Economy & Market
Green cement: Smart strategy
Published
1 year agoon
By
admin
As India races to build its future, green cement emerges as a powerful tool to balance growth with sustainability. Through innovative technologies and supportive policies, the cement industry is sculpting a low-carbon pathway for construction—toward climate-resilient infrastructure.
India’s rapid urbanisation and infrastructure development have positioned it as the second-largest cement producer globally. However, this growth comes with environmental challenges, as the cement industry contributes approximately six per cent of the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions. In response, the industry is increasingly turning to green cement—a sustainable alternative that aims to reduce the environmental footprint of construction activities.
According to a report by Ernst & Young Parthenon (published February 2025), India is positioning itself as a pivotal force in the global green hydrogen economy, leveraging hydrogen’s potential as a clean and adaptable energy source to drive its decarbonisation. The National Green Hydrogen Mission, launched in January 2023, encourages the production and utilisation of this clean energy source. Green hydrogen is set to play a vital role in decarbonising sectors like steel, cement, and transportation, significantly reducing the nation’s carbon footprint.
Hard-to-abate industries like steel, cement, power and utilities, oil and gas, auto-OEMs are high energy consuming and high emitting. These industries are pivotal for economic growth and hence its quintessential for them to decarbonise their production processes if India is to meet its emissions-reduction goals. The emission contribution of these sectors is expected to grow in the coming years. EY analysis indicates that the critical manufacturing sectors would reach a mark of ~2 gigaton CO2 emissions annually in the next 15 years.
Green cement minimises emissions by using alternative materials and low-carbon production techniques. Primary raw materials for this include industrial waste products like blast furnace slag and fly ash, reducing the clinker-to-cement ratio and an effort to close the loop across the cement production value chain as well.
Satish Maheshwari, Chief Manufacturing Officer, Shree Cement, says, “The future of green cement in global construction is set for rapid transformation, driven by sustainability goals and evolving industry demands. With stricter carbon regulations and a growing push for green-certified buildings, the shift toward low-carbon materials is accelerating. Green cement offers more than just environmental benefits. Its superior tensile strength and corrosion resistance make it a viable alternative to traditional cement. Builders are increasingly recognising its role in enhancing long-term project value while reducing carbon footprints.”
India’s cement industry, the world’s second-largest, plays a pivotal role in the nation’s infrastructure and economic development. However, it also contributes approximately 5.8 per cent of the country’s CO2 emissions as of 2022. Recognising this environmental challenge, India has committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070, with an interim goal of sourcing 50 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030. The transition to green cement—produced using alternative fuels and raw materials—offers a viable pathway to reduce the industry’s carbon footprint while supporting sustainable growth.
Understanding green cement
Green cement refers to cementitious materials produced using sustainable methods, incorporating alternative raw materials and energy-efficient processes. Unlike traditional Portland cement, which relies heavily on clinker—a primary source of CO2 emissions—green cement utilises industrial by-products such as fly ash, slag and silica fume. These substitutions not only reduce carbon emissions but also enhance the durability and performance of the final product.
The IMARC Group’s report on the India Green Cement Market highlights the pivotal role of alternative raw materials in driving the sector’s growth. In 2024, the market was valued at USD 1.6 billion and is projected to reach USD 2.8 billion by 2033, exhibiting a CAGR of 6.11 per cent during 2025–2033. This growth is largely attributed to the increasing incorporation of industrial by-products such as fly ash, slag and silica fume in green cement production. These materials, by substituting traditional inputs like limestone and clay, not only reduce the reliance on finite natural resources but also lower the carbon emissions associated with cement manufacturing. Additionally, certain green cement formulations have the capability to absorb carbon dioxide during the curing process, further mitigating their environmental impact.
The report also underscores a broader industry shift towards sustainable construction practices in India. The adoption of alternative raw materials aligns with national efforts to reduce the environmental footprint of the construction sector. By leveraging industrial waste products, the green cement industry not only addresses waste management challenges but also contributes to the creation of more sustainable building materials. This approach supports India’s commitment to environmental sustainability and positions green cement as a viable solution for eco-conscious construction projects.
Market dynamics: Growth and projections
The Indian green cement market has witnessed significant growth, valued at US$ 2.31 billion in 2024 and projected to reach US$ 3.28 billion by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 5.85 per cent. This upward trajectory is driven by increasing environmental awareness, government initiatives promoting sustainable construction, and the rising demand for eco-friendly building materials.
