Connect with us

Economy & Market

Building up Capacity

Published

on

Shares

2015 will be another year of more consolidation in the cement industry where quality players may take over smaller inefficient and high cost players with weak cash flows.
As per reports, the results of the government?s initiatives have already started reflecting in the growth of the cement industry to 8.5 per cent in the first eight months of the current fiscal. If this momentum gains further, the cement demand will again pick up a double digit growth. Even with 10 per cent growth, this will accelerate the cement production by over two-and-a-half times, to 665 MT in the next ten years, i.e. by 2024, which would require a cement capacity of around 750 MT at 90 per cent utilization. This will call for an additional investment of about Rs 2.5-3 lakh crore for creating another 390 MT of cement capacity. Concretisation of roads, dedicated freight corridors, development of smart cities, metro rail projects, are some of the major thrust areas of the government, which will drive cement consumption in coming year. At the same time, as per industry sources, 2015 will be another year of more consolidation in the cement industry where quality players may take over smaller inefficient and high cost players with weak cash flows. Impact of consolidation According to Manoj Misra, Chairman and Managing Director, Cement Corporation of India, large cement players in India will use the acquisition route to enhance capacity and market share; and in the long term smaller plants will not be able survive. Says Misra, ?The top five players will hold 70-80 per cent of capacities and market in the next decade; there is expectation that more global players would come into India as they would like to get a foothold in the market as the demand will propel in the emerging economies.?

Says Prashant K Tripathy, Group Head – Manufacturing, Dalmia Cement Bharat, Cement industry has experienced more change in the last decade than its entire history. With the demand in the cement sector poised to grow over 9 per cent in the next two years, increase in prices is a huge concern. Thus, consolidation helps in stabilizing prices? Tripathy adds,?There has been and increased focus on infrastructure and development with growth in demand in housing and industrial sector, with growing Indian GDP. Entry of foreign cement players resulted in the consolidation of the fragmented industry. Large number of mergers and acquisitions were witnessed in recent years.?

Explaining to what extent this is going to alter the market structure Misra adds, ?To better serve their markets, companies will combine their operations and streamline their offerings. Efficiencies of scale allow businesses to reduce costs and prices and ease decisions for potential investors. As a business segment ages and matures, numerous companies may find themselves offering the same products, at roughly the same price and quality, to the same market. The competition drags down sales and profits, while businesses struggle to innovate and remain viable. The answer in this situation is market consolidation: the takeover of the small by the strong through outright purchase or merger. By merging or acquiring, combining operations, closing factories and reassigning workers, a firm can reduce costs and improve profit margins. In addition, cutting redundant administrative workers and combining sales and marketing divisions can significantly lessen labour and head-office costs. This action reduces competition and tends to boost prices. That?s not so good for the consumer, perhaps, but it?s a natural cyclical development in the business realm.? He further adds, ?Global giants like Holcim and Lafarge have joined hands and their estimated capacity in Indian market is now at 65 million tonne. Indian giant Aditya Birla is also in the mode of acquiring and merging with small units throughout India to maintain its leadership position. AB group has also expanded its capacity to 59 million tonne, but has plans to enhance further to maintain its leadership. Hence the cement industry will be controlled mainly by two giants. The market will be dictated by the two groups in matter of pricing and supplies.?

Speaking about the positive impact of consolidation in the cement industry, Arvind Pathak, Chief Executive Officer, Reliance Cement Company says, ?Consolidation being witnessed in the industry is good and is in the right direction. Serious players increasing stakes in terms of manufacturing capacity is a good indicator of long term growth and stability for cement markets. Large players given the available financial headroom and scale of operation are expected push the industry towards operational efficiency and better service quality to the consumers. Consolidation will ensure not only healthy competition but also high level of quality and service assurance to the end consumers.? He adds, ?The Indian cement markets are poised for unprecedented growth on the back of both infrastructure as well as growth in the housing sector. This can be witnessed in the structural changes in the Indian economy being proposed by the present government. Reliance Cement is gearing up accordingly to cater to the upcoming demand and our capacity addition plans are in line with the expected demand in the coming years.?

