Analysis
Search Cement News
Electricity supplies to cement plants in Europe
Written by David Perilli, Global Cement
07 September 2022
Cembureau called for urgent action on electricity prices from European governments this week to protect cement plants. Its maths was crushingly simple. One tonne of cement takes around 110kWh of electricity to produce. Electricity prices started to top Euro700mWh in some European Union (EU) countries at the end of August 2022. The association says that this represents added costs of Euro70/t of cement and a tripling of the total cost of production. This kind of sudden extra cost to cement production could lead to the widespread closure of cement plants and lead to chaos in the construction supply chain.
Previously, Cembureau reported in 2020 that electricity accounts for about 12% of a cement plant’s energy mix. In a dry production process plant 43% of this is used for cement grinding, 25% goes into raw material preparation, another 25% on clinker production and the final portion is typically used for raw material extraction, fuel grinding and for packing and loading. However, the cost of the electricity can make a big difference to the overall energy bill for a cement plant. When a report by the European Commission’s (EC) Joint Research Centre (JRC) modelled a reference northern European cement plant with a production capacity of 1.0Mt/yr back in 2016, it concluded that the EU cement industry was spending around half of its energy costs on electricity compared to smaller ratios at plants in China, Egypt, Algeria and... Ukraine. That last country in the list is poignant given its unwitting participation in the current energy crisis. One other thing to note is that cement producers, as large scale users, may well be paying less than the wholesale prices Cembureau appears to be quoting.
The timing of Cembureau’s proclamation is pertinent because the EU and individual states have mostly been waiting until the autumn before revealing their energy support plans. However, the dilemma for Cembureau, and other industry lobbying groups, is how to protect their sectors whilst domestic consumers are threatened. The aftermath of the coronavirus lockdowns has shown what can happen when production of key commodities stops: supply chain disruption, shortages and price rises. One ironic shortage in the UK during the lockdown periods was that of CO2, as high gas prices forced the main producer to shut down, leading to unexpected knock-on problems along the supply chain in areas such as food production. The same situation is reportedly at risk of happening again now too.
Cembureau’s wider solution is to link domestic and industrial consumers of electricity. So, some of its suggestions to policymakers are to use all available means of power generation, implement emergency measures such as price caps immediately, change the rules of the electricity market more generally to prevent future price shocks and to promote large scale renewable power source development. These are all things that could help both individual and industrial users of electricity.
Compare and contrast, then, with the MPA’s (Mineral Products Association) approach to the same problem in the UK. Its strategy instead has been to ask the UK government for tax cuts and freezes and to hurry along the forthcoming policy on support for Energy Intensive Industries. That’s not to say that Cembureau’s suggestions don’t also include some sector specific requests. It has asked that the EU temporary state aid framework adopted in late March 2022 should allow all energy intensive industries to have access to state aid covering 70 - 80% of eligible costs. It has also encouraged the wider use of alternative fuels, although it doesn’t link the reason why beyond reducing imports of fossil fuels. Lastly, it bangs the drum for its recent preoccupation, the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, this time adding electro-intensity as a main criterion for eligibility for compensation under EU emission trading scheme (ETS) indirect state aid guidelines.
Government support packages for the energy crisis are starting to be announced in European countries but the question for everyone is whether they and other actions will be enough. One problem for the cement industry will be simply staying on the radar of policy makers facing a crisis looming over their citizens. Yet if there is not enough energy to go around then rationing of some kind will be inevitable and heavy industrial users will be the first obvious targets to be told to cut back. Some months later building material supply shortages will hit. One national cement sector to watch in the coming months may be the Spanish one as it has long warned of the risks of high electricity prices.
Update on China, August 2022
Written by David Perilli, Global Cement
31 August 2022
The larger cement producers in China have published their half-year financial results and the numbers are looking grim. Starting with data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, cement output in the country fell by 14.5% year-on-year to 979Mt in the first half of 2022 from 1.14Bnt in the same period in 2021. This is the lowest first half output figure since 2012. The decline on a monthly basis started in May 2021 and has carried on consistently since then. Rolling cumulative annual output hit a low of 2.18Bnt in July 2022, the lowest figure since at least the start of 2019 and well before the coronavirus pandemic started.
Graph 1: Cement output in China, 2018 to 2022. Source: National Bureau of Statistics of China.
