4 ms·

Quest for “green” cement draws big name investors to $300B industry

43 points by 0-_-0 5y ago

chovybizzass 5y ago
hopefully it lasts longer than those "green" starbucks straws. I can't even take 3 sips before it starts to degrade.
victor22 5y ago
It alredy exists and has been used from beginning of humanity til today. its called adobe. I just built a brand new kitchen with it.
imtringued 5y ago
I know it's not the same thing as conventional concrete but hempcrete is "green cement" in spirit.
dr_dshiv 5y ago
"Europe is an exception, where cement companies have to buy allowances to cover their CO2 emissions and can save money if they produce less. But in many other countries, such as the US, policies are not in place yet to encourage cement makers to pay for greener alternatives." That seems like a no-brainer, to build the externalities into the cost of goods.
- gogopuppygogo 5y ago
  Carbon taxes are extremely unpopular in the USA where many doubt the validity of climate change.
  - dmm 5y ago
    They also seem unpopular in France, see the yellow vest riots in 2018. Consumption taxes in general disproportionately affect the poor.
    - paulsutter 5y ago
      Carbon taxes should start out very small, and phase in gradually over the equipment replacement period (at least 20-30 years?) Carbon taxes need to drive a shift in planning - on the planning time horizon - for everything that emits carbon
    - DennisP 5y ago
      So don't pay your carbon tax into the general fund. Pay the revenue out as a dividend, equal amount per capita. If you emit less CO2 than average you come out ahead. Poor people tend to emit quite a bit less than rich people; they buy less, ride the bus more, live in apartments or smaller houses, etc.
      - bequanna 5y ago
        If you want to go down this road you should be looking at % of income spent on carbon taxes. Maybe some “carbon allowance” would then be afforded so the lower income people that qualify could claim a deduction on their personal income tax return.
        DennisP 5y ago
        Lower income people would already be turning a profit. Anyone with lower-than-average emissions would get more in their monthly dividend check than they pay in total carbon fees.
    - stainforth 5y ago
      Carbon taxes do not have to equal consumption taxes.
  - wffurr 5y ago
    73% in favor is hardly "extremely unpopular". https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/ https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of... The real issue is that the remaining 27% have a death grip on the levers of power by exploiting undemocratic aspects of the US electoral system.
    - astronautjones 5y ago
      "many doubt" is the same as "some people are saying", you can usually add "in completely bad faith" after those phrases
    - LatteLazy 5y ago
      73% "claim" to support taxing corporations. How many will actually vote for it knowing it means higher prices? This is the fundamental issue with climate change. Everyone agrees someone else should do something...
- baybal2 5y ago
  > That seems like a no-brainer, to build the externalities into the cost of goods. The real estate business is so profitable in the West that I doubt that even adding an extra zero to the price of concrete will make them to even scratch in the end.
  - DennisP 5y ago
    Yes but with a sufficient carbon price, green cement will be cheaper than traditional, hence more profitable to use.
  - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
    That's not the point. It gives cement companies an incentive to invest in greener tech because what would previously have been a pure cost now allow them to pay less taxes which means they can sell cheaper. That makes R&D into lowering emissions a competitive advantage.
- LatteLazy 5y ago
  It only works if everyone does it, and if they do it for the majority of emissions sources. As long as all the non-europe bits of the world don't do it, it's pointless. It just makes their flood defenses more expensive to build.
  - estaseuropano 5y ago
    Why would this not work? Its by definition a business that requires local delivery, so every potential competitor is equally affected and there is no laughing third party that benefits.
    - LatteLazy 5y ago
      It won't work as in it won't stop climate change. If one area stops emissions (especially an already low emissions area like European concrete) it doesn't make much difference overall.
dr_dshiv 5y ago
Timber buildings sequester carbon naturally. Transitioning from cement and steel to timber could take hundreds of millions of tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200127134828.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200127134828.h...
detritus 5y ago
There's also the Bill Gates-backed solar-concentrator tech that came out of stealth mode a couple of years back... https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/19/business/heliogen-solar-energy-bill-gates/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/19/business/heliogen-solar-e...
baybal2 5y ago
> CarbonCure, a start-up based in Canada, has developed an add-on machine that injects CO2 at the point of mixing the cement with water and sand to create concrete. This permanently stores the CO2 and makes the concrete stronger. I'm very sceptical of this. If you add CO2 to concrete, the extra strength comes from calcium carbonate, which accelerates concrete aging, and generally reduces its useful life. It's never a good thing. I readup on what they do, and there is nowhere this is addressed. Their official stance (https://www.carboncure.com/concrete-corner/key-differences-between-weathering-carbonation-and-carboncure/ https://www.carboncure.com/concrete-corner/key-differences-b...) simply restates the facts without addressing the ultimate fact that this concrete will have much lesser pH reserve for the corrosion to eat through, more porosity, and that this will reduce its useful life in the end no matter what.
- vlovich123 5y ago
  Generating more concrete sales that are “green” (from a marketing perspective) but in reality having a net increase and increasing the demand for “green” solutions. Brilliant business model.
immmmmm 5y ago
cement scientist here, two postdocs in the field for 4 years. while this co2 curing seems interesting some points should be noted: 1) polluting industries greenwash with no shame, further inspection of claims most of the time reveals that either the technology is impossible to scale up, or is simple PR with of scientific value. 2) i had the opportunity to work with some of the best cement scientists on earth. cement is so complex that it's basically not understood at all. we typically know more of a neutron star a billion light years away than a piece of concrete. this is arguably the most complex material known to man. we don't even know how various phases cristallise individually. 3) any effort to understand the fundamentals of the material in a scientific context will result in little to no funding. writing a proposal for "nano-smart-bs-concrete" you'll get millions of funding and make the front page of Nature/Science with your fancy article. 4) co2 isn't the only issue, by far. resources extraction is a massive problem, search "Holcim Eclepens" to see the scares it leaves. sand is even worst since desert sand doesn't work, and many places are running out of it. 5) yet another issue is comminution, namely the process of grinding clinker to dust, it is a process (ball mills) that has less than 1% efficiency. it's estimated that humanity spends 10% of electricity to make powders. there are other techniques but usually it's very hard to get a particle size distribution (PSD) with good properties. 6) it's in the end a cultural thing mostly. you can build most of the building with crude soil + straw + wood. slightly more expensive but materials readily available on site most of the time and have much better thermal properties. 7) why not using material that Life developed during 4 billion years. mushrooms are promising for instance.
- moltar 5y ago
  What do you think about hempcrete?
- timoth3y 5y ago
  > 7) why not using material that Life developed during 4 billion years. mushrooms are promising for instance. You can't just leave that there! Mushrooms as a building material? I really hope you were not joking, because that sounds unbelievably cool.
- specialist 5y ago
  Thanks for commenting. Very interesting. Can you recommend any blogs, feeds, influencers to follow? As a curious noob, I'd totally subscribe to The Limiting Factor for cement and adjacent. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIFn7ONIJHyC-lMnb7Fm_jw https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIFn7ONIJHyC-lMnb7Fm_jw

