Displaying items by tag: United Nations

Germany: HeidelbergCement has signed the Science-Based Targets Initiative’s (SBTi) Business Ambition for 1.5°C commitment and joined the United Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change Race to Zero campaign. The former entails a commitment to limiting global warming to 1.5°C and achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Race to Zero membership entails a positive commitment to beginning the transition to a decarbonised economy before the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties in November 2021.

Chair Dominik von Achten said “As one of the world's leading building materials producers, we are continuously increasing our efforts in the global fight against climate change. We are working on all levels to reach climate neutrality – within our operations as well as through associations and initiatives such as the Race To Zero campaign. Every effort brings us closer to our goal.”

Cameroon: Two cement trucks masquerading as belonging to a United Nations agency have been seized by customs officials. The smugglers were pretending to be transporting food and pharmaceutical products in transit to Chad, according the Ecofin Agency. The cement is believed to have originated from Nigeria. The operation by customs authorities was part of the ongoing Halcomi (halte au commerce illicite) initiative.

Switzerland: LafargeHolcim has committed to accelerate the impact across its United Nation (UN) Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) activities, and disclose its progress.

Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) Magali Anderson said, “As we celebrate the fifth anniversary of the Paris Agreement, it is more important now than ever for companies and governments to unite around climate action and the SDGs. That’s why we set ourselves the most ambitious 2030 climate targets in our industry, joining the Business Ambition for 1.5°C. Decarbonising business is vital, but it’s not enough. We are accelerating our overall commitment to the SDGs to build a world that works for people and the planet.”

Cemex last week. HeidelbergCement and LafargeHolcim this week. China yesterday. One can’t seem to move for major building materials companies (or their owners) issuing carbon neutral strategies at the moment. This week HeidelbergCement first launched its ‘Beyond 2020’ plan, a mixture of financial, portfolio and sustainability goals. Then, LafargeHolcim said that it had signed a pledge with Science-Based Targets (SBT) towards meeting intermediate targets by 2030. Last night, President Xi Jinping told the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in New York that China was aiming to hit peak emissions before 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060.

The timing of these various sustainability goals are directly or indirectly linked to Climate Week NYC, a notable annual event on the climate change calendar that is taking place at the moment. So it’s a good time for large-scale industrial CO₂ emitters, like building material producers, to have something positive to say.

China’s announcement steals the limelight given that the country produces around half of the world’s cement and holds a higher share of clinker production capacity. Western media has pointed out the geopolitical implications of Xi’s statement that was delivered shortly after a speech by US president Donald Trump, a notable climate change sceptic. Xi’s speech didn’t contain any details so it may simply have been an attempt to demonstrate global leadership. Yet if the Chinese government makes a go of it, the effect could be profound. Data from the Centre for International Climate and Environmental Research (CICERO) shows that the Chinese cement industry emitted an estimated 782Mt CO₂ in 2018 compared to 1.50Gt CO₂ from the cement industry globally and 37.1Gt CO₂ from all human-related sources. In other words, the Chinese cement industry was responsible for 2% of all CO₂ emissions in 2018. And this industry is mostly owned by a government that has just publicly declared a carbon neutral target.

In some ways the other announcements, by the western-based multinational building material companies, are even more radical since these producers are subject to market forces. These companies don’t have to do this. They also contain more specifics than Xi’s words so far.

HeidelbergCement says it has brought forward its CO₂ emissions target for 2030 of 525kg CO₂/t (specific net CO₂ emissions per tonne of cementitious material) to 2025. That’s a 30% decrease from 752kg CO₂/t in 1990. Its new goal for 2030 is below 500kg CO₂/t. The main emission reduction methods it outlines include: increased use of alternative raw materials and fuels; increased use of secondary cementitious materials to reduce the clinker factor of cement; investment in plant efficiency and CO₂ reduction at the plant level; and increased share of low-carbon concrete products.

Chart 1: HeidelbergCement’s path to net carbon zero concrete: Source: Leading the way to carbon neutrality, HeidelbergCement.

Chart 1 above outlines HeidelbergCement’s thinking post-2030 with further reductions to CO₂ emissions mainly achieved through circular economy methods and different carbon capture techniques. Two points to hold in mind here. One: note the current uncertainty about which route will provide the biggest share of the reduction. Two: this chart considers concrete, not cement.

