© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The Indian Express’ UPSC weekly news express covers some of the important and burning topics of current affairs news from this week to help you prepare for UPSC-CSE. Try out the MCQs and check your answers provided towards the end of the article.
(The UPSC Essentials Indian Express is now on Telegram- Indian Express UPSC Hub. Click here to join our YouTube channel and stay updated with the latest updates.
Note: Catch the UPSC Weekly Quiz every Saturday evening and brush up on your current affairs knowledge.)
WHY IN NEWS?
— On May 11, 1998, India conducted three nuclear bomb test explosions at the Indian Army’s Pokhran Test Range. Two days later, on May 13, two more bombs were tested.
— Codenamed Operation Shakti (literally, “strength”), these tests would display India’s capability to build fission and thermonuclear weapons with yields up to 200 kilotons, helping India enter the highly guarded club of countries with capability to deploy nuclear weapons.
— However, Pokhran-II, as the series of tests is more popularly known, was also the culmination of a long journey that began back in the 1940s-50s – a journey replete with difficulties, with failure lurking at every corner.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Homi J Bhaba lays the foundations
— India’s nuclear programme can be traced to the work of physicist Homi J Bhaba. In 1945, after Bhaba’s successful lobbying of India’s biggest industrial family, the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research was opened in Bombay. TIFR was India’s first research institution dedicated to the study of nuclear physics.
— Post independence, Bhaba repeatedly met and convinced Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru about the importance of nuclear energy and the need for India to allocate resources for its development. Thus, in 1954, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) was founed, with Bhabha as director.
— While Nehru publicly opposed nuclear weapons, privately, he had given Bhaba a free hand to lay foundations for both civilian and military uses of nuclear technology. Under him, the DEA operated with autonomy and away from significant public scrutiny.
The threat of China and Pakistan
— A pivotal moment in India’s nuclear journey came after it suffered a crushing defeat in the 1962 Sino-Indian War and China’s subsequent nuclear bomb test at Lop Nor in 1964. Concerned about India’s sovereignty and the looming might of an unfriendly China, the mood in the political establishment towards nuclear weapons was slowly shifting.
— While new Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri first tried to attain nuclear guarantees from established nuclear weapons states, when such guarantees did not emerge, a different route had to be taken.
— Things were further accelerated, when in 1965, India went to war with Pakistan once again, with China openly supporting Pakistan this time. Effectively, India was surrounded by two unfriendly nations, and needed to take steps towards building self-sufficiency.
— However, the path towards obtaining nuclear weapons would not be easy.
The “discriminatory” NPT
— By the 1960s, discourse around nuclear dearmament and non-proliferation had shifted to the mainstream as the Cold War arms pushed the US and the USSR to great extremes. After China successfully tested its own bomb, there was increasing international consensus among the big powers regarding the need for a non-proliferation treaty.
— In 1968, the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) came into existence. The treaty defines nuclear-weapon states as those that have built and tested a nuclear explosive device before January 1, 1967 – the US, Russia (formerly USSR), the UK, France and China – and effectively disallows any other state from acquiring nuclear weapons. While the treaty has been signed by almost every country in the world, India is one of the few non-signatories.
— As per foreign policy researcher Sumit Ganguly, “The government of India refused to accede to the terms of the treaty because it failed to address India’s misgivings; specifically, the continued nuclear abstinence of the non-nuclear states was not linked to explicit reciprocal obligations by the nuclear weapons states.”
Pokhran-I and its aftermath
— By the 1970s, India was capable of conducting a nuclear bomb test. Bhaba’s successor at the DAE, Vikram Sarabhai, had worked to significantly broaden India’s nuclear technology and now the question was more of political will, especially in context of a global order extremely wary of nuclear proliferation.
