CSE’s Sushmita Sengupta explains why infrastructure-heavy solutions have failed to clean Yamuna; why As Chhath wraps up, the Yamuna’s pollution woes resurface, fuelling fresh political controversy. De
Will developing countries be left behind in the race towards a new, green economy? This is an emerging threat, says a set of new discussion papers by New Delhi-based think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) at a time when the UN’s 30th Conference of Parties (COP) has kicked off in Belem in Brazil amid a turbulent geopolitical landscape in which climate ambition is struggling to stay afloat. ‘Towards a new green world’, as the CSE paper series is called, was released on the eve of COP30. It calls for centering economic resilience, value addition and green industrialization in the climate agenda for developing countries. Releasing the series, CSE Director General Sunita Narain said: “Inclusive and affordable development is critical for economic resilience and will help combat climate change.” “Countries need an economic stake in the green transition, which requires domestic manufacturing and job creation. For this, we must also reset global trade and finance rules for localization and value addition. “There is an opportunity to rethink these rules so that distributed local-led production systems can become the basis of green industrialization,” Narain added. Focusing on three strategic fronts of the green transition — agriculture and forest commodities, critical minerals, and clean technology and manufacturing — the series presents a Southern perspective on how the Global South can participate and stay afloat in the new, green economy. Across commodities, minerals and manufacturing, developing countries face a common dilemma: They supply the world’s resources but capture too little of the value. From raw cocoa and copper to lithium and solar cells, the green transition is repeating old patterns of extraction and dependence. “The global green transition risks reproducing old inequities under a new climate-friendly banner, unless the Global South is empowered to capture greater value, diversify its economies, and shape the governance of emerging green industries,” says Avantika Goswami, programme manager, climate change, CSE. “We need to reinvent the climate agenda for the Global South. Calling for decarbonization without economic resilience is no longer viable,” she adds. On agriculture and forest commodities, developing countries are trapped in a low-value export cycle — they sell raw agricultural and forest commodities, and end up with almost nothing of the value, says the first paper in the series. For instance, Ivory Coast and Ghana produce over 50 per cent of the world’s cocoa beans; but, they account for a mere 6.2 per cent of the total export revenue from value-added products like chocolate and cocoa powder. In contrast, manufacturers and retailers located in Global North countries capture almost 80-90 per cent of the total profit margin of a chocolate bar. The paper argues that “a shift from raw exports to processing and diversification is critical”. On critical minerals, the Global South holds most of the world’s reserves of critical minerals crucial for energy transition; but it captures little of the value generated from refining and manufacturing. Says Goswami: “These countries remain exposed to commodity price volatility, balance-of-payments instability, and geopolitical risk.” Taking the cases of three countries — Chile, Indonesia, and Congo — the paper has analyzed the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of their critical minerals policies and strategic plans and offers a list of principles for paving the way forward through centering equity and justice for the Global South in the climate-trade-development nexus. On clean technology manufacturing, global clean tech manufacturing is concentrated in China, the EU and the US; developing countries in Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia together account for less than 5 per cent of production value. Meanwhile, the Global South faces a dual challenge of decarbonizing while industrializing to meet the demands of a growing economy. Structural asymmetries persist: Developing nations assemble goods but import value-heavy inputs. This paper explores how countries can pursue green industrialization by building clean-tech manufacturing capacity amid China’s dominance, limited domestic capacities, and unequal participation in global trade. Using case studies from China, India, Indonesia, and Mexico, it outlines key takeaways from country experiences in the clean technology sector, calling for renewed industrial policy, South-South cooperation, and global rule reform to build resilient economies. (IANS)
Developing countries risk being left behind in the new green economy despite being richly endowed with critical minerals crucial for energy transition, a new report has revealed. The report, titled “Towards a New Green World: Critical Minerals—Moving Up the Value Chain, by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) reveals that the ongoing global transition toward renewable energy is repeating old patterns of resource extraction and dependency. While developing nations provide the raw materials needed for wind turbines, solar panels, and electric vehicles, the real profits are reaped elsewhere. “Developing countries continue to export raw materials while industrialized nations capture most of the value through refining, manufacturing, and innovation,” reads part of the report. According to the report, from copper and cobalt to lithium and rare earth elements, the mineral wealth of the Global South powers the world’s green ambitions, but the benefits rarely reach those who mine them. For instance, Chile contributes around 30 percent of the world’s raw copper exports, yet captures only 12 percent of the revenue from processed copper. Australia supplies more than 76 percent of global raw lithium, but China earns nearly a quarter of the world’s processed lithium export revenues. Meanwhile, Indonesia produces over 60 percent of mined nickel, but China and Japan control 75 percent of global refining capacity. “Countries need an economic stake in the green transition, which requires domestic manufacturing and job creation. For this, we must also reset global trade and finance rules for localisation and value addition. There is an opportunity to rethink these rules so that distributed local-led production systems can become the basis of green industrialisation,” said Sunita Narain, CSE’s Director general. The report warns that if developing countries remain stuck in the role of raw material suppliers, they could face new economic vulnerabilities. Heavy reliance on mineral exports exposes economies to commodity price shocks, environmental degradation, and “boom-and-bust” cycles that weaken long-term development. For example, Chile’s current account balance surged twenty-fold in 2004 during a global copper price spike, only to contract sharply when prices fell again. However, the report also highlights emerging success stories showing that change is possible. Indonesia, for example, banned the export of nickel ore in 2014 and introduced incentives for companies investing in local smelting and refining. This policy attracted over US$20 billion in downstream projects and transformed the country into the world’s largest refined-nickel producer. “In Africa, Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have formed a joint battery value chain partnership aimed at local processing of nickel, manganese, and cobalt critical inputs for electric vehicle batteries. Similarly, the African Union’s Green Minerals Strategy, launched in 2025, seeks to ensure that Africa moves from being merely a supplier of raw materials to an integrated partner in global value chains,” the report reads. To prevent the green transition from becoming another form of exploitation, the report proposes four strategic pillars for the Global South. First, sufficiency encouraging sustainable consumption and reducing over extraction. Second, recycling and circularity. Investing in technologies to recover minerals from e-waste and used batteries. Third, regional cooperation, through frameworks like the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), to harmonize standards and attract investment. Fourth, economic diversification, to reduce dependence on single-resource exports and build resilience against price shocks. “The global green transition risks reproducing old inequities under a new climate-friendly banner, unless the Global South is empowered to capture greater value, diversify its economies, and shape the governance of emerging green industries,” says Avantika Goswami, programme manager, climate change, CSE. The study calls on policymakers to embed justice, human rights, and environmental safeguards in mineral governance. It also urges stronger international collaboration that enables fair financing, technology transfer, and equitable participation in the green value chain. “The future green economy must not mirror the inequalities of the old one. The Global South needs not just a greener world but a fairer one, with economic resilience at its core, in hand with climate action,” says Narain.
