India’s Water Availability: Insights from the Central Water Commission

GS 1: Geography: Water Resources

Why is it in the news?

• The 2024 study by the Central Water Commission (CWC), titled ‘Assessment of Water Resources of India’, estimated India’s average annual water availability from 1985 to 2023 at 2,115.95 billion cubic meters (BCM), offering valuable insights into the nation’s water resource potential over the years.

Methodology of Assessment

• The CWC calculated average annual water availability based on annual net runoff using several critical inputs, including precipitation, evapotranspiration, land use, land cover, and soil datasets. This assessment excluded the western tributaries of the Indus basin, namely the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers.

Some of the Key Takeaways

• The report highlighted that water availability varies significantly across river basins. The Brahmaputra (592.32 BCM), Ganga (581.75 BCM), and Godavari (129.17 BCM) basins had the highest water availability.
• On the other hand, Sabarmati (9.87 BCM), Pennar (10.42 BCM), and Mahi (13.03 BCM) recorded the least availability. The total annual water availability across all basins is 2,115.95 BCM.
• The latest figure surpasses the previous 2019 estimate of 1,999.2 BCM, which assessed water availability from 1985 to 2015. Earlier assessments, conducted using various methodologies, consistently found water availability to be below 2,000 BCM, with the earliest estimate from 1901-03 pegging it at 1,443.2 BCM.
• The current higher figure stems primarily from methodological improvements. The study incorporates Bhutan’s contribution to the Brahmaputra and fully accounts for Nepal’s contribution to the Ganga, unlike the 2019 assessment.
• It also considers all trans-boundary water entering India in the Brahmaputra, Ganga, and Indus (eastern rivers) basins.

Significance of the Assessment

• Such assessments are crucial for sustainable water resource management amidst challenges like urbanization, industrialization, and climate change. They also help calculate per capita water availability, a vital metric for determining water stress levels.
• The Falkenmark Indicator categorizes countries under “water stress” if per capita availability is below 1,700 cubic meters, “water scarcity” if below 1,000 cubic meters, and “absolute scarcity” if under 500 cubic meters.
• In 2021, India’s per capita water availability was 1,486 cubic meters, based on the 2019 estimate of 1,999.2 BCM. The 2024 figure, considering a projected population of 1.398 billion, raises this to 1,513 cubic meters, still below the water stress threshold.

Utilizable Water Resources

• The CWC’s estimates do not represent utilizable water. For instance, in 2019, while total water resources availability was 1,999.2 BCM, only 690 BCM of surface water was deemed utilizable.
• Smaller basins generally have a higher proportion of utilizable surface water resources, except for basins like West Flowing Rivers from Tapi to Tadri, Tadri to Kanyakumari, Sabarmati, and Mahi. The Brahmaputra sub-basin, in contrast, shows a minimal proportion of utilizable water.
• This assessment underscores the criticality of strategic water resource planning to address availability and usage challenges across the nation.

Beijing’s War Against Air Pollution

GS 3: Environment and Biodiversity: Tackling air pollution

Why is it in the news?

• Beijing, with an average Air Quality Index (AQI) of 144 in 2015, was as polluted as Delhi is today (Delhi’s AQI for 2024 averages 155). However, Beijing achieved a remarkable one-third reduction in pollution levels between 2013 and 2017 through a coordinated anti-pollution programme.
• Beijing’s efforts to combat air pollution began in 1998, laying the groundwork for the intensive measures implemented during its “war against air pollution.”
• Both Beijing and Delhi are capitals of emerging economies facing similar pollution challenges. The pollution sources and regional dynamics for Delhi today mirror those of Beijing in 2013.
• For Delhi, winter data highlights significant pollution contributions from neighbouring states in the National Capital Region (NCR). Like Beijing, Delhi requires a concerted regional effort to address air pollution effectively.

