• Urban Lab

Monsoon season was 0.58 degree C warmer this decade than long-term average

Anumita Roychowdhury, CSE’s executive director (research and advocacy), called this a very disturbing trend as policy preparedness to mitigate rising heat due to climate change is nearly absent in India The June to September monsoon season has been 0.3-0.4 degrees Celsius hotter than pre-monsoon seasons in the decade from 2012 to 2022, according to a new Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) analysis based on India Meteorological Department (IMD)’s long-term data. Anumita Roychowdhury, CSE’s executive director (research and advocacy), called this a very disturbing trend as policy preparedness to mitigate rising heat due to climate change is nearly absent in India. “Without heat action plans, rising air temperature, radiating heat from land surfaces, concretisation, heat-trapping built structures, waste heat from industrial processes and air conditioners, and erosion of heat dousing forests, urban greens, and water bodies will worsen public health risks,” she said in a statement. “This requires an urgent time-bound mitigation.” The decadal average temperature for the pre-monsoon or summer period was 0.49 degrees Celsius hotter than long-term normal (1951-80 baseline). This is a significant increase but not as much as that for the other three seasons. The post-monsoon period from October to December has been hotter by 0.73 degrees Celsius than the long-term normal. The winter season from January to February, as per IMD classification, has been warmer by 0.68 degrees Celsius, and the monsoon by 0.58 degrees Celsius. HT on March 22 reported that there has been a sharp upward trend in average temperatures across seasons in the country since 1991 compared to the average surface air temperature baseline recorded between 1981 and 2010. The trend is more evenly pronounced during the monsoon and post-monsoon seasons. The seasonal average air temperature for this summer from March to May was 1.24 degrees Celsius warmer than the baseline trends between 1971 and 2000. This was warmer than the 1.20 degrees Celsius anomaly noted in 2016 summer. But it is lower than the 1.45 degree anomaly recorded in 2010 summer. Land surface temperature anomaly has been extreme this summer with a 1.46-degree Celsius increase compared to the baseline (1971-2000). Institute of Climate Change Studies director DS Pai said the temperature anomalies are increasing mainly because of less clouding on a higher number of days. “So, if rainy days are reducing, cloudless or less cloudy days will increase. If we analyse the overall increase in maximum and minimum temperatures during these two seasons [monsoon and post-monsoon] we can also find out if there is an incursion of warm air from other regions.” Pai said the rise in average temperatures is mainly linked to global warming. “We cannot link less cloudy days in monsoon and post-monsoon seasons to global warming directly but there may be indirect effects of climate change on cloud and rain patterns.” The CSE said that the average daily maximum temperature this year for March and April in northwest India was almost 4 degrees Celsius above the normal compared to its baseline of 1981-2010. “This is almost twice as much as the increase observed at all India levels and it holds true for even average daily minimum, daily mean, and land surface temperatures. Temperatures became relatively closer to normal during the month of May.” CSE cited National Crime Records Bureau data and said 2,137 people reportedly died due to heat strokes in northwest India between 2015 and 2020. “...the southern peninsula region... reported 2,444 deaths due to excessive environmental heat with Andhra Pradesh alone accounting for over half of the reported casualties.” It added Delhi reported only one death for the same period. “Most deaths have been reported among working-age men (30-60), usually not considered highly vulnerable to temperature anomalies. The understanding of the public health impacts of meteorological conditions like the heat waves is still weak in India.” The seasonal average temperatures of Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, and Hyderabad were 1-2-degree Celsius higher than the all-India average due to the urban heat island phenomenon. “Due to excessive hard and dark surfaces, cities tend to absorb the heat coming from the sun during the day; a city also generates a lot of waste heat due to human activities which adds to the natural heat. This extra heat should dissipate after sunset, but due to pollution and continuing generation of waste heat the city fails to cool down, leading to warmer condition compared to rural areas,” said the CSE analysis. It added that temperature and humidity data suggested massive variations in temperature within the cities. In terms of absolute air temperature, Hyderabad, with a 7.1-degree Celsius variation (difference between hottest and coolest part of the city), had the most pronounced heat islands. Kolkata, with just 1.3 degree Celsius, had the least pronounced ones. Delhi had a 6.2-degree Celsius variation and Mumbai 5.5. Some urban or metropolitan areas were significantly warmer than their surrounding rural areas or areas with more green cover. The phenomenon is referred as Urban Heat Island effect. Avikal Somvanshi, a senior programme manager with CSE’s Urban Lab, said understanding the overall temperature anomaly, extreme heat conditions, and the mixed trends in heat patterns across India has become necessary to assess the emergent risk. “Currently, the attention is largely on the maximum daily heat levels and extreme conditions of heat waves. But it is equally important to pay attention to the overall rising temperature and humidity trends in different regions to understand the gravity of the problem.” CSE sourced the intracity temperature variation data from the Continuous Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations and surface air from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

• Urban Lab

2022 pre-monsoon summer heat overtake 2016 as 2nd hottest pre-monsoon season on record: CSE

While extreme heat waves in the states of the northwest draw maximum public attention, the increase in overall anomalous temperature in other regions of the country have been largely neglected, indicated a new country-wide analysis by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) on Thursday. The seasonal average air temperature for 2022 summer was 1.24 degrees Celsius warmer than the baseline trends. Moreover, the heat waves lashing India this summer are symptomatic of the anomalous temperature trends that is expected to worsen with growing climate change impacts, it said. Year 2022 summer was the second hottest after the summer of 2010. Mega cities, including Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Hyderabad are much hotter than the larger region around them due to heat island effects caused by surface absorption of heat and local waste heat generated by traffic, industry and air conditioning (among other urban activities), the latest CSE analysis said. Talking about the increase in overall anomalous temperature in other regions of the country that have been largely neglected, “This is a very disturbing trend as policy preparedness to mitigate rising heat due to climate change is nearly absent in India,” said Anumita Roychowdhury, executive director, research and advocacy, CSE. “Without heat action plans, rising air temperature, radiating heat from land surfaces, concretisation, heat-trapping built structures, waste heat from industrial processes and air conditioners, and erosion of heat dousing forests, urban greens and waterbodies will worsen public health risks. This requires urgent time-bound mitigation,” she said. Avikal Somvanshi, senior programme manager, Urban Lab, CSE, said: “Currently, the attention is largely on the maximum daily heat levels and extreme conditions of heat waves. But it is equally important to pay attention to the overall rising temperature and humidity trends in different regions to understand the gravity of the problem.” The Urban Lab of CSE has analysed the temperature trends in India from January 2015 till May 2022. The effort has been to understand the warming trends by covering all three dimensions of heat stress — surface air temperature, land surface temperature, and relative humidity (heat index) — at the national, regional and local levels. The seasonal average air temperature for 2022 — pre-monsoon or summer (March, April and May as per IMD classification) — is 1.24 degrees Celsius warmer than the baseline trends that relate to 1971-2000 climatology. Baselines are defined based on historical timelines and may vary for different metrics; the anomaly is generally computed from the 1951-80, 1971-2000, or 1981-2010 climatology baseline. This is warmer than the 1.20 degrees Celsius anomaly noted in 2016 pre-monsoon, but lower than the 1.45 degrees Celsius anomaly recorded in the 2010 pre-monsoon season. Similarly, land surface temperature anomaly has been extreme this pre-monsoon season, with a 1.46 degrees Celsius departure from the baseline (1971-2000). It must be noted that pre-monsoon seasonal trends in both land and air temperature are identical to the annual trends, but with more pronounced highs and lows. Monsoon is hotter than the pre-monsoon period on an average, while winter and post-monsoon seasons are warming up faster. High heat stress and heat waves in the northwestern states, but Other regions even hotter in absolute terms.

• Water Programme

Environment Ministry proposes more fines, less imprisonment for violations

Fines proposed in lieu of imprisonment are 5-500 times greater than those currently levied The Environment Ministry proposes to soften the provisions of the Environment Protection Act (EPA) by replacing a clause that provides for imprisoning violators with one that only requires them to pay a fine. This, however, doesn’t apply to violations that cause grave injury or loss of life. The proposed fines, in lieu of imprisonment, are also 5-500 times greater than those currently levied. The Act currently says that violators will be punishable with imprisonment up to five years or with a fine up to ₹1 lakh, or with both. Were violations to continue, an additional fine of up to ₹5,000 for every day during which such failure or contravention continues after the conviction would be levied. There’s also a provision for jail terms to extend to seven years. The Environment Ministry in a note this week, laying out the rationale governing the amendments, said that it had received “suggestions” to decriminalise existing provisions of the EPA to weed out “fear of imprisonment for simple violations”. The two major changes proposed are appointing an “adjudication officer” who would decide on a penalty in cases of environmental violations such as reports not being submitted or information not provided when demanded. “However, in case of serious violations which lead to grievous injury or loss of life, they shall be covered under the provision of Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 24 of EP Act,” the document notes. Funds collected as penalties would be accrued in an “Environmental Protection Fund”. In case of contraventions of the Act, the penalties could extend to anywhere from ₹5 lakh to ₹5 crore, the proposal notes. The Ministry has sought comments from the public on its proposals until July 21. The removal of prison terms also applies to the Air Act, that is the cornerstone legislation for dealing with air pollution, and the Water Act, which deals with violations to water bodies. An analysis by the Centre for Science and Environment found that Indian courts took between 9-33 years to clear a backlog of cases for environmental violations. Beginning 2018, close to 45,000 cases were pending trial and another 35,000 cases were added in that year. More than 90% cases were pending trial in five of the seven environment laws. Environmentalist Vikrant Tongad said that the existing clause of imprisonment was to deter violators and not to imprison. The proposed penalties were too meagre and the proposed amendments opened up avenues for “large scale corruption” as the proposed ‘adjudication officers’ would be “arbitrary” in their decision making.

