Air Pollution in Indian Cities

Home , Air pollution in India, Bastacola

Air po caly

Assessment of Air Pollution pse in Indian Cities Report

1. Introduction 2 2. Methodology and Data 3 3. Inferences and Discussion 4

3.1 Andhra Pradesh 5 3.2 Bihar 6 3.3 Chandigarh 7 3.4 Chhattisgarh 8 3.5 Delhi 9 3.6 Gujarat 10 3.7 Haryana 12 3.8 Jharkhand 13 3.9 Karnataka 14 3.10 Madhya Pradesh 16 3.11 Maharashtra 17 3.12 Odisha (Orissisha (Orissa) 19 3.13 Punjab 20 3.14 Rajasthan 21 3.15 Tamil Nadu 22 3.16 Telengana 23 3.17 Uttar Pradesh 24 3.18 Uttarakhand 25

4. Way Forward 26 5. Comparison of air pollution policies 27 6. Appendix I 28 7. Appendix II 35

Airpocalypse: Assessment of Air Pollution in Indian Cities

Written by Sunil Dahiya, Greenpeace Lauri Myllyvirta, Greenpeace Nandikesh Sivalingam, Greenpeace

Acknowledgements Harshit Sharma, Narendra Dubey and Ashish Fernandes

Design Divya Kukreti, Studio Kuk Published by GPET, released in January 2017

For more information, contact: [email protected] A view of the smog-covered smoke stacks of the Indraprastha Power Generation Co. Ltd, a power plant in New Delhi. Printed on 100% recycled paper Image: Subrata Biswas/ Greenpeace Deaths every year due to outdoor air pollution in 1.2 million India

GDP lost due to Air pollution

Executive Summary

This report shows that deadly air pollution is not a problem restricted to Delhi-NCR (National Capital Region) or even to India’s metros. It is a national problem that is killing 1.2 million Indians every year and costing the economy an estimated 3% of GDP. If the country’s development is important, fighting air pollution has to be a priority.

Data gathered by Greenpeace India from state pollution control boards shows that there are virtually no places in India complying with WHO and National Ambient Air Quality (NAAQ) standards, and most cities are critically polluted. Except for a few places in Southern India which complied with NAAQ standards, the entire country is experiencing a public health crisis due to high air pollution levels.

Due to the range of different sectors responsible for pollutant emissions, urgent and determined action is needed by a number of ministries in the states and central governments, industry and general public.

Greenpeace is calling on the central and state governments to: 1. Institute robust monitoring of air quality across the country and make the data publicly available in real time. This should be coupled with a health advisory and ‘red alerts’ for bad-air days, which would enable the public to take decisions to protect their health and the environment and automatically institute measures to protect citizens, such as shutting down schools, traffic reduction measures, shutting down power plants and industries etc. 2. Use the data as a basis to fine tune pollution reduction strategies that must, inter alia seek to improve public transport and reduce petrol/diesel vehicle use, strengthen enforcement to get polluting vehicles off the roads, introduce higher fuel standards (Bharat VI), enforce stricter emission regulations and improved efficiency for thermal power plants and industries, move from diesel generators to rooftop solar, increase use of clean renewable energy, offer incentives for electric vehicles, dust removal from roads, regulate construction activities and stop burning of biomass and waste.

These strategies should be formalized as a time bound action plan which has targets and penalties. While some actions might need to be city or region-specific, there are a broad range of actions that will be universally applicable.

Vocal public participation is critical in reducing air pollution. Our choices in terms of electricity, transportation and waste management can play a major role in managing pollution levels, as are our choices in terms of political leaders who support the goal of reducing air pollution.

1 Introduction

In 2016, severe In 2016, severe air pollution has disrupted everyday life, especially during the winter. In 2015 air pollution (PM2.5) air pollution has levels increased in a rapid manner overtaking even China. Even though pollution levels are increasing across disrupted everyday the country, the emphasis so far has been on Delhi. life, especially during There has been a growing realization that the majority of the winter. Delhi’s pollution is coming from outside its borders and that pollution levels in other states like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra are also increasing. However, the country is yet to come to the full understanding that air pollution is a national problem and to win the fight against it, we need to act as a country and across city or even regional boundaries.

India’s air pollution has become a public health and In 2015 air economic crisis. There are increasing numbers of pollution people who die prematurely every year with the increasing pollution levels. Deaths due to air (PM2.5) levels pollution are only a fraction less than the number of deaths caused increased by tobacco usage. Global Burden of Disease in a rapid (GBD), a comprehensive regional and global research program including 500 researchers representing over manner 300 institutions and 50 countries, has estimated that overtaking 3283 Indians died per day due to outdoor air pollution in India in 2015, making the potential number of deaths even China due to outdoor air pollution in India in 2015 to 11.98 lakh. On the economic front, loss of productivity and the forced closures of schools and industries have already started impacting our economy. The World Bank estimates that India loses around 3% of its GDP due to air pollution. This makes air pollution one of the biggest issues to fight if we are to protect peoples’ lives, public health and our economy.

Air pollution is a complex issue, requiring an array of solutions. There are many sources that contribute to pollution across the country. Depending on region and climatic conditions, the contribution of particular sources will also differ. However, what is very clear is that irrespective of where you live, burning of fossil fuels (coal & oil) contributes majorly to air pollution levels across regions.

The purpose of this report is to show that air pollution is a national problem and it needs to be addressed equally across the country and not only in Delhi or the National Capital Region. The report also tries to identify major sources of pollution in parts of the country based

1 http://documents.worldbank.org/ on past research. As a way ahead for the country, our curated/en/220721468268504319/ long term goals to solve the air pollution crisis can be pdf/700040v10ESW0P0box0374379B00PUBLIC0. pdf universal, while short term solutions are to be decided based on the levels of pollution prevailing in the region.

2 Methodology and Data

The Central Pollution Control Board has instituted the National Air Quality Monitoring

Programme (NAMP). Under NAMP, three air pollutants viz., Sulphur Dioxide (SO2), Nitrogen

Dioxide (NO2) and Particulate Matter size equal to or less than 10 micron (PM10), have been identified for regular monitoring at all the locations. The NAMP network presently comprises 621 operating monitoring stations located in 262 cities/towns in 29 states and 5 union territories 2 across the country.” Greenpeace tried to collect data on PM10 levels for these NAMP station across the country through various sources such as Right to Information (RTI) application filed to SPCB (State Pollution Control Boards) to gather data, SPCB’s websites and annual reports of SPCBs etc. Simultaneously, a secondary literature review was carried out to understand the sources of pollution, to capture the most recent source apportionment studies carried out throughout the country.

Sulphur Air pollutants that have been Dioxide (SO2), identified for regular Nitrogen monitoring at all the Dioxide locations (NO ) and throughout 2 the country Particulate Matter

Delhi has been recording dangerous levels of air pollution putting everyone, but especially children, elders and patients, at serious health risk. Image: Sudhanshu Malhotra / Greenpeace 2 http://cpcb.nic.in/AQI_NAMP_ Rep_June2016.pdf

3 Inferences and Discussion

The map plotted from the annual average

PM10 concentrations across the country suggests that there are no places or cities in northern India complying with WHO and NAAQS standards, and most of the cities are critically polluted. Except for a few places in Southern India which complied with NAAQ standards, the entire country is experiencing a public health crisis due to high air pollution Jammu levels. A detailed description of the cities Damtal across all states in India is provided in the following sections. Chandigarh Dera Baba nanak

