Displaying items by tag: Turkey

Italy: Cementir’s revenue rose by 21% year-on-year to Euro362m in the first quarter of 2022 from Euro301m in the same period in 2021. It attributed this to higher prices linked to the increase in the costs of fuels, electricity, raw materials, transport and services. Its earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) grew by 26% to Euro60.7m from Euro48.1m. Grey, white and clinker sales volumes increased by 1.8% to 2.4Mt and ready-mixed concrete sales volume remained stable at 1.13Mm³. Cement sales volumes grew in Belgium, Denmark and the US but fell in Turkey. Concrete sales volumes grew in Belgium and Norway but fell in Turkey, Sweden and Denmark.

Russia: The government is ‘working to establish import flows’ of building materials from Uzbekistan. Russian media sources have reported that the construction industry is also hoping to expand import partnerships with China, India, Iran and Turkey. Russian cement production reportedly continues to adequately serve the national demand for cement.

Turkey: Members of Türkçimento produced 78.9Mt of cement in 2021, up by 9.2% year-on-year from 2020 levels. Capacity utilisation for the year averaged 71%. Cement sales also rose, by 8.2% to 60.2Mt. Exports fell by 1.9% year-on-year to 30.8Mt, with a value of US$1.26bn, 23% of total sales.

Türkçimento chair Fatih Yücelik said that the sector has ‘rapidly and heavily’ felt the effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on its operations. Yücelik said “We continued our activities in 2021 under difficult conditions, following 23% year-on-year growth in 2020. We predict 4% growth in our sector in line with the economic growth target in 2022.”

From the Nordics to the Mediterranean, European countries lead the field in reduced-clinker cement production using supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). While consumers, faced with ever-greater choice, continue to opt for sustainability, projects to improve existing SCMs and develop new ones have won government backing and have become a matter of serious investment for other heavy industries beside cement. European cement producers’ decisions are steering the course to a world beyond CEM I. Yet, even in Europe, great untapped potential remains.

Companies generated a good deal of marketing buzz around their latest reduced-CO₂ cement ranges in 2021 and the first quarter of 2022: Buzzi Unicem’s CGreen in Germany and Italy, Holcim’s EcoPlanet in six markets from Romania to Spain, Cementir Holding’s Futurecem in Denmark and Benelux, and Cemex’s Vertua in Spain and several other countries. All boast reduced clinker factors through the use of alternative raw materials. This, however, is really a rebranding of a long-established norm in Europe.

Since 2010, cements other than CEM I have constituted over 75% of average annual cement deliveries across Cembureau member countries (all cement-producing EU member states, plus Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey, the UK and Ukraine). This statistic breaks down differently from country to country. CEM II is the norm in Austria, Finland, Portugal and Switzerland, with deliveries in the region of 90%. Portland limestone cement (PLC) makes up a majority of deliveries in all four. It has been central to Switzerland’s transition to 89% (3.72Mt) of CEM II deliveries out of a total 4.18Mt of cement despatched in 2021. There, the main types of cement were CEM II/B-M (T-LL) Portland composite cement, with 1.38Mt (33%), and two different classifications of PLC: CEM II/A-LL PLC, with 1.28Mt (31%), and CEM II/B-LL PLC, with 888,000t (21%).

A second approach is that of the Netherlands, where CEM III blast furnace slag cement with a clinker factor below 65% predominates, favoured for its sulphate resistance and the protection it offers against chloride-initiated corrosion of steel reinforcement in marine settings. By contrast, the UK has traditionally maintained a higher reliance on CEM I cement. This can be partly explained by the preference of builders there for adding fly ash or ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) at the mixing stage. Nonetheless, CEM II Portland fly ash cement held a 14% (1.43Mt) market share in the UK’s 10.2Mt of cement consumption in 2021.

The UK Mineral Products Association (MPA) has identified limestone as an underutilised resource in the country’s cement production. Together with HeidelbergCement subsidiary Hanson Cement, it has applied for a change to National Application standards to allow the production of Portland composite cement from fly ash and limestone or GGBFS and limestone. The association has forecast that Portland composite cement could easily rise to 30 – 40% of UK cement consumption, and that this has the potential to eliminate 8% of the sector’s 7.8Mt/yr-worth of CO₂ emissions.

