_Apart from evading the fact that fine particles in diesel emissions kill, transnational carmakers are competing with each other to promote slow murder in India_ DESPITE knowing that SPM

levels are extremely high in Delhi and that fine particles from diesel exhaust kill, transnational auto manufacturers in India evade the issue of diesel exhaust completely and spread total

disinformation, especially as they know there is nobody in the government to question them. They are aware that as of now, there is no technology in the world that can effectively control

the levels of fine particles in diesel emissions. This becomes all the more ominous in the light of WHO’s conclusion that there are no safe limits of SPM. So there is no reason for adding to

particular. To find out what industry leaders feel about the high SPM levels in Delhi, researchers with CSE’s Right to Clean Air Campaign sent a questionnaire to the top brass of

transnational companies in India (see box: Needed: Answers). This was to act as an assessment of these corporate giants’ sense of moral responsibility and how they factor in environmental

and public health concerns while making their investment decisions. Almost all chief executive officers (CEOs) or other senior executives responded to the questionnaire. While each company

insisted that it was concerned about the environment, not one addressed the question of particulates properly. Every single one of them evaded this issue. The tone of the CEOs’ responses was

underlined by two factors: On the one hand, they want to maintain an image of concern towards public health. To this end, they do not hesitate to misinform and disinform. But their real

concern is to defend their investments, which they do by saying that diesel is an environment-friendly fuel. Deaths due to high SPM levels in cities like Delhi hardly figure on the agenda of

transnational carmakers. They want profits at any cost, as long as they are not caught breaking any rules. The dieselisation of the Indian private vehicle fleet is propelled by

transnationals, who are very careful about what they do back home. If governance in India is weak, it is clear that even these auto giants will take advantage of it. SOUNDS OF WANTONNESS

When asked why they are introducing diesel models despite being aware of the extremely high SPM levels in Delhi’s air, all the CEOs and senior executives of transnational car companies went

on the back foot, giving convoluted and confusing responses. In a telephonic interview with Down To Earth, Till Becker de Freitas, Mercedes-Benz India Ltd’s managing director (MD) and CEO,

said: “Our diesel cars pollute by far less than a lot of gasoline cars running on Indian roads.” While this may be true, it is beside the point. He added: “Besides, research world over has

shown that diesel cars are more environmentfriendly than gasoline cars.” This is totally untrue (see evidence cited earlier in the story). Responding to the same question, A Sankara

Narayanan, MD, Hindustan Motors, which has launched a diesel version of the Mitsubishi Lancer, said in a telephonic interview: “I would like to tell you that according to the emission norms

— Euro II — the suspended particulate matter is very close between diesel and petrol, which is not so in Euro I. And in Euro III, which will come later, it is almost the same. So it is not

that particulates are high in diesel, it is how you treat it in the engine.” For a MD of a major car company, Narayanan has all his facts mixed up. While Euro-I norms for particle emission

in Europe were exactly the same for petrol and diesel, subsequent particulate emission standards — Euro-II (1996), Euro-III (2000) or Euro-IV — have no norms for petrol vehicles because they

are considered to be very low. But there are standards for particulate emissions for diesel cars because they are way above those for petrol cars. This exposes the limitations of current

diesel technology in eliminating the problem of particles in the exhaust. It also shows that the senior executive of Hindustan Motors is either clueless about emission norms or he is

deliberately trying to misinform the public on this sensitive matter. Such disinformation may help him earn promotions and make profits for the company but it will certainly contribute to

the death count due to high SPM levels in Indian cities. The response of Ford India Ltd is a little more clever. In a letter faxed to Down To Earth, I Lewis of the company’s product

engineering wing, writing on behalf of Phil Spender, president and MD of the company, says particulate matter emissions from diesel engines fitted to the Ford Escort are below the Euro-II

standards mandated for Delhi. “In fact, they have always been low since initial launch,” he said. But he added, “It is not true that diesel engines are inferior to petrol in this respect (of

