Crop residue burning (CRB) over Northern India is an alarming issue and leads to human health effects. The present study aims to study the impact of PM10, PM2.5, NO2 and SO2, emitted during CRB activities in the agricultural state of North-western India i.e. Haryana on the air quality of Delhi. The transition from pre-burning to burning period, in both rabi and kharif seasons, shows considerable increase in pollutant concentrations. PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations exceeded NAAQS limits by 2–3 times, while NO2 and SO2 stayed within the limits. MODIS fire observations used to estimate CRB fire counts (confidence >80%) shows that rabi (burning period) fires in Haryana are ~3 times higher and more intense than in kharif. Furthermore, backward trajectories shows air mass movement from Haryana, Punjab and Pakistan. Thus, pollutants emitted reach Delhi via air masses, deteriorating its air quality. Meteorological conditions influence pollutant concentrations during both seasons. Frequent dust storms in rabi, and Dusshera and Diwali firework celebrations in kharif season exacerbate air pollution. In rabi, PM10 and PM2.5 have a significant negative association with (relative humidity) RH and positive association with (air temperature) AT. High AT during pre-monsoon, accompanied by low RH, loosens up soil particles and they can easily disperse. Stronger winds in rabi season promote NO2 and SO2 dispersion. In kharif, lower AT, higher RH and slower winds exist. Both PM10 and PM2.5 have a negative association with AT and (wind speed) WS. With lower temperature and slower winds during winter, pollutants are trapped within the boundary layer and are unable to disperse. As expected, NO2 has a significant negative association with AT in Haryana. However, in case of Delhi, the association is significant but positive, and could be due to the odd-even scheme imposed by the Delhi government. Strong initiatives are needed to mitigate the ill-effects of CRB activities over the region, in both rabi and kharif season. Large-scale farmer awareness camps and the use of sustainable CRB management practices are suggested.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saxena et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: