Global and National CO<sub>2</sub> Uptake by Cement Carbonation from 1928 to 2024

Niu, Le; Wu, Songbin; Andrew, Robbie M.; Shao, Zi; Wang, Jiaoyue; Xi, Fengming

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-437

Preprints

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-437

Preprints

25 Nov 2024

| 25 Nov 2024

Status: this preprint is currently under review for the journal ESSD.

Global and National CO₂ Uptake by Cement Carbonation from 1928 to 2024

Le Niu, Songbin Wu, Robbie M. Andrew, Zi Shao, Jiaoyue Wang, and Fengming Xi

Abstract. The hydration products of cement materials can absorb atmospheric CO₂, and this carbonation process provides an important decarbonization pathway for the cement industry. Global carbon sequestration by cement materials has been reported, but carbon uptake in different countries remains unquantified. Here, we quantify the national cement carbon uptake from 1928 to 2023 based on 58517 activity level data from 163 cement-producing countries and regions worldwide and 6186 carbonation parameters from detailed data records of 42 countries, and project their trend to 2024. The global CO₂ uptake by cement materials increases from 7.74 Mt yr^-1 (95 % confidence interval, CI: 5.84–9.85 Mt CO₂ yr^-1) in 1928 to 0.84 Gt yr^-1 (95 % CI: 0.71–1.00 Gt yr^-1) in 2023, and projected to rise to 0.86 Gt yr^-1 (95 % CI: 0.73–1.02 CO₂ yr^-1) in 2024. The accumulated CO₂ uptake from 1928 to 2023 is 21.26 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 17.93–25.17 Gt CO₂), which offsets about 46 % of the cement process emission (46.06 Gt CO₂) in past 96 years. Simultaneously, the dominance in cement carbon uptake has shifted from the USA, Japan and some European countries to emerging economies such as China and India, which account for 38.0 % and 9.1 % of total CO₂ uptake, respectively, in the last decade (2014–2023). By analyzing the long time-series carbon emission and uptake of the 42 countries with detailed data, we find they contributed 82.1 % of global cement CO₂ uptake from 1928 to 2023, including 21 peaked countries and 21 non-peaked countries in cement emissions The annual carbon offset level (the ratio of uptake to process emission in a given year) shows a remarkable decrease due to the temporal lag of cement carbon uptake. This is significant for countries with higher cement imports, for example, the cement industry in Australia and Japan have achieved net-zero when considering the cement carbonation sink. This study provides a precise bottom-up quantification to cement carbonation sinks at national and global levels. All the data described in this study are accessible at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13827861 (Wu et al., 2024).

Received: 25 Sep 2024 – Discussion started: 25 Nov 2024

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.

Download & links

Le Niu, Songbin Wu, Robbie M. Andrew, Zi Shao, Jiaoyue Wang, and Fengming Xi

Status: open (until 08 Jan 2025)

Post a comment Subscribe to comment alert

CC1:
'Comment on essd-2024-437', Peiying Li, 27 Nov 2024 reply
This study presents a updated dataset of global and national carbon uptake by cement carbonation from 1928 to 2024 based on previous studies (Xi et al., 2016; Guo et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2023). The updated dataset of cement carbon uptake covers 163 cement-producing countries worldwide for the first time, and extends the time scale to 1928-2024. Cement carbon sink has shown substantial impacts on the Global Carbon Budget (Friedlingstein et al., 2023, 2022a, b, 2020). While this study reveals the contribution of cement carbon sequestration as a carbon sink in each country, which making it is possible to include cement carbon sink in national GHG inventories (Andersson et al., 2019).
The manuscript is well written, however there are some comments need to be addressed.
The data description of the article contains supplementaryinformation, including 4 supplementary tables (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13827861).But it is difficult for readers to find the corresponding relations between the main texts and the data in supplementary tables. It is recommended that manuscripts have clear links to data files in the data description section. For example, in the section “2.1 Data source and treatment”, the explicit table paths should be indicated in corresponding data (Ln.104-118).

