Centre for Science and Environment masthead Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Instagram Donate

Cse In News

Cse In News

Reimagining Plastic Waste Management in India

For Prelims: Plastic pollution,UN Environment Programme's Global Plastics Treaty, Electric vehicles,Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana,Dioxins and furans, Microplastics, Paris Agreement,Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016,Urban local bodies,Environmental Compensation, Hyderabad's Jawahar Nagar WTE plant. For Mains: Major Sectors in India that are Relying Heavily on Plastic, Challenges Emerging from the Mismanagement of Plastic Waste in India The global endeavor to address plastic pollution through the UN Environment Programme's Global Plastics Treaty has reached an impasse, revealing deep divisions between nations on how to tackle this environmental menace. While developed countries and island nations advocate for stringent production cuts to combat the pervasive environmental and health risks of plastic, many developing countries, including India, resist such measures, viewing them as economic threats. India's current plastic recycling capacity stands at merely one-third of its annual plastic introduction, underscoring the critical need for a comprehensive and proactive approach to plastic waste management. What are the Major Domains in India Relying Heavily on Plastic? Packaging Industry: Accounting for approximately 59% of India's plastic consumption, the packaging sector relies heavily on both rigid and flexible plastics for their durability and cost-effectiveness. The surge in e-commerce and retail has amplified the demand for plastic packaging solutions. For instance, the widespread use of plastic packaging during the Covid-19 pandemic facilitated the safe distribution of essential goods. Building and Construction: This sector utilizes plastics in pipes, insulation, and fittings due to their corrosion resistance and longevity. The government's "Housing for All" initiative has further propelled the use of plastic materials in affordable housing projects, enhancing construction efficiency and reducing costs. Automotive Industry: Plastics are integral in manufacturing automotive components like dashboards, bumpers, and fuel tanks, aiding in weight reduction and fuel efficiency. The push towards electric vehicles (EVs) has intensified the adoption of lightweight plastic materials to extend battery life and performance. Companies like Tata Motors have incorporated advanced plastic composites in their EV models to achieve these goals. Agriculture: The agricultural sector employs plastics in applications such as drip irrigation systems, greenhouse films, and mulching, which enhance water conservation and crop yields. The Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana promotes micro-irrigation techniques, increasing the demand for plastic-based solutions to improve agricultural productivity. Healthcare: Plastics are vital in producing medical devices, disposables, and packaging, ensuring hygiene and patient safety. The Covid-19 pandemic underscored the importance of plastic in manufacturing personal protective equipment (PPE) kits, syringes, and vaccine vials, facilitating mass immunization efforts across the country. What Challenges Are Emerging from the Mismanagement of Plastic Waste in India? Environmental Degradation: Plastic waste in India amounts to nearly 9.3 million tonnes annually, with 40% of it remaining uncollected, severely impacting rivers, soil, and marine ecosystems. Rivers like the Ganga significantly contribute to a major chunk of global riverine plastic pollution, disrupting aquatic biodiversity and food chains. Plastics take up to 500-1000 years to degrade, resulting in microplastic contamination in drinking water sources, posing a grave threat to ecosystems. Public Health Crisis: Plastic pollution significantly contributes to respiratory diseases due to open burning, releasing harmful carcinogenic chemicals like dioxins and furans. Additionally, microplastics have infiltrated the human food chain through water, seafood, and salt, raising serious concerns about long-term health risks such as endocrine disruption and infertility. In 2024, India to be among top 4 contributors of microplastics released into water bodies Economic Burden: India recycles 60% of its plastic waste—much higher than the global average of 9%. However, this is primarily driven by the informal sector, which employs 1.5 million waste pickers working in hazardous conditions, with little access to healthcare, insurance, or fair wages. This perpetuates socio-economic marginalization. Moreover, plastic pollution incurs heavy costs for India’s economy in the form of lost fisheries, tourism revenue, and damage to urban infrastructure. . Regulatory Gaps: Despite the ban on certain single-use plastics introduced in July 2022 and the establishment of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations, compliance remains weak due to limited monitoring and enforcement. Small-scale manufacturers, who make up 90% of the plastics industry, face high compliance costs, leading to resistance and ineffective transition to eco-friendly alternatives. A new Centre for Science and Environment report uncovers 70,000 fake certificates and low registration of major polluters, and banned items like plastic cutlery continue to be produced. Climate Change Nexus: Plastics are petroleum-based and their production and incineration contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. India’s increasing reliance on plastics in sectors such as packaging, agriculture (e.g., mulch films), and e-commerce exacerbates the nation’s carbon footprint. Additionally, energy-intensive recycling processes undermine India’s climate goals under the Paris Agreement. Socio-Cultural Barriers: India faces significant behavioral challenges in reducing plastic usage, as single-use plastics are deeply embedded in everyday consumption patterns. Public awareness about alternatives and proper waste segregation remains insufficient, limiting the success of government initiatives. Cultural practices, such as mass consumption during festivals, lead to seasonal spikes in plastic waste, overwhelming municipal systems. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) recovered 363 metric tonnes (MT) of solid waste from seven beaches in Mumbai after Ganesh Chaturthi in 2024. Lack of Circular Economy Solutions: India’s waste management infrastructure remains inadequate for handling the growing plastic burden. Only 12-15% of plastic waste is scientifically processed, while the rest is dumped in landfills or waterways. Innovative technologies such as pyrolysis and bioplastics, which could improve plastic waste management, are underutilized due to high costs and insufficient public-private partnerships. What is the Current Plastic Waste Management Framework in India? Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016: Focus on minimizing waste generation, preventing littering, and ensuring segregation and proper disposal. It introduces Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for producers, importers, and brand owners. The minimum thickness of plastic carry bags is raised to 50 microns, with rural areas also included for implementation. Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2018: Phases out non-recyclable, non-energy recoverable, or non-reusable multi-layered plastic (MLP). Introduces a registration system for producers under the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). Plastic Waste Management Amendment Rules, 2021: Bans specific single-use plastics by 2022 and mandates EPR for packaging waste. Increases carry bag thickness to 120 microns by December 2022. Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2022: Sets mandatory recycling and reuse targets, imposes environmental compensation for non-compliance, and promotes a circular economy. Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2024: Specifies registration, reporting, and certification requirements for manufacturers and importers. Expands definitions of "importer" and "producer," mandates certification for biodegradable and compostable plastics, and requires reporting of pre-consumer plastic waste.

