After nine months of intense public debate over Delhi’s worsening air quality, there is no dearth of measures suggested to tackle air pollution, but rather than looking for quickfire solutions, the emphasis should be on a comprehensive roadmap that helps the Capital city breathe easier. On Saturday, the Supreme Court banned all diesel taxis in the National Capital Region spawning protests by taxi drivers who blocked roads in Gurgaon and Noida and threw traffic in the entire region out of gear. The difficulty posed by the order is that it is prohibitively expensive to convert diesel engines to CNG unlike the petrol-to-CNG conversion. Interestingly, the hearing also saw a suggestion to fit catalytic converters and particulate filters to all diesel cars to ensure cleaner emissions. This technology is cheaper than the diesel-to-CNG conversion and should be incentivised by the Centre.
Now the Delhi government, which had ignored the court’s order to stop registering diesel taxis after December, has woken up to the protests and sought a phased ban. The first time the Supreme Court banned diesel taxis in Delhi was in 2000. The ban was side-stepped by registering diesel taxis in the Capital with all-India tourist permits. Perhaps, the better solution is to stop registering diesel vehicles in NCR so that over the long run, these are phased out. The Supreme Court hearing also saw diesel car-makers arguing against the ban on diesel engines above 2000 cc capacity that was banned last December. Automakers like Mahindra have already succeeded in working around this ban by building 1,999 cc engines, demonstrating the limits of such artificial caps on engine capacity. Lawyers for the auto companies pinned the blame on older cars, claiming that diesel cars built to comply with BS-IV fuel norms were cleaner. Interestingly, the transport ministry had proposed last August a buyback policy for older cars where owners can earn up to Rs.1.5 lakh, but little has been heard about it since then.
It is surprising how matters that fall within the realm of administration are being deliberated and implemented in courtrooms with lawyer arguing the pros and cons and judges attempting to arrive at viable solutions. One would wonder how lawyers and judges have acquired expertise in environmental matters. But in an administrative vacuum, the courts have cited public interest to step in and push the green agenda at a faster pace. The apex court can take credit for ensuring that fewer trucks enter Delhi through restricting their entry hours and levying a hefty green tax. Similarly, the Delhi government has conducted two rounds of forcing odd and even numbered cars to ply only on alternate days. The central government claims it is expediting the introduction of cleaner fuels and is constructing peripheral roads to lighten Delhi’s traffic burden.
But none of this seems to be adding up when measured against the pollution figures during Odd-Even Phase 2. After declining for a few days, particulate matter in Delhi’s air shot up during the last 10 days of the 15-day effort, ostensibly because of stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana and forest fires in Uttarakhand. The gap between execution and reality becomes evident in this scenario. Though stubble burning is banned in NCR states and Punjab and is monitored through satellite data, governments are failing to dissuade farmers from this destructive activity. Similarly, despite tall claims to curb road and construction dust, nothing has been done. While the Supreme Court must be praised for expending judicial time to tackle a public interest issue, it cannot possibly evolve a comprehensive policy that will involve coordinated state, Centre and private sector actions. A healthy mix of bans, incentives, new technologies and better monitoring mechanisms are needed. But can governments keep aside their turf wars and work together?
