セメントの脱炭素化 2025-2035年：技術、市場予測、有力企業
CCUS、代替燃料への転換、補助セメント材料、代替セメント材料、電気炉、新セメント生産工程の各分野での市場展望、詳細予測、企業概要、ベンチマーク評価
製品情報
概要
目次
価格
Related Content
本調査レポートでは、セメントの脱炭素化技術、市場、有力企業を解説します。200社以上にわたる40種類の脱炭素化ソリューションを取り上げながら、2024年から2035年までの市場予測を掲載しており、この分野における最も包括的な調査となっています。今後10年間の投資や発展が特に期待できるセメント脱炭素化技術を明らかにしています。セメント脱炭素化ソリューションで抑えられるCO₂排出量は、2035年までに合計422メガトンに上る見込みです。
「セメントの脱炭素化 2025-2035年」が対象とする主なコンテンツ
（詳細は目次のページでご確認ください）
● 全体概要
● はじめに
- セメント脱炭素化の紹介
- 低炭素セメントの需要喚起
● CCUS
- セメントセクターでの二酸化炭素回収
- CCUSのビジネスモデル
- 二酸化炭素回収技術紹介
- CO2回収用溶液
- 酸素燃焼のCO2回収
- CO2回収の新技術
- CO2輸送
- CO2貯留
- CO2有効利用
● セメントセクターでの代替燃料
- セメント焼成炉での燃料転換
- 焼成炉の電化技術
- セメント生産用集光型太陽熱発電
● 最新セメント原料、セメント化学、セメント生産工程
- 補助セメント材料 - クリンカー代替物
- 代替セメント材料（ポルトランドセメント以外）
- 普通ポルトランドセメント代替生産工程
- コンクリート脱炭素化用その他添加剤
● 市場予測
- セメント脱炭素化市場全体の予測
- セメント脱炭素化用CCUS予測
- セメントセクターでの代替燃料予測
- 補助セメント材料予測
● 企業概要
「セメントの脱炭素化 2025-2035年」は以下の情報を提供します
技術トレンドとプレーヤー分析：
- セメント脱炭素化技術の詳細概要：CCUS、主要補助セメント材料、最新補助セメント材料、代替セメント材料、新セメント生産工程、（石油）廃棄物由来燃料、バイオマス由来燃料、焼成炉・煆焼炉の電化、水素燃料、焼成炉・煆焼炉向け集光型太陽熱発電
- セメント脱炭素化ソリューションのベンチマーク評価（コスト、TRL、脱炭素化の可能性）
- 200社以上（スタートアップ企業から大手セメント企業まで）のインタビューに基づく企業概要
- セメントセクターのネットゼロ達成推進要因と障壁（グリーンプレミアムやセメント規格の影響など）
- 低炭素セメント生産のビジネスケースの規制・民間セクター関連の推進要因（CBAM、ETS、調達、ブックアンドクレームなど）
- セメントセクターでの二酸化炭素回収技術分析
- より広範なCCUS視点のセメントセクター分析（ビジネスモデル、CO2有効利用、CO2輸送、CO2貯留）
- 再生可能エネルギーや電気を利用したセメントセクター向け産業用熱生成技術分析（回転動力による加熱、プラズマ技術、抵抗加熱、集光型太陽熱発電）
- 主要補助セメント材料（石炭フライアッシュ、高炉水砕スラグ、石灰岩、焼成粘土、天然ポゾラン）、最新補助セメント材料、代替セメント材料（バイオセメント、ジオポリマー、ケイ酸カルシウム系セメント）、新セメント生産工程（電気化学的セメント加工など）分析
市場の予測・分析：
- 世界セメント生産量の20年間市場予測
- セメント脱炭素化技術利用で抑えられるCO2排出量の10年間市場予測
- セメントによる世界全体のCO2排出量とネットゼロに向けた進展の10年間市場予測
- 地域別（欧州、北米、APAC）セメントセクターへのCCUS導入の10年間市場予測
- セメントセクターのCCUSコストの10年間市場予測
- 世界セメント生産での燃料構成比の10年間市場予測
- セメントセクター燃料転換で抑えられるCO2排出量の10年間市場予測
- セメントで利用される補助セメント材料数量の10年間市場予測
- 補助セメント材料で抑えられるセメントセクターCO2排出量の10年間市場予測
- セメントセクターでの補助セメント材料使用で抑えられるコストの10年間市場予測
- クリンカー／セメント比率予測
Concrete is the second most consumed material on Earth but its key ingredient, cement, is responsible for 7% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions. With the global population set to keep rising and developing countries continuing to urbanize, cutting back on construction simply isn't an option. Innovative cement decarbonization technologies must be deployed to lower concrete's carbon footprint.
