Featured Articles

Latest Post
Showing posts with label waste incinerator technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label waste incinerator technology. Show all posts

Demand for Cancellation of Public Hearing of waste fuelled thermal power plant in NCR Aravallis

Written By mediavigil on Monday, August 30, 2021 | 8:31 PM

 To 

Dr. Sumita Mishra
Chairperson
Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB) 
Panchkula

Date: 31 August, 2021

Subject: Request for Cancellation of Public Hearing on 31 st August 2021 for Waste to Energy Plant Expansion in the NCR Aravallis 

Madam, 

With due respect this is with reference to the Public Hearing regarding the expansion of the Waste to Energy plant at Bandhwari landfill site in Aravallis from 15 MW to 25 MW on 31 August, 2021.

The public hearing notice issued by the Haryana State Pollution Control board clearly states that the EIA study for the same will be available on the HSPCB website (hspcb.gov.in) and the offices of the Deputy Commissioner of Gurugram, Municipal Corporation Gurugram, Zila Parishad Gurugram and Regional office of the Haryana State Pollution Control Board in Vikash Sadan, Gurugram - along with the Executive Summary. 

When I wrote to Regional Officer, HSPCB in this regard, I did not get any reply. When I called him, I got no response. I have also learnt that when Aravalli Bachao team members spoke to the office of the Deputy Commissioner on the 27 th August 2021 to check if these documents are available with them, they said they do not have these documents in their office when according to the Public Notice these documents should be available in the DC Gurugram’s office for the public to view. 

According to Appendix 4 of the EIA Notification 2006, a copy of the EIA report needs to be made available to the public 30 days prior to the date of the Public Hearing so that sufficient time is given to citizens to study the document and give their views. 

The EIA Notification also states that the Executive Summary of the EIA report needs to be translated in local language and be made available to the public 30 days prior to the date of the Public Hearing. Both these criteria have not been met for the Public Hearing called on 31 st August 2021 for expansion of the waste to energy plant. The required documents were not available on the HSPCB website as late as 26 August, 2021. 

In Covid pandemic times when people are avoiding going to public places, accessing and studying documents online is the safest and most convenient way for citizens to give their suggestions / objections to the said project. 

In blatant violation of the law, HSPCB has failed to give this option to the public. I have learnt that after my letter to the Regional Officef, HSPCB and the Aravalli Bachao team’s visit to the Regional office of HSPCB at Vikash Sadan in Gurugram on 26 August 2021 and after submitting a letter demanding cancellation of the Public Hearing, the next day i.e 27 August 2021 (4 days prior to the date of the Public Hearing scheduled on 31 August 2021), the required documents were uploaded on the HSPCB website. On 30 August, 2021, I submitted to you my preliminary critique of the EIA/EMP. (http://www.toxicswatch.org/2021/08/critique-of-draft-eiaemp-report-of.html?m=1) 

It is crystal clear that instead of the mandatory 30 days period required by law, the HSPCB has given the public only 4 days to go through the hundreds of pages of the EIA report. HSPCB expects citizens to go through the EIA report in just 4 days, analyse its implications and give suggestions / objections on the Public Hearing scheduled on 31st of August 2021. This is quite irrational. It is due to these reasons, that I endorse the citizens' demand for cancellation of this Public Hearing which is in violation of the EIA Notification 2006. 

Having worked on the issue of waste management since 2000, I have reached the conclusion that waste incineration technologies like Refuse Derived Fuel technique is anti-environment, anti-science and anti-public health. It is Dioxins emitting technology. Dioxins was used as a chemical weapon in US-Vietnam war under the brand name Agent Orange. I wish to draw your attention towards the following papers for your perusal and consideration:

1. Why urban waste continues follows the path of least resistance 


2. In india, critics assail proposal to build 100 waste-fuelled power plants

3. Biomass Burning is not Green-Part I


4. Biomass Burning is not Green-Green-Part II

5. Clean India Mission on wrong track 

In view of the above, I seek your considered intervention to stop the project proponent from setting up this tried, tested and failed Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) technology based thermal plant which is linear, contrary to nature's circular process and is in violation of UN's Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, UN's Minamata Convention, Paris Agreement and cardinal principles of waste management that paves way for adoption of Zero Waste philosophy.  

Thanking you

Warm Regards
Gopal Krishna, LL.M., Ph.D
ToxicWatch Alliance (TWA) 
Mb:9818089660

Critique of Draft EIA/EMP Report on Expansion of Waste Incineration based Power Plant at Bandhwari, Gurugram

The Public Hearing of Expansion of Waste based Power Plant from 15 MW to 25 MW at Bandhwari, Gurugram is scheduled to be held at the site of the proposed plant on 31st August, 2021. The notice of the Public Hearing reveals that there is a manifest procedural violation of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification 2006 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Clause No. 1 of the EIA Notification, 2006 clearly states that the Hearing should give opportunity to "widest possible public participation". Disregarding this provision, the notice of the Environmental Public Hearing invites “suggestions and objections, if any, of the nearby public on the proposed project”. The notice makes a mockery of the EIA notification and the procedure of public hearing. Given the fact that air pollutants and water pollutants are long distance travellers and do require permission to go to farther places, confining the public hearing to “nearby public” transforms the EIA process into an empty ritual and a non-serious formality.  It is a mockery also because there is no existing plant to expand. Initially, the project proponent submitted a proposal for 15 MW and now its is trying to expand it.

