Displaying items by tag: CO2

US: A research team led by the University of Michigan’s Charles McCrory, in collaboration with the University of California, Davis (UCD) and the University of California, Los Angeles, has developed a process to capture CO₂ and convert it into metal oxalates for use in cement production. The method uses electrodes to transform carbon dioxide into oxalate, which binds with metal ions and precipitates as a solid suitable for alternative cement. The researchers reduced the required lead catalyst to parts per billion by modifying the polymer environment around the catalyst, mitigating environmental risks. The researchers next want to focus on scaling up the process and are working on electrolysis on a large scale.

UCD associate professor Jesús Velázquez said “Metal oxalates represent an underexplored frontier – serving as alternative cementitious materials, synthesis precursors and even carbon dioxide storage solutions.”

US: Ozinga has broken ground on a 1Mt/yr alternative cement grinding plant in East Chicago, Indiana. The plant is equipped with a Gebr. Pfeiffer MVR5300-C6 vertical roller mill. It will produce ASTM C989-compliant slag cement and other blended cements. When operational in 2026, it will be the largest of its kind in North America, and avoid 700,000t/yr of CO₂ emissions from conventional cement production. Its location offers strategic rail, road and shipping access to large markets in the US and Canada.

East Chicago Mayor Anthony Copeland welcomed an anticipated 150 new jobs resulting from construction and subsequent operations at the plant.

India: During the fourth quarter of the 2025 financial year (which ended on 31 March 2025), premium products constituted 16% of Shree Cement’s sales mix, up from 12% one year previously. During the period, the company further diversified its offering with the launch of two new premium cements, Bangur Marble Portland slag cement and Extra White Portland slag cement, in Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal. Both products are designed for maximum brightness and smoothness within their category of CEM-II Portland slag cements. The company says that its growing portfolio helped it to increase its full-year financial realisation per tonne by 5% year-on-year.

Business Today News has reported that managing director Neeraj Akhoury said "In the 2025 financial year, 74% of our cement output was blended, avoiding over 7.2Mt of CO₂ emissions."

Shree Cement crossed 60% consumption of energy from renewable sources in May 2025, Construction World News has reported. It has 582MW of installed renewable power capacity and is currently in the process of building a 1MW battery storage system at one of its cement plants in India.

Australia: Minister for Climate Change and Minister Chris Bowen says that the government is ‘considering’ the enactment of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to prevent carbon leakage from high emissions-intensity products, including cement.

The Australian Parliament committed to 43% national CO₂ emissions reduction between 2005 and 2030 in 2022, and capped emitters’ individual carbon footprints in 2023. Final advice from a government Carbon Leakage Review was due after May 2025, and was possibly complicated by on-going US climate and trade reforms under President Trump. The Australian Cement Industry Federation bemoaned a lack of action on carbon leakage in March 2025. It warned of jeopardy to both decarbonisation and 1400 jobs in the Australian cement sector.

Australia’s construction industry imported 40% of its cement used in 2024.

Demand for heavy building materials in the UK dropped in the first quarter of 2025, with ready-mix concrete sales reaching a new 60-year low.¹ In an update last week, the UK’s Mineral Products Association (MPA) attributed the decline to existing economic headwinds, compounded by global trade disruptions, reduced investor confidence and renewed inflationary pressures.

Major infrastructure projects – including the HS2 high-speed railway in the English Midlands, the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Somerset and the Sizewell C nuclear power plant in Suffolk – failed to offset delays and cancellations by cash-strapped local councils to roadwork projects. Residential construction, meanwhile, is ‘slowly but steadily’ recovering from historical lows, amid continuing high mortgage rates since late 2024.

The most interesting part of the MPA’s market appraisal was its warning of ‘new risks emerging in the global economy.’ These concern the new tariffs raised by the US against its import partners. The possible consequences, the MPA says, imperil the UK’s supply chains, construction sector and growth.

Of particular immediacy is the threat of imports into the UK from countries that previously focussed on the US market. The MPA said that the industry ‘cannot compete’ against increased low-cost, CO₂-intensive imports. It named Türkiye, which sends around 6.9Mt/yr of cement and clinker to the US, as a key threat. Türkiye became subject to the blanket 10% ‘baseline’ tariff on 2 April 2025.