• Clean Air & Sustainable Mobility

'Café Classroom': a pursuit to relearn relationship across humans and nature

The idea of coexistence and interdependency between atmosphere and humans more often than not falls into the trap of assumption – a deficit of understanding the human-led asymmetrical balance between the two. Over the years, the capitalistic way of life has sharply stifled the atmosphere, turning the natural process of breathing into a forceful exercise. As the terms pollution, toxicity, and suffocation received mainstream attention, especially in the year 2016, the urgency to curb the further deterioration of the atmosphere was all-time heightened. The series Café Classroom, part of the Does the Blue Sky Lie? Testimonies of Air’s Toxicities project by Khoj studios, emerges from the exigency to “relearn” our relationship with the natural world. Curated by Pradip Saha, Director of Damage Control, a communications agency in the sustainable development context, the Café Classroom acutely emphasised the collective effort of citizens, creative minds, environmentalists, economists and policymakers, to restore the equilibrium of the ecosystem. In an interview with STIR, Saha explains, “The Café Classroom was not conceived to address ‘rising air pollution’, but to use air pollution as an entry point for a larger discussion about ecological crisis. We used two threads. One was to enter through air pollution and move towards the larger crisis of climate change. The other was to connect ecological crisis (environment is a management term, it is anthropocentric and fails to address larger issues) to its reason which is political economy.” The Café Classroom began with in-person talk Decoding Dirty Air: Joining the Dots for the Big Solution by Anumita Roy Chowdhury, who is the Executive Director, Research and Advocacy, Centre for Science and Environment, India. The lecture at the Canteen, Khoj, Khoj studios traced the spiral concern around air pollution since the year 1996. Against the political and social issues, the crisis of air pollution and entailing health issues are deemed of lesser importance. The detrimental air makes for a “compelling human story,” which continues to be the most conflicted and unresolved one. While giving the statistical data on the declining quality of the air in the national capital New Delhi, India, Chowdhury observed the road design structure favours the car owner resulting in the disproportional effect on the pedestrians. The unfavourable road structures fail to promote the interest among the public to take a walk across the short distance. The talk walked us through the variety of places in Delhi which have been transformed into people-friendly and accessible on foot. Largely, the mobility by a vehicle is perceived as a sign of privilege. To deflate such preconceived notions of entitlement, Chowdhury gave an example of a Dutch minister who visited the queen on a bicycle. The image introduced the idea of owning the environment rather than being a purchaser of an automobile. When the atmosphere is a universal equaliser, we need to reciprocate it in a similar fashion. The next in-person talk Assessment of Vulnerability/Risk to Climate Change by Sandhya Rao focussed on the interconnection between climate change and vulnerability. While looking at the data produced by the IPCC report, Rao underlined how humans are forcing a substantial increase in the temperature globally. Be it Texas cold snap in February 2021, Canada heat wave in July 2021, floods in Germany in July 2021, Greece wildfire in August 2021, a Day Zero declared in Chennai, summer of 2019, Delhi urban flood in July 2021 and ongoing heat wave in the Indian Subcontinent are the cumulative results of the urbanisation and destruction of natural habitats. The vulnerability determined by climate change highlights the inequality among humans. The talk had Madhya Pradesh and Uttarakhand as the case studies to indicate how the factors such as economic, social, cultural, institutional, and politics play a significant role to define the living conditions of the people. Rao highlighted an informed decision-making process is pertinent to make an appropriate adaptation.

• Industrial Pollution

Emission norms for industrial boilers to be tightened

In Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR), industries contribute to 30% of PM 2.5 emissions in winter and 22% in summer The government has issued a draft notification for tightening the particulate matter (PM) norms for industrial boilers and provided new standards for their different sizes. The Union environment ministry issued the draft on Monday and has given the public 60 days to submit objections or suggestions. The standard for boilers of steam generation capacity of two tonnes per hour has been reduced from 1200 mg/Nm3 to 500 mg/Nm3 and those with a capacity of two tonnes per hour to less than 10 tonnes per hour from 800 mg/Nm3 to 150 mg/Nm3. Boilers with 10 tonnes per hour and more capacity will have to meet a standard of 50 mg/NM3, compared to 150 to 600 mg/Nm3 earlier. In Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR), industries contribute to 30% of PM 2.5 emissions in winter and 22% in summer, according to a 2018 The Energy and Resources Institute and Automotive Research Association of India study. A Central Pollution Control Board official said the technology of boilers and emission control systems have improved now and that is why the standards for industries have to rationalised. “We will tighten standards for other sectors as well. PM emissions are a major problem in India. Industries will have to install some emission control systems to meet the new standards.” Centre for Science and Environment executive director Anumita Roy Chowdhury welcomed the tightening of the norms as an important development. “We have been asking for this tightening of standards for boilers to address pollution from small and medium scale units that dominate. For instance, in the NCR region, nearly 70% of the boilers are tiny -- less than two tonnes. These are extremely polluting.” Chowdhury said only tighter norms can push towards the adoption of emission control systems for boilers. “The bigger solution will come from the adoption of bigger common boilers equipped with emission control system and on clean fuels that are managed centrally and are shared by multiple industrial units.”.

• Sustainable Food Systems

Explainer : अगर प्लास्टिक के टिफिन या प्लेट्स में गर्म खाना खा रहे हैं तो क्यों संभलें

01 जुलाई से देशभर में प्लास्टिक बैग से संबंधित 19 आइटम्स पर बैन लगा दिया गया है. देश में पिछले कुछ सालों से प्लास्टिक से जुड़े सामानों पर प्रतिबंध लगाने की कवायद तो चल रही है लेकिन ये सही तरीके से लागू नहीं हो पा रहा है. इनका इस्तेमाल ना केवल पर्यावरण बल्कि सेहत के लिए भी नुकसानदेह है. हालांकि ये रोक सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक पर लगाई गई, जिसमें बहुत पतली पन्नी वाले प्लास्टिक बैग इस्तेमाल होते हैं लेकिन प्लास्टिक के डिब्बे या प्लेट्स में आप अगर खाना खा रहे हैं तो ये भी सेहत को बिगाड़ सकता है. प्लास्टिक हमारी ज़िंदगी में हर कहीं मौजूद है. सुबह उठकर प्लास्टिक की पन्नी में दूध लाने से शुरू कर दिन में प्लास्टिक के टिफ़िन में खाना ले जाने से लेकर शाम को प्लास्टिक की कटोरी और चम्मच में जंक फ़ूड खाने तक हर कहीं प्लास्टिक मौजूद है. बहुत सारी रिसर्च बताती हैं कि जब हम खाना प्लास्टिक के कंटेनर में रखते है तो उसमें से कुछ मात्रा में केमिकल्स हमारे खाने या पानी में मिल जाते है. ये केमिकल दिखते तो नहीं लेकिन धीमे धीमे हमारे शरीर को बहुत नुकसान पहुंचते हैं. खाने या पानी में केमिकल्स का मिलना इस बात से तय होता है कि प्लास्टिक के डब्बे में जो खाना रखा जा रहा है वह कितना गरम है. हम जब ज़्यादा गरम खाना प्लास्टिक के बर्तनों में रखते है तो खाने में ज्यादा केमिकल्स मिल जाते हैं. क्या होते हैं ये केमिकल्स ये बहुत सारे अलग अलग केमिकल का मिश्रण होता है लेकिन सबसे खतरनाक केमिकल जो हमारे खाने में प्लास्टिक से मिल जाता है वह है ‘एंडोक्रिन डिस्ट्रक्टिंग’ नाम का ज़हर. ये केमिकल हार्मोंस असंतुलन पैदा करते हैं जिससे कि हार्मोंस सही से काम करने की क्षमता खो देते हैं. लंबे समय तक प्लास्टिक के बर्तनों में खाना कैंसर का कारण बन सकता है जिससे मौत भी हो सकती है. आपको यह जानकार आश्चर्य होगा कि यह केमिकल प्लास्टिक में पहले से मौजूद नहीं होते बल्कि प्लास्टिक में गरम खाना जाने के बाद बनने शुरू होते हैं. अनुसार पानी में न घुल पाने और बायोकेमिकली ऐक्टिव न होने की वजह से प्योर प्लास्टिक बेहद कम जहरीला होता है. लेकिन जब इसमें दूसरी तरह के प्लास्टिक और कलर आदि मिला दिए जाते हैं तो यह नुकसानदेह साबित हो सकते हैं. ये केमिकल खिलौने या दूसरे प्रॉड्क्ट्स में से गर्मी के कारण पिघलकर बाहर आ सकते हैं. कहा भी जाता है कि माइक्रोवेव प्लास्टिक कैंसर पैदा करने वाले केमिकल्स डाइऑक्सिन को खाने में मिला देता है लेकिन जब तक आप अपना भोजन माइक्रोवेव में नहीं गर्म करते तब तक ये केमिकल आपके खाने में नहीं आएगा. इसलिए माइक्रोवेव प्लास्टिक में खाना ज़्यादा देर तक गरम न करें. या ठंडा होने के बाद खाने को प्लास्टिक के टिफ़िन में पैक करें. कैसे पहचानें प्लास्टिक अच्छा है या नहीं यूं तो हम सभी लोग पानी के लिए बॉटल या खाना रखने के लिए प्लास्टिक लंचबॉक्स यूज करते हैं लेकिन कभी हमने उन्हें पलटकर देखा है कि उनके पीछे ISI लिखा है या फिर एक सिंबल बना है. अच्छी क्वॉलिटी के प्रॉडक्ट पर इन दोनों या फिर सिंबल का होना जरूरी है. यह मार्क ब्यूरो ऑफ इंडियन स्टैंडर्ड (BIS) जारी करता है और इससे पता लगता है कि प्रॉडक्ट की क्वॉलिटी अच्छी है. खाना पैक करने के लिए कौन सा प्लास्टिक सेफ पॉलीप्रोपायलीन (PP) से बना प्लास्टिक जिससे बोतल कैप, ड्रिंकिंग स्ट्रॉ, योगर्ट कंटेनर, प्लास्टिक प्रेशर पाइप सिस्टम आदि बनते हैं. केमिकल रेजिस्टेंस इसकी खूबी है. एसिड इसके साथ रिएक्ट नहीं करते, इसलिए इसको क्लीनिंग एजेंट्स, फर्स्ट ऐड प्रॉडक्ट्स आदि की पैकेजिंग के लिए भी यूज किया जाता है. पॉलिस्टरीन (PS) से बना प्लास्टिक जिससे बने प्रॉडक्ट्स पर 6 नंबर दर्ज रहता है. फोम पैकेजिंग, फूड कंटेनर्स, प्लास्टिक टेबलवेयर, डिस्पोजेबल कप-प्लेट्स, कटलरी, सीडी, कैसेट बॉक्सेज आदि में इसे इस्तेमाल किया जाता है. यह फूड पैकेजिंग के लिए सेफ है लेकिन इसको री-साइकल करना मुश्किल है और गर्म करने के दौरान इसमें से कुछ गैसें निकलती हैं. ऐसे में इसके ज्यादा इस्तेमाल से बचें. प्लास्टिक फूड कंटेनर्स के बड़े नुकसान देश और दुनिया के प्रमुख रिसर्च इंस्टिट्यूट्स में हुई स्टडी के मुताबिक, इस तरह के केमिकल्स से ब्रेस्ट कैंसर का खतरा रहता है. यही नहीं, पुरुषों में स्पर्म काउंट घटने का भी रिस्क होता है. प्रेग्नेंट महिलाओं और बच्चों के लिए ये ज्यादा नुकसानदेह होते हैं. किन चीजों पर दें ध्यान पानी की बोतल को गर्म होने से बचाएं- हम प्लास्टिक बोतल को तेज धूप में खड़ी कार में रखकर छोड़ देते हैं. गर्म होकर इन प्लास्टिक बोतलों से केमिकल निकलकर पानी के लिए रिएक्ट कर सकता है. ऐसे पानी या सॉफ्ट ड्रिंक्स आदि को न पिएं. पानी की टंकियों में तेज धूप में होने वाली रिएक्शन को लेकर भी खतरा जताया जा रहा है. इसे लेकर स्टडी की जा रही हैं लेकिन अभी पक्के तौर पर कुछ नहीं कहा जा सकता. सावधानी के तौर पर टंकी के ऊपर शेड बनवा सकते हैं. पॉलिथिन में चाय न लें. बच्चे को फीड करने के लिए प्लास्टिक बॉटल का इस्तेमाल न करें. प्लास्टिक बॉटल को माइक्रोवेव या गैस पर पानी में बिल्कुल न उबालें. बॉटल को गर्म पानी से साफ करना काफी नहीं है. इसके अलावा क्लोरीन सलूशन से साफ कर सकते हैं. सेंटर फॉर साइंस एंड एनवायरनमेंट (CSE) की एक स्टडी में कहा गया है कि बच्चों के दांत निकलते वक्त उसे जो खिलौने दिए जाते हैं उनमें बेहद खतरनाक केमिकल्स पाए गए हैं. प्लास्टिक की वजह से होता है कैंसर प्लास्टिक की बोतलों में पानी को जमाने या लंबे समय तक प्लास्टिक की बोतल में पानी पीने से भी कैंसर होने का खतरा बढ़ जाता है. इतना ही नहीं, एक ही प्लास्टिक बोतल का बार-बार इस्तेमाल करना भी कैंसर के लिए जिम्मेदार है. प्लास्टिक की बोतल को लंबे समय तक धूप में या गर्मी में रखना भी सही नहीं है. खाने को प्लास्टिक से रैप करने वाले पदार्थों में से प्लास्टरवाइजर्स खाने में आ सकता है जो कि कैंसर का कारण बन सकता है. बच्चों की बोतलों में बीपीए का इस्तेमाल किया जाने से भी कैंसर होने की आशंका बढ़ जाती है.

