Displaying items by tag: Fracking

CRH announced changes to its structure this week. The changes to its divisions follow the rapid growth of the company and may also anticipate the new cement assets it is about to take on-board once its acquisition of Ash Grove Cement completes in the US. Buried in one its regulatory filings covering the news were two graphs of changes in cement demand in the US and Europe through various financial depressions since the 1930s.

Graph 1: Changes in cement demand in US and Europe during financial depressions. Source: CRH with data from US Geological Survey, PCA, United Nations, Morgan Stanley etc.

The graphs serve their purpose for a public company as they show both markets in the current downturn starting to rise again. In other words it looks like the perfect time to invest in a building materials company! However, thinking more broadly the graphs give a timely reminder of how bad the last decade has been for the cement market, particularly in Europe. The period only really compares to the 1930s in decline and duration if the figures are accurate. It must be considered though that while the West has suffered, markets in the East, notably led by China and India, have boomed.

The financial crash in 2008 was precipitated by the US subprime mortgage market. Other potential market killers lie ahead no doubt. One such might be the so-called ‘Carbon Bubble.’ This idea has gained media traction this week with the publication of a paper in the Nature Climate Change journal examining the economic impact of decarbonisation, if or when it happens.

It’s not a new argument but it makes the assertion that as new technologies that replace fossil fuels start to influence the markets, traditional fuel producers like oil companies may face being stuck with ‘stranded’ assets as legislation toughens up and technology mounts. This in turn could cause a financial crash and it’s this aspect that the paper has looked at.

The ace in the hole from the Nature Climate Change paper is that the modelling here suggests a way out of the usual prisoner’s dilemma approach to climate change action. Once sufficiently-low carbon technologies hit a certain level of adoption, then any country holding out and using fossil fuels instead of taking of action may start to suffer economically. Or in other words cheating won’t pay.

The carbon bubble theory is pretty convenient for the climate change lobby as it gives it a financial reason to fight its enemies by targeting investors. One counter argument is realistically how fast and deep would the decarbonisation technologies actually have to be to cause significant financial disruption. Surely the oil producers would get out of risky assets before it was too late. Then again, maybe not.

The cement industry is in exactly the same situation as the oil producers as it too depends on carbon rich assets, in this case limestone, for its business to operate. If limestone assets become ‘stranded’ due to toughened legislation then how can production continue? In addition though, volatility in the fuels and secondary cementitious materials (SCM) markets already being observed from the cement industry may make one wonder about the existence of the carbon bubble. Markets for waste-derived fuels and granulated blast furnace slag are currently changing in the wake of the tightening of Chinese legislation both in and out of the country. In theory this could mean cheaper inputs for cement production but the market is hard to predict. The other classic recent example is how the US natural gas boom from fracking has reduced global oil prices with further effects on the coal and gas that cement producers use. This in turn has placed pressure on various countries that are reliant on their petrodollars and caused pain to their local cement industries, like Saudi Arabia for example. The price of Brent Crude may be rising at the moment but once it hits a certain threshold, the hydraulic fracking of gas wells in the US will resume pumping. Of course both waste inputs and fracking could just be attributable respectively to market distortions by a large country changing policy and a new technology finding its feet.

If the carbon bubble theory carries any weight then CRH’s cement demand graph during recessions may carry a warning to producers about what might happen if decarbonisation leaves the fossil fuel producers behind. With good timing for this theme South Korea’s Ssangyong Cement announced this week that it is close to completing a waste heat recovery (WHR) unit at its Donghae plant, one of the biggest in the world with seven production lines. The interesting detail here is that the WHR unit will work in conjunction with an energy storage system to form a microgrid. This kind of setup is well suited to using energy from renewables as well as from conventional sources like a national electricity grid. In other words, this is exactly the kind of development at a cement plant that might in a small way lessen its reliance on fossil fuels in the face of any potential supply issues.

