August 2025

Putting two speakers from the European Commission front and centre at the start of this year’s European Slag Association Conference (EuroSlag) in Metz, France was always going to cause a ruck. Once Coal and Steel Research Unit head Hervé Martin and steel sector policy officer Gabriele Morgante said their pieces and the panel opened up then the verbal punches started flying. Okay, this may be slightly exaggerated, but after a bunch of policy-heavy presentations, suddenly the situation became crystal clear. Was the agricultural use of ferrous slag going to be allowed to continue? What would be the classification of the slag? And so on. One Russian delegate commented afterwards, “I thought we had environmental problems in Russia.”

Jérémie Domas, Centre Technique et de Promotion des Laitiers Sidérurgiques (CTPL) explained in a later presentation that the heart of the current debate goes back to the European Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC). This legislation created an ambiguity over the status of slag between classifying it, as a waste or as a by-product, that the European industry has been battling over ever since. A multi-coloured map in Aurelio Braconi of the European Steel Association’s (Eurofer) presentation depicted the disarray this has caused with the varied legal statuses of slag across Europe. To add to this, Braconi’s home country of Italy, for example, is split into designating slag as both a product and a waste. His response was to say that the ‘human factor’ was important back home for utilising slag. The European Union (EU) is now working on its Circular Economy Package, which includes revised legislative proposals on waste, and it has been consulting on various issues throughout the year. It is this process is that been making slag producers twitchy.

Other delegates on the first session’s panel provided a bit more context, with Thomas Reiche of the German Technical Association for Ferrous Slag (FEHS) saying that the waste legislation didn’t need to be changed but that public procurement laws did. Eric Seitz of the French Association of the Users of industrial By-products (AFOCO) added that slag products had been sold for decades without any problems. However, he definitely wanted ‘strong’ support from the EU on the issue.

Moving on, Craig Heidrich of the Australasian (Iron & Steel) Slag Association (ASA) provided some interesting figures in his presentation on worldwide slag production that differ from the data often reported by trading companies. Heidrich reckoned that 567Mt of slag was produced in 2015 with a breakdown of 347Mt blast furnace (BF) slag and 220Mt steel slag.

Andreas Ehrenberg of the FEHS presented research on converting electric arc furnace (EAF) slag into a hydraulic material that could be used in cement or concrete production. Given that, using Heidrich’s figures for example, about a third of ferrous slag production is steel slag often created in an EAF, the potential implications of this line of inquiry are important. Unfortunately, the main disadvantages of the original EAF slag analysed in Ehrenberg’s work compared to BF slag are the lower CaO and SiO₂ contents and the higher MgO and Fe oxide contents. Laboratory-scale tests confirmed in principle the feasibility of forming clinker or ground blast furnace slag-like materials based on EAF slag. But the reduction and treatment steps in the process require a lot of effort and the economical value of the recovered metal is low. Taking the research further will require much more work on the semi-technical scale.

The other paper with particular relevance to the cement industry was Chris Poling of SCB International unveiling his company’s ground blast furnace slag (GBFS) micro-grinding mill, the Nutek Mill 2. The new mill is intended to allow slag grinding to take place in a much wider range of locations, along similar lines to the modular clinker grinding mills made by Cemengal or Gebr. Pfeiffer’s Ready2Grind line. The pilot project is being installed now in New York State, US. The mill has a GBFS capacity of 10 - 12t/hr with a target of 40 – 45kWh/t when fully optimised. Further units at the same location are planned for early 2018 with approval sought from the New York State Department of Transportation.

The 10th European Slag Conference is expected to take place in 2019. With more clarity expected from the EU on its Circular Economy Package there will be much to discuss.

India: ACC has appointed Jan Jenisch as an additional director to its board. Jenisch, a German national, was appointed as the chief executive officer (CEO) of ACC’s parent company LafargeHolcim in mid-2017. Previously he was the CEO of Sika. He graduated from the University Fribourg, Switzerland and holds an MBA degree.

Oman: Al Wusta Cement Company has appointed Abdullah Abbas Ahmed as its chairman and Ahmed bin Yousuf bin Alwai Al Ibrahim as its vice-chairman. The officials were nominated at a meeting of the representatives of two joint venture partners Raysut Cement Company and Oman Cement Company. The new cement company plans to build a plant at Duqm in 2018.

Well it doesn’t normally happen like this. In late September 2017 Ash Grove Cement announced that it was set to be bought by Ireland’s CRH. The words it used were a ‘definitive merger agreement.’ Then suddenly this week on 5 October 2017 Ash Grove said that it had received a higher offer from an unnamed third party and that it was extending its so-called ‘window shop period.’ So much for definitive! The following day Reuters revealed that the new bid was from Summit Materials.