Mandi Gobindgarh Haldwani

Meerut rohtak

Lucknow alwar Sibsagar Jodhpur Gorakhpur agra Unnao Nalbari Jaipur gwalior Kohima kota jhansi varanasi Byrnihat udaipur Patna silchar

sindri gandhi nagar singrauli kusunda ujjain sagar bhopal Jharia jamnagar ranchi rajkot indore korba Kolkatta surat bhavnagar siltara rourkela balasore akela raipur nashik amravati talcher cuttak jalna chaderpur

mumbai karim nagar berhampur latur Navi mumbai pune bidar warangal

hyderabad solapur visakhapatnam

guntur belgaum hubli nellore karwar davanagere

chitradurga tumku cities and PM10 levels across hassan kolar chennai India cuddalore chamrajnagar WHO Guideline NAAQS Guideline

tuticorin 1-1.25 times NAAQS 1.25-2 times NAAQS 2-3 times NAAQS 3-4 times NAAQS > 4 times NAAQS Indian state boundary Note: Map not to scale

4 Andhra Pradesh dec

10 nov tnam al) oct tnam sep Vishakapa concentrations in 10 g au Vishakapa s (annu naaq jul jun Guntur ay Guntur m e verag apr al) al a mar Annu 5 concentrations in three cities where the data was the data where cities concentrations in three as prescribed under NAAQS. PM under NAAQS. as prescribed 10 3 Feb ross cities in Andhra Pradesh during 2015 tions ac a Pradesh during 2015 ross cities in Andhr tions ac Anantpuram Anantpuram s (Annu Naaq levels in all three cities were constantly higher than the cities were levels in all three Jan 10 concentra concentra 0 for year 2015. 0 10 3 50 10 20 40 80 60 150 100 120

100

10 10 10 10

µ µ ) M G/ ( M P M P ) M G/ (

3 3 annual average prescribed by CPCB throughout the year. From PM From the year. by CPCB throughout annual average prescribed available from the pollution control board were higher than the annual higher than the were board the pollution control available from average of 60 µg/m Further analysis of the monthly variations in the data during 2015 suggests Further analysis of the monthly variations that the PM Anantpuram, Guntur and Visakhapatnam were respectively 84, 100 and 61 respectively were and Visakhapatnam Anantpuram, Guntur µg/m The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Andhra Pradesh Air Pollution levels for cities in Andhra The assessment of highlighted that PM concentrations from January to May were relatively high as compared to high as compared relatively January to May were concentrations from levels. to even dangerous other time of the year worsening the situation

al as 3 levels g/m µ 10 e ofverag three cities In Andhra Pradesh recorded PM higher than the annu a 60 prescribed S under NAAQ The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Bihar highlighted that

PM10 concentrations in Patna and Muzzafarpur were respectively at 200 µg/ 3 3 Biha r m and 164 µg/m for year 2015, which were at around 3 times the NAAQS annual limit set by CPCB and 8 to 10 times the annual limit set by WHO for

PM10. The data is not just an indicator of hazardous levels of pollution but a continuously ringing alarm for years indicating the health emergency faced by the people inhabiting the area.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Bihar during 2015

250 ) 3 200 G/ M

µ 150 ( 10

P M 100

0 Patna Muzzafarpur

Annual average naaqs (annual) Patna and

Muzzafarpur Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels has been In Bihar hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015 for both Patna and recorded Muzzafarpur with November to March being the severely polluted months PM levels 3 10 when the PM10 concentrations even reached above 300 µg/m . 3 times the NAAQS annual Guttikunda and Jawahar 20143, conducted a study to understand pollution limit set by contribution within city of Patna for base year 2012. They found that overall CPCB contribution to the PM10 pollution load within the city varied from source to source. They found that the transport, road dust, domestic sources, generator sets, open waste burning, manufacturing industry, brick kilns and construction activities respectively contributed approximately 13-22%, 14-19%, 12-16%, 5-6%, 9-11%, 5-10%, 11-29% and 8-13% to the total

PM10 emission load in the city. It is important to note that emissions within the city are different from contributions to ambient levels, as a large part of the pollution in ambient air comes from outside the city. The same paper also mentioned that the Greater Patna area has 2600 premature deaths, 2,00,000 asthma attacks and 1100 cardiac admissions due to exposure to ambient air pollution levels in Patna in 2012.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Bihar during 2015

350

300 ) 3 250

200 ( M G/ 10 3 Guttikunda, S.K. and P. 150 P M Jawahar, 2014. “Characterizing Patna’s Ambient Air Quality 100 and Assessing Opportunities for Policy Intervention”, 50 UrbanEmissions.Info (Ed.), New Delhi, India, http:// 0 shaktifoundation.in/wp- content/uploads/2014/02/ Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec AQM-in-Patna-2014-07-15- Final-Report.pdf Patna Muzzafarpur Naaqs (Annual)

6 C handiga r h

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for Chandigarh highlighted that PM10 concentrations are 85 µg/m3 for year 2015, which were at higher than the NAAQS annual limit set by CPCB and about 4 times the annual limit set

by WHO for PM10. Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels has been very high all around the year for 2015 for Chandigarh with

October to February being the severely polluted months when the PM10 concentrations even reached above 100 µg/m3.

PM10 concentrations in Chandigarh during 2015

150 ) 3 100 50

( M G/ 0 10

P M Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Chandigarh Naaqs (Annual)

Chaudhary et al., 20044 carried out source apportionment study for

Chandigarh in 2001, which attributed 24% of total primary PM2.5 pollution Chandigarh levels from fossil fuel combustion (coal, diesel, and gasoline) and 9 % to recorded the biomass combustion in Chandigarh. The same study also highlighted

PM10 levels that during the summer time secondary particulate formation and oil 4 times the (Diesel & Petrol) consumption were the biggest contributors to the overall annual limit particulate matter concentrations. set by WHO

Others Diesel 7% 10% Secondary Ammonium 6%

secondary Petrol 17% nitrate 2%

Secondary Sulphate 16%

Biomass Burning 9% Road Dust 33%

4 Chowdhury, Zohir; Zheng, Mei and Russell, Armistead, 2004, “Source Apportionment and Characterization of Ambient Fine Particles in Delhi , Mumbai , Kolkata , and Chandigarh” Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, https://smartech. gatech.edu/bitstream/ handle/1853/10872/E- 20-H76_736587.pdf

7 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Chhattisgarh highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in four cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 as

prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Bhilai, Korba, Raipur and 3 C hhatti s ga r h Siltara were respectively 109, 66, 138 and 145 µg/m for year 2015-2016.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Chhattisgarh during April 2015 - March 2016

200 )

3 150 G/ M

µ 100 ( 10

P M 50

0 Bhilai Korba Raipur Siltara

Annual average naaqs (annual)

Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels has been Detailed hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015-2016 for all the cities observation except Korba which shows PM10 levels close to NAAQS throughout the of the data year. suggests that the Korba has been declared 5th in the list of the 24 most critically polluted 5 PM10 levels areas in the country by CPCB. The same report also highlighted Coal has been Based Power Plants and Smelter Plants as major sources of air pollution hazardous along with fugitive emissions from coal mines in the area. and very high all around Deshmukh et al., 20136 highlighted vehicular growth, coal burning in steel the year for industry and thermal power plants, other industrial activities, biomass 2015-2016 for burning, brick kilns and domestic fuel use as the major factors contributing Most cities to air pollution in Raipur, although the contribution to total pollution from respective sources has not been attributed.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Chhattisgarh during April 2015 - March 2016

200 ) 3 150

100 ( M G/

10 50 P M

apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec Jan Feb mar

Bhilai Korba Raipur Siltara

Naaqs (Annual)

5 http://cpcb.nic.in/ divisionsofheadoffice/ess/ Korba.pdf 6 http://link.springer.com. sci-hub.cc/article/10.1007/ s11869-011-0169-9

8 D elhi

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for Delhi highlighted that PM10 concentrations are 268 µg/m3 for year 2015, which were at 4.5 times higher than the NAAQS annual limit set by CPCB and about 13 times the annual

limit set by WHO for PM10. Detailed observation of the data suggests that

the PM10 levels has been very high all around the year for 2015 for Delhi

with October to February being the severely polluted months when the PM10 concentrations even touched 500 µg/m3.

