Analysis

Nigerian billionaire Aliko Dangote was spotted attending the inauguration ceremony of Kenyan President William Ruto earlier in September 2022. This is relevant because Dangote’s cement company previously announced plans in 2016 to build two 1.5Mt/yr plants in Kenya, near Nairobi and Mombasa respectively. They were intended to become operational by 2021. Unfortunately, Dangote himself allegedly described Kenya as being more corrupt than Nigeria to Kenyan broadcast journalist Jeff Koinange a few years later and nothing more happened. Back in 2014 Ruto visited Dangote Cement’s Obajana plant in Kogi state in Nigeria when the politician was the Deputy President of Kenya. Dangote’s attendance at the presidential inauguration this month suggests at the very least that his relationship with Ruto remains active. Maybe more news on those planned plants will follow.

Graph 1: Cement in Kenya, 2018 – June 2022. Source: Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS).

The reason why the owner of Africa’s largest cement company might be interested in the Kenyan market can be seen in its latest cement production figures. Data from the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) shows that production for the first half of 2022 grew by 20% year-on-year to 4.95Mt in the first half of 2022, from 4.12Mt in the same period in 2021. Cement production was broadly similar in 2018 and 2019 at around 6Mt. It then increased by 25% to 9.25Mt in 2021 from 7.41Mt in 2020. On a rolling annual basis, production picked up at the start of 2020 and has risen consistently since then each month, peaking at over 10Mt in May 2022.

However, the elections in August 2022 probably slowed this growth trend, despite being much more peaceful than those in 2007, although the KNBS is yet to release the data. Bamburi Cement said in its outlook for the second half of 2022 that it expected markets to recover after the ballot. The subsidiary of Holcim reported increasing turnover in the first half of 2022, due to mounting sales volumes and price rises, but its profit fell sharply. It blamed this on fuel and logistics inflation, growing clinker import costs as well as negative currency exchange effects.

That last point about imported clinker is worth noting given that a government report in late 2021 found that the country had a clinker shortage of up to 3.3Mt/yr. Yet, the KNBS data in recent years shows that cement production and consumption are broadly similar, suggesting that the shortfall in clinker is being imported. The report added that 59% of the imported clinker originated from Egypt, tariff free, due to a free trade agreement. Local producers were reported to have been operating at a 65% capacity utilisation rate. Egypt and the UAE accounted for most of the imported clinker followed by Saudi Arabia. An interview in the Standard newspaper at this time with Bamburi Cement’s managing director Seddiq Hassani revealed that, despite locally produced clinker being cheaper than imported clinker, some producers were reluctant to hand control of a key input material over to their local competitors. Other producers, predictably, were trying to persuade the government to raise the duty on imports of clinker from 10% to 25%. Tariff discussions have continued in 2022.

So far in 2022 the other big stories in the sector have included Bamburi Cement’s plans to build two solar power plants and a major repair to the kiln shell at East Africa Portland Cement’s (EAPCC) Athi River cement plant. The solar plants will be built next to Bamburi Cement’s integrated Mombasa plant and its Nairobi grinding plant. Once operational in 2023 they are anticipated to supply up to 40% of the cement producer’s total power supply. Devki Group, the owner of National Cement, also announced plans in August 2022 to set up a wind farm near Mombasa. However, this seems more like an attempt to diversify the group into electricity production rather than to supply its own plant near Nairobi. EAPCC’s upgrade project has completed this week after about a month and half of work. It is intended to increase the plant’s cement production by 50%.

Cement production started in rise in 2020 but the Covid-19 pandemic may have constrained this. Production (and consumption) then jumped up in 2021 and looks set to do similar in 2022 bar a possible blip from the elections in August 2022. This is despite the global market issues arising from the end of Covid-19 and the war in Ukraine. These may be uncertain times but the fundamentals for the Kenyan cement market look positive despite rising end prices. Unsurprisingly, it looks likely that Dangote Cement remains keen to extend its business to Kenya.