The MPA probably didn’t have a particular company in mind when it said this. However, it bears noting that Turkish interests gained a share of UK cement capacity in October 2024, when Çimsa acquired 95% of Northern Ireland-based Mannok. Besides the Derrylin cement plant (situated on the border between Fermanagh, UK, and Cavan, Ireland), Mannok operates the Rochester cement storage and distribution facility in Kent, 50km from London. The facility currently supplies cement from Derrylin to Southern England and the Midlands. It could easily serve as a base of operations for processing and distributing imported cement and clinker from further afield.

Meanwhile in South West England, Portugal-based Cimpor is building a €20 – 25m cement import terminal in the Port of Bristol. The company is subject to 20% tariffs on shipments to the US from its home country. Its parent company, Taiwan Cement Corporation, is subject to 32% US tariffs from Taiwan.

But the plot thickens… On 8 May 2025, the UK became the first country to conclude a trade agreement with the US after the erection of the new tariff regime, under which the US$73bn/yr-worth of British goods sold in the US became subject to a 10% tariff.² The latest agreement brought partial relief for an allied sector of UK cement: steel. 180,000t flowed into the US from the UK in 2024.³ In 2024, the UK exported 7120t of cement and clinker to the US, up by a factor of 10 decade-on-decade from just 714t in 2014, all of it into two US customs districts, Philadelphia and New York City.⁴

In what may be one of the first true ‘Brexit benefits,’ UK cement exporters now ‘enjoy’ a US tariff rate half that of their EU competitors, notably those in Greece. Like the UK’s more modest volumes, Greece’s 1.82Mt/yr-worth of cement and clinker exports stateside also enter via the US’ eastern seaports, at New York City, Tampa and Norfolk. Given the overlaps in ownership between the Greek and UK cement sectors, it is conceivable that optimisation of cement export flows across Europe may already be under discussion.

On 6 May 2025, the UK and Indian governments announced a trade deal that will lift customs duties on almost all current Indian exports to the UK. UK MPs are still seeking clarifications as to whether this will include industrial products that might be dumped.⁵ Theoretically, the threat from an oversupplied and fast-growing cement industry like India’s could be existential to the UK cement industry.

As the UK invests heavily in its future, including with the HyNet Consortium, imports pose a major threat. Given enough time, the UK could develop a leading position in the decarbonisation space. Will it have enough time? Existential threats certainly add a sense of jeopardy.

References
1. Mineral Products Association, ‘Weak start to 2025 for building materials sales amid growing economic headwinds,’ 6 May 2025, www.mineralproducts.org/News/2025/release16.aspx

2. HM Government, ‘UK overseas trade in goods statistics November 2024,’ 16 January 2025, www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-overseas-trade-in-goods-statistics-november-2024/uk-overseas-trade-in-goods-statistics-november-2024-commentary

3. UK Steel, ‘US 25% tariffs on UK steel imports come into effect,’ 12 March 2025, www.uksteel.org/steel-news-2025/us-25-tariffs-on-uk-steel-imports-come-into-effect

4. United States Geological Survey, ‘Cement in December 2024,’ January 2025, https://d9-wret.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/s3fs-public/media/files/mis-202412-cemen.pdf

5. Welsh Liberal Democrats, ‘UK-Indian Trade Deal: Government Refuses to Answer Whether it Has Conceded on Cheap Indian Steel Imports,’ 6 May 2025, www.libdems.wales/news/article/uk-indian-trade-deal-government-refuses-to-answer-whether-it-has-conceded-on-cheap-indian-steel-imports

US: Queens Carbon has secured US$10m in seed funding to scale up production of its novel cement and supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). The start-up will build a 2000t/yr demonstration plant at strategic partner Buzzi Unicem USA's Stockertown, Pennsylvania, cement plant. The plant will demonstrate Queens Carbon’s low-energy Q-Reactor technology, which employs novel hydrothermal chemistry, with the help of steam and pressure, to combine standard cement feedstocks into carbon-neutral hydraulic cement and SCMs. The company’s flagship product, Q-SCM, is capable of replacing up to 50% of cement in concrete mixes. Queens Carbon says that it will now also begin preparations for its first full-scale commercial plant.

Buzzi Unicem USA was among investors in the seed funding round, led by Climate technologies investor Clean Energy Ventures, with participation from fellow venture capital firm Plug and Play.

Queens Carbon CEO Daniel Kopp said "With support from Clean Energy Ventures, Buzzi Unicem USA and the US Department of Energy, we're building next-generation technology and assembling the creative talent needed to drive industry revenues to move cement innovation forward and significantly reduce CO₂ emissions from cement production, all without a green premium."

