Myb1 2009 Cemen

2009 Minerals Yearbook
CEMENT [ADVANCE RELEASE]
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey
July 2011
CEMENT
By Hendrik G. van Oss
Domestic survey tables were prepared by Michelle B. Blackwell, statistical assistant, and the world production table was prepared by Glenn J. Wallace, international data coordinator. Combined production of portland and masonry cement in the United States in 2009 was 63.9 million metric tons (Mt). This was a 25.9% decline from production in 2008, a 35.6% decrease from the record output in 2005 (table 1), and the lowest level of output since 1983. Consumption of portland and masonry cement as measured by sales to domestic nal customers decreased in 2009 by 26.7% to 71.0 Mt (table 9), also the lowest level since 1983 and nearly 57 Mt or 44.5% lower than the 2005 record. In contrast, the decline in sales prices (mill net valuation basis) in 2009 was comparatively modest (tables 1, 1113). Overall, the value of cement sales totaled $7.0 billion, down by about 30% from that of 2008. Based on typical portland cement mixing ratios in concrete, the delivered value of concrete (excluding mortar) in the United States was estimated to be at least $47 billion in 2009. Percentage or other changes expressed in this report compare activity in 2009 with that of 2008 unless specied otherwise. Except where otherwise indicated, activity levels in this report exclude those in Puerto Rico. Cements covered in this report are mainly limited to those hydraulic varieties broadly classied as portland cement (including blended cement and other varieties listed in table 15) and/or masonry cement (including portland-lime and plastic cements); these are the binding agents in concrete and most mortars. A few other types of hydraulic cements and/or clinker (notably aluminous cement) are included in some of the trade data (tables 1618 and 21) and within the world production data (table 22). Except where incorporated as components within nished portland (blended) or masonry cements, this reports tables exclude supplementary cementitious materials (SCM), such as y ash, other pozzolans, and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS). Sales data for blended (also called composite) cements listed separately from portland cement are available in the monthly Mineral Industry Surveys reports of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The bulk of this report is based on data compiled from USGS annual questionnaires sent to cement and clinker manufacturing plants and associated distribution facilities and import terminals, and some terminals that are independent of U.S. cement manufacturers. For 2009, questionnaires were received from 152 of 156 facilities canvassed, a response rate of 97%, which included all of the production sites. For 2008, questionnaires were received from 149 of 152 facilities canvassed, a response rate of 98%, including all of the production sites. If missing data could not be obtained by followup telephone inquiries, they were estimated based on monthly data or past annual reporting. For both years, the data exclude several importers that have yet to participate in the surveys. To the degree that they are independent of the participating companies, sales by the missing importers for 2008 and 2009 are estimated to be equivalent to an additional 1% of the total portland cement sales tonnages
CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE]
shown in this report. Background information on cement and its manufacture and on the USGS cement canvasses can be found in van Oss (2005). Government Programs and Environmental Issues A number of ongoing Government programs provide funding and direction for public sector construction and were thus of importance to cement consumption levels. In 2009, stimulus program spending allotments, including those related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, were being compared to individual State spending of the appropriated monies as a means to predict increases in cement demand. By late 2009, it was evident that very little of the stimulus spending during the year had been for cement (concrete) but it was anticipated that the concrete industry would signicantly benet from ARRA funding in 2010 (Sullivan, 2010). Environmental issues associated with the cement industry mostly result from the manufacture of the intermediate product called clinker. In clinker manufacture, the burning of large amounts of raw materials and fuels leads to signicant emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), and can yield signicant emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), mercury and some other metals, volatile organic carbon compounds, and particulates. Increasingly, these emissions are regulated or are being considered for regulation or reregulation. The largest volume emissions are of CO2; the cement industry is one of the leading industrial emitters of this greenhouse gas (GHG). Overall, generation of CO2 by the U.S. cement industry in 2009 was calculated to be in the range of 0.87 to 0.92 metric ton (t) of CO2 per ton of clinker produced; the high end incorporates fuel combustion emissions calculated using standard heat values for the fuels consumed (table 7), and the low end incorporates heat values actually reported by the individual plants. Both ratios include a standard emissions factor from calcination of limestone of 0.51 t of CO2 per ton of clinker as detailed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Hanle and others, 2006), but exclude any correction for cement kiln dust (CKD) not recycled to the kiln (for which data are lacking). However, the standard calcination component of CO2 emissions can be reduced in the calculation in proportion to the calcium oxide contributed by noncarbonate alternative raw materials such as ferrous slags and coal combustion ashes. This incorporation would allow a reduction of calcination-related emissions of about 2.4% (0.7 Mt of CO2) in 2009 and 2.7% (nearly 1.1 Mt of CO2) in 2008; relative reductions can be signicantly larger for the subset of individual plants that actually burn these alternative raw materials. Certain fuels, including alternative or waste fuels, can either directly reduce plant-level CO2 emissions or may lead to reductions in reported
16.1
emissions from combustion because the fuels are considered to be carbon-neutral (certain biofuels) or because credits may be allowed for their use (certain waste fuels). Plant-level emissions can be reduced through upgrading to more fuel-efcient kiln line technology. Unit emissions can also be reduced by use of SCM in nished cement and in concrete to reduce the clinker content of these products and/or by allowing the addition of inert llers to boost cement output without simultaneously boosting clinker output. In past years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used methods similar to those used above to calculate and report overall U.S. levels of GHG emissions by various industries; for cement, these methods made use of national-level clinker production data published by the USGS. However, to more accurately determine U.S. emissions of GHG, in October, the EPA released a nal rule for mandatory site/plantspecic reporting of GHG emissions (to begin in 2010) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009b). For the cement industrys CO2 emissions, relevant calculation procedures for fuel combustion are covered under Part 98, subpart C (p. 56397 56411) and, for calcination and related process emissions, in subpart H (p. 5642056422). In May, the EPA proposed new, very low, limits on individual plant emissions of mercury, total hydrocarbons, particulate matter, and hydrochloric acid within a set of national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for the U.S. cement industry (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009a). It was unclear how many U.S. cement plants would be able to comply with the new NESHAP limits for all four listed pollutants. The new standards for mercury were set so stringent (for existing plants, 43 pounds of mercury per million short tons of clinker produced; and for new plants, 14 pounds of mercury per million short tons of clinker produced) as to possibly preclude, absent the installation of mercury scrubbers, which could be very expensive, the use at many plants of their normal raw materials and of coal as a fuel. The NESHAP could end the use of y ash as an alternative raw material for clinker manufacture; y ash commonly has a high mercury content and this content was expected to increase as coal-red powerplants installed their own scrubbers. The mercury-scrubbing technology most commonly discussed makes use of activated carbon, and this mercury-laden carbon (at a powerplant) would report to the y ash. A discussion of the cement NESHAP is provided by OHare (2009). The EPA was evaluating changing the regulatory classication of coal combustion byproducts, particularly y ash, under conditions of long-term or permanent storage (disposal) and for various usage purposes. Concern in the construction sector was that if y ash were to be reclassied as a hazardous waste, even under restricted circumstances, the material would be stigmatized and demand for it would decrease or cease altogether (Goss, 2010). Production Continued declining sales of cement, together with an apparent drawdown of cement stockpiles, and despite a major decline in cement imports, led to a 25.6% decrease in portland cement production in 2009 to just 62.0 Mt (table 3). This was
16.2 [ADVANCE RELEASE]
the lowest production since 1983 and was nearly 32 Mt less than the record output in 2005. Production fell in all districts except Indiana. Yearend stocks of portland cement fell by 28%. Owing to two plants coming online during the year (Florida and Missouri) and of some new mills at existing plants, overall grinding capacity increased by about 6%. The capacities and plant counts listed in table 3 for 2009 are, however, somewhat uncertain because of difculties differentiating between plants reported as idle (or indenitely idle) and those that were permanently closed. At least in terms of sales, some such plants continued to operate as distribution terminals. Likewise, plants that closed their kilns in late 2008 may have continued to grind remaining clinker stocks until they were exhausted in early 2009 after which the nish mills were closed as well. The USGS policy has been to count as active all plants having production for at least 1 day during the year, but this policy may not be realistic for plants idle all year and which offered few prospects of ever reopening. Thus, in a few locations, a decision was made for the 2009 tally to exclude plants that were idle throughout 200910 and for which a formal closure announcement was made in 2010. In one district, an ultimately closed plant was retained in the 2009 count because it made a small quantity of masonry cement early in the year, thus still having active grinding capacity. Another plant, seemingly closed, retained the possibility of restarting its nish mill. One plant in Florida that had been announced as closed in late 2008 was retained in the 2009 count despite no production during the year because its status was conrmed as idled, rather than closed. For masonry cement, a stagnant housing construction sector during the year led to a decline in cement production of 35% to just 2.0 Mt, the lowest level since at least 1954. With common parents combined under the larger subsidiarys name and with joint ventures apportioned, the 10 leading companies at yearend 2009, in descending order of portland cement production, were Holcim (US) Inc., CEMEX, Inc., Lafarge North America Inc., Lehigh Cement Co., Buzzi Unicem USA Inc. (including Alamo Cement Co.), Ash Grove Cement Co., Texas Industries, Inc. (TXI), Essroc Cement Corp., CalPortland Co., and St. Marys Cement Inc. The listing was unchanged from that of 2008. The U.S. industry continued to be heavily consolidatedthe leading 5 cement companies, combined, contributed 59% of total U.S. portland cement production, and the leading 10 companies accounted for 81% of total production. Of the above named companies, all except Ash Grove and TXI were foreign owned as of yearend, and for the industry overall, about 77% of total cement output was by foreign-owned companies. Clinker output in 2009 fell by 28.4% to 56.1 Mt (tables 1, 5). This was the lowest level since 1982. Production fell in all months, and for the year overall in all districts. Owing to a new plant coming online, the commencement of production from a plant that was completed at yearend 2008, and upgrades at some existing plants, apparent annual capacity increased by 6.5%; this was despite the removal in the 2009 total of plants or kilns closed during 2008. Utilization of clinker production capacity was only about 49% in 2009, well down from the 73% of the previous year and the presumed full practicable capacity utilization of 85% or more experienced during years
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009
of high cement sales volumes. The performance in 2009 reected a combination of permanent kiln or plant closures and long-term idling of extra kilns at multikiln plants. However, the utilization statistic is dependent on the reported downtime for routine maintenance. Many plants reported much longer than normal downtimes for this purpose in 2009; where this was obvious, corrections were made after consultation with the plants to remove the extra downtime (a result of slow sales) from the statistic. Yearend clinker stockpiles decreased by nearly 30%, likely reecting yet more kiln idlings late in the year. Nonfuel raw materials consumed to make clinker and cement are listed in table 6. Ratios among clinker raw materials consumed in 2009 appear to be broadly similar to those in 2008. For y ash and bottom ash, the data are similar to those published by the American Coal Ash Association (ACAA) for sales for use in making clinker and cement (combined), namely 2.210 Mt of y ash and 0.654 Mt of bottom ash (American Coal Ash Association, 2010; Goss, 2010). The ACAA also noted sales of 0.382 Mt of synthetic gypsum to the cement industry; this is less than the 0.47 Mt or more of this material included within the Gypsum and anhydrite data in table 6, but could reect the fact that the ACAA does not survey the cement plants own manufacture of this material. Data on fuel consumption by the cement industry are listed in table 7. Data shifts can reect activities at just a few plants. In terms of overall mass ratios among fuels in total and relative to clinker production, signicant changes in 2009 were evident for several fuels but in part reected closure and full-year idling of several wet kilns and some less efcient long dry kilns during the year. A much smaller percentage of clinker was contributed by wet kilns in 2009, for example. The signicant increase in the consumption of natural gas reects a combination of the incorporation of large amounts of landll gas at two plants, and a shift from gas as a warm up fuel to a major use fuel reported at two facilities. Some of the other apparent shifts reect upgrades, including conversions from wet to dry kiln technology at some plants. Although not revealed in table 7, overall heat consumption (gross heat basis) in 2009 was about 3.9 billion joules (GJ) per metric ton of clinker, down by about 9% from that in 2008. The reduction reected the closure or idling of wet kilns and less efcient dry kilns during the year. Heat energy consumption at the remaining operational wet kilns averaged 6.0 GJ per ton of clinker, down by nearly 8%. Dry kilns averaged 3.6 GJ per ton of clinker, down by 10%. Thus, efciency apparently improved despite much longer and perhaps more frequent than normal total downtimes (for all reasons) on the operational kilns. It is possible that further reductions in unit energy consumption will be realized if and when the industry resumes more normal operating schedules. As in past years, coal supplied the largest share of the heat consumed (60%, down by about 7%), followed by petroleum coke (about 21%, unchanged), and waste fuels (13%, up by 22%). As noted above, natural gas, including landll gas, use increased markedly; it contributed about 5% of total heat in 2009, up by 74%. The average unit electricity consumption increased again in 2009 (table 8); this most likely reects operational disruptions (idlings and closures, repairs, plant upgrades) at many plants,
and a greater reliance on dry plants. Dry plants, commonly, have higher unit electricity consumption than do wet plants. There were no signicant ownership changes in the U.S. cement industry in 2009. Two new plants were brought into production during the year. American Cement Co., LLC began operations early in the year at its 1.0-million-metric-ton-peryear (Mt/yr) plant at Sumterville, FL; plant construction had been completed at yearend 2008. Initial cement production was from purchased clinker, but the plant started its own clinker production in May. American Cement was a joint venture between Oldcastle Materials, Inc. and New Jersey-based Trap Rock Industries, Inc. In July, Holcim red the 4.0-Mt/yr precalciner kiln at its new plant in St. Genevieve County, MO; this kiln was said to have the largest annual capacity of any in the world and was expected, at full output levels, to put Missouri at or near the forefront of U.S. clinker production. The litany of plant closures and long-term or indenite idlings of plants that began in 2008 continued in 2009, although many of the facilities continued to operate as storage, packaging, and transshipment terminals for cement sourced elsewhere. At the end of January, Ash Grove indenitely idled the wet kilns at its Inkom, ID, plant, but the facility continued to produce cement from clinker stockpiles and from clinker brought in from another Ash Grove plant. CalPortland idled the long dry kilns at its Colton, CA, plant during the course of the year but continued to make cement from clinker brought in from the companys Mojave, CA, facility. CEMEX conrmed that its Brooksville North plant in Florida was on indenite idle status in 2009, and had not been closed as had been reported in 2008. Essroc closed the wet kilns at its Bessemer, PA, plant at the end of April and shut the nish mill there at the end of September. At the end of April, Holcim shut its wet plants at Dundee, MI, and Clarksville, MO; the Clarksville plants kiln was the longest in the world. At the same time, the company indenitely idled its wet plant at Artesia, MS, and in September, indenitely idled its dry plant at Mason City, IA. In addition to these plant closures and/or indenite idlings, many multikiln plants had one or more kilns idle for all or part of the year. Major kiln line upgrades were completed at three cement plants in 2009. In August, Buzzi Unicem red the new 1.2 Mt/yr precalciner kiln at its River (also known as the Festus or Selma plant), at Festus, MO; the new kiln replaced the existing pair of long dry kilns (Buzzi Unicem, 2009). Also in November, Keystone Cement Co. red its new precalciner kiln line at Bath, PA; the new 1.2-Mt/yr line replaced the plants pair of wet kilns, which were shut down at the same time. In August, Essroc closed the three wet kilns at its Martinsburg, WV, plant and in November red the plants new 2.0-Mt/yr precalciner kiln that had been under construction. Some ongoing upgrade projects were cancelled or postponed in light of poor cement sales. An example was the January announcement by TXI that it was postponing further work on the expansion project at its cement plant at Hunter, TX (Texas Industries, 2009); the project was expected to resume once market conditions improved.
16.3