The 2nd Future Cement Conference and Exhibition looking at how the cement industry can operate in a low- or zero-carbon world will take place in Belgium in May 2019

For the last issue of Global Cement Weekly before the Christmas and New Year break we're following our tradition of reviewing some of the major industry news stories of the year. Remember this is just one view of the year's events. If you think we've missed anything important let us know via LinkedIn, Twitter or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Lafarge and Holcim merger
The year has been dominated by one story: the merger of the two largest European-based cement producers, Lafarge and Holcim. The implications are massive. At a stroke the new company can dispose of less profitable units, clear debts and benefit from new mega-economies of scale. As Europe emerges from the recession, LafargeHolcim will be ready. Worldwide it is a rebuff to the consolidating Chinese cement producers who are poised, if they wish, to emerge from China and dominate international markets. The process has appeared surprisingly smooth so far with considerable forward planning. This week the European Commission has approved the proposed merger.

Lafarge CEO Bruno Lafont described the deal as 'a merger of equals'. What he didn't say is that the merger will leave LafargeHolcim with no equal. However, one question remains. Once the merger is complete will the new company be profitable?

China heads abroad
State planners in Hebei Province revealed plans to move excess cement production capacity outside of China in their usual sparse style. The quiet tone of the announcement failed to match its intentions to move 30Mt of capacity abroad by 2023. It is the next step after becoming the world's biggest cement producer, capturing swathes of the equipment market and consolidating its many local producers. How Chinese cement producers will fare in the wider global market remains to be seen. Yet while its economy remains strong the gobbling up of European utilities by Chinese companies suggests that, if all else fails, money talks.

Coal for India
If you can't fire-up your kiln you can't make clinker. With Indian cement producers reporting falling profits in 2014 the squabbling over coal allocation in the country summed up some of the input cost and infrastructure problems facing the country's cement industry. The coal blocks are due to be auctioned off from January 2015. Meanwhile analysts predict that Indian cement demand is unlikely to grow until 2016.

Sub-Saharan scares and skirmishes
The creation of Lafarge Africa means that three producers are now in a skirmish in Sub-Saharan Africa: Lafarge, Dangote and PPC. All three companies are present in multiple countries and expanding fast. This week, for example, PPC announced proposed merger plans with AfriSam. Given the low cement consumption per capita in this region the benefits of getting in early are immense. Unfortunately, there are many speed bumps along this road to development. One is the on-going Ebola epidemic. Left unchecked it could cause untold economic damage.

ASEAN set to open up
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is set to drop import tariffs in 2015 as it establishes a common market. Already in preparation cement producers have started to change their strategies, thinking regionally instead of nationally. Holcim Philippines, for example, announced in February 2014 that it was considering delaying building a new plant as it analysed the situation. The region, including high-growth countries like Indonesia and Thailand, could see its cement industry go into overdrive. However, the benefits may not be uniform as countries like the Philippines may lose out.

The US, fracking and falling oil prices
Of the western economies recovering from the 2007 recession, the US cement industry has rebounded the fastest, due in part to fracking which has brought down the cost of energy. The Brent Crude price hit a low of US$60 per barrel this week and this has consequences for everybody in the cement industry as fuel procurement strategies adapt.

For starters, cement producers gain a fuel bill cut as the cost of fuels fall. Producers in Egypt who have been frenziedly converting kilns from gas to coal may suddenly find their margins improve. Low energy prices also take away financial motivation to co-process alternative fuels in cement kilns. Finally, what of the giant infrastructure projects in Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) like Saudi Arabia? Take away the petrodollars propping up these builds and cement demand may evaporate.

For more a more detailed look at trends in the cement industry check out the Global Cement Top 100 Report.

Global Cement Weekly will return on 7 January 2015. Enjoy the festive break!

Canada: The Nova Scotia government has said that hydraulic fracturing waste water is going to be shipped to a Lafarge Canada cement plant in Brookfield for use in cement production. Environment Minister Randy Delorey presented details of the pilot project at a community meeting in Truro.

Atlantic Industrial Services will ship 2Ml of waste water from holding ponds in Debert to Brookfield over a three week period. The water will be used as coolant in the kiln and evaporated at 700°C. Lafarge will test its equipment for residual inorganic materials before and after using the water.

Three news stories this week cover the gamut of fuels used by the cement industry in North America.