Beijing’s Anti-Pollution Strategies

Beijing’s 20-year anti-pollution programme (1998–2017) unfolded in three phases:

• 1998–2008: Laying the foundation for structural changes.
• 2009–2012: Scaling up efforts with tighter controls.
• 2013–2017: Aggressive measures, especially regional cooperation.

Key Sources of Pollution and Interventions

• Energy and Coal Combustion: Beijing replaced coal-fired boilers, introduced clean energy alternatives in power plants, and eliminated residential coal usage for heating.
• Transportation: Vehicles were retrofitted with diesel particulate filters (DPF), emission standards were tightened, and old vehicles were scrapped through subsidies. The city expanded its subway and bus networks and promoted public transport.
• Industrial and Construction Activities: Beijing enforced strict environmental regulations, modernized industrial processes, introduced green construction models, and implemented video monitoring of construction sites with penalties for violations.
• Regional Cooperation: During the final phase (2013–2017), Beijing coordinated with five neighbouring provinces to reduce regional pollution collectively, significantly improving ambient air quality.

Results Achieved

• By targeting specific pollutants—sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and PM2.5—Beijing recorded reductions of 83%, 43%, 42%, and 59%, respectively, between 2013 and 2017.
• These successes were attributed to meticulous planning, source-specific targeting, and robust financial investments, which increased sixfold within four years.

Lessons for Delhi

1) Improving Public Transport

• Delhi must prioritize an efficient bus-metro system. The Delhi Transport Corporation’s (DTC) fleet is inadequate, and metro fares remain high with limited last-mile connectivity. Measures like scrapping old vehicles through subsidies, creating cycling lanes, and introducing congestion charges can reduce vehicular pollution.

2) Transitioning to Clean Energy

• Delhi’s reliance on coal-fired plants needs to shift towards renewable energy. Subsidizing solar rooftops and integrating them into the grid could lower dependency on coal-based electricity.

3) Regional Collaboration

• Like Beijing, Delhi must collaborate with neighbouring NCR states to tackle regional pollution sources collectively, which is essential for meaningful progress.

4) Public Advocacy for Clean Air

• Delhi’s citizens must demand accountability and clean air from the government, resisting the normalization of poor AQI levels. Public pressure can prompt both state and central governments to act decisively.

Addressing Political and Structural Challenges

• Despite the availability of effective strategies, Delhi’s political inertia undermines action. The blame game between the Centre and State, in power for over a decade, exacerbates the issue.
• Meanwhile, air purifiers serve as private solutions to a public problem, leaving disadvantaged communities most vulnerable. To protect public health and ensure equitable access to clean air, urgent and coordinated government action is imperative.

Preparing for Disease X: A Global Threat

GS 2: Society: Global Health Preparedness

Why is it in the news?

• Disease X, a term introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2018, refers to a hypothetical pathogen capable of causing a global epidemic or pandemic. It represents an unknown threat that could emerge unexpectedly, highlighting the need for proactive preparedness to combat future health crises.
• The recent outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in December 2024, which has claimed over 400 lives, has reignited concerns about Disease X, underscoring the importance of staying vigilant against such unknown threats.

Disease X and the COVID-19 Pandemic

• COVID-19 is considered the first real instance of Disease X. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 as an unexpected pathogen led to a global pandemic, exemplifying the exact scenario that Disease X was designed to prepare for—an unforeseen health threat requiring rapid and coordinated global response.
• The concept of Disease X emerged after the 2014–2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa, which revealed significant gaps in global preparedness for large-scale health emergencies.

WHO’s Priority Pathogen List

• In response to the growing threat of emerging infectious diseases, the WHO developed a priority list of pathogens in 2018, identifying those with pandemic potential and insufficient preventive measures. This list includes diseases such as Ebola, Marburg, Lassa fever, Nipah virus, Zika virus, and Disease X.
• These pathogens were selected based on their potential for rapid spread, high mortality rates, and the need for urgent research and development of vaccines and treatments.

