Concrete

Building Safety from the Ground Up

Published

5 months ago

August 5, 2025

admin

ICR explores how safety in the cement industry is evolving from a regulatory obligation to a strategic priority—driven by PPE compliance, digital tools, contractor management, and a safety-first mindset. Through a mix of technology, training, and behavioural change, Indian cement companies are laying the foundation for safer, more resilient workplaces.

The cement industry operates in one of the most high-risk industrial environments, where workers face extreme temperatures, high dust levels, heavy machinery, and hazardous materials. From quarrying to pyro-processing and dispatch, nearly every stage carries the potential for serious injury if not managed properly. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), over 2.3?million people die annually from work-related accidents or diseases worldwide, with cement manufacturing a notable contributor. In India, the Directorate General Factory Advice Service and Labour Institutes (DGFASLI) recorded over 3,000 industrial accidents in 2022, many linked to heavy-material industries like cement. Common plant hazards include mechanical failures, falls from height, electrical risks, chemical exposure, and fire or explosion threats. The Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) reports that falls, machinery entanglement, and contractor-related incidents remain leading causes of fatalities globally.
Safety in cement is far more than compliance—it is a foundation of operational excellence, corporate responsibility, and worker dignity. Investment in safety equipment, training, and systems delivers measurable business value, from higher workforce retention to reduced downtime and stronger stakeholder trust. A 2021 International Finance Corporation (IFC) study found that companies with robust Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) frameworks had 10 to 15 per cent fewer shutdowns and up to 20 per cent higher productivity. In a capital-intensive sector with tight margins, a proactive safety culture is not a cost but a strategic asset.

Common hazards in cement manufacturing
Cement manufacturing is a complex, multi-stage process involving raw material extraction, grinding, pyroprocessing, cooling, and packaging—each phase bringing its own set of safety challenges. Workers in cement plants are routinely exposed to high levels of dust, heat, noise, mechanical hazards, heights, confined spaces, and chemical agents. For instance, dust from raw materials like limestone and clinker contains respirable crystalline silica, which can cause silicosis and other long-term respiratory issues if inhaled without proper protection. According to the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), workers in dusty industrial environments are 3–5 times more likely to develop occupational lung diseases compared to other sectors.
Heat and noise exposure are especially acute in areas like kilns, clinker coolers, and grinding units, where operational temperatures can exceed 1400°C and ambient noise levels often surpass 90 decibels—well above the occupational exposure limits set by the Directorate General Factory Advice Service and Labour Institutes (DGFASLI). Extended exposure to such conditions without proper personal protective equipment (PPE) can lead to heatstroke, permanent hearing damage, and fatigue-induced errors, which increase the likelihood of accidents. A study published in the Journal of Occupational Health in 2022 noted that nearly 40 per cent of surveyed cement plant workers experienced early signs of noise-induced hearing loss, highlighting the urgent need for auditory protection and environmental noise control.
Raju Ramchandran, SVP and Head Manufacturing – Eastern Region, Nuvoco Vistas, says, “Cement manufacturing is an intense, high-temperature and operation-heavy process, where safety is paramount at every stage. Mining operations within the industry bring their own set of hazards, with strict adherence to Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS) guidelines being essential. Exposure to dust is another area of concern, necessitating advanced dust suppression systems and protective equipment to safeguard workers’ health. Electrical safety and proper energy isolation are also crucial, given the complexity of the equipment involved. At Nuvoco, we tackle these risks with a layered approach combining engineering controls, digital monitoring and rigorous safety protocols backed by continuous training and regular mock drills to ensure preparedness for any eventuality. Safety is an unwavering commitment to safeguarding everyone who works in and around our plants.”
Another major concern lies in working at heights, especially during equipment maintenance or installation of vertical structures such as preheaters and silos. Falls remain a leading cause of fatalities in the global cement industry, according to the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA). In addition, confined spaces such as kilns, storage tanks, and maintenance tunnels pose serious risks due to restricted movement, poor ventilation, and the presence of toxic gases like CO2 or CO. Exposure to chemical hazards from fuel oils, lubricants, and additives like chromium compounds also calls for robust hazard communication and protective measures. The multifaceted nature of these risks underlines why safety in cement manufacturing must go beyond compliance—it requires a continuous commitment to hazard identification, mitigation, and a culture of proactive risk management.

