Amidst all the significant contributions made by the cement industry to nation building, through employment generation, direct and indirect taxes, delivery of vital construction materials, absorption of hazardous industrials rejects like fly ash and slag, etc., it may sound surprising that the community still carries a negative perception about the industry because of its environmental issues. This looks like a perpetual, perceptual bind for the industry, from which it is unable to break free. Though our cement plants have come a long way in the last 2/3 decades in making improvements in environmental performance, the industry has apparently not done enough to communicate these improvements to the stakeholders. This is a bit of a tragedy, particularly when the industry is acknowledged as one of the best in the world in energy efficiency.
There are two distinct dimensions of environmental impact of the cement industry, the global and the local dimensions. The global view is that this industry, along with some other major sectors like steel, power, etc., is one of the major emitters of Carbon Dioxide, and is therefore, a leading contributor to climate change. The industry’s strategic response to this, on the global platform, is about making commitments on reduction of CO2 intensity of cement and increased usage of Alternative Fuels. However, at the level of the local community around a cement plant, the issues are quite different. The villagers around a cement plant are sensitive about tangible and palpable things such as ambient noise and dust, and they seem to expect continuous improvements in these emissions on a continuous basis. They are concerned about the mining activities, reforestation/reclamation of mined lands, about green belts around the factory periphery, about fugitive emissions from exposed, uncovered fuel stockpiles. The cement industry has initiated many proactive investments to address and allay these concerns, and as a result, there are today some plants which can be compared with the best global plants, in terms of cleanliness, housekeeping, and ambiance.
The regulators have not been sitting idle all this while. The environmental norms are being progressively tightened, and at the same time, monitoring and reporting practices are being continuously strengthened, so much so, that now one can get important data on pollutants on the Internet, almost on "real time" basis. The limits of emissions in the areas of SPM (Suspended Particulate Matter), SOx (Sulphurous Oxides), NOx (Nitrous Oxides), CO (Carbon Monoxide), etc., are being lowered keeping in tune with technological progress in Pyro-process Technologies and in CEM/SEM (Continuous Stack Emission Monitoring). Obviously, the challenges in complying with these moving goalposts, are different for different legacy cement plants, given the wide variety of raw materials and fuels, and it is only expected that the industry bodies will sometimes engage the regulators and stakeholders in a debate around the emerging stipulations. All in all, it would seem that we are in exciting and interesting times, in the middle of fast evolving stakeholder expectations in terms of sustainability parameters and transparency of reportage, with the technology and equipment providers trying to respond to these demands expeditiously. These are good times for the environment watchers!
However, together with making investments in technology and achieving sustained improvements in complying with, or exceeding the norms, the cement industry must think of enhancing its communications with its stakeholders, which would enable the industry to come out of the "perceptual bind" and continually renew its "real" license to operate.