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi visits Pokhran, the site of India’s first nuclear bomb test in Rajasthan. (Express Archive Photo)
— Indira Gandhi took over the country’s reins from Shastri after his sudden death in 1966. Once considered a puppet in the hands of senior Congress leadership, she would soon show her mettle, leading India through another testing war against Pakistan in 1971 and winning an overwhelming mandate in the following elections.
— On May 18, 1974, with support from Indira, India carried out its first nuclear test at the Pokhran test site. Pokhran-I, codenamed Operation Smiling Buddha, would be billed as a “peaceful nuclear explosion”, with “few military implications”.
— However, the world was not willing to buy India’s version of the story. There was near-universal condemnation and countries like the US and Canada imposed significant international sanctions on India. These sanctions would be a major setback for India’s nuclear journey, and majorly decelerate its progress.
The period between the two tests
— Beyond international sanctions, India’s nuclear journey was also hobbled by domestic political instability.The Emergency of 1975 and Prime Minister Morarji Desai’s opposition to nuclear weapons brought the programme to a grinding halt. However, clamour for developing nuclear weapons picked up once again in the 1980s, as reports on Pakistan’s rapidly progressing nuclear capabilities emerged.
— In 1983, the Defence Research and Development Organisation’s (DRDO) funding was increased and Dr APJ Abdul Kalam was put in charge of India’s missile programme. That year, India also developed capabilities to reprocess plutonium to weapons grade. Furthermore, throughout the decade, India exponentially increased its plutonium stockpiles.
— Early 1990s brought with them increased pressure to quickly develop nuclear weapons. With the fall of the USSR in 1991, India lost one of its biggest military allies, since the time Indira Gandhi had signed a 20-year security pact with it in 1971. Furthermore, the US continued to provide military aid to Pakistan despite its own misgivings with its nuclear weapons programme. Finally, discussions regarding a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) were also underway in the UN (it would be finalised in 1996, India did not sign it).
— For India, it felt like its window of opportunity was fast closing. Thus, in 1995, then Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao permitted the preparations for carrying out a nuclear test in December 1995. However, logistical and political reasons pushed back the tests further.
Pokhran-II: projecting India’s strength
— After a few years of domestic turmoil when the political will to conduct nuclear testing was wanting, in 1998, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) led by the BJP came to power under the leadership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. One of the key promises in its manifesto was to “induct nuclear weapons” into India’s arsenal.
— In March 1998, Pakistan launched the Ghauri missile – built with assistance from China. Two months later, India responded with Operation Shakti. While the 1974 tests were ostensibly done for peaceful purposes, the 1998 tests were the culmination of India’s nuclear weaponisation process. Consequently, the Indian Government declared itself as a state possessing nuclear weapons following Pokhran-II.
— While the tests in 1998 also invited sanctions from some countries (like the US), the condemnation was far from universal like in 1974. In context of India’s fast-growing economy and market potential, India was able to stand its ground and thus cement its status as a dominant nation state.
(Source: 25th anniversary of Pokhran-II: India’s journey to become a nuclear power by Arjun Sengupta )
Point to ponder: India must maintain nuclear sobriety. Comment.
1. MCQ:
Which of the following operation was aimed at displaying India’s capability to build fission and thermonuclear weapons?
(a) Operation Meghdoot
(b) Operation Shakti
(c) Operation Pawan
(d) None of the above
WHY IN NEWS?
— A panel formed by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas has recommended a ban on the use of diesel-powered four-wheel vehicles by 2027 in cities with a population of more than 1 million, and instead transition to electric and gas-fuelled vehicles.
— The Energy Transition Advisory Committee, headed by former petroleum secretary Tarun Kapoor, has also recommended that city transport should be a mix of Metro trains and electric buses by 2030.
“Diesel-driven 4-wheelers may be eliminated as soon as possible. Therefore, a ban on diesel-powered four-wheelers in all Million Plus cities and all towns with high pollution has to be enforced in five years, i.e. by 2027,” the report says. Also, “commercial vehicles may transition to LNG in the short term”, and “no diesel city buses addition be allowed in urban areas, to drive towards transition towards clean fuel urban public transport in about 10 years”.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
What is the background of this proposal?