Climate Change Crisis Being Seen As Investment Opportunity, COP29 A Disappointment, Says Top Official

Days after the year’s biggest annual UN climate summit ended with a $300 billion target for climate finance, India’s top environment official reaffirmed that COP29 failed to deliver, emphasising that the crisis of climate change is being viewed as a potentially commercially viable proposition — calling it the saddest part of the debate. “India made it abundantly clear, in words that were unambiguous and unequivocal, that this was not the deal that was to be accepted. It did not deserve to be the ultimate outcome. India made its point very strongly, and did not back down right down to the final negotiation of the text," said Leena Nanda, Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), during a public talk on climate in New Delhi. The two-week long tense UN negotiations had closed in Baku with a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) of $1.3 trillion, with developed nations committing just $300 billion per year by 2035 in climate finance to developing countries. Global South slammed the deal for being inadequate, with India recording its opposition at the plenary, calling it an “optical illusion". “Why are we not able to mobilise funds for mitigation? It is not that they are not there. They are being utilised for the purpose of investment. So, climate change as a challenge, this crisis, is being looked at as a potentially, commercially viable proposition. That is the saddest part of the entire debate and discussion," she added. The senior environment ministry official who was an integral part of India’s delegation at the recently concluded summit emphasised there will be no real progress until there is a clear definition of climate finance, and commitment on how $300 billion annually will be directed to developing nations. “The sentiment is widespread across the developing world, strongly voiced by India and supported by many other nations. COP29 failed to deliver," she added. Nandan also reiterated India’s strong opposition to the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), highlighting that G77+China agreed that it was fundamentally inequitable. “Instead of funds for decarbonisation, there is talk of coercive unilateral trade measures that are going to affect the very principle that economies of countries are founded on," she remarked. Speaking at the event, Sunita Narain, Director-General, CSE, brought attention to the severity of the climate change, highlighting how India is experiencing an extreme weather event almost every day in some region. “The world should have rejected the $300 billion deal. No deal would have been better than what we have come home with. This is not even peanuts. It has practically consigned 70 per cent of the world to a situation, where they have no option but to do development in ways that add to the emissions in the atmosphere. It has created a disabling framework, rather than an enabling one," she pointed out.

A plastics treaty is urgently needed, but getting it right will take time

More than two years ago, Nature urged the international community to put science front and centre as nations embarked on talks to agree a treaty to end plastics pollution. Such an agreement is needed urgently. Around 400 million tonnes of plastics are produced each year, and this figure is expected to double by 2040. Of all the plastics that have ever been produced, only about 9% have been recycled. If left unchecked, and if the world is to limit global warming to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial temperatures, plastics production and disposal are projected to be responsible for 15% of permitted carbon emissions by 2050. But the effort to curb plastics pollution is, at best, a work in progress. The latest round of talks in Busan, South Korea, broke up on 1 December without a treaty being formally agreed. Campaign groups and representatives of many countries — especially island states, which see the effects of plastics pollution every day, as plastics wash up on their coastlines — were visibly angry and frustrated. How to stop plastic pollution: three strategies that actually work The meeting’s outcome was not a surprise. International agreements can take years to finalize. This is particularly true of complex accords that involve the regulation of individual chemicals and chemical products. Talks on the United Nations Chemical Weapons Convention took more than a decade, from start to finish, before the agreement opened for signatures in 1993. The makings of a text for a plastics treaty are now in place and negotiators will reconvene within a year to continue talks. Although delegates’ frustrations are justified, the commitment to continuing the discussions and the ambition of most participating countries to secure a strong agreement are positive, says Samuel Winton, a researcher at the Global Plastics Policy Centre at the University of Portsmouth, UK, who is studying the negotiations as they unfold. There have been five rounds of negotiations since talks on an agreement got the green light at the UN Environment Assembly in March 2022. The proposed agreement will cover polymers and microplastics — particles less than five millimetres long — and products that contain them. UN plastics treaty: don’t let lobbyists drown out researchers It will include a list of named products to be regulated. There will also be provision for chemicals and products to be exempt from the treaty, but the criteria for these are yet to be defined. The treaty will have a “financial mechanism” — that is, some form of funding attached. Who will contribute, what the fund should total and what it is intended to be used for all remain to be agreed. Some of these questions might end up being parked until after the treaty text has been finalized and the first conference of the parties (or COP meeting) is held. We know from COP meetings on other topics that it is extremely difficult for participants to reach an agreement when there are too many issues in contention. One area on which the latest meeting reached, at best, a fragile consensus was the part of the text that says that any eventual agreement must cover the “full life cycle” of plastics. This was in no small part because what is meant by full life cycle still needs to be defined. Most countries interpret it as including both the production and disposal of plastics. However, some 30 countries that extract and sell fossil fuels — including Kuwait, Russia and Saudi Arabia — oppose the idea of setting limits on plastics production and would prefer the treaty to concentrate on regulating waste flows. This is an area in which a role for scientists will be key, both to help define terms according to a consensus of the evidence and to undertake research to bridge any knowledge gaps. Landmark treaty on plastic pollution must put scientific evidence front and centre That said, scientists have found it hard to get access to talks on the treaty. This is partly down to logistics — there are around 2,000 accredited observers allowed to attend the talks, out of a total of 3,300 participants, and meeting rooms cannot accommodate these numbers. Another reason, according to researchers at the Centre for Science and Environment, a think tank in New Delhi, is that some decisions were made in closed groups of countries that did not permit observers to attend. This is not a positive development, because it risks undermining trust in what should be a transparent process. Observers represent industry, non-governmental groups and academic research. So far, each negotiating session has seen more representatives from the fossil-fuel industry than the last, according to the Center for International Environmental Law, a non-governmental organization in Washington DC (see go.nature.com/3zgjzba). These voices cannot be allowed to dominate. The UN Environment Programme, based in Nairobi, is the overall host for the talks, and has still not announced how it will formally incorporate independent scientific advice. It should delay no further in addressing this: a formal role for scientists is essential. Both the treaty’s text, including its definitions, and the post-treaty implementation plans must be based on an accepted consensus of the research evidence. It is clear that the majority of countries do not want a weak treaty and are not going to compromise just to get a text over the line. And although all nations are looking to protect their own interests, no country doubts the need for an agreement to end plastics pollution. The status quo cannot continue — and scientists must guide the way, both during the negotiations and to ensure that the treaty, once finalized, is observed.

