ANNOUNCEMENTS
By Ranjana Ray Chaudhuri, Associate Professor and Head of the Departments of Natural and Applied Sciences and Regional Water Studies, TERI School of Advanced Studies
Air pollution is one of India’s deadliest health threats, causing 1.5 million deaths in a decade. A coordinated, science-led strategy is now reversing the trend, with strict regulations, biomass use, and cleaner fuels improving air quality—though much work remains.
In India, air has become a public health disaster, challenging both governance and public resolve. A slow, unseen threat that deprives people of years before their time, air pollution caused 1.5 million deaths in India between 2009 and 2019, as per the Lancet Planetary Health study. This accounts for nearly one in every six deaths nationwide. It is one of the country’s deadliest health threats, claiming more years of life lost than even cardiovascular or infectious diseases. Particulate pollution alone shortens the average Indian’s life by 5.3 years. In the Northern Plains, the worst-hit region, the number increases to about 8 years of life lost for nearly 521 million residents.
In 2019, the economic costs from premature deaths and illnesses linked to air pollution reached $36.8 billion, or 1.36% of India’s GDP 4 . This is a multi-faceted attack on health, society, and the economy, in the guise of an environmental issue. The problem looms over India like Damocles’ sword—a scepter that haunts our national productivity, stunts children’s growth, hampers adolescents’ lung and cognitive development and burdens hospitals.
CAQM as a Panacea
Faced with such a crisis, piecemeal interventions are no longer enough. India needs a science-backed authority with the mandate to cut across state lines and enforce tough decisions. The Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), set up in 2020 and given statutory powers under the CAQM Act, 2021, has emerged as that very institution. Its jurisdiction spans Delhi-NCR and neighbouring states, Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, and Rajasthan, where it can issue binding directions to state agencies, impose environmental compensation, and prosecute non-compliance.
CAQM’s strategy has zeroed in on two critical fronts in the fight against air pollution: managing agricultural residue to curb stubble burning and driving industrial decarbonisation to cut emissions at the source.
In agriculture, CAQM has created Parali Protection Forces for district-level oversight, satellite-based burnt area tracking with ISRO, and the legal empowerment of District Magistrates to prosecute violations. Together, these measures have driven a dramatic decline in crop residue fires. Punjab saw incidents fall from 71,304 in 2021 to 10,909 in 2024, while Haryana dropped from 6,829 to 1,315 . To create a sustainable outlet for farm waste, the Commission has also advanced biomass co-firing in coal-based power plants, blending paddy straw with coal to reduce coal consumption and avoid open burning. This began in 2021, when 11 thermal plants within 300 km of Delhi were directed to co-fire 5–10% biomass.
In June 2025, the mandate expanded to brick kilns in non-NCR districts of Punjab and Haryana, with a phased plan to achieve 50% paddy straw-based biomass use by November 2028.
In 2023, CAQM strengthened industrial decarbonisation by mandating strict and immediate compliance with emission limits for particulate matter, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury, and water use in coal- and lignite-based thermal power plants, in line with standards set and periodically updated by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. This regulatory push has strengthened compliance across the industrial and power sectors. CAQM has also boosted biomass pellet production, including the once-scarce torrefied type, through access to technology, training, and subsidies provided by the Central Pollution Control Board and state governments.
More read:-
https://fehealthcare.financialexpress.com/blogs/caqms-blueprint-for-breathing-easier-in-indias-most-polluted-regions
Read More
Across seven multi-season surveys, Wildlife Institute of India researchers searched for bird carcasses within a 150-m radius of 90 randomly selected wind turbines and found 124.
In the first half of 2025, India added around 3.5 GW to the wind sector – an 82% year-on-year growth – taking the total installed capacity to 51.3 GW. Even so, India’s wind power remains largely untapped. According to the National Institute of Wind Energy, India’s gross wind power potential is 1163.9 GW at 150 m above ground level.
At the Global Wind Day Conference in June, Union Minister of New and Renewable Energy Pralhad Joshi urged States to address land availability and transmission delays post-haste.
India’s ambitious climate goals and surging energy demands mean renewable energy development will continue to accelerate. Experts are concerned, however, that the addition of wind power capacity has been coming at the expense of avian welfare.
