Burning of crop residues in Haryana, Punjab and the northern plains of Uttar Pradesh is responsible for 12-25 per cent of particulate load in Delhi. But it poses a greater risk during the harvest periods of October-November and April-May. Besides, the burning of crop residues has emerged as a source of air pollution only during the last 20 years. Following the Green Revolution, farmers in these regions shifted from traditional crops to paddy and used mechanised implements for cultivation, sowing and harvesting. But mechanised harvesting has a downside: it leaves behind 6-15 cm tall stubble in the field which has no economic value for the farmer. To clear the field for the next crop, farmers usually set fire to it. In Punjab and Haryana, farmers burn 90-95 per cent of the 32 million tonnes of paddy stubble left in the fields, shows data submitted to EPCA by the Punjab and Haryana administrations. To dissuade people from burning crop residues, last year the Punjab and Haryana governments notified crop burning as an offence and launched awareness campaigns. They also provide subsidies on machines that mix straw with soil while tilling and drilling seeds. But these have made little impact on the ground. The dense smog in Delhi has also caught the attention of the Delhi high court, the Supreme Court and NGT this year. Both NGT and the high court have asked the Union and state governments to provide machines for removal of agricultural residues to the farmers of Punjab and Haryana. But the situation is unlikely to change unless viable alternatives for utilising the paddy straw are provided to farmers. One such alternative is promoting power plants that use straw and other biomass as raw materials. POWER PLANTS, INDUSTRIES It is urgent to shift from coal to cleaner fuels and new technologies There are 16 thermal power plants in the airshed of Delhi-NCR which generate electricity for Delhi and various cities in Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. These plants are the major sources of NOx, SOx and particulate load. The IIT-K study says these power plants, along with industrial pollution, are responsible for 11 per cent of the city’s PM2.5 emission and 52 per cent of the NOx emission. About nine of these power plants are coal-fired. These use antiquated technology, low-grade coals with high sulphur content and follow outdated emission norms. There was no standard in place for SO2, NOx and mercury emissions for these power plants till December 2015. Though the new stringent norms limit the concentration of particulate matter to 30 µg/m3 and that of SO2 and NOx to 100 µg/m3, these will be followed by power plants commissioned after January 2017. Coal-fuelled power plants also release high amounts of fly ash, which gets carried with winds and causes respiratory illnesses and skin irritation. Badarpur Thermal Power Station is the single largest source of NOx and fly ash in Delhi, says the IIT-K study. Fly ash pond of the 43-year-old plant, one of the oldest in the country, spans 362 hectares—larger than the area over which the plant has been built. It is surrounded by densely-populated residential areas. The plant should be shut immediately. The Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) shifted the worst polluting industries to adjoining towns, such as Ghaziabad, Noida, Faridabad and Baghpat, in the late 1990s. But pollutants from these industries blow into the city. Anand Vihar at the border records very high pollution. Many heavy engineering, oil processing and waste management industrial units in Ghaziabad and Sahibabad area are contributing to this trend. There are hundreds of small- and micro-industries, such as plastic moulding factories and electroplating units, which operate in densely populated slums and unauthorised colonies. Since they operate illegally, their emissions remain unaccounted. Though highly-polluting furnace oil is banned, industries continue to use it. It’s time the government took all these factors into consideration for cleaning up the city’s air. To begin with, it must shut all coal-fired power plants and industries, or shift them to cleaner fuels. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES India is on a building spree, but norms to control dust pollution are lax More than 60 per cent of buildings that will stand in India in 2030 are yet to be built. Delhi and the NCR are already experiencing prolific construction. These, along with road and Metro-line construction, whip up enormous concrete dust. DPCC is responsible for ensuring that all construction projects meet the dust pollution norms as laid down by CPCB. However, EPCA says enforcement has been lax and must be made stringent. EPCA has developed an accountability mechanism so that it can identify the agency and actions that have been taken to check pollution from construction activities. It has also developed a guidance note for inspection of such sites, which will assist in inspections and improve enforcement. It has also prepared a mobile app, Hawa Badlo, to identify agencies responsible for checking pollution from construction activities and MSW burning. The app, which is publicly available on iOS and Android phones, will also help monitor actions taken to curb pollution and has the scope to include other pollution-linked violations. To reduce the load of construction and demolition (C&D) waste, the Union environment ministry has introduced Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules, 2016, which requires the construction industry to recycle and reuse C&D waste. An estimate by CSE shows that the country generates 530 million tonnes of C&D waste a year. EMERGENCY ACTION Government needs to formulate a graded emergency action plan to curb pollution Health emergency demands emergency action. Last winter, the Delhi government had introduced first ever emergency measure of odd-even road rationing system. This slowed down the peaking of pollution. But this year, while announcing a slew of measures to curb the alarming pollution level, the Arvind Kejriwal government shied away from the odd-even scheme. Its emergency measures, announced on November 6, include shutting of schools for three days, closing the Badarpur power plant for five days, halting all construction activities for 10 days, sprinkling water on roads and vacuum cleaning them every week, imposing fines on responsible officials, and banning leaf burning, diesel generators and fly ash transport. The government also advised the residents to stay indoors. The government needs to frame a clear emergency action plan. Pollution control measures require stringent enforcement and must kick in whenever such episodes of pollution grip Delhi. Vehicles restraint plans must be included in the emergency plan. On November 8, the Supreme Court, responding to the health emergency, directed CPCB to firm up a proper graded emergency action plan according to the pollution levels.