• Sustainable Food Systems

कलर कोडिंग या स्टार रेटिंग- FSSAI के फूड लेबलिंग प्लान से छिड़ सकती है एक नई आहार जंग

भारत में पैक के सामने की ओर लेबलिंग का आधार 2010 में रखा गया था, जब एक PIL के जवाब में दिल्ली हाईकोर्ट ने FSSAI से जंक फूड को सख़्ती से विनियमित करने के लिए कहा था. शफाली मित्तल के यहां ‘घर में कोई जंक फूड नहीं’ का सख़्त नियम रहा है. उन्हें पता होना चाहिए- उन्होंने आहार और पोषण की पढ़ाई की है. लेकिन खाने के लिए तैयार पैक स्नैक्स, जिनके हेल्थ लेबल्स बहुत ख़राब होते हैं, उनकी इस पकड़ को कमज़ोर कर रहे हैं कि 17 और 23 साल की उम्र के उनके दो बेटे क्या खाते हैं. पिछले आठ साल से भारत में इस पर बहस चल रही है, कि उत्पाद को ज़्यादा उपभोक्ता हितैषी बनाने के दौरान, पीछे के तकनीकी डिसप्ले के अलावा, सामने की ओर किस तरह लेबल्स लाए जाएं- सीधी स्टार रेटिंग्स हों या रंग कोडित चेतावनियां हों. इस फैसले में, जो जल्द आ सकता है, मित्तल जैसे बहुत से पैरेंट्स से बात की जा सकती है. फिलहाल, खाद्य पैकेज पर लिखी किसी भी चीज़ से उन्हें ये पता नहीं चलता कि इसमें कितना कुछ सेहत के लिए नुक़सानदेह है. ऑस्ट्रेलिया, न्यूज़ीलैण्ड, चिली, इज़राइल, पेरू, ब्राज़ील, और मेक्सिको तथा कई अन्य देशों में पैक के सामने की ओर बहुत तरह के लेबल होते हैं, जो 10 सेकण्ड्स से भी कम समय में संकेत दे देते हैं कि खाद्य उत्पाद स्वास्थ्य के लिए कितना हानिकारक है. क़रीब एक इंच के लेबल के पीछे विचार ये है कि उपभोक्ता को अधिक स्वस्थ खाद्य पदार्थों की ओर धकेला जाए. इन देशों में बहुत से अध्ययन हुए हैं जिनसे पता चलता है कि कौन से लेबल प्रभावी रहे हैं, कौन से नहीं रहे हैं. भारतीय खाद्य सुरक्षा और मानक प्राधिकरण (एफएसएसएआई) इस पर विचार कर रही है कि देश के लिए कौन सा लेबल अपनाया जाए. उसमें फूड पैकेट्स पर अतिरिक्त हानिकार पोषकों पर- ख़ासकर फैट, नमक और शुगर- प्रमुखता से जानकारी होनी चाहिए, जिससे सुनिश्चित हो जाए कि उपभोक्ता पूरी जानकारी के साथ इसका चयन करें कि वो क्या खाना चाहते हैं. सब कुछ डिज़ाइन पर निर्भर करता है. एफएसएसएआई बैठकों में दो प्रमुख संकेतों के बीच खींचतान रहती है- चिली द्वारा इस्तेमाल चेतावनी चिन्ह, और ऑस्ट्रेलिया द्वारा इस्तेमाल हेल्थ स्टार रेटिंग. लेकिन दिप्रिंट ने सिलसिलेवार दस्तावेज़ देखे हैं जिनसे पता चलता है, कि एफएसएसएआई के भीतर पैक के सामने की ओर लेबलिंग का निर्णय, कथित तौर पर काफी हद तक खाद्य दिग्गज़ों के पक्ष में झुका है. उसमें एक मज़बूत रंग संकेत और विश्व स्वास्थ्य संगठन के दक्षिण-पूर्व एशिया क्षेत्रीय ऑफिस (डब्लूएचओएसईएआरओ) द्वारा निर्धारित पोषक तत्व सीमा के पालन जैसे पिछले प्रस्तावों को ख़ारिज कर दिया गया. उसकी बजाय, एफएसएसएआई अब एक हेल्थ स्टार रेटिंग के साथ आगे बढ़ रही है, जिसका उन देशों में अस्वस्थ भोजन का उपभोग घटाने में कोई असर नहीं रहा है जहां उसे लागू किया गया था. सार्वजनिक स्वास्थ्य और उपभोक्ता समूहों के सख़्ती के साथ स्टार रेटिंग से असहमत होने के बावजूद, एफएसएसएआई नए नियमों का मसौदा तैयार कर रही है, जिसे जल्द ही सार्वजनिक कर दिया जाएगा. परामर्श बैठकों में हिस्सा लेने वाले कम से कम तीन हितधारकों ने कहा कि एफएसएसएआई खाद्य पदार्थों की रेटिंग के लिए एल्गोरिदम तैयार करने की प्रक्रिया में है, जिसके आधार पर उन्हें स्टार दिए जाएंगे. हर कोई संतुष्ट नहीं है. सार्वजनिक स्वास्थ्य विशेषज्ञों का प्रतिनिधित्व करने वाले एक समूह न्यूट्रिशन एडवोकेसी इन पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट के संयोजक अरुण गुप्ता कहते हैं, ‘हेल्थ स्टार रेटिंग अस्वास्थ्यकर उत्पादों के इर्द-गिर्द एक स्वास्थ्य हेलो बना देती है. ये उत्पादों की अस्वास्थ्यकर नेचर को बिल्कुल कम कर देती है. एक उपभोक्ता के नाते मुझे लगता है कि अगर इसमें एक स्टार भी है, तो ये भले ही कम स्वस्थ है लेकिन स्वस्थ है. इसमें बुनियादी रूप से यही कमी है’. सही लेबल खाद्य उत्पादकों, औद्योगिक प्रतिनिधियों, पोषण वैज्ञानिकों, डॉक्टरों और उपभोक्ता समूहों के साथ बेशुमार बैठकें करने, और स्टडीज़ पर करोड़ों रुपए ख़र्च करने के बाद एफएसएसएआई ये तय कर पाई कि खाद्य पैकेट्स पर कौन से डिज़ाइन से उपभोक्ताओं को उनमें मौजूद अधिक नमक, चीनी, और वसा के बारे में सबसे अच्छी तरह पता चलेगा. बड़ों तथा बच्चों में ग़ैर- संचारी रोगों में चिंताजनक बढ़ोत्तरी की वजह से ही नीति में ये बदलाव किया गया है. वैज्ञानिक सबूत चीनी, नमक, और वसा से भरपूर खाद्य और पेय पदार्थों के उपभोग को, सीधे तौर पर मोटापे, उच्च रक्तचाप, ह्रदय रोग, स्ट्रोक, अवसाद, यहां तक कि कैंसर जैसी बीमारियों से जोड़ते हैं. चिली में हुई स्टडीज़ में भी- जहां एक काला षट्कोणीय चिन्ह इस्तेमाल किया जाता है जिससे अधिक नमक, चीनी या वसा का पता चलता है- ज़ाहिर होता है कि मीठे पेय पदार्थों का उपभोग गिरकर 24 प्रतिशत रह गया था. दूसरी ओर ऑस्ट्रेलिया में खाद्य पदार्थों को स्टार दिए जाते हैं. खाद्य पैकेट्स में जितना ज़्यादा नमक, चीनी, या वसा होगी, उसे उतने ही कम स्टार मिलेंगे, और ये चीज़ें जितनी कम होंगी स्टार उतने अधिक होंगे. अगर खाद्य पदार्थों में नट्स या फलों जैसी पॉज़िटिव सामग्री मिला दी जाती है, तो उनकी स्टार रेटिंग सुधर जाएगी. साक्ष्यों से पता चलता है कि ऐसी स्टार रेटिंग्स का उपभोग व्यवहार को बदलने में कोई ख़ास प्रभाव नहीं रहा है. वैश्विक सबूत के बावजूद 15 फरवरी 2022 को एफएसएसएआई ने, भारतीय प्रबंधन संस्थान अहमदाबाद के एक अध्ययन की सिफारिशों के आधार पर, जिसे उसने कमीशन किया था, भारत के लिए स्टार रेटिंग को चुन लिया. पांच प्रतीकों के लिए शोधकर्ताओं ने 20,000 से अधिक प्रतिभागियों के एक सैम्पल सर्वे से इनपुट्स लिए, और उनमें से दो के बीच कड़ा मुक़ाबला था- चेतावनी लेबल्स और हेल्थ स्टार रेटिंग. पहचान की आसानी और लेबल की समझ के चलते स्टार रेटिंग जीत गई, लेकिन जब किसी अतिरिक्त पोषक की पहचान में आसानी की बात आती है, तो चेतावनी लेबल्स को बेहतर रैंक और अंक मिलते हैं. खाद्य उद्योग प्रतिनिधि स्टार प्रतीकों को लागू करने पर राज़ी हो गए हैं, लेकिन उपभोक्ता समूहों को कहीं कुछ दाल में काला लगता है. किसी उत्पाद में अस्वास्थ्यकर सामग्री को कम करने के अलावा, स्टार रेटिंग पोषक तत्व-विशिष्ट नहीं होती. एक थिंक-टैंक सेंटर फॉर साइंस एंड एनवायरनमेंट में प्रोग्राम डायरेक्टर सस्टेनेबल फूड सिस्टम्स, अमित खुराना समझाते हैं कि इसमें ये पता नहीं चलता कि क्या किसी उत्पाद में कम स्टार ज़्यादा नमक, चीनी, या वसा की वजह से हैं. गुप्ता कहते हैं कि पैक्स पर ये पॉज़िटिव संकेत, सकारात्मक पोषक तत्वों के साथ मिलकर एकदम सही नुस्ख़ा बन जाता है, जिसका खाद्य निर्माता आसानी के साथ भरपूर फायदा उठाएंगे. गुप्ता