Cement Decarbonization Policy Makers Need To Understand All Levers – CleanTechnica

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

---

The global cement industry, long recognized as a backbone of infrastructure development, faces mounting pressure to reduce its environmental impact. Responsible for approximately 7–8% of global carbon emissions, cement production is one of the most carbon-intensive industrial processes. Yet, as climate policies tighten and innovation accelerates, the industry stands at a crossroads: either continue business as usual or embrace a transformative shift toward sustainability.

Almost a year ago, cement day turned into cement week then month, then two months for me as I kept digging through the depth and breadth of opportunities for decarbonization of the gray glue that keeps our buildings, roads and ports together. A dozen or more pieces and some 44,000 words left a bread crumb trail of my journey. As I noted at the time, I became an even more scintillating cocktail party conversationalist than usual as my brain congealed around the topic.

As with most of my deep and broad domain analyses, a decade by decade projection of global cement demand and the various levers which would displace or mitigate it through 2100 emerged. I found significant cause for optimism regarding decarbonization in the space, with the end of China’s infrastructure boom significantly decreasing the requirement for buildings and infrastructure, the end of population growth between 2050 and 2070 also reducing demand, and a host of already working levers such as engineered timber, finite element analysis software, geopolymers and more already out of the lab, as well as a couple of promising technologies that are just starting commercialization.

A few months after my projection, the World Cement Association did something I have found to be extremely rare. It published a demand projection that aligned in broad strokes with mine it its December 2024 white paper WCA Long Term Forecast for Cement and Clinker Demand. From the introduction:

• Global cement demand in 2050 is likely to be much lower than current forecasts, around 3 billion tonnes per annum (tpa)
• Demand for clinker, the key ingredient contributing to carbon emissions, will decline at an even steeper rate, down to 1.5 billion tpa
• This has significant implications for the scale of cement’s unabated carbon emissions by 2050. Our central scenario is for 0.8 million tpa CO2 before considering the impact of CCS
• This picture is not currently well understood and will inform the demand for CCS projects and reduce the number of cement plants at which CCS is needed.

They cast this in part as a serious challenge for the industry, while I, of course, embrace the creative destruction of one of the major emitters of carbon dioxide globally. I also note that they don’t recognize as many levers that will be diminishing cement demand as I do, and so I think their projection is still too high. As I always say, I don’t claim to be right, just less wrong that most, but this is one of the very rare industry association projections that’s at least less wrong than most as well. Industry associations for aviation, maritime shipping and methanol, to name a few, should take note and follow in the WCA’s foodsteps. Good strategies and investments start with accepting reality, no matter how bleak it might appear.

While even my most avid readers’ eyes glazed over at my torrent of calcined words, my material providing an excellent antidote to sleepless nights, others were paying attention. Enter Dr. Sanjeev Kumar, who holds a Ph.D. in Structures and Materials and is an assistant professor and program coordinator for Construction Management Engineering Technology at Norfolk State University, specializing in building materials, climate, and decarbonization. He saw in my work the potential for a fruitful collaboration on a peer-reviewed paper on policy levers related to cement, something his academic interests were aligned with. He reached out and asked me if I would be interested. I was honored, and agreed.

He also engaged Dr. Ankita Gangotra, who is a Senior Manager at the World Resources Institute (WRI) U.S., leading initiatives to decarbonize the industrial sector, with a focus on cement and steel industries. She holds a Master’s in Electronics Engineering with Nanotechnology from the University of York, UK, and a Ph.D. in Physics (Materials Science) from the University of Auckland, New Zealand.

The fruits of our collaboration have now passed peer review and are published in Current Sustainable/ Renewable Energy Reports under the title Towards a Net Zero Cement: Strategic Policies and Systems Thinking for a Low-Carbon Future. I’m pleased to share a summary of the paper here.

Cement’s carbon footprint largely stems from its primary ingredient: clinker. The production of clinker involves heating limestone at high temperatures, releasing large amounts of CO₂ in the process. While technological innovations such as alternative fuels, carbon capture, and new material formulations show promise, their widespread adoption faces significant barriers, including economic feasibility, regulatory uncertainty, and market acceptance.

Addressing these challenges requires a coordinated approach that integrates financial incentives, strict regulatory standards, and industry collaboration. We identified nine crucial policy areas that can enable cement decarbonization and accelerate industry transformation, and is not adequate by itself.

One of the most effective tools to drive this transition is carbon pricing. By assigning a financial cost to pollution, carbon pricing mechanisms create powerful incentives for companies to adopt cleaner technologies and reduce their environmental footprint.

Two primary approaches stand out: carbon taxes and cap-and-trade systems. A carbon tax directly imposes a cost on CO₂ emissions, making it financially advantageous for cement manufacturers to shift toward low-carbon alternatives. By increasing the cost of high-emission cement production, these taxes push industries to innovate and invest in cleaner processes. Meanwhile, cap-and-trade systems establish a marketplace for carbon allowances, allowing companies to buy and sell emission credits. This market-based approach fosters competition, rewarding firms that successfully cut emissions while ensuring that industry-wide targets are met. If effectively implemented, both strategies can accelerate the cement sector’s decarbonization without causing major market disruptions. However, as the political pushback experienced in both Australia in the early 2010s and now Canada show, pricing carbon can be politically challenging.