Large-scale fires plague Delhi’s three landfill sites—Bhalaswa, Okhla and Ghazipur—round the year. These are “processing sites” for the entire waste of Delhi—about 10,000 tonnes a day. The unsegregated waste, which includes liquid, organic and food waste, decomposes, releasing methane, a highly combustible and greenhouse gas. The figure in the winter months is 5 per cent. There are also numerous dispersed fires lit by the homeless, pavement dwellers and security guards for warmth and light during winter nights. These fires add to the pollution load in the air. The IIT-K study says burning of municipal solid waste (MSW) contributes to 3 per cent of the city’s total particulate load. Even though there is a ban on open burning it is not easy to enforce. In 2016, the Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority (EPCA) called upon the civic authorities to ensure that burning of horticulture waste in parks does not occur, and instead compost pits are used to dispose of dead leaves and branches. But there has been poor enforcement. Similarly, the government is supposed to formulate emergency plans to deal with fires at landfill sites, but they do not exist. Individual residents and resident welfare associations (RWAs) also have a key role to play. RWAs must ensure that arrangements are made for security guards to protect themselves against the cold. People can segregate and recycle garbage to stop fires in neighbourhoods. BURNING OF CROP RESIDUE Farmers burn crop residue because they do not see economic value in the straw

Though emission and fuel quality norms have become more stringent—from Bharat Stage II (BS II) in 2000 to BS IV in 2010—the gains made through this have been nullified by the increase in number of vehicles. Diesel cars, which are three to seven times more polluting than petrol cars, have further added to the toxicity. Delhi has moved all its buses, autos and taxis to CNG. But diesel car numbers have exploded—from 4 per cent of new car sales in 2000 to over 50 per cent in 2014. Already the levels of diesel-related pollutants—PM2.5, PM10, NOx and ozone—are high and increasing in Delhi’s air. The IIT-K study says diesel four-wheelers contribute 70-80 per cent of the PM2.5 from transport sector in the city. The Supreme Court and NGT have given a slew of orders to curb vehicular pollution. In December 2015, NGT ordered a ban on all diesel vehicles older than 10 years in the city. Earlier, the Supreme Court had banned 15-year-old commercial vehicles. The Supreme Court further passed orders in 2015 and 2016 to ban registration of luxury diesel cars of 2,000 CC and above (it later lifted the ban after imposing 1 per cent cess) and directed that taxis be shifted from diesel fuel to CNG in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR). These decisions are primarily targeted at reducing toxic diesel emissions and to stop misuse of low-taxed diesel for luxury consumption. TWO-WHEELERS Their huge number makes them a major source of pollution Two-wheelers pose a dilemma. These affordable, fuel- and space-efficient vehicles of the masses contribute enormously to pollution. Two-wheelers constitute 80 per cent of the total vehicles sales in the country. The IIT-K study says two-wheelers contribute 33 per cent of total PM2.5 emitted from all vehicles. Though its market has seen major transition in India in the past 15 years, with two-stroke engines being replaced by more fuel-efficient and cleaner four-stroke engines, studies indicate that two-stroke two-wheelers still account for a quarter of the total two-wheelers on the road. Emissions norms for two-wheelers have been tighter in the country than the rest of the world, especially to control carbon monoxide emissions. However there are concerns about potential high NOx emissions from four-stroke engines that power nearly all new vehicles now, because the norms do not regulate NOx separately. A combined limit for hydrocarbon and NOx allows margin for higher NOx emissions when vehicle is optimised for higher fuel efficiency. There is a technical trade off between NOx emissions and fuel economy. Two-wheeler industry is gearing up to meet BS IV norms which will come in force from April 2017. These norms have separate NOx limit, but the limit has still been kept higher than that of petrol cars. A paradigm shift in two-wheeler technology is expected with the enforcement of BS VI norms in 2020. With BS VI, India, for the first time, will set particulate standards for two-wheelers, have tighter and separate NOx and hydrocarbon limits, and on-board diagnostic systems. Also, there is a move to promote two-wheelers that run on electricity. But the ultimate solution will come from promoting affordable public transport. TRUCKS These diesel vehicles are difficult to check as Delhi is a major transit point The June 2015 traffic count survey by CSE suggests that light and heavy trucks that enter Delhi daily spew close to 30 per cent of the total particulate load and 22 per cent of the total NOx load released by the transport sector. The estimates were part of a report prepared by the Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority. Taking note of the estimates, the Supreme Court on October 9, 2015 imposed a green tax or environment compensation charge (ECC) on commercial goods vehicles entering Delhi from the city’s 124 entry points. Different amount of ECC was levied on different types of trucks—Rs 700 and Rs 1,300 on light-duty trucks and trucks having two or more axles respectively. Trucks carrying essential commodities like food and petroleum were exempted. The move had immediate impact. Another traffic count survey by CSE in December 2015 suggests that the decrease in truck traffic led to a reduction of 30-35 per cent in particulate load and NOx levels in this vehicle category. Though ECC has been introduced in Delhi, there were concerns that manual collection might allow tax evasion. To address this, the Supreme Court directed that the ECC collected should be used for installing a radio frequency identification (RFID) infrastructure in Delhi. RFID is an electronic system that allows automatic toll collection when vehicles pass through the entry gates. ECC will be transferred to government accounts. The Supreme Court, in an order passed on August 22, 2016, has asked the Delhi government to release Rs 120 crore from the ECC account to the South Delhi Municipal Corporation, which has been appointed as the executing agency for the installation of RFID. Thirteen key entry points have been identified where RFID installation will be done on a pilot basis. These entry points bring in as much as 80 per cent of the truck traffic. The court has also asked the transport department to give Rs 93 lakh to RITES Ltd, a government of India undertaking, to vet the RFID project for implementation. RFID will not only allow efficient collection of toll but also opens up the enormous possibility of tracking vehicle operations and performance. It can be broadened to include all vehicle segments and help in traffic and pollution control in future. Delhi has witnessed a prolonged battle against pollution from trucks and has evolved a more complex set of control measures compared to other cities, with good results. Action on trucks started in 2005 when the Supreme Court directed creation of two peripheral expressways to divert transit traffic away from Delhi. The eastern and western peripheral expressways are within the jurisdiction of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. But lack of coordination, rigid investments and lack of timely action has delayed these projects. VEHICLE RESTRAINT Stringent policies needed to discourage cars and to promote public transport Growing dependence on cars can negate pollution control efforts. About 55 per cent of Delhi lives within 500 metres from some road side where the impact of toxic vehicular fumes is huge. The Delhi Master Plan 2021 has set targets for improving the share of public transport ridership to 80 per cent by 2021. There is still no plan to meet this target. Bus numbers at 5,762 fall woefully short of the Supreme Court mandate of 10,000. Service conditions of buses have deteriorated and share of bus ridership has dropped from 60 per cent in 2000 to 40 per cent in 2008. Though the Metro rail network has expanded, it will be able to cater to only 20 per cent of the travel demand in 2020. Delhi will have to reinvent public transport to make it convenient and attractive for all. Buses, Metro, taxis and autos will have to be integrated to ensure the last mile connectivity. Car usage is highly subsidised. Cars pay a minuscule amount as a one-time road tax while buses pay much higher amount annually. More- over, parking is free in most parts of the city or is minimally priced in commercial areas. As a result, cars are aggressively encroaching upon the scarce and limited urban space that can have other more important uses. The increase in the number of cars creates an additional annual demand for land for parking—as large as 471 football fields a year. Delhi Master Plan 2021 has adopted norms for transit-oriented development to bring people closer to Metro line and encourage walking and cycling to reduce travel distances and pollution. But this is yet to take off. There are proposals to redesign the roads for non-motorised transport users but this has not been implemented. Roads are being designed to give priority to seamless movement of vehicles through flyovers and signal-free roads. This is compromising safe access and discouraging public transport. Short, walkable distances are getting converted into motorised trips. Enormous pollution load is getting locked into the urban infrastructure that cannot be easily undone. Delhi has built more roads and flyovers than any other city and still remains gridlocked and most polluted. GARBAGE COMBUSTION Fires at landfill sites, bonfires using roadside garbage as fuel need to be checked