Metallurgical waste streams have long flowed into European cement production, primarily as GGBFS, but also as bauxite residue. In 2021, alumina production in the EU alone generated 7Mt of bauxite residue, of which the bloc recycled just 100,000t (1.4%) that year. Two projects – the Holcim Innovation Center-led ReActiv project and Titan Cement and others’ REDMUD project – aim to produce new alternative cementitious materials from bauxite residue.

By collaborating with other industries, cement producers’ investments can most effectively reduce the overall cost of using these materials in cement production. In Germany, HeidelbergCement and ThyssenKrupp’s Save CO₂ project aims to develop new improved latent hydraulic binders or alternative pozzolan from GGBFS by producing slag from directly reduced iron (DRI). The Save CO₂ team believes that GGBFS substitution for clinker has the capacity to eliminite 200Mt/yr of CO₂ emissions from global cement production.

Meanwhile in the world of mining, ThyssenKrupp and others’ NEMO project is investigating the recovery of a useable mineral fraction for cement production from the extractive waste of the Luikonlahti and Sotkamo mines in Finland and the Tara mine in Ireland, through bioleaching and cleaned mineral residue upcycling. This may give cement producers full access to Europe’s 28Bnt stockpiles of sulphidic mining waste, of which mines generate an additional 600Mt each year.

Denmark-based CemGreen, which produces the calcined clay supplementary cementitious material CemShale, is developing a shale granule heat-treating technology called CemTower. This consists of three pieces of equipment vertically integrated into cement plants’ preheaters, kilns and coolers, and brings the processing of waste materials – here oil shale – to the cement plant.

Lastly, cement producers are exploring the possible uses of waste made of cement itself. In Wallonia, HeidelbergCement subsidiary CBR’s CosmoCem project is investigating the production of alternative cement additives from large available flows of local demolition, soil remediation and industrial waste. Similarly, the Greece-based C2inCO₂ project seeks to mineralise fines from concrete recycling for HeidelbergCement to use in the production of novel cements in its Greek operations.

In Switzerland, ZND Portland composite cement (produced using fine mixed granulate from building demolitions) is the third largest cement type, with 178,000t (4.3%) of total deliveries – narrowly behind CEM I with 239,000t (5.7%).Holcim Schweiz developed its Susteno 4 ZND Portland composite cement with Switzerland’s lack of any ash or slag supply in mind, demonstrating the potential flexibility of a circular economic approach to cement production.

On 21 March 2022, the University of Trier reported that it is in the process of mapping mineral resources, waste deposits and usable residues ‘on a cross-border scale,’ in an effort to produce new materials for use in cement production. Industry participants include France-based Vicat, CBR, Buzzi Unicem subsidiary Cimalux and CRH subsidiary Eqiom. Vicat is preparing a kiln at its 1Mt/yr Xeuilley cement plant in Meurthe-et-Moselle to use in testing new alternative raw materials developed under the project.

For Cembureau and its members, work continues, with the goal of Net Zero by 2050 constantly in sight. This goal includes a reduction in members’ clinker-to-cement ratios to well below 65%. In this, the association and its members are working towards a world not just beyond CEM I, but beyond CEM II, too. What exactly this will mean remains to be seen.

Sources

CemSuisse, ‘Lieferstatistik,’ 11 January 2022, https://www.cemsuisse.ch/app/uploads/2022/01/Lieferstatistik-4.-Quartal-2021.pdf

WSA, ‘December 2021 crude steel production and 2021 global crude steel production totals,’ 25 January 2022, https://worldsteel.org/media-centre/press-releases/2022/december-2021-crude-steel-production-and-2021-global-totals/

MPA, ‘Low carbon multi-component cements for UK concrete applications,’ July 2018, https://prod-drupal-files.storage.googleapis.com/documents/resource/public/Low%20carbon%20multi-component%20cements%20for%20UK%20concrete%20applications%20PDF.pdf

European Commission, ‘European Training Network for Zero-waste Valorisation of Bauxite Residue (Red Mud),’ 16 July 2020, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/636876

European Commission, ‘Industrial Residue Activation for sustainable cement production,’ 16 February 2022, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/958208

Recycling Portal, Zement der Zukunft – Forschungsprojekt „SAVE CO₂“ gestartet, 28 May 2021, https://recyclingportal.eu/Archive/65677

h2020-NEMO, ‘Project,’ https://h2020-nemo.eu/project-2/

European Commission, ‘Green cement of the future: CemShale + CemTower,’ 14 April 2021, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101009382

