Latest news with #Air(PreventionandControlofPollution)Act
Time of India
2 days ago
- General
- Time of India
TOI impact: NGT puts Chandigarh MC, CPCC on notice over Dadumajra crisis
1 2 Chandigarh: Taking suo motu cognisance of the TOI report, published on July 23, about a public health emergency due to missed deadlines to remove legacy waste at Dadumajra, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has issued notices to the Chandigarh municipal corporation and Chandigarh Pollution Control Committee (CPCC). The NGT noted, "The news item relates to a major environmental and public health emergency at the Dadumajra dumping site in Chandigarh. The article mentions that the heavy monsoon rains are aggravating the crisis. The article highlights that due to continuous heavy rains, overflowing leachate, contaminated liquid runoff mixed with solid waste, is spreading into nearby fields and even seeping into the Patiala Ki Rao Choe. " According to TOI report, initially, the authorities promised to clear the waste by May 31, but on the same day, a massive fire erupted at the dumping ground, requiring 1.25 lakh litres of water to extinguish the flame. The deadline was then pushed to July, but the garbage is still there. Residents said the situation has deteriorated into a severe public health emergency. They reported a rise in respiratory illnesses, skin diseases, and serious conditions like tuberculosis and cancer. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Beyond Text Generation: An AI Tool That Helps You Write Better Grammarly Install Now Undo The foul odour from the leachate has made it difficult to breathe, and many allege that constant exposure to the stench is affecting their health. Residents have also raised concerns about safety, stating that the leachate flowing onto roads has made them slippery and dangerous. Despite repeated demands from residents for urgent action, they claim that no effective measures have been taken so far. The tribunal, in its order, said, "The news item indicates violation of the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The news item raises substantial issues relating to compliance with the environmental norms and implementation of the provisions of scheduled enactment. "
News18
3 days ago
- Politics
- News18
NGT steps in over toxic waste crisis at Chandigarhs Dadumajra Dump
New Delhi [India], August 5 (ANI): The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has initiated suo motu proceedings following media reports of a growing environmental and public health crisis at the Dadumajra dumping ground in Chandigarh. It stated that a news article published on July 23 revealed that leachate–polluted liquid runoff from the accumulated waste–has started contaminating nearby fields and water bodies, including the Patiala Ki Rao Choe. Heavy monsoon rains have worsened the situation, prompting serious concern among local have reported an alarming surge in respiratory illnesses, skin infections, and even serious diseases like tuberculosis and cancer due to toxic waste mixing with rainwater and seeping into residential zones. The unbearable stench from decomposing waste and chemical runoff has further degraded everyday living conditions in the surrounding Tribunal noted several environmental laws had been violated, including the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016; Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The bench, led by Justice Prakash Shrivastava and supported by Dr A Senthil Vel and Dr Afroz Ahmad, attributed the unfolding crisis to ongoing mismanagement and delayed action by scheduled to be cleared by May 31, the dumping site remained unaddressed. On the deadline itself, a massive fire erupted, requiring more than 1.25 lakh litres of water to extinguish. Despite a revised cleanup target set for July, the waste still remains uncleared, heightening response, the Tribunal issued notices to the Municipal Corporation Chandigarh, Chandigarh Pollution Control Committee, the Deputy Commissioner of Chandigarh, and the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). These entities have been instructed to file their affidavits with responses at least one week prior to the next hearing, which is slated for November 3, Tribunal reinforced its authority to act in environmental emergencies, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha & Ors., which upheld the NGT's right to intervene without formal petitions. (ANI)
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Pollution boards can seek damages, bank guarantees for future, says Supreme Court
In a significant decision aimed at empowering pollution control boards, the Supreme Court Monday held that they can seek compensation for restitution of damages already caused by polluting entities or demand bank guarantees to prevent any potential future environmental damage. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Manoj Misra set aside the Delhi HC Division Bench order which said the Boards are 'not empowered to levy compensatory damages in exercise of powers under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 on the ground.' The HC held that such levy can be made only by courts, after taking cognisance of offences specified under the Acts. The SC said, 'having considered the principles that govern our environmental laws and on interpretation of Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts, we are of the opinion that that the Division Bench of the High Court was not correct in restrictively reading powers of the Boards. We are of the opinion that these regulators in exercise of these powers can impose and collect, as restitutionary or compensatory damages, fixed sum of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential or actual environmental damage.' The Delhi Pollution Control Board had approached the