Water Pollution in India 19 an Economic Appraisal M.N
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Water Pollution in India 19 An Economic Appraisal M.N. Murty and Surender Kumar Introduction Water pollution is a serious problem in India as almost certain levels without aff ecting its quality. In fact there 70 per cent of its surface water resources and a growing could be a problem of water pollution only if the pol- percentage of its groundwater reserves are contaminated lution loads exceed the natural regenerative capacity by biological, toxic, organic, and inorganic pollutants. of a water resource. Th e control of water pollution is In many cases, these sources have been rendered unsafe therefore to reduce the pollution loads from anthropo- for human consumption as well as for other activities, genic activities to the natural regenerative capacity of such as irrigation and industrial needs. Th is shows that the resource. Th e benefi ts of the preservation of water degraded water quality can contribute to water scarcity quality are manifold. Not only can abatement of water as it limits its availability for both human use and for pollution provide marketable benefi ts, such as reduced the ecosystem. water borne diseases, savings in the cost of supplying In 1995, the Central Pollution Control Board water for household, industrial and agricultural uses, (CPCB) identifi ed severely polluted stretches on 18 control of land degradation, and development of fi sh- major rivers in India. Not surprisingly, a majority of eries, it can also generate non-marketable benefi ts like these stretches were found in and around large urban improved environmental amenities, aquatic life, and areas. Th e high incidence of severe contamination near biodiversity. urban areas indicates that the industrial and domes- Using available data and case studies, this chapter tic sectors’ contribution to water pollution is much aims to provide an overview of the extent, impacts, higher than their relative importance implied in the and control of water pollution in India. It also tries to Indian economy. Agricultural activities also contribute identify the theoretical and policy issues involved in the in terms of overall impact on water quality. Besides a abatement and avoidance of water pollution in India. rapidly depleting groundwater table in diff erent parts, the country faces another major problem on the water Extent of Water Pollution in India front—groundwater contamination—a problem which Th e level of water pollution in the country can be has aff ected as many as 19 states, including Delhi. Geo- gauged by the status of water quality around India. Th e genic contaminants, including salinity, iron, fl uoride, water quality monitoring results carried out by CPCB and arsenic have aff ected groundwater in over 200 particularly with respect to the indicator of oxygen districts spread across 19 states. consuming substances (biochemical oxygen demand, Water as an environmental resource is regenerative BOD) and the indicator of pathogenic bacteria (total in the sense that it could absorb pollution loads up to coliform and faecal coliform) show that there is gradual 286 India Infrastructure Report 2011 degradation in water quality (CPCB 2009). During Another aspect of water pollution in India is inade- 1995–2009, the number of observed sample with quate infrastructure, comprising of monitoring stations BOD values less than 3 mg/l were between 57–69 per and frequency of monitoring for monitoring pollution. cent; in 2007 the observed samples were 69 per cent. Monitoring is conducted by CPCB at 1,700 stations, Similarly, during this period of 15 years between 17–28 (Figure 19.2), under a global environment monitoring per cent of the samples observed BOD value between system (GEMS) and Monitoring of Indian National 3-6 mg/l and the maximum number of samples in this Aquatic Resources (MINARS) programmes (CPCB category were observed in 1998. It was observed that 2009). Th ere is an urgent need to increase the num- the number of observations remained unchanged and ber of monitoring stations from their current number, followed a static trend in percentage of observations which translate as one station per 1,935 km2 to levels having BOD between 3–6 mg/l. Th e number of found in developed nations for eff ective monitoring. observed BOD value > 6 mg/l was between 13 and 19 For example, in the state of Arkansas in the US there per cent during 1995–2009, and the maximum value are monitoring stations per 356 km2 (Rajaram and of 19 per cent was observed in 2001, 2002, and 2009. Das 2008). CPCB (2009) also reports the frequency It was observed that there was a gradual decrease in of monitoring in the country. It