It has been long established as the pollution capital of the world by WHO, 20147 and most of the debate on air pollution in India are still centered around Delhi. Various studies have been done to understand the source contribution to Delhi’s Air pollution, the most recent being the study by IIT 8 Kanpur . According to the study, “The total PM10 emission load in the city is estimated to be 143 t/d (based on average annual activity data). The top

four contributors to PM10 emissions are road dust (56%), concrete batching (10%), industrial point sources (10%) and vehicles (9%); these are based on annual emissions”. According to the study control measures applied at the power plants within 300 KM radius of Delhi will “effectively reduce 3 3 PM10 and PM2.5 concentration by about 62 µg/m and 35 µg/m respectively.

Similarly 90% reduction in NOx can reduce the nitrates by 45%. This will 3 Air Pollution effectively reduce PM10 and PM2.5 concentration by about 37 µg/m and 23 3 levels µg/m respectively. It implies that control of SO2 and NOx from power plants 3 for Delhi can reduce PM10 concentration approximately by 99 µg/m and for PM2.5 the highlighted reduction could be about 57 µg/m3.” that PM10 concentra- Furthermore, the study highlighted that, “The contribution of the biomass tions are 268 burning in winter is quite high at 17% (for PM10) [and] 26% (for PM2.5). µg/m3 for Biomass burning is prohibited in Delhi and it is not a common practice at year 2015, a large scale. The enhanced concentration of PM in October-November is which were possibly due to the effect of post-monsoon crop residue burning (CRB). at 4.5 times It can be seen that the biomass contribution in PM10 in the month of higher than 3 3 November could be as high as 140 µg/m and about 120 µg/m for PM2.5 the NAAQS 3 3 (mean of contribution in entire winter season: 97 µg/m and 86 µg/m annual limit respectively). In all likelihood, the PM from biomass burning is contributed set by CPCB from CRB [crop residue burning] prevalent in Punjab and Haryana in winter”. and about 13 times the annual limit set by WHO PM10 concentrations in Delhi during August 2014- July 2015

600 )

3 500 400

300 ( M G/

10 200

P M 100 0

aug sep oct nov dec Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul

Delhi Naaqs (Annual)

7 http://www.who.int/phe/ health_topics/outdoorair/ databases/cities-2014/en/ 8 http://delhi.gov.in/DoIT/ Environment/PDFs/Final_ Report.pdf

9 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Gujarat highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in five cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 as G uja r at prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Bhavnagar, Gandhi Nagar, Jamnagar, Rajkot and Vadodara were respectively 91, 82, 88, 86 and 86 µg/ m3 for financial year 2014-2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Gujarat during April 2014 - March 2015

100

80 ) 3 60

40 ( M G/ 10

P M 20

0 Bhavnagar Gandhi Jamnagar Rajkot Vadodhara Nagar

Annual average naaqs (annual)

Detailed PM10 concent-

rations in Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels have been Bhavnagar, very high all around the year for 2014-2015 for all the cities in Gujarat. Gandhi Nagar, Guttikunda and Jawahar, 20119 estimated that power plants contribute Jamnagar, to 39% of PM10 pollution load in Ahmedabad and 31% to PM2.5, Rajkot and with transportation contributing to 16% and 27% to PM10 and PM2.5 Vadodhra respectively. were respectively In Surat and Rajkot the contribution of transportation to overall PM10 91, 82, 88, 86 were 30% & 26% and PM concentration were 42% & 40% respectively. and 86µ g/ 2.5 µ Contribution from industrial sector to PM levels of 12 % and 25% and m3 for year 10 PM levels of 20% and 36% in Surat and Rajkot respectively. 2014-2015 2.5

PM10 concentrations across cities in Gujarat during April 2014- March 2015

120 ) 3 100 80 60 ( M G/

10 40

P M 20 0

apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec Jan Feb mar

Bhavnagar Gandhi Jamnagar Rajkot Nagar

Vadodhara Naaqs (Annual)

9 Guttikunda and Jawahar, 2011, “Simple Interactive Models for Better Air Quality, Urban Air Pollution Analysis in India”, UrbanEmissions.Info, New Delhi, India, http://urbanemissions.info/ wp-content/uploads/docs/ SIM-37-2012.pdf

10 Contribution of major sources Contribution of major sources to

to PM10 emissions inventory PM2.5 emissions inventory

Ahmedabad Ahmedabad

CON WB IND CON 2% 4% 4% IND BK 11% 1% 2% WB 5% BK 7% RD 22% GS 5%

RD 7% GS 3% DOM 9%

DOM 5%

TR 16% PP 31% TR 27% PP 39%

Surat Surat

IND 12% GS 3% BK 7% DOM 10% BK 10% CON 2% GS 3% WB 5%

DOM 7%

IND 20%

TR 30% RD 34% TR 42% CON 1%

WB 6%

RD 8%

rajkot rajkot

GS 1%

IND 25% DOM 3% QR 11% IND 25%

CON 1% WB 3% GS 1%

DOM 3%

QR 11% TR 26% TR 26% RD 30% CON 1% WB 3%

RD 30%

TR- Transport BK- Brick Kilns; GS- Generator Sets; DOM- Domestic Fuel Combustion; CMQ- Construction Material rocessingat quarries; RD- Road Dust; WB- Open Waste burning; PP: Power Plant

11 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Haryana highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in four cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 H a r yana as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Faridabad, Gurgaon, Panchkula and Rohtak were respectively 240, 129, 92 and 92 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Haryana during 2015

300

250 ) 3 200

150 ( M G/

10 100 P M 50

Faridabad Gurgaon Panchkula Rohtak

Annual average naaqs (annual)

Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM levels have been PM10 levels 10 has been hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015 for all the cities hazardous wherever data is available Faridabad and Gurgaon being the places

all around which are severely polluted along with all other places having higher PM10 the year for concentrations reaching above NAAQS. 2015 with PM concentrations across cities in Haryana during 2015 Faridabad 10 and Gurgaon )

3 350 showing 300 severe 250 200 pollution ( M G/ 10 150 100

levels P M 50 0

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Bhilai Gurgaon Panchkula Rohtak

Naaqs (Annual)

12 J ha r khand

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Jharkhand highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in all 10 locations where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/ 3 m as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Jharia, Ranchi, Kusunda and Bastacola were respectively 228, 216, 214 and 211 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Jharkhand during 2015

250 ) 3 200

150 ( M G/

10 100 P M 50

0 a

acola Girdih Jharia Ranchi Sindri Dhanbad Kusund Bast HazaribagJhamshedpur

Annual average naaqs (annual) West Singhbhumi

Ranchi, Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels has been Kusunda, hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015 for all the cities Jharia and wherever data is available. Ranchi, Kusunda, Jharia and Bastacola are the 3 Bastacola places which are severely polluted with PM10 levels being above 200 µg/m are the all the time during the year along with all other places having higher PM10 places which concentrations reaching above NAAQS. are severely polluted Pandey et al., 201410 highlighted that the major causes of air pollution in with PM 10 area near Jharia including Bastacola, Dhansar, Ena, CIMFR are coal mining, levels being mine fires, vehicular pollution, windblown dust through unpaved roads and above 200 g/ µ over burdens in the area. m3 all year long PM10 concentrations across cities in Jharkhand during 2015

250 ) 3 200 150

( M G/ 100 10 50 P M 0

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Bastacola dhanbad girdih hazaribagh

jamshedpur jharia kusunda ranchi

sindri west singhbhumi Naaqs (Annual)

10 Pandey et al., 2014, “Assessment of air pollution around coal mining area: Emphasizing on spatial distributions, seasonal variations and heavy metals, using cluster and principal component analysis”, Atmospheric Pollution Research, 5, 79-86, http://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/ S1309104215303445