SC against the HC judgement which quashed the show cause notices issued by the Board to some residential complexes, commercial complexes and shopping malls which were allegedly constructed and were operating without obtaining the mandatory 'consent to establish' and 'consent to operate' under the Water Act and Air Act. The SC judgment said, 'The Board's powers under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act have to be read in light of the legal position on the application of the Polluter Pays principle… This means that the State Board cannot impose environmental damages in case of every contravention or offence under the Water Act and Air Act. It is only when the State Board has made a determination that some form of environmental damage or harm has been caused by the erring entity, or the same is so imminent, that the State Board must initiate action under' the provisions. It directed that 'the powers must be exercised as per procedure laid down by subordinate legislation incorporating necessary principles of natural justice, transparency and certainty.' The court said that 'given their broad statutory mandate and the significant duty towards public health and environmental protection the Boards must have the power and distinction to decide the appropriate action against a polluting entity. It is essential that the Boards function effectively and efficiently by adopting such measures as is necessary in a given situation. The Boards can decide whether a polluting entity needs to be punished by imposition of penalty or if the situation demands immediate restoration of the environmental damage by the polluter or both.' The bench said, 'Our firm view is that remedial powers or restitutionary directives are a necessary concomitant of both the fundamental rights of citizens who suffer environmental wrongs and an equal concomitant of the duties of a statutory regulator… The State's 'endeavour to protect and improve the environment' will be partial, if it does not encompass a duty to restitute.' It said that 'of all the duties imposed under Article 51A (fundamental duties), the obligation to conserve and protect water and air, is perhaps the most significant, amidst our climate change crisis. The Water Act and the Air Act institutionalised all efforts and actions that need to be taken to protect air that we breathe and water that we consume by creating the Pollution Control Boards. These Boards functioning as our environment regulators are expected to act with institutional foresight by evolving necessary policy perspectives and action plans.'
The Hindu
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Pollution Control Boards have power to impose restitutionary damages under Water, Air Acts, says Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (August 4, 2025) gave Pollution Control Boards more teeth by declaring their power to impose and collect restitutionary damages to completely restore polluted air and waterbodies back to their original, pristine selves in an ecosystem. 'We direct that Pollution Control Boards can impose and collect as restitutionary and compensatory damages fixed sums of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage in exercise of powers under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts,' Justice P.S. Narasimha, who authored the judgment, held. The judgment came on an appeal filed by the Delhi Pollution Control Committee against a Delhi High Court decision that it was not empowered to levy compensatory damages in exercise of powers under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The Bench, also comprising Justice Manoj Misra, further directed that the power to impose or collect restitutionary or compensatory damages or the requirement to furnish bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure under the Water and Air Acts should be enforced only after issuing the necessary subordinate legislation in the form of rules and regulations under both statutes. The rules must incorporate the basic principles of natural justice. 'According to the polluter pays principle, the responsibility for repairing the damage is that of the offending industry… The focus has to be on restoration of the ecosystem as close and similar as possible to the specific one that was damaged,' Justice Narasimha observed. The judgment said the payment of restitutory damages was distinct from charging punitive damages. 'Bringing the culprits to face the proceedings is a different matter and restoration of the damage already done is a different matter,' the court distinguished. Enormous responsibilities Justice Narasimha held that the Pollution Control Boards had expansive powers and 'enormous responsibilities' under the Water Act and the Air Act. They had a broad statutory mandate to prevent, control and abate water and air pollution. The provisions under these statutes bestowed the Boards with the power to direct closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process. Further, this power extended to directing the stoppage or regulation of supply of electricity, water or any other service. The laws allow the Boards significant flexibility in deciding the nature of directions. 'Our constitutionalism bears the hallmark of an expansive interpretation of fundamental rights. But such creative expansion is only a job half done if the depth of the remedies, consequent upon infringement, remain shallow. In other words, remedial jurisprudence must keep pace with expanding rights and regulatory challenges. It is not sufficient that courts adopt injunctory, mandatory and compensatory remedies… Remedial powers or restitutionary directives are a necessary concomitant of both the fundamental rights of citizens who suffer environmental wrongs and an equal concomitant of the duties of a statutory regulator,' Justice Narasimha wrote.
