Concrete
Change is inevitable and businesses must be ready
Published
4 years agoon
By
admin
Anil Sharma, Chief Financial Officer (CFO), HeidelbergCement India, shares his views on managing finances, investments and costs, in the face of inevitable changes in the cement sector.
Cement industry is capital intensive.
How does HeidelbergCement deal with its capex requirement?
Cement is one of the most highly consumed materials amongst all materials. The Government of India also looks at the growth of the industry but it requires a large capital to establish and set up the plant, maintain and adhere to all the compliances set for the industry.
At HeidelbergCement, we have a systematic way of assessing the capex requirement. We work in advance with a plan of three years in hand. During our planning, we split the capex requirement into various categories. Starting environmental, safety and legal capex requirements as they are mandatory and cannot be deferred. Then we plan for replacement capex, by lapse of time we need to complete for the maintenance of plants etc. Thereafter, we look for improvement in capex. With passing time and advancement of technology, we have to look for upgrades in the plants, which could be in the process, efficiency or productivity area. The improvement capex is used here. The last category of capex is the expansion or strategy capex, which is used for new product development, for entering new markets, etc.
When we do the assessment of capex for our organisation, we split the requirement into own versus hire. Example, if we need a bus to transport our employees, we need not buy it, the same can be hired. In HeidelbergCement, this is a very systematic way of assessing our asset capex requirement. We analyse the use, evaluate risk, profitability and payback and if the result is in favour of the organisation, then an authorisation is created for the capex to own a certain asset with all details of its requirement, wear and tear etc. Only upon approval of the same, the process is taken further and procurement is done. As a thumb rule in HeidelbergCement, we maintain 40 per cent of our annual depreciation as a sustainable capex.
This is not the end of the story – capex is a big thing at our organisation. We always go in for a post investment review. One part is to complete the capex cycle and the next is to assess if that decision was correct. This assessment is done a year after the project commenced and another assessment is done by the corporate finance department. They check if the assumptions taken into account were correct and projected results have been achieved. During the post investment reviews, we come across insights, which are shared with other departments and plants. It helps fine tune their workings on the same.
What are the major cost elements for producing cement and how have these cost dynamics changed in the recent past?
Cement manufacturing is a simple process. But the cement production costs are very dynamic. It changes with various changes in elements of the cost and it is also advisable to be flexible while taking cost decisions for the product.
India is a very competitive market for cement and to be relevant for the same, the cost should be competitive and brands should also be cost efficient. To decide the cost of the end product, the method is not a simple straight line, it needs to be broken down into different cost elements. In our organisation, we have the process of splitting cost in two parts, i.e., variable cost and fixed cost.
The variable costs are further split into the cost of various elements starting with limestone, the key raw material for cement manufacturing. It is acquired from our own mines and sometimes additives have to be purchased to bring it to a certain quality. Once the limestone is obtained, crushed and sent to the plant, the second cost element utilised is the power and fuel. This is the biggest cost element for the manufacturing of cement and currently with increase in fuel and energy cost, it accounts for approximately 30 to 40 per cent of the total cost. Power is either taken from the grid or purchased from the third party. In recent times, we have started using renewable power by setting up our own plants or by using power from wastage recovery power. The third element to cost are other cementitious materials like fly ash, slag and other packing materials that also play a big role in the manufacturing of cement.
Another category that accounts for variable cost is logistics. Materials in bulk are brought into the plant and end products are taken out of there. The outward transportation contributes to approximately 20 per cent of the total cost and is the second largest category of variable cost.
Fixed costs are also divided into three categories i.e., fixed production cost, sales and marketing costs and other administrative costs.
Fixed production costs include tax, duty, etc. that are an essential in the cement manufacturing process. The sales and marketing costs include the budgeted amounts for promotion, cost of sales offices, warehouses, etc. Administrative costs include travel of personnel, office rent etc. Fixed cost account to approximately 15 per cent of the total cement cost.
What initiatives has the company taken to optimise its cost?
In cement, we always say that there is room for improvement. Although the process is set and manufacturing is done for about 150 years, experience tells us that there are always methods to optimise costs for the industry. In our organisation, we have a continuous improvement programme, where we allow our people to look into various elements of processes and costs, give suggestions and with that we improve processes, efficiency and productivity.
