CEMENT

EXCELLENCE IN COST REDUCTION

FUEL MIX
FLEXIBILITY
EXCELLENCE IN COST REDUCTION

FUEL MIX FLEXIBILITY

In a global context of increasing and volatile energy costs, it is extremely important to de-
velop flexibility in our fuel mix to optimize the total fuel cost. Fuel Mix Flexibility can be
achieved by increasing the share of Alternative Fuels and the variety of Fossil Fuels in the
plant’s fuel portfolio.
Division objective is to reach 30% AF by 2015, through three major achievements for Lafarge:
• CO2 footprint reduction (~4 Mt less of coal/coke consumed per year)
• Energy cost reduction by 125 M€
• Great service rendered to our local communities (reduced landfill, new employments, etc.)
In parallel to this 30% Alternative Fuels target, there is a 70% share of Fossil Fuels to be con-
tinuously supplied and optimized in these future years, mostly by decreasing quality of fuels
burnt and by capturing market opportunities.
Flexibility requires preparation: competitive assessment, internal and external communica-
tion on fuels initiatives, combustion optimization, new grinding capabilities, etc. Issues, risks
and trade-offs will appear and can only be solved through cooperation at plant and BU level,
but also by coordinating the work of Industrial Ecology, Fossil Fuels Purchasing and the
Technical Centers.
This booklet consolidates knowledge gathered on Alternative Fuels sourcing and co-process-
ing but also on Fossil Fuel flexibility. It presents the 10 Fuel Mix Flexibility Golden Rules that
should be part of the day to day operation of a mastered plant. Included in the booklet is a
Self-Assessment Tool to help BU GM evaluate the level of maturity of each plant on each
Golden Rule. In addition, materials are provided to help BU GM design and implement cost
reduction action plans, along with a contact list for additional support. Finally, it will be
possible to assess and measure progress using existing KPIs and Excellence methodology.

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 3 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

contents
Golden Rules
05
Golden Rules: executive summary
A Alternative Fuels
1 Set objectives for Alternative Fuels
2 Develop Alternative Fuels mindset
3 Implement Alternative Fuels process,
tools and organization
4 Master Alternative Fuels skills

B Fossil Fuels
5 Minimize Fossil Fuel cost within existing
operational constraints
6 Develop low quality Fossil Fuels
7 Follow-up on Fossil Fuel supply strategy
8 Develop Fuel Flexibility
9 Stay attentive to market opportunities

C Fuel Mix
10 Optimize overall fuel cost

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 5 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

RULES 1-2
Set objectives for
Alternative Fuels
• Benchmark against competitors and internally with sim-
ilar economy and process to define ambitious objectives
(short and long term)
• Decide a current-year stretch goal at least 5% above the
budget (i.e. if budget is at 20% AF, set a stretch objective
at 21% or greater)
• Assess waste market (generators as well as waste dis-
posal competitors) and select relevant market segments
based on Industrial Ecology team's market intelligence
• Align personal objectives for AF of BU GM, Industrial
Director, Plant Manager and Lafarge Industrial Ecology
and get a teamwork between all these players
• Establish with the TC the AF % capability per plant with
the actual plant process design and the achievable tar-
gets with the addition of a chloride bypass
• Develop several AF types per plant and a flexible permit
(with as many AF/ARM as possible)
F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y
Develop Alternative
Fuels mindset
• Get internal (plant employees) and local community
understanding and acceptance of AF, invest in lobbying
and Public Relations
• Be ready to try, to change (equipment design, AF qual-
ity…), so to risk (PF, RF). Recognize the difficulties com-
ing with AF (sourcing consistency, handling, dosing,
burning) and reward successes and risks which have
been taken. Be open to learn and copy other successful
BUs and plants. Capex is not the focus
• Adapt strategy with Industrial Ecology to market oppor-
tunities (first movers maintain a market advantage, and
other waste disposal solutions such as AF to power plants
can be more disruptive than local competing cement
plants)
• Position yourself as a service provider to waste producers,
not as a waste purchaser
6 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
Lafarge co-processing activities in 2009-2010:
more than 8MT of AF & ARM
2,600,000T of AF,
700,000T Hazardous*

15.0
13.3

8.3
7.0
5.9 6.0
5.6 5.6
4.4 4.5
3.9 3.8
18.9
17.6
Central Europe
West Europe
North America

6.9
5.9
6.5 6.2
AF 2009 (100 kt)
AF 2010 (100 kt)
ARM 2009 (100 kt) 4.6 1.2 1.3
4.0
ARM 2010 (100 kt) Asia (with China)
1.2 1.9
Africa (& Middle East)
*Hazardous – depends on
country regulations, volume Latin America
includes solvents, impregnated
solids, waste oil & water,
animal meal

Supporting tools:
➩ Technical Agenda "Fuel Flexibility"
Good Practices:
➩ Synthesis per AF / ARM stream

➩ Waste Model shops & waste catalogue

➩ Korea: Development of Alternative Fuels with new
streams
➩ Position paper on Municipal sewage sludge
➩ Mexico: Development of AF utilization based on
➩ RR Policy & Guidelines tires and Solid Shredded Waste

➩ TA "Build up control" & "Chloride by-pass" ➩ River: Commissioning, ramp-up and turnaround of
solid shredded waste sourcing, pretreatment and
➩ Alternative Fuels section of CKHC database1 coprocessing operations
➩ Position paper on storage for Waste preparation1
➩ Spain: Significant increase of the use of Alterna-
➩ Position paper on gasification of biomass and waste1 tive Fuels

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 7 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

RULES 3-4

Implement Master Alternative

Alternative Fuels Fuels skills
process, tools • Foster Operators skills certification
• Pay attention to the design and operation of AF handling
and organization and dosing equipment
• Adapt process skills to higher complexity and push kiln
combustion mastery (a key plant skill even without AF)
• Plant management • Adjust the Process Control System (LUCIE) based on the
team must integrate AF AF used
in the Cement Business
Model. In the case the
AF% usage is lower
than 15%, a plant
champion is recom-
mended
• Make sure BU/Plant/TC/
LIEI/DEC/Region are
working as a team. Full
implication/support of the
BUGM is paramount
• Establish quality control
criteria (moisture, unifor-
Snapshot of LQMS
mity, etc.) to foster
for incoming material specifications sourced quality but learn
to use difficult quality
• Review AF % usage at each morning plant meeting, iden-
tifying roadblocks. Make progress on savings visible in plant
• Assess and develop the required skills (waste market and
industrial ) and adapt the organization to the challenge
• Adapt specific SOPs for Health and Safety Barrel sampling for dosing test in Fredonia plant (North America)

