Concrete

Mining in India: Moving Towards a Sustainable Future

Published

5 years ago

February 1, 2022

admin

The mining industry in India has to ramp up its efforts in order to be more energy efficient and sustainable. Since the process of mining plays an important role in cement manufacturing, we take a closer look at the impact of mining on the environment, human health and biodiversity, and the sustainable processes that are the need of the hour.

The mining industry in India contributes significantly to the economy, amounting to around 10 to 11 per cent to the industrial sector. This industry took a modern turn post the economic reforms of 1991, and the 1993 Mining Policy further helped its growth. India has a rich reserve of mineral and non-mineral ores distributed in five mineral belts across the length and breadth of the country. The geographical distribution of mineral belts are the North Eastern Peninsular Belt, Central Belt, Southern Belt, South Western Belt and North Western Belt. The index of mineral production of the mining and quarrying sector for November 2021 stood at 111.9, which was 5 per cent higher than the level in November 2020.

Mining in India falls under the legal and constitutional framework. Mining operations are regulated under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) [MMDR] Act of 1957. The State Governments, as owners of minerals, grant mineral concessions and collect royalty, dead rent and fees as per the provisions of MMDR Act. These revenues are held in the Consolidated Fund of State Government until the state legislature approves their use through budgetary processes. The MMDR Act was enacted to provide for the regulation of mines and development of minerals under the control of the Union. The Act has been amended in 1972, 1986, 1994 and 1999 in keeping with changes in the policy on mineral development.

In 2015, the act was amended with the intention of removing discretion and introducing more transparency in the grant of mineral concessions. The amendments now made to the MMDR Act, 1957 provide that mineral concessions will be granted only on the basis of bidding at an auction, for the prospecting stage or mining stage on a case to case basis.

The metals and mining sector in India is expected to witness a major reform in the next few years, owing to reforms such as Make in India Campaign, Smart Cities, Rural Electrification, and a focus on building renewable energy projects under the National Electricity Policy as well as the rise in infrastructure development.

The cement industry largely consumes two minerals – limestone and coal – in the cement making process, which are extracted by the mining from the reserves across the country. Limestone is the primary raw material used for making cement, while coal is extensively used to generate energy for the cement kilns.

The production level of limestone stood at 303 lakh tonnes as of November 2021. According to Invest India, National Investment Promotion and Facilitation Agency, India is home to 1,303 coal mines in 2019-2020, making it the second largest coal producer in the world, producing 716.084 MT coal.

Impact of mining on the environment

Mining of raw materials from quarries may result in enhanced production of the end product, but has an adverse impact on the environment. The effects can result in erosion, sinkholes, loss of biodiversity, or the contamination of soil, groundwater, and surface water by the chemicals emitted from the mining processes. These processes also affect the atmosphere from the emissions of carbon, which have an effect on the quality of human health and biodiversity.

The air around the mines is greatly impacted by the release of unrefined particles. Wind or vehicular movements make these fine particles airborne affecting people living close to the mines and causing health issues. Similarly, mining can also lead to the pollution of water bodies surrounding the mines, which could occur due to mineral or sediment deposits, acid mine drainage or waste disposal. This could hamper the quality of water surrounding the mines, leading to water pollution and health problems to those who may consume this water in some form. Land and biodiversity close to the mines are also impacted; it may lead to soil erosion and landslides while disrupting the life of living creatures in the area.

Mining and the cement industry

Mining is an integral part of the cement making process. It is the first step in obtaining the key raw material – limestone – from quarries to make the final product. Limestone is obtained from the deposits or rock by blasting or mechanical excavation depending on the hardness of the rock. It is then crushed into smaller chunks. After crushing the stone is sorted into different fractions by screening, after which it is processed further. In the grinding process, the limestone is ground to a fine powder.

Most of the limestone is obtained from open quarries. The extraction is carried out by open cast method on both small and large scales. The small-scale extraction of limestone is done manually by individuals using minimal machinery. The limestone beds are drilled for blast holes using drilling machines, after which the rocks undergo blasting. The limestone rocks undergo manual sizing, in order to obtain rock pieces of suitable sizes for easy transportation and processing.

