A recent study by researchers at the University of California, Davis has unveiled the substantial environmental impact of manufacturing common materials in the United States. The research, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, highlights the significant climate-related costs associated with producing materials such as steel, plastics, and cement.
Uncovering the True Cost of Material Production
The study, led by Elisabeth Van Roijen and her team, examined nine widely used materials: aluminium, iron, steel, brick, cement, lime, gypsum, asphalt, glass, and plastics. By analysing production data, energy consumption, and emissions factors, the researchers calculated both energy-related and process-related carbon dioxide emissions for each material.
Their findings reveal that the production of these materials in the United States resulted in 427 million tonnes of CO2 emissions in 2018, incurring an astonishing $79 billion in annual climate-related costs. These expenses, driven by greenhouse gas emissions, remain hidden from current market prices, effectively functioning as an enormous subsidy for carbon-intensive industries.
The Impact on Material Prices and Innovation
If the climate costs from these emissions were factored into prices, some materials would see significant cost increases. For instance, cement prices could rise by 62%, lime by 61%, and gypsum by 47%. Steel and plastics, despite their climate-related costs constituting a lower fraction of their market value, are each responsible for over $20 billion in annual climate costs due to their high production volumes.
The study used the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) estimate of $184 per tonne of CO2 to calculate the climate-related costs. This figure captures the quantifiable economic damage associated with increased carbon emissions, including impacts on human health, agriculture, and coastal infrastructure.
Towards a Greener Future in Manufacturing
Incorporating these climate costs into material prices could drive innovation in low-carbon production methods and increase the competitiveness of recycling and alternative materials. For example, if aluminium and steel production transitioned entirely to renewable energy sources, their climate-related costs would decrease by 95% and 79%, respectively.
The researchers emphasise the need for targeted policies to address process-related emissions, such as those from chemical reactions in cement and lime production, which cannot be eliminated by switching to clean energy sources. Improved recycling rates, extended producer responsibility laws, and the development of alternative materials could all play a role in reducing emissions.
As global material demand continues to grow, particularly in developing economies, the study calls for further research into policy solutions to address the climate impacts of material production and use in a global and coordinated manner. By exposing these hidden costs, the research provides a foundation for identifying relevant policy drivers to help mitigate emissions from materials production and move towards a more sustainable manufacturing sector.