Residents of Gurugram in particular and environmental groups in general are seriously perturbed with this initiative of the Municipal Corporation of Gurugram in the name of ‘Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Processing Facility’ in their region. The proposed setting up of this monstrous municipal solid waste based “waste-to-energy” incineration project in question is highly polluting and hazardous. As per the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), all municipal waste combustors (i.e. incinerators), regardless of technologies, release a number of pollutants, including cadmium, lead, mercury, dioxin, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter. Dioxin and mercury are of particular concern because they are toxic, persist in the environment, and bioaccumulate. The decision of Municipal Corporation of Gurugram to set up and expand the said project is ill conceived, and blatantly ignores the present demography of the surrounding areas of the proposed site. How can it propose such a hazardous project in the vicinity of residential areas while ignoring the current geography of the area? This plant emits large quantities of hazardous and toxic emissions (such as dioxins and furans) due to burning of mixed Municipal Solid Waste, and profoundly affects the health of the people living in the surrounding areas and environment for all times to come in future. This is in violation of the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and Articles 47, 48A and 51-A (g) of the Constitution. It disregards the provisions under Municipal Solid Waste Management Rules 2016, Rule 4(6), 4(7) and 4(8) which creates a compelling need for segregation of organic waste and composting or bio methanation. The proposed project is going to spoil the quality of life and living, the quality of the air for breathing, the quality of under-ground water and bring disaster to lives of all the residents.  The burning of 1500 to 2000 Tonnes of municipal solid waste per day near Gurugram and in the middle of Bandhwari village exposes them to toxic fly ash and bottom ash.

It is noteworthy that no EIA report has been uploaded on the website of Haryana State Pollution Control Board’s Website or on the website of Municipal Corporation of Gurugram till recently. The notification on public hearing dated 28 July, 2021 made an incorrect claim that it is available in HSPSCB website. The Reginal Officer of the Board was asked to provide the EIA report but he never responded to email and telephonic communications.

The proposed plant is located amidst an ecologically sensitive zone-Aravalli forest- between Bandhwari and Damdama which is very rich in wildlife acts as a corridor between Asola Bhatti wildlife sanctuary. The proposed thermal power plant is less than 10 kms away from it. The Wildlife Institute of India has confirmed the presence of leopards, hyenas, jackals, nilgais, porcupines, palm civets and many birds around the landfill. It is threat to the fragile forest ecosystem, flora, fauna and habitats.

It is noteworthy that the transportation of 2000 tonnes of waste to the proposed site will require a some 300-400 trucks on Delhi-Haryana corridor, will add to the carbon emission, smoke and dust in the city. The proposed project will have adverse impact on the public health and environmental health.

The proposed project can only make the problem invisible and complex. It can not make the mixed municipal solid waste with hazardous waste characteristics disappear. It requires a hazardous waste landfill to hold toxic ash and residuals from such plants. Minimum of 25 % of the waste burnt in the facility will reach landfill. It will cause food chain poisoning through air pollution and water pollution.

The city have to arrange for segregated collection of organic waste. When it is collected segregated the city should be able to set up decentralized composting facilities to recover it. That reduces cost and volume of waste to the common facility.

The residents are clearly the “victims” of improper, unjustified planning reflecting no concern towards the health of the residents. This kind of “planning” disregards all the scientific evidence. The residents have been demanding stoppage of this project to avoid Bhopal Gas disaster like situation in this residential area.

The following details are relevant in this regard:

1.      At page 27, 29, 34 and 39, of the 487 page long Draft EIA report pays lip service to health and prevention of health hazards. This is factually not correct as has been borne out by the order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court pertaining to a plant using similar incinerator technology at the same location. The landmark judgment in Writ Petition (C) No. 6976 of 2008 refers to 'The summary of "Epidemiological Studies on Adverse Health Effects Associated with Incineration" would show that medical waste incinerators are a leading source of dioxins and mercury in the environment and there is link between incinerator emissions and adverse health impacts on incinerator workers and residents living around the incinerators.'

2.     The observations made in the judgment will have far reaching implications. It reads: "Both older and more modern incinerators can contribute to the contamination of local soil and vegetation with dioxins and heavy metals. In several European countries, cow's milk from farms located in the vicinity of incinerators has been found to contain elevated levels of dioxin, in some cases above regulatory limits. Increased levels of dioxins have been found in the tissues of residents near to incinerators in the UK, Spain and Japan. At an incinerator in Finland, mercury was increased in hair of residents living in the vicinity. Children living near a modern incinerator in Spain were found to have elevated levels of urinary thioethers, a biomarker of toxic exposure. "It notes that "After 2 years of operation of incinerator, dioxins levels were found increased by about 25% in both groups living between 0.5 to 1.5 and 3.5 to 4.0 km away (201 people) of people. In the repeat analysis, the increase was in the range of 10-15%". It records that "Mothers living close to incinerators and crematoria from 1956 to 1993" showed "increased risk of lethal congenital abnormalities, in particular, spinal bifida and heart defects, near incinerators: increased risk of stillbirths and anacephalus near  crematoria". With regard to "Residents from 7 to 64 years old living within 5 km of an incinerator and the incinerator workers" the judgment observes, "Levels of mercury in hair increased with closer proximity to the incinerator during a 10 year period".

3.     This judgment found that "Residents living within 10 km of an incinerator, refinery, and waste disposal site" showed "Significant increase in laryngeal cancer in men living with closer proximity to the incinerator and other pollution sources". The "Residents living around an incinerator and other pollution sources" showed "Significant increase in lung cancer related specifically to the incinerator". The "People living within 7.5 km of 72 incinerators" displayed "Risks of all cancers and specifically of stomach, colorectal, liver and lung cancer increased with closer proximity to incinerators". The order observes, "10. In Master Plan for Delhi, 2021, notified on 07.02.2007, hazardous waste processing viz. hospital/medical/industrial waste is amongst the industries, manufacturing of which shall be prohibited within National Capital Territory of Delhi." It is not in dispute that Delhi's municipal waste has hazardous waste characteristics. The Hon'ble Court observed that "This is a mandatory requirement of the guidelines issued by CPCB that such facility should be far away from residential and sensitive areas". The same holds true for the location of the proposed municipal waste based RDF plant.

4. The reference to “renewable power generation” at page no. 35 of the 487 page long Draft EIA/EMP Report of Expansion of Power Plant from 15 MW To 25 MW (Waste To Energy) are scientifically and factually incorrect and misleading. The contention that generating electricity using a non-conventional energy source instead of fossil fuel must be deemed a renewable energy project is scientifically questionable. waste burning technology cannot automatically be deemed a renewable energy project. If anything, such attempts to classify the WTE plant as renewable project is farfetched.  Waste incinerator technologies are net energy losers when the embodied energy of the materials burned is accounted for. The move by the incineration industry to persuade public institutions to term waste incinerators as 'renewable energy' projects is not only fraudulent but also dangerous. Municipal solid waste is not considered to be a renewable energy source since it tends to be a mixture of fuels that can be traced back to renewable and non-renewable sources. The perpetuation of the myth claiming waste incineration as a source of ‘renewable energy’ has deeply harmful ramifications. European Commission’s definition of Renewable Energy Directive states that ‘energy from renewable sources’ is derived only from non-fossil sources. As per this definition energy from waste is not a renewable energy because waste is not a non-fossil source. It is “energy from a source that is not depleted when used, such as wind or solar power”.

5. Waste is not like wind or solar. It consists of paper, plastic food etc – all having been made from other sources of energy and resources. For instance, if waste consists entirely of plastic (for example) and generates 100MW of energy per tonne, it’s only renewable if it took less than 100MW of energy to produce. If this is how energy is being defined as ‘renewable’ then Waste to Energy is not renewable energy. A road that harnesses the movement and sound of cars to create electricity is not typically considered ‘renewable’ because it relies on a car’s use of fossil fuels to move. It is this very principle which is being applied to waste. The advocates of waste incineration based power plants prefer to pre-empt segregation and recycling efforts being made by municipalities and communities around the world.

6. Given the fact that at present the national electric grid in India has an installed capacity of 383.37 GW as of 31 May 2021, there is no compelling logic for the extraction of power from WTE plants.

7. The residents of the region are in a state of profound fear because of the expanison of the plant’s capacity from 15 MW to 25 MW. This amounts to transforming the residents and wild life in the area into guinea pigs for testing war chemicals in peace time. The emission of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) like Dioxins from the plant in this residential and ecologically fragile area is akin to use of Agent Orange, a war Dioxins based war chemical used by US Army against Vietnam.  Agent Orange is an herbicide and defoliant chemical, one of the "tactical use" Rainbow Herbicides. It is widely known for its use by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971. 

8. The fact is that contrary to the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report, Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) units do not exist.

9.  No residential locality in its sanity can give consent to allow expansion of un-segregated municipal waste incineration based thermal power plant in their locality. They cannot be expected to be superior bearers of risk. The Experts Appraisal Committee cannot turn a blind eye to serious health hazard to tens of thousands of people living and working in this ecologically-sensitive area.  

10. The residents and their neighbourhood will get submerged in the ashes which emerge from the such power plants plant which is going to burn mixed municipal waste which has hazardous waste characteristics.

11.  It is quite appropriate that Hazardous Substances Management Division (HSMD), MoEFCC has framed the Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules given the fact that Indian municipal waste does have hazardous waste characteristics.

12. The polluting potential of the proposed plant using municipal solid waste as fuel is serious. Emissions include suspended particulate matter (SPM), sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrogen chloride (HCl), and dioxins and furans, the most toxic substances known to mankind.

13. It is noteworthy that the 'White Paper on Pollution in Delhi with an Action Plan' prepared by Union Ministry of Environment and Forests. The White Paper says, "The experience of the incineration plant at Timarpur, Delhi and the briquette plant at Bombay support the fact that thermal treatment of municipal solid waste is not feasible, in situations where the waste has a low calorific value. A critical analysis of biological treatment as an option was undertaken for processing of municipal solid waste in Delhi and it has been recommended that composting will be a viable option. Considering the large quantities of waste requiring to be processed, a mechanical composting plant will be needed." The paper is available on Ministry's website. This paper is relevant for the proposed thermal treatment based RDF plant in Bandhwari, Gurugram, Haryana.

14. The failure of Delhi's Timarpur waste to energy plant, Hon'ble Delhi High Court had ordered an enquiry by the Comptroller Auditor General (CAG). In its annual report dated March 1990, the Comptroller Auditor General of India (CAG) observed, "The Refuse Incinerator-cum-Power Generation Plant installed by Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources in March 1985 remained inoperative since its installation. The Ministry failed to utilise or dispose off the inoperative plant and incurred an expenditure of Rs 1.25 crore on maintenance and insurance of the plant." The project was scrapped in July 1990. It is germane to note that Union Ministry of New and Renewable Energy which is now part of Ministry of Power provides a subsidy of Rs 1.5 crore/MW is distorting waste management in the country including Delhi.

15. As per Hon'ble Supreme Court's order in the Writ Petition (Civil) No.888 of 1996 such subsidies are not meant for incinerator plants like the one in Okhla. Hon'ble Court's order dated 6th May, 2005 said, "...we hope that till the position is clear, the Government would not sanction any further subsidies." It is noteworthy that on 15th May, 2007, the Court's order "permit (s) Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources (MNES) to go ahead for the time being with 5 pilot projects chosen by them" but it is noteworthy that this refers specifically to bio-methanation technology. MNES is renamed as Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (MNRE). It has been revealed through RTI that neither the proposed Delhi's waste to energy incinerator projects one of those 5 pilot projects nor is it based on the recommended technology.