Understanding Disease X

• Disease X is not a specific disease but a placeholder for an unknown pathogen that could lead to a health crisis. It encompasses both “known unknowns”—threats we are aware of but cannot fully understand—and “unknown unknowns”—threats we have yet to discover.
• The potential causes of Disease X range from viruses to bacteria, fungi, parasites, and prions. Historical data shows that a majority of emerging infectious diseases have zoonotic origins, often linked to human activities such as deforestation, urbanization, and agriculture, emphasizing the need for vigilance against diseases that may emerge from wildlife.

Patterns in Emerging Diseases

• Emerging infectious diseases often share common patterns influenced by human activity. Factors such as environmental disruptions, climate change, and increased human-wildlife contact have heightened the risk of zoonotic diseases.
• Estimates suggest that over 1.7 million undiscovered viruses exist in wildlife, many of which could potentially infect humans. With global travel and trade expanding, localized outbreaks can quickly escalate into pandemics, as evidenced by the COVID-19 crisis.

Challenges in Predicting Disease X

• Forecasting Disease X is challenging due to the unpredictable nature of emerging pathogens. Zoonotic diseases remain the most likely source, but mutations, laboratory accidents, or bioterrorism also pose potential threats.
• Additionally, climate change is altering disease transmission dynamics, expanding the reach of diseases like malaria and dengue. While advancements in genomic sequencing and artificial intelligence are helping, predicting the exact emergence of Disease X remains uncertain, given the vast pool of unidentified pathogens.

Preparing for Disease X

• Preparing for Disease X requires robust global surveillance systems to detect new outbreaks early. Advances in genomic sequencing, artificial intelligence, and real-time data sharing are crucial for developing rapid diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines.
• Strengthening healthcare infrastructure, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, is vital. Initiatives like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) are working on platforms to rapidly adapt to emerging diseases, with the goal of developing vaccines and treatments within 100 days of identifying a new threat.

The Need for Global Collaboration

• Addressing Disease X will require unprecedented international cooperation. The WHO’s priority pathogen list and the proposed Pandemic Treaty aim to foster a unified global response to health emergencies.
• Pandemics do not respect borders, and fragmented efforts will be insufficient in tackling such elusive threats. Governments must work together to share data, pool resources, and ensure equitable access to diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines.

Conclusion

• The recent outbreak in the DRC serves as a stark reminder of the risks posed by emerging diseases. Disease X is no longer a distant hypothetical but an imminent threat requiring urgent action.
• Strengthening public health systems, investing in research and innovation, and fostering global solidarity are essential to preparing for the unpredictable and preventing the devastating consequences of future pandemics.
• Frameworks like the Nagoya Protocol, which promote equitable sharing of biological resources, could help ensure fair access to research and medical countermeasures, reinforcing the need for global collaboration to combat Disease X.

Nine Years After the Paris Agreement: A Critical Look

GS 3: Environment and Biodiversity: Paris Agreement

Why is it in the news?

• The Paris Agreement, finalized in 2015, aimed to combat climate change by limiting global warming to 5°C above pre-industrial levels.
• However, nine years later, the agreement appears increasingly ineffective, with global emissions growing by 8% from 49 billion tonnes to 53 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
• Global temperatures have risen from 1.1°C to 1.45°C above pre-industrial levels, and the 1.5°C threshold is expected to be breached in 2024.
• This leaves the core goal of the Paris Agreement seemingly out of reach, prompting growing frustration among developing nations, particularly small island states, who are exploring alternative approaches to address climate change more effectively.

The Kyoto Protocol vs. The Paris Agreement

• Before the Paris Agreement, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 was established with the principle of “differentiated responsibilities,” placing the burden of emissions reduction on developed nations while allowing developing nations to contribute based on their capacities.
• However, the rising economic power of China and the constraints climate obligations placed on developed countries led to efforts to dismantle the Kyoto Protocol.
• In Paris, the resulting agreement weakened the fight against climate change, as it shifted to a system where every country voluntarily committed to climate action, leaving developed nations with minimal obligations. This shift has led to global climate actions falling short of the emission reductions needed to prevent dangerous warming.