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 8 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Supporting tools: Good Practices:
➩ LQMS for Risk Assessment ➩ Mexico: Development of AF utilization based on
Tires and Solid Shredded Waste
➩ LQMS for Managing non-compliance

➩ LQMS for Incoming material specification ➩ Morocco: Use of Tires as AF in precalciners in a

developing country
➩ RR Policy & Guidelines
➩ Poland: Development of Alternative Fuels
➩ Lucie Fuel Management module1
➩ River: Commissioning, ramp-up and turnaround of
solid shredded waste sourcing, pretreatment and
coprocessing operations
➩ Spain: Significant increase of the use of
Alternative Fuels
➩ Romania: Quick increase of AF thanks to a
dedicated task force

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 9 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

RULES 5-6-7
Minimize
Fossil Fuel
cost within
existing
operational
constraints
• Identify all potential Fossil Fuels
sources for each plant, with Fossil
Fuel Purchasing Team's support
• When there is a choice between
several types of Fossil Fuels, use the
Fuel Flexibility Tool (FFT) to identify
constraints due to equipment/
process limitations and AF potential
• Define objectives of Fossil Fuels ma-
trix based on most economical op-
tions within technical constraints
(considering fuel preparation costs)
and ensure budget reflects objec-
tives
• Set up the Fossil Fuels supply
program with the Fossil Fuels Pur-
chasing Team and organize quality
control scheme in order to adjust
blend components and pay for ac-
tual GJ received
F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y
Develop Follow-up on
low quality Fossil Fuel
Fossil Fuels supply strategy
• Question the existing Fossil Fuels
matrix and explore cheaper options
Cheapest
coal blend
based on Fossil Fuels Purchasing
Team's market intelligence (being
Strategy
+ Risks
technically possible
Purchasing - $/GJ -
the first one to develop the use of a
type of fuel gives a temporary com-
+ Existing
contracts
+ volumes
Negotiations
with suppliers
Commercially
possible
petitive advantage)
• Analyze, with TC, the conditions of Purchasing -
Proposals for BU
switching plants to a cheaper Fossil
Fuel and identify Capex require- Figure from Fuel Flexibility User Manual - After the
ments, if any, to be able to use it Technical Evaluation has been completed, additional
• Ensure, with TC support, existing investigation from Purchasing is necessary to deter-
mine the lowest USD/GJ which is commercially possible.
know-how related to the new options This step includes many commercial factors
is applied, especially on Health and
Safety (i.e. “Safety in coal grinding
• Set up a BU Fossil Fuels committee
shops” Technical Agenda)
(when a Regional Fossil Fuels task-
force does not exist) to define the
coming years strategy (Strategic Re-
view time), to review the coming
years options (PIP time) and to con-
firm the next year supply program
(Budget time)
• Have frequent meetings with the
Regional Fossil Fuels Sourcing Di-
rector to review the supply contracts
execution and how to optimize
Composite image of coal stock pile
(upper image) and coal lumps them. Stock management is key to
(lower image of photo) have a consistent fuel blend
10 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
 Supporting tools:
➩ Fuel Flexibility tool
➩ Technical Agenda "Build up control"
➩ Technical agenda "Chloride by-pass"
➩ Technical agenda "Safety in coal grinding shops"
Good Practices:
➩ Saving production cost using sub-bituminous coal
(Malaysia)
➩ Successful trial of Powder River Basin coal as a
solid fuel source (Alpena - Lakes & Seaway)
➩ Successful trial of Powder River Basin coal as a
solid fuel source (Sugar Creek - River)
➩ Partial substitution of current prime fuel with high
volatile coal (Beocin - Serbia)
➩ Low quality coal burning trial ( Gongxian -
Sichuan)
➩ High sulphur coal burning trial (Nanshan -
Chongqing)
➩ Increasing coke and AF (Sugar Creek - River)
➩ Increasing coke (Saint-Constant - Lakes & Seaway)
➩ Reducing fuel bill by using 100% petcoke as fossil
fuel (Trbovlje - Slovenia)
➩ Substitution of natural gas by anthracite on 5 wet
kilns (Mykolaiv - Ukraine)
➩ Reducing Fuel Cost by reducing the usage of light-
up fuel (Le Teil - France)
➩ Utilization of Indonesian high moisture coal
(Kanthan - Malaysia)

Plant Limits: %H2O, %S, %CI, HGI vs. NCV

25 110
100 H20
20 S
%H2O, %S, %CI

90
%CI x10
15 80 VM=5%
VM=10%
70
VM=15%
10 60 VM=20%
VM=25%
50 VM=30%
5
40 VM=35%
VM=40%
0 30
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000
NCV kcal/kg

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 11 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

RULES 8-9

Develop Fuel Stay attentive to

Flexibility
• Make sure the plants can easily and rapidly switch from
one type of Fossil Fuels to another one in a mastered way
(impact on safety, process, quality and environment)
• Develop plant employees' competencies and mindset to
be able to actively practice fuel flexibility
market opportunities
• Leave room in the supply program to jump on spot
market opportunities
• Set up a rapid decision process to be able to catch
market opportunities in a few days (even a few hours)

Short-term forward pricing curves – predicting costs based on

US$/t
coal futures market. In this case short-term lower cost position 232
has been taken by traders. 224
216
US$/t 208
200 C&F ARA
130 192
184
Hist. Front Q 176
Latest 168
Previous week 160
125 152
144
136
128
120
112
120 104
96
88
80
72
115 64
56
48
40
32 FOB
110 24 South Africa
16
8
0

105
De Ju Oc No Se South Africa steam coal prices (world standard fuel index)
c l y t v p
10 11 11 11 12 from 2000 to 2010. Note price peak just prior to crisis (sudden drop)
and now re-emergence of price increases.

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 12 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Supporting tools: Good Practices:
➩ Technical agenda “Safety in coal grinding shops” ➩ Reducing fuel cost by increasing fossilfuel
flexibility (Greece)
➩ Lucie Fuel Management module
➩ Utilization of Indonesian high moisture coal
(Kanthan - Malaysia)

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 13 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

RULE 10

Optimize overall fuel cost

• Review global fuel cost during the management cycle
process (PIP and Budget): putting a little more of an ex- Good Practices:
pensive fuel may allow to put more AF and putting more
AF may allow a higher sulfur coal/coke
• When the AF substitution is limited, optimizing Fossil
➩ Reducing fuel cost by increasing fossil fuel flexibility
(Greece)
Fuels cost remains a key lever to reduce manufacturing
cost (in some BUs, this cost represent 50% ot the ce-
ment cash cost)
• When the AF substitution is high, priority is to maximize
it before optimizing Fossil Fuels cost

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 14 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 15 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 16 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
contents
23 Good Practices

18 Self-Assessment
Tool 29 Key Performance
Indicators

20 “Basic”
supporting tools 33 Supporting
network

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 17 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Self-Assessment Tool
This tool aims at assessing your maturity on Fuel Mix Flexibility optimization.
It allows you to identify your current strengths and weaknesses on each Golden Rule detailed in the previous section.

