Centre for Science and Environment masthead Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Instagram Donate

Cse In News

Cse In News

केंद्र भारत में ईवी बैटरी के उत्पादन को बढ़ावा देने के लिए थिंक थैंक्स के साथ सहयोग करता

केंद्र के विज्ञान और प्रौद्योगिकी विभाग (डीएसटी) और ग्रीन थिंक टैंक सेंटर फॉर साइंस एंड एनवायरनमेंट (सीएसई) ने एक मंच बनाने के लिए सहयोग किया है जो भारतीय आवश्यकताओं के अनुरूप नई इलेक्ट्रिक वाहन (ईवी) बैटरी के विकास का समर्थन करेगा। भारत में नई बैटरी तकनीकों को विकसित करने के लिए एक रोडमैप पर एक श्वेत पत्र तैयार किया जाएगा। सीएसई ने मंगलवार को एक बयान में कहा, इसके बाद इस प्रक्रिया का समर्थन करने के लिए एक विशेषज्ञ-उद्योग मंच या मंच का निर्माण किया जाएगा। इस सहयोगी पहल को हाल ही में स्थानीय उपयुक्त ईवी बैटरी पर एक गोल मेज के साथ शुरू किया गया था जो गर्म और आर्द्र उष्णकटिबंधीय जलवायु की बाधाओं के भीतर सुरक्षित, टिकाऊ और प्रभावी हैं। अनुमिता रॉयचौधरी, कार्यकारी निदेशक-अनुसंधान और वकालत, सीएसई, ने कहा: "भारत ईवी कहानी को आगे बढ़ाने के लिए फेम और उत्पादन से जुड़े प्रोत्साहन के साथ काम कर रहा है, लेकिन लागत, सुरक्षा और चार्जिंग बुनियादी ढांचे के संबंध में चुनौतियां लाजिमी हैं - जिनमें से सभी बिंदु देश की शून्य उत्सर्जन महत्वाकांक्षाओं को पूरा करने में अंतराल पर। अंतर दूसरों के बीच सुरक्षा, आपूर्ति श्रृंखला, लागत संवेदनशीलता और त्वरित चार्जिंग अवसरों की आवश्यकता से संबंधित चिंताओं से लेकर है।" वरिष्ठ कार्यक्रम मौसमी मोहंती ने कहा, "इस संयुक्त पहल का उद्देश्य इन कमियों को दूर करना और एक ऐसा मंच तैयार करना है जो सुरक्षित, स्थानीय रूप से उपयुक्त आपूर्ति श्रृंखला प्रणालियों का मूल्यांकन, मूल्यांकन और पहचान करेगा और विभिन्न वाहन अनुप्रयोगों के लिए अनुकूलित किया जा सकता है।" प्रबंधक, स्वच्छ वायु और सतत गतिशीलता, सीएसई। नेशनल इलेक्ट्रिक मोबिलिटी मिशन प्लान (NEMMP) 2020 के हिस्से के रूप में, भारी उद्योग विभाग ने 2015 में इलेक्ट्रिक और इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों के निर्माण को बढ़ावा देने के लिए भारत में (हाइब्रिड और) इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों के तेजी से अपनाने और विनिर्माण (FAME India) नामक एक योजना तैयार की थी। हाइब्रिड वाहन प्रौद्योगिकी और इसके सतत विकास को सुनिश्चित करने के लिए।

Sunanda K. Datta-Ray | Deal on climate, but hard decisions put off till 2023

The goal was to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels Hearing Gianni Infantino, Fifa’s Swiss-born ethnic Italian president, declare “I think for what we Europeans have been doing the last 3,000 years, we should be apologising for the next 3,000 years before starting to give moral lessons to people”, millions of TV watchers worldwide may have wondered if it was the moment of truth, the epiphany that would erase the difference between East and West, rich and poor, and save mankind from extinction through floods, fires and all the catastrophic effects of climate change. For it was the last day of a contentious two-week conference on saving a world teetering on the edge of destruction, desertification and drowning. But, no, Mr Infantino wasn’t addressing the COP27 (Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) summit in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh where the representatives of 200 nations were haggling on who would have to pay the price of industrialisation. He was speaking in Qatar on the eve of the World Cup soccer tournament. The White House reckons that floods, drought, wildfires and hurricanes exacerbated by climate change could cost Washington about $2 trillion annually by the end of the century. Delayed by a year because of the Covid-19 pandemic, COP27 left effective action for COP28 to be held at the end of 2023. In theory, however, the developed nations agreed at last Sunday’s dawn session to create a “loss and damage fund” to help the developing countries pay for the disastrous consequences of climate change. The crucial question of who will finance the fund and who will be entitled to draw on it has been left to the future, and probably even more painfully protracted wrangling. But for Egypt’s Sameh Shoukry, who presided over the tumultuous two weeks of bargaining, this represented “the highest ambition that can be reached at this time”. He saw the agreement as “a gateway” to more substantive, far-reaching actions to counter the effects of climate change and the long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns that destroyed the Indus Valley civilisation in Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro, accounted for damage worth more than $30 billion in Pakistan’s devastating floods, and threatens to obliterate the independent Pacific island of Tuvalu. Since the 1800s, human activities -- not natural causes -- have been the main driver of climate change, primarily because burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas generate greenhouse gas emissions that act like a blanket wrapped around the Earth, trapping the sun’s heat and raising temperatures so that icebergs melt, forests burn and the oceans rise. The United States had previously opposed the plan for a disaster-aversion fund, fearing it might have to bankroll it. The $11.4 billion that President Joe Biden has promised may be a drop in the ocean of global needs, although American officials who attended the Sharm el-Sheikh summit argued that it would suffice for Washington’s international climate commitments. The draft agreement says nothing about the demand to phase out all polluting fossil fuels. India, which relies heavily on coal, initially led the push to broaden the phasedown to include natural gas and oil. Later, the United States, the European Union and other vulnerable countries also backed the call. China and Saudi Arabia didn’t. Nor did the energy-poor African nations. A core commitment of last year’s landmark Glasgow Climate Pact, reached at COP26 which targeted only coal, was to reassemble more quickly than planned and persuade many countries to accelerate their efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions even more. That didn’t happen. It probably would not have happened even if Covid-19 had not intervened. Inspired by the British politician, Alok Sharma, the pact also called for a doubling of finance to help developing countries to adapt to climate change and build resilience. Moreover, Glasgow established a work programme to define a global goal on adaptation, which will identify collective needs and solutions to the crisis already affecting many countries. While the need to adapt is not disputed, some of the most vulnerable communities are also the least able to adapt because they are poor and already struggling to mobilise resources for basics like health care and education. It has been estimated that adaptation costs in developing countries could reach $300 billion every year by 2030. Right now, only 21 per cent (or about $16.8 billion annually) of the climate finance provided by richer countries to assist developing nations goes towards adaptation and resilience. The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in December 1997 although it did not enter into force until February 2005, was one of the earliest action-oriented expressions of collective global concern. The protocol’s 192 parties operationalized the UNFCC by committing industrialised countries and economies in transition to limit and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with agreed individual targets. A number of countries have developed national adaptation plans since 2011, but a more aggressive version of the global adaptation fund, which already finances pioneering initiatives in developing countries like Costa Rica, Ghana, Djibouti and even India, is obviously needed. The wealthier countries are supposed to fulfil their commitment made in the Paris agreement to provide $100 billion a year in international climate finance. At least half of this should go to adaptation. This would be an important symbol of global solidarity in the face of a challenge we can only solve if everyone works together. The Paris agreement, a legally binding international treaty adopted by 196 parties at COP21 in December 2015, was a landmark in the multilateral climate change process because, for the first time, a binding agreement brought all nations into a common cause to undertake ambitious efforts to combat the peril. All the parties to the agreement were committed to strengthening the global response by increasing the ability of all to adapt and build resilience, and reduce vulnerability. The goal was to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. This long-term temperature goal, which is essential to achieve a climate neutral world by mid-century, will remain elusive if governments continue to squander their resources on weapons, space programmes, massive statuary and elaborate, expensive and unnecessary city redevelopment. As Indian environmentalist Sunita Narain has pointed out, we already know how to make our communities safer, and must act on that knowledge in the interests of justice. The tragedy is that there’s a Nero fiddling away in every burning Rome.

