National Ready Mix Concrete’s investment in CNG fleet to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

National Ready Mix Concrete Co significantly reduces carbon in their concrete production equation by transitioning 120 vehicles (mixers, dumps and tankers) from diesel to compressed renewable natural gas (CNG/RNG) as its main fleet fuel.

This reduces carbon from an add of 40kg CO2-eq/yd for diesel fuel down to a minus of 80 CO2/yd for CNG.

“There is no other low- or zero-emission technology available that could enable a heavy-duty fleet like ours, running routes from Southern to Central California, to offset the level of greenhouse gas emissions reductions we’ve achieved.”, say NRMCC President Steve Lode.

NRMCC is the first Los Angeles market ready mixed concrete operator to implement a set of digital applications to streamline EPD (environmental product declaration) preparation through a partnership with Climate Earth. NRMCC’s enterprise library is approaching 6,000 EPDs.

“We can now generate immediate, precise environmental and performance matrix for complex concrete mix designs any time in the project cycle,” says NRMCC Director of Technical services, John Halverson.

Click here to read more about NRMCC’s investment in their new fleet of RNG vehicles and how it is having a significant impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Sounds good for now, until Electric Vehicles can we used! Could you please confirm the natural gas is obtained from responsible sources that have no methane leaks? And/Or, is this “renewable” natural gas coming from farms/landfills etc? Also, are there no emissions created as the fuel is burned during use? Thank you!

1 Like

Sara, If I’m reading the report correctly, they are taking credit for burning methane emissions from dairy farms, landfills, and waste water plants. The “+40 to a -80” gives me a bit of pause, because in my head, I typically only think of a negative number being something that takes carbon out of the atmosphere (direct sequestration). However, if they are burning methane that would normally be emitted, then this could technically result in a net reduction that is negative depending on how you set your boundaries. As for the emissions, my understanding is that burning methane primarily results in CO2 and H20 which I’ve heard is less impactful than releasing methane directly into the atmosphere.

My gut feeling is that this is a bit of a stop gap system - imperfect, but at least a more efficient use of emissions then not using it. As you mentioned, leaks to the system would still result in direct methane emissions, which has large impacts. And by building a methane market, we’re only increasing the use of a fuel that continues to be leaked.

thank you very much Justin! That makes sense. At least they are “converting” the methane into CO2. But maybe there are leaks. Also, they are investing in a system that essentially is still releasing GHG.