कहते हैं, ‘अगर आप किसी एयरेटेड ड्रिंक के साथ फलों का रस मिला दें, या चीनी हटाकर उसमें कोई स्वीटनर डाल दें, तो उत्पाद को बेहतर स्टार मिल जाएगा. इसमें फिर भी चीनी की काफी मात्रा होगी. लेकिन ये उद्योग को ठीक लगता है क्योंकि इस तरह से वो उपभोक्ता को भ्रमित रख सकते हैं’. चॉकलेट्स में नट्स, अनाज में फल, आटे में मल्टीग्रेन, और ऐसे बहुत से फ़ॉर्मूलों का उद्योग में पहले ही इस्तेमाल हो रहा है. चुनाव का बचाव करते हुए, एफएसएसएआई के पूर्व कार्यकारी अधिकारी पवन कुमार अग्रवाल, जिन्होंने अपने कार्यकाल के दौरान पैक के सामने लेबलिंग पर हुई बैठकों की अध्यक्षता की थी, कहते हैं कि लेबल कैसा भी हो लेकिन एक शुरुआत होनी चाहिए. अग्रवाल कहते हैं, ‘परफेक्ट मॉडल कोई नहीं है. दुनिया का कोई देश ये दावा नहीं कर सकता कि उसने इसे जल्दी और सही रूप में हासिल कर लिया है. चिली और दूसरे देशों को भी आज की मौजूदा स्थिति में आने में बरसों लग गए थे. अगर पिछले 4-5 सालों में पता चला है कि कोई चीज़ भारत में काम कर जाएगी, तो मुझे लगता है कि उसे अपना लेना चाहिए. ये कोई पत्थर की लकीर नहीं है. इसमें पहले ही बहुत देर हो चुकी है’. इस बीच, एफएसएसएआई के साथ बैठकों में उद्योग इस पर राज़ी हो गया है, जब नए लेबलिंग नियम लागू होंगे तो वो उनका पालन करेगा. दिप्रिंट ने एफएसएसएआई बैठकों में उद्योग की नुमाइंदगी करने वाली दो इकाइयों, फेडरेशन ऑफ इंडियन चैंबर्स ऑफ कॉमर्स एंड इंडस्ट्री (फिक्की) और कन्फेडरेशन ऑफ इंडियन इंडस्ट्री (सीआईआई) से संपर्क साधने के कई प्रयास किए, लेकिन कोई प्रतिक्रिया नहीं मिल सकी. लंबा इतज़ार भारत में पैक पर सामने की ओर लेबलिंग की बुनियाद 2010 में रखी गई, जब स्कूलों में अस्वास्थ्यकर और प्रॉसेस्ड फूड पर पाबंदी की मांग करने वाली एक जनहित याचिका की सुनवाई करते हुए, दिल्ली हाईकोर्ट ने एफएसएसएआई को जंक फूड को विनियमित करने के लिए क़दम उठाने का निर्देश दिया. एफएसएसएआई ने लेबलिंग पर पहले 2014 और फिर 2018 में चर्चा की. विशेषज्ञ समूहों का इनपुट मिलने के बाद एफएसएसएआई ने एक मसौदा जारी किया, और नमक, चीनी तथा वसा के उपभोग के लिए डब्लूएचओ-एसईएआरओ द्वारा निर्धारित सीमा को भी अपना लिया. उसके बाद 2019 के अपने मसौदे में एफएसएसएआई ने डब्लूएचओ-एसईएआरओ की सीमाओं को त्याग दिया, और नई सीमाएं लेकर आई जिन्हें उपभोक्ता समूह अवैज्ञानिक बताते हैं. नमक, चीनी, और वसा की सीमा में इज़ाफा बहुत से अस्वास्थ्यकारी पैक स्नैक्स को तथाकथित ‘स्वस्थ’ श्रेणी में घुसा देगा, जहां उन्हें पैक के सामने की ओर लेबल लगाने की ज़रूरत नहीं होगी. सीमाओं पर अपने रुख़ का बचाव करते हुए एफएसएसएआई ने कहा, ‘पहले, सीमाएं डब्लूएचओ-एसईएआरओ मॉडल पर आधारित थीं, जो सांकेतिक हैं और जिन्हें वैसे भी किसी देश में लागू नहीं किया जाता. हितधारकों ने इन पर कई तरह की चिंताएं जताई थीं, और कोई आम सहमति नहीं बन पाई थी. इसलिए, वैज्ञानिक पैनल ने 2019 के मसौदा नियमों में प्रस्तावित श्रेणियों और सीमाओं की समीक्षा की, और मौजूदा प्रस्तावित सीमाओं में बहुत से देशों में लागू वैश्विक मॉडल्स, और डब्ल्यूएचओ-पॉपुलेशन न्यूट्रिएंट इंटेक गोल्स का ख़याल रखा गया है’. अग्रवाल, जिनके कार्यकाल में सीमाओं में संशोधन किया गया था, समझाते हैं कि डब्लूएचओ-एसईएआरओ सीमाओं में स्नैक्स की सामग्री में क़रीब 80 प्रतिशत कमी की गई है, जिससे वो भारत के लिए बहुत स्वादहीन हो जाते हैं. वो कहते हैं, ‘हम जो सीमा देते हैं अगर वो लोगों के उपभोग पैटर्न से बहुत अलग होगी, तो वो कभी लागू ही नहीं होंगी. नमक और चीनी में कमी लाने की प्रक्रिया क्रमिक होना चाहिए. ये एक दिन या एक साल में हीं हो सकती. हमने बहुत विस्तृत विश्लेषण करके इन सीमाओं में बदलाव किया है’. अग्रवाल के अनुसार 2017 में, एफएसएसएआई ने कंपनियों से संकल्प लिया, कि वो अपने खाद्य पदार्थों में नमक, चीनी, और वसा की मात्रा कम करेंगी. क़रीब 20 कंपनियां आगे आईं, लेकिन उनकी पहल को सीमित सफलता ही मिली. वो कहते हैं, ‘खाद्य व्यवसाय में लगीं इकाइयां इसमें मुनाफे के लिए हैं. जब वो बाज़ार में हिस्सेदारी के लिए एक दूसरे से मुक़ाबला करती हैं, तो ऐसे में ये मान लेना ग़लत है कि वो अलग तरह से बर्ताव करेंगी, और बाज़ार में हिस्सेदारी और मुनाफे की क़ीमत पर पोषण पर ध्यान देंगी’. फरवरी 2022 में हितधारकों की बैठक में एफएसएसएआई ने ऐलान किया कि चार साल के लिए लेबलिंग स्वैच्छिक होगी, और फिर इसे अनिवार्य कर दिया जाएगा. एफएसएसएआई का कहना है कि ये एक वैश्विक मानदंड है, और कंपनियों को पैक के सामने की ‘अग्रणी’ लेबलिंग को स्वीकार करने में समय लगेगा. खाद्य निर्माताओं समेत आठ करोड़ से अधिक व्यवसाइयों का प्रतिनिधित्व करने वाले समूह, कन्फेडरेशन ऑफ ऑल इंडिया ट्रेडर्स के संस्थापक और महासचिव प्रवीण खंडेलवाल के अनुसार, छोटे खाद्य निर्माता और व्यवसाइयों से, जिनकी भारतीय बाज़ार में 75 प्रतिशत तक हिस्सेदारी है, कभी परामर्श नहीं किया गया. ‘एफएसएसएआई फिक्की, सीआईआई जैसे बड़े उद्योग प्रतिनिधियों और कुछ मुठ्ठीभर खाद्य दिग्गजों को बुलाती है, जो केवल 15 प्रतिशत कारोबार की नुमाइंदगी करते हैं. हालांकि छोटे खिलाड़ी नए क़ानूनों का पालन करेंगे, लेकिन हितधारकों की बैठकों में उनकी चिंताओं को सुने जाने की ज़रूरत है. इन आरोपों पर कि खाद्य उद्योग उसके फैसलों को प्रभावित कर रहा है, एफएसएसएआई का कहना है कि उपभोक्ता समूह और उद्योग संघ दोनों परामर्श का एक अभिन्न अंग रहे हैं, और अंतिम अधिसूचना जारी किए जाने से पहले उनकी टिप्पणियों पर विचार किया जाएगा. इस बीच, हानिकारक खाद्य पदार्थों के ज़्यादा कड़े नियमन के लिए उठने वाली आवाज़ें तेज़ होती जा रही हैं. भारत में, चार में से एक वयस्क और 20 में से एक बच्चा या तो अधिक वज़न का है या मोटा है. विश्व मोटापा फेडरेशन के अनुसार, ये संख्या विश्व अनुपात से ज़्यादा तेज़ी से बढ़ रही है, और अगर कोई हस्तक्षेप नहीं किया गया, तो 2040 तक ये संख्या तीन गुना बढ़ जाएगी. बदलती जीवन शैली का असर मित्तल का बड़ा बेटा माधव सिंगापुर से वापस घर लौटा है, और उनके दिन उसे चर्म विशेषज्ञों के यहां ले जाने में बीत रहे हैं. वो कहती हैं, ‘उनकी त्वचा की चमक चली गई है और उसके बाल झड़ रहे हैं. डॉक्टर मुझसे कहते हैं कि ऐसा पोषण की कमी से हो रहा है’. मित्तल कहती हैं कि सिंगापुर में माधव की ख़ुराक का एक बड़ा हिस्सा भारतीय भोजन के खाने के लिए तैयार फूड पैकेट्स हैं, और वो अब ज़ाहिरी तौर पर अपना असर दिखा रहे हैं. वो कहती हैं, ‘भविष्य पैक किए हुए भोजन का है. काम की व्यस्तता, सामाजिक जीवन और 10-मिनट डिलीवरी एप्स के साथ कुछ भी ख़रीदना बहुत सुविधाजनक हो गया है’. लेकिन वो सोचती हैं कि क्या कोई चेक कर रहा है कि उन सीलबंद पैकेट्स में कंपनियां क्या मिला रही हैं.

