Connect with us

Concrete

Efficient Processes for a Better Tomorrow

Published

on

Shares

AK Dembla, President and Managing Director, and Deepti Varshney, Deputy General Manager, KHD Humboldt Wedag India, address the issue of thermal energy consumption and the solutions they offer, including preheater cyclones and calciners, and insulation and specialised coatings.

India, being the second largest cement producer in the world, accounts for over 8 per cent of the global installation capacity, yet responsible for huge emissions. Around 70 per cent of total cement production in India revolves across top 20 companies.
Over a decade, the Indian cement industry has spotted uncertainties, increased fuel prices, environment load, sustainability, etc. In view of the relentless requirements of the cement industry, as a responsible partner KHD is steadily delivering and contributing its best for more than 160 years presenting a sterling example in fulfilling the responsibility as a prime technology supplier. Persistent development based on industry needs, which mainly focuses on a green environment, escorts the technology providers to ponder ahead and gear up to impart cement industry with the latest art of technology integrating the innovations leading to plant sustainability in long run. With depleting resources, the growing concerns for greenhouse emissions and sustainable practices, KHD with its visionary approach have unriddled that for consistent growth, the base forming principles should be acquired through sustainable life cycle.
Earlier, cement manufacturers used to set up small plants of about 1.5 MTPA max. But now, it’s more towards installing large capacities for clinkerisation that is >3.0 MTPA. Factors which stimulate manufacturers to set up a single huge capacity plant rather than opting for a small capacity plant comes with benefits like low investments, low transportation costs, installation of utilities, energy conservation, etc. Although huge capacity plants have enough advantages, some concerns always surface like machine maintenance and reliability. KHD, with its huge capacity plants, has proven that such issues can be tackled by selecting the right machinery, which not only meets the environmental requirements but keeps in view the demand grows, too.

Installing efficient systems
Evolvement of calciner series wherein it was developed over a time for usage of alternative fuels of varying quality and degree. The evolutions were made considering the requirement of industry to use more of alternative fuels than the noble non-renewable fuel sources. Today, focus is on efficient use of alternative fuels up to 90 per cent in desired systems thus decreasing the load on mother nature and contributing towards the ‘2050 Climate Ambition.’ Decreasing thermal energy consumption, which is addressed by developing the preheater cyclones and calciner by KHD, to seize radiation losses in the system to protect the environment. KHD furnish proper insulation in preheater and ducts along with special aluminium-based paints to retain the heat within the system and increase the availability for intrinsic processes.

Power generation from exhaust
It is necessary to dissociate economic growth associated with GHG emissions. Energy productivity is required as 50 per cent of total energy consumed by the industrial sector is wasted in the form of heat losses. In the context, Waste Heat Recovery (WHR) system installation has played a vital role towards the capturing waste heat losses utilisation for
power generation.
In accord with The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), the Indian cement sector has the highest potential to generate 1100 MW (2016 estimates) of clean energy through WHRS installation. This capability continues to grow proportionally with an increase in cement manufacturing capacity, bringing it close to 1.3 GW at current production capacity levels. WHRS with its full potential will help replacing energy requirements equivalent to 8.6 MT of coal, resulting in emissions savings of 12.8 MT of CO2 by the Indian cement industry.

Alternative raw materials for clinker production
Focusing on usage of alternative raw materials for clinker production without compromising on parameters and quality. Selected waste and by-products containing useful minerals such as alumina, calcium, iron and silica can be used as raw materials in kilns rather than using clay, limestone and shale. Some extent of 3 per cent slag can even be used in raw material replacing few traditional raw materials. One of the KHD plants in Novotroitsk, Russia, replaced up to 30 per cent of raw material for clinker production by copper slag, which is a byproduct from nearby industry. This iron corrective component (Martin Slag) material not only acts as alternative raw material but also produces heat and fulfils the heat requirement for the process. This has led to a world record of specific heat consumption of only 600 kCal/kg clinker.

