Displaying items by tag: CO2

Norway: Private accreditation body DNVGL has certified Aker Solutions’ 400,000t/yr carbon capture and storage (CCS) system installation at Germany-based HeidelbergCement subsidiary Norcem’s 1.2Mt/yr integrated Brevik plant in Telemark as safe. HeidelbergCement Northern Europe director of sustainability and alternative fuels Per Brevik said, “The promising results from pilot testing in Brevik give us confidence that realisation of the full-scale capture plant will be successful. We trust that the project risk related to novel technology elements is low.”

Following an 18-month test of the partial installation, the certification ensures that the full-scale project will receive government funding.

Hungary: Italy-based Entsorga has completed the installation of an automated alternative fuel (AF) line at a Hungarian cement plant.The upgrade consists of an Entsorga Spider crane and Pelican power system which will be able to maintain a continuous feed to the plant’s calcination system 24 hours a day.

Entsorga CEO Francesco Galanzino said, “Bringing a commission to a successful conclusion in the middle of the maximum intensity period of the coronavirus crisis has been a great satisfaction. The cement plant will make significant savings in CO₂ emissions.”

Spain: A 25% alternative fuel (AF) substitution rate has accounted for a 9650t reduction in CO₂ emissions at Cementos Cosmos’ 0.7Mt/yr Oural, Galicia plant, lowering the specific CO2 emissions of its clinker by 45kg/t. A main constituent of the AF mix was olive stones. Cementos Cosmos Oural plant managing director Jaime Santoalla said, “At Cementos Cosmos, we accept our responsibility to meet the global objectives of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”

Cement and concrete products with sustainability credentials have increased in recent years as societies start to demand decarbonisation. In spite of the recent drop in the European Union (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) price, there has been a trend in recent years in the construction industry towards offerings with better environmental credentials. Indeed, this week’s position paper from Cembureau on a carbon border mechanism concerns directly the growth of these kinds of products within Europe. Typically, the higher profile projects have been slag cement or concrete implementations such as Hanson’s use of its Regen cement substitute in a London sewer project or David Ball Group’s Cemfree concrete in a road project also in the UK. In this short review we’ll take a selective look at a few of the so-called low carbon cement and concrete products currently available.

Table 1: Some examples of methods to reduce embodied CO₂ in cement and concrete. Note - the product examples are selective. In some cases many other products are available.

Looking at cement first, the easiest way for many producers to bring a lower carbon product to market has been to promote cements made using secondary cementitious materials (SCM) such as granulated blast furnace slag or fly ash. These types of cements have a long history, typically in specialist applications and/or in relation to ease of supply. For example, cement producers in eastern India often manufacture slag cements owing to the number of local steel plants. However, cement producers have more recently started to publicise their environmental credentials as they reduce the clinker factor of the final product. Alongside this though, in Europe especially, a number of so-called low carbon cement producers have appeared on the scene such as EcoCem and Hoffman Green Technologies. These newer producers tend to offer SCM cement products or other low carbon ones built around a grinding model. It is likely that their businesses have benefitted from tightening EU environmental legislation. How far cement producers can pivot to SCM cement products is contentious given that slag and fly ash are finite byproducts of other industries that are also under pressure to decarbonise. Although it should be noted that other SCMs such as pozzolans exist.

As will be seen below a few of the methods to reduce embodied CO₂ in cement and concrete can be used in both materials. SCMs are no exception and hold a long history in concrete usage. As mentioned above David Ball Group sells Cemfree a concrete product that contains no cement. Harsco Environmental, a minerals management company, invested US$3m into Carbicrete, a technology start-up working on a cement-free concrete, in late 2019.

Limestone calcined clay cements are the next set of products that are starting to make an appearance through the work of the Swiss-government backed LC3 project, more commercial offerings like FutureCem from Cementir and H-EVA from Hoffman Green Technologies and today’s announcement about ThyssenKrupp’s plans to fit the Kribi cement plant in Cameroon with its Polysius activated clay system. They too, like SCM cements, reduce the clinker factor of the cement. The downside is that, as in the name, the clay element needs to be calcined requiring capital investment, although LC3 make a strong case in their literature about how fast these costs can be recouped in a variety of scenarios.

