Displaying items by tag: CO2

UK: The Mineral Products Association (MPA) has demanded that the UK government protect the domestic cement industry from rising electricity costs. The comments came in the MPA's response to a Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) report has stated that electricity bills for UK manufacturers were higher than other key nations because of environmental regulation.

Commenting on the BIS report the MPA said that the new data confirmed what it had been telling the government since 2011. The MPS added the report clearly shows that the UK cement industry must receive some help if it is to survive and supply the UK's low carbon economy.

"The Government now has the evidence to corroborate the industry evidence," said Nigel Jackson, chief executive of the MPA. "It is time for them to respond and take the action we have been urging them to take for so long and to come forward with their long awaited Energy Intensive Industries Strategy."

The BIS report stated that electricity bills for UK manufacturers were higher than other key nations because of climate change levels. It added that by 2020, green taxes will be double those in other EU nations and many times higher than those in the US. According to the report firms in the UK will be forced to pay an extra Euro36 in green taxes on top of the market price they pay for every MWH of electricity by 2020 due to climate policies. This compares with Euro20 in Denmark, renowned for its renewable energy drive, Euro19.3 in France, Euro22 in Germany, Euro12.7 in China and a fall in the US and Russia.

In its response to the BIS report, the MPA stated that the UK cement industry had reduced its CO2 emissions by 57% since 1990 confirmed its commitment to tackling climate change. It approved of the government's 2011 autumn statement to compensate some energy intensive industries against electricity costs by Euro318m. Yet it also pointed out that the UK cement industry will not qualify for a share of the first Euro140m of this because the EU has ruled against such support for the sector, in relation to indirect costs associated with the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.

UK: The head of the UK Mineral Products Association (MPA), Nigel Jackson, has backed a 3 October 2011 announcement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, in which he said that environmental laws and regulations were 'piling costs' on to the energy bills of homeowners and business and that "we're not going to save the planet by putting our country out of business."

Commenting ahead of Osborne's Autumn Statement, which is expected to be on 29 November 2011, Jackson said, "I could not agree more with the sentiment and look forward to seeing how that welcome statement translates into positive action to reduce the complexity and plethora of energy related legislation that exists, as well as the actual amount of additional cost that this industry now faces."

Jackson additionally stressed the importance of keeping strategically important energy-intensive industries, such as cement and lime, in the UK. He warned against over-regulation of such industries, saying that it would not only threaten the UK's security of supply but would also export jobs and carbon for no environmental gain. Jackson said, "When the Chancellor announces the government's proposed package of help with energy costs for those energy-intensive industries at risk of 'carbon leakage' we need to see the cement and lime industries included. Government must act decisively to signal that it wants to retain viable domestic cement and lime industries in the UK." Jackson stressed, "This is the Chancellor's opportunity to put his words into practice and help protect British jobs, British manufacturing and British business. We need this Government to be the most enterprising ever."

Australia: Cement and lime manufacturer Adelaide Brighton Ltd (AB) has announced that its half-year profit for the first six months of 2011 declined by 10.6% amid weakness in the housing sector. The company stressed, however, that it was confident with regard to its future earnings. AB's net profit fell to USD64.67m for the six months to 30 June 2011 from USD72.0m in the first half of 2010. Its revenue declined by 2.2% USD531.5m.

While outlining a mixed to steady outlook of demand for its building products, AB said that it was, "confident on future earnings due to its strong exposure to infrastructure and resources."

Covering off the furore over Australia's potential CO2 tax, AB said that it had, "already significantly reduced its carbon footprint by using alternative fuels and sourcing alternative raw materials." It added that it had already closed inefficient clinker facilities and was now the largest importer of cement and clinker into Australia. This, it said, has helped to reinforce a strong position for the company relative to domestic cement and clinker competitors.

AB's apparent stance is distinctly opposed to those of the members of the public (who came out in protest in the capital Canberra on 16 August 2011), Opposition politicians, BCG Cement and the Cement Industry Federation, which have variously warned of massive job losses in the cement industry, price increases and emission leakage to countries with weaker environmental regulations.