Role of personal protective equipment
In the high-risk environment of cement manufacturing, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) plays a frontline role in safeguarding workers from a wide range of occupational hazards. From exposure to high temperatures and airborne particulate matter to mechanical injuries and chemical contact, the need for comprehensive, head-to-toe protection is non-negotiable. Standard PPE in cement plants typically includes hard hats, earplugs, respirators, safety goggles, flame-resistant clothing, cut-resistant gloves, and safety shoes compliant with IS 15298 or EN ISO 20345 standards. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), proper use of PPE can reduce workplace injury and illness by up to 40 per cent, yet studies by India’s Directorate General Factory Advice Service and Labour Institutes (DGFASLI) reveal that lack of proper PPE usage or ill-fitting gear continues to be a common root cause in many reported incidents in industrial settings.
Anuj Kumar Mathur, Industry Expert and Retd. DGM – Safety, Health and Environment, Indian Oil Corporation, explains that the cement manufacturing process involves exposure to a wide range of occupational hazards including dust, noise, high temperatures, mechanical injuries and chemical exposure. The use of appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is essential for safeguarding workers’ health and safety at every stage. PPE, however, serves as the last line of defence against occupational hazards in any industry. While engineering controls and administrative measures are essential, the proper selection, use, and maintenance of PPE can significantly reduce the risk of injury and illness.
Equally important is ensuring that PPE is not just available but also compliant with national and international safety norms. Indian Standards such as IS 2925 for helmets, IS 8519 for gloves, and IS 11226 for respiratory protection provide specific performance benchmarks tailored for heavy industries. In many leading cement plants, regular audits are now conducted to check PPE condition, fit, and user compliance. A recent report by the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) highlights that cement companies with strong PPE monitoring programs report significantly fewer recordable injuries per million man-hours. However, the challenge remains in ensuring contractor-level compliance, as outsourced workers often fall outside direct control systems. Bridging this gap through robust training, fit testing, and digital PPE tracking systems is becoming an industry best practice—and a critical component of building a truly safe and resilient cement workforce.

Fire safety in cement plants
Fire safety is a critical yet often underemphasised aspect of cement plant operations. The combination of high-temperature processes, combustible materials, heavy electrical loads, and complex machinery creates multiple ignition points across production and storage areas. Key fire risks in cement manufacturing include overheated bearings, short circuits, flammable oils and fuels, coal dust in mills, and welding or hot work activities during maintenance. According to a 2023 report by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), industrial fires caused an estimated $1.2 billion in direct property damage globally, with cement and mineral plants accounting for a significant share of incidents in developing economies. In India, several fire-related accidents in the cement sector have drawn attention to the urgent need for advanced fire suppression systems, periodic fire safety audits, and better-trained emergency response teams.
Priya Ajbani, Founder, Firescue, says, “High-risk industrial environments demand products that can perform under pressure literally and figuratively. In such cases, we focus on supplying robust, industrial-grade fire extinguishers, flexible sprinkler hose droppers that can be easily installed around tricky ductwork or high ceilings, and high-capacity hose reels with quality nozzles that ensure water pressure isn’t compromised. The key is to offer certified, tested equipment that meets international standards and lasts long despite heat, dust, and vibration- conditions that are typical in cement plants. At the end of the day, a good product doesn’t just save lives- it simplifies the fire safety process for the people who operate it on the ground.”
Modern fire safety in cement plants now goes beyond extinguishers and hose reels. Plants are increasingly deploying automatic fire detection and suppression systems, such as foam-based suppression in fuel storage areas, water mist systems for electrical rooms, and tube-based fire suppression for enclosed equipment like panels and conveyor belts. Fire audits, mandated under the Factories Act, 1948 and National Building Code (NBC), are conducted at regular intervals to assess readiness, check compliance, and recommend corrective actions. Additionally, leading cement manufacturers are investing in IoT-enabled hydrant systems and mobile-based emergency notification tools to improve incident response time. A 2022 study by the Indian Institute of Fire Engineers (IIFE) revealed that plants with digital fire safety systems experienced 35 per cent faster emergency response and 25 per cent lower downtime after fire-related events. As the sector moves toward more automated and sustainable operations, embedding robust fire safety frameworks remains a non-negotiable pillar for risk mitigation and operational resilience.

