I'm all for reduction, but if you priced in the externalities even that would likely favor other materials in many applications that are extensively cement based. Including bitumen in some cases. I just think we have to be aggressively against cement usage because theres no stoichiometric way to get it to not be a massive source of carbon if we keep using it the way we do.

My problem with the don't throw the productive economy out by just trying to decarbonize argument is really structural though. It just gets to the point that we can't outgrow destroying the commons. Who cares if we maintain rapid development if the resulting assets are worthless?