Economy & Market
It makes more sense to acquire plants rather than build them
Published
10 years agoon
By
admin
Rajnish Kapur, Business Head – Grey Cement, JK Cement
In a freewheeling interview, Rajnish Kapur, Business Head – Grey Cement, JK Cement, speaks on his company?s expansion plans and the state of the cement industry at large.
Give us some idea of the JK group and its foray into the cement business. What are your plans for expansion?
JK Cement is part of the multidisciplinary industrial conglomerate JK Organisation. We have over four decades of experience in cement manufacturing across the core categories of grey cement and white cement with value-added products like wall putty and waterproofing compounds, etc. Our enduring strength remains in our diverse product portfolio, high quality raw materials, consistently growing capacity, an extensive marketing and distribution network and the technical knowhow. JK Cement entered into the cement business by commencement of commercial production at the Nimbahera facility in 1975 with an annual capacity of 0.3 MTPA. With constant upgradation, the unit?s present capacity has touched 3.25 MTPA. It is equipped with a waste heat recovery system of 13.2 MW to reduce the electrical energy cost and utilise waste heat. The Mangrol facility?s commercial production commenced in 2001 with 0.75 MTPA capacity which has increased to 2.25 MTPA, along with a 25 MW captive power plant, a 10 MW waste heat recovery plant and a split grinding unit at Jharli with a capacity of 1.5 MTPA.
Near Muddapur village of Karnataka, we have a 3 MTPA plant which is based on Portland and slag cement. The Muddapur facility is equipped with the most advanced technology available in the global market, making it the most modern plant.
The Gotan facility at Rajasthan is a dual-process plant with the capability of manufacturing grey cement as well as white cement. The Gotan facility?s existing grey cement capacity stands at 0.5 MTPA. We were the first in India to build a white cement facility. The white cement plant was commissioned at Gotan in 1984, with an initial production capacity of 0.05 MTPA. Over the years, continuous process improvements and modifications have enhanced the plant?s production capacity to 0.6 MTPA. Our wall putty capacity was 30,000 tonnes per annum in 2005, which increased to 5 lakh tonnes in 2013. With the commissioning of the Katni unit, the capacity has surged to 7 lakh tonnes.
How has the consolidation phase in the cement industry progressed so far? Do you expect more consolidation to happen, or less, in the next 10 years?
I think in the year 2008 when I joined the cement industry, we saw the meltdown at the global level. Especially, I remember in a country like Spain, the cement consumption suddenly dropped to what it was 40 years back. But before that, the industry was doing very well from the global perspective. In India, the last couple of years have seen about 40 million tonnes of capacity changing hands. The reasons are many, but inability to service debt due to high infrastructure cost is one of the most prominent reasons. But mergers per se are not new to us. We saw the first consolidation taking place way back in 1936, where 10 existing cement companies came together under one umbrella in a historic merger and formed ACC. It is a matter of opportunity. Today, setting up a plant after acquisition of land has become extremely difficult. It makes more sense to acquire plants rather than build them. At present, there is huge surplus capacity over demand. In a wider sense, it helps the economy. The chances are that consolidation may make some players very strong, but it is taken care of by the Competition Commission laying down strict guidelines for acquisition. We, at JK, are watching the emerging opportunities and will take appropriate decisions when needed. As per my understanding, a reasonable amount of consolidation has already taken place, and while there may not be many big ticket acquisitions in the offing, standalone plants may still come up for sale.
Do you think there is a disconnect between the GDP numbers and the demand growth the cement industry is witnessing? At GDP growth of 7.6 per cent, the cement industry?s growth should have been more than 10 per cent…
The historic conversion ratio of cement industry growing at 2 to 2.5 per cent over GDP has seen a shift in the past decade or so. This may be attributable to a shift in the major drivers of cement demand growth; for example, there is a difference in the dependence of cement growth on infra today. Housing, being the biggest driver of growth, has seen a slowdown due to a number of unsold dwellings in the market. The large infra projects need a long gestation period and are now in the take-off phase. We, however, need to look at the Indian cement industry in context of the global scenario, wherein Indian growth is actually much higher than peers and developed economies. On a near-term analysis, with this year having good monsoons and the government infra push, we should see a positive impact. Over the long term, we should see road & highway projects, Smart Cities, ?Housing for All?, Metro projects, etc., driving growth.