Shreya’s ordeal did not end even after she got emergency care at the Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital in central Delhi. In the next 24 hours the air quality kept deteriorating. The concentration of PM2.5 in the atmosphere in a 15 km radius of Anand Vihar Bus Station (which is near Ghaziabad) reached 883 µg/m3. And Shreya’s parents had to rent a breathing apparatus with oxygen supply for her in their house. By November 5, PM2.5 touched 996 µg/m3. Both her siblings were also breathless throughout the week, says Deepak. The situation was similar in other parts of the city. “We get 150 to 200 patients a day around this time of the year. About 80 per cent of them complain of respiratory problems and over 50 per cent of these cases are children under five,” says Vineetha, medical officer in-charge at ESI Dispensary in Sarojini Nagar, Delhi. “Airways, lungs and immune system of children are not fully developed, which makes them vulnerable to allergies, respiratory infections and irreversible lung damage,” says Anupam Sibal, senior paediatrician at the Indraprastha Apollo Hospital. Though delayed, the smog drew reactions from all quarters—the state and Central governments, the Supreme Court, the High Court of Delhi, the National Green Tribunal (NGT), the civil society and city residents. On October 29, Delhi’s environment minister Imran Hussain blamed the burning of crop residues in neighbouring Punjab and Haryana for the crisis. The states countered by saying that bursting of crackers during Diwali in Delhi was the root cause. The Delhi government ordered closure of schools for three days on November 6, shut down Badarpur Thermal Power Station, stopped all construction activities and banned bursting of firecrackers except on religious occasions. The sale of surgical masks went through the roof because people wanted to wear them while stepping out of the house. On November 8, the Supreme Court asked why the city cannot be shut to fight the problem of pollution. The steps brought temporary relief, but they cannot provide a permanent solution to Delhi’s pollution problems. It’s time the government identified the factors that cause such a sharp rise in pollution levels in the national capital and take stock of the actions taken to curb its load. CARS Delhi has more four-wheelers than any other city in the country A 2015 study by the Indian Institute of Technology-Kanpur (IIT-K) says vehicles are the second largest source of PM2.5 emissions in the city, accounting for 20 per cent. The largest source, at 38 per cent, is road dust, which is mostly generated by vehicular movement (see ‘Perfect recipe for smog’). Vehicles are also a continuous source of toxic fumes.