The financial figures from the cement producers have mostly followed this trend. Of the companies covered here, Anhui Conch’s drop in sales revenue was the most distinct at 30% year-on-year to US$8.14bn. However, Jidong Cement actually managed to increase its revenue and Huaxin Cement’s decrease was fairly small, possibly due to its growing stable of overseas projects. None of these companies could avoid falling cement and clinkers sales volumes though. Again, Anhui Conch is the outlier here with a larger fall in sales volumes proportionally at nearly 40% compared to around 20% for the rest. Chen Bolin, the deputy secretary-general of China Cement Association (CCA), told the 21st Century Business Herald newspaper that of the 20 or so listed cement companies that have published their half-year reports by the end of August 2022, more than half had reported falling sales revenue and net profit and only one company had managed to increase its net profit.
Graph 2: Sales revenue from selected Chinese cement producers. Source: Company financial reports. Note: Cement revenue shown only for CNBM & Taiwan Cement.
Graph 3: Sales volumes of cement and clinker from selected Chinese cement producers. Source: Company financial reports.
The financial reports from the Chinese cement companies detailed here have been fairly light on the reasons for the current state of the sector. Repeated coronavirus outbreaks, instability in the real estate market, a lack of funding for infrastructure projects, growing energy and raw materials costs, pressure on prices and a generally weak economy have all been blamed for the situation. Media channels outside of China have continued to scan the country’s real estate sector for signs of collapse following Evergrande’s problems in 2021. However Chen Bolin diplomatically held back by describing the real estate market as not yet stabilised and a drag on cement demand. Instead he hoped that large-scale infrastructure projects would offer some form of relief.
One last point to note, that both the CCA has made and could be seen in some of the company reports, is that some of the Chinese cement companies are already starting to diversify their businesses. This is in parallel to what some of the larger western-based multinational cement producers have also been doing in recent years with forays into concrete, light building materials and construction chemicals. CNBM already has large concrete, light building materials and engineering subsidiaries. However, Huaxin Cement and Anhui Conch have also started to branch out recently into aggregates, concrete and new energy generation, in the case of the latter company. Things may get worse before they get better, especially depending when or if the Chinese government decides to act on the real estate market. However, whatever kind of adjustment the cement sector may face, there are some signs present already of what some of the companies may do next.
Fuel costs in India, August 2022
Written by David Perilli, Global Cement
17 August 2022
Fuels procurement and costs have been weighing on the minds of Indian cement producers since the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Two news stories this week show some of this. The first concerns recent imports of petcoke from Venezuela. The second covers the closure of captive power plants due to domestic shortages of coal.
At the same time, as the financial results for cement companies for the first quarter of the Indian 2023 financial year have been released, one constant has been hefty hikes in power and fuel costs. Graph 1 below gives a rough idea of the jump in costs major producers have been contending with. One point to note is that, possibly, the larger cement companies may have been better at slowing down the cost inflation from fuel. However, the prevalence of waste heat recovery installations and alternative fuels usage may also be a factor here. Finally, the company approved to buy Ambuja Cement and ACC, Adani Group, also runs India’s biggest coal trader. It will be interesting to see in the medium term how this might affect the fuel costs for its new cement division.
Graph 1: Comparison of Power & Fuel costs for selected Indian cement producers in first quarter of 2022 and 2023 financial years. Source: Company financial reports.
The Venezuelan story demonstrates the greater lengths that Indian cement producers are now going to secure fuel supplies. Reuters reports that cement companies imported at least 160,000t of petcoke from the South American country between April and June 2022 and that more was on the way. JSW Cement, Ramco Cements and Orient Cement are among them. The Venezuelan oil industry has been under US economic sanctions since 2019 but byproducts such as petcoke are not covered by this. Its petcoke has apparently been discounted by 5 - 10% below the price of US alternatives.
Indian cement producers have been prepared to risk US sanctions further by importing coal from Russia. The Business Standard newspaper, using data from Coalmint, reported that Russia became India’s third largest source of coal imports, at 2.06Mt, in July 2022. Before the war it was the sixth-largest source of coal to the country. Again, Reuters covered how cement companies were doing this in July 2022, when it revealed that UltraTech Cement had used India-based HDFC Bank to purchase coal using Chinese Renminbi, not the US Dollar as is more common for international purchases of commodities. In a conference call for the release of its first quarter results, UltraTech Cement’s chief financial officer Atul Daga confirmed the purchase and described it as “opportunistic.” He added that, “If something more surfaces, we will pick it up.” As the data for July 2022 shows, it may or may not be UltraTech Cement that is buying Russian coal right now but other parties in India certainly are.