COP27: Tι πήγε καλά, τι απέτυχε και τι έπεται στις ενέργειες για το κλίμα

Η27η διάσκεψη των Ηνωμένων Εθνών για το κλίμα (COP27) ολοκληρώθηκε το πρωί της Κυριακής με τους ερευνητές να είναι σε μεγάλο βαθμό απογοητευμένοι από την έλλειψη οποιασδήποτε φιλοδοξίας για σταδιακή κατάργηση των ορυκτών καυσίμων. Eκπρόσωποι από χώρες χαμηλού και μεσαίου εισοδήματος μάλιστα κατέληξαν σε συμφωνία για ένα νέο ταμείο χρηματοδότησης «απωλειών και ζημιών» για να τους βοηθήσει να καλύψουν το κόστος των επιπτώσεων της κλιματικής αλλαγής. Το τελικό κείμενο περίληψης 10 σελίδων, το οποίο συμφωνήθηκε στις 20 Νοεμβρίου, λέει ότι ο περιορισμός της υπερθέρμανσης του πλανήτη στους 1,5 °C πάνω από τα προβιομηχανικά επίπεδα απαιτεί «ταχεία, βαθιά και διαρκή μείωση των εκπομπών αερίων του θερμοκηπίου» έως το 2030. Το Μέλλον Με Πλαστικά Greenpeace 00:00 Previous PauseNext 00:33 / 01:53 Unmute Fullscreen Copy video url Play / Pause Mute / Unmute Report a problem Language Mox Player Ωστόσο, οι εκκλήσεις για σταδιακή κατάργηση των ορυκτών καυσίμων εμποδίστηκαν από τα κράτη που παράγουν πετρέλαιο και ορισμένοι εκπρόσωποι προσπάθησαν να βρουν λόγους για να είναι ικανοποιημένοι με τον αργό ρυθμό που κυλούν τα σχέδια απαλλαγής από τον άνθρακα. Πολλοί κατηγόρησαν την ενεργειακή κρίση που πυροδότησε η εισβολή της Ρωσίας στην Ουκρανία για έλλειψη προόδου στο ζήτημα με τα ορυκτά καύσιμα. Στα 45.000 ανέρχονται τα άτομα που εγγράφηκαν για να παρακολουθήσουν τις διαβουλεύσεις της COP27, με αποτέλεσμα ορισμένοι να αναρωτηθούν εάν αυτό από μόνο του αποτελεί ένα δείγμα για μια κατάλληλη αντιμετώπιση μιας πλανητικής έκτακτης ανάγκης. «Οι διαπραγματεύσεις που γίνονται στερούνται εντελώς πραγματικότητας», λέει η Sunita Narain, γενική διευθύντρια του Κέντρου Επιστήμης και Περιβάλλοντος, ενός οργανισμού περιβαλλοντικής έρευνας στο Νέο Δελχί της Ινδίας. Αν και έχει αξία να φέρεις κοντά τους ανθρώπους για να μοιραστούν ιδέες και να δώσουν ώθηση, φοβάται ότι ο βασικός σκοπός της συνάντησης - να ωθήσουν τους παγκόσμιους ηγέτες να δεσμευτούν σε ισχυρότερες ενέργειες και να τους θέσουν υπόλογους - έχει χαθεί. «Δεν έχω ξαναδεί κάτι τέτοιο. Υποβαθμίσαμε το όλο θέμα σε ένα μεγαλειώδες θέαμα», λέει. Ερευνητές και ακτιβιστές που παρευρέθηκαν στις συνομιλίες για πρώτη φορά περιέγραψαν δυσπιστία καθώς οι κυβερνητικοί διαπραγματευτές επί μέρες πήγαιναν και ερχόντουσαν δίχως τα όσα εξέφραζαν να έχουν ουσιαστική βαρύτητα. «Είμαι απλά, πολύ απλά σοκαρισμένος με τη διαπραγματευτική διαδικασία που έχω δει», λέει ο Blutus Mbambi από το Κέντρο Δράσης και Συνηγορίας για την Κλιματική Αλλαγή στη Λουσάκα της Ζάμπια. «Αλλά θα συνεχίσουμε να στηρίζουμε. Θα συνεχίσουμε να πιέζουμε».

Centre collaborates with think thank to push production of EV batteries in India

The Centre's Department of Science and Technology (DST) and green think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) have collaborated to create a platform that will support the development of new electric vehicle (EV) batteries to suit Indian requirements. A white paper will be prepared on a roadmap to develop new battery technologies in India. This would be followed by the creation of an expert-industry forum or platform to support this process, the CSE said in a statement on Tuesday.

Centre collaborates with think thank to push production of EV batteries in India

The Centre’s Department of Science and Technology (DST) and green think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) have collaborated to create a platform that will support the development of new electric vehicle (EV) batteries to suit Indian requirements. A white paper will be prepared on a roadmap to develop new battery technologies in India. This would be followed by the creation of an expert-industry forum or platform to support this process, the CSE said in a statement on Tuesday. This collaborative initiative was kicked off recently with a round table on locally appropriate EV batteries that are safe, durable and effective within the constraints of a hot and humid tropical climate. Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director-research and advocacy, CSE, said: “India has been working with FAME and production-linked incentives to push the EV story, but challenges are abound with regard to cost, safety and charging infrastructure – all of which point at gaps in fulfilling the country’s zero emission ambitions. The gaps range from concerns relating to safety, supply chain, cost sensitivity and need for quick charging opportunities among others.” “This joint initiative is aimed at addressing these gaps and to create a platform that will assess, evaluate and identify technology solutions that are safe, have locally appropriate supply chain systems and can be customised for various vehicle applications,” said Moushumi Mohanty, senior programme manager, Clean Air and Sustainable Mobility, CSE. As part of the National Electric Mobility Mission Plan (NEMMP) 2020, the Department of Heavy Industry had formulated a scheme — Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of (Hybrid &) Electric Vehicles in India (FAME India) in 2015 to promote manufacturing of electric and hybrid vehicle technology and to ensure its sustainable growth. PTI GVS CJ CJ

