Displaying items by tag: China

Oman: Raysut Cement has held a groundbreaking ceremony for a new 9MW waste heat recovery (WHR) unit at its Salalah cement plant. The Times of Oman newspaper has reported that China-based Sinoma Overseas Development will undertake the engineering, procurement and construction work on the project.

The producer said that the installation “Will contribute significantly to our ambitious targets such as reducing power consumption by 25 - 30%, reducing CO₂ emissions and above all reducing in water consumption by more than 50%.”

Cement imports were one of the themes in this week’s news, with stories on the topic from South Africa and Ukraine. The former concerned the latest chapter in that industry’s saga on slowing down imports. The International Trade Administration Commission (ITAC) has started a review on tariffs imposed on cement from Pakistan that were introduced in 2015.

Local producers in South Africa have experienced mixed fortunes since 2015, such as PPC and AfriSam’s failed merger attempt or the introduction of a local carbon tax, and were starting to complain again about imports even before the effects of coronavirus in 2020. This led the Concrete Institute to lobby ITAC in 2019 about rising imports from other nations, principally Vietnam and China.

Back in 2013 cement imports from Pakistan to South Africa were 1.1Mt. This represented the vast majority of all imports to the country. Tariffs of 14 – 77% were imposed on Pakistan-based exporters in mid-2015, initially for six months, but this was then extended. Roughly a year later in mid-to-late 2016, Sephaku Holdings said that imports of cement had ‘significantly’ declined on a year-on-year basis, particularly from Pakistan. By the end of June 2016 approximately 0.16Mt had been imported compared to 0.5Mt in the previous period. However, it noted that 75% of the volume was from China. Since then imports started to creep up. Cement imports reportedly rose by 84% year-on-year in 2018 and then by 11% in 2019. Data from construction industry data company Industry Insight suggests that Vietnam accounted for 70% or 0.47Mt of the 0.68Mt of cement imported into South Africa in the first nine months of 2020. The remaining 30% or 0.20Mt came from Pakistan. In this kind of environment it seems unlikely that ITAC will do anything other than extend tariffs.

Meanwhile in the northern hemisphere, in Ukraine this week a court in Kiev dismissed a challenge by the Belarusian Cement Company to remove cement import tariffs from Russia, Belarus and Moldova that were introduced in mid-2019 for five years. Notably, a law firm representing Dyckerhoff Cement Ukraine, HeidelbergCement Ukraine, Ivano-Frankivsk Ukraine and CRH subsidiary Podilsky Cement commented favourably upon the court’s decision to uphold tariffs. These producers form UKRCEMENT, the association of cement producers of Ukraine. However, the association doesn’t include Russia-based Eurocement, which operates Ukraine’s largest cement plant at Balakleya. Relations have been poor between Russia and Ukraine since a war between the countries that started in 2014. So any trade tariffs implemented upon Russia and/or Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) members will inevitably carry the whiff of geopolitics. Yet, in Ukraine’s defence, it also started an anti-dumping investigation into cement imports from Turkey in September 2020. Nationalism may be relevant but let’s not discount hard-nosed economics just yet.

Turkey’s involvement in Ukraine leads to last week’s presentation at Global Cement Live by Sylvie Doutres, DSG Consultants on cement and clinker trade in and out of the Mediterranean region. Readers can watch the presentation here but the headline story here was the trend of reducing exports away from southern European countries such as Spain, Italy and Greece, to greater exports from North African countries and Turkey over the last decade. Turkey particularly has pushed its share of exports even more in 2020 despite (or perhaps because of) a tough domestic market. The general trend here away from southern Europe has been blamed on European Union-based (EU) producers becoming less competitive often against newer plants in nearby countries.

Battles between producers and government tariff policies are a perennial feature of any market in commodities such as cement. The ebb and flow of import and export markets cover many factors including production costs, distribution networks, tariff structures and more. Distinctive features of cement trading, for example, are the high cost of transporting heavy building materials over land and the world’s chronic cement production overcapacity. In the EU’s case one reason that often gets blamed is the emissions trading system (EU ETS) and the mounting cost it is imposing upon cement production. For example, today’s story that Holcim España wants to convert its integrated Jerez plant into a grinding unit has been blamed on falling exports and a reduction in ETS credits. It is noteworthy then that the EU ETS rate breached the Euro30/t level in December 2020. This may be good news for the sustainability lobby but the exodus of exports away from Southern Europe tells its own story. What form the EU ETS carbon border adjustment mechanism takes as part of the EU Green Deal will be watched closely by producers both inside and outside the EU.

Global Cement Live continues on 21 January 2021 with Kevin Rudd, Independent Cement Consultants, presenting 'Independent or third party factory acceptance testing of major cement plant equipment and critical spare parts and the challenges of Covid’

China: Seven of Huaxin Cement’s plants have been selected on a national energy efficiency list released by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the State Administration of Market Regulation. The list contains energy efficiency ‘leaders’ from energy intensive industries in 2020. It includes 28 cement companies. Huaxin Cement’s plants were selected in Xinyang, Yangxin, Zhaotong, Zhuzhou, Xigaze, Wuxue and Tibet factory. Of these the Xinyang plant had the lowest energy intensity of clinker production of all the cement producers on the list.

China: Sinoma (CNBM) International Engineering’s value of new projects grew by 9% year-on-year to US$5.3bn in 2020. Most of these projects came from growth in its construction business segment. However, new project value from its equipment manufacturing business fell by 5% to US$629m. By region, domestic new project value decreased by 3% to US$2.1bn but overseas new project value rose by 19% to US$3.2bn. The engineering company and member of CNBM group also reported that its US$480m project to build a 5000t/day clinker production line in Zambia for Central African Cement remains in the financing stage. The project was originally announced in late 2018.

