Issues of Industrialization
Ayesha Bangi,
Research Associate,
ESCI, Hyd
Abstract
The world wide public debate before and after the Rio Earth Summit led to the announcements of major policy statements. The focus of all these policies was to identify the positive links between industrial growth and environmental protection. Unfortunately bad planning or no planning remains the hallmark of industrial development in India. Virtually every industrial area, particularly, the chemical and petrochemical ones are an ecological disaster. As the economy grows, it is likely that the growth in waste generation would become much faster. End-of-pipe pollution control systems address the problem partially and may be helpful in buying time. We still have a long way to go before we fully understand pollution and its ramifications and do the right thing. But do we have time?
Introduction
The concept of urban planning and administration has not yet taken root in India. We see today a chaotic and haphazard residential, commercial and industrial growth in urban areas without proper planning, support resources or concern for the environment. Bad planning or no planning at all remains the hallmark of industrial development in India. Chasing industrialization, governments in India have set up the infrastructure to create pollution without planning how to deal with it.
Industrial Pollution
In the past two decades, there have been 300 cases of conversion of green belt areas for development covering 3400 hectares of land in the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority area. A string of 18 industrial areas have sprung up, most of them skirting and some inside Hyderabad city. The industries produce bulk drug, chemicals, textiles, pharmaceuticals, electroplating, vegetable oils, rice mills, tanneries and tobacco. These units were set up without basic amenities like sewers and effluent treatment plants. The result is that effluents with high organic and heavy metal loads found their way into streams, lakes, the Musi river and also contaminated the groundwater.
Forty villages downstream of the Musi river were affected by the effluents containing a concentration of heavy metals. While villagers are exposed to water borne diseases, the ground water is polluted and the soil is losing its fertility forcing some of the farmers to move out.
A study conducted by the Central Ground Water Board in the city and surrounding areas revealed that the bulk drug and chemical industries located in and around L.B.Nagar, Uppal, Bollaram, Jeedimetla, Sanatnagar and Balanagar areas are polluting groundwater with colour and chemical constituents beyond desirable levels. A study conducted in Pocharam village of Patancheru Industrial area found that the level of mercury was 115 times the permissible limit while another study by the National Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI) found that arsenic levels in and around Patancheru were as high as 700 ppb as against a permissible 10 ppb recommended by the World Health Organization. A study by the Groundwater Department found very high toxicity endangering the lives of human beings, cattle and agricultural activities.
Another case of Industrial pollution lies along the road from Ahmedabad to Mumbai which runs through what can be called as India’s toxic corridor. Atleast 2000 industries compete for resources in this narrow belt of land. Virtually every river that enters the corridor leaves carrying with it lethal loads of industrial pollutants. A July 2000 World Bank sponsored State Environmental Action Plan report lists sections of all these rivers as critically polluted. “Critically Polluted” means that the rivers are close to losing all capacity to sustain life. The report also indicated that the groundwater in 74 out of 184 taluks of Gujarat is poisoned due to industrial pollution. An estimate by a high powered committee of the Supreme Court reported that an alarming 70 percent of Gujarat’s water resources are now contaminated by industrial pollution. Environmental surverys confirm the widespread presence of industrial pollutants which include dangerous levels of heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants.
Emerging evidence indicates that the pollutants have entered the food chain through vegetables and fish from the region. Reports from surrounding villages claim that infertility is on the rise, young women suffer from frequent miscarriages, Respiratory and skin diseases are commonplace. In Kolak village, which is sandwiched between the Rivers Damanganga and Kolak, villagers report more than 70 cancer fatalities in 10 years.
The Mitna Machhi, an adivasi community that depended on fish and mudskippers from the muddy riverbanks is now supportless because mudskippers are locally extent due to pollution.
Measures Adopted
For several years the polluting units had a free run letting out effluents as investment in effluent treatment plants is considered as a non productive investment by the industrial sector. When public pressure mounted, the concept of Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETP) was adopted. In Hyderabad, the first CETP was set up at Jeedimetla followed by one at Patancheru then one more at Bollarum. The CETP at Jeedimetla was set up in 1989 and was meant for waste treatment which was expensive to address at the level of each factory. It has now been modified to operate as a Combined Waste Water Treatment Plant (CWWTP) to overcome the problems caused by load variation.
However, Environmentalists have been opposing the concept of CETP to treat hetero genous effluents and combine industrial waste with domestic sewage. CETPs do nothing to reduce the threat due to toxic heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants from industrial waste streams. Rather than clean up pollution, they are a source of high pollution loads through the contaminated wastewater and the large quantities of toxic sludge generated by their processes. Take, for instance the CETP set up in Vapi (Guarat) in 1998. It was to treat the effluent from 800 factories and currently the CETP discharges red, foul smelling effluent into the river Damanganga. An analysis of the treated wastewater revealed the presence of cadmium, chromium and mercury.
The mechanisms employed by the regulatory bodies have been of effluent disposal standards. The waste generators have tended to seek “quick-fix” solutions, response that is essentially aimed at compliance. The result has been the proliferation of retrofits or “add-on” pollution control systems. Even after the installation of the treatment plants some units do not operate them regularly. This is done to save the operating expenses. Pollution control boards maintain that when offenders are tried under the existing acts, there are long delays in disposing off the existing cases. Unless there is a mandatory specification of time within which the court would dispose of all the cases instituted under environmental legislation, offenders will have no interest in complying with regulations.
The Environmental policy regime in India has primarily focused on end-of-the-pipe pollution control measures. An absence of a cradle-to-grave or integrated approach has led to a situation where curative solutions dominate and preventive measures are neglected.
Changes Needed
End–of-pipe pollution control interventions may buy time or partially address the problem. But unless they are implemented with a full understanding of these limitations, such interventions may give the false impression that the problem has been taken care of. It is yet to be realized that there are no real solutions to deal with pollution after it is caused.
“An ounce of prevention is worth a pond of cure” is probably a very trite saying but needs to be quoted to enhance programs rallying for the quality of the environment. Pollution prevention is a term used to describe production technologies and strategies that result in eliminating or reducing production waste streams.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) defines pollution prevention as the use of materials, processes or practices that reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants or wastes at the source. It includes practices that reduce the use of hazardous materials, energy water or other resources and practices that protect natural resources through conservation or more efficient use. The idea underlying the promotion of pollution prevention is that it makes far more sense for a generator not to produce waste than to develop extensive treatment schemes to ensure that the waste poses no threat to the quality of the environment.
One of the significant benefits is that it is often an economical approach. When wastes are reduced or eliminated, cost savings in materials results thereby more product is produced from the same starting materials. A close examination of manufacturing processes needed to plan successful pollution prevention approach can produce a number of side benefits such as significant improvements in energy and water conservation and improved or more consistent product quality.
Preventive measures like Clean Process Technologies (CPT) are measures which reduce the quantity and the hazards of all the waste streams within the production systems through preventive strategies. In the absence of any effort to popularize CPTs very little attention has been paid to research and development for evolving newer but cleaner technologies.
It must be recognized that CPTs cannot be imported from abroad and transplanted here. Often they have to be modified and adopted to suit Indian conditions in terms of level of automation, unreliable and erratic power supply etc.
A combination of financial, informational and policy level measures need to be devised to promote waste minimization/utilization and the adoption of cleaner technologies.
Environmental audits are an effective tool to improve environmental performance on a continual basis, however if the environmental audit remains an activity confined to filling out the format for submission to the concerned State Pollution Control Boards, nothing much can be expected.
Conclusions
The production of high quality products of a fine and pure standard by using untidy, substandard and outdated technology could soon be caught up in the contradictions and the deficiencies of its present production processes. Economic rationality does not deserve its name if it only accounts for activities within the narrow confines of a industry and of its supply and market situation but disregards damages caused to other areas in the same scenario. The entrepreneurial activities and present day managerial culture does not seem to exactly encourage the timely introduction of changes in the production process in order to prevent irreversible environmental damage but might lead to stop gap solutions.
Long term and real solutions should not be offset by the short sighted self interest of the industry as this would surely stop at eye-wash solutions, which might anyway prove to be somewhat unhealthy and inadequate.
References
1. Freman, M.Harry, “Industrial Pollution Prevention Handbook”, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1995.
2. Jayaram, Nityanand, “Industrial Pollution: Pollute first, pay later”, Survey of the Environment, 2001
3. Bunsha, Dionne, “Mumbai: Polluter gets paid”, Survey of the Environment, 2001
4. Venkataswarlu, K., “Hyderabad: Courts to the Rescue”, Survey of the Environment, 2001
5. Niyati, K.P., “Waste management and minimization-the Indian Scenario”, Proceedings of the Seminar on Waste Management and Low Cost Waste Technologies: The German and Indian Experience, 28-30 Sept, 1992.
6. Bowonder, B., “Efluent Control Systems- A corporate perspective”, Proceedings of the Seminar on Waste Management and Low Cost Waste Technologies: The German and Indian Experience, 28-30 Sept, 1992.
7. Agarwal, S.K., “Industrial Environment: Assessment and strategy”, APH Publishing Corporation, 1996.
