Dr S B Hegde, President – Manufacturing, Kanodia Group, provides in-depth understanding of the need for alternative cements and the stimulus that innovation needs from appropriate public policies.
The world’s population is projected to grow from its current level of about 6.6 billion to somewhere between 9.5 billion and 12.9 billion by 2100. This population growth will come with huge demands for housing, water, food, education and other life essentials, all of which will require huge growth in infrastructure. What is clear, however, is that population growth does not correlate to economic growth and that economic growth is likely a better indicator of future demands for cement. Most economic growth in this century is projected to be in developing countries and statistics already show that these are the same places that are now consuming 93 per cent of the cement produced globally. Consequently, global demand for cement is presently growing at a rate of about 4 per cent per annum. It is in these places of high growth and need for new infrastructure where aggressive changes in construction practises may also initiate fundamental change in the chemistry of infrastructure cement. While the composition of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) has remained largely the same since the last century, the mechanisms of OPC hydration and structure of C-S-H remain difficult to interpret. However, major advances in the use and performance of cement have come from three fundamental areas:
Construction technology
Science and engineering of composite materials
Admixture chemistry, both organic and inorganic
The 20th century construction technology gave rise to fast-track paving and construction methodologies, the ability to pump concrete over large distances, both horizontally and vertically, and the ready mixed concrete industry. The advent and widespread use of organic and inorganic chemical admixtures has enabled the development of high strength and, more recently, self-compacting concrete. Collectively, these material innovations have enabled the growth of modern infrastructure, the construction of the world’s tallest buildings, roads and railways etc.
Future of the OPC System OPC will probably be produced for at least the next 100 years, but likely in an evolved form, at a reduced scale, and by processes that utilise renewable energy and carbon sequestration technologies. The composition of OPC clinker will likely move towards lower CO2 emissions per ton by formulating reactive belite chemistries, by better exploitation of the ability of impurities to manipulate clinker reactivity, and by bringing new efficiencies to the clinkering cycle, the latter of which will become less empirical through close integration of kinetic and thermodynamic data Among alternative cements, formulations with reduced CO2 emissions, or that are even CO2 negative, are the main objectives for further development. An important aspect of such cements is the possibility they offer to realise beneficial utilisation of CO2. However, all current propositions for cement compositions that sequester CO2 are not yet competitive with OPC.
Requirements for mechanical performance and long-term durability are critical, but standards and specifications, whether prescriptive or performance-based, will also require robust evolution.
lternative Cement Systems Alternative cements could be defined as inorganic cementitious materials that can be used for construction, but whose properties and composition are not yet specified by existing standards, codal practices and regulations. Some examples of this include calcium aluminate cement (CAC), and Sorel cement etc. All cements have elemental composition, primarily comprising Si, O, Ca, Al, Fe, and Mg. This chemistry is not surprising on an economic basis because cementing materials must be composed of materials that are abundant in the Earth’s crust. The evolution of new cement types will need to overcome both technical and non-technical barriers. Requirements for mechanical performance and long-term durability are critical, but standards and specifications, whether prescriptive or performance-based, will also require robust evolution. In addition, confidence in new materials must be acquired by the end user (e.g., contractors) in the field-based application of new cements. In each case, some application flexibility will be needed, because new cements may need to be processed and placed in a manner somewhat different from OPC-based concrete.
Carbonated Cements Calcium-rich OPC hydrates (e.g., Ca (OH)2 and C-S-H) carbonate spontaneously to form CaCO3, amorphous hydrated silica and water. The carbonation reaction is sensitive to the presence of water, which accelerates the reaction and causes high pressure and temperature. Based on the tendency of calcium (and magnesium)-rich compounds to carbonate, three propositions for beneficial CO2 uptake which imparts hydraulic properties to cement are proposed:
Carbonation of brackish (Mg, Ca-rich) brines Concentrated brines that result from the desalination of seawater have magnesium-rich and calcium-rich compositions. When CO2 is dissolved in such brine compositions – (Mg, Ca) carbonates are spontaneously formed. It was found that hydrated magnesium carbonate has cementing characteristics.
Carbonation of hydrated lime Lime mortars ‘mature’ by taking up CO2 over long periods of exposure to the atmosphere. Lime carbonation by such an approach result in the formation of a monophasic CaCO3 end-product (and water) – whose crystal morphology can be controlled by varying the reaction conditions. While stable compacts can be formed, the performance characteristics of the carbonated solids require more in-depth investigations.
Natural minerals could replace the current composition of cement. Alternative cements are the emerging solutions to combat carbon emission from OPC production.