Sunita Narain of the Center for Science and Environment, pertinently asks: “Why single out coal? Why not natural gas, which is also a fossil fuel, and emits gases that contribute to global warming? I know, I am asking an inconvenient question. But bear with me. I do so, knowing that we need to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions, and fast. But we need clarity on what we are doing and why?” Most people say that Belem, which hosts COP30 multilateral meet, is a spectacularly beautiful place in Brazil. The event marks the 30th edition of a global alliance, which wants to mitigate the effects of Climate Change, and tackle the looming crisis. Predictably, soon after he was elected for a second term, the US President Donald Trump withdrew his country from the 2015 Paris Agreement. He did the same during his first tenure. Nevertheless, the Brazilian event will continue, even as it struggles to find solutions. Like most institutions, which are either governed directly or indirectly by the United Nations, its future faces challenges. For India, events like COP30 are of extreme importance for various factors. One, they trigger old and haggard arguments about the double standards, and hypocrisy of the West in Climate Change issues. Two, there is the growing pressure from global activists, actively aided and abetted by what I would call the brown sepoys. Three, although India is successful, particularly since the signing of the Paris Agreement, to grow its share of renewable production, and consumption increases rapidly, it faces stark choices. Despite the successes, the pressures are mounting. In an article, Anurabha Ghosh, a leading activist, wrote, “The time for promises is now over. COP30 must mark the shift from a bank of promises to a bank of actions where delivery not declarations mark progress. Nowhere is this more important than in South Asia, a region on the front lines of clear climate crisis…. For India, climate action is both a necessity and an opportunity…. But for it to succeed, the world must come together through smarter, more inclusive multilateralism.” Of course, as is the case with global activists, the voice is eloquent, articulate, and passionate. But India’s choices cannot be dictated only by the western or global concerns. For example, take the case of the increasing pressure to reduce the use of thermal energy, or of electricity generated by coal. In contrast, the European nations, which are not openly hostile to the Paris Agreement like the US, adopt a peculiar stance on energy sources. As far as they are concerned, natural gas is good, but coal is dirty, old, and polluting. It is ironic that gas, like coal, is a fossil fuel, and no matter how one spins it, or liquefies it, gas remains a polluting fuel. One cannot condone the use of one, and condemn the other. Obviously, everyone does not buy the argument. An environmentalist, Sunita Narain of the Center for Science and Environment, pertinently asks: “Why single out coal? Why not natural gas, which is also a fossil fuel, and emits gases that contribute to global warming? I know, I am asking an inconvenient question. But bear with me. I do so, knowing that we need to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions, and fast. But we need clarity on what we are doing and why?” Now, Narain is not a fan of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, or the ruling regime. She is not a fan of coal, or Trump. When the US president says that Climate Change is a hoax, and a fraud, Narain asks the reasons to single out coal vis-à-vis gas. She is merely harping on the fact that it is unjust, and cruel to impose restrictions on energy use on the third world countries. Narain has pointed that the average electricity consumption of an American is 36 times that of an average Indian household. Hence, as the Indian economy grows rapidly, emerges as the fastest-growing major economy in the world, millions will walk out of a life of poverty and destitution, and become part of the new aspirational Indian middle-class generation. These are families that have never used a refrigerator, mixer, or microwave oven, forget about a washing machine, dishwasher, or other gadgets. They need electricity, whatever may be the source, and coal is most obvious one in India. But the brown sepoy of the global activists have other arguments. They want India to give up coal, adopt gas in the interim period, and accelerate the production and use of renewables, and green energy. While this may be a fine argument for the Europeans, and even the US, which have access to gas, it does not suit India. While India sits comfortably vis-à-vis targets for green sources, its energy demand is high. At least for the next decade or so, it cannot give up on coal. At present, India produces a billion tonnes of coal a year, and imports 200 million tonnes. India has the fifth largest reserves of coal in the world, and half of the power and electricity generated is based on coal. This figure is likely to remain the same till 2030. Hence, it is virtually impossible for India to forsake coal, and choose gas and green sources, if it wishes to maintain high GDP growth. Even if one agrees with the argument, where will the gas come from? Most of the coal is locally produced, but the country has minimal gas sources. Hence, it will need to import huge quantities every year. Apart from the infrastructure costs, and issues of energy security, it will distort the current account deficit, and balance of payments. Just imagine the dollar value of importing gas equivalent a billion tonnes of coal! No government can take such a decision. It is economic harakiri, and political suicide for a ruling political party. Well, the next level of argument is that India needs to be a global poster boy, and reduce energy use through efficiency, and efficacy. For example, in heated discussions that the author has had with activists, the latter contend that there is no need to supply electricity to the poor and dark areas by using coal. Let these old, pristine communities live the way they do. Push more welfare schemes, and provide them with social security. Make sure that they get the basic amenities like food and drinking water, apart from healthcare and education, and higher incomes, minus the electricity. I find it strange. Well, I may not matter, but the Indian policy-makers will need to juggle with this kind of arguments, and activism, which may seem to border on the unusual. This explains why each time a coal mine licence is given, or a thermal plant construction begins, there are waves of protests. But then India cannot afford to let its guard down, and needs to ensure its economic interests. Global activists, and their brown sepoy backers will continue to question. The author has worked for leading media houses, authored two books, and is now Executive Director, C Voter Foundation; views are personal