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Single-Use Plastic Ban In India Explained: What Will Be The Challenges And What Should We Expect?

Team Banega Swasth India speaks with an expert from Centre for Science and Environment on the significance of the Single-use-plastic ban in India effective from July 1 and the challenges that lie ahead In a move that could have significant impact in checking plastic pollution, India banned the use of ‘single-use plastic’ from July 1, 2022. The Ministry for Environment, Forest and Climate Change had issued the notification last year in August announcing a ban on single-use plastic effective from July 2022, items like Balloon sticks; Cigarette packs; Cutlery items including plates, cups, glasses, forks, spoons, knives, trays; Earbuds; Sweet boxes to name a few have been banned. Team Banega Swasth India speaks with Atin Biswas, Pragramme Director – Municipal Solid Waste from Centre For Science And Environment (CSE) about this ban, what it means for India, what will be the challenges on the road ahead. Here’s what we discussed: NDTV: Centre has announced a single-use-plastic ban on some items. Is this the way ahead for India’s journey to manage plastic menace? Atin Biswas: We are little late on this ban, but it is a great beginning. This single-use-plastic ban list covers a lot of waste streams. Though, I had expected that the government would have included the multi-layer plastic packaging in this list but unfortunately that has not been covered. It should have been included but nonetheless, it is a great start. Going forward, we have to see how well it is enforced on ground. NDTV: Will this plastic ban in India make any difference or will it be like previous bans where enforcement has been an issue? According to you, what are some of the challenges with such types of bans? Atin Biswas: There have been plastic bans in the past as well. As many as 25 Indian states had banned plastic previously with some form of state notification within their own jurisdictions. But all these bans had a very limited impact on ground. Now, if this ban is genuinely enforced, I think it will have an impact. But the problem is that there is no overall strategy. Basically, this notification means that there is a law which will prohibit certain items for production, sale and consumptions. The enforcement of the ban has been left with the local authorities and municipal bodies. I am a little skeptical about that as I don’t know how much local authorities will be able to do alone as there is no holistic approach towards the ban. My worry is that, as a consumer, one might get these items somewhere in the market like we have seen in past as well. Another challenge of the notification is that this list contains majority of items that are not really branded, so you don’t really know who is making these items and who to hold accountable. NDTV: How prepared do you think industries are in enforcing this single-use plastic ban in India? Atin Biswas: This ban was notified last year in August, so ample time has been given. Currently, we have banned only 10% or 20% of plastic items that should have been banned. We have spent almost the year; we knew this ban was coming. The question really is have we done enough to educate all the stakeholders about this ban. The biggest of all is the consumer. I haven’t seen any advertisements, newspaper or TV commercials or something on social media on this ban that will help inform people about this ban taking place in the country. We have to adopt an inclusive approach otherwise enforcement will be very difficult. We are talking about environment, global warming, climate change – these are non-negotiable. Companies need to invest and do research in finding more sustainable alternatives to these banned products. It is no more a question of finding alternatives, industries will have to spend money in research and development and find sustainable alternatives. NDTV: How can the issue of proper enforcement and alternatives be tackled by the government? Atin Biswas: Plastic was an incidental invention; we were kind of experimenting with things when we invented plastic and since then it has become a major part of our lives. Today, we are living in a time, when we have started actually breathing, eating plastic. We are actually living a life full of plastic items. There have been many global studies that suggest that we have been ingesting 5 grams of plastic every year. And we all know what plastic is made of, so it is putting us all in tremendous health hazards. We have come at a stage, where 10-12 years down the line, we might even see another pandemic just because micro plastics are being found in our blood. Government cannot succeed until unless the approach is inclusive. We have to understand that beating plastic pollution is simply not government’s responsibility – it is the responsibility of industries, brands, manufacturers and most importantly the consumers. NDTV: Why it is so difficult to get greener and more sustainable alternatives to plastic at the similar cost? Atin Biswas: Finding an alternative to plastic is not easy, but it is necessary to find solutions. We have got ourselves in a situation where a decision to ban plastic items is non-negotiable. The decision to ban plastic items is a very timely, I wish, It would have come few years back, still, it is a good start. Everyone will have to focus on finding green alternatives. There are sustainable options available in the market like compostable and bio-degradable plastic. We need specific facilities to recycle these greener alternatives of plastic and government should look upon this and start educating the masses, so that the consumer is well informed. NDTV: Your message for consumers to make this plastic ban effective in India Atin Biswas: We all need to follow the 3Rs – Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. In our waste composition – more than half of the waste is food or kitchen waste. In this kitchen waste 70% is water. So, when we compost water evaporates and leaves behind the substitutes, which can be used for gardening purposes. Today, we spend million and billions of rupees on transporting and dumping the food waste. What Kerala has done that they have successfully introduced home composting. Today, there are more than 20,000 households in the city of Thiruvananthapuram that are following the practice of composting, which means they are reducing the waste at source and the municipality is free from the burden of managing so much waste. If you speak in numbers, nearly 200 tonnes of waste every day is saved for 365 days a year in that city – Imagine so much money and resources that they are saving just by following this simple rule – Reduce. The problem is that we start only thinking about managing waste, when we are already sitting on a waste mountain. We don’t think of solutions or situations and think of strategies that will help building a scenario wherein these waste mountains will not exist. It is the awareness and multi-stakeholders approach that India needs to focus on.

• Sustainable Food Systems

Colour coding or star rating—FSSAI food labelling plan can trigger a new nutrition war The ground for front-of-pack-labelling in India was laid in 2010, when in response to a PIL, the Delhi High Court asked FSSAI to strictly regulate junk food.

Colour coding or star rating—FSSAI food labelling plan can trigger a new nutrition war The ground for front-of-pack-labelling in India was laid in 2010, when in response to a PIL, the Delhi High Court asked FSSAI to strictly regulate junk food. Shafali Mittal has had a strict ‘no junk food in the house’ rule. She should know — she has studied diet and nutrition. But ready-to-eat packed snacks with poor health labels are weakening her grip on what her two sons, aged 17 and 23, eat. For the past eight years, India has been debating how to come up with front-of-pack labels, in addition to technical back-of-pack displays, while making them more consumer friendly—simple star ratings or colour coded warnings. The decision, which is expected soon, is likely to speak to many parents like Mittal. Right now, nothing on the food packages tells her how much of it is unhealthy. Countries like Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Israel, Peru, Brazil, and Mexico, among others, use a range of front-of-pack-labelling which indicates to the consumer, in less than 10 seconds, how unhealthy a food product is. The idea of the label, about an inch big, is to nudge the consumer to select healthier foods. Plethora of studies done in these countries show which label has worked and which hasn’t. The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has been deliberating which label to adapt for the country. It should bring information on excess harmful nutrients—primarily fat, salt and sugar—more prominently on food packets to ensure that the consumers make informed choices about what they eat. Everything hinges on the design. In the FSSAI meetings, the tussle is between two main symbols—warning signs used by Chile, and the health star rating used by Australia. But a series of documents accessed by ThePrint show that decision-making on front-of-pack-labelling within the FSSAI is allegedly severely compromised in favour of food giants. It rejected previous draft proposals such as a robust colour indication and adhering to nutrient thresholds set by the World Health Organization’s South-East Asia Regional Office (WHO-SEARO). Instead, FSSAI is now charging ahead with a health star rating, which has had no impact on reducing unhealthy food consumption in the countries where it was implemented. Despite public health and consumer groups vehemently disagreeing to the star rating, FSSAI is drafting new regulations that it will put in public domain soon. At least three stakeholders who took part in the consultancy meetings said that FSSAI is in the process of devising algorithms to rate food, based on which stars will be assigned to them. Not everyone is convinced. “Health star rating creates a health halo around unhealthy products. It minimises the unhealthy nature of the product. As a consumer I feel that even if it has one star, it’s less healthy, but it’s healthy. That’s the basic flaw with this,” says Arun Gupta, convenor of Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest, a group representing public health experts. The right tag It took countless meetings with food producers, industry representatives, nutrition scientists, doctors, consumer groups, and crores of rupees on commissioned studies for the FSSAI to decide which sign on food packets would best tell the consumers about the high salt, sugar and fat in it. An alarming rise in non-communicable diseases in adults as well as in children is a trigger for this policy move. Scientific evidence directly links consumption of foods and beverages rich in sugar, salt and fats to illnesses such as obesity, hypertension, heart diseases, stroke, depression, even cancer. Studies in Chile, which uses a black hexagonal sign saying ‘high in’ salt, sugar or fat, show that consumption of sugary drinks dropped to 24 per cent. Australia, on the other hand, gives stars to foods. Higher the salt, sugar or fat in food packets, fewer the stars it will get and vice versa. The star rating will improve if positive ingredients are added in the food, such as nuts or fruits. Evidence shows such health star ratings have had no significant impact in changing consumption behaviour. Despite global evidence, on 15 February 2022, the FSSAI selected the health star rating for India based on the recommendations of a study by the Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad, which it had commissioned in 2021. Researchers took inputs from a sample survey of more than 20,000 participants for five symbols. And it was a close fight between two of them—warning labels and health-star rating. The star rating wins for ease of identification and understanding of labels, but warning labels get a better rank and score when it comes to ease of identification of a nutrient which is While food industry representatives have agreed to implement the star symbols, consumer groups smell a rat. Apart from minimising the unhealthy ingredients in a product, a star rating is not nutrient-specific. It doesn’t tell if a product has less stars because of more salt, sugar or fat, explains Amit Khurana, programme director, sustainable food systems, Centre for Science and Environment, a think-tank. This positive symbol on packs, along with extra points for positive nutrients, is a perfect recipe, which food manufacturers will easily exploit, says Gupta. “If you add fruit juice to an aerated drink, or remove sugar and add a sweetener, the product will get a better star. It will still contain high amounts of sugar. But this suits the industry because this way, they can keep the consumer confused,” says Gupta. Fads like nuts in chocolates, fruits in cereal, multigrain in flour and many more such formulations are already used by the industry. Defending the selection, Pawan Kumar Agarwal, FSSAI’s former chief executive officer who headed the meetings on front-of-pack-labelling during his tenure, says that a beginning must be made, irrespective of the label. “There is no perfect model. No country in the world can claim that they have got it quickly and rightly. Even for Chile and other countries, it took them several years to get to where they are now,” Agarwal says. “If over the last 4-5 years it has been found something will work in India, I think we should go ahead with it. It is not cast in stone. It is already very delayed.” Meanwhile, the industry, in FSSAI’s meetings, has agreed to abide by the new labelling rules when they are implemented. ThePrint made several attempts to reach out to the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry (FICCI) and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), two industry bodies represented in FSSAI meetings, but could not get a response. The long wait The ground for front-of-pack-labelling in India was laid in 2010, when hearing a public interest litigation on banning unhealthy, processed food in schools, the Delhi High Court asked the FSSAI to take measures to regulate junk food. The labelling was first discussed by the FSSAI in 2014 and later in 2018. After inputs from expert groups, the FSSAI released a draft, also adapting the thresholds set by the WHO-SEARO for salt, sugar and fat consumption. The FSSAI did away with the WHO-SEARO thresholds in its subsequent draft in 2019, and introduced new thresholds which the consumer groups allege are unscientific. This upping the limit of salt, sugar and fats will push a lot of unhealthy packed snacks in the so-called ‘healthy’ category where they would not require a front-of-pack-labelling. Defending its stance on thresholds, the FSSAI said, “Earlier thresholds were based on the WHO-SEARO model, which is suggestive and not implemented as such in any of the countries. The stakeholders raised various concerns on the same and no consensus could be made. Hence, the scientific panel reviewed the categories and thresholds proposed in the draft regulations, 2019 and the current proposed thresholds take into account global models implemented across various countries & WHO-Population Nutrient Intake Goals.” Agarwal, under whose tenure the thresholds were revised, explains that the WHO-SEARO thresholds reduce the contents in snacks in India by almost 80 per cent, making them too bland for the Indian palette. “If the threshold we give is very different from the consumption pattern of the population, then these will not be implemented at all. The process of reduction of salt, sugar has to be gradual. It cannot happen in a day or a year. We did a very detailed analysis and revisited these thresholds,” he says. In 2017, according to Agarwal, FSSAI took pledges from companies to reduce salt, sugar and fat in their foods. About 20 companies came forward but their initiatives had limited success. “Food businesses are for-profit entities. When they are competing with each other for market shares, assuming that they will behave differently and focus on nutrition at the cost of market shares and profits is wrong,” he says. In February 2022, the FSSAI announced in the stakeholders’ meeting that the labelling will be voluntary for four years and then made mandatory. FSSAI says this is the global norm and the “path-breaking” front-of-pack-labelling needs time to be accepted by the companies. Smaller food manufacturers and traders who make up 75 per cent of the Indian market were never consulted while deliberating front-of-pack-labelling, according to Praveen Khandelwal, founder and general secretary of Confederation of All India Traders, a group representing over eight crore businesspersons including food manufacturers. “FSSAI calls big industry representatives like FICCI, CII and a handful of other food giants who represent only 15 per cent of the business. Though the smaller players will abide by new rules, their concerns need to be heard at stakeholders’ meetings.” On allegations that the food industry is influencing its decisions, the FSSAI says that both consumer groups as well as industry associations have been an integral part of the consultations and their comments will be considered before final notification is issued. Meanwhile, the cry for stricter regulation on harmful food is growing louder. In India, one in four adults and one in 20 children are either overweight or obese. These numbers are growing faster than the world average and unless there is an intervention, these numbers will triple by 2040, according to the World Obesity Federation. The impact of changing lifestyles Mittal’s older son, Madhav, is back home from Singapore and her days are spent taking him to dermatologists. “His skin has lost sheen and his hair is falling. The doctors tell me it is because of lack of nutrition,” she says. A large part of Madhav’s diet in Singapore has been ready-to-eat Indian food packets and that is apparently now showing results, Mittal says. “The future is packed food. With busy work and social lives and 10-minute delivery apps, it is so convenient to just buy everything,” she says. But is anyone checking what these companies are adding to those sealed packets, she wonders.