Says Noopur Jain, Assistant Vice President, ICRA, ?Of late, there has been some activity of acquisition in cement industry. Indian cement industry is still fragmented and can see some consolidation of assets to synergise. But I have not seen any exits by most companies except those who are facing liquidity crunch. More than consolidation, the more important input in pricing will be the demand-supply because although some sort of consolidation is happening by way of acquisitions, it is not changing the structure of the industry.?

Capacity utilization
After expanding at an average rate of 8-10 per cent in the last three decades, the cement growth in 2013-14 had dwindled to 3 per cent, the lowest in the last 20 years, due to slowdown in the economy and deceleration in the construction activities. With cement production at 256 MT against a capacity at 360 MT, the cement industry was saddled with an idle cement capacity of over 100 MT valuing a colossal dead investment of over Rs 70,000 crore at today?s cost. What will be the impact of lower capacity utilization on the industry as a whole? Says Tripathy, ?We are expecting that the capacity utilization in 2015-16 will be better than current financial year, giving a positive impact on the company bottom-line. The advantages of consolidation have been witnessed for over a decade now since sustained merger and acquisition activity in cement has led to much improvement in profitability and valuations in the sector.? He adds, ?During 2007-12, the cement capacity in India almost doubled to around 300 MTPA. Our capacity utilisation has adequate margin in the Tamil Nadu and AP plants therefore we may be able to fulfill the market demands. Our cement plants in India have grown manifolds in terms of capacity; we are also acquiring some new plants to increase the volume and expand further.?

?While it may be correct when we say the cement industry is projected to operate at 70-75 per cent in the near terms – a closer look at the expected regional performance is required. The central region where Reliance Cement is currently present is expected to operate far better than other areas. Our expectation is that the capacity utilisation in this region would be close to 90 per cent if not more and hence we foresee a positive impact on our performance,? says Pathak. He adds, ?We have current capacity of 5.8 MTPA, operating from four locations – Maihar (Satna), Kundanganj (Raebareilly), Butibori (Nagpur) and Durgapur. We have another 10 MTPA in the immediate pipeline. Capital expenditure is expected to be in the range of Rs 7,000-7,500 crore.?

Cement industry was at its all-time low in FY 14 with a marginal growth by 3 per cent and there was an excess capacity. Now we see a reversal in that trend as the demand has grown. In the first eight months of the current FY, the demand has grown by 8.5 per cent as compared to 3 per cent last fiscal. Says Jain, ?In the previous fiscal, since there was excess capacity existing, there was a slowdown in fresh capacity additions. With the demand is growing now, we expect the excess capacity to be absorbed by the industry in the next 2-3 years and expect the utilization level to improve in medium term from around 72 per cent to 78 per cent by 2017. As per industry trends, the capacity addition in the next two years is going to be in the range of 20-25 million tonne per annum. However, some of these projects will be running with delays and may face execution challenges or they may come up in the middle of the year with the effective capacity addition. I think the demand improvement will be the key for the overall utilization level to improve in future. Also the stable government at the Centre has taken steps to speed up the execution of various projects. All these are going to materialise in the coming 2-3 years.?

Jain adds, ?Although the utilisation level will improve from the current level of 70-72 per cent to 78-80 per cent in a couple of years, it will be still lower than what we saw in the peak of FY 06 and FY07 when India was witnessing a very high growth rate. That time the utilisation level touched 90s and even 100 per cent.? According to him even though there is a surplus capacity in the system, most of the cement players will keep announcing new capacities. This is because many existing plants are very old and they won?t be so efficient. So the players will set up new facilities to increase operational efficiency.

Speaking about the demand scenario, Misra says, ?The metro rail projects in Mumbai, Bangalore and Hyderabad and the expansion phase in Delhi drive cement demand in this segment. Concrete roads and national highways, rural linkage roads, development of smart cities, hydel dams, river canal lining and linkage and many other infrastructure related. Airports modernization across major cities will also expand demand. Huge demand of cement is expected to emerge as the above projects are expected to roll out in the entire country. With the huge demand coming, greenfield and brownfield units are going to be set up and by 2020 it is expected that the installed capacity in India would be 500 million tonne.? Misra adds, ?With CCI and its present operating units at Tandur in Telangana, Rajban in Himachal Pradesh (nearer to Uttarakand) and Bokajan in Assam will have the opportunity to maximize its capacity utilisation. We are in process of setting up a new clinkerisation unit at Bokajan and close circuiting at Tandur and Rajban to enhance the existing capacity.?

