Displaying items by tag: Buzzi

Mexico: Corporación Moctezuma has appointed Julio Rodríguez Izquierdo as the chair of its board of directors. This follows the resignation of Enrico Buzzi from the post. The change is a planned and periodic rotation of the holder of the role between the company’s two controlling shareholders: Spain-based Cementos Molins and Italy-based Buzzi Unicem. Together, the European cement companies own a 66.7% share of Corporación Moctezuma.

Rodriguez Izquierdo, a 60-year-old Spanish national, is the chief executive officer of Cementos Molins. Prior to becoming the head of Cementos Molins in 2015, he worked for over 30 years at Schneider Electric in a variety of roles before becoming the Executive Vice President Global Operations in 2011.

The economic fallout from the war in Ukraine continued this week with the news that Holcim plans to leave the Russian market. It said that it took the decision based on its “values to operate in the most responsible manner.” The company’s Russian subsidiary added that all of its plants would continue to operate as normal while it considered its divestment options.

Holcim’s road to withdrawal has been staggered. In February 2022 at the start of the war it pronounced its sympathy for any affected colleagues and their families and made a Euro1m donation to the Red Cross. Later it said that it would continue operating its business in Russia by following all regulations and supplying the local market. However, at this time it said it would suspend further capital investments in Russia and that it would “not benefit from our presence in this market.”

It’s unknown what prompted Holcim to take the plunge with Russia one month after the war started. At the very least, making decisions over assets valued this highly takes time. CM Pro has reported that the Russian government has considered introducing reference prices for building materials for infrastructure projects and that the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) has been monitoring prices for ‘unreasonable’ growth over the last month. This follows grumbling by the Ministry of Industry and Trade in late 2021 about an apparent low capacity utilisation rate in the country despite shortages in the Central Federal District.

CRH said that it was leaving its Russian concrete business in early March 2022. Yet the decision by Holcim makes it the first of the three western multinational cement producers with large-scale operations in Russia to publicly say it’s pulling out. Holcim, HeidelbergCement and Buzzi Unicem each operate at least two integrated cement plants in the region.

Lafarge entered the Russian market in 1996. Its successor Holcim runs plants at Voskresensk and Kolomna in the Moscow region, at Ferzikovo in the Kaluga region and Volsk in the Saratov region. Together the plants have a production capacity of around 9Mt/yr. Over the last decade Holcim and its predecessor has invested at least a reported Euro1.3bn in three of the plants. The dry-production line Ferzikovo plant was built in 2015. The Shchurovsky plant in Kolomna was originally founded in 1870 and claims to be the oldest in the country. In 2011 it started commissioned a new dry production line. The Volsk plant started a modernisation project in 2017. The fourth, the Voskresensk plant, was mothballed in 2016. However, in early February 2022 LafargeHolcim Russia said it was aiming to spend Euro23m towards restarting production at the site. This was likely due to a boom in construction in 2021. The subsidiary also owns three aggregate quarries in the Republic of Karelia region of the country, near the border with Finland.

Selling up in Russia looks set to be difficult for Holcim. This is principally due to the European and American economic sanctions and the Russian government’s stated intention to nationalise the assets of any company trying to leave. This is clearly why Holcim has worded its plans so vaguely. If or when a peace deal is reached between Russia and Ukraine, the business environment could change significantly, depending on the terms, complicating any existing sale process. Determining how much Holcim might want to get from such a sale in these conditions is complex. Smikom bought Eurocement from Sberbank for Euro2.1bn in 2021 giving it 10 plants. Could Holcim realistically expect to sell its plants for around Euro200m each in the current environment? As for the hit Holcim might take, in its annual report for 2021 it said that the group’s Russian operations represented around 1% of the 2021 consolidated net sales. This would have been around Euro260m. Its Russian cement production capacity was reported as being 9Mt/yr in 2021 or 3% of the group’s global figure of 293Mt/yr.

Finally, it is worth noting though that Lafarge’s charges of ‘complicity in crimes against humanity’ also continued to be tested in the French courts this week. The legal case relates to the conduct of Lafarge in Syria between 2011 and 2014. This is totally separate from the situation in Russia but it does highlight the issue of corporate ethics for the group once again. Following proceedings in December 2021, Beat Hess, chair of the board of Holcim said, “The described events concerning Lafarge SA were concealed from the Holcim board at the time of the merger in 2015 and go completely against the values of our company.” Consider that use of ‘values’ again. Holcim may be about to find out how much it is prepared to pay for its values as it departs Russia.

