Connect with us

Concrete

Unveiling Potential!

Published

on

Shares

ICR explores the various facets around the integration of Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs) into the cement manufacturing process, which has emerged as a crucial solution to enhance cost-effectiveness and environmental sustainability, resulting in effective management of issues such as carbon emissions and resource usage.

India is the second largest producer of cement in the world. Limestone is at the core of its production as it is the prime raw material used for production. The process of making cement involves extraction of this limestone from its quarries, crushing and processing it at the cement plant under extreme temperatures for calcination to form what is called a clinker (a mixture of raw materials like limestone, silica, iron ore, fly ash etc.). This clinker is then cooled down and is ground to a fine powder and mixed with gypsum or other additives to make the final product – cement. The reason we are elucidating the cement production process is to look at how supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) can be incorporated into it to make the process not only more cost effective but also environmentally responsible.
Limestone is a sedimentary rock composed typically of calcium carbonate (calcite) or the double carbonate of calcium and magnesium (dolomite). It is commonly composed of tiny fossils, shell fragments and other fossilised debris. This sediment is usually available in grey colour, but it may also be white, yellow or brown. It is a soft rock and is easily scratched. It will effervesce readily in any common acid. This naturally occurring deposit, when used in
large volumes for the cement making process is also depleting from the environment. Its extraction is the cause of dust pollution as well as some erosion in the nearby areas.
The process of calcination while manufacturing cement is the major contributor to carbon emission in the environment. This gives rise to the need of using alternative raw materials to the cement making process. The industry is advancing in its production swiftly to meet the needs of development happening across the nation.
Ratings agency Crisil forecasts an all-Indian cement consumption growth of 11 per cent year-on-year to 440Mt during the current financial year. Crisil attributed this to a 51 per cent year-on-year rise in infrastructure spending, to US$ 6.75 billion throughout the year.
Strong expansion of the industrial sector, which has fully recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic shock, is one of the main demand drivers for the cement industry. As a result, there is a strong potential for an increase in the long-term demand for the cement industry. Some of the recent initiatives, such as the development of 98 smart cities, are expected to significantly boost the sector.
Aided by suitable governmental foreign policies, several foreign players such as Lafarge-Holcim, Heidelberg Cement and Vicat have invested in the country in the recent past. A significant factor, which aids the growth of this sector, is the ready availability of raw materials for making cement, such as limestone and coal.
According to Indian Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF), cement demand in India is exhibiting a CAGR of 5.65 per cent between 2016-22. Nearly 32 per cent of India’s cement production capacity is based in South India, 20 per cent in North India, 13 per cent in Central, 15 per cent in West India, and the remaining 20 per cent is based in East India. India’s cement production is expected to increase at a CAGR of 5.65 per cent between FY16-22, driven by demands in roads, urban infrastructure and commercial real estate. India’s cement production was expected to range between 380-390 million tonnes in FY23, a growth rate of 8 to 9 per cent y-o-y.
Between FY12 and FY23, the installed capacity grew by 61 per cent to 570 MT from 353 in FY22. The Indian cement sector’s capacity is expected to expand at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4 to 5 per cent over the four-year period up to the end of FY27. It would thus begin the 2028 financial year at 715-725 MT/ year in installed capacity.
Sameer Bharadwaj, Head – Manufacturing Excellence, JK Cement, says, “The key feature of SCMs is their Pozzolanic properties, which refers to its capability to react with calcium hydroxide (CH) to form calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H). Likewise, with the increased conventional fuel prices, adopting green energy utilisation is now become a necessity in order to bring down the cement manufacturing cost, in a similar manner adoption of SCMs to a larger extent is a must requirement in order to bring down the clinker factor because clinker manufacturing will anyhow emit carbon emissions for calcination of limestone, but what we as a sustainable oriented manufacturer can contribute toward less carbon emissions is to produce more blended cement with less requirement of clinker.”
“At JK Cement, we manufacture various types of blended cements in which the contribution of SCM is well within the BIS norms. Major SCM’s are fly ash and slag which are procured from nearby thermal power plants and steel industries. We produce PPC (fly ash based) at all our manufacturing units in which 35 per cent (maximum) fly ash is being utilised. Also, to promote the more usage of blended cement, we are producing premium category PPC Cement which has a compressive strength equivalent to OPC. In our Muddapur plant in the South of India, we are also producing Portland Slag Cement (PSC),” he adds.
“The production of SCMs require less energy as compared to traditional cement and support in reducing carbon emission and use of fossil fuels to combat environmental challenges like depleting natural resources, climate change and air pollution. The other advantage of using SCM is enhancing the durability of concrete. Mixing SCMs can make concrete long-lasting and efficient, promoting conservation of resources. By using durable concrete with SCMs during construction of green buildings, it becomes possible to reduce the need for frequent repairs, replacements, and extend the lifespan of buildings. For instance, materials such as fly ash and slag carry the potential to mitigate alkali-silica reactions which often lead to formation of cracks in buildings and impact concrete’s durability.
By incorporating SCMs, it becomes possible to avoid the damaging effects and achieve stronger and structurally sound buildings with longer lifespans,” says Arun Shukla, President and Director, JK Lakshmi Cement.
Dr SB Hegde, Professor Jain University, India and Visiting Professor, Penn State University, United States of America says, “The use of SCMs in cement production is primarily to reduce carbon emissions. This can result in tax incentives and compliance benefits, further improving the overall profitability of cement manufacturing. Let us take a hypothetical example of an Indian cement plant with an annual production capacity of one
million tonnes.”
“SCMs like fly ash, in the case of Wonder Cement, are actually an industrial waste product, which if left unattended, can cause nuisance for the environment. Our cement plant consumes this industrial waste and in turn also preserves the natural resources of limestone and coal which would be used as a raw material and as a source of energy for the manufacturing of cement,” says RS Kabra, Executive Vice President – Commercial, Wonder Cement.
According to a report by McKinsey titled Cementing Your Lead: The Cement Industry in the Net-Zero Transition, October 2023, alternative cementitious materials, such as low-carbon cement or geopolymer concrete, have historically struggled to scale. However, current investment trends and rapid technological advancements have allowed start-ups to disrupt the alternative-cementitious space with low-carbon offerings. For example, Brimstone replaces limestone in traditional cement production with calcium-silicate rock, and Sublime Systems uses an electrochemical process that eliminates the need for a kiln. Although these approaches are novel, investment data indicates that appetite for alternative cementitious materials is high: Brimstone announced a $55 million funding round in 2022, and Sublime Systems has raised more than $40 million in two funding rounds since 2021.
In particular, supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) offer promising ways to significantly reduce the carbon footprint of traditional cement and concrete. Traditional SCMs—such as fly ash, ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBFS), and silica fume—can be used to partially replace the clinker used in cement or the cement content used in concrete. This can have both sustainability and cost benefits, but SCMs are typically not fully leveraged.
In many markets, local and regional standards limit the volume of traditional SCMs in cement based on their hydraulic and cementitious properties. For example, the European Union limits fly ash to a maximum of 35 percent, whereas the United States limits it to 40 percent. New SCMs such as calcined clay, limestone, and recycled concrete may require a reevaluation of these standards to maximise both the performance and decarbonisation potential of cement and concrete, particularly as the availability of traditional SCMs decreases.