16. As per the March 2018 report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Energy, on a query regarding provisions of financial incentives provided by the Government for Renewable Energy for Urban, Industrial and Commercial Applications, the Ministry furnished the information that Power generation from Municipal Solid Waste gets Rs. 2.00 crore/MW (Max. Rs.10 crore/project) from the MNRE. Other incentives and support measures provided by the Ministry under the programme incentives are given to State Nodal Agencies: service charge @ Rs. 1% of the subsidy restricted to Rs. 5.00 lakh per project and financial assistance for promotional activities: for organizing training courses, business meets, seminars/workshops and publicity/awareness, subject to a maximum of Rs. 3.0 lakh per activity. In addition, the Ministry of Urban Development is also implementing “Swachh Bharat Mission” (SBM) since 2 October, 2014, which also includes setting up of waste to energy plants with Central support up to 35% of the project cost in the form of Viability Gap Funding (VGF) / grant, subject to the overall State-wise funds envelop for SBM." Incentives include "Accelerated Depreciation: Tax depreciation rate of 80% under AD benefits besides concessional Custom Duty Exemption and GST. Waste to Energy projects draws 5% GST besides availing concessional custom duty which would help the promoters / developers to avail these concessions to improve economic viability of the projects.

According to the amended Tariff Policy, Distribution Licensee(s) are required compulsorily procure 100% power produced from all the Waste-to-Energy plants in the State, in the ratio of their procurement of power from all sources including their own, at the tariff determined by the Appropriate Commission under Section 62 of the Act. The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) vide notification dated 07th October 2015 and 31st March 2015 have notified norms for determination of Generic Tariff for MSW, RDF and Biogas based WTE projects along with Generic Tariff for FY 2016-17. The Levelised Tariff which is in the range of Rs.6.50 to Rs.7.60 per unit."

 When asked about the modes of financing, existing financial support available and possible options for funding capital and operation & maintenance costs with respect to W to E Plants, the Ministry stated: "The Government of India, through various schemes extends financial support for introducing appropriate solid waste management systems and for setting up processing and disposal facilities. These include Viability Gap Funding Swacch Bharat Mission of MoUD,  Loan from IREDA, Grants from MNRE for Supporting W to E Projects and Preferential Tariff by Regulators besides support for Purchase of Compost from Ministry of Agriculture.

 When the Committee desired to know about the current status and performance of Waste to Energy Plants in the country, the Ministry informed that "At present, six waste-to-energy plants using Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) with cumulative installed capacity of 65.75 MW are in operation in the country. The State-wise details of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) based power projects set up. It is apparent that the ministry is blind to environmental health concerns in its drive for energy from waste at any human and environmental cost. Such an unscientific approach is distorting waste management and poisoning the food chain. It high time MNRE withdrew or modified its letters that encourage and promote polluting technologies like the one proposed at Bandhwari, Gurugram, Haryana,  situated in residential and admittedly ecologically sensitive areas.

17. Every claim made about RDF is misplaced and an exercise in glaring misrepresentation of facts.

18.   It is noteworthy that for a project to qualify as climate crisis mitigating project it is necessary that it excludes waste incineration

-- including waste pelletisation or RDF, pyrolysis, gasification systems -- technologies. Incineration produces pollutants which are detrimental to health and the environment. Incineration is expensive and does not eliminate or adequately control the toxic emissions from today's chemically complex municipal discards. Even the latest incinerators release toxic metals, dioxins, and acid gases. Far from eliminating the need for a landfill, waste incinerator systems produce toxic ash and other residues. Such projects disperse incinerator ash throughout the environment and subsequently enter our food chain.

19. The emission of dioxins and heavy metals from such waste based thermal power plants is a cause of grave concern. Dioxins are the most lethal Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) which are associated with irreparable environmental health consequences.

20. It may be noted the Master Plan Report (2020) of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) said, “RDF is often an option when emission standards are lax and RDF is burned in conventional boilers with no special precautions for emissions.” The EAC ought to pay heed to it as well.

21. Union Minister of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha has informed, “Government  is  aware  of  the  reports  published  by  the  World  Health  Organization (WHO)  and  the  Health  Effects  Institute  (HEI)  regarding the  impact  of  air  pollution  on  human health in  terms  of  higher  casualty  rate  due  to  air  pollution.  The reports are based on models, simulations and extrapolations. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has carried out epidemiological studies to assess the impact of pollution on human health. Air Pollution could be one of the triggering factors for respiratory ailments and associated diseases. However, there are no  conclusive  data  available  in  the  country  to  establish  direct  correlation  between diseases and air  pollution. Health  effects  of  air  pollution  are  generally  synergistic  manifestation  of  the  individual’s food habits, occupational habits, socio-economic status, medical history, immunity, heredity, etc.” WHO’s Ambient Air Pollution database has been marked National Capital Region as the most polluted city in the world with an annual particulate matter (PM) 2.5 level of 153 μg/Nm3. The pollution had spiked beyond acceptable limits with dangerous PM 2.5 and PM 10 levels hitting 999 μg/Nm3, while the safe limits for those pollutants are 60 and 100 respectively. A 2010 study conducted by the Boston-based Health Effects Institute (2010) has estimated that about 3000 premature deaths occur in Delhi due to air pollution related diseases. This works out to about 8 deaths per day in National Capital Region alone relating to air pollution related diseases. This year again, levels of PM 2.5 in Delhi reached 710 μg/Nm3, more than 11 times the safe limit prescribed by the WHO. Biomass burning in the proposed  waste based thermal plant is a significant contributor to the air pollution load.

In such a backdrop, it is not surprising that municipal waste to energy plant based on incinerator technology in question faces bitter opposition from residents, environmental groups and waste pickers. 

Conclusion

Given the fact that at present India has surplus power, there is no compelling logic for the extraction of power from WTE plants. There is a logical compulsion to desist from proposing such toxic plants in order to save present and future generation of residents from being enveloped in a toxic gas chamber as a consequence of use of such hazardous incinerator technology adopted for generating energy from waste which admittedly has hazardous waste characteristics.

Contact Details: Gopal Krishna, LL.M., Ph.D, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 9818089660, E-mail: krishnagreen@gmail.com, Web: www.toxicswatch.org 

Note: TWA has been working on the issue of waste since 2000 and has managed to stop seven waste incineration based projects in Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kanpur, Bhopal, Jaipur, Agra and Bhojpur, Bihar. It has been part of research and advocacy regarding Okhla based waste to energy plant since March 2005.

