India’s Thermal Power Emissions
Context:
Recently, India’s Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) issued a notification amending the Environment Protection Rules, extending the deadline for thermal power plants to comply with sulphur dioxide (SO₂) emission norms by three years.
More on News
- No explanation accompanied this decision.
- Notably, the deadline for nearly 20 gigawatts (GW) of thermal capacity, all located near densely populated areas, was set to expire on December 31, 2024.
Decade of Shifting Goalposts
- 2015: The story began in December 2015 when the MoEFCC revised emission norms for Indian thermal plants after public consultations.
- The new regulations tightened existing particulate matter emission norms and, for the first time, introduced limits for SO₂ and other pollutants.
- These standards were aligned with international best practices, similar to those in Australia, China, and the United States.
- Delays: At the time, all thermal plants were expected to comply by December 2017—a timeline that was ambitious but set with the expectation of serious enforcement.
- However, rather than progressing toward meeting these norms, the debate soon shifted from compliance to challenges in implementation, setting the stage for repeated delays.
Sulfur dioxide (SO₂) is a reactive gas primarily emitted from burning fossil fuels, industrial processes, and natural sources like volcanoes. It poses significant threats to both health and the environment. Short-term exposure can harm the respiratory system, particularly for vulnerable populations, and contribute to particulate matter pollution. Environmentally, SO₂ damages vegetation, contributes to acid rain, and reduces visibility. India is currently the largest global emitter of SO₂, followed by Russia and China. Mitigation strategies include transitioning to low-sulfur fuels, installing abatement technologies in industrial facilities, and implementing stricter regulations on fuel sulfur content.
Shifting Debate: Technology, Costs, and Policy Paralysis
- India’s Coal: India’s coal generally has lower sulphur content than that of many other countries, theoretically making it easier for Indian thermal plants to comply with SO₂ norms.
- Yet, instead of identifying the most efficient ways to reduce emissions based on Indian coal characteristics, discussions soon centered around flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) technology—designed to remove sulphur from high-sulphur coal.
- The debate became mired in logistical concerns, such as the time required for FGD installation and the associated costs, even though the regulations never explicitly mandated the use of FGDs.
- Necessity of SO₂ Norms: Compounding the issue, various government agencies raised questions about the necessity of uniform SO₂ norms.
- The Central Electricity Authority (CEA), in reports published in 2020 and 2021, proposed delaying implementation until 2035, arguing that a nationwide rollout should be phased.
- A 2022 IIT Delhi study commissioned by the CEA acknowledged the air quality benefits of FGDs but recommended extending deadlines due to high costs, supply chain limitations, and concerns over increased coal consumption leading to higher greenhouse gas emissions.
- Further complicating matters, a 2024 study by the CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (commissioned by NITI Aayog) downplayed the significance of SO₂ norms, arguing that particulate matter emissions should be the primary focus.
- This argument gained traction despite evidence linking SO₂ emissions to the formation of secondary aerosols, which contribute to severe air pollution.
The Cycle of Compliance Extensions
- Amid these ongoing debates, the MoEFCC has repeatedly diluted standards and pushed back compliance deadlines.
- The December 2024 notification marks the fourth such extension, creating a patchwork of deadlines that vary based on plant location and emission type.
- For instance, while the deadline for particulate matter emission compliance—acknowledged as critical by all government agencies—was set for December 31, 2024 (with some plants required to comply as early as 2022 and 2023), there is little transparency regarding whether pollution control boards are actually enforcing these norms. Publicly accessible compliance data remains scarce.
Who Pays the Price?
- Despite the ever-evolving compliance timeline, many thermal plants have already initiated the process of installing FGDs.
- However, progress has been sluggish, lagging well behind the original deadlines.
- This slow pace has been enabled by electricity regulators, who introduced provisions allowing thermal plants to pass on the costs of installing FGDs and other pollution control equipment to consumers.
- Consequently, electricity users bear the financial burden, regardless of whether emission norms are ultimately met.
- With compliance deadlines postponed, there is little incentive for plants to operate these systems, as doing so would increase electricity generation costs—potentially making them less competitive in the power market.
This ongoing saga resembles a modern version of Birbal’s khichdi, a fable in which an impossible goal is set only to be endlessly delayed. Unlike the fable, however, the costs here are real—environmentally, financially, and in terms of public health.