— The panel’s recommendations come in the wake of the government’s stated aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to produce 40 per cent of its electricity from renewables as part of its 2070 net zero goal. Diesel currently accounts for about 40 per cent of India’s petroleum products consumption, according to estimates by the Petroleum Planning & Analysis Cell.
— The proposed ban will have a significant footprint — a large number of cities in India have more than 1 million people, and include not just the metropolitan centres, but also smaller towns and cities such as Kota, Raipur, Dhanbad, Vijayawada, Jodhpur, and Amritsar.
Who makes diesel cars in India?
— Maruti Suzuki, the country’s largest passenger vehicle manufacturer, stopped making diesel vehicles from April 1, 2020, and has signalled that it does not have plans to re-enter this segment.
— The diesel engine is, however, part of models sold by Hyundai and Kia, and Toyota Motor’s Innova Crysta range. Tata Motors, Mahindra, and Honda have discontinued production of 1.2-litre diesel engines; diesel variants are available only for 1.5-litre or higher engine capacity.
— Since 2020, most carmakers have taken significant steps towards deleveraging their diesel portfolios. As a result, the contribution of passenger vehicles to overall diesel vehicle demand has fallen to just 16.5 per cent, compared to 28.5 per cent in 2013.
What is the issue with the proposal?
— It is not yet clear how the proposal for a ban, if accepted, will unfold and how practical it would be to implement. This is especially true in the case of medium and heavy commercial vehicles that are used for the transport of goods on highways, and for buses plying in most Indian cities, where diesel is the mainstay. Even if the ban on diesel for commercial vehicles were to have a longer transition time, significant disruption could still happen.
— Around 87 per cent of diesel fuel sales are in the transport segment, with trucks and buses accounting for about 68 per cent. Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Haryana make up almost 40 per cent of the diesel sold in India. While it seems easier at the moment to convert diesel trucks to compressed natural gas (CNG), there are certain limitations — including CNG being used for shorter distances, and its lower tonnage carrying capacity.
— Also, many auto industry players argue that carmakers having a presence in the diesel segment are already in compliance with current emission norms, and have invested heavily to transition their diesel fleet from BS-IV to BS-VI emission norms.
What is the reason people prefer diesel vehicles?
— The higher fuel economy of diesel engines over petrol powertrains is one factor. This stems from the greater energy content per litre of diesel, and the inherent efficiency of the diesel engine.
— Diesel engines do not use high-voltage spark ignition (spark plugs), and thus use less fuel per kilometre, as they have higher compression ratios, making it the fuel of choice for heavy vehicles.
— Also, diesel engines offer more torque (rotational or turning force), and are less likely to stall as they are controlled by a mechanical or electronic governor, thereby proving to be better for haulage.
Why are carmakers moving away from diesel?
— The higher compression ratio of diesel engines means there are increased emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which is one of the main drawbacks of diesel engines versus petrol. The biggest blow for diesel, though, has been an external trigger — the Volkswagen emissions scandal, which led to an increase in the negative perception against diesel across markets, including India.
— Also, the reason why Maruti Suzuki and other carmakers announced an exit from the diesel segment was the rollout of the new BS-VI emission norms from April 1, 2020, and the prohibitively high cost of upgrading diesel engines to meet the new standard. The government’s decision to leapfrog directly from BS-IV to BS-VI is the reason carmakers such as Maruti Suzuki cite for the unviability of retaining diesel in their portfolio.
Didn’t petrol engines too need upgrades as a result of the shift to BS-VI?
