I was reminded of this by a large advertisement in leading newspapers by the Pollution Under Control (PUC) drive, Government of Delhi. It reminded the city's vehicle owners that failure to produce a valid PUC certificate on demand would lead to a Rs. 1000 fine for the first offence, and a Rs. 2000 fine for every subsequent offence. The Delhi government is understandably eager to reduce air pollution ahead of the Commonwealth Games.
But does enforcing this rule really help? Let's analyze and see.
A PUC certificate is valid for three months and costs Rs. 45. Therefore the government is effectively taxing each car owner Rs. 180 each year (and spending most of that money on the test) and perhaps 2-4 hours of his or her time. The time does not seem like a lot - but if you add up all the running around an Indian needs to do for his or her driving licence, ration card, passport, electricity bill, etc., the result is a very large number. The bureaucracy crushes our productivity.
My Civic is now more than 2 years old and has covered 25,000 km approximately. It's emissions numbers look like this:
The measured CO level is just TWO PERCENT of the limit. Similarly, the level of hydrocarbons is LESS THAN TWO PERCENT of the limit.
It is not just the Civic that gives these incredible numbers. My 15 year old Suzuki Esteem still gives very good numbers. In fact, most modern petrol cars will be well below the limits for the first few years or first 100,000 km of their lives. Given that there are at least ten or twenty lakh cars in Delhi that meet these criteria, we have perhaps Rs. 20 to Rs. 40 crores and millions of hours of productive time being wasted each year in enforcing the PUC certification for these vehicles.
And what of the cars that are at the edge of the emissions limits or over them - the cars that are diesel run, old, or used for commercial purposes? They often get PUC certificates too, by temporarily adjusting the engine, by bribing the vendor, and so on. I am not saying that the PUC certificates are useless, but this system has many holes.
Perhaps there should be random checking and the fines should be changed thus: Each time you are caught with emissions above the limits and no certificate, you pay a Rs. 2000 fine while if you are caught with emissions above the limits but with a valid certificate you pay Rs. 1000 (and the vendor who gave you the certificate is put on a watchlist). Wouldn't that ensure better compliance and lesser wastage of resources?
I can bet the Delhi air would be a LOT cleaner before the Commonwealth Games if this was the approach taken. Plus we would save a lot of time and money.
The current PUC system - computerized and with a webcam - was a great advance but it is time that we improve it still further.
3 comments:
Sir it is highly intelligent idea but if you want to let reach your voice to the relevent authority then what could be the standard procedure?
I would love to know the answer.
Sir, the idea of punishing even the defaulters with PUC (although a lesser amount), is a great idea. I would like to know your views as to why the Delhi government can’t take more stringent steps to solve the problem. The steps could include –
1. Charging a much higher price to the person whose vehicle crosses the critical limit. They could be forced to replace the old cars or get the engines properly serviced and then returning their money back (with a minimum fee charged as penalty).
2. The government can also ban certain outdated models which do not meet the pollution control norms
I think these steps could help control the pollution to a larger extent.
With Regards
Robin Singh Vasu
(Fall’09)
This is a typical scenario where no one cared to give a thought to the externalities of the decision to mandate the emission certificate. Personally, I am not a big fan of certifications; I see them more as a means of shifting liability having more spin and less substance. The problem becomes worse if there is no mechanism to monitor the certifying authorities. 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes'. We have seen numerous time how and why such certification efforts fail; mainly because the incentives are not correctly aligned. If Alice guards a system and Bob pays the price of failure, then such a system is bound to fail. If the certifying authorities have no incentive to be strict, they won't be. The incentive in this case (as you rightly said) should be a punitive measure against the certifier if the vehicle bearing their stamp is sub-par. Otherwise these certifiers have all the incentive to stoop as low as possible in order to get more business. The ensuing race to the bottom leads to an adverse selection where most of the certificates are below par.
Post a Comment