Golden Rule Level E (1) Level D (2) Level C (3)

AF approximately 5-15%. Typically only 1 AF used. AF typically between 15-30%. More than one AF stream.
No clear ambition in AF or no clear
Set objectives action plan for improving AF%. Competitors
Ambitions exist at all levels but not aligned. Progress plan is showing less than 5% per year but
for Alternative Fuels situation is not well known
Competitors are taking market shares on the AF line management is aligned. Competitors are more active
market than Lafarge.

Risk are not taken when reliability or production PF

No understanding of AF in the Cement business
Develop Alternative model. Risk adverse mindset. AF approach is as
Fuels mindset a fuel supplier, not a service to waste producer.
Stakeholders communication plan is reactive. Risks are
are at stake. Employees perceive AF as a problem
rather than an opportunity to contribute to our
taken but line management not fully supportive.
world. Communication is limited internally and
Employees have a mitigated perception on AF but
improving
externally

Optimize AF usage every month, bi-monthly meeting

Optimize AF usage every quarter by quarterly
Review AF performance once to twice a year as a between BU, IE and Relation Director. Know Lafarge KH
Implement Alternative general meeting topic between BU, IE and TC.
meeting between BU and IE and Relation Director.
(e.g. Fuel flexibility TA) and procedures, even if they're not
Fuels process, tools Reset often ambitions, strategy and planned
Identify bottle-necks and be aware of basic Lafarge
fully implemented. Do not leverage Lafarge network (BU,
and organization actions.
AF Knowledge and know-how, practices and
IE, TC,DEC) to solve AF problems. Follow AF usage
procedures (including quality procedures).
operationally but at a unclear frequency. Control AF quality.

AF use is normal operation but operators struggle with

A limited number of operators have success with AF
AF perturbations vs coal, process engineers and process
Master Alternative 'The plant has no experience on AF or very little. vs coal, plant is not self sufficient in kiln mastery.
technicians have difficulty to master combustion when
Fuels skills No specific skills are developed High quality AF are requested (unrealistic
fuels are changing. Operating targets for AF have been
expectations).
established

Minimize FF cost within Existing FF matrix reviewed from time to time but no Existing FF matrix reviewed on a regular basis, with the
existing operational Existing FF matrix not reviewed change in actual situation despite potential FFT when it is justified, and objectives to reduce costs
constraints financial interest defined

Develop low quality Existing FF matrix not questioned

Cheaper FF options analyzed based on data supplied New FF matrix defined with TC support and FF Purchasing
Fossil Fuels by FF Purchasing Team Team

No BU FF committee (or Regional FF taskforce) No BU FF committee (or Regional FF taskforce); BU FF committee (or Regional FF taskforce) exists;
Follow-up on Fossil and no regular meetings between BU and some sporadic meetings between BU and Regional some sporadic meetings between BU and
Fuel supply strategy Regional FF Purchasing Director FF Purchasing Director Regional FF Purchasing Director

Plant able to switch to several significantly different FF

Plant very limited to other FF (maximum 1 or 2
Develop Fuel Flexibility Plant not able to switch to another FF
options)
(low sulphur petcoke, high sulphur petcoke, standard
coal, sub-bituminous coal, anthracite,…)

Pay attention to market No flexibility in supply contracts and Very limited in supply contracts; decision process Room to manœuvre with supply contracts;
opportunities no rapid decisison process in place still too long (several days at least) agility in making rapid decision not fully operational

Limited review of global fuel cost during Thorough review of global fuel cost during management
Optimize overall No review of global fuel cost during management cycle process; very limited AF cycle process; limited AF substitution ratio (< 15%)
fuel cost management cycle process substitution ratio; classical FF (FO, natural gas, but partial substitution of classical FF by low grade FF
standard coal, low sulphur petcoke) (< 30%)

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 18 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

 Golden Rule
Set objectives
for Alternative Fuels
Develop Alternative
Fuels mindset
Implement Alternative
Fuels process, tools and or-
ganization
Master Alternative
Fuels skills
Minimize FF cost within ex-
isting operational con-
straints
Develop low quality
Fossil Fuels
Follow-up on Fossil
Fuel supply strategy
Develop Fuel Flexibility
Pay attention to market
opportunities
Optimize overall
fuel cost
F U E L
Level B (4)
AF approximately 30-50%. A road map exists.
Multiple complex AF streams. Improvement plan is showing progress
between 5 to 10% per year. Competitors are at par. AF selection is
optimized from AF portfolio
Proactive communication plan, employees are supportive, risks taken and
managed but some external expertise is necessary. Line management
rewards risk-taking. May need to strengthen idea that AF has a positive
contribution to sustain the business.
Optimize AF usage every week, have monthly meeting between BU, IE,
Relation Director. Have identified and solved most AF bottle-necks.
Implement Lafarge procedures. Be ready to use Lafarge KH and network
for new AF issues; partly use fuel flexibility technical agenda. Establish
clear roles between BU, IE and TCand DEC
PTA (plant team assessment) is in place, operators know procedures to
address AF perturbations, process engineers and technicians accept AF
quality changes as part of their role.
Operating targets for AF are reviewed weekly.
Objectives of a more economically attractive FF matrix defined and
translated into a supply program with FF Purchasing Team
New FF matrix defined and optimized with TC and
FF Purchasing Team; success conditions identified
BU FF committee (or Regional FF taskforce) gathers twice a year;
regular meetings (once per quarter) between BU and
Regional FF Purchasing Director
Plant able to switch to several significantly different FF;
people have some difficulties to do in a mastered manner;
mindset is not fully open to constant fuel changes
Good flexibility in supply contracts and
rapid decision process operational
Thorough review of global fuel cost during management
cycle process; good AF substitution ratio (between 15 and 50%) and more
than 50% use of low quality FF
M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 19 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
Level A (5) Score
AF above 50%. GM, Ind Dr, Plant Mgrs and IE are aligned on AF target
and stretch target and working as an ambitious team. A roadmap to
increase 10% absolute per year is in place. Lafarge is above competitors
and has several partners. AF is the main fuel. GM is a clear sponsor
Stakeholders management plan includes specific proactive actions on AF.
Perception on AF is very positive for a sustainable business. Risks are
accepted but well managed. Fuel cost reduction and reliability are not
perceived as being in opposition.
Optimize AF daily. Manage the complexity of a fuel portfolio
as a project for improvement. Organize weekly meeting between plant
and IE, monthly meeting between BU, IE and Relation Director. Have Fuel
flexibility Technical Agenda in place on all topics. Contribute to Lafarge
AF knowledge and operating practices.
Continuous AF skill improvement plan exists, certified operators correctly
react to AF perturbations; LUCIE contributes to AF mastery, process
engineers and technicians are proactive about AF quality changes, action
is coordinated between BU, IE and TC
Objectives of an aggressive more economical FF matrix part of
personal objectives, agreed with FF Purchasing and
with appropriate control scheme
New FF options included in budget and personal objectives,
conditions defined with TC and transfer of existing Lafarge
know-how planned
BU FF committee (or Regional FF taskforce) reviews strategy at
SR time, PIP objectives and budget targets; regular meetings
(once per month) between BU and Regional FF Purchasing Director
Plant people have a mindset and competencies to switch to other FF on
short notice (almost instantaneously); plant has the technical capability
to do it without any significant impact on mastery of operations
Large flexibility in supply contracts (partial coverage of needs,
flexibility on volumes, …) and operational rapid decision process tested
Thorough review of global fuel cost during management
cycle process; good AF substitution ratio (between 15 and 50%); 100%
use of low quality FF on remaining fuel matrix
“Basic” supporting tools
Listed below are “Basic” supporting tools that will help you define appropriate actions to optimize Fuel Mix
Flexibility in your BU.
Exhaustive list of tools ("Basic" and "Advanced") and files are available on Cement Portal.