PM emissions)” — disinformation once again. Meeting emission norms may be good enough where air quality is better than what it is in Delhi. But in the particleoverloaded air of Delhi, every

additional diesel vehicle takes the residents that much closer to death and disease. But to hope that Ford appreciates this crucial fact is perhaps asking for too much. It is not merely a

matter of refusing to acknowledge the danger posed by fine particles in diesel exhaust. The car industry in India is too busy blaming the bad quality of fuel for the high levels of air

pollution. “In future, fuel quality will be a more important factor for setting automotive emission standards than technology... The perception that diesel-driven vehicles create more

pollution is wrong,” wrote B S Rathor, vice president, external affairs, Ford India Ltd, in an article published in The Indian Express on June 14, 1999. Clearly, this is an effort to

deliberately mislead people into believing that diesel is an environment-friendly fuel. “The buyer must be given a choice,” he added. But then the buyer should also be given a choice to

purchase very polluting but cheap vehicles. He/she does not have that choice because nobody has the right to kill. Nor do manufacturers. Hyundai Motors India Ltd has recently announced that

it will be coming out with a diesel car in October. When asked in an interview if it was possible for the company to say that it will not go in for diesel cars in view of the particulate

emission crisis in India, Yang Soo Kim, the company’s MD, said: “I don’t have deep knowledge about that. That is a very difficult question. We cannot answer that question.” That the dilemma

between maintaining a good public image and earning quick profits can confuse the top brass of car companies shows exactly how much concern corporate chiefs have for the environment and

public health. In what can be described as perhaps the most ‘politically correct’ response to the questionnaire, Toyota Kirloskar Motor Ltd’s deputy MD, K K Swamy, and H Tsutsumi,

director-engineering division, say: “Toyota is not only aware of ongoing research on environmental issues but is one of the leaders in such research.” Yet when it comes to launching vehicles

in the market, they say “a diesel engine vehicle, if emission aspects are taken care of, becomes an obvious choice at this stage”. Making the right kind of noises for the environment and

public health does not take away the fact that even a company like Toyota, known the world over as one of the ‘greenest’ carmakers, will not think beyond the profit motive (see box: Toyota:

Letting India down). ‘WHAT SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE?’ None of the CEOs could answer why they had not taken the available scientific evidence about diesel particles into consideration while making

their investment decisions. “Our cars are sold both in India and California, which has very strict standards. We use the same technology for manufacturing cars for both USA and India,” said

the Mercedes-Benz India CEO. What he forgot to mention while making these ‘subtle’ comparisons is that SPM levels in Indian cities are much, much higher than in California and that every

additional diesel car increases the number of tiny killers in the air. “Your questions are unfair and almost an insult to us as it’s our very strong point that we are very

environment-friendly,” the CEO added. But when Down To Earth sent a copy of the telephonic interview for approval, this statement was deleted. It is surprising to see how a few observations

based on scientific data can ‘insult’ a company that claims to be environment- friendly. However, the CEO did not counter the ‘insulting’ question with any scientific facts. And the fact

that the company has to go back on the word of its CEO is by itself very damaging to its reputation. “The scientific evidence available is well known to Ford,” said the written response by

Lewis. And what example of this scientific evidence do they put forth? “It should be noted as an example that diesel produces lower levels of CO than petrol....” Part of the scientific

understanding of Ford is to talk about carbon monoxide when we are asking about the danger from diesel particles. A good way to obfuscating the issue for those who do not know. A CHOICE TO

KILL? “Diesel engine vehicles are popular even in markets where diesel fuel is more expensive than petrol. Customers appreciate the economy and longevity of the diesel product,” said Ford

India. The Hindustan Motors MD said: “I cannot deny that (the company is taking advantage of the fuel pricing policy of the government) because all of us know that diesel is cheaper than

petrol in India....” He also stressed that diesel engines are more fuel-efficient than petrol. That diesel is more fuel-efficient than petrol is true. But does human life have to subsidise

this fuel-efficiency? It is quite clear that economic concerns completely override concerns of human health in the business plans of transnationals. Moreover, they argue that in their diesel

models, they are offering a choice to the customer. “We are not taking advantage of the Indian government’s (fuel) pricing policy as all over the world, diesel is less expensive than

gasoline. We have equal number of gasoline models too. People are free to choose among them,” said the Mercedes-Benz CEO. But who will help the customer make an informed choice? J H Kim,

Hyundai India’s executive director, marketing and sales, said that the company was introducing a diesel model “because the customer wants (it). We are offering the diesel cars to better

serve the customers”. Perhaps serving the customer in the Hyundai dictionary includes giving options that will lead to numerous deaths in Delhi. To say that the companies are giving

customers a freedom of choice in a matter of life and death, such as emission of diesel particles, is perhaps the greatest example of social irresponsibility. Moreover, the fact that an

expensive car like Mercedes- Benz runs on diesel, which is less than half the price of petrol in India and meant for pumpsets used in agriculture and transport of essential commodities,

makes a mockery of the transnationals’ claims that people have the right to choose. It would be a matter of choice for the customer if diesel was the same price as petrol. Here, the blame

rests on the Indian government’s warped fuel pricing policies. So, if the Indian government does not discourage the use of diesel in private cars, transnationals will continue to introduce

diesel models that are ludicrously cheaper to run than petrol cars. SPM levels will continue to rise. People will keep dying. The argument of giving the choice to the customer is also weak

because they are not even aware of the deadly effects of tiny particles in diesel emissions. All the transnational carmakers, who claim to care for the environment and public health have

done nothing to create public awareness about this danger. No customer is in a position to make an informed choice while selecting a car (see box: Making an informed choice). MORAL