Utilisation assessment of alternative fuels
Presently, utilisation of alternative fuel in the Indian cement industry is at low level. The country average stands at less than 6 per cent of thermal substitution rate (TSR) as compared to average TSR of about 40 per cent in the European cement industry. The usage of alternative fuel can be enhanced through concerted effort of characterisation, evaluating various types of Waste Derived Fuel (WDF) and initiating their suitable use in cement manufacturing. Database development on availability and characterisation of combustible waste, waste derived fuels and evaluation of international best practices and technology for waste management and utilisation and their adaptation for an Indian cement plant will additionally
be helpful.
The industry has a lot of potential to utilise alternative fuels in cement manufacturing with benefits in terms of conservation of natural resources and prevention of environmental hazards including mitigation of GreenHouse Gas Emission, hence serving the goal of sustainable growth and development in India. Industrial and mineral wastes from mineral processing industries, such as chemicals, metallurgy, petrochemical, power, paper and pulp accounts for more than 200MT out of which more than 6MT are hazardous and can be used alternatively in cement kilns. Today, many cement plants are exploring to collect all the municipal waste of the area, process it and use it as an alternative fuel. Keeping in view all these, long ago KHD has rolled down equipment to use alternative fuels of varying degrees and one such example is of combustion chamber.
The KHD combustion chamber is especially designed to burn the materials, which are coarse and lumpy in nature as well as difficult to ignite. The calciner process is ruled by classical dilemma, that temperature and oxygen levels need to be reduced to the maximum to increase production at reduced heat consumption and emission levels while a complete burn-out is still required to avoid CO-triggered failures. Adding to difficulty, increasingly more often secondary fuels of lumpy size and sometimes problematic combustion properties are fired, which must be given sufficient retention time to burn out and must be kept clear from the bricklining until they are not fully burnt. An optimised flow pattern of gas-meal-fuel suspension within the vessel is necessary to accomplish, without creating excessive calciner dimensions. The Calciner design is based on requirements of creation of subsequent zones with dedicated functions for controlled process of NOx reduction, staged combustion and mixing zone for a reliable final oxidisation on CO-remains.
KHD Pyrorotor® is a unique rotary combustion reactor that sustainably co-processes waste materials. Within the range of modular solutions from KHD for co-processing of alternative fuels in the clinker production process. The Pyrorotor® covers the demands for highest TSR rates of least pre-processed AF. Due to its high temperature process and longer residence time, it is suitable for nearly all types of coarse solid fuels. For burning fuels tertiary air is used as combustion air.
Emissions released from cement kilns, coming from physical and chemical reactions of raw materials and from combustion of fuels. Exit gases contain small quantities of chlorides, carbon monoxide, dust, fluorides, NOx, sulphur dioxides and smaller quantities of organic compounds and heavy metals like mercury (Hg). Presently, norms exist for dust, HCL, HF, Hg, NOx, SOx, TOC, Heavy Metals and Dioxin in India which are comparable or better as compared to other blooming countries. There is a system consisting of equipment to draw, condition and analyse the flue gas sample and provide a permanent record of emissions and process parameters continuously on a real time basis and is called Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS). It’s of vital importance to install a CEMS system as sources can be controlled after measuring emissions. However, some of the cement manufacturers in India have not installed CEMS in their cement plants. It needs to be a collaborative effort of Cement manufacturers, suppliers, consultants, and Govt. to achieve the objective of emission control. KHD is trying to ensure that all the plants equipped with KHD technology get CEMS implemented for environmental protection.
An example, equipment from KHD for reducing the emissions at source is the low NOx burner (Pyro-Jet® Burner). The most imperative features of burner are low NOx emissions, low primary air and flame (stable and uniform) characteristics. The flame of the Pyro-Jet® burner has both an internal recirculation zone and a long external one resulting in substantial NOx reduction.
Pyroclon®-R Low NOx AF is a special design calciner which attains retention time desired for complete burnout of fuel. Another prominent solution from KHD for reducing NOx emissions is the PYROREDOX® system where NOx coming from the kiln gets further reduced and formation of Fuel NOx is suppressed.
Concentrating more on low clinker to cement ratio besides, focusing on steps for reduced carbon print, is already underway in the cement industry. At present, India is one of the fastest moving cement industries towards this aspect of green cover. PSC, PPC and composite cements are the up going curves. The cement industry is well versed with utilisation and manufacturing of blended cement. KHD is one of the key suppliers for providing energy efficient technologies namely roller press grinding for blended cement production. It is estimated that decreasing the clinker ratio in production of cement contributes nearly 37 per cent CO2 reduction targeted. By promoting PPC and PSC cement in India, more than 85 per cent cement is produced as blended cement / composite cement (which has come into existence during the last 3-5 years). PPC allows 35 per cent fly-ash usage at present, whereas PSC allows 55-65 per cent granulated slag in the clinker. Pozzolana (fly-ash) increased usage in PPC up to 45 per cent can reduce carbon footprint further, which has a permissible limit up to 55 per cent in some of the European countries.