Figure 1c, 1e, and Figure 3, “uptakes”should be “uptake”.

It is recommended that “emission”in the textshould be “process emission”, where the emission from energy consumption in cement industry was process emission.

Why are the global cement carbonsinks in 2023 and 2024 in this study smaller than that of 2021 in previous study (Huang et al., 2023)? Please explain it more clearly.

References:
Andersson, R., Stripple, H., Gustafsson, T., and Ljungkrantz, C.: Carbonation as a method to improve climate performance for cement based material, Cement and Concrete Research, 124, 105819, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.105819, 2019.
Friedlingstein, P., O’Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Hauck, J., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Le Quéré, C., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Arneth, A., Arora, V., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Benoit-Cattin, A., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Bultan, S., Chandra, N., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Evans, W., Florentie, L., Forster, P. M., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Harris, I., Hartung, K., Haverd, V., Houghton, R. A., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Joetzjer, E., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kitidis, V., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lenton, A., Lienert, S., Liu, Z., Lombardozzi, D., Marland, G., Metzl, N., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O’Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Smith, A. J. P., Sutton, A. J., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., van der Werf, G., Vuichard, N., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, X., and Zaehle, S.: Global carbon budget 2020, Earth System Science Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020.
Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M. W., O’Sullivan, M., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Currie, K. I., Decharme, B., Djeutchouang, L. M., Dou, X., Evans, W., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Gasser, T., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Luijkx, I. T., Jain, A., Jones, S. D., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Landschützer, P., Lauvset, S. K., Lefèvre, N., Lienert, S., Liu, J., Marland, G., McGuire, P. C., Melton, J. R., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., Ono, T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Schwingshackl, C., Séférian, R., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wada, C., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., and Zeng, J.: Global carbon budget 2021, Earth System Science Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022a.
Friedlingstein, P., O’Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Gregor, L., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Alkama, R., Arneth, A., Arora, V. K., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gkritzalis, T., Gloege, L., Grassi, G., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Jersild, A., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lindsay, K., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGrath, M. J., Metzl, N., Monacci, N. M., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O’Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pan, N., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rodriguez, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Shutler, J. D., Skjelvan, I., Steinhoff, T., Sun, Q., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Takao, S., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, X., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tsujino, H., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Whitehead, C., Willstrand Wranne, A., et al.: Global Carbon Budget 2022, Earth System Science Data, 14, 4811–4900, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, 2022b.
Friedlingstein, P., O’Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Landschützer, P., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Barbero, L., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Decharme, B., Bopp, L., Brasika, I. B. M., Cadule, P., Chamberlain, M. A., Chandra, N., Chau, T.-T.-T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Dou, X., Enyo, K., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Ford, D. J., Gasser, T., Ghattas, J., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Heinke, J., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jacobson, A. R., Jain, A., Jarníková, T., Jersild, A., Jiang, F., Jin, Z., Joos, F., Kato, E., Keeling, R. F., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Lan, X., Lefèvre, N., Li, H., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Ma, L., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGuire, P. C., McKinley, G. A., Meyer, G., Morgan, E. J., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O’Brien, K. M., Olsen, A., Omar, A. M., Ono, T., Paulsen, M., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Powis, C. M., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., et al.: Global Carbon Budget 2023, Earth System Science Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023.
Guo, R., Wang, J., Bing, L., Tong, D., Ciais, P., Davis, S. J., Andrew, R. M., Xi, F., and Liu, Z.: Global CO₂ uptake by cement from 1930 to 2019, Earth System Science Data, 13, 1791–1805, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-1791-2021, 2021.
Huang, Z., Wang, J., Bing, L., Qiu, Y., Guo, R., Yu, Y., Ma, M., Niu, L., Tong, D., Andrew, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Canadell, J. G., Xi, F., and Liu, Z.: Global carbon uptake of cement carbonation accounts 1930–2021, Earth System Science Data, 15, 4947–4958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4947-2023, 2023.
Xi, F., Davis, S. J., Ciais, P., Crawford-Brown, D., Guan, D., Pade, C., Shi, T., Syddall, M., Lv, J., Ji, L., Bing, L., Wang, J., Wei, W., Yang, K.-H., Lagerblad, B., Galan, I., Andrade, C., Zhang, Y., and Liu, Z.: Substantial global carbon uptake by cement carbonation, Nature Geosci, 9, 880–883, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2840, 2016.

