹⁰ 4.50×10⁻¹¹ 1.41×10⁻¹⁰ 1.83×10⁻⁹
depletion
Aquatic ecotoxicity [PDF·m²·yr / kg triethylene 2.22×10⁻² 2.06×10⁻⁴ 7.36×10⁻² 4.79×10⁻³ 3.48×10⁻² 1.24×10⁻² 2.93×10⁻² 1.77×10⁻¹
glycol]
Terrestrial [PDF·m²·yr / kg triethylene 1.31 1.38×10⁻² 8.46 2.48×10⁻¹ 5.50 1.13 4.69 21.4
ecotoxicity glycol]
Terrestrial [PDF·m²·yr / kg SO₂ eq. in 6.11×10⁻¹ 7.31×10⁻³ 5.02 4.97×10⁻¹ 6.56×10⁻¹ 1.83×10⁻¹ 5.61×10⁻¹ 7.54
acidification/eutrop air]
hication
Land occupation [PDF·m²·yr / m² organic 2.46×10⁻¹ 2.97×10⁻³ 2.77 4.75×10⁻¹ 1.12 3.30×10⁻¹ 9.51×10⁻¹ 5.89
arable land]
Aquatic — — — — — — — — —
acidification*
Aquatic — — — — — — — — —
eutrophication*
Climate change [kg CO₂ / kg CO₂] 3.62×10¹ 2.47×10⁻¹ 3.47×10² 7.48 1.37×10¹ 1.11×10¹ 1.14×10¹ 4.27×10²
Non-renewable [MJ primary / MJ primary] 1.11×10³ 3.30 2.29×10³ 1.09×10² 2.15×10² 7.35×10¹ 1.69×10² 3.97×10³
energy or [MJ / kg Fe eq.]

357
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

Mineral resource [MJ primary / MJ surplus] or 6.07×10⁻¹ 2.51×10⁻³ 7.97 4.34×10⁻² 1.61×10⁻¹ 1.21 1.32×10⁻¹ 1.01×10¹
extraction [MJ / kg crude oil]
* The IMPACT 2002+ method lacks damage factors for aquatic acidification and eutrophication, preventing damage score calculation.

Table 12 Life cycle impact contributions by stage and method (IMPACT 2002+ and Eco-Indicator 99 H)

Impact category IMPACT 2002+ Eco-Indicator 99 (H)

material

material
cement

cement
extraction

extraction
Concrete transport

Concrete transport
and distribution

and distribution
Concrete mixing

Concrete mixing
production

production

production

production

production

production
Aggregate

Aggregate
transport

transport
Adjuvant

Adjuvant
Portland

Portland
Water

Water
Raw

Raw
Human toxicity (carcinogenic) * 59.0 0.2 30.9 1.5 2.2 4.3 1.8 11.8 0.1 72.4 0.4 3.4 9.1 2.8
Human toxicity (non-carcinogenic) 8.9 0.1 74.0 0.5 4.4 8.4 3.7 — — — — — — —
Inorganic respiratory effects + 11.8 0.1 62.4 7.2 8.3 3.1 7.1 11.0 0.1 64.6 6.3 8.1 3.0 6.9
Ionizing radiation + 23.0 0.2 64.3 1.0 4.0 4.2 3.3 22.9 0.2 64.4 1.0 4.0 4.2 3.3
Ozone layer depletion+ 5.7 0.1 71.3 6.1 7.9 2.6 6.4 5.0 0.1 77.1 4.4 6.3 2.0 5.1
Organic respiratory effects + 24.4 0.1 37.6 11.4 13.7 2.0 10.8 24.9 0.1 37.5 11.3 13.6 2.1 10.7
Aquatic ecotoxicity+ 12.7 0.1 42.1 2.7 19.1 7.1 16.2 12.3 0.1 53.3 1.0 9.1 16.5 7.7
Terrestrial ecotoxicity 6.2 0.1 39.8 1.2 25.6 5.3 21.9 — — — — — — —
Terrestrial acidification/eutrophication + 8.1 0.1 66.8 6.6 8.6 2.4 7.3 8.1 0.1 66.8 6.6 8.6 2.4 7.3
Land occupation + 4.2 0.1 47.2 8.1 18.8 5.6 16.1 3.5 0.0 40.6 25.3 14.4 3.8 12.3
Aquatic acidification 11.0 0.1 69.2 4.1 6.3 3.7 5.4 — — — — — — —
Aquatic eutrophication 7.9 0.1 83.9 0.4 2.6 2.9 2.2 — — — — — — —
Climate Change + 8.5 0.1 81.4 1.8 3.1 2.6 2.6 8.9 0.1 80.9 1.8 3.1 2.6 2.6
Non-renewable energy use 28.5 0.1 58.9 2.8 4.3 1.9 3.5 — — — — — — —
Mineral resource depletion + 6.0 0.0 78.8 0.4 1.5 11.9 1.3 6.0 0.0 78.8 0.4 1.5 11.9 1.3
*Impact categories with significant trend reversal between methods include: Human Toxicity (Carcinogenic). + Impact categories with similar results across both methods include. Categories marked with
“—” indicate unavailable data.
358
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

