Concrete is 15% cement and 85% stone. Just crushed, homogenous, predictable and structurally sound stone. You can't reinforce stone like you can reinforce concrete, and you can't pour stone. Stone will not replace concrete. As soon as the energy crisis ends, concrete prices will fall again. The requirements for stone to be used structurally are high, and I don't think production could ever match the demand that replacing concrete would create, or if it did, it would be a whole lot more expensive.

The analysis is interesting, but why the alternative of using bricks instead of stone or concrete is not studied at all?

Seems even more efficient to mould clay than to carve stones, even it becomes fully automated.

I'm imagining the pit mining to retrieve the volume of large stones needed to keep up with concrete consumption.