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
Why concerns about SO₂ emissions, a major air pollutant, keep recurring
— Arunangshu Das Recently, the government decided to scale back its 2015 mandate requiring coal-based thermal plants to install clean-air equipment – flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) devices – that remove sulphur dioxide (SO₂) emissions, a key contributor to air pollution. This move is primarily driven by the high cost of retrofitting older plants and the significant capital investment needed for new installations. The government has reaffirmed its commitment to supplying low-cost electricity as a cornerstone of its economic and social development agenda — one that includes reducing regional disparities in electricity access and meeting the country's rising cooling demands. However, the rollback has raised concerns about the environmental implications of emissions, particularly with respect to sulphur dioxide (SO2), which is controlled by FGDs. First, let's understand the types of coal used in power plants and how they contribute to pollution. A significant portion of the world's electricity continues to be generated from coal. In India, coal accounts for more than 70 per cent of electricity generation. Although India has one of the lowest electricity tariffs in the world, its per capita electricity consumption remains low. The theoretical maximum efficiency of a coal-fired power plant is 64 per cent, but even the most advanced plants globally achieve up to 45 per cent. In comparison, plants in India average about 35 per cent efficiency. However, efficiency has improved in recent years with the adoption of supercritical and ultra-supercritical technologies in 2010 and 2019, respectively. Since 2015, India has also introduced emission standards for existing coal plants, aligning with regulatory approaches in the EU and the US. The dominant type of coal produced in India is 'sub bituminous', primarily of Gondwana origin, which has low sulphur and moisture content, which is beneficial in reducing emissions. However, 'sub bituminous' coal also has low carbon content and lower energy density. As a result, power plants burn more of this low carbon coal to produce the same amount of energy as higher-grade coals like anthracite. In other words, due to low calorific value and high quartz content, coal-fired power plants in India consume more coal per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated, produce more carbon dioxide (CO2) per unit of electricity, and generate large volumes of ash. Sulphur, a non-metal in Group 16 of the periodic table, forms acidic oxides, most notably sulphur dioxide (SO₂), which is a major air pollutant emitted mainly from coal-fired power plants. SO₂ contributes to acid smog, acid rain, and secondary aerosols. In the US, SO₂ is listed as a criteria pollutant under the Clean Air Act and is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In India, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, sets the annual average SO₂ limit of 50 µg/m³ for residential/industrial areas, and 20 µg/m³ for ecologically sensitive zones. The 24-hour average limit is 80 µg/m³ for both. Besides coal, other significant sources of SO₂ include petroleum refining, copper smelting, and cement production. Coal contains 0.5–6 per cent sulphur, present as organic sulphur (bound to carbon) and inorganic sulphur (mainly iron pyrites, FeS₂). Notably, inorganic sulphur can be partially removed through washing and pulverising. When oxidised, sulphur forms SO₂ and SO₃, which dissolve in water to produce sulphurous and sulphuric acids – the latter being one of the strongest known acids. SO₂ is also highly water-soluble and forms sulphate aerosols (0.2–0.9 µm in size), which reduce visibility and can penetrate deep into the lungs. The conversion of SO₂ into sulphate particles takes days, with deposition mainly occurring through acid rain. SO₂ can adsorb onto airborne particles and travel hundreds of kilometres before settling. Studies in the US have linked coal power plants to severe acid rain events, such as those recorded near Mississippi in 2004. The health impacts are worsened when SO₂ and sulphate particles act together, increasing mortality during air pollution episodes. Environmentally, SO₂ damages vegetation; acid rain leaches nutrients from soil, mobilises toxic aluminium that inhibits plant uptake and disrupts freshwater ecosystems. One of the most catastrophic effects of acid deposition due to SO2 is perhaps the collapse of pH buffer capacity in freshwater bodies. This can cause massive death of fish populations because of gelation and deposition of aluminium salts in their gills, causing respiratory blockage. Coal-fired power plants are operated using Rankine cycle, in which a working fluid (usually water) is alternately heated and condensed. Due to high levels of pollution from these plants, expensive pollution control measures have been in place since 1960. These systems can account for up to 40 per cent of the cost of building a new power plant and consume about 5 per cent of generated power, thereby reducing overall efficiency. SO₂ emissions can be reduced through two broad approaches: pre-combustion control and post-combustion control. Pre-combustion control Pre-combustion techniques include fuel switching, fluidized