Link
Tool name Tool Description Key words with GR#
This tool assists the optimization of the cost of the fuel mix based on fuel Fuel mix
Fuel Flexibility tool 6
caracteristics, FF equipment (coal mill limitations) and process constraints optimization tool CO2
The main objectives of the Fuel Flexibility study are to:
- Define a relevant technical segmentation of alternate fuels, each segment
regrouping a set of fuels presenting similar problems of combustion,
dosage and handling.
- For each segment, gather and document the various experiences
Technical Agenda AF, specifications
(good or bad) throughout the division in this handbook plant experience, 1
“Fuel Flexibility“ - Develop a program of systematic burning optimization for the segments combustion
offering the best potentials in terms of business
(e.g. a rate of substitution > 10 %).
- Write recommendations and develop a Best Practice
for optimizing combustion of the various waste fuels.
- Consolidate experiences from recent burner trials.
Within this Technical Agenda, experts from all 5 Technical Centers have
worked together to consolidate existing experiences and make them easily
Technical Agenda accessible in this study. The study contains many good examples and detailed Guide, Build up
recommendations. A 'Quick Reference Guide' sums up all important levers 2, 6
“Build up control” control
for improvement. It can be used for a first orientation and help in case of
build up problems - or even better before problems appear when volatile
levels increase due to fuel or raw mix changes.
Technical Agenda The objective of the precalciner study was to assess the ability of new and Precalciner, petcoke,
“Precalciner” existing precalciners to burn petcoke and solid waste fuels. solid waste fuel, study
This TA gives a detailed description when a bypass should be installed,
the criteria how to define the correct sizing of a bypass and how to select
Technical agenda the best type of a bypass system. Advantages and disadvantages of Chloride bypass, 2, 6
“Chloride by pass” the systems are explained. Bypass dust handling can be very difficult; When? Design
many hints are given how to master this challenge. Also the question what
to do with the bypass dust is discussed.
Arborescence of
“Resource Recovery” The presentation provides information on the way to Database - Waste - 1, 2
find easily the “Key” documents AF - ARM
domain

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 20 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

 Link
Tool name Tool Description Key words with GR#

The synthesis, proposed for the main categories of AF stream, are divided
Synthesis per AF / Synthesis, AF,
into 3 or 4 parts. They can content market studies, feedbak from plants, market studies, 1
ARM stream specific regulation, as well as Good Practices and recommandations to use the feedback, regulation
AF/ARM.

This Policy and Guidelines have been completed after a process of work group
from 2003 to 2004.Special attention has been paid to the work of Cement
RR Policy & Sustainability Initiative (CSI) of the World Business Council for Sustainable Policy, Guidelines,
Development (WBCSD) as well as different initiatives of other organizations (e.g. 2, 3
Guidelines cement industry associations, international conventions…) treating this AF, ARM
subject.They offer plants general guidance in the responsible use and handling
of AF&ARM.

The model shops aim at helping BUs starting or increasing AF coprocessing.

They include inter alia:
• A basic flow-sheet to be used as reference for any new project
• An equipment list (for mechanical and electrical items) Model shops,
Waste Model shops • A cost breakdown for equipment, civils, structures, erection & commissioning. equipment list, AF, 1
The technical solutions are based on a benchmark of consolidated (as realised) coprocessing
installations by Lafarge Cement Division and competition. Given data are to be
also used as a tool for capital expenditure calculation during the opportunity
phase to outline technical requirements for a co-processing project.

Position paper The Position Paper on municipal sewage sludge gives recommendations on all Municipal sewage
on Municipal aspects of municipal sewage sludge (MSS) use from market considerations, sludge, Health & 1
sewage sludge health and safety, process impacts to handling installations. Safety, Position paper
Precalciner, petcoke,
The objective of the precalciner study was to assess the ability of new and
Waste Catalogue solid waste fuel,
existing precalciners to burn petcoke and solid waste fuels. study
The Waste catalogue proposes for many AF or ARM a short description of the
Technical agenda stream, with its usual source, the possible impact, the key characteristics for Catalogue, waste 1
“Chloride by pass” coprocessing it, feedback from plants and other documents linked to the stream streams, industry
when available
LQMS for Risk Risk Assessment,
This is a mandatory management quality Standard for Risk Assessment 3
Assessment tool, quality

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 21 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

 Link
Tool name Tool Description Key words with GR#

LQMS for Managing Risk Assessment,

Lafarge Quality Management Standard to manage non compliance tool, quality, 3
non Compliance non compliance

LQMS for Incoming Risk Assessment, tool,

Lafarge Quality Management Standard for Incoming Material Specifications. quality, AF & ARM 2, 3
Material Specification specifications control

Risk Assessment, tool,

LQTS Solid Fuels Lafarge Quality Technical Standard on Solid fuels quality, fossil fuel
control

Technical agenda The aim of this tool is to be a reference to help plants achieve and maintain a
safe condition of their coal grinding shops. Details are given on operating Safety, coal grinding,
“Safety in coal grind- conditions, target parameters and safety devices, with a special focus on fuel fuel characteristics 6, 7
ing shops” characteristics

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 22 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Good Practices
Listed below are existing “Good Practices” illustrating success stories that happened in BUs since the beginning
of Excellence. They will help you to understand how other BUs managed to reduce their costs and should prevent
you to reinvent the wheel.
You will also find attached 3 Good Practices as an illustration. The full set of Good Practices are available on the
Cement Portal.