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

दिल्ली में निकलता है सबसे ज्यादा प्लास्टिक कचरा, दूसरे नंबर पर कोलकाता : सिद्धार्थ सिंह

दिल्ली में निकलता है सबसे ज्यादा प्लास्टिक कचरा, दूसरे नंबर पर कोलकाता : सिद्धार्थ सिंह राजधानी दिल्ली में भी एक जुलाई से सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक (एसयूपी) पर प्रतिबंध लग गया है, लेकिन यह प्रतिबंध कागजों और भाषणों में ही नजर आ रहा है, जबकि जमीन पर नहीं के बराबर दिख रहा है। एसयूपी की जिन 19 वस्तुओं पर पूर्ण पाबंदी है, वह अभी बाजार में मिल रही हैं। दुकानदार विकल्प न होने का रोना रो रहे हैं, तो जनता में जागरूकता का अभाव दिखाई देता है। आखिर एसयूपी पर लगे प्रतिबंध का पालन कैसे सुनिश्चित होगा और कैसे संरक्षित हो पाएगा पर्यावरण। ऐसे ही कुछ सवालों का जवाब तलाशने के लिए संजीव गुप्ता ने सेंटर फार साइंस एंड एन्वायरमेंट (सीएसई) में ठोस कचरा प्रबंधन प्रकोष्ठ के कार्यक्रम प्रबंधक सिद्धार्थ सिंह से विशेष बात की। प्रस्तुत हैं इस बातचीत के मुख्य अंश: कितना व्यावहारिक है एसयूपी पर लगाया गया यह प्रतिबंध और कैसे सुनिश्चित हो पाएगा इसका पालन? देखिए, प्रतिबंध अधिसूचित करना और इसे जमीन पर लागू करना दो अलग-अलग पहलू हैं। देश को प्लास्टिक प्रदूषण से मुक्त करना आसान नहीं है। यह केवल प्लास्टिक इंडस्ट्री और सरकार की जिम्मेदारी भी नहीं है। मौजूदा प्रतिबंध को कामयाब बनाने के लिए कच्चा माल तैयार करने में शामिल लोगों, प्लास्टिक मैन्युफैक्चर्स, एफएमसीजी कंपनियों, केंद्र एवं राज्य सरकारों समेत उपभोक्ताओं को भी अपनी भूमिका निभानी होगी। प्लास्टिक इंडस्ट्री, मैन्युफैक्चर्स और एफएमसीजी कंपनियों को उत्पादों की पैकिंग के डिजाइन इस तरह से तैयार करने पर विचार करना चाहिए कि उसमें प्लास्टिक स्ट्रा की अनिवार्यता समाप्त हो। यह तभी मुमकिन होगा, जब कंपनियां एक साथ आकर अपने संसाधनों का इस्तेमाल करें और ऐसा डिजाइन तैयार करें जो उन्हें मुनाफा देने के साथ-साथ लोगों और धरती के लिए भी लाभदायक हो। क्या आपको नहीं लगता कि प्रतिबंधित वस्तुओं का विकल्प न होना भी एसयूपी पर प्रभावी रोक में बाधक है? ऐसा नहीं है। पहले तो यह समङिाए कि जिन वस्तुओं पर रोक लगी है, वह प्लास्टिक स्टिक वाली या फिर कटलरी हैं। अगर 1990 से पहले की ओर देखा जाए तो पता चलेगा प्लास्टिक कटलरी थी ही नहीं। केले के पत्तों, पत्तल, दोने एवं लकड़ी का सामान प्रचलन था। इसी तरह कई कंपनियों ने प्लास्टिक स्टिक को भी लकड़ी में बदल लिया है। मसलन, हर बड़ी कंपनी आइसक्रीम स्टिक के लिए प्लास्टिक नहीं, बल्कि लकड़ी की स्टिक का इस्तेमाल कर रही है। दिक्कत केवल स्ट्रा को लेकर आ रही है। वह भी इसलिए क्योंकि कंपनियों ने इस प्रतिबंध को गंभीरता से लिया ही नहीं। उन्हें छह माह की मोहलत भी पहले दी जा चुकी है, लेकिन अब वह फिर से समय मांग रही हैं। देश और दिल्ली में हर साल कितना प्लास्टिक कचरा निकलता है? स्टेट आफ इंडियाज एन्वायरमेंट रिपोर्ट - 2022 के अनुसार भारत में हर रोज 25 हजार 950 टन प्लास्टिक कचरा निकलता है। वायु प्रदूषण के साथ-साथ दिल्ली इस मामले में पहले नंबर पर है, जहां रोजाना 689.8 टन प्लास्टिक कचरा निकल रहा है। कोलकाता दूसरे और चेन्नई तीसरे नंबर पर है। यहां रोज क्रमश: 429.5 टन और 429.4 टन प्लास्टिक कचरा निकलता है। देश में पिछले तीन दशकों के दौरान प्लास्टिक के उपयोग में 20 गुना बढ़ोतरी हुई है। सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक का 60 प्रतिशत हिस्सा यानी करीब 1.10 करोड़ मीटिक टन अलग-अलग पैकेजिंग में इस्तेमाल किया जाता है। करीब 30 लाख मीटिक टन प्लास्टिक अन्य उपयोग में ले लिया जाता है। 75 लाख मीटिक टन से अधिक प्लास्टिक अलग-अलग तरह की परेशानी पैदा करता है। क्या इस प्लास्टिक कचरे को रिसाइकिल नहीं किया जा सकता? रिसाइकिल तो तब हो पाएगा न, जबकि इसका संग्रहण हो। प्लास्टिक कचरे का संग्रहण ही आसान नहीं है। कबाड़ी भी प्लास्टिक का हर आइटम नहीं लेता। इसके अलावा रिसाइकिल भी केवल साफ वस्तुओं का ही हो सकता है। अगर उसमें खाने-पीने की कोई सामग्री लगी हुई है तो वह रिसाइकिल नहीं हो पाएगा। किस हद तक हानिकारक है प्लास्टिक कचरा? हानिकारक तो यह हर तरह से है। जानवरों के पेट में पालीथिन चिपक जाती है, जिससे उनकी मौत तक हो जाती है। प्लास्टिक कचरे के अंश जमीन में जाकर भूजल को प्रदूषित करते हैं और नदियों में गिरकर उसके पानी को। इसमें आग लगाई जाए तो हवा में प्रदूषित गैसें फैल जाती हैं। इसके अलावा भी यह विभिन्न प्रकार से स्वास्थ्य को नुकसान पहुंचा रहा है। ऐसे में सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक पर प्रभावी रोक और पर्यावरण की रक्षा कैसे संभव है? देखिए, यह एक लगातार जारी रहने वाली प्रक्रिया है, जिसमें राज्य प्रदूषण नियंत्रण बोर्ड एवं समितियों और स्थानीय निकायों को सख्ती एवं जागरूकता के साथ काम करना होगा। उपभोक्ताओं को भी अपनी भूमिका निभानी होगी, जिसमें प्लास्टिक कैरी बैग लेने से मना करने (उसकी मोटाई चाहे जितनी भी हो), सतर्कता से खाने-पीने और घरों में होने वाले ठोस कचरे को अलग करने जैसी चीजें शामिल हैं। इससे प्लास्टिक कचरे को, डलावघर से उठाकर उपलब्ध सुविधाओं के जरिये अलग ले जाया जा सकेगा, जहां इन्हें रिसाइकिल कर दोबारा काम में लाने लायक बनाया जा सकेगा। वैकल्पिक बाजार को व्यापक करने के लिए भी सरकारी कदमों की जरूरत है। लोगों में जागरुकता लाना भी एक अहम कदम है।

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Plastic Ban: सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक पर प्रतिबंध का फैसला सीमित लेकिन महत्वपूर्ण कदम

सुनीता नारायण। देश में सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक की श्रेणी में आने वाले कई उत्पादों पर रोक लगा दी गई है। वैसे तो सिंगल यूज यूज प्लास्टिक पर लगा यह प्रतिबंध कुल प्रयोग होने वाले प्लास्टिक की तुलना में बहुत कम है, लेकिन इस संकट से निपटने की दिशा में अहम कदम अवश्य है। हमें प्लास्टिक से उपजे संकट के बारे में किसी चेतावनी की आवश्यकता नहीं है, क्योंकि हम रोज इसका सामना कर रहे हैं। हमारे शहर ऐसे प्लास्टिक मैटेरियल से भरे पड़े हैं, जिनसे पर्यावरण को गंभीर नुकसान पहुंच रहा है। इससे निपटने के लिए हमें तीन चरणों वाली नीति पर कदम बढ़ाना होगा। पहला, प्रयोग के बाद प्लास्टिक कचरे को एकत्र किया जाए। दूसरा, प्लास्टिक कचरे को लैंडफिल में भेजने के बजाय रीसाइकिल किया जाए या जला दिया जाए। तीसरा, रीसाइकिल या नष्ट करने की प्रक्रिया ऐसी हो, जिससे पर्यावरण को या उस प्रक्रिया में काम करने वाले लोगों को खतरा न हो। इन तीन चरणों के साथ ही एक अहम कदम यह है कि ऐसे प्लास्टिक उत्पाद जिन्हें एकत्र करना या रीसाइकिल करना मुश्किल हो, उनका प्रयोग बंद कर देना चाहिए। वर्तमान प्रतिबंध इसी दिशा में उठाया गया कदम है। इसका लक्ष्य रोजाना प्रयोग वाले ऐसे उत्पादों की पहचान करना है, जिन्हें एक बार प्रयोग करके फेंक दिया जाता है। इसीलिए ईयर बड, कटलरी, स्ट्रा और 120 माइक्रोन से कम के कैरी बैग को प्रतिबंधित किया गया है। यह फैसला प्लास्टिक के खिलाफ लड़ाई के लिए निर्णायक है। यह हमें तय करना है कि इससे प्लास्टिक-मुक्त समाज की राह निकले या यह विफल प्रयास बनकर रह जाए। इस बात में कोई संदेह नहीं है कि अभी लगाया गया प्रतिबंध पूर्ण नहीं है। सिंगल यूज प्लास्टिक से छुटकारा पाना है तो इस सूची में मल्टी लेयर्ड पैकेजिंग को भी रखा जाना चाहिए। चिप्स से लेकर शैंपू और गुटखे तक कई उत्पादों में ऐसी पैकेजिंग होती है। यह पैकेजिंग बहुत बड़ा संकट है। इन्हें एकत्र कर पाना और रीसाइकिल कर पाना लगभग असंभव होता है। इस कचरे से निपटने का एकमात्र तरीका यही है कि इन्हें सीमेंट प्लांट में ईंधन के तौर पर जलाने के लिए भेज दिया जाए। बहुत से लैंडफिल में यह कचरा बड़ी मात्रा में रहता है। वैसे तो पैकेजिंग मैटेरियल को लेकर एक्सटेंडेड प्रोड्यूसर रेस्पांसिबिलिटी (ईपीआर) नोटिफिकेशन प्रभावी है। इसके तहत पैर्केंजग मैटेरियल बनाने वाली कंपनी की जिम्मेदारी है कि वह इन्हें एकत्र करे और रीसाइकिल करे। कंपनियों के स्तर पर सालाना लक्ष्य भी रखे गए हैं कि उन्हें कितना मैटेरियल रीकलेक्ट करना है। कागजों में यह व्यवस्था बहुत सही लगती है, लेकिन असली समस्या इसके क्रियान्वयन में है। उदाहरण के तौर पर, इस बात का कोई आंकड़ा ही नहीं है कि कोई कंपनी कितना पैकेजिंग मैटेरियल बना रही है। यह सब सेल्फ डिक्लेरेशन पर निर्भर है और उसकी पुष्टि करने का कोई तरीका नहीं है। कंपनियां ईपीआर लक्ष्य पूरा करने के लिए अपनी तरफ से पैकेजिंग मैटेरियल को एकत्र करने का काम प्रोड्यूसर रेस्पांसिबिलिटी आर्गनाइजेशन (पीआरओ) को दे देती हैं। उदाहरण के तौर पर, इस बात का कोई आंकड़ा ही नहीं है कि कोई कंपनी कितना पैकेजिंग मैटेरियल बना रही है। यह सब सेल्फ डिक्लेरेशन पर निर्भर है और उसकी पुष्टि करने का कोई तरीका नहीं है। कंपनियां ईपीआर लक्ष्य पूरा करने के लिए अपनी तरफ से पैकेजिंग मैटेरियल को एकत्र करने का काम प्रोड्यूसर रेस्पांसिबिलिटी आर्गनाइजेशन (पीआरओ) को दे देती हैं।