Delhi’s pollution crisis: A call for sustainable solutions

As India aspires to emerge as the world’s third-largest economy, it continues to grapple with the challenge of crafting a robust policy framework to combat the persistent environmental crises (read pollution) in its capital city, Delhi. Thankfully, the stubble-burning season officially concluded on November 30, 2024, and it is perceived as the end of the annual apocalypse of Delhi’s air pollution. But, it needs to be seen that although the practice was outlawed in 2015, it continues unabated, contributing to approximately 35 per cent of Delhi’s pollution. However, the core issue extends far beyond stubble burning, encompassing broader atmospheric and industrial factors. Decisive action in addressing these deeper challenges – and not prolonged silence – is the need of the hour. After weeks of smog and burning eyes and a high Air Quality Index (AQI), on December 2, 2024, Delhi’s air quality showed marginal improvement for the second consecutive day, with the AQI that was recorded at 273 in the morning – though still within the ‘poor’ category. According to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), the city’s 24-hour average AQI on December 1 stood at 285, providing a modest reprieve after 32 consecutive days of ‘very poor’ and ‘severe’ air quality (AQI levels exceeding 400). However, despite these minor improvements, the Supreme Court on December 2, 2024, refused to ease emergency restrictions under Stage 4 of the Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) for air pollution in Delhi. The Court emphasised that any relaxation of measures would depend on a consistent and substantial downward trend in AQI levels. The schools have nevertheless opened giving a fresh breath to the students from the online or hybrid mode. Although experts caution that pollution levels could potentially worsen, the past three days have seen clear skies and sustained, stronger winds from the northwest, which have facilitated the dispersion of pollutants. One of the most contributing factors of pollution, according to the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), is ‘vehicular pollution’ which remains the most significant contributor to Delhi’s air pollution, accounting for 51.1 per cent of emissions from all local sources, despite technical interventions aimed at reducing emissions. CSE’s analysis highlights a persistent ‘mobility crisis’ in the city, characterised by systemic shortcomings in the public transport infrastructure despite years of investment. This crisis has driven a sharp increase in the number of private vehicles, which now play a substantial role in fuelling winter air pollution. Notably, even during periods of reduced stubble burning, Delhi’s air quality frequently remains in the ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ categories. CSE’s report draws attention to several critical issues undermining public transportation, including its lack of reliability. For instance, instances of buses breaking down during transit rose significantly, from 781 in 2018-19 to 1,259 in 2022-23. Furthermore, high waiting times at bus stops reveal a fundamental inefficiency in the system: less than 1 per cent of bus stops offer waiting times of less than 10 minutes, while approximately 50 per cent require passengers to wait over 15 minutes.The state of public transportation in Delhi remains deeply inadequate. According to a report Delhi currently has approximately 45 buses per 100,000 residents, based on data from the 2011 census. This figure is significantly below the benchmark set by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, which recommends a ratio of 60 buses per lakh of the population. In comparison, major global cities such as London, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Seoul exhibit considerably higher ratios, ranging from 69 to 90 buses per 100,000 residents, highlighting a significant disparity in Delhi’s public transportation infrastructure.While the Delhi Metro has been championed as a cornerstone of urban mobility, its impact remains constrained. With an average daily ridership of only 2,700 passengers per train, the Metro’s limited capacity – that poor labourers aren’t able to afford – and reach is evident, failing to address the broader needs of the city’s commuters. According to The Economic Times, an unskilled daily-wage labourer in Delhi spend approximately 8 per cent of their income on travel via non-air-conditioned buses, 14 per cent on air-conditioned buses, and an alarming 22 per cent on the Metro. These figures underscore the economic burden placed on vulnerable sections of the population. The challenge is addressing the issue of ‘affordability’. Data from the ‘Economic Survey of Delhi 2023-24’ further paints a stark picture of the city’s growing vehicle population. Delhi currently has 7.9 million registered vehicles, with an additional 650,000 vehicles added in 2023-24, a figure that surpasses the pre-pandemic (COVID) annual average of 610,000. Moreover, the city experiences a daily influx and outflow of 1.1 million vehicles. The annual growth rate of two-wheelers and cars stands at 15 per cent, contributing significantly to transport-related pollution. Notably, according to the CSE, the transport sector accounts for 81 per cent of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions in the capital, further worsening its air quality challenges. There is a reports that the number of vehicles in the capital doesn’t correspond to the size of its population, showing how a small proportion of the population has an outsised contribution to the air pollution crisis. According to data obtained in the latest cycle of the National Family Health Survey, only a small proportion of families residing in Delhi own cars – 19 per cent in its rural areas and 28 per cent in its urban centers. Yet, Delhi streets are often congested by this small proportion of car-owners.” However, an equally concerning factor lies in the extensive proliferation of industries across Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR), which persist as major and consistent sources of pollutants. These industrial emissions subject the residents of Delhi to a form of ‘slow violence (read poison)’. Therefore, enhancing public transportation systems is a pivotal strategy for addressing the challenges posed by urban mobility and environmental sustainability in Delhi. Key measures such as improving last-mile connectivity, reducing fares to ensure affordability for a broader demographic, and expanding the public transport fleet to accommodate the city’s growing population are essential for reducing the dependence on private vehicles. By prioritising these initiatives, it is believed that a significant decrease in traffic congestion and vehicular emissions can be achieved, contributing to a cleaner and healthier urban environment. Moreover, such measures would improve the inclusivity and accessibility of the city, enabling individuals without personal vehicles to navigate Delhi more efficiently. In the long term, a robust and affordable public transport network would not only promote environmental sustainability but also enhance the overall quality of life for all residents by fostering greater equity and mobility within the city. (The writer is Programme Executive, Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti; views are personal)

DSS halts updates amid accuracy check

This is not the first setback in Delhi’s efforts to identify pollution sources. HT reported on November 21 that at least three key studies over the past four years were either halted or deemed ineffective. The Decision Support System (DSS) – the sole source apportionment tool currently available to assess or estimate sources of pollution in Delhi – has ceased updates. The reason: its performance is being evaluated by a Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) committee, which has asked the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology (IITM) — it runs this model – to make “certain changes” to improve accuracy and align the model with updated terms of reference. The last data update on the DSS website spans November 26 to November 29, with no subsequent updates available. A CAQM official, speaking on condition of anonymity, clarified that DSS is still in its development phase and has not been fully commissioned. “An evaluation committee thus reviewed it and assessed that its data and accuracy was not in line with the terms of reference set for the model. It was also seen that some of the data or the emissions inventory being used was fairly old,” said the official, adding that a timeline for resuming updates remains uncertain. The tool is also likely to upgrade its weather forecasting methodologies, the official cited above said, adding that a time frame on the resumption of DSS was difficult to ascertain at this point. An IITM official confirmed the assessment, stating that “an expert committee is currently reviewing the tool”. Experts said that with the last source apportionment tool also not sharing data any longer offers little transparency to the general public in terms of sources impacting Delhi’s air. “By withholding data, DSS risks further eroding the already minimal transparency in identifying pollution sources. This lack of openness undermines accountability and hampers effective action against pollution. Decision-makers must leverage available data and tools like DSS, real-time source apportionment studies, and other systems to address pollution. Failing to do so wastes public resources, scientific efforts, and critical time needed to combat pollution effectively,” said Sunil Dahiya, lead analyst at the think-tank Envirocatalysts. This is not the first setback in Delhi’s efforts to identify pollution sources. HT reported on November 21 that at least three key studies over the past four years were either halted or deemed ineffective. In 2021, a real-time source apportionment study by Washington University, commissioned by the Delhi government, was abandoned due to “unsatisfactory results” before its findings were published. The project was later assigned to IIT Kanpur, but the two-year term ended in November 2022 without renewal. DSS, which was the final source apportionment tool left, was running on an old 2021 emissions inventory. Its website acknowledges the limitation: “The region and source-wise contributions are based on the emissions inventory formulated in 2021. For more accurate estimation of source contributions, updated emission fields are required.” Experts flagged the importance of having advanced scientific systems and the tools to support air quality management in real-time. Without updated data, policymakers and citizens are left in the dark about the shifting dynamics of Delhi’s pollution, even as the national capital grapples with recurring smog episodes and declining air quality. “The DSS system and real-time source apportionment studies prioritised for Delhi are essential for transparent and informed decision-making, particularly during smog episodes,” said Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director of research and advocacy at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). The most recent DSS update, from November 26 onwards, indicated that stubble burning contributed 5.84% to Delhi’s PM2.5 levels. From November 27 to 29, the transport sector contributed an estimated 21-24.6% to PM2.5, while cross-boundary pollution sources such as Sonepat and Baghpat accounted for up to 9.96% and 6.51%, respectively.

