Displaying items by tag: Cement Sustainability Initiative

The Portland Cement Association (PCA) has launched a new website to promote the US cement industry’s progress towards net zero. It’s always interesting to see the different approaches the various associations around the world take in promoting the sector especially in response to mainstream media coverage that has often taken a negative view of cement and concrete. As sustainability thinking has permeated into society the stereotype that cement production releases vast amounts of CO₂ for little gain has been a hard one to shake off. Readers can draw their own conclusions on how well the PCA site works by looking at cementprogress.com.

Make no mistake, the PCA’s new website is a marketing tool designed to bring out some of the points of its carbon zero roadmap to a wider audience. Yet it is refreshing to see a national association website attempting to tell the general public what progress the cement industry is making towards reducing its CO₂ emissions. Unfortunately, it then avoids giving out any data that presents an overview of how it’s all actually going. This may come with time though as the roadmap was only released in late 2021. One number that does stick out on the site is that the PCA uses the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) carbon emissions data to calculate that the manufacture of cement accounts for 1.25% of total CO₂ emissions in the US. This is lower than the global figure of 7% that is often used from the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research - Oslo’s (CICERO) research. Both figures appear to be broadly correct based on the available data.

The real story here is to showcase the wide range of actions the PCA is taking as part of its roadmap. In the cement section, for example, the PCA is rightly able to demonstrate its recent work driving the transition to Portland Limestone Cement (PLC) production in the US. This then leads on to the usual beats of resilient construction, carbonation and a ’whole society’ approach to tackling the decarbonisation of the cement industry with suggestions that everybody from citizens to contractors to policy makers can do.

The wider context is that the big challenge facing cement advocacy groups today is that sustainability is a global issue but that such groups have generally been national or regional for most of their history. The national or regional cement associations have existed for decades serving the local needs of their members. This started to change in 1999 when the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) was created with its global approach to sustainability for the sector with its data gathering and technology roadmaps. In the 2010s global media attention started to focus on the large share of CO₂ emissions the cement industry was emitting as, coincidentally, China became the world’s largest cement producer. Then in the late 2010s the two global cement associations - the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) and the World Cement Association (WCA) - emerged with the GCCA taking over what the CSI did previously.

One problem that the PCA and the other associations face is that decarbonising the cement and concrete sectors is hard to do, expensive and will take decades. Until, or if, carbon capture is suddenly conjured up at scale, all of this work is inherently seen as boring by much of the media compared to, say. young photogenic environmental activists supergluing themselves to roads. One way to fight back against this is to show progress font-and-centre and to try and take back control of the narrative. This appears to be what the PCA is trying out in a more direct fashion than usual. The risk though is that any action by an industry-backed lobbying group to show off the work it is doing will simply be labelled as greenwashing, whether it’s fair or not. Of course, some environmentalists indulge in their own reverse version of this (industry staining?) to make the powerful but simple argument about the necessity of cutting CO₂ emissions but without taking fully into account or underplaying the scale of the societal changes necessary to do so. Either way, the cement industry and its advocates have an uphill struggle on their hands in the years ahead. This may require fresh thinking about how to win over hearts and minds.

The March 2023 issue of Global Cement Magazine includes an interview with Claude Lorea from the Global Cement & Concrete Association (GCCA)

Andrew Minson from the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) kicked off this week’s Virtual Global Concrete Conference with an overview of concrete’s role in the association’s 2050 climate ambition. The association announced in September 2020 that it was starting work on this roadmap for publication in the second half of 2021, just in time for the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference, currently schedule to take place in Glasgow, Scotland in November 2021. Minson ran through the topic, providing an overview of concrete’s intrinsic sustainable features and the policy levers the association is considering for its forthcoming roadmap.

One point from circular economy aspects of the plan included design for dis-assembly (DfD) and long life, loose fit modes of thinking around how a building using concrete should be conceived, designed, built, used and - crucially – reused. Long life, loose fit, low energy (to use its original name) was promoted by the Welsh architect Alex Gordon from the early 1970s. It covered themes of sustainability, flexibility and energy efficiency for building design ahead of both the 1970s oil crisis and the current climate one. DfD emerged in the 1990s as a way of thinking about a building’s demolition at the start and working from there. Deconstruction or demolition is prepared for through planning and design. It allows components and materials to be removed more easily, facilitating their subsequent reuse. So, components and materials can be removed more easily allowing their subsequent reuse and elements such as columns, walls, beams, and slabs can be disassembled to facilitate this. Last year Global Cement Weekly explored a similar path with the ideas of Dutch architect and commentator Thomas Rau (GCW348) and his concept of building materials as a service, following on from the Building Information Modelling (BIM) system, and the suggestion that companies simply rent (!) building materials from their manufacturers to encourage whole life thinking.