3.2.2. Sensitivity analysis of process parameters

The estimation of various process parameters was conducted by varying each parameter individually while keeping
others constant in order to observe changes in the overall environmental score of the process. The different values were
recorded in an Excel table, allowing us to assess, within a range of 100, the influence of each parameter on the
environmental burden of the process. The parameters considered were (i) transport distances, (ii) electricity
consumption and (iii) clinker consumption. Table 13 presents the sensitivity values of these parameters, expressed as
percentages.

Table 13 Sensitivity analysis of concrete process parameters in Cameroon (%)

Parameters Transport distances Electricity consumption Clinker consumption Other parameters

Sensitivity (%) 10 14.2 59 16.8

Clinker consumption emerges as the most influential parameter in the environmental impact of concrete production in
Cameroon. In comparison, electricity use and transport distances show limited sensitivity, while other parameters play
a secondary role. These results suggest that mitigation efforts should focus primarily on reducing clinker-related
impacts.

3.3. Analysis and discussion of environmental impacts

The environmental impact assessment of concrete production in Cameroon reveals that the most significant impact
categories include climate change, non-renewable energy depletion, eutrophication, ecotoxicity, acidification, human
toxicity, and mineral extraction. These findings align with trends observed in previous life cycle assessment (LCA)
studies of the concrete industry, reinforcing the relevance of these categories.

3.3.1. Climate change

The production of concrete in Cameroon results in the emission of approximately 427 kg of CO₂-equivalent per cubic
meter, of which 81.3% is attributed to Portland cement production. This corresponds to 347 kg CO₂-eq/m³ emitted
solely by the cement component.

Comparable values have been reported in the literature. For instance, Serres et al. [30] estimated emissions at 444 kg
CO₂-eq/m³ for conventional ready-mix concrete, while De Schepper et al. [22] reported 325 kg CO₂-eq/m³, and Petek
et al. [26] found values around 400 kg CO₂-eq/m³. These figures are all based on concrete mixes containing
approximately 350 kg of cement per cubic meter, which supports the finding that cement production contributes
between 80% and 90% of the total carbon footprint of concrete. This convergence in data highlights the significant
environmental burden of cement, thereby justifying the growing body of research dedicated to reducing its carbon
impact.

In this regard, Prusinski et al. [21] conducted a life cycle assessment (LCA) on concrete made with slag-blended cement.
Their results show that a 50/50 mix of Portland cement and ground granulated blast-furnace slag results in emissions
of 307 kg CO₂-eq/m³, compared to 555 kg CO₂-eq/m³ for concrete made exclusively with Portland cement. These
findings demonstrate that substituting Portland cement with more eco-friendly alternatives can reduce the
environmental impact of concrete production by nearly half, representing a key strategy in sustainable construction
practices.