A key driver of the Indian green cement market is the growing environmental awareness among consumers, builders and developers. Heightened by visible climate change impacts, media coverage, and educational initiatives, this awareness has fuelled demand for eco-friendly construction materials that reduce the carbon footprint. Green cement, with its lower embodied carbon, reduced energy consumption during production, and responsible use of raw materials, is increasingly preferred over traditional alternatives. Certifications such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and recognition from the Green Building Council of India (GBCI) have further incentivised the use of sustainable materials, motivating developers to
adopt green cement in order to meet regulatory and client expectations.
Manoj Rustagi, Chief Sustainability Officer, JSW Cement says, “In India, in the last couple of years, there have been many policy interventions which have been initiated. One of them, namely the carbon market is under notification; others like Green Public Procurement, Green Cement taxonomy and National CCUS Mission are in the advanced stages and are expected to be implemented in the next couple of years.”
This shift aligns with India’s broader sustainability goals. The country, one of the world’s largest producers of renewable energy, had achieved over 175 GW of renewable energy capacity—including solar and wind power—by 2024. With an ambitious target of reaching 500 GW by 2030, the focus on reducing environmental impact across sectors, including construction, is stronger than ever. As a result, green cement is emerging as a crucial component in India’s transition toward sustainable infrastructure and development.
Environmental impact: Reducing the carbon footprint
Traditional cement production emits approximately 0.66 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of cement. By adopting green cement technologies, this emission intensity can be reduced to 0.53 tonnes, representing a significant step toward decarbonising the sector. Moreover, the utilisation of industrial waste materials not only mitigates environmental pollution but also conserves natural resources.
Ganesh W Jirkuntwar, Senior Executive Director and National Manufacturing Head, Dalmia Cement (Bharat), says, “Low carbon cement not only matches but, in some cases, exceeds the durability of traditional cement. It offers superior resistance to chemical attack, chloride penetration and sulphate exposure, making it particularly well-suited for marine and industrial environments. Cements made with materials like fly ash or slag can achieve compressive strength comparable to that of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), though they may exhibit a slower initial strength gain that improves significantly over time.”
The Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) report, Evaluating Net-zero for the Indian Cement Industry, underscores the significant environmental impact of cement production in India. In the fiscal year 2018-19, the industry produced 337 million tonnes of cement, resulting in approximately 218 million tonnes of CO2 emissions. Notably, 56 per cent of these emissions stemmed from the calcination process during clinker production, 32 per cent from fuel combustion for process heating, and the remaining 12 per cent from electricity consumption. The report emphasises that while energy efficiency measures can reduce emissions intensity by 9 per cent, and the use of renewable energy and alternative fuels can contribute an additional 13 per cent reduction, a substantial 67 per cent of emissions would still need to be addressed through carbon management solutions such as carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS).
Financially, the transition to a net-zero cement industry is substantial. The report estimates a requirement of US$ 334 billion in capital expenditure and an additional US$ 3 billion in annual operating costs to achieve full decarbonisation. However, it also highlights that implementing decarbonisation measures with negative mitigation costs can reduce emissions intensity by 20 per cent and even lower the cost of cement by 3 per cent. Further reductions up to 32 per cent in emissions intensity can be achieved without increasing current production costs by adopting efficient technologies and practices. Nevertheless, achieving net-zero emissions would necessitate the adoption of more expensive technologies like CCUS, which could increase the cost of cement by 19 to 107 per cent, depending on the specific methods employed.
Radhika Choudary, Co-Founder and Director, Freyr Energy, says, “Solar-powered plants amplify the environmental benefits of green cement by ensuring that its production processes—from raw material handling to kiln operations—are powered by clean energy. This reduces greenhouse gas emissions across every stage of the cement’s lifecycle. In addition, leveraging solar energy aligns with emerging green building certifications and sustainability frameworks, making the final product more attractive to eco-conscious developers and construction companies. By adopting solar energy holistically, cement manufacturers not only meet regulatory standards but also position themselves as industry leaders in climate-resilient infrastructure.”
Technological innovations driving green cement
Advancements in technology are central to the production of green cement in India. Innovations include the use of alternative raw materials such as fly ash, slag, and calcined clay, which reduce the reliance on traditional clinker and lower CO2 emissions. Additionally, energy-efficient manufacturing processes and the adoption of renewable energy sources are contributing to more sustainable cement production. By embracing these technological advancements, India’s cement sector can progress towards its decarbonisation goals, aligning with national and global sustainability targets.
Several technological advancements are propelling the adoption of green cement in India:
- Alternative raw materials: Incorporating fly ash, slag, and other industrial by-products reduces reliance on clinker and lowers CO2 emissions.