Consumption Cement consumption data for the United States were surveyed and reported monthly by the USGS in terms of sales to nal customers and are summarized in table 9. Although the national sales totals in table 9 are similar to the shipments totals in tables 11, 12, and 14, only the table 9 breakout tonnages represent State-level consumption. The regional breakouts in tables 11, 12, and 14 simply pertain to the locations of the reporting entities (chiey the production sites), not the locations of consumption. It is very common for shipments to cross State lines. The U.S. cement market in 2009 continued a decline that began in early to mid-2006; this reected ongoing stagnation in several construction sectors, particularly in housing, a tight loan market, and continued declines in State property tax revenues. Decreases in sales of cement were experienced in all months during the year. Total sales of portland cement to domestic nal customers fell by 26.5% to 68.9 Mt, the lowest level since 1983. Sales declined in all districts; those into the three traditionally leading consuming States (California, Florida, and Texas) were down by about 32% in 2009. Although sensitive to the accuracy of the population data, per capita consumption of portland cement was just 220 kg in 2009, the lowest level since 1947; the amount in 2008 was 413 kg. Masonry cement consumption decreased by 31.0% to 2.1 Mt, the lowest level since 1949. Sales by some importers that did not participate in the USGS monthly and annual surveys were not included in the portland cement consumption data in this report. An estimate of these missing importers sales can be made by comparing ofcial (U.S. Census Bureau) trade data (tables 17 and 21) with the import origins of sales (table 9). The ofcial cement imports were about 0.3 Mt higher than the foreign origin tonnages in 2009 and 1.5 Mt higher than those in 2008; however, the discrepancy in 2009 appears to be too small based on known missing data for cement from the Republic of Korea into the Philadelphia, PA, customs district (0.139 Mt), and of much of the material from Colombia into the Houston, TX, and Wilmington, NC, districts (0.369 Mt). It appears that part of the reason for the difference in 2009 is that the table 9 import origins of sales data include a large component of drawdown of stocks, as suggested by the large yearend stockpile decline for importers listed in table 3. Adjusting for both years for cement varieties that are in the trade tables but not covered by the USGS canvasses (chiey aluminous cement) and for apparent drawdown of stocks, which cannot fully distinguish between imported and domestic cement, it becomes evident that the annual tables are missing about 0.5 Mt of cement sales in 2009 and about 1 Mt in 2008. As the binder in concrete, cement consumption levels within a given category of construction will broadly reect levels of construction spending, although signicant time lags may exist between the onset or cutoff of spending and changes in the consumption of cement. In terms of 1996 constant dollars, overall construction spending in 2009 fell by 15% to $552 billion (Portland Cement Association, 2011). Within this spending, public sector construction was the largest share, at $184 billion, down by 0.8% only. Residential construction, which had been the dominant sector in 2008, fell in 2009 by
25% to $168 billion. Nonresidential construction spending was $133 billion, down by 21%. Portland cement sales broken out by customer type are listed in table 14. Sales to ready-mixed concrete producers accounted for about 71% of total shipments, but the true tonnage for this type of concrete was larger because some of it was recorded under other customer categories, such as road paving contractors. As listed, the sales to ready-mixed customers declined by 27%, in line with the decrease in overall portland cement sales. The decline in residential construction spending noted above is in line with the 34% decline in sales tonnages of cement for brick and block; and the decline in nonresidential private and public sector spending noted is in line with reduced sales of cement for precastprestressed concrete products (down by 28%), and for road paving (down by 22%). Sales of cement for oil well and gas well drilling fell by 45%, in line with sharply reduced oil and gas prices and drilling activities in 2009. Sales of different types of portland cement are broken out in table 15. As in past years, sales were dominated by Types I and II cements and sulfate-resistant varieties of cement (Type V and Type II/V hybrids reported as Type V). Sales of these cements fell more or less proportionately to overall portland cement sales. Oil well cement sales fell by 42%, a result similar to that in table 14 noted above. White cement sales fell by 30%. As in past years, the white cement sales tonnage was signicantly less than the imports of white cement (table 20) and would seemingly preclude any need for domestic production of the material. The discrepancy is partly explained by the use of some imported white cement for masonry cement (sales not included in table 15), and by the fact that some imported white cement is blended with domestically produced white cement. Blended cement sales in table 15 fell by about 34% to 1.3 Mt, but this tonnage is signicantly less than the blended cement sales reported for 2009 in the monthly reports of the USGS (1.6 Mt). It is unclear why this difference exists, except that there could be inconsistent reporting between the monthly and annual surveys of cement sold under the general performance standard ASTM C1157, which at one time applied only to blended cements but which now applies to hydraulic cements in general. Data on the mill net values for shipments to nal customers by plants and import terminals (terminal nets) are provided in tables 11 to 13. Despite the large drop in sales tonnages, unit prices for portland and masonry cement declined relatively modestly. Foreign Trade Trade data from the U.S. Census Bureau are presented in tables 1621. Although at the highest tonnage level since 1948, exports of cement and clinker continued to be small compared with imports. Canada remained by far the dominant destination of the exports, taking about 76% of the total in 2009. Total imports of cement and clinker in 2009 fell by 40.5% to 6.8 Mt (table 17), the lowest total since 1992 and a decline of 28.8 Mt from the record level of 2006. The dominant share of imports was gray portland cement, imports of which fell by nearly 44% to 5.4 Mt (table 19). Canada continued to be the dominant source of U.S. imports. The tonnage of portland
cement imported from Canada in 2009 fell by nearly 20%, but this was a small relative decline compared with those of most other countries. The relative regional sourcing of imports has changed dramatically in recent years. For example, Canadas share of the U.S. cement and clinker import market was 50% in 2009, much higher than the 14% share it held in 2006. By comparison, Asia, which had accounted for 19.5 Mt or 54% of total imports in 2006, supplied just 1.8 Mt or 26% of the imports in 2009. China alone supplied nearly 30% of total U.S. imports in 2006 but accounted for only 9% of the imports in 2009. Ofcial imports of clinker fell by 10.5% to 0.56 Mt (table 21). The clinker data are incomplete, however, with regard to overland imports from Canada; the tonnages listed are insufcient to have fully supplied the grinding plants in Michigan and Washington, all of which imported their clinker from Canada. The unreported Canadian clinker appeared mostly to be coming in by truck, at a value of less than $2,000 (customs value) per truckload; such shipments are classied as informal entries and data on them are not routinely transmitted by the U.S. Customs Service to the U.S. Census Bureau for recordation into the ofcial trade data (reproduced in tables 1721). This problem presumably does not exist for imports by rail or by ship because these shipments are larger. Clinker imports from Canada were estimated to be higher than those reported in tables 1 and 21 by about 0.7 Mt in 2008 and by about 0.2 Mt in 2009. With the decline in imports, especially from Asia, several of the once-busiest import locations have fallen from prominence, and overland import locations have become relatively dominant. For cement and clinker combined, the 10 busiest customs districts of entry in 2009 were, in descending order of tonnage, Detroit, MI; Houston-Galveston, TX; Seattle, WA; Buffalo, NY; Cleveland, OH; Columbia-Snake, OR and WA; Honolulu, HI; El Paso, TX; Ogdensburg, NY; and Savannah, GA (table 18). These leading districts accounted for about 71% of the total imports for the year. World Review World hydraulic cement production data are listed in table 22. The data are intended to include all forms of hydraulic cement; however, the data for the United States are for portland and masonry cement only, and data for some other countries also may be incomplete. For some countries, the production data may include exports of clinker. World cement output in 2009 was an estimated 3.04 billion metric tons (Gt), up by 6.7%. Production was from more than 150 countries. China was again the worlds leading producer by far, with an output of 1.63 Gt or nearly 54% of the world total. The remaining top 20 producers were, in descending order of tonnage, India, the United States, Japan, Turkey, Brazil, the Republic of Korea, Iran, Vietnam, Egypt, Russia, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia (tied), Italy, Mexico, Pakistan, Thailand, Germany, Spain, and Malaysia. Cumulatively, the top 5 countries had about 66% of total world output, the top 10 countries, about 74%, and the top 20 countries, about 85%. Regionally, Asia and the Pacic contributed about 71% of world production, included 9 of the 20 leading producing countries, and continued to experience the greatest growth rate of all regions. The Middle East (including Turkey), had 6.8%
of world output; Western Europe, 6.1%; Africa, 4.3%; Central America and South America, combined, 3.8%; North America (including Mexico), 3.7%; the Commonwealth of Independent States, 2.5%; and Eastern Europe, 1.5%. Outlook A modest increase in concrete construction in 2010 was expected, based on projected benecial downstream effects of stimulus funding on the general economy and the housing construction sector in particular, and on expected access to ARRA funding. Relatively little ARRA funding had gone to public sector construction projects involving concrete in 2009 and many States still had signicant fractions of their respective ARRA allotments as yet unspent at yearend 2009. However, low revenues to the States from property taxes were expected to continue to hamper State contributions to construction projects funded jointly by State governments and the Federal Government. It was recognized that a return to cement consumption levels approaching those of the peak 200506 period was many years away. Of great concern to the cement industry was the proposed portland cement NESHAP, which would impose very low, stringent, limits on mercury and certain other emissions by cement plants. The NESHAP would be difcult to comply with owing to high cost of emissions control equipment and potential problems of sufcient control equipment availability within the 3-year NESHAP compliance window. According to some industry analysts, a large number of plantsrepresenting perhaps 25% of U.S. production capacitymight have to close as a result of the NESHAP, forcing the concrete industry to increasingly rely on imported cement. Further, should y ash become stigmatized as a result of an EPA reclassication of it as a hazardous material, the construction sector might lose this material as an alternative raw material or SCM, and thus hamper efforts to reduce the GHG footprint associated with concrete construction. References Cited
American Coal Ash Association, 2010, 2009 coal combustion product (CCP) production and use survey report: Aurora, CO, American Coal Ash Association fact sheet, 1 p. Buzzi Unicem, 2009, The largest line of the group: Casale Monferrato, Italy, Buzzi Unicem press release, September 24, 1 p. Goss, D.C., 2010, Usage declines may signal beginning of troubling trend: Ash at work, issue 2, p. 1417. Hanle, Lisa, Maldonado, Pedro, Onuma, Eiichi, Tichy, Milos, and van Oss, H.G., 2006, Mineral industry emissions, chap. 2 of Eggleston, Simon, Buenda, Leandro, Miwa, Kyoko, Ngara, Todd, and Tanabe, Kiyoto, eds., Industrial processes and product use: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, v. 3, CD-ROM. OHare, A.T., 2009, Proposed portland cement NESHAPA cure worse than the disease?: World Cement, v. 41, no. 3, March, p. 2732. Portland Cement Association, 2011, Construction put in place: Monitor, v. 21, no. 2, February, p. 10. Sullivan, Ed, 2010, There is light at the end of the tunnelIts just a really long tunnel: World Cement, v. 41, no. 3, March, p. 2226. Texas Industries, 2009, TXI reports second quarter results and announces delay of central Texas cement plant expansion: Dallas, TX, Texas Industries, Inc. press release, January 8, 6 p. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009a, 40 CFR Parts 60 and 63 National emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants from the portland cement industry (Proposed rule): Federal Register, May 6, v. 74, no. 86, p. 2113621192. 16.5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009b, 40 CFR Part 98Mandatory greenhouse gas reporting (Final rule): Federal Register, October 30, v. 74, no. 209, p. 5637456519. van Oss, H.G., 2005, Background facts and issues concerning cement and cement data: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 20051152, 88 p. (Accessed January 2, 2010, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1152/).
GENERAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION U.S. Geological Survey Publications Cement. Ch. in Mineral Commodity Summaries, annual. Cement. Mineral Industry Surveys, monthly. Other American Coal Ash Association, annual survey. Cement. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Problems, U.S. Bureau of Mines Bulletin 675, 1985.
Cement Americas, bimonthly. Concrete Products, monthly. European Cement Association, The. Global Cement Magazine, monthly. International Cement Review, monthly. North American Cement Directory, Cement Americas, annual. Portland Cement Association: Monitor, The, monthly. North American Cement Industry Annual Yearbook. U.S. and Canadian Portland Cement Industry, Plant Information Summary, annual. Rock Products, monthly. Slag Cement Association, annual survey. World Cement, monthly.
TABLE 1 SALIENT CEMENT STATISTICS FOR THE UNITED STATES1, 2 (Thousand metric tons unless otherwise specified) 2005 Production: Cement3 Clinker Shipments from mills and terminals:3, 4, 5 Quantity Value6 Average value6 Stocks, yearend: Cement Clinker Exports Imports: Cement Clinker Total9 Consumption, apparent10 World productione, 11
e 8
2006 98,167 88,555 127,000 12,900,000 101.50 9,380 5,370 723 32,141 3,425 35,566 127,660 2,610,000
2007 95,464 86,130 114,000 11,900,000 104.00 8,890 6,550 886 21,496 972 22,468 116,550 2,810,000
2008 86,310 78,382 96,700 9,990,000 103.50 8,360 7,070 823 10,744 621 11,365 96,760 2,850,000
r
2009 63,929 56,116 71,100 7,020,000 99.00 6,080 5,130 884 6,211 556 6,767 71,530 3,040,000
99,319 87,405 128,000 11,700,000 91.00 7,450 3,520 766 30,403 2,858 33,261 128,250 2,350,000
(thousands dollars) (dollars per metric ton)
Estimated. rRevised.
Unless otherwise indicated, data are for portland (including blended) and masonry cements only. Even where presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. Excludes Puerto Rico. Includes cement made from imported clinker. Includes imported cement.
2 3 4 5
Shipments to final domestic customers. Data are from an annual survey of plants and terminals and may differ from the totals in table 9, which are based on consolidated monthly surveys from companies. Value free on board mill or independently reporting terminal. Official export data have been corrected to remove an apparent excess of aluminous cement from Laredo, TX, of 943,939 metric tons in 2006 and 653,255 metric tons in 2007. All forms of hydraulic cement or clinker. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
6 7
8 9
10
Production (including that from imported clinker) of cement plus imports of hydraulic cement minus exports of hydraulic cement minus the change in yearend cement stocks.
11
Total hydraulic cement. May include clinker exports for some countries.
TABLE 2 COUNTY BASIS OF SUBDIVISION OF STATES IN CEMENT TABLES State subdivision California, northern California, southern Illinois, metropolitan Chicago Illinois, excluding Chicago New York, eastern New York, western New York, metropolitan Pennsylvania, eastern Pennsylvania, western Texas, northern Defining counties Alpine, Fresno, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Monterey, Tulare, Tuolumne, and all counties farther north. Inyo, Kern, Mono, San Luis Obispo, and all counties farther south. Cook, DuPage, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties in Illinois. All counties other than those in metropolitan Chicago. Delaware, Franklin, Hamilton, Herkimer, Otsego, and all counties farther east and south, except those within Metropolitan New York. Broome, Chenango, Lewis, Madison, Oneida, St. Lawrence, and all counties farther west. New York City (Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, and Richmond), Nassau, Rockland, Suffolk, and Westchester. Adams, Cumberland, Juniata, Lycoming, Mifflin, Perry, Tioga, Union, and all counties farther east. Centre, Clinton, Franklin, Huntingdon, Potter, and all counties farther west. Angelina, Bell, Concho, Crane, Culberson, El Paso, Falls, Houston, Hudspeth, Irion, Lampasas, Leon, Limestone, McCulloch, Reagan, Reeves, Sabine, San Augustine, San Saba, Tom Green, Trinity, Upton, Ward, and all counties farther north. Brazos, Burnet, Crockett, Jasper, Jeff Davis, Llano, Madison, Mason, Menard, Milam, Newton, Pecos, Polk, Robertson, San Jacinto, Schleicher, Tyler, Walker, Williamson, and all counties farther south.
Texas, southern
16.7
16.8 [ADVANCE RELEASE] U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009
TABLE 3 PORTLAND AND BLENDED CEMENT PRODUCTION, CAPACITY, AND STOCKS IN THE UNITED STATES, BY DISTRICT1 (Thousand metric tons unless otherwise specified) 2008 Grinding Production 3,061 3,826 1,327 2,655 2,587 4,928 762 3,987 2,396 4,651 4,979 5,057 2,925 4,635 3,045 2,623 6,303 4,778 2,097 2,610 2,727 -1,678 8,201 1,443 -83,283 1,301 84,584 capacity3 4,204 5,140 1,805 3,390 3,653 7,332 1,166 5,840 3,230 7,230 7,301 6,780 5,085 7,074 3,702 3,130 7,618 6,330 3,116 4,449 3,728 -2,853 10,855 2,435 -117,000 1,898 119,000
6 6 6 6
District2 Maine and New York Pennsylvania, eastern Pennsylvania, western Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota Kansas Missouri Florida7 Georgia, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia South Carolina Alabama Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee Arkansas and Oklahoma Texas, northern Texas, southern Arizona and New Mexico Colorado and Wyoming Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah Alaska and Hawaii California, northern California, southern Oregon and Washington Importers
10 9
Number of plants 5 7 3 4 4 5 2 5 4 5 7 7 3 5 4 4 6 6 3 4 6 -3 8 4 -114 2
Percentage utilized4 72.8 74.5 73.5 78.3 70.8 67.2 65.4 68.3 74.2 64.3 68.2 74.6 57.5 65.5 82.3 83.9 82.7 75.5 67.3 58.7 73.1 -58.8 75.6 59.3 -70.9 68.5 70.9
Yearend stocks5 234 285 140 268 237 287 64 458 247 532 389 595 137 242 282 198 1,324 260 102 173 221 82 188 310 248 310 7,810 44 7,860
6 6 6
Number of plants 5 7 3 3 4 5 2 5 3 6 7 6 3 5 4 4 6 6 3 4 6 -W 11 4 -112 2 114
2009 Grinding Production 2,118 3,064 678 1,487 2,685 3,548 550 2,991 1,669 4,418 3,145 3,859 1,868 3,416 1,958 2,067 3,833 4,519 1,464 2,165 2,050 -W 7,153 1,254 -61,961 936 62,897 capacity3 4,341 5,420 1,805 3,390 3,740 6,983 1,166 5,840 2,940 13,035 7,610 7,180 5,085 7,292 3,702 3,127 7,580 6,505 3,116 4,517 3,728 -W 13,600 2,435 -124,000 1,780 126,000
6 6 6 6
Percentage utilized4 48.8 56.5 37.6 43.9 71.7 50.8 47.2 51.2 56.8 33.9 41.3 53.7 36.7 46.8 52.9 66.1 50.5 69.5 47.0 47.9 55.0 -W 52.7 51.4 -49.9 52.6 50.0
Yearend stocks5 219 247 103 237 188 163 25 266 166 622 260 334 77 231 147 182 609 226 91 149 156 55 W 417 275 182 5,620 47 5,670
6 6 6
6 6
6 6
6 6 6
6 6
8 8
8 8
8 6, 8
8 8
8 6, 8 6 6 6 6 6
6 6 6 6
Total Puerto Rico Grand total See footnotes at end of table.