Bird mortality at wind farms
For years, researchers have raised concerns about the impact of wind turbines on fauna, particularly birds. A study by the Wildlife Institute of India (WII), published recently in Nature Scientific Reports, has estimated globally high bird mortality rates at wind farms in the Thar Desert.
The study was conducted in a 3,000 sq. km desert landscape in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, home to around 900 wind turbines and 272 bird species, including the critically endangered great Indian bustard. Across seven multi-season surveys, WII researchers searched for bird carcasses within a 150-m radius of 90 randomly selected wind turbines and found 124.
The estimated annual bird mortality per 1,000 sq. km came up to 4,464 birds after correcting for non-detection due to vegetation cover or carcass degradation during the survey and due to carcass scavenging before the survey.
The researchers conducted similar surveys at 28 randomly selected control sites (between 500 and 2,000 m of any turbine) to account for the natural mortality of birds and found no carcasses.
“Very few studies have robust data to have accurate assessments that correct for detection issues and have controls for comparison,” Yadvendradev Jhala, one of the authors of the study, said.
The WII study isn’t the first to examine bird mortality in wind farms in India. A 2019 study documented bird deaths at wind farms in Kutch and Davangere. However, the estimate of 0.47 bird deaths per turbine per year at both sites now pale in comparison to the 1.24 bird deaths per turbine per month in the Thar Desert.
“It’s quite a high estimate, but that’s quite possible,” Ramesh Kumar Selvaraj, an independent consultant and author of the 2019 paper, said. “[Mortality rate] will vary depending on geography, season, and other factors.”
Bird density, infrastructure density, and configuration are crucial factors, according to Jhala. The Thar Desert is part of the Central Asian Flyway — a major migration route for birds across Eurasia — and a prominent wintering destination.
The desert mortality estimates also included bird collisions with power lines linked to the wind turbines. The Gujarat and Karnataka study didn’t include this cause.
Per both studies, raptors were the most affected group of birds, echoing findings worldwide. “Raptors are long-lived species that lay fewer eggs, and any additional mortality can lead to population-level impacts,” Selvaraj said. “Their flight altitude and soaring flight behaviour means they are more vulnerable while manoeuvring rotating wind turbines.”
Organisations like Birdlife International have proposed several mitigation measures to reduce bird collisions with wind turbines, including painting one of the turbine blades to increase visibility and shutting turbines down at a certain time of day or season. However, Selvaraj said he believes the most crucial step in mitigation is to carefully select the site of a wind farm.
Avian Sensitivity Tool for Energy Planning (AVISTEP) is an open-source platform developed by Birdlife International that helps developers identify and avoid sites where renewable energy could affect birds. Selvaraj, previously with the Bombay Natural History Society, coordinated India’s map for AVISTEP.
“The whole of India, including offshore areas, have been divided into different categories of avian sensitivity such as ‘low’, ‘moderate’, ‘high’, and ‘very high’,” Selvaraj said. “While AVISTEP can serve as a guide, ground-level studies are crucial before installing wind farms,” he added.
However, onshore wind energy projects in India aren’t mandated to conduct an environmental impact assessment (EIA) before installation.
From land to ocean
Offshore wind farms are emerging as a valuable renewable energy resource worldwide. According to the Global Wind Energy Council, operational offshore wind capacity worldwide is currently around 83 GW.
India has also turned its attention offshore and aims to install 30 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030. In June, the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy launched offshore wind energy bids totalling 4 GW in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu.
The primary motivation is to look beyond land-based resources, which are becoming increasingly “complex” and “time-consuming” to procure for renewable project development, Disha Agarwal, senior programme lead, Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), New Delhi, said.
With a coastline stretching across 7,600 km and exclusive economic zones covering 2.3 million sq. km, India has considerable offshore wind energy potential.
According to CEEW research, the addition of offshore wind to the renewable energy pool in Gujarat will benefit power system operations in the State. “We saw that offshore wind will aid in system adequacy and help meet reliability requirements during peak load hours,” Agarwal said
However, despite the growing interest, there has been limited research on the environmental consequences of offshore wind farms.
Offshore wind energy is a complex infrastructure asset that requires detailed marine spatial planning exercises to assess environmental and social impacts, according to Gopal K. Sarangi, head of the Department of Policy and Management Studies at the TERI School of Advanced Studies, New Delhi.