- Energy-efficient processes: Implementing waste heat recovery systems and optimising kiln operations enhance energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- Carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS): CCUS is emerging as a critical strategy for decarbonising India’s cement sector. Given that cement production is responsible for a significant share of industrial CO2 emissions, integrating CCUS technologies can substantially mitigate environmental impacts. The Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) and the Global CCS Institute have identified potential CO2 storage sites across India, including saline formations and depleted oil and gas fields, which could be instrumental in implementing CCUS at scale.
Implementing CCUS in India requires a collaborative approach involving industry stakeholders, policymakers, and financial institutions. Developing supportive policy frameworks and financing mechanisms is essential to facilitate the deployment of CCUS technologies. Moreover, establishing CO2 hubs and infrastructure for transportation and storage will be crucial to the success of CCUS initiatives in the cement industry.
Dr Yogendra Kanitkar, VP – Research and Development, Pi Green Innovations, says, “CCUS is highly critical. If you are exporting to carbon-sensitive markets, you are likely to be hit with a carbon tariff. The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is one such example. Even within India, the Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS) has been notified, and around 283 entities have been obligated to reduce their CO2 footprints. So, it’s extremely important for Indian industries to wake up to this reality. If you want to remain competitive in foreign markets, adopting CCUS is non-negotiable.”
Policy framework and government initiatives
The Indian government has introduced several policies to promote sustainable construction practices:
- Perform, Achieve, and Trade (PAT) Scheme: Encourages industries to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions.
- National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC): Outlines strategies for promoting sustainable development and reducing carbon emissions across various sectors.
- Incentives for green buildings: Provides tax benefits and subsidies for adopting eco-friendly construction materials and practices.
These initiatives aim to align the cement industry with India’s commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070.
Challenges and barriers to adoption
Despite the promising outlook, several challenges hinder the widespread adoption of green cement:
- Cost implications: The initial investment for green cement technologies can be high, deterring small and medium-sized enterprises. The cost for decarbonising India’s cement industry amounts to more than US$330 billion in capital expenses and over US$3 billion in annual operating expenses, according to a report by Ernst & Young Parthenon (published February 2025)
- Lack of awareness: Limited knowledge about the benefits and availability of green cement among consumers and builders affects demand.
- Regulatory hurdles: Inconsistent regulations and standards across states can create confusion and impede adoption.
- Supply chain constraints: Ensuring a consistent supply of alternative raw materials like fly ash and slag is crucial for sustained production.
Future outlook: Strategies for sustainable growth
To overcome these challenges and promote the adoption of green cement, the following strategies can be implemented:
- Research and development: Investing in R&D to develop cost-effective and efficient green cement technologies.
- Public-private partnerships: Collaborations between government bodies and private companies can facilitate knowledge sharing and resource pooling.
- Education and training: Conducting awareness campaigns and training programs for stakeholders in the construction industry.
- Standardisation of regulations: Establishing uniform standards and certifications for green cement to streamline adoption.
Conclusion
The transition to green cement represents a transformative opportunity for India’s cement industry to align economic growth with environmental responsibility. As the country continues to urbanise and expand its infrastructure, the adoption of sustainable practices becomes not just desirable, but essential. Green cement offers a viable pathway to reduce the carbon intensity of construction through innovative technologies, alternative raw materials, and energy-efficient production processes. With the support of robust policy frameworks like the National Green Hydrogen Mission and Perform, Achieve and Trade (PAT) Scheme, the industry is well-positioned to meet the dual goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and maintaining its critical role in national development.
However, realising the full potential of green cement requires a coordinated, multi-stakeholder approach involving government, industry, academia, and financial institutions. Addressing cost barriers, improving supply chain logistics, and raising awareness among end-users are essential for scaling adoption. As India targets net-zero emissions by 2070, with interim renewable energy and efficiency milestones, green cement will play a pivotal role in the nation’s decarbonisation journey. By investing in innovation, standardisation, and education, India can emerge as a global leader in sustainable construction and set a powerful precedent for other developing economies facing similar climate and infrastructure challenges.
– Kanika Mathur
You may like
In a research-backed article, Dr SB Hegde examines why carbon-adjusted profitability and LC3 will decide the next set of winners in cement manufacturing.
