Cement-Making Process in the Philippine Cement Industry: Emissions Reduction, Product, and Industry

Traditional Method of Cement Production

What is the cement-making process Philippine cement industry?

The traditional method of cement production involved mining raw materials such as calcium carbonate,silica, alumina, and iron ore, which were extracted from limestone and clay, and crushing and stacking these into a stockpile for grinding. The mix was dried and ground again before cooking in a kiln fed with silica and/or clay, and underwent stages of preheating up to 1,500 degrees Celsius to produce clinker—a basic raw material needed for cement production. Clinker and a certain amount of gypsum were milled together to make cement. Additives gave cement specific properties such as permeability, resistance to sulphate, and higher quality.

The process induced heavy carbon dioxide emissions, which led to the cement industry accounting for around 5 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions. Government legislation was pushing cement manufacturers to focus on ways to lower carbon dioxide emissions. The combustion of fuels used to heat the kiln (fossil fuels such as coal and oil) accounted for 40 per cent of emissions, the calcination process (heating of limestone) for 50 per cent, and the electricity used to power additional plant machinery and final transportation accounted for 5–10 per cent of the industry’s emissions. Cement manufacturers were working on methods to use alternative fuels to lower fuel-combustion relatedemissions; for example, Holcim used alternative fuels such as industrial, agro, and residual waste (e.g., used tires and plastics) for its thermal-power requirements. Thermal energy generated from traditional fossil fuels such as coal represented 30–40 per cent of overall costs for the cement industry. The use of alternative fuels not only reduced manufacturing costs but also helped provide the government with a way to handle and dispose of hazardous waste and location waste. For example, when Republic Cement opted to use alternative fuels such as rice husks, saw dust, and refuse-derived fuel, substituting its fossil fuel requirements, the company not only managed to achieve a lower carbon footprint (an 18–25-per-cent emissions reduction), it also helped Metropolitan Manila address its solid waste disposal problem.17

Authorized for use only in the course Strategic Management at Cape Breton University taught by Peter Kerr from Jan 06, 2021 to May 15, 2021. Use outside these parameters is a copyright violation.

Improving production-process efficiency (i.e., moving from wet to dry kilns) and replacing limestone-based clinker with materials such as coal fly ash and blast furnace slag used for blended cement helped reduce emissions.18 According to the Cement Sustainability Initiative, the percentage of clinker in the final cement product across the world had decreased from 83 per cent in 1990 to around 75 per cent in 2012, wherein 25 per cent of the cement was a non-clinker mineral with a lower energy requirement.19 Republic Cement had replaced clinker in its blended cement with carbon-neutral minerals or industrial by-products, as exemplified by its product Republic Portland Plus, which used fly ash, an industrial by-product of the power industry, and had a lower environmental impact, of around 25 per cent.20 Eagle Cement had built a waste heat recovery system that generated up to 6.30 megawatts of power from the plant’s waste heat and allowed it to save up to 20 per cent of electricity costs in production—while conserving the renewable fuel supply and minimizing harmful gas emissions.21

Heavy Carbon Dioxide Emissions Produced by Cement Production

The various products available in the market included Portland cement (made of clinker and gypsum) and blended cement (made of Portland cement clinker, gypsum, and pozzolan); however, local cement manufacturers promoted blended cement because of its durability, performance in severe weather conditions, sustainable construction (carbon dioxide emissions), and economics.22 BBCI had plans to roll out Portland cement Type 1B (blended cement that required less clinker) priced at ?206 per bag, which was within the government price-control range of ?205–215 per bag.23 Besides, the process used to produce the clinker did not require a kiln (costing around ?3–5 billion) and hence required no burning.24 Clinker had to be imported from countries such as China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Japan as the Philippines did not have enough capacity to crush and burn limestone into the raw material.25 According to a BBCI spokesperson, the company’s cement production process would make use of readily available pozzolanic raw materials such as lahar, and almost all types of soils and fillers.26 The company claimed that it could use any sand the government would allow for its raw material, including beach sand, as sand throughout the Philippines was 93 per cent the same, regardless of its source. BBCI claimed that its process would not only cater to the local cement industry but also decrease air pollution and environmental damage. Further, the company would only incur a cost of ?2–4 billion, which was lower than the cost of a traditional cement plant (about ?70 billion).27 However, the process failed to get an initial approval from the Philippine Board of Investment due to a lack of “proof of concept.”28

With a population of about 100 million as of 2015, which was growing at an average rate of 1.8–2.3 per cent annually, the Philippines’ need to improve infrastructure facilities and develop new residential areas had compounded.29 Foreseeing the massive requirements for doing so, the National Economic and Development uthority announced an increase in government spending on infrastructure from 5.32 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2017 (?847.2 billion) to 7.3 per cent of GDP (?1.84 trillion) by 2022.30 It earmarked 75 projects for prioritization, approval, and implementation until 2022. Of these, 18 projects, including the Malolos-Clark Airport–Green City Rail Project; New Centennial Water Source Project; Chico River Pump Irrigation Project; Phase 1 of the Mindanao Railway; the New Cebu International Container Port; and the Davao, Bohol, Laguindingan, Bacolod, and Iloilo airports, were approved by the National Economic and Development Authority’s board.31 The government had committed to investing US$23 billion in tourism infrastructure over six years under the National Tourism Development Plan.