Displaying items by tag: Coal

Climate activist Greta Thunberg memorably summarised the outcome of the 2021 United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference (COP26) as “blah, blah, blah” but what did it mean for the cement and concrete industries?

Making sense of the diplomatic language the UN uses is a full time job due to its impenetrable jargon. This is partly why climate activists and others may have become jaded about the outcome of the world’s biggest climate change jamboree. The conference of the parties (COP) tried desperately to hang on to the 1.5°C warming aim set at the Paris event (COP21) in 2015. This is dependent though on countries sticking to their 2030 targets and becoming net-zero by 2050 or earlier. Unfortunately, both China and India, two of the world’s current top three CO₂ emitters, have announced net-zero dates of after 2050. Those two countries also drew fire in the western press for weakening the language used in the COP’s outcome document about the ‘phasing out’ or ‘phasing down’ of coal use. However, simply getting coal written on the final agreement has been viewed as a result. Other positive outcomes from the event included commitments for countries to review their 2030 targets in 2022, progress towards coordinating carbon trading markets around the world and work on adaptation finance from developed countries to developing ones.

The headline results from COP26 carry mixed implications for the building materials sector. The Paris agreement (COP21) has already achieved an effect in the run-up to COP26 by prompting the cement and concrete industries to release a roadmap from the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) in October 2021. Now it’s down to whether individual governments actually follow the targets and how they enforce it if they do. If they don’t, then the response from building material producers is likely to be mixed at best.

What may have a more tangible effect is the work on carbon markets at COP26. Countries were finally able to complete technical negotiations on the ‘Paris Agreement Rulebook,’ notably including work on Article 6, the section that helps to govern international carbon markets and allows for a global carbon offsetting mechanism. The European Union (EU) Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) has shown over the last year how a high carbon price may be able to stimulate companies to invest in mitigation measures such as upping alternative fuels substitution rates and developing carbon capture and storage/utilisation projects. Critics would argue that it may simply be offshoring cement production and closing local plants unnecessarily. Making a more global carbon trading scheme work amplifies both these gains and risks. Either way though, having an international framework to build upon is a major development. Finally, work on adaptation finance could have an effect for cement producers if the money actually makes it to its destination. The big example of this announced at COP26 was a US$8.5bn fund to help South Africa reduce its use of coal. It is mainly targeted at power generation but local cement producers, as a major secondary user of coal, are likely to be affected too.

Alongside the big announcements from COP26 lots of countries and companies, including ones in the cement sector, announced many sustainability plans. One of these included the launch of the Industrial Deep Decarbonisation Initiative (IDDI) during COP26 by the governments of the UK, India, Germany, Canada and the UAE. This scheme intends to create new markets for low carbon concrete and steel to help decarbonise heavy industry. To do this it will disclose the embodied carbon of major public construction projects by 2025, aim to reach net zero in major public construction steel and concrete by 2050, and work on an emissions reduction target for 2030 which will be announced in 2022. Other goals include setting up reporting standards, product standards, procurement guidelines and a free or low-cost certification service by 2023.

All of this suggests that the pressure remains on for the cement and concrete sector to decarbonise, provided that the governments stick to their targets and pledges, and back it up with action. If they do, then the industry will remind legislators of the necessity of essential infrastructure and then continue to ask for financial aid to support the development and uptake of low carbon cements, carbon capture and whatever else. Further adoption of carbon markets around the world and global rules on carbon leakage could help to accelerate this process, as could adaptation finance and global standards for low carbon concrete. The next year will be critical to see if the 1.5°C target survives and the next decade will be crucial to see if global gross cement-related CO₂ emissions will actually peak. If they do then it will be a case of ‘hip hip hurrah’ rather than ‘blah blah blah’.

US: LafargeHolcimUS and its subsidiary Geocycle have successfully completed a barge shipment of 2000t of reclaimed bottom ash and fly ash from a pond at CenterPoint Energy’s AB Brown coal-fired power plant at Evansville in Indiana. The delivery is the first under a new 6Mt multi-year coal ash recycling contract with the energy provider.

LafargeHolcim US will use the coal ash to replace clay and sand in cement production at its Ste. Genevieve cement plant in Missouri. The producer says that this will help to reduce the plant's consumption of raw materials. LafargeHolcim US and Geocycle have invested US$80m in infrastructure to extract, process, transport, store and recycle ash from the power plant. Geocycle has managed the on-going joint recycling initiative between LafargeHolcim and CenterPoint Energy since 2009.