“As observed in other countries, there are numerous environmental risks for offshore wind farms,” Sarangi said. “They could disturb marine biodiversity, create noise pollution for marine habitats, and pollute the ocean water at various stages of project development.”
According to the National Offshore Wind Energy Policy, unlike other renewable energy developments in the country, EIAs are essential for offshore wind energy.
The rapid EIA report of the proposed offshore wind farm in the Gulf of Khambhat in Gujarat documented five marine mammals, including dolphins and sharks, and a reptile within the study area. While the report recognised that increased turbidity and noise levels during the construction phase of the wind farm may drive away highly sensitive species, it deemed the noise and vibrations during the operation phase to be “limited”.
Selvaraj said he doesn’t agree with the report’s inference that there are very few bird species passing through the study region. “Gujarat and its coasts are a key area within the Central Asian Flyway and the African-Eurasian Flyway,” according to him.
Per AVISTEP as well, the proposed location has a high avian sensitivity score. Thus, Selvaraj urged a longer, more thorough study to understand how migratory bird species use the area and the possible effects of wind farms on these birds.
Nikhil Sreekandan is an independent journalist.
Read More| Date | News Title | Source |
| 14-August-2025 | CAQM Blueprint for Breathing E... | Financial Express (HealthCare Online) |
| 03-August-2025 | Bird deaths raise red flags as... | The Hindu (Online) |
| 18-July-2025 | 1 in 4 Indian married couples ... | The Indian Express |
| 23-June-2025 | Blended Learning: Driving educ... | The Pioneer |
| 22-June-2025 | All adults overweight in every... | |
| 21-June-2025 | TERI SAS Nurturing Global Sust... | The Interview World (Online) |
| 27-May-2025 | Eco-education trend grows: Sus... | India Today (Online- Education Desk) |
| 25-March-2025 | How water green credits can fu... | Hindustan Times (Opinion) |
| 23-February-2025 | Sustainable biz practices disc... | The Times of India (Online) |
| 21-February-2025 | Sangam fit for bath’, Enviro... | News9 (Online) |
Carbon pricing is the value ascribed to the external costs – usually social costs – of pollution emitted by an industry. The price on carbon emissions is applied either through a carbon tax or an emission trading system.

Representative Image Source: AP
In the 1920s, a British economist, Arthur Pigou, highlighted the social benefits of making industries pay for the costs of the pollution they caused. In time, this concept was taken up in different ways, which have led to the concept of ‘carbon pricing’.
According to the World Bank, carbon pricing is the value ascribed to the external costs of pollution emitted by an industry. External costs are those that do not affect the industry itself directly – most industries receive the full benefits of fossil fuel consumption, but only bear a trivial fraction of its climatic cost. Instead, public systems pay a socially tragic price – such as the costs of losing crops because of poisoned air/water and health care costs because of heat/cold waves or extreme weather events from global warming.
Carbon pricing is an economic tool used to push industries, households and governments to bring down emissions and invest in cleaner options. It helps in shifting the burden of damage caused by pollution onto those responsible for the pollution but does not dictate how or where emissions can be reduced. Instead, it puts an economic value to pollution and allows polluters to decide whether to reduce emissions or continue polluting but pay the price for it.
Carbon pricing/taxes/trade are under the control of a country’s government. The government decides what taxes to levy and polluters pay these taxes to the government. Ideally, these taxes should be used to either offset the extra burden of carbon taxation on low-income groups or on remedial projects to offset the effects of pollution.
Why a price on carbon?
Carbon is priced because carbon-based gases (of which carbon dioxide or CO2 is most prevalent) are the most abundant greenhouse gases (GHGs) in most emissions. Therefore, pricing carbon provides an incentive for households, firms, industries, and governments to reduce emissions cost-effectively.
According to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report (March 2022), the window of action for meeting the goals set by the Paris Convention (a reduction in GHG emissions such that global warming is restricted to 1.5–2 degrees C above pre-industrial times) is rapidly closing. The report, titled Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability states that without immediate action, rising global temperatures and climate change with create conditions beyond human tolerance.
Currently, the price on carbon emissions is applied in two ways; one is through a carbon tax, and the other through a cap-and-trading or emission trading system (ETS).
What is carbon tax?
Carbon taxes are the prices that governments impose on polluters for each metric ton of CO2 emissions (mt CO2e) generated. These taxes are levied on coal, oil products, and natural gases, according to their carbon contents. The advantages of levying carbon taxes are many. By internalising the externality of pollution costs, the tax motivates industries to improve energy efficiencies, move towards low-carbon fuels and renewable energy sources. The concept of carbon taxation can also be applied to other GHGs and pollutants. In addition, carbon taxes are fairly easy to administer as add-ons to already existent fuel taxes and generate revenue for governments that can be routed towards funding other aspects of the sustainable development goals.
Carbon taxes are, however, are not problem-free. One of the main arguments against carbon taxes is that they make fossil fuels more expensive, which will disproportionately affect people of lower income groups. In addition, carbon taxes may discourage investment and economic growth as businesses may shift production into countries without carbon taxes. Another issue with carbon taxation can centre on how the revenues collected from the taxes are utilised – should they be used towards alleviating tax burdens on workers due to rising fuel prices or towards repairing environmental degradation? Finally, the administrative costs of monitoring and measuring emissions, and uncertainties in measuring the social costs of carbon pollution can make carbon taxation a difficult task.
Individuals and households bear the brunt of carbon taxes when the price of the tax – which is usually directly levied on an industry – trickles down to consumer prices.
What is carbon trading? What are carbon credits?
Carbon trading is a market-based approach to pricing carbon emissions by putting a cap on or limiting the total amount of carbon-based pollution that can be produced. In this system, a central authority, in most cases, governments, allocate or sell a limited number (set as a cap) of permits that allow a specified amount of emissions over a period of time. In this system, each polluter is allotted a specific quota or allowance of pollution that it can emit.
However, polluters are then allowed to trade these permits with each other. For example, if a polluter manages to reduce its carbon emissions to levels lower than its assigned permit values, it is allowed to sell the right to emit carbon to another polluter which may be producing more emissions than it has permits for.
A carbon credit is a generic term for a tradeable certificate or permit representing the right to emit a certain amount of CO2 (usually 1 metric ton) or an equivalent amount of different GHGs. It is, in a sense, the basic trading unit for carbon markets.
The carbon trading market was set up in 1997, after the Kyoto Protocol was signed. Under this protocol, all participating countries were to set and adhere to a limit on their carbon emissions over a series of commitment periods. However, the protocol also allowed countries to trade emissions permits with each other. Apart from these permits, other tradeable carbon commodities could also be used, including carbon removal units (from activities such as reforestation), emission reduction units, and certified emission reductions (from clean development mechanism projects).
The prices in cap-and-trade schemes, which use carbon credits, are market driven (meaning that their prices vary according to demand and supply), although the government controls how many units/credits are allotted to each industry/stakeholder, and so how many credits are available for sale on the whole.

Carbon is priced because carbon-based gases, primarily carbon dioxide, are the most abundant greenhouse gases in most emissions. Photo by marcinjozwiak/Pixabay.
Criticisms of the carbon pricing system
Currently, the Environmental Defense Fund states that the cap-and-trade system is the most “economically and environmentally” sound approach to limit emissions and mitigate global warming. This is because the cap sets a firm limit on pollution and trading encourages cutting emissions in the most cost-effective manner.
However, there are several arguments that have been put forward (apart from the issues on carbon taxation) to highlight that carbon pricing, including carbon trading is insufficient to mitigate climate change. These arguments point out that carbon pricing places more importance on increasing efficiency than on effectiveness and encourages optimisation of existing systems rather than on transforming them to reduce pollution. Furthermore, it has been pointed out that current issues with emissions are a fundamental systemic problem of society, and not just a market problem; therefore, they will require more than just a ‘price on pollution’ to overcome.
“First and foremost, one must remember that carbon pricing, especially carbon taxation, is a tool to make cutting carbon emissions more economical – it is not necessarily a tool to cut the total amount of carbon produced”, says Nandan Nawn, a professor at the Department of Policy and Management Studies, TERI School of Advanced Studies and a member of the Biodiversity Collaborative.