The on-going board machinations at LafargeHolcim and the PPC-AfriSam merger saga in South Africa show that the cement industry has its moments of boardroom high drama. Indeed, both of these long-rumbling stories have had murmurs this week with the early departure of LafargeHolcim’s finance director Ron Wirahadiraksa after less than two years and Dangote Cement’s decision to exit the ring from the PPC bidding. However, it’s rare that cement companies are publicly announced as sold and then get gazumped instead.

The Ash Grove debacle also carries a personal dimension. Ash Grove chairman Charlie Sunderland initially described CRH as his company’s biggest customer and one with a close relationship to the firm. Yet a US$300m higher bid suggests how much those ‘kind’ words were actually worth. To add insult to injury the chief executive officer (CEO) of Summit Materials, Tom Hill, used to work for CRH. This no doubt gave him an idea of how the management of CRH thinks. CRH’s public response so far has been that it has noted the extended shareholder approval period at Ash Grove.

At first glimpse Summit Materials and CRH have a similar cement production base in the US. Both companies operate two integrated plants in the country. Summit Materials runs plants at Hannibal, Missouri and Davenport, Iowa. CRH runs plants at Sumterville, Florida and Trident, Montana. Summit then has 10 cement terminals along the Mississippi River from Minnesota to Louisiana compared to CRH US’ five cement terminals in Detroit, Michigan, Cleveland, Ohio, Dundee, Michigan, Buffalo, New York and Duluth, Minnesota.

Yet, CRH also has two plants in Canada. Then the sheer scale of CRH’s other operations in North America simply dwarfs Summit’s. CRH Americas reported sales of US$16.7bn in 2016, more than 10 times higher than the US$1.6bn that Summit Materials declared. Both companies cover aggregates, asphalt, readymix concrete and cement but CRH is by far the larger of the two. So much so in fact that Summit Materials might potentially be taking on a serious amount of debt to finance the Ash Grove sale. As such any blip to the US cement market over the next few years could have serious repercussions to an overleveraged Summit Materials.

On face value the possible engagement with Summit Materials might appear to show that there is a lack of trust between CRH and Ash Grove. However, this cannot be inferred. As its shares are traded over the counter, Ash Grove’s shareholders have allowed a two-week shop window to enable other companies to counter-offer. This is to ensure that they get the best possible value. Talking to Summit is part of this process and may, or may not, mean that the last remaining US-owned cement producer stays based in the US after all.

Switzerland: Géraldine Picaud has been appointed as the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of LafargeHolcim and member of the Executive Committee with effect from 1 February 2018. She succeeds Ron Wirahadiraksa, who is described as leaving the company for ‘opportunities outside the group.’ He leaves after less than two years in the role.

Picaud, a French national, joins the group from Essilor International, an ophthalmic optics company, where she has been Group CFO and member of the Executive Committee since 2011. Prior to joining Essilor, she spent four years working for the ED&F Man group in Winterthur, Switzerland following 13 years as CFO at international specialty chemicals group, Safic Alcan. She originally trained as an auditor.

It’s been a pessimistic month for the Indian cement industry with Ministry of Commerce & Industry data showing that cement production has fallen year-on-year every month since December 2016. This was followed by the Cement Manufacturers Association (CMA) saying that the industry was sitting on 100Mt/yr of excess production capacity. Now, the credit ratings agency ICRA has followed the data and downgraded its forecast for cement demand growth to not more than 4% for the 2017 - 2018 financial year.

Graph 1: Annual cement production in India. Source: Ministry of Commerce & Industry.

Graph 2: Monthly cement production growth rate year-on-year in India: Source: Ministry of Commerce & Industry.

Graph 1 shows a production peak in the 2015 - 2016 financial year before falling monthly production broke the trend in the 2016 - 2017 period. Graph 2 pinpoints the month it started to go wrong, November 2016, when the government introduced its demonetisation policy. Production growth went negative the following month in December 2017 and it hasn’t managed to right itself since then and grow. It’s convenient to blame the government for the slump in production but it troughed in February 2017 before taking a lower level of decline since then.

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) annual report in August 2017 suggests that the policy failed in its principal purpose of reducing the kind of corruption that a cash heavy economy can hide such as tax avoidance. People reportedly managed to find ways to bypass the bank deposit limit and may have successfully laundered large amounts of cash without being caught. However, as commentators like the Financial Times have pointed out, the longer term implications of forcing the economy towards digital payments and increasing the tax base could yet be beneficial overall.

Graph 3: Cement production capacity utilisation rates in India. Source: UltraTech Cement.

Moving on, the CMA has blamed production overcapacity for the current mess and Graph 3 shows the problem starkly. If anything the CMA appears to have downplayed the over capacity crisis facing India, as UltraTech Cement’s figures (using data from the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion) show an overcapacity of 155Mt in the 2016 – 2017 year and this will grow to a forecast 157Mt in the next financial year, even though the utilisation rate is expected to rise slightly. UltraTech Cement’s estimates don’t see the utilisation rate topping 70% until the 2020 – 2021 financial year. Analysts quoted in the Mint business newspaper concur, although they reckoned it would the rate would bounce sooner, in 2019 - 2020. Last month when the CMA moaned about the industry's excess capacity it pinned its hopes on infrastructure schemes like the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train. This prompted an official at JK Cements to say that he didn't think that one train line was going to make much of a difference.