Challenges
Speaking about the challenges Jain says, ?On the demand side, there needs to be a big push from the government sector to speed up investment in infrastructure and housing, which is happening but it is to be seen whether this is happening on a sustainable basis. Major challenge faced by the industry is the cost. Major cost components are the freight cost, power and fuel cost and raw material cost. The raw material cost is increasing at a steady level, but the freight cost increase is steep due to increase in diesel prices and subsequent raise of freight rates by Indian Railways and other transport and logistics firms. This is happening at a time when the industry is already facing the slowdown.?

Misra is on the same page. He says, ?The rising cost of production attributed mainly due to high price of energy and coal is adversely affecting the industry. Also there is at time the issue of availability of railway rakes. Transportation at times by road and especially for loose cement movement is a challenge in front of the industry. Another aspect is the taxes which forms about 60 per cent of the price of cement (taxes/duties direct and indirect). There is a pressing need to rationalise the tax structure.?

Pathak had this to say. ?It may be observed that while the manufacturing facilities are concentrated around the limestone belts these facilities are catering to the entire nation. Cost of logistics account for over 35 to 40 per cent of the total delivered cost of cement to the end consumers. Innovations have taken place in terms of adoption of split grinding/blending facilities bringing down the cost of logistics however; availability of railway infrastructure (rakes, reach and unloading facilities), roads and fragmented transportation service providers pose a major challenge to the industry to increase efficiency in terms of total delivered cost of cement. We as an industry have to start looking at sea route and inland water ways to effectively and efficiently cater to the upcoming demand and start investing in developing these infrastructures. Says Tripathy ?Our current capacity is 20 million tonne of cement including the group plants in Odisha and newly acquired Bokaro grinding unit. We have existing plants in Tamil Nadu three lines, AP one kiln, Meghalaya one kiln and a grinding unit in Assam near Guwahati. We are currently executing two green field projects, one near Belgaum in Karnataka and the other one in Assam. These two projects will be commissioned in year 2015 and will add another 3 million tonne to our current capacity making a grand total of 23 million tonne per annum.?

However, the long term growth seems to be intact. The government?s continuous thrust on and commit?ment for, affordable housing, construction of cement concrete roads, creation of 100 smart cities, world-class infrastructure development, with emphasis on development of freight corridors and ports connectivity should give a definite fillip to the creation of more demand for cement in the country.

Agith G Antony with input from Sudheer Vathiyath

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Concrete

Protect Your Margins

Published

on

By

Shares

In a research-backed article, Dr SB Hegde examines why carbon-adjusted profitability and LC3 will decide the next set of winners in cement manufacturing.

The Indian cement industry has achieved world-class operational efficiency through lower specific energy consumption, high plant utilisation and a reduced average clinker factor of approximately 67.5 per cent. These traditional measures of operational excellence remain essential. However, they are no longer sufficient. Carbon now carries a measurable financial cost under India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS) and under European carbon markets. Future leadership will be defined by carbon-adjusted profitability, the ability to generate strong returns while systematically lowering the carbon intensity of every ton sold.
Limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) offers a practical, scalable pathway to achieve this dual objective. By replacing up to 50 per cent of clinker with calcined clay and limestone, LC3 can reduce CO2 emissions by 30–40 per cent while delivering comparable or superior durability performance.
This article examines the technical foundations of LC3, European industrial practices, the emerging Indian carbon market and a concrete roadmap for Indian companies to embed carbon-adjusted metrics and LC3 into daily operations, incentives and commercial strategy.

Limits of traditional operational excellence
For many years, plant performance has been judged primarily by five indicators: specific heat consumption, specific power consumption, kiln and mill utilisation, clinker factor and overall equipment effectiveness. These metrics drove continuous improvement and helped the industry reduce energy use and increase the share of blended cement. Three structural changes have rendered them incomplete as sole measures of success.
First, carbon now carries a real or opportunity cost. Plants that improve volume or lower cash cost while raising or stagnating emissions intensity create a hidden liability that will surface as CCTS trading matures and as green procurement expands.
Second, lower-carbon products such as LC3 and high-performance blended cements are creating differentiated market segments. Customers in infrastructure, real estate and export-oriented construction are beginning to specify embodied-carbon limits.
Third, investors and lenders increasingly treat carbon intensity as a financial risk factor. Traditional KPIs can mask the divergence between short-term cash profit and long-term carbon-adjusted value.