The Indian cement industry has achieved world-class operational efficiency through lower specific energy consumption, high plant utilisation and a reduced average clinker factor of approximately 67.5 per cent. These traditional measures of operational excellence remain essential. However, they are no longer sufficient. Carbon now carries a measurable financial cost under India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS) and under European carbon markets. Future leadership will be defined by carbon-adjusted profitability, the ability to generate strong returns while systematically lowering the carbon intensity of every ton sold.
Limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) offers a practical, scalable pathway to achieve this dual objective. By replacing up to 50 per cent of clinker with calcined clay and limestone, LC3 can reduce CO2 emissions by 30–40 per cent while delivering comparable or superior durability performance.
This article examines the technical foundations of LC3, European industrial practices, the emerging Indian carbon market and a concrete roadmap for Indian companies to embed carbon-adjusted metrics and LC3 into daily operations, incentives and commercial strategy.
Limits of traditional operational excellence
For many years, plant performance has been judged primarily by five indicators: specific heat consumption, specific power consumption, kiln and mill utilisation, clinker factor and overall equipment effectiveness. These metrics drove continuous improvement and helped the industry reduce energy use and increase the share of blended cement. Three structural changes have rendered them incomplete as sole measures of success.
First, carbon now carries a real or opportunity cost. Plants that improve volume or lower cash cost while raising or stagnating emissions intensity create a hidden liability that will surface as CCTS trading matures and as green procurement expands.
Second, lower-carbon products such as LC3 and high-performance blended cements are creating differentiated market segments. Customers in infrastructure, real estate and export-oriented construction are beginning to specify embodied-carbon limits.
Third, investors and lenders increasingly treat carbon intensity as a financial risk factor. Traditional KPIs can mask the divergence between short-term cash profit and long-term carbon-adjusted value.
What is carbon-adjusted profitability?
Carbon-adjusted profitability evaluates normal profit after explicit adjustment for carbon performance. A practical expression is:
Carbon-Adjusted EBITDA = Conventional EBITDA – Carbon Cost + Green Premium Income
Carbon cost may be an internal carbon price, the actual cost of purchasing Carbon Credit Certificates under CCTS, or the opportunity cost of high emissions relative to peers. Green premium income arises when customers pay more for verified lower-carbon cement or when the company sells surplus credits. Tracking both conventional and carbon-adjusted profit side-by-side gives management a clearer picture of value creation under evolving market rules.
Table 1. Traditional KPIs versus Carbon-Adjusted Leadership Metrics
Traditional Focus New Leadership Metric Why It Matters
Specific energy consumption Emissions intensity (kg CO2/t cement) Directly linked to future CCTS and CBAM costs
Kiln utilisation Carbon-adjusted contribution margin Reveals true value of incremental volume
Clinker factor Share of lower-carbon products sold (incl. LC3) Measures commercial success of the transition
Power cost per tonne Effective carbon cost per tonne sold Expose hidden liabilities
Absolute EBITDA Carbon-adjusted EBITDA + green premium Aligning profit with future market reality
LC3: Technical foundations and performance advantages
LC3 is a ternary blended cement that typically combines approximately 50 per cent clinker, 30 per cent calcined clay, 15 per cent limestone and 5 per cent gypsum (the classic LC3-50 formulation). The decisive technical advantage is that clay is calcined at 700–850 °C, far below the 1,450 °C required for clinker production. This lower temperature, together with the substantial reduction in clinker content, delivers CO2 reductions of 30–40 per cent relative to ordinary Portland cement (OPC).
Chemistry is synergistic. Calcined kaolinitic clay (metakaolin) reacts with calcium hydroxide from clinker hydration and with limestone to form additional C-A-S-H gel and carboaluminate phases. These phases densify the microstructure, reduce porosity and improve durability.
Field experience shows superior resistance to chloride ingress, sulphate attack and alkali–silica reaction. Early-age strength can match OPC with high-reactivity clays; later-age strengths routinely meet 42.5 and 52.5 grade requirements.
Importantly, LC3 does not require high-purity kaolin. Clays with 40 per cent or even lower kaolinite content can be activated successfully, expanding raw-material availability across India. Calcination can use adapted rotary kilns or dedicated flash calciners, making the technology compatible with existing plant infrastructure and far less capital-intensive than carbon capture.
Economic analyses show that LC3 can be produced at equal or lower cost than OPC in many locations because of reduced energy demand and cheaper clay. Life-cycle assessments consistently report 30–40 per cent lower embodied CO2 per tonne of cement.
