🔬 Science, Policy & Sulfur: Are We Ignoring the Costs of Cleaner Air?

India’s coal-fired thermal power plants are a major source of electricity—but also of pollution, particularly sulfur dioxide (SO₂). SO₂ isn’t just a health hazard on its own—it contributes to acid rain, harming agriculture, aquatic ecosystems, and even human health.

To address this, the government had mandated Flue Gas Desulphurization (FGD) units in power plants back in 2015. But nearly a decade later, that requirement is being walked back. Why?

A scientific committee has now recommended that Indian coal has low sulfur content, and installing FGD units—costing nearly ₹97,000 crore nationwide—is unnecessary. Moreover, these units might delay supply, increase electricity prices, and create financial strain on both producers and consumers.

But here’s the catch: Should cleaner air and long-term sustainability be sacrificed for short-term cost savings? The article raises a crucial question—Should policy U-turns on public health be made without broader debate and transparency?

At a time when climate and air quality must be national priorities, are we ready to compromise on proven emission control technologies?

🧪 Science may guide decisions, but public health, transparency, and long-term impact must stay at the center.