Does JK Cement have any new market initiatives planned in the near future?
Customer orientation and service is our mission and we are constantly evaluating as to how we can improve our offerings to the customer. The first and foremost responsibility is to deliver a product that exceeds all quality parameters and we at JK Cement have the best quality monitoring systems in place. We are also taking a number of steps to improve our service to the customer. In terms of logistics, we are ensuring that we reach our network most efficiently. In the recent past, we have taken a number of steps to improve the capabilities of our own team, as well as our channel partners. Regular meetings with our channel partners are helping us understand the market needs correctly, and regular market visits by all in the hierarchy help us to be proactive in our service to the end customer. One area where we have made a paradigm shift is to separate the technical support activities for our grey cement and white cement divisions. With this, we are able to focus more diligently on the requirements of our respective customers. In continuation to this, we are also establishing concrete labs in different cities. We are also working on having a deeper penetration of our network. We have also planned various new initiatives in the near future, like we are working on a ?Go to Rural Market Model? to reach out to our rural customers. We have also recently launched a new influencer management scheme by which we hope to engage our influencers more meaningfully. Also, we will be adding various new value-added services for our customers and professionals looking at their needs, which will help them in building strong homes.
We have added a number of large infra players to our portfolio, and since the last year, JK Cement has been recognised as one of the major suppliers for big projects in the country. We have significantly increased our key account capability and this has also helped us get good brand visibility. Sustaining a good key account is not an easy task as we have to meet the expectations of various stakeholders in terms of product quality and supplies. Our product range is already approved by various agencies, which reflects the confidence of large buyers in our product quality. We also keep a close tab on the market to understand how our cement is performing in the hands of our customers. Our aim is to produce the best cement and provide the best service to our customers.
JK Cement has been ahead of others in power generation through Waste Heat Recovery (WHR); please give us some insight into how you have been doing it…
Our CMD, YP Singhania, is a great visionary. Living up to its reputation of pioneering many firsts in India, JK Cement became the first company to invest in installation of a WHR concept-based 10 MW power plant in India, in collaboration with TEC, Japan in 2008, and got carbon credit certificates under CDM, initiated by the World Bank, to reduce the carbon dioxide footprint. It was increased to 13.2 MW in the following years. As the plant capacity increased during the years due to upgradation in Nimbahera and new lines in Mangrol, we have today reached a total of 23.2 MW of WHR capability. In Muddapur, Karnataka, captive power plants were conceived along with the project and 2 x 25 MW coal based plants were installed.
Our current focus is to improve our capability to use AFR. Taking inspiration from the best companies in this field, we would like to improve our capabilities significantly. It makes good business sense, and it also helps the country.
How is the PAT scheme working for the industry, and more particularly, how is it working for JK Cement?
Perform Achieve and Trade is a scheme started by the Government of India under various international agreements to reduce the footprint of GHG (Green House Gases) by way of improving energy efficiency in energy intensive manufacturing sectors like steel, cement, etc. The Bureau of Energy Efficiency was set up under the Energy Ministry to look after this legally binding scheme. We have completed the 1st cycle of audit, and achieved our target. It is always easy to complete the first cycle. It is like an examination – getting up to 70 per cent of marks is fairly easy, but to increase the percentage from 80 to 85 is fairly difficult. We got the credit certificates for the first phase, but the 2nd cycle is going to be tough. We feel that the PAT scheme as such makes good business sense also; it?s not to be looked upon merely as a push from the government. In the second cycle, we are taking many small steps. Our focus is lowering electrical and thermal energy. We have planned investments accordingly – the major one being replacing drives with variable speed drives.
How has been the performance of JK Cement in the production of blended cements? Is JK planning to start production of composite cement? What do you think about the market for composite cements?
JK Super Cement is one of the premium grey cement brands in the country, available as Portland Pozzolana Cement (PPC). The product complies with quality standards specified by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) and is much in demand, from both the retail and the institutional segments.
When I was at Bangladesh, we tried making a masonry cement while working with a Holcim plant. However, it was not a success because of improper use by the end customer. The regulatory system has to be in place and effective for application-based products. If the product is used for an incorrect purpose, then the results can be catastrophic.