LafargeHolcim’s announcement was that it has joined Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) ‘Business Ambition for 1.5°C.’ It says that by doing so it has become the first global building materials company to sign the pledge with intermediate targets for 2030, validated by SBTi. This is slightly confusing given that other building materials companies have had different dealings with the SBT as it has worked towards its current scheme. Earlier this month, for example, we reported that Taiwan Cement had started an SBT project in 2019 and had some targets approved by the SBTi in June 2020. Grupo Cementos de Chihuahua (GCC) said it was joining SBTi at the start of 2020 and HeidelbergCement reported its SBTi approved targets in mid-2019. Finally, India-based Dalmia Cement is also on the SBTi ‘Business Ambition for 1.5°C’ list but it is a stretch to describe it as a ‘global’ company.

The core of LafargeHolcim’s statement is a further reduced target for CO₂ intensity in cement of 475kg CO₂/t by 2030. So far it’s decreased its CO₂ intensity by around 23% to 516 kg CO₂/t in 2019 from ~730kg CO₂/t in 1990. There’s less looking ahead after 2030 compared to HeidelbergCement but the measures outlined until then include: more use of low-carbon and carbon-neutral products; increased use of alternative raw materials and fuels; doubling waste-derived fuels in production to reach 37%; greater use of calcined clay and developing novel cements with new binders; and operating the company’s first net zero CO₂ cement production facility.

Many of the various networks and initiatives across the climate action community came together in June 2020 as part of the UN backed ‘Race To Zero Campaign,’ an attempt to align the disparate leading net zero initiatives ahead of the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP), due to take place in November 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland. This swirl of different net zero schemes also partly explains the confusion over the different organisations backing sustainability targets that companies can sign up to. So it’s a good thing to see closer collaboration here.

More cynical readers will have latched on to president Xi’s opportunity to show up President Trump in the climate change action stakes. They may also prefer news stories about activist investors prompting change at shareholder-owned companies as they increase their portfolios or stories like Morgan Stanley’s announcement this week that it has a new commitment to reach net-zero financed emissions by 2050. If the investment bank actually means it and other financiers follow suit then the fiscal incentives for net zero draw closer and the rest should follow. Moneys talks… and hopefully CO₂ stays buried in the ground.

For sustainability comparisons among the top global cement producers see the October 2020 issue of Global Cement Magazine

Myanmar: Switzerland-based LafargeHolcim says it is liquidating its subsidiary in Myanmar. The group says it decided in 2017 to exit its operations in Myanmar. Subsequently, it wound the company down in 2018, with no local employees and no product sales. Its cement repacking plant in Thilawa special economic zone (SEZ) originally opened in 2014.

The announcement follows the discovery by the Sonntags Zeitung newspaper of military links (Tatmadaw) with two companies allegedly linked to a sale of the assets. In mid-2019 the United Nations (UN) recommended that multinational companies operating in the country, “should conduct heightened due diligence to ensure they are not benefiting the Tatmadaw,” following the persecution of the mainly-Muslim Rohingya in Rakhine state from mid-2017.

Nepal: Ashden Environment and the United Nations Science, Technology and Innovation Forum have awarded Build Up Nepal their respective highest awards for its low-cement disaster-resistant concrete blocks. The Nepal Time newspaper has reported that the blocks contain a mix of 10% cement, 40% clay and 50% sand, all sourced from near Build Up Nepal’s Mitra Marg, Patang plant. The company has supplied its unique building materials to projects in 300 different communities, including the construction of 4500 homes. It says that the blocks, reinforced with iron rods, have a greater earthquake resistance than concrete.

Build Up Nepal said, “Interlocking brick is a highly suitable construction technology in Nepal, reducing the cost of construction as well as the carbon footprint of building a house. With this technology Nepal's houses can be stronger, more affordable and its air cleaner.”

