Global Roadmap of AFR in Cement Industry Philippe Fonta Managing Director, Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI)

Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) 23 member companies 2002 2006 Now One third global cement production Two thirds outside of China

CSI in India: 9 participants Two companies headquartered in India Dalmia Cement Ltd. UltraTech Cement Around 60% of Indian cement production Seven are part of global member companies ACC Limited (Holcim) Ambuja Cement Ltd. (Holcim) CRH-My Home Industries (CRH) HeidelbergCement India (Heidelberg Cement) Lafarge India (Lafarge) Shree Digvijay Cement (Votorantim) Zuari Cement (Italcementi)

Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) 14 Communications Partners Arab Union for Cement & Building Materials Association of Cementitious Material Producers Cement Industry Federation Australia Mineral Products Association Brazilian Cement Association Cement Manufacturers' Association

The role of CSI The CSI is a voluntary initiative of the leading companies in the global cement business. Economically viable (costs, resources, product quality ) Environmentally efficient (CO 2 and other emissions ) Socially responsible (OH&S, local communities) The CSI provides a platform for cooperation Common methodologies of reporting Common guidelines The CSI aims to be the partner of choice for international stakeholders.

Good progress, well documented All GNR participants, World 1990 2000 2005 2012 % change Net CO 2 / tonne clinker, kg / tonne Net CO 2 / tonne cementitious, kg / tonne 907 862 846 815-10 756 713 674 618-18 Heat consumption, MJ / tonne clinker % alternative fuel (incl. biomass) 4,260 3,750 3,690 3,505-18 2.0 5.2 8.0 14.4 +620 Clinker / cement ratio, % 83 81.9 78.8 74.7-10 Electricity consumption kwhr / tonne cement 116 114 112 104-10

Cement Technology Roadmap (2009) Published by IEA/WBCSD 2009 Emissions reduction levers: Energy efficiency Alternative fuels Co-processing Clinker substitution CCS

Co-processing Co-processing is the term used to describe introducing alternative fuels and raw materials into a standard cement production process, rather than using conventional fuels and raw materials.

Co-processing A cement kiln is by its nature an efficient tool for the recovery of minerals and energy from waste Kilns allow for complete burn-out of waste-derived fuel due to: The high main burner flame temperate of 2,000 C; The relatively long time that the waste is burned at 1,000 C (i.e., minimum five seconds, whereas the requirement for waste incinerators is only two seconds); The high level of oxygen at the kiln burner allows for rapid combustion and complete oxidation and destruction of organic components; During the burn-out process, ashes are incorporated in the clinker since they consist of mineral elements that are by nature required for the clinker, therefore there is a saving on the use of virgin raw materials; Emissions do not increase, proven by numerous applications worldwide.

Co-processing in the waste hierarchy

Cement and co-processing First CSI Agenda for action. Next steps 1979 Cement companies start to look at waste as a source of raw material and energy. 2002 2005 CSI Protocol for: - emissions reporting - Use of alternative fuels 2009 2012 2013 2014

Examples of feeding alternative fuels and raw materials

Some figures - CSI companies substituted 14.4% of primary fuels with waste-derived fuels in 2012; - CO 2 -emission saving: 25 million tonnes per year; - Yearly coal saving 11 million tonnes per year. - 100 incinerators with 500 tonnes/ day capacity not required due to the energy recovery in cement kilns,

With huge regional differences Substitution volume Availability of waste and alternative resources Regulations and incentives (or lack of them) 2012: 84.6% fossil fuel; 10% fossil waste; 4.4% biomass Europe leads on fossil waste (>25%); Brazil on biomass (10%) Models assume 25-60% alternative fuels by 2050

Some figures

A worldwide potential

Final energy consumption by energy source in the 2DS

A multi-stakeholder approach

Raising awareness Capacity building CSI is the ideal worldwide platform to: - Collectively develop knowledge and expertise - Share this information together with best practices example - Nurture the development of alternative fuels and raw material use in various parts of the planet.

Develop knowledge and expertise How to control emissions How unwanted emissions can be avoided

Some examples Brazil: Residue recovery from oil well drilling Stockpiled over several years and waiting for an economically and environmentally acceptable solution, the gravel from Petrobras oil drilling operations began to be co-processed in 2007 in a cement plant in Brazil. Between 2007 and 2011, the cement plant was able to replace around 57% of its total natural clay supplies with waste gravel. This means that 150,000 tonnes of natural clay were saved, representing a case of eco-efficiency in resource use.. Poland: Cement plants use country to reduce landfills In order to comply with the EU directive related to waste management (Directive 2008/98/EC), the Polish Ministry of Environment has set targets (issued in 2011) to reduce the amount of municipal waste going into landfills by 50% in 2013 and by 35% in 2020: Cement plants are replacing on average 36% (in 2009) of their coal with RDF. As a result, close to 20% of the MSW is now converted to RDF, which is allowing the cement industry in Poland to lead with the highest contribution to the country s waste reduction targets.

Raising awareness Examples: China CSI awareness workshop Yichang (China) June 16-17, 2011 CSI awareness tour for Chinese delegates (April 2012) CSI Annual Forum co-processing (September 2012) Guangzhou (technical) including a site visit Beijing (policy-makers and regulators)

Latin America With the support of FICEM Bogotà October 22 nd, 2012 San José Costa Rica February 18-19, 2013 Quito August 8, 2013

India IIP-CMA International Conference on Enhancing the Use of Alternate Fuel and Raw Material in the Indian Cement Industry

Clinker substitution

Conclusion 1. Environmental impact reduce 1. Life cycle analysis 1. If these materials would otherwise be considered as waste 1. They could be incinerated, 2. additional fossil fuels would be needed 1. Extraction 2. CO2 emissions 2. They could be landfilled 1. Huge environmental impact, on a longer time frame 2. Social benefit absorb society s waste 1. Growing population, middle income class and urbanization generate more waste 1. Municipal Solid Waste 2. Sewage sludge 2. Waste from other sectors to be managed 3. Economic issues 1. Price of primary fossil fuels and raw materials 2. Incentives by governments and policy-makers

Thank you