Calcium silicate cements offer reduced process emissions by decreasing the lime content of the clinker lowering the amount of CO₂ released and bringing down the temperature required in the kiln to make the clinker. Solidia offers its calcium silicate cement as part of a two-part system with a CO₂ cured concrete. In the US LafargeHolcim used Solidia’s product in a commercial project in mid-2019 at a New Jersey paver and block plant. Solidia’s second core technology is using CO₂ to cure concrete and reducing water usage. They are not alone here as Canada’s CarbonCure Technologies uses CO₂ in a similar way with their technology. In their case they focus more on CO₂ mineralisation. In Germany, Schwenk Zement backed the Celitement project, which developed a hydraulic calcium hydro silicate based product that does not use CO₂ curing. Celitement has since become part of Schwenk Zement.

Solidia isn’t the only company looking at two complementary technologies along the cement-concrete production chain. A number of companies are looking at recycling concrete and demolition waste. Generally this splits into coarse waste that is used as an aggregate substitute in concrete and fine waste that is used to make cement. LafargeHolcim has Evopact for the coarse waste and Susteno for the fine. HeidelbergCement has EcoCrete for the coarse and is researching the use of fines. Closing the loop for heavy building material producers definitely seems like the way to go at the moment and this view is reinforced by the involvement of the two largest multinational producers.

Of the rest of the other low carbon cement methods detailed in table 1 these cover other non-Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) such as geopolymer and calcium sulphoaluminate cements. The former are a type of alkali activated binder and generally lack common standards. The latter are similar to slag cements in that they are established specialist products with lower CO₂ emissions than OPC.

With concrete when trying to make a low carbon product the first choice is whether to choose a low-carbon cement as the binder or even not to use cement at all in the case of Regen or Cemfree. From here the next step is to simply use less cement in a concrete mixture. There are a number of ways to do this from optimising aggregate gradation, following performance specifications more closely, using strength tests like maturity methods and generally adhering to quality control protocols better to deliver more consistency. Read the Mineral Production Association (MPA) publication Specifying Sustainable Concrete for more detail on this. Using concrete admixtures can also help make concrete more sustainable by improving quality and performance at construction sites through the use of plasticisers and accelerators, by decreasing embodied carbon through the use of water reducers and by improving the whole life performance of concretes. The use of locally-sourced aggregates is also worth noting here since it can reduce associated transport CO₂ emissions.

More novel methods of reducing embodied CO₂ emissions in concrete include the use of geopolymer concrete in the case of Zeobond Group’s E-Crete or adding graphene as Concrene does. Like geopolymer cements, geopolymer concretes are relatively new and lack common standards. Products like Concrene, meanwhile, remain currently at the startup level. Finally, if all else fails, offsetting the CO₂ released by a cement or concrete product is always an option. This is what Cemex has done with its Vertua Ultra Zero product. The first 70% reduction in embodied CO₂ is gained through the use of geopolymer cement. Then the remaining 30% reduction is achieved through a carbon offsetting scheme via a carbon neutral certification verified by the Carbon Trust.

As can be seen, a variety of methods exist for cement and concrete producers to reduce the embodied CO₂ of their products and call them ‘low-carbon.’ For the moment most remain in the ‘novelty section’ but as legislators promote and specifiers look for sustainable construction they continue to become more mainstream. What has been interesting to note from this short study is that some companies are looking at multiple solutions along the production and supply chain whilst others are concentrating on single ones. The companies looking at multiple methods range from the biggest building material producers like LafargeHolcim and HeidelbergCement to smaller newer ones like Solidia and Hoffman Green Technologies. Also of note is that many of these products have existed already in various forms for a long time like SCM cements and concretes or the many ways concretes can be made more sustainable through much simpler ways such as changing aggregate sourcing or working more efficiently. In many cases once markets receive sufficient stimulus it seems likely that low carbon cement and concrete products will proliferate.

Global Cement is researching a market report on low carbon cement and concrete. If readers have any comments to make please contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Japan: Taiheiyo Cement has set out the measures by which it aims to achieve its July 2019 target to ‘reduce net CO₂ emissions per unit of cement production’ by 80% between 2000 and 2050. The measures consist of: the introduction of energy-saving equipment, the promotion of alternative fuels (AFs) and the development of lower-CO₂ cements, accounting for a minimum 15% reduction; development and introduction of new technologies to the production process, targeting especially indirect emissions by modernising energy sources, accounting for a minimum 15% reduction; assumption of future technologies, accounting for a minimum 50% reduction.