First we had an example of the changing trends in fossil fuel usage when TruStar Energy announced a deal to supply compressed gas to Argos USA. Then we moved to an example of recycled fuels used in co-processing when chemical waste firm ChemCare trumpeted its 100 million gallon milestone (that's 379,000m³ to the rest of the world) in supplying fuel-quality waste to the Lafarge co-processing subsidiary Systech Environmental. Finally, Cemex rounded off the main fuels groups with renewables, when it released pans to build a US$600m wind farm project in north-east Mexico.

Obviously fossil fuels still dominate in kilns north of the Darian Gap, as they do almost everywhere else, and fuel buyers wouldn't be doing their job properly if they weren't searching for the next best deal. Yet the range here shows a dynamic industry.

Jan Theulen from HeidelbergCement pointed out one example in the US at the recent Global CemFuels Conference held in Vienna. Here, rising landfill prices are increasing opportunities for alternative fuels use alongside changing US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) permitting for solid recovered fuel. Alternative fuels consultant Dirk Lechtenberg, in an interview with Global Cement Magazine in February 2014, singled out the US as one country that is developing its alternative fuels use. As he explained, "Even though the fossil fuel prices are quite low in the US, the industry is developing supply chains for alternative fuels to be more independent with their fuels sourcing."

This race between cheaper fossil fuels in the US (via shale gas) and increasing development in alternative fuels is fascinating. Specifically: why is it happening now? Gas prices have fallen and demand for cement is returning in the US. The annual mean Henry Hub natural gas spot price in the US fell from US$8.86/million BTU in 2008 to a low of US$2.75/million BTU in 2012. This compares to up to US$15/million BTU in Japan and US$9/million BTU in Europe.

Public environmental pressure made manifest by the policies of the EPA and general increased knowledge about co-processing may be factors for the surge in alternative fuels investment. Long lead times for alternative fuels schemes may be another. Planners making a decision about what fuels mix to pursue in 2008 at the start of the recession might well have bet on alternatives to spread their risk. Yet the cause could be something else, as shale gas takes over higher paying industries, such as electrical generation, and the cement industry continues to be priced out of the leftovers.

Ultimately what burns in a cement kiln comes down to price. Depending on how the shale gas market plays out in North America it would be ironic if 'frackers', the bogeymen of current environmentalists, inadvertently cleaned up the cement industry.

Water conservation is on the agenda this week with two water-related news stories from the multinational cement producers.

First came a story that Lafarge Canada is preparing to run a trial using waste water from hydraulic fracking at its Brookfield cement plant in Nova Scotia. Currently the plant uses 35ML/yr of fresh water from a nearby lake to control temperatures of its rotary cement kiln. Potentially some of this water could be replaced with water produced during the fracking process. This water would then evaporate and be emitted from the stack.

The background to this pilot project is that the Nova Scotia regional government introduced a two-year moratorium on fracking in 2012 while it reviews the situation. Given the high level of public debate on fracking, any process using waste products from it is going to receive a high level of attention. One of the major arguments against fracking concerns the toxicity of the fluids used. Hence Lafarge stressed in their statement how safe the waste water would be before it would even be used in the plant. Safe enough to drink apparently.

Focusing on the industrial aspects of the pilot for cement production, it will be fascinating to see what effects the fracking waste water might have even just as a coolant on plant equipment. Among other contaminants, fracking waste water often contains high levels of salt. Managing a transition from a fresh water coolant source to a saltier more corrosive one may pose the first of many challenges.

Later in the week Cemex announced the latest stage in its work on water conservation with the implementation of a corporate water policy. The policy aims to focus on resource availability, resource quality, and ecosystem integrity. It continues Cemex's Water Project, developed in partnership with the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Notably Cemex's water policy aims to maximise efficiency by managing water consumption with increased captured recycled or captured water usage given as an example. How Cemex might use recycled water from a contentious industrial process such as hydraulic fracking is not specified. However, the policy does aim to actively reduce pollution and limit the effects of discharge upon water ecosystems from its operations.

Water policies such as a Cemex's are great for an industry that often has an image problem in the eyes of environmentalists. Linking cement production to fracking runoff will not improve this image. Yet placing science before lobbying is the way to go. Bring on the results of the pilot.