“If we take the example of pollution from cars, a tax may not incentivise the owner-users to reduce the use of fossil fuels. After all, in urban areas, owning and using many cars is more of a status symbol, just like owning land in the rural areas. There are just too many incentives – EMI (equated monthly installment) is the most important – that fits nicely with this ‘aspiration’. For most users, fossil fuel is an ‘essential commodity’ and the quantum of its use is independent of price changes. On the other hand, making the emission standards stricter has the potential to reduce the pollution emitted by a running engine per unit of time. But according to ‘Jevons Paradox’ or the ‘rebound effect’ (expounded by William Stanley Jevons at the House of Commons two and a half centuries ago), if the rise in car numbers increases at a rate higher than the rate at which emissions are reduced, total emission will increase. There are no easy solutions here, given the political economy of carbon in India,” Nawn explains.
In addition to these issues, unlike how the cap-and-trade program drove innovations to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from power plants, the rise in technological innovations for reducing carbon emissions have not met with the same success. Although there is some evidence that innovations in low-carbon technologies are being driven by the European Union’s ETS (EU ETS) and China’s ETS, there are doubts that this will help in driving climate change mitigation at the desired rate.
What is the current rate at which carbon is priced?
According to The World Bank’s Global Carbon Pricing Dashboard as of April 2021, global carbon pricing initiatives range from less than $1 to as high as $137 per mt CO2e. There are currently 65 carbon pricing initiatives across 45 national jurisdictions. In 2021, these initiatives would cover 11.65 Gmt CO2e, which represents 21.5% of the global GHG emissions. However, less than 1% of the global emissions (5 out of 65 initiatives) are currently priced at close to or above the least estimated social cost of carbon, which, according to the IMF, is 75 USD per mt CO2e. A publication in 2021 in the journal Environmental Research Letters, places the social cost of carbon at a whopping >3000 USD per mt CO2e if climate-economy feedbacks and temperature variabilities are taken into account. As of November 2021, the average weighted price of carbon stood at 3.37 USD per mt CO2e.
How does carbon pricing work in India?
Currently, India does not have any explicit carbon pricing or cap-and-trade mechanisms; instead, it has an array of schemes that place an implicit price on carbon. The Perform, Achieve and Trade (PAT) scheme aims to reduce emissions from energy intensive industrial sectors by setting specific energy reduction targets. Industries that exceed the targets are awarded Energy Saving Certificates (ESCerts), each of which is equal to one metric tonne of oil. Those industries unable to meet the targets are required to buy ESCerts (from units that have exceeded their targets) through a centralised trading mechanisms hosted by the Indian Energy Exchange.
The Coal Cess is a tax on coal that was introduced in 2010, which aimed to use the collected revenue to finance clean-energy initiatives and research via the National Clean Energy Fund. However, the idea failed to achieve significant outcomes as a large part of the collected revenue remained unutilised. In 2017, the coal cess was abolished and replaced by the Goods and Services (GST) Compensation Cess; the proceeds of this tax are used to compensate states for revenue losses due to a shift to the new indirect tax regime.
Renewable Purchase Obligations (RPOs) and Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) are aimed at encouraging India’s growing renewable energy sector. All electricity distribution agencies are required to source a specific minimum of their electricity requirements from renewable energy sources. For each state, the RPO is fixed and regulated by the respective State Electricity Regulatory Commission. The RECs are market-based instruments that aid in achieving RPOs through trading at power exchanges.
Internal Carbon Pricing is a tool used by the private sector in India to reduce emissions voluntarily, so that they can channel investments into cleaner and more energy-efficient technologies to meet corporate sustainability goals. Currently many major Indian private companies such as Mahindra and Mahindra, Tata, Infosys, and Wipro, use ICP to lower their carbon footprints.
Can I participate in carbon trading?
Households and individuals at this stage, cannot directly participate in carbon trading, as carbon emissions calculations at such small scales are not very accurate. Households may be part of a larger trading scheme, where the carbon emissions of an area – for example, an entire city – are calculated, and used as measures to note increases/decreases in carbon emission profiles. The main issue with the carbon credit system currently, especially for small businesses or individual land holders, is that agencies that provide credentials for and evaluate carbon credit generation, charge very high fees, which may not be offset by the income generated from selling the carbon credits themselves.
Plot No. 10, Institutional Area, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi - 110 070, India.
Tel. +91 11 71800222 (25 lines).
Website : www.terisas.ac.in
Email id : registrar@terisas.ac.in
© Copyright © 2025, TERI SAS, All rights reserved.
Visitors No.: 47341486 Since 2023