Automation and digital tools enhancing safety
As the cement industry embraces Industry 4.0, automation and digitalisation are playing a transformative role not only in improving operational efficiency but also in elevating workplace safety standards. Traditional safety practices are being augmented—and in many cases replaced—by intelligent systems such as Permit-to-Work (PTW) software, IoT-based monitoring, Behaviour-Based Safety (BBS) platforms, and real-time safety dashboards. These tools offer real-time visibility into safety compliance, worker behavior, equipment health, and hazardous conditions—enabling faster, more informed decision-making. According to a 2022 report by McKinsey & Company, industries implementing digital safety tools saw a 25 to 40 per cent reduction in recordable incidents, thanks to improved monitoring, predictive analytics, and timely intervention.
Ganesh W Jirkuntwar, Senior Executive Director and National Manufacturing Head, Dalmia Cement (Bharat), says, “At Dalmia, safety is embedded into daily work, not treated as a separate task. Integrating safety into day-to-day operations is critical to its sustainability. Every morning begins with structured toolbox talks mandatorily attended by all workforce and ‘Suraksha Vartalaps’, where teams collectively identify job-specific risks. Across units, daily safety reviews are held as part of the operations rhythm, with real-time data and feedback feeding directly into corrective actions.”
“Digital tools like the ‘KAVACH’ and ‘Boots on Ground’ platform allow supervisors to log observations, track unsafe conditions and monitor action closures with location-tagged evidence. The Permit to Work (PTW) system is fully digitised, ensuring consistent protocols and visibility for all critical jobs. These practices ensure safety is not a standalone agenda, but rather, an integral part of the operating DNA” he adds.
In the context of cement plants, these tools are particularly valuable given the scale, complexity, and inherent risks of operations. IoT sensors installed on kilns, conveyors, and high-risk zones can track temperature spikes, gas leaks, or unauthorised access to restricted areas. PTW systems ensure that only trained personnel perform critical tasks like confined space entry or hot work, reducing human error. Behaviour-Based Safety platforms use data analytics to identify unsafe acts and reinforce positive habits through coaching and alerts. Meanwhile, centralised safety dashboards provide plant managers with real-time alerts, compliance reports, and actionable insights—enabling them to proactively manage risk across multiple sites. A case study from Dalmia Cement revealed that the integration of mobile-based PTW and IoT-linked hydrant systems led to a 30 per cent improvement in emergency response time and a measurable drop in near-miss incidents. The message is clear: digital tools are no longer optional add-ons—they are now integral to building safer, smarter, and more accountable cement operations.

Training and behaviour-based safety
While equipment and protocols are essential, the foundation of any truly safe cement plant lies in the behaviour and preparedness of its workforce. Training and Behaviour-Based Safety (BBS) programs are now recognised as critical components in reducing accidents, empowering employees, and fostering a proactive safety culture. Cement plants are increasingly investing in structured skill development initiatives—ranging from Emergency Response Training (ERT) and safe equipment handling to hazard identification and near-miss reporting. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), nearly 80 per cent of workplace incidents globally are caused by unsafe behaviours rather than unsafe conditions—highlighting the need for consistent behavioural interventions alongside technical controls.
Sujeet Kumar Singh, Founder, HSESkillEdge, says, “Contractor and worker compliance for routine activities is effectively managed through a Contractor and Logistics Safety Management System, supported by rigorous training, on-the-job observations, and active worker engagement in risk assessments. This includes regular toolbox talks, safety skits during monthly safety gate meetings, and, most importantly, positive reinforcement through public recognition, praise for safe behaviours, and continuous feedback on observations related to at-risk behaviours or opportunities for improvement (OFIs).”
“The Indian cement industry has also taken a progressive step by initiating the development of a Safety Passport System for contractors, contract workers, and drivers. This initiative, in collaboration with the Global Cement and Concrete Association (India) and the National Safety Council of India, is highly practical and focuses on hand-holding and capacity building to ensure health and safety, especially in non-routine and high-risk jobs. I am truly grateful to be part of the core team driving this initiative, alongside corporate safety heads from all GCCA (India) member companies” he adds.
In the Indian cement sector, leading companies have adopted comprehensive BBS models that combine real-time observations, peer-to-peer feedback, coaching, and performance tracking. Training modules are also being digitised using 3D animations, e-learning platforms, and simulation-based safety drills to enhance retention and engagement. A 2023 report by the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) showed that plants with active BBS and workforce training programs reported 40 to 50 per cent fewer lost-time injuries (LTIs) than those relying only on physical safety systems. Furthermore, integrating behaviour-focused audits with standard operating procedures (SOPs) ensures that safety becomes second nature rather than a checklist. In essence, when safety becomes a mindset—nurtured through daily reinforcement and skill building—it transforms from a policy into a way of life on the shop floor.

