Haneklaus, NilsBarbossa, SofiaBasallote Sánchez, María DoloresBertau, MartinNieto Liñán, José MiguelRuiz Cánovas, CarlosBilal, EssaidZakrzewska-Kołtuniewicz, Grażyna2024-03-082024-03-082022-04Haneklaus, N., Barbossa, S., Basallote, M. D., Bertau, M., Bilal, E., Chajduk, E., Chernysh, Y., Chubur, V., Cruz, J., Dziarczykowski, K., Fröhlich, P., Grosseau, P., Mazouz, H., Kiegiel, K., Nieto, J. M., Pavón, S., Pessanha, S., Pryzowicz, A., Roubík, H., … Zakrzewska-Kołtuniewicz, G. (2022). Closing the upcoming EU gypsum gap with phosphogypsum. In Resources, Conservation and Recycling (Vol. 182, p. 106328). Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.1063280921-34491879-0658 (electrónico)https://hdl.handle.net/10272/23360The EU Renewable Energy Directive with climate and energy goals does not leave room for coal-burning power plants that currently contribute approximately 17 million t of flue gas desulfurization (FGD) gypsum to EU manufacturers that require a total of 57 million t of gypsum per year (EU, 2020). It is also unlikely that natural gypsum production in the EU can be significantly increased in the near-term. Unlike other critical raw materials (CRMs) such as rare earth elements (REEs) that constitute a relatively small volume and can be imported over long-distances, such practice is not economically feasible for this relatively inexpensive (per weight) bulk-commodity used in large quantities. Transport costs for natural gypsum easily surpass the product value, so that imports would measurably increase prices for construction in the EU and affect millions.engAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 Españahttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/Gypsum gapPhosphogypsumRecyclingCircular economyEuropean Unionjournal article10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106328.open access2506 Geología