Displaying items by tag: Production

Another week and it’s another commodity story related to the effects of coronavirus. This time the Indian press and financial analysts have started to notice a shift in the fuel mix of some of the major producers from petcoke to coal. UltraTech Cement moved to 30% petcoke and 60% imported coal in the fourth quarter of its 2021 financial year that ended on 31 March 2021. This compares to a reported mix of 77% and 10% in the previous year according to Mint. Dalmia Bharat reduced its share of petcoke to 52% in the fourth quarter from 70% in the third quarter, while its coal mix was 35 - 40% in the fourth quarter.

Price is the driver here. UltraTech Cement’s chief financial officer Atul Daga summed the situation up in an earnings call in late January 2021. Essentially, he said that fuel represented about 13% of total costs for cement producers in India and that both the cost of coal and petcoke nearly doubled from June 2020 to January 2021. However, coal is seen as the cheaper option, hence the move towards it in the fuels mix ratio. The petcoke market meanwhile has suffered due to reduced oil refinery output due to, you guessed it, the effect of coronavirus on global markets in 2020. Scarcity in the US market has particularly affected the decisions on buyers for Indian cement companies since this is the key source of their imports. Demand for petcoke from Latin America and the Mediterranean hasn’t helped either. Both petcoke and coal markets are expected to stabilise in the second half of 2021. Diesel prices have also risen recently causing UltraTech Cement’s power and fuel costs to increase by 28% year-on-year to US$356m and logistics costs, including freight expenses, to rise by 25% to US$449m in the fourth quarter of its 2021 financial year.

With this in mind it’s interesting then, that for some analysts at least, fuel prices have been seen as more worrying for cement producer profits than the latest round of coronavirus-related lockdowns from India’s second wave of infection. Fitch Ratings for example, warned that the impact of mounting fuel costs would continue to be seen in the quarter to June 2021 but that it would subside due to the switch in fuel mix and price rises passed to end consumers. On the lockdowns, it forecast that localised restrictions, with cement plants being allowed to continue operating in most states, would cause a far less pronounced drop in cement demand than during the first national lockdown.

Graph 1: Monthly cement production in India, January 2019 – April 2021. Source: Office of the Economic Adviser.

Graph 1 above shows that the crisis the Indian cement sector faced during the first lockdown, when production crumbled by 85% year-on-year to 4.3Mt in April 2020. The following recovery saw production reach its second highest ever figure at 32.9Mt in March 2021. It’s too soon to tell what’s happening from the national figure but that dip in April 2021 is not looking good so far.

One benefit from unstable fuel prices is that it builds the economic case for cement producers to raise their alternative fuels substitution rates. UltraTech Cement, for example, reported that its ‘green’ energy rate grew to 13% in its 2021 financial year from 11% in 2020. With a target of 34% by its 2024 financial year, this is an ideal opportunity for a change for both UltraTech Cement and other producers.

Cuba: Cementos Cienfuegos’ Carlos Marx cement plant in Guabairo resumed production in late May 2021. Production had been suspended since 14 January 2021 due to a lack of petcoke, according to the Sierra Maestra newspaper. Fuel suppliers had been affected by a fuel shortage created by US trade sanctions. Despite the enforced shutdown the plant intends to meet its production target for 2021.

Vietnam: Vicem recorded 9.72Mt of cement production in the first four months of 2021, up by 12% year-on-year from 8.67Mt in the first four months of 2021. The Viet Nam News newspaper has reported that the company is targeting 22.0Mt of cement in 2021, corresponding to a 1% rise year-on-year. Chair Bui Hong Minh said that the growth signals the success of Vicem’s coronavirus pandemic prevention measures at meeting their aim of maintained operational stability.

Nepal: A report by the Nepal Rastra Bank has estimated that Nepal will require 26Mt/yr of cement by the 2024 – 25 financial year due to large-scale infrastructure projects. However, current production before the coronavirus pandemic was around 7.5Mt/yr despite the country’s production capacity of 15Mt/yr, according to the Kathmandu Post newspaper. Domestic consumption is 9Mt with around 1.5Mt of demand supplied from imports, mainly from India. The report added that most of the large projects in Nepal used cement imported from India due to issues with certification, consistent quality and the inability of local producers to offer bulk supply. In 2019 the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies forecast that the country’s cement production capacity could increase to 20Mt/yr by the end of the 2023 – 24 year.

Dhruba Raj Thapa, president of the Cement Manufacturers Association of Nepal, said that the data in the report by the bank contained errors. He pointed out that the country has a cement production capacity of 22Mt/yr and that it is already self-sufficient in the commodity. He also refuted the claims that infrastructure projects prefer imported cement.

Mexico: Cement production in Mexico grew by 24% year-on-year to 56Mt in 2020. This was its highest figure in the last five years, according to BNamericas. Data from INEGI, Mexico’s national institute of statistics, shows that production in January 2021 grew by 14.5% year-on-year to 4.2Mt. Yanina Navarro, the director of the National Cement Chamber (CANACEM), said that consumption changed in 2020 to favour bagged cement over bulk. She added that cement production was allowed to continue through coronavirus-related lockdowns in 2020 as it was classified as an ‘essential’ industry.

