Local communities should be involved in curbing pollution in coal-bearing areas, health impact assessments also necessary: Report

Coal will continue to constitute a large part of India’s energy system for the next several decades, so environmental challenges will continue
Local communities should be involved in curbing pollution in coal-bearing areas, health impact assessments also necessary: Report
Local residents of Jharia in Dhanbad district taking coal.Photo: iStock
Published on

India’s coal-bearing areas should be assessed not only for environmental impacts but also for those on health, experts said at the launch of a new report recently.

This is important as coal will remain an important part of India’s energy system in the future too, despite the country moving towards non-fossil fuel, renewable sources through a ‘just transition’.

“We believe that all coal fields should be assessed not only for environmental impacts but also for the health impacts on people living in those areas,” said Shripad Dharmadhikari, founder-coordinator and researcher of non-profit Manthan.

“It is very important that after mining in coal areas, proper pollution-prevention (remediation) and environmental restoration is done at those sites,” Dharmadhikari said while releasing Regulating Coal Operations: Environmental and Social Impacts through the Lens of the National Green Tribunal by non-profit Vikalpa at the India International Centre on August 26, 2025.

The document analyses eight separate cases filed in the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on various issues in the coal sector. This included coal transportation, storage, fly ash management and wastewater disposal. The lead authors are Dharmadhikari and Kush Tanwani.

The report, released in a roundtable discussion, said coal and lignite-based capacity accounted for 73 per cent of India’s total power generation in 2022-23. It is expected to remain at around 50 per cent by 2031-32. Coal-based power generation will thus remain the dominant energy source in India for the next several decades.

Meanwhile, serious challenges will remain regarding environmental effects as thermal power plants directly cause air, water and noise pollution as well as land degradation. Coal mining also has indirect impacts, including degradation of water, land, forests and biological habitats, and social displacement.

Given these serious impacts, it is essential that coal-based power generation is done in a manner that does not negatively impact the environment and the health and livelihoods of affected communities. However, experience so far shows that this is a difficult task. Existing legal frameworks are designed to regulate these impacts. However, their implementation lacks effectiveness and often does not include the voices of affected communities.

According to the report, the cases filed in NGT clearly show that storage, transportation and uncontrolled dumping of coal resulted in serious dust pollution, contamination of water bodies and safety hazards. Coal trucks have caused poor road conditions and dust has led to PM10 levels being five times higher than acceptable limits (460 μg/m3).

Improper disposal of fly ash has resulted in poisoning of water bodies and agricultural land, depletion of soil fertility and loss of biodiversity. Incidents of ash dyke breaches have destroyed agricultural land and fishery resources. In Tamil Nadu’s Ennore, fly ash clogged the local river, canal and floodplains, leading to waterlogging and flood risk.

In addition, fly ash containing silica increased the risk of silicosis, cancer and neurological diseases. Cadmium and lead were found to cause high cancer risk in children and adults in the Ennore area. Heavy metals were found in fish, causing health impacts on consumers.

Traditional livelihoods were also affected. Agriculture, fisheries, animal husbandry were the most affected. The affected people had to bear the double burden of health expenses and income loss.

These cases filed in NGT also revealed regulatory failures. In many cases, there was a serious lack of pollution control and compliance with rules. For example, Ennore’s thermal plant manipulated emissions data and consistently polluted above permissible limits. Participation of affected communities was almost negligible, highlighting the lack of accountability.

The report found that the compensation imposed by the NGT on polluters was not properly calculated. For example, in the Mejia case, the joint committee calculated Rs 16.1 crore, which was increased eight times to Rs 128.56 crore. But NGT rejected it and fixed interim compensation of Rs 20 crore, of which Rs 7.92 crore was given to farmers and Rs 12.08 crore for restoration work.

Similarly, in the Chandrapur case, an interim compensation of Rs 5 crore and an additional penalty of Rs 1 crore every month was imposed. However, in many cases the compensation is pending due to challenges in the high courts. In some cases, the money did not reach the affected communities. The NGT has repeatedly reiterated the principle that compensation should be based on absolute liability.

At the same time, the report shows that in many cases, the NGT has considered environmental restoration and cleaning as mandatory. For example, in the Sonbhadra case, a joint committee was directed to make a plan to repair the damage caused by coal dumping. In the Mejia case, the joint committee was asked to fix the restoration cost and make a plan in consultation with the affected parties. An amount of Rs 12.08 crore was set aside for restoration.

The Ennore case sought a detailed plan for fly ash removal and mangrove restoration. The NGT repeatedly made it clear that unless a clean-up is done and the environment restored, the problem will persist. But in many cases, action was delayed due to lack of timelines and weak monitoring by agencies.

What are the recommendations?

In its recommendations, the report said there is a need for regular monitoring of the situation in coal-bearing areas following the NGT issuing orders. The aim should be to track changes in air and water quality, soil health, biodiversity and the well-being of affected communities. This is necessary to assess how effectively the tribunal’s orders are implemented as well as to understand the capacity and accountability of regulatory authorities in ensuring long-term environmental solutions.

The report further demands that an appropriate system needs to be established for such monitoring. It suggests developing a mechanism with pollution control boards to enhance their capacities and involve representatives from directly affected communities, civil society organisations and independent experts. Similar systems are also needed for other long-term processes such as post-approval monitoring, environmental restoration processes and health impact assessments.

The analysis recommends that affected communities, in particular, should be involved in restoration committees to incorporate traditional knowledge and effectively address the adverse impacts on their lives and livelihoods. Apart from this, representatives of civil society and independent experts should also be part of this mechanism.

A very interesting recommendation is also made in the report. It states that another possibility is that the tribunal may not settle the cases but keep the matter pending so that regulatory agencies can submit regular reports on follow-up action. There is a risk that the tribunal will be overburdened with duties it was not originally created to handle. But this may be an option that can be used selectively.

The recommendation states that restoration and clean-up should be actively pursued wherever coal operations have been or are ongoing. This should be a key mission for the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and regulatory agencies.

Similarly, health impact assessments should also be carried out in all areas where there are large-scale coal operations.

Also, an important element in just transition discussions and plans is the impact on the environment in coal operating areas, as well as on the situation of local communities, such as health, social, economic and livelihood impacts. This should be taken as a matter of urgency, and it should be ensured that these issues are properly addressed.

The report also emphasises that long-term studies and data collection are essential so that compensation and policymaking can be based on a solid foundation.

Related Stories

No stories found.
Down To Earth
www.downtoearth.org.in