To
Shri Anil Razdan
Chairperson,
Experts Appraisal Committee (EAC) on Infrastructure and Miscellaneous Projects + CRZ,
Chairperson,
Experts Appraisal Committee (EAC) on Infrastructure and Miscellaneous Projects + CRZ,
Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
Indira Paryavaran Bhavan
Jorbagh Road
New Delhi-110003
Date: 8th June, 2016
Subject- TWA's submission on violation of
environmental clearance conditions by Jindal's waste to energy plant in Delhi’s
Okhla residential and ecologically fragile area
Sir,
This is to
bring to your notice the massive construction underway at the incineration
technology based Waste-to-Energy plant of The Timarpur Waste Management Company
Pvt. Ltd. (TWMCPL), M/s Jindal Urban Infrastructure Limited (JUIL), a company
of M/s Jindal Saw Group Limited at Sukhdev Vihar, Okhla in the vicinity of Hazi
colony, Gaffar Manzil and several residential and sensitive institutional
entities besides Okhla Bird Sanctuary. The residents of Okhla region are quite
perturbed and alarmed about it. A concrete mix plant has been erected to
construct an additional structure. These additional and modification activities
are in violation of the conditions laid down in the environmental clearance
letter.
I submit that this
construction is underway without any fresh Environment Impact Assessment (EIA)
report and Public Hearing giving details of the additional activity. This
activity is in addition to deviation in technology for which environmental
clearance was obtained. It has resulted in severe pollution to the environment.
The fact is that contrary to the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report, bio-methanation
plant and Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) units do not exist. This plant violates siting norms for
polluting industries, being barely 150 meters from long-established residential
areas, posing a threat to life of residents.
I submit that
no residential locality in its sanity can give consent to allow some 2,000 MT of
unsegregated municipal waste to be incinerated daily in their locality. They
cannot be expected to be superior bearers of risk. The EAC cannot turn a blind
eye to serious health hazard to tens of thousands of people living and working
in this ecologically-sensitive area. It is noteworthy that two major hospitals
in the area have complained to the Prime Minister's office about the hazards to
patients.
The claims made in the Compliance Report for the
Period 01.10.2012 to 31.03.2013 for the Project Integrated Municipal Solid
Waste Processing Complex (waste to energy plant) at Okhla by M/s Timarpur-Okhla
Waste Management Co. Pvt. Ltd with regard to the Specific Conditions and
General Conditions laid down in the Environment Clearance Letter No. : D/SD/DG
dated 23-1/2006-IA-III Dated 21.03.2007 and 09.05. 2007 are factually incorrect
and misleading.
Specific Condition reads: No Objection Certificate from the Delhi pollution Control committee should
be obtained before initiating the project.
Status of
Compliance:
Delhi Pollution
Control Committee has issued show cause notice to the project proponent and
denied it authorisation or consent to operate during the last monitoring
period.
Specific Conditions reads: “To minimize odour and aestheics, it should
be ensured that waste will be directly unloaded into specifically designed
pits. The air contained in the complex should be suitable treated with wet
scrubbing method before lettering out in the atmosphere.”
Status of Compliance: The entire Okhla region surrounding the waste
to energy plant is contaminated with toxic ash emanating from the plant. The
air pollutants from this plant contribute to the overall air pollution in Delhi
that is having adverse health impact and reducing life span of the individuals.
General Condition reads: In case of diversion or alteration in the project including the
implementing agency, fresh references should be made to Ministry for
modification in the clearances conditions or imposition of new one for ensuring
environmental protection. The project proponents should be responsible for
implementing the suggested safeguard
measures.
Status of
Compliance: Although there has been admitted “diversion or alteration in the project including the implementing agency”
especially with regard to technology, no fresh references has been made to
Ministry for modification in the clearances conditions or imposition of new one
for ensuring environmental protection.
This violation
of Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 is part of ongoing violations
by this project proponent from the very outset. This fact has been admitted by
the Union Minister of Environment & Forests in his letter to the Chief
Minister of Delhi.
I submit the
following in this regard:
1.
It all
started with the plan of The Timarpur Waste Management Company Pvt. Ltd.