Link
GP Name and description Key Words
with GR#
Korea:Development of Alternative Fuels with new streams Korea, Alternative Fuels 1, 2
Mexico: Development of AF utilization based on tires and Solid Shredded Waste Mexico, Tires, Solid Shredded Waste 1, 3
Alternative Fuels

Morocco:Use of Tires as AF in precalciners in a developing country Morocco, Tires, precalciner 3

Poland:Development of Alternative Fuels Poland, Alternative Fuels 1, 2, 3
River:Commissioning, ramp up and turnaround of
River, SSW sourcing, SSW pretreatment 1, 2, 3, 4
solid shredded waste sourcing, pretreatment and coprocessing operations
Spain:Significant increase of the use of Alternative Fuels Spain, Alternative Fuels 1, 4
Romania: Quick increase of AF thanks to a dedicated task force Romania, Task Force, Alternative Fuels 3
Saving production cost using sub-bituminous coal (Malaysia) Malaysia, Sub bituminous coal, Safety, volatile matters 5, 6, 7
Successful trial of Powder River Basin coal as a solid fuel source Powder River Basin coal, Alpena, US, safety,
5, 6, 7
(Alpena - Lakes & Seaway) high volatile matter
Successful trial of Powder River Basin coal as a solid fuel source
Powder River Basin coal, Sugar Creek, US, Safety 5, 6, 7
(Sugar Creek - River)
Partial substitution of current prime fuel wit high volatile coal (Beocin - Serbia) Beocin, Serbia, High volatile coal 5, 6, 7
Low quality coal burning trial ( Gongxian - Sichuan) China, trial, low quality coal 5, 6, 7
Fossil Fuels

High sulphur coal burning trial (Nanshan - Chongqing) China, trial, high sulfur coal 5, 6, 7
Increasing coke and AF (Sugar Creek - River) Sugar Creek, US, coke 5, 6, 7
Increasing coke (Saint-Constant - Lakes & Seaway) Saint Constant, US, coke 5, 6, 7
Reducing fuel bill by using 100% petcoke as fossil fuel (Trbovlje - Slovenia) Petcoke, Slovenia, step by step increase 5, 6, 7
Substitution of natural gas by anthracite on 5 wet kilns (Mykolaiv - Ukraine) Natural gas substitution, anthracite, wet kiln, Ukraine 5, 6, 7
Reducing fuel cost by increasing fossilfuel flexibility (Greece) Greece, fuel flexibility, high and low sulphur petcoke 8, 10

Reducing Fuel Cost by reducing the usage of light-up fuel (Le Teil - France) Light-up fuel, Le Teil, France 5, 6, 7

Utilization of Indonesian high moisture coal (Kanthan - Malaysia) Malaysia, high moisture coal 6, 7, 9

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 23 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Good Practices
BU: RIVER REGION (NORTH AMERICA)
EXPERIENCE: Commissioning, ramp up and
turnaround of solid shredded waste sourcing,
pre-treatment and coprocessing operations
TO KNOW MORE: Jarrod Huntley – Sugar Creek
plant manager, Mike Kralik, Sugar Creek Operations
Manager, or Ryan Hodder – Systech VP Sales and
Operations
OBJECTIVES:
Profitably ramp up a new AF solid shredded waste facility
for the Sugar Creek plant
BU/PROJECT CONTEXT:
Limited prior BU experience in solid shredded waste. On
the sourcing side: entering the waste market through di-
rect sales efforts of dedicated waste management organ-
ization (Systech, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lafarge).
On the pretreatment side: on-site shredding operations
integrated with the cement plant. Waste market context:
• Limited numbers of industries in the area.
• Competition of two big landfill players.
• Waste streams are not free of contaminants.
ACTION:
• Developed local sourcing from the ground up leveraging
direct sales efforts from internal waste management or-
ganization
F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y
• Learned the hard way to master pretreatment operations.
Now conducting weekly calls between all actors (sourcing,
on-site shredding and co-processing) to review new mate-
rial streams, discuss “troubled” material streams, update
on system improvements, costs and reliability issues in
order to ramp up while keeping shredding and co-process-
ing productivity and profitability under control
• Learned the hard way how to select and master fire-sup-
pression systems)
WHEN WAS THE LAUNCH?
March 2008
FIRST RESULTS:
• Profitability threshold reached after 5 months of opera-
tions (i.e 1,200 tons received and processed while first
months were very challenging and in the red)
NEXT STEPS:
• Continue to ramp up sourcing, pretreatment and co-pro-
cessing to exceed 30% overall AF substitution by 2010
KEY SUCCESS FACTORS IDENTIFIED:
• Need strong alignment between sourcing and co-process-
ing objectives (recognizing and understanding the differ-
ences in key success factors on both sides of the process)
• Need clear set of KPIs for sourcing, pre-treatment and
co-processing
• Performing business case review on each new material
stream before accepting it. Conduct time in motion stud-
ies to understand the performance and cost of shredding,
conveying, and feed rate of each candidate AF stream.
24 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
PROJECT ORGANIZATION:
• Include all levels of responsibility: sourcing as well as pre-treatment shredding supervisors and kiln operators.
• Sourcing done by Systech (wholly owned waste management subsidiary of Lafarge)
• Shredding integrated with cement plant

Current pre-treatment workshop

The primary shredder is a “cutter” kind, flow rate will be limited. Due to the fact that there is a secondary shredder at
SCK to reduce waste size to 2”, the primary shredder function is to reduce roughly the waste and smooth the flow for a
constant feeding of the secondary shredder. To fulfill this function, a “crusher”- type shredder might have been more
appropriate.