As a grey blanket of smog smothered the city and Delhiites struggled to breathe, air pollution data went missing for a major portion of Monday. Since 1 pm, neither hourly air quality index (AQI) updates nor the city's daily average had been released till late evening, even as the air visibly worsened since the afternoon. While hourly AQI data for individual stations was back on the Central Pollution Control Board website around 9pm, there were gaps in readings at several monitors. There was no response from CPCB or the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to TOI's queries on the data outage. As per an independent analysis, the average PM2.5 concentration from 12am to 9pm on Monday was 249 micrograms per cubic metre as compared to 215 micrograms per cubic metre over the same period of the previous day. Based on these readings, the PM2.5 levels were near severe on Monday. Till early afternoon, when the last available readings were published, the city's average PM2.5 levels - the primary pollutant responsible for Delhi's foul air - were nearly identical to those recorded at the same time on Sunday. Yet, the corresponding AQI values were significantly higher, mirroring the palpable deterioration that residents could feel. By evening, visibility had dropped sharply and an acrid stench hung in the air. Roads and flyovers disappeared into a yellow-grey haze as people covered their faces and hurried indoors. "The CPCB has not updated any data since the afternoon and it's not the first time this has happened in the last two years. The data missing from such a crucial website at such a critical time, handicaps citizens, researchers and regulators in taking action to reduce pollution or initiate precautionary measures, " said Sunil Dahiya, founder and lead analyst, Envirocatalysts. From 1pm onwards, data went missing from the CPCB website but was available on the DPCC portal. This indicated that the monitors were working and the glitch was elsewhere. By around 5.30pm, out of 562 stations across India, only 4 were live. Gurgaon's AQI 'cover story': Trees, walls & missing data A thick smokescreen hung over the city till late Monday morning. It was much the same in Delhi, Noida and other parts of NCR. But while Delhi's AQI was 345 (very poor) and Noida's 318 (very poor), Gurgaon seemed to be breathing easier with an AQI of 221 (poor). What one saw didn't fit with what the data suggested. It's been like this through this peak pollution season, since Diwali, with Gurgaon's average AQI mostly better than other NCR cities. Since Diwali, Gurgaon has recorded only two very poor AQI days, 16 poor days and three moderate days. Within the same airshed, this can happen sometimes because of wind direction and hyperlocal meteorological factors. But when it sustains over a period of time, one has to look more closely at the data. In fact, place recording the data. That's what we did on Monday. It was revealing. All five continuous air monitoring stations - at Vikas Sadan, Sector 51, Teri Gram, Gwalpahari and Manesar - are close to thick foliage or near walls, violating CPCB rules that require monitors to be installed at least 20-30 metres from trees and 50 metres from major structures, in open and wellventilated areas. The stations have also not consistently recorded PM2.5 and sulphur dioxide (SO₂) data, lowering the city's AQI averages. Gwalpahari and Teri Gram recorded incomplete indices for several days. LED display boards at all five stations have, meanwhile, been non-functional for weeks. Over the years, vegetation within govt and institutional campuses has grown tall around these stations, trapping air and absorbing a share of pollutants before they reach the sensors. The ambience of the stations, in other words, is very different from the ambience of the road that hits you as you step out. "Vegetation grew, but the monitors' locations stayed fixed, " an official said. An analysis of CPCB's real-time data shows the Gwalpahari station failed to record PM2.5 levels for several hours on multiple days this month. Since AQI averages are based on available readings, missing data of PM2.5 - the pollutant most responsible for NCR's poor air - improves the average score. At Teri Gram, SO₂ data was missing for extended periods, which means one key gaseous pollutant wasn't factored in AQI calculations. "The stations are recording partial data and AQI looks better than it should. There are long gaps in data, " said Shubhansh Tiwari, a research associate at Centre for Science and Environment.
The COP30 Summit opened in Brazil’s Belem on Monday with a brief agenda dispute that was swiftly resolved before the formal opening ceremony, with climate finance emerging as the dominant issue for the summit. The disagreement centred on Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which mandates developed countries provide financial resources to assist developing nations with mitigation and adaptation. Developing countries, particularly the G77 bloc, demanded its inclusion on the official agenda following inadequate and unpredictable climate finance flows. Developed countries, including the EU, resisted. The matter was resolved after it was agreed Article 9.1 would be discussed under Presidency consultations rather than on the formal agenda. The June Bonn climate meeting had also been delayed over the same issue. “India was among the first countries to raise concerns about the inadequacy of the finance outcome at Baku, and has carried that forward to Bonn demanding an agenda item on Article 9.1. This will remain crucial as finance is prominent in its absence and inadequacy across many tracks be it adaptation, mitigation and even the loss and damage fund that is yet to disburse fund. India must carry this mantle even at COP30,” said Avantika Goswami, programme manager at the Centre for Science and Environment’s Climate Change division.