What is carbon-adjusted profitability?
Carbon-adjusted profitability evaluates normal profit after explicit adjustment for carbon performance. A practical expression is:
Carbon-Adjusted EBITDA = Conventional EBITDA – Carbon Cost + Green Premium Income
Carbon cost may be an internal carbon price, the actual cost of purchasing Carbon Credit Certificates under CCTS, or the opportunity cost of high emissions relative to peers. Green premium income arises when customers pay more for verified lower-carbon cement or when the company sells surplus credits. Tracking both conventional and carbon-adjusted profit side-by-side gives management a clearer picture of value creation under evolving market rules.

Table 1. Traditional KPIs versus Carbon-Adjusted Leadership Metrics
Traditional Focus New Leadership Metric Why It Matters
Specific energy consumption Emissions intensity (kg CO2/t cement) Directly linked to future CCTS and CBAM costs
Kiln utilisation Carbon-adjusted contribution margin Reveals true value of incremental volume
Clinker factor Share of lower-carbon products sold (incl. LC3) Measures commercial success of the transition
Power cost per tonne Effective carbon cost per tonne sold Expose hidden liabilities
Absolute EBITDA Carbon-adjusted EBITDA + green premium Aligning profit with future market reality

LC3: Technical foundations and performance advantages
LC3 is a ternary blended cement that typically combines approximately 50 per cent clinker, 30 per cent calcined clay, 15 per cent limestone and 5 per cent gypsum (the classic LC3-50 formulation). The decisive technical advantage is that clay is calcined at 700–850 °C, far below the 1,450 °C required for clinker production. This lower temperature, together with the substantial reduction in clinker content, delivers CO2 reductions of 30–40 per cent relative to ordinary Portland cement (OPC).
Chemistry is synergistic. Calcined kaolinitic clay (metakaolin) reacts with calcium hydroxide from clinker hydration and with limestone to form additional C-A-S-H gel and carboaluminate phases. These phases densify the microstructure, reduce porosity and improve durability.
Field experience shows superior resistance to chloride ingress, sulphate attack and alkali–silica reaction. Early-age strength can match OPC with high-reactivity clays; later-age strengths routinely meet 42.5 and 52.5 grade requirements.
Importantly, LC3 does not require high-purity kaolin. Clays with 40 per cent or even lower kaolinite content can be activated successfully, expanding raw-material availability across India. Calcination can use adapted rotary kilns or dedicated flash calciners, making the technology compatible with existing plant infrastructure and far less capital-intensive than carbon capture.
Economic analyses show that LC3 can be produced at equal or lower cost than OPC in many locations because of reduced energy demand and cheaper clay. Life-cycle assessments consistently report 30–40 per cent lower embodied CO2 per tonne of cement.
Table 2. Comparative profile: OPC versus LC3-50
Parameter OPC LC3-50
Typical clinker content ~95 per cent ~50 per cent
CO2 emissions (relative) Baseline (≈0.85 t CO2/t cement process + fuel) 30–40 per cent lower
Clay calcination temperature Not applicable 700–850 °C
Key hydration products C-S-H, portlandite, ettringite C-A-S-H + carboaluminates
Chloride & sulphate resistance Good Superior
Production cost potential Baseline Equal or lower in most locations
Infrastructure compatibility Existing High (minor adaptations)

In India, commercial adoption has begun in earnest. JK Cement commenced the first commercial production of LC3 in the Indian subcontinent at its Mangrol plant in Rajasthan in 2025 under BIS standard IS 18189.
By early 2026, approximately 2,000 tonnes had been produced and sold, avoiding an estimated 500 tonnes of CO2. JK Lakshmi Cement followed with commercial launch of its Green PRO LC3 grade from the Jaykaypuram plant. As of mid-2026, two producers are supplying LC3 to the market. The first large-scale infrastructure application is the Noida International Airport (Jewar), where LC3 was used in the runway and a building complex, demonstrating full constructability and performance under demanding conditions. These early volumes are still small relative to national cement demand, but they mark the critical transition from pilot to commercial reality. Companies that scale capacity now will be positioned to capture both CCTS credits and emerging green-procurement demand.