Contractor safety management
In the cement industry, a significant portion of the workforce comprises contracted or third-party workers—particularly in operations such as maintenance, loading/unloading, material handling, and logistics. This creates a complex safety challenge, as contractors often operate outside the core company’s direct control systems, making it harder to enforce uniform safety protocols. In India, the Directorate General Factory Advice Service and Labour Institutes (DGFASLI) reported that nearly 40 per cent of serious industrial accidents in manufacturing units involved contract labour, largely due to inadequate training, lack of PPE compliance, and poor safety orientation. In cement plants, where high-risk environments are the norm, the lack of contractor safety governance can have severe and sometimes fatal consequences.
To address this, leading cement manufacturers have begun implementing structured Contractor Safety Management (CSM) programs that include prequalification audits, induction training, real-time safety tracking, and accountability frameworks. Some are also deploying digital ‘worker passport’ systems, which log training history, medical fitness, and access permissions for every contractor on site. The Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA) recommends integrating contractors into core Behaviour-Based Safety (BBS) programs, and ensuring they are part of regular tool-box talks, emergency drills, and incident investigations. In fact, a 2023 GCCA survey showed that cement plants with dedicated contractor safety governance reported 32 per cent fewer injuries among third-party workers compared to those without. Effective contractor safety isn’t just about regulatory compliance—it’s about aligning everyone on site with a common safety culture, where accountability and awareness are universal.

Conclusion
As the cement industry evolves to meet the demands of sustainability, scale, and operational excellence, the importance of a robust safety framework has never been greater. From managing high-risk environments and enforcing PPE compliance to leveraging automation, fire safety systems, and Behaviour-Based Safety (BBS) programs, the industry is steadily moving toward a culture where safety is not just enforced—but embedded. What’s clear is that safety must go beyond audits and checklists; it must become a continuous, organisation-wide commitment that includes not just full-time staff, but also contractors, suppliers, and every individual entering the plant gate.
The integration of digital tools, advanced training, and strict contractor safety management is not just about regulatory alignment—it is about building resilient operations that protect people, reduce downtime, and drive long-term value. With increasing awareness, global benchmarks, and support from industry bodies like the GCCA and CMA, Indian cement manufacturers are now well-positioned to lead by example. By putting “safety from the heart” into action—through technology, accountability, and culture—the industry can lay the foundation not just for stronger infrastructure, but for safer, smarter workplaces across the country.

– Kanika Mathur

Up Next

Zero Harm isn’t a target; it’s a mindset

Don't Miss

A proud milestone of India’s innovation and growth

Concrete

Cement Industry Backs Co-Processing to Tackle Global Waste

Industry bodies recently urged policy support for cement co-processing as waste solution

Published

21 hours ago

January 15, 2026

admin

Leading industry bodies, including the Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA), European Composites Industry Association, International Solid Waste Association – Africa, Mission Possible Partnership and the Global Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council, have issued a joint statement highlighting the cement industry’s potential role in addressing the growing global challenge of non-recyclable and non-reusable waste. The organisations have called for stronger policy support to unlock the full potential of cement industry co-processing as a safe, effective and sustainable waste management solution.

Co-processing enables both energy recovery and material recycling by using suitable waste to replace fossil fuels in cement kilns, while simultaneously recycling residual ash into the cement itself. This integrated approach delivers a zero-waste solution, reduces landfill dependence and complements conventional recycling by addressing waste streams that cannot be recycled or are contaminated.

Already recognised across regions including Europe, India, Latin America and North America, co-processing operates under strict regulatory and technical frameworks to ensure high standards of safety, emissions control and transparency.

Commenting on the initiative, Thomas Guillot, Chief Executive of the GCCA, said co-processing offers a circular, community-friendly waste solution but requires effective regulatory frameworks and supportive public policy to scale further. He noted that while some cement kilns already substitute over 90 per cent of their fuel with waste, many regions still lack established practices.

The joint statement urges governments and institutions to formally recognise co-processing within waste policy frameworks, support waste collection and pre-treatment, streamline permitting, count recycled material towards national recycling targets, and provide fiscal incentives that reflect environmental benefits. It also calls for stronger public–private partnerships and international knowledge sharing.

With global waste generation estimated at over 11 billion tonnes annually and uncontrolled municipal waste projected to rise sharply by 2050, the signatories believe co-processing represents a practical and scalable response. With appropriate policy backing, it can help divert waste from landfills, reduce fossil fuel use in cement manufacturing and transform waste into a valuable societal resource.