Some of the wider economic implications about India buying Russian coal in the face of US and European sanctions include whether any retaliation might be forthcoming and a general sign that the dominance of the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency is not guaranteed. The former seems doubtful given the size of India’s markets. Yet if the sanctions against Russia drag on then a shift in the global economic status quo becomes more likely, especially if opportunistic purchases become regular ones.
The situation facing captive power plants illustrates one more turn of the screw on energy costs for industrial manufacturers. 30% of captive power plants in India are reportedly closed due to the high cost of coal or an inability to even import it. Although it is worth noting that it is unclear whether, proportionally, more or less of these are serving cement plants. As N Srinivasan, the vice-chairman and managing director of India Cements told the Business Standard newspaper, “Most of our plants have coal based captive power generation. The cost of captive generation is now more than the grid cost. Hence, we shut down all captive power units and resorted to grid power.”
The International Energy Agency (IEA) forecast in July 2022 that Indian coal demand would grow by 3% year-on-year to 1.16Bnt in 2023 due to expanded electrification and economic growth. In its view, global coal demand will be driven principally by China but also by India to a lesser extent. However, unhelpfully, it added that uncertainty was also rising with ongoing developments in the war in Ukraine having a prominent effect. This is unlikely to assist Indian cement producers and their fuel buyers who will be asking themselves: how long will the current situation last and can the prices be passed on to consumers? There is one small silver lining in the current group of economic storm clouds hanging over cement producers at least. The second quarter of the Indian financial year is monsoon season, when economic activity slows down. It won’t slow the trend down but it may reduce the fuel bill a little.
First half 2022 update on multinational cement producers
Written by David Perilli, Global Cement
10 August 2022
Second quarter results have been released for many of the European-based cement producers, so we’ll take a look at how they are doing so far in 2022. The general trend for the companies sampled here is that revenue is up, cement sales volumes are down and earnings are varied. Added to this, ready-mixed concrete (RMC) and aggregate sales volumes have risen for most of these organisations. Each producer did well in the US, less well in Europe and differently elsewhere. Concurrently, input costs for raw materials, energy and logistics have been rising and this has been passed on to consumers fairly consistently as price rises.
Graph 1: Sales revenue for selected European-based multinational cement producers in the first half of 2022. Source: Company financial reports.
Graph 2: Cement sales volumes for selected European-based multinational cement producers in the first half of 2022. Source: Company financial reports.
Graph 3: Ready-mixed concrete sales volumes for selected European-based multinational cement producers in the first half of 2022. Source: Company financial reports.
Holcim is currently in a state of transition with responses from regulators on big divestments in India and Brazil expected in the second half of 2022 alongside its diversification into light building materials. Both North America and Europe did well for the group in the first half of 2022, particularly the former, where cement sales volumes rose, unlike the other regions. Asia Pacific was more problematic with inflation and pricing issues reported. Cement demand was also said to be ‘softer’ in China and the Philippines compared to the first half of 2021. The region’s recurring earnings before interest and taxation (EBIT) also fell.
HeidelbergCement’s half-year results were less upbeat with cement sales volumes down by 2.6% on a like-for-like basis, RMC sales volumes stable and aggregates sales volumes up by 1.7%. One point to note here is that HeidelbergCement divested its business in the western US in late 2021 and the graphs above do not show like-for-like changes. However, one reason for the dour tone was that higher input costs had led to a 11.4% drop in the group’s result from current operations before depreciation and amortisation (RCOBD) to Euro€1.53bn. It blamed this on its inability to raise prices sufficiently to counter ‘significantly’ higher costs of energy and transport.
Cemex benefitted from its strong presence in the Americas but even this wasn’t enough to shield it from the negative effect upon earnings of higher energy costs and supply chain disruptions. So, net sales increased in Mexico and the US but operating earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) fell. In Mexico this was blamed on a higher base for comparison in 2021. In the US a declining EBITDA margin was attributed to higher energy costs and supply chain headwinds from maintenance, imports and logistics. Interestingly though, Cemex managed to raise both sales and earnings in its Europe, Middle East, Africa and Asia despite cement sales volumes slipping. It said it was able to do this due to well executed price rises.
