Displaying items by tag: Finance

India: Grasim Industries accepted bids worth US$117m in an issue of bonds on 5 June, Reuters has reported. The bonds reportedly have a maturity of five years.

India: Dalmia Cement (Bharat) plans to raise US$122m through the issue of bonds maturing in seven and 10 years. Reuters has reported that the sale includes a greenshoe option of US$34.9m. The producer will receive coupon and commitment bids for both options from 11 June 2025.

A week ago, there were two fully-financed cement plant carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) projects underway in the US.¹ Now, there aren’t.

Projects to decarbonise National Cement Company’s Lebec, California, plant and Heidelberg Materials North America’s Mitchell, Indiana, plant were each set to receive up to US$500m in US Department of Energy (DoE) funding on a one-for-one basis with private investments. The projects were to include eventual 950,000t/yr (Lebec) and 2Mt/yr (Mitchell) carbon capture installations. Additionally, the Lebec plant was to transition to limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) production and the use of alternative fuels (AF), including pistachio shells. Both were beneficiaries of the DoE’s US$6bn Industrial Demonstrations Program (IDP), touted by former US Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm as ‘Spurring on the next generation of decarbonisation technologies in key industries [to] keep America the most competitive nation on Earth.’ Disbursement of funding under the programme was frozen by executive order of President Trump in January 2025.^{2, 3}

On 30 May 2025, Trump’s Secretary of Energy announced that the government in which Granholm served had approved spending on industrial decarbonisation without a ‘thorough financial review.’ He cancelled remaining project funding in signature Trumpian style, in list form.⁴ Among 24 de-funded projects, Lebec and Mitchell accounted for US$1bn (27%) of a total US$3.73bn in allocated funds that have now been withdrawn.

It's hard not to feel sorry for the management of the Lebec and Mitchell plant and the teams that had been working to deliver these projects. Heidelberg Materials has yet to comment, though CEO Dominik von Achten was in North America in late May 2025. National Cement Company parent Vicat, meanwhile, conceded the setback with a strong statement of its commitment to CO₂ reduction, to 497kg/t of cementitious product globally.⁵ There was a diplomatic edge to the statement too, however. Echoing the Secretary of Energy, Vicat said that its target remains ‘solely based on existing proven technologies, including energy efficiency, AF substitution and clinker rate reduction’ – as opposed to ‘any technological breakthroughs’ like carbon capture. There are currently no public details of possible back-up financing arrangements for these projects; for now, the best guess at their status is ‘uncertain.’

Alongside these group’s local subsidiaries, another organisation that has to do business daily with the DoE is the American Cement Association (ACA). President and CEO Mike Ireland has continually acknowledged the complex needs of the government, while stating the association’s case for keeping support in place. With regard to these funding cuts, Ireland’s emphasis fell on the latter side: “Today’s announcement is candidly a missed opportunity for both America’s cement manufacturers and this administration, as CCS projects have long been supported by bipartisan members in Congress and bipartisan administrations.”⁶ He reasserted the ACA’s understanding that carbon capture aligns with the administration’s strategy to bolster domestic manufacturing and innovation.

The early 2020s heyday of US carbon capture was founded on gradual, consensus-based politics – unlike its demise. Table 1 (below) gives a non-exhaustive account of recent and on-going front-end engineering design (FEED) studies and the funding they received:

Additionally, MTR Carbon Capture, which is executing a carbon capture pilot at St Marys Cement’s Charlevoix plant in Michigan, previously received US$1.5m in Fossil Energy Research and Development funding towards a total US$3.7m for an unspecified cement plant carbon capture study.¹⁰

Market researcher Greenlight Insights valued industrial decarbonisation initiatives under the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (ODEC – the now defunct DoE office responsible, among other things, for the IDP) at US$65.9bn in cumulative returns in April 2025.¹¹ The government has yet to publish any account of how it might replace this growth, or the 291,000 anticipated new jobs that would have come with it. Given all this (along with the extensive financial and technical submissions that accompanied each project), the issues raised by the DoE are presumably budgetary, or else founded in a perception of CCUS as essentially uneconomical.

