In April 2022 the World Cement Association (WCA) announced that it was helping cement producers in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region to develop their decarbonisation journeys. Here, Global Cement speaks with Ian Riley, CEO of the WCA, about the state of carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) around the world.
Global Cement (GC): Where do we find CO2 capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) in the cement sector in the early 2020s?
Ian Riley (IR): For the cement industry to comply with net zero commitments by 2050, it needs to reduce emissions by around a third by 2030 relative to 2020. The vast majority of that is going to be from ‘traditional levers,’ with a small portion from the earliest industrial CCUS installations. We are now at the stage where we’ve seen pilots for five years or so. We can expect the first of the full-scale operations in the next couple of years.
That’s from a cement-producer standpoint, but I think it’s also interesting to look from the concrete standpoint, as there are some additional options available. While cement-side CCUS projects are still at an early stage, there are things we can do at the concrete stage which could be quite interesting in terms of reducing CO2 emissions.
These include technologies that produce synthetic aggregates using CO2. Typically these combine CO2 with calcium oxide (CaO) or magnesium oxide (MgO) to form the respective carbonate. Then there’s the group of technologies almost ‘embodied’ by Solidia or CarbonBuilt. These mainly apply to pre-cast concrete and involve the direct carbonation of the concrete in a CO2-filled chamber. This absorbs the CO2, which is great, but it also increases the strength of the concrete because calcium carbonate crystals are formed in situ. Doing this makes it possible to redesign the mix to include less cement, which further lowers the embodied CO2 emissions.
There are also technologies that offer improved cementitious materials other than cement. For example Carbon Upcycling Technologies treats cementitious materials like fly ash, slag and natural pozzolans with CO2 in its milling process to create additional fresh sites that then react with CO2. Doing this improves the cementitious properties of the secondary cementitious material (SCM), as well as absorbing CO2. Again, you’ve got that dual function of absorbing CO2 and replacing some cement.
GC: What about CO2 capture and storage (CCS)?
IR: The main challenge for cement players is the sheer volume of CO2 that needs to be disposed of, making CCU a difficult option. This makes CCS more attractive, for which there are different technologies available. The conventional approach has been to take the end of pipe and then dealing with the flue gas as it is.
We also see increasing attention on alternative approaches, such as oxyfuel combustion, the LEILAC plant and others. These seek to purify the CO2 first to decrease the cost of the concentration step. By 2030 we could expect that some of the capture costs will come down. With the storage side there are quite a lot of initiatives to build hubs that would then link into storage. This is not just a cement-sector issue, but an issue for other industries too.
GC: Is there any particular CCUS technology which we should be looking at at the moment that you think is going to become prominent?
IR: One of the challenges with these types of CCU businesses is that they have several moving parts that need to come together in a way that makes sense for a particular project. If you just think about it as a CO2 abatement project then it looks fairly simple. But in most cases there are raw material considerations too. And where can the product that results from the process, be it a cementitious product or an aggregate, actually be sold? It’s not just a case of installing a technology, of which there are many, on a exhaust stack. There is a whole commercial side that will be a key challenge. This will differentiate which technologies will be successful and which will fall by the wayside.
GC: How is progress towards CO2 and/or hydrogen infrastructure outside of Europe and North America?
IR: There’s not much going on outside Europe and North America. Most of the activity that is happening is in China, but it is not cement-specific. For example, one of the major electricity producers has four or five pilot-scale plants. The biggest is around 100,000/yr and it has just begun a 1Mt/yr project.
GC: What do you think will be the tipping point in China with regards to the cement plants?
IR: I spent quite a bit of time in China in the late 2000s and early 2010s. During that time, I was involved with the discussions surrounding the early emissions trading schemes (ETS). Following a pilot in Hubei Province, it was expected that there would be a nationwide ETS by 2016. However, six years later this still hasn’t transpired. This is partly because it’s quite hard from the standpoint of designing it in a way that is not subject to gaming. China wanted to avoid the mistakes of the early EU ETS, but in doing so it has become frozen in the headlights.
That said, there are province-wide limits for CO2. If a given Province wants to start up a new facility it will probably be forced to close another. We’ve seen a number of small plants in Shandong closed as a result of that requirement.
With regards to the eventual roll-out of CCUS in China, I expect the pattern to be familiar to anyone who followed the story with waste heat recovery and NOx limits. Initially standards are introduced that are not compulsory. Then there’s a penalty if you can’t meet them and, following that, plants that don’t meet them are closed.
This could happen with CO2 too, via mandated technology or standards, a carbon tax or trade, all three of which are still on the table. I don’t rule out an ETS but I can’t clearly see the drivers that will give rise to it at this point. Remember too that the government is also a huge consumer of cement and concrete. This means it is possible that procurement standards could also be brought in to courage a move towards lower carbon cements.
GC: Are you brave enough to put any dates down for CCUS for the cement sector in China?
IR: I think we’ll see full-scale carbon capture before 2030 in China. People I talk to say they are expecting that the large players will have to have at least one installation, or maybe more, but the feeling is that they’re not quite ready to commit just yet.
GC: Away from China are there any countries outside of Europe and North America where carbon emission control or trading is expected to happen anytime soon?
IR: I’m not aware of anything that’s imminent. I would be fairly optimistic that India will see something eventually because India is terribly exposed to climate change. Although India has committed to be net-zero by 2070, the reality is that it may choose to speed up as the effects of climate change continue to become a more severe threat.
GC: How can cement producers in developing markets approach CCUS, given it will increase the cost to their customers?
IR: If we look at local producers in Asia, Africa or parts of the Middle East, most have not done very much so far regarding CO2 emissions. But a lot of initiatives taken by international companies, both to reduce their CO2 footprint and reduce costs, are available to them. Each has the opportunity to achieve a 30% reduction in CO2 emissions without using CCUS at all. Over the period to 2030, this could be done using established technology. After 2030, the CCUS trend in developing markets will follow five to 10 years behind the mature markets.
GC: What is WCA doing with regards to the promotion of CCUS?
IR: Regarding CCUS, and decarbonisation more widely, WCA is keen to promote the sharing of best practice. This includes sharing how to run plants more efficiently, the new technologies and ways to help the sector adopt these changes as early as possible. WCA is also helping to get new technologies to scale faster.
The situation is increasingly challenging for cement producers across the world, particularly regarding input costs for fuels. There are clear opportunities for producers to reduce costs significantly in a worthwhile way, at the same time as reducing their CO2 footprint. WCA is particularly keen to develop decarbonisation in the Middle East, especially with the next two COP Conferences on Climate Change coming in Egypt in 2022 and the UAE in 2023.
GC: What are the key kind of areas you’re pushing to them?
IR: If you look at the opportunities that are open to them, they are the traditional levers: the fuel efficiency or the use of alternative fuels; particularly biomass in the region from agricultural biomass rice husks; and so forth. The clinker factor is pretty high in a lot of the countries. There are natural pozzolans in some parts of the region, there’s clay, there’s slag and fly ash that’s not being used. There’s plenty of cementitious material around.
GC: What is the WCA’s strategy here?
IR: Again, it’s really to build awareness of the opportunities: share information; build awareness of the opportunities; and then help companies think through how they would do that.
We have a lot of roadmaps around the industry. I thought the latest Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) roadmap looks perfectly sensible, but there are a lot of other roadmaps. We need to look at each specific plant and ask, what would make sense in terms of routes to decarbonisation? We’re looking at the specific technologies and specific steps the operator can take, and which are the most appropriate given the individual circumstances. We’re in the process of developing a decision tool to help with this, coming later in 2022.
GC: What do you think is the biggest challenge to the further development of CCUS for the cement industry over the next 10 years?
IR: I could say that costs need to come down but fundamentally it has to make business sense. It’s one thing to do these pilot plants, which represent a fairly small cost compared to normal operations, but, at the end of the quarter, companies have an obligation to their shareholders to turn a profit.
Governments everywhere have to think about this. How can they set up incentives that will allow CCUS to make true business sense for companies to implement CCUS or otherwise abate their
CO2 emissions?
Ultimately this really comes down to the carbon price and procurement incentives. Governments buy a lot of concrete and cement, so they’re in a position where they can favour lower carbon materials and subsidies for specific projects. The biggest challenge is to get regulations in place that will make CCUS an economic business proposition.
GC: Thank you for your insights today Ian.
IR: You are welcome, as always.