Displaying items by tag: Moldova

Moldova: The Rybnitsa cement plant has closed amid a cutoff of gas supply to the Transnistrian region, leaving half of its 650 employees at home with 66% of their pay, while the rest carry out equipment repairs and cleaning, according to IPN news.

Interim director Oksana Baka said “The plant had a plan to produce about 30,000t of cement during this period. This stock would have ensured our protection on the market, but now the situation is critical because our supplies are insufficient.” Contributions to the local budget will decrease if gas supplies are not restored by February 2025.

The plant is modernising its dust filtration system and preparing for resumption once gas supplies are restored. On 1 January 2025, Gazprom stopped supplying gas to the Transnistrian region, after gas transit through Ukraine ended. The region remains under a state of emergency until 8 February 2025.

Moldova: The Ministry of Economic Development and Digitalisation has announced that Ukraine will cancel an existing anti-dumping duty on imports of Moldovan cement until 31 December 2023. Ukraine announced the move following constructive discussions held during a meeting of the co-chairs of the Moldovan-Ukrainian intergovernmental commission on trade and economic cooperation held in Odesa, according to Interfax-Ukraine.

Moldovan Minister of Economic Development and Digitalisation Vadim Humene insisted that Ukraine cancel the anti-dumping duty so that Moldova did not have to ‘initiate trade defence processes’ regarding products that Moldova imports from Ukraine.

In addition to the temporary removal of the anti-dumping duty, the two countries expressed their readiness to help remove barriers to trade and simplify border controls to optimise the flow of goods, review environmental duties and ensure transparent, uniform application of legislation by both countries.

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’

Ukraine: The District Administrative Court of Kiev has dismissed Belarusian Cement Company (BCC)’s claim against the government’s Interdepartmental Commission on International Trade for the cancellation of anti-dumping duties on cement. The duties on imported cement are 57% the value of goods from Belarus, 94% from Moldova and 115% from Russia. The commission introduced the tariffs in late May 2019 and they will expire in late May 2024.

The law firm representing third parties Dyckerhoff Cement Ukraine, HeidelbergCement Ukraine, Ivano-Frankivsk Ukraine and CRH subsidiary Podilsky Cement said "The court recognised the need to protect the violated rights of national cement producers in Ukraine from dumped imports of goods to Ukraine.” It added that the imports had caused ‘significant damage’ to national producers.

Last month Soyuzcement, the Union of Russian Cement Producers, reported that cement production was on course to grow by 8% year-on-year to 58Mt in 2019. This estimate was based on growth from January to October 2019 followed by a modest rise in November.

Graph 1: Cement production in Russia, 2010 – 2019. Source: CM Pro, Ernst & Young.

The pickup is significant because it’s the country’s first annual resumption of growth since 2014. At that time low commodity prices, a worsening economy and international sanctions broke a fairly steady growth cycle that had started in 2000. The only blip in that run was the global economic downturn around 2008. In the medium to long term Soyuzcement’s review pinpointed growth drivers as being government-backed residential housing schemes, integrated land development projects and an increase in the construction of concrete roads. This increase has been driven by consumption growth in most regions, led by a 12% rise in the Central Federal District although the Volga Federal District started to slow in the second half of 2019.

Figure 1: Russian Federal Districts by cement production in 2016. Source: Soyuzcement.ru.

Anecdotally, this change in the fortunes of the Russian cement industry can be seen in the volume of news coverage on the Global Cement website over the last few years. The mean number of news stories on the country in 2016 and 2017, increased by half in 2018 and then again in 2019. Partly this is down to our attempts to increase our coverage of the region but it also shows a general trend. In the news specifically there haven’t been many new plant projects domestically but there has been a steady stream of upgrades and maintenance related stories. For example, Eurocement subsidiary Kavkazcement reported in recent weeks that it had installed a replacement dry kiln. This has been part of a group of upgrades that Eurocement has started in 2019. On the supplier side both Germany’s Gebr. Pfeiffer and Italy’s Bedeschi opened subsidiaries in Russia in 2019.

One thing that didn’t seem to slow down the growth were mounting tariffs on Russian exports into Ukraine. Russia’s neighbour first blocked imports of cement from Russia in May 2019 due to, what it said was a Russian ban on imports. It then followed this with an antidumping rate of 115% for imported clinker and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) from Russia. It also penalised imports from Belarus and Moldova, although at lower rates. Russia’s cement export rates seemed untroubled by this, rising by 13.5% year-on-year to 0.8Mt in the first 10 months of 2019. Exports hit of high of just below 2Mt/yr in 2014 but have since stabilised at around 1Mt/yr. Imports reached around 5Mt/yr in the early 2010s and have been slowly declining since then, reaching 1.5Mt in 2018.

The lowered production rate that the Russian cement industry has faced over the last five years has been noteworthy given the apparent low capacity utilisation rate. The Global Cement Directory 2019 records the country as having a production capacity of 111Mt/yr. This gives Russia a capacity utilisation rate of 48% in 2018! Unlike, say, the countries in southern Europe that have had to rationalise their cement industries following the post-2008 decline, Russia may have structural aspects to the industry that have helped protect it from lower utilisation rates. These include relatively low export-import rates and the large size of the country with limited sea access to many regions. Most of its production capacity is located in the west but a sizable minority of plants are based further east across the Ural, Siberian and Far Eastern regions. Even under subdued economic conditions, plants in these places are likely to be less susceptible to foreign imports, for example.

Looking ahead, the question is whether the current growth that the cement industry is enjoying is viable once government spending slows down. Alongside this the industry could also focus on sustainability. As the government announced in early January 2020, the country expects to face both negative and positive effects from climate change. The cement industry could be at the front of this trend if it decides to clean up production and/or move into new markets as the Arctic region opens up.

Ukraine: Antidumping duties on clinker and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) from Russia, Belarus and Moldova introduced by Ukraine in mid-2019 have benefitted local producers. Mykola Kruts, the chairman of the board of Ivano-Frankivskcement, said that his company has been operating at a 90% capacity utilisation rate, according to Interfax-Ukraine.

Belarus/Moldova/Russia/Ukraine: Tariffs on on imported building materials from Belarus, Moldova and Russia imposed by the Ukrainian government will start on 26 June 2019, according to Interfax. The interdepartmental commission for international trade has set duties of 115% for goods originating in Russia, 57% for goods from Belarus and 94% for goods from Moldova.

Moldova: Rybnitsky Cement plans to challenge the Ukrainian government’s tariffs on building materials from Russia, Belarus and Moldova. The producer recently started exporting cement to Ukraine, according to the Infotag News Agency. About 20% of its export sales go to Ukraine. A 94% duty on goods originating from Moldova has been imposed following an anti-dumping investigation by the Ukrainian interdepartmental commission for international trade. In 2018 the Rybnitsky Cement plant produced about 0.4Mt of cement.

Belarus/Moldova/Russia/Ukraine: The Ukrainian interdepartmental commission for international trade has imposed antidumping tariffs on imported clinker and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) from Russia, Belarus and Moldova. It has set duties of 115% for goods originating in Russia, 57% for goods from Belarus and 94% for goods from Moldova, according to Interfax. The tariffs will have a duration of five years. Previously the government had embargoed OPC, alumina, slag, sulphate-resistant cement and similar hydraulic cements, including clinkers, from Russia.

Moldova: The Rybnitsky Cement plant has significantly cut its production costs due to a cheap gas deal. According to Radio Chișinău and the Infotag News Agency, the cement producer is paying four times less for its gas than its local competitor, the LafargeHolcim-owned Rezinsky Cement plant. In 2018 the Moldovan government held off renewing a supply contract with Russia’s Gazprom to see if cheaper options were available elsewhere.