Populist bans on various diesel cars will not check pollution. Better public transport and ‘polluting tax’, will
A columnist with this newspaper is in a quandary. His family owns a Toyota Innova to ferry his school-going children around. The car which previously had a diplomatic numberplate has to be re-registered with a regular registration. However, due to the Supreme Court ban on the registration of diesel cars with engines above 2000cc, our friend is stuck with a perfectly serviceable car that is lying outside his house, and is considering buying another car.
The Supreme Court ban on the registration of cars with bigger diesel engines has been very peculiar. For example, the highly controversial Volkswagen Group engine that failed the emission tests that started off the argument against diesel globally late last year, the EA189 engine is in its ‘two-litre’ avatar is actually 1968 cubic centimetres in capacity. So, the sales of vehicles equipped with this particular engine have not been stopped. Of course, most global carmakers have multiple engines in their portfolio and can replace engines, but they want certainty.
let us get some facts clear. Despite advances in diesel engine technology, by its very nature of being a heavier hydrocarbon and if you remember your chemistry equations from school diesel pollutes more carbon. And because it has more impurities from the refining process, diesel also emits a higher level of nitrogen oxides (NOx) compared to petrol or gas powered vehicles. But this was always offset by the increased mileage from diesel engines, which came at the cost of the exhilaration of driving a petrol car.
Yet, advances in diesel engine technology have meant that in the past two decades, diesel engines have gone from being clattering, loud,and horrible to being incredibly refined. If you were to sit and drive a modern diesel car, you would really not be able to make out the fuel that goes into the car. While a big petrol-engine is still the best car to own for sheer performance, a modern diesel is considerably cleaner, quieter, and incredibly efficient. Just that it is not as clean as a petrol engine, no matter how it is tested.
However, when driving over longer distances or in a heavier vehicle, the advantages of a diesel cannot be ignored. And the bigger the car the bigger the engine needs to be, albeit advances in forced induction technologies means that turbochargers can achieve incredible power. For example. Formula 1 cars today run small 1600cc engines with turbochargers to produce upwards of 700 horsepower. Yet, turbochargers are not always the answer, particularly in a hot country like India, and the arbitrary 2000cc cut-off for diesel cars benefits some and disadvantages others. There is no rule of thumb that a smaller engine is ‘more polluting' than a bigger engine. And car dealers are working around the ban by registering cars outside the National Capital Region.
So, we need some diesel cars, vans, utility cars. People who want to buy big Sports Utility Vehicles with big diesel engines should be allowed to, but if they pay the requisite amount. But instead of arbitrary cutoffs, a more scientific and methodical system ought to be proposed and one where the auto industry, which in the cases of Volkswagen, Mitsubishi and even General Motors in India, cannot regulate themselves as they have unfortunately, shown themselves to be untrustworthy. So, initially at least, a court-monitored Government laboratory should conduct the tests.
It would do India well to copy the system from the European Union, where cars are taxed according to their carbon emissions. What must be remembered is that the same engine in different cars with different gearboxes and weights can have very different emissions. Unlike the European Union, the Indian auto-industry should also see their vehicles taxed on NOx and particulate emissions.
This can be done on a points scale, and should apply to all cars irrespective of the fuel they use. This can be done on a scale of hundred and the higher the score the more ‘pollution tax' the consumer will pay. Naturally, petrol car buyers will pay less tax, but those who buy ‘performance-orientated’ petrol cars will pay more. This could encourage the development of brand-new Gas-powered cars such as Audi's ‘g-tron' with much lower emissions and also encourage carmakers to sell these cars in India, which will be the world's third-largest auto market in the next few years.
Cars that use so-called ‘mild-hybrid' systems that use regenerative energy from braking and start-stop systems should have points deducted. Cars that are equipped with ‘full-hybrid' systems which will anyway score highly on such a system should be given even more incentive. And there will be ‘zero emission' electric cars that will naturally pay no pollution tax at all, but both electric and hybrid cars should be given further excise incentives over a long period of time to assuage the industry and allow them to make the investments needed.
Consumers will naturally gravitate towards cars that are cleaner if there is a penalty on buying polluting cars. And India should encourage more and more people to buy hybrids and electric cars so as de-addict at least those in cities from their hydrocarbon fix. Of course, the best solution is for cities to double the public transportation infrastructure. If the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court want a fix for now and the industry wants to start selling cars again, this is a solution that can work.
Some environmentalists want to declare a war on the motorcar, but 125 years since the first cars moved on roads, there is no doubt that on the whole, the internal combustion engine has been a force for good, and in a growing economy like India more people will buy cars as aspiration levels continue to rise. This does not mean that the industry should not be regulated for pollution and equally for safety.