Chart 1: Uses of concrete by European Ready Mixed Concrete Organisation (ERMCO) members in 2018. Source: ERMCO.

Just how much concrete the world uses each year is a question beyond the scope of this article, given its range of applications and diversity of users. For example, the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) estimated 25Bnt in 2009. Later, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) technical committee for concrete, reinforced concrete and pre-stressed concrete placed the figure at around 33Bnt in 2016. It is worth considering how and where concrete is actually used. The chart above from the European Ready Mixed Concrete Organisation (ERMCO) shows how its members used concrete in 2018. Note that use in buildings comprised the biggest share, nearly two thirds, but that the rest included infrastructure, pavements, roads and more. Lifecycle thinking and its various offshoots can apply to all of these applications. Yet it’s easier to imagine a concrete building shell being reused within its lifespan than, say, a bridge or a road. Concrete used in infrastructure seems more suitable for re-use further down the waste hierarchy, such as recycling as an aggregate.

A few final thoughts to consider are that both Cemex and gypsum wallboard manufacturer Etex have invested in modular and/or offsite construction companies in January 2021. Both targets were relatively small companies suggesting growing interest in these sectors by larger players. Offsite building construction suits lifecycle thinking well because the modular components start off being built elsewhere before installation. Factoring in what happens afterwards should be relatively easy and expandable at scale. Finally, LafargeHolcim announced this week that it is acquiring two ready-mix concrete and aggregate suppliers in France and Italy that will give it 35 concrete plants in the region.

Sustainability places lifecycle thinking into mainstream building practice and some methods and tools will inevitably make it into any policy framework the GCCA will recommend. Whether some or all of the ideas above hang around remains to be seen but lifecycle thinking in some form or another is here already and not going anywhere.

The proceedings and video of the Virtual Global Concrete Conference 2021 are available to buy now

Register for the 2nd Virtual Global Concrete Seminar - 'Future Concrete' on 14 September 2021

Mexico: Cemex says that Carbon Trust has validated its roadmap to decarbonise global operations in line with the Sectoral Decarbonisation Approach (SDA) 2-degree scenario (2DS) developed by the International Energy Agency (IEA). The validated roadmap is intended to help the company to achieve a 35% reduction of net carbon emissions by 2030. The findings validate Cemex's roadmap for reducing Scope 1 and 2 emissions.

The Carbon Trust has assessed the technical feasibility of the plan based on guidelines defined by international institutions including the International Energy Agency, the Cement Sustainability Initiative, and the European Climate Research Alliance. The CO₂ reduction methods include the use of alternative fuels, using decarbonated raw materials, renewable power projects, and novel cements, among others. The validation also included a review of Cemex's commitment to implement the scheme based on governance mechanisms and business planning.

“The magnitude and complexity of change required by a company such as Cemex to decarbonise its global operations is significant. Our assessment provides the organization’s management, investors and stakeholders with an independent validation that its commitments are backed up by sound assumptions and planning,” said Aleyn Smith-Gillespie, Associate Director Advisory at the Carbon Trust.

Fascinating information came out of LafargeHolcim last week as part of its Capital Markets Day 2018. The building materials company said it is expecting sales growth to slow in 2019 but earnings to grow. Jan Jenisch, the chief executive officer (CEO), said that the group was ‘aggressively’ moving forward in aggregates and ready-mix concrete. Alongside this, its recent divestment of its Indonesian operations was declared a ‘major’ milestone in focusing its portfolio and cutting down on debt.

Graph 1: LafargeHolcim’s major product lines by sales (%), 2015 – 2017. Source: Company reports.

Graph 1, above, gives a good idea of how LafargeHolcim has been changing its business. Cement sales as a percentage of total sales have been cut to 60% in 2017 from 67% in 2015. Ready-mix concrete and other sales (including asphalt) have risen to 26% from 19%. Aggregate sales have stayed at around 14%. If the world is making too much cement then LafargeHolcim is switching to concrete and balancing out its supply chain. Naturally, this was backed up in one of its investor presentations showing a more even split in the world building materials market between cement, concrete and aggregates. This fits with Jenisch’s background as the former head of Sika. That company manufactures a wide range of specialty chemicals for the construction and automotive industries.