13 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Karnataka highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in 9 towns and cities out of the 21 where data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual 3 ka r nataka average of 60 µg/m as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Davanagere, Bangalore, Tumkur, Raichur and Hubli were respectively 109, 119, 118, 87 and 80 µg/m3 for year 2015-2016.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Karnataka during April 2015 - March 2016

160

140

120

100 ) 3 80

60 ( M G/

10 40 P M 20

0 a ar thi ad am ar olar a k v hubli bid tumkumRandymysore hassan karw anagere belgu raichurbellary v dharw gulbarga PM bangalore a 10 mangalore d chitrabhduradrgaaranebennur concentra- chamrajnagar tions in 9 Annual average naaqs (annual) towns/cities out of 21 were higher than TERI 201011 estimated emission load and source contribution to pollution the annual for Bangalore and estimated that, “At the city level, the major sources average of of PM10 emissions are transport (42%), road dust resuspension (20%), 3 60 µg/m as construction (14%), industry (14%), DG set (7%) and domestic (3%). prescribed Likewise, at the city level, major sources of NOx are transport (68%), DG under NAAQS set (23%), industry (8%) and domestic (1%). In case of SO2, at the city level, industry (56%0, DG set (23%) and transport (16%) are the major sources.” The same report through source apportionment also highlighted:

• “Share of transportation increases from 19% in PM10 to 50% in PM2.5, depicting dominance of finer particles in the vehicular exhaust. • Share of anthropogenic sources has been eclipsed by dust contribution,

in case of PM10. However, PM2.5 clearly shows significant contribution of anthropogenic sources. • DG sets have emerged out as an important source of air pollution. Their

contribution is 13% & 25% in PM10 and PM2.5, respectively. • Contribution of industries to the particulate matter is low in Bangalore, primarily due to absence of any large scale air polluting unit. However, their contribution in the industrial zone (Peenya) is high.

• Share of secondary particulates is higher in PM2.5 than PM10, depicting their finer size.”

11 Air quality assessment, emission inventory and source apportionment study for Bangalore city: Final report, New Delhi: The Energy Resources Institute, 186 pp. [Project Report No. 2004EE28], http://www.cpcb. nic.in/Bangalore.pdf

14 x Figure: Percentage share of different sources in total PM10 and NO emission loads

PM10 nox

Hotel 0% Hotel 0%

construction Industrial 14% 14%

Transport 42.0%

DG set 7.0%

Industrial 14%

Domestic Transport DG set 7.0% 3% 42.0%

Domestic 3%

road dust 20%

Figure: Comparison of PM10 and PM2.5 source contribution in Bangalore city (average of 3 seasons)

PM10 PM2.5

secondary 8.7% secondary Transport 12.7% 19.0% Paved road & Soil dust 3.5%

Domestic 5.8%

DG set Transport Industrial 13.0% 49.9% 3.5%

Paved road & Soil dust 50.6%

Industrial 4.5% DG set 24.7% Domestic 4.2%

15 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Madhya Pradesh

highlighted that PM10 concentrations in all 4 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average 3 of 60 µg/m as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Bhopal, Satna, Singrauli and Gawalior were respectively 158, 88, 93 and 128 µg/m3 M adhya Pr ade s h for 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Madhya Pradesh during 2015

) 200 3 ( M G/

10 100 P M

bhopal satna singrauli gawalior

Annual average naaqs (annual)

The data suggests that the PM10 levels have been hazardous and very high vehicular all around the year for 2015 for all the cities, with January to May being the

emissions, most severely polluted months. Highest recorded monthly average PM10 air born concentration exceeded 200 µg/m3 for Gwalior, in April. dust and industrial The average PM10 levels in Indore between September 2009 and emissions June 2010 were 195 µg/m3 according to a study by MPPCB that also are major mentioned vehicular emissions, airborne dust, and industrial emissions emission load 12 as major emission load contributors to PM10 in Indore by MPPCB , in contributors Comprehensive Environment Pollution Abatement action Plan for Critically to PM in 10 Polluted area Indore. Indore

PM10 concentrations across cities in Madhya Pradesh during 2015 )

3 300

200 ( M G/ 10 100 P M 0

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

bhopal gawalior satna

singrauli Naaqs (Annual)

12 Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board, “Comprehensive Environment Pollution Abatment action Plan for Critically Polluted area Indore”, http://cpcb.nic.in/ divisionsofheadoffice/ess/F- Indore.pdf

16 M aha r a s ht

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Maharashtra highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in every single one of the 25 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual 3 average of 60 µg/m as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Nanded, Taloja, Akola, Jalna, Thane, Mumbai and Chandrapur were respectively 162, 126, 128, 118, 118, 107 and 103 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Maharashtra during 2015

180

160

140

120

100 ) 3 80

60 ( M G/

10 40 P M 20 0 ti th a n on a tur ol a a lli v a ndi p une ja ln a l a

In Mumbai, a lo ja th a ne ak s a n g li n a shi k t nvel pa ka ly ur n agp n a nded mumb a i sol ap ur ja l ga the main olh ap ur a mr bhiw b a dl ap ur k vi mumb a i a mbern dombiv contributors ur a n ga b d r ull a sn aga c h a ndr ap ur n a for PM, a like power Annual average naaqs (annual) plant, open burning, commercial Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels were food sector, hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015 for all the cities and road except for the monsoon months. October to January were the most transport severely polluted months, with average PM10 concentrations even exceeding 150 µg/m3.

Maji et al., 201613 mentioned, “In Mumbai, different combustion processes are the main contributors for PM, like power plant, open burning, 13 Maji, et al., 2016, “Human health commercial food sector, and road transport, and they contribute 37, 24, risk assessment due to air pollution in 10 urban cities in Maharashtra, 18, and 10%, respectively. A study by National Environmental Engineering India”, Cogent Environmental Research Institute (NEERI) found that open burning and landfill fires Science, 2(1), 1193110, https:// www.cogentoa.com/article/10.1080 of municipal solid waste (MSW) were a major source of air pollution in /23311843.2016. 1193110.pdf Mumbai (CPCB, 201014). The survey results show that about 2% of total 14 CPCB. (2010). Air quality assessment, emissions inventory generated MSW is burnt on the streets and slum areas, 10% of the total and source apportionment studies: generated MSW is burnt in landfills by management authorities or due Mumbai [online]. Central Pollution Control Board. Retrieved November to accidental landfill fires, thereby emitting large amounts of CO, PM, 23, 2014, from http://cpcb.nic.in/ carcinogenic HC, and NOx. In Chandrapur, primary sources of high critical Mumbai-report.pdf 15 MPCB. (2010). Action plane pollutant concentration (i.e. SPM, PM10, SO2, and NO2) are open coal for industrial cluster: Chandrapur. mining, lime stone mining, fluoride mining, cement industry, thermal power Maharashtra Pollution Control Board. Retrieved February 14, plant, road dust, natural burning of coal, and domestic coal burning by 2015, from http://cpcb.nic. local people for cooking (MPCB, 201015). Within the city of Pune, highest in/divisionsofheadoffice/ ess/ Action%20plan%20CEPI- shares of emissions of PM10 come from road dust (61%), vehicular sources Chandrapur.pdf (18%), industry (1.25%), vegetative burning, and solid fuels burning. For 16 ARAI. (2010). Air quality monitoring and emission source NO2 emissions, major contributions are from vehicles (95%), industries apportionment study for city of (2%), and domestic and commercial fuel burning (3%) (ARAI, 201016), due Pune [online]. Pune: The Automotive Research Association of India, [ARAI/ to absence of major industrial emitters within the city boundaries. Vehicles IOCLAQM/R-12/2009-10]. Retrieved and industries contribute to high SO2 emission loads due to fuel burning. March 21, 2015, from http://cpcb. nic.in/Pune.pdf Main cause of air pollution in Nashik city is due to plastic industry, food

17 (cont)

processing factories, and domestic waste burning. Till December 2013, there are 1.13 million registered vehicles in the city, constituting a major source of pollution (TI, 201417)”.

