Rapidly rising cement imports, especially from countries outside the European Union, are posing a growing threat to Polish producers. Their competitiveness is also being undermined by high energy and fuel prices, as well as the cost of purchasing CO2 emission allowances under the EU ETS system. Experts argue that the cement sector is crucial for strategic construction and defense-related investments that are expected to intensify in the coming years. That is why they are calling for a range of measures, including an increase in free CO2 allowances and tighter control over imports.
In 2025, cement imports into Poland reached a record 1.73 million tonnes, accounting for more than 10% of the country’s domestic cement production. According to forecasts by the Polish Cement Association, imports are expected to rise to around 2 million tonnes this year. The sharpest increase is coming from Ukraine. In 2021, cement imports from Ukraine totaled 53,000 tonnes, while this year they are projected to exceed 1 million tonnes. The growing inflow of foreign cement is contributing to a decline in domestic output, which may fall by 2% year on year to 16.8 million tonnes in 2026. These forecasts may still be revised depending on how the ongoing conflict in the Middle East affects fuel prices, transport costs, and the need to revalue contracts.
“To improve the competitiveness of the cement sector, we need several mechanisms. The European Union’s implementation of a mechanism that levels the playing field between domestic producers and those outside the EU, namely the carbon border tax, also known as CBAM, is a good initiative,” says Maciej Sypek, CEO of Holcim Polska and a member of the Polish Cement Association, in an interview with Newseria.
The purpose of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism is to prevent so-called carbon leakage to countries with less stringent climate and environmental policies. This occurs when companies relocate production to places where decarbonization requirements are less demanding. CBAM covers cement, iron and steel, aluminum, fertilizers, electricity, and hydrogen.
“For CBAM to genuinely improve competitiveness, it must be watertight. This means that materials and products, in our case cement imported into Poland from outside the European Union, should be subject to proper controls. Its emissions intensity should be verified, and that emissions profile depends on the composition of the cement,” Maciej Sypek argues.
As experts from the Polish Cement Association explain, the current classification of cement under CBAM is not based on clinker content, even though this has a direct impact on the product’s carbon footprint and the related CO2 charge. This means that several issues still need to be addressed, including the review of exemptions for third countries, clarification of rules on determining a product’s country of origin, and verification of emissions values declared by producers.
“It is very important that importers covered by these charges actually pay the carbon tax. The mechanism works in such a way that it is imposed after a year of activity. Those importing this year will pay the tax in the following year,” explains the CEO of Holcim Polska.
EU importers are required to declare emissions associated with imported goods and surrender the corresponding number of certificates each year. If they can prove that a carbon price has already been paid during the production of those imported goods, the relevant amount may be deducted.
“The second mechanism worth implementing is the state aid framework for energy-intensive industries developed by the European Commission. It is based on offering support to energy-intensive companies in the form of relief or a reduced electricity price. The savings generated in this way are then meant to be reinvested in technologies that support a decarbonized industry,” Maciej Sypek emphasizes.
The European Commission has laid out the CISAF guidelines, the Clean Industrial State Aid Framework, which allow member states to design and implement electricity price stabilization schemes for energy-intensive sectors at a level of €50/MWh. To qualify for such support, companies must allocate at least 50% of the aid received to investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency improvements, or greater flexibility in electricity consumption.
“The cement sector has been firmly moving down the path of decarbonization for many years. Significant investments have already been made, and even larger ones still lie ahead. But in the current geopolitical environment, we should consider buying time so that we can prioritize investments linked to national defense and the country’s energy security,” says Mariusz Adamek, CEO of Cement Ożarów.
Over the next 10 years, around 3 million tonnes of cement will be needed for key projects, including the Eastern Shield defense initiative, the construction of shelters, bunkers, and civil protection facilities. Demand for concrete, which uses cement as a core ingredient, for Poland’s planned nuclear power plant is estimated at more than 1 million cubic meters. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2028.
“As an industry, we would expect the phase-out period for free CO2 allocations to be extended. By 2030, we will lose around half of our allocations, and by 2034 we will effectively have to be close to zero-emission. As for the benchmark used in calculating free ETS allocations, we want it to be set at 690 kilograms per tonne of clinker,” stresses Mariusz Adamek.
Under current regulations, the number of free CO2 allowances granted to cement producers is calculated on the basis of so-called benchmarks. Since these benchmarks are lower than actual emissions, they directly reduce the competitiveness of the industry. The system assumes a gradual phase-out of free allowances by 2034.
“We are facing an enormous challenge related to carbon capture and storage. Full government regulations are still missing, and they would provide the necessary momentum to carry out such investments using our own resources. It would also be beneficial if the funds generated through the ETS program were used to feed a decarbonization fund for the cement sector,” adds the CEO of Cement Ożarów.
Revenues from the EU ETS system flow mainly into national budgets. Member states are required to use them to support investments in renewable energy, improvements in energy efficiency, and low-emission technologies that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and, as a result, lower the carbon costs borne by companies.
According to experts from the Polish Cement Association, the cost of purchasing CO2 emission allowances under EU ETS is one of the key factors undermining the competitiveness of Poland’s cement industry. Prices have already exceeded €100 per tonne of CO2, and forecasts for 2030 suggest they could rise further to between €123 and €150.
The industry also points to another serious challenge: high electricity prices. Data from the Forum of Electricity and Gas Consumers, cited by the Polish Cement Association, show that electricity prices in Poland under forward contracts for 2027–2028 are around €100/MWh. In Spain and France, they range between €50 and €53/MWh, while in Germany they are around €80/MWh. According to European Commission forecasts, wholesale electricity prices for industry between 2030 and 2050 could reach as much as €130/MWh.
“2026 will be an exceptional year for the construction market. It will be a period of accumulated infrastructure investments supported under the National Recovery Plan. On the other hand, we are also facing a black swan in the form of rising energy costs and operating expenses. This is a risk factor that the market was not expecting just a few months ago. As a result, it will certainly weigh negatively on the opportunities linked to the development of the construction market,” says Szymon Jungiewicz, chief analyst for the construction market at PMR Market Experts.
PMR Market Experts has prepared a sensitivity simulation for the Polish economy, focusing on the impact of the conflict in the Middle East and the uncertainty it is creating, including higher fuel prices. In an “oil shock” scenario, inflation could rise to 4.9% in 2026 and to 6.2% in 2027, compared with the baseline forecast of 3%.
