Displaying items by tag: European Commission

EU: Cembureau has welcomed the European Commission (EC)’s proposal for consultations on setting up a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) for imported goods including cement, and set out a number of ‘design principles’ that it says ‘should apply’. According to Cembureau, a CBAM ought to be: complementary to EU emissions trading scheme (ETS) free allowances (in the initial phase) and World Trade Organisation (WTO) compatible, based on importers’ verified emissions, including indirect emissions, applicable to all ETS sectors and capable of providing a CO2 charge exemption for EU exporters.

The EC has said that it will present a final proposal for a CBAM by mid-2021.

EU: Cembureau has responded to the European standardisation organisation Cenelec’s CEN/TC 350 ‘sustainability of construction works’ rules by amending its European Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) for CEM I, CEM II and CEM III, corresponding to Portland cement, Portland-composite cement and blast furnace cement respectively. It says the update brings the three main cement types into ‘full alignment with the EU Commission strategy for a sustainable built environment.’

There was fantastic news for fans of novel cements this week, when Cementos Argos announced the completion of work on a new 0.45Mt/yr calcined clay production line at its Rio Claro plant in Colombia. This artificial pozzolanic material, developed and promoted by the Swiss-led LC3 consortium in recent years, can dramatically lower cement CO₂ emissions by replacing slag and/or fly ash in cement mixes. The Rio Claro plant is the first major cement plant to install such a line following smaller trials in Switzerland, India and Cuba.

Suitable clays are more widely available than slag and fly ash, alleviating some of the difficulty and cost of obtaining supplementary cementitious materials. They also need to be calcined at just 800°C, offering massive savings in terms of fuel costs, CO₂ emissions and embodied energy compared to Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) production. Karen Scrivener from the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), the leading academic party in the LC3 consortium, explained that calcined clays are at their best when in ternary (three-way) blends alongside clinker and limestone in the September 2019 issue of Global Cement Magazine. “It has long been known that calcined clays can be pozzolanic,” she explained. “When used alone, the maximum substitution level is around 30%, which gives a moderate saving in CO₂ emissions. However, if we substitute a further 15% of the clinker with limestone, we get a significant reduction in CO₂ emissions, with a product that has almost identical properties to the blend that contains just the calcined clay.”

While the exact composition of Rio Claro’s new products is unclear, it will enable Cementos Argos to produce ternary cement blends with CO₂ emissions 38% lower than OPC. Energy consumption is also cut by 30%, which provides secondary benefits in terms of reduced off-site CO₂ emissions. At the plant’s launch, Cementos Argos’ President Juan Esteban Calle clearly stated that calcined clays were the way forward, announcing, “With this project we are sowing the seeds of the Argos of the future. It starts today with a new production line at Rio Claro. In our commitment to climate change, this project makes us very proud.”

The response from Argos’ consumers will be keenly watched, especially in Europe. Just this week LafargeHolcim and Vicat, along with France’s Technical Association of the Hydraulic Binders Industry (ATILH), called on the European Commission and European Committee for Standardisation to hurry up and publish ternary cement standards across the European Union (EU). At the moment these producers are primarily concerned with CEMII / C-M and CEM VI cements. These classes of cement comprise a range of ternary blends that contain clinker and limestone, plus a third component, be it slag, fly ash, natural pozzolans or calcined clay. They claim that placing low-clinker cements on the market could reduce the amount of CO₂ emitted by 127kg/t, around 20% of the 656kg/t average in Europe at present.

Frustrated with the delays at Commission level, cement producers have now taken things into their own hands. The plan is to establish the same standard within each EU Member State at the national level, rather than waiting in vain for standards from ‘on high.’ One pressing driver for this behaviour is the rapid approach of the Phase 4 of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) in January 2021. In Phase 4 it is likely that EU cement producers will be allocated only 80% of the free allowances they have become accustomed to. They will have to buy the remainder at market prices, currently Euro25.1/t of CO₂ (17 February 2020). This will represent a massive new expense for some producers. The opportunity to sell cement that emits only 58% of the CO₂ of OPC is clearly exceedingly attractive as a way to reduce outgoings. CO₂ emissions will be reduced, of course but, as usual, the way to make companies do things is to hit them in the wallet.

Indeed, on this point, Vicat seemed to almost goad or ‘troll’ its competitors in Europe this week by announcing that it has never sold any EU ETS allowances and is sitting atop a 5Mt CO₂ reserve worth Euro120m. This is sufficient to last it until 2030 at current prices. The key part of that last sentence is ‘current prices,’ which are subject to change. In its press release, Vicat was keen to point out that it is not resting on its laurels, highlighted by its advocacy for ternary blends and continued development of alternative fuels. This may be wise, considering that EU ETS allowances will likely cost more once Phase 4 kicks in.