EU: The coronavirus has caused emissions credits sold under the Emissions Trading Scheme to take a price dive to Euro16.31/t of CO₂ on 19 March 2020, down by 36% month-on-month from Euro25.66/t on 19 February 2020 and 22% year-on-year from Euro21.01/t on 19 March 2020. Environmental consultancy firm Energy Aspects said, “As the COVID-19 outbreak is now spreading rapidly in Europe, it will start to reduce emissions as lockdowns are put in place in multiple countries,” according to Reuters. The European Commission has forecasted a 1.0% contraction in the EU economy in 2020, revising its February estimate of 1.4% growth year-on-year. This would correspond to a reduction in industrial CO₂ emissions of between 10.0Mt and 20.0Mt by the end of year.

Germany: HeidelbergCement’s profit was Euro1.24bn in 2019, down by 3.4% from Euro1.23bn in 2018. Its revenue grew by 4.3% to Euro18.9bn from Euro18.1bn. HeidelbergCement says that it reduced its specific net CO₂ emissions by 1.5% year-on-year to 590kg/t from 599kg/t in 2018 and ‘intensified its research and development (R&D) efforts on carbon capture and utilisation/storage (CCU/S)’ in every operating region globally.

The group announced a year-on-year increase in volumes in the first two months of 2020, with all but three of its plants (HeidelbergCement subsidiary Italcementi’s 2.8Mt/yr Calusco plant, 2.5Mt/yr Rezzato plant and 0.6Mt/yr Tavernola plant in Lombardy region, Italy) still operating through the coronavirus pandemic, though it noted that construction is slowing in the US, Australia and Western Europe due to the outbreak.

HeidelbergCement cancelled its 7 May 2020 annual general meeting (AGM) ‘due to the spread of the coronavirus.’

Estonia: Germany-based HeidelbergCement’s subsidiary Kunda Nordic Tsement has announced the planned closure of its 0.8Mt/yr integrated Kunda plant in Kunda, Lääne-Viru County in March 2020. Business World Magazine has reported the plant closure will result in 80 redundancies. The company has stated the reason for the closure as being that the plant’s equipment, which produces cement by the wet method, is economically unviable due to its CO₂ intensity.

The price of EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) emissions permits fell to Euro15.24/t of CO₂ on 18 March 2020, down by 30% from Euro21.71/t on 18 March 2020.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) took on direct implications for the international cement industry this week when an Italian vendor infected with the virus visited Lafarge Africa in Ogun state, Nigeria. The cement producer said that it had ‘immediately’ started contact tracing and started isolation, quarantine and disinfection protocols. This included initiating medical protocols at its Ewekoro integrated plant, although local press reported the unit’s production lines were still open. Around 100 people were thought to have had contact with the man.

Global Cement has been covering the epidemic since early February 2020 when the virus’ effect on the construction industry in China started to become evident. First, an industry event CementTech was postponed, financial analysts started forecasting negative financial consequences for producers and plants started going into coronavirus-related maintenance or suspension cycles. Then at least one plant started to dispose of clinical waste and now China National Building Material Group (CNBM) is considering how to restart operations at scale. Also, this week Hong Kong construction companies reportedly laid off 50,00 builders due to a lack of cement due to the on-going production suspension in China.

The major cement companies have identified that their first business risk from coronavirus comes from simply not having the staff to make building materials. LafargeHolcim’s chief executive officer Jan Jenisch summed up the group’s action in its annual financial results for 2020 this week when he said, “We are taking all necessary measures to protect the health of our employees and their families.” Other major cement producers that Global Cement has contacted have placed travel restrictions for staff and reduced access to production facilities.

The next risk for cement companies comes from a drop in economic activity. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) forecasts a global 0.5% year-on-year fall in real gross domestic product (GDP) growth to 2.4%, with China and India suffering the worst declines in GDP growth at around 1%. The global figure is the worst since the -0.1% rate reported by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2009. The OECD blamed the disease control measures in China, as well as the direct disruption to global supply chains, weaker final demand for imported goods and services and regional declines in international tourism and business travel. This forecast is contingent on the epidemic peaking in China in the first quarter of 2020 and new cases of the virus in other countries being sporadic and contained. So far the latter does not seem to have happened and the OECD’s ‘domino’ scenario predicts a GDP reduction of 1.5%. All of this is likely to drag on construction activity and demand for cement and concrete for some time to come.