HeidelbergCement’s latest sustainability target has been to reduce the ‘cement’ footprint from its own name. From this week it has become Heildelberg Materials. Of the top ten global cement producers in Global Cement Magazine’s roundup in the December 2021 issue only three now have the word ‘cement’ in their names.

In Heildelberg Materials’ own words, the “new brand identity underlines the company's pioneering role on the path to carbon neutrality and digitalisation in the building materials industry.” Chair Dominik von Achten then goes on to explain that the company is proud of its cement business but its range of services goes far beyond cement. This is certainly true but in 2021 the cement business generated 44% of the group’s revenue. 19% came from aggregates, 25% from ready-mixed concrete plus asphalt and the remaining 12% from services and other lines.

Yet, Heidelberg Materials is also a leader in driving innovation in carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) for the cement sector with a full production line capture unit planned for commissioning in 2024 at the Brevik plant in Norway. When it opens it will be the only full scale CCUS unit at a cement plant anywhere in the world. The group further plans to reduce the CO₂ footprint of its cementitious products to below 500kg/t CO₂ by 2030 and aims to generate half of its revenue from low-carbon products. These are not small achievements or ambitions.

Meanwhile, Holcim completed the divestment of its Indian business to Adani Group this week for US$6.4bn. For Holcim the move marks a milestone in the reshaping of its business away from developing markets and the diversification on its product lines into light (and more sustainable) building materials. So why would a company like Adani Group move into the cement sector when multinationals are getting out?

Money is the obvious answer and the one group owner Gautam Adani raised at a speech marking his latest mega-acquisition. He said, “Our entry into this business is happening at a time when India is on the cusp of one of the greatest economic surges seen in the modern world.” He expects his new cement arm to become the most profitable cement producer in the country although his competitors may have other ideas. As well as operational efficiency, Adani also plans to inject US$2.5bn into the business as part of plans to increase its production capacity to 140Mt/yr in the next five years, from around 70Mt/yr at present. However, the financial press in India and elsewhere has wondered how much debt Adani Group can cope with and whether it will consolidate its latest acquisitions or simply use them to buy into even more sectors. Time will tell.

Lastly, it should be noted that Adani Group’s new rival UltraTech Cement has targeted a production capacity of 154Mt/yr by 2025. Any growth in the Indian market will clearly be contested. It is also worth noting that the latter company has retained ‘cement’ in its name. For now at least.

Argos Honduras revealed this week that it has been testing the injection of hydrogen into the kiln of its integrated Piedras Azules cement plant. It has completed a pilot with Portugal-based company UTIS. As part of the process it has been trialling, it has split water by electrolysis and then injected the hydrogen and oxygen directly into the kiln via the main burner. The pilot has reportedly increased clinker production and reduced petcoke consumption at the plant.

Argos is far from alone in using hydrogen in this way. At the end of August 2022 Cemex said that it was also starting to use hydrogen at its San Pedro de Macorís cement plant in the Dominican Republic. CRH UK-subsidiary Tarmac completed a trial in July 2022 using hydrogen as an alternative to natural gas at its Tunstead lime plant. HeidelbergCement UK-subsidiary Hanson also ran a successful trial using hydrogen as part of the fuel mix at its Ribblesdale cement plant in 2021. The government-funded trial used a combination of hydrogen (39%), meat and bone meal (12%) and glycerine (49%) to reach a 100% alternative fuels substitution rate. In 2021 Hanson reported that fuel switching to hydrogen could help it reduce its 2050 CO₂ emissions by about 3%, or by -35kg CO₂/t of cement product.

Cemex appears to be a leader in using hydrogen in this way. The Mexico-based company started injecting hydrogen in 2019 and retrofitted all of its European cement plants with the technology to do so in 2020. It then said it wanted to roll this out to the rest of its operations. The project in the Dominican Republic is an example of this. In February 2022 it announced an investment in HiiROC, a UK-based company that has developed a method using thermal plasma electrolysis to convert biomethane, flare gas, or natural gas into hydrogen. The stated aim of this investment was to increase Cemex's hydrogen injection capacity in its cement kilns and to increase its alternative fuel substitution rate. Back in 2020 Cemex said that it planned to use hydrogen injection to contribute 5% of its progress towards its 2030 CO₂ emissions reduction target along with other measures such as increasing its thermal substitution rate and reducing its clinker factor.