10
116
TABLE 3Continued PORTLAND AND BLENDED CEMENT PRODUCTION, CAPACITY, AND STOCKS IN THE UNITED STATES, BY DISTRICT1
W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; included in Total. -- Zero.
Even where presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. Includes data for white cement. Includes cement made from imported clinker.
District assignation is the location of the reporting facilities. Specific districts include importers for which district assignations were possible.
Grinding capacity is based on fineness needed to produce a plants normal output mix, including masonry cement, and allowing for downtime for routine maintenance.
Calculated relative to portland cement output; utilization would be higher if calculated to include output of masonry cement.
Includes imported cement. Includes stocks at mills, terminals, and in transit.
Data contain estimates for nonrespondent or incompletely reporting facilities and have been rounded to no more than three significant digits.
Production and capacity data exclude a plant that produced only masonry cement.
Data for Northern California for 2009 are included with those for Southern California.
Data include only those importers or terminals for which district assignations were not possible.
10
Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
16.9
TABLE 4 MASONRY CEMENT PRODUCTION AND STOCKS IN THE UNITED STATES, BY DISTRICT1 (Thousand metric tons unless otherwise specified) 2008 Number of active plants 4 9 6 4 2 2 1 5 6 3 4 3 4 7 3 2 1 3 5 -Yearend Production3 69 254 332 99 W W W 310 367 323 303 W 125 274 W W W 59 278 -stocks4 17 56 73 34 W W W 65 53 31 63 W 18 20 W W W 19 23 3
6 6
2009 Number of active plants 4 9 6 4 2 2 1 6 6 3 4 3 3 8 3 2 -W 7 -73 Yearend Production3 41 176 244 80 W W W 123 250 174 208 W 97 202 W W W W 236 -1,968 stocks4 12 46 52 28 W W W 38 42 16 61 W 21 22 W W W W 45 3 456
District2 Maine and New York Pennsylvania Indiana and Ohio Michigan Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota Kansas Missouri Florida Georgia, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia South Carolina Alabama Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee Arkansas and Oklahoma Texas Arizona and New Mexico Colorado and Wyoming Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah California, northern California, southern Importers
8 7
5 6 6 6
74 3,027 549 Total W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; included in Total. -- Zero.
1
Includes masonry, portland-lime, plastic, and stucco cements. Even where presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. District assignation is the location of the reporting facilities. Specific districts include importers for which district assignations were possible. Includes cement produced from imported clinker. Includes imported cement. Data for 2009 for Northern California is included with those for Southern California. Data contain estimates for nonrespondent or incompletely reporting facilities. Data include only those importers or terminals for which district assignations were not possible. Data may not add totals shown because of independent rounding.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE] 16.11
TABLE 5 CLINKER CAPACITY AND PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES IN 2009, BY DISTRICT1 Daily Number of active plants2 Process used Total Wet Dry Both3 2 2 -4 3 5 1 9 -1 1 1 -1 1 ----1 2 2 ---3 -1 19 -19 3 3 2 1 4 2 5 7 4 3 5 3 2 4 5 3 4 3 9 2 81 2 83
9
Number of kilns4 5 18 6 8 8 3 9 5 8 8 8 3 5 4 10 12 6 7 5 8 11 3 160 2 162
District Maine and New York Pennsylvania Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota Kansas Missouri Florida Georgia, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia South Carolina Alabama Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee Arkansas and Oklahoma Texas, northern Texas, southern Arizona and New Mexico Colorado and Wyoming Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah California Oregon and Washington Total11 Puerto Rico Grand total11 See footnotes at end of table.
capacity4, 5 (thousand metric tons) 11.3 22.8 7.7 10.2 14.1 3.3 14.1 8.2 36.3 23.8 22.1 12.3 16.9 10.5 8.1 19.0 16.2 8.6 11.5 8.5 40.4 6.0 332.1 5.3 337.4
Average days of routine maintenance6 26.8 13.9 7.5 25.8 18.6 25.8 17.9 18.5 25.6 18.1 19.3 26.6 31.0 17.5 20.5 18.6 15.7 11.6 26.8 20.3 26.0 34.4 20.1 42.5 20.4
Apparent annual capacity4, 7 (thousand metric tons) 3,817 8,000 2,728 3,430 4,796 1,159 4,850 2,746 12,400 8,350 7,570 4,185 5,670 3,635 2,796 6,586 5,648 3,022 3,907 2,876 13,667 2,019 114,000 1,731 116,000 Production (thousand metric tons) 1,856 3,523 1,311 2,578 2,587 467 2,614 1,682 4,123 2,984 3,611 1,770 3,240 1,773 1,775 3,480 4,128 1,125 1,992 1,671 6,612 1,213 56,116 802 56,918 Percentage of capacity utilized 48.6 44.2 48.1 75.2 53.9 40.3 53.9 61.3 33.3 35.7 47.7 42.3 57.1 48.8 63.5 52.8 73.1 37.2 51.0 58.1 48.4 60.1 49.3 46.3 49.3
Yearend stocks (thousand metric tons) 100 271 134 198 132 23 230 63 434 338 261 325 196 47 66 649 366 136 228 154 717 64 5,130 75 5,210
8
----1 ---1 -----------3 -3
3 4 3 2 5 3 6 7 5 3 5 4 4 6 5 3 4 6 9 3 103 2 105
8 8 8
8 8 8
10
10
TABLE 5Continued CLINKER CAPACITY AND PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES IN 2009, BY DISTRICT1
-- Zero.
Even where presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits.
Includes white cement plants. Includes all plants that produced clinker for at least one day during the year.
Plants that can operate both wet and dry kilns, whether or not both types were active during the year.
Includes kilns active for at least one day during the year. For kilns idle all year, excludes those that cannot be restarted, fully permitted, in less than 6 months.
Sum of reported kiln capacities for each plant in a district.
Total days of routine maintenance (summed for all kilns) divided by the number of kilns.
Sum of apparent annual capacities for each kiln. For each kiln, the statistic is calculated as 366 days (leap year) minus days reported for routine maintenance and then multiplied by the unrounded daily capacity.
Data contain estimates for nonrespondents and incompletely reporting facilities and have been rounded to no more than three significant digits.
Includes one semiwet kiln.
10
Includes as a dry operation one plant, formerly operating both wet and dry kilns, whose wet kilns were idle all year (2009) and which, in 2010, were declared permanently closed.
11
Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
TABLE 6 RAW MATERIALS USED TO PRODUCE CLINKER AND CEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) 2008 Materials Calcareous: Limestone (aragonite, chalk, coral, marble) Cement rock (includes marl) Cement kiln dust (CKD)4 Lime4 Other Aluminous: Clay Shale and schist Other5 Ferrous: Iron ore Mill scale Other6 Siliceous: Sand, calcium silicates Sandstone, quartzite, soils, nonpozzolanic rocks Fly ash Other ash, including bottom ash Granulated blast furnace slag7 Other blast furnace slag Steel slag Other slag Natural rock pozzolans8 Other pozzolans9 Other: Gypsum and anhydrite Other
10
2009 Cement3 1,920 50 304 15 --20 ------95 -328 --30 9 3 4,620 90 7,480 1,810 9,290
r r
Clinker 101,000 10,900 425 248 41 3,780 3,290 849 609 702 65 3,970 693 2,710 948 81 262 428 67 -79 -115 131,000
Clinker 73,600 6,560 288 17 62 2,500 2,540 438 481 536 40 2,550 464 2,290 706 44 99 169 38 -45 -79 93,600 -93,600
Cement3 1,510 -156 5 -3 -------74 -192 ---11 3 3,367 57 5,380 1,250 6,630
Total11 Clinker, imported, raw materials equivalent Grand total11

