Emissions should be judged by pollution tests, not model year
For some time now, there has been a sword of uncertainty hanging over vehicles that have crossed a certain age limit. In 2021, the Vehicle Scrapping Policy mandated the deregistration of private cars over 20 years old and commercial vehicles older than 15. Officials justified this policy as one aimed at reducing pollution and improving road safety.
In the past week, controversy was stoked in Delhi after the government issued an ‘end of life’ (EoL) fuel ban. What it meant was that the government had ordered that fuel would be denied to EoL vehicles that are older than 15 years and diesel vehicles that have been on the roads for over 10 years. Gurugram and other parts of the National Capital Region (NCR) are expected to follow suit by November. This was greeted by what the national media described as “public fury” and “widespread public anger.”
Obviously, the approach could cause quite a bit of dislocation, especially in a price-sensitive India where old vehicles (in fact, anything old) seldom go to waste but tend to be used for as long as possible. Critics of this approach have warned that while it could look economically progressive, it could lead to problems on the economic, social, and infrastructural fronts.
For one, not all older vehicles pollute equally. A well-maintained 15-year-old car could emit less than a poorly maintained seven-year-old diesel SUV. Such blanket bans ignore maintenance, usage, and even actual emissions. This policy is one of economic injustice. Millions of Indians in lower and middle-income brackets rely on older vehicles, including for a livelihood, as with rickshaws or scooters. Such a policy is also financially burdensome. Likewise, manufacturing new vehicles requires metal, plastics, even rare earths (particularly for electric vehicles), and energy.
Then, prematurely junking older vehicles creates waste and carbon debt. Emissions should be judged by pollution tests, not model year. Those opposed to the policy — obviously many — were quick to point out that Delhi’s policy was quick to create black markets, fake certificates, and harassment by traffic police. Following the controversy, the Delhi government ‘put on hold’ the contentious order.
There is no denying that pollution, both vehicular and otherwise, is an acute problem in the NCR. No solution will come about entirely pain-free. But the approach needs to be multi-pronged, sustained, and realistic. Suggestions have focused on massively upgrading public transport, integrating multimodal transport, and strict enforcement of emission norms. Cleaner fuels, congestion pricing, and low-emission zones (as part of vehicle management policies) and retrofitting older vehicles have also been proffered. Non-motorised transport (boosting walking and cycling) and designing cities to reduce commutes are being tried elsewhere. Incentivising citizens is another possibility: Goa too has its first citizen-led carpooling networks (on WhatsApp), though it’s not clear how effectively these work. The issue of reducing the pressure of freight and industrial traffic has also been raised, in Delhi’s case.
In the case of the ‘scrap older vehicles’ approach, the country can learn from how other countries approach the issue. Japan has strict and presumably corruption-free vehicle inspections every two years (even 20-30-year-old vehicles can pass if maintained well). Germany has low-emission zones in cities. The UK has annual tests on vehicles above three years old. France has its Crit’Air sticker system for city access. In most countries, vehicle condition and emissions determine its legality, not age. Goa should also try some model to reduce vehicular emissions. Learning from Delhi, the state could initiate steps to have a relook at the Vehicle Scrapping Policy.