"Decarbonization of Cement 2025-2035: Technologies, Market Forecasts, and Players" provides a comprehensive outlook of the emerging cement decarbonization space and regulatory landscape, with an in-depth analysis of the technological, economic, regulatory, and environmental aspects that are set to shape the cement industry over the next 10 years. Cement decarbonization technologies are evaluated, discussing latest advancements, key players, and opportunities and barriers within each area. The report includes 10-year granular forecasts until 2035 for cement decarbonization technologies covering:
- CCUS CO2 capture capacity in the cement sector (segmented by region)
- Amount of supplementary cementitious materials being used in the cement sector and the associated tonnes of CO2 avoided (segmented by fly ash, blast furnace slag, limestone, calcined clay, and natural pozzolans)
- Global cement fuel mix (segmented by fossil fuels, biomass fuels, and waste-based fuels)
- Key economic considerations (CO2 capture costs and savings from displacing clinker with supplementary cementitious materials)
Forty interview-based company profiles are contained, with coverage of over 200 start-ups and key players.
Breakdown of the 10 year IDTechEx cement decarbonization forecasts included in this report. Source: IDTechEx
In this report, IDTechEx benchmarks CCUS, leading supplementary cementitious materials, emerging supplementary cementitious materials, alternative cementitious materials, new cement production processes, (petroleum) waste-derived fuel, biomass-derived fuel, kiln/calciner electrification, hydrogen fuel, and concentrated solar power for the kiln/calciner.
Supplementary cementitious materials have the most important role to play over the coming decade
Repurposing waste materials such as coal fly ash from the energy sector and GBFS (granulated blast furnace slag) from the steel sector as supplementary cementitious materials is already a well-established practice in the cement sector. Primarily motivated by lower cost materials, additional benefits of this practice include lowering cement's carbon footprint. With the biggest role to play in cement sector decarbonization over the coming decade, this report examines how supply, economics, and industry trends will influence the use of supplementary cementitious materials.
Trends in supplementary cementitious materials will change the global average composition of cement over the coming decade. Source: IDTechEx
Record-breaking decade expected for CCUS in the cement sector
The high costs of CCUS have long been a barrier to its deployment in the low-margin construction sector, but many large-scale projects are expected to be constructed this decade. There will be significant regional variation, with Europe expected to lead the charge due to mechanisms such as the Innovation Fund, Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and the Emissions Trading System (ETS). This report provides comprehensive coverage of all aspects of the CCUS value chain in the cement sector from carbon pricing and carbon markets, carbon capture technologies, CO2 transportation, CO2 storage, CO2 utilization, and costs.
Renewable electric industrial heat generation important for decarbonizing many industries
Sectors including cement, steel, alumina, and chemicals/pharmaceuticals require high temperature industrial heat. Traditionally, such high temperatures have required fossil fuels. While biomass-based and waste-based fuels are playing an ever-increasing role, there is commercial interest in hydrogen, renewable electricity, and concentrated solar power as energy sources. This report benchmarks renewable high temperature heat technologies to enable optimal industrial decarbonization.
Innovative areas need further investment
Like many other sectors, cement producers are targeting net-zero by 2050. New cement raw materials, chemistries, and production processes have a vital role to play, but the early-stage nature of some solutions means start-ups require further demonstration and investment. This report provides benchmarking of economic, technical, and environmental factors for cement decarbonization technologies to enable the best investment opportunities to be identified.
Key questions answered in this report:
- Which cement decarbonization technologies are the most promising?
- What is the current scale of cement production using these decarbonization technologies and how will production scale up?
- What is the market outlook for cement decarbonization technologies?
- Which CCUS technologies are best suited for the cement sector?
- What are the key drivers and barriers to cement decarbonization market growth?
- Who are the key players in cement decarbonization?
- What progress will the cement sector make towards net-zero in the coming decade?