(TWMCPL), a subsidiary of Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd.
(IL&FS) to generate 6 MW of electricity from the project at Timarpur,
Delhi. The plant got subsequently owned by M/s Jindal Urban Infrastructure Limited
(JUIL), a company of M/s Jindal Saw Group Limited. At the outset it planned to
process and to treat 214,500 MT of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and produce
69,000 MT of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) in a year as per company's Project
Design Document (PDD) submitted to United Nations Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC)’s CDM Executive Board. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of
Municipal Solid Waste facility at Okhla was submitted by New Delhi Waste Processing Company
Private Limited, Okhla, New Delhi (NDWPCL), Infrastructure Leasing &
Financial Services (IL&FS). Thus, one arm of the company ILFS proposed the
project and another arm of the same company prepared the EIA report. A case of
conflict of interest is quite manifest.
2.
The report prepared in December 2006 is full of flaws. This 155
page long document is ridden with flaws.
3. The header on all the pages
of EIA report reads “Rapid EIA – Okhla Integrated
Municipal Solid Waste Processing Facility”, so it won’t be incorrect to say
that this is not a comprehensive assessment of project activity and its
likely impacts on health and environment. That’s a different
matter; if “Full or Detailed EIA” is not mandatory for this kind of
project activity (we are sure this won’t be true).
4. Page 30 of EIA reads “Since
this being a rapid EIA, only one season data was collected”.
5. If you read page 63/64, where the
ecological environment has been described, it says “The proposed project
is at the landfill site, near STP located in Okhla industrial area in the
southern part of Delhi.” This description is factually and technically incorrect
because the piece of land where the waste to energy project has been
constructed is not a ‘landfill” site and has historically never been a landfill
site. Moreover, because of the geography of this area, a landfill site can
never be created here. This is not part of Okhla Industrial Area. All this
misrepresentation has been done intentionally to give the impression that this
is being located in the industrial area.
6. At page 102,
EIA report concludes that “….no likely adverse impact on people’s
health is predicted” (i.e. during the operation phase). This
is factually not correct as has been borne out by the order of 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.'
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.'
7. 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".
8. 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. It is noteworthy that the biomedical
waste incinerator which now been removed was located exactly in the vicinity of
the residential colonies and Jindal's controversial municipal waste incinerator.
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 Jindal's municipal waste based incinerator plant.
9. In such a
backdrop, it is not surprising that Jindal’s municipal waste to energy plant based
on incinerator technology in question faces bitter opposition from residents,
environmental groups and waste pickers of Delhi. The
plant is just 1.7-km away from the Okhla Bird Sanctuary. The sanctuary is situated
at the entrance of Noida in Gautam Budh Nagar district of Uttar Pradesh. An
area of 3.5 square kilometres on the river Yamuna was notified as a bird
sanctuary by the Government of Uttar Pradesh under the Wildlife Protection Act,
1972 in 1990. The Jindal's power plant is sandwiched between an eco sensitive
zone and the residential colonies. The plant is situated at a distance of less
than 50-100 meters from the residential colonies. This hazardous plant has an adverse
impact on a large number of transcontinental migratory birds that visit the
Okhla sanctuary. Their numbers have decreased over the years.
10. Not only that
there is a large lake which lies sandwiched between Okhla village towards the
west and Gautam Budh Nagar towards the east, the impact of the plant on this
water source was not been disclosed in the Environment Impact Assessment report
of the plant. This plant does not have the required mandatory clearances from
the National Board for Wildlife. The sanctuary is approachable from Mathura
Road (NH-2), via Sarita Vihar going towards NOIDA. The nearest stations of Delhi Metro are Sarita Vihar and Jasola Apollo metro station.
This also reveals that the plant located in the vicinity of the sanctuary is
amidst densely populated residential area. It is quite disturbing that Okhla's
vegetable market (subzi mandi) is getting submerged in the ashes which emerge
from the plant which is burning some 2050 Metric Tons of mixed municipal waste
which has hazardous waste characteristics.
11. It is quite
appropriate that Hazardous Substances Management Division (HSMD), MoEFCC has
framed the Draft Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules to
replace the pre-existing Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules,
2000 given the fact that Indian municipal waste does have hazardous waste
characteristics.
12. This Jindal's
waste based power plant is situated not only in the proximity of New Friends
Colony, Maharani Bagh, Sukhdev Vihar and the business district Nehru Place -
but also several
prominent institutions, including hospitals like Apollo, Escorts and Holy Family. But disregarding these habitations of birds and humans and a number of binding guidelines from multiple state agencies and Supreme Court directive, the plant has deployed unapproved and untested Chinese technology for power generation from burning the garbage unmindful of its human and environmental cost due to emissions of pollutants like persistent organic pollutants and heavy metals. This has serious health and environment implications for the residents of National Capital Region (NCR) in general and Okhla and NOIDA residents in particular.
prominent institutions, including hospitals like Apollo, Escorts and Holy Family. But disregarding these habitations of birds and humans and a number of binding guidelines from multiple state agencies and Supreme Court directive, the plant has deployed unapproved and untested Chinese technology for power generation from burning the garbage unmindful of its human and environmental cost due to emissions of pollutants like persistent organic pollutants and heavy metals. This has serious health and environment implications for the residents of National Capital Region (NCR) in general and Okhla and NOIDA residents in particular.
13. It is noteworthy
that transboundary air pollution from plant is adversely affecting Delhi's Okhla vegetable market and UP's NOIDA areas. South Delhi's residents in Okhla face toxic dust as Jindal's waste
based power plant in Sukhdev Vihar, Okhla spews out large clouds of thick
emissions. Residents are left choking and spluttering and suffered severe eye
irritation in Sukhdev Vihar which is barely 100 metres from the plant.
Much of Sukhdev Vihar, Hazi colony, Gaffar Manzil and adjoining colonies
including Jamia Milia Islamia and hospitals remains blanketed by soapy brown
ash which had to be cleaned off floors, cars and even trees and shrubbery. The
plant is amidst 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.
14. This plant has
violated all the rules in the rule book. The polluting potential of a 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.
15. 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 the Union Minister of Environment & Forests pursuant to his site
visit of the plant. It is noteworthy that the Hon'ble Minister
had written to the then Chief Minister,
NCT of Delhi underling that the plant is functioning in
violation of environmental regulations.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. 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 Hon'ble 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. It is
relevant to take note of an order of Union Ministry of Renewable Energy (MNRE)
order in this regard. It reads: "Projects for power generation from MSW
through a two-stage process involving production of RDF by processing of MSW
and it's combustion for generation of power are proposed to be taken up in a
fast track mode. ...The developers will be selected on the basis of a bid for
minimum amount of financial assistance (or 'viability gap' funding) within an
overall ceiling of Rs 1.50 crore per MW." 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.
20. Hon'ble 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 Hon'ble Court's order.
21. It must be
recalled that Delhi Government had falsely claimed in the
Hon'ble High Court that it was one of the five projects cleared by Hon'ble
Supreme Court leading to dismissal of petition filed by residents but when the
Hon'ble 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 Shri A S Chandiok the then Additional Solicitor
General. Hon'ble 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 Shri A.S. Chandihok, the bench
headed by the Chief Justice, Hon'ble 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."
22.
The attached certificate
of Host Country Approval dated 15th May, 2007 given by National CDM
Authority to the project of The Timarpur Waste Management Company Pvt. Ltd.
(TWMCPL), a subsidiary of Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd.
(IL&FS) is quite relevant and merits your attention. This approval was
given after is consideration by the NCDMA on 30th March, 2007.
It was confirmed based on submissions by the company prior to approval and
prior to registration with UNFCCC’s CDM Executive Board that “The project
contributes to Sustainable Development in India”. 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.
23.
The country
approval laid down certain specific conditions which are required to be
complied with “during the lifetime of the project”. The approval conditions
stated 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.”
24.
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 conditions have been violated.
25.
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.
26.
There is an inexcusable
admitted deviation from approved and validated technology in the matter of
Clean Development Management (CDM) project by
Delhi’s 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.