Concrete

Industry Bodies Call for Wider Use of Cement Co-Processing

Joint statement seeks policy support for sustainable waste management

Published

2 days ago

January 14, 2026

admin

Leading industry organisations have called for stronger policy support to accelerate the adoption of cement industry co-processing as a sustainable solution for managing non-recyclable and non-reusable waste. In a joint statement, bodies including the Global Cement and Concrete Association, European Composites Industry Association, International Solid Waste Association – Africa, Mission Possible Partnership and the Global Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council highlighted the role co-processing can play in addressing the growing global waste challenge.

Co-processing enables the use of waste as an alternative to fossil fuels in cement kilns, while residual ash is incorporated into cementitious materials, resulting in a zero-waste process. The approach supports both energy recovery and material recycling, complements conventional recycling systems and reduces reliance on landfill infrastructure. It is primarily applied to waste streams that are contaminated or unsuitable for recycling.

The organisations noted that co-processing is already recognised in regions such as Europe, India, Latin America and North America, operating under regulated frameworks to ensure safety, emissions control and transparency. However, adoption remains uneven globally, with some plants achieving over 90 per cent fuel substitution while others lack enabling policies.

The statement urged governments and institutions to formally recognise co-processing in waste management frameworks, streamline environmental permitting, incentivise waste collection and pre-treatment, account for recycled material content in national targets, and support public-private partnerships. The call comes amid rising global waste volumes, which are estimated at over 11 billion tonnes annually, with unmanaged waste contributing to greenhouse gas emissions, pollution and health risks.

Concrete

Why Cement Needs CCUS

Published

3 days ago

January 13, 2026

admin

Cement’s deep decarbonisation cannot be achieved through efficiency and fuel switching alone, making CCUS essential to address unavoidable process emissions from calcination. ICR explores if with the right mix of policy support, shared infrastructure, and phased scale-up from pilots to clusters, CCUS can enable India’s cement industry to align growth with its net-zero ambitions.

Cement underpins modern development—from housing and transport to renewable energy infrastructure—but it is also one of the world’s most carbon-intensive materials, with global production of around 4 billion tonnes per year accounting for 7 to 8 per cent of global CO2 emissions, according to the GCCA. What makes cement uniquely hard to abate is that 60 to 65 per cent of its emissions arise from limestone calcination, a chemical process that releases CO2 irrespective of the energy source used; the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) therefore classifies cement as a hard-to-abate sector, noting that even fully renewable-powered kilns would continue to emit significant process emissions. While the industry has achieved substantial reductions over the past two decades through energy efficiency, alternative fuels and clinker substitution using fly ash, slag, and calcined clays, studies including the IEA Net Zero Roadmap and GCCA decarbonisation pathways show these levers can deliver only 50 to 60 per cent emissions reduction before reaching technical and material limits, leaving Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) as the only scalable and durable option to address remaining calcination emissions—an intervention the IPCC estimates will deliver nearly two-thirds of cumulative cement-sector emission reductions globally by mid-century, making CCUS a central pillar of any credible net-zero cement pathway.

Process emissions vs energy emissions
Cement’s carbon footprint is distinct from many other industries because it stems from two sources: energy emissions and process emissions. Energy emissions arise from burning fuels to heat kilns to around 1,450°C and account for roughly 35 to 40 per cent of total cement CO2 emissions, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). These can be progressively reduced through efficiency improvements, alternative fuels such as biomass and RDF, and electrification supported by renewable power. Over the past two decades, such measures have delivered measurable gains, with global average thermal energy intensity in cement production falling by nearly 20 per cent since 2000, as reported by the IEA and GCCA.
The larger and more intractable challenge lies in process emissions, which make up approximately 60 per cent to 65 per cent of cement’s total CO2 output. These emissions are released during calcination, when limestone (CaCO3) is converted into lime (CaO), inherently emitting CO2 regardless of fuel choice or energy efficiency—a reality underscored by the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). Even aggressive clinker substitution using fly ash, slag, or calcined clays is constrained by material availability and performance requirements, typically delivering 20 to 40 per cent emissions reduction at best, as outlined in the GCCA–TERI India Cement Roadmap and IEA Net Zero Scenario. This structural split explains why cement is classified as a hard-to-abate sector and why incremental improvements alone are insufficient; as energy emissions decline, process emissions will dominate, making Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) a critical intervention to intercept residual CO2 and keep the sector’s net-zero ambitions within reach.

