GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS

Peter Edwards, Global Cement Magazine

Global cement emissions standards

Integrated cement plants are recognised as a source of undesirable airborne emissions. In an

attempt to moderate the effects of these on the environment and local populations, local,
regional and national governments legislate maximum permissable limits for a multitude of
emission types. As with many other aspects of cement manufacturing, there are variations
between jurisdictions and even individual plants. Here, Global Cement attempts to untangle
the web of emissions regulations for four key pollutant categories: sulphur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen oxides (NOx), mercury (Hg) and dust / particulate matter (PM).

Sulphur dioxide - SO2

A s in other industries, the latter part of the 20th

Century saw cement plants start to consider
their effects on the environment and local popula-
tions far more than before. The motivating factors
for this include: pressure from local population
groups; internal sustainability policies; rising costs
of fuels and/or raw materials and; direct legislation
from governments.
A cynic might point out that it is ultimately leg-
islation that drives down emissions of key pollutants
in the cement industry. This is not to say that some
plants dont voluntarily reduce emissions. Indeed,
more and more cement producers are trying to stay
ahead of the legislation curve. However, such actions
can frequently be traced back to concern for public
opinion and/or anxiety over future regulations.
In the global cement news we often hear of dif-
ferent cement plants preparing for or bemoaning
new emissions limits. However, looking for concise
emissions limits online leaves a very complicated
picture. Emissions in the EU, for example, are gov-
erned centrally, unless a particular country has a
permit to exceed the limit for a given type of emis-
sion or decides nationally to have harsher limits on
some emissions classes. On top of this there may be
additional restrictions for individual plants based on
their unique circumstances. Elsewhere, there are dif-
ferences depending on fuels, kiln type, raw materials,
plant age, plant size and other factors. What follows
is Global Cements attempt to see through the smog.
Formula: SO2
Molecular weight: 64.61g/mol
Melting point: -72C
Boiling point: -10C
Sulphur dioxide - Introduction
A irborne SO2 reacts with water vapour to form
sulphuric acid (H2SO4). This contributes to acid
rain, negatively affecting water sources, forests and
crops. SO2 is also a potent greenhouse gas.
SO2 is emitted from cement plants via two main
processes: 1. Sulphite impurities in the limestone and
other raw materials; 2. Elemental sulphur contained
in fuels, particularly coal and some alternative fuels.
SO2 emissions have risen significantly since the
onset of the Industrial Revolution.2 In 2014, 73% of
the emissions come from conventional coal power
plants, with the remainder emitted from other indus-
trial processes, including the cement industry.3
Although more developed economies have re-
duced their emissions of SO2 in recent years in line
with concerns over acid rain, emissions from Eu-
rope, the (former) Soviet Union and North America
have been more than replaced by those from other
parts of the world.2 These are mainly East Asia (pre-
dominantly China) and India. It is possible that, with
China now taking a more environmentally-conscious
stance, growth in SO2 emissions from that country
will tail off. Emissions levels from other emerging
economies will determine whether or not global SO2
emissions rise or fall in the coming decades.

Australia Sulphur dioxide - Emissions limits

Australian States have different regulations for
cement plant emissions.1 The only regulations
that could be collected prior to publication
were for New South Wales and Victoria. In
both cases these related to individual cement
plants, which, despite belonging to the same
operator, were regulated in different units
using different measurement regimes.
A summary of SO2 emissions limits from cement
plants can be seen in Table 1. Across the countries
that information has been received for, most national
limits for SO2 are in the region of 200-500mg/Nm3.
However, there are some significantly higher limits
in developing nations. Particularly high levels are
permitted in Nigeria (2000mg/Nm3) and Pakistan
(1700mg/Nm3). India has some state-level lim-
its for this pollutant but given its high permitted