— While petrol vehicles needed upgrades for this transition, these were limited to catalysts and electronic control upgrades. But for diesel vehicles, the upgrades were more complicated and entailed higher costs. Carmakers had to put three pieces of equipment — a diesel particulate filter, a selective catalytic reduction system, and an LNT (Lean NOx trap) — to meet the BS-VI norms, all at the same time. This was vital to curb both PM (particulate matter) and NOx emissions as mandated under the BS-VI norms.
— For most carmakers, the economics of the conversion simply did not make it worthwhile to continue with the diesel option after the transition to BS-VI. “For us, diesel is completely out… We did study the market, but we found that it didn’t make sense given the future regulatory environment, the cost would have been really high and it just didn’t make sense,” CV Raman, chief technology officer, Maruti Suzuki India had told The Indian Express in an interaction in March.
What about the buyers of diesel vehicles?
— There is the issue of the price of diesel, and consequently, of running the car. The Indian carbuyer’s romance with diesel powertrains lasted nearly a decade, with diesel cars accounting for 48 per cent of passenger vehicle sales in the country in 2013. The main reason was the sharply lower price of diesel as compared to petrol — a yawning Rs 25 per litre at its peak.
—But this changed when the decontrol of fuel prices started in late 2014. The price difference has since come down to around Rs 7 per litre — the closest the two fuels have been in price since 1991. Consequently, diesel cars accounted for less than 20% of overall passenger vehicle sales in 2021-22, less than half the share they had five years ago.
What is the upshot, overall, of this proposal?
— A move towards a phasing out of diesel — and ultimately petrol as well — vehicles is in keeping with action by most federal governments across the world.
— In the case of India, however, automotive experts foresee difficulties in implementing a total ban on diesel because, (a) carmakers — and oil companies — have invested heavily in transitioning to BS-VI and all that investment could go down the drain if a complete ban were to be implemented and; (b) in the commercial vehicles segment, where diesel penetration is very high and alternative fuels options such as electric vehicles, CNG, liquified natural gas (LNG), and hydrogen are still only being explored, and a total ban would cause serious disruption.
— The Energy Transition Advisory Committee report has said that “LNG has the potential to replace both diesel and CNG in heavy-duty vehicles and thereby reduce GHG emissions. Its push in both medium and heavy-duty vehicles, despite cost constraints and higher payback periods, can be a gamechanger for the Indian logistics market”, alongside a recommendation for an EV push and leveraging hydrogen as a motive fuel.
— Automakers have consistently maintained that the government’s approach should be technology-agnostic, and that interventions should be restricted to prescribing stringent operational standards, including emission norms. If a particular technology or fuel type is not able to meet the standards, then it should be phased out, rather than proposing a complete ban on a technology platform, an executive with a car company said.
— Oil marketing companies claim that emission standards under BS-VI have necessitated oil refineries to substantially reduce the level of sulphur in diesel, and that the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has brought out the specification for “diesel with 7 per cent biodiesel”, which further lowers the emission footprint of diesel.
(Source: What a total ban on diesel vehicles could mean in India by Anil Sasi)
Point to ponder: There should be no diesel city buses addition in urban areas in about 10 years, the panel which submitted its report to the government in February this year, said. Discuss.
2. MCQ:
What is the reason people prefer diesel vehicles?
1. They offer more torque (rotational or turning force), and are less likely to stall as they are controlled by a mechanical or electronic governor, thereby proving to be better for haulage.
2. Diesel engines use high-voltage spark ignition (spark plugs), and thus use less fuel per kilometre, as they have higher compression ratios, making it the fuel of choice for heavy vehicles.
Select the correct answer using the code given below.
(a) Only 1
(b) Only 2
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
WHY IN NEWS?
— India has set a deadline of 2035 to establish green hydrogen bunkering and refuelling facilities at major ports in the drive to cut its carbon footprint, the shipping ministry said in guidelines issued on Wednesday.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
— One of the world’s biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, India aims to cut emissions to net zero by 2070, and the shipping minister said three of its ports would initially have bunker facilities for green hydrogen and ammonia.