Plastic is no longer a waste management issue

New CSE report shows its production went up by 80% during 2000-15, adding to climate change Plastic is arguably the most ubiquitous material of our times. In this Age of Plastic, it might seem its use can’t go up any further – and yet it keeps going. Between 2000 and 2015, global production of plastic increased by a whopping 79%. The total mass of plastics on our planet is now twice the mass of all living mammals, and about 80% of all the plastics ever produced continues to remain in the environment. There is an intimate connection to climate change as well. Plastic production has quadrupled over the last four decades and if this trend were to continue, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from plastics alone would reach 15% of the global carbon budget by 2050. In fact, if the plastic industry were a country, it would be the fifth largest greenhouse gas emitter on Earth. India consumed 18.45 million metric tonne (MMT) of plastic in 2018-19; and 59% of it went into packaging. This means that of all the petrochemicals produced in the country (29.1 MMT), more than 37% was used to manufacture plastics for packaging applications. These mind-numbing data and information is compiled from national and international research in a new report by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) which was released here on Tuesday. Bringing home the omnipresent character of the ‘plastic problem’, the report was released at a national conclave titled ‘The plastic life cycle’ that brought together key regulators, waste management professionals, urban and town planners, representatives from NGOs and journalists. The report was released jointly by Leena Nandan, secretary, ministry of environment, forest and climate change, Parameswaran Iyer, CEO, NITI Aayog, and Sunita Narain, director general, CSE. “We are given to understand that the problem of plastic is a waste management issue and not a material production issue because we can recycle it, burn and bury it, or ship it to other countries where it can be handled. But it is not that simple. We have… Read More (+)

Indian manufacturers and brands don’t manage plastic waste adequately, flags CSE

NEW DELHI: Plastic production has quadrupled over the last four decades and if this trend were to continue, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from plastics alone would reach 15% of the global carbon budget by 2050, said the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in its new report, released on Tuesday, that made a case for proper recycling of of its waste to save the planet. Noida: Put your money to work and Start Earning a Potential Second Income with only $250 Ad Octopus Squad Noida: Put your money to work and Start Earning a Potential Second Income with only $250 Keeping in view the enormous challenge of plastic waste that pollutes air, water and soil, and also enters the food chain through animals carrying microplastics in their bodies, the report - The Plastic Life-Cycle - flags findings of a research paper published in Nature Climate Change, saying "if the plastic industry were a country, it would be the fifth largest GHG emitter on Earth”. The report, released jointly by environment secretary Leena Nandan and Niti Ayog CEO Parameswaran Iyer, shows that India consumed 18.45 million metric tonne (MMT) of plastic in the year 2018-19 and 59% of this went into packaging — it means of all the petrochemicals produced in the country (29.1 MMT), more than 37% was used to manufacture plastics for packaging applications. Noting the existing challenge of managing the plastic waste, the report reveals that India recycled a meagre 12% and burnt 20% of the 3.5 million tonnes of plastic waste it generated in 2019-20 whereas there is no information on the remaining 68% of plastic waste, which most likely ends up in dumpsites and landfills. Broadly, the report flags that the plastic producers as well as major Indian brands cause plastic waste and pollution in the country in a big way. They manufacture large amounts of plastic which can’t be recycled, while brands do not recycle enough. “We are given to understand that the problem of plastic is a waste management issue and not a material production issue because we can recycle it, burn and bury it, or ship it to other countries where it can be handled. But it is not that simple. We have crossed the last frontier on plastic with our current production and consumption patterns. Plastic has not gone away. Plastic that we produce on land is now ending up in our oceans, and from there and elsewhere, into our own bodies," said Sunita Narain, director general, CSE. Globally, the production of plastic between 2000 and 2015 increased by a whopping 79%. “The total mass of plastics on our planet is now twice the mass of all living mammals, and about 80% of all the plastics ever produced continues to remain in the environment,” said the CSE, referring to another study by the Stockholm Resilience Centre.

सस्ते हो सकते हैं इलेक्ट्रिक वाहन, सरकार ने लिया ये बड़ा फैसला, देखें और क्या होगा असर?

केंद्र सरकार के साइंस एंड टेक्नोलॉजी डिपार्टमेंट (डीएसटी) और ग्रीन एनर्जी के थिंक टैंक साइंस एंड एनवायरमेंट सेंटर (सीएसई) ने एक ऐसा मंच बनाने के लिए हाथ मिलाया है जो भारतीय लोगों की आवश्यकताओं के हिसाब से नई इलेक्ट्रिक वाहन (ईवी) बैटरियां बनाने में मदद करेगा. सीएसई ने एक बयान में कहा कि भारत में नई बैटरियों की टेक्नोलॉजी विकसित करने के लिए एक रूपरेखा तैयार की जाएगी. इसके बाद इस प्रक्रिया में सहयोग के लिए विशेषज्ञ-उद्योग मंच बनाया जाएगा. सीएसई की रिचर्स डिवीजन की एग्जीक्यूटिव डायरेक्टर अनुमिता रॉय चौधरी ने कहा, ‘‘भारत इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों को आगे बढ़ाने के लिए ‘फास्टर एडॉप्शन एंड मैन्युफैक्चरिंग ऑफ इलेक्ट्रिक व्हीकल्स’ (एफएएमई) के साथ और उत्पादन से जुड़े प्रोत्साहनों पर काम कर रहा है, लेकिन इसकी लागत, सुरक्षा और चार्जिंग सुविधाओं से जुड़ी अभी कई चुनौतियां हैं.’’ सीएसई की एक अन्य अधिकारी मौसमी मोहंती ने कहा कि इस पहल का उद्देश्य इन चुनौतियों से निपटना है. तेजी से बढ़ रही e- वाहनों की मांग ‘नेशनल इलेक्ट्रिक मोबिलिटी मिशन प्लान’ (एनईएमएमपी) 2020 के तौर पर भारी उद्योग विभाग ने इलेक्ट्रिक और हाइब्रिड वाहन टेक्नोलॉजी को बढ़ावा देने और इसके लगातार विकास के लिए 2015 में ‘फेम’ योजना बनाई थी. भारत समेत दुनिया के कई देशों में इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों की मांग अब तेजी से बढ़ने लगी हैं. इसकी वजह दुनिया भर में बढ़ता प्रदूषण और पेट्रोल-डीजल की निर्भरता को कम करना है. इसे देखते हुए सरकार देश में ईवी को बढ़ावा देने के लिए कई तरह की योजना बना रही हैं. 185 प्रतिशत बढ़ी ईवी की बिक्री पिछले महीने यानी अक्टूबर के दौरान देश में इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों की बिक्री की बात करें तो इसमें सालाना आधार पर करीब 185 प्रतिशत बढ़ोतरी हुई है. इस दौरान कुल 1,11,971 ईवी बिके हैं. इसमें यात्री वाहनों की बिक्री शामिल है. फेडरेशन ऑफ ऑटोमोबाइल डीलर्स एसोसिएशन ऑफ इंडिया (फाडा) के मुताबिक, पिछले साल अक्टूबर में इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों की बिक्री 39,329 इकाई रही थी. कुल इलेक्ट्रिक यात्री वाहनों की बिक्री पिछले महीने में 178 प्रतिशत बढ़कर 3,745 इकाई रही जो एक साल पहले इसी महीने में 1,346 इकाई थी. कमर्शियल वाहनों की बिक्री भी बढ़ी फाडा के आंकड़ों के अनुसार, इलेक्ट्रिक कमर्शियल वाहनों की बिक्री 125.64 प्रतिशत बढ़कर 274 इकाई रही. इलेक्ट्रिक दोपहिया वाहनों की बिक्री अक्टूबर में 269.06 प्रतिशत बढ़कर 73,169 इकाई रही जो एक साल पहले इसी महीने में 19,826 इकाई थी. आंकड़ों के अनुसार, इलेक्ट्रिक थ्री-व्हीलर वाहनों की बिक्री अक्टूबर में 92.87 प्रतिशत बढ़कर 34,793 इकाई रही, जो एक साल पहले अक्टूबर, 2021 में 18,040 इकाई थी.