Table 2. Comparative profile: OPC versus LC3-50
Parameter OPC LC3-50
Typical clinker content ~95 per cent ~50 per cent
CO2 emissions (relative) Baseline (≈0.85 t CO2/t cement process + fuel) 30–40 per cent lower
Clay calcination temperature Not applicable 700–850 °C
Key hydration products C-S-H, portlandite, ettringite C-A-S-H + carboaluminates
Chloride & sulphate resistance Good Superior
Production cost potential Baseline Equal or lower in most locations
Infrastructure compatibility Existing High (minor adaptations)
In India, commercial adoption has begun in earnest. JK Cement commenced the first commercial production of LC3 in the Indian subcontinent at its Mangrol plant in Rajasthan in 2025 under BIS standard IS 18189.
By early 2026, approximately 2,000 tonnes had been produced and sold, avoiding an estimated 500 tonnes of CO2. JK Lakshmi Cement followed with commercial launch of its Green PRO LC3 grade from the Jaykaypuram plant. As of mid-2026, two producers are supplying LC3 to the market. The first large-scale infrastructure application is the Noida International Airport (Jewar), where LC3 was used in the runway and a building complex, demonstrating full constructability and performance under demanding conditions. These early volumes are still small relative to national cement demand, but they mark the critical transition from pilot to commercial reality. Companies that scale capacity now will be positioned to capture both CCTS credits and emerging green-procurement demand.
Why the shift is accelerating
According to the World Bank’s State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2026, direct carbon pricing now covers nearly 30 per cent of global greenhouse-gas emissions and generated more than US$107 billion in public revenue in 2025. The average global carbon price stands at approximately US$21 per tonne, although regional prices vary widely.
In Europe, the EU ETS price has traded near €80–85 per tonen in mid-2026. Free allocation for cement is being withdrawn in parallel with CBAM. European producers therefore face a clear signal: every tonne of avoided CO2 improves both compliance and competitiveness. Holcim has scaled calcined-clay production, including Europe’s first dedicated line at Saint-Pierre-la-Cour (France) and a second line in the Czech Republic (2026). Heidelberg Materials, Cementir (FUTURECEM) and others have commercialised low-clinker calcined-clay blends across multiple markets, showing that carbon-adjusted profitability is already reshaping capital allocation in the world’s most mature carbon market.India’s CCTS is now operational. Binding emission intensity targets apply to 186 cement facilities for FY 2025–26 and FY 2026–27. Average required reductions for integrated plants are modest (around 2.7 per cent by FY 2027), yet the direction is clear.
Trading of Carbon Credit Certificates is expected in the second half of 2026, with early prices likely in the `800–1,500 per tonne range. Plants that outperform targets can sell credits; those that underperform must buy them or face compensation. Cement is well positioned to be a net supplier of credits if clinker factor continues to fall through LC3 and other low-clinker systems.
Way forward for India
India starts from a strong baseline, world-class energy efficiency and a clinker factor already lower than the global average. The next competitive frontier is the deliberate reduction of process emissions through clinker substitution at scale. LC3 is uniquely suited to Indian conditions because suitable clays are widely distributed, the technology fits existing kiln and grinding infrastructure, and the resulting product can meet the performance demands of both infrastructure and building construction.
A practical national pathway contains five interlocking elements:
- Standards and acceptance: Accelerated finalisation and promotion of BIS specifications for calcined-clay and limestone–calcined-clay cements will remove a key barrier to commercial uptake. Alignment with European practice (EN 197-5) can facilitate knowledge transfer and export readiness.
- Supply-chain development: Investment in flash calcination capacity and systematic characterisation of regional clay deposits will secure reliable, low-cost feedstock. Existing rotary kilns can be adapted for initial volumes while dedicated calciners are built.
- Incentive alignment: Part of variable compensation for plant managers, sales teams and senior leadership should be linked to emissions intensity reduction and to the volume of lower-carbon products (including LC3) sold. Without this link, traditional volume and cost targets will continue to dominate behaviour.
- Product-level carbon accounting: Reliable measurement of emissions intensity at the individual cement grade level, supported by third-party verification where required, is essential for both CCTS compliance and credible green claims.
- Demand-side pull: Green public procurement policies that specify maximum embodied-carbon thresholds for major infrastructure projects will create a predictable market for LC3 and other low-carbon cements, accelerating scale and cost reduction.
Companies that treat LC3 as a strategic product line rather than a niche offering will be better positioned to generate surplus Carbon Credit Certificates, capture any emerging green premium, and protect margins as carbon costs rise.
Organisational changes required
Technical capability alone is insufficient. Three organisational shifts are required.
Daily management: Emissions intensity must appear on the same daily and monthly dashboards as heat consumption, power consumption and utilization. Plant reviews should examine both conventional and carbon-adjusted results.
Incentives: A meaningful portion of bonuses for plant heads, technical teams and sales leadership should be tied to lower emissions intensity and successful commercialisation of LC3 and other low-carbon grades.
Commercial approach: Sales teams need clear volume and pricing targets for lower-carbon products, supported by technical service that helps customers specify and place the material correctly. Without commercial pull, excellent technical performance remains under-utilised.
Table 3. Three-stage roadmap to carbon-adjusted profitability
Time Horizon Priority Actions Expected Outcome
Next 12 months Add emissions intensity to plant dashboards; establish internal carbon price; initiate LC3 pilot production and customer trials Visibility and early organisational learning
12–24 months Revise incentive systems; scale LC3 and other low-carbon grades to key accounts; secure third-party verification capability People and sales aligned with carbon goals
24–36 months Embed carbon-adjusted metrics in board reporting and capital allocation; expand calcined-clay capacity Full system integration and competitive advantage
Questions senior leaders should ask
Boards can accelerate the transition by insisting on answers to a short list of questions:
• Is our carbon-adjusted profit improving, stable or declining relative to conventional EBITDA?
• Did recent volume growth improve or worsen our emissions intensity?
• What share of sales already comes from lower-carbon products, including LC3, and what is the trajectory?
• How exposed is our capital expenditure plan to rising carbon costs under CCTS and potential CBAM-related requirements?
• Do our incentive systems still reward only volume and cost, or have they been updated to include carbon performance?
Treating carbon with the same seriousness as energy cost or kiln utilization does not diminish operational excellence; it expands the definition of excellence to match the new competitive reality.
Looking ahead
By 2030 the gap between leading and lagging cement companies will not be decided by who records the lowest specific heat consumption. It will be decided by who delivers the strongest carbon-adjusted profits.
Absolute emissions may still rise as national production grows. That is not the issue. Companies that reduce intensity year after year and successfully sell cleaner products will pull ahead in both domestic and export markets. Those that do not will fall behind, even if their traditional efficiency numbers look strong.
Operational excellence built the Indian cement industry. It remains the foundation. It is no longer the complete picture. Carbon-adjusted profitability is the clearer measure of success.
LC3 is not a distant technology. It is available now. It cuts CO3 by 30–40 per cent, works with existing plants, and is already in commercial production in India. Companies that treat it as a strategic product, not a pilot, will protect their margins and generate tradable credits.
Leaders who act now will place carbon metrics on daily dashboards, link incentives to intensity reduction and LC3 sales, invest in calcined-clay capacity, and build commercial capability to sell lower-carbon products. They will shape the next chapter of the industry.
References
- World Bank. (2026). State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2026. Washington, DC: World Bank Group.
- International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP). (2026). India Carbon Credit Trading Scheme – Status and Coverage. Berlin: ICAP.
- Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change / Bureau of Energy Efficiency. (2025). Greenhouse Gases Emission Intensity Target Rules, 2025. New Delhi: Government of India.
- Scrivener, K., Martirena, F., Bishnoi, S., & Maity, S. (2018). Calcined clay limestone cements (LC3). Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 49–56.
- RMI. (2024). The Business Case for LC3. Rocky Mountain Institute.
- European Commission. (2026). EU Emissions Trading System – Allowance Price Data and Free Allocation Phase-out Schedule. Brussels.
- Holcim. (2025–2026). Scaling Calcined Clay for Sustainable Building – Corporate Updates on European and Latin American Capacity. Zurich: Holcim Ltd.
- LC3 Project / EPFL. (2026). LC3 – A Guide to Best Practices for Scalable, Affordable and Sustainable Low-Carbon Building. Lausanne: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
- Business Today / Industry Reports. (2026). First Large-Scale LC3 Application at Noida International Airport, Jewar. New Delhi.
- NITI Aayog / Industry Analyses. (2026). Roadmap and Baseline Performance Indicators for the Indian Cement Sector. New Delhi.
- Springer / Innovative Infrastructure Solutions. (2026). LC3 Systems: A Review of Chemistry, Performance, Durability and Sustainability toward Market Adoption.
- Cementir Holding / Industry Sources. (2025–2026). FUTURECEM and Related Low-Clinker Technologies in Europe.
- Climate Risk Horizons & Independent Analyses. (2026). Assessment of Emission Intensity Targets under India’s CCTS for Cement and Other Hard-to-Abate Sectors.