Key Aspects
Technology trends & players analysis
- Detailed overview of cement decarbonization technologies: CCUS, leading supplementary cementitious materials, emerging supplementary cementitious materials, alternative cementitious materials, new cement production processes, (petroleum) waste-derived fuel, biomass-derived fuel, kiln/calciner electrification, hydrogen fuel, concentrated solar power for the kiln/calciner
- Benchmarking of cement decarbonization solutions (cost, TRL, decarbonization potential)
- Coverage of over 200 companies (start-ups and leading cement players), including interview-based company profiles
- Drivers and barriers for reaching a net-zero cement sector (including impacts of green premiums and cement standards)
- Regulatory and private sector drivers for low-carbon cement production business case (i.e. CBAM, ETS, procurement, book and claim)
- Analysis of carbon capture technologies in the cement sector
- Analysis of the cement sector within the wider CCUS picture (business model, CO2 utilization, CO2 transportation, CO2 storage)
- Analysis of renewable/electric industrial heat generation technologies for the cement sector (rotodynamic heating, plasma technologies, resistive heating, concentrated solar power)
- Analysis of leading supplementary cementitious materials (coal fly ash, GBFS - blast furnace slag, limestone, calcined clay, natural pozzolans), emerging supplementary cementitious materials, alternative cementitious materials (biocement, geopolymers, calcium silicate cements), and new cement production processes (such as electrochemical cement processing)
Market Forecasts & Analysis:
- 20 year market forecast for global cement production volume
- 10 year market forecast for CO2 emissions avoided by using cement decarbonization technologies
- 10 year market forecast for global cement CO2 emissions and progress towards net-zero
- 10 year market forecast for CCUS deployment in the cement sector by region (Europe, North America, APAC)
- 10 year market forecast for CCUS costs in the cement sector
- 10 year market forecast for percentage distribution of fuels in global cement production
- 10 year market forecast for CO2 emissions avoided by fuel switching in the cement sector
- 10 year market forecast for volumes of supplementary cementitious materials utilized in cement
- 10 year market forecast for CO2 emissions avoided by supplementary cementitious materials in the cement sector
- 10 year market forecast for cost savings from using supplementary cementitious materials in the cement sector
- Clinker-to-cement ratio forecast
| Report Metrics | Details |
|---|---|
| Historic Data | 2000 - 2023 |
| CAGR | Cement decarbonization solutions will avoid a further 422 megatonnes of CO₂ emissions by 2035. This corresponds to a CAGR of 47% compared to 2025. |
| Forecast Period | 2024 - 2035 |
| Forecast Units | CO₂ avoided (Mt), SCMs in cement (Mt), Distribution of alternative fuels (%), Costs (million US$) |
| Regions Covered | Worldwide |
| Segments Covered | Global cement production (production volume, CO₂ emissions), CCUS (CO₂ capture capacity in Europe, North America, APAC, and costs), alternative fuel switching (fossil fuels, biomass fuels, waste fuels, and CO₂ emissions reductions), supplementary cementitious materials (coal fly ash, blast furnace slag, limestone, calcined clay, natural pozzolans, clinker-to-cement ratio, and cost savings) |
IDTechEx のアナリストへのアクセス
すべてのレポート購入者には、専門のアナリストによる最大30分の電話相談が含まれています。
レポートで得られた重要な知見をお客様のビジネス課題に結びつけるお手伝いをいたします。このサービスは、レポート購入後3ヶ月以内にご利用いただく必要があります。
詳細
この調査レポートに関してのご質問は、下記担当までご連絡ください。
アイディーテックエックス株式会社 (IDTechEx日本法人)
電話 03-3216-7209
担当: 村越美和子 m.murakoshi@idtechex.com
| 1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
| 1.1. | Cement is the main component of concrete |
| 1.2. | Cement demand will continue to increase |
| 1.3. | Technologies for cement decarbonization introduction |
| 1.4. | Cement decarbonization technologies covered in this report |
| 1.5. | Benchmarking cement decarbonization technologies |
| 1.6. | Why is cement production hard to decarbonize? |
| 1.7. | The most favourable decarbonization technologies will vary by region |