Where CCUS stands today
Globally, CCUS in cement is moving from concept to early industrial reality, led by Europe and North America, with the IEA noting that cement accounts for nearly 40 per cent of planned CCUS projects in heavy industry, reflecting limited alternatives for deep decarbonisation; a flagship example is Heidelberg Materials’ Brevik CCS project in Norway, commissioned in 2025, designed to capture about 400,000 tonnes of CO2 annually—nearly half the plant’s emissions—with permanent offshore storage via the Northern Lights infrastructure (Reuters, Heidelberg Materials), alongside progress at projects in the UK, Belgium, and the US such as Padeswood, Lixhe (LEILAC), and Ste. Genevieve, all enabled by strong policy support, public funding, and shared transport-and-storage infrastructure.
These experiences show that CCUS scales fastest when policy support, infrastructure availability, and risk-sharing mechanisms align, with Europe bridging the viability gap through EU ETS allowances, Innovation Fund grants, and CO2 hubs despite capture costs remaining high at US$ 80-150 per tonne of CO2 (IEA, GCCA); India, by contrast, is at an early readiness stage but gaining momentum through five cement-sector CCU testbeds launched by the Department of Science and Technology (DST) under academia–industry public–private partnerships involving IITs and producers such as JSW Cement, Dalmia Cement, and JK Cement, targeting 1-2 tonnes of CO2 per day to validate performance under Indian conditions (ETInfra, DST), with the GCCA–TERI India Roadmap identifying the current phase as a foundation-building decade essential for achieving net-zero by 2070.
Amit Banka, Founder and CEO, WeNaturalists, says “Carbon literacy means more than understanding that CO2 harms the climate. It means cement professionals grasping why their specific plant’s emissions profile matters, how different CCUS technologies trade off between energy consumption and capture rates, where utilisation opportunities align with their operational reality, and what governance frameworks ensure verified, permanent carbon sequestration. Cement manufacturing contributes approximately 8 per cent of global carbon emissions. Addressing this requires professionals who understand CCUS deeply enough to make capital decisions, troubleshoot implementation challenges, and convince boards to invest substantial capital.”

Technology pathways for cement
Cement CCUS encompasses a range of technologies, from conventional post-combustion solvent-based systems to process-integrated solutions that directly target calcination, each with different energy requirements, retrofit complexity, and cost profiles. The most mature option remains amine-based post-combustion capture, already deployed at industrial scale and favoured for early cement projects because it can be retrofitted to existing flue-gas streams; however, capture costs typically range from US$ 60-120 per tonne of CO2, depending on CO2 concentration, plant layout, and energy integration.
Lovish Ahuja, Chief Sustainability Officer, Dalmia Cement (Bharat), says, “CCUS in Indian cement can be viewed through two complementary lenses. If technological innovation, enabling policies, and societal acceptance fail to translate ambition into action, CCUS risks becoming a significant and unavoidable compliance cost for hard-to-abate sectors such as cement, steel, and aluminium. However, if global commitments under the Paris Agreement and national targets—most notably India’s Net Zero 2070 pledge—are implemented at scale through sustained policy and industry action, CCUS shifts from a future liability to a strategic opportunity. In that scenario, it becomes a platform for technological leadership, long-term competitiveness, and systemic decarbonisation rather than merely a regulatory burden.”
“Accelerating CCUS adoption cannot hinge on a single policy lever; it demands a coordinated ecosystem approach. This includes mission-mode governance, alignment across ministries, and a mix of enabling instruments such as viability gap funding, concessional and ESG-linked finance, tax incentives, and support for R&D, infrastructure, and access to geological storage. Importantly, while cement is largely a regional commodity with limited exportability due to its low value-to-weight ratio, CCUS innovation itself can become a globally competitive export. By developing, piloting, and scaling cost-effective CCUS solutions domestically, India can not only decarbonise its own cement industry but also position itself as a supplier of affordable CCUS technologies and services to cement markets worldwide,” he adds.
Process-centric approaches seek to reduce the energy penalty associated with solvent regeneration by altering where and how CO2 is separated. Technologies such as LEILAC/Calix, which uses indirect calcination to produce a high-purity CO2 stream, are scaling toward a ~100,000 tCO2 per year demonstrator (LEILAC-2) following successful pilots, while calcium looping leverages limestone chemistry to achieve theoretical capture efficiencies above 90 per cent, albeit still at pilot and demonstration stages requiring careful integration. Other emerging routes—including oxy-fuel combustion, membrane separation, solid sorbents, and cryogenic or hybrid systems—offer varying trade-offs between purity, energy use, and retrofit complexity; taken together, recent studies suggest that no single technology fits all plants, making a multi-technology, site-specific approach the most realistic pathway for scaling CCUS across the cement sector.
Yash Agarwal, Co-Founder, Carbonetics Carbon Capture, says, “We are fully focused on CCUS, and for us, a running plant is a profitable plant. What we have done is created digital twins that allow operators to simulate and resolve specific problems in record time. In a conventional setup, when an issue arises, plants often have to shut down operations and bring in expert consultants. What we offer instead is on-the-fly consulting. As soon as a problem is detected, the system automatically provides a set of potential solutions that can be tested on a running plant. This approach ensures that plant shutdowns are avoided and production is not impacted.”