Reply
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-437-CC1
- CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fengming Xi, 12 Dec 2024 reply
  
  We sincerely appreciate your high regard and meticulous review of our manuscript. We have thoroughly considered your suggestions and rechecked the entire text to enhance the manuscript's quality, as follows in response to your comments.
  C1: The data description of the article contains supplementary information, including 4 supplementary tables (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13827861). But it is difficult for readers to find the corresponding relations between the main texts and the data in supplementary tables. It is recommended that manuscripts have clear links to data files in the data description section. For example, in the section “2.1 Data source and treatment”, the explicit table paths should be indicated in corresponding data (Ln.104-118).
  Response：Thanks for your suggestion. There are four tables in the Supplementary tables. Supplementary table 1 is the activity level data of cement clinker production and consumption, which contains five data: (1) cement production, (2) cement clinker ratio, (3) clinker imports, (4) clinker exports, and (5) revised clinker production for countries from 1928 to 2024. Supplementary table 2 is the input model parameters of cement uptake and emissions, including the parameters of cement carbon uptake (Data 1~Data 11), and the carbon emission factors (Data 12) for countries. Supplementary table 3 shows the accounting results of cement carbon uptake, including global carbon uptake by cement material and use (Data 1), annual global carbon uptake by cement material and relevant lag time (Data 2), global carbon uptake by 163 countries and regions from 1928 to 2024 (Data 3) and process carbon emissions from cement production by region and category from 1928 to 2024 (Data 4). Supplementary table 4 is the result of uncertainty accounting for global and national carbon uptake in cement.
  Changes: In the revised manuscript of line 118-119, line 185-187, and line 270-271. We have added a description of the detailed indexing of Supplementary tables.
  C2: Figure 1c, 1e, and Figure 3, “uptakes” should be “uptake”.
  Response: Thanks for your comments. We have changed the “uptakes” in figure 1 and figure 3 to “uptake”.
  Changes: In the revised manuscript, we have changed “uptakes” to “uptake” in the title of the axis coordinates of Figure 1 on line 267, and in the figure notes of Figure 3 on line 307.
  C3: It is recommended that “emission” in the text should be “process emission”, where the emission from energy consumption in cement industry was process emission.
  Response: Thank you for your rigorous consideration. According with your advice, we have changed the expression “emission” from cement production process in the original text to “process emission”.
  Changes: The original text included several descriptions of emissions associated with the cement production process. The revisions to these descriptions can be found at the following line numbers in the updated version: 88, 171, 206, 217, 278, 311-315, 319, 323, 331, 335, 344, 351, 356, 360-361, 363, and 365.
  C4: Why are the global cement carbon sinks in 2023 and 2024 in this study smaller than that of 2021 in previous study (Huang et al., 2023)? Please explain it more clearly.
  Response: Thank you for your valuable comments. It's important to note that of the estimate of global cement carbon uptake in this study is not merely updating three years of data from previous studies. Instead, we have employed a bottom-up approach to calculate global carbon uptake. The cement carbon uptake for 2021 in this study is 0.83 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.70-0.99 Gt CO₂ yr^-1). While this is slightly lower than the 0.96 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.81-1.15 Gt CO₂ yr^-1) reported in the previous study (Huang et al., 2023), it falls within the uncertainty range of the earlier estimate. This is mainly due to the fact that the activity level data in this study is corrected cement consumption. The global cement carbon uptake in 2022 is 0.82 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.69-0.98 Gt CO₂yr^-1), a decrease of 1.1% from 2021. It mainly attributable to the decline in both global cement production and apparent cement consumption in 2022, which decrease by 5.6% and 6.2% from 2021, respectively. In particular, as the largest cement producer, China's cement production and apparent consumption decreased by 11.1 %. In 2023, the global cement carbon uptake is 0.84 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.71-10.03 Gt CO₂yr^-1), an increase of 2.8 % from 2022, in which the global cement production declined by 1.4 %, but the apparent consumption of cement clinker increased by 2.0 %. This suggests a strong correlation between cement carbon uptake and cement consumption. A modest recovery in global cement consumption is anticipated for 2024, primarily driven by rapidly growing markets in South-East Asia and Africa (Cheng et al., 2023). This recovery is expected to correspond with a continuation of growth in the global cement carbon uptake, which is forecasted to reach 0.86 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.73-0.99 Gt CO₂ yr^-1), marking an increase of 2.0 % from the 2023 levels.
  Changes: We have added the description to line 220-228 of the revised draft. “The results show that global cement carbon uptake in 2022 is 0.82 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.69-0.98 Gt CO₂yr^-1), a decrease of 1.1 % from 2021. It mainly attributable to the decline in both global cement production and apparent cement consumption in 2022, which decrease by 5.6 % and 6.2 % from 2021, respectively. In particular, as the largest cement producer, China's cement production and apparent consumption decreased by 11.1%. In 2023, global cement carbon uptake shows a 2.8 % increase from 2022, in which the global cement production declined by 1.4 %, but the apparent consumption of cement clinker increased by 2.0 %. This suggests a strong correlation between cement carbon uptake and cement consumption. A modest recovery in global cement consumption is anticipated for 2024, primarily driven by rapidly growing markets in South-East Asia and Africa (Cheng et al., 2023). This recovery is expected to correspond with a continuation of growth in the global cement carbon uptake, which is forecasted to reach 0.86 Gt CO₂ (95 % CI: 0.73-10.23 Gt CO₂ yr^-1), marking an increase of 2.0% from the 2023 levels.”
