Cse In News

Climate Change and Green Economy

OUTSIDE VIEW: Rich, poor nations can strike a win-win deal on climate

More than a century of burning coal, oil and gas has fueled intense heatwaves, prolonged droughts, heavier rains and devastating floods. To prevent even more severe impacts, the UN global climate summit, Cop29, must deliver tangible results to keep global temperature rises below 2C — the limit defined in the 2015 Paris agreement. Achieving this goal means human societies can only emit a finite amount of additional carbon dioxide, known as the world’s “carbon budget.” Developed nations have exceeded their carbon budgets, while developing countries remain within theirs. Carbon dioxide lingers in the atmosphere for centuries, turning past unchecked fossil fuel use into a costly planetary bill. Between 1870 and 2019, the US, EU, Russia, UK, Japan, Canada and Australia — home to just 15% of the global population — accounted for over 60% of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment.

Director General Office

खुद को मजबूत कर लीजिए, दिल्ली में और खराब होने वाली है आब-ओ-हवा, जानिए क्या कह रहे एक्सपर्ट्स

बदलते मौसम का ट्रेंड इस बार प्रदूषण सीजन पर भी साफ नजर आ रहा है। एक्सपर्ट के अनुसार, इस बार सर्दियों का आगाज देरी से हुआ। इसी वजह से प्रदूषण भी दिवाली बीत जाने के 10 दिनों बाद अपने रोद्र रूप में आया। इसके बाद वेस्टर्न डिस्टरबेंस की वजह से तापमान बढ़ा और प्रदूषण भी कम होने लगा। अब मौसम और प्रदूषण के पूर्वानुमान बता रहे हैं कि तापमान कम होगा। इसके साथ ही प्रदूषण एक बार फिर गंभीर स्तर पर पहुंच जाएगा। इस बार सर्दियां अधिक पड़ने की संभावना एक्सपर्ट के अनुसार इस बार सर्दियां अधिक पड़ने की संभावना है। सीएसई की डीजी सुनीता नारायण के अनुसार सर्दियां अभी शुरू हो रही हैं। मौसम विभाग का पूर्वानुमान है कि सर्दियां काफी तीखी रहेंगी। वहीं प्रदूषण का पूर्वानुमान बता रहा है कि 27 नवंबर के बाद हालात फिर एक बार काफी खराब होने वाले हैं। इस बार फिर तीन से चार दिन का स्मॉग झेलना पड़ सकता है। इसलिए अभी से प्रदूषण बढ़ाने वाले सोर्स पर सख्ती की जानी चाहिए ताकि प्रदूषण को उस दौरान बहुत अधिक तेजी से बढ़ने से रोका जा सके। प्रदूषण है कि मानता नहीं पर्यावरण एक्टिविस्ट दीपक वासन ने बताया GRAP का सबसे अंतिम चरण लागू है। लेकिन दिल्ली एनसीआर में अब भी सड़कों पर बिना पानी डाले झाडू लग रही है। जाम दिख रहा है, पर्यावरण स्पेशल बस सर्विस शुरू नहीं की गई है। ठंड बढ़ने के बाद ओपन बर्निंग भी अब बढ़ रही है। वहीं प्रदूषण का स्तर एक बार फिर बढ़ रहा है। ग्रीनपीस के अविनाश चंचल के अनुसार इस समय प्रदूषण को नियंत्रित करने के लिए जमीनी स्तर पर काम सबसे अधिक जरूरी है। जबकि उसकी कई जगहों पर कमी नजर आ रही है। नवंबर व दिसंबर इस बार प्रदूषण के लिहाज से काफी संवेदनशील है।

Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Global meet set to begin final negotiations on a treaty to end plastic pollution

As global negotiations intensify in Busan, South Korea, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) urges India to take a leadership role in developing a global framework for banning single-use plastics. CSE highlights India's efforts, including its criteria-based approach for identifying and phasing out problematic plastics, as a potential model for international action against plastic pollution. Can India lead the way to develop a global criteria for ban on single-use plastics, asks Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). New Delhi/Busan (South Korea), November 22, 2024: As the world gets ready to meet in Busan, South Korea next week for the fifth Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee session (INC 5) on ending plastic pollution, India could lead the world towards the development of a global criteria for single-use plastics ban, say researchers from Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) who have closely followed the negotiations through the years. In March 2022, the world had come together to agree on a ground-breaking United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolution 5/14 to “End Plastic Pollution”. The resolution mandated the creation of the INC to arrive at a legally binding instrument. After four rounds of negotiations in Punte Del Este, Paris, Nairobi and Ottawa, this fifth and final round of negotiations in Busan -- between November 25 and December 1, 2024 – is where the member states are expected to try and build consensus on a host of issues related to plastic pollution. According to the UNEP, problematic, unnecessary and avoidable (single-use) plastics represent 36 per cent of the plastic production in the world. Of this, an estimated 85 per cent is mismanaged – which means they end up in the environment and pollute it. Says Sunita Narain, director general, CSE: “141 countries across the globe have banned or restricted some form of plastic products, indicating a high willingness among member states to take action. However, inconsistencies in regulations across countries or provinces and states have rendered the implementation of these bans more challenging than anticipated.” India introduced a resolution in UNEA 4, aimed at "ending single-use plastic product pollution." Says Atin Biswas, programme director, Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy, CSE: “The country is positioning itself as a leader in efforts to eliminate single-use plastics at both regional and national levels.” In 2019, the Government of India had developed a criteria-based framework to identify problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic products. A total of 40 single-use plastic products, including carry bags, small plastic bottles, intravenous (saline) bottles and tea bags were evaluated using this criteria-based method – which was then used to phase out 19 single-use plastic items that were banned from production, stocking, distribution, sale, and use from the Indian market. Adds Biswas: “The criteria developed by India, guided by its ministry of chemicals and fertilisers, along with support and inputs from other member states advocating for a global criteria-based approach, can serve as a foundation for creating a comprehensive, logical, and science-based global framework for problematic, unnecessary, and avoidable plastic products including single-use plastic products.” At the INC meetings, a criteria-based approach has been advocated by many countries. “Overall, the idea of developing and embracing global criteria for problematic, unnecessary, or avoidable plastic products under the international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution enjoys support from at least 70 member states,” says Siddharth G Singh, programme manager, Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy, CSE.

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

Avg AQI remains ‘poor’ but Gwalpahari inches close to ‘severe’

Gurgaon: City's air quality improved marginally on Tuesday but remained in the ‘poor' category with a 24-hour air quality index (AQI) of 289, compared to the previous day's 295. Of the four monitoring stations in the city, Gwalpahari was the worst hit and recorded the highest average AQI at 393 (very poor) on Tuesday. It was followed by Vikas Sadan (265), Teri Gram (218), and Sector 51 (210) – all ‘poor'. The System of Air Quality and Weather Forecasting and Research (SAFAR) predicted a surge in pollution levels and, ‘very poor' to ‘severe' AQI over the next six days. The forecasting agency said the average wind speed in Delhi-NCR will be less than 10kmph, allowing pollutants to remain suspended in the air. The concentration of PM2.5 — tiny pollutants that can get absorbed into the bloodstream — was the highest at Gwalpahari station, at 336 µg/m³, followed by Teri Gram (276 µg/m³), Vikas Sadan (234 µg/m³), and Sector 51 (211 µg/m³). PM10 levels were 379 µg/m³ at Gwalpahari, 256 µg/m³ at Teri Gram, and 245 µg/m³ at Sector 51. Vikas Sadan did not record this data. These figures far exceed the safe limits set in India — at 60 µg/m³ for PM2.5 and 100 µg/m³ for PM10. Experts said favourable weather alone, cannot improve the air quality and expressed concerns over the delayed implementation of pollution control measures despite severe air quality being a recurring winter issue. "The lower AQI on Tuesday stems purely from favourable meteorological conditions. Govts need to focus on year-round monitoring of pollution sources and emission reduction is imperative to tackle air pollution," said Shubhansh Tiwari, research associate at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). According to the India Meteorological Department (IMD), temperatures are likely to remain in the same range. "Dense to very dense fog is likely to occur in isolated areas of south Haryana due to high moisture ratio and the inability of low-speed winds to disperse it. Dense fog will be predominantly present in the late night and early morning hours of the day," stated an advisory by the IMD. "The ventilation index lower than 6000 m2/s with average wind speed less than 10 kmph is unfavourable for dispersion of pollutants. The air quality is likely to be in the severe to very poor category," SAFAR said.

Down To Earth

Govt approves ₹1,116 crore for disaster mitigation, capacity building projects

New Delhi: A high-level committee, under the chairmanship of Union home and cooperation minister Amit Shah, on Tuesday approved ₹1,115.67 crore for disaster mitigation and capacity building projects for various states. This comes at a time when the country has seen a sharp rise in landslide events due to extreme weather conditions. Between January and October, India witnessed extreme weather events in 93% of the days – 255 out of 274 days – killing over 3,200 people, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) said in a report released earlier this month. The committee, comprising Union finance and agriculture ministers, vice-chairman of NITI Aayog as members, considered the proposal to mitigate landslide risk in 15 states, for funding from National Disaster Mitigation Fund (NDMF) and another proposal for training and capacity building of Civil Defense volunteers in all states and Union Territories under Preparedness and Capacity Building from the funding window of National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF), according to an official statement. About ₹1,000 crore would go towards the 15 states, namely Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, Uttarakhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal. Another project The committee has also approved another project for training and capacity building of civil defense in all states and Union Territories at a total outlay of ₹115.67 crore. Earlier, the committee had approved urban flood risk mitigation projects in seven cities at a total outlay of ₹3,075.65 crore and glacial lake outburst flood risk management in 4 states at a total outlay of ₹150 crores from National Disaster Mitigation Fund (NDMF).

Climate Change and Green Economy

X marks the spot: How power and compromise led to COP29’s $300 bn climate finance outcome

Developed nations arrived at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, with the same inscrutable expression they wear at every climate negotiation—a poker face that betrays nothing until the final moments. For developing countries, this familiar stance often signals trouble: a prelude to backroom deals that secure incremental wins for rich nations while sidelining the urgent and existential needs of vulnerable communities. This year, the long-promised $100 billion climate finance goal was tripled to $300 billion—a headline-grabbing figure that, on closer examination, came laden with caveats. The package blended public and private finance. A far cry from the $1.3 trillion in public finance that the G77+ China group had previously demanded. Compounding the frustration was the inclusion of a voluntary call for developing countries to contribute. “After so much of the world going in for elections in 2024 and flailing national budgets since after COVID, 2025 was always going to be a year of austerity. In light of that, the paltry pledge of $300 billion a year since 2035 is not surprising,” said Professor Runa Sarkar, IIM Kolkata. As the conference drew to a close, the question loomed larger than ever: Was COP29 a victory or another missed opportunity? The answer, as always, lies in a tangled mix of perspectives and the unresolved reality of climate injustice. A slow start “They [developed countries] are not putting their cards on the table.” This is what delegations and experts from developing nations kept repeating throughout the two wells of COP29. This was to be the “Finance COP”. And yet, even before the summit began on November 11, all indications were that it would be anything but, largely because of the disinterest shown by the big hitters in participating with the same robust energy they had in COPs past. This COP had no big leaders, and hence no big voices — which has helped move negotiation logjams in the past. To add to the uncertainty, Argentina walked out in the first week. This lack of political will quickly turned into the most concerning issue for civil society groups. That, and of course, the lack of a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) number in COP29’s climate finance text — which was what everyone was most keen to see. The NCQG replaces the $100 billion climate finance goal that had been set for developed nations to pay to the developing world. But iteration after iteration, there was an X in place of where the number should have been. It also wasn’t clear how this money was to be paid. Through public finance, which would include grants? Or through private finance? Would there be a multilayered-approach to the finance? When does the money actually start flowing and from where? The answers to these questions were whispered and speculated in the long corridors of Baku Olympic Stadium, but never stated as fact until the last couple of days of the summit. More on that later. The first mystery that needed to be solved was why there was no NCQG number at the Finance COP. Countries had a whole year to calculate a number. So who had not done their homework? We found out in the first week itself that G77 + China had indeed proposed an NCQG number of $1.3 trillion per year in public finance. The climate finance need of trillions from the billions being discussed earlier was first announced in the New Delhi Declaration of Leaders under India’s G20 presidency. India had also submitted a proposal of $1 trillion in climate finance to the UN in March this year. This was ambitious, especially considering the developed countries had struggled to pay the previous $100 billion goal only in 2022, even though it had been set in 2009 in Copenhagen. But it is important to note here that this was not a random number, unlike the $100 billion, which had been sprung up as a surprise on developing nations, all those years ago. The $1.3 trillion was a number based on analysis and after a thorough calculation of the needs of the developing world. So there was a number to start the negotiations with. Despite this, the X remained in subsequent iterations of the climate finance text. This was being interpreted in two ways — either the developed countries had come to the finance COP without a number in mind, or this was a well-thought out strategy to tire the other side out until their (lowball) number was finally accepted out of sheer exhaustion and the lack of time. And this is exactly what happened. Former United States special presidential envoy for climate, John Kerry had declared at COP28 that the US had no money for climate finance. The US also pledged a paltry $17 billion to the Loss and Damage Fund last year despite being the richest country globally. Kerry, instead, said climate finance can be found from groups such as Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), a coalition of financial institutions. Developed countries also pushed to include carbon markets as a part of climate finance, which saw major pushback from developing countries at COP29. Mohamed Adow, founder and director, Power Shift Africa, called carbon markets a “dangerous distraction and a wolf in sheep’s clothing”. However, a deal on government-to-government carbon markets was agreed on at COP29. Experts remain wary of the agreement, with Isa Mulder, policy expert, Carbon Market Watch calling it ‘dangerously loose and opaque, tailor-made for those pushing to turn it into a free-for-all’. Meanwhile, the adoption of Article 6.4 rules on removals risk repeating the inadequate measures of the voluntary carbon market that guarantee permanence. But the narrative of “private finance should be climate finance” had already been set by Kerry, and so the mystery of $X trillion in the draft texts was an easy one to solve. The iteration journey In two weeks, the climate finance text was whittled from 34 pages to 22 pages to 10 pages and finally 6. The first and longest iteration was filled with options from different countries, which meant that not a lot of work had been done on cutting down the text since it was last looked at in Bonn, Germany in July 2024. The $1.3 trillion figure was in several of the options, with the words ‘at least’ added before it. The length of the text aside, this seemed to be a good start for developing countries. There was also mention of grant-based concessional finance mentioned in the options, which was another positive for poorer nations. The NCQG options also included $1 trillion (put forth by India), and $2 trillion. But while successive iterations showed movement on the language around $1.3 trillion, the sentences mentioning the latter two figures remained as is. This could be interpreted as negotiations going back and forth on $1.3 trillion, while the other numbers would probably be deleted in later iterations. The X for the main NCQG text, however, remained, with no mention on the type of finance this would be. If COP28 was chaos, filled with cancellations of press conferences that were also scheduled at the last minute, COP29 was eerily quiet. Apart from the expected flurry of activity whenever iterations of the draft text were released, there wasn’t much to do except wait and watch. By the end of the first week, restless media tried to understand why things were moving so slowly. The issues were known—developed countries wanted to expand the list of climate finance donor countries to include China; there was pushback from the developing world on strong references to mitigation being linked to the NCQG; linking carbon markets to the NCQG was also unacceptable to the G77 + China and LMDC. But everyone wanted to understand what would end the logjam. “We have been seeing for years and years at COP that when there is big contestation around an issue—this year it is finance—then that issue tends to hold up other issues. It is like a hostage taking of other issues. So if we don’t move forward on finance, we will potentially see its impact felt in the other negotiation areas,”said Tasneem Essop, executive director, Climate Action Network (CAN). The other texts under negotiation at COP29 were the Mitigation Work Programme (MWP) and the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP). But soon after, some details emerged that indicated movement on one of the issues — that of expanding the climate finance donor base— which is a list of developed countries primarily responsible for giving climate finance under the Paris Agreement. Avantika Goswami, Programme Manager for Climate Change, Center for Science and Environment, India, said, “On the contributor base question, we have heard that developed countries are starting to back down somewhat and have softened their earlier very hardline position that the base must be expanded. China may have shown some willingness to report its existing voluntary climate finance provisions from developing countries under Article 9.2 . And that may have to some extent helped pacify some of the developed countries. We’ve also heard that developed countries have realised that pushing hard on the contributor base expansion is a very bad look for them and it’s hurting them in their relationships so they may have taken a step back. Again this is conjecture and it might change through the course of this week, we have a wait and watch situation.” Negotiations are also dependent on optics. No one wants to be portrayed as the bad guy. But the war of optics had already made the US the villain of the developed world seeing how it is currently in a state of limbo with no indication of its future in climate action. The villain of the developing world was not China, but Saudi Arabia, which was accused by the western media of blocking negotiations. China was sitting in between, with everyone from the UN to Germany asking it to step up on its climate leadership. China is already a climate leader. On November 12, Chinese Vice Premier Ding Xuexiang said China has provided more than Yuan 177 billion ($24.50 billion) of climate finance since 2016, supporting developing countries’ efforts to cope with climate change. China stepping in and ending the finance logjam would undoubtedly earn the country goodwill from both the developed and the developing world. The final countdown After three iterations in the first week, the second week had a slow start. COP attendees didn’t see a new version of the text until Thursday. Members of the Indian delegation whom CarbonCopy spoke to were cautiously optimistic, but the uncertainty of what the developed countries’ NCQG number would be was a problem. They [developed nations] are trying to come up with creative ways to dodge paying the climate finance bill, sources alleged. This was evident in the iteration released on Thursday where the phrase “absorptive capacity”, which asked developing countries to bring in policies incentivising private finance and creating a fertile ground for investment—yet another attempt to make way for more private finance. But the X remained. Some experts were pragmatic about the final NCQG number. “How to expect $1 trillion to come as low-cost, interest-free grants. For negotiations it is okay, but practically we don’t expect that to happen,” said Vaibhav Chaturvedi, Senior Fellow at Delhi-based Council On Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). “What could end up happening is the EU [on behalf of the developed nations] saying $300 billion dollars. The developing world is clearly saying $1 trillion. Somewhere in the between you say $500-600 million dollars. It is always the incentive of the [COP] presidency and everyone else to show success. So they may say ‘$500 billion, which is 5 times compared to the earlier floor of $100 billion. This is not as good as what the developing world is asking but it is still a success’,” Chaturvedi added. The G77 + China along with LMDCs and the ADG saw what was to come and quickly changed strategy. They would accept a $600 billion public finance figure and would work towards a larger quantum subsequently, they all said. Then came Freaky Friday. A draft text was released early evening and it sent shockwaves across the venue. The X was finally replaced with the number. It was $1.3 trillion per year, but the catch was that this was the number that climate finance had to scale up to by 2035. Even worse was that the $100 billion goal was replaced with a $250 billion goal, which was not just public finance, but also private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources. Even more troubling was the line “Invites developing country Parties to make additional contributions, including through South–South cooperation, to or supplementing, the goal set forth in paragraph 8 above.” For the developing world, the worst case scenario was now in play. This became known as “a bad deal” by the civil society. A late night press conference by Brazil on Friday night gave attendees an idea of what is to come in the final text. Brazil’s minister of the environment and climate change, Marina Silva, invoked the numbers of an Independent High Level Expert Group (IHLEG) report that had been released at COP29 a few days earlier. “The IHLEG report states we need $300 billion per year by 2030 and $390 billion by 2035. This is a reality that has to be understood. It is a form of kick-starting the process of achieving $1.3 trillion per year by 2030. Developing country resources will be working in a catalytic manner only, but not to replace the commitment by developed countries as written in the Paris Agreement,” she said. This is 300 Friday night ended with news that a closing plenary would be held on Saturday at 10am—a day after COP29 was to officially end. That time came and went but the uncertainty of what is to happen with the text remained. Will developing countries reject the $250 billion? Would they ask for more or would they walk out? “No deal is better than a bad deal” was the chant heard throughout the venue. Whispers of developing country negotiators pushing for $300 billion and trying to keep a mention of Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement — which places the obligation to provide financial resources on developed countries — began doing the rounds. It was down to the wire. Text had to be gavelled, flights had to be taken. It was only just before midnight that the final text arrived. Developing nations were to get $300 billion but as mobilised finance — through public, private and other sources. “What is disappointing is that, first, this is the sum total of all financial flows. Had this been the total (concessional) public finance flows, it would have sent the developing world a signal that there was scope for crowding in more finance leveraging these flows and using them as risk mitigators. Second, there is no discussion around debt forgiveness although it was an important issue on the table. Third, there is no earmarking of what these flows will be for, no focus on additionality and my concern is that most of these will go the mitigation way, leaving the voiceless to bear adaptation costs. Fourth, the reassurance of flows of funds over a decade later does not inspire any confidence. Finally, deliberations for the way forward lack specificity on how to get to the goal of USD1.3 trillion, while talking of imposition of taxes, which is a step in the wrong direction. Thus, the lack of focus on the details leads to a sense of distrust among the parties and does not bode well for future COPs,” explained Sarkar. The controversial sentence inviting developing countries to contribute to climate finance now ended with the word voluntary, to appease angry and tired delegates from developing nations. The text also launched the “Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T” — aimed at scaling up climate finance to developing countries through “grants, concessional and nondebt-creating instruments, and measures to create fiscal space, taking into account relevant multilateral initiatives as appropriate.” But the rest more or less remained the same. Lost chance Despite criticism, the outcome brought mixed reactions. The good news? An agreement was reached. Multilateralism may have still survived. The bad news? With insufficient funds allocated to support transitions in developing countries, expectations for ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) remain low. The reluctance of developed countries to step up where it matters, remains. Sehr Raheja, program officer, climate change, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), said, “The call by developed countries for ambitious NDCs was heard frequently at this COP, but the means of implementation to enable high ambition in NDCs does not really seem to have matched the needs. Apart from the quantum of finance, the lack of sub-goals for mitigation, adaptation,loss and damage; the too long timeline of 10 years (“by 2035”) and reduced emphasis on grants and grant equivalent finance have made this outcome a rather weak one. It feels like a totally missed opportunity — NCQG was a chance to course-correct and provide finance to enable necessary climate action in this critical decade. That chance has been lost.” Compounding the challenges, COP29 failed to provide clarity or consensus on pivotal issues, including the Global Stocktake (GST) and the UAE Dialogue along with the Just Transition Work Programme and the Mitigation Work Programme. These unresolved questions now hang over the climate agenda, leaving much work to be addressed at the Bonn Climate Conference in a few months. Optical illusion From rushing the discussions on Article 6 to claiming an early win at the start of the two-week long summit to observers calling the process in the second-week opaque, the Presidency was accused of not following transparent processes. At the closing plenary of COP29, India voiced its strong dissatisfaction with how the final text was negotiated and adopted, delivering a fiery intervention just before the document’s approval. India’s negotiator Chandni Raina accused the Presidency of having “stage-managed” the procedure. She also said that the host has not followed inclusivity on various incidents, along with not letting India share its statement—as requested by the country—prior to any decision on the text adoption. “India does not accept the goal proposal in its present form. The amount that is proposed to be mobilised is abysmally poor. It is a paltry sum. It is not something that will enable conducive climate action that is necessary for the survival of our country. This document is nothing more than an optical illusion. We oppose the adoption of this document,” said Chandni Raina, while making her intervention at the final plenary. COP29 chief negotiator Yalchin Rafiyev refused to answer questions about climate activists being jailed, saying he was focused purely on efforts, “to agree and adopt important decisions on climate action”. A local told CarbonCopy that the day COP29 ended, everyone in Baku celebrated because they could now go back to their lives as schools, universities and offices were ordered to operate remotely to avoid congestion on the road and metro. Looking ahead, COP30 in Brazil is already being referred to as the “NDC COP,” where the second round of the GST will also commence. Yet, without robust financial commitments to back new pledges, COP30 will face an uphill battle to restore faith in the process and deliver meaningful progress.

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

Delhi hasn’t had a ‘good’ air day in over a year, you may have to wait till 2025

Delhi has not breathed a single ‘good’ air day in the past 443 days, with meteorologists further warning that the national capital was likely to end this year without any ‘clean air’ day. According to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) data, the last time Delhi’s air quality index was in the ‘good’ category was September 2023. The CPCB data shows Delhi’s air quality index (AQI) on 10 September last year was 45—considered ‘good’, shows an analysis by ThePrint. An AQI of 50 or below is considered ‘good’; ‘satisfactory’ when it is between 51 and 100; ‘moderate’ between 101 and 200; and ‘poor’ when it is between 201 and 300. Anything between 301 and 400 is considered ‘very poor’; while it is marked ‘severe’ when AQI is above 400. This year, the cleanest air recording in Delhi was on 13 September, when the AQI touched 52. The AQI on Tuesday was at 343 in the ‘very poor’ category. “We are yet to record a ‘good’ air day, but we have seen that there has been an increase in the number of ‘moderate’ and ‘satisfactory’ days. We will release the annual air quality analysis soon,” a senior CPCB official told ThePrint. Senior CPCB officials said that since it was nearly December, which usually records the worst air days, it was unlikely that Delhi would record a ‘good’ air day this year. Over the last few weeks, the capital has been reeling under one of the worst pollution spells since monitoring began in the region. On November 18, AQI climbed to 494—categorised in the ‘severe plus’ zone. From 13 November onwards, Delhi has recorded a continuous spell of ‘severe’ AQI—barring two days when it marginally improved but still remained only a few notches short of being categorised in the ‘emergency’ zone. Intense pollution days on rise Weather experts pointed out that Delhi’s pollution levels are becoming more intense. While air quality data shows that there has been no significant difference in the average annual AQI recordings, the levels of ultrafine particulate matter or PM2.5—which tends to log into internal organs, causing long-term health problems—are increasing every year. An analysis by the Centre for Science and Environment, an environmental think tank, showed that in 2023, Delhi’s annual average PM2.5 level was 100.9 micrograms per cubic metre (ug/m3). This was two percent higher than in 2022 and six percent higher than in 2020 when the city’s air was exceptionally clean owing to the Covid lockdown. The analysis also showed a similar pattern in the long-term three-year average recordings from five of the oldest air quality monitoring stations in Delhi—ITO, IHBAS, Mandir Marg, Punjabi Bagh and RK Puram. The 2021-23 average was around three percent higher than the 2020-22 period.

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

How Delhi Missed The Bus In Bad-Air Fight

Every winter, a greyish haze thickens in the air, with air quality levels reaching hazardous levels. To control the further rise in toxic air quality, several restrictions under Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) come into effect. Currently, schools are switched to online mode, while there is a ban on construction and demolition activities. There is a restriction on the plying of certain vehicles, including BS-III petrol and BS-IV diesel four-wheelers, non-cleaner inter-state buses from NCR states, entry of trucks, non-cleaner light commercial vehicles registered outside Delhi, and Delhi-registered BS-IV-and-below diesel-operated medium goods vehicles and heavy goods vehicles. While Delhi's transport sector is a major contributor to pollution, experts say not much has been done to strengthen public transport to reduce the number of private vehicles on the road. As per Economic Survey of 2023-24, Delhi has a total stock of 79 lakh vehicles — and it added 6.5 lakh vehicles during 2023-24, according to the VAHAN database. As much as 90.5% of these are two-wheelers and cars. On a daily basis, as many as 1,100 two-wheelers and 500 private cars are registered on average in Delhi, according to an analysis done by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). Delhi sees the daily entry and exit of approximately 1.1 million vehicles. Emission inventory studies for Delhi done by IIT-Kanpur in 2015, TERI-ARAI in 2018, and SAFAR in 2018 point out that the transport sector's contribution to PM2.5 is 20%, 39%, and 41%, respectively. Private vehicles on roads have increased, but the number of public buses is highly inadequate to meet the city's requirements. Sample this: In 2018, Delhi govt informed Supreme Court that the city requires 11,000 buses to meet its transportation needs. However, Delhi currently has 7,683 buses, including govt-run DTC and cluster bus services. Of these, 3,000 CNG buses are more than 10 years old. Traffic police say that an average of 70 buses, including DTC and cluster, break down in the city every day, causing significant traffic congestion, inconvenience to commuters, and increased pollution levels due to idling vehicles. According to CSE, Delhi has around 45 buses per lakh population (considering 2011 census data) as opposed to the service level benchmark of 60 buses per lakh population specified by ministry of housing and urban affairs. Around 1 lakh three-seater auto-rickshaws ply in the city. Delhi Metro currently has an operational network of 348.418 km with 255 stations and an additional 85.982 km with 63 stations in the pipeline. Though Delhi Metro has been recording an increase in passenger journeys and is one of the most preferred modes of public transport, the lack of proper last-mile connectivity is an issue. Besides, a denser network of DMRC is required for routes connecting outer Delhi areas. Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director, research and advocacy, CSE, said despite several technology solutions implemented to control vehicular emissions, vehicles remained the top contributor among the local sources. "This requires massive scaling up of bus transport and its integration with the metro system with efficient last connectivity. This demands adequate, reliable, affordable, and connected public transport service across all neighbourhoods. This progress needs to be monitorable and verifiable," she said. Amit Bhatt, India managing director, International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), said, "To reduce vehicular emissions, we need to look at both the demand and supply sides. There is a need to add more buses, enhance the metro network, and create proper infrastructure for cycling and pedestrian-friendly areas." Another way, Bhatt said, was to restrict the absolute number of vehicles based on successful examples from other countries. "In China, there is a cap on the number of vehicles that can be registered. London has a provision for a congestion tax, while California made it mandatory for vehicle manufacturers to sell a certain percentage of EVs from their total fleet. After Delhi made it mandatory to switch to CNG, the time has come for Delhi to consider a shift to EVs by drawing inspiration from California model and give mandates to manufacturers to sell a portion of their fleet as electric. However, it is also necessary to have proper EV infrastructure at public and private places. For instance, Norway has a provision for the right to charge, and no society, municipal bodies, or others can refuse anyone from charging their vehicles." Former deputy commissioner of transport department Anil Chikara said several studies done in the past stated that 55% of vehicles travelled a distance of up to 5 km, while around 85% of vehicles covered a distance of up to 15 km in Delhi. "The focus should be on reducing the dependency on personal vehicles of those who cover up to 5 km daily. Strengthening the last-mile connectivity can help people switch to public transport," said Chikara. He added that similar to a golf cart, govt should introduce vehicles in the organised sector that could be plied for last-mile connectivity and people could use them on a sharing basis for travelling shorter distances.

Climate Change and Green Economy

Finance COP fails to offer adequate finance to developing countries for climate action

After an extension and over two weeks of intense negotiations, the 29th UN climate change conference or COP29 in Baku finally reached a consensus on a new collective quantified goals (NCQG) on climate finance but disappointed developing countries with only $300 billion per year by 2035 as against a required $1.3 trillion. The Standing Committee on Finance of COP29 last week acknowledged that the nationally determined contributions of developing countries will cost $5.1–6.8 trillion up until 2030, or $455–584 billion per year, and adaptation finance needs are estimated at $215–387 billion annually until 2030. “The NCQG’s heavy reliance on loan-based financing and private capital, with limited emphasis on grants or low-cost mechanisms, risks exacerbating debt burdens for developing countries. This could shift undue responsibility onto these nations, compelling them to seek additional contributions," said Suryaprabha Sadasivan, senior vice president at Chase India, a public policy and advocacy advisory firm. The NCQG refers to finance that is meant to be provided by developed countries to developing countries to help them meet their goals to transition from fossil fuels and curb greenhouse gas emissions. This will cost “trillions of dollars" to developing nations. Developing countries are due to share their new NDCs by early 2025. Experts have raised concerns that the lack of predictable and adequate finance constrains the ability of developing nations to scale up climate ambition. “COP29 comes at the close of a brutal year—a year seared by record temperatures and scarred by climate disaster—all as emissions continue to rise," UN secretary-general António Guterres said in his closing remarks. “Developing countries swamped by debt, pummelled by disasters, and left behind in the renewables revolution, are in desperate need of funds." Onus on developed countries The final draft of NCQG said developed countries must take the lead on climate finance, mobilizing at least $300 billion per year by 2035 for developing countries. It recommended diversifying funding sources to include public and private, bilateral and multilateral and alternative sources. “The COP29 decision on NCQG is the final nail in the coffin of 1.5°C," said Vaibhav Chaturvedi, senior fellow at the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). “Accelerating mitigation actions without the required means of implementation is only a fool’s dream." A funding agreement at COP29 was essential to help nations take measures that would keep global temperature rise below 1.5°C of pre-industrial levels. COP29 closed in the wee hours of Sunday, two days beyond its schedule. Despite extended plenary sessions, the summit witnessed a dramatic walkout by developing and vulnerable nations, including India and Cuba. “The NCQG outcome is extremely disappointing; the developed countries have completely let down the Global South," said Sehr Raheja, programme officer, climate change, at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). Developing countries voiced their opposition to the NCQG in its present form. “The call by developed countries for ambitious NDCs was heard frequently at this COP, but the means of implementation to enable high ambition in NDCs does not really seem to have matched the needs." Raheja lists a number of reasons as to why the outcome from COP29 has been deemed weak. Among the most pressing issues were the quantum of finance, the lack of goals for mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage, the long timeline of 10 years (2035) and reduced emphasis on grants and grant- equivalent finance. The agreement did say, “All actors to work together to enable the scaling up of financing to developing country Parties for climate action from all public and private sources to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035." Identifying alternative fund sources Part of the negotiations this year was to identify alternative sources of climate funding for developing countries, particularly exploring public and private sources. Rich countries, which are primarily responsible for historical climate change, committed in 2009 to providing $100 billion annually by 2020 to developing countries. This pledge, already seen as grossly inadequate, was only fulfilled in 2022, two years behind the deadline. “Current NDCs will require $7 trillion. By 2035, NDCs are to be revised at least twice, so the needs will be much greater. Unlike NDC revisions, there is no provision for revising the $ 300 billion target every five years. This sends a negative signal for raising ambition. It would not be surprising if the collective enhancement in NDC 3.0 ambition by developing countries is only symbolic or absolutely conditional," said Manish Shrivastva, senior fellow, earth science and climate change, at New Delhi-based The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI).

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

Calcutta air 'poor' at four sites, people out to enjoy nippy weekend exposed to foul air

Four of the city’s seven air quality monitoring stations recorded “poor” air on Sunday, exposing people out to enjoy a nippy weekend to foul air. The stations that recorded poor air at 10am, 1pm and 4pm are at Ballygunge, Bidhannagar, Fort William and the Victoria Memorial. The stations at Jadavpur, Rabindra Sarobar and Rabindra Bharati University (BT Road campus) recorded “moderate” air. According to the data, PM2.5, a tiny particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in size that can hit any organ, was the prominent pollutant in all seven monitoring stations. According to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), “poor” air causes “breathing discomfort to most people on prolonged exposure” and “moderate” air causes “breathing discomfort to people with lungs, asthma and heart diseases”. Anumita Roy Chowdhury, the executive director of the New Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), said PM2.5 are so tiny that they “break through blood barriers”. “PM2.5 enters the bloodstream after breaking through the barriers. It can then travel to any organ with blood,” said Roy Chowdhury, an air quality management expert. She said automobile exhaust, industrial units, any form of combustion and open burning contribute to the generation of PM2.5. The ultra-small particulates also form from the breakdown of larger particulates such as PM10. “Air pollution is a year-long phenomenon but adverse atmospheric conditions during winter lead to concentration of the pollutants. During summer the air in touch with the ground heats up and rises, dispersing the pollutants. This process slows down during winter, trapping pollutants in the lower levels of the air, the air that we breathe,” said another scientist. A haze hung over the city on Sunday. A woman in her 30s who crossed EM Bypass around noon said the visibility had dropped because of the haze. “During winter, people step out in large numbers on Sundays. They must be concerned about the drop in the air quality,” a scientist said. The National Environmental Engineering Research Institute had in 2017-18 done a source apportionment study for air pollution in Calcutta and Howrah. The report was submitted in 2019. The study found that vehicles contributed 25 per cent of PM2.5 in Calcutta during winter, secondary aerosols contributed 32 per cent, wood combustion 15 per cent and coal burning 9 per cent. In Howrah, vehicles accounted for 31 per cent of PM2.5, secondary aerosols 27 per cent, and wood and coal combustion 11 per cent each. Secondary aerosols, also called secondary particles, are pollutants that are formed when gases produced by human activities or naturally react in the air. Last year, the state pollution control board hired The Energy and Resources Institute to conduct a fresh source apportionment study. A board official said the report is expected next year. Guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board say citizens can help improve the air quality of a place by maintaining vehicles properly, following lane discipline, abiding by the speed limit and avoiding prolonged idling of engines. The guidelines also urge people to use small cars instead of SUVs when the air quality drops to “very poor” or “severe”.

Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Global meet set to begin final negotiations on a treaty to end plastic pollution

As the world gets ready to meet in Busan, South Korea next week for the fifth Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee session (INC 5) on ending plastic pollution, India could lead the world towards the development of a global criteria for single-use plastics ban, say researchers from Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) who have closely followed the negotiations through the years. In March 2022, the world had come together to agree on a ground-breaking United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolution 5/14 to “End Plastic Pollution”. The resolution mandated the creation of the INC to arrive at a legally binding instrument. After four rounds of negotiations in Punte Del Este, Paris, Nairobi and Ottawa, this fifth and final round of negotiations in Busan — between November 25 and December 1, 2024 – is where the member states are expected to try and build consensus on a host of issues related to plastic pollution. According to the UNEP, problematic, unnecessary and avoidable (single-use) plastics represent 36 per cent of the plastic production in the world. Of this, an estimated 85 per cent is mismanaged – which means they end up in the environment and pollute it. Says Sunita Narain, director general, CSE: “141 countries across the globe have banned or restricted some form of plastic products, indicating a high willingness among member states to take action. However, inconsistencies in regulations across countries or provinces and states have rendered the implementation of these bans more challenging than anticipated.” India introduced a resolution in UNEA 4, aimed at “ending single-use plastic product pollution.” Says Atin Biswas, programme director, Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy, CSE: “The country is positioning itself as a leader in efforts to eliminate single-use plastics at both regional and national levels.” In 2019, the Government of India had developed a criteria-based framework to identify problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic products. A total of 40 single-use plastic products, including carry bags, small plastic bottles, intravenous (saline) bottles and tea bags were evaluated using this criteria-based method – which was then used to phase out 19 single-use plastic items that were banned from production, stocking, distribution, sale, and use from the Indian market. Adds Biswas: “The criteria developed by India, guided by its ministry of chemicals and fertilisers, along with support and inputs from other member states advocating for a global criteria-based approach, can serve as a foundation for creating a comprehensive, logical, and science-based global framework for problematic, unnecessary, and avoidable plastic products including single-use plastic products.” At the INC meetings, a criteria-based approach has been advocated by many countries. “Overall, the idea of developing and embracing global criteria for problematic, unnecessary, or avoidable plastic products under the international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution enjoys support from at least 70 member states,” says Siddharth G Singh, programme manager, Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy, CSE. CSE’s analysis of the existing Indian criteria for problematic and mismanaged single-use plastic and those proposed in the Report of the Co-Chairs of the ‘Ad hoc intersessional open-ended expert group’ reveals significant alignments and overlaps between India’s national ban framework and the global ban proposals from these countries. Says Singh: “Commonalities include criteria such as littering propensity, environmental impact, recyclability, essentiality, collectability, and availability of alternatives. India’s approach additionally considers aspects like product safety and social and economic impacts.” The third version of the INC Chair’s non-paper notes that Article 3 on Plastic Products (and Chemicals) of Concern could incorporate criteria for identifying specific (short-lived and single-use) plastic products. It also outlines a proposed process or framework for the Conference of Parties (COP) to identify additional plastic products subject to regulation and establish a process for reviewing the list. Harmonisation and creating a level playing field for businesses would be a step to avoid unnecessary economic costs. Says Narain: “The significant alignments indicate that the groundwork for global consensus is already in place. By building on these shared principles and drawing from successful national models, the international community can establish a cohesive, science-driven approach to ensure global consistency in tackling problematic, unnecessary and avoidable single-use plastic products.”

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

How Delhi missed the bus in bad-air fight

Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

In Busan the World Needs to Choose Planet Over Plastics

This week, numerous experts from international Geneva have joined negotiators in Busan, Republic of Korea, for the fifth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (INC-5). Member States are expected to agree at this session, scheduled to conclude on Sunday 1 December, on the final text of the future plastics treaty, marking a turning point in how plastic is produced, consumed and disposed. While the negotiations have formally started this Monday, Member States and stakeholders have been busy in the past days attending preparatory meetings and a march in support of a strong treaty. In his video message, the UN Secretary General insisted that Member States have a historic opportunity to start building a world free of plastic pollution and waste, they must deliver a treaty that is ambitious, credible and just. → Follow the negotiation on UN TV, through the IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin daily coverage, or the Global Plastics Diplomacy Briefing daily wraps and learn more about the role of Geneva and other resources, news, parallel and side events, on our dedicated page Road to Busan | Plastic Pollution INC-5. At INC-5, negotiators have to decide whether to accept the INC Chair’s Third Non-Paper as the basis for negotiations. The non-paper presents treaty text on elements States have expressed sufficient convergence on, while unresolved elements among States remain to be further discussed during negotiations. The approach proposed by the Chair H.E. Amb. Vayas aims to make the best use of the remaining time left in the negotiations. Last week, the Chair released a new Note providing further detail relevant to the organization of work at INC-5 (UNEP/PP/INC.5/7), including on the establishment of contact groups, in-session documentation, and the schedule of work for the first three days of the session. → Access all INC-5 documents. Well before the adoption of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolution 5/14 mandating the establishment of the instrument, international Geneva has brought forward discussions on the need for ambitious action on plastic pollution, contributing with its knowledge in areas such as chemicals, health, trade, finance, green economy and more. The Geneva Beat Plastic Pollution Dialogues have offered the space for conversations to turn into synergetic action. → Read last week’s newsletter for a recap of the dialogues that took place on the Road to Busan, stressing that we cannot say we didn’t know, we cannot say we can’t act. Recent news and resources include: Plastics counteract the ability of Antarctic krill to promote the blue carbon pathway in the deep ocean | C. Manno, I. Corsi, E. Rowlands et al. | Marine Pollution Bulletin | December 2024 Greenpeace, WWF, Break Free from Plastic deliver almost 3 million signatures demanding strong Global Plastics Treaty | 24 November 2024 At least 1,500 March in Busan Demanding Cuts in Plastic Production as Global Treaty Talks Reach Final Stage | Break Free From Plastic | 23 November 2024 Why South Korea’s Leadership Is Critical for a Successful Global Plastics Treaty | The Diplomat | 23 November 2024 Information submitted by the World Health Organization | Ensuring the integration of health aspects within the international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment | 22 November 2024 Busan EPPIC convening sparks progress on plastic pollution lifecycle solutions, celebrates first year with over 100 members | IUCN | 22 November 2024 84% of people across ten countries support cuts to plastic production | Break Free From Plastic | 22 November 2024 Plastic pollution a global threat to human rights, say UN experts | OHCHR | 21 November 2024 Moment of Truth: Will INC-5 Deliver the Plastics Treaty the World Needs? | Andrés Del Castillo & Lindsey Jurca Durland | CIEL | 20 November 2024 Five firms in plastic pollution alliance ‘made 1,000 times more plastic than they cleaned up’ | The Guardian | 20 November 2024 What to Expect at Plastics INC-5 | IISD | 18 November 2024 Open Letter: The Importance of Consumer Information in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastics Pollution | One Planet Network, Adelphi and HEJSupport | 18 November 2024 Streamlined Comparison of the Third Non-Paper and Compilation Draft Text of the Future Plastics Treaty | CIEL | 18 November 2024 Global Plastic Treaty Negotiations Country Positions | Centre for Science and the Environment India | 18 November 2024 The Global Commitment 2024 | Ellen MacArthur Foundation & UNEP | 18 November 2024 The US no longer supports capping plastic production in UN treaty | GRIST | 18 November 2024 Preventing Corporate Capture: Democratic Legitimacy and the Global Plastics Treaty | Rob Ralston, Bethanie Carney Almroth, Rachel Radvany, Dharmesh Shah, Mengjiao Wang and Juressa Lee | SSRN | 15 November 2024 Global Plastics AI Policy Tool | Benioff Ocean Science Laboratory at University of California Santa Barbara and Eric and Wendy Schmidt Center for Data Science & Environment at University of California Berkeley

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

Delhi chokes with just 32% clean air funds being utilised, progress remains sluggish

Delhi witnessed its worst air quality in five years on Monday, with the Air Quality Index (AQI) hitting a staggering 494, rivaling its most polluted day in 2019. The alarming figures put a spotlight on the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP), launched in 2019, which aimed to cut PM10 levels by 40% (from 2017 levels) or meet national air quality standards by 2026. But the numbers tell a grim story. Delhi has utilised just 32% of its allocated NCAP funds of Rs 42.69 crore, leaving a whopping Rs 29.15 crore untouched. This places the capital among the bottom five of 19 identified “non-attainment cities.” Cities like Noida and Faridabad, while faring worse in fund utilisation, have made some progress, yet remain far from hitting their targets, says a report in The Indian Express. So, what’s holding Delhi back? Officials from the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) pointed to bureaucratic delays. A standing committee in the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), crucial for approving proposals above Rs 5 crore, is yet to be formed. This bottleneck has stalled key projects like pavement work, traffic corridor greening, and dust control measures. “This lower percentage is primarily due to delays in forming a standing committee in the MCD. Once established, this committee is expected to accelerate fund utilisation for various planned activities such as end-to-end pavement of roads, greening of traffic corridors, projects, and dust-control measures etc. under NCAP,” said a DPCC official, The Indian Express reported. Delhi’s neighbouring city, Ghaziabad stands out with an 80% fund utilisation rate. But even there, reducing PM10 levels by the required 57% remains a Herculean task. At the other end of the spectrum is Noida, which has used just 11% of its funds. The Centre’s recent submission to the National Green Tribunal shows that Delhi and several NCR cities are only halfway toward achieving NCAP targets. What’s worse, key tools like source apportionment studies — critical to identifying major pollution sources — are still pending in cities like Noida and Faridabad. Critics argue that the current focus on dust mitigation under NCAP diverts attention from industrial and vehicular pollution, which are major contributors to PM10 levels. The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) highlighted earlier this year that performance-linked funding disproportionately favours dust control while leaving major combustion sources underfunded. With Delhi’s air quality teetering between “very poor” and “severe” levels since the start of November, these inefficiencies highlight the urgent need for a course correction. Until then, the city and its residents are left gasping for breath.

Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

What can Commission for Air Quality Management do to improve Delhi air?

The story so far: Air pollution in Delhi has been in the ‘severe’ and ‘severe plus’ category for the most part of the last 10 days. This week, the Supreme Court pulled up the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), the government’s monitoring agency, on its inadequate pollution control response. What is the CAQM? The CAQM in the National Capital Region (NCR) and adjoining areas came into existence through an ordinance in 2020, which was later replaced by an Act of Parliament in 2021. The CAQM was set up for better coordination, research, identification and resolution of problems surrounding air quality and connected issues. It initially had 15 members, comprising officials, past and present, of the environment ministry and other departments of the Union government, as well as officials of various State governments, and representatives from NGOs and other agencies. The CAQM is now headed by Rajesh Verma and there are 27 members. The CAQM replaced the EPCA (Environmental Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority), which was formed in 1998 by the Supreme Court. However, the EPCA was not backed by a statute and experts had raised the issue that it lacked the teeth to act against authorities which did not follow its orders. Despite that drawback, it was under the EPCA that many of the measures being followed by the CAQM started, including the Graded Response Action Plan or GRAP, a list of temporary emergency measures to control air pollution. What are the powers of CAQM? Under the Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas Act, 2021, the CAQM was given the power to take all measures, issue directions and entertain complaints, as it deems necessary, for the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of air in the NCR and adjoining areas. Under Section 14 of the Act, the CAQM can initiate stringent actions against officers for not following its orders. Why did the SC pull up the CAQM? Over the years, the Supreme Court which has been hearing an ongoing case on air pollution, has pulled up different governments and agencies for their laxity. On September 27, Justice A.S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih orally observed about CAQM: “Like pollution, your directions are in the air.” The court was referring to various stakeholders not following the CAQM’s orders despite specific provisions under the 2021 Act. “There has been total non-compliance of the Act. Please show us a single direction issued to any stakeholder under the Act... We are of the view that though the Commission has taken steps, it needs to be more active. The Commission must ensure that its efforts and directions issued actually translate into reducing the problem of pollution,” the Bench observed. On November 18, the Supreme Court slammed the CAQM for delayed action while directing stringent curbs under Stage IV of the GRAP and noted that rather than taking pre-emptive action to contain air pollution, it waited in vain for the air to improve. Stage IV is the highest level of restrictions under GRAP, and according to the CAQM’s rules, it is supposed to be implemented when the air quality category is likely to fall to ‘severe plus’, and is likely to remain in that level for three or more days. The court pulled up the CAQM for delaying implementation of curbs though the AQI had slipped to the ‘severe plus’ category. Is the CAQM to blame for Delhi’s pollution? Though the CAQM makes plans and coordinates with different agencies, it is the agencies that have to implement them on the ground. An official of the CAQM said the commission has improved coordination and planning. “For example, though the paddy stubble burning, which is a source of severe pollution, happens in October-November, we start meeting State officials from February and continue talks till the season is over,” the member said. The CAQM had also coordinated with Punjab and Haryana to prepare action plans for controlling stubble burning in 2022 and it is updated every year. About challenges that the commission faces, the official said, “Over the years, though we were looking at different sources of pollution and trying to control them, our main focus was on controlling stubble burning. But from now onwards, we will try to focus on multiple areas. We will be putting more energy and time on controlling dust and vehicular pollution too.” Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director, Centre for Science and Environment, said that the decision to impose GRAP should be taken proactively by the CAQM. Pollution forecasting methods have to be more accurate, she added. About CAQM being pulled up by the court for not making sure that the commission’s orders are not followed, she said that before taking action on officers, the CAQM should work with different State governments to work out the specific time bound targets to be achieved in different sectors. “Then identify gaps in actions and ensure proper strategy development, and resource allocation have been done and accordingly track implementation. If the action is still not on track then the action can be taken. But it is more important to focus on enabling action at ground level,” she said.

Director General Office

King Charles official foreign tour of Indian subcontinent 'encouraging' sign after cancer treatment

Atrip to the Indian subcontinent could be on the cards for the King, providing a much-needed lift after his battle with cancer. The tour might also mark a return to his postponed visits to India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan following the Queen's passing in September 2022. Downing Street is reportedly drafting plans for Charles and Camilla to spearhead a charm offensive as the UK seeks stronger economic ties post-Brexit. A source revealed: "It's hugely encouraging to be able to make such plans for the King and Queen given the year the monarch has had, but it's very much full steam ahead. A tour of the Indian subcontinent is in the offing, which will be of huge political and cultural significance for Britain on the world stage. The King and Queen are the perfect ambassadors at such a time." Foreign Office officials have been greenlit to discuss potential Royal visits, with tours of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh now being considered. Indian PM Narendra Modi, after the cancellation of the prior visit, is keen to welcome the King and Queen Camilla. However, the burgeoning friendship between Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin raises concerns, following their meeting at the BRICS summit and recent commendations of Russia's "strategic partnership" with India by Putin. Mr Modi has maintained that the conflict in Ukraine should be "ended peacefully". During his tenure as Prince of Wales, Charles, accompanied by Camilla, visited Pakistan in 2006 for a week-long trip, reports the Mirror. He expressed to well-wishers: "It has taken me very nearly 58 years to reach you and it's not from want of trying, I can tell you." The Royal couple returned to Pakistan in 2019 to strengthen bilateral relations. In November of the same year, Charles embarked on his 10th official visit to India, with a focus on climate change, sustainability, and social finance. His itinerary included a stop at the Meteorological Department in New Delhi, a ride in an electric rickshaw, and a meeting with environmentalist Sunita Narain. Last month, the King and Queen Consort enjoyed a spa break in India following their tour of Australia and Samoa. Sources suggest Charles is keen to make an official visit to India as monarch. Palace officials reported last month that he is ready to resume a full schedule of overseas tours after finding the Australian and Samoan trip to be the "perfect tonic". The Mirror disclosed recently that the Royal couple is gearing up for a spring tour to Italy as efforts to fortify European ties continue. With Italy celebrating a holy Jubilee year in 2025, starting on Christmas Eve and concluding on Epiphany 2026, there is speculation about a potential meeting between the royals and the Pope.