 

Photo: Notice for Environmental Public Hearing of Expansion of Power Plant from 15 MW t25 MW (Waste To Energy) Capacity at BandhwariGurugram, Haryana



Case of Okhla waste incinerator shows High Court more competent than Tribunal

Written By mediavigil on Sunday, September 11, 2016 | 9:36 PM

Despite 76 hearings in High Court & NGT, no relief in sight from waste incinerator for Okhla residents & birds
Matter listed for 77th time on 14th September
National CDM Authority must revoke the “Host Country Approval” given to Okhla waste incinerator
September 10, 2016, New Delhi: ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) expresses its dismay at the approach of National Green Tribunal (NGT) in the matter of Jindal's waste incinerator technology based power plant in Okhla, Delhi which came up for hearing on 9th September and listed the matter for hearing on 14th September for 49th date of hearing in the face of callousness of the Government of Delhi towards the health of residents and birds of Okhla. The Petition in question (Application No. 22 of 2013) reached NGT after having been heard 28 times in Delhi High Court between October 2009 and January 2013. The new Solid Waste (management and handling) Rules 2016 too have failed to bring any ray of hope to the residents and birds of Okhla.

It is puzzling as to why NGT is deviating from its own observation "the first  and  the  foremost  question  that  has  to  be  answered to  this  Tribunal  is  whether  or  not  this generating plant is causing environmental  problems  and  is  releasing  hazardous  discharge s which  could  be  injurious  to  the  health  of  the  residents  in  the  colonies  of  the  area  in  the  vicinity  of  project  site." NGT had observed this in its order dated March 11, 2013.

The case was transferred from the High Court of Delhi in view of the terms of the order dated 23rd January, 2013. It was transferred at a stage when High Court was all set to pronounce its verdict in the matter after a Division Bench of the High Court vide the judgment dated 15th January, 2013 took a categorical position against incinerator technology. The judgment cited ‘The summary of “Epidemiological Studies on Adverse Health Effects Associated with Incineration” would show that medical waste incinerators are a leading source of dioxins and mercury in the environment and there is link between incinerator emissions and adverse health impacts on incinerator workers and residents living around the incinerators.’

Court observed: “Both older and more modern incinerators can contribute to the contamination of local soil and vegetation with dioxins and heavy metals. In several European countries, cows milk from farms located in the vicinity of incinerators has been found to contain elevated levels of dioxin, in some cases above regulatory limits. Increased levels of dioxins have been found in the tissues of residents near to incinerators in the UK, Spain and Japan. At an incinerator in Finland, mercury was increased in hair of residents living in the vicinity. Children living near a modern incinerator in Spain were found to have elevated levels of urinary thioethers, a biomarker of toxic exposure. “ It noted that “After 2 years of operation of incinerator, dioxins levels were found increased by about 25% in both groups living between 0.5 to 1.5 and 3.5 to 4.0 km away (201 people) of people. In the repeat analysis, the increase was in the range of 10-15%”.

The High Court’s verdict records that “Mothers living close to incinerators and crematoria from 1956 to 1993” showed “ncreased risk of lethal congenital abnormalities, in particular, spinal bifida and heart defects, near incinerators: increased risk of stillbirths and anacephalus near crematoria”. With regard to “Residents from 7 to 64 years old living within 5 km of an incinerator and the incinerator workers” the judgment observes, “Levels of mercury in hair increased with closer proximity to the incinerator during a 10 year period”. The judgment found that “Residents living within 10 km of an incinerator, refinery, and waste disposal site” showed “Significant increase in laryngeal cancer in men living with closer proximity to the incinerator and other pollution sources”.

The “Residents living around an incinerator and other pollution sources” showed “Significant increase in lung cancer related specifically to the incinerator”. The “People living within 7.5 km of 72 incinerators” displayed “Risks of all cancers and specifically of stomach, colorectal, liver and lung cancer increased with closer proximity to incinerators”.

The High Court dismissed the contention of M/s Synergy Pvt Ltd that it’s Bio-Medical Waste Treatment Facility based on incinerator technology is far away from residential localities such as Sukhdev Vihar. On inquiry it was found that the distance between the said facility and their colony is less than 30 meters.

But defying any logic and disregarding such glaring evidence, the High Court instead of applying the same relevant reasoning for the same geographical location in the matter of Jindal's waste incinerator technology based power plant in Okhla, transferred the matter to NGT.

The September 1, 2016 order of NGT starkly reveals the insensitivity of NGT. It reads: "The  Learned  Counsel  appearing  for  all  the Public Authorities   shall   take   clear   instructions   as   to   the availability  of  the  sites, operationalisation  of  the  waste  to  energy plant, capacity of each of them and what steps they are going to take to ensure their continuous operalisation without any further delay.  The   Learned   Counsel   appearing   for   the   North Corporation would also take clear instructions as to the Revenue Sharing Agreement with the Project Proponent. List this matter for arguments on 09th September, 2016."

The order has no relationship with the prayers in the case and with "the first and the foremost question" identified by the NGT. It appears that either someone from the side of residents has compromised the cause or has failed to comprehend the grave issues at stake.    

The fact is that it has been ascertained by the NGT that is the plant is "causing environmental  problems  and  is  releasing  hazardous  discharge s which  could  be  injurious  to  the  health  of  the  residents." But the petitioner and their lawyer have failed to argue the case. There is surely something fishy in the state of affairs. The content analysis of the NGT's orders demonstrate it.  September 1, 2016 order has no relation with what was the "the first and the foremost question" determined by the NGT.  

This projects demonstrates how highly polluting technologies like waste incinerator technology are being promoted in the name of climate solution under the supervision of the CDM Executive Board (CDM EB) that supervises the UNFCCC's Kyoto Protocol’s CDM under the authority and guidance of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP). The CDM EB is fully accountable to the CMP.  The CDM EB is the ultimate point of contact for CDM Project Participants for the registration of projects and the issuance of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs). For further details you may refer to the letter of ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) sent to Dr. Subrata Bose,  National Clean Development Mechanism Authority (NCDMA) and Mr. Eduardo Calvo, Chair, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in May and June 2016 “Seeking action against questionable carbon credit/CDM project in Delhi’s Okhla residential and ecologically fragile area (Project: waste to energy project of Timarpur-Okhla Waste Management Co Pvt Ltd)”.  

The violation of the specific conditions made the certificate of Host Country Approval dated 15th May, 2007 given to the project of The Timarpur Waste Management Company Pvt. Ltd. (TWMCPL), a subsidiary of Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd. (IL&FS) a conditional certificate. This approval was given after its consideration by the NCDMA on 30th March, 2007 but the approval is valid subject to compliance with the given specific conditions. 

It was confirmed based on submissions by the company in question prior to approval and prior to registration with UNFCCC’s CDM Executive Board that “The project contributes to Sustainable Development in India”. It is eminently clear that post registration changes establish beyond any reasonable doubt that the project does not contribute to Sustainable Development and sets a very bad precedent for the country in particular. It puts the communities and the ecosystem of Okhla, Delhi to enormous risk which cannot be deemed acceptable.
The approval conditions state categorically that “This approval is not transferrable. The authority reserves the right to revoke this Host Country Approval if the conditions stipulated in this approval are not complied with to the satisfaction of the National CDM Authority.”
The conditions stipulated in the approval certificate have not been complied with the project in this question. It must be noted that the approval was given to The Timarpur Waste Management Company Pvt. Ltd. (TWMCPL), a subsidiary of Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd. (IL&FS) but the approval was transferred to Timarpur-Okhla Waste Management Co Pvt Ltd (TOWMCL) of M/s Jindal Urban Infrastructure Limited (JUIL), a company of M/s Jindal Saw Group Limited. This clearly implies that the specific conditions have been violated.
Besides this the approval certificate states “The TOWMCL shall obtain all statutory clearances and other approvals as required from the competent authorities for setting up of the project.”
It is evident from the Validation opinion for post registration changes provided by Det Norske Veritas (DNV) that the “statutory clearances” which were obtained pre registration were not and has not been obtained post registration.  This also clearly shows that Host Country Approval “conditions stipulated” in the approval have not been complied with. This creates a full proof compelling logic for the National CDM Authority which admittedly has the “right to revoke this Host Country Approval” to revoke the approval granted to this project. This creates a compelling logic for the process of revoking the "Host Country Approval" to this project because the "all statutory clearances" which it was required to obtain have become legally questionable.
Meanwhile, TWA has written to Anil Razdan, Chairperson, Experts Appraisal Committee (EAC) on Infrastructure and Miscellaneous Projects sharing evidence of the violation of environmental clearance conditions by Jindal's waste to energy plant in Delhi’s Okhla residential and ecologically fragile area. TWA, a research and advocacy group has been working to prevent such resource incineration projects and tried, tested and failed technologies since 2000. (Gopal Krishna of ToxicsWatch addressing Delhi residents on waste incionerators in Okhla, Narela Bawana & Ghazipur in the presence of )
It is apparent NGT isn’t as sensitive as Delhi High Court on the issue of public health crisis in Okhla due to questionable waste incinerator technology and dubious carbon credit project. NGT’s order of September 9, 2016 reads, "List this matter on 14th September, 2016" for the 49th time. After a total of 76 hearings since 2009 in High Court and NGT, there is no relief in sight for residents and birds of Okhla and its bird sanctuary. 


For Details: Dr Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 9818089660, 08227816731, E-mail-1715krishna@gmail.com, Web: www.toxicswatch.org

Govt’s joint inspection team visits Jindal’s municipal waste incinerator based power plant in Okhla

Written By mediavigil on Thursday, November 19, 2015 | 8:46 PM

Delhi's Okhla area awaits public heath disaster due to unapproved Chinese technology

November 19, 2015: Following the order of National Green Tribunal (NGT) a Joint Inspection team of Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB and Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) visited the Dioxins and heavy metals emitting unapproved Chinese incinerator technology based municipal solid waste (MSW) based power plant of Timarpur-Okhla Waste Management Co Pvt Ltd (TOWMCL) of M/s Jindal Urban Infrastructure Limited (JUIL), a company of M/s Jindal Saw Group Limited. The joint inspection team visited the factory from 10 AM- 11.45 AM on November 19, 2015 along with Anant Trivedi, Dr U C Bahri, K S Rao and A B Akolkar, Member Secretary, CPCB and Bharat Sharma of CPCB, B.L Chawla, Senior Environment Engineer, DPCC, Dr Anil Kumar, Department of Environment, Government of Delhi, Rakesh Agrawal, Executive Director, TOWMCL and Neelesh Gupta, whole Time Director, TOWMCLGopal Krishna of ToxicsWatch Alliance which has been opposing this plant because of its hazardous technology since March 2005 also joined the inspection team at the request of the residents.

The NGT case is named Application No. 22 of 2013 in NGT. The next date of hearing is on December 14, 2015. Residents of Delhi's Okhla locality await relief and justice at least since 2009. Environmental groups have been opposing this plant since March 2005. 

The Show Cause Notice issued to the plant of Jindal's TOWMCL reveals unambiguously that the its Consent to operate under Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 & Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 granted by Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC), which exercises the delegated powers of CPCB had expired on 20th March, 2013. The plant is operating without the same since then. But DPCC has failed to order its closure despite such blatant violation of law.
As per the website of TOWMCL, it is claimed that the plant received Consent to operate on 21st December. 2011. The fact is that the plant is operating without consent to operate since 2013.