Progressive Weakening of the Paris Agreement

• Over time, provisions in the Paris Agreement have been weakened further to align with the interests of developed nations. A key example is the finance deal reached in Baku in 2024.
• Developed countries, which are legally obligated under the UNFCCC to provide financial support to developing countries for climate action, had pledged $100 billion annually starting in 2020.
• However, the new deal only raises this amount to $300 billion annually, but only from 2035. Given that developing countries need trillions of dollars per year for climate action, this shortfall undermines any hope for more ambitious global climate efforts.

Dwindling Trust and the Call for Legal Clarity

• The Paris Agreement faces further challenges with the potential return of Donald Trump to power in the United States, which is expected to exit the accord once again. This has contributed to a growing sense of distrust in the agreement, particularly among countries most vulnerable to climate impacts.
• In response, Vanuatu, a small island nation, has led efforts to push the UN General Assembly for a resolution asking the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to provide clarity on countries’ climate obligations.
• The ICJ’s advice is sought not only on the existing climate-specific legal frameworks under the UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, and Paris Agreement, but also in the context of broader international laws, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Supreme Court Ruling on the Places of Worship Act, 1991

GS 2: Polity and Governance: Places of Worship Act

Why is it in the news?

• The Supreme Court recently issued an order barring civil courts across the country from registering new suits challenging the ownership and title of any place of worship, as well as from ordering surveys of disputed religious places until further notice.
• The Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, emphasized that no new suits could be filed or registered, and existing suits should not result in any effective interim or final orders, including surveys, until the next hearing.
• The Supreme Court was hearing petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The law, introduced during the Ayodhya movement, prohibits the conversion of any place of worship and mandates the preservation of the religious character of places of worship as it stood on August 15, 1947.
• The law specifically exempts the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, which was already under legal proceedings at the time.

Impact of the Court’s Order

• The Supreme Court’s ruling affects both pending civil suits and any future cases. Civil courts are now barred from registering any new suits or issuing orders for surveys, including requests for reports from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which has been involved in several recent cases.
• Many of the civil suits have questioned the ownership of mosques, alleging they were constructed on the remains of Hindu religious structures destroyed by medieval rulers.
• The Court also highlighted that court orders in these civil cases could be challenged on constitutional grounds, particularly concerning secularism and the rule of law, even outside the scope of the Places of Worship Act.

Challenge to the 1991 Act

• The constitutional challenge to the 1991 Act remains before the Supreme Court, with petitions pending since 2020. These petitions argue that the law removes judicial review by retroactively halting claims from before the law’s enactment and preventing fresh claims.
• Petitioners also challenge the law’s arbitrary selection of August 15, 1947, as the cut-off date for determining the religious character of places of worship. In 2019, the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya case referred to the 1991 law as part of the “basic structure of the Constitution,” although the law was not directly challenged in that case.

Places of Worship Act: A Timeline

• 1991: The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act was enacted, stipulating that the religious character of a place of worship would remain as it was on August 15, 1947, with the exception of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.
• October 2020: The first petition challenging the Act was filed, with several others following, arguing the law was arbitrary, especially with its retroactive cut-off date.
• August 2021: Five women filed a suit in Varanasi seeking permission to pray at the Gyanvapi mosque.
• May 2022: The case reached the Supreme Court, where then Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed that a survey “may not necessarily fall foul” of the Places of Worship Act.
• 2022-2024: At least six suits were filed claiming the prior existence of Hindu temples at mosque or dargah sites, with surveys ordered in three of these cases.
• December 2024: The Supreme Court barred further survey orders, effective orders, and the registration of fresh suits.

