At Sunder Nursery Park in New Delhi, a 5.5-meter-tall pillar with geometric facade adorns the place. But its purpose is more than appealing to aesthetics. Named “Verto,” it is an air pollution filter, filtering 600,000 cubic meters of air every day. Installed in 2019, the filter performed well, so much so that its manufacturers aimed at a government contract for mass usage. However, as of now, it is the only one of its kind, standing alone in New Delhi as the Air Quality Index surges past 400 (anything below 50 is considered “good”; anything above 151 is unhealthy.)
Amid these hazardous circumstances, the government decided to loosen its pollution controls. On November 12, it issued a notice relieving the “White” category industries from dual pollution permits. On November 14, another notice claimed that these industries were further exempted from state pollution approvals as well. All of these industries were to be brought under an integrated environment clearance process, which, the government claimed, is necessary to streamline regulations and make it easier to do business.
With these pollution permits scrapped and no clear date on when the integrated process will begin, these small-scale industries are now essentially unregulated in their environmental impact. What does it mean for India’s climate activism, and its position in the global effort?
“White” industries are one of the four categories of industries that the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs), and Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) brought into light in 2016. The category is the newest edition, preceded by Red, Orange, and Green. White industries include factories for manufacturing goods such as biscuit trays, cotton and woolen hosiers, electric lamps and compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). As per the guidelines, these industries have a pollution index score below 20 on a scale of 100.
However, the pollution index itself has some glaring issues. For instance, the index came from a “series of brain-storming sessions” among the mentioned boards. The chart for calculating the index contains three categories, and is based on the discharge of air and water pollutants along with hazardous wastes. The first two categories (air and water pollutants) hold 40 marks each, with 20 marks for the third one (hazardous waste).
However, apart from air pollution monitoring in 344 major cities and towns under the NAMP (National Air Quality Monitoring) scheme, there is no system for monitoring all variations of pollution for the 10 million-plus small scale industry units across the country. It must be noted at this point, that among these units, 324,006 are reported to run on coal, 595,817 run on oil, and 62,459 on LPG. Some 90 percent of these small-scale factories are under the “unregistered” heading. Under these circumstances, the value of the index for monitoring all variants of pollution is in serious question, especially when the vast majority of units have not registered.
The assumption that lack of data equates to lack of pollution has troubling consequences. For example, the MSME report from 2020-2021 claimed strongly that CFL manufacturing does not produce any pollution and hence it does not require pollution control clearance. However, studies from both the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risk (SCHER) and the Indo-German Action Research group showed that trace amounts of mercury can be found in CFL bulbs. The Indo-German combined research team did surveys on Delhi and Kolkata, and recommended that mishandling and improper recycling of such lamps can cause serious health hazards.
As for the cotton industry, apart from soil pollution and water contamination due to insecticides, the chrome composite leather-clad (CCLC) rollers commonly used in the ginning process of cotton results in chromium contamination and pollution. The persistent rubbing of such rollers with knives, necessary for ginning (i.e., separating cotton fibers from seeds), produces 17 to 250mg/kg (ppm) of chromium, which gets attached to the fibers. Chromium is a carcinogenic element that should remain under 0.1 mg/kg (ppm) according to government health standards. Toxin-free rollers do exist, but their implementation in cotton factories is far from widespread.
These examples cover just two of the “White” industries; the rest of the 34 industries have similar, if not more adverse environmental impacts. The relaxation of environmental permits for all these industries points toward serious trouble. And lax regulation at home risks invalidating India’s climate change activism abroad.
India’s claims at COP28 last year were quite ambitious relative to the country’s economic position. Despite being a developing nation, India made claims similar to the developed ones, including the “Panchamrit” pledge to reach net zero emission by 2070. Other pledges involving the National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG), sustainable river-centric development, and transfer of low carbon technology for industries highlighted India’s position in the event.
However, India faced questions over the lack of clear mechanisms and funding for achieving such goals, for which New Delhi did not have a clear answer. India also faced pressure to phase down its use of coal power but showed stiff resistance to the idea.
As far as river protection and river-centric development are concerned, in 2023 it was reported that industries in 25 areas for redevelopment under the Master Plan for Delhi 2021 were still unconnected to Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CEPTs). The industries were discharging untreated waste into the Yamuna River. They are still a large concern, and the recent photos of froth deposits in the Yamuna River speak to the financial and infrastructural deficits India is facing, which hinders the actualization of its pledges made in COP28.
When considering this implementation gap, we cannot overlook the economic factor. The national economy of India, plagued with slowing growth after the harsh impacts of demonetization, COVID-19, and recent world events, is trying to revive to become a “$7 trillion economy” by 2030. In this race, India’s best bet is the revitalization and growth of small-scale industries, which contribute to almost 40 percent of the gross industrial value added in the Indian economy. The “White” category in particular includes many of these small-scale industries. From an economic standpoint, it’s understandable why India would want to relieve these industries of the regulatory burden. However, no government reports exist on the pollution that “White” category industries contribute, meaning there is little clarity on how lifting pollution permits would impact the environment.
In a global sense, world trade has been roiled by Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. presidential election. With the U.S. anticipated to lurch sharply toward protectionism, large scale production is the call of the hour. This rejuvenates the Global North-South debate pertaining to climate concerns once again, where the Global North is using the resources of Global South, both material and human, for their economic benefit, leaving the South deprived of their resources. Moreover, due to the domination of the Global North in the global economic framework, the Global South is in a constant race against time for its sustenance and growth. This frequently forces developing countries to make choices that could have a negative impact on both people and the environment.
India is not alone in risking environmental degradation for the chance to grow its economy. Neighboring Bangladesh is also facing similar circumstances. The textile industry in Bangladesh, which sustains Bangladesh’s economy by clothing the Global North, is one of the key concerns behind water scarcity in Jamuna, as well as air pollution and soil degradation due to untreated affluents. Pakistan faces the same plight. The recent AQI of Lahore reached 1600, and the reasons are quite similar.
As far as India is concerned, the decision to exempt “White” industries from environmental regulation brought mixed feelings to climate activists based in India, who see it as “prioritizing short-term economic gains over long-term sustainability and public wellbeing.” Knowing that India is far from alone in making such a choice is cold comfort indeed.