That shift in focus could also be seen at the inaugural Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) event in late November 2018 where concrete was very much the centre of attention from a sustainability angle. The main companies involved with the GCCA are vertically integrated ones and, by switching its product balance, LafargeHolcim seems to be moving in the same direction. In a sense this is a continuation of the synergy-seeking that was promised when Lafarge and Holcim merged in 2015.

Graph 2: Forecast cement demand growth in LafargeHolcim markets. Source: LafargeHolcim investor presentation 2018.

The other interesting question for LafargeHolcim is where next for growth? The graphic above shows a number of promising areas, including India and east Sub-Saharan Africa. Also, note the slowdown forecast for China. That renewed faith in India is timely this week given the expectation by the Indian Cement Manufacturers Association that cement demand growth in the country will rise by at least 10% in the current financial year to March 2019. If the momentum holds up after a strong first half then it will mark the fastest increase for the region since the market slowed down in 2011. LafargeHolcim doesn’t appear to be on course to grow significantly in India anytime soon but it has major ‘skin in the game’ in a promising market.

Another indication of the vibrancy of the Indian market also came this week from the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) with the results of a status review from its low carbon technology roadmap (LCTR). The results were fairly good for such a large industry, with falling CO₂ emissions intensity, growing co-processing rates and a decreasing clinker factor. This report carried a sad note given that the work that the CSI does will be taken over by the GCCA in January 2019. However, if this is the last we’re going to hear from the CSI, then they’ve left on a high note.

Lastly, leafing through old financial reports may not be everybody’s idea of a good time but it does let one see how LafargeHolcim’s product mix has changed. It also gives one time to catch up with old faces. Like Bruno Lafont and Eric Olsen. Once again those two former executives popped up in the latest twist of the on going Lafarge Syria legal case as a group of Yazidi women have applied to become ‘civil parties’ in the case. Whether the war crimes inflicted upon the Yazidis can be pinned on Lafarge Syria remains to be seen. Yet, for all of the LafargeHolcim’s business reorganisation, its predecessor’s conduct in Syria continues to make headlines. However much progress the company makes in turning around its fortunes, if it can be, this will continue to overshadow everything. Once a line is drawn under the affair then LafargeHolcim can move on properly.

Chief executives from over 30 companies attended the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) inaugural event last week in London. Its first president Albert Manifold, the chief executive officer (CEO) of CRH, laid out the line by saying that, “For the first time we have a global advocacy body.” He followed this up by emphasising that ‘our product’ is the most used man-made product in the world. Just like the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI), the body the GCCA is partly-replacing, it is a CEO-led organisation. The target is very much about giving a global voice to the cement and concrete industries and the vertically integrated companies that produce these products.

Along with the head of CRH, the leaders of LafargeHolcim, HeidelbergCement, CNBM, Votorantim, Buzzi Unicem and Eurocement, amongst others, were all on the attendance list too. That kind of representation gave the event a charged air and a real sense of intent. At present the association says it represents 35% of global cement production and its aim is to reach 50%. That compares to the 30% base that the CSI had.

Representatives from some major cement associations were also present, including Europe’s Cembureau, the Federación Interamericana del Cemento (FICEM), the Canadian Cement Association and the VDZ. The only thing stopping the US Portland Cement Association being there was reportedly the Thanksgiving holiday. Although not comprehensive, that kind of representation suggests serious interest from the regional cement associations. The word from the GCCA CEO Benjamin Sporton was that the GCCA is here to provide a global level of coordination to the advocacy and sustainability side of the industry dealing with global organisations like the United Nations (UN), development banks, other associations and non-government organisations (NGOs).

How this will work in practice has yet to be seen, but at the very least, the GCCA can take over the work of the CSI and run with it. The word from the attendees we spoke to was uniformly positive for the association. It was seen as a long-overdue move to finally give the industry some sort of uniform voice at a global scale. In this sense it is catching up with similar bodies in industries like wood and steel. One benefit from moving from the CSI to a full advocacy organisation is that the industry can actually talk about the good things it does rather than being limited to sustainability and environmental data reporting. It seems like a small change in focus but it’s a big shift in mind-set.

A cynic might suggest that the exercise is one of a dirty industry trying to wrest the Overton window, or window of public discourse, back from legislators facing mounting environmental pressure. The latest UN Emissions Gap Report for 2018, for example, reported this week that CO₂ emissions rose in 2017 after four consecutive years of decline. This is the latest environmental report in a long line pointing out bad news. Yet, the GCCA’s unwritten mantra, that concrete improves lives, is sound. Somebody or something needs to link it all up. That somebody might just be the GCCA.