Smog chokes Delhi with eerie regularity. But why doesn't our suffocation wake us up? Just like the recent post-Diwali episode of extreme pollution, we are caught unawares each winter. What's disturbing is the criminal charade of fixing the blame when all are to be blamed. Down To Earth tracks the 20-year-long fight to clean Delhi's air. It is clear that behind the unfathomable smog in the capital, there is a dirty nexus of players with vested interests who put profit over people's health. It is this lobby that has made the air lethal. It is time to say enough is enough. It is time to fight for action WHEN RESIDENTS of the national capital woke up the morning after Diwali, on October 31, the city gave the feel of a post-apocalyptic world. A blanket of thick smog had engulfed Delhi. The air was just not breathable. As hospitals started getting deluged with patients complaining of respiratory problems, there was confusion all around. The government showed no emergency in dealing with the pollution that was too high to be measured by monitoring machines in some localities. The worst affected were children, who have a respiration rate higher than adults but are more susceptible to air pollution. Priya (name changed) delivered a healthy baby girl in Delhi’s Indraprastha Apollo Hospital on October 29. But she had no clue about the harrowing time the baby was to go through. The doctors advised the parents to keep the girl in the hospital for two-three days because the next day was Diwali, when the pollution levels are at their peak every year. The parents agreed to the idea. However, on October 31, the baby developed breathing trouble and had to be moved to the intensive care unit. “Doctors say the baby had perfectly developed lungs when she was born but is likely to suffer from bronchitis for life,” cries an inconsolable Priya. The reason, they say, is the high level of particulate matter in the air. On November 5 and 6, PM2.5 levels (particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns that enters the blood stream via lungs) reached 837 microgram per cubic metre (µg/m3). The safe limit for humans is 60 µg/m3. Delhi’s polluted air is not a secret. But what the city witnessed in the week after Diwali was unheard of. Air quality monitoring stations reported the situation to be the worst in almost two decades. According to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), on November 2, 5 and 6, PM2.5 levels reached 999 at Punjabi Bagh and Anand Vihar. This is the maximum possible level most monitoring machines in the city are equipped to measure. Priya’s was not the only such case. Deepak and Anju Goswami, who live in Ghaziabad on the outskirts of Delhi, spent the post-Diwali week running from one hospital to another in search of an affordable healthcare facility. On October 30, their six-year-old daughter Shreya started having severe trouble in breathing. She was unable to eat and became agitated. Born with Ventricular Septal Defect, or a hole in the heart, Shreya had undergone a surgery when she was eight months old. For children born with such defects, a polluted atmosphere can be fatal, say doctors. Moving her around the city for three hours with high PM2.5 and carbon monoxide levels was akin to making her smoke five cigarettes.

To let citizens die of air pollution is anti-national

That week Delhi gasped for governance. Since 1996, it has been a suffocating journey of knowing and forgetting. So, who is letting us die? An insiders' narration of the politics behind the mass murder





THIS WAS in 1996. The air of Delhi was black with smog. The difference between then and now—when smog is back with a vengeance—is that Delhi did not know what had engulfed it. It was breathing poison. But it did not know as dirty air had crept upon it. There was no information about air pollution and its hazards. We just thought it was dark winter days.



This is when the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) began its work on air pollution. It was in November 1996—20 years ago—that we published Slow Murder—the deadly story of vehicular pollution in India. The book started with an investigation into the pollution-under-control system; it asked if Delhi or any city could clean its air by checking the tailpipe emissions of each car. It asked if we needed more measures—from emission technology to fuel quality. This was the first such enquiry and it brought results.





It was also the first time that CSE was not only doing research, but decided that this was a fight to the finish. Slow Murder would launch a campaign to fix what we had found was wrong with Delhi’s air. Remember, this was the time when air pollution was not on the discussion table. It was not on anyone’s agenda. In fact, the question we were asked more than once was: why were we so worried about some black air. The then Lieutenant Governor of Delhi had said that this was only dust. Nothing to be worried about! The then health minister said air pollution was not a health concern.



Deliberate and systemic



We deliberately called the book, Slow Murder, as pollution did not kill instantly, but led to the suppression of the body’s immune system, destroying lung function or adding to the cancer and cardiovascular disease burden. It was slow, but murder nevertheless. We indicted government and industry. We put three faces on the cover of Down To Earth (November 15, 1996); the Minister of Environment and Forests, Jai Narain Prasad Nishad; T R Baalu, the Minister of Petroleum (there was no natural gas then); and, Rahul Bajaj, the owner of Bajaj Motors and then India’s sole auto king.





Why? Because our research had shown that proposals for vehicular standards were being shuffled between agencies. This was the time when India had no Bharat Stage (BS) I or II vehicle emission standards. We had nothing. The proposal for cleaner fuels was being similarly bandied about, without any resolution. This was the time when fuel had 10,000 parts per million (ppm) and above of sulphur (today, with BS IV, sulphur is down to 50 ppm, and this will go down to 10 ppm by 2020 when we enforce BS VI).



Rahul Bajaj was on the cover because of the extremely polluting 2-stroke technology that two-three wheelers used. Bajaj had a monopoly on vehicles at the time—this is before the advent of 4-stroke technology, which saw the rise of Hero Honda, and, personal car mobility, which saw the rise of Maruti-Suzuki and then other companies. Our agenda was not personal. It was to bring policy for fuel-technology standards and to use this to drive out polluting vehicles. This is what we now call the first generation reform.