Carbonation of calcium silicates Hydrated calcium silicates are well-known to carbonate. Based on this idea, there has been some interest in contacting wollastonite (CaSiO3)slurries with carbonated water at elevated pressure and temperature. Therefore, carbonation processing is likely best-suited to factory production in the style of precast concrete manufacture today. While the style of such manufacture is evolutionary, encompassing larger and more sophisticated dimensions of additive manufacturing, the promise of carbonation relies on practical cost-effective, industrially viable processing solutions, and the introduction of incentives or credits for cementation agents that take up CO2.
Calcium Sulphoaluminate Cements (CSA) Calcium sulphoaluminate (CSA) cements are types of cements that contain high alumina content. To produce CSA clinker, bauxite, limestone, and gypsum are mixed together in a rotary kiln. CSA cements were developed in China and came to prominence in the late 1970s. The main constituents of the cement powder contain belite phase (C2S), ye’elimite (C4A3S), and gypsum (CSH2) [90–92]. Upon hydration, CSA cements form ettringite according to the following reactions. The classical calcium sulphoaluminate clinkers are predominately based on 35–70 per cent ye’elimite (C4A3S), 30 per cent belite (β−C2S), with lesser percentages 10–30 per cent of phases like, C12A7, C4AF, and CaO, but C2AS and CS are not desirable due to their deleterious nature. Raw mix design of CSA compositions needs less limestone that not only benefits in reduced thermal energy (up to 25 per cent) but also decreased CO2 emissions (up to 20 per cent) compared to the Portland cement. Industrial waste materials can also be used as raw materials for manufacturing CSA cements and therefore, calcium sulphoaluminate cements have significant environmental advantages.
Active Belite Cements The belite compound in cement (Ca2SiO4, abbreviated as C2S) is known to contribute significantly to the strength of hydrated OPC especially after the first few days or weeks of hydration. Since belite comes with less lime than alite (Ca3SiO5), it can be produced with a lower CO2 impact. The reactive belite is facilitated by the fact that belite has several polymorphs. The olivine structured γ-C2S structure is essentially unreactive with water, but the β-C2S structure that is stabilised by dopants in clinkers is much more reactive with water. The alpha polymorphs are reported to be reactive, although efforts to stabilise them at lower temperatures have not been successful. However, the origin of belite and, more broadly, of clinker reactivity is still a matter of debate. The thermodynamic stability differences among the different polymorphs are important because phase transformations that occur during cooling can produce twinning, exsolution, and mechanical strain. So far, it has not been possible to deconvolute many factors controlling belite reactivity, but recent research shows systematic approaches by which the role of defects and clinker processing could be decoupled to render new understanding. This renews the potential for controlling reactivity enhancement, making belitic cements a valuable proposition in reducing the industrial reliance on Alite-dominant clinkers for early strength. Magnesia-based Cements Magnesia cements are based on magnesium oxide (MgO) as the main ingredient. It was developed by Sorel in 1867 and is known as ‘magnesite’ or magnesium oxychloride cements. At early stages, this type of cements was produced by using magnesium oxide and aqueous magnesium chloride. The resulting hardened product consists of four major bonding phases as: 2Mg(OH)2 · MgCl2 · 4H20, 3Mg(OH)2 · MgCl2 · 8H2O, 5Mg(OH)2 · MgCl2 · 5H2O, and 9Mg(OH)2 · MgCl2 · H2O. However, it was soon recorded that magnesium oxychloride phase is not stable after an exposure to water over a long time as it results in leaching out in the form of magnesium chloride and magnesium oxide. This limits the practical application of the cement to certain properties in construction even though it showed high strength properties, high fire resistance, high abrasion, and exemption of wet curing compared to traditional OPC. In the recent decade, after Harrison patented reactive MgO cements the production has been significantly increased to 14 Mt per year. Magnesium oxysulphate cements, based on magnesium sulphate solution and magnesium oxide, have similar properties to Sorel cements but poor weathering resistance has confined its utilisation on mass scale.
The main concern about geopolymers is their inability to react sufficiently to produce early-age strength unless significant heat curing and elevated alkali concentrations are used.