Why the shift is accelerating
According to the World Bank’s State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2026, direct carbon pricing now covers nearly 30 per cent of global greenhouse-gas emissions and generated more than US$107 billion in public revenue in 2025. The average global carbon price stands at approximately US$21 per tonne, although regional prices vary widely.
In Europe, the EU ETS price has traded near €80–85 per tonen in mid-2026. Free allocation for cement is being withdrawn in parallel with CBAM. European producers therefore face a clear signal: every tonne of avoided CO2 improves both compliance and competitiveness. Holcim has scaled calcined-clay production, including Europe’s first dedicated line at Saint-Pierre-la-Cour (France) and a second line in the Czech Republic (2026). Heidelberg Materials, Cementir (FUTURECEM) and others have commercialised low-clinker calcined-clay blends across multiple markets, showing that carbon-adjusted profitability is already reshaping capital allocation in the world’s most mature carbon market.India’s CCTS is now operational. Binding emission intensity targets apply to 186 cement facilities for FY 2025–26 and FY 2026–27. Average required reductions for integrated plants are modest (around 2.7 per cent by FY 2027), yet the direction is clear.
Trading of Carbon Credit Certificates is expected in the second half of 2026, with early prices likely in the `800–1,500 per tonne range. Plants that outperform targets can sell credits; those that underperform must buy them or face compensation. Cement is well positioned to be a net supplier of credits if clinker factor continues to fall through LC3 and other low-clinker systems.

Way forward for India
India starts from a strong baseline, world-class energy efficiency and a clinker factor already lower than the global average. The next competitive frontier is the deliberate reduction of process emissions through clinker substitution at scale. LC3 is uniquely suited to Indian conditions because suitable clays are widely distributed, the technology fits existing kiln and grinding infrastructure, and the resulting product can meet the performance demands of both infrastructure and building construction.
A practical national pathway contains five interlocking elements:

  1. Standards and acceptance: Accelerated finalisation and promotion of BIS specifications for calcined-clay and limestone–calcined-clay cements will remove a key barrier to commercial uptake. Alignment with European practice (EN 197-5) can facilitate knowledge transfer and export readiness.
  2. Supply-chain development: Investment in flash calcination capacity and systematic characterisation of regional clay deposits will secure reliable, low-cost feedstock. Existing rotary kilns can be adapted for initial volumes while dedicated calciners are built.
  3. Incentive alignment: Part of variable compensation for plant managers, sales teams and senior leadership should be linked to emissions intensity reduction and to the volume of lower-carbon products (including LC3) sold. Without this link, traditional volume and cost targets will continue to dominate behaviour.
  4. Product-level carbon accounting: Reliable measurement of emissions intensity at the individual cement grade level, supported by third-party verification where required, is essential for both CCTS compliance and credible green claims.
  5. Demand-side pull: Green public procurement policies that specify maximum embodied-carbon thresholds for major infrastructure projects will create a predictable market for LC3 and other low-carbon cements, accelerating scale and cost reduction.
    Companies that treat LC3 as a strategic product line rather than a niche offering will be better positioned to generate surplus Carbon Credit Certificates, capture any emerging green premium, and protect margins as carbon costs rise.

Organisational changes required
Technical capability alone is insufficient. Three organisational shifts are required.
Daily management: Emissions intensity must appear on the same daily and monthly dashboards as heat consumption, power consumption and utilization. Plant reviews should examine both conventional and carbon-adjusted results.
Incentives: A meaningful portion of bonuses for plant heads, technical teams and sales leadership should be tied to lower emissions intensity and successful commercialisation of LC3 and other low-carbon grades.
Commercial approach: Sales teams need clear volume and pricing targets for lower-carbon products, supported by technical service that helps customers specify and place the material correctly. Without commercial pull, excellent technical performance remains under-utilised.