केंद्र ने इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों की बैटरियों के उत्पादन के लिए थिंक टैंक से हाथ मिलाया

केंद्र के विज्ञान एवं प्रौद्योगिकी विभाग (डीएसटी) और हरित ऊर्जा के थिंक टैंक विज्ञान एवं पर्यावरण केंद्र ( सीएसई) ने एक ऐसा मंच बनाने के लिए हाथ मिलाया है जो भारतीय लोगों की आवश्यकताओं के अनुकूल नयी इलेक्ट्रिक वाहन (ईवी) बैटरियां बनाने में मदद करेगा। सीएसई ने मंगलवार को एक बयान में कहा कि भारत में नयी बैटरियों की प्रौद्योगिकियां विकसित करने के लिए एक रूपरेखा पर एक श्वेत पत्र तैयार किया जाएगा। इसके बाद इस प्रक्रिया में सहयोग के लिए विशेषज्ञ-उद्योग मंच बनाया जाएगा। सीएसई की अनुसंधान प्रभाग की कार्यकारी निदेशक अनुमिता रॉय चौधरी ने कहा, ‘‘भारत इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों को आगे बढ़ाने के लिए ‘फास्टर अडोप्शन एंड मैन्यूफैक्चरिंग ऑफ इलेक्ट्रिक व्हीकल्स’ (एफएएमई) के साथ और उत्पादन से जुड़े प्रोत्साहनों पर काम कर रहा है लेकिन इसकी लागत, सुरक्षा और चार्जिंग सुविधाओं के संबंध में चुनौतियां हैं।’’ सीएसई की एक अन्य अधिकारी मौसमी मोहंती ने कहा कि इस पहल का उद्देश्य इन चुनौतियों से निपटना है। ‘नेशनल इलेक्ट्रिक मोबिलिटी मिशन प्लान’ (एनईएमएमपी) 2020 के तौर पर भारी उद्योग विभाग ने इलेक्ट्रिक और हाइब्रिड वाहन प्रौद्योगिकी को बढ़ावा देने तथा इसके सतत विकास के लिए 2015 में ‘फेम’ योजना बनायी थी।

Centre for Science and Environment and Department of Science and Technology (DST) will collaborate for development of EV batteries

According to a press release by the New Delhi based Non-profit Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), “ Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) and the Department of Science and Technology (DST) of the Government of India have collaborated to create a platform that will support the development of new electric vehicle (EV) batteries to suit Indian requirements. A white paper will be prepared on a roadmap for the development of new battery technologies in India;this would be followed by the creation of an expert-industry forum or platform to support this process. This collaborative initiative was kicked off recently with a round table on locally appropriate EV batteries that are safe, durable and effective within the constraints of a hot and humid tropical climate This was the first in a series of consultations that will be held with experts from leading institutions and representatives from vehicle manufacturers, battery industry, regulatory bodies, testing entities and independent laboratories focused on battery chemistries.

Beijing is fixing its foul air. Why can’t New Delhi?

A decade ago, the capitals of Asia’s two largest countries had some of the dirtiest skies in the world. On the worst days, millions were enveloped in thick gray canopies of smog that darkened the sun and besieged the lungs. Since then, one of those cities has made significant improvements. After the Chinese government declared a war against pollution in 2013, Beijing pressed ahead with a multiyear, $100 billion effort to clean its air. Authorities clamped down on factories, took old vehicles off the road and shifted from coal to natural gas. While more still needs to be done, Beijing officials say the city now has over 100 more days of clear skies each year than when the campaign began. But in the other city, New Delhi, the air this autumn has been as foul as ever. The onset of air pollution season brought weeks of haze to the city, prompting officials to halt truck traffic, close schools and ask people to work from home. Those who still ventured out coughed into their masks and rubbed their eyes. The air felt bitter on the tongue. Every year, the skies in the Delhi region turn acrid from pollution generated by millions of vehicles, the burning of stubble on surrounding farms and the use of open fires for heating and cooking in rural homes. And every year, residents are left to ask why nothing changes. The diverging fortunes come down, in no small part, to differences between China’s authoritarian system and India’s huge and messy democracy. Overall, China ranks relatively low on international indexes of environmental performance. But in the case of Beijing’s pollution, the Chinese government tackled it with single-minded focus when its scale became too daunting to ignore, forcing rapid, coordinated action in response to public anger. India, experts say, has lacked both political resolve and public pressure to address the issue. Voters have more pressing concerns in a country where tens of millions still live in poverty. Politicians use the crisis to attack adversaries, rather than seek solutions. “A lot of it has to do with the political will and the coordination between the various governments,” said Avikal Somvanshi, a data specialist for the Clean Air Campaign at the Center for Science and Environment in New Delhi. “The infighting keeps happening,” he lamented. Take, for instance, a recent exchange between local and national leaders in India, who have perennially traded blame over who is responsible for the capital’s poor air quality. An official in the party led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi compared Delhi’s chief minister — a member of an opposition party — to Hitler, saying the minister had “converted his city into a gas chamber.” The chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal, swiped back on a television show, asking why “the central government is sitting in hiding, locked up in a room.” In China, the one-party system brooks no opposition; when the central government prioritizes an initiative, local authorities fall in line. That happened in the case of Beijing’s pollution, as the capital worked in tandem with regional officials and neighboring cities, said Zongbo Shi, an atmospheric science professor at the University of Birmingham in England. In India, where local governments are run by an array of parties, coordination is “really complicated,” Shi said. In the absence of political will, economic interests win out; Delhi is surrounded by regions that are home predominantly to farmers and blue-collar workers who typically prioritize urgent economic needs over the environment. India is much less wealthy than China, which has enjoyed four decades of rapid growth, so Delhi cannot invest as much in environmental cleanup. India’s economic output was $2,300 per person last year, while China’s was $12,500. “It’s very hard to trade off air pollution with money — money is likely to win that fight,” said Michael Greenstone, the head of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago. “There are dual and conflicting goals here: reducing air pollution and growing the economy.” Indian leaders have little incentive to bridge the divides in part because cleaning the skies is low among voters’ priorities. Even as air pollution has been known to kill more Indians than any other risk factor, voters ranked air quality as their 17th most urgent concern in a countrywide survey before the 2019 election, well behind jobs, health care and infrastructure. Only about 12% of respondents called air pollution a priority. In China, by contrast, residents — especially those in a growing middle class — made their frustration known even within the authoritarian system. Some in Beijing began to call the most toxic bouts of smog an “airpocalypse.” Alarm grew as studies showed that air pollution was contributing to more than 1 million premature deaths across China each year. (Today, censorship makes it harder to express complaints on all issues, including environmental ones.) “The people’s will can have a great influence on what happens,” Greenstone said. “Until there’s consistent demand, it’s very, very hard to get real improvements.” In India, he added, air pollution “has not taken the same central political priority as it has in China to date.” With no unified effort, experts say, Delhi officials have taken limited action. In recent years, the city has closed two coal-burning power plants and required factories to switch to piped natural gas from coal, and there are plans to deploy at least 8,000 electric buses by 2025, said Jasmine Shah, a vice chair of the Delhi government think tank that helps create the city’s air pollution policy. But officials have also turned to more dubious solutions. On a recent afternoon, giant fans at the bottom of a green “smog tower” threw out cool, filtered air near an imposing Sikh temple in the heart of Delhi. Nearby, a truck-mounted “anti-smog gun” sprayed water into the air. Ishmeet Kaur, 19, a college student, considered the smog tower from across the street. “A cosmetic effort by the government to make us feel better,” she said. “If only the politicians took our health seriously and did something real about this problem,” she added as she coughed into a black face mask. “We will have to rely on the weather gods.” When China acted on its own pollution problem, it took on a crisis decades in the making. Since the 1980s, rapid industrialization and urbanization had driven China’s extraordinary rise as an economic power. But its reliance on energy-intensive heavy industry to fuel that growth came at an immense environmental cost. In 2013, Chinese officials released a new national air action plan, began publishing important air-quality data and publicly raised alarms about the pollution problem. As part of the national plan, Beijing was required to reduce its pollution by 25%. China then undertook an array of steps, experts said: It tightened industrial emission standards on some factories and phased out or upgraded other outdated ones; discarded 20 million old vehicles; upgraded 200,000 industrial boilers; and switched to natural gas from coal as the source of electricity for 6 million households. In some cases, the decisive action came with a cost: When officials removed the coal boilers, for instance, some homes were temporarily left without winter heating. “A clear example of a poor execution of a plan to make a massive difference,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, an analyst at the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air, based in Helsinki. “It caused major suffering for a lot of people.” Nonetheless, researchers found that the tough policies worked. From 2013 to 2017, the concentration of dangerous fine particulate matter known as PM 2.5 in China’s atmosphere declined by roughly a third. Beijing’s air is still far from perfect, especially in the winter. For more than 100 days last year, the air was considered “unhealthy for sensitive groups of people” or carried a worse rating. According to Greenstone of the University of Chicago, Beijing’s average level of microparticle pollution in 2020 was three times that in Los Angeles. This past weekend, Beijing’s smog reached levels classified as “very unhealthy.” While the city has seen improvement overall, in Delhi, the concentration of air pollutants remained at roughly the same hazardous levels between 2013 and 2020, according to the Energy Policy Institute. India has long known how to fix Delhi’s air pollution. A 1997 government white paper identified vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions as the main culprits and suggested sweeping action. During the 1990s, the city tightened emission standards, relocated polluting industries and required thousands of its buses and auto rickshaws to switch to compressed natural gas from diesel fuel. But Delhi continues to struggle with poor air quality. On a recent Monday, the sky was a lovely light blue. But the tint was misleading. The air quality was classified as “poor,” according to government data, which gave it a “very unhealthy” index score of 294. Anything 50 or under is considered satisfactory.