43 points by 0-_-0 5y ago

hopefully it lasts longer than those "green" starbucks straws. I can't even take 3 sips before it starts to degrade.

It alredy exists and has been used from beginning of humanity til today. its called adobe. I just built a brand new kitchen with it.

imtringued 5y ago

I know it's not the same thing as conventional concrete but hempcrete is "green cement" in spirit.

dr_dshiv 5y ago

"Europe is an exception, where cement companies have to buy allowances to cover their CO2 emissions and can save money if they produce less. But in many other countries, such as the US, policies are not in place yet to encourage cement makers to pay for greener alternatives." That seems like a no-brainer, to build the externalities into the cost of goods.

gogopuppygogo 5y ago
Carbon taxes are extremely unpopular in the USA where many doubt the validity of climate change.
- dmm 5y ago
  They also seem unpopular in France, see the yellow vest riots in 2018. Consumption taxes in general disproportionately affect the poor.
  - paulsutter 5y ago
    Carbon taxes should start out very small, and phase in gradually over the equipment replacement period (at least 20-30 years?) Carbon taxes need to drive a shift in planning - on the planning time horizon - for everything that emits carbon
  - DennisP 5y ago
    So don't pay your carbon tax into the general fund. Pay the revenue out as a dividend, equal amount per capita. If you emit less CO2 than average you come out ahead. Poor people tend to emit quite a bit less than rich people; they buy less, ride the bus more, live in apartments or smaller houses, etc.
    - bequanna 5y ago
      If you want to go down this road you should be looking at % of income spent on carbon taxes. Maybe some “carbon allowance” would then be afforded so the lower income people that qualify could claim a deduction on their personal income tax return.
      - DennisP 5y ago
        Lower income people would already be turning a profit. Anyone with lower-than-average emissions would get more in their monthly dividend check than they pay in total carbon fees.
  - stainforth 5y ago
    Carbon taxes do not have to equal consumption taxes.
- wffurr 5y ago
  73% in favor is hardly "extremely unpopular". https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/ https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of... The real issue is that the remaining 27% have a death grip on the levers of power by exploiting undemocratic aspects of the US electoral system.
  - astronautjones 5y ago
    "many doubt" is the same as "some people are saying", you can usually add "in completely bad faith" after those phrases
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    73% "claim" to support taxing corporations. How many will actually vote for it knowing it means higher prices? This is the fundamental issue with climate change. Everyone agrees someone else should do something...
baybal2 5y ago
> That seems like a no-brainer, to build the externalities into the cost of goods. The real estate business is so profitable in the West that I doubt that even adding an extra zero to the price of concrete will make them to even scratch in the end.
- DennisP 5y ago
  Yes but with a sufficient carbon price, green cement will be cheaper than traditional, hence more profitable to use.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  That's not the point. It gives cement companies an incentive to invest in greener tech because what would previously have been a pure cost now allow them to pay less taxes which means they can sell cheaper. That makes R&D into lowering emissions a competitive advantage.
LatteLazy 5y ago
It only works if everyone does it, and if they do it for the majority of emissions sources. As long as all the non-europe bits of the world don't do it, it's pointless. It just makes their flood defenses more expensive to build.
- estaseuropano 5y ago
  Why would this not work? Its by definition a business that requires local delivery, so every potential competitor is equally affected and there is no laughing third party that benefits.
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    It won't work as in it won't stop climate change. If one area stops emissions (especially an already low emissions area like European concrete) it doesn't make much difference overall.