www.GlobalCement.com Global Cement Magazine March 2014 25

GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
Right - Table 1: Selected
current and future SO2 emission
COUNTRY / REGION SO2 LIMIT (mg/Nm3)
An example of an EU member state legally ex-
standards by country. Most Australia (New South Wales, AF)1 50 ceeding EU emissions limits can be seen in the case
limits are in the range of around
500mg/Nm3. Limits normalised Australia (Victoria)1 250g/min of the UK, which has high limits of 600-2500mg/
to dry exhaust gas at 1atm Austria4 350 Nm3 in cases where there are unavoidably high levels
pressure, 273K with 10% O2 of sulphate or sulphur in the kiln feed. This is higher
as a reference unless stated Bolivia5 600
than the permitted level in Pakistan.
otherwise. Brazil6 By state
AF = Alternative fuels. Chinas limit for SO2 emissions from cement
Canada7 By province plants is a relatively stringent 200mg/Nm3. This
Notes: Australian limits are set
at state level. Chile (AF plants only)8 None certainly flies in the face of the stereotypical image
China (2008 regs.)9 200 of Chinese industrial facilities as being highly-pol-
Canadian limits are by province luting. The limit, imposed only since 2008, was the
and were unavailable prior to Colombia (Conventional fuels)10 550
direct result of top-down influence from the Chinese
publication. Only plants using Colombia (Non-hazardous AF)10 200
AF are regulated in Chile and all
government to shut down the most highly-polluting
plants use some form of AF. Colombia (Hazardous AF)10 500 facilities in all types of industry. The new emissions
Egypt11 400 standard for Chinese cement SO2 emissions limits
Colombian limits for plants
burning non-hazardous AF are for the period after 1 March 2014 is not yet known.
European Union (EU)12 <50-400
more stringent than for those The USA is the only country to regulate its
burning hazardous AF. The coun- Germany (Current)13 50 emissions limits in non-SI units, with its Portland
try uses 11% O2 in its reference Germany (From 1 Jan 2016)13 50 Cement Maximum Achievable Control Technology
criteria instead of 10%.
India14 Some State limits (PC MACT) regulations stating a limit of 0.4lb/ton
Indonesian regulations are
currently under discussion. Indonesia (Proposed)15 800 (400)
Saudi Arabian regulations were Lebanon (as SOx)16 850 (old) / 800 (new) Canada
related to all industrial plants. Nigeria (New plants)17 2000 Canadian Provinces have different regulations
South African plants are Nigeria (Existing plants)17 2000 for cement plant emissions. This is likely con-
regulated differently according fused by plant-by-plant variations due to local
to date of construction and Norway (Norcem Brevik)18 500
fuel type.
conditions in this relatively environmentally-
Norway (Norcem Kjpsvik)18 400
conscious country. The limits are complicated
Russia operates on a plant-by- Pakistan19 1700 to the point that that the countrys cement as-
plant basis.
Russia20 By plant sociation was unable to collate the standards in
*UAE data as supplied by cement time for publication.
producer. Global Cement is of the Saudi Arabia21 365
opinion that this is limit could S Africa (AF, Built post-2004)22 50
infact be 125mg/Nm3.
S Africa (AF, Built pre-2004)22 250
UK regulations permit higher
levels due to high levels of sul-
S Africa (Built post-2004)22 250 of clinker produced. This is proposed for implemen-
phites in the raw material and/or S Africa (Built pre-2004)22 250 tation on 9 September 2015. This approximately
high levels of sulphur in fuels. corresponds to 0.2kg/t of clinker. Without knowing
Switzerland23 500
Source: Local cement producers the total amount of gas emitted from the stacks, a pa-
Trinidad & Tobago (Proposed)24 1000
and associations. rameter that will change depending on the weather,
Turkey (Conventional fuel)25 300 the fuel, the clinker factor and the type of kiln being
UAE26 125g/Nm3 * used, it is not possible to transfer this into a mg/Nm3
UK27 200 (600-2500 for High S) rate as used in other jurisdictions.
US cement plants SO2 emissions are currently
UK (One particular plant)28 1760 (400 proposed)
limited by the Clean Air Act, which covers many
USA (From 9 September 2015)29 0.4lb/ton (clinker) sources of air pollution in the US. In reality, many
cement producers in the United States are already
levels for PM and NOx it is unlikely that these are preparing for the PC MACT SO2 regulations, hav-
particularly stringent. ing been planning for more stringent limits that were
Most of the lowest limits for SO2 emissions are being discussed previously.
seen in mature economies where environmental pres-
sures have come to bear on industrial activities. The Sulphur dioxide - Future trends
highly-advanced German cement inudstry has the It is likely that, as other economies develop, there will
lowest permitted limit for SO2 at 50mg/Nm3, a fac- be increased pressure on cement plants (and other
tor of 40 lower than is permitted in Nigeria. Norway industrial sites) to reduce SO2 emissions in these
(400-500mg/Nm3) and Austria (350mg/Nm3) have regions. As well as lower and lower limits in
moderately stringent limits. Other nations with rela- European countries, China is reducing its SO2 lim-
tively low emissions standards for SO2 include Egypt its. Other countries will follow as local populations
(400mg/Nm3), Colombia (200-550mg/Nm3 depend- become more vocal against emissions. For abate-
ing on fuel type) and South Africa (50-250mg/Nm3). ment technology specialists there are considerable