27.
The company
submitted the 52 -page long PDD (Version 2) to the Board as CDM project
activity to earn carbon credit. The project got listed before the board on 23rd
May, 2006, and the CDM Executive Board invited public comments until 21st
June, 2006. Subsequently, there was 90- page long Version 04 of PDD of The
Timarpur –Okhla Waste Management Company Pvt Ltd’s (TOWMCL) dated 6th
September, 2007. Prior to that there Version 03 of PDD dated 28th
July, 2006. Then there was PDD Version 03.1. The initial request for
registration was submitted on 3rd March, 2007 by Designated
Operational Entity (DOE) through Mr Siddarth Yadav of Société Générale de
Surveillance (currently known as SGS), a Switzerland and United Kingdom based
DOE. The project got registered on 10th November, 2007.
Prior to the registration I had submitted elaborate comments in this regard.
The same is available on UNFCCC’s CDM Executive Board’s website at http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/Validation/DB/9JGKQMHTCBE61J51WVVT1AIH7DUW0H/view.html Subsequently, the 55 -page long PDD
Version Number 9 titled Version 04. 1 dated 30th January, 2014 was
published on the Board’s website following request for post-registration
changes.
28.
As per
Validation opinion for post registration changes provided by Det Norske Veritas
(DNV), an Oslo based international certification body and classification
society dated 27th May, 2014, new “parameters are now proposed to be
additionally monitored consequent upon the technology adopted” by
TOWMCL. These include monitoring of average additional
distance travelled by vehicle for ash
and inert disposal compared to the baseline in year y is now
proposed to be monitored to account for the project emission.
It also includes monitoring of “Amount of RDF used outside the project boundary
is proposed to be monitored based on the sale invoice. There
will normally be no sale and the
parameter is used for project emission calculations.”
It adds, “Weight of RDF sold offsite for
which no sale invoices can be
provided is also monitored .The quantity will be monitored
based on weigh bridge report and is being monitored to account for
project emission.” It states “Monitored content of
methane in the stack gas from RDF
combustion in year y. This will be monitored by third party
on quarterly basis. This parameter is being monitored to account for
project emission.” It submits “Monitored content of nitrous oxide in the stack
gas from RDF combustion in year y. This will be monitored by third party on
quarterly basis. This parameter is being monitored to account for project
emission.”
29. Every claim made about RDF is misplaced
and an exercise in glaring misrepresentation of facts. It is not surprising
that residents have noticed how efforts are on within the premises of the plant
to set up a structure in one corner to justify claims regarding RDF.
30. The Validation Opinion informs that
as per the registered PDD Version 1 , the
project activity was envisaged to be
developed at two different location, i.e. Timarpur and Okhla
with 650 Tonne Per Day (TPD) of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) to be process
ed at the Timarpur site while 1300 TPD of MSW was envisaged to be
processed at Okhla site for the preparation of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF).
Additionally, 100 TPD of green waste (waste collected from garden like dry
leaves, cut grass, etc) was to be utilized at Okhla site biomethanation plant
for generation of biogas. It was also envisaged to generate
electricity to the tune of 16 MW
by utilizing the RDF produced from
the project activity. However while implementing
the project, Timapur site was not
considered and the total quantity of waste of
2050 tonnes per day is now processed at Okhla site. The
green waste is not being provided as
envisaged earlier but additional 100 TPD of
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is being provided that is total
of 2050 TPD of waste is provided for processing. Due to the
technology adopted it is estimated that from the RDF produced 20.9 MW of
power can be generated instead of 16 MW envisaged due to better
efficiency consequent to preheating of the input waste.
The biomethanation and composting plants were also not required due to change
in design as green waste not being made available for processing. The reference
to “the technology” is to city refuse incinerator of China’s Hangzhou Boiler
Group Co., Ltd that engages in the installation of boiler.
31. As per DNV’s opinion the start date of
the project activity was revised to 27th
November, 2009 which was the date of issue of purchase order for the boiler which
is the first order issued. DNV from the documents verified /3//5//7/ and
from the site visit interviews / 24 / can confirm that
the changes in the project activity
occurred after the registration of the project
activity on 10th November, 2007. The verified documents refer
to Dalkta Energy Services Ltd : Detailed project report dated 4 May 2009,
Timarpur-Okhla Waste Management Company Private Ltd.: Board resolution on
adopting new technology dated 24th June, 2009 and Timarpur – Okhla
Waste Management Company Private Ltd.: Contract for supply Plant and
Machinery with Hanzhou Boiler Group dated 27th November, 2009
respectively.
32. It is recorded that “DNV from the
interviews and perusal of documents find that, the project participant
was not allocated the green waste that was assured earlier and the waste
supplied to the project activity was to be
processed at two locations Okhla and
Timarpur. Subsequently the waste is being processed only at Okhla only
/3//6//9/. This resulted in changes in the project design.”
33. It is also recorded that “from the
verification of documents /3//5//7//11//, DNV can conclude that the
changes were not known to the project participant prior to the
registration of the project activity.” The verified documents refer to Dalkta
Energy Services Ltd: Detailed project report dated 4 May 2009, ICICI Bank :
Enhanced loan sanction letter dated 24 December 2009 and Delhi Pollution
Control Committee : Consent letter T - 12/458TO465 dated 20/11/12 respectively.
34. Responding to the comments received
from stakeholders, the CDM Executive Board’s Form asked the project proponent
the question:”What are the measures taken by the Company regarding the
environmental aspects?” mentioned in the PDD. The project proponent replied,
“The Project Proponents
has taken adequate measures regarding the
environmental aspects and the SPM, SO2 & NOX levels will comply with all
the regulatory requirements. Further Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
study for the project has also
been carried
out. The Environment Management
Plan (EMP), Risk assessment and Disaster Management
Plan (DMP) in the EIA report
takes care of all the environmental issues.”
35. The 31- page long
report of CPCB communicated on 22nd
March, 2012 on the Timarpur - Okhla Waste
to Energy Incinerator Plant of Shri Prithivraj
Jindal‟s JITF Urban Infrastructure Limited
(Jindal Ecopolis) is based on three
meetings of the Technical Experts Evaluation Committee
held on 26th April, 2011, 11th August, 2011
and 22nd September, 2011. This report underlined that that the
operation of Jindal's waste burning based power plant is an act of
environmental lawlessness in the heart of the national capital.
36. The Terms of Reference (ToR) given by
Union Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF)'s Experts Appraisal
Committee (EAC) to the project in question specifically demanded "Disaster
Management Plan" (DMP) but the CPCB’s Technical Evaluation Committee
constituted by the then Union Minister of Environment & Forests headed by
Chairman, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) observed in its report that
the DMP plan has not been prepared.
37. The Jindal’s power plant in Okhla 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.
38. The plant is using untested and
unapproved Chinese incinerator technology, a fact noted in the report of the
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) 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, Delhi
underling that the plant is functioning in violation of environmental
regulations.
39. The plant in question is situated in a
green belt. It is 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 Ministry of Environment
& Forests. 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. That now a bizarre situation has emerged because
the arguments for Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) incineration technology that was
advanced by the company before the MoEF and the UNFCC’s CDM Executive Board 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 in the presence of two officials only as per records. It was CPCB’s
report that disclosed that Jindal’s power plant was using an unapproved
technology.
40. Having studied the details of the
project and its impacts, I submit that EAC ought to devise ways to stop
such hazardous projects from being designated as sustainable
development and CDM projects. It is also submitted that for
a project to qualify as climate change
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.
41. The Project Design Document
(PDD) deliberately chose not to mention emission of dioxins and heavy metals
and thus does not mention the method to deal with such emissions. Dioxins are
the most lethal Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) which are associated with
irreparable environmental health consequences. It did not reveal that
the project is situated in an ecologically fragile and a densely
residential area adjoining a bird sanctuary and a wetland.
42. The TOWMCL’s agreement with
Siemens Ltd: Agreement NG2010 dated 7th
May, 2010 for design, engineering, supply and erection
of turbine generator merits scrutiny besides agreement with Waxi
Guolian Huaguang Power Engineering Co Ltd:
Agreement for supply of machinery, equipment for flue
gas system and Hangzhou Boiler Group Co: Contract
NG2009 - 311 dated 24 Dec ember 2009 for supply
of boiler to ascertain whether pre-existing general and specific conditions as
envisaged in the Environmental Clearance certificate for the project based RDF
technology has been complied with. All these official documents besides the
CPCB report clearly indicate that Chinese boiler technology based waste to
energy plant has violated every rule in the rule book.
43. The first Environmental Clearance to
this plant was granted 21st March, 2007 for 15 MW under the
signature of Dr A Senthil Vel, Additional Director, MoEF pursuant to directions
from Shri R Chandramohan, Joint Secretary, MoEF. The minutes of the 46th
meeting of Expert Appraisal Committee on Infrastructure Development and
Miscellaneous Projects held on 16th November, 2006 reveals that
TOWMCL, the project proponent when it was part of IL&FS Limited (when Shri
D K Mittal, IAS was its Managing Director) had submitted that it will set up a
Refuse Derived Fuel technology facility based on Department of Science and
Technology-TIFAC technology with a capacity to process 1300 tons per day of MSW
to produce 15 MW of power. Subsequently, TOWMCL requested Dr A Senthil Vel “to
issue make suitable amendments in the EC to reflect the capacity of the
proposed plant as 16 MW instead of 15 MW. The EC was amended for processing
1950 tons MSW by an order dated 9th May, 2007. In March 2011, TOWMCL again
sought an amendment to the EC after making submission for an additional 4.9 MW
before the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) for processing of 2050 tons of MSW.
The EC was amended again for 20.9 MW. Although these amendments happened no new
studies have been carried out to assess the impacts of the alteration in the
technology and the changes the installed capacity. Source http://environmentclearance.nic.in/writereaddata/Form-1A/EC/0_0_15_Jul_2013_151116420123-1-2006.pdf
44. In a glaring omission TOWMCL did not
disclose its Contract for supply Plant and Machinery with Hanzhou Boiler Group
dated 27th November, 2009 to the EAC.
45. It is noteworthy that even the initial
EC was granted based on a fake public hearing as per records. The public
hearing was conducted in Saket on January 20, 2007 instead of it being
conducted in Okhla area where the project was proposed. The advertisement for
the Public Hearing was made through two newspapers on 17th December, 2006. The
advertisement was titled “Public Hearing for environmental clearance to the
construction of proposed integrated municipal solid waste processing complex at
Okhla —adjacent to existing Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) Delhi.” It did not
disclose that it was a waste based power plant.
46. The public hearing Shri Mittal wrote at
least twice to Shri Chandramohan on 5th October, 2006 and 13th
October, 2006. It was “B category project promoted to A category because of
proximity to inter-state border & sanctuary (within 10 km). Hence Public
Hearing report sought.” The Public Notice for public hearing did not disclose
that the proposed plant in the residential area was a waste based thermal power
plant, it was advertized as “Integrated Municipal Waste Processing Complex”.
The attendance register revealed that there was virtually no attendance for the
public hearing. The fact is that the Public Hearing did not take place as per
the letter and spirit of Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006,
something which was admitted by the then Union Minister of Environment &
Forests in writing. Besides the project was subsequently sold to JITF Urban
Infrastructure Limited (Jindal Ecopolis), which took no fresh environment
clearance.
47. This plant is owned by Shri Prithviraj
Jindal who won an open tender in 2008 to build and operate the plant for 25
years at a project cost of Rs 240 crore. It is apparent that the owner has
ignored the disastrous environmental health consequences of plant’s
operations.