HeidelbergCement has taken multiple measures to optimise cost. First it has taken into account the fuel cost. We have brought flexibility in fuels that we use for clinker manufacturing depending upon their cost. The fuel that is lesser in cost, we use that for the production process. We have also implemented an alternative fuel plant in the manufacturing process and use many kinds of alternative fuels like biomass, municipal waste, pharma waste etc. that helps us optmise our costs and reduce carbon footprint.
Another cost optimisation effort has been taken into the power category where we use power from renewable sources. We have set up our own solar power plants and have also entered into a long term agreement with a power developer who supplies power around the clock from renewable sources. Of our total power consumption currently, we are using 25 per cent green power for our plants. We are also working towards reducing our dependence on grid power which will help us optimise our costs.
In the recent past, we have taken up some debottlenecking projects to optimise logistics cost. We have made despatch flexibile between road and rail depending upon which costs less at the time of despatch. This helps us bring more quantity of material in and out of the plant.
Internal production processes need to be simplified to create an environment of efficiency and productivity that will also help us optimise our costs.
What are the various types of direct / indirect tax, cement industry undergoes?
The cement industry is a highly tax levied industry. GST is the highest and known to the people tax at 28 per cent. But there are other taxes like royalty on limestone or other minerals, district mineral funds, electricity duties, import duty, custom duties etc. All taxes combined amount to approximately 40 per cent of net sales of the total production.
Share your experience on the transformation of indirect taxes under the GST regime? Are there any challenges due to GST implementation? What initiatives are taken to overcome them?
GST has been one of the biggest tax reforms in India. Earlier there were many taxes, which were different in different states, but with GST it has become one nation, one tax system which is a welcome decision for the industry. It has brought an ease to doing business when we deal with many states for materials etc. When the taxes were different, the processes were also different and paperwork was cumbersome. GST implementation has made processes smoother and transparent, thus, easing logistics and procurement for the industry. Calculation methodology of GST is simple. The organisation may deal with one state or multiple, all information is available on government portals making work flow smooth and transparent.
The change from state wise tax to one nation tax, GST, came with its own set of challenges. This meant changing of calculation, different invoicing, and a lot of rework of methods like stock transfer from state to state. The initial transition with GST was full of challenges especially with the MSME sector who were not digitised and informed enough. The hiccups that our smaller vendors were experiencing in the shift to GST was coming back to us and causing a delay in the entire chain of processes.
We educated our employees and vendors about the new taxation system with the help of consultants who were experts in this field, to help them understand and transition smoothly. We created points of contacts for these vendors that helped them file their taxes.
In nutshell, GST became a catalyst for smooth business function in India.
How has digitalisation and automation played a game-changing role in the finance sector for the cement industry?
Our business is volume driven and all transactional activities are in large numbers and quantities.
Raising invoices, debit notes, credit notes etc. is done everyday, multiple times a day. These jobs require a lot of labour and can also lead to a lot of errors when done manually at such a large scale. Digitalisation has been a game changer for the industry. For optimising costs, for removing errors and a lot more. The concept of bringing technology to the business was a costly proposition, but now people are understanding that it is for the betterment of the business.
In HeidelbergCement, digital transformation is changing the landscape of the business, not only in the finance department but also in the manufacturing activity. We have made this a project on a global level and have identified three pillars for digitalisation for the business.
H-Connect: The real time, end to end experience for our customers. Through this portal customers can know about the statement of account, dispatch of material, track it, place order etc.
H-Produce: This portal is related to our manufacturing system. We have moved to the next mile with respect to digitalisation where we are bringing technology to our production, be it maintenance of equipment, track all KPIs of production parameters reducing maintenance cost and increasing productivity of man and machine.
H-Service: All the service related processes are digitised through this portal. We have implemented Robotic Process Automation (RPA), which is also gaining momentum in our manufacturing side where mundane human tasks are done by robots.
What are the risks / concerns for the cement industry in the short to medium term?
Cement industry is going through a difficult time. The biggest short term risk is the increase in the input cost of the cement, which has increased significantly. Similarly, the energy and fuel price have increased in the recent past and all of the increased cost burden cannot be passed on to the market. The demand in recent times has also been moderate, and not increased as expected. One of the major reasons for this increase in cost and lack of demand is inflation. This can be a further risk as our Indian rupee weakens in comparison to the dollar, which would still increase the input costs.
