Analysis

We turn to look at the Chinese cement sector now that the larger China-based cement producers have released their financial results for 2023. In summary, national output of cement has continued to fall and many of the bigger companies are reporting weakening sales and profits. Yet this trend appears to be slowing, with a few of the producers managing to grow revenue, profits and sales volumes.

Graph 1: Cement output in China, 2018 to 2023. Source: National Bureau of Statistics of China.

Data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China shows that cement output fell by 4.5% year-on-year from 2.11Bnt in 2022 to 2.02Bnt in 2023. This is a slower rate of decline than the 10.4% drop reported between 2021 and 2022. However, it is worth noting that the rate of decrease in output on a half-year basis fell strongly in the first half of 2023 but remained similar in the second half of the year. In its commentary, the China Cement Association (CCA) said that the country’s real estate development investment fell by 10% year-on-year to US$1.53tn.

Graph 2: Sales revenue from selected Chinese cement producers. Source: Company financial reports.

Graph 3: Sales volumes of cement and clinker from selected Chinese cement producers. Source: Company financial reports.

Unlike in 2022 the two graphs above show that not every cement producer has lost revenue or sales volumes of cement in 2023. CNBM chair Zhou Yuxian used the phrase ‘storms and challenges’ to describe the situation faced by the world’s largest cement company. He left president Wei Rushan to deliver the bad news that the cement industry as a whole faced “insufficient demand, weakening expectations and weakening off-peak season characteristics” along with surpluses and high costs. He said that the cement sector in China saw its profit fall by 50% to US$4.42bn in 2023, its lowest figure since the mid-2000s.

In comparison CNBM Group’s revenue fell by 10% year-on-year to US$29bn and profit by 52% to US$534m. This was principally due to losses from the group’s basic building materials division, the section that makes heavy building materials, including cement. Alongside this, it pushed on with its supply-side structural reforms, implemented staggered peak production and worked on sustainability initiatives. These included preparations for the national carbon emissions trading scheme. Anhui Conch’s results showed that it managed to increase its revenue but its sales volumes of cement dropped and its profits fell by 33% to US$1.48bn. It achieved the boost in revenue by growing its trading business.

Of the smaller companies covered here, only Huaxin Cement managed to grow its revenue in 2023. It appeared to pull this off by growing its concrete and aggregate business domestically whilst growing the business overseas at the same time. The share of its international business grew to 16% in 2023 from 13% in 2022. Major overseas acquisitions in 2023 included Oman Cement and InterCement’s subsidiaries in Mozambique and South Africa. More recently Huaxin Cement has also been reported by local media as the preferential bidder for InterCement’s business in Brazil, although no formal announcement has been made. Of the rest, Tangshan Jidong Cement, CRBMT and China Tianrui all reported declines in sales revenue and profits. Tangshan Jidong Cement did manage to grow its cement sales volumes, but reported heightened competition in the north and north-east of China where most of its plants are located.

With the first quarter results for 2024 on the way soon, the CCA has been bracing itself and the sector for more bad news. It noted that national cement prices during the last week of March 2024 were about 1% lower than during the same week in 2023. Prices were lower in East, Central and South China, although they had increased in Chengdu and Sichuan. The CCA is worried that a price war, either nationally or regionally, will make a bad situation worse. It has called on cement producers to accept that the slowdown of infrastructure development in the country has led to a decline in cement demand and that this is the new normal. Apart from the usual watchwords of ‘self-discipline,’ ‘overcapacity reduction’ and ‘supply-side reforms’ the association has suggested that cement companies look for growth internationally and look to the leadership of associations to help everyone adapt to the new market situation. China’s sales output of cement may be starting to stabilise, but the market has a way to go yet to adapt to the new reality.

The US Department of Energy (DOE) announced a US$1.6bn investment in the cement sector this week. The funding was part of a total of US$6bn for 33 projects in over 20 states to decarbonise energy-intensive industries also including chemicals and refining, iron and steel, aluminium and metals, food and beverages, glass, process heat applications and pulp and paper. The DOE was keen to link the money to “the President’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act.” Politics is never far away it seems! The projects are part of the Industrial Demonstrations Program, managed by DOE’s Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED).