Gurgaon: A thick smokescreen hung over the city till late Monday morning. It was much the same in Delhi, Noida and other parts of NCR. But while Delhi's AQI was 345 (very poor) and Noida's 318 (very poor), Gurgaon seemed to be breathing easier with an AQI of 221 (poor). What one saw didn't fit with what the data suggested. It's been like this through this peak pollution season, since Diwali, with Gurgaon's average AQI mostly better than other NCR cities. Since Diwali, Gurgaon has recorded only two very poor AQI days, 16 poor days and three moderate days. Within the same airshed, this can happen sometimes because of wind direction and hyperlocal meteorological factors. But when it sustains over a period of time, one has to look more closely at the data. In fact, place recording the data. That's what we did on Monday. It was revealing. All five continuous air monitoring stations — at Vikas Sadan, Sector 51, Teri Gram, Gwalpahari and Manesar — are close to thick foliage or near walls, violating CPCB rules that require monitors to be installed at least 20-30 metres from trees and 50 metres from major structures, in open and well-ventilated areas. The stations have also not consistently recorded PM2.5 and sulphur dioxide (SO₂) data, lowering the city's AQI averages. Gwalpahari and Teri Gram recorded incomplete indices for several days. LED display boards at all five stations have, meanwhile, been nonfunctional for weeks. Over the years, vegetation within govt and institutional campuses has grown tall around these stations, trapping air and absorbing a share of pollutants before they reach the sensors. The ambience of the stations, in other words, is very different from the ambience of the road that hits you as you step out. "Vegetation grew, but the monitors' locations stayed fixed, " an official said. An analysis of CPCB's real-time data shows the Gwalpahari station failed to record PM2.5 levels for several hours on multiple days this month. Since AQI averages are based on available readings, missing data of PM2.5 — the pollutant most responsible for NCR's poor air — improves the average score. At Teri Gram, SO₂ data was missing for extended periods, which means one key gaseous pollutant wasn't factored in AQI calculations. "The stations are recording partial data and AQI looks better than it should. There are long gaps in data, " said Shubhansh Tiwari, a research associate at Centre for Science and Environment. "There is no live display, but the data is being generated every day. LED screens are unable to show data as they were shut down for several months, " Krishan Kumar, regional officer, HSPCB, told TOI.
Developing countries could be left behind in the race towards a green economy unless they make economic resilience and green industrialisation central to their climate agenda, noted a new set of discussion papers by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). Released on the eve of the UN's 30th Conference of Parties (COP30) in Belem, Brazil, the paper series titled "Towards a New Green World" urges developing nations to focus on value addition and localised production to ensure equitable participation in the emerging global green transition. CSE Director General Sunita Narain said, "Inclusive and affordable development is critical for economic resilience and will help combat climate change." She added, "Countries need an economic stake in the green transition, which requires domestic manufacturing and job creation. For this, we must also reset global trade and finance rules for localisation and value addition. There is an opportunity to rethink these rules so that distributed local-led production systems can become the basis of green industrialisation." The papers focus on three strategic fronts of the transition, agriculture and forest commodities, critical minerals, and clean technology and manufacturing. It presents a Southern perspective on how developing economies can participate and remain afloat in the new, green order. According to the series, developing nations supply much of the world's raw resources but capture only a fraction of the profits. From cocoa and copper to lithium and solar cells, the report says the green transition risks "repeating old patterns of extraction and dependence." CSE programme manager for climate change, Avantika Goswami, noted "We need to reinvent the climate agenda for the Global South. Calling for decarbonisation without economic resilience is no longer viable." The first paper, on agriculture and forest commodities, notes that developing nations are trapped in a low-value export cycle. For instance, Ivory Coast and Ghana, which produce over 50 per cent of the world's cocoa beans, account for only 6.2 per cent of total export revenue from value-added products like chocolate, while manufacturers and retailers in the Global North capture nearly 80-90 per cent of profits. The paper argues that "a shift from raw exports to processing and diversification is critical." The second paper, on critical minerals, highlights that while the Global South holds most reserves crucial for the energy transition, it captures little of the value generated. Goswami said, "These countries remain exposed to commodity price volatility, balance-of-payments instability, and geopolitical risk." The paper examines the mineral strategies of Chile, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, calling for policies that centre "equity and justice for the Global South." The third paper, on clean technology manufacturing, observes that global production is dominated by China, the EU and the US, with developing regions accounting for less than 5 per cent of production value. It urges renewed industrial policies, South-South cooperation and reforms in trade rules. Concluding, Narain said, "The future green economy must not mirror the inequalities of the old one. The Global South needs not just a greener world, but a fairer one, with economic resilience at its core, in hand with climate action." (ANI) (This content is sourced from a syndicated feed and is published as received. The Tribune assumes no responsibility or liability for its accuracy, completeness, or content.)