Bắc Kinh đang giải quyết ô nhiễm không khí. Tại sao New Delhi không thể?

Một thập kỷ trước, thủ đô của hai quốc gia lớn nhất châu Á đều có bầu trời bẩn nhất thế giới. Vào những ngày tồi tệ nhất, hàng triệu người bị bao phủ bởi những màn sương mù dày đặc màu xám làm đen mặt trời và bao vây phổi. Kể từ đó, một trong những thành phố đó đã có những cải thiện đáng kể. Sau khi chính phủ Trung Quốc tuyên bố cuộc chiến chống ô nhiễm vào năm 2013, Bắc Kinh đã thúc đẩy một thời hạn nhiều năm, 100 tỷ USD nỗ lực để làm sạch không khí của nó. Các nhà chức trách đã siết chặt các nhà máy, buộc các phương tiện cũ ra khỏi đường và chuyển từ than đá sang khí đốt tự nhiên. Trong khi vẫn còn nhiều việc phải làm, các quan chức Bắc Kinh cho biết thành phố hiện đã vượt qua 100 ngày nữa bầu trời quang đãng mỗi năm so với khi chiến dịch bắt đầu. Nhưng ở thành phố khác, New Delhi, không khí mùa thu năm nay vẫn hôi hơn bao giờ hết. Mùa ô nhiễm không khí bắt đầu mang đến nhiều tuần khói mù cho thành phố, khiến các quan chức phải tạm dừng lưu lượng xe tải, đóng cửa trường học và yêu cầu mọi người làm việc tại nhà. Những người vẫn mạo hiểm ho vào khẩu trang và dụi mắt. Không khí cảm thấy đắng trên lưỡi. Hàng năm, bầu trời ở khu vực Delhi trở nên khắc nghiệt do ô nhiễm do hàng triệu phương tiện giao thông tạo ra, việc đốt rơm rạ ở các trang trại xung quanh và việc sử dụng lửa để sưởi ấm và nấu ăn ở các ngôi nhà nông thôn. Và mỗi năm, cư dân lại hỏi tại sao không có gì thay đổi. Vận may khác nhau một phần không nhỏ là do sự khác biệt giữa hệ thống chuyên chế của Trung Quốc và nền dân chủ rộng lớn và lộn xộn của Ấn Độ. Nhìn chung, Trung Quốc xếp hạng tương đối thấp về các chỉ số quốc tế về hiệu suất môi trường. Nhưng trong trường hợp ô nhiễm ở Bắc Kinh, chính phủ Trung Quốc đã giải quyết nó bằng sự tập trung duy nhất khi quy mô của nó trở nên quá khó khăn để bỏ qua, buộc phải hành động nhanh chóng, phối hợp để đáp lại sự tức giận của công chúng. Các chuyên gia cho rằng Ấn Độ đã thiếu cả quyết tâm chính trị lẫn áp lực của công chúng để giải quyết vấn đề. Các cử tri có nhiều mối quan tâm cấp bách hơn ở một đất nước mà hàng chục triệu người vẫn sống trong cảnh nghèo đói. Các chính trị gia sử dụng cuộc khủng hoảng để tấn công đối thủ, thay vì tìm kiếm giải pháp. Avikal Somvanshi, chuyên gia dữ liệu cho Chiến dịch Không khí Sạch tại Trung tâm Khoa học và Môi trường ở New Delhi, cho biết: “Rất nhiều điều liên quan đến ý chí chính trị và sự phối hợp giữa các chính phủ khác nhau. “Đấu đá nội bộ,” anh than thở, “tiếp tục xảy ra.” Lấy ví dụ, một cuộc trao đổi gần đây giữa các nhà lãnh đạo địa phương và quốc gia ở Ấn Độ, những người lâu nay vẫn đổ lỗi cho nhau về việc ai chịu trách nhiệm về chất lượng không khí kém của thủ đô. Một quan chức trong đảng do Thủ tướng Narendra Modi đứng đầu đã so sánh thủ hiến Delhi – một thành viên của đảng đối lập – với Hitler, nói rằng bộ trưởng đã “biến thành phố của mình thành một phòng hơi ngạt.” Bộ trưởng, Arvind Kejriwal, đã rút lại trên một chương trình truyền hìnhđặt câu hỏi tại sao “chính quyền trung ương đang ngồi ẩn, nhốt trong phòng.” Ở Trung Quốc, hệ thống độc đảng không chấp nhận sự phản đối; khi chính quyền trung ương ưu tiên một sáng kiến, chính quyền địa phương sẽ xếp hàng. Zongbo Shi, giáo sư khoa học khí quyển tại Đại học Birmingham ở Anh, cho biết điều đó đã xảy ra trong trường hợp ô nhiễm của Bắc Kinh, khi thủ đô làm việc song song với các quan chức khu vực và các thành phố lân cận. Ở Ấn Độ, nơi chính quyền địa phương được điều hành bởi nhiều bên, sự phối hợp là “thực sự phức tạp,” Giáo sư Shi nói. Khi không có ý chí chính trị, lợi ích kinh tế sẽ chiến thắng; Delhi được bao quanh bởi các khu vực chủ yếu là nông dân và công nhân cổ xanh, những người thường ưu tiên các nhu cầu kinh tế cấp bách hơn môi trường. Ấn Độ kém giàu có hơn nhiều so với Trung Quốc, quốc gia đã có bốn thập kỷ tăng trưởng nhanh chóng, vì vậy Delhi không thể đầu tư nhiều vào việc làm sạch môi trường. Sản lượng kinh tế của Ấn Độ là 2.300 USD/người vào năm ngoái, trong khi của Trung Quốc là 12.500 USD/người. Michael Greenstone, người đứng đầu Viện Chính sách Năng lượng tại Đại học Chicago cho biết: “Rất khó để đánh đổi ô nhiễm không khí bằng tiền – tiền có khả năng chiến thắng trong cuộc chiến đó. “Có hai mục tiêu mâu thuẫn nhau ở đây: giảm ô nhiễm không khí và tăng trưởng kinh tế.” Các nhà lãnh đạo Ấn Độ có ít động lực để thu hẹp khoảng cách một phần vì làm sạch bầu trời nằm trong số các ưu tiên thấp của cử tri. Ngay cả khi ô nhiễm không khí được biết đến là nguyên nhân giết chết nhiều người Ấn Độ hơn bất kỳ yếu tố rủi ro nào khác, các cử tri đã xếp chất lượng không khí là mối quan tâm cấp bách thứ 17 của họ trên toàn quốc. sự khảo sát trước cuộc bầu cử năm 2019, chậm hơn nhiều so với việc làm, chăm sóc sức khỏe và cơ sở hạ tầng. Chỉ có khoảng 12 phần trăm số người được hỏi coi ô nhiễm không khí là ưu tiên hàng đầu. Ngược lại, ở Trung Quốc, cư dân — đặc biệt là tầng lớp trung lưu đang phát triển — đã bày tỏ sự thất vọng của họ ngay cả trong hệ thống độc tài. Một số người ở Bắc Kinh bắt đầu gọi những đợt sương mù độc hại nhất là “ngày tận thế”. Báo động ngày càng lớn khi các nghiên cứu cho thấy ô nhiễm không khí góp phần gây ra hơn một triệu ca tử vong sớm trên khắp Trung Quốc mỗi năm. (Ngày nay, cơ quan kiểm duyệt khiến việc bày tỏ sự phàn nàn về mọi vấn đề trở nên khó khăn hơn, kể cả những vấn đề về môi trường.) Giáo sư Greenstone nói: “Ý chí của mọi người có thể có ảnh hưởng lớn đến những gì xảy ra. “Cho đến khi có nhu cầu nhất quán, rất, rất khó để có được những cải tiến thực sự.” Ông nói thêm, ở Ấn Độ, ô nhiễm không khí “không được coi là ưu tiên chính trị trung tâm giống như ở Trung Quốc cho đến nay”. Các chuyên gia nói rằng không có nỗ lực thống nhất, các quan chức Delhi đã có hành động hạn chế. Trong những năm gần đây, thành phố đã đóng cửa hai nhà máy điện đốt than và yêu cầu các nhà máy chuyển đổi dẫn khí tự nhiên từ than đávà có kế hoạch triển khai ít nhất 8.000 xe buýt điện vào năm 2025, Jasmine Shah, phó chủ tịch của think tank của chính quyền Delhi giúp tạo ra chính sách ô nhiễm không khí của thành phố. Nhưng các quan chức cũng đã chuyển sang các giải pháp đáng ngờ hơn. Vào một buổi chiều gần đây, những chiếc quạt khổng lồ được lắp dưới đáy của một “tháp khói” màu xanh lá cây đã thổi ra luồng không khí được lọc sạch mát mẻ gần một ngôi đền Sikh hùng vĩ ở trung tâm Delhi. Gần đó, một “súng chống khói” gắn vào một chiếc xe tải phun nước lên không trung. Ishmeet Kaur, một sinh viên đại học 19 tuổi, nhìn tháp khói từ bên kia đường. “Một nỗ lực thẩm mỹ của chính phủ,” cô ấy nói, “để làm cho chúng tôi cảm thấy tốt hơn.” “Giá như các chính trị gia coi trọng sức khỏe của chúng ta và làm điều gì đó thực sự về vấn đề này,” cô ấy nói thêm khi ho vào chiếc khẩu trang đen. “Chúng ta sẽ phải dựa vào các vị thần thời tiết.” Khi Trung Quốc hành động đối với vấn đề ô nhiễm của chính mình, nó đã trải qua một cuộc khủng hoảng kéo dài hàng thập kỷ. Kể từ những năm 1980, quá trình công nghiệp hóa và đô thị hóa nhanh chóng đã thúc đẩy sự trỗi dậy phi thường của Trung Quốc với tư cách là một cường quốc kinh tế. Nhưng sự phụ thuộc của nó vào ngành công nghiệp nặng sử dụng nhiều năng lượng để thúc đẩy sự tăng trưởng đó đã phải trả giá đắt về môi trường. Vào năm 2013, các quan chức Trung Quốc đã công bố kế hoạch hành động về không khí quốc gia mới, bắt đầu công bố dữ liệu quan trọng về chất lượng không khí và công khai đưa ra những cảnh báo về vấn đề ô nhiễm. Là một phần của kế hoạch quốc gia, Bắc Kinh được yêu cầu giảm 25% ô nhiễm. Các chuyên gia cho biết, Trung Quốc sau đó đã thực hiện một loạt các bước: thắt chặt các tiêu chuẩn khí thải công nghiệp đối với một số nhà máy và loại bỏ hoặc nâng cấp dần các nhà máy lỗi thời khác; 20 triệu xe cũ thải bỏ; nâng cấp 200.000 nồi hơi công nghiệp; và chuyển sang sử dụng khí đốt tự nhiên từ than đá làm nguồn cung cấp điện cho sáu triệu hộ gia đình. Trong một số trường hợp, hành động quyết đoán đi kèm với cái giá phải trả: Chẳng hạn như khi các quan chức dỡ bỏ các nồi hơi đốt than, một số ngôi nhà tạm thời bị bỏ lại mà không có hệ thống sưởi mùa đông. Lauri Myllyvirta, nhà phân tích tại Trung tâm Nghiên cứu Năng lượng và Không khí Sạch, có trụ sở tại Helsinki, Phần Lan, cho biết: “Một ví dụ rõ ràng về việc thực hiện kém kế hoạch nhằm tạo ra sự khác biệt lớn. “Nó gây ra đau khổ lớn cho rất nhiều người.” Tuy nhiên, các nhà nghiên cứu tìm thấy rằng các chính sách cứng rắn đã làm việc. Từ năm 2013 đến 2017, nồng độ của vật chất hạt mịn nguy hiểm được gọi là PM 2.5 trong bầu khí quyển của Trung Quốc đã giảm khoảng một phần ba. Không khí ở Bắc Kinh vẫn chưa hoàn hảo, đặc biệt là vào mùa đông. Trong hơn 100 ngày vào năm ngoái, không khí được coi là “không lành mạnh cho những nhóm người nhạy cảm” hoặc bị xếp hạng tồi tệ hơn. Theo Giáo sư Greenstone của Đại học Chicago, mức độ ô nhiễm hạt vi mô trung bình của Bắc Kinh vào năm 2020 cao gấp ba lần so với ở Los Angeles. Cuối tuần này, sương mù ở Bắc Kinh đã đạt đến mức được phân loại là “rất có hại cho sức khỏe”. Tuy nhiên, trong khi thành phố đã được cải thiện về tổng thể, thì ở Delhi, nồng độ các chất gây ô nhiễm không khí vẫn ở mức nguy hiểm gần như tương tự từ năm 2013 đến năm 2020, theo báo cáo của Ủy ban. Viện chính sách năng lượng. Ấn Độ có từ lâu đã biết cách khắc phục tình trạng ô nhiễm không khí ở Delhi. Chính phủ năm 1997 giấy trắng xác định khí thải xe cộ và khí thải công nghiệp là thủ phạm chính và đề xuất hành động truy quét. Trong những năm 1990thành phố đã thắt chặt các tiêu chuẩn khí thải, di dời các ngành công nghiệp gây ô nhiễm và yêu cầu hàng nghìn xe buýt và xe kéo của thành phố chuyển sang sử dụng khí thiên nhiên nén từ nhiên liệu diesel. Nhưng Delhi vẫn tiếp tục vật lộn với chất lượng không khí kém. Vào một ngày thứ Hai gần đây, bầu trời có màu xanh nhạt đáng yêu. Nhưng màu sắc đã gây hiểu lầm. Chất lượng không khí được phân loại là “kém”, theo dữ liệu của chính phủ, cho điểm chỉ số “rất không tốt cho sức khỏe” là 294. Bất cứ thứ gì từ 50 trở xuống đều được coi là đạt yêu cầu.