We welcome the plan to introduce composite cements and we are evaluating the potential of this product. In Muddapur, we produce all three types of cement and can launch composite cement, if we find a demand for this product. We have started taking laboratory trials and evaluating all options.
We would like to know more on your dual-process plant, which can produce grey as well as white cement.
The white cement plant at Fujairah has been established with technical assistance of Taiheiyo Corporation, Japan. The company?s grey cement plant at Gotan in India is also of Taiheiyo technology and it can produce both grey and white cement. Similarly, the plant at Fujairah can produce both grey and white cement and the capacity is 0.6 MTPA of white cement or 1 MTPA of grey cement, or a combination of both. The changeover from white to grey or vice versa can be done in a short span of two to three days. However, presently the company is operating the plant at Fujairah only for production of white cement and has no immediate plans of producing grey cement, looking at the market conditions in the region.
Can you brief us on your CSR initiatives?
JK Group is known for its philanthropic initiatives in our country. The group has made many contributions to society by way of running schools, colleges, training facilities, ITIs, and building temples, etc. The JK temples in Kanpur and Nimbahera are much revered and are important religious places. We have built some of the best schools in the states in which we operate. LKSEC, Gotan (Rajasthan) is one such school where students from all parts of the country strive to get admission. We also have a university and a management college in Udaipur. At Nimbahera, we have constructed a new building for ITI this year, and it has received green building certification. We are running an RTC for the past few decades. Here, we not only train our own employees, but also those from other companies as well. In addition, we take a number of initiatives to improve the living conditions of our plant neighbourhood like vocational training, supply of water to villages, etc. We also encourage architects by conducting one of the most prestigious competitions for Indian architects and those from neighbouring countries. AYA is now in its 25th year, and we have honoured almost all the leading architects of India during the last 25 years.
You may like
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
- World Bank. (2026). State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2026. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
- International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP). (2026). India Carbon Credit Trading Scheme – Status and Coverage. Berlin: ICAP.
- Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change / Bureau of Energy Efficiency. (2025). Greenhouse Gases Emission Intensity Target Rules, 2025. New Delhi: Government of India.
- Scrivener, K., Martirena, F., Bishnoi, S., & Maity, S. (2018). Calcined clay limestone cements (LC3). Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 49–56.
- RMI. (2024). The Business Case for LC3. Rocky Mountain Institute.
- European Commission. (2026). EU Emissions Trading System – Allowance Price Data and Free Allocation Phase-out Schedule. Brussels.
- Holcim. (2025–2026). Scaling Calcined Clay for Sustainable Building – Corporate Updates on European and Latin American Capacity. Zurich: Holcim Ltd.
- LC3 Project / EPFL. (2026). LC3 – A Guide to Best Practices for Scalable, Affordable and Sustainable Low-Carbon Building. Lausanne: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
- Business Today / Industry Reports. (2026). First Large-Scale LC3 Application at Noida International Airport, Jewar. New Delhi.
- NITI Aayog / Industry Analyses. (2026). Roadmap and Baseline Performance Indicators for the Indian Cement Sector. New Delhi.
- Springer / Innovative Infrastructure Solutions. (2026). LC3 Systems: A Review of Chemistry, Performance, Durability and Sustainability toward Market Adoption.
- Cementir Holding / Industry Sources. (2025–2026). FUTURECEM and Related Low-Clinker Technologies in Europe.
- Climate Risk Horizons & Independent Analyses. (2026). Assessment of Emission Intensity Targets under India’s CCTS for Cement and Other Hard-to-Abate Sectors.
- GCCA / TERI. (Various years). Decarbonization Roadmaps for the Indian Cement Industry.
- EN 197-5:2021. Cement – Part 5: Portland-composite cement CEM II/C-M and Composite cement CEM VI. European Committee for Standardization.
Concrete
More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe
Published
3 days agoon
August 28, 2026By
admin
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.
Concrete
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership
Published
3 days agoon
August 28, 2026By
admin
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.
CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech
Protect Your Margins
More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership
The Future of Vertical Material Handling
CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech
Protect Your Margins
More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership

