Pollution Control and PSUs

When I was posted as Member Secretary of the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB), Odisha, in April 2009, a colleague of my father wondered, “Why are you joining an organization where the only job is to collect prescribed fees and issue certificates?”

That was the general perception. But on joining, I realised SPCB is the prime agency for implementing very critical central Acts for controlling air and water pollution and for safeguarding environment. It took me a few months to get a grip over the subject. SPCB had a number of highly qualified and committed scientists and engineers, but their potential was grossly underutilised. We chalked out a strategy to strengthen the organization and ensure enforcement of regulations entrusted to it. There was initial resistance, but things started to fall in place. I observed the industries were not averse to installing pollution control equipment and adhering to pollution control norms when they were assured of transparency and impartiality. However, there was a general feeling that public sector undertakings (PSUs), particularly the large central PSUs, had immunity and could get away with violations. We wanted to send across a strong message that all are equal before law. I am narrating a few instances about mega PSUs.

Air and water pollution due to release of fly-ash by Thermal Power Plants (TPP) in Talcher-Angul region was so acute that one did not see green leaves on plants as those were covered with ash and water of river Brahmani looked milky. We got a lot of complaints against TPP of National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) at Kaniha. Repeated interventions by SPCB had hardly any impact. Finally, we issued closure direction for two units of NTPC. Their Odisha head was in a state of shock: “How can you close down a ‘Navratna’ central PSU?” The CMD, NTPC, rushed to Bhubaneswar. He sought immediate intervention by the Chief Minister. In the meeting, NTPC functionaries elaborately presented their case and explained their future course of action for pollution control. After giving a patient hearing, the CM said, “SPCB is an independent statutory authority and my government doesn’t interfere in its functioning. I am sure they must have good reasons for issuing closure direction. You may first take up the matter with them.”

Their main grievance, I realised, was how could we issue a closure direction to such a prestigious central PSU. After several rounds of discussion, they agreed that serious issues on air and water pollution existed and those need to be addressed immediately. They pleaded that it would take some time for installation of the required equipment. However, they immediately took measures to bring the parameters within the prescribed limits and we revoked the closure direction after 6 days. I am happy to say NTPC, being a responsible PSU, not only installed the pollution control equipment we had specified in the Kaniha plant, but also in all their plants across the country. It did cost them quite a bit, but that was necessary for keeping the environment clean.

Control of pollution in two units of the Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP), a unit of Steel Authority of India (SAIL), was a major issue. After due diligence, we decided to issue closure direction for Sinter Plant-I and MP Boiler-III. CEO, RSP, was candid enough to admit that it would be very difficult to adhere to latest pollution control norms as those plants were quite old and had not been designed for strict pollution control. He intimated that they are in the process of modernisation and installation of new state-of-the-art units was underway. He pleaded for some breathing space. We insisted that pollution norms could not be compromised at any cost. It was finally agreed that closure direction would be revoked only after they adhere to the norms to our satisfaction. Ultimately, Sinter Plant-I was upgraded and MP Boiler-III was closed down.

National Aluminum Company (Nalco) is a star PSU. Aluminum smelting involves several pollution issues. On one hand, aluminum smelting is energy intensive and captive thermal power plants were a potential source for air pollution. On the other hand, in the process of electrolysis a large quantity of fluoride waste is generated that can potentially contaminate ground water. We had regular interactions with Nalco authorities to keep a watch on pollution issues. Disposal of fly-ash was a serious problem due to land constraints, necessitating increase in size and height of existing ash-ponds. For a long-term solution, we asked them to carry fly-ash in slurry form to fill up a nearby mine void from extraction of coal by Mahanadi Coalfields Limited (MCL). It was a win-win situation for both Nalco and MCL. On one hand, Nalco would get a place for disposal of fly-ash for quite some time to come and, on the other hand, MCL got an opportunity to fill-up a mine void and reclaim the land for productive use. Now the slurry pipeline project is underway, but the progress I understand is slow.

It was a huge problem handling the fluoride waste. Used anode butts and Spent Pot-Line (SPL) from cathode had piled up as hillocks. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) took up a pilot project for finding ways and means for its disposal. But nothing very significant has emerged as yet. The anode butts and SPL are still piling up occupying a lot of space and requiring attention to prevent possible pollution. Since these have large calorific content, a few private re-processors of these waste products have emerged, and they are only able to process a small fraction of the hazardous waste. A complete solution to this problem is yet to be found.

In recent years general awareness on conservation of environment and control of pollution has gone up considerably. Industries have become more conscious of their responsibilities and the enforcement mechanisms have become consistent, transparent and incisive. Hopefully, this would pave the way to successfully handle issues arising due to global warming and climate change.