The economics of CCUS
Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) remains one of the toughest economic hurdles in cement decarbonisation, with the IEA estimating capture costs of US$ 80-150 per tonne of CO2, and full-system costs raising cement production by US$ 30-60 per tonne, potentially increasing prices by 20 to 40 per cent without policy support—an untenable burden for a low-margin, price-sensitive industry like India’s.
Global experience shows CCUS advances beyond pilots only when the viability gap is bridged through strong policy mechanisms such as EU ETS allowances, Innovation Fund grants, and carbon Contracts for Difference (CfDs), yet even in Europe few projects have reached final investment decision (GCCA); India’s lack of a dedicated CCUS financing framework leaves projects reliant on R&D grants and balance sheets, reinforcing the IEA Net Zero Roadmap conclusion that carbon markets, green public procurement, and viability gap funding are essential to spread costs across producers, policymakers, and end users and prevent CCUS from remaining confined to demonstrations well into the 2030s.

Utilisation or storage
Carbon utilisation pathways are often the first entry point for CCUS in cement because they offer near-term revenue potential and lower infrastructure complexity. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that current utilisation routes—such as concrete curing, mineralisation into aggregates, precipitated calcium carbonate (PCC), and limited chemical conversion—can realistically absorb only 5 per cent to 10 per cent of captured CO2 at a typical cement plant. In India, utilisation is particularly attractive for early pilots as it avoids the immediate need for pipelines, injection wells, and long-term liability frameworks. Accordingly, Department of Science and Technology (DST)–supported cement CCU testbeds are already demonstrating mineralisation and CO2-cured concrete applications at 1–2 tonnes of CO2 per day, validating performance, durability, and operability under Indian conditions.
However, utilisation faces hard limits of scale and permanence. India’s cement sector emits over 200 million tonnes of CO2 annually (GCCA), far exceeding the absorptive capacity of domestic utilisation markets, while many pathways—especially fuels and chemicals—are energy-intensive and dependent on costly renewable power and green hydrogen. The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) cautions that most CCU routes do not guarantee permanent storage unless CO2 is mineralised or locked into long-lived materials, making geological storage indispensable for deep decarbonisation. India has credible storage potential in deep saline aquifers, depleted oil and gas fields, and basalt formations such as the Deccan Traps (NITI Aayog, IEA), and hub-based models—where multiple plants share transport and storage infrastructure—can reduce costs and improve bankability, as seen in Norway’s Northern Lights project. The pragmatic pathway for India is therefore a dual-track approach: utilise CO2 where it is economical and store it where permanence and scale are unavoidable, enabling early learning while building the backbone for net-zero cement.