is observed that 32 per the BOD levels and in 2009, 17 per cent had BOD cent of the stations have frequency of monitoring on value > 6 mg/1. Th e worrying aspect of this trend is a monthly basis, 28.82 per cent on a half-yearly basis, the high percentage (19 per cent) of sampling stations and 38.64 per cent on a quarterly basis. Th is indicates exhibiting unacceptable levels of BOD, which might the need for not only increasing the number of moni- either mean that the discharge sources are not complying toring stations but also the frequency of monitoring. with the standards or even after their compliance their Th e water quality monitoring results obtained by high quantum of discharge contributes to elevated levels CPCB during 1995 to 2009 indicate that organic and of contaminants (Rajaram and Das 2008). However, bacterial contamination was critical in the water bod- the status of water quality cannot be adequately assessed ies. Th e main cause for such contamination is discharge through monitoring of basic parameters in the current of domestic and industrial wastewater in water bod- inadequate number of sampling stations. ies mostly in an untreated form from urban centres. 100 16 16 17 15 16 16 19 19 15 15 14 18 13 15 17 80 18 19 18 18 18 27 25 23 28 27 25 21 17 18 19 60 40 67 66 68 69 67 57 59 60 57 57 59 60 64 64 64 20 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year BOD<3 BOD 3–6 BOD>6 Figure 19.1 Trend of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), 1995–2009 Source: CPCB (2009). Water Pollution in India 287 1800 1700 1600 1429 1400 1245 1200 1019 1032 1000 870 784 784 784 800 784 507 507 600 507 480 480 480 480 480 480 450 400 400 310 200 No. of Monitoring Stations 168 136 120 89 67 200 73 74 43 29 18 0 1977–8 1978–9 1980–1 1981–2 1982–3 1983–4 1984–5 1985–6 1986–7 1987–8 1988–9 1990–1 1991–2 1992–3 1993–4 1994–5 1995–6 1996–7 1997–8 1998–9 2000–1 2001–2 2002–3 2003–4 2004–5 2005–6 2006–7 2007–8 2008–9 1979–80 1989–90 2009–10 1999–2000 Year Figure 19.2 Growth of Water Pollution Monitoring Network in India Source: CPCB (2009). Secondly the receiving water bodies also do not have (Class-I), treat only about 32 per cent of the wastewater adequate water fl ow for dilution. Th erefore, the oxygen generated. Note that out of the total effl uent treatment demand and bacterial pollution is increasing. capacity of 11554 MLD in the country, about 70 Household borne effl uents contribute a substantial per cent (8040 MLD) has been created in 35 metropoli- proportion of water pollution in India. Untreated effl u- tan cities. Metropolitan cities treat about 52 per cent of ents from households pollute surface and groundwater their wastewater. Delhi and Mumbai account for about sources. Local governments (city corporations, mu- 69 per cent of the treatment capacity of metropolitan nicipalities, and panchayats) have the responsibility of cities. Th is indicates that smaller towns and cities have water supply and sanitation and are supposed to treat very little wastewater treatment capacity. Meanwhile, the effl uents as per national water pollution standards or only 3.15 per cent of the rural population has access minimal national standards (MINAS) However, about to sanitation services and 115 million homes have no 70 per cent of the effl uents are not treated and disposed access to toilets of any type. off into the environmental media untreated. Table 19.1 CPCB provides source-specifi c pollution standards provides the summary statistics of wastewater generation for industries with respect to pollution concentration and treatment in India in 2008. Th is table shows that of major water pollutants: (BOD), chemical oxygen de- cities, which have a population of more than one lakh mand (COD), suspended solids (SS), and pH. CPCB Table 19.1 Wastewater Treatment Capacity in Urban Areas in India, 2008 Category No. of cities Total water supply Wastewater generation Treatment capacity (in MLD) (in MLD) (in MLD) Class-I City 498 44,769.05 35,558.12 11,553.68 (32%) Class-II town 410 3,324.83 2,696.7 233.7 (8%) Total 908 48,093.88 38,254 11787.38 (31%) Source: CPCB (2008). 288 India Infrastructure Report 2011 launched a water pollution control programme in 1992 of work are lost each year, and the country loses about for industries. It identifi ed 1,551 large and medium Rs 366 billion each year due to water related diseases industries, and gave a time schedule to these industries (Parikh 2004). for compliance with prescribed standards. It was found McKenzie and Ray (2004) also observe similar that many of these industries have effl uent treatment eff ects of water pollution; however, the magnitude plants (ETPs) but despite these they did not comply of the eff ect was modest.