Beijing Is Tackling Its Air Pollution Problem. Why Can’t New Delhi?

A decade ago, the capitals of Asia’s two largest countries both had some of the dirtiest skies in the world. On the worst days, millions were enveloped in thick gray canopies of smog that darkened the sun and besieged the lungs. Since then, one of these cities has made significant improvements. After the Chinese government declared a war against pollution in 2013, Beijing pushed through a multi-year, 100 billion dollars efforts to clean its air. Authorities cracked down on factories, forced old vehicles off the road and switched from coal to natural gas. While more still needs to be done, Beijing officials say the city is now over 100 more days of clear skies each year than when the campaign began. But in the other city, New Delhi, the air this autumn has been as bad as ever. The start of air pollution season brought weeks of haze to the city, prompting officials to briefly halt truck traffic, close schools and ask people to work from home. Those who still ventured out coughed into their masks and rubbed their eyes. The air felt bitter on the tongue. Every year, the sky in the Delhi region turns acrid with pollution generated by millions of vehicles, the burning of stubble in surrounding farms and the use of open fires for heating and cooking in rural homes. And every year residents are left to ask why nothing changes. The divergent fortunes are due in no small part to differences between China’s authoritarian system and India’s vast and messy democracy. Overall, China is relatively low on international indices of environmental performance. But in the case of Beijing’s pollution, the Chinese government tackled it with single-minded focus when its scale became too terrifying to ignore, forcing swift, coordinated action in response to public outrage. India, experts say, has lacked both political resolve and public pressure to address the problem. Voters have more pressing concerns in a country where tens of millions still live in poverty. Politicians use the crisis to attack opponents instead of seeking solutions. “A lot of it has to do with the political will and the coordination between the different governments,” said Avikal Somvanshi, a data specialist for the Clean Air Campaign at the Center for Science and Environment in New Delhi. “Infighting,” he lamented, “keeps happening.” Take, for example, a recent exchange between local and national leaders in India, who have for years traded blame over who is responsible for the capital’s poor air quality. An official of the party led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi compared Delhi’s chief minister – a member of an opposition party – to Hitler, said the minister had “converted his city into a gas chamber.” The Chief Minister, Arvind Kejriwal, struck back on a TV programand asks why “the central government is sitting in hiding, locked in a room.” In China, the one-party system does not trigger any opposition; when the state prioritizes an effort, the municipalities fall in line. That happened in the case of Beijing’s pollution when the capital worked with regional officials and neighboring cities, said Zongbo Shi, an atmospheric science professor at the University of Birmingham in England. In India, where local governments are run by a number of parties, coordination is “really complicated,” Professor Shi said. In the absence of political will, economic interests prevail; Delhi is surrounded by regions that are predominantly home to farmers and laborers, who typically prioritize pressing economic needs over the environment. India is much less wealthy than China, which has enjoyed four decades of rapid growth, so Delhi cannot invest as much in environmental cleanup. India’s economic output was $2,300 per person last year, while China’s was $12,500. “It’s very difficult to trade air pollution for money — money will probably win that battle,” said Michael Greenstone, the director of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago. “There are dual and conflicting goals here: reducing air pollution and growing the economy.” Indian leaders have little incentive to bridge the divides, in part because cleaning the skies is low on voters’ priorities. Although air pollution has been known to kill more Indians than any other risk factor, voters ranked air quality as their 17th most pressing concern in a nationwide examination before the 2019 election, far behind jobs, healthcare and infrastructure. Only about 12 percent of respondents called air pollution a priority. In China, on the other hand, citizens – especially a growing middle class – voiced their frustration even within the authoritarian system. Some in Beijing began to call the most toxic smog attacks an “airpocalypse”. The alarm grew when studies showed that air pollution contributed to more than a million premature deaths across China each year. (Today, censorship makes it harder to voice grievances on all issues, including environmental ones.) “The will of the people can have a big impact on what happens,” Professor Greenstone said. “Until there is consistent demand, it is very, very difficult to achieve real improvements.” In India, he added, air pollution “has not taken the same central political priority as it has in China to date.” Without a concerted effort, experts say, Delhi officials have taken limited action. In recent years, the city has closed two coal-fired power plants and required the factories to switch for pipeline of natural gas from coaland there are plans to install at least 8,000 electric buses by 2025, said Jasmine Shah, a vice-chairman of Delhi government think tank which helps to create the city’s air pollution policy. But officials have also turned to more questionable solutions. On a recent afternoon, giant fans mounted at the base of a green “smog tower” threw out cool, filtered air near an imposing Sikh temple in the heart of Delhi. Nearby, a “anti-smog gun” attached to a truck sprayed water in the air. Ishmeet Kaur, a 19-year-old college student, contemplated the smog tower from across the street. “A cosmetic effort by the government,” she said, “to make us feel better.” “If only the politicians took our health seriously and did something real about this problem,” she added, coughing into a black face mask. “We’ll have to trust the weather gods.” When China acted on its own pollution problem, it took a crisis decades in the making. Since the 1980s, rapid industrialization and urbanization have fueled China’s extraordinary rise as an economic power. But its reliance on energy-intensive heavy industry to fuel this growth came at huge environmental costs. In 2013, Chinese officials released a new national air action plan, began publishing key air quality data, and publicly raised alarms about the pollution problem. As part of the national plan, Beijing was required to reduce its pollution by 25 percent. China then took a series of steps, experts said: It tightened industrial emissions standards at some factories and phased out or upgraded others that were outdated; scrapped 20 million old vehicles; upgraded 200,000 industrial boilers; and switched to natural gas from coal as the source of electricity for six million households. In some cases, the decisive action came with a cost: When officials removed the coal furnaces, for example, some homes were temporarily without winter heat. “A clear example of poor execution of a plan to make a massive difference,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, an analyst at the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air, based in Helsinki, Finland. “It caused great suffering to many people.” Nonetheless, researchers found that the tough policies worked. From 2013 to 2017, the concentration of dangerous fine particles known as PM 2.5 in China’s atmosphere fell by about a third. Beijing’s air is still far from perfect, especially in winter. For more than 100 days last year, the air was considered “unhealthy for sensitive groups of people” or had a worse rating. According to Professor Greenstone of the University of Chicago, Beijing’s average level of microparticle pollution in 2020 was three times higher than that of Los Angeles. This weekend, Beijing’s smog reached levels classified as “very unhealthy.” But while the city has generally seen improvements in Delhi, the concentration of air pollutants remained at roughly the same dangerous levels between 2013 and 2020, according to Energy Policy Institute. India has long known how to fix Delhi’s air pollution. A government from 1997 white paper identified vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions as the main culprits and suggested sweeping action. During the 1990sthe city tightened emissions standards, relocated polluting industries and required thousands of its buses and auto-rickshaws to switch to CNG from diesel fuel. But Delhi continues to struggle with poor air quality. On a recent Monday, the sky was a lovely pale blue. But the color was deceiving. Air quality was classified as “poor” according to government data, giving it a “very unhealthy” index score of 294. Anything 50 or below is considered satisfactory.