With clinker factors of just 50 - 65% for CEMII / C-M, and 35 - 50% for CEM VI, Edelio Bermejo, director of research and development (R&D) at LafargeHolcim insists, "These cements are no longer at the research and development stage. They have been widely validated and we are ready to produce them, especially as their manufacture does not require modification of our facilities." The establishment of Cementos Argos’ Rio Claro calcined clay plant proves his point. We can expect to hear a lot more about these blends in the coming months. In the words of Bermejo, “The future is here!”

If you needed a sign that the cement industry has become serious about carbon capture it was the presence of two organisations offering CO₂ transport and storage capacity in northern Europe at last week’s Innovation in Industrial Carbon Capture Conference 2020 (IICCC). Both Norway’s Northern Lights and the Rotterdam CCUS (Project Porthos) were busy at their stands during the event’s exhibition. Meanwhile, Cembureau, the European Cement Association, said that it will work on finding other potential storage sites for CO₂ and on identifying existing gas pipelines that could be converted. The industry is planning what to do about CO₂ transport and storage.

As with the previous IICCC event in 2018 the heart of the programme was the Low Emissions Intensity Lime And Cement (LEILAC) project. Since then Calix’s 60m tall pilot Direct Separation Calciner unit has been built at the HeidelbergCement cement plant in Lixhe and has been tested since mid-2019. Early results look promising, with CO₂ separation occurring, calcined material produced and the tube structure and mechanical expansion holding up. Problems with thermocouples failing, blockages and recarbonation at the base of the tube have been encountered but these are being tackled in the de-bottlenecking phase. Testing will continue well into 2020 and plans for the next demonstration project at another cement plant in Europe are already moving ahead. LEILAC 2 will see industry partners Cimpor, Lhoist, Port of Rotterdam and IKN join Calix, HeidelbergCement and other research partners to work together on a larger 0.1Mt/yr CO₂ separation pilot scheduled for completion in 2025.

Alongside this HeidelbergCement presented a convincing vision of a carbon neutral future for the cement industry at the IICCC 2020. It may not be what actually happens but the building materials producer has a clear plan across the lifecycle chain of cement. It is researching and testing a variety of methods to capture CO₂ process emissions, is looking at supply chains and storage sites for the CO₂ and is working on recycling concrete as aggregates and cementations material via recarbonation. In terms of carbon capture technology, an amine-based industrial scale CCS unit looks likely to be built at Norcem’s Brevik plant in the early 2020s. HeidelbergCement’s other joint-research projects – direct separation and oxyfuel – are further behind, at the pilot and pre-pilot stages respectively. Each technology looks set to offer progressively better and cheaper CO₂ capture as they come on line.

Or put another way, cement companies in Europe could build industrial scale amine-based carbon (CC) capture plants now. Yet the game appears to be to wait until the cost of CCS falls through new technology versus the rising emissions trading scheme (ETS) price of CO₂. CC is expected to become economically feasible in a decade’s time, sometime in the 2030s. At which point there might be an upgrade boom as plants are retrofitted with CC units or new production lines are commissioned. Other ways of reducing the cement industry’s CO₂ emissions, of course, are being explored by other companies such as further reducing the clinker factor through the use of calcined clays (LC3 and others), solar reactor or electric-powered kilns and more.

The usual problem of how the construction industry can cope with a higher cost of cement was acknowledged at IICCC 2020 but it is largely being worked around. Higher priced cement poses competitive issues for specifiers and construction companies but it is widely expected to result in price rises below 5% for most residential end users. In the short-term government policy such as requiring low carbon cement in state building projects could stimulate the market. The start of this process can be seen already with the use of slag cements in various infrastructure projects.

Hans Bergman, Head Unit ETS Policy Development at the Directorate-General for Climate Action (DG Clima) partly addressed the cost issue by talking about the EU Green Deal. The EU wants to meet its new targets but it also wants to let gross domestic product (GDP) rise whilst greenhouse emissions fall. The EU ETS is its principle vehicle for this but the commission is wary of changes, such as making modifications linked to CCS, in case it undermines the system. Discussions are ongoing as the work on the Green Deal continues.

IICCC was a wider forum beyond just what LEILAC is up to. To this extent the CC projects involve multiple partners, including those from other cement companies like Cemex and Tarmac (CRH) in LEILAC and Dyckerhoff (Buzzi Unicem), Schwenk Zement and Vicat in the oxyfuel project. The decarbonisation fair included representatives from Vicat’s FastCarb project and Polimi’s Cleanker. Speakers from the European Climate Foundation, Acatech, INEA, TCM, SINTEF and Lhoist were also present.