A review of the inaugural annual general meeting and symposium of the GCCA will be published in a forthcoming issue of Global Cement Magazine.

UK: The Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) has appointed Claude Loréa as Cement Director. She will take up the role in early November 2018 and will be based at the association’s offices in London. Loréa joins the GCCA from European cement industry body, Cembureau where she is Deputy Chief Executive and Industrial Affairs Director. Loréa will report to incoming GCCA chief executive, Benjamin Sporton and will be a member of the executive team.

Loréa will lead all aspects of GCCA work related to cement, calling for a practical understanding of its chemistry, production, co-processing, data collection, standards as well as international climate policy, regulatory requirements and trends. With sustainability a key priority of the GCCA, she will also oversee the smooth transition of the activities of the Cement Sustainability Initiative to the GCCA.

Over her career Loréa has built up knowledge of the cement industry including the sector’s sustainability agenda where, among other achievements, she has led the development of the European Cement Industry Low Carbon Economy Roadmap. A Belgian national, she holds a degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Brussels and has worked as an environmental consultant and auditor. She gained her first hands-on experience of the cement industry as an environmental engineer with Cimenteries CBR in Belgium, in time moving to Cembureau where she was appointed technical director and subsequently deputy chief executive.

The Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) announced this week that it intends to take over the work done by the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI). This marks a change in how the cement industry as a whole approaches sustainability and in the wider context how the sector manages itself on the world stage.

The CSI was set up in 1999 with the aim of advancing a sustainability agenda for the cement industry. It has done this by laying out strategy for the industry to follow in the form of technology roadmaps and publishing its ‘Getting the Numbers Right’ (GNR) data on CO₂ and energy performance information. By 2018 it had 24 cement company members composed of nine core members, 14 participating members and one affiliate member. It represents around 2.4Bnt/yr of global cement production capacity or over half of the world production, according to Global Cement Directory 2018 data.

The idea behind the membership was that the core members are all members of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and that the members would contribute ‘modest’ funds to run the organisation. That last point about WBCSD membership is worth noting because members need to stick to conditions such as publishing an annual sustainability report and agree to have the sustainability report reviewed and benchmarked by the WBCSD.

Figure 1: Outline of selected current global cement organisations with a sustainability remit. Source: Association websites, Global Cement Directory 2018.

The GCCA, which formed in early 2018, says it had formed a ‘strategic’ partnership with the WBCSD and that it will take over the work previously done by the CSI from the start of 2019. Although there’s no mention so far whether GCCA members have to actually become WBCSD members with all that this entails. At present the GCCA consists of nine major international cement producers, including over half of the world’s top 10 producers by production capacity, with a production base in every inhabited continent except Antarctica. Roughly speaking it represents just under 2Bnt/yr of global cement production capacity or about half of the world’s total.

Now where this starts to get confusing is that other cement associations exist with their own established advocacy roles and sustainability agendas. The established players include the various regional associations such as the Portland Cement Association in the US, Cembureau in Europe and so forth. The multinational ones also often represent national bodies.

Then there is the World Cement Association (WCA), which formed in 2016. This independent body is a private company run out of an office in London, UK with non-profit aims. It has 45 members but only three quarters are actual cement producers. Of these most are single-country cement manufacturers. The glaring standout is China National Building Material (CNBM) and its subsidiaries, representing over half of the association’s member’s cement production capacity. The production capacity of the WCA’s members is around 1Bnt/yr or a quarter of the global total. More than half of this comes from CNBM and its subsidiaries. Unsurprisingly then that Song Zhi Ping, the head of CNBM, is the president of the WCA. It too supports a sustainability agenda, saying that it, “seeks to co-operate with the WBCSD, CSI and regional and national Cement Associations.” What is noteworthy is how few of the current members of the WCA joined the CSI previously.

There is definitely a need for a global organisation advocating sustainability issues for the cement industry and by taking over the work of the CSI and the GCCA has cornered this part of what a global cement association might do. However, the GCCA represents less cement production capacity than the CSI did. The main omissions are the Indian producers, led by UltraTech Cement, as well as others. It seems likely that they will join the GCCA following the end of the CSI but there is no guarantee.