Table 3. Three-stage roadmap to carbon-adjusted profitability
Time Horizon Priority Actions Expected Outcome
Next 12 months Add emissions intensity to plant dashboards; establish internal carbon price; initiate LC3 pilot production and customer trials Visibility and early organisational learning
12–24 months Revise incentive systems; scale LC3 and other low-carbon grades to key accounts; secure third-party verification capability People and sales aligned with carbon goals
24–36 months Embed carbon-adjusted metrics in board reporting and capital allocation; expand calcined-clay capacity Full system integration and competitive advantage

Questions senior leaders should ask
Boards can accelerate the transition by insisting on answers to a short list of questions:
• Is our carbon-adjusted profit improving, stable or declining relative to conventional EBITDA?
• Did recent volume growth improve or worsen our emissions intensity?
• What share of sales already comes from lower-carbon products, including LC3, and what is the trajectory?
• How exposed is our capital expenditure plan to rising carbon costs under CCTS and potential CBAM-related requirements?
• Do our incentive systems still reward only volume and cost, or have they been updated to include carbon performance?
Treating carbon with the same seriousness as energy cost or kiln utilization does not diminish operational excellence; it expands the definition of excellence to match the new competitive reality.

Looking ahead
By 2030 the gap between leading and lagging cement companies will not be decided by who records the lowest specific heat consumption. It will be decided by who delivers the strongest carbon-adjusted profits.
Absolute emissions may still rise as national production grows. That is not the issue. Companies that reduce intensity year after year and successfully sell cleaner products will pull ahead in both domestic and export markets. Those that do not will fall behind, even if their traditional efficiency numbers look strong.
Operational excellence built the Indian cement industry. It remains the foundation. It is no longer the complete picture. Carbon-adjusted profitability is the clearer measure of success.
LC3 is not a distant technology. It is available now. It cuts CO3 by 30–40 per cent, works with existing plants, and is already in commercial production in India. Companies that treat it as a strategic product, not a pilot, will protect their margins and generate tradable credits.
Leaders who act now will place carbon metrics on daily dashboards, link incentives to intensity reduction and LC3 sales, invest in calcined-clay capacity, and build commercial capability to sell lower-carbon products. They will shape the next chapter of the industry.

References

  1. World Bank. (2026). State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2026. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
  2. International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP). (2026). India Carbon Credit Trading Scheme – Status and Coverage. Berlin: ICAP.
  3. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change / Bureau of Energy Efficiency. (2025). Greenhouse Gases Emission Intensity Target Rules, 2025. New Delhi: Government of India.
  4. Scrivener, K., Martirena, F., Bishnoi, S., & Maity, S. (2018). Calcined clay limestone cements (LC3). Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 49–56.
  5. RMI. (2024). The Business Case for LC3. Rocky Mountain Institute.
  6. European Commission. (2026). EU Emissions Trading System – Allowance Price Data and Free Allocation Phase-out Schedule. Brussels.
  7. Holcim. (2025–2026). Scaling Calcined Clay for Sustainable Building – Corporate Updates on European and Latin American Capacity. Zurich: Holcim Ltd.
  8. LC3 Project / EPFL. (2026). LC3 – A Guide to Best Practices for Scalable, Affordable and Sustainable Low-Carbon Building. Lausanne: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
  9. Business Today / Industry Reports. (2026). First Large-Scale LC3 Application at Noida International Airport, Jewar. New Delhi.
  10. NITI Aayog / Industry Analyses. (2026). Roadmap and Baseline Performance Indicators for the Indian Cement Sector. New Delhi.
  11. Springer / Innovative Infrastructure Solutions. (2026). LC3 Systems: A Review of Chemistry, Performance, Durability and Sustainability toward Market Adoption.
  12. Cementir Holding / Industry Sources. (2025–2026). FUTURECEM and Related Low-Clinker Technologies in Europe.
  13. Climate Risk Horizons & Independent Analyses. (2026). Assessment of Emission Intensity Targets under India’s CCTS for Cement and Other Hard-to-Abate Sectors.
  14. GCCA / TERI. (Various years). Decarbonization Roadmaps for the Indian Cement Industry.
  15. EN 197-5:2021. Cement – Part 5: Portland-composite cement CEM II/C-M and Composite cement CEM VI. European Committee for Standardization.

Continue Reading

Concrete

More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe

Published

on

By

Shares

Dijam Panigrahi makes a counterintuitive but data-backed argument that routing every sensor alert through human approval does not make cement plants safer.