48. 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. It is noteworthy that a hazardous plant in Bhopal's
residential area that led to world worst industrial disaster in 1984 also did
not have any disaster management plan. This report made a shocking revelation
that although Hon’ble High Court has been hearing the case since 2009, the
project proponent did not inform the court about gross deviations from the
project design plan envisaged in the EIA report. As per the minutes of the
second meeting of this committee, non-cooperative approach of the senior
officials of Timarpur-Okhla Waste to Energy Incinerator Plant was “condemned”
on 11th August, 2011. Representatives of GTZ underlined that there
was lack of transparency with regard to environmental and health impact on the
neighborhood residents. It was also noted that the fugitive emissions and the
expected emission of Dioxins and Furans has not been quantified. The
characteristic of ash and required standards was not mentioned. Prof. T R
Sreekrishnan, Department of Biochemical Engineering and Biotechnology and a
member of the Committee stated that disposal option for incineration instead of
bio-methanation proposed for green waste is in violation of what was mentioned
in the EIA report of the company in question.
49. All subsequent reports by subordinate
officers of Chairman, CPCB are subservient to this report of the High Powered
Technical Experts Evaluation Committee headed by Chairman, CPCB. This report revealed
how illegal Chinese boilers are being used without any approval in Delhi’s
Okhla Waste to Energy project. The technical review by CPCB committee admitted
that efficacy of reciprocal stoker type boilers (in place of RDF) "is not
known for Indian conditions and requires to be verified." There is a
compelling reason to take cognizance of this report as the main report of CPCB.
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 Shri A B Akolkar from CPCB who is currently the
Member Secretary, CPCB.
50. A study of the first monitoring report
of the TOWMCL’s integrated waste to energy project in Delhi dated 17th
October, 2012 shows that facts were not verified on the ground and those who
were adversely affected by the project were not consulted. As a consequence
this questionable project managed to get Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs)
issued. The initial crediting period of the project was mentioned as 1st
April 2009 – 31st March 2019. Now it has been changed to 30th
March 2011 – 29th March 2021 and declared as fixed.
51. All these developments vindicate the
validity of my comments on the PDD which are available at this URL of CDM
Executive Board http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/Validation/DB/9JGKQMHTCBE61J51WVVT1AIH7DUW0H/view.html
52. 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.
53. Having studied the second monitoring
report of the project dated 15th October, 2015 and the relevant
pages on the website of the Board, it is learnt that as of 30th May,
2016, “CDM Issuance request” for CERs is awaited. As you are aware Issuance is
the instruction by the CDM Executive Board to the CDM Registry Administrator to
issue a specified quantity of CERs, lCERs, or tCERs for a project activity or
PoA into the pending account of the Board in the CDM registry, for subsequent
distribution to accounts of project participants in accordance with the CDM
rules and requirements. These reports for UNFCCC reference number of the
project activity 1254 are available on UNFCCC’s CDM Executive Board’s
website. EAC is ought to communicate its considered opinion based on the
above submissions to the National CDM Authority and recommend withdrawal of
host country approval given to the project in question.
In view of the
above facts and violations on numerous counts, I wish to request you to withdraw
the environmental clearance given to this plant because you have a legal and
moral obligation 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.
I will be happy to share more information and
relevant documents since March 2005 till date.
Thanking you in anticipation
Yours faithfully
Dr Gopal Krishna
Director
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi-110016
Mb: 09818089660, 08227816731
Tel/Fax: 91-11-26517814
Cc
Shri Arun Kumar
Mehta, Chairman, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)
Dr. Anuradha Shukla, Member, EAC on Infrastructure and
Miscellaneous Projects + CRZ
Ms. Mita Sharma, Member, EAC on Infrastructure and
Miscellaneous Projects + CRZ
Dr A.B.Akolkar,
Member Secretary, CPCB
Shri Vinod Babu,
-Senior Scientist, CPCB
Shri G. Rambabu,
Scientist, CPCB
Shri Kulanand
Joshi, Member Secretary, Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC)
Shri B.L.Chawla,
Senior Environment Engineer, DPCC
Annexures:
1.
The 31 page report of the Union Environment
Ministry constituted Technical Experts Evaluation Committee of Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) on the Okhla Waste to Energy Incinerator
Plant was communicated on
March 22, 2012.
2.
Proceedings of Public Hearing held on 20.01.2007
3.
Letter
from Holy Family Hospital
4.
MS Word version
of the letter is attached.
5.
RTI
Reply from Union Ministry of New & Renewable Energy
No comments:
Post a Comment