Similarly, Kothai et al., 200818 carried out a source apportionment study for Navi Mumbai and estimated that “percentage contribution of soil, two- M aha r a s ht stroke emission with fugitive dust, industrial emission, motor vehicles and sea salt to the average fine mass concentration was 3%, 18%, 23%, 29% and 9%, respectively”

PM10 concentrations across cities in Maharashtra during 2015

200 180

160 )

3 140 120

( M G/ 100 10 80 P M 60 40 20

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

akola ambernath amravati aurangabad badlapur

bhiwandi chanderpur Dombivalli jalgaon jalna

kalyan kolhapur latur mumbai nagpur navi nanded nashik panvel pune mumbai

sangli solapur taloja thane ullasnagar

Naaqs (Annual)

17 TI. (2014). Vehicles in Nashik region rise by nearly 10% [online]. The Times of India. Retrieved January 23, 2015, from http://timesofindia. indiatimes.com/city/ nashik/Vehicles-in-Nashik- region-rise-by-nearly-10/ articleshow/29924015.cms Tominz, R., Mazzoleni, B., & Daris, F. 18 Kothai, et al., 2008, “Source Apportionment of Coarse and Fine Particulate Matter at Navi Mumbai, India”, Aerosol and Air Quality Research, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 423-436, http://aaqr.org/VOL8_No4_ December2008/5_AAQR-08- 07-OA-0027_423-436.pdf

18 odisha (orissa) al) sNaaq (Annu dec nov oct al) sep levels have been rourkela concentrations in rourkela 10 10 g au s (annu naaq jul jun keonjhar keonjhar ay m e verag apr al a mar carried out a study to understand the emission carried out a study to understand the emission 19 Annu as prescribed under NAAQS. PM under NAAQS. as prescribed 19 3 Feb a during 2015 ross cities in Odish tions ac ross cities in Orissa during 2015 tions ac levels were between 85-110 and, “The major industries levels were berhampur berhampur 10 Jan concentra concentra 0 10 10 0 50 concentrations in Keonjhar and Rourkela were higher than the annual and Rourkela were concentrations in Keonjhar 20 40 80 60 150 100

120 140 160 100 10 PM

10 10 10 10

M G/ M ( M P ) ) M G/ M ( M P

3 3 average of 60 µg/m loading and pollution contribution in Angul-Talcher area and found out that area loading and pollution contribution in Angul-Talcher the average PM contributing to air pollution are thermal power plants of NALCO and NTPC contributing to air pollution are & Steel plants like BRG Iron iron and Smelter of NALCO besides sponge emissions the fugitive the above sources and Bhusan Steel Ltd. Apart from burning the fuel, transportation of of wood and coal as domestic from the mines also contribute to air pollution in the vehicles and emissions from area.” Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM Detailed observation of the data suggests Berhampur were found to be below the NAAQS for year 2015. found to be below Berhampur were The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Odisha highlighted that Air Pollution levels for cities in Odisha highlighted The assessment of PM very high all around the year for 2015 at Rourkela whereas for Keonjhar for the year for 2015 at Rourkela whereas very high all around higher in months of September to and Berhampur the pollution levels were January. SPCB Odisha, 2010

10 and t the

ading and e PM verag SPCB Orissa, 2010, “Action plan for abatement of pollution in critically polluted industrial clusters (Angul- http://cpcb.nic. area), Talcher in/divisionsofheadoffice/ess/ Action%20Plan%20Angul- Talcher.pdf levels were between 85- 110 19 SPCB Orissa, 2010 carried out a study to underst the emission lo pollution contribution in Angul- lcher area Ta and found out tha a The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Punjab highlighted that

PM10 concentrations in all 14 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 P unja b

as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Amritsar, Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Mandi Gobindgarh, Khanna and Bhatinda were respectively 184, 151, 139, 130, 122 and 111 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Punjab during 2015

200

150 ) 3

100 G/ M µ ( 10 50 P M

0 a ot ti a l tind pa k h a nn l a n aga a rid k s a n g rur y f a mrits r bh a ludhi a n r a sul p ur r sbs n aga der a b ssi Industrial ja l a ndh r n a combustion

contributes der a b n ak

47% of m a ndi g obind ga rh Annual average naaqs (annual) the PM10 emissions followed Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels were by brick and hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015 for all the cities with open burning October to January being the severely polluted months. Highest monthly 3 average PM10 levels, exceeding 200 µg/m were recorded in Jalandhar in December and in Amritsar in April-May.

200 20 180 “State wise emission assessment study (TERI, 2015 ) shows sector-wise emissions for the Punjab state (Figure). Industrial combustion contributes 160 47% of the PM emissions followed by brick-making and open burning. 140 10 Almost 56 % of NO emissions are contributed by transport sector in 120 x Punjab including both road transport and mode of transportation used 100 during agricultural activities.” 80

60 emissions Kt/yr PM10 concentrations across cities in Punjab during 2015 40

20 300 ) 3 0 250 x x PM 200 SO nO PM10 2.5 150 ( M G/ 100 10 Figure: Sector-wise 50 emissions for criteria P M 0 pollutants from different sources in Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec Punjab in 2010

amritsar bhatinda dera baba dera bassi nanak Agricuture ind_comb Transport jalandhar khanna ludhiana mandi residential gobindgarh Open Burning Non-road patiala rasulpur sangrur sbs nagar Brick transport

cement road transport faridkot naya nagal Naaqs

ind_proc power (Annual)

20 TERI, 2015. “Air pollution in Punjab”, New Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute. 16 pp., http://www.teriin.org/projects/green/pdf/Punjab-Air-quality.pdf

20 Raja s than

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Rajasthan highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in 4 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 as

prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Alwar, Jaipur, Kota and Udaipur were respectively 227, 171, 134 and 156 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Rajasthan during 2015

250 ) 3 200 G/ M

µ 150 (

10 100 P M 50

alwar jaipur kota udaipur

Annual average naaqs (annual)

Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels were hazardous and very high all around the year for 2015 for all the cities, with PM concen- 10 the pollution moderating somewhat in most cities in the summer months. trations October to January were the most severely polluted months, with PM in Alwar, 10 concentrations reaching above200 µg/m3. Jaipur, Kota and PM10 concentrations across cities in Rajasthan during 2015 Udaipur were ) respectively 3 350 300 227, 209, 134 250 200 and 156 µg/m3 ( M G/

10 150 for year 2015 100 P M 50 0

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

alwar jaipur kota udaipur

Naaqs (Annual)

21 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Tamilnadu highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in Chennai were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 as prescribed under NAAQS. Detailed observation of the data

suggests that the PM10 levels has been high all around the year for 2015 for T amil N adu Chennai.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Tamil nadu during 2015

100 ) 3 80 G/ M

µ 60 (

10 40 P M 20

0 chennai cuddalore

Annual average naaqs (annual)

No source apportionment studies were available for Tamil Nadu. Within the city of Chennai, CPCB, 201121 highlighted that the share of vehicular Industrial exhaust emissions was 14%, industrial sector 2%, DG sets less than 1%, combustion construction activities approx. 9% of total PM10 emission load with nearly contributes 72% contribution from fugitive dust emissions. 47% of PM concentrations across cities in Tamil Nadu during 2015 the PM10 10 emissions ) followed 3 120 by brick and 100 80 open burning ( M G/

10 60 40 P M 20 0

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

chennai Naaqs (Annual)