Carbon capture is very, very expensive. A fatuous reply is that so is climate change, just with a few more ‘verys.’ Hurricane Ian in September 2022 cost US$120bn, more than enough to fund carbon capture installations at all 91 US cement plants, along the lines of the former Lebac and Mitchell agreements.¹² Unlike climate change, however, carbon capture remains unproven. Advocates need to continually justify taxpayer involvement in such a high-risk venture.

At its Redding cement plant in California, Lehigh Hanson successfully delivered a funding-free FEED study, with its partner Fortera raising US$85m in a Series C funding. This presents an alternative vision of innovation as fully-privatised, in which the government might still have the role of shaping demand. This is borne out in the IMPACT Act, a bill which ‘sailed through’ the lower legislature in March 2025.¹³ If enacted, it will empower state and municipal transport departments to pledge to buy future outputs of nascent reduced-CO₂ cements and concretes.

A separate aspect of the funding cancellation that appears decidedly cruel is the targeted removal of grants to start-ups. Two alternative building materials developers – Brimstone and Sublime Systems – were listed for a combined US$276m of now vapourised liquidity. Both are commercially viable without the funding, but the effect of this reversal – including on the next generation of US innovators who hoped to follow in their footsteps – can only be chilling. As non-governmental organisation Industrious Labs said of the anticipated closure of the ODEC in April 2025: “We may see companies based in other geographies start to pull ahead.”

Heidelberg Materials’s Brevik carbon capture plant came online in June 2025, 54 months after the producer secured approval for the project. The term of a presidency is 48 months. This probably means that producers in the US will no longer see CCUS as a viable investment, even under sympathetic administrations.

Even as government funding for CCS flickers from ‘dormant’ to ‘extinct,’ the sun is rising on other US projects. Monarch Cement Company commissioned a 20MW solar power plant at its Humboldt cement plant in Kansas on 27 May 2025. The global momentum is behind decarbonisation, even if economics determines that it will only take the form of smaller-scale mitigation measures at US cement plants into the medium-term future. We can hope that these, at least, might include the AF and LC3 aspects of National Cement Company’s plans at Lebec.

References

1. Clean Air Task Force, ‘Global Carbon Capture Activity and Project Map,’ accessed 3 June 2025, www.catf.us/ccsmapglobal/

2. Democrats Appropriations, ‘Issue 5: Freezing the Industrial Demonstrations Program Undermines U.S. Manufacturing Competitiveness and Strands Private Investment,’ January 2025, www.democrats-appropriations.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/democrats-appropriations.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/5%20DOE%20Frozen%20Funding%20-%20Industrial%20Demos.pdf

3. Colorado Attorney General, ‘Attorney General Phil Weiser secures court order blocking Trump administration’s illegal federal funding freeze,’ 6 March 2025, www.coag.gov/press-releases/weiser-court-order-trump-federal-funding-freeze-3-6-25/

4. US Department of Energy, ‘Secretary Wright Announces Termination of 24 Projects, Generating Over $3 Billion in Taxpayer Savings,’ 30 May 2025, www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-wright-announces-termination-24-projects-generating-over-3-billion-taxpayer

5. Vicat, ‘Cancellation of funding agreement for the Lebec Net Zero project by the US Department of Energy,’ 3 June 2025, www.vicat.com/news/cancellation-funding-agreement-lebec-net-zero-project-us-department-energy

6. American Cement Association, ‘Statement from the American Cement Association on Department of Energy’s Cancellation of Clean Energy Grants,’ 30 May 2025, www.cement.org/2025/05/30/statement-from-the-american-cement-association-on-department-of-energys-cancellation-of-clean-energy-grants/

7. Gov Tribe, ‘Cooperative Agreement DEFE0031942,’ 30 September 2022, www.govtribe.com/award/federal-grant-award/cooperative-agreement-defe0031942

8. Higher Gov, ‘DECD0000010 Cooperative Agreement,’ 13 May 2024, www.highergov.com/grant/DECD0000010/

9. Gov Tribe, ‘Cooperative Agreement DEFE0032222,’ 7 February 2025, www.govtribe.com/award/federal-grant-award/cooperative-agreement-defe0032222