| 1.8. | Methods for stimulating demand for low-carbon cement |
| 1.9. | Fossil fuels provide the high temperatures required for cement production |
| 1.10. | Fossil fuel combustion dominates cement production |
| 1.11. | Percentage distribution of fuels in global cement production forecast (2025-2035) |
| 1.12. | Introduction to supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) |
| 1.13. | Overview of major supplementary cementitious materials |
| 1.14. | Supplementary cementitious materials used in cement production - megatonnes per annum of SCMs (2025-2035) |
| 1.15. | Supplementary cementitious materials used in cement production - discussion |
| 1.16. | CCUS will be the most important cement decarbonization technology by 2050 |
| 1.17. | Status of carbon capture in the cement industry |
| 1.18. | Major future CCUS projects in the cement sector (1/2) |
| 1.19. | Major future CCUS projects in the cement sector (2/2) |
| 1.20. | US 45Q tax credits and CCUS |
| 1.21. | CCUS in the cement sector - megatonnes per annum of CO₂ captured (2025-2035) |
| 1.22. | Technologies for cement decarbonization - megatonnes per annum of CO₂ avoided (2025-2035) |
| 1.23. | Technologies for cement decarbonization forecast: Discussion |
| 1.24. | Cement decarbonization - Analyst viewpoint: Value proposition and status |
| 1.25. | Cement decarbonization - Analyst viewpoint: Benchmarking of cement decarbonization technologies |
| 1.26. | Key players in the cement industry |
| 2. | INTRODUCTION |
| 2.1. | Introduction |
| 2.1.1. | Cement is the main component of concrete |
| 2.1.2. | Clinkering manufacturing process |
| 2.1.3. | Cement demand will continue to increase |
| 2.1.4. | Technologies for cement decarbonization introduction |
| 2.1.5. | Cement decarbonization technologies covered in this report |
| 2.1.6. | Benchmarking cement decarbonization technologies |
| 2.1.7. | Why cement decarbonization needs immediate action |
| 2.1.8. | Key players in the cement industry |
| 2.1.9. | Emissions profile of making clinker (kg of CO₂/tonne of clinker) |
| 2.1.10. | Why is cement production hard to decarbonize? |
| 2.1.11. | Current progress: Cement decarbonization |
| 2.1.12. | Cement sector progress towards net-zero |
| 2.1.13. | Which cement decarbonization technology will have the biggest impact? |
| 2.1.14. | The most favourable decarbonization technologies will vary by region |
| 2.1.15. | Cement standards can delay adoption of new materials |
| 2.1.16. | How much will the green premium be for decarbonized cement? |
| 2.2. | Stimulating demand for low-carbon cement |
| 2.2.1. | Methods for stimulating demand for low-carbon cement |
| 2.2.2. | Introduction to carbon pricing and carbon markets |
| 2.2.3. | Compliance carbon pricing mechanisms across the globe |
| 2.2.4. | EU ETS: Cement |
| 2.2.5. | EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) |
| 2.2.6. | EU CBAM: Cement |
| 2.2.7. | Government procurement of low-carbon cement |
| 2.2.8. | US: Cement decarbonization roadmap |
| 2.2.9. | Voluntary demand for green cement: Private sector |
| 2.2.10. | Data centre decarbonization - driving voluntary demand |
| 2.2.11. | Book and claim system for low-carbon cement |
| 2.2.12. | China's plans for cement decarbonization |
| 3. | CCUS |
| 3.1. | Carbon capture in the cement sector |
| 3.1.1. | What is Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage (CCUS)? |
| 3.1.2. | The CCUS value chain |
| 3.1.3. | CO₂ capture cost for a specific sector depends on CO₂ concentration |
| 3.1.4. | The challenges in CCUS |
| 3.1.5. | CCUS will be the most important cement decarbonization technology by 2050 |
| 3.1.6. | Status of carbon capture in the cement industry |
| 3.1.7. | Largest operational cement sector CCUS project |
| 3.1.8. | Major future CCUS projects in the cement sector (1/2) |
| 3.1.9. | Major future CCUS projects in the cement sector (2/2) |
| 3.1.10. | Post-combustion solvent capture is less disruptive to clinker manufacturing |
| 3.1.11. | Carbon capture technologies demonstrated in the cement sector |
| 3.1.12. | SkyMine® chemical absorption: The largest CCU demonstration in the cement sector |
| 3.1.13. | Algae CO₂ capture from cement plants |