26 Global Cement Magazine March 2014 www.GlobalCement.com

 GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
Left - Table 2: Selected current
COUNTRY / REGION NOx LIMIT (mg/Nm3) and future emissions standards
opportunities in India and parts of Africa, as well as
in the United States. Australia (New South Wales, AF) 800 for NOx by country. The limits
typically fall in the
Australia (Victoria) 3600g/min 400-800mg/Nm3 band. Limits
Sulphur dioxide - Abatement methods Austria 500 normalised to dry exhaust gas at
Amid ever-decreasing SO2 emissions limits, cement 1atm pressure, 273K with 10%
Bolivia 1800 O2 as a reference unless
plants can employ a number of processing and tech-
Brazil By state stated otherwise.
nical measures to reduce their emissions. Firstly,
producers can move to low-sulphur coal sources or Canada By province Notes: Australian limits are set
at state level.
move away from using coal as a primary fuel. Some Chile (AF plants only) None
alternative fuels, for example tyres, can also include Canadian limits are by province
China (2008 regs.) 800 and were unavailable prior
high levels of sulphur impurities. Some limestone
China (2013 regs., Existing plants) 400 to publication.
sources can also contain high levels of sulphite im-
purities, which convert to sulphates in the presence China (2013 regs., New plants) 400 Only plants using AF are
regulated in Chile and all plants
of oxygen and heat. Coal cleaning technologies, Colombia (Conventional fuels) 800 use some form of AF.
including sulphate adsorbtion and absorbtion, are Colombia (Non-hazardous AF) 200
Colombian limits for plants
also possible ways to reduce ingoing sulphur-based
Colombia (Hazardous AF) 550 burning non-hazardous AF are
impurities but can be expensive to run. more stringent than for those
If sulphurous inputs are unavoidable, two main Egypt 600 burning hazardous AF. The coun-
abatement technologies are available, which both European Union (EU) 200 - 450 try uses 11% O2 in its reference
criteria instead of 10%.
come under the heading of flue-gas desulphurisation: Germany (Current) 500
limestone forced oxidation scrubbers and lime spray Germany (From 1 June 2018) 200
Indian cement producers are in
dryer scrubbers. These create gypsum as a byproduct, discussion with environmental
India (Proposed by industry) 1200 (existing), 800 (new) authorities regarding future
which can be used as an onsite source of gypsum for NOx limits, which will vary
the preparation of final cement blends. India (Proposed by authorities) 1000 (existing), 600 (new) depending on the ages of the
Indonesia 1000 plant. Global Cement infers that
Nitrogen oxides - NOx the split between existing and
Indonesia (Proposed) 800 new plants will be made when
Lebanon 2500 (old), 1500 (new) limits are set.

Nigeria (New plants) 600-800 (fuel dep.) Indonesian regulations are

currently under discussion.
Nigeria (Existing plants) 1200 (old or wet)
Pakistans NOx limits are
Norway (Norcem Brevik) 800 dependent on fuel type:
Norway (Norcem Kjpsvik) 800 Gas = 400mg/Nm3,
Oil = 600mg/Nm3,
Pakistan 400-1200 (fuel dep.) Coal = 1200mg/Nm3.
Formula: NO / NO2 (represented as NOx) Russia By plant Russia operates on a plant-by-
Molecular weight: 30.01g/mol / 46.00g/mol Saudi Arabia 600 (1hr average) plant basis.
Boiling point: -152C / 21.2C S Africa (AF, Built post-2004) 2000 Saudi Arabian regulations were
related to all industrial plants.
Nitrogen oxides - Introduction S Africa (AF, Built pre-2004) 1200
South African plants are

I n the atmosphere, nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen S Africa (Built post-2004) 1500
regulated differently according
dioxide (NO2) are in equilibrium via a reaction S Africa (Built pre-2004) 2000 to date of construction
involving ozone (O3). As such they are both ozone and fuel type.
Switzerland 800
depleters. Both gases are precursor compounds to Source: Local cement producers
Trinidad & Tobago (Proposed) 500 (as NO2)
nitric acid (HNO3), which contributes to acid rain, and associations.
negatively affecting water sources, forests and crops. Turkey 1200
NOx results from the combustion of nitrogen Turkey (From 2015) 400
in oxygen at high temperatures and from nitrogen UAE 400
bound to fuels used. As such, it is not unique to ce-
UK 900
ment production.
NOx emissions have been on the rise in most UK (One particular plant) 800 (500 future)
world regions in recent decades, rising by around 60% USA (from 9 September 2015) 1.5lb/ton clinker
since 1970 from ~75Mt/yr to ~120Mt/yr in 2005. The
main historic source (~2Mt/yr) was North America additional NOx emissions have come from the rest of
(mainly the US), although China has now risen to Asia, India, the Middle East and from shipping.
parity. Trade is also a major NOx source (~17Mt/yr),
because it is emitted from ships and aircraft. Nitrogen oxides - Emissions limits
The Americas, Africa and Europe generally had A summary of NOx emissions limits from cement
the same combined NOx emissions in 2005 as in 1975 plants can be seen in Table 2. Across the countries
(47-48Mt/yr). As well as China, much of the recent that information has been received for, most national