As can be seen above there are a number of examples of hydrogen injection being used in cement plants in Europe and the Americas. However, there is very little actual data available publicly at this stage on how much hydrogen that the plants are actually using. For example, Cemex may have hydrogen injection equipment installed at all of its plants in Europe but it is unclear how many plants are actually using it. This is understandable though, given how commercially sensitive the fuel mix of a cement plant is and in Cemex’s case if it wishes to maintain a leader’s advantage in using a new technology.

It is interesting to see, in what has been released so far, the focus on doing deals with companies that supply electrolysis technology such as HiiROC and UTIS. A feasibility study ahead of the Hanson trial at Ribblesdale by the MPA, Cinar and the VDZ suggested that upgrading a kiln burner and adding all the necessary hydrogen storage and pipework could cost at least Euro400,000. However, this study also pointed out that the cost of hydrogen made a big difference to the cost of the CO₂ saving from using it as an alternative fuel. Hence the focus on the technology partners. It will be interesting to see how many more hydrogen injection projects are announced in the coming months and years and, crucially, who is providing the technology to supply the hydrogen.

For more information on the use of hydrogen in cement production see the proceedings from the 15th Global CemFuels Conference & Exhibition where presentations on the topic were given by Cemex and the VDZ

Cembureau called for urgent action on electricity prices from European governments this week to protect cement plants. Its maths was crushingly simple. One tonne of cement takes around 110kWh of electricity to produce. Electricity prices started to top Euro700mWh in some European Union (EU) countries at the end of August 2022. The association says that this represents added costs of Euro70/t of cement and a tripling of the total cost of production. This kind of sudden extra cost to cement production could lead to the widespread closure of cement plants and lead to chaos in the construction supply chain.

Previously, Cembureau reported in 2020 that electricity accounts for about 12% of a cement plant’s energy mix. In a dry production process plant 43% of this is used for cement grinding, 25% goes into raw material preparation, another 25% on clinker production and the final portion is typically used for raw material extraction, fuel grinding and for packing and loading. However, the cost of the electricity can make a big difference to the overall energy bill for a cement plant. When a report by the European Commission’s (EC) Joint Research Centre (JRC) modelled a reference northern European cement plant with a production capacity of 1.0Mt/yr back in 2016, it concluded that the EU cement industry was spending around half of its energy costs on electricity compared to smaller ratios at plants in China, Egypt, Algeria and... Ukraine. That last country in the list is poignant given its unwitting participation in the current energy crisis. One other thing to note is that cement producers, as large scale users, may well be paying less than the wholesale prices Cembureau appears to be quoting.

The timing of Cembureau’s proclamation is pertinent because the EU and individual states have mostly been waiting until the autumn before revealing their energy support plans. However, the dilemma for Cembureau, and other industry lobbying groups, is how to protect their sectors whilst domestic consumers are threatened. The aftermath of the coronavirus lockdowns has shown what can happen when production of key commodities stops: supply chain disruption, shortages and price rises. One ironic shortage in the UK during the lockdown periods was that of CO₂, as high gas prices forced the main producer to shut down, leading to unexpected knock-on problems along the supply chain in areas such as food production. The same situation is reportedly at risk of happening again now too.

Cembureau’s wider solution is to link domestic and industrial consumers of electricity. So, some of its suggestions to policymakers are to use all available means of power generation, implement emergency measures such as price caps immediately, change the rules of the electricity market more generally to prevent future price shocks and to promote large scale renewable power source development. These are all things that could help both individual and industrial users of electricity.