| 3.1.14. | Benchmarking carbon capture technologies in the cement sector |
| 3.1.15. | Cost and technological status of carbon capture in the cement sector |
| 3.1.16. | Which sectors will see the biggest growth in CCUS? |
| 3.1.17. | Major CCUS players |
| 3.1.18. | Mixed performance from CCUS projects |
| 3.1.19. | How much does CCUS cost? |
| 3.1.20. | Enabling large-scale CCUS |
| 3.1.21. | Carbon capture in the cement sector: Key takeaways |
| 3.1.22. | IDTechEx CCUS Portfolio |
| 3.2. | Business models for CCUS |
| 3.2.1. | Development of the CCUS business model |
| 3.2.2. | Government funding support mechanisms for CCUS |
| 3.2.3. | Government ownership of CCUS projects varies across countries |
| 3.2.4. | CCUS business model: Full value chain |
| 3.2.5. | CCUS business model: Networks and hub model |
| 3.2.6. | First cross-border CO₂ T&S project: Northern Lights Longship project |
| 3.2.7. | Emerging CCUS business model: Partial-chain |
| 3.2.8. | Why CO₂ utilization should not be overlooked |
| 3.2.9. | Alternative to carbon pricing: 45Q tax credits |
| 3.2.10. | Carbon pricing and carbon markets |
| 3.2.11. | Compliance carbon pricing mechanisms across the globe |
| 3.2.12. | What is the price of CO₂ in global carbon pricing mechanisms? |
| 3.2.13. | Challenges with carbon pricing |
| 3.2.14. | Can carbon pricing support CCS in the cement sector? |
| 3.2.15. | How high does carbon pricing need to be to support CCS? |
| 3.3. | Introduction to carbon capture technologies |
| 3.3.1. | Main CO₂ capture systems |
| 3.3.2. | Comparison of point-source CO₂ capture systems |
| 3.3.3. | Post-combustion CO₂ capture |
| 3.3.4. | Oxy-fuel combustion CO₂ capture |
| 3.3.5. | CO₂ concentration and partial pressure varies with emission source |
| 3.3.6. | How does CO₂ partial pressure influence cost? |
| 3.3.7. | Main CO₂ capture technologies |
| 3.3.8. | Comparison of CO₂ capture technologies |
| 3.3.9. | When should different carbon capture technologies be used? |
| 3.3.10. | CO₂ recovery rate considerations in cement production |
| 3.4. | Solvents for CO₂ capture |
| 3.4.1. | Solvent-based CO₂ capture |
| 3.4.2. | Chemical absorption solvents |
| 3.4.3. | Amine-based post-combustion CO₂ absorption |
| 3.4.4. | Innovation addressing solvent-based CO₂ capture drawbacks |
| 3.4.5. | When should solvent-based carbon capture be used? |
| 3.4.6. | Innovation in carbon capture solvents |
| 3.4.7. | Chilled ammonia process (CAP) |
| 3.4.8. | Comparison of key chemical solvent-based systems - emerging |
| 3.4.9. | Applicability of chemical absorption solvents capture solvents for post-combustion applications |
| 3.5. | Oxyfuel combustion capture |
| 3.5.1. | Oxy-fuel combustion CO₂ capture |
| 3.5.2. | Oxygen separation technologies for oxy-fuel combustion |
| 3.5.3. | Oxyfuel CCUS projects in the cement industry |
| 3.5.4. | Large-scale oxyfuel CCUS cement projects in the pipeline |
| 3.6. | Novel CO₂ capture technologies |
| 3.6.1. | LEILAC process: Direct CO₂ capture in cement plants |
| 3.6.2. | LEILAC process: Configuration options |
| 3.6.3. | Calcium Looping (CaL) |
| 3.6.4. | Calcium Looping (CaL) configuration options |
| 3.7. | CO₂ transportation |
| 3.7.1. | Introduction to CO₂ transportation |
| 3.7.2. | Overview of CO₂ transportation methods and conditions across all sectors |
| 3.7.3. | CO₂ transportation by pipeline |
| 3.7.4. | CO₂ transportation by ship |
| 3.7.5. | CO₂ transportation by rail and truck |
| 3.7.6. | Purity requirements of CO₂ transportation |
| 3.7.7. | General cost comparison of CO₂ transportation methods |
| 3.7.8. | Cost considerations in CO₂ transport |
| 3.7.9. | CO₂ transport operators |
| 3.7.10. | CO₂ transport and/or storage as a service business model |
| 3.7.11. | Key takeaways |
| 3.8. | CO₂ storage |
| 3.8.1. | CO₂ storage in the cement sector |
| 3.8.2. | The case for carbon dioxide storage or sequestration |
| 3.8.3. | Storage type for geologic CO₂ storage: Saline aquifers |
| 3.8.4. | Storage type for geologic CO₂ storage: Depleted oil and gas fields |
| 3.8.5. | Unconventional storage resources: Coal seams and shale |
| 3.8.6. | Unconventional storage resources: Basalts and ultra-mafic rocks |
