Displaying items by tag: California

US: California Resources Corporation and its carbon management subsidiary, Carbon TerraVault (CTV), have signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with National Cement Company of California to develop the ‘Lebec Net Zero’ project, which will produce carbon-neutral cement at National Cement’s Lebec facility in Kern County, California.

CTV will provide transportation and sequestration solutions for up to 1Mt/yr of CO₂ emissions captured from the Lebec plant. The captured CO₂ will be transported and stored in CTV’s underground storage reservoirs. The project will integrate carbon capture technology, use locally sourced biomass fuel from agricultural byproducts and produce limestone calcined clay cement (LC3).

Pending customary approvals, operations are expected to commence in 2031.

US: Oakland, California-based cleantech startup Brimstone has received a US Department of Energy grant worth up to US$189m to establish a plant with a capacity of 80,000t/yr of ‘green’ cement and 20,000t/yr of smelter-grade alumina, according to the San Francisco Business Times. The grant will be paid out in instalments and requires matching funds from new investments, loans and other sources.

The US$378m facility, which is still in the site selection phase, will be located near an existing quarry in order to mine calcium silicate rocks.

CEO Cody Finke said “We’re exclusively looking at brownfield sites. The goal is to build our own plant while utilising existing quarries to ensure a sustainable and economically viable operation.”

Brimstone plans to begin pilot operations in 2025 and aims to have the plant fully operational by the end of the decade. The company is currently testing its decarbonised cement with potential customers from its Oakland research and development facility.

US: Fortera has inaugurated its first ‘green’ cement production facility in North America, located in Redding, California. The 2787m² ReCarb plant operates alongside the existing CalPortland cement plant, capturing CO₂ emissions and mineralising the CO₂ into calcium carbonate for production of the company’s low-carbon ReAct cement. The process reportedly reduces emissions by 70% compared to traditional methods, yielding a tonne of ‘green’ cement for every tonne of limestone input. The facility aims to capture 6600t/yr of CO₂ and to produce 15,000t/yr of ‘green’ cement.

According to Fortera CEO Ryan Gilliam, Fortera currently has 20 upcoming projects with various cement producers, which will cost US$150m each. This includes a plant in the Midwest that will be a 25-fold capacity increase compared to the Redding plant, producing 400,000t/yr of ‘green’ cement.

Last week the US General Services Administration (GSA) announced that it was investing US$2bn on over 150 construction projects that use low-embodied carbon (LEC) materials. The funding is intended to support the use of US-manufactured low carbon asphalt, concrete, glass and steel as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. For readers who don’t know, the GSA manages federal government property and provides contracting options for government agencies. As part of this new message, it will spend US$767m on LEC concrete on federal government buildings projects following a pilot that started in May 2023. The full list of the projects can be found here.

This is relevant because the US-based ready-mixed concrete (RMX) market has been valued roughly at around US$60bn/yr. One estimate of how much the US federal government spent on concrete was around US$5bn in 2018. So the government buys a significant minority of RMX in the country, and if it starts specifying LEC products, this will affect the industry. And, at present at least, a key ingredient of all that concrete is cement.

This isn’t the first time that legislators in the US have specified LEC concrete. In 2019 Marin County in California introduced what it said was the world’s first building code that attempted to minimise carbon emissions from concrete production. It did this by setting maximum ordinary Portland cement (OPC) and embodied carbon levels and offering several ways suppliers can achieve this, including increasing the use of supplementary cementitious materials (SCM), using admixtures, optimising concrete mixtures and so on. Unlike the GSA’s approach in November 2023 though, this applies to all plain and reinforced concrete installed in the area, not just a portion of procured concrete via a government agency. Other similar regional schemes in the US include limits on embodied carbon levels in RMX in Denver, Colorado, and a reduction in the cement used in RMX in Berkeley, California. Environmental services company Tangible compiled a wider list of embodied carbon building codes in North America that can be viewed here. This grouping also includes the use of building intensity policies, whole building life cycle assessments (LCA), environmental product declarations (EPD), demolition and deconstruction directives, tax incentives and building reuse plans.