Moving to cement markets and production, demand is likely to be slowed as countries implement various levels of isolation and quarantine leading to reduced residential demand for buildings directly and as workforces are restricted. Business and infrastructure projects may follow as economies slow and governments refocus spending respectively.

The UK government, for example, is basing its coronavirus action plan on an outbreak lasting four to six months. This could potentially happen in many countries throughout 2020. This has the potential to create a rolling effect of disruption as different nations are hit. Assuming China has passed the peak of its local epidemic then its producers are likely to report reduced income in the first quarter of 2020. The effect may even be reduced somewhat due to the existing winter peak shifting measures, whereby production is shut down to reduce pollution. Elsewhere, cement companies in the northern hemisphere may see their busy summer months affected if the virus spreads. The effect on balance sheets may be visible with indebted companies and/or those with more exposure to affected areas disproportionately affected. The wildcard here is whether coronavirus transmits as easily in warmer weather as it does in the cooler winter months. In this case there may be a difference, generally speaking, between the global north and south. Exceptions to watch could be cooler southern places such as New Zealand, Argentina and Chile. Shortages, as mentioned above in Taiwan, potentially should be short term, owing to global overcapacity of cement production, as end users find supplies from elsewhere.

The cement industry is also likely to encounter disruption to its supply chains. Major construction projects in South Asia are already reporting delays as Chinese workers have failed to return following quarantine restrictions after the Chinese New Year celebrations. As other countries suffer uncontrolled outbreaks then similar travel restrictions may follow. Global Cement has yet to see any examples of materials in the cement industry supply chain being affected. On the production side, raw mineral supply tends to be local but fuels, like coal, often travel further. Fuel markets may prove erratic as larger consumers cut back and suppliers like the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) react by restricting production.

On the maintenance side cement plants need a wide array of parts such as refractories, motors, lubricants, gears, wear parts for mills, ball bearings and so forth. Some of these may have more complicated supply chain routes than they used to have 30 years ago. On the supplier side any new or upgrade plant project is vulnerable if necessary parts are delayed by a production halt, logistics delayed and/or staff are prevented from visiting work sites. Chinese suppliers’ reliance on using their own workers, for example, might well be a hindrance here until (or if) international quarantine rules are normalised. Other suppliers’ weak points in their supply chains may become exposed in turn. This would benefit suppliers with sufficiently robust chains.

Chinese reductions in NO₂ emissions in relation to the coronavirus industrial shutdown have been noted in the press. A wider global effect could well be seen too. This could potentially pose problems to CO₂ emissions trading schemes around the world as CO₂ prices fall and carbon credits abound. This might also have deleterious effects on carbon capture and storage (CCS) development if it becomes redundant due to low CO₂ pricing. In the longer-term this might undesirable, as by the time the CO₂ prices pick up again we will be that much nearer to the 2050 sustainability deadlines.

COVID-19 is a new pandemic in all but name with major secondary outbreaks in South Korea, Iran and Italy growing fast and cases being reported in many other countries. The bad news though is that individual countries and international bodies have to decide how to balance the economic damage disease control will cause, versus the effects of letting the disease run unchecked. Yet as more information emerges on how to tackle coronavirus, the good news is that most people will experience flu-like symptoms and nothing more. Chinese action shows that it can be controlled through public health measures while a vaccine is being developed.

Until then, frequent handwashing is a ‘given’ and many people and organisations are running risk calculations on aspects of what they do. It may seem flippant but even basic human interaction such as the handshake needs to be reconsidered for the time being.

Germany: Switzerland-based LafargeHolcim subsidiary Holcim Deutschland has publicised further details of its plan to make its low-CO₂ concrete, EcoPact Zero, carbon neutral. It has partnered with German bog rewetting specialist MoorFutures to offset the remaining CO₂ from the reduced-emissions production process of EcoPact Zero concrete. LafargeHolcim has purchased a climate protection certificate from the company, which in return is restoring enough peatland in Königsmoor, Schleswig-Holstein, to capture 1t of CO₂ for every Euro64 it receives. MoorFutures says “Peatlands are the most effective CO₂ stores on Earth.”