Modernisation and Upgradation
More focus is on modernisation and upgradation of existing set-ups, rather than building new production lines to increase capacity. Utilisation of existing kiln to its maximum potential is talk of art, which not only enhances clinker production but significantly contributes to improving the overall operational efficiency. Reduction in electrical and thermal and energy demands will aid in reducing the carbon footprint of existing plants.

Digitisation and Automation
At present time, a number of plants are operating in traditional, non-agile manner with manual or outdated technology infrastructure, while struggling to acquire and retain skilled workers in important roles. The potency of new enterprise-resource-planning systems, process-optimisation tools, and even predictive maintenance has lagged behind due to changed-management challenges and cultural differences between sites.
It’s a considerable fact that future cement plants will operate in dramatically different and green ways as of today’s plants, while achieving considerably lower operating costs and higher asset value through higher energy efficiency, yield and throughput. More targeted and effective maintenance lengthens the lifetime of equipment. Each plant’s environmental footprint is minimised, securing its licence to operate across locations and jurisdictions. For future cement plant volume will be of key focus rather than considering the value. Ecosystem variability lies in norms for real-time, fact-based decision making and continuous adjustments.

Conclusion
Presently, the path is towards shaping the industry to reach the highest point of the curve of sustainability vs time period. Cement manufacturers are taking a big leap for attaining the goals as established by various associations and global bodies. The positive aspects of decarbonisation of industry, capacity utilisations, productivity enhancements and controlled emissions are taking a big leap towards sustainability. The Indian cement industry has been working on the issue of its GHG emissions and has brought down the CO2 emission factor considerably. However, it requires more efforts to achieve the goals of Cement and Concrete Roadmap 2050 for the Net Zero Concrete. The leading cement and concrete companies in India have accepted the goal to achieve Net Zero Concrete by 2050 and committed to fully contribute to building a sustainable tomorrow. However, the industry requires increased efforts for newer technologies like renewable energy, novel cements, carbon capture and storage/utilisation.
Cement technology suppliers are in the process of rolling out these technologies with the main plants. KHD has done advanced work in this field and has solutions such as LC cement. As part of the ‘Made in India’ concept, KHD is also promoting more manufacturing in Indian workshops with improved quality which can aim at efficient reliability of the equipment. All these steps are keen steps to make the Indian cement industry bloom, achieving the roadmaps of carbon reduction, green environment, increased capacity to meet the demands and go in liaising with government plans.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
AK Dembla, President and Managing Director, was the founder president of Humboldt Wedag India in 2001. He has 36 years of experience in cement industry ranging from responsibility for CEO, profit and loss account, company operations, strategy and advisory support to parent companies. He has worked with Enexco Technologies (part of Beumer Group-Germany), Jaypee Cement, Gebr. Pfeiffer, Cimmco Birla Limited and NCCBM.

Deepti Varshney, Deputy General Manager, KHD Humboldt Wedag India, holds 16 years of work experience in the cement industry and is a passionate professional.

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