Exploring Long Term Benefits of SCMs
SCMs are materials that can be used in cement manufacturing to partially replace traditional Portland cement clinker, thereby reducing the environmental impact of cement production. The incorporation of SCMs in cement helps reduce the carbon footprint, energy consumption and natural resource usage associated with cement production.
Some of the most used SCMs are:
• Fly ash is a fine, powdery byproduct of coal combustion in power plants. It is rich in silica and alumina and is often used as an SCM in cement production. When properly processed and blended, fly ash can improve concrete workability, reduce heat of hydration, and enhance long-term durability.
• Blast furnace slag is a byproduct of iron production and consists of glassy granules with latent hydraulic properties. Ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) is commonly used as an SCM in cement to improve concrete properties and reduce the heat of hydration.
• Silica fume is a very fine, amorphous silicon dioxide powder obtained from the production of silicon and ferrosilicon alloys. It is highly reactive and is used in small quantities to enhance the strength, durability, and impermeability
of concrete.
• Natural pozzolans, such as calcined clay, calcined shale, or volcanic ash, can be used as SCMs in cement manufacturing. They are rich in reactive silica and alumina and can improve concrete performance when properly processed and blended.
• Limestone and calcined clays (LC3) are materials that can be used in cement to reduce the clinker content. Limestone and clay are mixed with clinker, reducing the carbon dioxide emissions associated with traditional Portland cement.
“Use of alternative fuels and raw materials impacts the emission rates of the cement plant. 3 to 4 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions are caused by landfills. Use of alternative fuels and raw materials avoids formation of dioxins and furans and
reduces Nox generation” says Amarjit Bhowmic, GM – Procurement (AFR Incharge), Heidelberg Cement India.
“CEMS is the quantity of hazardous substances coming from the stacks, measurements are performed every 2 seconds and are recorded in a secured place, where human access is not possible. Annual spot checks are done by a third party” he adds.