During one speaker discussion Calix was described as the 'Tesla' of industrial CC by one speaker, who said that, “…there is a genuine competitive opportunity for those bold enough to grasp it.” Calix’s managing director Phil Hodgson enjoyed the accolade but the point was that leading innovation or setting the agenda offers advantages. In the case of industrial CC for the cement industry, change feels a step closer.

The visible lobbying work by Cembureau, the European cement association, has been building in recent months as it has started to tackle the European Green Deal. Last week’s move was its aim to align with the objectives of the new legislation. To this end it plans to review the targets from its 2050 Low Carbon Roadmap (2013/2018) to fit with what the European Commission’s (EC) policy initiatives are aiming to do. It intends to publish the new roadmap in the spring of 2020.

The immediate problem for the European cement industry is that the EC wants to pick up the pace. Before the Paris agreement in 2016 it was aiming for a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. The overall target, remember, was an 80% reduction in emissions by 2050. However, the wording from the EC to the European Parliament about the Green Deal in December 2019 is now targeting carbon neutrality and the 2030 target has increased to ‘at least 50%’ and toward 55% in a ‘responsible way.’

To give readers an idea of the uphill battle facing the cement industry. Cembureau said it was on target in 2015 with a 14% reduction in emissions per tonne of cement produced from direct, indirect and transport sources. For comparison, gross CO₂ emissions Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) data from the Global Cement & Concrete Association (GCCA) shows a 29% drop from 1990 to 2017 from Cembureau members. The EC now wants to make it even harder to meet the 2030 target.

The cement industry’s problem is that it is energy intensive and that making clinker releases CO₂ (process emissions) as limestone is calcined. Cembureau’s roadmap offered multiple paths to its end goal including resource efficiency, energy efficiency, carbon sequestration and reuse, product efficiency. However, most of these things - like lower clinker factors, production efficiency use of alternative fuels, better transport efficiency and so on - only reach a reduction of a little below 35%. We should note here that great work has been achieved in all of these with Europe leading the way for many. The other 45% was intended to come from breakthrough technologies such as carbon capture and usage (CCU) and/or storage (CCS). Again, Europe has been leading the way worldwide with its various research and pilot projects. Yet, given that there are no commercial-level carbon capture installations at any cement plants in Europe in 2020, the EC is potentially cutting off the industry’s escape route to meet the 2030 deadline.

The EC gives the impression that it knows that energy intensive industries need help meeting the targets with the publication of its masterplan for energy-intensive Industries in November 2019. CCS, CCU, biomass, alternative binders to make cement, more efficient use of cement in concrete and the use of alternative fuels were all listed as being of in use of high potential to the sector. These are similar to Cembureau’s five paths on its roadmap. Incidentally, more recently Cembureau has been promoting its so-called 5C approach: clinker, cement, concrete, construction & built environment, and (re)carbonation. This is intended to initiate a wider debate across the construction industry supply chain along similar lines to the objectives in the roadmap. It also follows the general industry pivot towards concrete.

However, just one badly-considered measure from the legislators could scupper this. The new tax on refuse-derived fuel (RDF) imports in the Netherlands is one example of this. It potentially complicates alternative fuels markets in Europe. Another, more subtle risk that Cembureau warned of in December 2019, was of the EC’s intent to propose a carbon border adjustment mechanism to reduce the risk of carbon leakage. Its argument was that a new untested scheme could create uncertainty in an industry already at risk being replaced by production capacity outside of the EU.

So now we wait to see how many more reductions Cembureau can squeeze out of its revised roadmap in the spring. It may be able to gain more from its existing measures or offset emissions more widely along the construction chain. Whether it does or does not though the bulk of emissions reduction needs to come from the continued research, testing and implementation of novel technologies like CCU/S. CCS also needs help setting up the infrastructure to move CO₂ to the storage sites. To this end the EU heavy industry expert group says that developing large-scale pilot projects on ‘clean’ technologies should be supported with EU funds and by easier access to private financing. The ongoing question is how and when can this funding be unlocked? The answer is far from clear.

Portugal: Turkey’s Oyak Cement has completed it acquisition of Cimpor. The completion of the transaction follows the approval of the European Commission in mid-January 2019, according to the Expresso newspaper. The purchase includes three integrated cement plants, two grinding plants, 20 quarries and 46 ready-mix concrete plants in Portugal and Cape Verde.

Belgium: The European Commission has approved the acquisition of sole control over Cimpor Portugal by Turkey’s Oyak. The commission ruled that there are no competition concerns between the cement producers given that they operate in different geographic markets. The deal was announced in late October 2018.