Italy: Buzzi Unicem’s earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) rose by 1.8% year-on-year in 2021 to Euro795m. Despite this, its net profit for the year declined by 3.2% year-on-year to Euro542m.

In 2022, Buzzi Unicem forecasts a 10% full-year EBITDA decline due to the impacts of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

From the Nordics to the Mediterranean, European countries lead the field in reduced-clinker cement production using supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). While consumers, faced with ever-greater choice, continue to opt for sustainability, projects to improve existing SCMs and develop new ones have won government backing and have become a matter of serious investment for other heavy industries beside cement. European cement producers’ decisions are steering the course to a world beyond CEM I. Yet, even in Europe, great untapped potential remains.

Companies generated a good deal of marketing buzz around their latest reduced-CO₂ cement ranges in 2021 and the first quarter of 2022: Buzzi Unicem’s CGreen in Germany and Italy, Holcim’s EcoPlanet in six markets from Romania to Spain, Cementir Holding’s Futurecem in Denmark and Benelux, and Cemex’s Vertua in Spain and several other countries. All boast reduced clinker factors through the use of alternative raw materials. This, however, is really a rebranding of a long-established norm in Europe.

Since 2010, cements other than CEM I have constituted over 75% of average annual cement deliveries across Cembureau member countries (all cement-producing EU member states, plus Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey, the UK and Ukraine). This statistic breaks down differently from country to country. CEM II is the norm in Austria, Finland, Portugal and Switzerland, with deliveries in the region of 90%. Portland limestone cement (PLC) makes up a majority of deliveries in all four. It has been central to Switzerland’s transition to 89% (3.72Mt) of CEM II deliveries out of a total 4.18Mt of cement despatched in 2021. There, the main types of cement were CEM II/B-M (T-LL) Portland composite cement, with 1.38Mt (33%), and two different classifications of PLC: CEM II/A-LL PLC, with 1.28Mt (31%), and CEM II/B-LL PLC, with 888,000t (21%).

A second approach is that of the Netherlands, where CEM III blast furnace slag cement with a clinker factor below 65% predominates, favoured for its sulphate resistance and the protection it offers against chloride-initiated corrosion of steel reinforcement in marine settings. By contrast, the UK has traditionally maintained a higher reliance on CEM I cement. This can be partly explained by the preference of builders there for adding fly ash or ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) at the mixing stage. Nonetheless, CEM II Portland fly ash cement held a 14% (1.43Mt) market share in the UK’s 10.2Mt of cement consumption in 2021.

The UK Mineral Products Association (MPA) has identified limestone as an underutilised resource in the country’s cement production. Together with HeidelbergCement subsidiary Hanson Cement, it has applied for a change to National Application standards to allow the production of Portland composite cement from fly ash and limestone or GGBFS and limestone. The association has forecast that Portland composite cement could easily rise to 30 – 40% of UK cement consumption, and that this has the potential to eliminate 8% of the sector’s 7.8Mt/yr-worth of CO₂ emissions.

Metallurgical waste streams have long flowed into European cement production, primarily as GGBFS, but also as bauxite residue. In 2021, alumina production in the EU alone generated 7Mt of bauxite residue, of which the bloc recycled just 100,000t (1.4%) that year. Two projects – the Holcim Innovation Center-led ReActiv project and Titan Cement and others’ REDMUD project – aim to produce new alternative cementitious materials from bauxite residue.

By collaborating with other industries, cement producers’ investments can most effectively reduce the overall cost of using these materials in cement production. In Germany, HeidelbergCement and ThyssenKrupp’s Save CO₂ project aims to develop new improved latent hydraulic binders or alternative pozzolan from GGBFS by producing slag from directly reduced iron (DRI). The Save CO₂ team believes that GGBFS substitution for clinker has the capacity to eliminite 200Mt/yr of CO₂ emissions from global cement production.

Meanwhile in the world of mining, ThyssenKrupp and others’ NEMO project is investigating the recovery of a useable mineral fraction for cement production from the extractive waste of the Luikonlahti and Sotkamo mines in Finland and the Tara mine in Ireland, through bioleaching and cleaned mineral residue upcycling. This may give cement producers full access to Europe’s 28Bnt stockpiles of sulphidic mining waste, of which mines generate an additional 600Mt each year.

Denmark-based CemGreen, which produces the calcined clay supplementary cementitious material CemShale, is developing a shale granule heat-treating technology called CemTower. This consists of three pieces of equipment vertically integrated into cement plants’ preheaters, kilns and coolers, and brings the processing of waste materials – here oil shale – to the cement plant.