bed combustion (FBC), and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC). — Fuel switching: It involves using or blending low-sulphur coal, which can cut SO₂ emissions by 30–90 percent, but only temporarily. — Coal washing: Using physical, chemical, or biological methods, it removes iron pyrites (FeS₂) due to its higher density. This can lower sulphur content by approximately 10 per cent, while reducing ash levels and improving fuel quality and boiler efficiency. — Fluidized bed combustion: It uses crushed coal mixed with limestone in a fluidized bed; the lime reacts with SO₂ to form calcium sulfate. FBC can remove more than 90 per cent of sulphur, operates at lower temperatures (~800°C), thereby lowering NOₓ formation, and is less sensitive to coal quality. — Integrated gasification combined cycle: It turns coal-water slurry to clean syngas, removing particulates, mercury, and sulphur. IGCC plants reach up to 45 per cent efficiency compared to approximately 40 per cent for conventional pulverized coal plants, and allow for CO₂ capture via deep injection. Post-combustion control Post-combustion control is mainly achieved through flue gas desulphurisation (FGD). — In dry FGD systems, limestone (CaCO₃) slurry is injected into flue gas to form calcium sulphite/sulphate. Lime-based slurries work better but are costlier. — In wet scrubbing, flue gas is bubbled through limestone slurry, producing gypsum as a by-product, which is used as a construction material. Scrubbers also consume large amounts of water and generate significant sludge as landfills with the consistency of toothpaste. — Regenerative SO2 capture processes, like Wellman-Lord, generate economically important byproducts like sulphuric acid, and even elemental sulphur for industrial application. — Biotechnological application of autotrophic sulphur bacteria in thermophilic conditions to produce economically attractive elemental sulphur is also another environmentally benign alternative for SO2 remediation. Without any control measures in place, burning Indian coal can equate to SO₂ emission of 800 to 1600 mg/m3, which is higher than the 2015 standards set for SO₂ gas. In 2021, a report titled 'A pathway to reducing emissions from coal power in India', by the International Energy Agency for the Coal Industry Advisory Boards, recommended the implementation of some kind of SO₂ control measures. This is because SOx and NOx can bind to particulate matter and travel hundreds of kilometres from their source, posing serious health and environmental risks even in distant areas. The installation cost of FGD is around 50 lakh/MW, though this can be partially offset by selling the gypsum generated during the desulphurisation process. More recent studies from India's premier institutions, however, have suggested that the overall impact of FGD technology is limited, as ambient SO₂ levels remain low even in the absence of FGD at most power plants, largely due to India's favourable geographic location and meteorological conditions. Of the 206 GW capacity required to comply with the SO₂ norms, the centrally-owned plants, notably those of NTPC, already had a higher rate of implementation as about 68 per cent of capacity (35.4 GW). As of August 2024, out of 537 coal-based thermal power plants, 39 had completed installations, 238 had awarded contracts or had been under implementations, 139 units were in the process of tendering and 121 were at the initial stages of pre-tendering. Globally, policy rollbacks on environmental regulations are becoming increasingly common. In 2017, the then Trump administration issued an executive order to reevaluate Clean Power Plant rules and eliminate other federal initiatives addressing climate change. However, these actions were subsequently settled by the Biden administration to reduce pollution from fossil fuel-fired power plants. Nonetheless, with the return of the Trump administration for the second term, there is renewed momentum to reconsider these regulations made by the previous government, specifically relaxing the carbon emission rules and Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). According to some estimates, these rollbacks could result in up to seven times more CO₂ emissions than current levels. Such rollbacks risk setting new precedence across the globe in an era of climate crises. It is hoped that science will judiciously tackle all concerns, which include not only human wellbeing but also planetary health in taking such crucial decisions. Why has the government exempted 78 per cent of coal-based thermal plants from installing anti-pollution devices? Evaluate. What is the dominant type of coal produced in India, and how does it produce more carbon dioxide (CO2) per unit of electricity, and generate large volumes of ash? How does the formation of sulphate aerosols from SO₂ affect both air quality and human health? How do pre-combustion and post-combustion SO₂ control strategies compare in terms of cost, efficiency, and environmental impact? How effective has India's regulatory approach to SO₂ emissions been when compared to countries like the US or EU, particularly in enforcement and technological adaptation? (Dr. Arunangshu Das is the Principal Project Scientist at the Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi.) Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