Luigi Buzzi, Chief Technology Officer at Italy-based Buzzi, said "We know that achieving our goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 demands forward-thinking solutions to enhance both our operations and our environmental performance.”

US: MTR Carbon Capture says that St Marys Cement’s Charlevoix plant in Michigan will be the first cement plant in the world to deploy its Polaris polymeric membrane-based technology. The pilot project aims to capture 3t/day of CO₂ during a six month testing period. It intends to demonstrate that a 95% CO₂ capture rate is achievable.

US-based Membrane Technology and Research (MTR) specialises in the development and production of membrane-based separation systems for the petrochemical, natural gas and refining industries. The company was set up in 1982 and has its headquarters in Newark, California.

The European Union (EU) is set to launch its Green Deal Industrial Plan, today, on 26 February 2025. It is the latest plan to help industry in the region reach net zero whilst remaining competitive. Key parts of the scheme that have been seen by the media include support for industries facing high energy prices, tax breaks for decarbonisation projects, simplifying the cross border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), linking funding for industrial CO₂ cutting more directly to revenue gathered from the emissions trading scheme (ETS) and revamping procurement rules.

Cembureau, the European cement association, presented its comments on the impending announcement earlier this week. On CBAM it said that more work was required on exports, “such as export adjustment or continued free allowances for exported goods through the application of the destination principle which merits more in-depth analysis and discussion as to its WTO compatibility.” On financing it called for 75% of ETS taxation on the cement sector to be funnelled straight back again in the form of a cement decarbonisation fund. On infrastructure it called for competitive access to low-carbon energy sources such as thermal biowaste and electricity. It also lobbied for the rapid-development of CO₂ pipelines and storage sites. Finally, on lead markets it asked that concrete carbonation and CO₂ use in construction materials be recognised as a carbon sink and that carbon capture and utilisation using CO₂ from industrial sectors be acknowledged through a review of the CO₂ accounting rules in the ETS.

Lobbyists from the other side of the argument, also ahead of the official unveiling of the Green Deal Industrial Plan, took a dim view of the ETS. A report published by Carbon Market Watch and WWF called for greater scrutiny to be placed on the scheme. Its argument is that the “current architecture of the EU ETS continues to reward heavy polluters by granting them free allowances instead of incentivising emissions reductions.” Holcim, Heidelberg Materials and Cemex were each singled out as having received more free allowances under the ETS than the actual emissions they were responsible for in 2023. The report also reflected the growing environmental backlash against carbon capture and utilisation and/or storage (CCUS). In its view the money from the ETS going into the Innovation Fund should be directed at schemes that directly reduce emissions, not at CCUS projects, although it did concede that the cement and lime industries were some of the few sectors that should be allowed funding towards CCUS. This may be a point for the cement sector to watch for in the future if there ends up being a wider backlash against CCUS in general.

The Carbon Market Watch-WWF case is that the cement sector (and others) have received far too many free allowances in the ETS for far too long. The authors admit that the allowances are set to fall fast, to 2034, as the CBAM comes in but they don’t think that anywhere near enough has been done. This has not been helped over the years by news stories occasionally emerging of idled cement plants appearing to make money from emissions allowances. These occurrences date back to the drop in production following the financial crash in 2008 but there have been more recent examples.

Graph 1: Allowances for and emissions from clinker production from the emissions trading scheme in the European Union, 2017 - 2023. Source: EU Transaction Log (EUTL).

As Graph 1 above shows the environmentalists may be overstating their point on the ETS given that emissions were higher than the free allocation in 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2022. Roughly speaking, both the allowances and emissions by the cement sector from clinker production have been dropping since 2017 and further back to the mid-2000s. The system is intended to squeeze emissions but it doesn't take into account short-term variations in market conditions. Cembureau data shows that production rose in 2021. Sure enough, emissions jumped above the allocation. Although the cement production data is yet to be released for 2023, it is looking fairly likely that it will have decreased. Hence, emissions have fallen below the allocation level.