3.3.2. Energy use and resource Depletion

The overall non-renewable energy consumption is 3980.1 MJ/m³, with cement production accounting for the largest
share (57%) followed by the use of admixtures (28%). Mineral extraction contributes 10.1 MJ/m³ to the total energy
demand. These values are notably higher than those reported in studies conducted in developed countries, such as those
by Serres et al. [30] and Prusinski et al. [21], likely due to disparities in technological advancements and operational
efficiencies.

3.3.3. Human health impact

According to the IMPACT 2002+ methodology, human health is one of the four primary endpoint categories, alongside
ecosystem quality, climate change, and resource depletion. The total human health damage associated with concrete
production is quantified at 2.22 × 10⁻⁴ DALY per m³, which translates to a loss of 416 years of life annually across the

359
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

population of Cameroon. Notably, CO₂ emissions alone contribute to 168 DALYs per year, representing an average loss
of approximately 5 minutes of life per individual, assuming 62% exposure to fine particulate matter as reported by
Brauer et al. [31].

3.3.4. Land Use Impact

The land use associated with concrete production is largely attributable to cement manufacturing (49.95%) and
transportation processes (35%). Unlike many conventional life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methods, the IMPACT
2002+ framework enables a detailed quantification of land occupation, a category that remains underrepresented in
most environmental assessments. By integrating this dimension, IMPACT 2002+ enhances the comprehensiveness of
environmental evaluations, offering critical insights into spatial resource demands often overlooked in the built
environment sector.

Overall, the analysis clearly demonstrates that cement production is the dominant contributor to environmental
impacts across nearly all evaluated categories, including climate change, energy depletion, land use, and human health.
The latter, measured in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), emphasizes the urgency of implementing mitigation
strategies, particularly regarding CO2 emissions and air pollution from both cement manufacturing and transportation
activities. These results support the development of targeted interventions within Cameroon’s concrete sector, with a
particular emphasis on decarbonizing cement through alternative binders, improving energy efficiency across the
supply chain, and reducing transport-related emissions. By addressing these priority areas, substantial environmental
and public health benefits can be achieved, contributing to more sustainable construction practices in the region.

4. Conclusion
The present study offers a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) of concrete production in Cameroon, integrating
empirical data from field investigations with internationally recognized methodological frameworks, notably ISO 14040
and the IMPACT 2002+ model. By examining both industrial and informal production systems, the research provides a
nuanced depiction of the technological, organizational, and environmental characteristics of the national concrete
sector.

Key findings reveal that Portland cement production is unequivocally the dominant contributor to environmental
impacts across all assessed categories, including climate change, energy and resource depletion, human toxicity, and
land occupation. With emissions reaching approximately 427 kg CO₂-eq/m3 of concrete, 81.3% of which stems from
cement, this result not only aligns with global LCA benchmarks but also underscores the urgency of transitioning
towards lower-carbon binders. Sensitivity analyses further highlight clinker consumption as the most environmentally
consequential parameter, thus offering a clear target for mitigation strategies.

Moreover, the study underscores the limitations of existing infrastructure, material transport inefficiencies, and process
variability, especially within informal and small-scale operations, exacerbating the environmental burden. The
integration of locally contextualized inventory data and assumptions strengthens the reliability of the impact
assessment, particularly in a region where comprehensive environmental datasets remain scarce.

Ultimately, this research contributes valuable regionalized data to the global discourse on sustainable construction,
offering evidence-based recommendations for reducing the environmental footprint of concrete in sub-Saharan Africa.
Policy measures should prioritize the decarbonization of cement production through the adoption of supplementary
cementitious materials, investment in energy-efficient technologies, and improvements in supply chain logistics. In
parallel, efforts must be directed towards formalizing quality standards within the informal sector to ensure
environmental compliance and structural reliability.

The approach demonstrated herein serves as a model for future assessments in comparable developing contexts, where
balancing rapid urbanization with sustainable material use remains a critical challenge. In doing so, this study provides
not only a methodological template but also an actionable roadmap for advancing environmental stewardship in the
concrete industry across the Global South.