Table 1: Summary of US Department of Energy funding announced on March 2024 to decarbonise cement and concrete production

Table 1 above shows the main approaches each of the projects aim to use. The two most expensive ones involve carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) at Heidelberg Materials US’ Mitchell cement plant in Indiana and National Cement’s Lebec plant in California respectively. In a complimentary press release Chris Ward, the CEO of Heidelberg Materials North America, said “This substantial federal funding investment will help create the first full-scale deployment of carbon capture and storage on a cement plant in the US.” The proposed CCS unit at the plant will capture around 2Mt/yr of CO₂ from 2030. If Ward’s forecast is accurate (and no one beats them to it), then Heidelberg Materials will likely have set up the first full-scale CCS units at cement plants in both North America and Europe. This will be a significant achievement. The National Cement project, by contrast, is a mixed bag of approaches to decarbonising cement production that follows the multi-lever approach advocated for in many of the industry net-zero roadmaps. It intends to use agricultural by-products such as pistachio shells, as alternatives fuels to lower the fuel-based emissions, calcined clay to lower the clinker factor and CCS to capture the remaining 950,000t/yr of CO₂ emissions.

The other projects either involve using calcined clay or substituting limestone with calcium silicate. The Summit Materials proposal is noteworthy because it aims to build four clay calcination units in locations in Maryland, Georgia and Texas. None of these appear to be near Summit’s (or Cementos Argos’) cement plants. This suggests that the company may be intending to use calcined clay in ready-mixed concrete production. The Roanoke Cement Company calcined clay project will be baseEuropead at its cement plant in Troutville, Virginia.

The remaining two grant recipients, Brimstone and Sublime Systems, will both test the companies’ different methods of manufacturing cement by using calcium silicate instead of limestone. Brimstone’s method produces ordinary Portland cement (OPC) and supplementary cementitious materials (SCM). The company said in July 2023 that its OPC met the ASTM C150 standards. However, the company has released less information about its actual process. Sublime Systems’ uses an electrolysis approach to create its ASTM C1157-compliant cement. It calls this ‘ambient temperature electrochemical calcination.’

Investment on the same scale of the DOE has also been happening in Europe. In July 2023, for example, the European Commission announced an investment of Euro3.6bn in clean tech projects to be funded from the proceeds of the European Union emissions trading scheme (ETS). This was the third call for large-scale projects following previous announcements of recipients in 2021 and 2022. Euro1.6bn of the third call funding went towards cement and refining projects including five cement and lime projects in Belgium, Croatia, Germany and Greece. The money granted for each of these schemes was in the region of Euro115 - 235m.

Both the US and Europe are throwing serious finance at the cement industry to try and kickstart the various pathways towards net zero. They are also doing it in different ways, with the US aiming to boost its economy by onshoring sustainable industry, and Europe hoping to fund its approach via carbon taxation. Government-driven decarbonisation investment for cement in other large countries and regions around the world appears to be lagging behind the US and Europe but these may spring up as net zero targets are set, roadmaps drawn up and government policy formulated. These places could also benefit from watching what works and does not work elsewhere first. Back in the US and Europe the next tricky part of this process will be bridging the gap between government subsidy and commercial viability.

The Portland Cement Association (PCA) is currently considering changing its name as part of a wider rebranding exercise. As the PCA’s president and CEO Mike Ireland puts it, “Portland cement no longer adequately represents the products PCA member companies manufacture, as they increasingly produce blended cements in today's environmentally conscious marketplace.” The exercise opens up a host of issues about the promotion of cement and concrete and the role of a trade association in the 21st century.

The reason the PCA holds its name is because ordinary Portland cement (OPC) became the most popular type of cement used to make concrete (and other building materials) in the second half of the 19th century. This continued in the 20th century without any issues. So naming a national cement association after the sector’s key product made sense at the time. The parent organisation that became the PCA was formed in 1902 and the PCA proper officially started in 1916 when cement producers met in Chicago and agreed to set up an expanded organisation.

One topic that was less of an issue in 1916, was considering a national cement association in an international context. Or in other words, should a national or regional cement association say where it is from in its name? Many associations do so elsewhere in the world but not all. Cembureau in Europe, the Cement Manufacturers’ Association in India and the Mineral Products Association in the UK for instance are three examples that do not. The PCA’s current name does not indicate where it is based and it has appeared to have coped for over 100 years. Curiously though, most of the suggestions that the PCA has put forward for its potential new name do include ‘America’ in some shape or form. Another connected problem is whether the general public in the US make the assumption that the PCA is a smaller group based in Portland, Oregon!

Mike Ireland points out another dilemma facing the PCA today with the rise in popularity of blended cements. The PCA, for example, worked on supporting the use of Portland Limestone Cement in the 2010s before lots of US producers started making it in the 2020s. To illustrate the scale of the change that this and other initiatives have created, United States Geological Survey (USGS) data shows that shipments of blended cements doubled from 26Mt in 2022 to just under 55Mt 2023. At the same time, shipments of Portland Cement fell by 37% year-on-year to around 52Mt from 83Mt. More blended cements were shipped in the US than OPC in 2023. So the PCA finds itself named after a minority cement product.

