Connect with us

Economy & Market

Indian Cement Industry: The year gone by and the challenges ahead

Published

on

Shares

Though the year 2011 has been bumpy for the Indian cement sector, demand growth for the sector is likely to bounce back given the positive outlook of the general construction and infrastructure sector. The main impediments which have impacted the industry are the recent devaluation of the rupee and bank funding becoming costlier for the industry. This has led to a rise in import & input costs for the company in the form of freight and logistics cost. Read on to know the journey of the Indian Cement industry in the current scenarioIndia is the second largest producer of cement in the world after China and the Indian cement industry has seen a tremendous boom during the last few years in sync with the booming Indian economy. However, the fiscal 2011-12 saw the Indian economy suffering a setback due to an increase in inflation, spiking interest rates and a surge in the prices of commodities and fuels alongwith a devalued rupee. A lull has also been observed in the country’s housing sector, which accounts for over 60-70 percent of the country’s cement demand.Pervasion of a negative sentiment in the Indian Economy :As per the monthly "Economic Watch for November 2011" brought out by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), the country’s economic growth is expected to slump to 6.6-6.8 percent in the financial year 2011-12. This projection by the industry’s apex body comes in the wake of the Indian government having lowered the country’s GDP growth forecast from the originally projected 9 percent to 7.25-7.75 percent. A poor performance by the mining, manufacturing and capital goods sectors resulted in a 5.1 percent on year contraction in the country’s industrial production in October in over two years. The growth of India’s GDP in the July-September quarter was pegged at 6.9 percent, the lowest in two years on account of the weak global fundamentals and a tight monetary policy by the government. The export sector is also likely to witness a moderation given the bearish fundamentals gripping the world economy. The situation has been complicated further by a widening trade deficit in the current fiscal. Exports for the April-November period increased by 33.2 percent on year to $ 192.7 billion while imports rose by 30.2 percent on year to $ 309.5 billion.A gloom has also been witnessed in the investment climate of the country with a slowdown in the housing and construction industry, which are critical demand drivers for the cement industry. This view was further emphasized by Jayram Nambiar, Ex Managing Director, Pfeiffer India Pvt Ltd who stated, "there has been a substantial reduction in private investments in major capital projects in 2011. There has been low government expenditure on public projects and a fall in investment levels in the housing and construction industry. The cement industry is unlikely to see a revival in demand to the tune of 8-9 percent for some time."Indian Cement Industry : The year that wasThe negative sentiment in the economy has also found its reverberations in the cement sector.Jayram Nambiar, Ex Managing Director-Pfeiffer India Pvt Ltd has concurred "as per a report by the CMA, the country produced 98.81 mt of cement in April-October 2011 which is only 1.2 percent higher than 96.75 mt produced in 2010. A slowdown in demand for cement has been noticed from the housing industry and if the trend continues, the annual growth in demand for cement will remain in the range of 3 per cent on a year on year basis , in 2011-12". The year 2011 also witnessed low cement capacity utilizations compounded by a fall in capacity additions. It was further observed that inspite of an oversupply situation, increased cost of inputs such as fuel and commodities led to a rise in prices of cement across India. Commenting on the capacity parameters for the cement industry, Umesh Shrivastava, Executive Chairman, Holtec Consulting Private Limited stated, "the average capacity utilization, over the year is likely to be in the range of 70-75 percent, which despite being low, is pegged at a level higher than the breakeven point of 50 percent. A slowdown has also been observed in capacity additions, with only 12-13 mtpa of capacity commissioned till now. A capacity addition of around 30 mtpa was expected to come onstream in the period April 1, 2011-31 March 2012." The industry was expecting the installation of around 15-20 mtpa of capacity in 2011. However, a difference in value perceptions between prospective sellers and buyers led to the prospect remaining unrealized. As compared to a peak cycle witnessed during FY 2007-08, cement industry utilization rates witnessed a downslide in FY 2011-12. Commenting on this aspect, Sumit Banerjee, Vice Chairman, Reliance Cementation augured, "the cement sector is cyclical in nature and continues to witness peak and trough cycles. Following a peak capacity utilization rate of 98 percent in FY08, the industry witnessed a down cycle with utilization rate falling to 74 percent in FY 2011-12. Hopefully, this should be the bottom of the cycle with the utilization rate expected to record an improvement to 76 percent in FY 2012-13 and further to 79 percent in FY 2013-14."A moderate 3.1 percent year