Government-backed procurement codes promoting or requiring the use of LEC building materials for infrastructure projects have been around for a while in various places. The general trend has been to start with measurement via tools such as LCAs and EPDs, move on to government procurement and then start setting embodied carbon limits for buildings. In the US the GSA’s latest pronouncement follows on from the Federal Buy Clean Initiative and from when California introduced its Buy Clean California Act in 2017. Outside of the US similar programmes have been introduced in countries including Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK. On the corporate side members of the World Economic Forum’s First Movers’ Coalition have committed to purchasing or specifying volumes of LEC cement and/or concrete by 2030. Examples of whole countries actually setting embodied carbon emissions limits for non-government buildings are rarer, but some are emerging. Both France and Sweden, for example, introduced laws in 2022 that start by analysing life-cycle emissions of buildings and will move on to setting embodied carbon limits in the late 2020s. Denmark, Finland and New Zealand are also in the process of introducing similar schemes. The next big move could be in the EU, where legislators are considering embodied carbon limits for building materials as part of its ongoing revisions to its Energy Performance of Buildings Directive or the Construction Products Regulation legislations. Lobbying, debate and arguing remains ongoing at present.

To finish, Ireland-based Ecocem spent a period in the 2010s attempting to build a slag cement grinding plant at Vallejo, Solano County, in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. The project met with considerable local opposition on environmental grounds and was eventually refused planning permission. The irony is that slag cement is one of those SCM-style cements that Marin County, also in the San Francisco Bay Area, started encouraging the use of just a few years later. Ecocem held its inaugural science symposium in Paris this week. A number of scientists who attended the event called for existing low carbon technologies to be adopted by the cement and concrete sectors as fast as possible. One such approach is to lower the clinker factor in cement through the use of products that Ecocem and other companies sell. A point to consider is, if Marin County’s code or the GSA’s recent procurement directive came earlier, then that slag plant in Vallejo might have been built. Encouraging the use of LEC building materials by governments looks set to proliferate but it may not be a straightforward process. Clear and consistent policies will be key.

US: The Portland Cement Association (PCA) has announced the winners of its 2023 Safety Innovation and Chairman's Safety Performance Awards.

The Safety Innovation Award Program recognises companies that have developed innovative practices, projects and programs that improve safety at cement plants in the US. Entries are judged in five areas: innovation, ease of use and ease of construction, effectiveness and risk prevention. The recipients were:

• Distribution: Continental Cement, Continental Port Allen Terminal, Chesterfield, Missouri
• Quarry: CalPortland Company, CalPortland Oro Grande Plant, Oro Grande, California
• Pyroprocessing: GCC of America, GCC Tijeras Plant, Tijeras, New Mexio
• General Facility: Mitsubishi Cement Corporation, Mitsubishi Cushenbury Plant, Lucerne Valley, California

The Chairman’s Safety Performance Awards are given to member cement plants that did not have a reportable injury or illness during the year. Fifteen plants achieved this in 2023, which represented more than 10% of all active cement facilities in the US and its territories. The recipients were:

• Argos USA, Atlanta, Georgia
• Argos USA, Newberry, Florida
• Argos Puerto Rico Corp, Dorado, Puerto Rico
• Ash Grove Cement Company (CRH), Durkee, Oregon
• Ash Grove Cement Company (CRH), Midlothian, Texas
• Buzzi Unicem USA, Chattanooga, Tennessee
• Buzzi Unicem USA, Maryneal, Texas
• CalPortland Company, Rillito, Arizona
• GCC of America, Odessa, Texas
• Heidelberg Materials, Bellingham, Washington
• Martin Marietta Materials, New Braunfels, Texas
• Martin Marietta Materials, Midlothian, Texas
• Martin Marietta Materials, Tehachapi, California
• National Cement Company of California, Kern, California
• St Marys Cement (Votorantim), Detroit, Michigan

Taiwan Cement has just commissioned a 107MWh energy storage project at its Yingde plant in Guangdong province, China. Subsidiary NHOA Energy worked on the installation and has been promoting it this week. The battery storage works in conjunction with a 42MW waste heat recovery (WHR) unit, a 8MWp solar photovoltaic unit and a proprietary energy management system. It is expected to store about 46,000MWh/yr of electricity and save just under US$3m/yr in electricity costs.

