The most expensive infrastructure decisions usually happen long before the first brick is laid or the first beam is hoisted. It’s the protective coating that gets skipped and the environmental wear-and-tear that gets underestimated. The cheaper material chosen to save a few lakhs today, or the tender awarded strictly on construction costs, with zero thought given to what the asset will actually cost to maintain over the next fifty years. At the time, none of these choices seem like a big deal, but their true price tag creeps up on us slowly, through endless repairs, fresh coats of paint, frustrating shutdowns, and infrastructure that falls apart decades before it should. That’s the tricky economics of corrosion, the rust might show up years later, but the decision that caused it was made at the drawing board.
Right now, this matters enormously for India. We are building an unprecedented amount of long-life infrastructure, highways, bridges, railway networks, power grids, renewable energy parks, and industrial corridors. We are expecting the things we build today to power our economy decades into the future. So, the real question isn't just how much we can build, but how much economic life we can squeeze out of every single asset. The numbers are a wake-up call. According to a recent CII–Nomura Research Institute analysis, corrosion costs India roughly ₹14.15 lakh crore every year, about 4.3% of our GDP. Infrastructure alone eats up ₹1.42 lakh crore of that. Nearly ₹49,580 crore of those infrastructure losses could easily be avoided with better corrosion management. At this scale, we aren't just talking about rusting steel anymore. We are talking about bleeding capital.
Every bridge or transmission tower is an investment with an expected lifespan. If it deteriorates too fast, requiring constant upkeep and causing operational nightmares, the return on that investment tanks. Yet, we still obsess over what an asset costs to build, rather than what it costs to own.
{{/usCountry}}Every bridge or transmission tower is an investment with an expected lifespan. If it deteriorates too fast, requiring constant upkeep and causing operational nightmares, the return on that investment tanks. Yet, we still obsess over what an asset costs to build, rather than what it costs to own.
{{/usCountry}}Flipping that mindset completely changes what we consider the "cheapest" option. A basic protection system might look great on a spreadsheet today, but it will demand endless cycles of inspection, repair, and recoating. Another system might cost more upfront but practically eliminate the need for future maintenance. We need to stop looking at the price per tonne at procurement, and start looking at the cost per year of actual service delivered.
Take reinforcement steel, for example, standard TMT bars are cheaper upfront, but that math changes quickly if the concrete starts cracking and requires major rehab halfway through its lifespan. Galvanised reinforcement costs a bit more initially but drastically extends the structure's life in harsh environments. The same goes for structural steel, constantly repainting it is a hidden tax compared to using a long-life solution like hot-dip galvanising. And let's be honest, the cost of fixing this stuff goes way beyond the price of new materials. Repairing a bridge means traffic jams. Fixing a railway track means cancelled trains. Reaching a rusted transmission tower in the middle of nowhere requires massive logistics and manpower. Industrial repairs mean factory downtime. You won't find these headaches listed in a tender document, but they absolutely become part of the economic cost of the asset.
This is why lifecycle value must become just as important as the initial price tag.
India’s incredible environmental diversity makes this even more critical. Steel reacts to environmental conditions differently in coastal regions and dry geographies. Engineering specifications must reflect the heightened corrosion risks posed by high humidity, heavy rainfall, and industrial pollution. India has a massive opportunity to lean into this approach, creating stricter corrosion-zone guidelines, better coating specs, and tougher testing standards. This is especially urgent as India’s energy landscape shifts, the green transition is creating a massive new generation of exposed steel, from solar panel mounts and wind turbine towers to new substations and transmission networks. Combine that with our booming railway, telecom, and urban infrastructure, and we have a lot of metal out in the open.
Corrosion prevention can't be a reactive band-aid we apply once the rust shows up. It needs to be baked into the design.
This is where the material science of zinc comes in. Galvanising doesn't just put a physical shell around steel. Zinc provides two-fold protection by forming a physical barrier and, through its electrochemical properties, corroding sacrificially before the iron to protect the underlying steel even when the coating is scratched.
This dual protection is the reason for galvanised steel to be the global gold standard for power grids, crash barriers, railways, and factories. Not every piece of steel needs to be galvanised, but corrosion protection should be chosen upfront to suit the conditions and improve sustainability. An asset that lasts longer would require fewer replacement of parts, and less energy spent on repairs. Durability, in its own right, is a powerful form of resource efficiency.
The next step is combining that durability with low-carbon materials. Take EcoZen, Asia's first low-carbon zinc produced by Hindustan Zinc. It has a verified carbon footprint of less than one tonne of CO₂ equivalent per tonne of zinc, roughly 75% lower than the global average. Using it to galvanise a tonne of steel saves about 400 kg of carbon emissions compared to traditional zinc.
We need to make corrosion prevention a non-negotiable part of how we talk about infrastructure longevity and resilience. To actually move the needle, this mindset has to jump from awareness campaigns to decision-making. It needs to be hardwired into engineering specs, EPC contracts, government tenders, and procurement frameworks.
We have to fix this at the earliest, because majority of the infrastructure India will rely on in 2050 has not even been built yet. The choices we make today will determine not just the construction costs, but also the long-term cost of repairs, resource use, and the value preserved from our investment. Till now, our infrastructure ambition has been about building more and building faster. The next evolution is building for longevity, recognising that corrosion begins not when rust appears, but years earlier with a material choice made on the drawing board.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by Rahul Sharma, director - India, International Zinc Association.