r 12
-131,000
Revised. -- Zero. Excludes Puerto Rico. Data have been rounded to three significant digits to reflect inherent reporting accuracy and the incorporation of estimates for some facilities. Includes portland, blended, and masonry cements. Data are probably underreported. Includes alumina, aluminum dross, bauxite, spent catalysts, and other aluminous materials. Includes iron sludges, pyrite, and other ferrous materials. Includes both ground (GGBFS) and unground material. Includes pozzolana and burned clays or shales (except where directly reported as clay or shale). Includes diatomite, silica fume, other microcrystalline silica, and other pozzolans, even if not used as such. Includes fluorspar and all other materials not listed earlier. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Converted as the weight of foreign clinker consumed times 1.7.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12
16.13
16.14 [ADVANCE RELEASE] U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009
TABLE 7 CLINKER PRODUCED AND FUEL CONSUMED BY THE U.S. CEMENT INDUSTRY, BY KILN PROCESS1
Kiln process 2008: Wet Dry Both7 Total8 2009: Wet Dry9 Both7 Total8 -- Zero.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Number of plants 22 81 3 106 19 81 3 103
Clinker production2 Quantity (thousand Percentage metric tons) of total 9,930 64,664 3,788 78,382 4,866 50,112 1,138 56,116 12.7 82.5 4.8 100.0 8.7 89.3 2.0 100.0
Coal (thousand metric tons) 1,230 6,440 561 8,240 569 4,690 186 5,450
Conventional fuels3 Petcoke Oil5 (thousand (thousand metric tons) liters) 518 1,610 -2,130 157 1,300 33 1,490 24,300 28,000 -52,300 7,310 26,500 1,810 35,600
Natural gas (thousand cubic meters) 23,200 218,000 38,900 280,000 96,200 247,000 1,190 344,000
Tires (thousand metric tons) 91 341 6 438 50 263 -313
Waste fuels3 Solid (thousand metric tons) 10 335 9 354 16 307 -324
Liquid (thousand liters) 370,000 354,000 67,200 791,000 256,000 493,000 34,600 784,000
Excludes Puerto Rico. Clinker production data are all reported. Although unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. All fuel data have been rounded to no more than three significant digits. Essentially all reported to be bituminous. Distilliate and residual fuel oils. Excludes used oils that were reported under liquid wastes. Includes landfill gas and propane.
Plants that can operate both wet and dry kilns, whether or not both types were active during the year. Includes plants that converted from wet to dry technology during the year. For 2009, excludes one plant as noted in footnote 9. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Includes one plant that operated a dry kiln in 2009 that had wet kilns which, although technically idle all year, were deemed as closed.
8 9
CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE] 16.15
TABLE 8 ELECTRICITY CONSUMED BY U.S. CEMENT PLANTS, BY KILN PROCESS1 Electricity consumed2 Purchased Number of plants Quantity (million kilowatthours) Number of plants Average Total3 Quantity (million kilowatthours) Cement Percentage of total produced4 (thousand metric tons) consumption (kilowatthours per ton of cement produced)
Generated Number of plants Quantity (million kilowatthours)
Plant process 2008: Integrated plants: Wet Dry Both6 Total or average3 Grinding plants7 Exclusions8 2009: Integrated plants: Wet Dry9 Both6 Total or average Grinding plants7 Exclusions XX Not applicable. -- Zero.
1 2 3 4 5 6 8 3
-3 -3 ---
-236 -236 ---
22 83 3 108 5 3
1,530 9,960 563 12,100 130 XX
22 83 3 108 5 3
1,530 10,200 563 12,300 130 XX
12.4 82.9 4.6 100.0 ---
10,598 70,279 3,736 84,612 1,481 216
145 145 151 145 88 XX
-2 -2 ---
-223 -223 ---
19 83 3 105 5 3
815 8,000 222 9,030 91 XX
19 83 3 105 6 3
815 8,210 222 9,260 91 XX
8.8 88.6 2.4 100.0 ---
5,804 55,739 1,334 62,877 908 143
140 148 166 147 99 XX
Excludes Puerto Rico. Electricity data are rounded to no more than three significant digits because they contain estimates. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Portland and masonry cement. Data are all reported and are unrounded. Includes two grinding plants whose data were included with the integrated plants.
Plants that can operate both wet and dry kilns, whether or not both types were active during the year. Includes plants that converted from wet to dry technology during the year. For 2009, excludes one plant as noted in footnote 9. Plants that did not produce clinker but ground clinker from outside sources. Excludes plants that only made masonry cement or just reground one type of portland cement into another, or which also reported a significant component of grinding of excess granulated blast furnace slag. Plants whose production of portland cement was by simply regrinding of one type into another, or which reported production only of masonry cement. Includes one plant that operated a dry kiln in 2009 that had wet kilns which, although technically idle all year, were deemed as closed.
9
TABLE 9 CEMENT SHIPMENTS TO FINAL CUSTOMER, BY DESTINATION AND ORIGIN1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Portland cement 2008 2009 1,559 148 2,778 902 3,179 6,189 2,156 640 217 168 5,875 3,112 397 507 1,656 1,636 1,719 1,658 1,430 1,085 2,477 239 1,223 919 1,858 1,374 1,063 2,079 349 1,134 1,651 269 1,594 709 573 748 1,637 2,343 391 2,817 1,570 923 1,722 1,082 139 1,242 453 1,692 6,580 7,668 1,313 1,140 146 1,727 732 2,133 4,395 1,403 478 159 129 3,946 1,887 306 367 1,397 1,181 1,454 1,448 1,133 870 2,135 185 902 702 1,384 1,135 805 1,728 256 1,018 1,008 198 1,152 534 476 652 1,304 1,612 375 2,232 1,338 663 1,270 913 106 822 450 1,223 4,255 5,344 1,058 Masonry cement 2008 2009 122 -44 49 73 238 14 12 7
(4)
Destination and origin Destination: Alabama Alaska3 Arizona Arkansas California, northern California, southern Colorado Connecticut3 Delaware3 District of Columbia3 Florida Georgia Hawaii3 Idaho Illinois, excluding Chicago Illinois, metropolitan Chicago3 Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana3 Maine Maryland Massachusetts3 Michigan Minnesota3 Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire3 New Jersey3 New Mexico New York, eastern New York, western3 New York, metropolitan3 North Carolina3 North Dakota3 Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania, eastern Pennsylvania, western Rhode Island3 South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas, northern Texas, southern Utah See footnotes at end of table.
85 -26 40 45 170 7 11 5
(4)
351 235 4 1 13 31 56 2 10 68 62 3 59 15 59 13 59 26 1 3 15 4 59 9 13 23 73 229 1 99 54 1 48 42 2 103 1 164 123 198