- GCCA / TERI. (Various years). Decarbonization Roadmaps for the Indian Cement Industry.
- EN 197-5:2021. Cement – Part 5: Portland-composite cement CEM II/C-M and Composite cement CEM VI. European Committee for Standardization.
Concrete
More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe
Published
3 days agoon
August 28, 2026By
admin
Dijam Panigrahi makes a counterintuitive but data-backed argument that routing every sensor alert through human approval does not make cement plants safer.
India’s cement industry has spent the last two years wiring kilns, mills and coolers with sensors and automated control systems, and the safety case for doing so is strong on paper. Contract workers still make up the majority of the industry’s workforce, and fatal accidents remain a recurring problem. The Indian National Cement Workers Federation has noted that around 83 per cent of workers in the sector hold precarious positions, a fact that resurfaced after an oxygen cylinder explosion killed three contract workers at a plant in Chhattisgarh.
Industry tallies compiled by IndustriALL found cement plants recorded at least seventeen accidents in one year with 21 workers killed, and ten accidents the following year with nine killed, most of them contract staff. Automated monitoring, in theory, closes that gap. A sensor never gets complacent and never skips a check because a shift is short staffed.
However, plants that respond by routing every anomaly reading to a person for approval are quietly building a system that fails the same way understaffing does. When operators receive dozens of flagged deviations a shift, most of them minor, they learn a simple lesson: the fastest way through the queue is to approve without reading closely. The safety benefit disappears, not because the technology failed, but because the humans supervising it adapted to the volume.
Why alerts get ignored
A study cited by manufacturing technology publisher Applied SmartFactory found more than 95 per cent of alarms in a semiconductor fab were low priority, and only about 4 per cent ever triggered an action, with just 100 out of 5,000 alarms accounting for 70 per cent of all alarm activity. The mechanism is the same whether the trigger is a vibration sensor or an AI model flagging a kiln temperature swing. Once the ratio of noise to signal crosses a threshold, workers stop treating the system as a decision aid and start treating it as a formality to clear.
The scale of AI deployment underway makes this more than a theoretical risk. Stanford’s 2026 AI Index Report found organisational adoption of AI has reached 88 per cent, even as documented AI incidents rose to 362 in 2025, up sharply from 233 the year before, according to analysis of the report. The Index also found only about a third of organisations have adopted a formal governance framework, with NIST’s AI Risk Management Framework cited by 33 per cent and ISO/IEC 42001 cited by 36 per cent.
Most manufacturers are deploying monitoring systems faster than they are building the judgment for when a flagged event actually needs a person’s attention. In India, plants run by JK Cement have begun pairing CCTV feeds with AI to define safe zones around heavy machinery, a promising direction that still depends on operators trusting and reading the alerts the system generates.
A three-tier model for cement plant
The fix is not less monitoring or more monitoring. It is classifying decisions by risk and by novelty, rather than treating human oversight as a single switch that is either on or off. A workable model sorts factory floor events into three tiers.
The first tier, proceed, covers deviations the plant has seen before that fall within known safe bounds, such as a kiln feed rate adjustment within an established range. These should run without a stop for approval, because routing them to a person only trains that person to click through.
The second tier, pause, covers events that are unusual but not yet dangerous, such as a vibration reading trending toward a limit or a fuel blend shifting outside its typical mix. These warrant a brief human check before the system proceeds, giving an operator the chance to apply judgment the model does not yet have.
The third tier, escalate, covers events that are both high risk and unfamiliar, such as a pressure reading combined with a temperature spike that has no close precedent in the plant’s history. These should stop the process entirely and require a decision from someone with the authority to shut down a line.
Who should set the threshold
Where these tiers get drawn matters as much as the framework itself. Threshold setting is frequently handed to the vendor supplying the monitoring software or to a plant’s IT department, both of which understand the technology but not the specific tolerances of a given kiln, mill or line. Operations staff, who know that a particular grinding unit runs hotter under monsoon humidity or that a calciner behaves differently after a refractory reline, are better positioned to calibrate what counts as routine on their own equipment.
Handing threshold ownership to operations does not remove IT or vendors from the process, but it puts the calibration decision closest to the people who live with its consequences on the floor.
Signals that oversight is actually working
A few concrete indicators reveal whether a monitoring setup is functioning as intended or simply providing the appearance of safety. The escalation rate over time is the first: a rate that stays flat or climbs slowly as operations mature is healthy, while one that spikes and then falls sharply often means operators have started overriding the system rather than engaging with it. Time to resolution is the second: escalations that take progressively longer to close suggest fatigue or confusion about ownership, not diligence. The third, and most telling, is how accurate the system’s own uncertainty estimates turn out to be, meaning whether events flagged as high risk actually correlated with real incidents, and whether events waved through stayed incident free. A system whose escalations do not track with actual outcomes trains operators toward the same complacency that unmonitored equipment produces.