India: Cement producers and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) have launched the Indian Cement Sector SDG Roadmap. The planning framework uses the United Nation’s (UN) sustainable development goals (SDG) to set a series of goals in energy and climate, people and communities, the circular economy and natural resource management. It is intended to contribute to the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

This initiative has been convened by nine cement companies: ACC, Ambuja Cement, CRH, Dalmia Cement (Bharat), Heidelberg Cement, Shree Cement, Orient Cement, UltraTech Cement, Votorantim Cimentos. It is also partially funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).

Notable goals from the roadmap include promoting railway and waterway transport networks, improving transport safety, increasing the use of blended cements and encouraging the use of alternative fuels. The framework also plans to increase the number of women in the indsutry workforce at every level from entry to board.

Mexico: Cemex has adopted the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). It has prioritised five goals from the charter that connect with the company’s business and represent an opportunity to contribute to the UN 2030 Agenda. These five goals are focused on the promotion of decent employment and economic growth (SDG 8), innovation and infrastructure development (SDG 9), climate change mitigation (SDG 13), environmental and ecosystem conservation (SDG 15) and the advancement of sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11). Cemex plans to continue embedding the UN SDGs into its business processes to create systemic change, increase engagement, promote a sense of purpose and raise awareness among its stakeholders.

Well, it turns out that the European cement industry wasn’t kidding when it raised the risks of the climate mitigation on the sector. This week three (!) integrated plants have been earmarked for closure.

Cementa in Sweden said that it was considering closing its Degerhamn plant due to increased environmental regulations. Today, local press in Spain is reporting that Cemex España is planning to shut down two of its plants. These are plants in different parts of Europe with different local market dynamics but both are within the European Union (EU). That’s three plants closing out of 219 in the EU, or a loss of around 1% of production capacity.

Last week’s column on the United Nations’ (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on Global Warming raised the way the cement sector is tackling climate change and the existing and impending legislation. President of the German Cement Works Association (VDZ) Christian Knell’s opening words at the VDZ Congress in September 2018 seem prescient. He said, “To be able to realise our efforts in terms of climate protection and at the same time not to lose competitiveness, we need research policy-related support for our investment in breakthrough technologies and the corresponding demonstration projects.” The add-on was that the industry needed to focus on how the development of carbon abatement technologies can meet the 2050 climate goals and, specifically, that suitable boundary conditions would have to be created. The press releases accompanying his speech emphasised that, “on-going trends in European emissions trading and the ‘rapidly increasing’ price of CO₂ were already today leading to considerable costs for cement manufacturers.”

These words are similar to the comments Albert Scheuer, a board member of HeidelbergCement, made at the Innovation in Industrial Carbon Capture Conference early in 2018 about dividing the mounting environmental costs of cement and concrete between producers and society in general. Considering how much cementitious building materials most people use throughout their lives compared to the relative low price of cement, this argument carries some weight. In addition, the sustainability credentials of concrete buildings through longer lifespan and durability through extreme weather events is another argument that industry advocates such as the Portland Cement Association (PCA) in the US have been hawking in recent years.

Cementa, a subsidiary of HeidelbergCement, blamed anticipated tightening of environmental regulations for its decision. Although it said that the plant had made improvements over the years, the expected difficulty (read: cost) to make further improvements was becoming too hard. Shifting production to the company’s other two plants in the region, Slite on Gotland and Brevik in Norway, will reduce CO₂ emissions by 260,000t/yr.

In Spain, the news from Cemex follows a half-year report from Oficemen, the local cement association, that predicted growth for the year but not as fast as previously expected. The problem was that continued declines in the export market, the 13th decline month-by-month in a row, offset the domestic growth. Oficement president Jesús Ortiz also took time to blame rising electricity costs, expected to rise by 20% year-on-year by the end of 2018.

Market issues in Spain aren’t in doubt, but the real question for both Sweden and Spain is whether EU CO₂ legislation right now is causing cement producers to shut plants. The CO₂ emissions allowance price hit a high of Euro22/t in September 2018, the highest price in a decade. Allowances have stayed below Euro10/t since 2011 and the price has more than doubled in 2018. Throw in the mood music of the IPCC and the trend seems irresistible. How many more plants in Europe are at risk to shut next? No doubt the European cement producers have charts marking the viability of their plants against the CO₂ price. This would be a very interesting graph to get our hands on.