• Down To Earth

Angela Merkel to Chair the Jury of the Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity

LISBON — Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel will be the next president of the jury for the prize, worth 1 million euros, awarded annually by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. This is the first position accepted by Merkel since she ceased her duties as chancellor in December 2021. Founded by the Armenian oil magnate and art collector Calouste Gulbenkian in Portugal in 1956, the foundation aims to improve people’s quality of life through art, charity, science and education. Angela Merkel succeeds Jorge Sampaio, who has been president of the jury since its first edition. The jury also includes Miguel Bastos Araújo (Research Professor at the National Museum of Natural Sciences, in Madrid and Professor of Biogeography at the University of Évora, Pessoa Prize 2018), Hans Joachim Schellnhuber (Founder and Director Emeritus of the Potsdam Institute for Research on the Impact Climate Specialist and Professor Emeritus at Tsinghua University in China), Johan Rockström (Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Researchand Professor of Earth System Sciences at the University of Potsdam), Miguel Arias Cañete (former European Commissioner for Energy and Climate Action), Rik Leemans (Director of the Environmental Systems Analysis Group, University of Wageningen and Wageningen and editor-in-chief of the journal international Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability ), Runa Khan (Founder and Executive Director of the NGO Friendship and President of Global Dignity Bangladesh), Sandra Díaz (Biologist, Professor of Ecology at the National University of Córdoba and member of the Royal Society) and Sunita Narain (Director of the Center for Science and Environment in Delhi and Editor of Down To Earth Magazine). The Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity was established by the Foundation with the aim of distinguishing people, groups or organizations from all over the world that have been outstanding in the fight against the climate crisis. Among the potential areas of recognition for the Award are those that can contribute to reducing or removing greenhouse gas emissions; actions to increase the resilience of people and the environment to the impacts of climate change; and also the mobilization of financial resources, public or private, to accelerate the decarbonization of the economy. The Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity was awarded for the first time, in 2020 , to the young Swedish activist Greta Thunberg , who decided to distribute the amount to various environmental and humanitarian projects in the Global South. Last year, the Prize was awarded to the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy – the largest global alliance for city climate leadership, comprising over 10,600 cities and local governments from 140 countries, including Portugal. The amount of the Gulbenkian Prize was used to support the Energy Transition and climate resilience in Africa, with large projects being financed in five cities in Senegal (supply of drinking water) and in one city in Cameroon (development of energy efficiency solutions) .

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

A small step on the long road to banning plastic

Environmental and waste experts are concerned over the selective ban on single-use plastic, and the continued use of multi-layered plastics. The 21 single-use plastic items banned in India from July 1 are just the tip of the iceberg. There is a much bigger environmental hazard that is assuming humongous proportions in the country and worldwide, experts warn. Nevertheless, the ban is a good start that needs proper enforcement to be successful. The experts say the list is not comprehensive, as major plastic contaminants such as multi-layered packaging, which is used in everything from packets of chips to shampoo bottles and gutkha pouches, have been left out. The Plastic Waste Management Amendment Rules, 2021, notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on August 12 last year, bans the manufacture, import, stocking, distribution and sale of 21 items with low utility and high littering potential. What's being banned The list includes plastic sticks for ear buds, balloons, candy and ice-cream; plastic flags; polystyrene (thermocol) for decoration; plastic plates, cups, glasses; cutlery such as forks, spoons, knives; straws, trays; wrapping or packaging films around sweet boxes, invitation cards and cigarette packets, plastic or PVC banners less than 100 micron, and stirrers. The rules already prohibit carrybags with thickness less than 75 microns and less than 120 microns (from December 31 this year). The list was prepared by an expert committee constituted by the department of chemicals and petrochemicals under the Union Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisers. The panel proposed two parameters to identify the problematic plastics. The first were those high on environmental impact such as litter found in water bodies, river beds, drains, etc. The second were those low on utility – stuff that is used once and discarded. In February, the environment ministry had also notified guidelines on ‘extended producers’ responsibility’ on plastic packaging. The norms would require producers to take responsibility for environmentally sound management of a plastic product until the end of its life. “The ban is a welcome step. It has happened after much deliberation and sends out a positive message on adverse impacts of plastics,” said Satish Sinha, associate director of Toxics Link, an environmental NGO. Pradeep Sangwan, founder of Healing Himalayas, which works for the protection of the mountain range, feels most of these products polluting hills and rivers are being used because they are being manufactured. “Why are we using such useless products? We can survive without them.” Implementation is the key The experts, however, warn that this is only a small beginning, albeit an important one, and only strict enforcement will make it work else it will end up like previous bans on plastic bags, which fizzled out. “It is a good move, a starting point that needs enforcement and proper implementation to be successful,” said Atin Biswas, programme director, municipal solid waste, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). “But the popular narrative that India is going to ban single-use plastics is just not right because only a fraction is being prohibited,” he cautioned. According to the environment ministry, national and state-level control rooms and special teams will keep an eye on the illegal production, import, distribution, sale and use of the banned items. Violations will lead to punitive actions prescribed under the Environment Protection Act, such as imprisonment for up to five years with a fine that may extend to ₹1 lakh, or both. Biswas said one can’t expect overnight change but if these plastics are still being used three-four months down the line, the ban will have no meaning. “We have a basketful of policies but implementation remains tardy.” However, some reduction in the foot-print of single-use plastic can be expected if implemented properly, he said. Sangwan seconded Biswas, saying many good policies on solid waste were not being implemented in a proper manner. “We don’t need a paper policy,” he said. Panchayats and villages are doing good work to reduce plastic but need help and guidance, Sangwan said. “We need a bottom-up and top-down approach. All agencies need to collaborate to enforce the ban at the ground level.” Both said a lot of plastic waste reduction depends on how consumers behave. Once they know about the ill-effects of plastic, and the alternatives available, many might want to shift to cleaner stuff. What's left out A major cause of concern is the absence of the ubiquitous multi-layered plastics (MLPs) as well as plastic bottles from the list. One of the top litter items, these are found everywhere, right from your neighbourhood drain to rivers and oceans to high up in the hills. Multi-layered plastics used in packets of chips or gutkha or food products by fast-moving consumer goods companies are problematic because they are difficult to collect and almost non-recyclable. These plastics have two or more layers, plastic together with aluminium or paper, Biswas explained. “Hypothetically, these can be recycled. The layers can be separated. But as they do not meet the criteria of economy of scale, the industry is not interested in recycling them,” Biswas said. There is no definite number on the quantity of MLPs in the overall plastic waste stream. “But if we look at garbage heaps, we will mostly find MLPs, which are mainly incinerated in cement kilns or waste-energy plants,” the CSE expert explained. Nearly 60 percent of plastic comes from packaging comprising 25-30 big brands, which can be identified because there is distinct marking or branding. But most of the items mentioned in the notification, barring earbuds, are non-branded and made by the informal sector. “So if you look at this notification, the big brands are barely getting affected,” Biswas said. The methodology applied to make this list should be applied to other sections of plastic as well, he argued. “There is evidence to prove that drinking water, beverage or pet bottles fulfil the criteria to feature in this list but they have not been banned.” Explaining the flip side of recycling, Biswas explained how 90 percent of recycled pet bottles are used to make textile fabric. But pet fibre, once discarded, gets categorised as textile waste and not as plastic waste. “So this is not recycling in real terms.” Sunita Narain, director general of CSE, said the ban was too limited but still a critical step. “Our cities are littered with non-biodegradable plastic material, and it is adding to environmental stress and degradation,” she said in a statement. A worldwide concern According to the Central Pollution Control Board, which sent a slew of directives regarding the ban, approximately 3.4 million tonnes per annum (TPA) of plastic waste was generated in India in 2019-20. Maharashtra (13 percent) topped the list followed by Tamil Nadu (12 percent). Goa, Delhi and Kerala reported the highest per capita plastic waste generation. India generated more than 25,940 tonnes of plastic waste every day, the government told the Lok Sabha in 2019. Forty percent of this remained uncollected. According to a report by earthday.org, around 380 million tonnes of plastic are produced yearly across the world. And 8.3 billion tonnes have been produced since plastic was introduced in the 1950s. Humans use about 1.2 million plastic bottles per minute in total and about 500 billion plastic cups every year. Roughly, half of our global annual plastic production is destined for single-use products, the report says. Single-use plastic straws and stirrers collected over 35 years from marine bodies would stretch the entire length of the Himalayas, according to the 2021 International Coastal Cleanup (ICC) report by oceanconservancy.org. The total weight of trash removed during the 35 years is equal to 1,148 blue whales. In the fourth United Nations Environment Assembly in 2019, India piloted a resolution to tackle pollution by single-use plastic products. In the fifth session, held this March, India engaged with all member states to develop a consensus on global action to deal with the issue. Many countries, such as Canada, European Union members and some US states, have already banned plastic bags or select single-use plastic items. Highlighting the problem in the fragile Himalayas, Sangwan said tourism is one of the reasons behind increased waste generation. “Waste of tier 2/3 cities is generated in small towns in the hills. There is plastic waste on Mount Everest.” Sangwan said they were in talks with the Himachal Pradesh government to find out ways to stop plastic bottles and other waste from reaching the higher Himalayas. Manoj Mishra, convenor of Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan, said rivers are dying as their tributaries, especially smaller ones, are clogged with refuse, chiefly single-use plastics. “Manufacturing of such products must be banned across the board. Selective banning will lead to corrupt practices by enforcers.” Are viable alternatives available? Apart from lacklustre enforcement, another challenge that could impede implementation efforts is stiff resistance from traders and manufacturers of plastic products. The industry is asking for some more time to find alternatives, saying 88,000 units employing about 1 million people and contributing to exports worth Rs 25,000 crore will be left bankrupt. Biodegradable plastics are among the alternative materials being suggested. Experts say cutlery could be replaced through other materials such as bamboo or plantain leaves, paper, or areca leaf, which manufacturers say are costlier. All India Plastics Manufacturers’ Association director-general Deepak Ballani said the ban had thrown up many challenges. And switching over to alternatives to cater to the current market is one of them. “The alternatives do not necessarily provide the same functionality, not to mention availability of raw materials. The higher cost of alternatives is also a major challenge,” Ballani said. It would have been prudent to have alternatives in hand before enforcing the phase-out, he said. The makers now face the dilemma of compromising on food safety, health safety and consumer convenience while searching for alternatives, Ballai argued. “Hopefully, such alternatives will be based on sound science so as not to leave a larger impact on the environment than what they are replacing,” he said. The ministry notice said central and state pollution control authorities and the Union ministry for small, micro and medium enterprises would provide technical assistance to small industrial units for the production of viable alternatives. Biswas, however, said compostable and bio-degradable plastic is not as easy as it sounds. Bio-degradable doesn’t mean one throws the plastic along with food waste and it will get composted. “They are compostable only in a controlled industrial environment. We don’t know how many establishments with such facilities exist.” Dealers and shop owners had their own concerns. A wholesaler said he would suffer huge losses as he did not know what to do with his current stock. The owner of a small tea stall said an earthen cup is costlier than a disposable plastic cup and would reduce his income. Experts say it’s now or never as every move to change is always resisted. “The cost of inaction perhaps will be far higher,” Sinha said. Narain said it is time people take responsibility for the waste they generate and not use banned items. “Because we must and can live without them,” she said.