LafargeHolcim US's chief executive officer Toufic Tabbara said “This milestone is a tangible example of how industry participants together can develop creative and efficient solutions that contribute to the circular economy. Together, LafargeHolcim, Geocycle and CenterPoint Energy will avoid landfilling for power plants and reduce the consumption of non-renewable raw materials. This is a clear win-win for people and our planet.”

Vietnam: Cement producers have raised their prices due to mounting coal costs. In October 2021 Bim Son Cement increased the cost of its products by 6%, according to the Viet Nam News newspaper. Other manufacturers have done likewise. Data from the Vietnam Association of Construction Contractors shows that local coal prices have grown by 7 – 10% recently. Coal represents around 40 – 45% of the production cost of cement. Prices of diesel and additives have also risen.

Japan: Sumitomo Osaka Cement says it will raise the price of its cement from February 2022 due to rising coal and heavy fuel oil costs. It said that these mounting input prices were leading to ‘significant’ manufacturing and logistical overheads. The cement producer expects that these energy prices will remain high in the foreseeable future. It added that maintenance, labour and carbon neutrality goal costs were also growing.

UltraTech Cement, Taiheiyo Cement, Cimtogo and the Chinese Cement Association (CCA) have all been talking about the same thing recently: energy prices.

India-based UtraTech Cement reported this week that coal and petcoke prices nearly doubled in the second quarter of its current financial year, leading to a 17% rise year-on-year in energy costs. Japan-based Taiheiyo Cement released a statement earlier in October 2021 saying that due to mounting coal prices it was planning to raise the price of its cement from the start of 2022. It principally blamed this on increased demand in China and a stagnant export market. It added that it was ‘inevitable’ that prices would rise further in the future. Meanwhile in West Africa, Eric Goulignac, the chief executive officer of Cimtogo, complained to the local press that the reason the company’s cement prices were going up was due to a 250% increase in the cost of fuels for the Scantogo plant and an increase in the price of sea freight of over US$35/t for transporting gypsum and coal.

Other places where the cost of energy has been biting cement producers include Turkey and Serbia. In the former, Türk Çimento, the Turkish Cement Manufacturers' Association, warned in June 2021 that the price of petcoke had nearly tripled over the previous year. Whether it was connected or not, the Turkish Building Contractors Confederation (IMKON) organised a strike in September 2021 due to high costs. The confederation claimed that the price of cement had tripled over the last year. In Serbia electricity prices have risen sharply in recent months in common with much of Europe. Local press reported comments last month from President Aleksandar Vučić saying that an unnamed cement producer had warned of a 25% rise in the price of cement if electricity prices remained high. In the UK the Energy Intensive Users Group (EIUG), a network of lobbying groups for heavy industry including cement, has been holding talks with the government on how to cope with growing energy costs. Finally, in the US, Lhoist warned in September 2021 that is was going to increase the cost of all of its lime products from the start of November 2021 due to increasing gas prices. These are just some of the reactions by cement and lime producers to the current global energy market. No doubt there are many more.

The current global energy crunch has widely been attributed to the waking up of economies following coronavirus-related dormancy in 2020 with supply failing to meet demand. Gas prices have risen to record highs and this has promoted electricity producers to switch to coal in the US, Europe and Asia. This in turn has put pressure on industrial users as both electricity and coal prices have grown and governments have taken action in some cases to protect domestic users. In Europe price pressure has lead to reductions in ammonia and fertiliser production. Power cuts have been reported in China and India.

In China a variety of factors have converged to create a crisis. These include shutting down coal mines on environmental and safety grounds, anti-corruption measures and even promoting mine closures to facilitate clean skies for national events such as the Communist party’s 100th anniversary. Disruption to import sources such as a ban on Australian coal on political grounds, flooding in Indonesia and a renewed coronavirus outbreak in Mongolia can’t have helped either. Thermal coal futures traded on the Zhengzhou Commodity Exchange hit a high of US$263/t on 15 October 2021 marking a 34% rise through the week and the largest weekly growth since trading started in 2013. The International Energy Agency estimates that coal demand in China grew by over 10% year-on-year in the first half of 2021 but coal production increased by just over 5%.

