Denying Cemex extension will increase carbon output, construction costs

With regard to denying extension of the Cemex mine. Where to begin?

Cement is a heavy and low value material. The closest operator to any population center has a huge competitive advantage, because it’s very expensive to transport. So it’s perplexing that the carbon output of this plant was cited as a reason to deny extension. Cement has no substitutes and is critical in construction, as well as in the installation of, say, wind turbines and solar farms. For any of these projects in Boulder County, where will the cement aggregate be obtained going forward? The answer is, from somewhere further away, requiring more transportation and thus more carbon generation.

It’ll furthermore be yet another increase to building costs in Boulder County. This on top of sky high land costs, driven largely by the crowding out of private land by open space over the decades, as well as tight building restrictions limiting development.

As a resident who lives a few miles east of the site, I’ve always been perplexed by the relatively moribund nature of the facility. There are no discernible traffic disruptions, and it’s in a sparsely populated area. For a couple years, in fact, I wondered whether the facility was even operating. The article cited “community” opposition to the long-tenured site. Another word is NIMBYISM.

As to whether Cemex will keep the plant open? There’s no question that their proximity to the mine resulted in reduced costs of production (and thus lower energy usage), which meant lower prices for consumers. I’d be surprised if it stays open after they lose their source of feedstock, and along with the plant will go a number of unique and differentiated jobs, in a county which is quite homogenous.

— Brian Harper, Longmont