This is one reason why ICRA’s and the other credit agencies’ growth rate forecasts for cement demand are important, because they indicate how fast India might be able to close the gap between production capcity and demand. Unfortunately demonetisation scuppered ICRA’s growth prediciton for 2016 – 2017. It forecast a rate of 6% but it actually fell by 1.2%! So downgrading its forecast for 2017 – 2018, with fears of weather and the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) in the second half of the year, is ominious. Major cement producers such as Ultratech Cement and Ambuja Cement have based their road to recovery in their latest investor presentations on a 6% growth rate or higher. Pitch it lower and the gap doesn’t close. Here’s hoping for a brisk second half.

US: Douglas C Rauh has resigned as the Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Summit Materials with effect from 30 December 2017. Tom Hill, the company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, will act as Interim Chief Operating Officer while the building materials company searches for a replacement. During the recruitment period, the three Executive Vice Presidents of the company’s operating segments Tom Beck (Cement Segment), Shane Evans (West Segment) and Damian Murphy (East Segment) will report directly to Hill.

Ivory Coast: Xavier Saint-Martin-Tillet, the chief executive officer of LafargeHolcim Côte d'Ivoire has been appointed as the head of the Association of Cement Producers of Cote d'Ivoire (APCCI). His term will last two years, according to Financial Afrik. He will be assisted by Soro Nagolo, deputy general manager of the Société des Ciments d'Abidjan (SCA), who will serve as the vice-president of the association.

Saint-Martin-Tillet is a graduate of the École Centrale Paris in France. He spent 20 years working for Lafarge before joining LafargeHolcim Côte d'Ivoire in October 2016 as its managing director.

The last week marked a step change to the US industry with the news that Ireland’s CRH has agreed to buy Ash Grove Cement. The latter is the largest remaining cement producer still owned by an American company. Its history dates back 135 years to its founding in 1882, with links to the Sunderland family for over a century. Following the acquisition, each of the top five cement producing firms in the US will be operated by multinational corporations based in foreign countries.

Although this scenario is not new to many other countries around the world, it is rare for a nation with a cement industry of this scale. The US is the third biggest cement producer worldwide. Out of the top ten cement producing nations Global Cement Magazine identified in its Top 100 Report 2017 feature in December 2016 only Egypt doesn’t have a local company to match the multinationals. China has China National Building Material (CNBM), for example and India has UltraTech cement and so on and so forth.

The actual sale covers Ash Grove Cement’s eight cement plants and 23 cement terminals, as well as its ready mix concrete and aggregate businesses, for US$3.5bn. Altogether its cement plants have a production capacity of 9.5Mt/yr and this really puts into contrast the Cementir Italia deal last week. HeidelbergCement has agreed to buy that company for around Euro57/t. CRH is buying Ash Grove Cement for US$368/t. That’s more that five times as much!

To be fair they are very different markets, with Italy’s cement sector consolidating near the bottom of a business cycle and the US growing with some promise. For comparison with other recent US acquisitions, CRH is offering to pay about the same as Summit Materials did to Lafarge for a cement plant and seven terminals in mid-2015. Other than that a few of the more recent transactions have been between US$200 – 300/t. The gradual price inflation for cement production capacity indicates that there is confidence in the US cement market.

In terms of CRH’s enhanced presence in North America following the completion of the deal, it currently operates two cement plants in the US: the American Cement Sumterville plant in Florida, a joint venture with Elementia, and the Trident plant in Montana. The CRH US division also runs five terminals in the Midwest and Northeast. This compliments Ash Grove Cement’s presence in the West, Midwest and South. Throw in CRH’s Canadian cement plants in Ontario and Quebec and CRH has the makings of a seriously strong cement business in North America. The only obvious impediment could be the close proximity of the CRH Trident plant and the Ash Grove Cement Montana City plant. Both are in Montana within 115km of each other and they are the only integrated plants in the state. A Federal Trade Commission arranged divestment in this location seems likely.

Ash Grove Cement’s chairman Charlie Sunderland, described CRH as his company’s biggest customer when the acquisition was announced. Buying Ash Grove Cement fills in one more piece in CRH’s construction materials puzzle in North America. Its American divisions have generated more than half of its revenue since at least 2014 dominating asphalt, aggregate and ready mix concrete markets. Yet it has lacked a cement market presence to match this. This changes when the deal with Ash Grove Cement completes.

Indonesia: Hendi Prio Santoso has been appointed as the president director of Semen Indonesia following his approval at a shareholders meeting. He succeeds Rizkan Chandra, who died in July 2017. Santoso is the former president director of state-owned gas company Perusahaan Gas Negara (PGN).