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 25 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Good Practices
BU: LAFARGE GREECE: MILAKI, HALKIS AND VOLOS
EXPERIENCE: Reducing Fuel Cost by increasing
fossil fuel flexibility (Coal, Low Sulphur Petcoke
and High Sulphur petcoke)
TO KNOW MORE: T. de Charette (BU), V. Katerelos
(MIL) K. Loakimidis (VOL)– S. Guruswamy, T. Durand,
Martin Bains (ETC)
OBJECTIVES:
• Reduce fuel cost by increasing the plant fuel flexibility:
using High and Low Sulphur Petcoke, hard Petcoke
(< 50 HGI) and coal, depending on prices and availability.
• Ensure impacts on process and quality are under control
while switching from one type of fuel to another one.
FIRST RESULTS:
The increase of the BU fuel flexibility was done in several
steps:
• 2007 / 2008: Partial substitution of Coal by Low Sul-
phur Petcoke
• 2009: 100% Petcoke with a mix of Low and High Suph-
fur Petcokes, first trials with high Sulphur and Low HGI
Petcokes.
• Beginning 2010: 100% High Sulphur Petcoke (Volos
100% High Sulphur and Low HGI - Milaki 60% High
Sulphur and Low HGI and 40% High Sulphur and High
HGI)
• Mid 2010: switch back to Coal for price and availability
reasons.
• For Halkis, the Low Sulphur Petcoke was switched to
High Sulphur Petcoke
• Savings reached in 2009: 7 M€

BU/PROJECT CONTEXT:
• In Greece, the Alternative Fuel program development
is blocked because of permitting issues. Consequently,
plants are fully impacted by solid fuel price increases. VOL % of petcoke on the fuel mix (in heat a value)
• It is then crucial the BU develops its fuel flexibility, in
order to optimize fuel cost.

WHEN WAS THE LAUNCH?

• End of 2007; further steps were carried out from 2008
to 2010.

Pet Coke Pet Coke Pet Coke

High sulfure High sulfure Low sulfure
Low HGI

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 26 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011


LIMITATIONS AND ACTIONS:
At each step, plants faced and solved the following main is-
sues:
• Petcoke fineness, particularly on the 200 micron sieve,
was a limitation in MIL and HAL: Adjustment of rotor
seal gap in coal mill separator.
• Operation with low O2 level at kiln inlet due to ID fan
limitation and main focus on production: ID fan replace-
ment in VOL, lower output in MIL and new SOPs to bet-
ter manage O2 level.
• Analyser reliability at kiln inlet due to excessive build
ups in the area: redesign of protection and further clean-
ing with air blasters in MIL and increased of mainte-
nance in VOL
• Build-up prevention: revise preheater cleaning manage-
ment in bottom cyclone stages in all plants and daily
monitoring of hot meal : Cl, SO3, volatilization level
• Adverse effect: NOx emission increased when using
High Nitrogen Petcoke in the calciner: as plants do not
have SNCR equipment, new purchasing specifications
were set to limit fuel nitrogen.
F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y
• HAL had to keep some Coal in the calciner due to inap-
propriate calciner design.
• Maintain a Sulphur Alkali ratio > 1, specially when
switching back to Coal, by addition of gypsum in the raw
mix.
NEXT STEPS:
• Continue to optimize the utilization of FFT, launched in
early 2010, as part of the new fossil fuel purchasing
process for the BU
• Continue to increase the plants fuel flexibility :
- In MIL, optimization of using 100% High Sulphur and
Low HGI Petcoke is still going on.
- In VOL, increase the fuel flexibility toward high risk fuel.
- In HAL, optimization for increasing % of High Sulphur
Petcoke is still on going.
KEY SUCCESS FACTORS IDENTIFIED:
• Knowledge sharing between plants, coordinated by BU
and TC
• Excellent Plant Team work (Production, Process, Quality
and Maintenance) in order to achieve 100% Petcoke
substitution
• Support provided by tools developed by the Cement Di-
vision: Technical Agenda, ‘’How to burn petcoke’’ pro-
cedure and Fuel Flexibility Tool
PROJECT ORGANIZATION:
• Managed by the BU and Plant organization, with the
assistance of TC:
- BU process network meeting with TC on this subject
- One week TC task force for the 3 plants
27 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
Good Practices
BU: ROMANIA
EXPERIENCE: AF Task Force
TO KNOW MORE: Sorin Bogdan (BU), Sorin Petrescu
(ETC)
OBJECTIVES:
• Improve the % AF using the existing AF installation
• Improve H&S linked with AF handling
• Identify potential areas and methods for process opti-
mization and cost reduction
• Create “plant ownership” for low CAPEX AF develop-
ment projects
• Develop synergy between Industrial Ecology (IE) and
co-processing (Plant, TC)
BU/PROJECT CONTEXT:
• Priority BU under X2010
• Prepare a step change in AF in anticipation of approval
for AF CAPEX plans
• A wide variety of wastes were being used in both
plants, with limited capital equipment (tyres, solid
shredded, haz, oil sludge, including 5% schlamm – a
low quality, high ash waste coal)
ACTION:
• Creation of a Task Force composed of Managers and Spe-
cialists from different entities – Plant team, BU (Indus-
trial Mgr, IE-BU), ETC (RR Mgr, Process, DdR), IE-Lyon
• Open discussion, brain-storming and analysis of existing
problems and issues (waste market & technical)
• Action plans in each plant including H&S, Process, AF
quality control, Investment
F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y
WHEN WAS THE LAUNCH?
• February 2009, Medgidia plant. Continued in October
2009 in Hoghiz plant
FIRST RESULTS:
• MED 08: 11% AF (5% schlamm) → MED 09: 49% AF
(32% schlamm)
• HOG 08: 15,5% AF (5% schlamm) → HOG 09: 45,5%
AF (31% schlamm)
• X2010 savings 09vs08 are 4,7 M€ for the BU. Total
gross savings 2009: 5,95 M€
NEXT STEPS
• Three meetings in 2010 in each plant (Medgidia, Hoghiz)
• Follow-up of action plans
• Optimization of new AF workshop commissioned end ‘09
KEY SUCCESS FACTORS IDENTIFIED:
• BU, plant and ETC commitment, motivation
• Presence of key decision-makers (BU, TC, IE Managers)
• Synergy and know-how brought by a mixed team of
experts and managers (BU, plant, IE Lyon, ETC)
PROJECT ORGANIZATION:
• Working group co-ordinated by ETC RR
• Follow-up of KPIs and action plan by plant visit three
times per year
28 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011
Key Performance Indicators list
Listed below are fundamental KPIs commonly agreed upon in Cement Division to monitor progress on Fuel Mix
Flexibility optimization.