Will developing countries be left behind in the race towards a new, green economy? This is an emerging threat, says a set of new discussion papers by New Delhi-based think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) at a time when the UN’s 30th Conference of Parties (COP) has kicked off in Belem in Brazil amid a turbulent geopolitical landscape in which climate ambition is struggling to stay afloat. ‘Towards a new green world’, as the CSE paper series is called, was released on the eve of COP30. It calls for centering economic resilience, value addition and green industrialisation in the climate agenda for developing countries. Releasing the series, CSE Director General Sunita Narain said: “Inclusive and affordable development is critical for economic resilience and will help combat climate change.” “Countries need an economic stake in the green transition, which requires domestic manufacturing and job creation. For this, we must also reset global trade and finance rules for localisation and value addition. “There is an opportunity to rethink these rules so that distributed local-led production systems can become the basis of green industrialisation,” Narain added. Focussing on three strategic fronts of the green transition -- agriculture and forest commodities, critical minerals, and clean technology and manufacturing -- the series presents a Southern perspective on how the Global South can participate and stay afloat in the new, green economy. Across commodities, minerals and manufacturing, developing countries face a common dilemma: They supply the world’s resources but capture too little of the value. From raw cocoa and copper to lithium and solar cells, the green transition is repeating old patterns of extraction and dependence. “The global green transition risks reproducing old inequities under a new climate-friendly banner, unless the Global South is empowered to capture greater value, diversify its economies, and shape the governance of emerging green industries,” says Avantika Goswami, programme manager, climate change, CSE. “We need to reinvent the climate agenda for the Global South. Calling for decarbonisation without economic resilience is no longer viable,” she adds. On agriculture and forest commodities, developing countries are trapped in a low-value export cycle -- they sell raw agricultural and forest commodities, and end up with almost nothing of the value, says the first paper in the series. For instance, Ivory Coast and Ghana produce over 50 per cent of the world’s cocoa beans; but, they account for a mere 6.2 per cent of the total export revenue from value-added products like chocolate and cocoa powder. In contrast, manufacturers and retailers located in Global North countries capture almost 80-90 per cent of the total profit margin of a chocolate bar. The paper argues that “a shift from raw exports to processing and diversification is critical”. On critical minerals, the Global South holds most of the world’s reserves of critical minerals crucial for energy transition; but it captures little of the value generated from refining and manufacturing. Says Goswami: “These countries remain exposed to commodity price volatility, balance-of-payments instability, and geopolitical risk.” Taking the cases of three countries -- Chile, Indonesia, and Congo -- the paper has analysed the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of their critical minerals policies and strategic plans and offers a list of principles for paving the way forward through centering equity and justice for the Global South in the climate-trade-development nexus. On clean technology manufacturing, global clean tech manufacturing is concentrated in China, the EU and the US; developing countries in Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia together account for less than 5 per cent of production value. Meanwhile, the Global South faces a dual challenge of decarbonising while industrialising to meet the demands of a growing economy. Structural asymmetries persist: Developing nations assemble goods but import value-heavy inputs. This paper explores how countries can pursue green industrialisation by building clean-tech manufacturing capacity amid China’s dominance, limited domestic capacities, and unequal participation in global trade. Using case studies from China, India, Indonesia, and Mexico, it outlines key takeaways from country experiences in the clean technology sector, calling for renewed industrial policy, South-South cooperation, and global rule reform to build resilient economies. The three papers present preliminary pathways for how developing countries can capture more value, earn more revenue and emerge as strong players in the new green economy for combating climate change. Says Narain: “The future green economy must not mirror the inequalities of the old one. The Global South needs not just a greener world -- but a fairer one, with economic resilience at its core, in hand with climate action.”
Shubhansh Tiwari, a research associate at the Centre for Science and Environment, said: "The stations are recording partial data and AQI looks better than it should. There are long gaps in data."
Climate agenda, noted a new set of discussion papers by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE).
Gurgaon: While Delhi, Noida and Ghaziabad remain trapped under a thick smog layer with "very poor" air quality, the city has so far stayed relatively better off. On Sunday, CPCB data showed Delhi's average AQI at 370, Noida at 366 and Ghaziabad at 345, all in the ‘ very poor' range.The city's average AQI, meanwhile, was 238, in the ‘poor' category. Officials at India Meteorological Department (IMD) said the city's position on the southwestern edge of the national capital region gives it a temporary meteorological advantage. An IMD scientist said, "Surface winds have been northwesterly for the past few days, which means smoke and pollutants from Punjab and Haryana are being transported mainly towards central and eastern Delhi first. Gurgaon stays on the cleaner edge of the air mass, at least in the first half of the day." He added that clear skies and stronger daytime winds over the Aravalis allow faster dispersion of pollutants, while Delhi's flat terrain traps them once temperatures drop. "Delhi sits in a sort of bowl that holds pollution. By evening, when the inversion layer forms, pollutants can't rise and get trapped near the surface. Gurgaon benefits marginally because of its open terrain, but this advantage will fade as the inversion strengthens, " the scientist explained. However, the reliability of these comparisons is far from certain. For much of Oct, several air quality monitoring stations across Gurgaon and other NCR cities remained non-functional or partially operational. Experts say that raises doubts over how authentic the current data really are. "How authentic these data are is itself debatable, " Centre for Science and Environment research associate Shubhansh Tiwari said.