“Our target is to cover all 12 major parts with a green hydrogen bunkering facility by 2035,” Shipping Minister Sarbananda Sonowal told Reuters.
— The initial ports in the effort are to be Paradip in the east, Kandla in the west, and Tuticorin in the south.
“Financing required to turn these ports into green ports is under consideration,” Sonowal added.
— More than 200 ports dot India’s coastline, which stretches 7,500 km (4,660 miles), in addition to the 12 major ones, all together accounting for 95 per cent of its trade by volume and 65 per cent by value.
— Authorities want electricity to power at least half the vehicle and equipment needs of major ports by 2030, rather than diesel, and raise that figure further to 90 per cent by 2047.
“Whatever initiative we are taking aims to meet the 2070 goal of being a net-zero carbon nation,” Sonowal said.
— To meet the net-zero goal, at least 40 per cent of India’s electricity will have to come from renewables.
— To that end, the new shipping guidelines require ports to satisfy at least 60 per cent of electricity needs through renewables by 2030 and 90 per cent by 2047.
— Also, by 2030, all ports must achieve cuts of more than a fifth in energy consumption on each tonne of cargo versus 2023, the guidelines show.
— To boost use of gas, the shipping ministry wants ports to set up at least one liquefied natural gas (LNG) bunkering station by 2030 and electric vehicle charging stations in and around port areas by 2025.
What is green hydrogen?
— Green hydrogen is hydrogen gas produced through electrolysis of water — an energy intensive process for splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen— using renewable power to achieve this.
(Source: India eyes green hydrogen bunkering at major ports by 2035 by Reuters)
Point to ponder: Most efforts towards addressing climate change are concentrated on mitigating its impact rather than innovating enough to adapt to newer challenges. Do you agree?
3. MCQ:
Which of the following best describes/ describe the aim of the ‘Green India Mission’ of the Government of India? (2016)
1. Incorporating environmental benefits and costs into the Union and State Budgets thereby implementing the `green accounting’
2. Launching the second green revolution to enhance agricultural output so as to ensure food security to one and all in the future
3. Restoring and enhancing forest cover and responding to climate change by a combination of adaptation and mitigation measures
Select the correct answer using the code given below.
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
WHY IN NEWS?
—The annual mean temperature of the world is known to have increased by 1.1 degree Celsius from the average of the 1850-1900 period. But this increase, as can be expected, is not uniform. It varies in different regions and also at different times of the year. This single number denoting global temperature increase, very effective for communicating the dangers of climate change, is built on top of several layers of averages.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
—Temperature rise over land is much higher than over oceans. Over land, the annual mean temperatures have risen by as much as 1.59 degree Celsius since preindustrial times, according to the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Oceans, in contrast, have warmed by about 0.88 degree Celsius.
—The warming trends over the Indian region are very different. An assessment of climate change over the Indian subcontinent, published by the Ministry of Earth Sciences in 2020, said annual mean temperatures had risen by 0.7 degree Celsius from 1900. This is significantly lower than the 1.59 degree Celsius rise for land temperatures across the world. It could give the impression that the problem of climate change over India was not as acute as other parts of the world. But that is not entirely accurate.
Why is warming over India lower?
—The relatively lower rise in temperatures over India is not a surprise. Also, India is not a special case. The increase in temperatures is known to be more prominent in the higher altitudes, near the polar regions, than near the equator. This is attributable to a complex set of atmospheric phenomena, including heat transfers from the tropics to the poles through prevailing systems of air circulation. India happens to be in the tropical region, quite close to the equator
—A substantial part of the difference between the temperature rise over India and that over the entire world can be explained by understanding what the different numbers represent.
—The planet as a whole has warmed by 1.1 degree Celsius compared with preindustrial times. But, as mentioned earlier, this is just the average. Different regions have seen very different levels of warming. The polar regions, particularly the Arctic, have seen significantly greater warming. The IPCC report says the Arctic region has warmed at least twice as much as the world average. Its current annual mean temperatures are about 2 degrees Celsius higher than pre-industrial times. Some other studies suggest the Arctic could be warming even faster.