(4)
231 131 2
(4)
10 19 39 1 7 49 49 2 42 11 42 12 40 19 1 2 12 7 43 7 10 16 59 135 1 78 39
(4)
37 33 1 70 1 108 79 157
(4)
TABLE 9Continued CEMENT SHIPMENTS TO FINAL CUSTOMER, BY DESTINATION AND ORIGIN1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Portland cement 2008 2009 116 2,019 2,044 504 1,729 497 93,751 564 1,397 95,710 83,178 11,197 1,335 95,710 95 1,526 1,437 402 1,410 348 68,885 502 979 70,366 63,486 5,948 932 70,366 Masonry cement 2008 2009 3 118 1 21 13
(4)
Destination and origin DestinationContinued: Vermont3 Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin3 Wyoming Total5 Foreign countries6 Puerto Rico Grand total5 Origin: United States Foreign countries7 Puerto Rico Total shipments5 -- Zero.
1 2
2 80 1 14 10
(4)
3,047
(4)
2,102
(4) (4)
-3,047 2,995 52 -3,047
2,102 2,070 32 -2,102
Includes cement produced from imported clinker and imported cement shipped by domestic producers and importers.
Data are developed from consolidated monthly surveys of shipments by companies and may differ from data in tables 1, 1012, and 1415, which are from annual surveys of individual plants and importers. Although presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. Has no cement plants. Less than unit. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Includes shipments to U.S. possessions and territories.
3 4 5 6 7
Imported cement sold to final customers in the United States as reported by domestic producers and other importers. Data do not match the imports in tables 1720.
TABLE 10 SHIPMENTS OF PORTLAND CEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES, BY TYPE OF CARRIER1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Plant to terminal In bulk In bags3 2008: Railroad Truck Barge and boat Total4 2009: Railroad Truck Barge and boat Total4 -- Zero.
1 2 3 4 5
Plant to customer In bulk In bags3 1,870 49,000 323 51,200 1,460 36,000 55 37,500 3 1,310 43 1,360 2 1,040 -1,040
Terminal to customer In bulk In bags3 438 39,900 37 40,400 528 29,400 -30,000 2 644 -647 4 400 -404
Total to customers4 2,310 90,900 403 93,600 2,000 66,900 55 69,000
10,700 5,350 7,230 23,300 9,580 4,000 7,120 20,700
108 308 3 419 8 116 -125
Includes imported cement and cement made from imported clinker. Excludes Puerto Rico. Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits because they contain estimates. Includes packages, bags, and supersacks. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
Shipments are based on an annual survey of plants and importers; may differ from totals in table 9, which are based on consolidated monthly data.
16.17
TABLE 11 PORTLAND CEMENT SHIPPED IN THE UNITED STATES, BY DISTRICT1 2008 Quantity (thousand metric tons) 3,820 3,838 1,248 2,810 2,346 4,986 733 4,366 2,115 5,058 5,763 2,299 2,957 2,756 4,444 2,673 2,643 7,316 6,417 3,106 2,554 2,589 497 2,481 7,540 2,196 4,060 93,600 1,381
5 3
2009 Quantity (thousand metric tons)

5 5 5 5 3
District4 Maine and New York Pennsylvania, eastern Pennsylvania, western Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota Kansas Missouri Florida Georgia, Virginia, West Virginia Maryland South Carolina Alabama Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee Arkansas and Oklahoma Texas, northern Texas, southern Arizona and New Mexico Colorado and Wyoming Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah Alaska and Hawaii California, northern California, southern Oregon and Washington Importers8 Total or average Puerto Rico
9
Value2 Average Total (per (thousands) metric ton) $403,000 382,000 121,000 279,000 205,153 508,000 71,200 453,124 217,519 490,008 599,000 243,026 240,275 267,411 432,000 268,412 262,806 733,000 645,641 391,316 273,303 260,250 86,882 256,000 784,938 212,013 478,000 9,560,000 W W
5 5 5 5 5
Value2 Average Total (per (thousands) metric ton)

5
$105.50 99.50 97.00 99.00 87.46 102.00 97.20 103.79 102.85 96.89 104.00 105.71 81.25 97.02 97.00 100.43 99.44 100.00 100.61 125.97 107.02 100.53 174.79 103.00 104.10 96.53 117.50 102.00 W W
2,580 2,995 949 2,014 1,951 4,114 582 3,382 1,627 4,219 3,790 4,141 W 1,826 3,515 1,885 2,300 4,557 4,730 2,173 1,932 2,063 406 W 6,835 1,651 2,747 69,000 978 69,900
$250,000 285,000 90,800 191,586 169,069 406,143 55,691 365,298 166,000 414,000
5 5 5
$97.00 95.00 95.50 95.11 86.66 98.72 95.69 108.01 102.00 98.00 98.00 88.70 W 90.46 89.72 99.53 100.60 99.50 95.65 117.68 98.63 96.87 164.27 W 90.50 90.85 115.00 97.50 W W
5 5 5
5 5 5 6 6
5 5 5 6 6
5 6 6
371,000 367,335 W 165,160 315,408 187,660 231,363 453,000 452,380 255,708 190,508 199,834 66,690 W 618,000 150,011 315,000 6,730,000 W W
7 7
7 5, 7
7 5, 7
5 5, 10
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5, 10 5 5, 10
95,000 5, 10 Grand total9 W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data.

1
Includes gray and white portland cement. Includes cement made from imported clinker. Even where presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits.
Values are mill net or ex-plant (free on board) valuations of total sales to final customers, including sales from plants external distribution terminals. The data are ex-terminal for independently reporting terminals. Data include all varieties of portland cement and both bulk and bag shipments. Unless otherwise specified, data are presented unrounded. Unrounded or not, unit value data should be viewed as value indicators, good to no better than the nearest $0.50 or $1.00 per metric ton. Tonnages are those by reporting entities in the district but may include shipments into other districts. They differ from the data in table 9, which are the actual reported sales into the specific States. District is the location of the reporting entities, not necessarily the location of sales (see table 9 for sales data, by State). Specific districts include shipments by importers where district assignations were possible. Data are rounded (unit values to the nearest $0.50) because they include estimates. For 2009, data for Maryland are included with Georgia, Virginia, West Virginia district. For 2009, data for Northern California are included with those for Southern California. Importers for which district assignations were not possible. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Shipments are based on an annual survey of plants and importers; may differ from totals in table 9, which are based on consolidated monthly data.
5 6 7 8
10
TABLE 12 MASONRY CEMENT SHIPPED IN THE UNITED STATES, BY DISTRICT1, 2 2008 Quantity (thousand metric tons) 82 241 335 136 19 84 282 320 305 353 80 125 155 146 67 3 51 279 10
6 4
2009 Quantity (thousand metric tons)

