All Issue

2025 Vol.34, Issue 2 Preview Page

Research Paper

Empirical Analysis of GHG Emission Determinants in the Korean Cement Industry

국내 시멘트 산업의 온실가스 배출 요인 분석

이나영*‧조용성**

Nayoung Lee* and Yongsung Cho**

*고려대학교 지속발전연구소 연구위원, 제1저자(e-mail: clfod79@korea.ac.kr)
**고려대학교 식품자원경제학과 교수, 교신저자(e-mail: yscho@korea.ac.kr)
*Research Fellow, The Institute for Sustainable Development, Korea University, First author (e-mail: clfod79@korea.ac.kr)
**Professor, Dept. of Food and Resource Economics, Korea University, Corresponding author (e-mail: yscho@korea.ac.kr)
30 June 2025. pp. 291-319
PDF Citation
Abstract
This study empirically analyzed the characteristics of greenhouse gas emissions in the domestic cement industry. Using data from seven major domestic cement manufacturers from 2012 to 2022, the study performed a decomposition analysis, a panel analysis, and a decoupling analysis to derive policy implications for emission reduction. The decomposition analysis revealed that increases in sales revenue and decreases in clinker production efficiency increased greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, improvements in a carbon intensity and a cement intensity, as well as reductions in clinker dependency, reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Panel analysis results showed that sales, the clinker-to-cement ratio, fossil fuel consumption, and electricity consumption were important variables significantly impacting greenhouse gas emissions. Notably, the results suggested that an increase in sales does not necessarily lead to an increase in CO2 emissions, consistent with the decoupling analysis results. The decoupling index value (DI) between sales and CO2 emissions in the cement industry was negative, indicating a decoupling phenomenon in which sales increased while greenhouse gas emissions decreased during the analysis period. Because the cement industry is a major emitter of greenhouse gases, continuous improvements in production efficiency and technological innovation are necessary.
Keywords
Cement industry
Greenhouse gas emissions
Decomposition analysis
Panel analysis
Decoupling analysis
본 연구는 국내 시멘트 산업의 온실가스 배출 특성을 실증적으로 분석하고, 배출 감축을 위한 정책적 시사점을 도출하기 위해 2012년부터 2022년까지 국내 주요 시멘트 제조업체 7개사의 데이터를 활용하여 요인분해 분석, 패널 분석, 그리고 동조화 분석을 수행하였다. 요인분해 분석 결과, 매출액 증가와 클링커 생산 효율성의 하락은 온실가스 배출량을 증가시키는 요인으로 작용한 반면, 탄소집약도와 시멘트집약도의 개선, 클링커 의존도의 감소는 온실가스 배출량을 감소시키는 긍정적 요인으로 작용하였다. 패널 분석 결과에서는 매출액, 시멘트 대비 클링커 비율, 화석연료 소비 및 전력 소비가 온실가스 배출량에 유의미한 영향을 미치는 중요 변수로 나타났다. 특히, 매출액 증가가 반드시 배출량 증가로 이어진다고 볼 수 없다는 시사점을 도출하였고, 이 결과는 동조화 분석 결과와 일치한다. 시멘트 산업의 매출액과 CO2 배출량 간의 동조화 지수값은 음수(-)로서 분석 기간 동안 매출액은 증가했지만 온실가스 배출량은 감소하는 탈동조화 현상을 나타냈다. 시멘트 산업은 대표적인 에너지 다소비 산업으로 많은 양의 온실가스를 배출하고 있으므로 지속적인 생산 효율성의 개선과 함께 기술 혁신이 필요하다.
키워드
시멘트 산업
온실가스 배출
요인분해 분석
패널 분석
동조화 분석
References
  1. 김동구, “철강산업의 온실가스 배출 탈동조화 국제비교”, 「자원환경경제연구」, 제31권 제1호, 2022, pp. 113~139.
  2. 김수이‧김현석, “LMDI 방법론을 이용한 국내 제조업의 에너지 소비 요인 분해 분석”, 「에너지경제연구」, 제10권 제1호, 2011, pp. 49~76.
  3. 김수이‧정경화, “LMDI 방법론을 이용한 국내 제조업의 온실가스 배출 요인 분해분석”, 「자원환경경제연구」, 제20권 제2호, 2011, pp. 229~256.
  4. 박년배, “탄소중립 선언한 국내 주요 기업의 온실가스 배출량 변화 분해분석”, 「에너지공학」, 제32권 제2호, 2023, pp. 23~37.10.5855/ENERGY.2023.32.2.023
  5. 삼표시멘트, 2023 삼표시멘트 ESG 보고서, 2024.
  6. 손서원, “시멘트 업종의 저탄소 전환”, 삼성증권 리서치센터 ESG연구소, 2024.
  7. 에너지경제연구원, 산업부문 온실가스 감축 및 에너지절약 잠재량 추정(Ⅰ), 2023.
  8. 이상원‧이재윤, “소재 효율성을 반영한 산업 부문 온실가스 배출 요인 분석 및 시사점: 철강, 시멘트 산업을 중심으로”, 산업연구원 연구보고서 2023-05, 2023.
  9. 이재형‧임지재‧김용기‧이재영, “LMDI 분해 분석을 이용한 국내 철도 노선별 온실가스 배출 특성 분석”, 「한국철도학회 논문집, 제15권 제3호, 2012, pp. 286~293.10.7782/JKSR.2012.15.3.286