10. Higher Gov, ‘DEFE0031949 Cooperative Agreement,’ 1 May 2023, www.highergov.com/grant/DEFE0031949/

11. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, ‘Jobs, Economic Impact of OCED Closure,’ 11 April 2025, www.c2es.org/press-release/oced-closure-could-cost-65-billion-290000-jobs/

12. National Centers for Environmental Information, ‘Events,’ accessed 4 June 2025, www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/events/US/2022?disasters%5B%5D=tropical-cyclone

13. US Congress, ‘H.R.1534 - IMPACT Act,’ 26 March 2025, www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1534

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: Eco Material Technologies has secured a US$800m green term loan facility. The facility will mature in 2032. Eco Material Technologies will invest the funds in expansion to its supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) production capacities, to raise them to 20Mt/yr.

The company noted the oversubscription of the raise as demonstrative of high confidence in its proposition for the decarbonisation of cement and concrete.

India: Aditya Birla subsidiary UltraTech Cement is reportedly considering issuing bonds worth US$118m. Informist MoneyWire News has reported that the issuance may take place later in November 2024.

India: UltraTech Cement announced plans to make a private placement of non-convertible debentures (NCDs) on 12 November 2024. MarketLine News has reported that the value of the proposed placement as US$356m.

One unusual thing about coverage of cement in the media is the way that discussions often centre precisely on its absence – that is, on alternatives to cement. These alternatives boast unique chemistries and performance characteristics, but are all produced without Portland cement clinker. They are generally called ‘alternative cements,’ perhaps because ‘cement-free cement’ does not have such a commercially viable ring to it. This contradictory tendency reached a new high in the past week, with developments in alternative cement across Asia, Europe, the Middle East and North America. Together, they hint at a more diverse future for the ‘cement’ industry than the one we know today.

Asia

In Indonesia, Suvo Strategic Minerals has concluded tests with Makassar State University of a novel nickel-slag-based cement. Huadi Nickel-Alloy Indonesia supplied raw materials, and tests showed a seven-day compressive strength of 37.5MPa. Suvo Strategic Minerals says that a partnership with Huadi Nickel-Alloy Indonesia for commercial production is a likely next step.

Europe

Cement producer Mannok and minerals company Boliden partnered with the South Eastern Applied Materials (SEAM) research centre in Ireland to launch a project to develop supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) from shale on 7 October 2024. The project will additionally investigate CO₂-curing of cement paste backfill for use in mines. Irish state-owned global commerce agency Enterprise Ireland has contributed €700,000 in funding.

UK-based SCM developer Karbonite expects to launch trial production of its olivine-based SCM with a concrete company in 2025. The start-up launched Karbonite Group Holding BV, with offices in the Netherlands, to facilitate this new phase. Karbonite’s SCM is activated at 750 – 850°C and sequesters CO₂ in the activation process, resulting in over 56% lower CO₂ emissions than ordinary Portland cement (OPC). Managing director Rajeev Sood told Global Cement that talks are already underway for subsequent expansions into the UAE and India.

Back in the UK, contractor John Sisk & Son has received €597,000 from national innovation agency Innovate UK. John Sisk & Son is testing fellow Ireland-based company Ecocem’s <25% clinker cement technology in concrete for use in its on-going construction of the Wembley Park mixed development in London.

At the same time, Innovate UK granted a further €3.23m to other companies for concrete decarbonisation. Recipients included a calcined clay being developed by Cemcor, an SCM being developed from electric arc furnace byproducts by Cocoon, a geopolymer cement technology being developed by EFC Green Concrete Technology UK and an initiative to develop alternative cement from recycled concrete fines at the Materials Processing Institute in Middlesbrough. Also included was the Skanska Costain Strabag joint venture, which is working on the London stretch of the upcoming HS2 railway. The joint venture, along with partners including cement producer Tarmac and construction chemicals company Sika UK, will test low-kaolinite London clay as a raw material with which to produce calcined clay as a cement substitute in concrete structures in HS2’s rail tunnels.