Buzzi Unicem reported growth in sales revenue and earnings despite falling cement sales volumes. It attributed this to a ‘strong’ increase in prices. However, it noted that the mounting energy costs had contributed to a decline in its EBITDA margin. Deliveries for the half-year grew in the US, Central Europe, Poland and the Czech Republic. They fell in Italy and, unsurprisingly, Ukraine. Also, despite the growth in deliveries in Poland and the Czech Republic in the reporting period, Buzzi Unicem said that a slowdown in Europe had become evident in the second quarter of 2022 and was particularly evident in Italy, Poland and the Czech Republic. In Ukraine the group reported that activity had resumed at its Volyn plant in the north-west of the country following the Russian invasion in February 2022. The Nikolayev plant, in the south, though continued to remain idle. Sales volumes halved in the country year-on-year. Given the circumstances it seems amazing that they didn’t fall by more frankly.
Finally, Vicat had a tougher time of it than some of the other companies featured here. Its sales revenue grew significantly, as a result of higher prices, but earnings tumbled. The latter was blamed on a high base for comparison in the first half of 2021 and the energy situation. A few non-recurring capital intensive projects at various plants, including the start-up of the Ragland plant’s new kiln in the US, didn’t help either.
Much of the above leaves an uncertain outlook for the second half of 2022. All of the cement producers here expect to increase their sales revenue and raise their prices. Most of them though are rather more circumspect or downright pessimistic about what the state of their earnings will be. The companies covered here are multinational but with a focus on Europe and the US. We have omitted plenty of regional producers elsewhere around the world in this roundup that have already published their results, such as India-based UltraTech Cement or Nigeria-based Dangote Cement. The other big market that is missing is China, where the producers are mostly yet to publish their half-year results. We will return to cover these topics in future weeks.
Doing business in Russia
Written by David Perilli, Global Cement
03 August 2022
A disturbing story has emerged this week concerning attempts by an unknown party to seize control of Holcim Russia. The situation marks a dangerous new phase for multinational companies operating in Russia. This includes a number of building materials producers and their suppliers.
The public side of events started on 26 July 2022 when Holcim Russia announced on its website that a legal case concerning an unpaid loan against it had been initiated at a court in Chechnya and that someone was also trying to change ownership documents with the Federal Tax Service. This was then followed by an interview by Forbes Russia with the new alleged owner of the construction materials company explaining how he had made the so-called acquisition. Holcim Russia immediately hit back hard with multiple and well researched reasons why this couldn’t be so. These included the supposed private investor’s apparent lack of a business past, a long criminal history, psychiatric records, social media accounts of an individual of seemingly modest means and so on. Kommersant FM has since reported that the court in Chechnya took the side of the asset raider but that both the Federal Security Service (FSB) and the Ministry of Industry and Trade are now investigating the case.
Taking loans from a mystery businessman with no apparent past does not look credible for a multinational like Holcim and its subsidiaries. This particular method was also flagged up by one of the legal sources quoted by Kommersant FM as a recognisable corporate scam in Russia dating back to the 2000s. What is more certain is that Holcim reported that it had a 100% interest in Holcim Russia in its annual report for 2021. It then said it was going to leave the Russian market in late March 2022 following the start of the war in Ukraine a month earlier. By May 2022 it said that it had attracted the interest of 30 possible buyers. Only this week Holcim’s chief executive officer Jan Jenisch confirmed in the company’s second quarter conference call that divestment discussions were 'active' and ongoing with a 'solution' expected in the coming months. The timing of Holcim Russia’s sudden difficulties is therefore noteworthy given that a potential buyer has not yet been publicly announced.
Whoever has tried their luck at taking over Holcim Russia has done so at a time when anti-Western sentiment is high in Russia. For example, the government attempted to pass a new law seizing the assets of Western companies trying to leave the country in July 2022. Any intervention by the authorities is likely to take some of this into account and they may be wary of helping an organisation with perceived European links. Naturally, the nationalist card was played up in the interview with Forbes Russia. For its part, Holcim Russia has commented that the ongoing 'illegal action' might lead to production delays for building materials supporting key housing and infrastructure projects. Whatever is going on it must be a tense time for Holcim Russia and its 1500 employees. We’ll leave the last word to Holcim Russia’s general manager Maxim Goncharov who has described the situation as the “theatre of the absurd.” He is not wrong.