www.GlobalCement.com Global Cement Magazine March 2014 27

GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
Right: Installed in 2012, the
new semi-dust SCR for NOx
reduction from Scheuch is cur-
rently under test at the Lafarge
Mannersdorf plant in Austria.
limits for this pollutant are in the region of 500-
1000mg/Nm3.
NOx is the least stringently limited pollutant
among those analysed here. The range of maximum
permissable emissions is broad, stretching from
200mg/Nm3 for some sets of conditions within the
EU, to 2500mg/Nm3 for older Lebanese plants, a fac-
tor of 12.5.
Again, the United States bucks the SI-unit trend
with a limit of 1.5lb/ton of clinker (~0.75kg/t), which,
like the incoming SO2 limit will start on 9 September
2015. Brazil has no limit for NOx emissions from
cement plants (or for SO2 emissions). Other admini-
stations with relatively low NOx limits include new
plants in China (400mg/Nm3) and certain types of
kiln/fuel combination in Pakistan (400mg/Nm3).
Nitrogen oxides - Future trends
In 2018, Germany will go to a NOx limit of just
200mg/Nm3. There is also discussion in Trinidad &
Tobago regarding the introduction of its NOx limit
(it currently has none), but at a higher level (500mg/
Nm3). Meanwhile, Turkey will limit its cement indus-
try to a maximum of 400mg/Nm3 NOx from 2015.
While India currently has no NOx emission limits
for its industry, there is ongoing discussion regard-
ing these. Industry and enforcement authorities are
in disagreement over the levels that NOx emissions
should be set at, with a 200mg/Nm3 disparity be-
tween what the authorities want and the level that the
industry is currently happy to be bound to. It is pos-
sible that these discussions will come to agreement at
some point in 2014.
Going forward, the onset of new regulations for
NOx in the jurisdictions mentioned above are a sign
of the continued drive towards lower limits across
28 Global Cement Magazine March 2014 www.GlobalCement.com
China
The worlds largest cement player, China has
been cleaning up its environmental act so far
in the 21st Century. New emissions limits, ef-
fective 1 March 2014 have brought allowances
into line with European norms.
With a top-down attitude, the government
has started a wholesale capacity reduction
drive, targeting the most polluting plants. It
targets regional emission reductions and has
no qualms when taking the necessary steps.
the world. With Germany often a leader in terms of
environmental awareness in the industry, it is possi-
ble that its 2018 reduction to 200mg/Nm3 will trigger
a new round of reductions in other regions towards
the latter half of the current decade. The reality is
that most European plants are already operating well
within the limits imposed for NOx. This will increas-
ingly be reflected in the regulations of the future.
Nitrogen oxides - Abatement methods
With respect to NOx abatement, there are two main
technologies available: Selective catalytic reduction
(SCR) and selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR).
Both of these involve the injection of ammonia (NH3)
into the waste gas. In the presence (SCR) or absence
(SNCR) of a catalyst, the NOx is selectively reduced
to nitrogen (N2) as well as water (H2O). It is not really
feasible to reduce NOx emissions by selection of input
materials as these are rarely the source of emissions.
Mercury - Hg
Formula: Hg
Molecular weight: 200.59 g/mol
Melting point: -39C
Boiling point: 357C
Mercury - Introduction
T he only metal that is a liquid at room tem-
perature and pressure, mercury and many of its
compounds are extremely toxic. This is in part due
to its inherent chemistry as a heavy metal and is also
due to it being a liquid. Methyl-mercury is a persis-
tent and very toxic bio-accumulator, particularly in
aquatic life forms and can pass into the human popu-
lace with extremely damaging consequences.
Mercury enters the cement production process
via: 1. Impurities in the limestone raw material; 2.
Minor impurities in fuel sources like coal and selected
alternative fuels. Mercury becomes concentrated
within cement plants but a portion is constantly
emitted. Spikes in emissions occur upon start-
up and shutdown, especially when the shutdown
is unexpected.
Anthropogenic atmospheric mercury emissions
have been on an inexorable rise since the start of the
GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS

COUNTRY / REGION Hg LIMIT (mg/Nm3)