Chris Harris from AB said that the company believed that the carbon tax, as proposed, would not have any significant impact on the continuation of AB's successful growth strategy of the past decade and that AB would continue its successful long-term strategy of operational improvement, growth in the lime business and vertical integration into downstream markets.

Australia: The Federal Opposition has claimed that 1800 cement industry jobs will be at risk from Labour's carbon tax and proposed new shipping rules. Nationals leader Warren Truss says the USD2.2bn-a-year industry is facing a 'double-whammy' under the Gillard government, saying that domestic cement manufacturers could be killed off by 'dirtier' imports, made cheaper under the carbon tax.

"The paradox is Australian cement production is a leader in low-emission technology and any shift to imports will force global CO₂ emissions to rise," said Truss. He added that the Australian cement industry has the world's second lowest greenhouse gas emissions behind Japan. "The carbon tax will price Australia's cleaner cement out of the market, giving the green light to our international competitors to boost their higher CO₂-emitting production and flood Australia with dirty cement. The Australian cement industry will be crushed by competitors who will not be paying a carbon tax."

Mr Truss said Labor was also rewriting the Navigation Act to force businesses that ship products around Australia to use domestic union-dominated vessels. He said 'unionised shipping' in Australia cost significantly more than current international market rates and would be another blow to the cement industry.

"Right now it costs about the same to ship cement from China to Australia as it does to ship it from Adelaide to Port Kembla," he said. "Under the Gillard government's sop to the maritime union, our biggest competitors in cement - China, Indonesia, Taiwan and Thailand - will dramatically undercut Australian suppliers on shipping costs alone."

The Cement Industry Federation (CIF) backed Truss's claims, saying the shipping reforms would impose new cost burdens on the sector. "Australian manufacturing cannot afford adding further cost imposts as a result of regulatory changes to coastal shipping," said a CIF spokeswoman in a statement. "While improving job security and conditions for Australian-based shipping crew is important, this must be weighed against the job security for manufacturing workers in primary production and manufacturing industries."

Meanwhile, Truss said a large section of the cement manufacturing sector would not be compensated under the carbon tax plan. The compensation package would apply only to producing clinker, the first stage of making cement. "The milling stage to make cement receives no compensation," he said.

Truss dismissed federal Treasurer Wayne Swan's comments that predictions of job losses in the manufacturing industry as a result of the carbon tax were 'doom and gloom.' "It is simply a nonsense for Mr Swan to suggest that his tax on Australian industry is not going to affect the competitiveness of Australian producers," he said. "We will be the only cement producers in the world and the only manufacturing industry in the world that pays a carbon tax. It naturally makes Australian products less competitive and will cost Australian jobs."

Ireland: The Irish cement industry stands to make windfall profits of up to Euro50m 'at the taxpayers' expense,' according to sources familiar with the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS). The sources estimate that companies such as CRH, Quinn Cement and Lagan Cement have made Euro26m over the past five years from the over-allocation of carbon credits by the government.

The sources estimate that the cement industry stands to make a further Euro25m when the next round of carbon credits is allocated under the ETS. The government allocates a certain amount of emission permits to companies for free. The idea is that polluting companies would buy credits in the market if they exceeded the permitted amount of emissions.

This system is known as 'cap-and-trade' but an initial over-allocation arose, partly because of the construction bust which meant that firms did not produce as much cement as expected. The sources said the transfer was a waste of public funds at a time when the exchequer was financially stressed. They also argued that the effect was to distort the market in favour of making cement.

The estimate of the scale of the subsidy comes after the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) noted earlier in 2011 that the current EU ETS provided potentially large windfall gains for certain industries, such as electricity generation and cement production. The ESRI argued that such windfall gains should be recaptured by society through the tax system.