NHOA Energy, formerly known as Engie EPS before Taiwan Cement bought a majority stake in it, claims it is one of the largest industrial microgrids in the world. We can’t verify this for sure, but it is definitely large. For comparison, the 750MW Vistra Moss Landing Energy Storage Facility in California often gets cited as the largest such facility in the world. This is run by a power company, as are many other large battery energy storage systems. In its annual report for 2022 Taiwan Cement said it was planning to using NHOA’s technology to build seven other large-scale energy storage projects at sites in Taiwan including its integrated Suao, Ho-Ping and Hualien cement plants.

The aim here appears to be supplying renewable electricity to the national grid in Taiwan. Taiwan Cement is diversifying away from cement production, with an aim to derive over 50% of its revenues from other activities besides cement by 2025. In 2022 cement and concrete represented 68% of its sales, while its electricity and energy division, including power supply and rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, represented 29%. The company is also not using its own batteries at the Yingde plant. Instead it is using lithium iron phosphate batteries supplied by Ningde Times. This is worth noting, as the cement producer’s batteries are used in vehicles.

Global Cement regularly reports news stories on cement plants that are building photovoltaic solar power arrays. However, so far at least, energy storage projects at scale have been rarer. One earlier example of an energy storage system loosely associated with a cement plant includes the now decommissioned Tehachapi Energy Storage Project that was situated next to the Tehachapi cement plant in California. That project tested using lithium ion batteries to improve grid performance and integrate intermittent generation from nearby wind farms. It is also worth noting that Sumitomo Osaka Cement’s sister company Sumitomo Electric is one of the world’s larger manufacturers of flow batteries, although no installation at a cement plant appears to have happened yet. In simple terms, flow batteries are an alternative to lithium ion batteries that don’t store as much energy but last longer.

More recently, Lucky Cement in Pakistan started commercial operation of a 34MW solar power plant with a 5.59MWh energy storage unit at its Pezu plant in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in late 2022. Reon Energy provided the equipment including a lithium-ion based battery approach to the storage. Then, in March 2023, Holcim US said that it was working with TotalEnergies to build solar power capacity and a battery energy storage unit at the Florence cement plant in Colorado. TotalEnergies will install, maintain and operate a 33MW DC ground-mounted solar array and a 38.5MWh battery energy storage system at the site. Operation of the renewable energy system is expected to start in 2025.

Away from electrical batteries, the other approach to energy storage at cement plants that has received attention recently from several quite different companies has been thermal batteries. The two prominent groups using them at different scales are Rondo Energy and Synhelion. The former company has developed its Heat Battery technology, which uses refractory bricks to absorb intermittent renewable energy and then supply the energy back as a steady stream of hot gas for use in a cement plant mill, dryer, calciner or kiln. Both Siam Cement Group (SCG) and Titan Cement have invested in Rondo Energy. In July 2023 SCG and Rondo Energy said that they were planning to expand the production capacity of a heat battery storage unit at a SCG plant to 90GWh/yr. Synhelion, meanwhile, has been working with Cemex on using concentrated solar power to manufacture clinker. It achieved this on an ‘industrially viable scale’ in August 2023. It has since been reported that the companies are working on building a small scale industrial plant at Móstoles near Madrid by 2026. Crucially for this discussion though, the process also uses a thermal energy storage unit filled with ceramic refractory material to allow thermal energy to be released at night, and thus ensure continuous operation.

The examples above demonstrate that some cement companies are actively testing out storing energy at scale. Whilst this will not solve the cement sector’s process emissions, it does potentially start to make using renewable energy sources more reliable and reduce the variable costs of renewable power. Whether it catches on remains to be seen. Most of these kinds of projects have been run by power companies and that is where it may stay. It is instructive to note that Reon Energy was the only company to state that its battery-based energy storage system has a life-span of 8 - 12 years. Our current vision of a net-zero future points to high electrical usage but it may be shaped by how good the batteries are… from our phones to our cars to our cement plants.

For more information on Rondo Energy read the January 2023 issue of Global Cement Magazine

US: Peru-based UNACEM has entered into a definitive agreement with Martin Marietta Materials to acquire its Tehachapi cement plant in California. North Carolina-based Martin Marietta Materials reported the value of the deal as US$317m. The companies expect to close the deal in mid-late 2023.

Taiheiyo Cement subsidiary CalPortland previously terminated its deal to buy the Tehachapi plant, along with two local cement terminals, in April 2023. Japan-based Taiheiyo Cement said that the parties had been unable to obtain necessary approvals from the US Federal Trade Commission within a suitable timeframe.