CosmoCem, ‘Communiqué de Presse,’ https://cosmocem.org/

CO₂ Win, ‘C²inCO₂: Calcium Carbonation for industrial use of CO₂,’ https://co2-utilization.net/en/projects/co2-mineralization/c2inco2/

Les Echos, ‘Rendre le ciment moins gourmand en CO₂,’ 21 March 2022, https://www.lesechos.fr/pme-regions/innovateurs/des-substituts-au-clinker-rendent-le-ciment-moins-gourmand-en-co2-1395002

Türkçimento’s Volkan Bozay took to the airwaves last week to raise the issues that the war in Ukraine is causing for Turkey-based cement producers. The head of the Turkish Cement Manufacturers’ Association explained, to the local Bloomberg HT channel, that the dramatic jump in the price of Newcastle Coal posed a serious threat to the sector. The price jumped nearly US$100/t in a single day in early March 2022. Bozay said that the cost of cement from a plant using imported coal would consequently rise by around US$15/t. He added that the association’s members had an average of 15 – 20 days of coal stocks.

Graph 1: Price of coal, March 2020 – March 2021. Source: Trading Economics.

In a separate press release Türkçimento revealed that Turkey, as a whole, imported approximately US$1.5bn of coal from Russia in 2021. The cement industry imported about 5Mt of coal in 2021, from all sources, although the majority of this came from Russia. Coal shipments from Russia since the start of the war were reported as ‘very limited or even not possible.’ It was further explained that each US$10/t increase in the price of coal put up plant production costs by US$1.5/t of cement.

Naturally Bozay’s appearance on a television news show carried a lobbying aspect. He called for government import standards – such as the sulphur ratio, lower heating values and volatile matter limits - to be relaxed to allow coal to be imported more freely from sources such as Colombia, Indonesia and South Africa. There was also a push to let in more alternative fuels such as tyres and waste-derived fuels. The bit that Bozay didn’t mention though was how many of his members had long term coal supply contracts in place to cushion them, from short term price inflation at least. Yet, if coal shipments from Russia have simply stopped, then the price is irrelevant. A cement kiln configured to run on coal stops when it uses up its stocks.

Turkey was the world’s fifth largest cement producer in 2021 according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Türkçimento data shows that in 2020 it exported 145,000t of cement to Russia by sea. Overall it exported 16.3Mt of cement and 13.5Mt of clinker. The US, Israel, Syria, Haiti and Libya were the top destinations for cement. Notably, Ukraine was the sixth largest recipients of cement, with 752,000t imported, although anti-dumping legislation introduced in mid-2021 looked set to reduce it until the war started. Ghana, Ivory Coast, Guinea, Cameroon and Belgium were the principal recipients of clinker. Cumulative cement exports for the year to October 2021 were up by 3% year-on-year compared to the first 10 months of 2020. Clinker exports were down by 27% though. Overall domestic production and sales in Turkey rose by 9.5%, suggested an estimated production figure of 79Mt for 2021.

Other fallout in the cement sector from the war in Ukraine this week included Ireland-based CRH’s decision to quit the Russian market. It entered the region in 1998 through a subsidiary based in Finland and was operating seven ready-mixed concrete plants via its LujaBetomix joint venture. CRH says that all operations in Russia have now stopped. In 2021 it sold its lime business in Russia, Fels Izvest, to Russia-based Bonolit. Although selling concrete plants is not trivial, these are far cheaper assets than clinker production lines. Germany-based HeidelbergCement, Italy-based Buzzi Unicem and Switzerland-based Holcim each operate at least one integrated cement plant in Russia. So far these companies have publicly expressed dismay at the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Ukraine and made donations to the Red Cross.

Graph 2: European Union Emission Trading Scheme price, 2020 – March 2022. Source: Sandbag.

Finally, one more surprise this week has been a crash in the European Union (EU) Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) carbon price from a high of Euro96/t in early February 2022 to Euro58/t on 7 March 2022. As other commentators have stated, normally the carbon price would be expected to follow the energy market, but this hasn’t happened. Instead investors have pulled out, possibly to maintain liquidity for other markets.

With the US set to ban Russian oil, gas and coal imports and phase-outs to varying degrees promised by the UK and the EU in 2022, we can expect more turbulence from energy markets in the coming days. As the Turkish example above shows, all of this can... and will... have effects on cement production.