Policy, infrastructure and clusters
Scaling CCUS in the cement sector hinges on policy certainty, shared infrastructure, and coordinated cluster development, rather than isolated plant-level action. The IEA notes that over 70 per cent of advanced industrial CCUS projects globally rely on strong government intervention—through carbon pricing, capital grants, tax credits, and long-term offtake guarantees—with Europe’s EU ETS, Innovation Fund, and carbon Contracts for Difference (CfDs) proving decisive in advancing projects like Brevik CCS. In contrast, India lacks a dedicated CCUS policy framework, rendering capture costs of USD 80–150 per tonne of CO2 economically prohibitive without state support (IEA, GCCA), a gap the GCCA–TERI India Cement Roadmap highlights can be bridged through carbon markets, viability gap funding, and green public procurement.
Milan R Trivedi, Vice President, Shree Digvijay Cement, says, “CCUS represents both an unavoidable near-term compliance cost and a long-term strategic opportunity for Indian cement producers. While current capture costs of US$ 100-150 per tonne of CO2 strain margins and necessitate upfront retrofit investments driven by emerging mandates and NDCs, effective policy support—particularly a robust, long-term carbon pricing mechanism with tradable credits under frameworks like India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS)—can de-risk capital deployment and convert CCUS into a competitive advantage. With such enablers in place, CCUS can unlock 10 per cent to 20 per cent green price premiums, strengthen ESG positioning, and allow Indian cement to compete in global low-carbon markets under regimes such as the EU CBAM, North America’s buy-clean policies, and Middle Eastern green procurement, transforming compliance into export-led leadership.”
Equally critical is cluster-based CO2 transport and storage infrastructure, which can reduce unit costs by 30 to 50 per cent compared to standalone projects (IEA, Clean Energy Ministerial); recognising this, the DST has launched five CCU testbeds under academia–industry public–private partnerships, while NITI Aayog works toward a national CCUS mission focused on hubs and regional planning. Global precedents—from Norway’s Northern Lights to the UK’s HyNet and East Coast clusters—demonstrate that CCUS scales fastest when governments plan infrastructure at a regional level, making cluster-led development, backed by early public investment, the decisive enabler for India to move CCUS from isolated pilots to a scalable industrial solution.
Paul Baruya, Director of Strategy and Sustainability, FutureCoal, says, “Cement is a foundational material with a fundamental climate challenge: process emissions that cannot be eliminated through clean energy alone. The IPCC is clear that in the absence of a near-term replacement of Portland cement chemistry, CCS is essential to address the majority of clinker-related emissions. With global cement production at around 4 gigatonnes (Gt) and still growing, cement decarbonisation is not a niche undertaking, it is a large-scale industrial transition.”

From pilots to practice
Moving CCUS in cement from pilots to practice requires a sequenced roadmap aligning technology maturity, infrastructure development, and policy support: the IEA estimates that achieving net zero will require CCUS to scale from less than 1 Mt of CO2 captured today to over 1.2 Gt annually by 2050, while the GCCA Net Zero Roadmap projects CCUS contributing 30 per cent to 40 per cent of total cement-sector emissions reductions by mid-century, alongside efficiency, alternative fuels, and clinker substitution.
MM Rathi, Joint President – Power Plants, Shree Cement, says, “The Indian cement sector is currently at a pilot to early demonstration stage of CCUS readiness. A few companies have initiated small-scale pilots focused on capturing CO2 from kiln flue gases and exploring utilisation routes such as mineralisation and concrete curing. CCUS has not yet reached commercial integration due to high capture costs (US$ 80-150 per tonne of CO2), lack of transport and storage infrastructure, limited access to storage sites, and absence of long-term policy incentives. While Europe and North America have begun early commercial deployment, large-scale CCUS adoption in India is more realistically expected post-2035, subject to enabling infrastructure and policy frameworks.”
Early pilots—such as India’s DST-backed CCU testbeds and Europe’s first commercial-scale plants—serve as learning platforms to validate integration, costs, and operational reliability, but large-scale deployment will depend on cluster-based scale-up, as emphasised by the IPCC AR6, which highlights the need for early CO2 transport and storage planning to avoid long-term emissions lock-in. For India, the GCCA–TERI India Roadmap identifies CCUS as indispensable for achieving net-zero by 2070, following a pragmatic pathway: pilot today to build confidence, cluster in the 2030s to reduce costs, and institutionalise CCUS by mid-century so that low-carbon cement becomes the default, not a niche, in the country’s infrastructure growth.

Conclusion
Cement will remain indispensable to India’s development, but its long-term viability hinges on addressing its hardest emissions challenge—process CO2 from calcination—which efficiency gains, alternative fuels, and clinker substitution alone cannot eliminate; global evidence from the IPCC, IEA, and GCCA confirms that Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) is the only scalable pathway capable of delivering the depth of reduction required for net zero. With early commercial projects emerging in Europe and structured pilots underway in India, CCUS has moved beyond theory into a decisive decade where learning, localisation, and integration will shape outcomes; however, success will depend less on technology availability and more on collective execution, including coordinated policy frameworks, shared transport and storage infrastructure, robust carbon markets, and carbon-literate capabilities.
For India, a deliberate transition from pilots to practice—anchored in cluster-based deployment, supported by public–private partnerships, and aligned with national development and climate goals—can transform CCUS from a high-cost intervention into a mainstream industrial solution, enabling the cement sector to keep building the nation while sharply reducing its climate footprint.

– Kanika Mathur