This study evaluates a novel integrated carbon capture and utilization (I-CCU) pathway for the cement industry, comparing its performance to business as usual (BAU) and carbon capture and storage (CCS). The I-CCU pathway involves producing methanol using hydrogen from electrolysis and CO₂ captured at an oxyfuel cement plant, with oxygen recycled from the same electrolysis plant. The analysis focuses on the energy and emissions balances, considering a functional unit of 1 ton of clinker plus 522 kg of methanol. Key findings include: 1. **Energy Intensity**: The I-CCU pathway is highly dependent on the specific electricity emissions, making it sensitive to the carbon footprint of the electricity grid. 2. **Performance Compared to BAU**: I-CCU outperforms BAU only when the specific electricity emissions are below about 0.2 kgCO₂/kWh, which is true for most European regions. 3. **Compared to CCS**: CCS is generally a better alternative to I-CCU, except in regions with nearly zero specific electricity emissions. 4. **Process Integration**: The elimination of the air separation unit (ASU) in I-CCU is insignificant due to the high energy demand associated with electrolysis. 5. **Electricity Requirements**: The I-CCU pathway requires significantly more electrical energy, necessitating substantial new power infrastructure. 6. **Renewable Energy**: Investing in renewable energy for e-mobility or other services is more advantageous than using it to drive I-CCU, unless there is abundant renewable energy and efficient applications are exhausted. The study emphasizes the importance of a comparative analysis to ensure that decarbonization strategies are effective and environmentally beneficial.This study evaluates a novel integrated carbon capture and utilization (I-CCU) pathway for the cement industry, comparing its performance to business as usual (BAU) and carbon capture and storage (CCS). The I-CCU pathway involves producing methanol using hydrogen from electrolysis and CO₂ captured at an oxyfuel cement plant, with oxygen recycled from the same electrolysis plant. The analysis focuses on the energy and emissions balances, considering a functional unit of 1 ton of clinker plus 522 kg of methanol. Key findings include: 1. **Energy Intensity**: The I-CCU pathway is highly dependent on the specific electricity emissions, making it sensitive to the carbon footprint of the electricity grid. 2. **Performance Compared to BAU**: I-CCU outperforms BAU only when the specific electricity emissions are below about 0.2 kgCO₂/kWh, which is true for most European regions. 3. **Compared to CCS**: CCS is generally a better alternative to I-CCU, except in regions with nearly zero specific electricity emissions. 4. **Process Integration**: The elimination of the air separation unit (ASU) in I-CCU is insignificant due to the high energy demand associated with electrolysis. 5. **Electricity Requirements**: The I-CCU pathway requires significantly more electrical energy, necessitating substantial new power infrastructure. 6. **Renewable Energy**: Investing in renewable energy for e-mobility or other services is more advantageous than using it to drive I-CCU, unless there is abundant renewable energy and efficient applications are exhausted. The study emphasizes the importance of a comparative analysis to ensure that decarbonization strategies are effective and environmentally beneficial.