India’s cement industry has spent the last two years wiring kilns, mills and coolers with sensors and automated control systems, and the safety case for doing so is strong on paper. Contract workers still make up the majority of the industry’s workforce, and fatal accidents remain a recurring problem. The Indian National Cement Workers Federation has noted that around 83 per cent of workers in the sector hold precarious positions, a fact that resurfaced after an oxygen cylinder explosion killed three contract workers at a plant in Chhattisgarh.
Industry tallies compiled by IndustriALL found cement plants recorded at least seventeen accidents in one year with 21 workers killed, and ten accidents the following year with nine killed, most of them contract staff. Automated monitoring, in theory, closes that gap. A sensor never gets complacent and never skips a check because a shift is short staffed.
However, plants that respond by routing every anomaly reading to a person for approval are quietly building a system that fails the same way understaffing does. When operators receive dozens of flagged deviations a shift, most of them minor, they learn a simple lesson: the fastest way through the queue is to approve without reading closely. The safety benefit disappears, not because the technology failed, but because the humans supervising it adapted to the volume.

Why alerts get ignored
A study cited by manufacturing technology publisher Applied SmartFactory found more than 95 per cent of alarms in a semiconductor fab were low priority, and only about 4 per cent ever triggered an action, with just 100 out of 5,000 alarms accounting for 70 per cent of all alarm activity. The mechanism is the same whether the trigger is a vibration sensor or an AI model flagging a kiln temperature swing. Once the ratio of noise to signal crosses a threshold, workers stop treating the system as a decision aid and start treating it as a formality to clear.
The scale of AI deployment underway makes this more than a theoretical risk. Stanford’s 2026 AI Index Report found organisational adoption of AI has reached 88 per cent, even as documented AI incidents rose to 362 in 2025, up sharply from 233 the year before, according to analysis of the report. The Index also found only about a third of organisations have adopted a formal governance framework, with NIST’s AI Risk Management Framework cited by 33 per cent and ISO/IEC 42001 cited by 36 per cent.
Most manufacturers are deploying monitoring systems faster than they are building the judgment for when a flagged event actually needs a person’s attention. In India, plants run by JK Cement have begun pairing CCTV feeds with AI to define safe zones around heavy machinery, a promising direction that still depends on operators trusting and reading the alerts the system generates.

A three-tier model for cement plant
The fix is not less monitoring or more monitoring. It is classifying decisions by risk and by novelty, rather than treating human oversight as a single switch that is either on or off. A workable model sorts factory floor events into three tiers.
The first tier, proceed, covers deviations the plant has seen before that fall within known safe bounds, such as a kiln feed rate adjustment within an established range. These should run without a stop for approval, because routing them to a person only trains that person to click through.
The second tier, pause, covers events that are unusual but not yet dangerous, such as a vibration reading trending toward a limit or a fuel blend shifting outside its typical mix. These warrant a brief human check before the system proceeds, giving an operator the chance to apply judgment the model does not yet have.
The third tier, escalate, covers events that are both high risk and unfamiliar, such as a pressure reading combined with a temperature spike that has no close precedent in the plant’s history. These should stop the process entirely and require a decision from someone with the authority to shut down a line.

Who should set the threshold
Where these tiers get drawn matters as much as the framework itself. Threshold setting is frequently handed to the vendor supplying the monitoring software or to a plant’s IT department, both of which understand the technology but not the specific tolerances of a given kiln, mill or line. Operations staff, who know that a particular grinding unit runs hotter under monsoon humidity or that a calciner behaves differently after a refractory reline, are better positioned to calibrate what counts as routine on their own equipment.
Handing threshold ownership to operations does not remove IT or vendors from the process, but it puts the calibration decision closest to the people who live with its consequences on the floor.