As per the attached official document of DPCC on the subject of "Status of Okhla Waste to Energy plant by Timarpur-Okhla Waste Management Co Pvt Ltd" (TOWMCL) as on 16th April, 2015. The plant of TOWMCL is operational. It is processing 1950 MT of waste and
generating 16 MW of power. The report mentions that the plant was supposed to use RDF technology but refrains from mentioning that it is using an unapproved Chinese technology brought to light by the CPCB committee report prepared pursuant to 22th March 2011 dated order of the then Union Minister of Environment & Forests. This led to the official recognition of deviations from approved technologies. The Chinese technology provider is from Hangzhou New Century Company Ltd of Hangzhou Boiler Group. The High Powered Technical Experts Evaluation Committee of CPCB in its 31 page report on the Timarpur-Okhla Waste to Energy Incinerator Plant brought to light the illegalities committed by Jindal's TOWMCL. The report was communicated on March 22, 2012. This report is based on three meetings of the Technical Experts Evaluation Committee held on April 26, 2011, August 11, 2011 and September 22, 2011 under the chairmanship of Chairman, CPCB.
Notably, substitution of technology is prohibited under the provisions of the Environmental Clearance. It is deemed dangerous to according to a report of CSIR-National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI).
Notably, the representatives of GTZ (German Technical Cooperation) led by Dr. Juergen Porst, Senior Advisor stressed the need for a Disaster Management Plan in the very first meeting of this CPCB Committee, which is annexed to the CPCB's report. This finds reference in the minutes of the meeting annexed with the report. It underlines the possibility of disaster from the Timarpur-Okhla Waste to Energy Incinerator Plant, which is situated in a residential area.

DPCC's attached status report dated 16th April, 2015 states, "...in case the Project Proponent (Jindal's TOWMCL) found defaulting in compliance of the direction of Tribunal, the Tribunal would be compelled to direct the closure of this industry." The DPCC concludes
that "directions u/s 31 (A) of the Air Act, 1981 was issued on 03.07.2014 and simultaneously show cause notice was issued for refusal of consent under Air & Water Act and authorization under MSW Rules. The Project Proponent has filed statutory appeal against the directions dated 03.07.2014 before the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India. The appeal was listed for 27.02.2015 and the same is pending. The matter is to be listed for final hearing and the next date of hearing is yet to be notified."
The ToR given by MoEF's Experts Appraisal Committee to the project in question specifically demanded "Disaster Management Plan" but the High Powered Committee constituted by the then Union Minister of Environment & Forests headed by Chairman, CPCB observed in its report that this plan has not been prepared. It condemned the non-cooperation by the company. This committee noted that this plant is operating in violation of Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling) [MSW] Rules, 2000. It came to light from the observation of A B Akolkar from CPCB. Akolkar is currently the Member Secretary of CPCB. He was part of the Join Inspection Team that visited the plant on November 19, 2015.
A judgment of Delhi High relevant to Okhla refers to 'The summary of "Epidemiological Studies on Adverse Health Effects Associated with Incineration" would show that medical waste incinerators are a leading source of dioxins and mercury in the environment and there is link between incinerator emissions and adverse health impacts on incinerator workers and residents living around the incinerators.'
The observations made in the judgment will have far reaching implications. It reads: "Both older and more modern incinerators can contribute to the contamination of local soil and vegetation with dioxins and heavy metals. In several European countries, cow's milk
from farms located in the vicinity of incinerators has been found to contain elevated levels of dioxin, in some cases above regulatory limits. Increased levels of dioxins have been found in the tissues of residents near to incinerators in the UK, Spain and Japan. At an incinerator in Finland, mercury was increased in hair of residents living in the vicinity. Children living near a modern incinerator in Spain were found to have elevated levels of urinary thioethers, a biomarker of toxic exposure. " It notes that "After 2 years of operation of incinerator, dioxins levels were found increased by about 25% in both groups living between 0.5 to 1.5 and 3.5 to 4.0 km away (201 people) of people. In the repeat analysis, the increase was in
the range of 10-15%".
It records that "Mothers living close to incinerators and crematoria from 1956 to 1993" showed "increased risk of lethal congenital abnormalities, in particular, spinal bifida and heart defects, near incinerators: increased risk of stillbirths and anacephalus near
crematoria". With regard to "Residents from 7 to 64 years old living within 5 km of an incinerator and the incinerator workers" the judgment observes, "Levels of mercury in hair increased with closer proximity to the incinerator during a 10 year period".
The judgment found that "Residents living within 10 km of an incinerator, refinery, and waste disposal site" showed "Significant increase in laryngeal cancer in men living with closer proximity to the incinerator and other pollution sources". The "Residents living
around an incinerator and other pollution sources" showed "Significant increase in lung cancer related specifically to the incinerator". The "People living within 7.5 km of 72 incinerators" displayed "Risks of all cancers and specifically of stomach, colorectal, liver and lung cancer increased with closer proximity to incinerators".
The  Court had observed that "This is a mandatory requirement of the guidelines issued by  CPCB, that such facility should be far away from residential and sensitive areas" The same holds true for the location of the Jindal's municipal waste based incinerator plant. This order of High Court underlines that its approach to environmental damage is better than that of NGT. The plant is amidst residential colonials and institutions of national importance like Central Road Research Institute, Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology and the Indian Institute of Information Technology.  Such toxic emissions from the Jindal's power plant in an ecologically sensitive area and thickly populated area has become a routine affair with all the concerned authorities turning a blind eye towards this illegitimate and illegal act. This plant has violated all the rules in the rule book.

