Three Delhi toddlers, who pushed for a ban on firecrackers last year while asserting their right to be brought up in a pollution-free environment, prodded the grown-ups again to clear the city’s noxious air and persuaded the Supreme Court to back possible initiatives on Saturday.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India TS Thakur, which was contemplating imposition of a heavy environment tax on diesel cars, said experts should examine the feasibility of fitting vehicles with filters that scrub fumes from tailpipe emissions.
Arjun Gopal, Aarav Bhandari and Zoya Rao Bhasin, all aged between six months and 14 months, are the apex court’s youngest petitioners who were represented by their parents and a team of senior lawyers. The mounting levels of pollution that regularly cloak the Capital in smog often leave residents struggling to breathe in air quality that international agencies say is worse than in the Chinese capital of Beijing.
The legal team led by senior lawyer KK Venugopal and assisted by advocates Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Pooja Dhar suggested making it mandatory for all cars -old and new, petrol and diesel – to retrofit their engines with catalytic
converters and diesel particulate filters, devices that “worked wonders in California and brought down pollution level by nearly 85 per cent”, changing toxic gases to less toxic pollutants.
“When CNG was introduced in Delhi, people said it is not possible and others said it is too expensive, but ultimately people started using it. Earlier, it took more than three months to convert a vehicle into CNG, but now it takes around two to three days and costs just Rs 40,000 to Rs 80,000,” Venugopal said, adding that retrofitting diesel vehicles will help reduce emission of particulate matter substantially.
Indian citizens have been demanding cleaner air as the World Health Organization estimates that more than 6,00,000 people die every year in the country because of diseases triggered by outdoor air pollution.
“We were only thinking in terms of imposing a cess. But why can’t we address pollution itself? Why cannot cars be modified? Let experts check, Centre examine,” the CJI said during a special Saturday hearing. “If we find it feasible then why not? We are not shutting it out; we must consult others on it.”
The chief justice said this to senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi who appeared for a car manufacturer, appealing for the lifting of a ban imposed on December 15 on the sale of diesel vehicles with engine capacity of more than 2000 cc.
The court has told automakers such as BMW, Mercedes, Toyota and Skoda that it can end the prohibition only after imposing a 10 to 30 per cent green cess, based on the categories of cars. The bench also pulled up the Centre for supporting Venugopal’s idea immediately without coming up with any such plans earlier. This happened when the court wondered if catalytic converters can be made mandatory when there is no “legal requirement”.
When additional solicitor general Maninder Singh said legislation can be passed to enable it, the CJI shot back, “Why did you have to wait till Venugopal made this submission?” “You have woken up from slumber after Venugopal came up with this? You want somebody to point out this? What were you doing till now? See after all, this is affecting everybody. People are dying. What are the ministry officials doing? Simply sitting in their air-conditioned offices and sipping coffee?” Thakur asked Singh.
Venugopal said the government should put the matter before environmental panels, including one set up by the court, and assess the plan’s viability. “There are some converter companies to begin with and once it is a success, several others will come into the field,” he said. The hearing will continue on May 9.
However, Sunita Narain, a member of the Environment Pollution Control Authority that has recommended a green cess on new diesel vehicles, shot down the idea of retrofitting cars as a measure to reduce pollution.
“For retrofitting you need a cleaner fuel. Even otherwise, more than 15-year-old diesel vehicles and more than 10-yearold petrol vehicles have been banned by a court order,” she pointed out. “So where is the question of retrofitting old vehicles? This can only be seen as a measure to save old vehicles which to my view should not be encouraged.”
No comments:
Post a Comment