Far right - Table 3: Selected
current and future emissions
standards for mercury by
country. Most limits fall into
a range of 0.05-0.1mg/Nm3.
Limits normalised to dry exhaust
gas at 1atm pressure, 273K with
10% O2 as a reference unless
stated otherwise.
AF = Alternative fuels.
Notes: Several countries have
different mercury emissions
limits depending on whether
or not a plant uses alternative
fuels. This is seen in the case of
Australia and Colombia, which
are more stringent for AF than
for conventional fuels. Colombia
uses 11% O2 in its reference
criteria instead of 10%.
Brazil uses 7% O2 in its reference
criteria for mercury.
Source: Local cement producers
and associations.
USA
Australia (New South Wales) 0.10
In the US, the Environmental Protection Australia (New South Wales, AF) 0.05
Agency sets PC MACT regulations for Australia (Victoria) 0.25g/min
non-hazardous pollutants and NESHAP Austria 0.05
regulations for hazardous pollutants such as
Bolivia None
mercury. Following dispute from industry in
the 2010s, the most stringent regulations are Brazil 0.05
now on hold until 9 September 2015, with ce- Canada By province
ment plants currently implementing emission Chile (AF plants only) 0.10
reduction strategies.
China None
Colombia (Conventional fuels) None
modern industrial era, although natural peaks from Colombia (Non-hazardous AF) 0.03
volcanic eruptions have occurred throughout the
Colombia (Hazardous AF) 0.05
millenia. In 2010 it is estmated that around 1960t of
Egypt 0.05
mercury entered the atmosphere.
East and Southeast Asia accounted for 40% (777t) European Union (EU) 0.05
of the global total, with China contributing about Germany (Current) 0.03
three quarters of these emissions. This represents Germany (From 1 June 2018) 0.02
around a third of all emissions. Sub-Saharan Africa India None
was the second most-prolific emitter, partly due to
Indonesia (AF plants only) By plant
artisanal gold smelting, giving rise to 16% (316t) of
mercury emissions in 2010. South America was third Lebanon None
(13%, 245t), South Asia fourth (7.9%, 154t), with Nigeria 0.05
Europe and CIS fifth (6%, 115t). Norway 0.05
This bias towards higher emissions from develop-
Pakistan 10.0
ing regions is a result of their higher populations and
Russia By plant
rapidly-growing industrial activity as well as a strong
emphasis on mercury emission abatement from en- Saudi Arabia None
vironmental action groups in more mature markets. South Africa 0.05
Switzerland 0.10
Mercury - Emissions limits
Similarly to NOx and SO2 emissions limits, more Trinidad & Tobago (Proposed) 0.05
developed nations generally have more stringent Turkey None
emissions than developing economies. With a cou- Turkey (AF) 0.05
ple of notable exceptions, mercury emissions from UAE None
cement plants are regulated at 0.05-0.10mg/Nm3 (in
UK 0.05
those jurisdictions where they are restricted). This
range applies to emissions from cement plants in USA (from 9 September 2015) 55lb/Mt (old) /
places as diverse as Europe, Egypt, Brazil, Nigeria, 21lb/Mt (new)
Australia, Chile and South Africa (See Table 3).
Pakistan (10mg/Nm3), Colombia (0.03mg/Nm3) countries that have no limit for mercury emissions at
and Germany (0.03mg/Nm3) represent the extremes all. These include the major markets of China, India,
in mercury emissions limits. However, there are many Turkey (for non-AF burning plants), the UAE, Saudi
Arabia and Lebanon. China is in the process of im-
plementing new regulations, effective 1 March 2014.

India Mercury - Future trends

India has few emissions limits, for the second-
largest cement industry in the world. There
are some state limits for NOx and SO2 but
no national policy for these, for mercury
or dust. There is currently discussion between
the national associations and authorities
regarding the potential implementation of
national standards for these pollutant classes,
which could conclude in 2014.
As with the other emissions classes in this review,
limits for mercury emissions from cement plants are
on a downward trend.
From 1 January 2016 Germany will reduce its
legal limit for mercury emissions from cement
plants down to 0.02mg/Nm3. This will make it the
most stringent regulator of mercury emissions in the
global cement industry. As has been the case in other
environmental areas, it is possible that this shift in
Germany could spread across Europe. The standard

30 Global Cement Magazine March 2014 www.GlobalCement.com

 GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS

COUNTRY / REGION DUST LIMIT (mg/Nm3)