Compare and contrast, then, with the MPA’s (Mineral Products Association) approach to the same problem in the UK. Its strategy instead has been to ask the UK government for tax cuts and freezes and to hurry along the forthcoming policy on support for Energy Intensive Industries. That’s not to say that Cembureau’s suggestions don’t also include some sector specific requests. It has asked that the EU temporary state aid framework adopted in late March 2022 should allow all energy intensive industries to have access to state aid covering 70 - 80% of eligible costs. It has also encouraged the wider use of alternative fuels, although it doesn’t link the reason why beyond reducing imports of fossil fuels. Lastly, it bangs the drum for its recent preoccupation, the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, this time adding electro-intensity as a main criterion for eligibility for compensation under EU emission trading scheme (ETS) indirect state aid guidelines.

Government support packages for the energy crisis are starting to be announced in European countries but the question for everyone is whether they and other actions will be enough. One problem for the cement industry will be simply staying on the radar of policy makers facing a crisis looming over their citizens. Yet if there is not enough energy to go around then rationing of some kind will be inevitable and heavy industrial users will be the first obvious targets to be told to cut back. Some months later building material supply shortages will hit. One national cement sector to watch in the coming months may be the Spanish one as it has long warned of the risks of high electricity prices.

The larger cement producers in China have published their half-year financial results and the numbers are looking grim. Starting with data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, cement output in the country fell by 14.5% year-on-year to 979Mt in the first half of 2022 from 1.14Bnt in the same period in 2021. This is the lowest first half output figure since 2012. The decline on a monthly basis started in May 2021 and has carried on consistently since then. Rolling cumulative annual output hit a low of 2.18Bnt in July 2022, the lowest figure since at least the start of 2019 and well before the coronavirus pandemic started.

Graph 1: Cement output in China, 2018 to 2022. Source: National Bureau of Statistics of China.

The financial figures from the cement producers have mostly followed this trend. Of the companies covered here, Anhui Conch’s drop in sales revenue was the most distinct at 30% year-on-year to US$8.14bn. However, Jidong Cement actually managed to increase its revenue and Huaxin Cement’s decrease was fairly small, possibly due to its growing stable of overseas projects. None of these companies could avoid falling cement and clinkers sales volumes though. Again, Anhui Conch is the outlier here with a larger fall in sales volumes proportionally at nearly 40% compared to around 20% for the rest. Chen Bolin, the deputy secretary-general of China Cement Association (CCA), told the 21st Century Business Herald newspaper that of the 20 or so listed cement companies that have published their half-year reports by the end of August 2022, more than half had reported falling sales revenue and net profit and only one company had managed to increase its net profit.

Graph 2: Sales revenue from selected Chinese cement producers. Source: Company financial reports. Note: Cement revenue shown only for CNBM & Taiwan Cement.

Graph 3: Sales volumes of cement and clinker from selected Chinese cement producers. Source: Company financial reports.

The financial reports from the Chinese cement companies detailed here have been fairly light on the reasons for the current state of the sector. Repeated coronavirus outbreaks, instability in the real estate market, a lack of funding for infrastructure projects, growing energy and raw materials costs, pressure on prices and a generally weak economy have all been blamed for the situation. Media channels outside of China have continued to scan the country’s real estate sector for signs of collapse following Evergrande’s problems in 2021. However Chen Bolin diplomatically held back by describing the real estate market as not yet stabilised and a drag on cement demand. Instead he hoped that large-scale infrastructure projects would offer some form of relief.

One last point to note, that both the CCA has made and could be seen in some of the company reports, is that some of the Chinese cement companies are already starting to diversify their businesses. This is in parallel to what some of the larger western-based multinational cement producers have also been doing in recent years with forays into concrete, light building materials and construction chemicals. CNBM already has large concrete, light building materials and engineering subsidiaries. However, Huaxin Cement and Anhui Conch have also started to branch out recently into aggregates, concrete and new energy generation, in the case of the latter company. Things may get worse before they get better, especially depending when or if the Chinese government decides to act on the real estate market. However, whatever kind of adjustment the cement sector may face, there are some signs present already of what some of the companies may do next.