Right to clean air



We were young and we were angry. But first, we did what gentrified researchers do. The then Vice President of India, K R Narayanan agreed to release the book in the Vice President’s residence. It brought attention. We followed this with a public meeting—our first—at the capital’s FICCI auditorium. We said, cough, wheeze, suffocate or its time to take a stand. This was in November 1996.



But as it happens, nothing really moved. A year went by. The automobile industry pushed against any reform and the government shuffled papers. In 1997, we again went to the public. This time, we had data to show the number of deaths because of pollution. Our analysis (based on a World Bank model) showed that in just four years—between 1991 and 1995—there had been a shocking 30 per cent increase in the number of premature deaths because of air pollution.



Cardiologist Naresh Trehan shared with us two photographs of lungs. He said when he operated he knew where the patients hailed from the colour of their lungs. The first photograph was that of a Delhite, Trehan said. Even non-smokers from Delhi had black lungs. The second photograph was that of a resident from Himachal Pradesh who had pink lungs.



All this spurred action. In December 1997, the then Union Minister of Environment and Forests (MOEF), Saifuddin Soz, issued a white paper on pollution in Delhi, which became the basis of an action plan. In January 1998, the MOEF constituted the Environment Pollution (Prevention & Control) Authority (EPCA) for the National Capital Region (NCR).



In June, 1998, EPCA released its first report on priority actions, in which it detailed steps that were needed to clean Delhi’s air. These included control on diesel vehicles and a move towards Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). In July, the Supreme Court’s (SC) top bench, then headed by Chief Justice A S Anand, issued directions based on EPCA’s report with deadlines. It set a deadline for conversion of all three-wheelers and diesel buses to CNG.



Delhi was now on schedule for a clean-up. But even as the SC proposed, the government deposed. Powerful vested interests reigned. They did not allow anything to move. Why? Because diesel had big friends.





SPM to PM: diesel toxicity is known



This was also the time when science had discovered the real pollution villain—small particulates. Till then, we had only one pollutant in our lexicon, Suspended Particulate Matter or SPM. Now evidence showed that what was really toxic was the smaller particulates, then called Respirable Suspended Particulate Matter (RSPM), because they are small enough to inhale. The first survey of RSPM—later called PM 10 and then PM 2.5 as the size of the particulate became clearer and its deadly toxicity better understood—was done in 1998. Monitoring by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) showed that the level of RSPM was five times above the national 24-hour standard. This was deadly. But where did RSPM come from, we asked?



By then global research was pointing at diesel—depending on the size and toxicity of the particulate; and explaining not just on how the fuel was burnt, but also the nature of the fuel itself. Studies had found that 90 per cent of the exhaust from a diesel vehicle was below 1 micron in size; it was coated in highly carcinogenic poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and other toxins. In 1998, after a decade of work, the California Air Resources Board formally designated diesel particulates as toxic air contaminants. This was then followed by studies from Japan, which discovered the most potent carcinogen in diesel exhaust. This news was unpalatable to the automobile industry. They hit back and things got messy. Really messy.



Engines of the devil



In 1998, the car industry was about to bloom—old players like Hindustan Motors, with its Ambassador car, were being edged out by the zippy Maruti Suzukis and Hyundais. And waiting in the wings was Telco, or now Tata Motors, which till then, had a grand presence only in the commercial truck and bus segments.



Tata Motors had worked out a scheme to break into the Japanese-Korean-dominated car industry with a product that was not only savvy, but also cheap. How? It would use diesel, which was till then reserved for public transport. It was just about to launch the diesel-powered Sumo. This was unacceptable for pollution control. EPCA (with CSE’s director, Anil Agarwal, as a member) had already petitioned the SC asking for diesel to be banned for use in buses. We wanted the fleet to move to cleaner CNG. Clearly, we did not want cars to also use the dirty and toxic diesel.



In 1999, we published a report, titled provocatively, Engines of the Devil—why dieselisation of the private automobile fleet should be banned. Tata Motors was not amused. In April 1999, Tata Motors sued us for defamation, slapping us with a case of Rs 100 crore for writing an article in Business Standard on the toxicity of diesel. We took the matter to the public. Tata withdrew the notice, but the fight moved underground. Tata Motors hired a public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller Roger Pereira Communications, to campaign for diesel. We soon found pamphlets (this was before the age of the Internet) on myths and facts about diesel, which quoted anonymous experts, on the tables of all decision-makers. Many non-profits sprung up to defend diesel. One was called Citizens Against Pollution, which had a one-point agenda to defend diesel. Disinformation became the name of the game.



But this did not deter us. EPCA had already started working on this issue. In April 1999, it submitted a report to the SC on restrictions for plying diesel-driven (private) vehicles in NCR. It called for a ban based on emerging public health issues and the extent of pollution in Delhi. The apex court was listening.



Industry says: I deny



The SC-appointed amicus curiae, Harish Salve (who continues to play this role with great commitment), took up the matter asking for the “forthwith suspension of registration of diesel vehicles until further orders”. The learned judges of the country’s apex court concurred, saying that the “very right to life of the citizens is at stake”. The government was asked to respond.



The fight became dirty; personal attacks on CSE’s director Anil Agarwal, who was then battling a serious form of cancer, became common. The automobile industry, led by Tata Motors, used their full might to defeat this move. In court, Tata Motors lawyers, F S Nariman and Arun Jaitley (yes the same), P Chidambaram for Fiat (also, the same) and Kapil Sibal for Maruti (also, the same) argued that particulate matter was not dangerous. Tata Motors’ affidavit in court said, “I deny that smaller the particulate, the more harmful it is.” “I deny that RSPM is more deadly because they are breathed deep into the lungs and lodged there.” I deny, I deny. This was the refrain.

