Dean Spears’ Air dissects the sources of air pollution, its impact on citizens and policy missteps, and potential solutions.
When I moved back to Delhi in the summer of 2022, the air quality was one of my prime concerns. Delhi is considered to be one of the highest polluted cities in the world — and the sky looks grey most of the year. Fortunately, the air quality is relatively better during the months of July and August due to monsoon as rain and wind ensure the dust and pollutants are removed from the atmosphere.
Air by Dean Spears is an essential read for anyone who is interested in understanding the problem of air pollution in India, various sources, its impact on the local population and future generations, policies taken by the government to combat it, and what needs to be done to fix it going forward.
Busting some myths about air pollution in India:
1. Air pollution affects everyone. While it does affect everyone, the adverse impact is inequitably distributed with poorer people exposed to higher pollution than their richer counterparts. A multimedia report by New York Times shows how.
2. Air pollution is an urban/ large city problem. It may surprise some readers that Bhiwandi is the most polluted city in India. At least, I was. It shows that air pollution is not restricted to large cities like Delhi but spreads to small town cities like Bhiwandi and Kanpur.
3. Air pollution is an essential byproduct of economic growth. It is true that air quality improves as a country progresses economically. But India’s air pollution is worse than other developing countries due to various factors like climate, policies, and apathy.
4. Curbing air pollution would require immense sacrifice. It requires a combination of smart policies and strategic shifts to reduce air pollution in the long term. Low-hanging solutions include shutting some coal plants. For example, Dan Tong et al identified that the worst 7% of India’s coal plants offer only 1.8% of the country’s electricity generating capacity, but are responsible for 13% of PM 2.5.
5. If the government won’t do anything, then nothing can be done. While the government and policies need to take lion’s share of work to fix this issue, civil society has started taking note and working on it. Open Philanthropy recently granted $1.2 million to set up air quality monitoring sensors, researchers are tracking the sources of air pollution.
6. Let me buy an air purifier and I will be safe. While affordable air purifiers significantly improve the air quality, the particle count never goes too low to acceptable standards. It helps but not completely. There are no private quick fixes.
Choices
The story about air pollution can be described, in some ways, as making choices. Some are hard and some aren't that hard.
Electricity vs Pollution
Coal-powered plants are the primary source of electricity in India. However, burning coal comes at a cost. It releases SO2 and NOx which react with air to become PM2.5 that goes deep into the smallest air sacs in the lungs and into the bloodstream. PM2.5 - particulate matter that is 2.5 micrometer in diameter or less, causes illness in the near term. And carbon emissions from coal plants cause climate change in the long term.
While there are environmental and health costs to coal plants, electricity is essential for people. There is a trade-off between getting electricity and protecting the environment. Electrification of a village/ town brings about economic benefits. This is the primary reason people disregard the environmental costs associated with coal plants.
Studies show that getting a coal plant and consequently electrification of a village reduces stunting in children (a proxy measure for health). However, an additional coal plant within the same village offsets the benefits generated. In other words, a town that gets electricity due to a coal plant for the first time gets benefits but an additional coal plant in the town has worse effects.
If one has to rank the choices:
No coal plant to electrified city > First coal plant that brings electricity to a city > Additional coal plant to already electrified city
Coal-powered plants vs Other plants
This is one of the easiest to argue in theory than applying them in practice. Should we wean away from coal plants to other forms of energy? Of course, we should. So, why aren't we then?
Coal is the surest form of energy currently available. It provides electricity 24 hours a day. On the other hand, other forms of energy like hydro, wind, and solar either have much less capacity or cannot provide 24 hours a day.
But there are some solutions available. First, the government can shut down 'super polluting' coal plants. Tong et al. identified that the worst 7% of India’s coal plants offer only 1.8% of the country’s electricity generating capacity, but are responsible for 13% of PM 2.5.
Second, there needs to be a renewed focus on nuclear power plants. There is a fear among people regarding nuclear energy but it is considered one of the safest forms of energy. In fact, we can see this happen in Germany since they shut down several nuclear reactors -- and consequently, faced an energy crisis amid the Russia-Ukraine war. Things are changing globally as public opinion towards nuclear energy is more favorable. India also plans to set up additional nuclear plants in the future.
Note: The author mentions nuclear energy could be an alternative but doesn't endorse it.
Solid fuel vs Liquid fuel
Most of the households in rural India use solid fuels like wood and cow dung to cook food. However, solid fuels are one of the biggest contributors to indoor air pollution. Further, more than 88% of households prefer food cooked using solid fuel compared to liquid fuel.
When researchers Rema Hanna and Paulina Oliva gave assets to poor households, making them less poor, households shifted from clean to unclean. Similarly, when they were given clean stoves, many families didn't use them. It has dire consequences. As the image below shows, families that cook with solid fuel have lower lung capacity than families that use liquid fuel.
One might of solid fuel is not just down to preference. But there is more to it. One hypothesis is that women didn't have decision-making power while they bear the consequences of it. There is an interesting study that corroborates this hypothesis. Richer mothers are more likely to use clean fuels. Mothers, after controlling for socio-economic status, who bear their first child as a boy are more likely to use clean fuel.
Conclusion
The author ends on a positive note. He believes that air pollution could be tackled if the Indian state machinery single-mindedly focused on solving the problem. However, this can only happen if the government is held accountable for its inaction. To ensure this, air pollution needs to become a political issue -- an issue that people are willing to change their vote. This leaves us with a question - how many voters will insist on clearing the air?