Lastly, cement producers are exploring the possible uses of waste made of cement itself. In Wallonia, HeidelbergCement subsidiary CBR’s CosmoCem project is investigating the production of alternative cement additives from large available flows of local demolition, soil remediation and industrial waste. Similarly, the Greece-based C2inCO₂ project seeks to mineralise fines from concrete recycling for HeidelbergCement to use in the production of novel cements in its Greek operations.

In Switzerland, ZND Portland composite cement (produced using fine mixed granulate from building demolitions) is the third largest cement type, with 178,000t (4.3%) of total deliveries – narrowly behind CEM I with 239,000t (5.7%).Holcim Schweiz developed its Susteno 4 ZND Portland composite cement with Switzerland’s lack of any ash or slag supply in mind, demonstrating the potential flexibility of a circular economic approach to cement production.

On 21 March 2022, the University of Trier reported that it is in the process of mapping mineral resources, waste deposits and usable residues ‘on a cross-border scale,’ in an effort to produce new materials for use in cement production. Industry participants include France-based Vicat, CBR, Buzzi Unicem subsidiary Cimalux and CRH subsidiary Eqiom. Vicat is preparing a kiln at its 1Mt/yr Xeuilley cement plant in Meurthe-et-Moselle to use in testing new alternative raw materials developed under the project.

For Cembureau and its members, work continues, with the goal of Net Zero by 2050 constantly in sight. This goal includes a reduction in members’ clinker-to-cement ratios to well below 65%. In this, the association and its members are working towards a world not just beyond CEM I, but beyond CEM II, too. What exactly this will mean remains to be seen.

Sources

CemSuisse, ‘Lieferstatistik,’ 11 January 2022, https://www.cemsuisse.ch/app/uploads/2022/01/Lieferstatistik-4.-Quartal-2021.pdf

WSA, ‘December 2021 crude steel production and 2021 global crude steel production totals,’ 25 January 2022, https://worldsteel.org/media-centre/press-releases/2022/december-2021-crude-steel-production-and-2021-global-totals/

MPA, ‘Low carbon multi-component cements for UK concrete applications,’ July 2018, https://prod-drupal-files.storage.googleapis.com/documents/resource/public/Low%20carbon%20multi-component%20cements%20for%20UK%20concrete%20applications%20PDF.pdf

European Commission, ‘European Training Network for Zero-waste Valorisation of Bauxite Residue (Red Mud),’ 16 July 2020, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/636876

European Commission, ‘Industrial Residue Activation for sustainable cement production,’ 16 February 2022, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/958208

Recycling Portal, Zement der Zukunft – Forschungsprojekt „SAVE CO₂“ gestartet, 28 May 2021, https://recyclingportal.eu/Archive/65677

h2020-NEMO, ‘Project,’ https://h2020-nemo.eu/project-2/

European Commission, ‘Green cement of the future: CemShale + CemTower,’ 14 April 2021, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101009382

CosmoCem, ‘Communiqué de Presse,’ https://cosmocem.org/

CO₂ Win, ‘C²inCO₂: Calcium Carbonation for industrial use of CO₂,’ https://co2-utilization.net/en/projects/co2-mineralization/c2inco2/

Les Echos, ‘Rendre le ciment moins gourmand en CO₂,’ 21 March 2022, https://www.lesechos.fr/pme-regions/innovateurs/des-substituts-au-clinker-rendent-le-ciment-moins-gourmand-en-co2-1395002

France: Vicat plans to use a kiln at its 1Mt/yr Xeuilley, Meurthe-et-Moselle, cement plant for trials of cement production using new alternative raw materials developed under the international CO₂Redres supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) project. The project brings together Vicat, HeidelbergCement subsidiary CBR, Buzzi Unicem subsidiary Cimalux and CRH subsidiary Eqiom in an effort to map mineral resources, waste deposits and usable residues ‘on a cross-border scale.’ On the basis of this research, the partners will seek to develop new SCMs for use in cement production.

US: Buzzi Unicem has announced the upcoming transition of its 1Mt/yr Stockertown cement plant in Pennsylvania’s Northampton County to 100% Type IL Portland limestone cement (PLC) production in 2022. Local press has reported that Buzzi Unicem and its subsidiary Alamo Cement Company will have fully converted to PLC production at ‘several locations in the US’ before the end of the year, according to the group.

