Cancio Díaz, YudieskySánchez Berriel, SofíaSánchez Machado, Inocencio RaúlMartirena Hernández, José FernandoHeierly, UrsFavier, AurélieScrivener, KarenHabert, Guillaume2019-03-132019-03-132017-06-15Cancio, Y., Sánchez, S., Sánchez, I.R., Martirena, J.F. , Heierly, U., Favier, A., Scrivener, K.,Habert, G (2017). Limestone calcined clay cement as a low carbon solution to meet expanding cement demand in emerging economies. Development Engineering, No. 2, pp. 82-91. ISSN: 2352-7285. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.deveng.2017.06.0012352-7285https://dspace.uclv.edu.cu/handle/123456789/10907This paper aims at assessing the economic, environmental and social feasibility of five investment alternatives for the Cuban cement industry in a long-term horizon appraisal (15 years). Anticipated growing demand for cement, constrained supply and an urgent need for optimisation of limited capital while preserving the environment, are background facts leading to the present study. This research explores the beneficial contribution of a new available technology, LC3 cement, resulting from the combination of clinker, calcined clay and limestone, with a capacity of replacing up to 50% of clinker in cement. Global Warming Potential (GWP) is calculated with Life Cycle Assessment method and the economic investment’s payback is assessed through Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) approach. Main outcomes show that projected demand could be satisfied either by adding new cement plants–at a high environmental impact and unprofitable performance– or by introducing LC3 strategy. The latter choice allows boosting both the return on investment and the production capacity while reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions up to 20-23% compared to business-as-usual practice. Overall profitability for the industry is estimated to overcome BAU scenario by 8 to 10 percentage points by 2025, if LC3 were adopted. Increasing the production of conventional blended cements instead brings only marginal economic benefits without supporting the needed increase in production capacity. The conducted study also shows that, in spite of the extra capital cost required for the calcination of kaolinite clay, LC3 drops production costs in the range of 15-25% compared to conventional solutions.enEste documento es Propiedad Patrimonial de la Universidad Central “Marta Abreu” de Las Villas. Los usuarios podrán hacer uso de esta obra bajo la siguiente licencia: Creative Commons: Atribución-No Comercial-Compartir Igual 4.0 LicenseCement, Alternative, ROCE, CO2, LCA, InvestmentEconomía IndustrialIndustrial EconomicsMateriales de ConstrucciónConstruction MaterialsArticleUniversidad Central "Marta Abreu" de Las Villashttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.deveng.2017.06.001