Middle East

Talks are underway between UK-based calcined clay producer Next Generation SCM and City Cement subsidiary Nizak Mining Company over the possible launch of a joint venture in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The joint venture would build a 350,000t/yr reduced-CO₂ concrete plant, which would use alternative cement based on Next Generation SCM’s calcined clay.

North America

Texas-based SCM developer Solidia Technologies recently patented its carbonatable calcium silicate-based alternative cement, which sequesters CO₂ as it cures.

Meanwhile, C-Crete Technologies made its first commercial pour of its granite-based cement-free concrete in New York, US. C-Crete Technologies says that the product offers cost and performance parity with conventional cement, with net zero CO₂ emissions. Its raw material is globally more abundant than the limestone used as a raw material for clinker. Other abundantly available feedstocks successfully deployed within C-Crete Technologies’ repertoire include basalt and zeolite.

Across New York State, in Binghamton, KLAW Industries has succeeded in replacing 20% of concrete’s cement content with its powdered glass-based SCM, Pantheon. KLAW Industries has delivered samples to local municipalities and the New York State Department of Transportation. Its success expands the discussion of possible circular cement ingredients from the industrial sphere into post-consumer resources.

In Calgary, Canada, a novel SCM has drawn attention from one of the major cement incumbents: Germany-based Heidelberg Materials. It invested in local construction and demolition materials (CDM)-based SCM developer EnviCore on 9 October 2024. The companies plan to build a pilot plant at an existing Heidelberg Materials CDM recycling centre.

Conclusion

Alternative cement developers are still finding the words to talk about their products. They may be more than ‘supplementary’ up to the point of entirely supplanting 100% of clinker. Product webpages offer ‘hydraulic binder,’ ‘pozzolan’ and even ‘cement.’ As alternative ‘cements’ are developed, they build on the work of pioneers like Joseph Aspdin and Louis Vicat. Start-ups and their backers are now reaching commercial offerings, on a similar-but-different footing to cement itself. None of these novel materials positions itself as the sole, last-minute ‘super sub’ in the construction sector’s confrontation with climate change. Rather, they are a package of solutions which can combine into a net zero-emissions heavy building materials offering, hopefully before 2050.

Related to this is the need for ‘technology neutral’ standards, as championed this week by the Alliance for Low-Carbon Cement and Concrete (ALCCC), along with 23 other European industry associations, civil society organisations and think tanks. The term may sound new, but the concept is critical to the eventual uptake of alternative cements: standards, the ALCCC says, should be purely performance-based. They ought not attempt to define what technology, for example cement clinker, makes a suitable building material. According to the ALCCC, Europe’s building materials standards are not technology neutral, but instead ‘gatekeep’ market access, to the benefit of conventional cement and the exclusion of ‘proven and scalable low-carbon products.’

At the same time, cement itself is changing. Market research from USD Analytics showed an anticipated 5% composite annual growth rate in blended cement sales between 2024 and 2032, more than doubling throughout the period from US$253bn to US$369bn. If you can’t beat it, blend with it!

For a further discussion of alternative cement and binders in Europe, see Global Cement’s interview with ALCCC co-ordinator Joren Verschaeve in the forthcoming November issue of Global Cement Magazine on 17 October 2024.

Saudi Arabia: Al Jouf Cement Company’s board of directors has accepted the resignation of Suleiman Abdulaziz Al-Zaben as chair of its audit committee. Al-Zaben had been serving as committee member from outside the board.

In July 2024, Al Jouf Cement Company took legal action against unnamed former board members, following an investigation into possible ‘administrative irregularities’ by an independent auditor launched in December 2023.

Saudi Arabia: Eastern Province Cement Company has secured US$226m through a credit facilities agreement with Saudi National Bank. Arab News Releases has reported that Eastern Province Cement Company will use the funds for an upcoming new 10,000t/day line at its Al Khursaniyah cement plant in Eastern Province.

The on-going construction of the Al Khursaniyah cement plant’s new line has a budget of US$271m and was first announced on 7 January 2024.