Geopolymer Cement In the absence of precise definition, geopolymers are formed by reaction of an aluminosilicate solid (e.g., clay, fly ash, or slag) with an alkali source, typically sodium or potassium hydroxide or silicate, or mixtures thereof, with water. The main bonding phase formed is a hydrous gel with poor long-range order that contains sodium (or potassium), and oxides of aluminium and silicon (abbreviated as N-A-SH). This gel is analogous to, but not continuously miscible with, the C-A-S-H gels formed in hydrated OPC. For example, sodium is strongly bonded in the gel, unlike sodium in C-A-S-H, which is readily leached. Alkalis in geopolymers are bonded into a rather open and negatively-charged Al-Si network. Calcium has also been used to replace part of the alkalis to produce a hybrid cementing matrix. The main concern about geopolymers is their inability to react sufficiently to produce early-age strength unless significant heat curing and elevated alkali concentrations are used. The N-A-S-H gel is thermally fragile and crystallises at temperatures exceeding 60 °C. This results in the formation of phases similar to sodalite, which have inferior binding characteristics compared to the original gel.
Conclusion Substantial progress should be made scientifically, before these cements can be manufactured at industrial scales. On the other hand, Calcium Sulpho Aluminate cements (CSA) appear to be emerging as a leading alternative cement over the next decade. Indeed, in near future commercial production of CSA cements appears to be implemented in the Western world. In broader terms, the stimulus and time scale to innovation and evolution of alternative cements depends on public policy. Scientific developments and technology can inform debates, but if the cement industry is to remain competitive in the face of possible policy-driven mandates, it needs to present realistic, viable and impactful alternatives to traditional OPC. An important concern that arises along with the requirement to replace OPC, whether by supplementary cementitious materials or by new cement types, is whether a new formulation can provide high enough pH to passivate the reinforcing steel, which OPC does quite nicely. A shift away from OPC will tend to compromise the calcium buffer, and hence the extent of passivity afforded, but simultaneous changes in reinforcing materials away from ferrous metals (e.g. fiber-reinforced polymers) may reduce the need for corrosion resistance. Nevertheless, because of the driving force to reduce CO2 emissions, some alternative cements that may emerge in the next 100 years appear promising.
Reference LinkedIn posts of Dr S B Hegde
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Dr S B Hegde, President – Manufacturing, Kanodia Group, Noida and Visiting Professor, Pennsylvania State University, United States of America.
Indian Cement Review (ICR) and Fuller Technologies brought industry, policy and technology leaders together to discuss how cement innovation can drive green construction at scale, writes Rakesh Rao.
India is building at a pace few countries can match. Highways, airports, housing, logistics parks, industrial corridors and urban infrastructure are reshaping the country’s economic geography. But beneath this growth story lies a difficult question: can India continue to build at scale without locking itself into a high-carbon future?
That question formed the core of an online panel discussion titled “Driving Green Construction Through Cement Innovation”, organised by Indian Cement Review (ICR) in association with Fuller Technologies as the Presenting Partner on June 25, 2026. The webinar brought together experts from cement technology, R&D, global industry platforms, building performance policy and international development cooperation to examine how low-carbon cement and material innovation can accelerate India’s green construction transition.
The discussion came at a crucial time. India has committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070 and reducing the carbon intensity of its economy by 45 per cent by 2030. At the same time, the country’s construction sector is expanding rapidly, driven by urbanisation, infrastructure development, housing demand and industrial growth. Cement, as one of the most widely used construction materials, sits at the heart of this transition. It is indispensable to development, but also central to the challenge of reducing embodied carbon in buildings and infrastructure.
Moderated by Nitika Krishan, Senior Urban Infrastructure and Sustainable Policy Consultant, the panel featured:
Dr Hemantkumar Aiyer, VP and Head R&D, Nuvoco Vistas Corp Ltd;
Devika Wattal, Innovation Lead, Global Cement and Concrete Association (GCCA);
Dr Sunita Purushottam, MD, GBPN India (Global Buildings Performance Network); and
Vaibhav Rathi, Senior Technical Advisor, GIZ (the German Agency for International Cooperation)
Setting the tone for the discussion, Nitika Krishan underlined the scale of the challenge before the sector. “The question before us is no longer whether we build, but how we build sustainably,” she said. She pointed out that construction accounts for nearly 40 per cent of global energy-related carbon emissions when both operational and embodied carbon are considered. Cement production, she added, remains one of the hardest industrial processes to decarbonise.
For India, this is not merely an environmental issue. It is a development issue, a competitiveness issue and increasingly, a market issue. As one of the world’s largest cement producers and among the fastest-growing construction markets, India’s material choices will influence the carbon trajectory of its built environment for decades. As Krishan observed, sustainability solutions in economies such as India must not remain limited to laboratory success. They must be scalable, commercially viable and practical at national level.
