It looks like the Government of India is all set to push for electric vehicles (EV) nationally. As part of FAME (Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of (Hybrid &) Electric Vehicles in India), it has decided to hold talks to enhance the adoption of EVs. Power minister Piyush Goyal has spoken to various stakeholders, along with NITI Aayog, to explain how the economies of scale can make it more viable in India.
Currently in its pilot phase, FAME offers incentives of Rs 29,000 and Rs 1.38 lakh for two- and four-wheelers respectively. A nationwide roll-out is set to begin 1 April.
In July 2016, the road transport ministry had amended the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, (CMVR) to allow older vehicles to be retrofitted with a hybrid electric kit. This move was aimed at getting older vehicles to conform to Bharat-II norms, but that it would merely increase the number of low-quality hybrid kits in the market. Delhi’s ill-planned odd-even formula provided an exemption to compressed natural gas (CNG) and electric hybrid vehicles, but, again, this move would have given rise to low-quality kits in the market as a legal loophole for people who wanted to take out their cars.
The problem with EVs is a more chronic version of what plagues vehicles running on either CNG or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). Lack of refuelling points is the biggest problem with gas-based vehicles, mainly due to the legal monopolies in place. EVs are more or less in the same boat, with Plug In India, a website that promotes the use of EVs listing 206 charging points in India. The figure stood at 194 in July 2016. Twelve new charging stations over a period of six months do not augur well for the ecosystem. Tata Motors in 2010 deferred the launch of the electric version of the Nano citing a lack of charging points, and seven years later, the Nano EV is nowhere in sight.
Public transport is marginally better off with buses covering short distances in urban sectors, and have the added benefit of returning to a depot at the end of the day to charge their batteries. This is where the Union government should direct its focus.
In December 2015, Prime Minister Narendra Modi flagged off an electric bus service designed by the Pune-based firm KPIT Technologies to be used in Parliament premises. However, nothing much has happened since then. In 2014, the Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) managed to acquire a fully electric bus from Chinese manufacturer Utopia for a two-month trial period. After that, however, the bus went back, and nothing happened after. Why? The cost of the bus was Rs 2 crore – too expensive for BMTC to afford.
As suggested earlier, Indian cities can slowly transition from diesel to electric buses if they start investing in the batteries required. Economies of scale play an important role. If we aggressively push for electric vehicles, we can make up for the cost of investment through reduced expenditure in operations.
To solve the problem, what needs to be addressed is demand and supply. There are two parts to the problem, vehicles and charging stations. The old-school method of pushing up the supply to create a demand will not work in a capitalist society like ours. Supply needs to cater to demand, and that is on a sticky wicket. Goyal solved it in the case of the lighting sector with the LED distribution scheme. In January 2014, under United Progressive Alliance-II, Energy Efficiency Services Limited (EESL) procured LED bulbs at Rs 310 a piece, one that fell sharply to below Rs 100 under Goyal.
In this regard, road transport minister Nitin Gadkari inviting Elon Musk’s Tesla Motors to set up a manufacturing base in India makes perfect sense. With Musk himself hinting at Tesla’s plans to ship to India soon, we can assume that 2018 might see a few of them in India. This will push up the supply and demand for Tesla cars in India, mainly due to the company’s brand value. The government should, logically, ensure that nothing stops Tesla legally from setting up charging stations similar to what Mahindra has done after its purchase of Reva Electric.
Public transport
Public transport needs to be prioritised. The simplest argument in favour of public transport is that it boosts productivity or, at worst, slows down the loss of productivity. In the case of a long trip, a commuter can catch up on reading, watch a film, take a nap or even work on their phone or laptop. The subsidy being given to cars and bikes needs to be extended to buses in order to solve the supply and demand problem. Public transport unfortunately is hindered by archaic laws that allow only government-run bodies to operate, penalising private entities who do. While that is a matter that needs to be sorted out by the centre with guidance from the Aayog, what Mr. Goyal and Mr.Gadkari need to do is:
1. Incentivise EVs for public transport
Public transport system is one of the largest consumers of commercial fuel. With the rise in traffic, the average mileage for buses in different cities has also gone down, resulting in an increase in the cost of purchasing fuel. In Mumbai, the fuel cost amounts to 18.2 per cent of the operational costs while in Bengaluru, it comes to 38.6 per cent. Since power supply is cheaper than fuel, the savings on fuel and the investment on the electric vehicle will balance each other out in the long run.