Colombia Australia (New South Wales, AF) 4g/m2/month at
the plant boundary Left - Table 4: Selected current
Colombia has fairly strong emissions limits Australia (Victoria) and future emissions standards
for cement plants but they seem to have been Austria 20 for dust by country. Limits
put together in a strange order. The limits normalised to dry exhaust gas at
Bolivia 300 (Total solid particles) 1atm pressure, 273K with 10%
are lower for plants burning non-hazardous O2 as a reference unless
Chile None
alternative fuels than they are for plants burn- stated otherwise.
ing hazardous alternative fuels. Discussion is China None AF = Alternative fuels.
ongoing regarding changes to this situation. Colombia None Notes: Australia regulates the
Could this result in an increase in permit- Egypt 100 (old), 50 (new) rate of dust deposited at the
ted limits for those burning non-hazardous plant boundary.
Germany 20 (10 from 1 January 2016)
alternative fuels? This would certainly be an Bolivia includes dust and
unusual situation if it occurs. Indonesia 80 (50 Proposed) particulate matter together
Lebanon 250 (old), 50 (new) under the classification
total solid particles.
Nigeria 100
The cut-off date between
Norway 30 old and new Egyptian and
0.05mg/Nm3 limit could suddenly look old when the
Oman 100 Libyan plants is unclear.
new German requirement is introduced.
Pakistan None Germany will have the lowest
dust emissions limits for cement
Mercury - Abatement methods Russia By plant plants in 2016.
In the face of increasing limits on mercury emis- South Africa None Russia operates on a plant-by-
sions, cement plants can take two approaches to
Switzerland 20 plant basis.
reduce their mercury emissions. Firstly, careful
selection of input materials, specifically limestone Trinidad & Tobago (Proposed) None In Turkey dust emissions are
limited according to the type of
and fuels, can reduce the quantities entering the Turkey 50-120 abatement system used:
system. Secondly mercury vapour and compounds UAE 15 ESP (pre-1993) = 120mg/Nm3;
can be absorbed onto carbon dust in the stack. The Filters (pre-1993) = 75mg/Nm3;
UK 30 Post 1993 = 50mg/Nm3.
dust is collected in an electrostatic precipitator prior
to processing. UK (One particular plant) 30 (10-20 Proposed) Source: Local cement producers
and associations.
Dust / Particulate matter - Introduction

D ust is emitted from storage, crushing, grind-

ing and pyroprocessing in cement plants. It
is the industrys most obvious pollutant, since you
can actually see it. It can cause respiratory prob-
Far left: Scanning electron
lems. Some of the earliest cement plant emission
micrograph of a PM10 particle
regulations were for dust. The German Cement stuck to filter fibres.
Association (VDZ) set up a dust committee as
early as the 1930s.
Left: Dust pours out of an older
As well as being the first emission type that was
Russian cement plant prior to
targeted by those outside the industry, cement the installation of filter bags.
companies in developing markets often target
dust as their first pollutant to remove from the gas
stream. Abatement technologies are...

European Union (EU)

Richard Leese of the UK Mineral Products
Association explains EU emissions limits:
Limits for European cement plants are en-
shrined in the Industrial Emissions Directive
and best available techniques associated emis-
sion levels (BAT AELs). This means that, in
theory, all plants in Europe will have the same
emission limits. There will be exception cases
where derogations from the limits are neces-
sary. These have to be justified at plant level.