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Single-use plastic ban: Lack of affordable alternatives, fear of job losses worry industry

An across-the-board ban on single-use plastic came into effect in India on Friday. The Ministry of Environment said that the state governments, implementing the ban on single-use plastic smoothly, would initiate an enforcement campaign and close down units engaging in the production, distribution, stocking, and sale of such items. The Union government notified the Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2021, in August last year, prohibiting 20 single-use plastic items by 2022. The ban covers rigid plastic items such as plates, cups, glasses, cutlery, wrapping or packaging films, PVC banners less than 100 microns, straws, and stirrers, among others. The single-use plastic manufacturing industry employs nearly 2 lakh people directly and around 4.5 lakh people indirectly, the ministry said. As per official figures, the single-use plastic items industry is estimated worth Rs 10,000 crore, however, sources in the industry claim it to be even larger at Rs 60,000 crore. As per information provided by all state pollution control boards, India generates 3.5 million tonnes of plastic waste a year. The government data reveals that India's per capita plastic waste generation is 3 kg per year. The World Bank estimates the global average at 0.74 kg per individual. Plastic waste generation during the year 2020-21 is approximately 41,26,997 tonnes per annum. Practical issues with the blanket ban The concerns over plastic waste are genuine. But the issue with the blanket ban on single-use plastic is that the alternatives are very expensive. For example, the cost of paper straws is five times as much as plastic straws. That means the single-use plastic ban is going to hurt small vendors and manufacturers. The Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has written to the Union Environment Minister Bhupendra Yadav to extend the last date of imposition of the ban on single-use plastic to one year from July 1, 2022. CAIT has also urged to form a joint committee of senior government officials and representatives of stakeholders with a time-bound mandate of suggesting equitable alternatives to single-use plastic so that without any disruption, the country stops using single-use plastic. The CAIT letter is the outcome of deliberations held on this critical issue by more than 100 trade leaders from all states of the country at a two-day national conference of CAIT being held at Nagpur in Maharashtra. Sunita Narain, director general, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), says that the way ahead is to ensure that plastic items are recycled or disposed of safely. "For this, we need a three-pronged strategy," she told India Today. "First, all the plastic produced and used should be collected for disposal. Second, the waste plastic must be recycled or incinerated; it should not reach landfills or choke our waterbodies. Third, the reuse or disposal has to be in a manner that is environmentally friendly and does not end up creating more pollution or health hazards. Most importantly, those plastic items that are difficult to collect or recycle should be eliminated from use. This is where the current ban, however limited, fits in." CAIT National President BC Bhartia and Secretary General Praveen Khandelwal said that "undoubtedly the pollution of the environment is a big threat to human civilisation and corrective steps are much needed to protect the environment. However, before any imposition of the ban, it is all the more necessary to keep equivalent alternatives ready to shift the usage". What about multi-layered packaging? Environmental researchers state that the current list of banned items does not include multi-layered packaging (MLP), which, according to CSE researchers, is used in almost all fast-moving consumer goods, from chips to shampoos to gutkha pouches. MLP packaging uses layer/layers of plastic along with materials like paper, paper board, polymeric materials, etc, to protect sensitive food products and hence offer a longer shelf life. The government says all packaging material has been included as part of the extended producer responsibility (EPR) notification. Under this, the companies that manufacture or consume this material are required to take it back and send it for reprocessing. Annual targets have been fixed for companies on how much is to be recollected. The environment ministry has also set aside a target for the manufacturing industry on recycling. "By 2026-2027, manufacturers will have to recycle 100 per cent of all their plastic packaging," said the ministry. Currently, however, the target falls behind. By 2022-23, companies are expected to recycle 70 per cent of their plastic. Sunita Narain points out that there are huge problems in the way EPR has been designed or is being implemented. "For instance, there is no information on the quantity of this plastic material or the waste the company generates. Not only is it based on self-declaration, but there is nothing available in the public domain to assess its accuracy. This means the target that has been set for each company is meaningless," she says. Narain says, under EPR, "companies are required to recycle or reprocess the material they collect only by 2024. The question, then, is what is happening to the plastic waste that is being collected — is it being stored or dumped?" There's also the question of jobs While imposing a blanket ban on single-use plastic, CAIT says it should not be forgotten that, over a longer period, single-use plastic has emerged as a much bigger industry giving employment to lakhs of people in the country and having an annual turnover of more than Rs 60,000 crores. "Banks and financial institutions have a great stake in the single-use plastic industry and a situation of a complete ban without providing any equitable alternative will cause massive destruction in the working vertical of retail trade in India," the trader's body said in the letter to the Environment Ministry. "Since traders are the first connection point for the consumers and the public, they will have to face the consequences, though the traders selling the products are acting merely as a component of the supply chain, making things available to the public," the letter added. Environment ministry's strategy The ministry is looking at a three-pronged strategy for banning single-use plastic in India. It includes preventing the usage of plastic that has high littering potential, and low utility after use, and providing alternatives for them. * High littering potential: This includes products that are thrown away quickly post usage. Most of these are disposable items found in drains and are seen as products that contribute to littering. * Low utility: These are plastic products that have the least amount of usage or utility after being used. For instance, wrapping plastic sheets is hardly utilised after the packaging is opened. * Availability of alternatives: For instance, paper bags, paper wrappings (which can be made from recycled material), bamboo spoons instead of plastic spoons, etc. As the traders' body and the government continue talks over how to go about the ban, the alternative to single-use plastic will continue to hang fire. Given the number of jobs at stake and the money being invested, the government will have to be cautious in following up with the ban, and the industry will have to quickly find ways to go along with the difficult decision of pruning the jobs or re-skilling the workforce.

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Ban on single-use plastic by July 1st, is India Inc. ready?

From July 1, 2022, the government will prohibit the production, distribution, and use of specific single-use plastic products such as plates, cups, straws, trays, and polystyrene. Is the sector prepared to abide by the prohibition? The administration is prepared to start enforcing the single-use plastic ban on July 1. On January 26, 2019, from the Lal Quila’s fortifications, Prime Minister Narendra Modi discussed India’s progress in this direction. The government then announced on August 12, 2021, that as of July 1, 2022, all single-use plastic goods with low usefulness and high litter potential are prohibited from being manufactured, imported, stocked, distributed, sold, and used. PET bottles used to package water do not yet fit into this category. INDIA’S PLASTIC WASTE GENERATION LANDSCAPE Every year, 3.5 million tons of plastic garbage are produced in India. According to government statistics, India produces 3 kilograms of plastic garbage per person each year. Approximately 41, 26,997 tons of plastic garbage will be produced annually in 2020–21, according to data from all state pollution control boards. The best course of action, according to Sunita Narain, director general of the Centre for Science and Environment, is to make sure that plastic products are recycled or disposed of properly. We need a three-pronged approach for this, she continues. “First, all plastic that is made and used should be gathered and disposed of.” Second, the used plastic garbage has to be recycled or burned; it shouldn’t end up in landfills or clog our waterways. Thirdly, the recycling or disposal process needs to be done in a way that is not harmful to the environment or human health. However, it is most crucial to stop using plastic products that are hard to recycle or collect. Herein lays the purpose of the existing restriction, albeit curtailed. Can the industry abide by the single-use plastic ban? Even while the government authorities seem ready to enforce, is the sector ready to reform? Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has asked Union Environment Minister Bhupendra Yadav to extend the single-use plastic ban’s deadline to July 1, 2022, rather than the current six months. Additionally, he has called for the establishment of a joint committee made up of senior government officials and stakeholder groups with the task of coming up with fair substitutes for single-use plastic so that the country may discontinue its usage without any hindrance.

• Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy

Angela Merkel to chair the jury of the Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel will be the next president of the jury for the prize, worth 1 million euros, awarded annually by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. This is the first position accepted by Merkel since she ceased her duties as chancellor in December 2021. Founded by the Armenian oil magnate and art collector Calouste Gulbenkian in Portugal in 1956, the foundation aims to improve people’s quality of life through art, charity, science and education. Angela Merkel succeeds Jorge Sampaio, who has been president of the jury since its first edition. The jury also includes Miguel Bastos Araújo (Research Professor at the National Museum of Natural Sciences, in Madrid and Professor of Biogeography at the University of Évora, Pessoa Prize 2018), Hans Joachim Schellnhuber (Founder and Director Emeritus of the Potsdam Institute for Research on the Impact Climate Specialist and Professor Emeritus at Tsinghua University in China), Johan Rockström (Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Researchand Professor of Earth System Sciences at the University of Potsdam), Miguel Arias Cañete (former European Commissioner for Energy and Climate Action), Rik Leemans (Director of the Environmental Systems Analysis Group, University of Wageningen and Wageningen and editor-in-chief of the journal international Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability ), Runa Khan (Founder and Executive Director of the NGO Friendship and President of Global Dignity Bangladesh), Sandra Díaz (Biologist, Professor of Ecology at the National University of Córdoba and member of the Royal Society) and Sunita Narain (Director of the Center for Science and Environment in Delhi and Editor of Down To Earth Magazine). The Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity was established by the Foundation with the aim of distinguishing people, groups or organizations from all over the world that have been outstanding in the fight against the climate crisis. Among the potential areas of recognition for the Award are those that can contribute to reducing or removing greenhouse gas emissions; actions to increase the resilience of people and the environment to the impacts of climate change; and also the mobilization of financial resources, public or private, to accelerate the decarbonization of the economy. The Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity was awarded for the first time, in 2020 , to the young Swedish activist Greta Thunberg , who decided to distribute the amount to various environmental and humanitarian projects in the Global South. Last year, the Prize was awarded to the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy – the largest global alliance for city climate leadership, comprising over 10,600 cities and local governments from 140 countries, including Portugal. The amount of the Gulbenkian Prize was used to support the Energy Transition and climate resilience in Africa, with large projects being financed in five cities in Senegal (supply of drinking water) and in one city in Cameroon (development of energy efficiency solutions) .