2. Set up a framework for private participation the charging point market
While long-distance bus operators might not go for electric buses, they can use their land resources to set up charging stations. Similarly, there needs to be a provision for anyone who wishes, to set up a charging station for vehicles.
3. Invest in education
Unless we invest in our education sector, research and development will not bear near-enough fruit. The reliance on foreign technology isn’t really a good idea in India with the varying ecosystem from state to state and issues with power.
The EVs market is just starting to take off. If Mr. Goyal can incentivise it, similar to the LED distribution scheme, the market will thrive, resulting in greater savings, a higher quality of travel and, most importantly, more jobs.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.
Globally, around 80% of wastewater flows back into the ecosystem without being treated or reused, according to the United Nations.
This can pose a significant environmental and health threat.
In the absence of cost-effective, sustainable, disruptive water management solutions, about 70% of sewage is discharged untreated into India’s water bodies.
A staggering 21% of diseases are caused by contaminated water in India, according to the World Bank, and one in five children die before their fifth birthday because of poor sanitation and hygiene conditions, according to Startup India.
As we confront these public health challenges emerging out of environmental concerns, expanding the scope of public health/environmental engineering science becomes pivotal.
For India to achieve its sustainable development goals of clean water and sanitation and to address the growing demands for water consumption and preservation of both surface water bodies and groundwater resources, it is essential to find and implement innovative ways of treating wastewater.
It is in this context why the specialised cadre of public health engineers, also known as sanitation engineers or environmental engineers, is best suited to provide the growing urban and rural water supply and to manage solid waste and wastewater.
Traditionally, engineering and public health have been understood as different fields.
Currently in India, civil engineering incorporates a course or two on environmental engineering for students to learn about wastewater management as a part of their pre-service and in-service training.
Most often, civil engineers do not have adequate skills to address public health problems. And public health professionals do not have adequate engineering skills.
India aims to supply 55 litres of water per person per day by 2024 under its Jal Jeevan Mission to install functional household tap connections.
The goal of reaching every rural household with functional tap water can be achieved in a sustainable and resilient manner only if the cadre of public health engineers is expanded and strengthened.
In India, public health engineering is executed by the Public Works Department or by health officials.
This differs from international trends. To manage a wastewater treatment plant in Europe, for example, a candidate must specialise in wastewater engineering.
Furthermore, public health engineering should be developed as an interdisciplinary field. Engineers can significantly contribute to public health in defining what is possible, identifying limitations, and shaping workable solutions with a problem-solving approach.
Similarly, public health professionals can contribute to engineering through well-researched understanding of health issues, measured risks and how course correction can be initiated.
Once both meet, a public health engineer can identify a health risk, work on developing concrete solutions such as new health and safety practices or specialised equipment, in order to correct the safety concern..
There is no doubt that the majority of diseases are water-related, transmitted through consumption of contaminated water, vectors breeding in stagnated water, or lack of adequate quantity of good quality water for proper personal hygiene.
Diseases cannot be contained unless we provide good quality and adequate quantity of water. Most of the world’s diseases can be prevented by considering this.
Training our young minds towards creating sustainable water management systems would be the first step.
Currently, institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M) are considering initiating public health engineering as a separate discipline.
To leverage this opportunity even further, India needs to scale up in the same direction.
Consider this hypothetical situation: Rajalakshmi, from a remote Karnataka village spots a business opportunity.
She knows that flowers, discarded in the thousands by temples can be handcrafted into incense sticks.
She wants to find a market for the product and hopefully, employ some people to help her. Soon enough though, she discovers that starting a business is a herculean task for a person like her.
There is a laborious process of rules and regulations to go through, bribes to pay on the way and no actual means to transport her product to its market.
After making her first batch of agarbathis and taking it to Bengaluru by bus, she decides the venture is not easy and gives up.
On the flipside of this is a young entrepreneur in Bengaluru. Let’s call him Deepak. He wants to start an internet-based business selling sustainably made agarbathis.
He has no trouble getting investors and to mobilise supply chains. His paperwork is over in a matter of days and his business is set up quickly and ready to grow.
Never mind that the business is built on aggregation of small sellers who will not see half the profit .
Is this scenario really all that hypothetical or emblematic of how we think about entrepreneurship in India?