Besides violating all the relevant laws and rules, this plant is violation of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 creating a compelling reason for the closure of this plant. The plant became operational in 2012 but it is using untested and unapproved Chinese incinerator technology, a fact noted in the report of the Central Pollution Control Board committee constituted after a delegation had met Shri Jairam Ramesh, the then Union Minister of Environment & Forests pursuant to his site visit of the plant. It is noteworthy that the Union Environment Minister had written to the then Chief Minister, NCT of Delhi underling that the plant is functioning in violation of environmental regulations.
Notably, this plant does not have clearance from the Delhi Urban Arts Commission, which is a mandatory requirement.
This plant is in a green belt contrary to the Master Plan of Delhi, in contravention of section 3(2) (v) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Rule 5 (ix) of Environment (protection) Rules, 1986 and Guidelines for Establishment of Industries issued by MoEF.
As per  Supreme Court's order in the Writ Petition (Civil) No.888 of 1996 such subsidies are not meant for incinerator plants like the one in Okhla.  Court's order dated 6th May, 2005 said, "...we hope that till the position is clear, the Government would not sanction any
further subsidies." It is noteworthy that on 15th May, 2007, the Court's order "permit (s) Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources (MNES) to go ahead for the time being with 5 pilot projects chosen by them" but it is noteworthy that this refers specifically to bio-methanation technology. MNES is renamed as Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (MNRE) and is part of Power Ministry at present. It has been revealed through RTI that neither the proposed Delhi's waste to energy incinerator projects one of those 5 pilot projects nor is it based on the recommended technology.
It is apparent that amendments made in the EC have been made to gain this assistance of Rs 1.5 crore/MW even as the stay by the  Supreme Court on sanction of any further subsidies for projects on energy recovery from Municipal Solid Wastes continues to be in force, in manifest violation of Court's order. In the light of the Court's order MNRE must be persuaded to withdraw or modify its letter (No.10/3/2005-UICA) to stop promotion of polluting technologies like incinerators.

Supreme Court is quite categorical in saying, "The Committee has recommended that projects based on bio-methanation of MSW should be taken up only on segregated/uniform waste unless it is demonstrated that in Indian conditions, the waste segregation plant/process can separate waste suitable for bio-methanation. It has opined that there is a need to take up pilot projects that promote integrated systems for segregation/collection/ transportation and processing and treatment of waste. In view of the report of the Committee and having regard to the relevant facts, we modify the order passed by this Court earlier and permit Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources (MNES) to go ahead for the time being with 5 pilot projects chosen by them, keeping in view the recommendations made by the Expert Committee and then take appropriate decision in the matter." Despite this Delhi Government has erred in supporting illegal waste to energy incinerators in Delhi which is contrary to the Court's order.
But Delhi Government falsely claimed in the High Court that it was one of the five projects cleared by  Supreme Court leading to dismissal of petition filed by residents but when the  High Court later found to its shock that such a claim was manifestly untrue, the petition was
restored. It was in March 2009 that Writ Petition (Civil) No. 9901 of 2009 which was initially dismissed on 12th August, 2009 because of misrepresentation of facts by the then Additional Solicitor General.  High Court later found that it was misled earlier which had led to it dismissing the petition. The Petition was restored by an order dated 15th January, 2010. In the presence of A.S. Chandihok, the bench headed by the Chief Justice, Delhi High Court in the order observed, "that the project in question" and "the location of the pilot project in Delhi was neither recommended by the Expert Committee nor approved by the Supreme Court."

In a strange case that one of NGT's order in the case in question relied on reasoning advanced in the dismissal order of  High Court and chose not to take cognizance of the  Court's restoration of the same case which later admittedly got transferred to NGT.
Notably, High Court on had asked Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) 18th July, 2010 to conduct a joint inquiry about India's first waste-to-energy plant and file a report on the allegations that it posed health risks
to citizens.  The Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna ordered, "A joint report be submitted by the DPCC and the CPCB after an inquiry of the site of the energy plant about the alleged risks posed to citizens".
It is noteworthy that Asian Development Bank (ADB)'s Asian Pacific Carbon Fund (APCF) dropped this waste to energy plant out of its portfolio amidst controversy surrounding it. In any case it is a misplaced carbon credit project. It underlines how carbon trade is not
part of the solution but part of the problem.
Now a bizarre situation has emerged because the arguments for Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) incineration technology that was advanced by the company and the law officers of the previous central and state governments are no more relevant because the plant is using an experimental Chinese technology which was never ever mentioned at the time of submitting the project proposal or in its EIA report based on which a so-called Public Hearing was conducted in Saket.

The ongoing protest rallies and an online campaigns against the toxic, waste-to-energy incinerator where students are also participating in large numbers underlines that the operation of Jindal's waste burning based power plant is an act of environmental lawlessness in the heart of the national capital.
The closure of this plant will be a major and memorable contribution to NCR's landscape for generations to come and help prevent approval for hazardous industrial units in the region at a time when Delhi's residents are gasping for fresh air.
Having been involved with these issues since October 2000 and with this specific issue since March 2005, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) has sought Union environment minister’s urgent intervention for prevention of unfolding public health and environmental disaster in Delhi's Okhla area and adjoining areas of Uttar Pradesh in particular and NCR region in general due to the Dioxins emitting plant of Jindal's TOWMCL.
Global experience demonstrates without any dispute that incinerator based WTE plants do not resolve the issue of non-availability of land and landfill sites because disposal of incineration ash into the landfill site remains a problem recognized under Schedule IV of the
MSW (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000. This experience also shows that energy from municipal waste is not produced at any lesser price in fact it more expensive. The myth of incinerator based WTE plant solving the problem of leachate which contaminates ground water has long been debunked. The existing literature on waste management underlines that incinerator based WTE plants constitute a meaningless and misplaced option. The fact is that it is not a solution, it is a problem creator. It gives birth to the problem of what can be deemed as landfills in the sky. It is a case of putting resources up in flames.
It appears strange that Delhi Government is following the footprints of a government whose misplaced initiatives like these led to it being vanquished. It is hoped that the report of the Joint Inspection Team will undo the threat of public health disaster due to the plant’s location in the proximity of the residential colonies. 

For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660
E-mail: 1715 krishna @
gmail.com, Web: www.toxicswatch.org
 
Copyright © 2013. ToxicsWatch, Journal of Earth, Science, Economy and Justice - All Rights Reserved
Proudly powered by Blogger