देश की राजधानी दिल्ली और एनसीआर आज प्रदूषण के ऐसे भंवर में फंस चुके हैं, जहां सांस लेना तक मुश्किल हो गया है। हवा में घुला जहर अब केवल आंकड़ों का खेल नहीं रहा, यह हर उम्र के लोगों के स्वास्थ्य को चुपचाप निगल रहा है। सबसे अधिक खतरे में हैं वो मासूम, जिनका इस प्रदूषण में कोई दोष नहीं। जन्म लेते ही ये बच्चे जहरीली हवा में सांस लेने को मजबूर हैं। परिणामस्वरूप शारीरिक ही नहीं बल्कि मानसिक बीमारियां भी उनके जीवन का हिस्सा बनती जा रही हैं। भारत में हर साल 1.7 लाख बच्चों की मौत प्रदूषण से मौत द लैंसेट की 2023 की रिपोर्ट के अनुसार, भारत में हर साल पांच साल से कम उम्र के लगभग 1.7 लाख बच्चों की मौत केवल प्रदूषण के कारण होती है। पिछले एक महीने में दिल्ली-एनसीआर की वायु गुणवत्ता लगातार गंभीर श्रेणी में बनी हुई है। अस्पतालों में बढ़ रहे मरीज अस्पतालों में खांसी, जुकाम, सांस लेने में तकलीफ और अस्थमा के मरीजों की संख्या में उल्लेखनीय वृद्धि हुई है। इनमें से अधिकतर आठ साल से कम उम्र के बच्चे हैं। पहले जहां सामान्य खांसी-जुकाम 5–7 दिन में ठीक हो जाता था, वहीं अब प्रदूषण के कारण इसका असर 15–20 दिन तक बना रहता है। छोटे बच्चों की रोग-प्रतिरोधक क्षमता कमजोर होती है विशेषज्ञ चेतावनी दे रहे हैं कि छोटे बच्चों की रोग-प्रतिरोधक क्षमता कमजोर होती है, जिससे प्रदूषण का प्रभाव उनके शरीर पर और गहरा पड़ता है। प्रदूषण की मार अब केवल बाहर की हवा तक सीमित नहीं रही। घरों में धूल के कणों और रसोई से निकलने वाले धुएं के कारण इनडोर एयर क्वालिटी भी तेजी से बिगड़ रही है, जिससे मासूमों के स्वास्थ्य पर दोहरी चोट पड़ रही है। यह भी पढ़ें- Delhi Air Pollution: दिल्ली में बढ़ा प्रदूषण का स्तर, हवा हुई जहरीली; कई इलाकों में AQI 400 पार बच्चों में बढ़ रही बीमारियां 1. जुकाम व खांसी: प्रदूषण के कारण यह सामान्य संक्रमण अब गंभीर रूप ले रहा है। अस्पतालों में ऐसे मरीजों की संख्या 40% तक बढ़ गई है। 2. अस्थमा: छोटे बच्चों में अस्थमा जैसे लक्षण तेजी से देखे जा रहे हैं। लंबे समय तक प्रदूषण में रहने पर यह स्थायी अस्थमा में बदल सकता है। 3. निमोनिया: लगातार खांसी, जुकाम और सांस लेने में कठिनाई कई बार निमोनिया का रूप ले रही है। 4. फेफड़ों पर असर: प्रदूषण से फेफड़ों का विकास रुक रहा है। इसका असर बच्चों की बढ़ती उम्र में भी बना रह सकता है। 5. सीओपीडी (काला दमा): पहले यह बीमारी सिर्फ धूम्रपान करने वालों तक सीमित थी, अब प्रदूषित हवा से यह गैर-धूम्रपान करने वालों में भी दिख रही है। 6. आंखों की समस्या:आंखों में जलन, सूखापन और धुंधलापन की शिकायतों में 60% तक इजाफा हुआ है। 7. मस्तिष्क पर प्रभाव: प्रदूषण बच्चों के मस्तिष्क के विकास को धीमा कर रहा है, जिससे चिड़चिड़ापन, एकाग्रता में कमी और स्ट्रोक का खतरा बढ़ रहा है। गर्भ में भी प्रदूषण का असर सेंटर फॉर साइंस एंड एनवायरनमेंट (CSE) की रिपोर्ट के अनुसार, प्रदूषित हवा गर्भस्थ शिशु के लिए भी घातक बन रही है। जब गर्भवती महिला जहरीली हवा में सांस लेती है, तो हवा में मौजूद सूक्ष्म कण गर्भ तक पहुंचकर भ्रूण को नुकसान पहुंचाते हैं। इससे बच्चे को पर्याप्त ऑक्सीजन और पोषण नहीं मिल पाता, जिसके चलते समय पूर्व प्रसव, जन्म के समय कमजोरी और कई मामलों में गर्भस्थ शिशु की मृत्यु तक हो जाती है।
As I write this, world leaders are meeting in Brazil for the annual climate conference of parties (COP 30). This COP is being held in the shadow of the massive churning in the world — not the kind that makes headlines but deeper undercurrents: Collisions of powerful forces working against one another. What will emerge as the victor? At this point, the only certainty is uncertainty. Consider this. The World Meteorological Organization has reported that carbon-dioxide levels in the atmosphere have reached a record high — rising from 420.4 ppm (parts per million) in 2023 to 423.9 ppm in 2024. According to the agency, this signals new threats of rising temperatures and more extreme weather events. Yet, we are witnessing clear signs of reversal in the commitment needed to take urgent climate action. And it is not just the United States (US) that is leading this retreat. There is a broader global hesitancy; countries find it difficult to scale up low-carbon solutions that can drastically cut emission. So, the question is, what will “win” — the urgency to act in the face of mounting climate threats, or inaction driven by economic interests? Then there is the news that, for the first time, renewable energy has overtaken coal as the primary source of electricity in the first six months of 2025. In its report: “Global Electricity Mid-Year Insights 2025”, energy think tank Ember reports that solar power has recorded rapid growth, doubling over the past three years and adding more electricity than any other source during this period. More than half this increase in solar generation came from a single country: China. India