US: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has awarded its Energy Star certification to cement plants belonging to two Titan America subsidiaries. Titan Florida’s Pennsuco, Florida, cement plant has secured its 14th consecutive Energy Star, while Roanoke Cement’s Troutville, Virginia, cement has secured its 15th consecutive Energy Star.

Other cement plants to receive Energy Stars in 2022 included two Argos USA plants (Calera, Alabama, and Harleyville, South Carolina), two GCC plants (Pueblo, Colorado, and Rapid City, South Dakota), Buzzi Unicem’s Chattanooga, Tennessee, plant and three plants in Arizona: CalPortland’s Rillito plant, Drake Cement’s Paulden plant and Salt River Materials Group’s Clarkdale plant.

Türkçimento’s Volkan Bozay took to the airwaves last week to raise the issues that the war in Ukraine is causing for Turkey-based cement producers. The head of the Turkish Cement Manufacturers’ Association explained, to the local Bloomberg HT channel, that the dramatic jump in the price of Newcastle Coal posed a serious threat to the sector. The price jumped nearly US$100/t in a single day in early March 2022. Bozay said that the cost of cement from a plant using imported coal would consequently rise by around US$15/t. He added that the association’s members had an average of 15 – 20 days of coal stocks.

Graph 1: Price of coal, March 2020 – March 2021. Source: Trading Economics.

In a separate press release Türkçimento revealed that Turkey, as a whole, imported approximately US$1.5bn of coal from Russia in 2021. The cement industry imported about 5Mt of coal in 2021, from all sources, although the majority of this came from Russia. Coal shipments from Russia since the start of the war were reported as ‘very limited or even not possible.’ It was further explained that each US$10/t increase in the price of coal put up plant production costs by US$1.5/t of cement.

Naturally Bozay’s appearance on a television news show carried a lobbying aspect. He called for government import standards – such as the sulphur ratio, lower heating values and volatile matter limits - to be relaxed to allow coal to be imported more freely from sources such as Colombia, Indonesia and South Africa. There was also a push to let in more alternative fuels such as tyres and waste-derived fuels. The bit that Bozay didn’t mention though was how many of his members had long term coal supply contracts in place to cushion them, from short term price inflation at least. Yet, if coal shipments from Russia have simply stopped, then the price is irrelevant. A cement kiln configured to run on coal stops when it uses up its stocks.

Turkey was the world’s fifth largest cement producer in 2021 according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Türkçimento data shows that in 2020 it exported 145,000t of cement to Russia by sea. Overall it exported 16.3Mt of cement and 13.5Mt of clinker. The US, Israel, Syria, Haiti and Libya were the top destinations for cement. Notably, Ukraine was the sixth largest recipients of cement, with 752,000t imported, although anti-dumping legislation introduced in mid-2021 looked set to reduce it until the war started. Ghana, Ivory Coast, Guinea, Cameroon and Belgium were the principal recipients of clinker. Cumulative cement exports for the year to October 2021 were up by 3% year-on-year compared to the first 10 months of 2020. Clinker exports were down by 27% though. Overall domestic production and sales in Turkey rose by 9.5%, suggested an estimated production figure of 79Mt for 2021.

Other fallout in the cement sector from the war in Ukraine this week included Ireland-based CRH’s decision to quit the Russian market. It entered the region in 1998 through a subsidiary based in Finland and was operating seven ready-mixed concrete plants via its LujaBetomix joint venture. CRH says that all operations in Russia have now stopped. In 2021 it sold its lime business in Russia, Fels Izvest, to Russia-based Bonolit. Although selling concrete plants is not trivial, these are far cheaper assets than clinker production lines. Germany-based HeidelbergCement, Italy-based Buzzi Unicem and Switzerland-based Holcim each operate at least one integrated cement plant in Russia. So far these companies have publicly expressed dismay at the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Ukraine and made donations to the Red Cross.

Graph 2: European Union Emission Trading Scheme price, 2020 – March 2022. Source: Sandbag.

Finally, one more surprise this week has been a crash in the European Union (EU) Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) carbon price from a high of Euro96/t in early February 2022 to Euro58/t on 7 March 2022. As other commentators have stated, normally the carbon price would be expected to follow the energy market, but this hasn’t happened. Instead investors have pulled out, possibly to maintain liquidity for other markets.

With the US set to ban Russian oil, gas and coal imports and phase-outs to varying degrees promised by the UK and the EU in 2022, we can expect more turbulence from energy markets in the coming days. As the Turkish example above shows, all of this can... and will... have effects on cement production.

