Fixing India’s air in five years

From vehicular pollution to construction dust, coordinated solutions exist. What's needed now is the Will t0 ACt

- 

There are easy problems, there are complex problems, and then there are the wicked problems.

The easiest problems are those where we know the precise issue, we know the solution, and it is easy to assign accountability. The wickedest of all problems are those where the problem is ill-defined, and, therefore, so are the solutions. But North India’s pollution problem is neither. While it is easy to measure and fix accountability, multiple stakeholders work against one another.

Fortunately for us, the political parties are explicitly united on reducing pollution. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had “halving Delhi’s AQI (air quality index) by 2030” as an election promise. And, even more fortunately for everyone concerned, the techno-economic-policy solutions to pollution are well known. So, then, where is the problem? Simply confusion on what to prioritise and how to do so.

There are two ways to solve any problem: The first is to analyse the causes and work from the bottom up by eliminating each of the underlying causal factors. The other is to identify the technological solution and determine how institutions and incentives can be aligned to enable the full rollout of the tech solution. This lays out a method for the latter.

Broadly, the pollution process is as follows: Economic activity gives rise to many emissions such as dust, nitrous or sulphur compounds, and particulate matter. These interact with weather conditions such as temperatures, humidity, and winds to increase, reduce, persist, or be removed from our immediate environment.

All cities and rural areas create pollution. Delhi seems worse than many other cities because of its unique weather conditions. In jest, a Muskian solution would be to place large jet engines at a height of 500-700 metres, sucking up the pollution over cities like Delhi and throwing it upwards to be blown away by stratospheric winds. But unfortunately — or perhaps fortunately — that’s not feasible.