also played a significant role. However, the report, in the same breath, highlights that countries are reverting to fossil fuel-based electricity to meet the rising energy demands of data centres working on artificial intelligence (AI) and intensifying heatwaves. Natural gas-based electricity has increased by 1.6 per cent to reach a record high, led by the US. The ultimate counter-push comes from China, which, despite its renewable-energy achievements and substantial underused coal-power capacity, is building new coal-power plants, adding up to 95 Gw of new capacity, according to CarbonBrief, a website. This is also what we see in India. The question now is: Which energy sense will prevail? Will renewable energy continue its surge toward dominance, or will fossil fuels make a comeback? Another major trend and counter-trend can be seen in the shift toward electric vehicles (EVs). This has the potential to be a gamechanger because it reduces the carbon intensity of the transport sector. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), in 2024, some 20 per cent of all new cars sold globally were electric. China led the growth, with electric cars accounting for almost half the sales of new cars in the country. EVs are now cost-competitive and offer performance on a par with that of the petrol and diesel variants. But this transition faces headwinds, more from geopolitics than technology. China’s near-total dominance across the EV supply chain — from rare-earth minerals to battery production to EV manufacturing — has prompted other vehicle-manufacturing countries to step back on their ambition to electrify vehicles; subsidies are being rolled back and plans for phasing out internal combustion engine cars are being reconsidered. China’s recent move to restrict exports of critical rare minerals is likely to further unsettle this global green transition. Will EVs accelerate or hit the brakes, amid this deepening polarisation in the global trade and economy? The world appears to have grouped into two camps: Countries that have invested in “older” technologies and fossil fuels, and those that can invest in emerging, greener technologies. The nub is that the transition to new energy systems will hinge on access to finance so that the new world can leapfrog to new green technology. The recently released World Economic Outlook, by the International Monetary Fund, aptly captures today’s uncertainty with its tagline: “Global economy in flux, prospects remain dim.” But its real kicker comes from its data that says for the first time in 2025 since 2000, the world’s poorest and most vulnerable countries are spending more on servicing debt than they receive in official development assistance. What, then, does the future hold for all of us in this confused and disordered world? The final, and perhaps only, question is this: What can be done to make the winds of positive change to blow stronger and faster? The author is at the Centre for Science and Environment.sunita@cseindia.org, X: @sunitanar
जब मैं यह लिख रही हूं, दुनिया भर के नेता वार्षिक जलवायु सम्मेलन (कॉप 30) के लिए एकत्रित हो रहे हैं। यह सम्मेलन दुनिया में चल रहे व्यापक उथल-पुथल के बीच आयोजित हो रहा है। एक-दूसरे के विरुद्ध काम कर रही शक्तिशाली ताकतों का टकराव देखने को मिल रहा है। सवाल यह है कि विजेता कौन होगा? फिलहाल अगर कुछ तय है तो वह अनिश्चितता ही है। इस पर विचार करें। विश्व मौसम विज्ञान संगठन ने बताया है कि वायुमंडल में कार्बन-डाइऑक्साइड का स्तर रिकॉर्ड ऊंचाई पर पहुंच गया है। यह वर्ष 2023 के 420.4 पीपीएम (पार्ट्स प्रति मिलियन) से बढ़कर 2024 में 423.9 पीपीएम हो गया है। एजेंसी के अनुसार यह बढ़ते तापमान और अधिक चरम मौसमी घटनाओं के नए खतरों का संकेत देता है। इसके बावजूद हम जलवायु के मामले में कार्रवाई करने के लिए अत्यंत आवश्यक प्रतिबद्धता से हटने के स्पष्ट संकेत देख रहे हैं। और यह केवल अमेरिका नहीं है जो इस उलट कार्रवाई में सबसे आगे है, बल्कि एक व्यापक वैश्विक हिचकिचाहट है। अनेक देशों को कार्बन में कमी लाने के समाधानों में तेजी लाना मुश्किल लगता है जबकि ये उत्सर्जन में भारी कटौती कर सकते हैं। ऐसे में सवाल यह है कि अंतत: परिणति क्या होगी-बढ़ते जलवायु खतरों के सामने कार्रवाई करने की तत्परता, या आर्थिक हितों से प्रेरित निष्क्रियता? फिर खबर यह भी है कि पहली बार अक्षय ऊर्जा ने 2025 के पहले छह महीनों में बिजली के प्राथमिक स्रोत के रूप में कोयले को पीछे छोड़ दिया है। ऊर्जा थिंक टैंक एम्बर ने अपनी रिपोर्ट ‘ग्लोबल इलेक्ट्रिसिटी मिड-इयर इनसाइट्स 2025’ में बताया है कि सौर ऊर्जा ने तेजी से विकास दर्ज किया है। यह पिछले