US: Heidelberg Materials North America has reached an agreement with the administration of Santa Clara County to decommission its quarry in the county, near Cupertino. Silicon Valley News has reported that the quarry historically supplied limestone for cement production at Permanente cement plant, which came offline in April 2020. The county administration says that the deal signals that it has achieved its aim to ensure final closure of the Permanente plant.

Heidelberg Materials North America spokesperson Jeff Sieg said that the company is ‘pleased to formalise our agreement not to restart the kiln at our Permanente cement plant.’ He continued "We remain focused on working collaboratively with the community and other stakeholders on the development of a long-term strategy for the property, so that it can continue to provide value in the future.”

US: In 2022, Fortera began building a 15,000t/yr-capacity plant to produce its low-carbon cementitious material, Fortera Reactive Calcium Carbonate (RCC), at CalPortland's Redding cement plant in California. The commercial-scale plant will produce a reactive form of calcium carbonate using CO₂ from the kiln of the 600,000t/yr cement plant. Fortera's process converts 1t of limestone into 1t of Fortera RCC by capturing and mineralising CO₂ from the cement plant's kiln. Fortera cement production emits 60% less CO₂ than ordinary Portland cement (OPC). The 15,000t/yr plant will operate at 20 times the scale of previous pilot tests. The Redding Record newspaper has reported that 15 workers will be employed at the site.

Former Redding cement plant owner Lehigh Hanson formed an agreement with Fortera to collaborate on the low-carbon cement plant project in March 2021. The plant subsequently switched ownership to Martin Marietta Materials in October 2021, before CalPortland bought it in July 2022.

Eagle Materials announced this week that it had completed the acquisition of Martin Marietta’s cement import business in the north of California. A key part of the deal includes the sale of a cement terminal at Stockton. No value for the transaction has been disclosed.

The agreement prompts discussion for two immediate reasons. Firstly, it continues the enlargement of Eagle Materials’ cement business with its second terminal in California. The company operates its cement business in a band running almost right across the US. It runs seven cement plants in seven different states and jointly operates, with Heidelberg Materials, a plant in Texas too. It also runs a network of 25 cement terminals, including the new acquisition, stretching from California in the west to Pennsylvania in the east.

Eagle Materials’ focus on the cement sector also harks back to its previous plans to separate its various businesses. In 2019 it approved a plan to split its heavy materials and light materials businesses into two publicly-traded entities. The decision was made in response to pressure by shareholder Sachem Head Capital Management to make the company, in its view, more valuable. A strategic portfolio review followed but the planned separation was subsequently delayed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and poor market conditions, amongst other reasons. The board of the company then cancelled the proposed separation in 2021 citing the financial benefits of a diversified business, opportunities for strategic growth and the divestment of its oil and gas proppants business.

The other talking point is that the Eagle Materials transaction follows a positive response by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in response to the abandonment of CalPortland’s attempt to buy the Tehachapi cement plant in southern California and two related terminals from Martin Marietta. CalPortland’s parent company Taiheiyo Cement said in late April 2023 that it had terminated the acquisition agreement originally announced in mid-2022 due to its inability to obtain approval from the FTC in a timely manner. Whilst the FTC did not say if it had directly tried to block the proposed deal it did say, “The abandonment is a victory for consumers and preserves competition for a key component of Southern California’s construction and infrastructure industries.”

The FTC argued that the transaction would have reduced the number of cement suppliers in Southern California from five to four, further concentrating an already concentrated market, and was “presumptively illegal.” It noted that the Tehachapi plant was only about 20km away from CalPortland’s Mojave cement plant. It went on to say that, if the deal had gone ahead, CalPortland was poised to own half of the cement plants serving the Southern California market. It added that it would have been well-placed to raise its prices and that, “the transaction would have also increased the likelihood for coordinated action between the remaining competitors in this concentrated market.”

The de-facto block by the FTC of the Tehachapi sale now opens up the question of who Martin Marietta might try to sell it to next. Cemex, Mitsubishi Cement and National Cement (Vicat) are the obvious contenders given that they each also run integrated plants in the state. Of course another company, especially one with some form of existing distribution network, may express interest. Given its enlarged presence in Northern California, Eagle Materials springs to mind. Other potential buyers are, of course, available.