www.GlobalCement.com Global Cement Magazine March 2014 31

GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
Right - Table 5: Selected
current and future emissions
standards for PM by country.
Limits normalised to dry exhaust
gas at 1atm pressure, 273K with
10% O2 as a reference unless
stated otherwise.
AF = Alternative fuels.
Notes: Australia regulates
by State and fuel type.
Bolivia includes PM and dust
together under the classification
total solid particles.
Brazil uses 11% O2 in its
reference criteria for this
emission class.
Canada regulates PM by
Province.
Colombia regulates PM by
kiln type and fuel type, with
hazardous AF-using plants
regulated less stringently than
non-hazardous AF-using plants.
The country uses 11% O2 in its
reference criteria instead of 10%.
India regulates on plant size.
The date of the switch-over
between old and new Nigerian
plants is unclear.
Saudi Arabia legislates
PM10 emissions. Limit seen is for
general industrial installations.
Russia operates on a plant-by-
plant basis.
Source: Local cement producers
and associations.
Global Cement Magazine March 2014 www.GlobalCement.com
...well developed for dust, which often (50mg/Nm3) and for South African
allows rapid installations. There is the cement plants built after 2004.
potential to rapidly reduce emissions. Australia has an interesting meth-
The term particulate odology for dust emissions limits.
matter (PM) describes solid It stipulates that no more than
material that is suspended four grammes of dust must
in the air, regardless of its settle on a given square
origin. Covering a very wide metre at the plant bound-
diameter range, from less ary in any given month.
than 0.01m (eg: virus, This is presumably aimed at
tobacco smoke) to 10- developing dust limits that more
100m (dust, soot, ash), PM is closely relate to the perceptions of
broken down into classes by diameter. local residents and may therefore
The two classes of PM of most rel- not include airborne emissions that
evance to the cement industry are PM2.5 (a diameter are carried far from the plant. It is unfortunately
lower than 2.5m and PM10 (a diameter lower than not possible to convert the Victoria, Australia or
10m). PM10 accumulates in the lungs and PM2.5 can US PM limits into mg/Nm3 levels without first
enter the blood-stream. Both classes are potential knowing the mass of gas evolved from the plant(s)
carcinogens. Cement plants emit PM due to ash for- being regulated.
mation and may also emit salts and heavy metal PM. There are several countries for which no dust
Some diameters of cement dust particle can be emission limits could be found, as evidenced by
classed as PM10, meaning that PM and dust limits the number of countries not included in Table 4
frequently overlap in the cement industry.
COUNTRY / REGION PM LIMIT (mg/Nm3)
Dust and particulate matter -
Australia (New South Wales) 95
Emissions standards
Dust and PM emissions are not as frequently regu- Australia (New South Wales, AF) 30
lated as SO2, NOx or mercury. It is possible that this Australia (Victoria) 1155g/min
is because cement plants are dustier than other in- Bolivia 300 (Total solid particles)
dustrial installations of a similar size and therefore
Brazil 70
cannot be easily covered under more general indus-
Canada By province
trial regulations. Cement-specific regulations appear
to trail behind more general ones. Chile (AF plants only) 50
As cement dust is essentially large particulate China 50
matter, different jurisdictions often combine them
Colombia (Conventional fuels) 150-250 (wet) / 150 (dry)
as a single formal pollutant class or legislate formally
Colombia (Non-hazardous AF) 10
against just one as a proxy for the other. In Bolivia
the two are mandated together under the term total Colombia (Hazardous AF) 50
solid particles. Egypt 10
Most of the countries in this research for which India (<200t/day) 400
there are cement-specific limits for dust are <100mg/
India (>200t/day) 250
Nm3, with Nigeria and Oman at the top of this range
(See Table 4). However, Bolivian (300mg/Nm3 (for Indonesia (AF) By plant
total solid particles), old Lebanese (250mg/Nm3) and Lebanon None
some Turkish (<120mg/Nm3) facilities are limited
Nigeria 50 (old) / 100 (new)
less strongly. These countries have dust emissions
Pakistan 300
limits around 10-30 times higher than those with the
lowest permitted levels of dust. Austrian and German Russia By plant
plants are both restricted to 20mg/Nm3 and plants in Saudi Arabia (PM10) 340
the UAE are limited to just 15mg/Nm3. S Africa (AF, Built post-2004) 30
Most PM limits are <100mg/Nm3 although there
S Africa (AF, Built pre-2004) 80
are some substantially higher permitted levels in
India (200-400mg/Nm3), Pakistan (300mg/Nm3) S Africa (Built post-2004) 50
and for some Colombian plants (<250mg/Nm3). S Africa (Build pre-2004) 100
The lowest limits found are also in Colombia, for Trinidad & Tobago (Proposed) 100
plants that burn non-hazardous alternative fuels Turkey 100
(10mg/Nm3) and Egypt (10mg/Nm3). Other
UAE 100g/Nm3
relatively low limits are set in New South Wales,
Australia (30mg/Nm3), Chile (50mg/Nm3), China USA 0.07lb/ton of clinker
GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
compared to the other tables. Countries for which
a lack of limit was positively identified are all in
developing regions: South and Central America
(Trinidad & Tobago, Colombia and Chile); Asia (Pa-
kistan) and; Africa (South Africa).
Dust and particulate matter - Future trends
As with other limits seen in this research, dust emis-
sion limits are on a downward trend. On 1 January
2016 Germany will lower its 20mg/Nm3 limit to just
10mg/Nm3 to have the lowest dust limit for cement
producing facilities in the world. As EU legislators
have looked to Germany in the past, it is possible that
this trend may repeat in the future.
Elsewhere, discussions are ongoing in India
regarding applying emission limits in principle in
2014 and Indonesia is targeting a reduction from
80mg/Nm3 to 50mg/Nm3, although its changes are
currently at the proposal stage. Countries that have
a split between emissions limits for older and newer
facilities will see the effective dust emission load re-
duce with time as a result of the decommissioning of
older capacity.
No evidence of cement-specific dust emission
limits in China prior to 1 March 2014 were found.
In a country that has placed such emphasis on
macro-scale emission reduction efforts and places
such a strong emphasis on PM emission monitoring,
it is likely to be only a matter of time before these
are included.
While PM currently gets a bad press in the popu-
lar media, especially with reference to Chinese smog
pollution, in the US and Europe PM levels are on