EMISSION INVENTORY PM10 CHENNAi

Others 0.11, 1% RESTAURANTS/ BAKERIES STREET VENDORS 0.08, 1% INDUSTRY POINT 0.22, 2.00%

DOMESTIC COMBUSTION CONSTRUCTION 0.98, 8.89% 0.03, 0.27%

VEHICLE EXHAUST 1.59, 14%

21 CPCB, 2011, “Air quality PAVED & UNPAVED ROAD monitoring, emission inventory / DUST 8.01, 72.69% and source apportionment study for Indian cities: National Summary Report”, http:// www.moef.nic.in/downloads/ public-information/Rpt-air- monitoring-17-01-2011.pdf

22 T elangana

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Telangana highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in 4 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/ 3 m as prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Mahboobnagar, Hyderabad, Karim Nagar and Khammam were respectively 108, 99, 65 and 60 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 cconcentrations across cities in Telangana during 2015

120

100

80 ) 3 60 G/ M µ

( 40 10

P M 20

“Results of arangal w khammam CMB Model hyderabad karim nagar showed that mehboobnagar major source Annual average naaqs (annual) throughout the study Gummeneni, et al., 201122 conducted a source apportionment study for period were Hyderabad and concluded as, “Results of CMB Model showed that major resuspended dust (40%) source throughout the study period were re-suspended dust (40%) for PM10 and 31% for PM2.5. Vehicles has also contributed significant influence for PM10 and on particulate matter levels at the site for both PM10 (22%) and PM2.5 31% for PM2.5” (31%). Other major identified sources of particulate matter were industrial emissions, combustion and refuse burning.

Figure: Source contribution to PM10 and PM2.5

PM10 PM2.5

Others 9% Others 21%

Refuse 9% Resuspended dust 26%

Industrial 9% Resuspended Refuse 6% dust 40%

Industrial Combustion 7% 12% Combustion 9% Vehicles 31% Vehicles 22%

22 Gummeneni, S., et al., Source apportionment of particulate matter in the ambient air of Hyderabad city, India, Atmos. Res. (2011), doi:10.1016/j. atmosres.2011.05.002

23 The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Uttar Pradesh highlighted 23 that PM10 concentrations in all 20 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 as

prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Gaziabad, Braeli, Allahabad, 24 Kanpur, Agra, Lucknow, Varanasi (Average of PM10 levels from October U tta r Pr ade s h 2015 to September 2016 is 228 µg/m3 for Varanasi) and Sonebhadra were respectively 258, 240, 250, 201, 186, 169, 145 and 132 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Uttar Pradesh during 2015

300

250 )

3 200 G/ M

µ 150 ( 10

P M 100 In Kanpur For 50 NOx emissions “nearly 50% of 0 a emissions are o r a ag a b d noid attributed thur a j h a nsi unn a k hur ja meerut ka n p ur b a r eli a r n si gaj rol a m a v

to vehicles ga zi a b d lu ck now r a eb reli firoz a b d a ll h b d g or ak h p ur s a h r n p ur that occur sonebh a dr moor a d at ground Annual average naaqs (annual) level”

Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels has been hazardous and very high all around the year for from October 2015 to September 2016 for all the cities, with October to February being the severely polluted 3 months when the PM10 concentrations even reached near to 400 µg/m . Sharma, 201025 carried out a source apportionment study for Kanpur and concluded as, FUNERAL WOOD / CREMATION 0.05, 0.58% “There are several important sources of PM10 in the city including industrial point MEDICAL WASTE GARBAGE INCINERATOR sources (26%), industry area source (7 %), vehicles (21%), domestic fuel burning BURNING 0.002, 0.02% (19%) paved and unpaved road (15%), garbage burning (5%) and rest others.” 0.47, 5.09% AGRICULTURAL For NOx emissions “nearly 50% of emissions are attributed to vehicles that occur WASTE BURNING 0.35, 3.84% at ground level, probably making it the most important pollutant. Vehicle sources DG DOMESTIC are followed by industrial point and area sources (42%), DG sets (5%) and SETS COMBUSTION 0.08, domestic sources and 1.76, 18.64% 0.87% rest others (3%)”. INDUSTRY AREA

0.64, PM10 concentrations across cities in Uttar Pradesh during October 6.94% 2015 - September 2016

PAVED & 400 UNPAVED ) 350 INDUSTRY ROAD / 3 300 POINT DUST 2.39, 1.35, 250 25.59% 14.46% 200 ( M G/ 150 10 100 P M 50 HOTEL / VEHICLE RESTAURANT 0 EXHAUST 0.30, 3.26% 1.91, 20.50% oct nov dec Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep

CONSTRUCTION 0.003, 0.03% agra allahabad baraeli firozabad gajrola gaziabad gorakhpur jhansi kanpur khurja lucknow mathura meerut mooradabad noida

raebareli saharanpur sonebhadra unnao varanasi 23, 24, 25 Footnotes on page 25 Naaqs (Annual)

24 U tta r akhand

The assessment of Air Pollution levels for cities in Uttarakhand highlighted

that PM10 concentrations in all 6 cities where the data was available from pollution control board were higher than the annual average of 60 µg/m3 as

prescribed under NAAQS. PM10 concentrations in Deharadun, Haldwani, Haridwar, Kashipur, Rishikesh and Rudrapur were respectively 186, 139, 123, 107, 121 and 124 µg/m3 for year 2015.

PM10 concentrations across cities in Uttarakhand during 2015

200

150 ) 3

100 G/ M µ ( 10 50 P M

0 dehradun haldwani haridwar kashipur rishikesh rudrapur

Annual average naaqs (annual) for all the cities with October to Detailed observation of the data suggests that the PM10 levels has been February hazardous and very high all around the year for from October 2015 to being the September 2016 for all the cities with October to February being the severely severely polluted months when the PM concentrations even reached near polluted 10 to 200 µg/m3. months when the PM10 concentrations across cities in Uttrakhand during 2015 PM10 concentrations 250 reached near )

3 200 to 200 µg/m3 150

( M G/ 100 10 50 P M 0

Jan Feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

dehradun haldwani haridwar kashipur

rishikesh rudrapur Naaqs (Annual)

Page 24 footnotes

23 Data for Firozabad is from August 2014 to July 2015 24 Average PM10 concentration from October 2015 to September 2016 is 228 µg/ m3, whereas for 2015 calendar year it was shown to be 145 µg/m3 by the UPPCB data collected through RTI. 25 Sharma, 2010, “Air Quality Assessment, Emissions Inventory and Source Apportionment Studies for Kanpur City”, IIt Kanpur, Submitted to CPCB, http:// cpcb.nic.in/Kanpur.pdf

25 Way forward

Government initiative

It requires a system approach to understand pollution levels regularly and take action. The first step in the direction is having a robust monitoring of air quality across the country to know information in real time and using the data to arrive at strategies that would protect public health and reduce pollution levels. The strategies to reduce pollution should become an action plan which is time bound and has targets and penalties.

Action Plan

Governments of India should adopt time-bound national and regional action plans, which have clear targets for regions and penalties for non-compliance. This should include providing transparent data to the public on air quality, short term and long term measures to reduce air pollution.

Transparent Short term Long term data measures measures

Improving NAQI monitoring Issuing red alert and Improving public transport, limiting systems and providing health advisories during the number of polluting vehicles access to data to the public bad air-days, shutting on the road , Introducing less on a real time basis for the down schools, taking polluting fuel (Bharat VI), Strict whole country. This should polluting vehicles (odd/ emission regulations and improved be coupled with a health even) off the roads, efficiency for thermal power plants advisory which would enable shutting down power and industries, moving from diesel the public to take decisions plants and industries etc. generators to rooftop solar, increased to protect their health and the use of clean renewable energy, environment. Electric vehicles, Removing dust from roads, regulating construction activities, stopping biomass burning etc.

People initiative

Public participation is critical in reducing air pollution. Our choices for electricity and transportation could play a major role in managing pollution levels in many parts of the country. Efforts should be made in key areas such as:

1 2 3 4 Moving Increased Using Waste towards usage of energy minimization, roof top public efficient segregation and solar transport, appliances recycling, which cycling and will reduce and reducing burning of waste walking household in streets as energy well as at the usage landfills along with energy reductions in transporting huge quantities of waste

26 Comparison of facts on air pollution in the world’s four major economies26 U tta r Pr ade s h

China India U.S. EU

Change in satellite-based -20% (from 2005 PM levels -17% +13% -15% 2.5 to 2013) from 2010 to 2015 Falling since Increasing steadily 2011; 2015 was for past 10 years; Falling since Falling since PM trend 2.5 the best on 2015 was the worst measurements started measurements started record year on record

PM2.5 in capital city, annual 81 128 12 18 (µg/m3)

PM2.5 air quality 35 40 15 25 (from 2020, 20) standard, annual (µg/m3) Deaths per day from air 2,700 1,800 250 640 pollution in 2013 1,500 stations 39 stations in 23 Online PM 770 stations in 540 1,000 stations in 400 cities 2.5 in 900 cities & cities (as of Feb monitoring cities & towns & towns towns 2016)

Share of thermal power plants with basic pollution controls 95% 10% 60% 75% (desulphu- rization, particle controls)

Deadline 2030; most key 2012; violating for meeting 26 cities have an areas are currently 25 by 2015 energy/2016/Clean%20Air%20Action%20Plan,%20The%20way%20forward.pdf national None http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate- interim target implementing new 20 by 2020 air quality for 2017 plans standards States must adopt emission reduction Promotion measures into law Consequences of province that are demonstrated Cities & countries face for missing governors None to enable meeting legal action for not targets depends on targets; must account meeting standards meeting targets for pollution transport into downwind states; periodic review National, regional and Mainly action in city-level action individual cities National air plans with with no measurable quality targets; measurable targets “Clean Air For Europe” implementation plans 5-year targets action plan approved on federal Recently introduced Europe-wide emission Coverage of level and executed on National India-wide emission standards for power government state level emission standards for plants, industry and cars measures standards for thermal power National emission power plants, plants; Introduction Most countries and key standards for power industrial of Bharat VI vehicle cities have own plans plants, industrial sectors and emission norms is sectors and vehicles vehicles proposed by April 2020

27 27 Appendix-I PM10 Levels across India (Annual Average 2015 )

City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Delhi Delhi 268 60 2015 26

Uttar Gaziabad 258 60 2015 26 Pradesh Uttar Allahabad 250 60 2015 22 Pradesh Uttar Braeli 240 60 2015 22 Pradesh

Faridabad Haryana 240 60 2015 26

Jharia Jharkhand 228 60 2015 26

Alwar Rajasthan 227 60 2015 26

Ranchi Jharkhand 216 60 2015 26

Kusunda Jharkhand 214 60 2015 26

Bastacola Jharkhand 211 60 2015 26

Uttar Kanpur 201 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Patna Bihar 200 60 2015 26

Uttar Firozabad 194 60 2015 22 Pradesh Uttar Agra 186 60 2015 22 Pradesh

Deharadun Uttrakhand 186 60 2015 23

Amritsar Punjab 184 60 2015 16

Uttar Gajrola 177 60 2015 22 Pradesh

Jaipur Rajasthan 171 60 2015 18

Uttar Lucknow 169 60 2015 22 Pradesh

Dhanbad Jharkhand 168 60 2015 7

Uttar Mooradabad 168 60 2015 22 Pradesh Uttar Saharanpur 168 60 2015 26 Pradesh Uttar Khurja 167 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Muzzafarpur Bihar 164 60 2015 26

Nanded Maharashtra 162 60 2015 11

Uttar Gorakhpur 162 60 2015 26 Pradesh

27 For few Cities where annual averages for 2015 were not easily available, lates data as well as for Gwalior data from 2014-2015 is included 28 Provided on after the current table

28 City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Uttar Mathura 162 60 2015 26 Pradesh Madhya Bhopal 158 60 2015 10 Pradesh Uttar Raebareli 157 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Udaipur Rajasthan 156 60 2015 26

Jodhpur Rajasthan 152 60 2015 18

Jalandhar Punjab 151 60 2015 17

Uttar Noida 148 60 2015 26 Pradesh Uttar Meerut 146 60 2015 26 Pradesh April 2015 - Siltara Chhattisgarh 145 60 26 March 2016 Uttar Varanasi 145 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Ludhiana Punjab 139 60 2015 17

Haldwani Uttrakhand 139 60 2015 23

April 2015 - Raipur Chhattisgarh 138 60 26 March 2016

Nagaon Assam 137 60 2015 2

Panvel Maharashtra 137 60 2015 11

Uttar Anpara 136 60 2015 22 Pradesh

Talcher Odisha 135 60 2015 15

Jamshedpur Jharkhand 134 60 2015 26

Kota Rajasthan 134 60 2015 26

Uttar Sonbhadar 132 60 2015 26 Pradesh Mandi Punjab 130 60 2015 16 Gobindgarh

Gurgaon Haryana 129 60 2015 26

Akola Maharashtra 128 60 2015 12

Madhya August 2014 Gawalior 128 60 26 Pradesh - July 2015

Taloja Maharashtra 126 60 2015 11

Jammu & Jammu 125 60 2015 6 Kashmir

29 27 Appendix-I PM10 Levels across India (Annual Average 2015 )

City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Navi Mumbai Maharashtra 125 60 2015 12

Rudrapur Uttrakhand 124 60 2015 23

Haridwar Uttrakhand 123 60 2015 23

Girdih Jharkhand 123 60 2015 26

Byrnihat Meghalaya 122 60 2015 13

Dimapur Nagaland 122 60 2015 14

Khanna Punjab 122 60 2015 16

Rishikesh Uttrakhand 121 60 2015 24

Nalbari Assam 120 60 2015 2

Bangalore Karnataka 119 60 2015 8

Uttar Jhansi 119 60 2015 22 Pradesh Himachal Kala Amb 118 60 2015 5 Pradesh April 2015 - Tumku Karnataka 118 60 9 March 2016

Jalna Maharashtra 118 60 2015 11

Thane Maharashtra 118 60 2015 11

Uttar Unnao 118 60 2015 26 Pradesh Himachal Ponta Sahib 117 60 2015 5 Pradesh

Hazaribagh Jharkhand 112 60 2015 26

Bhatinda Punjab 111 60 2015 16

Andhra Vijaywada 110 60 2015 1 Pradesh

Patiala Punjab 110 60 2015 16

West Jharkhand 110 60 2015 26 Singhbhumi

Bhilai Chhattisgarh 109 60 2015 3

Davanagere Karnataka 109 60 2015 8

Amravati Maharashtra 108 60 2015 12

Jalgaon Maharashtra 108 60 2015 12

Mahboobnagar Telangana 108 60 2015 21

Mumbai Maharashtra 107 60 2015 12

30 City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Ullasnagar Maharashtra 107 60 2015 12

Kashipur Uttrakhand 107 60 2015 24

Himachal Damtal 105 60 2015 5 Pradesh

Badlapur Maharashtra 105 60 2015 12

Kolkata West Bengal 105 60 2015 25

Madhya Sagar 103 60 2015 10 Pradesh

Domdivali Maharashtra 103 60 2015 11

Chandrapur Maharashtra 103 60 2015 12

Angul Odisha 102 60 2015 15

Himachal Baddi 101 60 2015 5 Pradesh

Ambernath Maharashtra 101 60 2015 11

Rourkela Odisha 100 60 2015 15

Andhra Guntur 100 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Sangrur Punjab 98 60 2015 16

