Less pollution this Diwali

Times of India , Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Correspondent : Staff Reporter
AHMEDABAD: If you felt that the noise and air pollution levels in the city went down during Diwali as compared to last year, you may have "sniffed" it right. State pollution control authorities confirm that it did go down this Diwali. A section of activists, however, think otherwise.

The combined result of a ban on bursting firecrackers, anti-crackers campaign launched by NGOs and supported by various schools in the city, seem to have worked to bring down the levels of respirable suspended particulate matter (RSPM) and suspended particulate matter (SPM) and sulphur dioxide (SO2) emitted by crackers during Diwali this year.

"Although we still have to garner all data, the pollution levels seem to have gone down substantially as have the sales of firecrackers," says GPCB secretary Sanjiv Tyagi. The Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) monitored pollution levels at 16 sites this year using High Volume Samplers (HVS) from which air samples are taken to the laboratories for testing.

The one at the Nehru Bridge area could be taken as a benchmark where RSPM levels on the Diwali and New Year Day were 176 µg/M3, SPM was at 516 µg/M3, NO2 at 23 µg/M3 and SO2 at 14 µg/M3. At the same site, last year RSPM levels stood at 354 µg/M3, SPM was 852 µg/M3, SO2 is 40 µg/M3 and NO2 was 49 µg/M3. But pollution levels still remained higher than the acceptable limits of SPM at 200, RSPM at 100, SO2 and NO2 at 80 in 24 hours.

The noise levels too have been under control as per the figures provided by the GPCB. While last year no systematic monitoring was done, this year the GPCB measured noise levels at 37 sites on the Diwali day where a maximum of 123 decibel noise level was recorded, less than the acceptable limit of 145 decibel. However, activists say, the lower level of pollution this year, is only notional as not only are the routine levels of pollution high, the manner in which pollution is measured in the state is erroneous and misleading.

 
SOURCE : Times of India, Wednesday, November 17, 2004
 


Back to pevious page



The NetworkAbout Us  |  Our Partners  |  Concepts   
Resources :  Databases  |  Publications  |  Media Guide  |  Suggested Links
Happenings :  News  |  Events  |  Opinion Polls  |  Case Studies
Contact :  Guest Book  |  FAQs |  Email Us