This week’s Plastics Strategy from the European Commission (EC) presents the cement industry with a narrowing target. If the Plastics Strategy is successful it will prevent plastics waste altogether. This will then eliminate the key calorific content of refuse-derived fuels (RDF) and disrupt co-processing supply chains at cement plants across the continent. If it is too lax then dumping plastics in landfill could become more economically viable, also changing the market dynamic. Neither extreme looks likely at this stage but the European cement industry needs to make its views known.

Cembureau, the European cement association, has done just that today with the publication of a position paper on the subject. It conveniently ignores the top two tiers of the waste hierarchy – prevention and re-use – but it does recognise that ‘high quality recycling’ is the preferred option. This is followed by the target of its lobbying: protecting co-processing. Make no mistake, this is supporting industrial behaviour change with solid environmental benefits. Its areas for policymakers to focus on include protecting co-processing: a ban on landfill; linking energy recovery to recycling; concentrating on the legislation; thinking about material lifespan sustainability benefits; and helping minimise the investment costs for processing facilities.

Providing cool heads prevail, the importance of co-processing plastics as part of any realistic plastics strategy seems unlikely to change any time soon. What’s more likely to be the real target for Cembureau is standardising measures on collection, sorting and material recovery across the European Union (EU). For example, as this column has reported twice in 2017 (GCW288 and GCW324), the issues with waste disposal legislation in Italy have led to various problems in the sector. Waste collectors found it easier to export RDF to Morocco from Italy rather than use it locally in 2016. The slag industry has also reported similar issues with reuse in Italy. The consolidation of the local cement industry following the takeover of Italcementi and Cementir by HeidelbergCement and of Cementizillo by Buzzi Unicem should present a more unified industry approach towards alternative fuels. Backup from the EC could solve the other half of the alternative fuels puzzle in Italy and help to deliver serious change. Ecofys data from 2014 showed the EU co-processing average rate as being 41%, with six countries – Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Bulgaria, Italy and Greece – having rates below 30%.

Vagner Maringolo of Cembureau outlined the market opportunities for waste uptake at cement plants at the 11th Global CemFuels Conference that took place in Barcelona in February 2017. He started by revealing that plastics represented over 40% of the total share of alternative fuels used in the EU in 2014. A ban on landfilling municipal waste was expected to boost the supply of RDF and a Cembureau/Ecofys study on the market potential of alternative fuels concluded that around 10Mt of waste was co-processed in cement kilns in the EU28 in 2015. This represented around 2% of total combustible waste each year but it represented 10% of all of the energy recovery from waste in the EU. In other words co-processing plastics waste offers a very attractive means for the EU to meet its sustainability targets.

However, before Cembureau and the cement industry starts popping the (reusable) champagne corks, consider the wider picture. China has banned imports of foreign waste in 2018 including RDF from the UK, a major exporter. Unless new markets are found this may impact the price of RDF in Europe. Brexit is another example how of European waste markets might be disrupted in the medium-term. Cement producers want a steady supply of cheap fuels but if the providers can’t make enough money from their products then the market will fail. The tightrope for Cembureau to walk with plastics is to promote RDF use and secure its supply. Persuading the EC to support this may involve some wobbling along the way.

The 12th Global CemFuels Conference on alternative fuels for cement and lime takes place in Berlin on 20 – 21 February 2018

Belgium: Cembureau, the European cement association, has published a position paper outlining its stance European Commission’s plastics strategy. The association wants policymakers to ensure any plastic waste that has a calorific value that can be recovered as a fuel source is not landfilled. At present there are differences in waste management policies across the member states of the European Union.

Other points that Cemburea wants to highlight include: a ban on landfill of recoverable and recyclable waste; recognition that cement plants can treat different waste streams such as plastics and simultaneously recycle them as material in the manufacturing process of cement and recover them as energy; the specific relevance that co-processing offers the unique opportunity of a simultaneous energy and material recovery; and the potential to minimise investment costs in dedicated facilities.

In January 2018, the European Commission published a dedicated Plastics Strategy as part of the Circular Economy package. The strategy indicates that there is currently a low rate of recycling or reuse of plastics with most of it going to landfill or used in incinerators.

Belgium: Cembureau, the European Cement Association, has signed the Joint Initiative for Standardisation. This initiative is an action to unify standards between the European Commission, European Union and European Free Trade Association Member States, national and European standardisation bodies and industry associations. The aim of the initiative is to work towards prioritisation, modernisation and appropriate speed for timely standards. Key areas that Cembureau will focus on include increased awareness, education and understanding about the European Standardisation System, ensuring adequate European standards exist and supporting European competitiveness in global markets.