US: Cement shipments grew by 4.2% year-on-year to 107Mt in 2021 from 103Mt in 2020. Data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) show that domestic shipments and imports rose by 2.3% to 90.8Mt and 16% to 16.3Mt respectively. Regionally, particular gains were reported in New England and Middle Atlantic, West North Central, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Arizona and New Mexico. Puerto Rico reported a 47% decline in shipments. The largest cement exporting nations to the US were Turkey, Canada, Greece, Mexico and Vietnam. Turkey, Greece and Vietnam each increased their imports by over 30% in 2021.

Turkey: Medcem has appointed Ruhi Bilge as the director of its integrated Mersin cement plant. He has worked in the cement sector for over 20 years, most recently holding the position of production director for Kümaş Refractories. Prior to this he worked for cement companies including Bursa Çimento, Vicat’s subsidiary Baştaş Çimento and Norm Cement.

Turkey: Çimsa Çimento revenue grew by 80% year-on-year to Euro240m in 2021 from Euro133m in 2020. Its earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) grew by 46% to Euro41.4m from Euro28.5m. The subsidiary of Sabancı Holding says that 54% of its sales in 2021 came from foreign sales. However, it noted that its production energy costs increased by 94%. It also reported that its alternative fuels substitution rate hit 15%.

“In July 2021 we took over the Buñol Factory in Valencia, Spain with Cimsa Sabancı Cement. With the addition of the Buñol Factory to our production and distribution network, we have strengthened our export network and expanded our sphere of influence in Europe, North Africa and South America,” said chief executive officer Umut Zenar. With the acquisition of the white cement plant in Spain, Çimsa Çimento says it has become one of the largest white cement producers in the world.

International tensions reached a new high this week with Russia’s formal recognition of the breakaway Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine and its decision to deploy troops accordingly. However, what of the local cement industry in Ukraine going into the current crisis?

Ukrcement, the Ukrainian Cement Association, says that its members reported a record 11Mt of cement production in 2021. Clinker production totalled 8.11Mt during the same period. The cement figure is close to Ukrcement’s forecast in the autumn of 2021 of 11.5Mt, a rise of 17% year-on-year from 9Mt in 2020. At that time association head Pavlo Kachur added that the local cement industry operated at 66% capacity utilisation in the first nine months of 2021.

The big industry story locally was the start of tariffs on cement imports from Turkey that was announced in September 2021. After much complaining by local producers and an investigation the year before in 2020 the Interdepartmental Commission on International Trade (ICIT) introduced anti-dumping duties of 33 - 51% on cement imports from Turkey for five years. Other than this the usual energy preoccupations have been present in Ukraine. In an interview with Interfax in November 2021, Pavlo Kachur expressed alarm that the price of coal had tripled from the start of 2021 to August 2021. At the same time he explained that the biggest driver of cement consumption was infrastructure projects.

CRH, the largest producer locally, rebranded its subsidiary as Cemark in November 2021 with the intention to start shipping cement bags with the new marking from January 2022. It operates three integrated plants at Mykolaiv, Podilsky and Odessa. It reported that its local operating profit grew year-on-year in 2020, despite a “challenging pricing environment” as cost savings initiatives and lower fuel and logistics costs resulted in improved performance. In September 2021 CRH said that sales were up due to growing cement sales volumes resulting from market demand. Although once again it complained about competitive pricing forcing it to lower its prices. Despite this though lower maintenance costs and cost controls had boosted its operating profit.

Buzzi Unicem runs two integrated cement plants in Ukraine, Volyn and Yugcement, as well as terminals at Kiev and Odessa through its Dyckerhoff Ukraine subsidiary. In 2021 it noted recovery in the construction sector, helped by government stimulus and the introduction of tariffs on imports from Turkey. It said that prices fell in the first half of the year before recovering in the second half. Ready-mixed concrete output showed more growth. Dyckerhoff Ukraine’s net sales rose by 9.4% year-on-year to Euro127m in 2021 even despite negative currency exchange effects.

As for the other producers, NEQSOL Holding Ukraine filed an application to the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (AMCU) in October 2021 to acquire a stake in Ivano-Frankivskcement. Azerbaijan-based NEQSOL Holding also operates the Norm Cement plant near Baku in Azerbaijan. HeidelbergCement used to operate in Ukraine, including the Amvrosiyivka Plant in the contested part of Donetsk region, but it sold up in 2019 to local investors. Its two former integrated plants now operate under the Kryvyi Rig Cement brand. Finally, Russia-based Eurocement runs two plants in Ukraine, at Balakleya in Kharkiv region and Kramatorsk in Donetsk region, under its Balcem subsidiary, which formed in 2019. However the status of the second plant is currently uncertain. Balcem said that the Balakleya plant resumed full cycle production in March 2021 when it restarted kiln two. Kiln one was restarted in June 2021 after a down period since 2008. The plant currently has a production capacity of around 1Mt/yr.