  References:
  Andersson, R., Stripple, H., Gustafsson, T., and Ljungkrantz, C.: Carbonation as a method to improve climate performance for cement based material, Cement and Concrete Research, 124, 105819, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.105819, 2019.
  Cheng, D., Reiner, D. M., Yang, F., Cui, C., Meng, J., Shan, Y., Liu, Y., Tao, S., and Guan, D.: Projecting future carbon emissions from cement production in developing countries, Nat Commun, 14, 8213, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43660-x, 2023.
  Friedlingstein, P., O’Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Hauck, J., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Le Quéré, C., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Arneth, A., Arora, V., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Benoit-Cattin, A., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Bultan, S., Chandra, N., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Evans, W., Florentie, L., Forster, P. M., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Harris, I., Hartung, K., Haverd, V., Houghton, R. A., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Joetzjer, E., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kitidis, V., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lenton, A., Lienert, S., Liu, Z., Lombardozzi, D., Marland, G., Metzl, N., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O’Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Smith, A. J. P., Sutton, A. J., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., van der Werf, G., Vuichard, N., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, X., and Zaehle, S.: Global carbon budget 2020, Earth System Science Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020.
  Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M. W., O’Sullivan, M., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Currie, K. I., Decharme, B., Djeutchouang, L. M., Dou, X., Evans, W., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Gasser, T., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Luijkx, I. T., Jain, A., Jones, S. D., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Landschützer, P., Lauvset, S. K., Lefèvre, N., Lienert, S., Liu, J., Marland, G., McGuire, P. C., Melton, J. R., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., Ono, T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Schwingshackl, C., Séférian, R., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wada, C., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., and Zeng, J.: Global carbon budget 2021, Earth System Science Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022a.
  Friedlingstein, P., O’Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Gregor, L., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Olsen, A., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Alkama, R., Arneth, A., Arora, V. K., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bittig, H. C., Bopp, L., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Gasser, T., Gehlen, M., Gkritzalis, T., Gloege, L., Grassi, G., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jain, A. K., Jersild, A., Kadono, K., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lindsay, K., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGrath, M. J., Metzl, N., Monacci, N. M., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O’Brien, K., Ono, T., Palmer, P. I., Pan, N., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rodriguez, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Shutler, J. D., Skjelvan, I., Steinhoff, T., Sun, Q., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Takao, S., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, X., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tsujino, H., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Walker, A. P., Wanninkhof, R., Whitehead, C., Willstrand Wranne, A., et al.: Global Carbon Budget 2022, Earth System Science Data, 14, 4811–4900, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, 2022b.
  Friedlingstein, P., O’Sullivan, M., Jones, M. W., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Landschützer, P., Le Quéré, C., Luijkx, I. T., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Schwingshackl, C., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Barbero, L., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Decharme, B., Bopp, L., Brasika, I. B. M., Cadule, P., Chamberlain, M. A., Chandra, N., Chau, T.-T.-T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Dou, X., Enyo, K., Evans, W., Falk, S., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Ford, D. J., Gasser, T., Ghattas, J., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Hefner, M., Heinke, J., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Jacobson, A. R., Jain, A., Jarníková, T., Jersild, A., Jiang, F., Jin, Z., Joos, F., Kato, E., Keeling, R. F., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Lan, X., Lefèvre, N., Li, H., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Ma, L., Marland, G., Mayot, N., McGuire, P. C., McKinley, G. A., Meyer, G., Morgan, E. J., Munro, D. R., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., O’Brien, K. M., Olsen, A., Omar, A. M., Ono, T., Paulsen, M., Pierrot, D., Pocock, K., Poulter, B., Powis, C. M., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., et al.: Global Carbon Budget 2023, Earth System Science Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023.
  Guo, R., Wang, J., Bing, L., Tong, D., Ciais, P., Davis, S. J., Andrew, R. M., Xi, F., and Liu, Z.: Global CO₂ uptake by cement from 1930 to 2019, Earth System Science Data, 13, 1791–1805, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-1791-2021, 2021.
  Huang, Z., Wang, J., Bing, L., Qiu, Y., Guo, R., Yu, Y., Ma, M., Niu, L., Tong, D., Andrew, R. M., Friedlingstein, P., Canadell, J. G., Xi, F., and Liu, Z.: Global carbon uptake of cement carbonation accounts 1930–2021, Earth System Science Data, 15, 4947–4958, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4947-2023, 2023.
  