For cement, limestone mining takes place on a large scale by the underground mining method. The basic operations in underground mining are drilling, blasting, loading and hauling, scaling and roof bolting. Drilling equipment includes horizontal drills and down hole track drills. This equipment results in much smaller blast holes and a lower volume of rock produced with each blast. Other equipment required in the underground mine includes powder loaders, which are used to blow ammonium nitrate–fuel oil mixtures into the blast holes. Scaling rigs, which are used to remove loose rocks from the ribs and roof of the mine, and roof-bolting equipment may also be required in an underground mine.

“Mining is undertaken as per the approved mine plan. All environmental parameters as per the norms of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) are taken into consideration while preparing the mine plan. Since mining is localised to a few hectares of area only, hence its impact is negligible. The areas of concern are air, water and noise pollution, which are monitored regularly while dust suppression is a regular process as per the guideline of DGMS as well as IBM. Impact on the lease area is minimal,” says Hitesh Sukhwal, Senior Manager (Head Environment), JK Lakshmi Cement Ltd.

“The mining area is selectively identified, and parameters such as reducing diesel consumption, less lead distance, fuel efficient equipment, separate dumps for rejects, dust suppression with less quantity of water (like fogging system), optimum utilisation of resources, working and calibration of cross belt analyser are some considerations, which are taken into account while carrying out mining. Monitoring of all the mentioned parameters helps in identifying areas of concern and thereby leads to optimisation of the mining operations,” he adds.

Cement making is an energy intensive process and coal provides for 90 per cent of the energy consumed by cement plants around the world. India is one of the largest producers and consumers of coal, with the cement sector dominating its consumption. The Coal India Limited (CIL) is the state-owned miner for the country and accounts for over 80 per cent of domestic coal production. CIL coal production target for India is set to 1 billion tonnes by FY2020. However, the cement industry gets about 5 per cent of coal from within the country, and the rest of its coal demand is met through imports. The combustion process results in the emission of carbon dioxide, which is a prominent reason for air pollution.

There are four types of coal available in India, namely, peat, lignite, bituminous coal and anthracite coal. The most consumed amongst these are lignite and bituminous. The cement industry mainly uses non-coking bituminous coal and lignite in small quantities in plants in Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan. Specifically, the coal used by the cement companies is of grade G4, G5, G6, G7, G8 and G9.

The industry is constantly looking for alternative solutions to replace coal and reduce the carbon emission by substituting it with other energy giving materials. This is a conscious effort taken by all large players in the cement industry.

This leads to the cement industry being one of the largest consumers of coal and buyers of the mined mineral. Coal mining has its own set of impacts on the environment. “Coal mining activities change the land use pattern and thus, impact the flora, fauna, water table and vegetation in the mining area and surrounding to an extent. However, by deploying sustainable practices, which are part of mine planning and implementation, this impact can be reduced to a great extent,” says Pukhraj Sethiya, Associate Vice President – Mining & Integrated Coal Management, Adani Enterprises.

“We have been deploying sustainable mining practices in our mines, which has mitigated the impact of mining activities on the environment to a great extent while at the same time generating a large number of employment opportunities. The sustainable practices that we have adopted include transplantation of trees rather than simply cutting them, soil storage, water treatment and reutilisation and coal transportation through mechanised and covered means,” he adds.

Mining waste – a resource or hazard?

According to the Indian Bureau of Mines, it is estimated that well over 170 million tonnes of solid wastes related to mining are generated in India every year. This is expected to rise substantially to 300 million tonnes with the increase in production of various minerals. Due to shortages of some minerals in the natural reserves and depletion of high-grade ores, leaner grade ores are being mined which generate a large amount of waste. Adding to this, the preferred method of mining for industries is the open cast method for its high productivity, economic viability and safety aspects, which leads to large volumes of waste generation.

This rock waste generated cannot be immediately back filled due to geological constraints and has to be planned and phased out. This results in stacking of this waste externally creating a mining waste dump.

“We practice zero waste mining as part of our sustainable process. The waste generated during the mining (while removing the soil or hard rocks) we use the waste for the back filling. When we move the limestone that is exposed through drilling and mining, a pit is formed and we use the waste material from the mining process to fill back the pit,” says SK Tiwar, Director Technical, Heidelberg Cement (India).