dr_dshiv 5y ago

Timber buildings sequester carbon naturally. Transitioning from cement and steel to timber could take hundreds of millions of tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200127134828.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200127134828.h...

detritus 5y ago

There's also the Bill Gates-backed solar-concentrator tech that came out of stealth mode a couple of years back... https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/19/business/heliogen-solar-energy-bill-gates/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/19/business/heliogen-solar-e...

baybal2 5y ago

> CarbonCure, a start-up based in Canada, has developed an add-on machine that injects CO2 at the point of mixing the cement with water and sand to create concrete. This permanently stores the CO2 and makes the concrete stronger. I'm very sceptical of this. If you add CO2 to concrete, the extra strength comes from calcium carbonate, which accelerates concrete aging, and generally reduces its useful life. It's never a good thing. I readup on what they do, and there is nowhere this is addressed. Their official stance (https://www.carboncure.com/concrete-corner/key-differences-between-weathering-carbonation-and-carboncure/ https://www.carboncure.com/concrete-corner/key-differences-b...) simply restates the facts without addressing the ultimate fact that this concrete will have much lesser pH reserve for the corrosion to eat through, more porosity, and that this will reduce its useful life in the end no matter what.

vlovich123 5y ago
Generating more concrete sales that are “green” (from a marketing perspective) but in reality having a net increase and increasing the demand for “green” solutions. Brilliant business model.

immmmmm 5y ago

cement scientist here, two postdocs in the field for 4 years. while this co2 curing seems interesting some points should be noted: 1) polluting industries greenwash with no shame, further inspection of claims most of the time reveals that either the technology is impossible to scale up, or is simple PR with of scientific value. 2) i had the opportunity to work with some of the best cement scientists on earth. cement is so complex that it's basically not understood at all. we typically know more of a neutron star a billion light years away than a piece of concrete. this is arguably the most complex material known to man. we don't even know how various phases cristallise individually. 3) any effort to understand the fundamentals of the material in a scientific context will result in little to no funding. writing a proposal for "nano-smart-bs-concrete" you'll get millions of funding and make the front page of Nature/Science with your fancy article. 4) co2 isn't the only issue, by far. resources extraction is a massive problem, search "Holcim Eclepens" to see the scares it leaves. sand is even worst since desert sand doesn't work, and many places are running out of it. 5) yet another issue is comminution, namely the process of grinding clinker to dust, it is a process (ball mills) that has less than 1% efficiency. it's estimated that humanity spends 10% of electricity to make powders. there are other techniques but usually it's very hard to get a particle size distribution (PSD) with good properties. 6) it's in the end a cultural thing mostly. you can build most of the building with crude soil + straw + wood. slightly more expensive but materials readily available on site most of the time and have much better thermal properties. 7) why not using material that Life developed during 4 billion years. mushrooms are promising for instance.

moltar 5y ago
What do you think about hempcrete?
timoth3y 5y ago
> 7) why not using material that Life developed during 4 billion years. mushrooms are promising for instance. You can't just leave that there! Mushrooms as a building material? I really hope you were not joking, because that sounds unbelievably cool.
specialist 5y ago
Thanks for commenting. Very interesting. Can you recommend any blogs, feeds, influencers to follow? As a curious noob, I'd totally subscribe to The Limiting Factor for cement and adjacent. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIFn7ONIJHyC-lMnb7Fm_jw https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIFn7ONIJHyC-lMnb7Fm_jw