COP29 seals Article 6 deal for carbon trading, but environmental concerns persist

Countries at COP29, organised in Baku, Azerbaijan, managed to make a breakthrough in finalising rules related to Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which addresses carbon trading. However, concerns over transparency and environmental safeguards continue. At COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, over 200 countries formally adopted key rules and guidelines for Article 6 on November 23, extending the negotiations beyond the scheduled dates of November 11–22. Two separate drafts were adopted: one for Article 6.2, addressing bilateral or multilateral carbon trading, and another for Article 6.4, focusing on a centralised carbon trading mechanism. The host country described Article 6 as a game-changing tool that can ensure the flow of $250 billion annually to developing countries to support their climate plans. However, experts warn that the agreed language on Article 6 is so weak that it could lead to increased emissions instead of reductions. For instance, inconsistencies when a country misreports emission reduction have been a major concern. The final draft related to Article 6.2, which deals with bilateral or multilateral carbon trading, sets several rules to correct inconsistencies. As per this draft, countries will have to submit the report to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the beginning of the project and annually. However, parties have no deadlines to fix the discrepancies or penalties for not following the carbon credit rules. Few parties wanted a strong consequence, and the draft talks about putting the parties’ names in the public if persistent inconsistency is found, but is it enough? “Several other measures could have been adopted, countries could have been asked to not trade in Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOS), equivalent to a carbon unit, until a resolution is made to this particular kind of inconsistency, says Trishant Dev, a Programme Officer for climate change at Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a Delhi-based think tank. There were other demands like incorporating human rights violations, etc, while setting the rules of future carbon trading, but it didn’t get space in the final draft, he added.

Data on pollution share not updated since Nov 29, air panel says rejig on

New Delhi: The Decision Support System (DSS), which provides data on the sources of local and regional PM2.5 pollutants, hasn't been updated since Nov 29. It is the city's lone source apportionment system and estimates the contribution of varied sources to the capital's air pollution. DSS is being reviewed by an expert committee, revealed sources in the Commission for Air Quality Management, and it is expected to start operating soon after some changes are effected. However, experts said data should be updated for transparency and public awareness. Launched in Oct 2021, and developed by the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Pune, and funded by CAQM, DSS estimates and forecasts the contribution of local sources of pollution and those in 19 NCR districts to Delhi's PM2.5. It also calculates the percentage contribution of stubble burning to the city's air pollution. The system is available only for the winter season (Oct to Feb). The last data available on the DSS website is for Nov 26-29. Last winter, DSS had briefly stopped sharing data on pollution sources in Delhi. Sources in CAQM said DSS was still in the developmental state and hadn't been fully commissioned. "A project evaluation committee is reviewing DSS periodically because its data and accuracy were not in line with the terms of reference decided for the model. Some data used by the system or emission inventory was quite old. DSS has also been asked to update its weather forecasting techniques or methodologies," said a CAQM official. The official added that air pollution sources and emission patterns over the years in the entire NCR, as well as the weather forecasting techniques, needed to be updated in DSS. The system is being evaluated and will be resumed after changes are introduced to improve its accuracy, said the sources. According to DSS's website, the region and source-wise contributions are based on the emissions inventory formulated in 2021. "For a more accurate estimation of source contribution, the latest emission fields are required," says DSS's website. An IITM official confirmed that the system was being reviewed by an expert committee. "DSS was commissioned along with the early warning system in 2018, and it was then capable of calculating the share of biomass burning in Delhi's air quality. However, after CAQM was formed, the commission in 2021 funded the project for calculating other sources impacting Delhi's air quality," said the official, who, however, offered no clarity on when this system will become operational again. Experts emphasised that source apportionment data was needed to prepare strategies and reduce air pollution at the source level. Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director, research and advocacy, Centre for Science and Environment, said, "Dynamic forecasting of the relative contribution of pollution sources and real-time assessment of the contribution of pollution sources to the city's air quality are critical for responsive and transparent decision-making, science-based air quality management, and tracking progress. Public investments in these systems need to be upscaled and not become wasteful." Sunil Dahiya, founder and lead analyst, Envirocatalysts, added that by withholding data, DSS risked further erosion of the already minimal transparency in identifying pollution sources. "This lack of openness undermines accountability and hampers effective action against pollution. Decision-makers must leverage available data and tools like DSS, real-time source apportionment studies, and other systems to address pollution. Failing to do so wastes public resources, scientific efforts, and critical time needed to combat pollution effectively," remarked Dahiya.

NESREA releases new environmental audit guidelines

The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA), Nigeria has unveiled new guidelines on environmental audit in Nigeria at a workshop-cum-report release programme today. The one-day workshop organized in partnership with the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a global think tank based in New Delhi, India is attended by over 350 participants comprising NESREA accredited consultants and staff of the Agency. An environmental audit is a series of activities undertaken with respect to the operations of a facility or an organisation to evaluate its environmental performance. It is not a one-time step but an ongoing activity that aims to identify and correct environmental issues that arise during the operation of a project and improve operating and environmental conditions in industries. The review of the guidelines was necessitated by observations that existing audit reports lacked essential technical data, hindering accurate assessments of industrial performance. Officially unveiling the Environmental Audit Guidelines and manual, the Director General of NESREA, Dr. Innocent Barikor said: “The Agency has observed that audit reports received from consultants come in different formats, lack important information, and in some cases they do not reflect the actual status of the process of the operating facility. Also, these reports do not adequately cover the information included in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) developed during the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The new guidelines are intended to streamline the processes associated with undertaking and review of the environmental audits”. Dr Barikor added: “This revised guideline is an outcome of the collaborative efforts between CSE and NESREA. I would like to extend my appreciation to CSE for the support they have provided to NESREA in the development of these guidelines, needed to standardize environmental audit reports in our country. Going forward the Agency will be verifying the parameters in the Audit Report submitted by consultants and will also take a decisive action against any consultant that engages in falsification, fabrication and plagiarism” In preparing the guidelines, officials of NESREA and CSE reviewed the existing audit guidelines and the corresponding environmental audit reports from different sectors and concluded that the existing audit reports lacked technical data and information required for depicting the performance of the industries. Speaking at the event, Ishita Garg of CSE said: “A thoroughly performed environmental audit allows industries to analyse the ambiguities in the implementation of management plans and take corrective measures. It also helps industries improve the process efficiency by optimizing the usage of resources, increasing production and thereby resulting in monetary benefits”. On the regulatory front, “a comprehensive audit report can be helpful as it will assist in assessing the compliance status of the industry and understand its environmental performance. Comparing data of two to three years can ascertain whether the performance of an industry is improving or declining,” she adds. Says Garg: “Most of the audit reports had enough of qualitative information but lacked in basic quantitative data like the production capacity, energy and water consumption, quantity of wastewater and solid waste generated. The reports also have only one-year data which makes it difficult to compare the performance of the industry with the previous years. In the absence of sufficient data, the whole audit process becomes ineffective,” she adds. The Director, Inspection and Enforcement, NESREA, Mr. Isa Abdussalam, said: “The new guidelines are more robust, focusing on quantitative and technical data from the industries along with the information on mitigation measures taken in various sectors over the years. Apart from being of immense use for project proponents and assistance to experts in conducting audits, these guidelines would also be useful for the regulatory bodies to review the submitted audit reports.”