North Korea: The North Korea government says that it will supply 10,000t/yr of cement to every city and county in the country. The new target will help to fulfil the aims of the January 2021 Five Year Plan, under which the state aims to build 10,000 apartments/year in Pyongyang and 5000 apartments/year in Komdok. The 38 North project has reported that in order to realise this vision, it plans to establish 8.0Mt/yr of new capacity via upgrades and new projects by January 2026.

In March 2021 a North Korean delegation visited a Chinese cement plant to learn about modern cement production.

Vietnam: Data from the General Statistics Office shows that cement companies produced 32.4Mt of cement in the first four months of 2020, up by 7% year-on-year. Projected April 2021 cement production is 9.40Mt, up by 17% year-on-year. The Viet Nam News newspaper has reported that the country produced 100Mt of cement in 2020.

Iran: National cement production increased to 68.3Mt in the 2021 financial year, which ended on 20 March 2021. The figure corresponds to 79% utilisation of the country’s 87.0Mt/yr production capacity. The Tehran Times newspaper has reported that Iranian cement consumption during the year was 65.0Mt and exports were 11.0Mt. Iran supplied both cement and production equipment to its neighbouring countries.

LafargeHolcim retained its ability to surprise this week with the news that it may be making preparations to leave Brazil. Local press in Minas Gerais revealed on 20 April 2021 that the company was about to try and sell its operations in the country. The building materials producer has not made a public statement yet on the matter, it may not until a deal is done and/or this could all be a great big misunderstanding. So treat the following with caution.

Firstly, LafargeHolcim deciding to sell in Brazil fits with the selective approach increasingly shown by the non-Chinese cement multinationals in recent years. It famously decided to sell up in South-East Asia from 2018 and it got as far as divesting assets in Indonesia and Malaysia. It also tried to sell in the Philippines but the local competition commission didn’t give permission for the proposed deal in the end. As Global Cement Weekly mentioned at the time this was a bold move and doing the same in Brazil seems similarly decisive now. It’s a big market to leave! CRH and HeidelbergCement have both talked openly as well about taking a value-first approach to their divestment strategies rather than trying to retain blanket coverage. However, just because a sale in Brazil by LafargeHolcim sounds right doesn’t mean it is right.

Secondly, data from the National Cement Industry Association (SNIC) shows that the Brazilian cement industry had a good year in 2020. Despite the relentlessly bad news from the coronavirus pandemic, the Brazilian government decided to keep the economy mostly open, allowing the cement industry to continue its recovery since 2018. The sector reported an 11% rise year-on-year in cement sales to 60Mt in 2020. So far in 2021 it has noted a 19% rise year-on-year to 15.3Mt in the first quarter of 2021. Yet, the association forecast slower growth in 2021 as a whole and has warned that the first quarter figures in 2021 don’t show a true picture due to a decline in sales per working day so far in 2021 despite an apparent growth in absolute figures. On the surface it’s a good time to sell cement assets in the country since the sector has been riding a recovery but the general outlook for the country is looking gloomy especially considering the ongoing scale of its coronavirus outbreak and the uncertain damage this may do to the economy as a whole.

Whether or not LafargeHolcim is actually selling up in Brazil or not it, follows the conclusion of the CRH Brazil acquisition by Buzzi Unicem’s Companhia Nacional de Cimento (CNC) joint-venture that was also announced this week after approval by the completion authority. The assets that CRH Brasil has now sold include three integrated cement plants and two grinding plants in the south-east of the country. The subsidiary sold approximately 2.8Mt of cement in 2020. If nothing else this suggests that there should be companies out there pursuing a different strategy to LafargeHolcim, CRH, HeidelbergCement and the rest who will be only too happy to build their portfolio if LafargeHolcim’s Brazilian business does go on sale.

CRH originally bought its plants in Brazil as part of a package deal when Lafarge and Holcim merged in 2015 and any potential sales by LafargeHolcim also link back to this. LafargeHolcim has spent much of the last six years working out what kind of company it wants to be. Certainly, since the current chief executive officer Jan Jenisch took charge it has had the air of a company with a mission. The Firestone Building Products acquisition earlier in 2021 is an example of this, propelling the group away from the triad of cement, concrete and aggregates as the carbon risks of heavy building materials heat up. There is something fitting perhaps that at the company’s next annual general meeting its shareholders will be asked whether they want to change the company’s name to Holcim at the group level. It’s a small thing, all market brands will remain as they are, but it may bookend the post-merger era as much as asset divestments in Indonesia and... potentially Brazil.

Vietnam: The Provincial Department of Trade and Industry (PDTI) of the northern province of Quang Ninh has announced a second-quarter cement production target of 879,000t in 2021. Viet Nam News has reported that the figure represents a significant increase as part of a local plan to increase gross regional domestic product (GRDP) by 10% in 2021. In the second quarter of the year, the PDTI is targeting US$2.1bn-worth of private investment in the provincial economy.