The other point arises when looking at these various cement associations is: who does what exactly? The CSI’s focus on sustainability gave it a purpose that it did well with a genuine appearance of independence. Its narrow focus also gave it a complimentary role to the existing national and regional associations. Global bodies like the GCCA and the WCA are clearly more into advocacy territory for their members. Also, a more general association approach like the GCCA and the WCA may clash with regional bodies like the PCA and Cembureau. Regional bodies seem better suited to the way governance works globally with regional groups such as the European Union (EU) or government departments in continental sized countries such as the US, China and India. However, a truly global cement body could respond better to coordinated environmental lobbying and fill in the gaps around the world in places with looser regional representation.

Sustainability is the immediate link between the CSI, the GCCA and the WCA. Indeed the WCA recently held a ‘Global Climate Change’ forum in Paris to discuss its own climate action plan. Yet, with the GCCA taking over the work the CSI does and the WCA saying it wants to cooperate with the CSI, the obvious outcome is that the GCCA will become the world’s apex cement association. It will represent the companies with the most cement production capacity, have a presence in every inhabited continent and take the lead on WBCSD issues. Beyond this though it will be interesting to see what, if anything else, the GCCA chooses to do.

Two reports out this week have looked at the carbon footprint of the cement industry. The first, a technology roadmap by the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) and the International Energy Agency (IEA), laid out a technology pathway for the sector to reduce its direct CO₂ by 24% from current levels by 2050 to meet the IEA’s 2°C scenario (2DS). The second, a report by the CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) on the progress of 13 major cement producers to reduce their emissions, was a progress report on the business readiness for a low carbon economy transition.

Graph 1: European Union industry emissions by sector, 2013 - 2017. Source: Sandbag, European Commission.

The scene was set last week when the environmental campaign group Sandbag picked up on the latest emission data from the European Union (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). Industrial emissions as a whole rose by 2% year-on-year to 743Mt in 2017. The cement and lime industry reported a rise of 3% to 148Mt in 2017 from 144Mt in 2016. As Sandbag reported, industrial emissions have remained ‘stubbornly high’ for the duration of the ETS. It then went on to say that, “the EU urgently needs a new industrial strategy to bring about radical industrial process changes and/or carbon capture and storage, especially for the high-emitting steel and cement sectors.”

The CDP’s report provided a global scorecard on the readiness of the cement industry to adapt to a low-carbon future. Unfortunately, the report used data from self-reporting questionnaires and it lacked data from the two largest Chinese cement producers, Anhui Conch and China National Building Materials (CNBM), although it did try to compensate for this. The CDP assessed companies across four key areas aligned with the recommendations from the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).

Graph 2: Opportunity vs. risk for low-carbon transition. Source: Building Pressure report, CDP.

Surprisingly, the study, even with its limitations, found regional variation. As can be seen in Graph 2, the Indian cement producers came out on top from the criteria used: transition risks, physical risks, transition opportunities and climate governance and strategy. CDP pinned this on better access to alternative materials such as fly ash and slag coming from other carbon intensive sectors, such as thermal power generation and steel production. Reported process emissions measured by the clinker ratio for the Indian companies was 69% versus 78% for the other companies. They also benefited from newer cement plants driven by high market growth in the region compared to older plants in Europe.

The technology roadmap from the CSI and the IEA set out key actions for the industry to take by 2030 to have at least a 50% chance of achieving the 2°C 2DS scenario followed by a possible transition pathway that could be achieved through technology, legislation and investment. The key actions are protecting carbon pricing mechanisms from carbon leakage, putting new technology into action and supporting it by legislation, and greater government support for products with a lower clinker factor.

The CSI’s and IEA’s targets for 2030 included reaching a clinker to cement ratio of 0.64 in 2030 from 0.65 in 2014, a thermal energy intensity of clinker of 3.3GJ/t from 3.5GJ/t, an electricity intensity of cement of 87kWh/t from 91kWh/t and a alternative fuel co-processing rate of 17.5% from 5.6%. Perhaps the most optimistic is a CO₂ capture and storage amount of 14MtCO₂/yr in 2030 from nothing at the moment. This last target seems unlikely to be achieved given the lack of projects outside of the pilot stage, but it’s not impossible.