A spokesman for Cement Manufacturers Ireland did not dispute the figures, saying that the industry had invested millions of Euros in new technology upgrades to become one of the most efficient in Europe. "The current recession was not predicted when allowances were allocated under rules proposed by the Commission," he said.

China: China National Building Material Group Corp (CNBM), China's largest building materials manufacturer, invested about USD131m in energy saving and emission reductions in 2010, according to the company's 2010 corporate social responsibility report. The construction industry has long been known for its heavy pollution and high energy use.

The Beijing-based, state-owned company gave top priority to fulfilling its corporate social responsibility (CSR) in terms of energy saving. "The company has dedicated itself to energy conservation by investing in clean technology," said Song Zhiping, chairman of CNBM. According to Liu Baoying, vice-president of CNBM, the cement sector is a major contributor to the company's energy consumption, accounting for more than 90% of the total.

"The company's energy consumption in the cement sector was down by 23% during the period of the country's 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-2010), mainly because of our efforts to eliminate poor production methods and upgrade technology," said Liu. CNBM has disposed of 51 energy-inefficient cement operations with a total capacity of 6.8Mt/yr over the past five years, according to its CSR report.

The country as a whole has also attached great importance to decreasing its carbon footprint with the government targeting reductions in CO₂ emissions for every unit of gross domestic product by between 40-45% by 2020 compared with 2005 levels. In addition, CNBM has made substantial efforts in developing new building materials in a bid to reduce energy consumption.

Beijing New Building Material (Group) Co Ltd (BNBM), a subsidiary of CNBM, mainly focused on manufacturing houses made of new building materials that can save electricity, water and materials during construction. They can also reduce by 60-90% the energy used when the buildings are functional, said Cui Lijun, general manager of BNBM.

US: A Duke University study prepared for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reported that the cement industry reduced its energy intensity by 13% between 1997 and 2007, averaging improvements of more than 1%/yr. These energy savings equate to a reduction of almost 1.5Mt of energy-related carbon. The study showed the gap between the best-performing cement plants and others narrowed and the performance of the industry as a whole improved.

"The decade studied by Duke was one of unprecedented growth for the cement industry, yet Portland Cement Association (PCA) members demonstrated their commitment to environmental stewardship by building sound strategies for energy management and investing in their facilities with state-of-the-art technologies that significantly improved the industry's energy-efficiency and reduced emissions," said Brian McCarthy, PCA CEO and president. "The US cement industry was among the first major industries to tackle the issue of climate change and this study illustrates that it has remained at the forefront of developing policies and improving the manufacturing process."

The study was commissioned by the EPA to measure the change in the cement industry's energy efficiency curve. The energy management approach promoted by the EPA's 'Energy Star' programme, which benchmarks plant energy performance against peers over time and certifies plants that achieve the best enviornmental performance, was an important factor in enabling the industry to improve its energy performance.

The Energy Performance Indicator (EPI) scores the energy efficiency of a single cement plant and allows the plant to compare its performance to that of the entire industry. The tool is intended to help cement plant operators identify opportunities to improve energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, conserve conventional energy supplies and reduce production costs.

France: Lafarge announced new CO₂ targets in partnership with the World Wildlife Fund on 23 June 2011.Key areas include a 33% reduction of CO₂ emissions per ton of cement produced by the end of 2020 compared with 1990 levels and a commitment to develop innovative solutions for sustainable construction by 2015. It is anticipated that Lafarge will emit an average of 518kg of CO₂ per ton of cement produced in 2020, around 250kg less than in 1990.

US: A federal appeals court has scheduled oral arguments for 11 October 2011 in pending litigation challenging EPA's air toxics and criteria pollutant rules for the Portland cement industry, giving activists a chance to argue for the inclusion of greenhouse gas (GHG) limits in the criteria pollutant rule and for industry to highlight what it says are major flaws in both rules.

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has scheduled oral arguments for the suits challenging EPA's new source performance standards (NSPS) for criteria pollutants and a maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards for air toxin emissions.