on year growth in dispatches was recorded by the Indian cement industry in FY 2011-12, following a year on year increase of 4.5 percent in FY 2010-11. The bleak scenario was a result of muted demand, especially in the Southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh due to political instability. Demand growth for cement in fiscal 2011-12 was expected to remain lower at 4.5 percent due to a slowdown in the economy, sluggish growth in infrastructure and real estate projects and a low momentum in government sponsored housing and irrigation schemes.Cost pressures also added to the woes of the cement industry in this fiscal. There was a rise in limestone mining costs due to a hike in prices of diesel in June 2011. Heavy monsoons in the coal mining areas also forced cement companies to import coal at inflated price levels due to a fall in the value of the rupee. High input costs coupled with a fall in demand led to a pressure on the margins of companies. Commenting on the cost factor, Sumit Banerjee, Vice Chairman, Reliance Cementation said, "severe pressure has been exerted over cement production costs over the last two years. The underlying reason behind the same was an increase in costs incurred on raw material, fuel and power, and freight costs which account for around 70 percent of the overall costs for the manufacture of cement. This has affected the operating margin of the industry, which has gone down significantly inspite of higher cement prices."The year can also be noted for technological developments which included waste heat recovery systems and utilization of lower grades of limestone for making clinker. Positive moves were also witnessed on the part of stronger players in the domestic cement arena who tried to establish production capacities outside India and acquire sources for solid fuel.The road aheadThe future largely appears bleak for the cement industry in the fiscal 2012-13 due to prevalent weak economic fundamentals. Commenting on the adversities likely to be faced by the industry, Jayram Nambiar, Ex Managing Director, Pfeiffer India Pvt Ltd said, "looking ahead, the economic scenario the world over and in India is anti growth and the worst is yet to come. The problem in India has been compounded by the current unfavorable political climate. The coming general election is unlikely to lead to the emergence of a strong political party or coalition. The growth levels of 2008-09 are not likely to be witnessed over the next two years. The period is also likely to be tough for the cement industry. The industry will have to deal with problems like rising energy costs compounded with the depreciation of the rupee, higher freight and distribution costs and low price realizations due to weak demand." These problems shall further be exacerbated by a rise in labour costs due to inflationary trends and a rise in the cost of living index. However, price levels for cement cannot be expected to increase much due to high unutilized capacity far in excess of demand likely to prevail in 2012 and 2013. However, it should be noted that additional cement capacity of 20 million mtpa is being implemented and will be commissioned in 2012. If sufficient demand exists, a capacity utilisation of more than 85 percent is easily achievable. The weak economic climate will also have an impact on smaller cement producers and their operations, leading to a spate of consolidations. Concurring on this issue, Nambiar reiterated, "presently, 35 percent of the cement production capacity is in the hands of smaller producers for whom the future will be one of tribulation due to unfavourable economic conditions. The next two years will see a period of consolidation in the industry with the smaller players withdrawing from the industry by selling out to the financially stronger cement producers. Their share of the total cement capacity can be expected to increase to over 70 percent by 2014."Being a huge country, there will be a difference in the region wise demand for cement in the country which is broadly divided into the western, eastern, northern and southern regions. Elaborating on this aspect, Sumit Banerjee, Vice Chairman, Reliance Cementation stated, "demand for cement in the South is expected to go southward by 4 percent in FY2011-12, display lower than average growth at 5 percent in FY2012-13 and bounce back sharply in FY2013-14. A rise in growth will be witnessed by the Eastern and Central regions from the lower than average levels of 6 percent in FY2011-12 to 9 percent in FY2013-14. Demand for cement in the Northern region is expected to remain in the range of 7-9 percent while the Western region will show demand in the 10 percent range till FY2013-14."Reiterating on the capacity utilization differentials across different regions, Banerjee stated, "a moderation is expected to set in the average industry capacity utilization rate to 76 percent in FY2012-13 from 79 percent in FGY2010-11 before showing an upward curve to 79 percent in FY2013-14. The highest capacity utilization rates are likely to be witnessed by the Eastern and Northern regions at 90 percent levels in FY2012-13 while higher capacity additions could lead to a fall in capacity utilizations in Central India. Utilization rates are also likely to be impacted in the Western region due to pressure