Beijing Is Tackling Its Air Pollution Problem. Why Can’t New Delhi?

A decade ago, the capitals of Asia’s two largest countries both had some of the dirtiest skies in the world. On the worst days, millions were enveloped in thick gray canopies of smog that darkened the sun and besieged the lungs. Since then, one of those cities has made significant improvements. After the Chinese government declared a war against pollution in 2013, Beijing pressed ahead with a multiyear, $100 billion effort to clean its air. The authorities clamped down on factories, forced old vehicles off the road and shifted from coal to natural gas. While more still needs to be done, Beijing officials say the city now has over 100 more days of clear skies each year than when the campaign began. But in the other city, New Delhi, the air this autumn has been as foul as ever. The onset of air pollution season brought weeks of haze to the city, prompting officials to briefly halt truck traffic, close schools and ask people to work from home. Those who still ventured out coughed into their masks and rubbed their eyes. The air felt bitter on the tongue. Every year, the skies in the Delhi region turn acrid from pollution generated by millions of vehicles, the burning of stubble on surrounding farms and the use of open fires for heating and cooking in rural homes. And every year, residents are left to ask why nothing changes. The diverging fortunes come down, in no small part, to differences between China’s authoritarian system and India’s huge and messy democracy. Overall, China ranks relatively low on international indexes of environmental performance. But in the case of Beijing’s pollution, the Chinese government tackled it with single-minded focus when its scale became too daunting to ignore, forcing rapid, coordinated action in response to public anger. India, experts say, has lacked both political resolve and public pressure to address the issue. Voters have more pressing concerns in a country where tens of millions still live in poverty. Politicians use the crisis to attack adversaries, rather than seek solutions. “A lot of it has to do with the political will and the coordination between the various governments,” said Avikal Somvanshi, a data specialist for the Clean Air Campaign at the Center for Science and Environment in New Delhi. “The infighting,” he lamented, “keeps happening.” Take, for instance, a recent exchange between local and national leaders in India, who have perennially traded blame over who is responsible for the capital’s poor air quality. An official in the party led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi compared Delhi’s chief minister — a member of an opposition party — to Hitler, saying the minister had “converted his city into a gas chamber.” The chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal, swiped back on a television show, asking why “the central government is sitting in hiding, locked up in a room.” In China, the one-party system brooks no opposition; when the central government prioritizes an initiative, local authorities fall in line. That happened in the case of Beijing’s pollution, as the capital worked in tandem with regional officials and neighboring cities, said Zongbo Shi, an atmospheric science professor at the University of Birmingham in England. In India, where local governments are run by an array of parties, coordination is “really complicated,” Professor Shi said. In the absence of political will, economic interests win out; Delhi is surrounded by regions that are home predominantly to farmers and blue-collar workers who typically prioritize urgent economic needs over the environment. India is much less wealthy than China, which has enjoyed four decades of rapid growth, so Delhi cannot invest as much in environmental cleanup. India’s economic output was $2,300 per person last year, while China’s was $12,500. “It’s very hard to trade off air pollution with money — money is likely to win that fight,” said Michael Greenstone, the head of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago. “There are dual and conflicting goals here: reducing air pollution and growing the economy.” Indian leaders have little incentive to bridge the divides in part because cleaning the skies is low among voters’ priorities. Even as air pollution has been known to kill more Indians than any other risk factor, voters ranked air quality as their 17th most urgent concern in a countrywide survey before the 2019 election, well behind jobs, health care and infrastructure. Only about 12 percent of respondents called air pollution a priority. In China, by contrast, residents — especially a growing middle class — made their frustration known even within the authoritarian system. Some in Beijing began to call the most toxic bouts of smog an “airpocalypse.” Alarm grew as studies showed that air pollution was contributing to more than one million premature deaths across China each year. (Today, censorship makes it harder to express complaints on all issues, including environmental ones.) “The people’s will can have a great influence on what happens,” Professor Greenstone said. “Until there’s consistent demand, it’s very, very hard to get real improvements.” In India, he added, air pollution “has not taken the same central political priority as it has in China to date.” With no unified effort, experts say, Delhi officials have taken limited action. In recent years, the city has closed two coal-burning power plants and required factories to switch to piped natural gas from coal, and there are plans to deploy at least 8,000 electric buses by 2025, said Jasmine Shah, a vice chairman of the Delhi government think tank that helps create the city’s air pollution policy. But officials have also turned to more dubious solutions. On a recent afternoon, giant fans fitted at the bottom of a green “smog tower” threw out cool, filtered air near an imposing Sikh temple in the heart of Delhi. Nearby, an “anti-smog gun” attached to a truck sprayed water into the air. Ishmeet Kaur, a 19-year-old college student, considered the smog tower from across the street. “A cosmetic effort by the government,” she said, “to make us feel better.” “If only the politicians took our health seriously and did something real about this problem,” she added as she coughed into a black face mask. “We will have to rely on the weather gods.” When China acted on its own pollution problem, it took on a crisis decades in the making. Since the 1980s, rapid industrialization and urbanization had driven China’s extraordinary rise as an economic power. But its reliance on energy-intensive heavy industry to fuel that growth came at an immense environmental cost. In 2013, Chinese officials released a new national air action plan, began publishing important air-quality data and publicly raised alarms about the pollution problem. As part of the national plan, Beijing was required to reduce its pollution by 25 percent. China then undertook an array of steps, experts said: It tightened industrial emission standards on some factories and phased out or upgraded other outdated ones; discarded 20 million old vehicles; upgraded 200,000 industrial boilers; and switched to natural gas from coal as the source of electricity for six million households. In some cases, the decisive action came with a cost: When officials removed the coal boilers, for instance, some homes were temporarily left without winter heating. “A clear example of a poor execution of a plan to make a massive difference,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, an analyst at the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air, based in Helsinki, Finland. “It caused major suffering for a lot of people.” Nonetheless, researchers found that the tough policies worked. From 2013 to 2017, the concentration of dangerous fine particulate matter known as PM 2.5 in China’s atmosphere declined by roughly a third. Beijing’s air is still far from perfect, especially in the winter. For more than 100 days last year, the air was considered “unhealthy for sensitive groups of people” or carried a worse rating. According to Professor Greenstone of the University of Chicago, Beijing’s average level of microparticle pollution in 2020 was three times that in Los Angeles. This weekend, Beijing’s smog reached levels classified as “very unhealthy.” But while the city has seen improvement overall, in Delhi, the concentration of air pollutants remained at roughly the same hazardous levels between 2013 and 2020, according to the Energy Policy Institute. India has long known how to fix Delhi’s air pollution. A 1997 government white paper identified vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions as the main culprits and suggested sweeping action. During the 1990s, the city tightened emission standards, relocated polluting industries and required thousands of its buses and auto rickshaws to switch to compressed natural gas from diesel fuel. But Delhi continues to struggle with poor air quality. On a recent Monday, the sky was a lovely light blue. But the tint was misleading. The air quality was classified as “poor,” according to government data, which gave it a “very unhealthy” index score of 294. Anything 50 or under is considered satisfactory.