| 3.8.7. | Estimates of global CO₂ storage space |
| 3.8.8. | CO₂ storage potential by country |
| 3.8.9. | Permitting and authorization of CO₂ storage |
| 3.8.10. | What is CO₂-EOR? |
| 3.8.11. | What happens to the injected CO₂? |
| 3.8.12. | CO₂-EOR SWOT analysis |
| 3.8.13. | Technology status of CO₂ storage |
| 3.8.14. | The cost of carbon sequestration (1/2) |
| 3.8.15. | The cost of carbon sequestration (2/2) |
| 3.8.16. | Storage-type TRL and operator landscape |
| 3.9. | CO₂ utilization |
| 3.9.1. | Why CO₂ utilization? |
| 3.9.2. | CO₂ utilization pathways |
| 3.9.3. | Emerging applications of CO₂ utilization |
| 3.9.4. | Comparison of emerging CO₂ utilization applications |
| 3.9.5. | Technology Readiness Level (TRL): CO₂U products |
| 3.9.6. | Key players in emerging CO₂ Utilization technologies |
| 3.9.7. | Production of CO₂-derived building materials is growing fast |
| 3.9.8. | Competitive landscape: TRL of players in CO₂U concrete |
| 3.9.9. | Key takeaways in CO₂-derived building materials |
| 4. | ALTERNATIVE FUELS IN THE CEMENT SECTOR |
| 4.1. | Introduction |
| 4.1.1. | Fossil fuels provide the high temperatures required for cement production |
| 4.1.2. | Benchmarking cement high temperature heat technologies |
| 4.1.3. | Using alternatives to fossil fuels only addresses 1/3 of cement's carbon footprint |
| 4.1.4. | Temperature ranges achieved by different energy sources for cement kilns |
| 4.1.5. | Key technology providers in renewable power sources for electric kilns |
| 4.2. | Fuel switching for cement kilns |
| 4.2.1. | Introduction to alternative fuels for cement kilns |
| 4.2.2. | Fossil fuel combustion dominates cement production |
| 4.2.3. | Alternative fuels in cement production by region |
| 4.2.4. | Waste as an alternative fuel in cement production |
| 4.2.5. | Biomass as an alternative fuel in cement production |
| 4.2.6. | When can fuel switching for cement plants be net-zero? |
| 4.2.7. | Major planned fuel switching and CCS projects in the cement sector |
| 4.2.8. | Net-zero by 2050: fuel mix in cement sector |
| 4.2.9. | Cement plants can already run on 100% alternative fuels |
| 4.2.10. | Burner design considerations when fuel switching at cement plants |
| 4.2.11. | Hydrogen as a fuel in cement production |
| 4.2.12. | Status of hydrogen |
| 4.2.13. | Barriers remain for low-carbon hydrogen |
| 4.2.14. | Further info - IDTechEx Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Research Portfolio |
| 4.2.15. | Benchmarking of alternative fuels |
| 4.2.16. | Key takeaways - switching to alternative fuels in the cement sector |
| 4.3. | Technologies for kiln electrification |
| 4.3.1. | Introduction to kiln electrification |
| 4.3.2. | Coolbrook's RotoDynamic Heater |
| 4.3.3. | Economics of cement electrification: Coolbrook case study |
| 4.3.4. | Rotodynamic heating for electrified cement production: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.5. | Electric arc plasma technologies |
| 4.3.6. | Electric arc furnaces for cement recycling: SWOT analysis |
| 4.3.7. | Resistive heating for kiln electrification (i) |
| 4.3.8. | Resistive heating for kiln electrification (ii) |
| 4.3.9. | Microwave and induction heating for kiln electrification |
| 4.3.10. | Kiln electrification enables cheaper carbon capture |
| 4.3.11. | Initial focus is on electrifying calciner |
| 4.3.12. | Comparing conventional cement production with CCUS to electrified cement production with CCUS |
| 4.3.13. | Electrochemical cement processing |
| 4.3.14. | Benchmarking kiln electrification technologies for cement production |
| 4.3.15. | Kiln electrification: Key takeaways |
| 4.4. | Concentrated solar power for cement production |
| 4.4.1. | Concentrated solar power (CSP) |
| 4.4.2. | Synhelion: CSP in cement production technology |
| 4.4.3. | Process flow diagram: solar-driven clinker production |
| 4.4.4. | State-of-the-art technologies in CSP for cement pyroprocesses |
| 4.4.5. | Concentrated solar power (CSP) in cement production: Key takeaways |
| 5. | EMERGING CEMENT RAW MATERIALS, CHEMISTRIES AND PRODUCTION PROCESSES |
| 5.1. | Introduction |
| 5.1.1. | Introduction to alternative cement raw materials, chemistries, and production processes |