We won, and also lost



The SC, faced with this barrage of opposition from the industry, decided that instead of banning diesel for private cars, it would push for a drastic improvement in fuel and emission standards. Meanwhile, the government believed it was not its war at all. So in April 1999, the SC gave its sentence. It said that only those vehicles that were Euro I compliant could be registered in the NCR as of June 1999; but it gave only one year for the transition to Euro II. It directed that from April 1, 2000, only Euro II vehicles could be registered.



In the interim—May 1, 1999 to April 1, 2000—it set a quota for 250 diesel cars per month and 1,250 petrol cars per month to be registered in the NCR on a first-come-first-served basis. In one stroke, the apex court introduced emission standards for vehicle technology and fuels, and gave the automobile industry six months to make the transition.



Industry lawyers argued for “more time”, saying the industry would be hit. The court answered: “People cannot breathe and you are asking for more time.” The industry argument that people are registering cars not conforming to emission standards outside NCR, made the judges say, “There are no limits to ingenuity.” They stood firm, saying to auto lawyers, “Whether you speak one or two sentences, we will only pass a sentence.”



The rest is history. The automobile industry met the deadline. The oil industry provided cleaner fuel. The air of Delhi benefitted. But we had lost the critical fight—private diesel cars zoomed ahead. Clean air benefits were squandered away. But more on this later.



Tracing the CNG transition



We were in the Chief Justice Court, SC, on February 16, 2001. The final deadline of April 2001 for converting all buses, autos and taxis to CNG to reduce toxic diesel particulate pollution was very close. The Delhi government wanted the deadline to be extended by another three years. The SC rejected the plea. This was just the beginning of the shadow of things to come. Delhi was turning into a battlefield to block CNG implementation.



Anyone impatient with the inaction today must know what it takes to push for action. Every excuse to delay implementation was put forth in the court. The disinformation campaign made claims of unreliability of the “untested” CNG technology and unavailability of gas and cylinders. But the judges were firm on the deadline. They said: “We are conscious of the fact that from April 1, 2001, inconvenience is likely to be caused to commuting public, but this “urban chaos” (to use the expression of the administration) which may arise... is creation of the administration and private operators.”



The judges said giving a “blanket extension would amount to putting a premium on the lapses and inaction of the administration and private transport operators”. Only a limited extension was granted till September 30, 2001, but with rigid conditions. The then principal secretary, transport, was made personally responsible for compliance; diesel buses would be allowed to ply only with his authorisation.





All hell breaks loose



As diesel buses were decommissioned, violence erupted on April 3, 2001. Angry commuters resorted to arson and set buses ablaze. Politicians too started the blame game for the rioting. “Anti-CNG lobby does a war dance” was the headline in The Indian Express on the morning of April 7. Media quoted lawyers saying that the matter was leading to a constitutional crisis. On April 4, the court said it was “distressed at... defiant attitude on the part of the Delhi administration to comply with our orders. The attitude is wholly objectionable and not acceptable”. Fearing contempt proceedings, the Delhi government filed an affidavit on April 18, saying it was committed to implement the court’s directions. The contempt proceedings were dropped on April 27.



Game of zeroes



The matter was reduced to a puerile high school debate on CNG v diesel. Saboteurs started a game of zeroes to block CNG. Detractors advocated the use of ultra low sulphur diesel, with less than 0.005 per cent sulphur, as an alternative to CNG. But when asked to make a recommendation to the court, through the EPCA, it quietly mentioned low sulphur diesel (0.05 per cent), which is the Bharat Stage II fuel standard. Deleting a zero was clever; to confuse the court with an alternative that did not exist.



Then came the bogey that there was no gas, and that CNG was unworkable. CNG was potrayed as anti-poor. The plight of bus and auto drivers waiting in long queues made hearts bleed. This was used to whip up anger against CNG.



The government claimed the city’s transport could not run on one fuel, as any hitch in the pipeline could bring the city to a halt, and demanded that the EPCA recommend 0.05 per cent sulphur diesel as a world standard clean fuel. Detractors spawned myths claiming that CNG is unsafe and emits more ultrafine particulates; CNG causes cancer, and not diesel. A study conducted for a bus and truck engine manufacturer in the US got baptised as a Harvard study, and found its way to every policymaker to debunk CNG. We had to counter this disinformation to clear the smokescreen of lies.



Everyone seemed to have missed the point that the SC was not promoting CNG or any specific fuel, but was only trying to clean up the air. The original order of July 28, 1998, had asked for CNG and other clean fuels. Following directions, the EPCA defined clean fuels in 2001, and specified CNG, LPG, unleaded petrol with low benzene used with catalytic converters, and clean diesel with 10 ppm sulphur used with advanced particulate traps as alternatives. The Union government then submitted a hurried interim report of the newly-constituted Auto Fuel Policy Committee to the court, asking it to not prescribe fuels and technology, but only set emissions standards. We said such an approach would not work as Euro II diesel buses emit 46 times higher particulate matter than CNG. It is diesel emissions that the WHO has branded as a carcinogen for its clear links with lung cancer.



The only hope for public health in the face of a sustained campaign to sabotage the move to CNG was the firm stand taken by the SC, which refused to give in to pressure tactics. The court said: “No diesel, no diesel, no diesel.”