The innovation gap: From technology to market
Experts believe that there is a need to bridge the innovation gaps for making decarbonisation in cement and concrete scalable. Devika Wattal of GCCA, explained, “The starting point must be the core cement manufacturing process itself. The first and foremost is the heart of our process, the heart of cement manufacturing. How do we reduce clinker? That is always a topic where industry is working very intrinsically.”
Clinker reduction remains one of the most important pathways for lowering emissions in cement. Since clinker production is energy-intensive and chemically emits carbon dioxide, reducing the clinker factor through supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), blended cements and new chemistries can have a significant impact. Wattal also noted that carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) will have a role, though it may not be the first lever for all markets.
However, she stressed that innovation cannot stop at technology development. A solution that works in the lab must also be adaptable to industry, scalable in production and acceptable in construction practice. “It is important for that innovation to be adaptable, to be scalable, and so that it can be executed in real time,” she said.
Wattal also called for stronger enabling systems around innovation. These include performance-based standards, product-level embodied carbon databases and clearer frameworks for evaluating green materials. Without these, low-carbon cement products may struggle to compete with conventional materials in procurement and design.
R&D must balance carbon, cost and performance
Bringing in the R&D perspective into the discussion, Dr Hemantkumar Aiyer of Nuvoco Vistas emphasised that low-carbon cement development cannot be treated as a single-variable exercise. Cement must perform in real construction conditions. It must deliver strength, durability, consistency and cost competitiveness, while also reducing carbon.
“The root of understanding and balancing all these aspects lies in materials, and knowing the materials,” he said.
According to Dr Aiyer, R&D teams must understand the variability of raw materials such as fly ash, slag and clinker. Different sources produce different material behaviours. This makes mix optimisation, material characterisation and processing-property relationships critical. When performance is affected, cement manufacturers must understand how strength enhancers, admixtures and other performance chemicals interact with the material system.
He also linked material science with process efficiency. Clinkerisation takes place at extremely high temperatures, around 1,400 to 1,450 degrees Celsius. Any improvement in raw mix design, process control or energy optimisation can, therefore, help reduce emissions and cost. Dr Aiyer pointed to artificial intelligence-based optimisation, Cement 4.0 tools and advanced software as important enablers for real-time process and material control.
“The more you understand the materials, the more you can control it,” he said.
LC3: The promise is proven, the sequencing is not
Limestone calcined clay cement, commonly referred to as LC3, has attracted global attention because it can reduce clinker content significantly by using calcined clay and limestone while maintaining performance in many applications. Kiranmai Sanagavarapu of Fuller Technologies said the technology itself has already moved beyond proof of concept. Fuller Technologies has worked with calcined clay technology for nearly two decades and has seen plants running in France and Ghana. These plants, she said, are meeting local and national specifications, while the economics are beginning to make sense.
“The calciner is performing, the economics is stacking up, it is making business sense to produce,” she said.
But if the technology is viable, why has adoption not scaled faster? For Sanagavarapu, the answer lies in project sequencing. Too often, clay characterisation happens after equipment is specified. This, she warned, is a backward approach because calciner design depends on clay mineralogy, kaolinite content, iron levels, reactivity, moisture and other variables.
“If you don’t know what your deposit looks like before you commit for the equipment, you are, in a way, going blind into designing,” she said.
She also identified permitting and plant integration as major bottlenecks. Environmental clearances, mining permissions and local regulatory approvals must begin early. Similarly, calcined clay must be integrated into existing grinding, blending and logistics systems from the design stage, not treated as an afterthought during commissioning.
India already has IS 18189:2023 standard for LC3, but Sanagavarapu pointed out that the standard is not yet visible enough in procurement documents. “The gap between what is technically being permitted and what the procurement is asking is the single biggest bottleneck,” she said.
In her view, successful scale-up depends on getting the sequence right: clay characterisation first, permitting in parallel, standards aligned with construction, and integration built into plant design.
India’s LC3 journey: Progress, but demand remains thin
Providing details of India’s LC3 commercialisation experience, Vaibhav Rathi of GIZ noted that JK Cement carried out the first commercial production of LC3 at its Rajasthan plant, followed by JK Lakshmi Cement three months later. These initiatives were supported by the International Climate Initiative of the Government of Germany, with IIT Delhi contributing deep institutional knowledge on LC3 research and BIS certification.
Rathi said India’s early experience has produced clear lessons. One of the biggest was the need to build capacity among regulators. While BIS certification existed, State Pollution Control Boards were unfamiliar with the technology and unsure about the approval pathway.