Signals that oversight is actually working
A few concrete indicators reveal whether a monitoring setup is functioning as intended or simply providing the appearance of safety. The escalation rate over time is the first: a rate that stays flat or climbs slowly as operations mature is healthy, while one that spikes and then falls sharply often means operators have started overriding the system rather than engaging with it. Time to resolution is the second: escalations that take progressively longer to close suggest fatigue or confusion about ownership, not diligence. The third, and most telling, is how accurate the system’s own uncertainty estimates turn out to be, meaning whether events flagged as high risk actually correlated with real incidents, and whether events waved through stayed incident free. A system whose escalations do not track with actual outcomes trains operators toward the same complacency that unmonitored equipment produces.
None of this argues against automation in Indian cement manufacturing, where a labor structure built on contract work and a track record of serious accidents make better monitoring an urgent need. It argues for treating human oversight as a design problem with three distinct settings, rather than a single
dial turned up whenever a plant wants to look safer on paper.

About the author:
Dijam Panigrahi, Co-founder and COO, GridRaster, is a spatial computing platform for industrial enterprises and manufacturers.

Continue Reading

Concrete

The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership

Published

on

By

Shares

Anuj Kumar Mathur, Safety Consultant, stresses on the importance of closing the enduring gap between what safety systems say on paper and what actually happens on the plant floor.

Robust safety manuals, certified PPE and digital monitoring systems mean little if the culture on the plant floor does not enforce them. Safety Consultant Anuj Kumar Mathur has spent enough time in high-risk operations to know precisely where that gap opens and why it persists. In this exclusive interaction, he suggests feasible ways to strengthen the safety culture at a manufacturing unit.

Having led safety across high-risk fuel operations, what lessons can the cement industry adopt to strengthen its safety culture beyond regulatory compliance?
Beyond regulatory compliance, the cement industry should embed visible leadership commitment, proactive risk assessment, process safety management, strong contractor control, near-miss learning, and employee engagement to build a resilient safety culture that prioritises prevention, operational discipline and continuous improvement over mere compliance.

As cement plants become increasingly automated and digitally connected, how should organisations redefine their approach to process safety and operational risk?
As cement plants become increasingly automated, organisations should integrate process safety with digital risk management by strengthening cybersecurity, real-time monitoring, predictive maintenance, management of change and workforce competency to ensure safe, reliable and resilient operations.

What are the most common gaps between having robust safety systems on paper and achieving consistent safety performance on the ground?
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership commitment on ground, weak safety culture, inadequate supervision, poor risk communication, insufficient workforce engagement specially, ineffective training and failure to translate procedures into disciplined execution, accountability and continuous monitoring at the operational level.

How can cement manufacturers better integrate contractor safety, leadership accountability and workforce behaviour to build a truly zero-harm workplace?
Manufacturers can achieve a zero-harm workplace by enforcing uniform safety standards for employees and contractors, strengthening leadership accountability, promoting proactive hazard reporting, enhancing competency through continuous training and fostering a culture where safe behaviour is recognised, expected and consistently practiced

What emerging technologies and safety practices do you believe will have the greatest impact on risk prevention in cement manufacturing over the next decade?
Artificial intelligence, IoT-enabled monitoring, predictive analytics, digital twins, wearable safety devices, drones, robotics and advanced process automation will significantly enhance hazard detection, predictive maintenance, real-time risk management, and worker protection, enabling safer and more resilient cement manufacturing.
IoT-enabled monitoring is the use of interconnected sensors and smart devices to continuously collect, transmit and analyse real-time data from equipment, processes and the work environment. This enables early detection of unsafe conditions, equipment failures, or abnormal operating parameters, allowing timely intervention before incidents occur.
In cement manufacturing, IoT-enabled monitoring can be used for:
• Monitoring kiln, crusher, and mill temperatures, pressures, and vibrations.
• Detecting overheating of bearings and motors to prevent failures.
• Monitoring dust concentration, gas leaks (CO, SO2, NOx), and oxygen levels.
• Tracking conveyor belt alignment and condition.
• Monitoring structural health of silos and
storage facilities.
• Tracking worker location and exposure to hazardous environments using wearable devices.
• Providing real-time alerts and predictive maintenance recommendations.


Benefits:
• Early hazard detection
• Reduced equipment downtime
• Improved process safety and reliability
• Lower maintenance costs
• Enhanced regulatory compliance
• Better decision-making through real-time data and analytics
In simple terms, IoT-enabled monitoring transforms periodic manual inspections into continuous, real-time surveillance of plant safety and equipment health.

Continue Reading

Video Thumbnail

    SIGN-UP FOR OUR GENERAL NEWSLETTER


    Trending News