Few are likely to be happy with the EU’s Green Deal Industrial Plan. For producers, it is unlikely to add sufficient support against the additional ‘green’ cost burden. For environmentalists, it doesn't go far enough. The usual equilibrium for EU sustainability legislation is aiming at the target of net-zero without killing industry. The current US administration has further tipped this balancing act with its threats to fight against CBAM and the like with trade tariffs. Tom Lord, Redshaw Advisors described the EU ETS as a political construct at the Global FutureCem Conference that took place in February 2025 in Istanbul. This also applies to the EU’s green legislation (like any laws). Subsequently, certainty is a word that crops up frequently in discussions about EU green policies. Can EU industry be certain that these political constraints remain should circumstances change? With the ETS allowances dropping, CBAM coming and industry facing higher energy prices than its competitors, we’re about to find out how committed the EU is on net-zero and who the winners and losers will be.

Two news stories to note this week concerning climate legislation in eastern Asia. First, the Indonesian government announced plans to create a mandatory carbon emissions trading scheme (ETS) for key industries including cement. Second, an initiative to set up a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) in Taiwan emerged.

The proposal in Indonesia has been expected by the local cement sector and the wider market. Back in November 2024 at the ASEAN Federation of Cement Manufacturers (AFCM) event, an Indonesian Cement Association (ASI) speaker said that a preparation period for carbon trading by industrial sectors was expected from 2025 to 2027 followed by an easing-in period and then full implementation from 2031 onwards. This latest announcement appears to confirm the planned roll-out of the country’s cap-and-trade system. So far the government has set up a carbon tax, a voluntary carbon trading scheme (IDX Carbon) and a mandatory carbon trading scheme for part of the power sector. Notably, the local carbon price for that last one is low compared to other schemes elsewhere around the world. In 2024 the World Bank reported a price of US$0.61/t of CO₂. Since it only started in 2023 it is still early days yet though.

The new information confirms that the cement, fertiliser, steel and paper industries will be added to the mandatory emissions trading scheme. As per other cap-and-trade schemes, low emitters should be able to sell spare credits. However, comments made by Apit Pria Nugraha, Head of the Center for Green Industry, Ministry of Industry, at a recent trade event in Jakarta suggested that companies that emit more than their allowance would have to pay a 5% levy on the excess and buy credits for the rest. This seems to be different from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, where companies are fined only if they go above their allowance and they do not buy sufficient credits to cover themselves. However, we’ll have to wait to confirm this and other details.

Meanwhile in Taiwan, Peng Chi-ming, the Minister of Environment, announced that a bill establishing a local CBAM could be prepared in the second half of 2025. What is telling though is how the local press coverage of this story framed the trade policy aspects of such a scheme. Peng questioned how the EU CBAM might fare in response to the protectionist and pro-tariff administration in the US. He also noted that importers of cement and steel didn’t have to disclose their carbon emissions compared to local producers. Vietnam, unsurprisingly, was singled out as a likely target of a CBAM given that one third of Taiwan’s imports of cement come from there. Lastly, Peng also said that Taiwan would have to apply to the World Trade Organization for approval if or when it did set up its own CBAM.

Taiwan introduced a carbon tax at the start of 2025 with a standard price of US$9.16/t of CO₂ and lower prices for companies using approved reduction plans or meeting technology benchmarks. Research by Reccessary indicated that Taiwan Cement might face a carbon tax bill of US$41m and Asia Cement could be looking at US$28m based on 2023 data. These additional costs will increase operating costs and reduce profits.

All of this may sound familiar because it has already happened in Europe. Some form of carbon trading or taxation is introduced and then the debate moves on to carbon leakage via imports. The cement industries in Indonesia and Taiwan are unlikely to be aggravated directly by the EU CBAM but the wider economies of both countries are reacting to secure access to export markets. This, in turn, has implications for a heavy CO₂-emitting sector like cement. For example, if a CBAM isn’t already being considered in Indonesia, local heavy industry is likely to start lobbying for one, if the new ETS starts affecting import rates.

The Minister of Environment in Taiwan and others before him have identified that climate policies can be protectionist. As more countries regulate local carbon emissions, more trade disputes look likely. The big one right now might be the growing argument between the US Trump administration and the EU. Yet, every time a country sets up a new carbon scheme, a potential new argument over trade is brewing. And cement producers in Indonesia, Taiwan and everywhere else are stuck in the middle of all of this.

Germany: The German Cement Works Association (VDZ) has launched its new Cement Carbon Class (CCC) labelling system for cement. CCC labels inform customers of the embodied CO₂ emissions of cement, with Classes A to D signifying 100 – 500kg CO₂/t. Meanwhile, those below 100kg CO₂/t will class as CCC Near Zero. The labels are currently available for cement producers to adopt on a voluntary basis.