Cement markets have mostly recovered following the shock emergence of coronavirus in 2020. Most of the producers that have released their results so far for 2021 have reported strong boosts to sales revenue and racing earnings as something more like normality resumed. The following roundup covers a selective group of cement companies around the world.

The recovery in 2021 has made the outliers in the companies covered here noteworthy. UltraTech Cement, Semen Indonesia and Dangote Cement are all large regional companies with dominant positions domestically and varying degrees of international spread. As can be seen in Graph 1, UltraTech Cement and Dangote Cement both reported very large increases in sales, over 20% year-on-year. By contrast, Semen Indonesia sales fell very slightly.

Graph 1: Sales revenue from selected cement producers in 2020 and 2021. Source: Company reports. Note: Figures calculated for UltraTech Cement.

One reason for UltraTech Cement and Dangote Cement’s success can be seen in Graph 2 (below). Both companies managed to sell more cement in 2021. Semen Indonesia did not due to Indonesia’s production overcapacity and new competitors. It also blamed a significant rises in coal prices for a 9% drop in its earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA).

UltraTech Cement has been wary of successive waves of coronavirus throughout its 2022 financial year, but generally the Indian regional markets have recovered and government-backed rural housing and infrastructure spending have supported growth. It did note rising coal prices earlier in the year, but these were reported to have somewhat softened during the quarter to 31 December 2021. It is worth noting that the ongoing war in Ukraine is affecting energy markets but more on this at the end of this article. Dangote Cement’s performance was slowed somewhat by the start of coronavirus but it has since resumed its turbo-charged trajectory with volumes, revenue and earnings growth all above 10% in 2021. Mostly this performance is supported by the Nigerian market but the company is doing well internationally too.

Graph 2: Cement sales volumes from selected cement producers in 2019 and 2020. Source: Company reports. Note: Figures calculated for UltraTech Cement.

Holcim and HeidelbergCement’s increase in sales revenue in 2021 are actually fairly similar on a like-for-like basis, both with around 10%. The former’s sales volumes were up across cement, ready-mixed concrete and aggregates in each of its regions around the world, as were sales revenue. Holcim’s big move in 2021 has been the expansion of its Solutions & Products segment with the acquisition of Firestone in April 2021. Now this has continued with the completion of the Malarkey Roofing Products purchase on 1 March 2022, a few days after it released its 2021 results. Chief executive officer Jan Jenisch described the move towards lightweight building materials as generating, “further double-digit growth engines for the company.” As an aside, it was fascinating to see CRH leave the building envelope business this week, mostly based in the US, with an agreement to sell up its division for US$3.8bn to private equity. The business CRH is divesting sells architectural glass, storefront systems, architectural glazing systems and related hardware to customers primarily in North America. CRH is clearly pursuing a different business strategy to Holcim.

HeidelbergCement has also reported a strong year in 2021 albeit without the Holcim razzle-dazzle of barging into new market areas. It noted significant increases in energy prices and pandemic‐related lockdowns in some key markets in Asia. It described a very slight cement sales volume decline in Africa and the Middle East and a drop in earnings in Asia. Its trump cards are its carbon capture projects coming down the pipeline. It’s keen to remind investors about this with the unspoken implication that it might save the company money in the future when carbon taxes bite further.

Both Cemex and Buzzi Unicem followed the growth pattern seen in sales and earnings by the other larger multinational producers covered above. Central and South American markets really took off for Cemex in 2021, starting with its home market in Mexico. However, growth was present, although slower, in both its largest markets in the US and its Europe, Middle East, Africa and Asia region. Notably cement volumes in the Philippines grew by 7% and that’s even with the devastation caused by typhoons at the end of the year taken into account. Similarly, Buzzi Unicem performed well in 2021 due to growth in Italy, the US and Eastern Europe compensating for a small sales decline in Germany. As mentioned in Update on Ukraine, February 2022 Buzzi Unicem has particular exposure to the war in Ukraine as it operates two cement plants in Ukraine and two units in Russia but this is a problem for the 2022 financial year.

To finish on Ukraine, first and foremost, a human tragedy is unfolding. Yet the war also presents many economic challenges to financial markets through sanctions and counter-actions. A recession in Russia looks likely as do energy price surges in the US and Europe leading to further inflation and, perhaps, recessions too. All this potentially lies ahead. For now, the dilemma for US and European-based cement companies and suppliers with operations in Russia is reputational. Should they continue to do business in Russia as public opinion hardens and companies like BP, Shell, Equinor, HSBC and AerCap head for the exit? The Russian government has blocked foreign companies and individuals from selling shares locally but pressure looks set to intensify for such companies to do something.