6 6 4
District5 Maine and New York Pennsylvania Illinois, Indiana, Ohio Michigan Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota Kansas and Missouri Florida Georgia, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia South Carolina Alabama Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee Arkansas and Oklahoma Texas, northern Texas, southern Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming Alaska and Hawaii California, northern; Oregon; Washington California, southern Importers
9
Value3 Average Total (per (thousands) metric ton) $10,100 32,300 47,725 16,400 2,161 13,427 42,800 57,900 39,409 44,247 11,784 15,070 26,100 18,300 9,259 946 6,511 36,213 1,950
6 6 6 6 6
Value3 Average Total (per (thousands) metric ton) $6,265 25,300 33,900 11,538 1,921 6,353 29,100 36,547 21,376 29,735 8,360 11,100
7 7 6 6
$124.50 134.00 142.55 121.00 114.53 159.64 151.50 180.50 129.07 125.38 146.57 120.65 168.00 125.50 137.47 279.55 128.31 129.87 196.00 140.50
56 187 230 95 15 51 192 214 169 242 57 93 W 221 42 2 W 232
$112.54 135.00 147.50 121.87 128.09 124.50 151.50 170.78 126.43 122.90 146.39 119.00 W 140.40 129.76 289.54 W 119.50 191.50 136.50
6 6
6 6
6 6
6 7 7
6 7 7
6 6
6 6
W 31,000 5,387 620 W 27,700 1,220 287,000
8 6, 8 6 6, 11
8 6, 8 6 6
8 6, 8 6 6
6 6
6 2,100
3,070 6, 11 433,000 Total or average10 W Witheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; included in Total.
1
Shipments are those by cement companies to final customers and include imported cement and cement made from imported clinker. Sales are those by cement plants and exclude masonry cement made by portland cement customers from purchased portland cement and which was then resold and/or consumed. Data exclude Puerto Rico, which did not record any masonry cement sales. Even where presented unrounded, data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. Data include true masonry, plastic, portland-lime, and stucco cements. Values are mill net or ex-plant (free on board) valuations of total sales to final customers, including sales from plants external distribution terminals. The data are ex-terminal for independently reporting terminals. Data include both bulk and bag shipments. Unless otherwise specified, data are presented unrounded. Unrounded or not, unit value data should be viewed as value indicators, good to no better than the nearest $0.50 or even $1.00 per metric ton.
2 3
Tonnages are those by reporting entities in the district but may include shipments into other districts. They differ from the data in table 9, which are the actual reported sales into the specific States. District is the location of the reporting entities, not necessarily the location of sales (see table 9 for sales data, by State). Specific districts include importers for which district assignations were possible. Data are rounded (unit values to the nearest $0.50) because they include estimates. For 2009, data for Northern Texas are included with those for Southern Texas. For 2009, data for Northern California, Oregon, and Washington are included with those for Southern California. Importers for which district assignations were not possible. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Shipments are based on an annual survey of plants and importers; may differ from totals in table 9, which are based on consolidated monthly data.
6 7 8 9
10 11
16.19
TABLE 13 AVERAGE MILL NET VALUE OF CEMENT SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES1, 2 (Dollars per metric ton) Portland cement Year 2008 2009
1
Gray 101.00 96.50
White3 221.50 211.00
Total 102.00 97.50
Masonry cement 141.00 136.50
All cement 103.50 99.00
Values are average of sales to final customers, free on board the plant or independently reporting terminal. Values include any bagging charges, but exclude delivery charges to customers or to exterminal terminals. Data exclude Puerto Rico. Data are rounded to the nearest $0.50 per metric ton because they contain estimates. Data for white cement include a component of resales showing significant price markups.
TABLE 14 PORTLAND CEMENT SHIPMENTS IN 2009, BY DISTRICT AND TYPE OF CUSTOMER1 (Thousand metric tons) Oil well, mining, Government waste and stabilization other3 -60 -115 7 32 164 91 6 11 14 29 1 -51 62 38 19 64 47 -6 5 106 3 123 15 99 23 14 75 16 456 84 315 6 18 2 142 28 217 43 --89 20 24 4 49 99 1,780 -1,780 1,120 -1,120
2 3
District2 Maine and New York Pennsylvania, eastern Pennsylvania, western Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota Kansas Missouri Florida Georgia, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia South Carolina Alabama Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee Arkansas and Oklahoma Texas, northern Texas, southern Arizona and New Mexico Colorado and Wyoming Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah Alaska and Hawaii California Oregon and Washington Importers6 Total5 Puerto Rico Grand total5 -- Zero.
1
Readymixed concrete 1,930 1,750 625 1,390 1,480 3,300 442 2,520 1,250 3,080 2,640 2,970 1,250 2,460 1,480 1,490 2,870 3,150 1,680 1,410 1,440 317 4,930 1,280 2,020 49,100 504 49,700
Concrete product manufacturers 288 739 159 182 254 387 71 301 173 390 783 702 297 458 220 90 367 441 310 132 157 61 1,150 186 272 8,570 91 8,660
Contractors 77 182 113 164 157 309 58 418 96 579 261 231 116 370 90 530 662 598 125 170 137 9 346 83 258 6,140 5 6,150
Building material dealers 220 206 12 25 42 80 10 32 49 56 98 124 37 111 61 103 114 220 38 52 70 18 306 73 54 2,210 377 2,590
Total4, 5 2,580 2,995 949 2,014 1,951 4,114 582 3,382 1,627 4,219 3,790 4,141 1,826 3,515 1,885 2,300 4,557 4,730 2,173 1,932 2,063 406 6,835 1,651 2,747 69,000 978 69,900
Includes imported cement and cement made from imported clinker. Except for district totals, data have been rounded to three significant digits, but are likely accurate to only two significant digits. District totals are likely accurate to no more than three significant digits. District is the location of the reporting entity, not the location of sales (see table 9 for sales data, by State). Specific districts include shipments by importers for which district assignations were possible. Includes shipments to miscellaneous customer types and for which customer types were not specified. District totals are unrounded except in accord with table 11. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Shipments by importers for which district assignations were not possible. Grand total shipments to concrete product manufacturers include brick and block3,090; precast and prestressed2,330; pipe929; and other or unspecified2,300. Grand total shipments to contractors include airport156; road paving2,910; soil cement1,575; and other or unspecified1,500. Grand total shipments include oil well drilling1,380; mining228; and waste stabilization173.
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TABLE 15 PORTLAND CEMENT SHIPMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES, BY TYPE OF CEMENT1, 2, 3 (Thousand metric tons) Type4 General use and moderate heat (Types I and II)5, 6 High early strength (Type III) Sulfate resisting (Type V)5 Block Oil well White7 Blended:8 Portland, natural pozzolans Portland, ground granulated blast furnace slag Portland, fly ash Portland, other pozzolans9 Total blended10 Expansive and regulated fast setting Miscellaneous11 Grand total10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2008 73,600 3,450 11,800 509 1,470 823 38 981 381 563 1,960 36
(12)
2009 55,000 2,460 8,610 167 846 577 34 580 357 325 1,300 13 27 69,000
93,600
Includes sales of imported cement. Excludes Puerto Rico. Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits. Gray portland-type cements unless otherwise specified. Sold mostly under specifications ASTM C150, ASTM C595, and ASTM C1157. Type II/V and similar sulfate-resisting cement hybrids are included within Type V. Includes ASTM C1157 general use cements that contain no pozzolans. White or colored portland-type cements. Most are Types I or II but may include Types III and V and block cements. Cements sold under ASTM C590 and those under ASTM C1157 that contain pozzolans. Includes blends with cement kiln dust, silica fume, or other pozzolans, and blends containing multiple pozzolans. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Includes low heat (Type IV), waterproof, and other portland-type cements. Less than unit.
10 11 12
16.21
TABLE 16 U.S. EXPORTS OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Country United States: Angola Anguilla Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize Bermuda Brazil Canada Cayman Islands China Colombia Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic Greece Haiti Hong Kong Ireland Jamaica Japan Mexico Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Niger Pakistan Panama Peru Russia Saudi Arabia St. Christopher and Nevis Sweden Taiwan Turks and Caicos Islands Other Total Puerto Rico: Anguilla British Virgin Islands Netherlands Antilles Turks and Caicos Islands Other Total4 Grand total4
r 4
2009 Quantity 2 4 2 48
(3)
Quantity 1 1 1 28 1 1 16 1 711 3 1 1 1 -3 7 10
(3) (3) (3) (3)
Value2 183 42 352 3,853 153 224 1,430 136 82,814 293 354 675 89 -322 352 726 98 101 25 26 4,540 187 414 114 3 413 255 8 259 133 90 366 267 3,169 102,466 846 1,778 332 545 131 3,631 106,097
Value2 323 255 336 5,628 61 1,513 224 39 79,836 95 133 680 19 12 219 729 62 326 225 2,737 225 5,915 196 3 -43 3,794 198 47 844 102 77 149 55 2,230 107,330 -1,807 5 152 30 1,994 109,323
36
(3) (3)
674
(3) (3)
1
(3)
23 1 1 2
(3)
1 2 15 1 1 4 26 1 23 1
(3)
3 1
(3)
1
(3)
1 1 1 5 823 12 13 1 8 1 34 858
-1 28 1 1 1 2 1
(3) (3)
r
5 884 -15
(3)
1
r
(3)
16 900
Revised. -- Zero. Includes portland and masonry cements.
1 2
Free alongside ship value. The value of exports at the U.S. seaport or border point of export is based on the transaction price, including inland freight, insurance, and other charges incurred in placing the merchandise alongside the carrier. The value excludes the cost of loading. Less than unit. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
3 4
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
TABLE 17 U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Country United States: Algeria Brazil Canada China Colombia Croatia Denmark Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany Greece India Japan Korea, Republic of Mexico Netherlands Norway Peru Sweden Taiwan Thailand Turkey United Kingdom Other Total Puerto Rico: China Colombia Korea, Republic of Mexico Spain Other Total
r 5 5
2009 Value C.i.f.3 520 3,225 356,325 164,401 90,608 13,061 14,898 1,082 7,331 24,999 564 18,514 153 1,038 85,899 99,673 4,800 897 7,509 24,583 55,867 7,909 12,201 2,076 74 998,208 5,701 665 5,812 2,808 33
r
Quantity 4 36 4,104 2,020 964 34 99 11 57 108 1 213 1 6 1,229 1,071 4 20 92 261 855 77 96 4
(4) r
Customs2 316 2,780 338,225 103,055 67,117 10,048 9,768 786 4,873 22,266 464 11,717 98 773 50,550 84,714 3,894 897 4,727 13,192 36,424 5,165 5,257 1,712 69 778,888 3,270 529 3,861 1,981 25 14 9,681 788,569
Quantity 14 -3,426 608 654 15 69 4 55 65

(4)
Customs2 1,576 -272,829 35,251 39,799 5,687 9,924 307 6,345 20,373 265 10,705 151 523 34,694 35,342 1,925 --3,821 11,332 2,594 7,858 153 138 501,592 5 674 1,350 1,641 5,694 169 9,532 511,125
C.i.f.3 2,123 -291,298 50,161 56,216 6,890 12,302 381 7,965 21,607 340 12,429 209 654 56,700 39,132 2,539 --7,074 16,677 3,801 12,220 281 148 601,148 7 862 2,322 2,216 7,064 174 12,645 613,793
186 1 1 855 366 2 --74 254 21 95 1

r
(4)
11,365 78 4 54 17
(4) (4)
6,767
(4)
5 27 14 81
r
18 15,037 1,013,244
(4)
153 11,519
127 6,894
Grand total5 Revised. -- Zero.

1 2
Includes portland, masonry, and other hydraulic cements.
Customs value. The price actually paid or payable for merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States, excluding U.S. import duties, freight, insurance, and other charges incurred in bringing the merchandise to the United States.
Cost, insurance, and freight. The import value represents the customs value plus insurance, freight, and other delivery charges to the first port of entry. Less than unit. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
4 5
16.23
TABLE 18 U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY CUSTOMS DISTRICT AND COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Customs district and country United States: Anchorage, AK: Canada China Japan Korea, Republic of Taiwan Total4 Baltimore, MD: Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Total4 Boston, MA, Canada Buffalo, NY: Canada France Germany Japan Total4 Charleston, SC: China Germany Netherlands Total Chicago, IL: Croatia Denmark France Germany Japan Netherlands Poland Total Cleveland, OH: Canada China Croatia Netherlands Poland Total Columbia-Snake, OR-WA Canada China Thailand Total4 See footnotes at end of table.
4 4 4
2009 Value C.i.f.3 Quantity Customs2 C.i.f.3
Quantity
Customs2
7 1 5 102 -114
(5) (5)
419 98 187 4,471 -5,175 13 229 -242 2,537 57,564 60 3 -57,627 ----38 15 3 2 220 231 41 551 40,608 13 261 37 -40,919 8,012 26,857 2 34,872
1,479 106 282 8,689 -10,556 15 259 -274 4,584 60,681 61 3 -60,744 ----53 16 25 3 259 296 44 696 41,506 17 354 57 -41,935 8,756 44,713 4 53,473
9 15 -72 16 112 -(5) (5) (5)
745 1,036 -3,165 1,047 5,994 -42 20 62 4,196 48,103 --13 48,116 5 12 41 59 ----107 92 19 218 34,399 --137 21 34,558 4,256 13,016 -17,272
2,267 1,561 -5,658 1,066 10,552 -48 21 70 6,824 52,028 --13 52,041 9 13 47 70 ----117 141 22 280 36,894 --158 24 37,077 4,503 19,757 -24,259
-(5)
45 707
(5) (5)
77 574 --(5)
-708 ----(5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5)
574
(5) (5) (5) (5)
----(5) (5) (5) (5)
1 485
(5)
1
(5)
493 --(5) (5)
-485 135 653

(5)
494 55 237 -292
788
TABLE 18Continued U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY CUSTOMS DISTRICT AND COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Customs district and country United StatesContinued: Dallas, Fort Worth, TX: Italy Netherlands Total4 Detroit, MI: Canada China Germany Netherlands Total4 El Paso, TX, Mexico Great Falls, MT: Canada China Germany Japan United Kingdom Total Honolulu, HI: China Korea, Republic of Taiwan Thailand Total4 Houston-Galveston, TX: Algeria China Colombia Croatia Denmark Egypt France Germany Korea, Republic of Sweden Taiwan Turkey Total4 Laredo, TX, Mexico Los Angeles, CA: Algeria China Colombia See footnotes at end of table.
4
Quantity
Customs2
(5)
3 -3 76,193 -5 260 76,457 31,680 468 24 13 --505 705 -16,848 3 17,556 94 4,219 30,692 11 -1,892 69 109 31,413 6,076 16,972 58 91,605 15,994 179 23,241 28
r r r
4 -4 77,285 -5 356 77,645 35,277 503 32 21 --556 1,597 -25,388 6 26,991 122 6,940 39,484 12 -2,774 79 133 51,352 8,957 27,229 89 137,171 16,939 328 42,027 43
-(5) (5)
-34 34 66,897 41 -60 66,998 23,449 20 143 -2 23 189 14 3,569 8,281 188 12,052 728 186 14,822 -3 3,230 44 78 19,219 -1,968 -40,278 11,467 -2,408 --
-95 95 68,458 42 -100 68,600 25,875 21 171 -2 33 227 47 7,329 12,233 552 20,160 1,022 274 20,624 -3 3,988 50 93 30,821 -3,198 -60,074 12,646 -2,876 --
-(5)
837 -(5) (5)
841
(5)
-(5)
838 384 9
(5) (5)
841 275
(5) (5)
-(5) (5) (5)
--9 10 -373
(5)
(5)
84 188 3 276 6 2 235 -(5)
383 1 93 403
(5)
-22
(5) (5)
28
(5) (5)
799 108 449 1 1,876 133 2 505

(5)
472 -49 -793 85 -21 --
16.25
TABLE 18Continued U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY CUSTOMS DISTRICT AND COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Customs district and country United StatesContinued: Los Angeles, CAContinued: Croatia Egypt Germany India Japan Lithuania Thailand United Kingdom Total Miami, FL: Algeria China Colombia Denmark Egypt Italy Mexico Sweden Turkey Total4 Minneapolis, MN: Canada China Denmark United Kingdom Total4 Mobile, AL, Mexico New Orleans, LA: China Croatia Korea, Republic of Peru Taiwan Turkey Total4 New York, NY: Colombia Croatia Denmark France Germany See footnotes at end of table.
4
Quantity
Customs2
(5)
11
(5)
109 964 188 -36 13 2,285 12 27,055 43 23 1,464 414 1,971 2 9,869 10,596 -24,382 17,524 -6 11 17,541 -5,076 7,929 1,506 3,205 -5,199 22,915 777 9 4,440 -14
180 1,667 206 -51 13 3,521 12 48,048 70 36 1,837 529 2,811 2 12,580 20,770 -38,636 17,541 -6 11 17,558 -6,461 9,887 2,412 4,652 -12,112 35,525 1,650 11 6,564 -19
(5)
1
(5) (5)
220 68 53 24 -26 1,629 80 4,508 848 41 790 -2,197 -410 3,270 6,618 14,174 12,105 15 -15 12,136 7 1,062 5,410 1,273 -36 1,240 9,021 68 57 2,804 107 22
273 72 72 25 -28 2,202 194 5,741 1,101 73 997 -2,807 -590 6,455 9,585 21,609 12,117 15 -15 12,148 12 1,269 6,542 1,961 -180 2,634 12,586 116 75 3,655 110 23
-(5) (5)
-(5)
19
(5)
12
(5)
538 1
(5)
35 7
(5)
11 3 23
(5)
98 239 -375 154 -(5) (5)
6 -19 -5 73 74 185 113