तीन वर्षों में दोगुना हो गया है और उसने इस अवधि के दौरान किसी भी अन्य स्रोत की तुलना में अधिक बिजली जोड़ी है। सौर ऊर्जा उत्पादन में इस वृद्धि का आधे से अधिक हिस्सा एक ही देश चीन का रहा। भारत ने भी महत्त्वपूर्ण भूमिका निभाई। हालांकि, रिपोर्ट में इस बात को रेखांकित किया गया है कि देश भीषण गर्मी और आर्टिफिशल इंटेलिजेंस (एआई) पर काम कर रहे डेटा केंद्रों की बढ़ती जरूरत पूरा करने के लिए जीवाश्म ईंधन पर आधारित बिजली की ओर लौट रहे हैं। प्राकृतिक गैस पर आधारित बिजली की खपत 1.6 फीसदी बढ़कर रिकॉर्ड ऊंचाई पर पहुंच गई है जिसमें अमेरिका सबसे आगे है। कार्बनब्रीफ नामक वेबसाइट के अनुसार चीन अपनी अक्षय ऊर्जा उपलब्धियों और कोयला बिजली उत्पादन क्षमता के पर्याप्त उपयोग के बावजूद नए कोयला बिजली संयंत्रों का निर्माण कर रहा है, जिससे 95 गीगावॉट की नई क्षमता जुड़ेगी। भारत में भी यही स्थिति है। अब सवाल यह है कि क्या अक्षय ऊर्जा का प्रभुत्व बढ़ता रहेगा, या जीवाश्म ईंधन की वापसी का रुख रहेगा? एक और बड़ा बदलाव इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों (ईवी) की ओर रुझान में देखा जा सकता है। इसमें क्रांतिकारी बदलाव लाने की क्षमता है, क्योंकि यह परिवहन क्षेत्र में कार्बन की तीव्रता को कम करता है। अंतरराष्ट्रीय ऊर्जा एजेंसी (आईईए) के अनुसार वर्ष 2024 में दुनिया भर में बिकने वाली सभी नई कारों में से लगभग 20 फीसदी इलेक्ट्रिक थीं। चीन इस वृद्धि में अग्रणी रहा, जहां नई कारों की बिक्री का लगभग आधा हिस्सा इलेक्ट्रिक कारों का था। ईवी पर अब अपेक्षाकृत कम खर्च आ रहा है और उनका प्रदर्शन पेट्रोल तथा डीजल वाहनों के बराबर ही है। लेकिन दूसरी ओर इस बदलाव में तकनीक से ज्यादा भू-राजनीति की अड़चनों का सामना करना पड़ रहा है। इलेक्ट्रिक वाहनों की आपूर्ति श्रृंखला- दुर्लभ खनिजों से लेकर बैटरी उत्पादन और इलेक्ट्रिक वाहन निर्माण तक- में चीन का लगभग पूर्ण प्रभुत्व है। इस वजह से अन्य वाहन निर्माता देश वाहनों के विद्युतीकरण की अपनी महत्त्वाकांक्षा से पीछे हटने के लिए प्रेरित हुए हैं। सब्सिडी वापस ली जा रही है और पेट्रोल और डीजल इंजन वाली कारों को चरणबद्ध तरीके से बंद करने की योजनाओं पर पुनर्विचार किया जा रहा है। महत्त्वपूर्ण दुर्लभ खनिजों के निर्यात पर प्रतिबंध लगाने के चीन के हालिया कदम से इस वैश्विक हरित परिवर्तन में और अधिक अस्थिरता आने की आशंका है। वैश्विक व्यापार और अर्थव्यवस्था में इस बढ़ते ध्रुवीकरण के बीच, क्या इलेक्ट्रिक वाहन तेजी से बढ़ेंगे या उनके चलन की गति मंद पड़ जाएगी? ऐसा लगता है कि दुनिया दो खेमों में बंट गई है- वे देश जिन्होंने पुरानी तकनीकों और जीवाश्म ईंधनों में निवेश किया है, और वे देश जो उभरती, हरित तकनीकों में निवेश कर सकते हैं। मुख्य बात यह है कि नई ऊर्जा प्रणालियों में बदलाव धन की उपलब्धता पर निर्भर करेगा ताकि नई दुनिया नई हरित तकनीक की ओर तेजी से बढ़ सके। अंतरराष्ट्रीय मुद्रा कोष द्वारा हाल ही में जारी विश्व आर्थिक परिदृश्य अपनी टैगलाइन के साथ आज की अनिश्चितता को सटीक रूप से दर्शाता है: ‘वैश्विक अर्थव्यवस्था में उतार-चढ़ाव, संभावनाएं धुंधली।’ लेकिन इसकी असली चिंता इसके आंकड़ों से आती है, जो बताते हैं कि 2000 के बाद पहली बार 2025 में दुनिया के सबसे गरीब और सबसे कमजोर देश आधिकारिक विकास सहायता से प्राप्त राशि से अधिक ऋण चुकाने पर खर्च कर रहे हैं। तो फिर, इस उलझी और अव्यवस्थित दुनिया में हम सबके लिए भविष्य क्या है? आखिरी और शायद एकमात्र सवाल यह है: सकारात्मक बदलाव की बयार को और तेज करने के लिए क्या किया जा सकता है?
A City at the Crossroads Bhubaneswar, once a temple town and now a rising urban star, stands at a critical juncture. As one of India’s fastest-growing Tier-2 cities, it has transformed into a hub for education, IT, tourism, and culture. Yet, its growth is outpacing its governance. Without bold structural reforms, Bhubaneswar risks becoming a victim of its own success—straining under the weight of inadequate infrastructure, fragmented planning, and reactive administration. The time has come to ask: should Bhubaneswar be granted greater autonomy to manage its own development, growth, and resources? Can we envision a Greater Bhubaneswar-Cuttack-Puri Metropolitan Region governed by a unified, empowered civic authority—one that is agile, accountable, and future-ready? Growth Without Governance Bhubaneswar’s urban sprawl is accelerating. Between 2001 and 2011, its population grew by over 30%, and by 2023, the Bhubaneswar Urban Agglomeration had crossed 1.2 million residents. With the adjoining cities of Cuttack and Puri forming a natural economic and cultural corridor, the region is poised to become a megacity. But the cracks are showing: • Infrastructure Stress: Water supply, sewage, solid waste management, and public transport systems are already under strain. A 2022 report by the Centre for Science and Environment ranked Bhubaneswar low on sustainable urban mobility.