Guwahati Assam 97 60 2015 2

Madhya Indore 97 60 2015 10 Pradesh

Kolhapur Maharashtra 97 60 2015 11

Dera Bassi Punjab 96 60 2015 17

Gulbarga Karnataka 95 60 2015 8

Madhya Ujjain 93 60 2015 10 Pradesh

Kohima Nagaland 93 60 2015 14

Hyderabad Telangana 93 60 2015 21

Singrauli Madhya 93 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Panchkula Haryana 92 60 2015 26

Rohtak Haryana 92 60 2015 26

Tuticorin Tamil Nadu 91 60 2015 19

Bhavnagar Gujarat 91 60 April 2014 - 26 March 2015

31 27 Appendix-I PM10 Levels across India (Annual Average 2015 )

City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Dewas Madhya 90 60 2015 10 Pradesh

Nagpur Maharashtra 90 60 2015 12

Faridkot Punjab 90 60 2015 16

Surat Gujarat 89 60 2015 4

Nalagarh Himachal 89 60 2015 5 Pradesh

Jamnagar Gujarat 88 60 April 2014 - 26 March 2015

Satna Madhya 88 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Raichur Karnataka 87 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Vadodhra Gujarat 86 60 April 2014 - 26 March 2015

Rajkot Gujarat 86 60 April 2014 - 26 March 2015

Patencheru Telangana 85 60 2015 21

Chandigarh Chandigarh 85 60 2015 26

Keonjhar Odisha 85 60 2015 26

Anantpuram Andhra 84 60 2015 26 Pradesh

Sunder Nagar Himachal 83 60 2015 5 Pradesh

Aurangabad Maharashtra 83 60 2015 11

Naya Nangal Punjab 83 60 2015 17

Kurnool Andhra 82 60 2015 1 Pradesh

Sangli Maharashtra 82 60 2015 11

Balasore Odisha 82 60 2015 15

Gandhi Nagar Gujarat 82 60 April 2014 - 26 March 2015

Bhubneshwar Odisha 81 60 2015 15

Cuttak Odisha 81 60 2015 15

Chennai Tamil Nadu 81 60 2015 20

Hubli Karnataka 80 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

32 City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Latur Maharashtra 78 60 2015 12

Nashik Maharashtra 78 60 2015 12

Pune Maharashtra 77 60 2015 12

Dera Baba Punjab 77 60 2015 17 Nanak

Nalgonda Telangana 76 60 2015 21

Sindri Jharkhand 75 60 2015 26

Solapur Maharashtra 74 60 2015 12

SBS Nagar Punjab 74 60 2015 16

Bhiwandi Maharashtra 73 60 2015 11

Silchar Assam 72 60 2015 2

Kalyan Maharashtra 71 60 2015 11

Sibsagar Assam 70 60 2015 2

Rasulpur Punjab 70 60 2015 16

Dharwad Karnataka 69 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Nellore Andhra 66 60 2015 1 Pradesh

Korba Chhattisgarh 66 60 April 2015 - 26 March 2016

Karim Nagar Telangana 65 60 2015 21

Belguam Karnataka 64 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Kolar Karnataka 63 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Visakhapatnam Andhra 61 60 2015 1 Pradesh

Parwanoo Himachal 61 60 2015 5 Pradesh

Khammam Telangana 60 60 2015 21

Bellary Karnataka 57 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Bidar Karnataka 57 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Chamrajnagar Karnataka 57 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

33 27 Appendix-I PM10 Levels across India (Annual Average 2015 )

City State Annual NAAQS Time Reference Average (Annual) Frame Source28

Warangal Telangana 56 60 2015 21

Cuddalore Tamil Nadu 56 60 2015 26

Berhampur Odisha 55 60 2015 26

Chitradurga Karnataka 46 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Mysore Karnataka 46 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Ranebennur Karnataka 46 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Karwar Karnataka 40 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Mandya Karnataka 40 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Bhadravathi Karnataka 38 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Mangalore Karnataka 35 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

Hassan Karnataka 25 60 April 2015 - 9 March 2016

34 Appendix-II reference source

Reference Reference SourcE

1 http://cpcb.nic.in/Andhra_Pradesh_nonattainment.pdf 2 http://cpcb.nic.in/Assam_nonattainment.pdf 3 http://cpcb.nic.in/Chhattisgarh_nonattainment.pdf 4 http://cpcb.nic.in/Gujarat_nonattainment.pdf 5 http://cpcb.nic.in/HimachalPradesh_nonattainment.pdf 6 http://cpcb.nic.in/Jammu&Kashmir_nonattainment.pdf 7 http://cpcb.nic.in/Jharkhand_nonattainment.pdf 8 http://cpcb.nic.in/Karnataka_nonattainment.pdf 9 http://kspcb.kar.nic.in/AAQ-Karnataka-2015-16.pdf 10 http://cpcb.nic.in/MadhyaPradesh_nonattainment.pdf 11 http://mpcb.gov.in/envtdata/demoPage1.php 12 http://cpcb.nic.in/Maharashtra_nonattainment.pdf 13 http://cpcb.nic.in/Meghalaya_nonattainment.pdf 14 http://cpcb.nic.in/Nagaland_nonattainment.pdf 15 http://cpcb.nic.in/Odisha_nonattainment.pdf 16 http://www.ppcb.gov.in/Attachments/Environmental%20Data/4%20year%20Air%20oct%202016.pdf 17 http://cpcb.nic.in/Punjab_nonattainment.pdf 18 http://cpcb.nic.in/Rajasthan_nonattainment.pdf 19 http://cpcb.nic.in/TamilNadu_nonattainment.pdf 20 http://www.tnpcb.gov.in/pdf_2016/ambient_airquality_rpt-2015.pdf 21 http://tspcb.cgg.gov.in/Pages/Envdata.aspx 22 http://cpcb.nic.in/UttarPradesh_nonattainment.pdf 23 http://ueppcb.uk.gov.in/files/Ambient_Air_Quality_2015__(2).pdf

24 http://cpcb.nic.in/Uttarakhand_nonattainment.pdf

25 http://cpcb.nic.in/WestBengal_nonattainment.pdf

26 RTI Data

A ghostly ceremonial boulevard in New Delhi Image: Subrata Biswas/ Greenpeace Greenpeace is a global organisation that uses non-violent direct action to tackle the most crucial threats to our planet’s biodiversity and environment. Greenpeace is a non-profit organisation, present in 40 countries across Europe, The Americas, Asia and the Pacific.

It speaks for 2.8 million supporters worldwide, and inspires many millions more to take action every day. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.

Greenpeace has been campaigning against environmental degradation since 1971 when a small boat of volunteers and journalists sailed into Amchitka, an area north of Alaska, where the US Government was conducting underground nuclear tests.This tradition of ‘bearing witness’ in a non-violent manner continues today, and ships are an important part of all its campaign work.

Greenpeace Environment Trust Old No 21, New No 6 1st Floor, Rajaram Mehta Avenue Nelson Manickam Road Chennai 600029

Phone: 044-42046502

Head Office No.338, 8th Cross Wilson Garden Bangalore - 560 027

Supporter Services: 1800 425 0374 / 080 22131899

Regional Office 161-J, Internal Road Gautam Nagar, opp 161/B/1 New Delhi 110 049

Phone: +91 11 47665000 Fax: +91 11 47665010

Supporter Services: 1800 425 0374/ 080 22131899 Toll Free No.: 1800 425 0374 Email: [email protected] www.greenpeace.org/india

Reach us across our five offices in

Mumbai, Pune, Hyderabad, Patna and Delhi should not be used for navigation or legal purposes. It is intended Disclaimer: Map of India on Cover page the report to be either spatially or temporally as graphical element to the design layout and does not warrant Map or its features or authenticity of the same. do not claim the correctness accurate or fit for a particular use. Greenpeace