—Again, this happens because of a variety of reasons, including the processes mentioned earlier. Another prominent cause is what is known as the albedo effect, or how much sunlight a surface reflects. The ice cover in the Arctic is melting, because of which more land or water is getting exposed to the Sun. Ice traps the least amount of heat and reflects most of the solar radiation when compared with land or water. More recent research suggests that the higher warming in the polar region could be attributed to a host of factors, including the albedo effect, changes in clouds, water vapour and atmospheric temperatures.
—The warming in the polar regions account for a substantial part of the 1.1 degree Celsius temperature rise over the entire globe.
Higher warming over land than oceans
—However, the 0.7 degree Celsius temperature rise over India has to be compared with the warming seen over land areas, not the entire planet. As mentioned, land areas have become warmer by 1.59 degree Celsius.
—Land areas have a tendency to get heated faster, and by a larger amount, than oceans. Daily and seasonal variations in heating over land and oceans are usually explained in terms of their different heat capacities. Oceans have a higher capacity to cool themselves down through the process of evaporation. The warmer water evaporates, leaving the rest of the ocean relatively cooler.
—However, longer-term enhanced heating trends over land have to be attributed to other, more complicated, physical processes involving land-ocean-atmospheric interactions.
Impact of aerosols
—Aerosols refer to all kinds of particles suspended in the atmosphere. These particles have the potential to affect the local temperature in multiple ways. Many of these scatter sunlight back, so that lesser heat is absorbed by the land. Aerosols also affect cloud formation. Clouds, in turn, have an impact on how much sunlight is reflected or absorbed.
—Aerosol concentration over the Indian region is quite high, due to natural as well as man-made reasons. Due to its location in the tropics and the arid climate, India is no stranger to dust. But it also happens to be experiencing heavy pollution right now. Emissions from vehicles, industries, construction, and other activities add a lot of aerosols in the Indian region. A reduction in warming could be an unintended but positive side-effect.
Tropical location key
—A major part of India’s relatively lesser warming can be attributed to its location in the lower latitudes. As Bala Govindasamy, professor at the Centre for Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the Indian Institute of Science in Bengaluru, said, the fact that higher latitudes experience greater warming is now fairly well established in science.
—A majority of the global landmass is concentrated in the northern latitudes. In the tropics and along the equator, it is mostly oceans. Land areas are also prone to faster, and greater, heating. Because of both these reasons — that lands heat up more, and most of the land is located in northern latitudes — the average warming over global land areas has become more pronounced. For a country like India, located in the tropics, the deviation in temperature rise from the global average is not surprising.
—Aerosols could also be playing a role, but the extent of the impact is not very clear right now. As M Rajeevan, former Secretary in the Ministry of Earth Sciences, put it, aerosols have the potential to avoid 0.1 to 0.2 degree Celsius of warming over the Indian region. Tragically, this would mean that as we clean up our air, temperature rise could be faster.
—Incidentally, while the maximum temperatures over India have shown a significant increase since 1900, the rise in minimum temperatures has not been much. The rise in annual mean temperatures, therefore, has been mainly due to the increases seen in the maximum temperatures. The reasons for this are not very well understood. The climate system operates at a global level, and modelling it on regional scales introduces a lot of uncertainties.
(Source: Global warming- Why India is heating up slower than the world average by Amitabh Sinha)
4. MCQ:
In the context of mitigating the impending global warming due to anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide, which of the following can be the potential sites for carbon sequestration? (2017)
1. Abandoned and uneconomic coal seams
2. Depleted oil and gas reservoirs
3. Subterranean deep saline formalities
Select the correct answer using the codes given below:
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Share your views, answers and suggestions in the comment box or at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com