exerted on account of cement supply from Southern India."The industry is also optimistic that demand for cement will surge in the near future through the revival of economic activity by the government especially through investment in infrastructure projects. Expressing confidence that the government will initiate the demand push process, Umesh Shrivastav, Executive Chairman, Holtec Consulting Private Limited stated, "following the slump of 2011, demand for cement is likely to see a recovery process and will touch levels of 6-8 percent in 2012. The increase in growth will be triggered by the government’s drive to revive economic activity by initiating investment in infrastructure projects. A correction is foreseen in interest rates and improved regulation as regards land acquisition and environmental clearance leading to revival of several on-hold projects. Cement prices are likely to maintain an upward curve due to increasing production and ownership costs alongwith lower capacity utilizations."Challenges & Opportunities for Indian Cement Industry during 2012 onwards:The forthcoming year 2012 for the Cement Industry is likely to see more of consolidation but lower growth rate. The challenges and opportunities may be summarized as follows:??Extraordinary delay in mining lease sanction and delay in land acquisition & MoEF clearance.??Non availability of domestic coal clubbed with poor quality. Hence, industry has to depend upon high cost imported coal. ??Depreciation of Indian currency has further increased the cost of imported coal, Fuel, Gypsum & other raw materials.??Continuous hike in power tariff, due to increase in coal cost & cross subsidy. Though captive power plant appear to be a part solution, but CPP is again depending upon coal supply linkage, which is uncertain.??On top of it, total taxation including excise, VAT, royalty and cross subsidy amounts to approx. 39 – 40% of Ex-works sales realization. Cement being mass consuming item, such high taxation needs re-visit.??Low packing rate and low level of dispatches leading to IR – Labor issues as per the applicable rules & norms of wage board.??Cement Plant being a capital intensive unit, high interest cost is another disincentive for fresh investment in the sector.??Reduced spending on Government Projects and Slow down in infrastructure investment is another cause of worry for fresh investment.Some of the Indian Economy Strong Points & Stimulators relating to Cement Industry??Growing population of currently 1.2 billion with increasing spending power??Government pursuing structural reforms, facilitating pan-Asian trade, increasing FDI inflows??Recent push at Prime Minister’s level for large infrastructure projects such as Highways, Roads, Ports, Railways, Power, Housing, etc. ??Requirement of Accelerated industrialization to cater to infrastructure and consumer markets??India’s economic growth based on reforms and economic liberalization likely to sustain on long term basis.Measures to be implemented for stimulating cement demand:In order to stimulate demand in an already sagging industry, the government needs to initiate certain measures in the form of providing tax incentive to the industry, reduce the overall tax value on the commodity and phase out cross subsidy on supportive components. The government can also consider classifying cement as "Declared Goods" like steel having a uniform VAT rate of 4 percent throughout the country. To throw light on the matter further, P.K.Ghosh, Chairman, Ercom Engineers Pvt Ltd Ercom Group said, "the overall taxation value on cement can be brought down to a level of 20-25 percent of ex-works selling price from the current level. Tax incentive should be provided by the government for promoting blended cement in the larger interest of mineral conservation, waste utilization and bringing down carbon emission. Cross subsidy burden on electricity, diesel and railway freight should be phased out in a gradual manner. The supply of superior quality coal should be increased through merchant mining in private sector. Companies who have been allotted captive coal blocks should be asked to increase production for selling in the open market."Cement manufacturers need to maximize production of blended cement by utilizing industrial waste like fly ash and slag for conserving mineral resources. The current average blending ratio in the country is pegged at approximately 27 percent which needs to be increased to 40 percent over the next 4-5 years. High energy consuming old and inefficient equipment needs to be replaced with modern equipment for optimizing and minimizing energy consumption alongwith increasing capacity. The industry needs to adopt the latest technology for Green Cement grinding for reducing clinker consumption and deriving benefits of carbon credits. Ready Mix Concrete (RMC) business may be promoted by cement companies or small companies should be encouraged to undertake RMC business at various locations, leading to bulk supply of cement and consequent reduction in packaging cost.ConclusionIn a nutshell, the government needs to support the cement industry in reviving its fortune through initiatives like reducing tax burden, providing incentives and ensuring availability of superior quality coal.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Economy & Market

