6 thoughts on “Climate Startup Wants to Re-Invent Cement”
I find it curious that they named the company Brimstone (a name from biblical times which meant Sulphur). I hope this does not turn off the religious-right.
It is my understanding the major source of emissions is cooking the limestone.
Limestone is crushed into a powder then heated in a kiln, where as a source of calcium it is mixed with powdered clay to produce a hard mud, which is then ground down with a source of sulfate, like gypsum, to make cement … which is just one ingredient to concrete.
My interest, having poured a lot of concrete, is what they’re doing with basalt that replicates a limestone-like end result. Are they cooking it too … ?
“Pre-hydrated calcium silicates are a new family of hydraulic binders that are of a similar chemical composition to standard Portland cements (which are also based on calcium silicates) but that require much lower energy inputs and limestone in the raw mix for production. As a result, they have a much lower carbon footprint.”
So, it is heated to make clinker, just not to the temps of cement, a definite gain. Otherwise doesn’t appear to be any different than any other concrete, except maybe Roman …
If concrete made with this process is just as strong as standard concrete, costs less, and actually absorbs carbon, should we not mandate its use?
Big cement would no doubt love to just buy these guys out and continue BAU. But this product – if it can actually deliver on the promises made in the video – would be one of the most important developments in the history of fighting climate change. 8% of global GHG emissions removed without drawbacks is huge.
I find it curious that they named the company Brimstone (a name from biblical times which meant Sulphur). I hope this does not turn off the religious-right.
Anyway, here’s the first thing that came up in a google search today:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/07/13/green-concrete-cement-climate-brimstone/
It is my understanding the major source of emissions is cooking the limestone.
Limestone is crushed into a powder then heated in a kiln, where as a source of calcium it is mixed with powdered clay to produce a hard mud, which is then ground down with a source of sulfate, like gypsum, to make cement … which is just one ingredient to concrete.
My interest, having poured a lot of concrete, is what they’re doing with basalt that replicates a limestone-like end result. Are they cooking it too … ?
Global Cement and Concrete Association are impressed, pending practical trials:
https://gccassociation.org/cement-and-concrete-innovation/alternative-binders/pre-hydrated-calcium-silicates/
“Pre-hydrated calcium silicates are a new family of hydraulic binders that are of a similar chemical composition to standard Portland cements (which are also based on calcium silicates) but that require much lower energy inputs and limestone in the raw mix for production. As a result, they have a much lower carbon footprint.”
It goes on to discuss some production processes.
So, it is heated to make clinker, just not to the temps of cement, a definite gain. Otherwise doesn’t appear to be any different than any other concrete, except maybe Roman …
If concrete made with this process is just as strong as standard concrete, costs less, and actually absorbs carbon, should we not mandate its use?
Big cement would no doubt love to just buy these guys out and continue BAU. But this product – if it can actually deliver on the promises made in the video – would be one of the most important developments in the history of fighting climate change. 8% of global GHG emissions removed without drawbacks is huge.
Big Limestone isn’t going to be happy.
😉