The 2nd FutureCem Conference on CO₂ reduction strategies for the cement industry will take place in May 2019 in London, UK

One graph the United Nations’ (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on Global Warming of 1.5°C didn’t include this week was what happens if the world just doesn’t bother. It’s probably just as well since warming of 1.5°C is likely to happen between 2030 and 2052 at the current rate of climate mitigation efforts. If they had included such as diagram, it likely would have had a ominous red line hurtling skywards like a rollercoaster track just before the screams start.

The giant paper study is really about comparing and contrasting the different impacts and responses to a 1.5°C and a 2°C rise. One taste of what the higher rise threatens is, “limiting global warming to 1.5°C instead of 2°C could result in around 420 million fewer people being frequently exposed to extreme heatwaves, and about 65 million fewer people being exposed to exceptional heatwaves."

The cement industry gets a look-in with an acknowledgment that the sector contributes a ‘small’ amount (5%) of total industrial CO₂ emissions. It then breaks the entire industrial sector’s mitigation strategies down to (a) reductions in the demand, (b) energy efficiency, (c) increased electrification of energy demand, (d) reducing the carbon content of non-electric fuels and (e) deploying innovative processes and application of carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Speaking generally, phasing out coal, electrification and saving energy in mechanisms like waste heat recovery is predicted to get industry only so far. Yet from here even skirting over 1.5°C but below 2°C is ‘difficult to achieve’ without the, “major deployment of new sustainability-oriented low-carbon industrial processes.” Such new process include full oxy-fuelling kilns for clinker production, which have not been tested at the industrial scale yet. Likewise, CCS is seen as a major part of keeping warming below 2°C with a target of 3 Gt CO₂/yr by 2050. Some reality is present though when the report says that the development of such projects has been slow, since only two large-scale industrial CCS projects outside of oil and gas processing are in operation and that cost is high. It even posits a value of up to US$188t/CO₂ (!) for the cost of CO₂ avoided from a Global CCS Institute report.

None of this is new to cement producers. The real debate is how to get there without wiping out the industry. In his address to the recent VDZ conference, Christian Knell, the president of the German Cement Works Association (VDZ), highlighted that meeting climate change goals was leading to ‘considerable’ costs for the cement industry. He then called for policy-related support to on-going research projects into CO₂ mitigation technology.

The bit that the IPCC doesn’t go into is how much those five steps to the industrial sector will cost cement producers and, vitally, who will pay for it. For example, taking a cement plant’s co-processing rate to 70% and building a waste-heat recovery system, might cost around US$30m. The Low Emissions Intensity Lime And Cement (LEILAC) Consortium’s Calix’s direct CO₂ separation process pilot at the Lixhe cement plant in Belgium has funding of about Euro20m. Rolling all three of these measures out to the world’s 2300 cement plants would cost over US$100bn and it would take more than a decade. Beware, the financial figures here are rough estimates and may be way out. The point remains that the implementation costs will not be trivial.

Industry advocates have started in recent years to push back against the climate lobby by highlighting the essential nature of concrete to the modern world. The IPCC barely mentioned this aspect of cement’s contribution to society suggesting recycling, using more renewable materials, like wood, and resorting to the mitigation strategies detailed above. Building new cities out of wood is not inconceivable but CCS seems more likely to solve the climate problem at this stage. Manufacturing the cement that becomes concrete may create CO₂ emissions but it has also built the modern world and raised living standards universally. No cement means no civilisation. There is, at present, no alternative.

Instead of leaving this discussion at an impasse, it is worth reflecting on the last week in the industry’s news. An Indian cement company is importing fly ash, several companies are opening or preparing cement grinding plants, a coal ash extraction pilot project is running, a waste heat recovery unit has opened at a plant in Turkey and a producer is getting ready to co-process tyres as a fuel in Oman. All of these stories are proof that change is happening. The trick for policymakers is to keep prodding the cement sector in this direction without disrupting the good things the industry does for people’s lives through sustainable housing and infrastructure.

The November 2018 issue of Global Cement Magazine will include an exclusive article by Mahendra Singhi, the CEO of Dalmia Cement, about his company’s CO₂ mitigation efforts.

The 2nd FutureCem Conference on CO₂ reduction strategies for the cement industry will take place in May 2019 in London, UK.