“The capacity building is not just needed amongst the producer and the users of the cement, but also the regulators who are working with this technology for the first time,” he said.
He also highlighted the need for better information on China clay deposits. Since China clay is currently classified as a minor mineral, centralised data on availability, quality and location is limited. If cement manufacturers are to adopt LC3 at scale, stronger mineral intelligence will be important.
The third issue is demand. LC3 has already been used in projects such as Palava City in Mumbai and Noida International Airport, but these remain limited examples. “It is in a chicken and egg situation,” Rathi said. “Cement companies are saying we need more demand, and users are saying there is not enough cement available.”
Public procurement, he suggested, could help break this cycle. If agencies such as CPWD and other public bodies begin testing, accepting and specifying LC3, it could create the market confidence needed for cement companies to invest in production and storage.
Building codes must catch up with innovation
Dr Sunita Purushottam of GBPN India argued that material choices will determine built environment emissions over the long term, but India’s current policy signals remain fragmented. Although LC3 has received BIS recognition, she pointed out that building codes, municipal bylaws, schedules of rates and sustainability codes do not yet provide uniform guidance on low-carbon cement.
“The current cement regulations are largely prescriptive and favouring traditional materials,” she said. This limits the ability of alternative materials to compete on performance, durability and emissions.
Dr Purushottam also raised the issue of taxation. Cement, including LC3, currently falls under the same GST bracket as conventional cement. A differentiated tax structure, she argued, could help accelerate market adoption. “In order for the market to demand LC3, that differentiation in the GST could go a long way,” she said.
She noted that green building certifications such as IGBC and GRIHA are already creating demand for low-carbon materials by assigning points for embodied carbon and sustainable material use. However, she said large-scale adoption will require regulatory mandates, particularly through building codes and state-level notifications.
She also cautioned that low-carbon cement alone does not solve the entire building performance problem. A material may reduce embodied carbon, but the operational carbon of a building depends on thermal performance, design, insulation and energy use. “The energy part has two elements,” she said. “One is the embodied carbon of the material itself, and the other is the operational carbon.”
Collaboration is the bridge between invention and impact
Wattal said GCCA sees innovation as a strategic priority and works through platforms that connect industry with academia and start-ups. “There is no way we will decarbonise our sector without innovation,” she said.
However, she stressed that research must be connected to actual industry challenges. Innovations developed in isolation may fail when they encounter real-world barriers such as raw material variability, plant integration, cost, standards and finance. Start-ups, too, need industry mentorship and scale-up pathways.
Wattal also flagged the importance of finance. Even strong technologies may struggle to attract investment if there is no common understanding of bankability. “We have always put projects into, is this a bankable project? But the definition of a bankable project has never been defined,” she said.
For India, she saw strong potential in its academic and start-up ecosystem, but said the challenge lies in alignment and prioritisation. The country has the research base, industrial capacity and market size. What it now needs is a coordinated route from innovation to deployment.
There is a practical concern for cement manufacturers: how can existing plants be adapted for lower emissions without compromising reliability or commercial viability?
Kiranmai Sanagavarapu addressed, “The reliability risk in calcined clay retrofit is definitely real, but it is almost always self-inflicted. The risk arises when a new process is added to an existing circuit without properly redesigning grinding and blending configurations.”
Existing cement plants, she explained, can take two broad routes. The first is external sourcing of calcined clay combined with mill optimisation. This requires lower capital investment and can potentially move in 12 to 18 months if other conditions are in place. It may reduce emissions by around 20 to 30 per cent. The second route is integrated calcination on site, which requires higher capital expenditure and longer lead times, but provides greater control over quality, supply and emissions reduction potential.
For Sanagavarapu, the principle is simple: low-carbon retrofits must be designed with intent. “Design it with an intent properly from the start. Start in the market conditions where the economics are already working,” she said.
Circularity: The overlooked advantage
According to Vaibhav Rathi, fly ash and slag are already well established in cement and construction (C&D), but construction and demolition waste remains underutilised. “C&D waste is a growing business opportunity which not many have taken up,” he said. India’s continuous construction and demolition activity creates huge volumes of waste, much of which contributes to air pollution, land degradation and material inefficiency. With the right processing and standards, this waste can be converted into useful construction products.
Rathi also pointed out that LC3 has a circular economy dimension that is often overlooked. It can use low-grade kaolin-rich clay left behind after high-grade clay is extracted for other applications. “LC3 is not only a low-carbon solution, but also a circular economy solution,” he said.