Alternative Fuels definitions

KPI Name KPI unit KPI description/definition BRS Code Comments

LCS are generally based on spent co-products of petrochemical refinery that were
originally commercialized due to their capacity to dissolve or extract impurities Target : should
from chemical substances. After its initial application such liquids get collected include all liquids
for regeneration and reuse. SCL represent the residues from these second and containing one
Liquids % (GJ) third life cycles of fresh solvents. Main users are paint industy, chemical & CR119X
droplet of solvent
Containing tons pharmeceutical industry, adhesives or rubber manufacturers, metalworking and CR130X
as it implies the
Solvents (LCS) LMU/GJ cleaning services. AR627X
same type
The common names used for this kind of waste are: Refused or Recycled Liquid equipment
Fuel (RLF); Fuel Quality Waste (FQW), Combustibles Liquides de Substitution (CLS); (safety issue).
G3000 (Lafarge Ciments).

This category includes oils such as:

- the black oils which come from the evacuation of the thermal engines;
Liquids

% (GJ) CR118X
- the light oils from the gearing boxes;
Used Oil tons
- the oils used for the lubrication of the cutting instruments used in mechanical
CR129X N/A
LMU/GJ activities. AR626X
Pure vegetal oil should be reported under the category "Biomass".

% (GJ) CR157X
This category regroups liquid effluents from industrial processes, with very low or
Waste water tons CR136X N/A
no calorific value.
LMU/GJ AR637X

This category regroups liquid wastes, which are not classified as “Liquid Category to report
containing Solvents”, “used oils” nor as “wastewater”. It includes wastes all the rest of liq-
Other % (GJ) coming from petroleum refineries and petrol stations (e.g. sludge of CR121X uids that are not
pumpable tons hydrocarbons; refuse coming from storage installations of hydrocarbons; sludge CR132X
reported in the
liquids LMU/GJ from API settling tanks; emulsions) ; sludge originating from the ultra-filtration AR629X
of cutting products; kormul; wastes from the cosmetics industry (spoiled other 3 liquid
products, paints); inks from the lithographic industry, etc. categories.

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 29 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

 Alternative Fuels definitions

KPI Name KPI unit KPI description/definition BRS Code Comments

% (GJ) CR122X
Used tyres (whole tyres or shreds or chips); rejects from the tyres
Tyres tons
production; deformed tyres; off-spec. tyres.
CR133X N/A
LMU/GJ AR630X
Non-hazardous industrial waste, dried fraction of the household
% (GJ) CR123X
Solid Shredded tons
waste, plastics, paper, cardboard, synthetic textiles. The common
CR134X N/A
Waste (SSW) LMU/GJ
names used for this kind of waste are: Refused Derived Fuel (RDF);
AR631X
CDR (fuel derived from the household waste).

This category is for processed solid hazardous fuel consisting of a

blend of “difficult-to-handle” waste and absorbents. Typical input CR124X Target : all other pre-
% (GJ)
Impregnated tons
chiefly comprises pasty residues with difficult properties (paint
CR135X
treatment than the
Solid Fuel (ISF) LMU/GJ
sludge, glue, grease, ...) and containing also heterogeous solids ones used for liquid or
(resins...). Its common names are Resofuel, Combustibles Solides de AR632X shredding/sorting
Substitution (CSS), PASi (Polish designation).

The objective is to
avoid a wide name so
This category regroups all solid wastes that are not classified as that the reader is
Solids

% (GJ) “Tyres”, “Impregnated Solid fuel”, “Energetic ARM” nor as “Shredded CR125X forced to examine other
Other non tons Solid Waste”. CR144X categories before
pumpable solid LMU/GJ An example is the TDI tar, a residue whose origin is the isocyanate falling back to this
AR634X
toluenes manufacturing process. one. The majority of it
will be tar and other
solid chemicals.

The objective is to
report only the
energetic ARM as it is
a very specific stream.
This category includes the alternative raw materials (ARM) whose
Only the % will be
% (GJ) calorific value contributes to the plant's alternative fuels CR120X
reported as the
Energetic ARM tons substitution. CR131X
tonnage and gate fees
LMU/GJ A typical example is fly-ash. AR629X
will be reported in the
The quantity and the gate fee should be reported as ARM.
ARM reporting to avoid
double counting. The
GS will be calculated
as (cost ref fuel - 0)*

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 30 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

 Alternative Fuels definitions
KPI Name KPI unit KPI description/definition BRS Code Comments
% (GJ) The different types of meal, which regroup the definition “animal meal” are the fol- CR115X
Animal meal tons lowing: meat and bone meal, blood meal, feather meal, poultry meal, bone meal and CR126X N/A
LMU/GJ fish meal. The animal fat is classified as Biomass and not as Animal Meal. AR623X

This category includes the solids removed from municipal or industrial Target is all
Processed % (GJ) CR116X
Biomass

wastewater at wastewater treatment plants (WWTP). The final quality depends on residues from the
Sewage tons
both the nature of the wastewater and the process of the WWTP. It can be used in
CR127X
Waste Water treat-
Residue (PSR) LMU/GJ
cement kilns in the form of sludge, filter cakes, dried material or pellets. AR624X
ment process

This category includes all the wastes of organic matter which can be reused like CR117X
% (GJ)
the husks of different agricultural products (sunflower, rice, palm tree), the
Biomass tons
vegetal oils (lipix), the wood wastes, the animal fat, the mycellium, moinha, the
CR128X N/A
LMU/GJ AR625X
spoiled seeds (with or without pesticides), natural textiles.