  10. 조용성, “전력산업의 온실가스 배출 요인 분석 및 감축 방안 연구”, 「한국기후변화학회지」, 제8권 제4호, 2017, pp. 357~367.10.15531/ksccr.2017.8.4.357
  11. 한겨레, 자원순환 구축 통해 지속가능 성장 추구, 한겨레, 2023.8.7. https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/1103288.html
  12. 한국경제, 에너지 효율목표 제도(KEEP 30) 우수기업 인증 관련 보도자료, 2024.12.19. https://www.hankyung.com/article/202412093856i
  13. 한국시멘트협회, 시멘트탄소중립 현황과 전망, 2035 NDC 콘퍼런스 발표자료, 2024. https://www.2050cnc.go.kr/storage/board/base/2024/12/11/BOARD_ATTACH_1733883271053.pdf
  14. Akyürek, Z., LMDI decomposition analysis of energy consumption of Turkish manufacturing industry: 2005–2014. Energy Efficiency, 2020.10.1007/s12053-020-09846-8
  15. Andrew, R. M., “Global CO2 emissions from cement production”, Earth System Science Data, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2018, pp. 195~217.10.5194/essd-10-195-2018
  16. Ang, B. W., and F. L. Liu, “A new energy decomposition method: perfect in decomposition and consistent in aggregation,” Energy Policy, Vol. 26, 2001, pp. 537~548.10.1016/S0360-5442(01)00022-6
  17. Barbhuiya, S., M. A. Rahman, M. Alam, and M. R. Islam, “Decarbonising cement and concrete production: A review of technologies, barriers, and opportunities,” Journal of Building Engineering, Vol. 89, 2024.
  18. Branger, F., and P. Quirion, “Reaping the carbon rent: Abatement and overallocation profits in the European cement industry, insights from an LMDI decomposition analysis,” Energy Economics, 2015.10.2139/ssrn.2497474
  19. Gartner, E., and H. Hirao, “A review of alternative approaches to the reduction of CO2 emissions associated with the manufacture of the binder phase in concrete,” Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 78, 2015, pp. 126~142.10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.04.012
  20. González, P. F., M. Landajo, and M. J. Presno, “Tracking EU CO2 emissions through LMDI decomposition,” Energy, 2014.
  21. Hall, B. H., and J. Mairesse, Testing for unit roots in panel data: An exploration using real and simulated data, UC Berkeley and INSEE-CREST, 2002.
  22. He, H., and R. J. Myers, Log Mean Divisia Index decomposition analysis of the demand for building materials: Application to concrete, dwellings, and the UK, Environmental Science & Technology, 2021.10.1021/acs.est.0c0238733615791PMC8023668
  23. Hua, F., M. Alharthi, W. Yin, et al., Carbon emissions and socioeconomic drivers of climate change: LMDI base model for China, Sustainability, 2022.
  24. International Energy Agency (IEA), Technology Roadmap: Low-Carbon Transition in the Cement Industry, 2018.
  25. Jain, A., “Analysing the Scope 3 emissions of the cement industry,” International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 2024.
  26. Lehne, J., and F. Preston, Making Concrete Change: Innovation in Low-carbon Cement and Concrete, 2018.
  27. Levin, A., C. F. Lin, and C. S. J. Chu, “Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties,” Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 108, No. 1, 2002, pp. 1~24.10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
  28. Li, Y., Q. Wang, and X. Zhang, “Reduction of CO2 emissions in cement production through alternative clinker materials,” ACS Environmental & Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2024, pp. 785~794.
  29. Lin, B., and Z. Zhang, Carbon emissions in China's cement industry: A sector and policy analysis, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016.10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.348
