·PIB·15 marks·250–350 words

BOD load reduction has outpaced effluent volume reduction in the Ganga basin. What does this imply for India's industrial water policy? Suggest measures.

New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →
In this answer
  1. Implications for industrial water policy
  2. Measures

Between 2017 and 2025, the industrial BOD load in the Ganga basin fell 72.46%, from 26 to 7.16 tonnes per day. Over the same period effluent volume fell only 21.24%, from 349 to 274.88 MLD [1]. So factories are treating their wastewater better, but they are not discharging much less of it. Policy has worked on pollution control but has barely begun on water efficiency.

Implications for industrial water policy

  • End-of-pipe bias: the gains came mainly from upgrading effluent treatment plants (ETPs) and from inspections against the Consent to Operate (CTO). Neither of these pushes a factory to use less water [1].
  • Freshwater demand untouched: about 275 MLD is still drawn and discharged every day. Cleaner water does not mean less water is being used.
  • Risk stays with volume: a large daily flow means any bypass or ETP breakdown sends a big pollution load into the river at once. This is why inspections check for bypasses with geo-tagged evidence [1].
  • Gaps in monitoring: only 885 of 1,072 grossly polluting industries (GPIs) were linked to online monitoring (OCEMS) in 2019 [2]. The CPCB carried out only 63% of its required compliance checks in 2011–17 [3].
  • Small units left out: the GPI threshold is 100 kg BOD per day [4]. Clusters of small units below it add volume that nobody counts.

Measures

  • Volume-based norms: add water-recycling targets against total water input, and Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) where feasible, to the sector Charters. The five Charter sectors (pulp & paper, sugar, distillery, textile, tannery) produce about 88% of the pollution load [1].
  • Water audits and pricing: require yearly audits and charge for industrial water drawn from rivers and aquifers, in line with the polluter-pays principle.
  • Universal OCEMS with flow meters: make continuous data the main test and use the yearly inspection to confirm it [2].
  • Cluster CETPs: Jajmau and Mathura are complete; Banther should be finished and funded beyond March 2026 [5].
  • Stronger regulators: fill SPCB vacancies, as the CAG audit pointed to staff shortages, and publish compliance data for each unit [3].
  • Basin-level permits: set discharge limits by how much pollution the river can absorb, not factory by factory.

The fall in BOD shows that regulation can deliver results. The slower fall in volume shows what comes next: moving from treatment to reduce-reuse-recycle. Recycling-linked permits, real-time data and shared treatment plants would carry this forward. Together they would advance SDG 6.3 and the constitutional duty under Article 48A and Article 51A(g) to protect rivers.

Sources

  1. 1Industrial Pollution Abatement: Sustainability through Regulations under Namami Gange, PIB (13 Oct 2026)BOD and effluent reduction figures, CTO benchmark, bypass checks, Charter sectors and their 88% load share
  2. 2Namami Gange Programme – Industrial Effluent Monitoring, NMCG885 of 1,072 GPIs linked to OCEMS (April 2019)
  3. 3Audit of Namami Gange – summary of CAG Report No. 39 of 2017, PRS Legislative ResearchCPCB did 3,163 of 5,016 checks (63%); CAG findings on monitoring and staffing
  4. 4CPCB – Frequently Asked QuestionsGPI definition: discharge into a watercourse with BOD of 100 kg/day or more, and/or hazardous substances
  5. 5A Holistic Approach for Cleanliness of River Ganga, PIB (Mar 2025), NMCG copyJajmau and Mathura CETPs completed, Banther sanctioned

More from this note