From Vision to Action: Fornnax Global Growth Strategy for 2026

Published

on

By

Shares

Jignesh Kundaria, Director & CEO, Fornnax Recycling Technology

As 2026 begins, Fornnax is accelerating its global growth through strategic expansion, large-scale export-led installations, and technology-driven innovation across multiple recycling streams. Backed by manufacturing scale-up and a strong people-first culture, the company aims to lead sustainable, high-capacity recycling solutions worldwide.

As 2026 begins, Fornnax stands at a pivotal stage in its growth journey. Over the past few years, the company has built a strong foundation rooted in engineering excellence, innovation, and a firm commitment to sustainable recycling. The focus ahead is clear: to grow faster, stronger, and on a truly global scale.

“Our 2026 strategy is driven by four key priorities,” explains Mr. Jignesh Kundaria, Director & CEO of Fornnax.

First, Global Expansion

We will strengthen our presence in major markets such as Europe, Australia, and the GCC, while continuing to grow across our existing regions. By aligning with local regulations and customer requirements, we aim to establish ourselves as a trusted global partner for advanced recycling solutions.

A major milestone in this journey will be export-led global installations. In 2026, we will commission Europe’s highest-capacity shredding line, reinforcing our leadership in high-capacity recycling solutions.

Second, Product Innovation and Technology Leadership

Innovation remains at the heart of our vision to become a global leader in recycling technology by 2030. Our focus is on developing solutions that are state-of-the-art, economical, efficient, reliable, and environmentally responsible.

Building on a decade-long legacy in tyre recycling, we have expanded our portfolio into new recycling applications, including municipal solid waste (MSW), e-waste, cable, and aluminium recycling. This diversification has already created strong momentum across the industry, marked by key milestones scheduled to become operational this year, such as:

  • Installation of India’s largest e-waste and cable recycling line.
  • Commissioning of a high-capacity MSW RDF recycling line.

“Sustainable growth must be scalable and profitable,” emphasizes Mr. Kundaria. In 2026, Fornnax will complete Phase One of our capacity expansion by establishing the world’s largest shredding equipment manufacturing facility. This 23-acre manufacturing unit, scheduled for completion in July 2026, will significantly enhance our production capability and global delivery capacity.

Alongside this, we will continue to improve efficiency across manufacturing, supply chain, and service operations, while strengthening our service network across India, Australia, and Europe to ensure faster and more reliable customer support.

Finally: People and Culture

“People remain the foundation of Fornnax’s success. We will continue to invest in talent, leadership development, and a culture built on ownership, collaboration, and continuous improvement,” states Mr. Kundaria.

With a strong commitment to sustainability in everything we do, our ambition is not only to grow our business, but also to actively support the circular economy and contribute to a cleaner, more sustainable future.

Guided by a shared vision and disciplined execution, 2026 is set to be a defining year for us, driven by innovation across diverse recycling applications, large-scale global installations, and manufacturing excellence.

Continue Reading

Concrete

Why Cement Needs CCUS

Published

on

By

Shares

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

Continue Reading

Concrete

CCUS has not yet reached commercial integration

Published

on

By

Shares

MM Rathi, Joint President – Power Plants, Shree Cement, suggests CCUS is the indispensable final lever for cement decarbonisation in India, moving from pilot-stage today to a policy-driven necessity.

In this interview, MM Rathi, Joint President – Power Plants, Shree Cement, offers a candid view on India’s CCUS readiness, the economic and technical challenges of integration, and why policy support and cluster-based infrastructure will be decisive in taking CCUS from pilot stage to commercial reality.