Another risk is the liquidity crunch in the market. Not only in business, but with a higher fiscal deficit of the central government, it leaves less room for them to bring rapid development in infrastructure growth as planned in the short to medium term which can make the growth of cement industry slower. This will also lead to unemployment which will also impact GDP growth. If this is not timely controlled, the cycle of inflation to purchasing capacity will remain imbalanced and it shall impact the top line and bottom line of companies and business due to lack of consumption. This will also defer new investments in the business. These challenges have to be overcome in the short term, otherwise its impact shall stay on the industry for a longer duration than expected.
In the cement industry, the input cost increase and liquidity will impact other impacts and services, but the risk that I foresee is the availability of cementitious materials. One of the biggest materials is fly ash, and the availability is not the same as it was 10 years ago. Sometimes, it needs to be procured from farther areas. Similarly, slag which is the by-product of steel companies, is also getting scarce. These being contributors to decarbonising of cement will be much in demand and lower in supply. These materials can be a risk medium to long term. The industry must invest in research and development in identifying newer alternative raw materials and supporting the environment.
What are the key priorities for the next two-three years? What recommendations do you have for the Indian business ecosystem?
The foremost priority for us at the moment is to reduce our carbon footprint. The process of calcination of the limestone, emits carbon. We need to reduce this emission from the entire cement manufacturing process.
There are two ways to reduce carbon emission from the cement manufacturing process. First would be to increase the use of cementitious materials and make more blended cements, and the other would be to use alternative fuels for the process of clinker making.
We have already started the process and our current alternative fuel consumption is in the range of 8 to 10 per cent of thermal substitution rate of total fuel and target to increase it to 20 per cent. There are many constraints in the availability and quality of alternative fuels, obtaining municipal waste of the required standard, logistic cost of acquiring the same etc. We have to do a cost analysis of alternative fuel to fossil based fuel to understand, which is beneficial to the business.
These are the key priorities for the business to reduce carbon footprint.
Another focus we have is to increase the use of renewable power. We purchase power and if that purchased power is thermal power, then it contributes to the carbon footprint. Thus, we want to increase the percentage of renewable power consumption in our total power consumption. capex is set aside in that direction and steps are being taken to bring this in action.
The third focus is automation and technology which is the need of the hour. If the business needs to reach a certain level of maturity, customer satisfaction and adapt to newer methods of business that are quick and real time, the solution is to integrate systems and processes to the automation and digital tools. This would also include integrating vendors, third parties and customers in this process.
In my experience, the recommendation I can give to any business especially in the post pandemic era is to always be ready with a plan B. There are a lot of uncertainties in business and plans should be made in a manner to accommodate change and keep it flexible. Change is inevitable and businesses must be ready to adapt to these changes that are coming in the dynamic world.
Another recommendation to any business should be to evaluate their risks. They must take all kinds of steps to understand and mitigate risks that are to come to any task. They should always do a risk-benefit analysis and not put all their resources in a single project, rather allocate the same in the one that stands out in your analysis.
In our organisation, we split our risk evaluation matrix into four baskets called risk atlas. Market risk would include competition, new product launch, change in customer behaviour. Second would be legal and compliances risk, which would include risks arising from new policies, new regulations, compliances etc. Third risk would be operational risk that are related to production, availability of raw material, dependency on vendors, etc. Lastly, financial risk, which would include bad debts, working capital requirements, tax risk, etc. We always have the processes and policies in place where we deliberate and prioritise tasks and decide where the funds and resources should be allocated.
A very important recommendation is the cash reserve. Any business must focus on their cash resources and availability. They must prioritise spending to support their growth. They must focus on cash inflow and optimise their cash conversion cycle. It is important to keep inventory moving and not blocking their funds.
Last recommendation for the entire business ecosystem would be to allow the next generations to come on this planet to live with all the resources we have and in a safe environment. That is called sustainability. It could be a cost centre by businesses but it actually is an investment towards the future of any business. If businesses are not woke today and don’t bring down the carbon footprint or give back to the society there will not be any real growth in the business environment and it is not justified for the same.
-Kanika Mathur
Concrete
CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech
To build capacity of 100,000 tonnes a year
Published
3 days agoon
August 28, 2026By
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.
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.
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