Besides occupying a large area of land, these dumps impact the landscape forestry and vegetation of the location. Wash-offs from these dumps pose siltation of nearby water bodies and agricultural fields. They are also prone to wind erosion.

While this waste is an unavoidable damage to the land, there are many ways of rehabilitating the area where the waste is dumped. The design of the waste should accommodate progressive rehabilitation to ensure a minimum area is disturbed at any given time. This waste can also be used in alternative jobs, like construction or landfills, to put it to good use and reduce the stacking and dumping of the same.

It must be ensured that a proper drainage channel is created from the waste dump in case heavy rainfall is expected in the area. This shall prevent the nearby land from getting contaminated with the waste residues. Proper rehabilitation of tailings must be planned in order to avoid contamination of water sources around the dump area.

Rehabilitation of the mining waste dump areas should aim to establish a vegetative cover and increase rainfall infiltration. Dumps with higher salt content must be screened with overburden of the lowest salt content.

In all the above methods, the mining waste dump must be attended to and should be put to use or rehabilitated to avoid damage to the environment, water and people around the area.

Neeraj Akhoury, CEO India, Holcim Group and Managing Director & CEO, Ambuja Cements Ltd for World Cement, said, “Building a sustainable green construction sector will be the outcome of an active participation of not only cement and other building materials manufacturers but also end consumers and governments. The level of awareness among all stakeholders is much better than what it used to be even a decade or so ago. We can draw a lot of confidence and optimism about the future of a sustainable construction sector from similar achievements like the growth in clean mobility (electric vehicles) and also the impressive strides made in India’s renewable energy sector. A very green construction sector is not very far behind.”

The cement industry consumes mined materials for their varied processes, and its volume has the potential to change the game for the environment. Shifting practices towards sustainable means can lead to a greener country with cleaner air. With advanced technology and better planning, this is an achievable feat. Influential players in the cement industry are making efforts to help heal the environment and create mining processes that do more good than harm.

Kanika Mathur

Up Next

Cement demand bounces back

Don't Miss

It is essential to identify priority areas of technology application and innovation

Concrete

CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech

To build capacity of 100,000 tonnes a year

Published

1 day ago

August 28, 2026

admin

CarbonStrong has raised Rs 125 million (125 mn) to scale a low carbon cement technology and build commercial production capacity. The startup was founded in 2022 by Harsh Jain and Vikramaditya Singh and has moved from customer trials to plans for industrial supply. The company said its material replaces up to 50 per cent of cement in concrete while reducing costs and improving durability.

CarbonStrong states the product is around 30 per cent cheaper than cement and compatible with existing concrete plants, reducing the need for new equipment and operational disruption. Trials and paid pilots have been conducted in Bengaluru, Hyderabad and Chennai with demonstration projects involving ready-mix firms and precast manufacturers. Compatibility with current workflows forms a central part of the commercial strategy, aiming to ease adoption by builders and contractors.

The funding will support construction of a facility with capacity of up to 100,000 tonnes (100,000 t) a year over the next two years to supply early customers commercially. The firm is also developing materials from steel slag, copper slag and mine tailings to expand its feedstock base, while noting the technical challenge of homogenising different waste streams. Recognition by HCL ClimaForce in 2026 and by the Avaana-Startup India-NITI Aayog AIM Grand Challenge in 2025 has underscored progress.

Industry adoption remains the principal test and will require consistent material performance, supply reliability and competitive economics. CarbonStrong projects the Indian market for cement substitutes could reach Rs 250 billion (250 bn) by 2030 and has set an ambition to produce 10 million tonnes a year by 2035 (10 mn t), a target far above its near term capacity. Moving from pilots to production demands capital, manufacturing discipline and customers willing to specify the material beyond demonstrations. The recent Rs 125 million raise is intended to fund the next phase of scale and to demonstrate that industrial waste can become a dependable input for lower carbon construction.

Concrete

Protect Your Margins

Published

1 day ago

August 28, 2026

admin

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

1 day ago

August 28, 2026

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.