NESREA train staff, accredited consultants on environmental audit reporting

The Director-General, National Environmental Standards and Regulations Environmental Enforcement Agency (NESREA), Dr. Innocent Barikor has charged staff of the Agency and accredited consultants to play a critical role safeguarding Nigeria’s natural resources and public health. He gave the charge on Wednesday at a capacity building workshop for NESREA staff and accredited consultants on Environmental audit reporting. The one-day workshop organized in partnership with the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a global think tank based in New Delhi, India is attended by over 350 participants comprising NESREA accredited consultants and staff of the Agency Dr. Barikor said NESREA staff and consultants are on the Frontline of environmental compliance, hence the training will enhance their capacity to enforce compliance, identify areas for environmental improvement and contribute valuable insights to our ongoing environmental strategy. “Today’s training is organized with a view to strengthening our approach to environmental auditing, align our practices with global standards and sharpen our focus on effective, high-quality audit reporting. It encompasses a comprehensive orientation on the National Environmental Audit Guidelines, recently reviewed by NESREA in collaboration with CSE. These guidelines reflect both international standards and the specific regulatory and environmental contexts of Nigeria. “This workshop focuses on two important aspects of environmental auditing, firstly, International Best Practices and Current Realities in Environmental Auditing and secondly, enhanced Audit Reporting for Regulatory and Strategic Impact. “This training is expected to expose NESREA officers and consultants to recent developments and equip them with global best practices that elevate the accuracy, comprehensiveness and impact of our audits. Our participants will be enlightened on advanced techniques such as risk-based auditing, lifecycle analysis and data-driven environmental assessments, all of which are essential to conducting audits that are not only compliant but also predictive and preventive. “As we are aware, high-quality audit reporting is a foundation to environmental compliance and enforcement. Our reports are key instruments that guide policy, inform industry standards and ultimately shape environmental performance across sectors. “This workshop is sure to emphasize best practices for reporting, including enhanced environmental data interpretation, effective visualization, and clear communication of findings and recommendations. The goal is to produce audit reports that are actionable and technically robust, providing clear guidance for industries and facilities to improve their environmental management practices. Speaking at the event, Ishita Garg of CSE said a thoroughly performed environmental audit allows industries to analyse the ambiguities in the implementation of management plans and take corrective measures. “It also helps industries improve the process efficiency by optimizing the usage of resources, increasing production and thereby resulting in monetary benefits”. She said on the regulatory front, a “comprehensive audit report can be helpful as it will assist in assessing the compliance status of the industry and understand its environmental performance. Comparing data of two to three years can ascertain whether the performance of an industry is improving or declining,” “Most of the audit reports had enough of qualitative information but lacked in basic quantitative data like the production capacity, energy and water consumption, quantity of wastewater and solid waste generated. The reports also have only one-year data which makes it difficult to compare the performance of the industry with the previous years. In the absence of sufficient data, the whole audit process becomes ineffective,” she adds. According to the Director, Inspection and Enforcement, NESREA, Mr. Isa Abdusalam “The new guidelines are more robust, focusing on quantitative and technical data from the industries along with the information on mitigation measures taken in various sectors over the years. Apart from being of immense use for project proponents and assistance to experts in conducting audits, these guidelines would also be useful for the regulatory bodies to review the submitted audit reports.”

NESREA To Take Decisive Action Against Consultants For Report Fabrication-DG

The Director General of NESREA, Dr Innocent Barikor says the Agency is monitoring the activities of state field offices to ensure that staff do not obstruct or interfere with the work of NESREA Accredited Consultants. Dr Barikor disclosed this at a “Capacity Building Workshop for NESREA Accredited Consultants and Staff on Environmental Audit Reporting,” held in Abuja the nation’s capital. He says going forward the Agency will be verifying the parameters in the Audit Report submitted by consultants and will also take a decisive action against any consultant that engages in falsification, fabrication and plagiarism. Dr Barikor also noted that the goal is to produce audit reports that are actionable and technically robust to provide clear guidance for industries and facilities to improve their environmental management practices. The DG also charged staff of the Agency and accredited consultants to play a critical role safeguarding Nigeria’s natural resources and public health. While identifying areas for environmental improvement and contribute valuable insights to NESREA ongoing environmental strategy, Dr Barikor says the training is expected to expose NESREA officers and consultants to recent developments and equip them with global best practices. “This training is expected to expose NESREA officers and consultants to recent developments and equip them with global best practices that elevate the accuracy, comprehensiveness and impact of our audits. Our participants will be enlightened on advanced techniques such as risk-based auditing, lifecycle analysis and data-driven environmental assessments, all of which are essential to conducting audits that are not only compliant but also predictive and preventive. “As we are aware, high-quality audit reporting is a foundation to environmental compliance and enforcement. Our reports are key instruments that guide policy, inform industry standards and ultimately shape environmental performance across sectors “ he stated. Dr. Barikor said NESREA staff and consultants are on the Frontline of environmental compliance, hence the training will enhance their capacity to enforce compliance. “This workshop is sure to emphasize best practices for reporting, including enhanced environmental data interpretation, effective visualization, and clear communication of findings and recommendations,” he added. Speaking at the event, Programme Manager Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), Ishita Garg, said on the regulatory front, a comprehensive audit report can be helpful as it will assist in assessing the compliance status of the industry and understand its environmental performance. “Comparing data of two to three years can ascertain whether the performance of an industry is improving or declining. “Most of the audit reports had enough of qualitative information but lacked in basic quantitative data like the production capacity, energy and water consumption, quantity of wastewater and solid waste generated. ‘The reports also have only one-year data which makes it difficult to compare the performance of the industry with the previous years. In the absence of sufficient data, the whole audit process becomes ineffective,” she stated. She further stressed that a thoroughly performed environmental audit allows industries to analyse the ambiguities in the implementation of management plans and take corrective measures. “It also helps industries improve the process efficiency by optimizing the usage of resources, increasing production and thereby resulting in monetary benefits,” she said. Director, Inspection and Enforcement, NESREA, Mr. Isa Abdusalam, explained that the new guidelines are more robust, focusing on quantitative and technical data from the industries along with the information on mitigation measures taken in various sectors over the years. According to him, “Apart from being of immense use for project proponents and assistance to experts in conducting audits, these guidelines would also be useful for the regulatory bodies to review the submitted audit reports.” The one-day workshop organized in partnership with the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a global think tank based in New Delhi, India was attended by over 350 participants comprising NESREA accredited consultants and staff of the Agency. The training workshop is to strengthen NESREA commitment to environmental sustainability, compliance, and the pursuit of excellence in conducting environmental audits across facilities in Nigeria. An environmental audit is a series of activities undertaken with respect to the operations of a facility or an organisation to evaluate its environmental performance. It is not a one-time step but an ongoing activity that aims to identify and correct environmental issues that arise during the operation of a project and improve operating and environmental conditions in industries.

NESREA Releases New Environmental Audit Guidelines

The National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) has released updated guidelines for environmental audits in Nigeria. The unveiling took place at a workshop held today in collaboration with the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a globally recognised think tank based in New Delhi, India. The event brought together over 350 participants, including NESREA-accredited consultants and agency staff. An environmental audit involves evaluating a facility’s or organisation’s environmental performance through a systematic review of its operations. This process identifies and addresses environmental issues while improving operational efficiency and environmental conditions. Unlike a one-time activity, an environmental audit is an ongoing process essential for sustainable industrial practices. The need to revise the guidelines arose from concerns that existing audit reports lacked critical technical data, undermining their effectiveness in accurately assessing industrial performance. Speaking at the official launch of the revised guidelines, NESREA’s director-general, Dr. Innocent Barikor highlighted these deficiencies. He stated, “Audit reports from consultants often come in inconsistent formats, lack crucial information, and fail to reflect the actual operational status of facilities. Moreover, these reports often do not align with the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) developed during Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA). The new guidelines aim to streamline and standardise the environmental audit process.” Barikor credited the successful revision of the guidelines to the collaborative efforts between NESREA and CSE. He expressed gratitude to CSE for its support, noting that the updated guidelines would improve the accuracy and consistency of audit reports in Nigeria. He also emphasized NESREA’s commitment to monitoring the submitted reports closely. “The Agency will verify the parameters in audit reports and take decisive action against any consultant found guilty of falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism,” he warned. The revised guidelines were developed following a detailed review of existing environmental audit reports across various sectors. Officials from NESREA and CSE observed significant gaps in the technical data provided in these reports, which limited their effectiveness. For example, many reports lacked quantitative data on production capacity, energy and water consumption, and the volumes of wastewater and solid waste generated. Additionally, most reports included data for only one year, making it impossible to track trends or improvements over time. Highlighting the importance of robust audits, CSE representative Ishita Garg explained, “A comprehensive environmental audit helps industries identify gaps in their environmental management plans and take corrective action. It also optimises resource use, increases efficiency, and can lead to significant monetary benefits. From a regulatory perspective, a thorough audit enables better assessment of compliance and performance trends over multiple years.” Garg noted that many existing reports contained qualitative insights but fell short in providing critical quantitative data. “The absence of sufficient technical data renders the audit process ineffective. Reports should include at least two to three years of data for meaningful comparisons and insights into industry performance,” she added. NESREA’s director of inspection and enforcement, Mr. Isa Abdussalam underscored the technical improvements in the revised guidelines. “The new guidelines emphasise quantitative and technical data alongside mitigation measures adopted by industries over time. These enhancements make the guidelines valuable not only for project proponents and experts conducting audits but also for regulatory bodies reviewing audit reports,” he explained. The updated guidelines aim to bridge the gaps identified in the earlier framework and foster better compliance with environmental standards. By prioritising data accuracy and consistency, the guidelines promise to enhance industrial accountability and promote sustainable practices in Nigeria. The partnership between NESREA and CSE reflects a shared commitment to environmental protection and regulatory excellence. As industries adopt the revised guidelines, they are expected to improve their environmental performance and align more closely with global best practices.

Govt unveils new environmental audit guidelines

The Federal Government has unveiled new environmental audit guidelines in Nigeria for the operation of facilities in the country.Sustainable fashion Dr Innocent Barikor, the Director-General, National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA), stated this at a workshop and unveiling of the guidelines on Wednesday, December 4, 2024, in Abuja. He said that the guidelines aimed to strengthen the agency’s shared commitment to environmental sustainability, compliance, and the pursuit of excellence in conducting environmental audits across facilities in Nigeria.Sustainable fashion The workshop was organised in collaboration with the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a global organisation based in New Delhi, India. Barikor said the environmental audit guidelines identified and addressed environmental problems that occurred during project operations, aiming to improve industrial operations and minimise environmental impact. He said that the agency had observed that audit reports received from consultants come in different formats, lacking important information. Barikor said that in some cases it failed to reflect the actual status of the process of the operating facility. “These reports do not adequately cover the information included in the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) developed during the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). “The new guidelines are intended to streamline the processes associated with undertaking and review of the environmental audits,” he said. He said that high-quality audit reporting was a foundation to environmental compliance and enforcement. “Our reports are key instruments that guide policy, inform industry standards and ultimately shape environmental performance across sectors. “The alignment of our guidelines with global best practices will ensure that Nigeria’s environmental audits are credible, transparent and impactful on a global scale,” he said.Sustainable fashion “Going forward, the agency will be verifying the parameters in the Audit Report submitted by consultants and take a decisive action against any consultant that engages in falsification, fabrication and plagiarism,” he said. He said the revised guideline is an outcome of the collaborative efforts between CSE and NESREA. Barikor said that the agency was carefully monitoring the activities of the state field offices, to ensure that staff do not obstruct or interfere with the work of NESREA accredited consultants. Ms. Ishita Garg of CSE said that a thoroughly performed environmental audit allowed industries to analyse the ambiguities in the implementation of management plans and take corrective measures. “It also helps industries improve the process efficiency by optimising the usage of resources, increasing production and thereby resulting in monetary benefits. ” A comprehensive audit report can be helpful as it will assist in assessing the compliance status of the industry and understand its environmental performance,” she said. Mr. Isa Abdussalam, Director, Inspection and Enforcement, NESREA, said the new guidelines are more robust, focusing on quantitative and technical data from the industries. He said that the new guidelines also contained information on mitigation measures taken in various sectors over the years. “These guidelines would also be useful for the regulatory bodies to review the submitted audit reports,” he said. The review of the guidelines was necessitated by observations that existing audit reports lacked essential technical data, hindering accurate assessments of industrial performance.