The turnaround



After several missed deadlines, Salve reacted in the court in March 2002: “This is the fifth time that the Union and state governments were coming to court with the prayer that diesel buses be allowed. If this was a private party, it would amount to abuse of process and the party would be made to pay the costs.” In April 2002, the SC brought down the curtains on the capital’s diesel buses. It imposed a penalty of Rs 1,000 per diesel bus per day, and slapped a penalty on the Union government for repeatedly seeking a modification of the CNG order.



This helped change the focus from resistance to implementation. Bus operators threatened to protest, but this time the state government did not back down. Sensing that the government had changed its mood, bus operators were back on the roads, paying fines and buying new CNG buses. On December 1, 2002, media reported: “Finally its bye bye diesel buses”.



But for us, the work was not yet over. Actual implementation threw up several glitches, largely related to the quality of CNG conversion, safety and inspection issues. We brought an international expert team to assess the CNG technology and conversion for remedial measures and a robust roadmap. This helped to frame the emissions and safety regulations for the CNG technology.



We will never forget how we were surrounded by irate bus operators and faced public abuse and hate mails. Or the time when the police, instead of making oil companies accountable for fuel adulteration, turned up at our doorsteps to take us as witnesses against oil tanker drivers, whom we had photo documented to expose indiscipline in fuel transportation in the capital.



The CNG crisis had affected everyone in Delhi. Once implemented, there was palpable public recognition that CNG had improved the capital’s air quality. Before the Delhi assembly elections in 2003, political parties vied with each other to take credit for CNG. Delhi’s democracy had matured.



The lull period...



It was time to take stock and refocus. While the clean fuel and technology agenda remained un-finished, the exploding number of cars and two-wheelers threatened to undo the incremental gains. We realised that the game of pollution control cannot be won by simply catching up, but only by leaping ahead.



We presented a statement of concern to the SC in 2004. It said the SC directives had helped to stabilise air pollution levels. But the breathing space that Delhi had gained could be lost if vehicle numbers and congestion increased overwhel-mingly. We asked for a firm action plan for an inte-grated public transport strategy and vehicle restraint measures. Salve converted the statement of concern into an interim application. The Chief Justice bench served a notice to the Delhi government for a strategy to control vehicle numbers and congestion.





For the first time, the Delhi government sub-mitted a plan for an integrated network of metro and bus rapid transit networks, and light rail, specifying agencies and timelines for implementation. We then pitched for a parking strategy and vehicle taxation to restrain car numbers and usage.



In 2006, the EPCA submitted a parking strategy to the SC. It stated: “Land is limited and there is a limit to the additional parking space that can be created. Parking for personal motorised vehicles cannot be considered as a matter of public good. The “user pays” principle should govern the pricing of parking and not subsidised.” The SC took this on board and issued directives for a parking policy to reduce the demand for parking.

Unfortunately, the proposals from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) to the SC during 2008-09 missed the point, as they proposed to increase the parking space only. The principle of managing and reducing parking demand was lost. We had to wage a war to stop the conversion of green areas and parks for construction of parking lots. EPCA had to get the Delhi Master Plan amended to stop this practice.





Commonwealth spaces



We saw the Commonwealth Games in 2010 as an opportunity. We visited Beijing to see what the Chinese government had done during the Beijing Olympics to clean up the air. We presented an action agenda to the Delhi government. At a high-level meeting, Sheila Dikshit, former chief minister, reviewed the air pollution control strategies for the Games, and framed a contingency plan.



Delhi got new modern buses and implemented protected bus lanes, restrictions on private vehicle movement and higher parking charges for cars during the Games. Cycle and pedestrian paths were created; Bharat Stage IV emissions standards were enforced; and, action was taken against pollution from thermal power plants.



In 2009, our “walkability” audit of Delhi’s roads exposed the dismal state of footpaths that discouraged walking and the use of public transport. About 40 km of footpaths were built around the venues of the Games.



Post-Commonwealth Games was a lull period. There was nothing substantial, except a few more kilometres of metro lines and buses. The rapidly growing car owning middle-class, enjoying hidden subsidies for cars and two-wheelers, were not ready to support car restraint measures. They blocked the equitable sharing of road space with walkers, cyclists and buses; resisted parking restraints and higher parking charges. Meanwhile, unveiling of the cheap Nano car whipped up car-buying passions. We said that our city needs mobility, not cars—whether small, cheap, big, or expensive.



During this period, peak oil prices rapidly shifted the market towards diesel cars adding to the toxic woes. Meanwhile, under the Air Act, 1981, a pollution cess was slapped on diesel fuel to create the Air Ambience Fund. But the diesel industry tried everything to block higher taxes on diesel cars and also, tighter emissions standards. It resorted to a misleading number game to prove that pollution from diesel cars did not matter.



During this phase, action was slow, but the policy language and politics around public health and mobility began to change. The city was no longer in denial mode, as in the past. But acceptance also did not lead to effective action. We got involved with the revision of the Delhi Master Plan that took on board the principles of reinventing mobility.



By now, public awareness and the rhetoric around polluted air was much sharper than it was 20 years ago. Noticing this change was more important than getting cynical about conservative forces fighting against change.



Measuring the toxic curve



October 2015 was yet another turning point. The SC stepped in once again to combat Delhi’s deadly winter pollution. Through successive winters, the capital was waking up to more wheeze, cough and suffocation. We were continuously tracking evidence on pollution trends, health and sources to raise fuss and push for action.



