this article List of countries by cement production - Wikipedia shows that a great chunk of world cement production is made by two poor, coal-rich countries - China and India. But it also shows that there are big cement industries in America, Japan, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Germany and some other places. Whereas the great coal producer Ukraine, surprisingly enough, produces little cement.
So how come we don’t see countries like China, India and Ukraine, with plenty of coal and few green-on-the-outside politicos, completely wipe out these industries in the developed world? Is it a matter of government protection for vital industries through tariffs and such? Or do advanced countries preserve some valuable know-how technologies for making high grade cement that were never handed over to potential competition overseas?
That is only because the cement bag manufacturers pack way too match in the bag. If they could get some consultants from the snack food manufacturers, the cost of shipping a bag of cement would be trivial.
I’ve read many times that cement industry is one of the most localized of any of the basic materials. It’s very cheap and very heavy. Before you go too far from the point of use the transportation costs eat any possible savings.
Cement is one of those things that only get imported when there just aren’t any other options. Countries like Singapore, many of the small rich Middle Eastern countries, just have no domestic means to product a satisfactory amount of cement.
Yeah, it’s much the same reason why those coal-rich nations don’t usually wipe out other nations’ coal industries. The main advantage coal or concrete can have is being close to where it’s being used. I think the reason why some take an interest in cement production numbers is that it’s a pretty good indication of economic growth, precisely because it’s rarely imported or exported.
If you filled them completely with cement, but that’s true of anything that’s denser than water. They even made concrete ships: Concrete ship - Wikipedia
Ok, so on froogle the ton of cement adds up to around $250. If so, shipping cost of $20-30 per ton (as long as the consumers are located near the coast) does not look like a lot. Then again, maybe the froogle prices are just exorbitant gouging? Does cement really cost way less than that in bulk?
how about a counter argument? Let’s say making cement requires lots of coal. In America coal is localized, so you need to ship it by rail or by truck to places that need cement. Or, you have to convert coal into cement where there is coal, but then you end up shipping the cement itself, again via expensive inter-American shipping methods that end up spending valuable diesel fuel.
Of course, if cement is produced using something other than coal, this argument would fall apart. Unfortunately the wikipedia article does not explain what exactly is used as fuel for cement production here in America. In China they do use coal.
ETA: transporting coal or cement in places like China or Ukraine may suffer from the same problems, e.g. if it were shipped to the coast for export. But railroad freight should generally cost less in poor countries than in rich countries thanks to more sane regulatory regime and lower salaries.
Cement doesn’t need coal, particularly, it just needs heat. Wikipedia lists coal, fuel oil, and natural gas as the main fuels used. I used to know of a cement kiln in southern California that mixed solvent waste into their fuel, and I’ve seen old lists of kilns using industrial waste or ground used car tires. So you can make cement without coal.
You also have to have the right raw material to make cement out of. That looks like specialized clay and calcium carbonate. Those are bulky materials and if your country doesn’t have them nearby, making cement isn’t going to be cost effective for you. It won’t matter how much coal you have.
As an anecdote, the Port of Stockton has a ship called the Golden Arrow 1 permanently anchored in a berth. Ships filled with bulk concrete dock next to the Arrow and unload onto it. The Arrow bags the cement and it’s shipped out from there bagged and on pallets. There isn’t an incoming ship listed, so I can’t say where it’s coming from. But I’ll try to remember to watch for the next one and pass the country of origin on. It’ll be a single data point.
The port is listing bulk fertilizer coming in from Europe, though, so I wouldn’t discount shipping cement big distances. You’d want to do it in bulk, though, and some ports have shifted to mainly cargo containers.
Most cement is bought by the truckload (mixed with gravel and water as concrete). I think the truckload rate is probably a little cheaper than the by-the-bag rate.
Fine particles such as cement are hard to handle in bulk. Fairly large quantities of many materials are still handled in the basic 50 pound bag. They are very labor intensive. When I worked for Rinshed Mason in Detroit in the 60’s, they might fill most of a 40,000 pound batch by dumping 50 pound bags. In the 80’s I was managing a vinyl compounding plant. Most of our formulation were about half vinyl resin, and the other half divided between crushed linestone and liquid plasticizers. The resin came it rail hoppers and was handled in bulk. The plasticizer came in tank trucks and was also handled in bulk. There were months we may have used 10,000 fifty pound bags of limestone. We also used lead stabilizer that came in semi bulk, 2000 pound bags. To reduce exposure to lead, we had a bulk system for it. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the redimix plants are still using 80 pound bags of cement.
could you please elaborate on just which part is labor intensive? So I get it that the manufacturer ships it in bags, whether 50lb or 90lb or whatnot, but why can’t they automatically load the bags into a bigger container and then move around the container as a whole?
Or is the labor intensive part just the sheer affixing the bag to the pipe that spits out cement and then sealing the bag?
Yllaria has the critical point, which answers half the question. Cement kilns can run on a wide range of fuels. Combustion in cement kilns is a very high tech business, especially in the west. An interesting figure, roughly 1% of the planet’s energy use goes into making cement.
The other half of the question is that there is international competition in cement, and local industries have been nearly wiped out. During the big Asian Tiger crash a decade ago there was suddenly significant overproduction of cement (production that was previously vanishing into new construction in the Tiger countries.) This cement was dumped on the market and cement prices crashed. It made local production here in Oz essentially profitless. What probably keeps the current price high is the insatiable appetite for cement in China and India.
The other thing to consider is that being coal rich isn’t the end of the story. Coal is used for many things, and has a cash value on it is own. Turning coal into cement is not necessarily the most profitable use you can make of it. And again, whilst these countries have significant natural resources of coal, they are still using pretty well all their production to make electricity and steel.
When the next economic slowdown hits Asia I would expect there to be a huge knock on effect in the world cement prices, and severe angst in the west.
hibernicus, thank you for your response. Clarification question - is $15 per ton reasonable for this particular (Australia to Europe) distance, or is the cost per ton basically the same regardless of the route because loading, unloading, customs, waiting in ports and other overheads basically hide the actual cost of running the ship for extra days at sea? Or is there some rule of thumb for estimating shipping costs, like let’s say shipping across Pacific costs 30% more than across Atlantic or something like that?
There are various freight contracts with names like C4, C7 representing different routes (start- and end-points). They are traded on more or less liquid markets and there is no fixed relationship between them. For example, it is possible at a given moment for the rate to ship from Australia to Europe to be cheaper than that from South Africa to Europe. I don’t have the figures in front of me, but over the last 3 years I remember C4 (South Africa to Europe) being less than $10 and more than $30. It’s been fairly stable around $15 for a number of months.
I missed the edit window. I wanted to post by way of clarification that my post above refers to Cape size (150,000 tonne) coal shipments. I suspect bulk shipment of cement might be in a smaller vessel, with a higher cost per tonne.