Governments play a crucial role in accelerating the cement industry’s transition to low-carbon technologies by making sustainability financially attractive. Research and development grants can bridge the gap between laboratory breakthroughs and large-scale industrial applications, ensuring that innovations such as carbon capture, alternative fuels, and new cement formulations move from theory to reality. By funding these efforts, policymakers can help companies overcome the financial risks associated with early-stage technology adoption.

Tax credits provide another powerful incentive, lowering the upfront costs for companies investing in energy-efficient equipment and alternative raw materials. By reducing the financial burden, these incentives encourage manufacturers to prioritize sustainable practices, making low-carbon cement more competitive in the market. Together, strategic funding and targeted tax benefits can drive industry-wide change, fostering innovation while maintaining economic viability.

Stronger regulations are pushing the cement industry toward sustainability, with legally binding targets for CO₂ reductions and stricter energy efficiency standards. By setting clear expectations, policymakers provide long-term certainty, encouraging companies to invest in cleaner technologies and modernized production methods.

Requiring manufacturers to adopt the best available technologies ensures that the industry continually improves efficiency and lowers emissions. Regular updates to these standards will be essential as new advancements emerge, helping cement producers stay aligned with global best practices while meeting ambitious climate goals.

Reducing the cement industry’s carbon footprint requires a shift away from traditional clinker, and alternative materials offer a viable solution. Industrial byproducts such as fly ash and slag can replace a portion of clinker, cutting emissions without compromising performance. Calcined clay is another promising substitute, significantly lowering CO₂ output while maintaining durability. Emerging blends like limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) could further revolutionize sustainable cement production, offering a low-carbon alternative that meets industry standards.

Widespread adoption of these materials, however, depends on updated regulations, increased research funding, and financial incentives. Policymakers and industry leaders must work together to establish new standards that encourage the use of supplementary cementitious materials. With the right support, alternative materials can help cement manufacturers meet climate targets while ensuring long-term economic and structural viability.

The paper includes a set of case studies. Sublime Systems is pioneering an electrochemical cement-making process that removes the need for traditional high-temperature kilns, significantly cutting emissions. The National Cement Company’s Lebec Net Zero Cement Plant integrates biomass fuels, calcined clay, and carbon capture to cut emissions, but challenges remain. Roanoke Cement is championing the use of calcined clay as an alternative to clinker, a step that could significantly lower the carbon intensity of cement. Heidelberg Materials’ Mitchell Cement Plant is focusing on carbon capture and storage (CCS) to curb emissions. Each of these projects highlights both the promise and complexity of cutting emissions in cement production.

Integrating circular economy principles into cement production could significantly cut emissions and reduce reliance on virgin materials. By repurposing construction and demolition waste, manufacturers can create a closed-loop system that minimizes waste and conserves resources. Industrial symbiosis programs, where byproducts from other industries—such as fly ash from power plants—are used in cement production, offer another pathway to sustainability. These initiatives not only lower emissions but also improve resource efficiency, making them a crucial strategy for decarbonizing the sector.

Collaboration across borders is becoming essential in the push to decarbonize the cement industry. By sharing research and best practices, countries can accelerate the adoption of low-carbon technologies and avoid duplicating efforts. International partnerships in research and development can help scale successful strategies more quickly, ensuring that innovations in cement production reach markets worldwide.

Governments also have a powerful role to play by driving demand for sustainable cement through public procurement policies. Prioritizing low-carbon materials in infrastructure projects can create a strong market signal, encouraging manufacturers to invest in greener alternatives. Green building standards and procurement guidelines that favor lower-emission products can push the industry toward sustainability while ensuring long-term economic viability.

A skilled workforce is critical for the cement industry’s transition to low-carbon technologies. As new processes and materials emerge, specialized training programs will be necessary to equip engineers and construction workers with the knowledge to implement and maintain these innovations. Integrating sustainability principles into engineering and construction curricula will also help prepare the next generation of professionals to lead the industry toward a more sustainable future.

Community engagement is equally important in driving acceptance of decarbonization initiatives. Public concerns over costs, safety, and environmental impact can slow progress if not properly addressed. Transparent communication, stakeholder consultations, and proactive outreach efforts can build trust and foster local support for projects involving alternative materials, carbon capture, and new production methods. By ensuring public buy-in, companies and policymakers can create a smoother path for the cement industry’s transformation.

The cement industry’s transition to a low-carbon future is not just an environmental necessity—it is an economic and technological opportunity. With the right mix of policy incentives, financial support, regulatory frameworks, and industry collaboration, cement production can evolve to meet 21st-century sustainability goals.

Policymakers, industry leaders, and consumers all have a role to play in reshaping this critical sector. By fostering innovation and adopting forward-thinking policies, we can build a more sustainable world—one concrete block at a time.