The other issue that Ireland touches upon is the environmental perception of cement by the general public and the problems for marketing, branding and advocacy this presents to a trade association. Simply put, it is far easier for the environmental lobby in developed economies to portray cement as ‘bad’ than it is for the cement sector to publicise the many small but incremental changes it has made or the monumental effect that cement and concrete have made upon human society over the last 150 years. Although it may not mean much to the wider public, to whom ‘cement is cement,’ the rise of blended cements in the US has handed the PCA the opportunity to differentiate cement into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ offerings. In this case high CO₂ emitting OPC becomes the old dirty product of the past and blended cements become clean shiny symbols of the future. It follows, therefore, that retaining the name of an old product for one of the biggest cement associations in the world might be considered unhelpful.

In some respects OPC and the PCA have become victims of their own success. Cement built the modern world and has become ubiquitous. So commonplace in most countries, in fact, that people outside of the building industry often fail to realise how crucial the stuff is. The tricky proposition for those marketing cement today is to somehow recognise the historical contribution that it has made to build our world whilst also conveying how it is changing to become more sustainable. Unfortunately for fans of OPC though this may mean dumping it from the name of the PCA.

TürkÇimento revealed this week that cement production in Türkiye grew by 10.5% year-on-year to 81.5Mt in 2023. In a press release describing the progress of the local cement sector, the cement association reported that domestic sales rose by 19% to 65Mt but that exports fell by 28% to just under 20Mt. Fatih Yücelik, the chair of TürkÇimento, also said that his country was the second largest exporter of cement in the world in 2023 and that its most important target market was the US. He noted that the construction sector grew by 8% during 2023, that reconstruction projects were enacted following earthquakes in early 2023 but that no further growth in domestic sales of cement was anticipated in 2024.

As is standard for these kinds of occasions, Yücelik also raised the association’s sustainability ambitions, describing his sector as one “whose main goal is to provide low-carbon production.” He added that the Turkish cement industry supports the country’s net zero target of 2053. To this end the association has also released its first sustainability report, for 2022, covering 48 of the country’s 52 integrated plants. The Hürriyet Daily News newspaper offered one reason for this enthusiasm for sustainability: the US$30bn in investment required to meet that 2053 net-zero target. It also reported that Yücelik said that the industry needed to spend US$2bn towards meeting the incoming requirements of the European Union Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

Graph 1: Domestic and export cement sales in Türkiye, January – October, 2017 – 2023. Source: TürkÇimento.

TürkÇimento’s data for 2023 currently runs up to October 2023 but it supports Yücelik’s assessment. As can be seen in Graph 1, domestic sales of cement rose sharply in the first 10 months of 2023, by 20% year-on-year to 53.1Mt, yet exports fell almost as abruptly, by 18% to 13Mt. This is noteworthy, as exports had been rising steadily each year since 2018. Italy-based Cementir provided some context here in its annual report for 2023 saying that it had decided to focus on the domestic market due to greater profitability. Heidelberg Materials’ joint-venture Akçansa echoes these comments, blaming declining exports on “historically low freight rates increasing competitiveness of southeast Asian suppliers” while emphasising that the shift to the domestic market was made to meet increasing demand.

Graph 2: Revenue of selected large Turkish cement producers, 2022 - 2023. Source: Company reports.

Financial information from the larger Turkish cement producers that have released their results for 2023 follows the same pattern. Three of the four companies included in Graph 2 saw sales revenue grow in 2023. The one that saw its revenue fall, Nuh Çimento, is a major exporter. In 2022 for example it supplied 18% of the country’s total cement exports. All of these companies saw operating profit or earnings increase though.

The other big Türkiye-based news story this week was that Taiwan Cement Corporation (TCC) completed the latest increase to its stakes of Cimpor Global Holdings joint-ventures in Türkiye and Portugal. TCC now owns a 60% stake of the business in Türkiye and a 100% stake in Portugal. With respect to the business in Türkiye this means that TCC now has control of the country’s largest cement producer, OYAK Çimento. Once again the CBAM received a mention, with TCC saying in its valedictory statement that it believed that, “whether it's domestic or imported cement, low-carbon cement will become the main competitive advantage for the cement companies entering the European market.”