IMPACT OF SCMs
The use of SCMs in the production of cement can have several significant impacts, both positive and negative, on the cement manufacturing process. The most significant positive impact of using SCMs is the reduction in carbon emissions. SCMs allow for a partial replacement of clinker, which is the most energy-intensive and carbon-intensive component in cement production.
By using SCMs, cement manufacturers can reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, as clinker production is responsible for a substantial portion of the carbon footprint associated with cement. Additionally, the incorporation of SCMs typically requires less energy compared to clinker production, leading to cost savings and environmental benefits. This reduction in energy consumption also contributes to environmental sustainability by conserving natural resources.
Many SCMs can enhance the performance of cement, such as increasing durability, reducing heat of hydration, and improving workability. This can lead to better-quality concrete and greater customer satisfaction. Furthermore, SCMs are often derived from industrial byproducts or waste materials, and their use in cement production helps repurpose
and recycle these materials, reducing the need for landfill disposal.
Dr Hegde explains how by incorporating 20 per cent fly ash, a common SCM, into its cement mix, the plant can realise significant cost savings, in the following ways:
• Reduced raw material costs: Assuming a cost savings of Rs 200 per tonne (as fly ash is typically cheaper than clinker), the annual savings would be Rs 20 million.
• Energy savings: A 10 per cent reduction in energy costs due to reduced clinker production would result in savings of Rs 10 million.
• Transportation costs: Savings from reduced transportation costs might amount to Rs 5 million annually.
• Regulatory benefits: Tax incentives and compliance benefits might contribute another Rs 5 million.
This hypothetical case illustrates that by incorporating SCMs into their cement production processes, Indian cement manufacturers can potentially save Rs 40 million annually. These cost savings can significantly impact the overall profitability of the business. Beyond cost savings, this practice aligns with sustainability goals, reduces carbon emissions, and opens doors to regulatory benefits.
Kabra affirms, “With the use of this supplementary cementitious material, we are saving substantial heat value, electricity and natural minerals.”
As the Indian construction industry continues to expand, cement manufacturers should get the new amendment done as early as possible from BIS for higher addition of SCMs in blended cements and also get the new IS codes in place for ‘Newer and Emerging Cementitious’ materials in the months to come.

Role of Technology
Technology is fundamental to the effective use of supplementary cementitious materials in cement plants. It allows for precise control over material handling, quality, mix design, and production processes, resulting in more sustainable and high-performance cement products. Additionally, technology helps cement plants comply with environmental regulations and reduce their carbon footprint, contributing to a greener and more sustainable cement industry.
Advanced systems streamline SCMs handling and storage, employing automated conveyors and robotics to efficiently transport materials while minimising manual labour. Quality control is bolstered by cutting-edge technology, with online sensors and analytical instruments continuously monitoring SCMs properties to meet stringent standards.
Furthermore, advanced grinding and blending technologies ensure the homogeneous mixing of SCMs, enhancing reactivity in the final cement product. In the kiln, energy-efficient designs and alternative fuels are deployed to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions during clinker production. Alternative clinker materials, activated SCMs, energy-efficient equipment, and emissions control technologies all contribute to a more sustainable and eco-friendly cement production process.

Conclusion
Cement manufacturing in India, like many parts of the world, faces the dual challenge of meeting the growing demand for construction materials while minimising its environmental impact. A critical strategy employed in this endeavour is the incorporation of SCMs in cement production.
As India continues to align its construction practices with global sustainability initiatives, these standards play a pivotal role in fostering innovation and responsible SCMs use in cement manufacturing. The collaboration between industry stakeholders and the BIS standards ensures that the nation’s construction materials are not only of high
quality but also environmentally conscious,contributing to a more sustainable and resilient built environment.

  • Kanika Mathur

Concrete

CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech

To build capacity of 100,000 tonnes a year

Published

on

By

Shares



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.

Continue Reading

Concrete

Protect Your Margins

Published

on

By

Shares

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

Continue Reading

Concrete

More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe

Published

on

By

Shares

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Video Thumbnail

    SIGN-UP FOR OUR GENERAL NEWSLETTER


    Trending News

    SUBSCRIBE TO THE NEWSLETTER

     

    Don't miss out on valuable insights and opportunities to connect with like minded professionals.

     


      This will close in 0 seconds