Successful, at-scale, examples already exist of cement works burning 100% fuel alternatives to traditional fossil fuels, including pilot projects using combinations of hydrogen and biomass (UK) and hydrogen and electricity (Sweden). Yet, innovations such as use of hydrogen and kiln electrification are forecast to play only a small role, providing 10% of energy needs by 2050. Worldwide, only 24% of cement in 2023 was produced using alternative fuels, with 76% of cement produced using fossil fuels (37% of cement overall is heated using coal). The continuing reliance on burning fossil fuels to generate heat at cement works contributes to its high CO2 footprint – particularly its upstream footprint due to the resources and methane emissions associated with mining coal. Globally, the cement industry is responsible for up to 8% of CO2 emissions (but only 1.5% of UK CO2 emissions) – nearly as much as steel.

Coal-free fuel examples from around the world:

Globally, the clinker ratio to cement (Portland and blended) has reduced from 78% in 2012 to 75% in 2023. The use of clinker substitutes has correspondingly increased by 12.7 million tonnes between 1990 and 2023, but much of this increase may be accounted for by the overall growth in cement production. Although most ‘green cement’ works around the world substitute up to 40% of clinker, there is at least one commercial example of a cement works substituting up to 100% of the clinker in their cement production. The use of alternative cementious materials reduce, or even eliminate the needs for clinker. Unlike clinker, these alternative cementious materials don’t require as much, or any, heating – thereby reducing the amount of coal burned. Some of these materials, such as the coal by-products of fly-ash and blast furnace slag, are in increasingly short supply as economies decarbonise. However, other clinker substitutes such as burnt rice husks do not face supply issues, and a lack of acceptance by the construction sector continues to be the most limiting factor in producing more cement with a lower clinker content. One solution to this would be Government mandating that publicly-funded construction projects must use entirely or partially ‘low carbon’ cement products where clinker substitutes have been included.

Clinker substitution examples from around the world:

In contrast to worldwide trends, UK cement production has been in decline since a peak in the 1970s, and roughly halving since 1990. Despite this decline, the UK cement industry still burned just under 400,000* tonnes of coal to make 7.3 million tonnes of cement in 2024 – averaging roughly 1 tonne of coal for every 18 tonnes of cement. To put that into context, around 8,000 tonnes of cement is needed for a new hospital, while between 3-5 tonnes are needed to build a four-bedroom family house.

*There is no cement-specific coal consumption statistics available, but the UK Government reported that 395,000 tonnes of coal were used in the minerals industry in 2024, the vast majority of which would be cement.

At the moment, there are isolated examples of cement works around the world that operate entirely without burning coal or fossil fuels. Yet all large UK cement works continue relying on coal and fossil fuels. The £3.2 million public fund to research pathways to decarbonise UK cement making is welcome, but to get value for money, proven pathways must be implemented at commercial cement works.

Carbon Capture & Storage - risks:

There is also a proposal to create a CCS network (Peak Valley Cluster), funded in part by the new UK National Wealth Fund. The CCS project would aim to reduce CO2 emissions from several cement works in Derbyshire and Staffordshire. But the high-risk CCS technology is an extremely expensive decarbonisation pathway, with high construction and running costs. The UK Government pledged an eye-watering £22 billion from 2025, driving even more households into fuel poverty (currently 11% of UK households struggle in energy poverty). Given the many £billions poured into the technology around the world, it has a disastrous global track-record of cancellations, suspensions soon after operating, and under-performance of up to 50%. Crucially, CCS will also do nothing to remove coal from the cement-making process, failing to reduce any upstream emissions or harms associated with coal mining and resource extraction in the supply chain. Investment in CCS is investment diverted from eliminating our use of fossil fuels, thereby prolonging our reliance on them.

Published: 03. 11. 2025