The court recently granted the cement industry's request to sever and hold in abeyance several aspects of its pending lawsuits challenging key provisions of the two rules, following an agency decision to issue a partial denial and partial granting of several petitions for administrative reconsideration of the rules. The oral arguments will focus on suits challenging other provisions of the two rules. For example, the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and other industry petitioners will likely ask the court to vacate both rules due to what they say are numerous faults and errors in the final versions.

In the fight over the NSPS rule, industry filed a brief on 16 May 2011 taking issue with, among other things, the rule's new limits on particulate matter (PM) emissions, particularly its limit of 4.5g (0.01lb) of PM per tonne of clinker. Producers argue that the EPA 'simply adopted' the same PM limit that it set for the air toxins rule, at odds with Clean Air Act requirements for setting NSPS.

In their brief in the MACT suit (16 May 2011), the producers argue that the EPA failed to address the overlap between the cement rule and a recent EPA emissions rule for commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators (CISWI). On 21 March 2011 the EPA issued a memo trying to clarify the number of cement facilities that would be subject to the final CISWI rule but the producers said that the memo did not resolve their concerns and sought to have the question addressed through an administrative reconsideration of the rule. This request was subsequently denied by the EPA.

The PCA and others in the industry have also continued to express concerns over whether some cement kilns burning alternative fuels that may fall under a recent final EPA rule defining non-hazardous solid waste would fall under the cement MACT or under the CISWI rule issued in February 2011 and how that would impact on the MACT baseline emissions limits that the agency used when it developed the cement air toxins regulation.

The rules were amendments to existing NSPS and MACT standards for the sector and industry only wants the court to vacate the 2010 amendments and not the rules that were in place prior to the new rules. If the court vacates the amendments, the rules could revert to the older regulations, a cement NSPS set in 1988 and the MACT rules from 2006.

Environmentalists meanwhile will likely use the oral arguments to push their legal fight that is trying to have the court force the EPA to... ...include GHG limits in the cement NSPS. Environmentalists have filed briefs in the cement litigation arguing that GHGs meet the EPA's two-part criteria for determining whether to regulate new pollutants under NSPS. When the EPA issued the cement NSPS alongside an air toxins rule for the sector in September 2011 it said that CO2 standards 'may be appropriate' for the sector, but chose not to include GHG limits in the final rules, because it had not included GHG limits in the proposed version of the rule. The agency said that it needed, "additional information on site-specific factors that affect performance of these controls, where they are currently applied, and control costs," for reducing CO2 from the Portland cement industry. This is a point that environmentalists are disputing.

In a brief issued on 16 May 2011 Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council and others argue that the EPA's decision not to include GHG limits in the NSPS while saying such limits 'may be appropriate' for future action 'is particularly egregious' given that the EPA's findings in the proposed and final versions of the rule point toward inclusion of CO2 standards and that the agency has already determined that CO2 negatively affects public health.

US/Colombia: Ceratech, Inc., a producer of alternative, non-OPC cementitious materials, has accepted another strategic equity investment, this time from Colombian cement powerhouse Cementos Argos. The Ceratech investment follows Argos' recent expansion of its US presence through a USD 760m purchase of Lafarge assets in the south east of the country. The strategic investment will help Argos meet its goal of building a competitive advantage based on sustainability and innovation.

Ceratech's manufacturing process produces technologically advanced, more durable, 'sustainable cements' comprising 95% waste fly ash generated by electric utilities. Its production does not generate any CO2 and the product is well-positioned for adoption by contractors, distributors and companies that are looking for new solutions that better conform to green building initiatives.

The two companies will cooperate to develop and distribute Ceratech's cement through Argos' established ready mix channels throughout the mid-Atlantic, southeastern and southwestern US markets.

"This strategic investment being made by Argos shows how important innovative, sustainable construction products are to the industry," stated Jon Hyman, CEO of Ceratech. "Ours is the only cement on the market composed of more than 90% fly ash. As the industry's only carbon-free cement, we exceed the requirements for green building practices such as USGBC's LEED rating system."