Industrial users have suffered as energy supplies have been rationed and producers asked to cut output. In September 2021 cement output fell by 12% year-on-year to 205Mt from 233Mt in September 2020. This is the lowest monthly figure for September since 2011. It’s also not the usual direction of double-digit rate of change that the Chinese cement sector is used to. The CCA attributed this mainly to energy controls, power shortages and high coal prices in Jiangsu, Hunan, Zhejiang, Guangdong, Guangxi, Yunnan, Shandong and elsewhere. Cement output for the first nine months of 2021 is still ahead of 2020 at 1.77Bnt compared to 1.67Bnt but it’s been slipping noticeably since July 2021.

This will leave energy users, including cement producers, watching the weather forecasts rather closely this winter. Should the Northern Hemisphere suffer a cold one then energy prices such as coal will reflect it. Industrial users may also become subject to energy rationing in many places. The knock-on effect of this then will be higher cement prices. However bad the winter does turn out to be though we can expect more cement companies trying to explain bashfully why their prices are going up. On the plus side any producer that can diversify its energy mix through solar, alternative fuels or whatever else is likely to be doing so soon if they are not already.

Japan: Taiheiyo Cement says that the cost of producing its cement has increased throughout 2021. The company said the coal prices have risen due to increased coal demand in China and a reduction in exports from coal-producing countries. It anticipates further rises in the price of coal. Additionally, it foresees a rise in maintenance costs as the equipment at its plants nears the end of its service life. The producer says that it is endeavouring to improve productivity and reduce costs.

Pakistan: The All Pakistan Cement Manufacturers Association (APCMA) recorded a 5.7% year-on-year decline in overall cement sales in the first quarter of the 2022 financial year to 12.8Mt from 13.6Mt in the corresponding period of the 2021 financial year. Intensified local construction activity increased domestic cement sales by 4% to 11.3Mt/yr from 10.9Mt/yr.

Costs increased – notably the price of coal, which more than tripled year-on-year to US$210/t from US$68/t. Its transport costs from South Africa more than doubled to US$30/t from US$11/t. Currency effects exacerbated the rise in costs. The Dawn newspaper has reported that exports fell by 44% in the period to 1.55Mt from 2.74Mt. Afghanistan had previously received 606,000t of Pakistani cement exports, 22% of the total. This figure fell by 36% year-on-year to 389,000t, 25% of the first-quarter 2021 total, due to political unrest and increased transport costs.

India: Cement companies produced 82Mt of cement in the three-month period ending on 30 June 2021, the first quarter of the 2022 financial year, corresponding to growth of 54% year-on-year. Production in the quarter declined by 12% quarter-on-quarter, due to the proliferation of new state Covid-19 lockdowns from April 2021 onwards. The Hitavada newspaper has reported that ratings agency ICRA forecast that full-year production will rise by 12% in the 2022 financial year, on account of pent-up demand, growing rural housing demand and a pick-up in infrastructure activity. It nonetheless estimated that production will remain 2% below pre-Covid-19 outbreak 2020 financial year levels, with continuing high costs due to rising fuel prices. In the first quarter of the 2022 financial year, coal prices more than doubled and petcoke prices rose by 98% year-on-year.

Asia: France-based Fives says it has commissioned a Pillard Novaflam Evolution burner for an unnamed cement plant in East Asia. Due to the travel restrictions linked to the coronavirus pandemic, the commissioning was carried out remotely with the cooperation of the customer. A 143MW coal and petcoke burner with oil as a start-up fuel was supplied as a replacement for an old burner. The aim of this replacement was to increase the kiln capacity to 9000t/day without impacting its NO_x emissions whilst maintaining a good clinker quality despite a high sulphur content in the petcoke. The installation is now in production and an intervention is planned in the coming weeks to further optimise the operation.

Pakistan: The Pakistan International Bulk Terminal plans to invest US$70m in increasing its coal capacity by 40% to 17Mt/yr from 12Mt/yr with the installation of a second conveyor belt. The expanded terminal will open in late 2023 or early 2024. The Dawn newspaper has reported that cement producers previously called for an expansion of the country’s coal import infrastructure. The All Pakistan Cement Manufacturers Association (APCMA) lobbied the government in July 2021 to permit coal discharge at the 10,000t/day Karachi Port Trust port. By contrast, the Pakistan International Bulk Terminal currently has a capacity of around 30,000t/day. It charges importers US$5.49/t of coal, plus a US$1/t handling fee for use of its berth.