None of this argues against automation in Indian cement manufacturing, where a labor structure built on contract work and a track record of serious accidents make better monitoring an urgent need. It argues for treating human oversight as a design problem with three distinct settings, rather than a single
dial turned up whenever a plant wants to look safer on paper.
About the author:
Dijam Panigrahi, Co-founder and COO, GridRaster, is a spatial computing platform for industrial enterprises and manufacturers.
Concrete
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership
Published
3 days agoon
August 28, 2026By
admin
Anuj Kumar Mathur, Safety Consultant, stresses on the importance of closing the enduring gap between what safety systems say on paper and what actually happens on the plant floor.
Robust safety manuals, certified PPE and digital monitoring systems mean little if the culture on the plant floor does not enforce them. Safety Consultant Anuj Kumar Mathur has spent enough time in high-risk operations to know precisely where that gap opens and why it persists. In this exclusive interaction, he suggests feasible ways to strengthen the safety culture at a manufacturing unit.
Having led safety across high-risk fuel operations, what lessons can the cement industry adopt to strengthen its safety culture beyond regulatory compliance?
Beyond regulatory compliance, the cement industry should embed visible leadership commitment, proactive risk assessment, process safety management, strong contractor control, near-miss learning, and employee engagement to build a resilient safety culture that prioritises prevention, operational discipline and continuous improvement over mere compliance.
As cement plants become increasingly automated and digitally connected, how should organisations redefine their approach to process safety and operational risk?
As cement plants become increasingly automated, organisations should integrate process safety with digital risk management by strengthening cybersecurity, real-time monitoring, predictive maintenance, management of change and workforce competency to ensure safe, reliable and resilient operations.
What are the most common gaps between having robust safety systems on paper and achieving consistent safety performance on the ground?
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership commitment on ground, weak safety culture, inadequate supervision, poor risk communication, insufficient workforce engagement specially, ineffective training and failure to translate procedures into disciplined execution, accountability and continuous monitoring at the operational level.
How can cement manufacturers better integrate contractor safety, leadership accountability and workforce behaviour to build a truly zero-harm workplace?
Manufacturers can achieve a zero-harm workplace by enforcing uniform safety standards for employees and contractors, strengthening leadership accountability, promoting proactive hazard reporting, enhancing competency through continuous training and fostering a culture where safe behaviour is recognised, expected and consistently practiced
What emerging technologies and safety practices do you believe will have the greatest impact on risk prevention in cement manufacturing over the next decade?
Artificial intelligence, IoT-enabled monitoring, predictive analytics, digital twins, wearable safety devices, drones, robotics and advanced process automation will significantly enhance hazard detection, predictive maintenance, real-time risk management, and worker protection, enabling safer and more resilient cement manufacturing.
IoT-enabled monitoring is the use of interconnected sensors and smart devices to continuously collect, transmit and analyse real-time data from equipment, processes and the work environment. This enables early detection of unsafe conditions, equipment failures, or abnormal operating parameters, allowing timely intervention before incidents occur.
In cement manufacturing, IoT-enabled monitoring can be used for:
• Monitoring kiln, crusher, and mill temperatures, pressures, and vibrations.
• Detecting overheating of bearings and motors to prevent failures.
• Monitoring dust concentration, gas leaks (CO, SO2, NOx), and oxygen levels.
• Tracking conveyor belt alignment and condition.
• Monitoring structural health of silos and
storage facilities.
• Tracking worker location and exposure to hazardous environments using wearable devices.
• Providing real-time alerts and predictive maintenance recommendations.
Benefits:
• Early hazard detection
• Reduced equipment downtime
• Improved process safety and reliability
• Lower maintenance costs
• Enhanced regulatory compliance
• Better decision-making through real-time data and analytics
In simple terms, IoT-enabled monitoring transforms periodic manual inspections into continuous, real-time surveillance of plant safety and equipment health.
CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech
Protect Your Margins
More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership
The Future of Vertical Material Handling
CarbonStrong Raises Rs 125 Million To Scale Low Carbon Cement Tech
Protect Your Margins
More Oversight Makes Cement Plants Less Safe
The biggest gap arises from inconsistent leadership