Pending Suits on Mosque-Temple Disputes

Several civil suits related to mosque-temple disputes are currently pending in various courts, many of which involve claims that mosques were built on the ruins of Hindu temples:

• Shahi Jama Masjid, Sambhal: A suit filed in November 2023 claims the mosque was built on the ruins of a temple dedicated to Lord Kalki. The civil court had ordered a survey, which led to violence in November. The Supreme Court intervened, halting the proceedings.
• Atala Mosque, Jaunpur: A suit filed in May 2024 seeks to declare that the Atala Devi temple existed at the site, with a survey ordered. The Allahabad High Court is reviewing a challenge to the suit’s registration.
• Kamal Moula Mosque, Bhojshala Complex, Dhar: A petition was filed before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging an ASI order allowing Muslims to pray on Fridays. In March 2024, the High Court sought a scientific survey, which the Supreme Court later blocked in April.
• Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi: A suit filed in 1991 and later revived by five Hindu women seeking permission to pray at the mosque has led to several court orders, including surveys.
• Shamsi Jama Masjid, Budaun: A suit filed in 2022 by the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha claims that a temple to Neelkanth Mahadev once stood at the site, with the court currently hearing arguments on the suit’s maintainability.
• Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque, Delhi: A 2020 suit seeks the restoration of Hindu and Jain deities inside the mosque in the Qutub Minar complex. The civil court rejected the suit, citing the Places of Worship Act, and the case is pending.
• Shahi Idgah Mosque, Mathura: Multiple suits have been filed since 2020 seeking the removal of the mosque, with the Allahabad High Court rejecting a challenge to the maintainability of the suits in August 2024. The mosque committee has appealed to the Supreme Court.
• Teele Wali Masjid, Lucknow: A suit filed in 2013 claims the mosque was built after the demolition of a temple. The maintainability of the suit is under review.
• Ajmer Sharif Dargah, Ajmer: A 2024 suit claims evidence of a temple to Lord Shiva at the site, with the civil court issuing notices to various authorities.
• Malali Juma Masjid, Mangaluru: A 2022 suit by the VHP claims a temple-like structure was found beneath the mosque during renovations. The Karnataka High Court has ordered the trial court to decide on the suit’s maintainability.

India Doubles Nuclear Power Generation in a Decade

GS 3: Economy: Nuclear Power Generation Capacity

Why is it in the news?

• India has significantly increased its nuclear power generation capacity over the past decade. The Union Minister of State for Science and Technology recently informed the Lok Sabha that nuclear capacity grew from 4,780 MW in 2014 to 8,180 MW in 2024.

Growth in Nuclear Power

• Capacity Expansion: India now operates 24 nuclear reactors, with plans to triple capacity to 22,480 MW by 2031-32. By 2047, India aims for 1 lakh MW nuclear capacity, aligning with its net-zero goals for 2070.
• Key Initiatives: Growth is driven by approvals for 10 new reactors, increased funding, collaborations with Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), and limited private sector participation.

Technological Advancements

• Indigenous Innovations: Development of Bharat Small Modular Reactor (BSMR) and Bharat Small Reactor (BSR) for captive power generation.
• Fast Breeder Reactor: The Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) is nearing criticality, marking technological progress.
• Thorium Utilization: India is leveraging its abundant thorium reserves (21% of global reserves) through indigenous projects like ‘Bhavani’ to reduce dependency on imported uranium.

Broader Applications Beyond Power Generation

• Agriculture: Development of 70 mutagenic crop varieties to enhance agricultural productivity.
• Healthcare: Use of advanced isotopes for cancer treatment.
• Defense: Development of cost-effective, lightweight bulletproof jackets.

Challenges and Solutions

• India faces hurdles such as land acquisition, forest clearances, and equipment procurement. To address these:

1) Streamlined Processes: Simplified administrative procedures to expedite projects.

2) Stakeholder Collaboration: Enhanced coordination among government bodies, PSUs, and private players.

Conclusion

• With clear strategies and ambitious targets, India is poised to lead globally in nuclear energy. This expansion will strengthen India’s energy mix, bolster its clean energy commitments, and support long-term sustainability goals.