the decline. In addition, industrial plants are rarely
a major source of these types of emissions compared
to sources like fossil fuel-burning power stations,
agriculture and transportation. Cement plants make
up a relatively small proportion of industrial instal-
lations, giving the industry somewhat lower impetus
to legislate against PM by itself, rather than including
PM emissions in general dust legislation.
With the EU and legislation front-runner
Germany including PM along with dust limits,
there are actually relatively few countries consider-
ing changes to PM limits for the cement industry
Global Cement Magazine March 2014 www.GlobalCement.com
compared to other pollutants in this study. Colom-
bian authorities are discussing the implementation
of new regulations that will bring a more coherent
picture for PM regulations with respect to the gulf
between limits for conventional fuels and alternative
fuels. While it is possible that this will result in an
increase in the PM restrictions for plants using non-
hazardous fuels, it is possible that the limits for plants
using conventional fuels could head in the other
direction. It is not known whether India and Brazil
will introduce PM-only legislation for their growing
cement industies.
Dust and particulate matter -
Abatement methods
Cement plants can use two main dust and PM
abatement technologies to help them meet emis-
sions limits: 1. Electrostatic precipitators (ESP); 2.
Filter bags.
ESPs use an induced electrostatic charge to at-
tract dust to charged surfaces. While efficient on
start-up and mechanically-reliable, ESPs become
less effective as dust builds up on the charged sur-
faces, causing time lost to maintenance and cleaning
and potentially causing emissions to rise above
permitted levels.
Filter bags, housed in baghouses, use natural or
synthetic fibre-based bags to physically remove dust
from the gas-stream. With typically four to 12 bags
working in parallel, baghouses maintain steady op-
eration for longer than ESPs, although care must be
taken with respect to the potential for damaged bags.
If a bag breaks mid-operation, the potential exists
for a massive emission of dust. This can have severe
adverse effects for local residents, water courses and
may involve financial penalties for the producer.
Currently, the majority of upgrade projects
conducted with respect to dust reduction see ESPs
being replaced with baghouses. Particulate matter
(PM) is also removed using these technologies.
Summary
By looking at the four pollutant classes in this
review it is possible to draw some conclusions
from the hard numbers in Tables 1-5. The most
fundamental of these is that all four classes are
seeing a gradual reduction in permitted emissions
levels. This is the result of growing environmen-
tal awareness in developed markets from both
cement producers and local residents. On top of
this, countries that have a split between emissions
limits for older and newer facilities will see the effec-
tive emission loads reduce with time as a result of the
decommissioning of older capacity.
The most stringent regulations covered here are
in the EU, specifically in Germany and Austria. Both
countries are leaders in overall environmental aware-
ness and have cement industries of sufficient size to
act as plausible models for future production regimes
GLOBAL CEMENT: ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
elsewhere in the world. Producers in this region have
been fairly proactive with respect to hitting limits
(and exceeding them).
Comparisons with North America are hard due
to a lack of data from Canada and a predisposi-
tion to non-SI-units in the US that does not easily
permit conversion of its forthcoming limits. Pro-
ducers in this region have previously warned of the
highly-damaging effects of new regulations, so much
so that they have successfully added five years to
their implementation deadlines.
Central and South America is a continent of ex-
tremes. Brazil, the largest cement producer on the
continent, does not have particularly strong limits
and cement industry contacts were unable to provide
NOx and SO2 emissions limits, which are mandated
by state. Chile and Colombia appear to be aspiring
to EU-level emissions limits, with relatively worse-off
Bolivia somewhat more lax. Trinidad & Tobago is
targeting slightly less stringent restrictions.
Areas that have had little legislation relating to
cement plant emissions in the past include Africa
and the Middle East. India only has some state-based
limits for some pollutants, although commitments
are expected in 2014 for other types of emissions.
Australia and Canada, both developed countries
with sparse populations, implement limits on a re-
gional basis, often for one plant (or even zero plants).
While the global cement news is full of stories as
to how stringent limits put domestic industries at risk
(see for example US producer concern over mercury
limits or Australian concerns over CO2 taxation),
countries with less stringent regulations (or indeed
no regulations) relating to this area are catching up.
Right: Smog in Beijing, China.
Global Cement Magazine March 2014 www.GlobalCement.com
This is evidenced by discussions in India, Trinidad
& Tobago, Indonesia and others regarding stronger
limits. While we have not been able to access the new
Chinese limits (except for NOx) it is clear that a coun-
try that is removing cement capacity wholesale in
some regions is finally taking action over long-held
environmental grievances. This desire to improve air
quality will hopefully extend to other countries in the
coming years and decades, benefiting local popula-
tions and the environments in the immediate vicinity
of cement plants.
Complication risks complacency
A further general trend in global cement emissions
limits appears to be that, as more stringent regulations
come in, the more tailored emissions limits become.
This is certainly the case in the EU, the UK and the
US, where individual plants are granted higher lim-
its for given pollutants. This raises the prospect for
more individual plants in more jurisdictions in the
future. However, there is a risk that, as more jurisdic-
tions go down the route of issuing exemptions, that
national (and potentially future international) limits
may become less and less relevant. If every plant has
a special limit, then what is the point of a headline
limit for that country?
In this hypothetical situation, it may be possible
that exemptions could virtually invalidate overarch-
ing regulations. It is controversial but, faced with
overcapacity, perhaps some European countries
could do worse than employing a top-down ap-
proach, implementing future emissions changes with
overall national emissions in mind.