Between our national obsession with unicorns on one side and glorifying the person running a pakora stall for survival as an example of viable entrepreneurship on the other, is the middle ground in entrepreneurship—a space that should have seen millions of thriving small and medium businesses, but remains so sparsely occupied that you could almost miss it.
If we are to achieve meaningful economic growth in our country, we need to incorporate, in our national conversation on entrepreneurship, ways of addressing the missing middle.
Spread out across India’s small towns and cities, this is a class of entrepreneurs that have been hit by a triple wave over the last five years, buffeted first by the inadvertent fallout of demonetization, being unprepared for GST, and then by the endless pain of the covid-19 pandemic.
As we finally appear to be reaching some level of normality, now is the opportune time to identify the kind of industries that make up this layer, the opportunities they should be afforded, and the best ways to scale up their functioning in the shortest time frame.
But, why pay so much attention to these industries when we should be celebrating, as we do, our booming startup space?
It is indeed true that India has the third largest number of unicorns in the world now, adding 42 in 2021 alone. Braving all the disruptions of the pandemic, it was a year in which Indian startups raised $24.1 billion in equity investments, according to a NASSCOM-Zinnov report last year.
However, this is a story of lopsided growth.
The cities of Bengaluru, Delhi/NCR, and Mumbai together claim three-fourths of these startup deals while emerging hubs like Ahmedabad, Coimbatore, and Jaipur account for the rest.
This leap in the startup space has created 6.6 lakh direct jobs and a few million indirect jobs. Is that good enough for a country that sends 12 million fresh graduates to its workforce every year?
It doesn’t even make a dent on arguably our biggest unemployment in recent history—in April 2020 when the country shutdown to battle covid-19.
Technology-intensive start-ups are constrained in their ability to create jobs—and hybrid work models and artificial intelligence (AI) have further accelerated unemployment.
What we need to focus on, therefore, is the labour-intensive micro, small and medium enterprise (MSME). Here, we begin to get to a definitional notion of what we called the mundane middle and the problems it currently faces.
India has an estimated 63 million enterprises. But, out of 100 companies, 95 are micro enterprises—employing less than five people, four are small to medium and barely one is large.
The questions to ask are: why are Indian MSMEs failing to grow from micro to small and medium and then be spurred on to make the leap into large companies?
At the Global Alliance for Mass Entrepreneurship (GAME), we have advocated for a National Mission for Mass Entrepreneurship, the need for which is more pronounced now than ever before.
Whenever India has worked to achieve a significant economic milestone in a limited span of time, it has worked best in mission mode. Think of the Green Revolution or Operation Flood.
From across various states, there are enough examples of approaches that work to catalyse mass entrepreneurship.
The introduction of entrepreneurship mindset curriculum (EMC) in schools through alliance mode of working by a number of agencies has shown significant improvement in academic and life outcomes.
Through creative teaching methods, students are encouraged to inculcate 21st century skills like creativity, problem solving, critical thinking and leadership which are not only foundational for entrepreneurship but essential to thrive in our complex world.
Udhyam Learning Foundation has been involved with the Government of Delhi since 2018 to help young people across over 1,000 schools to develop an entrepreneurial mindset.
One pilot programme introduced the concept of ‘seed money’ and saw 41 students turn their ideas into profit-making ventures. Other programmes teach qualities like grit and resourcefulness.
If you think these are isolated examples, consider some larger data trends.
The Observer Research Foundation and The World Economic Forum released the Young India and Work: A Survey of Youth Aspirations in 2018.
When asked which type of work arrangement they prefer, 49% of the youth surveyed said they prefer a job in the public sector.
However, 38% selected self-employment as an entrepreneur as their ideal type of job. The spirit of entrepreneurship is latent and waiting to be unleashed.
The same can be said for building networks of successful women entrepreneurs—so crucial when the participation of women in the Indian economy has declined to an abysmal 20%.
The majority of India’s 63 million firms are informal —fewer than 20% are registered for GST.
Research shows that companies that start out as formal enterprises become two-three times more productive than a similar informal business.
So why do firms prefer to be informal? In most cases, it’s because of the sheer cost and difficulty of complying with the different regulations.
We have academia and non-profits working as ecosystem enablers providing insights and evidence-based models for growth. We have large private corporations and philanthropic and funding agencies ready to invest.
It should be in the scope of a National Mass Entrepreneurship Mission to bring all of them together to work in mission mode so that the gap between thought leadership and action can finally be bridged.