(5)
-(5)
154 -26 27 45 62 -95 256 16

(5)
113
(5)
5 15 34 -1 21 75
(5) (5)
38 -(5)
24 3
(5)
TABLE 18Continued U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY CUSTOMS DISTRICT AND COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Customs district and country United StatesContinued: New York, NYContinued: Greece Netherlands Norway Portugal Sweden United Kingdom Total4 Nogales, AZ, Mexico Norfolk, VA: Canada China Egypt France Germany Netherlands Sweden United Kingdom Total4 Ogdensburg, NY: Canada Germany South Africa Total Pembina, ND Canada France Total4 Philadelphia, PA: Belgium China Germany Korea, Republic of Netherlands Thailand United Kingdom Total4 Portland, ME, Canada Providence, RI: Canada See footnotes at end of table.
4
Quantity
Customs2
213
(5)
20 -3
(5)
11,717 336 897 -1,670 41 19,902 21,095 8,044 9 -22,121 14 353 79 1,647 32,267 41,749 --41,749 10,174 5 10,179 6 33 104 5,032 1,275 1,629 -8,079 9,765 4,572
18,514 398 897 -1,856 72 29,982 25,919 8,940 11 -24,818 17 464 89 1,980 36,319 42,237 --42,237 10,293 5 10,298 7 33 143 11,590 1,463 2,379 -15,616 10,410 8,488
186
(5)
-(5)
--214
(5)
10,705 79 -34 --13,876 9 5,003 -389 20,222 -34 551 -26,198 23,489 3 2 23,494 12,370 -12,370 5 -92 4,988 814 -14 5,913 4,469 4,069
12,429 105 -35 --16,550 10 5,373 -482 21,447 -39 619 -27,961 23,989 3 2 23,994 12,455 -12,455 5 -131 7,063 937 -17 8,153 4,954 6,273
291 348 113

(5)
-108
(5) (5) (5)
53 -3 63 -(5)
4 225 399 --399 173

(5)
1 -120 248
(5) (5)
248 162 -162

(5)
173
(5) (5) (5)
-(5)
137 1 48 -187 75 80
139 1 -(5)
140 37 62
16.27
TABLE 18Continued U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY CUSTOMS DISTRICT AND COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Customs district and country United StatesContinued: Providence, RIContinued: Colombia Peru Total4 San Diego, CA, Taiwan San Francisco, CA: China Egypt France India Netherlands Taiwan Thailand Total4 Savannah, GA: China Colombia Egypt Japan Netherlands Portugal Thailand Total4 Seattle, WA: Canada China Japan Korea, Republic of Netherlands Taiwan Total4 St. Albans, VT: Canada Germany Total4 St. Louis, MO: China Croatia Netherlands Total4 See footnotes at end of table. Quantity Customs2 C.i.f.3 Quantity Customs2 2009 Value C.i.f.3
48 29 158 13 370 1
(5)
2,502 1,522 8,596 515 16,786 46 9 98 18 1,036 1,150 19,143 10 17,005 --537 -96 17,649 45,848 25,961 331 6,170 188 1,053 79,551 14,748 -14,748 -1,690 430 2,120
3,909 2,857 15,253 517 27,248 79 12 153 37 1,679 1,806 31,013 12 23,652 --713 -194 24,570 48,079 35,167 447 9,308 257 1,055 94,312 15,543 -15,543 -2,564 500 3,064
--62 -211 1 -1 --6 219 -221 3

(5) (5) (5)
--4,069 -10,114 108 -127 --777 11,126 -12,861 354 2 223 31 -13,471 42,802 7,158 398 2,480 40 -52,879 9,904 4 9,907 11 -329 340
--6,273 -13,216 173 -184 --1,047 14,620 -18,609 443 2 364 31 -19,450 44,572 10,833 519 3,869 61 -59,853 10,571 4 10,575 18 -442 459
1
(5)
20 9 400
(5)
258 --1 -1 259 757 362 1 123

(5) (5)
-224 611 117 1 54

(5)
-783 89
(5)
1,243 126 -126 -6

(5)
89
(5)
-(5) (5)
TABLE 18Continued U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF HYDRAULIC CEMENT AND CLINKER, BY CUSTOMS DISTRICT AND COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Customs district and country United StatesContinued: Tampa, FL: Brazil Colombia Denmark Korea, Republic of Spain Sweden Total4 U.S. Virgin Islands: Colombia Dominican Republic Total4 Wilmington, NC, Colombia U.S. total4 Puerto Rico (San Juan): China Colombia Dominican Republic Korea, Republic of Mexico Peru Spain Total
r 4
Quantity
Customs2
36 39 58 24
(5)
19 175 2 11 13 186 11,365 78 4 -54 17

(5) (5)
2,780 2,103 4,893 1,958 4 847 12,584 213 786 998 12,333 778,888 3,270 529 -3,861 1,981 14 25 9,681 788,569
3,225 2,865 7,782 2,548 4 1,868 18,292 219 1,082 1,300 16,952 998,208 5,701 665 -5,812 2,808 18 33 15,037 1,013,244
-58 45 ---103 -4 4 134 6,767

(5)
-3,225 7,117 ---10,342 -307 307 8,033 501,592 5 674 169 1,350 1,641 -5,694 9,532 511,125
-4,557 8,644 ---13,201 -381 381 11,313 601,148 7 862 174 2,322 2,216 -7,064 12,645 613,793
5
(5)
27 14 -81 127 6,894
153 11,519
Grand total4 Revised. -- Zero. Includes all varieties of hydraulic cement and clicker.
1 2
Customs value. The price actually paid or payable for merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States, excluding U.S. import duties, freight, insurance, and other charges incurred in bringing the merchandise to the United States.
Cost, insurance, and freight. The import value represents the customs value plus insurance, freight, and other delivery charges to the first port of entry. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding. Less than unit.
4 5
16.29
TABLE 19 U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF GRAY PORTLAND CEMENT, BY COUNTRY (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Country United States: Brazil Canada China Colombia Dominican France Greece Japan Korea, Republic of Mexico Norway Peru Sweden Taiwan Thailand United Kingdom Other Total Puerto Rico: China Korea, Republic of Spain Total4, 5 Grand total4, 5
r 4, 5
2009 Value C.i.f.2 3,225 275,818 137,987 81,614 1,082 34 18,514 282 85,539 55,076 897 7,509 22,638 54,813 2,379 96
r
Quantity 36 3,294 1,906 891 11

(3)
Customs1 2,780 259,073 81,907 60,180 786 27 11,717 187 50,410 45,002 897 4,727 11,443 35,371 1,629 65 106 566,307 3,270 3,861 6 7,137 573,443
Quantity -2,642 573 636 4 3 186

(3)
Customs1 -205,197 30,463 37,333 307 107 10,705 5 34,641 11,770 --3,270 11,332 188 46 164 345,529 -1,350 5,694 7,044 352,572
C.i.f.2 -222,340 44,369 52,800 381 110 12,429 5 56,563 13,305 --6,455 16,677 552 50 269 426,307 -2,322 7,064 9,386 435,693
213 5 1,227 744 20 92 257 855 48 1

(3) r
854 185 --73 254 3

(3)
r
126 747,629 5,701 5,812 8 11,521 759,150
(3)
9,599 78 54
(3)
5,414 -27 81 108 5,521
132 9,731
Revised. -- Zero.
The price actually paid or payable for merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States, excluding U.S. import duties, freight, insurance, and other charges incurred in bringing the merchandise to the United States. Cost, insurance, and freight. The import value represents the customs value plus insurance, freight, and other delivery charges to the first port of entry. Less than unit. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
3 4 5
Total imports do not include gray portland cement that was misregistered by importers under the white cement tariff code and which has been included in table 20. Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
TABLE 20 U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF WHITE CEMENT, BY COUNTRY (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Country United States: Algeria Canada China Colombia Denmark Egypt India Korea, Republic of Mexico Thailand Turkey United Kingdom Other Total Puerto Rico: Colombia Mexico Other Total Grand total5
r 5 5
2009 Value Quantity 14 251 29 18 69 53 1 2 113 18 95 1

r
Quantity 4 296 88 58 99 55 1 2 237 29 96 -(4) r
Customs1 316 40,213 15,869 6,491 9,747 4,724 98 140 29,222 3,536 5,257 -1,056 116,669 529 1,981 14 2,525 119,194
C.i.f.2, 3 520 41,086 19,697 8,276 14,875 7,087 153 360 32,871 5,530 12,201 -1,058 143,715 665 2,808 18 3,491 147,206
Customs1 1,576 33,932 3,396 2,466 9,921 6,028 130 53 15,822 2,406 7,858 99 7
6
C.i.f.2, 3 2,123 34,681 4,125 3,415 12,300 7,628 178 137 17,357 3,249 12,220 219 7 97,638 862 2,216 -3,078 100,715
(4)
964 4 17
664 5 14 -19 683
83,693 674 1,641 -2,315 86,008
(4) r
21 985
Revised. -- Zero. Customs value. The price actually paid or payable for merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States, excluding U.S. import duties, freight, insurance, and other charges incurred in bringing the merchandise to the United States. Cost, insurance, and freight. The import value represents the customs value plus insurance, freight, and other delivery charges to the first port of entry.
Values of less than $90.00 (c.i.f.) per metric ton likely indicate the mistaken total or partial inclusion of data for gray portland or similar cement or clinker. This error happens when the importer records the wrong tariff number with the U.S. Customs Service. Values that exceed $200 per ton likely indicate misidentified specialty cement, not white cement. Less than unit. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
4 5 6
Total imports of white cement include substantial quantities of gray cement that were misregistered by importers under the white cement tariff code. Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
16.31
TABLE 21 U.S. IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF CLINKER, BY COUNTRY1 (Thousand metric tons and thousand dollars) 2008 Value Country United States: Canada China Colombia Egypt France Other Total5 -- Zero.
1 2
2009 Value C.i.f.3 35,310 4,285 718 244 23,550 33 64,141 Quantity 489 3 -3 62 -556 Customs2 30,192 709 -318 19,571 -50,789 C.i.f.3 30,459 855 -337 20,732 -52,383
Quantity 477 19 16 2 107