Fossil Fuels definitions

KPI Name KPI unit KPI description/definition BRS Code Comments
Standard/high quality coal has a low heat value LHV > 22500 MJ/t (on an air dry
Standard / High % (GJ) basis) and volatile materials 12 < VM < 36 (on an air dry basis) and pyritic
CR029X
N/A
quality coal LMU/GJ
sulphur < 1%.
AR610X

By extension of
Includes low quality coal used in clinker manufacturing, whose low heat value
Low quality % (GJ) CR034X petcoke definitions,
Solids

LHV < 22500 MJ/t (on an air dry basis) or volatile materials VM < 12 or > 36
coal LMU/GJ
(on an air dry basis) or pyritic sulphur > 1% AR614X includes coal where
total S > 4%
Low / Medium % (GJ) CR229X
Pet coke types with sulphur content < 5.5% and index hardGrove HGI > 45 N/A
sulphur petcoke LMU/GJ AR759X
Low quality % (GJ) CR230X
Pet coke types with sulphur content > 5.5% or index hardGrove HGI < 45 N/A
petcoke LMU/GJ AR760X
% (GJ) CR031X Do not include
Fuel oil LMU/GJ
All type of fuel oil excluding high viscosity fuels
light oil
AR608X
Pitch, bottom
Others

High viscosity % (GJ) CR032X product. Do not

Fuel oil with high viscosity
fuel LMU/GJ AR611X include alternative
fuels of any viscosity
% (GJ) CR033X
Natural gas LMU/GJ
All type of natural gas N/A
AR612X

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 31 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

 Fuel Cost Definitions

KPI Name KPI unit KPI description/definition BRS Code Comments

Cost per LMU/GJ

Specific fuel expenses, site delivered, based on LHV, divided by total GigaJoules
ARxxxX
Applies to each
specific fuel of consumed specific fuel product (LMU/GJ

The average cost of fossil fuel mix is the average heat expenses of the different Average cost for
Cost FF LMU/GJ
fossil fuels used for clinker production, weighted by the % of heat consumed. all AF (LMU/GJ)

The average cost of alternative fuel mix is the average heat expenses of the
Average cost for
Solids

Cost AF LMU/GJ different alternative fuels used for clinker production, weighted by the % of heat AR613X
all FF (LMU/GJ)
consumed.

The average specific heat cost or cost of fuel mix is the average heat expense of
the different fuels used for clinker production, weighted by the % of heat
Average consumed. For plants generating their own power, fuels already included in the Average cost for all
specific LMU/GJ
power cost can not be taken into account. The costs of the in-house power plant
AR607X
fuels (LMU/GJ)
heat cost should only appear once in the clinker production cost: either as fuel and fuel
costs, or in the power cost.

 Fuels Mix Flexibility Excellence savings calculation

(available through CDP)
Fossil fuel mix Excellence savings
= (Avg FF cost €/GJ at ‘10 mix & at ’11 prices
Total fuel mix Excellence savings – Avg FF cost €/GJ at ‘11 mix & at '11 prices)
= (Avg Total Fuel cost €/GJ at '10 mix & at '11 prices x ‘11 GJ/t cons. x '11 T. clinker x % ‘10 Fossil fuel
– Avg Total Fuel cost €/GJ at '11 mix & at '11 prices)
x '11 GJ/t cons. x '11 T. clinker +
Alternative fuel mix Excellence savings
= Total fuel mix impact – Fossil fuel mix impact

Note: 2010 and 2011 years mentioned in above formulas are to be used for Excellence 2011 savings. In more general terms, please consider them as respectively reference
year and analyzed year

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 32 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Lafarge network supporting
Fuels Mix Flexibility
If you need support or further details on how to optimize Fuel Mix Flexibility, do not hesitate to contact
the relevant person as mentioned below

Name Function Function description Location

Challenge and support BUs to reach Excellence
G. Roth Variable Costs Lever Leader Lyon, DPC
savings, with a focus on priority BUs
Industrial Ecology organization
O. Mérindol President, Lafarge Industrial Ecology International Lyon, IE
Industrial Ecology Development & Performance
F. Bourgarel Lyon, IE
Director
N Rousset IE Support Team, Engineering expert Support AF projects - Design & Engineering Lyon, IE
R Mc Quillan IE Support Team, Alternative Fuels specialist Support Sourcing Africa and AF biomass project Lyon, IE
IE Support Team, Knowledge Management
S Fourage Support AF Knowledge Management Lyon, IE
Engineer
A Lopez IE VP South Europe Madrid, IE
AC Rousseau IE VP France Saint-Cloud, IE
D Cheney IE VP North & Central America Dayton, Systech
D Lemarchand IE VP CE/ CIS & Brasil Paris, IE
Manage AF& ARM sourcing for his region
F Vallat IE VP China/ Korea/ Japan Beijin, IE
P Cech IE VP South West Asia Kuala Lumpur, IE
P Delcroix IE VP Middle East/ Africa Cairo, IE
R Hodder VP Sapphire (UK) Cauldon, Sapphire
Fossil Fuel Purchasing organization
J. Lauvin VP, Fuels Risk Management Manage overall Fossil Fuel sourcing Paris, Purchasing
Director, Risk Management, Liquid Fuels and Manage Liquid Fuels and Natural Gas
L. Jeanneney Paris, Purchasing
Natural Gas sourcing Process
P. Peenaert VP, Solid Fuels Manage Solid Fuels sourcing Paris, Purchasing
B. Kren Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - Petcoke Manage Petcoke sourcing worlwide Paris, Purchasing
Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - Manage freight and supply programs for Western
P. Musonda Paris, Purchasing
Freight & Planning - W.Europe / LatAm / N.Africa Europe, Latin America and North Africa regions

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 33 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

Name Function Function description Location
Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - Manage Solid Fossil Fuel sourcing for Sub-
G. Varghese Cairo, Purchasing
Sub-Sah. Africa / Middle East Saharan Africa and Middle East regions
Kuala Lumpur,
I. Tjondrohihardjo Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - Asia
Manage Solid Fossil Fuel sourcing Purchasing
for East Asia and South West Asia regions Kuala Lumpur,
Hyung-Woo Lee Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - Asia Purchasing
Manage Solid Fossil Fuel sourcing
Mirjana Milkic Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - CE / CIS Beocin, Purchasing
for Central Europe / CIS region
Manage Solid Fossil Fuel sourcing
P. Panzarino Strategic Sourcing Director for Fossil Fuels - N. Am Denver, Purchasing
for North America region
Fuel Processing Integrators network
Ensure development of the Fuel Processing
P. Ukrainetz Fuel Processing Integrator's Network Leader Integrators' network and foster know-how Montreal, DPC
transfer
Develop AF programs with BU
S. Petrescu Europe Alternative Fuel Manager Vienna, ETC
in coordination with IE
Develop Low Grade FF with BU
L. Charreton Europe - Responsible Fossil Fuels Vienna, ETC
in coordination with Purchasing
M. Adamek Africa and Middle East - Fuel Processing Integrator Cairo, CTC

R. Sweigart Asia - Fuel Processing Integrator Kuala Lumpur, ATC

Develop AF and Low Grade FF programs
with BU in coordination with IE and
N. Khan LNA Fuel Processing Integrator Purchasing Montreal, CTS

C Patel LatAm Fuel Processing Integrator Atlanta, CTS

F U E L M I X F L E X I B I L I T Y 34 EXCELLENCE KIT • MAY 2011

FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY