Centre for Science and Environment masthead Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Instagram Donate

Cse In News

Cse In News

Two-thirds of NCAP funds used for dust management, less than 1 pc for industrial pollution: Report

NEW DELHI: Nearly two-thirds of the funds allocated to 131 cities under the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) have been used for dust management, while less than one per cent has been utilized to combat air pollution from the industrial sector, a new report revealed on Friday. Launched in 2019, the NCAP is India's first national effort to set clean air targets, aiming for a 20-30 per cent reduction in PM10 pollution by 2024, with 2017 as the base year. The revised target is a 40 per cent reduction by 2026, using 2019-20 as the base year. The report, titled "National Clean Air Programme: An Agenda for Reform", by the independent think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), also said that only 64 per cent of the total funds given to the 131 cities have been spent so far.

Two-thirds of NCAP funds used for dust management, less than 1 pc for air pollution: Report

Nearly two-thirds of the funds allocated to 131 cities under the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) have been used for dust management, while less than one per cent has been utilised to combat air pollution from the industrial sector, a new report revealed on Friday, 19 July. Launched in 2019, the NCAP is India's first national effort to set clean air targets, aiming for a 20-30 per cent reduction in PM10 pollution by 2024, with 2017 as the base year. The revised target is a 40 per cent reduction by 2026, using 2019-20 as the base year. The report, titled "National Clean Air Programme: An Agenda for Reform", by the independent think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), also said that only 64 per cent of the total funds given to the 131 cities have been spent so far. “While NCAP’s objectives and aims have always been commendable, we are finding that attention and investments under it are largely focused on dust control, and not on emission-spewing combustion sources such as industries or vehicles. As much as 64 per cent of the funds utilized under NCAP and the 15th Finance Commission have been spent on road dust mitigation,” said CSE director general Sunita Narain. According to the report, only 0.61 per cent of the total funds have been used to tackle industrial pollution, 12.63 per cent for vehicular pollution and 14.51 per cent for biomass burning. Among the cities covered under NCAP, 82 receive direct funding from the Union environment ministry, while 42 cities and seven urban agglomerations with populations over a million get funding from the 15th finance commission. The report detailed that only Rs 6,806 crore (64 per cent) of the total Rs 10,566 crore allocated to the 131 cities since the programme's inception has been utilised as of 3 May. The 82 cities utilised Rs 831.42 crore of the total Rs 1,616.47 crore allocated, while the 49 cities receiving funding under the 15th finance commission utilised Rs 5,974.73 crore of the total Rs 8,951 crore allocated. Anumita Roychowdhury, CSE's executive director, said that while dust control has become the focus of NCAP, PM2.5, a more harmful fraction of particulate pollution largely emitted from combustion sources, has been neglected. Taking PM10 as the basis for assessing air quality improvement has diverted attention and investments toward dust control. Even though NCAP was originally planned to tackle both PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations in non-attainment cities, in practice, only PM10 concentration has been considered for performance assessment, she said. Roychowdhury said annual changes in PM10 levels can be significantly influenced by meteorological factors, dust storms, and heatwaves, rather than just policy actions. "This may not adequately reflect the impact of measures across all key sectors. PM10 monitoring needs to be source-specific." Making PM2.5 improvement the benchmark to drive action is crucial, as PM2.5 is a more relevant health indicator for assessing air quality improvement, she said.

National Clean Air Programme blew up Rs 6,806.15 crore on dust control, neglected key areas: CSE report

A study released by environmental think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) on Friday has revealed upsetting facts and figures about the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP), India’s much-vaunted flagship initiative to counter air pollution. It has turned into a merely dust control programme, spending more than Rs 10,000 crores so far, without much focus on containing pollution from key sources. The report, titled National Clean Air Programme: An agenda for reform, has pointed out that only 0.61 per cent of the funds were used to contain industrial pollution, 12.63 per cent to contain vehicular pollution, and 14.51 per cent for biomass burning. The report has also found that even in dust control, NCAP mainly aims to contain the coarser dust particles, PM 10 so far; and has much less focus to minimise ultrafine and most toxic PM 2.5 pollutants despite a spate of international reports pointing out that PM 2.5 is mostly responsible for air pollution-related deaths in the country, particularly in major metropolitan cities including Kolkata. The report vindicates what many Kolkata-based environmentalists have been alleging for several years that NCAP has become mostly a water-sprinkling exercise in Kolkata and other cities of the state. “While NCAP’s objectives and aims have always been commendable, we are finding that attention and investments under it are largely focused on dust control and not on emission-spewing combustion sources such as industries or vehicles,” said CSE director-general Sunita Narain at the launch of the report, opining that “a balanced approach to funding is critical for effective impact”. Funds up in dust The report shows that while 64 per cent of funds under NCAP and 15th Finance Commission were spent on road dust mitigation, much less was allocated for controlling emissions from combustion sources such as industries, vehicles and biomass burning. NCAP, the first-ever national effort to set clean air targets for 131 designated polluted cities, was launched by the Union ministry of environment, forest & climate change (MoEF&CC) in January 2019, with the aim of reducing particulate pollution by up to 40 per cent by 2025-26 from the base year of 2019-20. So far, 131 cities have received Rs 10,566 crore out of which Rs 6,806.15 crore, which translates to 64 per cent of the released funds, was utilised till May 3, 2024, to combat road dust mitigation. NCAP blind eye to PM 2.5 A recent report in The Lancet covering 10 major cities in India pointed out that there were 4,678 deaths in average within Kolkata in 2008-2019 due to short-term exposure to PM 2.5 pollution. The statistic stands for 7.3 per cent of all deaths, claims the latest Lancet Planetary Health Study. However, NCAP hardly dwells on PM 2.5. Frontline pulmonologist Arvind Kumar recently complained in a meeting in Kolkata organised by CMRI Hospitals and non-profit Swich Onn that health has been completely ignored in NCAP. “You won’t find the term ‘health’ much in NCAP documents,” Kumar told this correspondent in the meeting. The CSE study has also pointed out within the dust sector, the focus is much more on coarser PM 10, stating that “benchmark for assessing performance of cities focused on PM 10” and called for changing the focus to the more harmful PM 2.5. “Cities are judged based on different metrics. There are serious questions about these metrics being used to benchmark progress and its implications for real improvement,” observed CSE executive director Anumita Roychowdhury, adding that “taking PM 10 as the basis for assessing air quality improvement has diverted attention and investments towards dust control”. Even though NCAP was originally planned to tackle both PM 10 and PM 2.5 concentrations in non-attainment cities, in practice only, PM 10 concentration has been considered for performance assessment. PM 2.5, the more harmful fraction and emitted largely from combustion sources, has been neglected; claims the report. “Annual changes in PM 10 levels can be significantly influenced by meteorological factors, dust storms and heatwaves, rather than just policy actions. This may not adequately mirror the impact of action across all key sectors. PM 10 monitoring needs to be source specific,” reads the report questioning the high claims on PM 10 reduction across the country. “The West Bengal Pollution Control Board has all along focusing on sprinkling water and reducing road dust, ignoring other key areas of air pollution concern particularly PM 2.5. We have all along been saying this; and the latest report vindicates our allegation,” said Naba Dutta of green platform Sabuj Mancha.

City acing clean air action plan at bottom of PM10 levels survey? CSE points to govt data opacity

New Delhi: The city of Amravati was among the top performers in the 2023 edition of the government’s Swachh Vayu Sarvekshan (Clean Air Survey), but ranks at the bottom in the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) assessment of improved PM10 levels in cities. This is an example of the kind of information mismatch highlighted by the Centre for Science and Environment’s new report titled ‘National Clean Air Programme: An Agenda for Reform’. Released on 19 July, this report assesses the performance of the flagship air pollution management strategy of the Government of India over the last five years. The NCAP was launched in 2019 and applied to 131 non-attainment cities, including cities with a million-plus population, where air quality was regularly beyond the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The NACP is a performance-based funding scheme, which means that access to funding for cities is dependent on their performance and achievement of clean air targets. The report by the Delhi-based think tank said over Rs 19,711 crore have been unlocked under this programme for 82 cities that are funded directly by the NCAP and 49 that are funded by the 15th Finance Commission air quality performance grant. CSE’s report focuses on three characteristics of the funding mechanism of NCAP – its performance-based nature, its various sources of funding, and the destination of the funds. One concerning issue the report points out in the performance assessment of NCAP cities is that it largely focuses on reducing PM10 levels, despite PM2.5 levels being proven to be more harmful. Given that the assessment focuses on PM10 levels, the report finds that most of the air pollution mitigation strategies and funds too focus on reducing it, through dust control on roads. According to it, 64 percent of the total funds in NCAP have been used for road dust mitigation, while only 0.61 percent have been used for industrial pollution. “While NCAP’s objectives and aims have always been commendable, we are finding that attention and investments under it are largely focused on dust control, and not on emission-spewing combustion sources such as industries or vehicles. A balanced approach to funding is critical for effective impact,” CSE director general Sunita Narain said in a press release.

Is India’s National Clean Air Programme Achieving Its Objectives?

Has India’s much vaunted National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) helped our cities meet clean air standards to reduce the public health risk that air pollution poses? A new assessment report by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) says there are serious concerns with the way the programme has been run through the five years of its operation. NCAP was launched by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC) in January 2019. This is the first ever national effort to set clean air targets for 131 designated polluted cities,with the aim of reducing particulate pollution by upto 40 per cent by 2025-26 from the base year of 2019-20. This is also the first ever instance in India of performance-linked funding for improving air quality. Speaking on the occasion, CSE director general Sunita Narain said: “While NCAP’s objectives and aims have always been commendable, we are finding that attention and investments under it are largely focused on dust control, and not on emission-spewing combustion sources such as industries or vehicles. As much as 64 per cent of the funds utilised under NCAP and the 15th Finance Commission have been spent on road dust mitigation. Much less has gone towards controlling emissions from combustion sources --- with industrial pollution getting 0.61 per cent, vehicular pollution 12.63 per cent, and biomass burning 14.51 per cent. A balanced approach to funding is critical for effective impact.” The money flow A lot of money has flowed in to fund the clean air action plans in Indian cities. Under the overall Programme (NCAP) which covers 131 cities, 49 cities with million-plus populations have received money from the 15th Finance Commission; the remaining 82 cities have been funded directly by NCAP. As per official figures, funds released to 131 cities stand at Rs 10,566 crore out of which Rs 6,806.15 crore (64 per cent of the released funds) has been utilized in road dust mitigation as of May 3, 2024. Funds released for 82 NCAP cities is significantly lower than that given to the 4915th Finance Commission cities. Utilisation of funds follows the same trend. Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director, CSE says: “Cities are judged based on different metrics. There are serious questions about these metrics being used to benchmark progress and its implications for real improvement.” The CSE report points out that while under NCAP cities need to demonstrate improvement in PM10 levels to access the funds, under the parallel programme of Swachh Vayu Sarvekshan (SVS) these cities are ranked based on policy measures implemented in managing sectors such as biomass, municipal solid waste, road dust, public awareness, besides improvement in PM10 concentrations. “The new agenda for clearing the air has to gear up for scale and speed of changefor transformative reform. This needs massive energy transition in all sectors, mobility transition to reduce automobile dependence and shift long range transport from polluting roadways to railways and waterways, and circularity to close the loop around all waste streams. That is possible only if the method of tracking progress and compliance gets stronger,” Roychowdhury added. Key highlights of the CSE report and action to be taken The CSE report has said that dust control has become the focus and PM2.5 should be the benchmark. Taking PM10 as the basis for assessing air quality improvement has diverted attention and investments towards dust control. Even though NCAP was originally planned to tackle both PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations in non-attainment cities, in practice only PM10 concentration has been considered for performance assessment. PM2.5, the more harmful fraction and emitted largely from combustion sources, has been neglected. Roychowdhury said, “Annual changes in PM10 levels can be significantly influenced by meteorological factors, dust storms and heatwaves, rather than just policy actions. This may not adequately mirror the impact of action across all key sectors.PM10 monitoring needs to be source specific.” Make PM2.5 improvement the benchmark to drive action. PM2.5 is a more relevant health indicator to assess improvement in air quality. Mismatched aims and objectives; real on-ground action must be incentivised Currently, cities ranked high for improving PM10 levels may not necessarily rank high for taking policy action. Cities that score high for good action under SVS can paradoxically be the worst performing cities for not improving PM10 concentration under NCAP. There is no way to establish the link between action and improvement in PM10 levels.

European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism puts a disproportionate burden of decarbonisation on developing countries: CSE

Policies such as the European Union’s (EU’s) Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) place the burden of decarbonising heavy industrial sectors on the Global South, and act as roadblocks in the path of development, said experts speaking at a webinar organised by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), the New Delhi-based think tank. CBAM, announced in 2022 by the EU, places a tax on imported goods such as iron and steel, cement, aluminium, fertilisers, electricity and hydrogen, based on the GHG emissions intensity of production of these goods. At the webinar, CSE released a new report explaining the implications of the CBAM mechanism (see link given above). Inaugurating the webinar, CSE director general Sunita Narain said: “Trade and climate are becoming intrinsically linked, and global trade rules need to be overhauled for a climate-risked world, but not at the cost of climate justice. Measures like CBAM are unilateral measures and shift the burden of the transition to the developing world. This, when developed countries themselves have not reduced their emissions sufficiently and continue to occupy carbon space. What is of particular concern is that such measures may further hurt economies of countries of the South, restricting their abilities to decarbonise.” CBAM is aimed at cushioning the EU’s firms from competitors who can manufacture more cheaply in countries that do not subject them to a carbon price. The EU also believes that the tax would incentivise its trading partners to decarbonise their manufacturing industries. Panellists at the webinar included — besides Narain – Claudia Contreras, Economic Affairs Officer at UNCTAD (UN Trade and Development); Faten Aggad, Executive Director, African Future Policies Hub (AFPH); Avantika Goswami, Programme Manager, Climate Change, CSE; and Trishant Dev, Programme Officer, Climate Change, CSE. Presenting the CSE report, Goswami said: “Developed countries historically relied on fossil fuels for their economic growth. Today, despite having the capacity to significantly reduce domestic emissions and possessing technologies for low-carbon manufacturing, they continue emitting. They have also outsourced high-emission production to developing countries. Meanwhile, developing nations are unjustly penalised by a CBAM, which fails to account for the historical factors shaping their current reality.” “It also disregards the prior failure of wealthy countries to make good on their promises to ensure that green technologies are more accessible to developing countries, whether through extending knowledge or providing financing. They are also expected to bear the cost of their decarbonisation to avoid the CBAM. This, when Paris Agreement emphasises the need for the developed world to extend financial and technological support to the developing world, aiding them in their mitigation efforts. Thus, the CBAM is a clear violation of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) enshrined in the Paris Agreement and the UNFCCC,” added Goswami. UNCTAD’s Claudia Contreras said: “All such policies (such as CBAM) appearing everywhere should be designed and developed in alignment with the Paris Agreement, taking into consideration the fact whether other countries have the capacity to comply. Trade is an important source of revenue for some countries, and the negative impact of these policies may leave them with even fewer resources to fund their decarbonisation efforts. Therefore, it is important that countries implementing these measures support those that are affected.” Faten Aggad of AFPH said: “Our findings show that the economic impact on Africa would result in a US $25 billion loss per year. To put it in perspective, the entire continent receives just under US $30 billion per annum in climate finance, which is far below what is required for a solid response to the climate challenge, Essentially, we are losing US $25 billion that isn’t being compensated. Of course, there is the issue of justice and burden-shifting. Despite Africa’s historical contribution being under 4 per cent of global GHG emissions, CBAM comes across as an attempt by the EU to shift the burden of decarbonisation to other countries without providing the necessary financial or large-scale technical support, such as accounting systems.” What does CBAM mean for India For India, CBAM-covered goods exports to the EU comprised almost 10 per cent of its total goods exports to the EU in the year 2022-23. Says Trishant Dev: “Our estimate suggests that at a rate of €100 (or US $106) per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent, CBAM would impose an average tax burden of 25 per cent annually over and above the value of CBAM-covered goods exported to the EU by India. This is a cost that we should not have to bear.” The way ahead The CSE report recommends the following: The EU should set aside revenue from CBAM to aid the decarbonisation of manufacturing in developing countries as a necessary step. Shifting to low-carbon processes demands substantial financial resources and technological advancements – which many developing countries currently lack. Moreover, it must increase overall flows of climate finance towards developing countries, and exempt the most vulnerable countries from bearing any tax burden. Developing countries can proactively take steps to mitigate CBAM’s liability, while also transforming their manufacturing sectors to shift towards low-carbon processes. In line with their demand for financing, developing countries must have sectoral mitigation plans in place outlining specific measures and targets for emissions reductions in key emitting sectors of their economies. Says Trishant Dev of CSE: “This is essential to align their domestic strategies with their unique needs and avoid the impact of top-down prescriptions from the international community which may fund solutions not appropriate for them. By aligning climate finance with these sectoral mitigation plans, the EU could be assured that its support is targeted and impactful, maximising the effectiveness of its financing for decarbonisation efforts.” To mitigate the impacts of paying the tax to the EU (or any country imposing such a mechanism), developing countries may consider taxing their goods domestically at the point of exports, and cycling the funds into a government-managed decarbonisation fund. This fund can then be utilized by industries to shift to low-carbon production processes and reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity. This approach satisfies the EU’s requirement for the existence of a domestic carbon pricing mechanism, in this case, a carbon tax, and does not disrupt fair trade conditions with the EU. Moreover, it retains the funds within the developing country. As an interim measure, developing countries may consider diversified production processes for different markets and trade partners. Allocating green production processes to goods destined for regions imposing a CBAM could be an interim step while the country’s manufacturing sector gradually decarbonises. Says Goswami: “This would mean reserving less carbon-intensive production for markets that prioritise environmental considerations over price. Industries can thus achieve multiple objectives: engineering industrial outputs to minimise the costs of CBAM-like measures and buying time to decarbonise overall at a fairer pace.” If climate policies are to permeate trade agreements, climate justice must be at the core of this development. This requires us to consider the burden-sharing aspect of climate policy in trade as well. In this light, we propose a system where developing countries could impose a ‘historical polluter tax’ on trade partners to fund their own decarbonization efforts. This tax could be imposed on trade partners responsible for a certain share of cumulative historical CO2 emissions since the pre-industrial period. CBAM is one among several policy tools that have been initiated in this decade, that appear to further the cause of climate protection, but carry with them telltale signs of trade protectionism and economic nationalism, points out Goswami. Many of these policies have been driven by developed nations in response to the perceived threats of de-industrialisation, and carbon leakage due to relatively stricter domestic climate policies in their jurisdictions as compared with some developing countries. Says Dev: “The impacts of policies like CBAM must be minimised so that the developmental process in the Global South is not hindered, and can be achieved through low-carbon, climate-resilient pathways with adequate financing and technology support from developed countries.”

How Electric Cooking Can Help Indian Families Transition To Cleaner Fuels

Haarika Y. lives in a crowded settlement in the by-lanes of Hyderabad’s Yousufguda with her husband and two children. She is a domestic worker and her husband is a watchman. The family recently shifted from Machilipatnam of Andhra Pradesh’s Krishna district. Haarika uses a traditional biomass stove for her cooking needs, with her seven-year-old daughter keeping her company as she prepares the family’s dinner. They use leftover wood from a construction site with dung cakes for the stove. They want to apply for a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) or cooking gas connection but Haarika is not sure if they can manage the expenses. “We are used to this stove but the smoke is too much. I have a recurring cough and my daughter is underweight,” says Haarika. India is home to 1.45 billion people with over 350 million households. Of these, about 127 million households or 577 million people still rely on conventional solid fuels for cooking, estimates suggest. The situation worsens in rural areas, where 54.3% of households rely on traditional biomass-based fuels such as wood, dung, briquettes, pellets, and agricultural leftovers. Even where families have received connections under a Union government programme, many are unable to afford refills and are falling back on conventional fuels, as we explain below. Solid fuel like firewood, cow dung and dry grass are highly damaging to health, as IndiaSpend reported in April 2019. Cooking on traditional chulhas leads to incomplete combustion, and emission of particles such as suspended particulate matter, carbon monoxide, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, polyorganic matter and formaldehyde. All these are harmful for respiratory health. Household air pollution led to 482,000 deaths and 21.3 million disability adjusted life years (DALYs)--years lost due to ill-health, disability or early death--in 2017, according to a study published in The Lancet Planetary Health, a global journal, as IndiaSpend reported in December 2018. Of all premature deaths caused by household air pollution, 44% were due to pneumonia, 54% due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 2% due to lung cancer, we had reported. Women and younger children who spend the most time at home are the most vulnerable. Exposure to air pollution during pregnancy leads to outcomes such as low birth weight and stillbirth. Coal, solid biomass, kerosene, LPG, piped natural gas and others are primarily used as cooking fuels. The coverage of households with an LPG connection has increased due to the Pradhan Mantri Ujwala Yojana. About 103 million households have received cooking gas connections under the programme as of July 15, 2024, but the prohibitory costs of refills meant that in 2021-22, 9.6% of beneficiaries took no LPG cylinder refills, 11.3% took only one refill and 56.5% took four or fewer refills in 2021-22, according to data provided in the Lok Sabha in July 2022 and data from a response given in the Rajya Sabha on August 1, 2022. On the other hand, the use of electricity for cooking has been slow: According to the National Family Health Survey in 2019-21, 0.6% households reported using e-cooking. According to a September 2021 report by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), a policy research think-tank, 5% of Indian homes use e-cooking gadgets, 10.3% in urban areas and 2.7% in rural areas. These data are based on India Residential Energy Survey (IRES) 2020 which covered 14,850 households in 152 districts. E-cooking combined with rooftop solar could be a quick and healthy way to transition people to clean cooking, but upfront costs on gadgets and suitable utensils, perceptions of increase in running costs, fewer options for multi-pot cooking--standard in the Indian context--and apprehensions about the taste of food cooked on e-stoves are affecting the pace of adoption, studies have shown. The awareness problem There are several factors such as consumer perception and levels of awareness that affect the choice of cooking fuel. With changing times and fast-paced lives, there is a preference for fast cooking methods, generally requiring two-pot cooking, and this is where LPG becomes more accepted as it is a proven technology and has been around for decades, says Akif Farooqui, Fellow, Social Transformation & CSR Division, The Energy and Resources Institute. “While induction [cookstoves] could be a potential option in urban households, improved chulhas could be popularised in rural areas. The difference is mainly due to factors like convenience and existing cooking patterns that are distinct for rural and urban users,” feels Farooqui. Further, while electric cooking is slowly gaining popularity, especially in urban areas, there is still a lack of awareness about its benefits. For example, e-cooking needs specialised utensils that would work on the induction stove, which may not be as easily available in rural areas. Also, a single-pot cooking option may not be suitable for large families. Two-pot induction stoves are more expensive. People also perceive the recurring cost of induction to be higher as it may add to the electricity bill. There are also apprehensions about the taste of the food cooked on such 'modern' appliances as opposed to that cooked using traditional methods. Even with LPG, 24% households that use solid fuel for cooking felt that food prepared on LPG stoves does not taste good. “To address this, we can look at improving consumer awareness of electric cooking and how it can handle all cuisines that an LPG stove can,” says Abhishek Kar, Senior Programme Lead at CEEW. Most homes now use e-cooking as a supplement to other clean fuels such as LPG. The IRES data show that about half the e-cooking consumers use it on a regular basis. Although there was a lot of skepticism regarding e-cooking among non-users, 60% of e-cooking users believe that switching to e-cooking entirely would be viable. Induction cookstoves and rice cookers are the most popular devices, each used by nearly 40% of the e-cooking users, followed by microwave ovens, the IRES found. Choice of e-cooking devices varies across states, with rice cookers dominating in Andhra Pradesh, induction plates in Tamil Nadu and microwave ovens in Delhi. In Assam, low-income households use electric coil-based cookstoves, whereas wealthier households use microwave ovens or rice cookers. These patterns suggest that jurisdictions with lower electricity pricing and gaps in billing and revenue collection will probably see higher adoption rates of e-cooking in the future. “Daily cooking on a chulha left me with burning eyes and breathlessness, now I use a rice cooker for cooking rice and LPG for all other cooking and it has made my life much easier, the new scheme has helped in reducing my expenses,” says Ramadevi, a domestic worker from Hyderabad. The cost factor Women in urban-poor and rural households across India face significant hardships due to the high cost of LPG refills. “Despite the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana providing subsidised LPG connections, many cannot afford the recurring high costs, forcing them to rely on traditional chulhas,” says Bhavreen Kandhari, co-founder of Warrior Moms in India, a network of mothers pushing for clean air and climate action. This results in severe health impacts and poor air quality, as we explained above. Improved stoves are the cheapest way of improving health, according to a World Health Organization report, as IndiaSpend reported in February 2015. In Africa and South and South-east Asia, the regions with the greatest number of people exposed to toxic soot, improved stoves could reduce the burden of disease associated with indoor air pollution for an average yearly cost of Rs 30,000 to 37,000 per healthy year gained. Households utilising piped natural gas, which is now only available in a few Indian cities, will only need to pay Rs 340 per month for the exclusive use of PNG for cooking, according to CEEW estimates. Thus, PNG is currently the least expensive cooking energy option. By December 2020, 7.29 million PNG connections (almost 2% of Indian homes) were in use in urban India. The Indian government intends to connect 50 million homes in the country to PNG. The impetus on LPG and PNG could be explained by the economics of e-cooking versus LPG. Many households, especially those from lower income categories, would find the large upfront cost of electric cooking appliances to be unaffordable. Recurring expenses represent yet another crucial limitation. For families receiving subsidised electricity (tariff less than Rs 6.6 per kWh), e-cooking would be operationally cost-effective as against an unsubsidised LPG refill, CEEW found. With subsidised LPG, only people who pay a tariff of less than Rs 5 per kWh would find e-cooking more affordable. However, if these homes use a lot of power for cooking, they run the risk of being transferred to a higher tariff slab, which might not be as cost-effective, the analysis said. “People need to be more aware about the reliability of electricity to use induction stoves, government need to advocate the usage of decentralised renewable energy to electric cooking, so that the dependency on electricity reduces,” says Sunil Dahiya, from the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA). Metros take the lead Affluent metropolitan households are likely to be the first to adopt e-cooking. Given that India’s current power generation is mainly from coal-fired thermal power plants, “any e-cooking roadmap is incomplete without also including a roadmap to decarbonize India’s power sector fully”, a December 2023 analysis by the Centre for Science and Environment says. According to an analysis by CEEW, depending on rooftop solar power generation capacity, a typical household relying entirely on electric cooking will require 974 kWh of electricity every year, or about 80 units per month. According to a June 2022 review, average power consumption in urban households was about 125 units while rural households consumed 60 units a month. This means that even using e-cooking exclusively would keep families in Indian cities under the 200 units being offered free of cost in several places including Karnataka, Delhi and Jharkhand. In the vote-on-account presented in February 2024, the finance minister said 10 million households would be provided 300 units of electricity free of cost using rooftop solar. Further, the CEEW paper shows that while the total cost of an induction cooker is around Rs 2,200, it is cheaper than using LPG. For homes who spend less than Rs 9 per unit for electricity, e-cooking will be more cost-effective than LPG cooking at the current 14.2 kg LPG refill pricing of approximately Rs 1,100. By targeting homes which spend less on electricity, the government can offer subsidies in purchasing induction stoves and create awareness about the shift to clean cooking methods. It is crucial to think about the possibility of using renewable energy for large-scale direct electric cooking or indirect electric to thermal conversion cooking technologies like indirect solar cookers, given the increasing penetration of renewable electricity-based capacity and its generation, a 2023 discussion paper by Vasudha Foundation, a non-profit working to promote environment-friendly, socially just and sustainable models of energy, says In comparison to gas and biomass cook stoves, electric cook stoves--especially induction cook stoves and electric pressure cookers--have been demonstrated to be safer, more efficient, and less polluting in terms of exposure, efficiency, and safety. Induction cooking also has the largest abatement cost, the discussion paper said. Furthermore, the greater availability of energy and the improved durability of electric cookstoves make them more beneficial. “For those having solar rooftop systems, which are mainly on-grid models (they will work only when there is grid supply), the possibility of the induction not being available for cooking in case of power cuts is another concern,” says Farooqui. Power tariff rates and payment discipline are the other factors that may influence the adoption of e-cooking, the CEEW paper says citing the example of Tamil Nadu, which has the highest e-cooking adoption at 17%. Conversely, the adoption of e-cooking in all urban rich households could worsen the peak demand stress of the power distribution companies (discoms) and must be approached carefully. “Improving the energy efficiency of induction cook stoves could help reduce electricity consumption and improve affordability,” Kar of CEEW says. To facilitate quicker and more widespread adoption of e-cooking equipment in India, a strong local manufacturing environment is required which needs domestic research to create e-cooking advances more appropriate for the Indian context, particularly for rural areas, where cooking is done in much larger pots that can be used with the induction tops now in the market. Even within urban households that have adopted e-cooking, many still depend on LPG and look at induction stoves only as a backup option. “In our colony most of us use induction cook stoves for cooking as electricity is free for us, and we use LPG only for big batches of cooking,” says Monica Kumar, who lives in the colony of the National Thermal Power Corporation, Ramagundam. G. Varalakshmi, a homemaker from Hyderabad, says, “I use the induction stove only when there is an emergency and there is lots of cooking to be done, I have to wait in front of the stove as there are chances of spilling and also it needs special vessels, because of which I prefer using LPG for cooking.” “The comfort of having continuous supply is still not there, the assurance and reliability is still not there, and we still have power cuts. It’s not a luxury we can have if we have children, elders and patients at home; this is a big challenge in the shift to e-cooking,” says Vibhuti Garg, Director of the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, South Asia. While the government has pushed the transition from conventional cookstoves to LPG and PNG, the focus is less on e-cooking. It is important that governments focus more on creating awareness about integrating solar power to cooking systems so that power consumption reduces and more households transition to e-cooking, says Dahiya of CREA. We have reached out to officials in the government for comment on plans to push e-cooking. We will update this story when we receive a response. A conference organised by the Bureau of Energy Efficiency under the power ministry sought to explore how India can accelerate the adoption of e-cooking. “We are coming up with aggregation models whereby prices can be brought down,” additional secretary in the power ministry Ajay Tewari said. “We are moving towards an Indian model of e-cooking to serve Indian kitchens. If we have standard and affordable models, we should be able to cover all urban areas within 2-3 years. By 2030, we will like to cover as many households as possible under e-cooking. This will contribute significantly to our fight against climate change.” “What is needed is replication at scale,” said BEE director general Abhay Bakre. “Our focus has been on kitchens and locations where cooking can happen for longer periods of time, of 8 – 10 hours per day. Rather than going for full replacement, consumers could go for replacing 50% of their cookers with electric cookers, so that they get the time to build confidence in e-cooking before making a full transition.” Further, more awareness should be created about the benefits of shifting to cleaner cooking, Dahiya says. “I used to struggle a lot while using the chulha, collecting firewood and sitting and cooking for hours while taking care of my children was a difficult task for me, now that I have a gas stove, a rice cooker and a microwave, it has become much easier,” says Saroja B., a domestic worker from Hyderabad. Her daughter is a cook and together, they earn Rs 30,000 a month. ”Given the urgency in limiting greenhouse gases and particulate matter emissions, we need to try all alternatives of cleaner cooking methods be it induction stove or integrating solar energy with e-cooking other than LPG,” says Sachchida Nand Tripathi, a Civil Engineering professor from IIT Kanpur.

AD and Biogas Industry Awards 2024 winners

The Anaerobic Digestion and Bioresources Association (ADBA) has announced the winners of this year’s AD and Biogas Industry Awards, celebrating outstanding achievements and innovations in the global anaerobic digestion (AD) and biogas sectors. Co-organised by ADBA in partnership with World Biogas Association (WBA), the awards ceremony, held 10 July 2024 at the NCC in Birmingham, UK, recognised the exceptional international contributions of individuals, companies and projects that have demonstrated excellence and leadership in advancing the biogas industry. The award winners, judged by an expert panel representing the global biogas sector, exemplify the innovation, dedication and progress driving the global shift towards sustainable circular economy solutions to waste and energy issues. WBA Chief Executive Charlotte Morton OBE said, “I heartily congratulate the winners of the 2024 AD and Biogas Industry Awards, who stood out among an extraordinary competition. The exceptional standard of this year’s shortlisted nominees highlights the remarkable innovation and dedication within the sector. Each nominee has demonstrated pioneering advancements, operational excellence and a commitment to sustainability, setting new benchmarks in the biogas industry. Their contributions underscore the dynamic progress and potential of AD and biogas technologies in addressing global energy and environmental challenges. This year’s shortlist not only reflects the industry’s current achievements but also its promising future.” During the ceremony, host Chris Hines MBE, sustainability pioneer and co-founder of Surfers Against Sewage, spoke about his decades campaigning for sustainable waste water management and praised the AD and biogas industry for creating sustainable solutions, supporting healthy rivers and seas. Chris’ message resonated strongly with fellow guest speaker, and avid surfer, the 11-year-old Child Prime Minister of the UK Children’s Parliament, Clark Dearson, who spoke passionately about his own love of the sea and the inspiring power that solutions like AD and biogas have on overcoming the environmental despair felt by many children – and motivating the next generations. The ceremony was attended by global industry leaders and policy makers with a delegation from India including Mr Pankaj Jain, Secretary of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, and the Chairman of the Indian Oil Corporation Mr Shrikant Madhav Vaidya, both major advocates for biogas’ great potential to decarbonise the global economy and cut harmful methane emissions. They were joined by representatives from the United Nation Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), C40 Cities and the Global Methane Hub along with Shell Energy, Future Biogas and Hexagon Agility – the award sponsors. The AD and Biogas Industry Awards 2024 Winners and Highly Commended: Health and Safety Winner: Marches Biogas Ltd Highly Commended: Dwr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) Women in Biogas Sponsored by Shell Energy Winner: Katrin Pütz – (B)energy Highly Commended: Alexi Dragonetti – Agrivert; Christine Mapp – Eco Verde Energy (EVE); Deanna Martin – Deanna Martin Biogas; Helen Edwards – Ceres Energy Limited; Mantopi Martina de Porres Lebofa – Lesotho Council of NGOs (LCN) AD Hero of the Year Sponsored by Future Biogas Winner: Christopher Kellner Best Anaerobic Digestion/Biogas Support Winner: Marches Biogas Ltd The Net Zero Circular Solutions Sponsored by Hexagon Agility Winner: Madrid City Council’s Anaerobic Digestion Complex – Ayuntamiento de Madrid, Parque Tecnológico de Valdemingómez (Madrid City Council-Valdemingómez Technology Park) Education Campaign of the Year Winner: Advancing CBG and Biomethane Projects – Dr Rahul Jain – Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) Highly Commended: Biogas and Gases Technologies – TIND-BGASTECH