  Xi, F., Davis, S. J., Ciais, P., Crawford-Brown, D., Guan, D., Pade, C., Shi, T., Syddall, M., Lv, J., Ji, L., Bing, L., Wang, J., Wei, W., Yang, K.-H., Lagerblad, B., Galan, I., Andrade, C., Zhang, Y., and Liu, Z.: Substantial global carbon uptake by cement carbonation, Nature Geosci, 9, 880–883, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2840, 2016.
  
  Reply
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-437-CC2
RC1:
'Comment on essd-2024-437', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Dec 2024 reply
Review Comments for ESSD-2024-437
General Comment

The manuscript, ESSD-2024-437, represents the fourth update of the Global Cement Carbon Uptake Database. Compared to previous versions, this update enhances the records to the country level, extends the temporal coverage, and reduces uncertainty by focusing on cement clinker production rather than apparent consumption. The manuscript is well-written, and I believe such an update is valuable to the community. Below, I have outlined several comments that may help improve this work.
Major Comments
Forecasting for 2024

The ARIMA temporal forecasting model is commonly applied when data series exhibit high autocorrelation, such as seasonal cycles. However, the annual production and carbon uptake data in this study are strongly influenced by economic development and policy-making in one specific year, leading to high variability (as shown in Figure 4). How do the authors justify the use of ARIMA in this context?