| 5.1.2. | Cement standards can delay adoption of new cement materials/chemistries/production processes |
| 5.1.3. | Innovation landscape for low-carbon cement and concrete |
| 5.2. | Supplementary cementitious materials - clinker substitutes |
| 5.2.1. | Main supplementary cementitious materials |
| 5.2.2. | Introduction to supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) |
| 5.2.3. | How common are SCMs currently: Global clinker-to-cement ratio |
| 5.2.4. | Overview of major supplementary cementitious materials |
| 5.2.5. | Economics of major low-carbon cement blends |
| 5.2.6. | Which SCMs are most used today? |
| 5.2.7. | Which SCMs will dominate by 2050? |
| 5.2.8. | Portland limestone cement (PLC) |
| 5.2.9. | Fly ash blended cement |
| 5.2.10. | Slag cement (GGBFS/GBFS cement) |
| 5.2.11. | Natural pozzolans blended cement |
| 5.2.12. | Limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) |
| 5.2.13. | Overview of operational clay calcination kiln projects |
| 5.2.14. | Overview of future clay calcination kiln projects |
| 5.2.15. | Technologies for clay calcination: Rotary kiln or flash calciner |
| 5.2.16. | Alternatives methods of clay activation: Mechanochemical |
| 5.2.17. | Key takeaways main supplementary cementitious materials |
| 5.2.18. | Alternative supplementary cementitious materials |
| 5.2.19. | Emerging alternative supplementary cementitious materials |
| 5.2.20. | Silica fume blended cement |
| 5.2.21. | Burnt oil shale as an SCM |
| 5.2.22. | Emerging coal fly ash SCMs |
| 5.2.23. | Mine tailings and biomass ashes as SCMs |
| 5.2.24. | Waste glass and zeolites as SCMs |
| 5.2.25. | Recycled concrete as an SCM |
| 5.2.26. | CO₂ utilization enables supplementary cementitious materials through accelerated carbonation |
| 5.2.27. | Key players in alternative supplementary cementitious materials |
| 5.3. | Alternative cementitious materials (non-Portland cements) |
| 5.3.1. | Introduction to alternative binders |
| 5.3.2. | Benchmarking main alternative cementitious materials |
| 5.3.3. | Production scale of alternative cement chemistries (tonnes per annum) |
| 5.3.4. | Calcium sulphoaluminate cements |
| 5.3.5. | Belite-rich Portland cement |
| 5.3.6. | Geopolymers and alkali-activated binders |
| 5.3.7. | Alkali activators |
| 5.3.8. | Commercial players in alkali-activated concrete |
| 5.3.9. | Vaterite cement (calcium carbonate cement): Fortera |
| 5.3.10. | CO₂ utilization enables alternative cementitious materials through mineralization |
| 5.3.11. | Microbial biocement (calcium carbonate cement) |
| 5.3.12. | New calcium silicate cements start-ups |
| 5.3.13. | Key players in alternative cementitious materials |
| 5.4. | Alternative cement production processes for ordinary Portland cement |
| 5.4.1. | Making ordinary Portland cement from alternative raw materials and/or production processes |
| 5.4.2. | Alternative production processes for Portland cement |
| 5.4.3. | LEILAC process: Indirect calcination |
| 5.5. | Other additives for concrete decarbonization |
| 5.5.1. | Strength enhancers and grinding aids |
| 5.5.2. | CO₂ as a performance enhancing additive |
| 6. | MARKET FORECASTS |
| 6.1. | Introduction |
| 6.1.1. | Breakdown of IDTechEx cement decarbonization forecast |
| 6.1.2. | Global cement forecast 2000-2045 (million tonnes per annum of cement) |
| 6.1.3. | Global cement forecast 2000-2045: Discussion |
| 6.2. | Overall cement decarbonization market forecast |
| 6.2.1. | Technologies for cement decarbonization - megatonnes per annum of CO₂ avoided (2025-2035) |
| 6.2.2. | Technologies for cement decarbonization forecast: discussion |
| 6.2.3. | Cement sector progress towards net-zero forecast (2025-2035) |
| 6.2.4. | Cement sector progress towards net-zero - discussion |
| 6.3. | CCUS for cement decarbonization forecast |
| 6.3.1. | CCUS in the cement sector - megatonnes per annum of CO₂ captured (2025-2035) |
| 6.3.2. | CCUS for cement decarbonization forecast: Discussion (1/2) |
| 6.3.3. | CCUS for cement decarbonization forecast: Discussion (2/2) |
| 6.3.4. | CCUS in the cement sector - million US$ in expected CCUS costs (2025-2035) |