How critical is CCUS to achieving deep decarbonisation in cement compared to other levers?
CCUS is critical and ultimately indispensable for deep decarbonisation in cement. Around 60 per cent to 65 per cent of cement emissions arise from limestone calcination, an inherent chemical process that cannot be addressed through energy efficiency, renewables, or alternative fuels. Clinker substitution using fly ash, slag, and calcined clay can reduce emissions by 20 per cent to 40 per cent, while energy transition measures can abate 30 per cent to 40 per cent of fuel-related emissions. These are cost-effective, scalable, and form the foundation of decarbonisation efforts.
However, these levers alone cannot deliver reductions beyond 60 per cent. Once they reach technical and regional limits, CCUS becomes the only viable pathway to address residual
process emissions. In that sense, CCUS is not an alternative but the final, non-negotiable step toward net-zero cement.

What stage of CCUS readiness is the Indian cement sector currently at?
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.

What are the biggest technical challenges of integrating CCUS into existing Indian kilns?
Retrofitting CCUS into existing Indian cement plants presents multiple challenges. Many plants have compact layouts with limited space for capture units, compressors, and CO2 handling systems, requiring modular and carefully phased integration.
Kiln flue gases contain high CO2 concentrations along with dust and impurities, increasing risks of fouling and corrosion and necessitating robust gas pre-treatment. Amine-based capture systems also require significant thermal energy, and improper heat integration can affect clinker output, making waste heat recovery critical.
Additional challenges include higher power and water demand, pressure drops in the gas path, and maintaining kiln stability and product quality. Without careful design, CCUS can impact productivity and reliability.

How does the high cost of CCUS impact cement pricing, and who bears the cost?
At capture costs of US$ 80-150 per tonne of CO2, CCUS can increase cement production costs by US$ 30-60 per tonne, potentially raising cement prices by 20 to 40 per cent. Initially, producers absorb the capital and operating costs, which can compress margins. Over time, without policy support, these costs are likely to be passed on to consumers, affecting affordability in a highly price-sensitive market like India. Policy mechanisms such as subsidies, tax credits, carbon markets, and green finance can significantly reduce this burden and enable cost-sharing across producers, policymakers, and end users.

What role can carbon utilisation play versus geological storage in India?
Carbon utilisation can play a supportive and transitional role, particularly in early CCUS deployment. Applications such as concrete curing and mineralisation can reuse 5 to 10 per cent of captured CO2 while improving material performance. Fuels and chemicals offer niche opportunities but depend on access to low-cost renewable energy. However, utilisation pathways are limited in scale and often involve temporary carbon storage. With India’s cement sector emitting over 200 million tonnes of CO2 annually, utilisation alone cannot deliver deep decarbonisation.
Long-term geological storage offers permanent sequestration at scale. India has significant potential in deep saline aquifers and depleted oil and gas fields, which will be essential for achieving net-zero cement production.

How important is government policy support for CCUS viability?
Government policy support is central to making CCUS commercially viable in India. Without intervention, CCUS costs remain prohibitive and adoption will remain limited to pilots.
Carbon markets can provide recurring revenue streams, while capital subsidies, tax incentives, and concessional financing can reduce upfront risk. Regulatory mandates and green public procurement can further accelerate adoption by creating predictable demand for low-carbon cement. CCUS will not scale through market forces alone; policy design will determine its pace and extent of deployment.

Can CCUS be scaled across mid-sized and older plants?
In the near term, CCUS is most viable for large, modern integrated plants due to economies of scale, better layout flexibility, and access to waste heat recovery. Mid-sized plants may adopt CCUS selectively over time through modular systems and shared CO2 infrastructure, though retrofit costs can be 30 to 50 per cent higher. For older plants nearing the end of their operational life, CCUS retrofitting is generally not economical, and decarbonisation efforts are better focused on efficiency, fuels, and clinker substitution.

Will CCUS become a competitive advantage or a regulatory necessity?
Over the next decade, CCUS is expected to shift from a competitive advantage to a regulatory necessity. In the short term, early adopters can access green finance, premium procurement opportunities, and sustainability leadership positioning. Beyond 2035, as emissions regulations tighten, CCUS will become essential for addressing process emissions. By 2050, it is likely to be a mandatory component of the cement sector’s net-zero pathway rather than a strategic choice.

– Kanika Mathur

Continue Reading

Trending News