This time the science was stronger. A new source inventory and apportionment study by the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kanpur, ranked key polluters in the city, and also found diesel cars responsible for 70-80 per cent of PM 2.5 from vehicles. This allowed better source-wise decisions. The SC cracked the whip on toxic diesel emissions from trucks, cars and taxis; waste burning; construction and road dust; and, called for enhancing public transport, walking and cycling infrastructure.



The focus now shifted from the local to the regional air-shed of Delhi. The SC’s directives now included not only Delhi, but the entire National Capital Region. This helped nail the episodic problem of farm fires in Punjab and Haryana.



We were able to bring the attention back to the toxic diesel emissions from trucks. We counted trucks at the borders and found that the official numbers were grossly underestimated, and, it was cheaper for trucks to go through Delhi than take the toll roads outside. This data provoked significant decisions when EPCA shared this information with the SC. The apex court evoked the “polluter pays” principle and imposed an environment compensation charge on each truck entry and banned pre-2006 trucks. Within a month, truck numbers dropped by about 20 per cent, lowering night-time pollution and shaving off winter pollution peaks.



Heat on diesel cars



The court rulings also finally established that diesel cars are more polluting. Misuse of low-taxed diesel by cars came under fire. The SC, in its ruling of December 16, 2015, said: “It is noteworthy that diesel vehicles of 2,000 CC and above and SUVs are generally used by more affluent sections of our society and …more prone to cause higher levels of pollution.” The court imposed a temporary ban on big diesel cars and SUVs for the winter.



History repeated itself when the car industry opposed the SC’s move to nail diesel cars with the polluter pay principle. The judges said this will make people aware that they are buying more polluting vehicles. While the pending proposal from EPCA shows that diesel cars should pay at least 20 per cent of the car value to pay for the extra fuel tax that petrol cars pay over lifetime, the diesel car industry got away by volunteering a mere 1 per cent environment compensation charge to escape the ban.



The car industry once again led the charge in the court room to plead that diesel cars are clean. On January 5, 2016, Chief Justice T S Thakur said: “You are saying diesel vehicles pollute less. So are your vehicles emitting oxygen? People’s life is at stake and you are interested in selling cars.”



The heat on diesel catalysed the momentous step taken by the Union government on September 16, 2016, to skip Euro V and directly leapfrog to Euro VI emissions standards by 2020. Only at this level do petrol and diesel emissions nearly equalise. This is a game-changing decision.



As the previous winter witnessed several smog episodes, public outcry led to the first-ever emergency measure of odd-even scheme for cars by the Delhi government in January 2016. But irate car users contested this in the high court. We had to gather evidence of pollution and congestion reduction gains to build support for emergency action.



A befitting reply came from Chief Justice T S Thakur in SC, “We are doing carpooling. The government is taking some steps. People are dying due to pollution and you are challenging it for publicity.”



With the odd-even scheme, the city understood the benefits of reducing car congestion. Bus and metro services improved, fuel consumption too reduced, and commuting became quicker. The city now needs to take permanent measures to sustain these gains.





The fact that Delhi could succeed once again in slowing the pollution peaks during winter kindled hope. But the momentum lost steam post-winter. The recent post-Diwali smog in 2016—the worst in 17 years—showed that the city was still not prepared. Standing in the SC on November 8, 2016, we heard the observation of the Chief Justice, “The limit has gone beyond human tolerance… It has become dangerous for human life. It is a disaster and you must have a disaster management plan for this. The time has come when you have to have a policy; a concrete plan.”



Smog 2016



The question we are asking ourselves, and you our reader, is whether smog 2016 is a sign of things to come? Or will it be the turning point where we force the pace of intervention so that we can, indeed, go through winters without any hazards?



It can be done. In the late 1990s, when Delhi’s air was just as bad, we did make a difference. The struggle to bring in CNG was not easy. It happened because the judiciary took the lead and the government was forced to take action. But now things are complicated. This second generation reform requires finding solutions to mobility. Currently, we are only cleaning up vehicle technology and fuel, but with larger number of vehicles on the roads, the gains are negated. But reinventing mobility is tough. This has been our most difficult of battles.



The fact is that people who travel in buses, who walk or cycle, are invisible to us in cars. We own the roads. When we go abroad, we will take a bus or a subway (underground or metro). But not here! Why? There is a class system at work—it is not for us, but “them”. This class system makes its way into the mindsets of planners and engineers, as all cities are designed to make sure that we cannot walk; cross a road and certainly not cycle.



We need enforcement on all sources—from dust to garbage burning. For long, cities like Delhi have pushed away their pollution to where someone else lives. It will not work anymore. Delhi also needs to “persuade” farmers in Punjab and Haryana not to burn their paddy. But this needs incentives and it needs us to get our own house in order.



Though buses, three-wheelers and taxis are today switching from diesel to CNG, cars and SUVs, which carry the rich and powerful, cannot be touched. The argument is that by 2020 we will have “clean” diesel technology—this is when petrol and diesel emissions get equalised. But the Volkswagen scandal shows that even “clean” diesel needs a cheat device to make it “clean”. In this way, toxicity will grow. The carcinogenicity index of diesel will poison and kill us. This is no longer slow murder, but fast and deliberate murder.



Will we succeed? Or will we fail? Our story is your story today and tomorrow. We are not going to give up. So let us make this work. We must.