| 6.4. | Alternative fuels in the cement sector forecast |
| 6.4.1. | Percentage distribution of fuels in global cement production (2025-2035) |
| 6.4.2. | Fuel switching in the cement sector - megatonnes per annum of CO₂ avoided (2025-2035) |
| 6.4.3. | Fuel switching in the cement sector forecast: discussion |
| 6.5. | Supplementary cementitious materials forecast |
| 6.5.1. | Supplementary cementitious materials used in cement production - megatonnes per annum of SCMs (2025-2035) |
| 6.5.2. | Supplementary cementitious materials forecast - discussion (1/3) |
| 6.5.3. | Supplementary cementitious materials forecast - discussion (2/3) |
| 6.5.4. | Supplementary cementitious materials forecast - discussion (3/3) |
| 6.5.5. | Supplementary cementitious materials used in cement production - megatonnes per annum of CO₂ avoided (2025-2035) |
| 6.5.6. | Supplementary cementitious materials used in cement production - million US$ from raw material savings (2025-2035) |
| 6.5.7. | Clinker-to-cement ratio breakdowns: 2024 and 2035 |
| 7. | COMPANY PROFILES |
| 7.1. | 1414 Degrees |
| 7.2. | Airco Process Technology |
| 7.3. | Aker Carbon Capture |
| 7.4. | Antora Energy |
| 7.5. | Ardent |
| 7.6. | Biomason |
| 7.7. | Bright Renewables: Carbon Capture |
| 7.8. | C-Capture |
| 7.9. | Cambridge Electric Cement |
| 7.10. | Capsol Technologies |
| 7.11. | CarbiCrete |
| 7.12. | Carbonaide |
| 7.13. | CarbonCure |
| 7.14. | Chiyoda: CCUS |
| 7.15. | Coolbrook |
| 7.16. | Electrified Thermal Solutions |
| 7.17. | Fluor: Carbon Capture |
| 7.18. | FuelCell Energy |
| 7.19. | Giammarco Vetrocoke |
| 7.20. | Greenore |
| 7.21. | Honeywell UOP: CO₂ Solutions |
| 7.22. | Mitsubishi Heavy Industries: KM CDR Process |
| 7.23. | MTR (Membrane Technology and Research) |
| 7.24. | NovoMOF |
| 7.25. | Nuada: MOF-Based Carbon Capture |
| 7.26. | Orchestra Scientific: MOF-Based Carbon Separation |
| 7.27. | Paebbl |
| 7.28. | Pentair: Carbon Capture |
| 7.29. | Pyrowave |
| 7.30. | Rondo Energy |
| 7.31. | Saipem: Bluenzyme |
| 7.32. | SaltX |
| 7.33. | Seratech |
| 7.34. | Solidia Technologies |
| 7.35. | Sumitomo SHI FW: Carbon Capture |
| 7.36. | Svante: MOF-Based Carbon Capture |
| 7.37. | Synhelion |
価格および注文方法
セメントの脱炭素化 2025-2035年：技術、市場予測、有力企業
£€$元¥
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 1-5名）
£5,650.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 6-10名）
£8,050.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 1-5名）
£6,450.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 6-10名）
£8,850.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 1-5名）
€6,400.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 6-10名）
€9,100.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 1-5名）
€7,310.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 6-10名）
€10,010.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 1-5名）
$7,000.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 6-10名）
$10,000.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 1-5名）
$7,975.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 6-10名）
$10,975.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 1-5名）
元50,000.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 6-10名）
元72,000.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 1-5名）
元58,000.00
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 6-10名）
元80,000.00
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 1-5名）
¥990,000
電子版_PDF（ユーザー 6-10名）
¥1,406,000
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 1-5名）
¥1,140,000
電子版_PDFおよびハードコピー1部（ユーザー 6-10名）
¥1,556,000
Click here to enquire about additional licenses.
If you are a reseller/distributor please contact us before ordering.
お問合せ、見積および請求書が必要な方はm.murakoshi@idtechex.com までご連絡ください。
セメント脱炭素化ソリューションで抑えられるCO₂排出量は、2035年までに422メガトンに上る見込み
レポート概要
| スライド | 308 |
|---|---|
| 企業数 | 37 |
| フォーキャスト | 2035 |
| 発行日 | Nov 2024 |
コンテンツのプレビュー
 Webinar Slides
|
|
Sample pages
|
|
|
Customer Testimonial
"The resources produced by IDTechEx are a valuable tool... Their insights and analyses provide a strong foundation for making informed, evidence-based decisions. By using their expertise, we are better positioned to align our strategies with emerging opportunities."