India to lose 0.05 pc of GDP due to CBAM, should impose 'historical polluter tax' on EU: Report

NEW DELHI: The European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will impose an additional 25 per cent tax on carbon-intensive goods exported from India to the EU, a new report said on Wednesday and recommended a counter-tax on rich countries historically responsible for climate change. CBAM is the EU's proposed tax on energy-intensive products, such as iron, steel, cement, fertilizers and aluminium imported from countries like India and China. This tax burden would represent 0.05 per cent of India's GDP, according to the report titled "The Global South's response to a changing trade regime in the era of climate change" by an independent think tank -- Centre for Science and Environment (CSE).

Most funding under National Clean Air Programme went into dust management: CSE

New Delhi: Road dust mitigation has been the primary focus of the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP), which was launched in 2019 as the first such effort to set clean air targets for 131 polluted cities and to reduce particulate pollution nationally, with much lower funding for combustion sources that emit pollutants, a Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) assessment released on Friday has found. As much as 64% of the total funds ( ₹10,566 crore) have gone into road paving, widening, pothole repair, water sprinkling, mechanical sweepers, etc. Only 14.51% of funding has been used for controlling biomass burning, 12.63% for vehicular pollution and a mere 0.61% for industrial pollution control. “The primary focus of the funding is thus road dust mitigation,” the assessment said. NCAP which was aimed at reducing particulate pollution by up to 40% by 2025-26 from the base year of 2019-20. It was first ever performance-linked funding programme to improve air quality in India. NCAP was originally planned to tackle both PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations in the 131 non-attainment cities. In practice, only PM10 concentration has been considered for performance assessment. PM2.5, the more harmful fraction and emitted largely from combustion sources, has been neglected, CSE found. As much as ₹19,711 crore has been earmarked for 131 cities for the period of FY 2019–20 to 2025–26, as per the 2023–24 ministry of environment, forest and climate change (MoEFCC) report. Out of this, about ₹3,172.00 crore has been allocated to 82 cities under the NCAP and about ₹16,539.00 crore to 42 million-plus cities and seven urban agglomerations. Approximately ₹10,566.47 crore was released to the 131 cities between FY 2019–20 and FY 2023–24 (until 03 May 2024) under both NCAP programme and Fifteenth Finance Commission (XV-FC). CSE director general Sunita Narain said NCAP’s objectives and aims have always been commendable, but attention and investments under it are largely focused on dust control, and not on emission-spewing combustion sources such as industries or vehicles. “As much as 64% of the funds utilised under NCAP and the 15th Finance Commission have been spent on road dust mitigation. Much less has gone towards controlling emissions from combustion sources—with industrial pollution getting 0.61%, vehicular pollution 12.63%...” she said.

EU’s carbon tax could cost India 0.05 per cent of GDP Report – EQ

In Detail : New Delhi : The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will impose additional 25 per cent tax on energy-intensive goods exported from India to the EU, a new report said on Wednesday. This tax burden would represent 0.05 per cent of India’s GDP, according to the report titled “The Global South’s response to a changing trade regime in the era of climate change” by independent think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). These findings are based on data from the past three years (2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24). CBAM is the EU’s proposed tax on energy-intensive products, such as iron, steel, cement, fertilizers, and aluminum, imported from countries like India and China. The tax is based on the carbon emissions generated during the production of these goods. The EU argues that this mechanism creates a level playing field for domestically manufactured goods, which must adhere to stricter environmental standards, and helps reduce emissions from imports. But other nations, particularly developing countries, are worried this would harm their economies and make it too expensive to trade with the bloc. The move has also sparked debate at multilateral forums, including UN climate conferences, with developing countries arguing that, under UN climate change rules, countries cannot dictate how others should reduce emissions. Avantika Goswami, who leads CSE’s climate change programme, said that India’s CBAM-covered goods exports to the EU accounted for 9.91 per cent of its total goods exports to the bloc in 2022-23. She said 26 per cent of India’s aluminum and 28 per cent of its iron and steel exports were destined for the EU in 2022-23. These sectors dominate the basket of CBAM-covered goods shipped from India to the EU. In 2022-23, the exports of CBAM-covered goods to the EU made up about one-fourth (25.7 percent) of India’s total such goods exported globally, which is significant for the industries operating in these sectors. Currently, hydrogen and electricity are not exported from India to the EU. Of India’s total goods exported worldwide, CBAM-covered goods exports to the EU constitute only about 1.64 percent.

India To Lose 0.05% of GDP Due To EU's Carbon Tax, Should Impose 'Historical Polluter Tax' on EU: Report

The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will impose an additional 25 per cent tax on carbon-intensive goods exported from India to the EU, a new report said on Wednesday and recommended a counter-tax on rich countries historically responsible for climate change. CBAM is the EU’s proposed tax on energy-intensive products, such as iron, steel, cement, fertilizers and aluminium imported from countries like India and China. This tax burden would represent 0.05 per cent of India’s GDP, according to the report titled ”The Global South’s response to a changing trade regime in the era of climate change” by an independent think tank — Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). These findings are based on data from the past three years (2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24). The tax is based on the carbon emissions generated during the production of these goods. The EU argues that this mechanism creates a level playing field for domestically manufactured goods, which must adhere to stricter environmental standards, and helps reduce emissions from imports. But other nations, particularly developing countries, are worried this would harm their economies and make it too expensive to trade with the bloc. The move has also sparked debate at multilateral forums, including UN climate conferences, with developing countries arguing that under UN climate change rules countries cannot dictate how others should reduce emissions. Trishant Dev, Programme Officer (Climate Change) at CSE, said that India’s CBAM-covered goods exports to the EU accounted for 9.91 per cent of its total goods exports to the bloc in 2022-23. He said 26 per cent of India’s aluminium and 28 per cent of its iron and steel exports were destined for the EU in 2022-23. These sectors dominate the basket of CBAM-covered goods shipped from India to the EU. In 2022-23, the exports of CBAM-covered goods to the EU made up about one-fourth (25.7 per cent) of India’s total such goods exported globally, which is significant for the industries operating in these sectors. Currently, hydrogen and electricity are not exported from India to the EU. Of India’s total goods exported worldwide, CBAM-covered goods exports to the EU constitute only about 1.64 per cent. The report recommended a counter-tax on rich countries historically responsible for climate change. Countries that have not historically contributed to the climate crisis may consider imposing a ’historical polluter tax’ on trade partners to fund their own decarbonisation efforts, the report said. This tax could be levied on trade partners responsible for a significant share of cumulative historical carbon dioxide emissions since the pre-industrial period, Avantika Goswami, who leads CSE’s climate change programme and the report’s co-author, said. Historical trends indicate that carbon-intensive production has shifted from developed to developing countries, creating disparities in emissions intensity between nations. Today’s differences in emissions intensity are also tied to historical emissions, as the Global North utilised fossil fuels like coal during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution which enabled it to amass wealth and grow its economies.

Tax: सीबीएएम के कारण भारत को GDP का .05 % नुकसान, रिपोर्ट में किया गया दावा

भारत से निर्यात किए जाने वाले कार्बन-सघन सामानों पर यूरोपीय संघ अतिरिक्त 25 प्रतिशत कार्बन बॉर्डर एडजस्टमेंट मैकेनिज्म (सीबीएएम) कर लगाएगा। यह बात बुधवार को एक रिपोर्ट में बताई गई है। रिपोर्ट में जलवायु परिवर्तन के लिए ऐतिहासिक रूप से जिम्मेदार अमीर देशों पर जवाबी कर लगाने की भी सिफारिश की गई है। क्या है CBAM? सीबीएएम भारत और चीन जैसे देशों से आयातित लोहा, इस्पात, सीमेंट, उर्वरक और एल्यूमीनियम जैसे ऊर्जा-गहन उत्पादों पर यूरोपीय संघ का प्रस्तावित कर है। थिंक टैंक - सेंटर फॉर साइंस एंड एनवायरनमेंट ने "द ग्लोबल साउथ रिस्पॉन्स टू चेंजिंग ट्रेड रिजिम इन द एरा ऑफ क्लाइमेट चेंज’’ शीर्षक वाली रिपोर्ट जारी की है। इस रिपोर्ट के मुताबिक सीबीएएम कर भारत के सकल घरेलू उत्पाद का 0.05 प्रतिशत होगा। ये निष्कर्ष पिछले तीन वर्षों (2021-22, 2022-23 और 2023-24) के आंकड़ों पर आधारित हैं।यह कर वस्तुओं के उत्पादन के दौरान उत्पन्न कार्बन उत्सर्जन पर आधारित है। यूरोपीय संघ बोला- सख्त पर्यावरण मानकों का पालन होगा यूरोपीय संघ का कहना है कि यह कर व्यवस्था घरेलू स्तर पर निर्मित वस्तुओं के लिए एक समान अवसर प्रदान करेगी। इसके साथ ही सख्त पर्यावरण मानकों का पालन करना होगा और आयात से उत्सर्जन को कम करने में मदद करता है। हालांकि इस कर व्यवस्था के कारण अन्य देश, विशेष रूप से विकासशील देश, चिंतित हैं। इन देशों का मानना है कि इस कर व्यवस्था से उनकी अर्थव्यवस्थाओं को नुकसान होगा और इस गुट के साथ व्यापार करना बहुत महंगा हो जाएगा। CBAM कर के कारण बहस छिड़ी इस कदम ने संयुक्त राष्ट्र जलवायु सम्मेलनों सहित बहुपक्षीय मंचों पर भी बहस छेड़ दी है। जिसमें विकासशील देशों का तर्क है कि संयुक्त राष्ट्र जलवायु परिवर्तन नियमों के तहत कुछ देश यह निर्देश नहीं दे सकते हैं कि दूसरे देशों को उत्सर्जन कैसे कम करना चाहिए। CEA भी जता चुके हैं आपत्ति मुख्य आर्थिक सलाहकार (सीईए) वी अनंत नागेश्वरन ने कहा, जलवायु परिवर्तन से निपटने के लिए विकसित देशों के कार्बन सीमा समायोजन व्यवस्था (सीबीएएम) जैसे उपाय विकासशील अर्थव्यवस्थाओं के लिए उचित नहीं हैं।