The domestic market in Türkiye may have seen a bounce in 2023 but the attention of both TürkÇimento, TCC and others are firmly set on the wider market in the region. TürkÇimento’s Fatih Yücelik said that the country’s cement production capacity was 120Mt/yr and that the population would have to be 150m to eliminate the need for exports. Its population is currently just under 85m. Yücelik set a value of US$2bn for his sector to adjust to CBAM but he also remarked that the income from exports in 2023 was around US$1.3bn. This is not an easy investment ‘pill’ to swallow but one that the country will have to digest if it wants to keep its export levels up.

Cement producers appear to have doubled down on the lessons they learned in 2022 by seeking profits wherever they could in 2023, despite stagnant markets in certain key places. Even with sales volumes of cement going down for most of the multinational cement companies covered here, revenues and earnings rose through price rises or business realignment.

Heidelberg Materials can often be relied upon to sprinkle a bit less sugar on its financial commentary compared to some of its competitors. Thus it is always worth reflecting on what it says. In its view, “In 2023, high inflation rates across the globe, increased financing costs, and persistently high energy and raw material prices significantly impaired construction activity and thus demand for our building materials. The decline in demand in private residential construction, which was massive in some cases, could not be offset by a solid development in industrial commercial construction and infrastructure projects.” Other opinions are available.

Graph 1: Sales revenue from selected cement producers in 2022 and 2023. Source: Company reports. Note: Figures calculated for UltraTech Cement.

Heidelberg Materials is notably missing in Graph 2 (below), though as the company is likely to be holding back its cement sales volume numbers until it releases its full annual report for 2023 towards the end of March 2024. However, Holcim and Heidelberg Materials reached similar sales volumes of cement in 2022 and this looks likely to have continued in 2023, or even gone further. Holcim divested its India-based and Brazil-based operations in 2022 and Africa-based ones in South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda in 2023. Heidelberg Materials has also slimmed down, albeit at a slower pace, with the sale of its businesses in Southern Spain in 2022 and The Gambia in 2023. Note that CRH and Holcim have swapped places in terms of sales revenue from 2022 to 2023. 65% of CRH’s sales came from its Americas divisions.

The outlier here is UltraTech Cement. It increased its sales volumes as the India-based market continues to push forward. Dangote Cement, meanwhile, delivered a surprise with a fall in volumes, due to poor trading at home in Nigeria. Sales outside of Nigeria grew significantly though. A real key moment for the evolution of Dangote Cement as a multinational player will be when its sales, volumes and earnings outside of Nigeria surpass those from back home. It’s not there yet but it looks likely to happen in the next few years.

Graph 2: Cement sales volumes from selected cement producers in 2022 and 2023. Source: Company reports. Note: Figures calculated for CRH and UltraTech Cement.

The progress of the construction market in the US compared to elsewhere has wielded an outsized effect on balance sheets for companies. Signs of this have been apparent for several years but it really picked up in 2023 with CRH switching its primary listing to the US in September 2023 and then Holcim announcing that it is planning to spin-off its North American business (for more on this see GCW 645). Heidelberg Materials was asked during its analysts’ conference call for its 2023 financial results what its plans were for the US. Chair Dominik von Achten said he was against splitting the business off from the rest of the group but that all other options were on the table. Various media outlets have interpreted this to mean that an initial public offering in the US is a likely possibility.

What Cemex does with this situation, if anything, might be worth watching. The company is already North America-focused. Its key markets are in Mexico, the US and Europe, and it is already listed in Mexico and the US. Subsequently in 2023 the market in Mexico bounced back and operating earnings rose sharply in both Mexico and the US. Finally on this theme, Buzzi, the fifth largest cement producer in the US by capacity, may also face a similar dilemma to its peers about what to do with its largest earning business area.

The increasing dominance of the US market for western-based multinational cement producers may be accelerating a trend towards large regional companies everywhere. China-based cement players already dominate the top 10 list of the world’s largest cement producers by capacity. Companies from India and elsewhere are on the way to do likewise as they grow and concentrate on one geographic area. The situation in the US meanwhile is persuading the multinationals to do the same thing in reverse as they reconfigure themselves based on market demand. In financial terms, this may mean chasing growth in the US, learning to cope with high carbon prices in Europe or diversifying away from heavy building materials. Elsewhere, despite the proliferation of regional giants, such as the China-based cement companies, few seem keen to become truly multinational in a hurry, although opportunities, such as the ongoing sale of InterCement in Brazil or CRH’s acquisition of AdBri in Australia, are still present.

Global Cement Weekly will return to look at the large China-based cement companies when they release their financial results later in March 2024