360
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

Compliance with ethical standards

Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the managers and staff of the concrete batching plants visited for their cooperation and for
generously sharing operational data. Their support was essential to the fieldwork and significantly contributed to the
quality and depth of this study.

Disclosure of conflict of interest

No conflict of interest to be disclosed.

References
[1] Scrivener, K., John, V. M., & Gartner, E. Eco-efficient cements: Potential, economically viable solutions for a low-
CO₂ cement-based materials industry. Cement and Concrete Research. 2018; 114, 2–26.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.03.015
[2] GlobalABC (Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction). 2023 Global Status Report for Buildings and
Construction. UN Environment Programme. 2023 ; https://globalabc.org
[3] UN-Habitat. World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization. 2020 ; https://unhabitat.org
[4] Benhelal E., Zahedi G., Shamsaei E., Bahadori A. Global strategies and potentials to curb CO2 emissions in cement
industry. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2013; 51:142–161. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.049
[5] Worrell E., Price L., Martin N., Hendriks C., Meida L. O. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Global Cement Industry.
Annual Review of Energy and the Environment. 2001; Vol. 26, pp. 303-329.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.26.1.303
[6] Bajja S., El-Bouayady R., Çelik A., Ahmed Z., Radoine H. Environmental degradation in emerging-market
economies of Africa: evaluating impacts of human capital development, international trade, renewable energy
consumption, and urbanization. Front. Environ. Sci. 2024; 12:1445476. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2024.1445476
[7] Al-Numan B. S. Construction Industry Role in Natural Resources Depletion and How to Reduce It. In book: Natural
Resources Deterioration in MENA Region. 2024; Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-
58315-5_6
[8] UNEP. 2021 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a zero-emissions, efficient and
resilient buildings and construction sector. United Nations Environment Programme, 2021.
https://www.unep.org
[9] ISO. Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework (ISO 14040:2006).
Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.
[10] Guinée J. B., Heijungs R., Huppes G., Zamagni A., Masoni P., Buonamici R., Ekvall T., Rydberg T. Life Cycle
Assessment: Past, present, and future. Environmental Science & Technology. 2011; 45(1), 90–96.
https://doi.org/10.1021/es101316v
[11] Hauschild, M. Z., Rosenbaum, R. K., & Olsen, S. I. Life Cycle Assessment: Theory and Practice (2nd Ed.). Springer.
2017; Springer International Publishing, pp.1-1216, https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02607169
[12] Karkour S, Rachid S, Maaoui M, Lin CC, Itsubo N. Status of life cycle assessment (LCA) in Africa. Environ. 2021;
8(2): 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments8020010
[13] Badza, K., Soro, Y.M., Sawadogo, M. Life cycle assessment of a 33.7 MW solar photovoltaic power plant in the
context of a developing country. Sustain Environ. 2023; Res 33, 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42834-023-
00201-x
[14] Nouhoun I. S., Nshimiyimana P., Hema C., Messan A. Development of a Life Cycle Inventory Database for
Environmental Impact Assessment of Construction Materials in Burkina Faso. Sustainability. 2025 ; 17(2),
471; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17020471
[15] Duna, L.L., Audrey, N.N.G., Tchamba, A.B. Billong N., Kamseu E., Qoku E., Alomayri T. S., Bier T. A. Engineering and
Mineralogical Properties of Portland Cement Used for Building and Road Construction in Cameroon. Int. J.
Pavement Res. Technol. 2022; 15, 821–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42947-021-00055-9