  30. Lisaba, E. B., & N. S. Lopez, Using LMDI to estimate drivers to energy consumption and emissions in ASEAN, IOP Conference Series, 2021.
  31. Liu, G., Y. Hao, Y. Zhou, Z. Yang, Y. Zhang, and M. Su, China's low-carbon industrial transformation assessment based on Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index model, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2016.10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.02.002
  32. Long, X., M. Sun, F. Cheng, and J. Zhang, “Convergence analysis of eco-efficiency of China’s cement manufacturers through unit root test of panel data,” Energy, Vol. 134, 2017, pp. 709~717.10.1016/j.energy.2017.05.079
  33. Mehta, P. K., and P. J. M. Monteiro, Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials (4th ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2014.
  34. Setyawan, D., Energy efficiency in Indonesia's manufacturing industry: LMDI analysis, Sustainable Environment Research, 2020.
  35. Tapio, P., “Towards a theory of decoupling: Degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001,” Transport Policy, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005, pp. 137~151.10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.001
  36. Tu, M., W. Li, and L. Bao, Decomposition of CO2 emissions from urban transport: Global study, Sustainability, 2019.
  37. UNEP, Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth: A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Panel, United Nations Environment Program, 2011.
  38. Wang, K., and Y. M. Wei, “China’s regional industrial energy efficiency and carbon emissions abatement costs,” Energy Economics, Vol. 42, 2014, pp. 292~300.
  39. Wang, W., X. Liu, M. Zhang, and X. Song, Using a new generalized LMDI (logarithmic mean Divisia index) method to analyze China's energy consumption, Energy, 2014.10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.064
  40. Wu, L., M. Wang, J. Cheng, and X. Li, Embodied carbon emission of building materials in Southwest China: Analysis based on Tapio decoupling and LMDI decomposition, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 2023.10.21203/rs.3.rs-1776035/v1
  41. Xu, J. H., T. Fleiter, W. Eichhammer, & Y. Fan, Energy consumption and CO2 emissions in China's cement industry: A perspective from LMDI decomposition analysis, Energy Policy, 2012.10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.038
  42. Zhang, X., W. Chen, Z. Mi, and S. J. Davis, “Projecting future carbon emissions from cement production and the mitigation potential in developing countries,” Nature Communications, Vol. 14, 2023.10.1038/s41467-023-43660-x38081830PMC10713616
  43. Zhang, Y., and Y. Da, “The decomposition of energy-related carbon emission and its decoupling with economic growth in China,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 41, 2015, pp. 1255~1266.10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.021
Information
  • Publisher :Environmental and Resource Economics Review
  • Publisher(Ko) :자원 · 환경경제연구
  • Journal Title :자원·환경경제연구
  • Journal Title(Ko) :Environmental and Resource Economics Review
  • Volume : 34
  • No :2
  • Pages :291-319
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.15266/KEREA.2025.34.2.291
Journal Informaiton 자원·환경경제연구 자원·환경경제연구
E-Book
Manuscript Submission
한국환경경제학회
Manuscript Submission
한국자원경제학회
  • NRF
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close