International tensions reached a new high this week with Russia’s formal recognition of the breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine and its decision to deploy troops accordingly. However, what of the local cement industry in Ukraine going into the current crisis?

Ukrcement, the Ukrainian Cement Association, says that its members reported a record 11Mt of cement production in 2021. Clinker production totalled 8.11Mt during the same period. The cement figure is close to Ukrcement’s forecast in the autumn of 2021 of 11.5Mt, a rise of 17% year-on-year from 9Mt in 2020. At that time association head Pavlo Kachur added that the local cement industry operated at 66% capacity utilisation in the first nine months of 2021.

The big industry story locally was the start of tariffs on cement imports from Turkey that was announced in September 2021. After much complaining by local producers and an investigation the year before in 2020 the Interdepartmental Commission on International Trade (ICIT) introduced anti-dumping duties of 33 - 51% on cement imports from Turkey for five years. Other than this the usual energy preoccupations have been present in Ukraine. In an interview with Interfax in November 2021, Pavlo Kachur expressed alarm that the price of coal had tripled from the start of 2021 to August 2021. At the same time he explained that the biggest driver of cement consumption was infrastructure projects.

CRH, the largest producer locally, rebranded its subsidiary as Cemark in November 2021 with the intention to start shipping cement bags with the new marking from January 2022. It operates three integrated plants at Mykolaiv, Podilsky and Odessa. It reported that its local operating profit grew year-on-year in 2020, despite a “challenging pricing environment” as cost savings initiatives and lower fuel and logistics costs resulted in improved performance. In September 2021 CRH said that sales were up due to growing cement sales volumes resulting from market demand. Although once again it complained about competitive pricing forcing it to lower its prices. Despite this though lower maintenance costs and cost controls had boosted its operating profit.

Buzzi Unicem runs two integrated cement plants in Ukraine, Volyn and Yugcement, as well as terminals at Kiev and Odessa through its Dyckerhoff Ukraine subsidiary. In 2021 it noted recovery in the construction sector, helped by government stimulus and the introduction of tariffs on imports from Turkey. It said that prices fell in the first half of the year before recovering in the second half. Ready-mixed concrete output showed more growth. Dyckerhoff Ukraine’s net sales rose by 9.4% year-on-year to Euro127m in 2021 even despite negative currency exchange effects.

As for the other producers, NEQSOL Holding Ukraine filed an application to the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (AMCU) in October 2021 to acquire a stake in Ivano-Frankivskcement. Azerbaijan-based NEQSOL Holding also operates the Norm Cement plant near Baku in Azerbaijan. HeidelbergCement used to operate in Ukraine, including the Amvrosiyivka Plant in the contested part of Donetsk region, but it sold up in 2019 to local investors. Its two former integrated plants now operate under the Kryvyi Rig Cement brand. Finally, Russia-based Eurocement runs two plants in Ukraine, at Balakleya in Kharkiv region and Kramatorsk in Donetsk region, under its Balcem subsidiary, which formed in 2019. However the status of the second plant is currently uncertain. Balcem said that the Balakleya plant resumed full cycle production in March 2021 when it restarted kiln two. Kiln one was restarted in June 2021 after a down period since 2008. The plant currently has a production capacity of around 1Mt/yr.

Ukrcement’s Pavlo Kachur said that the cement market in Ukraine was experiencing a positive period in November 2021. Whether this continues is very much in the balance given events in the east of the country. The wider implications for cement producers in the rest of Europe and Russia are the fallout from the economic warfare between both sides. A number of countries have started to react to Russia’s actions with the US, European Union, UK, Japan and Australia announcing economic sanctions and Germany halting approval of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. However, Russia supplies a significant share of Europe’s gas supply. All of this could disrupt energy supplies and force input costs up. This has already been reflected in higher oil prices.

Meanwhile, one aspect of the current situation to watch is how multinational cement producers with a presence in Russia will cope. Moving money in or out of the country is likely to become harder. HeidelbergCement told Reuters this week that it did not expect any major impact on its Russian operations, even if the conflict escalated. Its three cement plants supply local markets and do not export outside of Russia, it added. Other companies straddling the potential sanctions divide include Holcim, Buzzi Unicem and Eurocement.

The crisis continues.