Ukrcement’s Pavlo Kachur said that the cement market in Ukraine was experiencing a positive period in November 2021. Whether this continues is very much in the balance given events in the east of the country. The wider implications for cement producers in the rest of Europe and Russia are the fallout from the economic warfare between both sides. A number of countries have started to react to Russia’s actions with the US, European Union, UK, Japan and Australia announcing economic sanctions and Germany halting approval of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. However, Russia supplies a significant share of Europe’s gas supply. All of this could disrupt energy supplies and force input costs up. This has already been reflected in higher oil prices.

Meanwhile, one aspect of the current situation to watch is how multinational cement producers with a presence in Russia will cope. Moving money in or out of the country is likely to become harder. HeidelbergCement told Reuters this week that it did not expect any major impact on its Russian operations, even if the conflict escalated. Its three cement plants supply local markets and do not export outside of Russia, it added. Other companies straddling the potential sanctions divide include Holcim, Buzzi Unicem and Eurocement.

The crisis continues.

Russia made imports easier last week. At the end of January 2022 an order from Rosstandart, the national standisation agency, relaxed inspection controls allowing for simpler imports from countries outside the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Previously each such batch required a 28 day inspection period. This has now been dropped to encourage more imports of cement. Deputy Industry and Trade Minister Viktor Yevtukhov explained the reasoning behind the measure to InterFax, “In order to avoid problems in the domestic Russian cement market in the future, it is necessary to spur competition. It will balance the prices for this basic building material and will restrain their growth in case of such risks.”

Some idea of the situation facing the Russian cement market at the moment can be gleaned from market data supplied by CM Pro. Production rose by 7% year-on-year to 56.4Mt in the 11 months to November 2021. Imports rose by 26% to 1.6Mt at the same time. The Ministry of Industry and Trade has attributed this to a construction boom created by growth in both government-funded infrastructure projects and domestic housing. It also noted a local shortage and price increases in the Central Federal District in the autumn of 2021, although it said it redistributed cement from other regions to remedy the situation. This imbalance in the country’s main cement producing and consuming region, including Moscow, can also be seen in the figures. Production was about 2Mt below consumption in this area in 2019 and 2020. Yet so far, to November 2021, this gap grew to 2.7Mt. At the same time the price of cement reportedly jumped by 20% from November 2020 to December 2021.

Graph 1: Cement production in Russia, 2015 – 2021. Source: CM Pro and estimate from Global Cement.

It has been reported that the Ministry of Industry and Trade has also been wondering publicly why a study conducted in 2021 found that the national cement sector had an apparent operating capacity of 65Mt/yr compared to a total production capacity of 105Mt/yr, including mothballed and inactive plants and production lines. In other words the sector has been operating at a 62% production utilisation rate and the government is trying to coax it higher by opening up imports. And just to make sure that there was no confusion on the matter, Yevtukhov added, “I am sure that if the domestic producers will cope with the task of increasing the real volume of cement production and will not allow prices for their products to increase above the rate of inflation, the market will self-regulate, and additional imports of cement to Russia (which are traditionally small) will not be needed."

Given the country’s large size, imports seem to be mainly a threat to producers in the big population centres around Moscow and the Volga with good international transport links. Producers appear to have received and understood the message from the government as they have pledged to increase real operating capacity by 3 – 5Mt. The bear in the room for both Russian and European cement producers though is what happens in Ukraine in 2022. With North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members threatening economic sanctions and Russia supplying a significant share of Europe’s gas supply, any progression from the current rhetoric could cause discomfort to markets in both Russia and Europe. Turkish cement exporters, manufacturing in a NATO member country and hoping to take advantage of increased exports to Russia, could be in a particular bind if events heat up. All of this indicates that Smikom picked an interesting time to buy Russia’s largest cement producer, Eurocement, back in mid-2021. There’s an ongoing construction boom but also risks aplenty.

With apposite timing, LafargeHolcim Russia announced this week that it was going to reopen its integrated Voskresensk cement plant near Moscow. The unit was originally stopped in 2016. Now it plans to spend Euro23m on restarting the plant and building a dry construction mix unit at the site. Who says big government doesn’t work?