(4)
Customs2 35,048 3,414 446 149 20,976 21 60,054
621
For all types of hydraulic cement.
Customs value. The price actually paid or payable for merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States, excluding U.S. import duties, freight, insurance, and other charges incurred in bringing in the merchandise to the United States. Cost, insurance, and freight. The import value represents the customs value plus insurance, freight, and other delivery charges to the first port of entry. Less than unit. Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.
4 5
TABLE 22 HYDRAULIC CEMENT: WORLD PRODUCTION, BY COUNTRY1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australiae Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladeshe Barbados Belarus Belgium Benine Bhutane Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bruneie Bulgaria Burkina Fasoe Burma4 Cambodia Cameroone Canada Chile China Colombia Congo (Brazzaville)e Congo (Kinshasa) Costa Rica Cte dIvoiree Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Eritreae Estonia Ethiopia Fijie Finland France French Guianae Gabone Georgiae See footnotes at end of table.
e
2005 60 489 12,800 1,315 7,595 605 8,475 4,560 1,538 400 5,100 341 3,131 7,594 250 170 1,440 1,026 38,705 266 3,618 30 543 -1,000 14,179 3,999 1,068,850 9,959 100 521 2,000 650 3,481 1,567 1,805 3,978 2,120 2,779 3,690 32,458 1,131 45 726 1,569 143 1,357 21,277 60 260 450
3 3 r r, e r 3 r, 3
2006 50 525 14,702 1,373 8,929 625 9,000 4,852 1,622 400 5,100 338 3,495 8,192 1,489 180 1,636 1,226 41,895 240 4,093 30 570 -1,000 14,336 4,112 1,236,770 10,038 100 519 1,900 650 3,598 1,705 1,786 4,239 2,115 3,777 4,110 36,200 1,311 45 849 1,731 143 1,685 22,540 60 260 450
r r r 5 r 3
2007 50 889 15,886 1,400 9,602 722 9,500 5,203 1,691 400 5,100 294 3,820 8,200 1,550 180 1,739 1,283 46,551 200 4,413 30 608 87 1,000 15,078 4,440 1,361,170 11,068 100 530 2,300 650 3,587 1,805 1,873 4,899 2,100 4,100 4,420 38,400 1,300 45 937 1,626 145 1,743 22,300 60 229 450
3 e r e e e r r r 5 r e e 3 e
2008 50 737 17,398 1,780 9,703 770 9,000 5,309 1,595 438 5,000 300 4,219 8,200 1,500 180 1,985 1,406 51,970 240 4,903 30 676 772 1,000 13,672 4,622 1,400,000 10,456 100 411 2,500 650 3,637 1,707 1,870 4,710 2,100 4,000 5,493 40,000 1,300 45 808 1,834 143 1,745 21,700 62 230 450
r r r e r e e r e e r 5 r r r r r r r e r r r e r r r
2009e 50 740 18,000 1,800 10,000 750 8,500 4,600 1,283 800 5,000 300 4,350 8,200 1,500 180 2,292 1,074 51,748 220 2,662 30 670 774 1,000 10,985 3,876 1,629,000 10,000 100 444 2,500 650 2,800 1,700 1,800 3,637 2,000 3,000 5,000 46,500 1,300 45 326 2,300 110 1,750 18,300 62 230 450
3 3 3 3 3 p, 3 3 3 3 3 3 p, 3 3 3
r r
16.33
TABLE 22Continued HYDRAULIC CEMENT: WORLD PRODUCTION, BY COUNTRY1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Country Germany Ghanae Greece Guadeloupee Guatemalae Guineae Haiti
e
2005 31,009 1,800 15,166 240 2,400 -300 1,384

3 3 r r
2006 33,630 1,800 15,674 230 2,500 -300 1,800 1,010 3,724 141 160,000
3 3 r r
2007 33,382 1,800 16,667 230 2,500 -300 1,800 1,000 3,552 90 170,000 36,000 41,000 4,500 5,000 5,000 47,542 592 67,685 4,051 5,699 2,546 6,130 52,182
e r e r e r r
2008 33,581 1,800 16,500 230 2,500 -300 1,800 1,000 3,544 100 185,000 36,000 44,400 6,453 5,000 4,819 43,030 725 62,810 4,375 5,223 2,829 6,415 51,653 590 2,200
r r r e r r 3 r, 3 e r r r e
2009e 30,441 1,800 16,000 230 1,500 -300 1,800 1,000 3,200 100 205,000 40,000 50,000 8,000 5,000 4,759 36,317 700 54,800 5,000 5,000 3,320 6,400 50,127 600 2,000
r 3 3 3 3 3 3
Hondurase Hong Kong Hungary Iceland Indiae Indonesiae Iran

e e
1,005 3,371 132 145,000 33,917 32,650 3,000 5,083 5,093 40,284 845 69,629 4,046 3,975 2,123 5,700 51,391 450 2,145 973 250 280 4,600 144 3,621 832 760 887 150 166 17,860 220 300 37,452 641 112 11,000 490 290 2,496 119 1,100 530
35,000 35,300 3,500 4,981 5,089 47,814 761 69,942 3,967 4,880 2,174 6,160 53,971 450
Iraqe Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea, Northe Korea, Republic of Kosovo6 Kuwaite Kyrgyzstan Laose Latviae Lebanon Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourge Macedonia Madagascare Malawi Malaysia Martiniquee Mauritania Mexico Moldova Mongolia Moroccoe Mozambiquee Nepale, 4 Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealande Nicaraguae See footnotes at end of table.
r r, 3 r
470 2,200 1,230 400 300 4,900 157

e
3 r
2,200 1,060 400 280 4,400 155 5,300 1,065

e r
1,218 400 310 5,000 94 5,509 1,100 780
1,100 400 300
e r r e
5,000 95 6,000 1,100 780 909 240 240 18,500 220 500 35,160
3 3
5,206 1,105 780
3 r
800 924 150 188 18,400 220

e r
945 270 185 19,480 220 410 40,670 800 180 11,000 800 300 2,700 134
r 3
916 270 240 19,000 220 446 47,609
e r, e
374 40,362 837 141 11,000 600 295 2,790 133 1,120
3
e r
750 269 11,000 730 295
e r
700 140 12,000 830
r e e
300 2,700 130 1,100 530
e e
2,700 134 1,100 530
1,100 530
530
TABLE 22Continued HYDRAULIC CEMENT: WORLD PRODUCTION, BY COUNTRY1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Country Niger
e
2005 59 2,700 1,613 2,686 17,000 1,050

3 r
2006 83 3,300 1,695 3,611 20,652 1,050 600 5,782 12,033 14,688 8,340 1,568 400 8,253 54,700 103 27,056 2,884
8 3 r
2007 62 4,700 1,700 3,880 27,000 1,050 600 6,231 13,048 17,120 12,631 2,500 400 10,000 59,900 103 30,369 3,152 2,677 236 3,718 1,300 13,651 54,720 1,700 326 65 2,950 4,000 5,104 18,957 313
r e e r, e e r e r
2008 42 5,000 1,700 3,991 31,000 1,050 600 6,922 13,369 17,207 12,650 3,500 400 11,000 53,600 103 31,823 3,084 2,843 254 4,157 1,300 13,341 42,088 1,800 370 65 2,900 4,000 5,336 17,330 190
r r r r e e r, e e r r r, e r e r e r r r
2009e 40 4,500 1,650 4,000 32,000 1,050 600 6,862 14,865 15,537 12,700 4,150 375 7,800 44,300 100 40,000 3,000 2,232 250 3,011 1,000 11,500 29,505 1,900 1,000 65 2,950 4,000 5,605 15,918 190 1,700 31,181 800
r 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Nigeriae Norway Oman Pakistane Panamae Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Runione Romania Russia Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia
7 e
550 5,107 15,494 12,646 8,438 1,500 380 7,032 48,500 101 26,064 2,623 2,276 172 3,499 1,114 11,464 50,347 1,500 331 65 2,709 4,022 4,700 19,891 253 1,366 37,872 800 686 6,691 42,787 650 630 12,183 10,000 11,216 100,903 620 5,068 5,800 30,808 1,550 435
r e
2,565 234 3,593 1,269 12,658 54,033 1,600 202 65 2,952 4,040 4,804 19,294 282 1,370 39,408 800 883 6,932 47,499 800 630 13,732 11,000 11,471 99,712 620 5,700 7,200 32,690 1,470 650
e r r
Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia South Africa, sales9 Spain, including Canary Islands Sri Lankae Sudan Surinamee Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togoe Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistane Ugandae Ukraine United Arab Emiratese United Kingdom United States, including Puerto Rico10 Uruguay
e
1,630 35,668 800 1,992 7,052 49,553 900 650 15,000 12,000 11,887 96,850 620 6,500 9,000 37,102 1,728 650
1,756 31,651 800
958 7,559 54,027 900 650 14,918
950 8,000 53,973 900 650 9,496

3 3
r r
13,200 10,071 87,610 620 6,600 9,000
r r
16,000 7,622 64,864 620

3 3
Uzbekistan Venezuelae Vietnam Yemen Zambiae See footnotes at end of table.
6,600 9,000 47,900 4,000 600
40,009 3,000 700
r e
16.35
TABLE 22Continued HYDRAULIC CEMENT: WORLD PRODUCTION, BY COUNTRY1, 2 (Thousand metric tons) Country Zimbabwee Total
e
2005 600 2,350,000
2006 700 2,610,000
2007 400 2,810,000
2008 400 2,850,000
2009e 300 3,040,000
Estimated. Preliminary. Revised. -- Zero.
World totals and estimated data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. Even where presented unrounded, reported data are thought to be accurate to no more than three significant digits. Data are from a variety of sources, including the European Cement Association. Table includes data available through July 23, 2010. Data may include clinker exports for some countries. Reported figure. Data are for fiscal year ending March 31 of the following year. Data for 200608 are for gray cement only; white cement output was likely to have been an additional 50,000 to 100,000 tons per year. Not included in Serbia data. Excludes Kosovo data. Montenegro and Serbia formally declared independence in June 2006 from each other and dissolved their union. Montenegro has no cement plants.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Data have been adjusted to remove sales of cementitious materials other than finished cement. Material sales removed (mostly fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag) amounted, in metric tons, to: 20051,511,716; 20061,599,505; 20071,664,304; 20081,395,124; and 2009 1,200,000 (estimated). Portland and masonry cements only.
10

Myb1 2009 Cemen

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Myb1 2009 Cemen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2009 Minerals Yearbook

CEMENT [ADVANCE RELEASE]

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

(thousands dollars) (dollars per metric ton)

16.6 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

16.8 [ADVANCE RELEASE] U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

Number of plants 5 7 3 4 4 5 2 5 4 5 7 7 3 5 4 4 6 6 3 4 6 -3 8 4 -114 2

Number of plants 5 7 3 3 4 5 2 5 3 6 7 6 3 5 4 4 6 6 3 4 6 -W 11 4 -112 2 114

Total Puerto Rico Grand total See footnotes at end of table.

W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; included in Total. -- Zero.

Includes imported cement. Includes stocks at mills, terminals, and in transit.

CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.

16.10 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE] 16.11

Number of kilns4 5 18 6 8 8 3 9 5 8 8 8 3 5 4 10 12 6 7 5 8 11 3 160 2 162

----1 ---1 -----------3 -3

16.12 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

Sum of reported kiln capacities for each plant in a district.

Includes one semiwet kiln.

Data may not add to totals shown because of independent rounding.

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

Total11 Clinker, imported, raw materials equivalent Grand total11

CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

16.14 [ADVANCE RELEASE] U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

Number of plants 22 81 3 106 19 81 3 103

Tires (thousand metric tons) 91 341 6 438 50 263 -313

CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE] 16.15

Generated Number of plants Quantity (million kilowatthours)

-236 -236 ---

1,530 9,960 563 12,100 130 XX

1,530 10,200 563 12,300 130 XX

12.4 82.9 4.6 100.0 ---

10,598 70,279 3,736 84,612 1,481 216

145 145 151 145 88 XX

-223 -223 ---

815 8,000 222 9,030 91 XX

815 8,210 222 9,260 91 XX

8.8 88.6 2.4 100.0 ---

5,804 55,739 1,334 62,877 908 143

140 148 166 147 99 XX

351 235 4 1 13 31 56 2 10 68 62 3 59 15 59 13 59 26 1 3 15 4 59 9 13 23 73 229 1 99 54 1 48 42 2 103 1 164 123 198

16.16 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

-3,047 2,995 52 -3,047

2,102 2,070 32 -2,102

Total to customers4 2,310 90,900 403 93,600 2,000 66,900 55 69,000

10,700 5,350 7,230 23,300 9,580 4,000 7,120 20,700

108 308 3 419 8 116 -125

CEMENT2009 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

2009 Quantity (thousand metric tons)

Value2 Average Total (per (thousands) metric ton)

95,000 5, 10 Grand total9 W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data.

16.18 [ADVANCE RELEASE]

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERALS YEARBOOK2009

2009 Quantity (thousand metric tons)

56 187 230 95 15 51 192 214 169 242 57 93 W 221 42 2 W 232

W 31,000 5,387 620 W 27,700 1,220 287,000