China: Huaxin Cement has forecast a 9 -14% year-on-year fall in full-year net profit in 2020, of up to US$140m. It said that it recorded a net profit attributable to shareholders after deducting non-recurring gains and losses of around US$980m in 2019.

The company said, “The main reason for 2020 performance decline is the hit of Covid-19 in the first half of this year and vast flood disaster along Yangtze River in July 2020. The sales volume of main products were hugely affected and the price fell to some extent, leading to the reduction in the operating revenue.”

Vietnam: Vietnamese cement export growth is forecast to slow in 2021. The Viet Nam News newspaper has reported on research by SSI Research that expected exports to remain stable due to high infrastructure spending in China, but that growth is unlikely due to the full recovery of Chinese domestic cement supply in 2020. SSI Research forecasts a total 2021 cement and clinker sales growth of 2% year-on-year to 104Mt from 102Mt. It predicts a 5% - 7% increase in domestic sales. The country’s installed cement production capacity is due to rise by 7% or 7Mt in early 2021.

Indonesia: Semen Indonesia subsidiary Semen Padang’s cement and clinker exports totalled 1.6Mt in 2020. Indonesia Government News has reported that the company said that it exported 0.2Mt of cement and 1.4Mt of clinker throughout the year. The main markets for its products were Bangladesh, China, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Australia, the Maldives and Sri Lanka.

Semen Indonesia group senior export sales manager Fifit Abriyanto said, “There are two types of cement that we export, namely ordinary Portland cement (OPC) Type I grade 52.5N and OPC Type I grade 42.5N."

China: Huaxin Cement has ignited the kiln and started production at a new integrated 2.9Mt/yr cement plant near Huangshi City in Hubei Province. The company said that the plant will combine second-generation intelligent dry kilns, alternative fuel (AF) co-processing and a waste heat recovery (WHR) power plant, at a total investment cost of around US$465m. The group expressed its commitment to digital innovation and the promotion of Internet and industry. An artificial sand and gravel unit has also been started at the same site.

One of the last news stories we covered before the Christmas break was that Lafarge Poland had selected China-based Nanjing Kisen International Engineering as the general contractor for a Euro100m-plus upgrade to its Małogoszcz cement plant. This appears to be the first major European cement plant upgrade project to be publicly run by a Chinese contractor. There may be other European projects in the sector run by Chinese companies ‘on the down-low.’

If it is the first then this is a significant milestone for the growth of the Chinese industry. It is a noteworthy first for Nanjing Kisen in the European Union. Europe is the home, after all, of a number of locally-based contractors and companies that can build or upgrade cement plants including FLSmidth, Fives, ThyssenKrupp, IKN and others. Indeed, all of the work on this project might actually be conducted by local companies, selected by the general contractor. For example, Lafarge Poland says that the general contractor will select a subcontractor on the Polish market.

It’s easy to fall into jingoistic nostalgia but should we really be surprised that China can competitively build cement plants given the ferocious growth of its own industry over the last few decades? Arguments by Western critics against growing Chinese dominance in industry have tended to home in on excuses why they might be ‘cheating’ such as intellectual property theft, unfair state aid or the use of low-cost infrastructure loans to countries along its Belt and Road Initiative. That last one carries some irony given that not so long ago discussions about developing world debt were framed in the context of the Cold War and the oil crisis in the 1970s. Western countries were seen as the bogeymen depending on one’s political outlook. With this in mind, the Financial Times recently reported on data released in December 2020 that suggested that China might be heading into its own overseas debt crisis. The takeaway message here is that attempting to apply China’s whopping infrastructure boom elsewhere might not work so well without the same level of control. Exporting production overcapacity abroad may simply turn out to be something like a giant Ponzi scheme! For the cement industry this may mean a pause or wind-down in the number of new plants backed by Chinese money, often with Chinese contractors tied in, and that the rise of Chinese engineering firms might not seem as unassailable as all that after all.

This leads into another noteworthy story that we also published before Christmas on China’s latest proposal to further reduce production capacity at home. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) wants to tighten the ratio of production capacity that has to be closed before new capacity can be built from 1.25:1 to 1.5:1. The kicker is that the new rules also include a clause intended to restrict the use of so-called ‘zombie’ capacity in the swapping process by limiting eligibility to productions lines that have been operated for two or more consecutive years since 2013. These rules seem targeted at the present day but they could potentially push Chinese cement production capacity per capita to rates more similar to those found in developed economies elsewhere (i.e. halve existing Chinese production capacity). Many of the country’s kilns were built in the early 2000s and the average lifespan of a clinker kiln is 50 years. This suggests that the ministry is thinking seriously about culling capacity by the administration’s carbon neutrality target of 2060.

Chinese penetration in the European cement plant market is more of an after-thought given the pace of projects in Asia and Africa over the last decade and the maturity of the sector. It can also be misleading given that some very-European-sounding engineering companies are actually owned by Chinese concerns. Yet no doubt local contractors and suppliers would like to keep any business they can. On the other hand, more market share may be found in Europe over the coming decades from retrofitting CO₂ mitigating equipment or building the anticipated hydrogen revolution once the regulatory and financial framework starts to favour it. Or maybe shifts to service and/or machine intelligence-style packages are the way forward. Nanjing Kisen may be the first Chinese company to upgrade a European cement plant but the market focus may quickly move on. Time will tell.

Answers by email for when readers think the first cement plant or production line in the US will be built by a Chinese company.

Happy New Year from Global Cement

China: Companies increased total cement production in the first 11 months of 2020 by 1% year-on-year to 2.16Bnt from 2.14Bnt in the first 11 months of 2019. Xinhua News Agency has reported that estimated total building materials sector operating revenues rose by 1% to US$700bn. The sector’s estimated profit for the period rose by 3% to US$61.9bn.