the actual product kaocem, page-8

abib, edouardo,

I agree with your statements.

A metakaolin based concrete is apparently a significantly better product, quite apart from the CO2 benefits.

My understanding is that it cannot be used as an alternative to structural concrete because of insufficient testing/standardization.

However there is nothing really favouring MSC in this. There are other suppliers of metakaolin cement replacements. MSC is just one. I suspect the "patent" is just a marketing tool. This stuff has been in the research labs for decades, but it is only since the interest in CO2 reduction that it may become marketable.

I see it as more of an issue of whether MSC can compete in price for selling kaolin. That is where the real issue is. The history is not good for MSC for this issue. If MSC could not compete in selling more expensive higher quality kaolin, then how is it going to compete in the lower quality lower priced market for the kaolin required for metakaolin cement?