CO₂ Uptake Characteristics

The CO₂ uptake ability of concrete theoretically decreases significantly over time due to surface calcification. How does the CO₂ uptake model (Table 1) account for this characteristic? Including explicit figures to demonstrate this phenomenon would strengthen the analysis.

Input Data Summary

It is recommended to summarize the metadata of input data (e.g., time span, resolution, references, and data links) in a table for ease of reference.

Figure 1b

The carbon offset levels in Figure 1b show a clear overall increasing, stable, trend (unit as percentage) over the past 100 years. Considering the construction substantially increased over the past century, does this indicate that the carbon uptake efficiency of materials is increasing over time? I did not follow. Additionally, uncertainty levels should be provided in this figure. The explanation of short-term disturbances, such as World War II, is reasonable, but the manuscript lacks interpretation for the long-term stable increase in carbon offset levels.

Discussion on Cement Carbonation Risks

Page 10, Line 237: The authors call for inter-industry collaboration to maximize CO₂ uptake from cement materials. While this is an important goal, it is worth noting that cement carbonation significantly reduces the durability of constructions. Reconstruction necessitated by reduced durability would lead to additional carbon emissions. Could the authors discuss the potential risks associated with relying on carbonation as a pathway to achieving carbon neutrality?

Comparison with Previous Studies

As this study is an update of Huang et al. (2023) with some shared figures but updated results, it would be helpful to include an explicit comparison with previous reports. Are there any revised conclusions, corrections, or new insights presented in this update?

Uncertainty and Future Directions

Adding a dedicated section or paragraph to discuss data uncertainty and propose potential research directions would enhance the manuscript.

Minor Comments
Page 2, Line 48: The manuscript refers to cement carbonation as a "permanent CO₂ uptake method." Given that the carbon uptake ability changes over time, why is it characterized as permanent?

Page 2, Line 55: This report suggests a nearly 50% uptake from cement carbonation, which differs significantly from the 10% uptake reported by PCA. Could the authors explain this discrepancy?

Page 3, Line 79: Citing the previous three updates of the Global Cement Carbon Uptake Database in this section would help readers better understand the evolution of the dataset.

Figure 4 & 5: provide full spells of the countries in Appendix or supplement would be helpful. Any possibility to include the uncertainty range?

Reply
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-437-RC1

Le Niu, Songbin Wu, Robbie M. Andrew, Zi Shao, Jiaoyue Wang, and Fengming Xi

Data sets

Global and National CO2 Uptake by Cement Carbonation from 1928 to 2024 Songbin Wu, Le Niu, Jiaoyue Wang, and Fengming Xi https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13827860

Le Niu, Songbin Wu, Robbie M. Andrew, Zi Shao, Jiaoyue Wang, and Fengming Xi

Viewed

Total article views: 314 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML	PDF	XML	Total	BibTeX	EndNote
244	62	8	314	4	4

HTML: 244
PDF: 62
XML: 8
Total: 314
BibTeX: 4
EndNote: 4

Views and downloads (calculated since 25 Nov 2024)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Nov 2024	155	41	5	201
Dec 2024	89	21	3	113

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 25 Nov 2024)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Nov 2024	155	41	5	201
Dec 2024	89	21	3	113

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 305 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 305 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country	#	Views	%

Latest update: 13 Dec 2024

Short summary

This study provides a precise bottom-up quantification to cement carbonation sinks at national and global levels. It shows the global CO₂ uptake by cement materials increases from 7.74 Mt yr^-1 in 1928 to 0.84 Gt yr^-1 in 2023, and projected to rise to 0.86 Gt yr^-1 in 2024, the accumulated CO₂ uptake offsets about 46 % of the cement process emission. The dominance in cement carbon uptake has shifted from the USA, Japan and some European countries to emerging economies such as China and India.


Total:	0
HTML:	0
PDF:	0
XML:	0