Development amid dirty air and a changing climate

This article is authored by Aun Abdullah, programme director, sustainable urbanisation, Lodha Foundation.

Environmental debate is often framed as a zero-sum choice: build more or breathe better; expand industry or stabilise the climate. This framing is misleading. India’s true challenge is not to pick one objective over another, but to pursue three simultaneously: Expand material production, clean its air, and decarbonise its economy.

Climate crisis (Pixabay)

Environmental problems operate at different scales. Air pollution is a local health crisis; economic growth is a national necessity for jobs and infrastructure; and the climate crisis is a global, cumulative threat. These layers overlap; failing to act on them together risks failure on all three fronts.

Energy and materials sit at the centre of this tension. Steel, cement, and aluminium are not discretionary choices; they form the physical basis of electrification, housing, transport, and sanitation. India is still urbanising and closing large development gaps. Material demand will rise because it must, and any credible environmental strategy must begin from this physical reality.

These ‘hard-to-abate’ sectors are usually discussed in terms of carbon, but they sit at the nexus of energy and local pollution. The built environment not only carries embodied carbon but also carries what can be described as embodied smog – the atmospheric pollutants generated during the production of core materials. To achieve a sustainable future, the focus must be on cleaning the methods by which materials and energy are produced, rather than inhibiting the essential process of development itself.

China’s experience is often cited as a model, but it is better understood as a lesson in timing. China industrialised before the climate crisis became a binding global constraint. By the time its air quality deteriorated sharply, its economy had already begun shifting away from heavy industry toward services.

India is in a different phase. Its energy demand is rising rapidly, coal has yet to peak, and transport demand remains elastic because metro and suburban rail density remains low across most cities. Heavy industry is expanding, driven by fundamental housing and manufacturing needs. India cannot follow China’s path, but it can learn from it: clean the air while growing, and decarbonise without assuming premature de-industrialisation.

India generates roughly 1,800–1,900 terawatt-hours of electricity annually, with 70% still coming from coal. While renewable capacity has crossed 50%, it accounts for a much smaller share of delivered energy due to intermittency and storage constraints. With electricity demand expected to more than double by the 2040s, coal will remain significant in the near-term.

From an air quality perspective, the key variable is not coal’s existence but its emissions intensity. High-efficiency particulate capture, flue gas and combustion management can reduce health-damaging emissions by over 90%. In parallel, the recent policy push to enable large-scale investment in storage and grid flexibility is what will convert clean capacity into clean energy.

Concrete is a pillar of development. India produces over 350 million tons of cement annually, with demand projected to approach 500 million tons by the early 2030s. Cement’s environmental footprint arises largely from kiln combustion and fuel quality. While volumes will rise, environmental impact can be lowered if clinker substitution continues and alternative fuels displace coal. Furthermore, performance-based design and the use of fly ash, slag, and calcined clays can reduce both pollution and carbon intensity well before carbon capture becomes technically viable.

Steel presents a sharper dilemma. India produces 140 million tonnes of crude steel today, with capacity targets approaching 300 million tonnes in the 2030s. Much of this will remain coal-based, making it intensive in both carbon and pollutants. Cleaning this future does not require suppressing demand; it requires emission capture in existing plants, increased scrap-based electric furnace production, and the targeted enablement of hydrogen-based and renewable energy-based production routes.

Aluminium, while smaller in volume, is highly energy-intensive. As electrification, transport, and construction expand, aluminum demand will grow rapidly. Its embodied impact depends on the cleanliness of electricity and refining emissions. Most of the aluminium production is still reliant on captive coal power. Coupling smelters to low-pollution power and expanding recycling – which uses a fraction of the energy of primary production – can sharply reduce its footprint.

Urbanisation is the connective tissue between energy systems, material demand, and public health. Transitioning from road-based transport to expanded metro and suburban rail networks simultaneously reduces energy intensity and localised pollution. This shift, combined with upgrading or relocating legacy high-emission industries, lowers health care costs while reclaiming valuable urban land for housing.

Sustainable urbanisation can also drive systemic efficiency through concepts like material minimalism and high-performance design, which alleviate the burden on energy ecosystems. Walkable cores and integrated public transit enhance energy security by decoupling mobility from private vehicles. Furthermore, incorporating natural ventilation, green-blue infrastructure, and high-albedo surfaces reduces the cooling load, inherently lowering energy demand.

What ultimately binds air quality, growth, and climate is the need to internalise environmental costs into economic decisions. When pollution and environmental risk remain externalities, capital flows toward short-term output. When they are priced into planning, subsidies, and finance, investment shifts toward solutions that sustain growth while reducing exposure. Storage becomes as important as generation; clean steel becomes an industrial strategy; public transport becomes core infrastructure.

India does not need to solve air pollution first and the climate crisis later, nor can it afford to slow its development. It must solve them together, with a clear-eyed recognition of scale and timing. The material dilemma is not whether India builds more; it will. The real question is whether growth continues to externalise its costs, or whether air, energy, and climate are finally treated as parts of the same economic system. If India succeeds, it will redefine what development looks like in a carbon-constrained world.

(The views expressed are personal)

This article is authored by Aun Abdullah, programme director, sustainable urbanisation, Lodha Foundation.