At the same time, he cautioned that LC3 in India is not yet cheap because it has not reached scale. Site-specific techno-commercial feasibility studies, supported jointly by development agencies and industry, could help companies assess whether LC3 production makes technical and financial sense at a given location.
Dr Purushottam added that India must address both low-carbon cement and construction waste together. “Both low-carbon cement and C&D waste go hand in hand. India does not have an option but to work on both,” she said.
Dr Aiyer called for policy shifts from both government and industry, including preferential purchasing of sustainable materials, minimum supplementary cementitious material requirements in public and public-private projects, and faster regulatory implementation. “If we can fast-track the regulatory standards and their implementation on the ground, that is the way to go,” he said.
From green ambition to green construction
Cement innovation is no longer only about chemistry. It is about systems. Low-carbon cement will scale only when technology, standards, procurement, finance, regulation, education and construction practice move together.
LC3 and other low-carbon technologies have shown promise. India has early commercial examples, strong research capability and growing market interest. But mainstream adoption will depend on whether demand can be created, regulators can be capacitated, standards can be embedded in procurement, and manufacturers can see a clear business case.
For a country building at India’s scale, the opportunity is enormous. Cement will continue to be central to infrastructure and urban development. The challenge now is to ensure that the cement used in India’s growth story carries a lower carbon burden.
Rakesh Rao
Participate in Cement Expo 2026 and discover how next-gen infrastructure can be built with innovations in cement.
JK Cement gained after being declared preferred bidder for the Gilund Limestone Block in Chittorgarh, Rajasthan, a lease area of 370.96 hectares. The firm saw its shares trade at Rs. 5550.05, up by 28.45 points or 0.52 per cent from the previous close of Rs. 5521.60 on the BSE. The scrip opened at Rs. 5569.15 and touched a high of Rs. 5625.00 and a low of Rs. 5531.00.
The stock recorded turnover of 1742 shares on the counter and the BSE group A stock with face value Rs. 10 has a 52 week high of Rs. 7565.00 on 20-Aug-2025 and a 52 week low of Rs. 4670.05 on 12-Jun-2026. Last one week high and low stood at Rs. 5625.00 and Rs. 5329.00 respectively. The promoters holding in the company stood at 45.66 per cent, while institutions and non-institutions held 40.61 per cent and 13.73 per cent respectively.
The e-auction conducted by the Government of Rajasthan resulted in the company being declared preferred bidder for the mining lease, and the allocation will enable the company to plan phased development of the deposit, subject to regulatory approvals. The Gilund block spans 370.96 hectares and its allocation is intended to support raw material security for the company’s cement operations in the region. The designation follows the government auction process and will allow the company to plan development and integration of the deposit into its supply chain.
The current market capitalisation stands at Rs. 430.38 billion (bn), reflecting market response to the mining news and prevailing valuation levels for the sector. Investors and analysts will watch for formal allotment and related disclosures that can clarify timelines, capital expenditure and expected production profiles. The report is intended for informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice, and market participants are advised to consult advisers before making decisions.
Star Cement has been declared the preferred bidder for the mining lease for Boro Lakhindong West Block following e-auctions conducted by the Government of Assam. The block is located in Boro Lakhindong Village, Umrangso Tehsil, Dima Hasao District, Assam, and extends over an area of 123 hectares. The estimated limestone resource is 207.822 million (mn) tonnes (t), a quantity that will supply raw material for cement production and support the company’s manufacturing operations in the region.
The company is engaged in the manufacturing and selling of cement clinker and cement and distributes products across the north-eastern and eastern states of India. Star Cement operates plants and logistics networks that procure and process limestone to produce clinker for cement, and the addition of Boro Lakhindong is presented as a strategic enhancement of feedstock availability. The preferred bidder status secures rights to the specified lease area under the terms of the auction process.
Financial results for the company in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2026 showed a consolidated net profit rise of 20.24 per cent to Rs 1,481.0 mn on an 11.54 per cent increase in revenue to Rs 11,735.5 mn compared with the corresponding quarter of the previous year. Those results reflected higher sales volumes and revenue growth in the company’s primary markets and are cited in company disclosures accompanying the lease announcement. The reported performance provides context to the company’s ability to pursue and finance new mining lease opportunities.
Market reaction to the declaration was modest, with the scrip rising zero point thirty six per cent to trade at Rs 212 on the BSE. The award of the Boro Lakhindong lease concludes the e-auction process for the west block and assigns operational rights to Star Cement as the preferred bidder, subject to completion of statutory and contractual formalities.