आवरण कथा/पर्यावरणः जलवायु नीतियों का भविष्य

राष्ट्रपति के चुनाव में डोनाल्ड ट्रम्प की जीत रिपब्लिकन पार्टी के समर्थकों के लिए जश्न का कारण हो सकती है लेकिन पर्यावरण पर काम करने वाले लोग इससे चिंतित हैं। ट्रम्प जलवायु परिवर्तन को संदेह की निगाह से देखते हैं। उनके अलावा किसी और राष्ट्रपति ने हाल के वर्षों में कार्बन कटौती के वैश्विक प्रयासों को इतना धक्का नहीं पहुंचाया है। अपने पिछले कार्यकाल में ट्रम्प ने दावोस के वर्ल्ड इकनॉमिक फोरम में पर्यावरणवादियों को ‘प्रलय के पैगम्बर’ कह कर आलोचना की थी। उन्होंने ग्लोबल वार्मिंग को ‘मिथकीय’, ‘अफवाह’ और ‘घोटाला’ करार दिया है। अपनी जीत के बाद समर्थकों को संबोधित करते हुए उन्होंने कहा कि जीवाश्म ईंधनों से दूर हटने के समझौते पर कॉप 28 में दस्तखत करने वाला- अमेरिका अब तेल उत्पादन को बढ़ाएगा। तेल और गैस उद्योग ने इस बयान का स्वागत किया है। उन्होंने कहा था, ‘‘हमारे पास जितना तेल है उतना दुनिया में किसी के पास नहीं, सउदी अरब से भी ज्यादा, रूस से भी ज्यादा है।’’ ट्रम्प के पिछले कार्यकाल के दौरान कई विवादास्पद कदमों में एक पेरिस संधि से अमेरिका को पीछे खींचना था। बाइडन ने दोबारा अमेरिका को पेरिस समझौते का हिस्सा बना दिया था। पेरिस जलवायु समझौता 2015 में किया गया था। इसे ग्लोबल वार्मिंग के खिलाफ एक बड़ा कदम माना जाता है। इसका लक्ष्य तापमान में इजाफे को डेढ़ डिग्री सेंटिग्रेड तक सीमित रखना है। पेरिस में यह भी तय किया गया था कि अमीर देश सालाना एक अरब डॉलर का योगदान गरीब विकासशील देशों को देंगे ताकि यह लक्ष्य हासिल करने में उनकी मदद की जा सके। जो बाइडन ने पेरिस समझौते पर वापसी के अलावा कई जलवायु हितैषी उपाय अपनाए थे। अमेरिका फिलहाल चीन के बाद ग्रीनहाउस गैसों का सबसे बड़ा उत्सर्जक है। यदि ट्रम्प के बयानों को गंभीरता से लें, तो मान सकते हैं कि वैश्विक जलवायु लक्ष्य अमेरिका की पहुंच से और दूर ही होते जाएंगे। बाइडन ने 2022 में इनफ्लेशन रिडक्शन कानून पर दस्तखत किए थे। यह अमेरिका का जलवायु में सबसे बड़ा निवेश था। इसका काम 2030 तक 2005 के स्तरों के मुकाबले उत्सर्जनों को आधे पर ले आना है। ट्रम्प ने अपने प्रचार के दौरान इस कानून को बहुत महंगा बताते हुए इसकी आलोचना की थी और इस पर जो भी राशि अभी खर्च नहीं हुई है उसे रद्द करने का वादा किया था। दिलचस्प यह है कि स्वच्छ ऊर्जा के घोषित निवेशों में तीन चौथाई से ज्यादा रिपब्लिकन पार्टी द्वारा शासित प्रांतों के लिए थे। इसीलिए कुछ रिपब्लिकन नेताओं ने भी आइआरए को समर्थन दे दिया था, खासकर उन प्रांतों में जहां सौर ऊर्जा कारखानों, पवन चक्कियों और अन्य परियोजनाओं से रोजगार पैदा हुए थे। इसलिए आइआरए को खत्म करने में इन लाभ पाए राज्यों के प्रतिनिधियों के समर्थन की भी ट्रम्प को जरूरत पड़ेगी। कानूनी फर्म मैक्डर्माट विल ऐंड एमेरी में पार्टनर कार्ल फ्लेमिंग ने रायटर्स को बताया है, ‘‘रोजगारों और आर्थिक लाभों का फायदा रिब्लिकन प्रांतों को इतना ज्यादा मिला है कि यह सोचना मुश्किल है कि कोई सरकार ऐसे ही कह देगी कि हमें ये पसंद नहीं।’’ दिल्ली की संस्था सेंटर फॉर साइंस ऐंड एनवायरनमेन्ट की महानिदेशक सुनीता नारायण कहती हैं, ‘‘आइआरए इसलिए अहम है क्योंकि ग्रीनहाउस गैसों के उत्सर्जन के मामले में ऐतिहासिक रूप से से अमेरिका अव्वल रहा है। आइआरए दुनिया को यह संदेश था कि अमेरिका जलवायु परिवर्तन विरोधी कार्रवाइयों में अगुवाई कर सकता है।’’ ये सवाल इसलिए भी अहम हैं क्योंकि 11 से 22 नवंबर के बीच दुनिया भर के नेता अजरबैजान के बाकू में कॉप 29 की बैठक में मिल रहे हैं। इस शिखर सम्मेलन में एक नए जलवायु वित्त समझौते पर सहमति की बात होनी है जिसके तहत अगले साल से विकसित देश जलवायु परिवर्तन से लड़ने और खुद को अनुकूलित करने के लिए विकासशील देशों का वित्तपोषण करेंगे। अमेरिका का इस मसले पर रुख महत्वपूर्ण होगा। फिलहाल, अटकलें लगाई जा रही हैं कि डोनाल्ड ट्रम्प कहीं अमेरिका को संयुक्त राष्ट्र के जलवायु परिवर्तन पर फ्रेमवर्क कनवेंशन (यूएनएफसीसी) से भी अलग न कर दें, जिसका 198 देश अनुमोदन कर चुके हैं। ट्रम्प यदि इससे अलग हो गए तो अगले किसी भी राष्ट्रपति के लिए यूएनएफसीसी का दोबारा हिस्सा बनना कठिन हो जाएगा क्योंकि उसके लिए सीनेट की मंजूरी जरूरी होगी। जलवायु परिवर्तन झेल रहे प्रमुख देशों में एक ऑस्ट्रेलिया है, जहां के प्रधानमंत्री एंथनी अल्बानीज की सरकार ने अमेरिका के साथ अपने रिश्तों में जलवायु और स्वच्छ ऊर्जा को तीसरा स्तंभ बनाने की परिकल्पना की है। ट्रम्प अगर यूएन की संधि से अलग हुए तो ऑस्ट्रेलिया को यूरोप और एशिया में नए सहयोगी ढूंढने होंगे।

Eklavya Prasad's series 'Portraits of Persistence...' to display an untold story of North Bihar's resilience

Art is a powerful medium that can capture the essence of a community, its struggle, and its triumph. The medium has the power of telling a story. One such powerful visual story will be displayed through Eklavya Prasad's 'Visual Katha' on 'Portraits of Persistence, and Enduring Communities of North Bihar' – a series of photographs. The series will be open for display from December 6 to 12 at the Art Gallery, India International Centre Annexe, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, between 11 am to 7 pm. Photographer Eklavya Prasad, over the years, has captured the life struggles and battles of numerous communities that struggle to stay afloat in North Bihar. The artist captured their spirit, tenacity, and the eternal strive to seek a better life. Bihar is one of the most populous states in India, with a rich culture, ancient history, and beautiful landscapes. But it is also known for its poverty, illiteracy, and social inequalities. The communities Eklavya Prasad has captured through his lens are often marginalised and neglected by society. But through his photographs, he brings their stories to the forefront and sheds light on their existence and struggles. The 'Portraits of Persistence' are not photographs; they are visual kathas or stories that speak to the viewers. Each photograph tells a different story – a story of hope, determination, and perseverance. One cannot help but feel moved by these powerful images. The exhibition will be inaugurated on December 5, 2024, at 6:00 pm by Sunita Narain, Director General, Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi. Dr Krishna S Vatsa, a member of the National Disaster Management Authority, New Delhi, will also grace the occasion as the Guest of Honour. Who is Eklavya Prasad? Eklavya Prasad is a social development professional and a photographer, known for capturing and narrating the complexities of rural landscapes and communities confronting environmental adversity. With over 29 years in social development, he has been instrumental in documenting the interactions between people, water, and the environment, using photography to raise awareness and foster community-centred solutions to water insecurity, sanitation technology for flood-prone areas, and contextual climate resilience. Eklavya Prasad captures more than the physical aspects of these communities through his photographs; he also goes to their emotional and spiritual level. He captures their struggle, dreams, and aspirations to give voice to those usually overlooked by society.