RESPONSIBILITY: ‘WHAT? ME? WORRY?’ When asked if Mercedes-Benz was morally correct in making an investment that was going to affect public health, the company’s CEO in India replied: “I

don’t think we are harming public health otherwise by now our cars would have been forbidden in California.” If this was the case, then US carmakers need not have been bothered at all about

the extremely stringent emission norms that CARB has decided to implement 2004 onwards even when PM levels are so low. But that is not the case. There is a clear recognition in the US

industry that unless there are significant technological breakthroughs, California’s standards will virtually ban light duty diesel vehicles in 2004. But after he made the above statement,

the CEO said something that was extremely surprising, and — quite predictably — was withdrawn when Down To Earth faxed the script of the telephonic interview to the CEO. With arrogance that

made a mockery of the thousands of people who die due to high levels of SPM in urban India, the CEO said over the phone that “it may sound like an exaggeration but our exhaust is cleaner

than the surrounding air”. It seems that the only hope for the wheezing populace of urban India is to crouch behind the tailpipe of a Mercedes-Benz car to take respite from Delhi’s murderous

air. The statement was also a Freudian slip as the CEO indirectly acknowledged the terrible air quality in Indian cities. Ford’s reply to the question of moral responsibility was a little

more studied but a little more misleading: “Ford will do everything practical to support low emission vehicles. Diesel has the potential to be a very low emission vehicle in future and

research is actively in progress on new generations of diesel engines which are similar to or better than petrol equivalents.” If everything was so gung-ho in the diesel world, then why are

there clear sounds of panic from the US car industry in response to the 2004 emission norms for California. However, Narayanan of Hindustan Motors could not even dig up a half-truth to

shroud the question of moral responsibility: “I believe that the modern diesel engine is as environment friendly as a petrol engine. If you drive a diesel Mitsubishi Lancer, you would find

it no different from any petrol car in terms of emissions.” Perhaps Hindustan Motors should start thinking in terms of a MD who can lie a little more effectively. “We have emission test

results for both diesel and petrol cars. Diesel technology is advancing all over the world,” he added. Then why are there still standards for particulate emissions from diesel vehicles in

Europe while there are none for petrol? “Besides, diesel cars form a very minuscule portion of the pollution caused by diesel,” was what Narayanan had to say to retrieve the situation. But

it would require a better effort than this. Yes, of course, he is right. But what happens when diesel cars increase in number. Given the particle load in Delhi’s air, present fuel-pricing

policies and the fact that the number of cars is growing faster than the number of two-wheelers in Delhi, the number of diesel cars will be enough to promote slow murder. NO ‘CAN DO’ Delhi

faces the challenge of decreasing 90 per cent of its particle load if the capital’s air is to become clean. In this scenario, each and every diesel vehicle sold at the showroom makes the air

that much heavier with particles. One would expect that it is easier for the private vehicle fleet to move away from diesel while the same will be difficult for public transport. Not

really. After the Supreme Court order, Delhi’s buses are going to switch to CNG to help bring down the SPM load. All that effort will be in vain if transnational carmakers keep flooding the

market with diesel cars. This amounts to a sabotage of the SC order. Transnationals’ claims that they would meet the most stringent emission norms also seems doubtful. While their cars may

meet the norms at the factory gates, chances are that they would not meet the norms a few months later on the road, given the poor quality of fuel, especially diesel, in India. All companies

interviewed say diesel cars comprise a very small fragment of the market and thus the pollution threat is minimal. But dieselisation of the private vehicle fleet is not merely an immediate

problem with no long-term consequences. All over the world, pollution control agencies look several years ahead while deciding on emission norms because improvement of air quality requires

long-term planning. But, in India, where the problem of SPM load is most acute, the trend seems to be to look backwards. While the world is increasingly showing signs of moving away from

diesel, the Indian market is seeing more and more cars running on diesel that is kept cheap for the requirements of the nation’s food security. While the Indian government knows very little

about the air pollution problem, let alone doing anything to deal with it, transnational carmakers say public health is primarily the concern of the government. So where does this leave the

residents of urban India? Dead, probably. Because we do not have a government that will protect the health of the people.