Domestic and overseas political action on greenhouse gas emissions and global warming is weighing on cementitious materials production and economic factors influencing concrete mix designs. The most recent example of outside forces bearing on the industry was to be packaged late last month as a Senate energy bill amendment, the Climate Stewardship Act.

The amendment was considered unlikely to make the final bill, but not to the surprise of sponsors John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT). They reportedly introduced the act to continue pushing for establishment of a market-based credit trading system aimed at reducing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other greenhouse gases. Under Climate Stewardship, companies emitting more than 10,000 metric tons of these gases annually could reduce their emissions to a required allowance, issued by a federal agency, or buy other companies' allowances.

In regulatory terms, McCain and Lieberman's plan is a “cap and trade” system. In cement production, it is wildly impractical. The cement industry is second only to coal-fired utilities in CO₂ emissions, with the gas generated in near equal volumes during two production stages: the preheating or calcining phase, where carbon is burned off ground limestone and other raw kiln feed; and the clinker phase, where the feed travels through a coal-fueled heat chamber. For each ton of powder produced, a comparable amount of CO₂ is released into the environment.

Climate Stewardship opponents include Portland Cement Association, which notes that any caps on CO₂ or other greenhouse gas will create a constrained emissions market. Given the nature of cement milling, PCA contends, such a market will a) result in a capping of domestic production, leading to increased imports; and, b) fail to reduce emissions on a global scale since imported cement, regardless of origin, will remain the product of a process that releases CO₂ gas.

Anyone in construction has a vested interest in a strong domestic industry providing portland and blended cements as well as supplementary materials. With regulators at the federal, regional and state levels weighing options on greenhouse gas emission reduction, the prospect of a cap and trade system for CO₂ emissions cannot be taken lightly. A new entity, Global Climate Reserve Corp. (877/218-8391) of Salt Lake City, is exploring what role concrete producers might play in an emissions credit trading system. Officials of the company, a sister business to leading fly ash marketer ISG Resources, note that the use of supplementary materials in concrete lowers CO₂ emissions by reducing portland cement consumption. Consequently, producers could secure credits in a cap and trade system — albeit through a complicated process requiring scientific justification, documentation and monitoring, and third-party verification, plus contract negotiation costs running into the six-figure range. Global Climate officials report that producers who can quantify supplementary materials substitution for cement would likely be able to participate in large trading blocks of higher credit value.

As Global Climate gauges producers' role in market-based emissions credit trading, PCA is pursuing CO₂ reduction measures regulators should recognize as effective alternatives to cap and trade legislation. The cement industry is active in Climate Visions, a program of the Bush Administration, which has been sensitive to the economic effects of climate change policy on domestic industry. Climate Visions entails a three-part strategy in cement: improved manufacturing processes and capital investments leading to lower CO₂ emissions; product reformulation, such as placing greater emphasis on blended cements and slag cement processing capacity; and applying technology with the net effect of emission reduction. The final point brings cement companies back to the familiar ground of promoting the energy efficiency of concrete building methods and life-cycle cost benefits of concrete slabs and non-building structures.

Global warming merits further debate by Congress and the White House. Is to too much to ask that both table the matter long enough to reauthorize TEA-21?

e-mail: dmarsh@primediabusiness.com