Visual Kathã: A Glimpse Of Eklavya Prasad’s Portraits of Persistence, Enduring Communities of North Bihar

Photographer Eklavya Prasad’s Visual Kathã series on ‘Portraits of Persistence, and Enduring Communities of North Bihar’ will be on display at Delhi’s The Art Gallery on Lodhi Road from December 6-12 from 11 am to 7 pm. Sunita Narain, Director General, Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi will inaugurate the exhibition 6 pm on December 5. Dr. Krishna S. Vatsa, Member, National Disaster Management Authority, New Delhi, will be the guest of honour. The series captures the untold resilience of North Bihar’s communities as they confront the cyclical devastations of annual flooding. THE EXHIBITION Through this collection, viewers will be taken on a journey that unfolds the intricate dimensions of floods, beginning with the varied typologies, from flash floods to the riverine floods, engulfing rise of river waters, each with unique implications for the region’s landscape and lives. The photographs document the immediate impacts on daily life, as homes, farmlands, and infrastructure yield to the force of water.

Unpacking India’s fuming response at COP29: What really transpired?

In the wee hours of November 24, while most people in India were fast asleep, a drama unfolded at a sprawling conference hall of the Olympic stadium in Azerbaijan’s capital Baku. Diplomats from nearly 200 countries, civil society representatives and journalists had gathered to witness a decision that could determine the fate of climate action in the Global South. But what transpired was far from routine — it was a moment of diplomatic brinkmanship that left many stunned and India’s delegation fuming. As the president of this year’s UN climate conference, Mukhtar Babayev, approached the centrepiece agenda item — the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance — India’s Deputy Lead Negotiator Neelesh Sah rushed to COP29 Lead Negotiator Yalchin Rafiyev to convey that the country wants to make a statement before the adoption of the contentious decision. Around 2:30 am, without so much as a pause for objections or comments, Babayev hammered the gavel, declaring the USD 300 billion climate-finance package adopted. The move was so swift, it left delegates from many developing countries blinking in disbelief. Avantika Goswami, head of the Climate Change Programme at the Centre for Science and Environment, said it happened “quite suddenly and unceremoniously”. “We were surprised because the last-known figure on the table — USD 300 billion — was far below the latest G77 compromise of USD 500 billion. We also knew that India was preparing to interject in the process. The fact that it was passed before any such objections were raised came as a surprise,” she said. Journalists witnessing the drama unfold in the plenary room saw the entire Indian delegation leap to their feet, making a timeout gesture. Sah dashed over to Rafiyev, exchanged a few words and returned to his seat, panting. Meanwhile, Babayev passed the microphone to Cuba for a statement, followed by India, Bolivia, Nigeria and Malawi, who spoke on behalf of a group of 45 least-developed countries. In total, 49 countries objected to the deal. In the UNFCCC process, one objection is enough to block a decision. However, India had no intention of blocking the deal and its outburst was about more than just the money. Delivering India’s statement, Chandni Raina, Adviser at the Department of Economic Affairs, described the manner in which the deal was adopted as “unfair” and “stage-managed”. Raina was scathing about the new climate-finance package, calling the meagre USD 300 billion a year by 2035 “too little and too distant”. She labelled the sum “abysmally poor”, “paltry” and an “optical illusion” — a far cry from the USD 1 trillion developing countries need every year to cope with the warming world. Raina flagged three major issues for India in the deal — paragraphs 8a, 8c and 9 of the agreement. Para 8a: This suggests that the USD 300 billion will come from all sorts of sources — public, private, bilateral, multilateral — and not directly as public money from developed to developing countries. Developing countries have long demanded grants or grant-equivalent funding, not loans that pile on debt. Many poorer nations already spend up to 10 per cent of their GDP on servicing debt. Paras 8c and 9: These allow developing countries’ contributions — whether through their funding to multilateral climate finance (MDBs) or their own bilateral climate finance — to be voluntarily counted towards the USD 300 billion goal. Essentially, Global South countries might end up footing their own climate bills — hardly the spirit of climate justice. Raina called it a “deflection” of developed nations’ responsibilities. Questions have been raised as to why India did not mention these issues at the heads-of-delegation meeting on Saturday or earlier. To be clear, India had already articulated its concerns throughout the two-week conference. From high-level dialogues on just transition, pre-2030 ambition, climate finance and adaptation finance to the Mitigation Work Programme and its national statement, India has consistently made its case, aligning with the group of Like-Minded Developing Countries. A former negotiator familiar with the backroom drama told PTI that India’s 11th-hour objection was not a tantrum — it was a plea for fairness. India wanted more discussion, especially since the text — with actual numbers — only came out a day before adoption. “India was shown a figure of USD 300 billion in closed-door meetings on Saturday (November 23), but public documents still listed it as USD 250 billion. Understandably, India was nonplussed,” the former negotiator said. To make matters worse, the COP29 presidency did not share how other countries had reacted to the USD 300 billion figure. India wanted to raise all these points before the decision was finalised, but the presidency did not give it the chance, the former negotiator explained. Another former negotiator pointed out that India’s statement in the plenary hinted at its desire for a proper discussion on all these issues. If India and others had spoken before the decision, it might have delayed the agreement. India’s actions suggest that it was not trying to derail the deal entirely, the negotiator added. Meanwhile, a civil society member was baffled by how two of the most vulnerable groups to climate change — the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) — ended up accepting “such a bad deal” after staging a walkout just hours earlier. These groups had demanded USD 220 billion and USD 39 billion respectively from the total finance package. Most experts PTI spoke to believe that the shadow of the US presidential elections played a big role. “Countries were scared into thinking that next year’s deal would be even worse. They felt cornered into accepting this one,” said the first negotiator. An observer added that Brazil, set to host COP30, wanted to avoid inheriting a mess, while heavyweights like China and Saudi Arabia were busy safeguarding their interests — they did not want to be officially recognised as climate-finance contributors. As the world turns its focus to the next climate summit in Brazil, one question lingers — can meaningful progress be made if such critical decisions are seen as skewed against those most vulnerable to climate change?