361
 Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 2025, 23(01), 347-362

[16] Miamo W. C., Saha J. C., Kakeu B. P., Kamdjo C. Achuo E. D. Analysis of the multiplier effects of basic public
infrastructure on local entrepreneurship in cameroon. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship. 2024; Vol.
29, No. 02, 2450008. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1084946724500080
[17] Elime Bouboama A., Mamba Mpele, Ngouadjio A. C. Applying the life cycle analysis in the construction of social
housing in cameroon: the case of single-storey houses at the sic residential Area in olembe (yaoundé).
Sustainability in Environment. 2018; Vol. 3, No. 3, 207-229. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/268085796.pdf
[18] Habibi A., Tavakoli H., Esmaeili A., Golzary A. Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of concrete mixtures: a
critical review. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering. 2022; Volume 27, 2023 - Issue 3 Pages
1285-1303. https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2022.2078885
[19] PRé Sustainability. SimaPro 9.5 Software Documentation. 2023; https://simapro.com
[20] Habert, G., d’Espinose de Lacaillerie, J. B., Roussel, N. An environmental evaluation of geopolymer based concrete
production: reviewing current research trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2011; 19(11), 1229-1238,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.03.012
[21] [21] Prusinski, J. R., Marceau M. L., Martha G. V. Life cycle inventory of slag cement concrete. Slag Cement
Association / Portland Cement Association. 2007; PDF available via
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/pourshafeie2/docs/marceau-2007.pdf
[22] De Schepper, M., Van den Heede, P., Van Driessche, I., De Belie, N. Life Cycle Assessment of Completely Recyclable
Concrete. Materials. 2014; 7(8), 6010–6027. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma7086010
[23] INS Cameroon (Institut National de la Statistique). Annuaire statistique du Cameroun, Chapitre 4: Hanitat et
conditions de vie, ECAM 4. 2019; Yaoundé: INS.https://ins-cameroun.cm/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/0CHAPITRE-4_HABITAT-ET-CONDITIONS-DE-VIE.pdf
[24] Rebitzer, G., Ekvall, T., Frischknecht, R., Hunkeler, D., Norris, G., Rydberg, T., Schmidt, W., Suh, S., Pennington, D.
W. Life cycle assessment: Part 1: Framework, goal and scope definition, inventory analysis, and applications.
Environment International. 2004; 30(5), 701–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2003.11.005
[25] Mbohwa C., Moyo S. Life cycle assessment of the cement industry in Zimbabwe. 15th CIRP International
Conference on Life Cycle Engineering. 2008 ; https://hdl.handle.net/10210/14425
[26] Petek A., Masanet E., Horvath A., Stadel A. Life-cycle inventory analysis of concrete production: A critical review,
Cement and Concrete Composites. 2014; Volume 51, Pages 38-48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2014.03.005
[27] Petek Gursel, A. Life-Cycle Assessment of Concrete: Decision-Support Tool and Case Study Application (Doctoral
dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering). 2014;
retrieved
fromhttps://escholarship.org/content/qt5q24d64s/qt5q24d64s_noSplash_cfb277e51a7c50310b77aa1772e1b
ecd.pdf
[28] Jolliet O., Margni M., Charles R., Humbert S., Payet J., Rebitzer G., Rosenbaum R.. IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle
assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2003; 8:324-330 DOI: 10.1007/BF02978505
[29] Baidai Y. D. A. Analyse de cycle de vie appliquée à un système de production d'eau potable: cas de l'unité
industrielle SODECI nord-riviera. Master II Genie de l'Environnement, Institut de Formation à la Haute Expertise
et de Recherché, France. 2011; Retrieve on https://www.memoireonline.com/a/fr/cart/show
[30] Serres, N., Braymand, S., & Feugeas, F. Environmental evaluation of concrete made from recycled concrete
aggregate implementing Life Cycle Assessment. Journal of Building Engineering. 2016; 5, 24–33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2015.11.004
[31] Brauer M., Amann M., Burnett R, T., Cohen A., Dentener F., Ezzati M., Henderson S. B., Krzyzanowski M., Martin R.
V., Van Dingenen R., van Donkelaar A., Thurston G. D. Exposure assessment for estimation of the global burden of
disease attributable to outdoor air pollution. On behalf of the Outdoor Air Pollution Expert Working Group of the
Global Burden of Disease Project. Environ Sci Technol. 2012; 17; 46(2): 652–660. doi: 10.1021/es2025752.

362