This column barely touches on the detail within either report or even the latest data from the EU ETS. Both reports offer ways forward to meet the 2°C global warming target outlined in the Paris Agreement. It’s easy to be pessimistic given the on-going clash between environmental optimism and business logic but both reports offer a way forward. The CDP report sets out a baseline with a look to the future, whilst the CSI/IEA roadmap offers what it says is a realistic route to reach that 2DS target. Lastly, if the CDP’s assessment is correct about the Indian producers then it’s possible that other developing cement industries may inherently be cleaner due to their use of newer plants and equipment. If worldwide government support can be provided for use of alternative fuels and materials on a much larger scale, as well as all the other recommendations, then meeting the Paris agreement may be easier than expected as new markets build new production capacity.

Two examples of carbon capture utilisation and sequestration projects will be covered in the May 2018 issue of Global Cement Magazine

Switzerland: Eric Olsen, chief executive officer of LafargeHolcim, has been elected as the new chairman of the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) in 2017. The appointment was confirmed at the CSI’s annual CEO Meeting in Madrid.

“It is an honour for me to be chairing this important industry organization in the coming year. Sustainability in the construction sector is not the preserve of one organisation. I will focus on ensuring that the CSI continues to play an important role in building collaboration within our industry and encouraging joint action across the entire value chain. As one of the largest global sustainability programs ever undertaken by a single industrial sector, we have a real opportunity to drive change. Our plans are ambitious and we are conscious that we will only achieve them by working together”, said Olsen.

LafargeHolcim is one of the founding members of the CSI which is part of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and was launched in 1999 with the aim of supporting the progress of the global cement sector toward sustainable development. The CSI unites 23 major cement producers with operations in more than 100 countries. Collectively these companies account for around 30% of the world’s cement production and range in size from multinationals to local producers.

The Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) has announced its aim to reduce CO₂ emissions by clinker producers by 20 - 25% by 2030. It made the announcement as part of a new action plan launched on 8 December 2015 at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference (COP21).

Most of the plan follows the CSI's existing aims announced to chime with the on-going COP21 negotiations. The plan depends on a long-term agreement being brokered successfully in Paris at COP21 as a whole. It then recommends policy in each of its key areas to achieve its goals. All of this sits beneath a general policy statement to, '...encourage policies for predictable, objective, level-playing and stable CO₂ constraints and incentives as well as energy frameworks on an international level.'

The Cement Action Plan is part of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development Low Carbon Technology Partnerships initiative (LCTPi). It puts together a series of measures to aspire to reduce CO₂ emissions by 1Gt by 2030 compared to business as usual. However this reduction is dependent on the entire cement industry getting involved, not just the existing 26 CSI members. Together these 26 members represent just a quarter of world cement production.

The drop in emissions is based on the so-called 'best-in-class' CSI company 2020 targets. To reach this the CSI is suggesting actions including focusing on recording Chinese cement industry emissions and energy usage, improving energy efficiency, promoting co-processing of alternative fuels, further lowering the clinker factor of cements, developing new low-energy and low-carbon cements, looking at the entire build chain to reduce emissions and considering other options such as carbon capture and storage. The plan had the support of the CEOs of 16 cement companies at its launch, with CNBM CEO Song Zhiping adding his assent at the event also.

The most prominent step is the clear focus on China for data capture using existing CSI tools such as the CO₂ and Energy Accounting and Reporting Standard for the Cement Industry, the Getting the Numbers Right (GNR) and the Cement Technology Roadmaps. As the CSI puts it, "What gets measured gets managed."

Given that China produces around 60% of the world's cement, according to United States Geological Survey data, the focus on China is essential. Currently the CSI has six Chinese members: CNBM, Sinoma, China Resources, Tianrui Group, West China Cement and Yati Group. Notable exceptions to CSI membership from the world's biggest cement producers include the Chinese producers Anhui Conch and Taiwan Cement, as well as Russia's Eurocement and India's Aditya Birla Group.

So, the CSI has set out its stall ahead of a hoped-for global agreement on climate change at the Paris conference. If some sort of legal agreement is reached then the CSI has its recommendations ready in the wings to hand to policymakers everywhere to promote its aims. If no agreement is reached then the plan loses momentum although pushing forwards makes sense where possible, starting with better CO₂ data reported especially in China.

Problems lie ahead for the CSI whatever happens in Paris given that the LCTPi Cement Action Plan is a series of policy suggestions from only 16 cement producers aiming for a non-binding target. For example, without some sort of world legal agreement there are clear commercial advantages for non-CSI members to burn cheap fossil fuels in their kilns and undercut their more environmentally pious rivals. The sustaining low cost of oil, dipping below US$40/barrel this week, can only aggravate this situation and distract the strategies of fuel buyers away from co-processing upgrades.