India Expands 10 Plastic Parks With 50% Grant to Boost Polymer Sector

India is accelerating the development of its polymer-based industrial ecosystem through the expansion of Plastic Parks, aimed at strengthening domestic plastic manufacturing, attracting investment, and promoting sustainable practices. The initiative, overseen by the Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals, is being implemented under the New Scheme of Petrochemicals.

As part of the scheme, the government supports the creation of industrial clusters—termed Plastic Parks—by providing up to 50% of the project cost as grant-in-aid, with a maximum cap of ₹40 crore per project. These parks are designed to offer state-of-the-art infrastructure and shared facilities to consolidate the capacities of the downstream plastic processing industry.

So far, 10 Plastic Parks have been approved across various states including Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Assam, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, and Uttar Pradesh. Parks in Gorakhpur (UP) and Ganjimutt (Karnataka) were the latest to be greenlit in 2022. These hubs are not only intended to drive production and exports but also play a significant role in managing plastic waste through built-in recycling and waste treatment facilities.

According to government data, more than ₹258 crore has been released for Plastic Parks since 2013, with significant investment drawn to projects in states such as Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. The parks are managed by Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) set up by state governments, who also facilitate private sector participation through incentives and awareness programs.

The move aligns with India’s growing footprint in the global plastic trade. The country ranked 12th globally in plastic exports in 2022, up from 8.2 million thousand USD in 2014 to 27 million thousand USD, according to World Bank estimates.

In tandem with industrial expansion, the government is placing a strong emphasis on environmental sustainability. Plastic Parks are equipped with recycling sheds, effluent treatment plants, and hazardous waste management systems. The initiative is supported by Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations and bans on specific single-use plastics.

To support innovation, the Department has also established 13 Centres of Excellence (CoEs) at leading research institutions such as IIT Delhi, IIT Guwahati, and CIPET Bhubaneswar. These CoEs focus on sustainable polymer research, bio-engineered materials, and advanced polymer applications.

Additionally, the Central Institute of Petrochemical Engineering and Technology (CIPET) is offering a range of training programs to equip the workforce with the skills needed in the evolving plastics sector.

With continued focus on sustainability, innovation, and global competitiveness, the Plastic Parks initiative is poised to play a pivotal role in India’s ambition to become a major global hub for polymer production and environmentally responsible plastic processing.

Bitcoin Mining: Researchers find it environmentally unsustainable, threat to future energy

Taken as a share of the market price, the climate change impacts of mining the digital cryptocurrency Bitcoin is more comparable to the impacts of extracting and refining crude oil than mining gold, according to an analysis published in Scientific Reports by researchers at The University of New Mexico.

The authors suggest that rather than being considered akin to ‘digital gold’, Bitcoin should instead be compared to much more energy-intensive products such as beef, natural gas, and crude oil.

“We find no evidence that Bitcoin mining is becoming more sustainable over time,” said UNM Economics Associate Professor Benjamin A. Jones. “Rather, our results suggest the opposite: Bitcoin mining is becoming dirtier and more damaging to the climate over time. In short, Bitcoin’s environmental footprint is moving in the wrong direction.”

In December 2021, Bitcoin had an approximately 960 billion US dollars market capitalization with a roughly 41 percent global market share among cryptocurrencies. Although known to be energy intensive, the extent of Bitcoin’s climate damages is unclear.

Researchers at The University of New Mexico find digital cryptocurrency Bitcoin is more comparable to the impacts of extracting and refining crude oil than mining gold./CREDIT:
University of New Mexico

Jones and colleagues Robert Berrens and Andrew Goodkind present economic estimates of climate damages from Bitcoin mining between January 2016 and December 2021. They report that in 2020 Bitcoin mining used 75.4 terawatt hours of electricity (TWh) – higher electricity usage than Austria (69.9 TWh) or Portugal (48.4 TWh) in that year.

“Globally, the mining, or production, of Bitcoin is using tremendous amounts of electricity, mostly from fossil fuels, such as coal and natural gas. This is causing huge amounts of air pollution and carbon emissions, which is negatively impacting our global climate and our health,” said Jones. “We find several instances between 2016-2021 where Bitcoin is more damaging to the climate than a single Bitcoin is actually worth. Put differently, Bitcoin mining, in some instances, creates climate damages in excess of a coin’s value. This is extremely troubling from a sustainability perspective.”

The authors assessed Bitcoin climate damages according to three sustainability criteria: whether the estimated climate damages are increasing over time; whether the climate damages of Bitcoin exceeds the market price; and how the climate damages as a share of market price compare to other sectors and commodities.

They find that the CO2 equivalent emissions from electricity generation for Bitcoin mining have increased 126-fold from 0.9 tonnes per coin in 2016, to 113 tonnes per coin in 2021. Calculations suggest each Bitcoin mined in 2021 generated 11,314 US Dollars (USD) in climate damages, with total global damages exceeding 12 billion USD between 2016 and 2021. Damages peaked at 156% of the coin price in May 2020, suggesting that each 1 USD of Bitcoin market value generated led to 1.56 USD in global climate damages that month.

“Across the class of digitally scarce goods, our focus is on those cryptocurrencies that rely on proof-of-work (POW) production techniques, which can be highly energy intensive,” said Regents Professor of Economics Robert Berrens. “Within broader efforts to mitigate climate change, the policy challenge is creating governance mechanisms for an emergent, decentralized industry, which includes energy-intensive POW cryptocurrencies. We believe that such efforts would be aided by measurable, empirical signals concerning potentially unsustainable climate damages, in monetary terms.”

Finally, the authors compared Bitcoin climate damages to damages from other industries and products such as electricity generation from renewable and non-renewable sources, crude oil processing, agricultural meat production, and precious metal mining. Climate damages for Bitcoin averaged 35% of its market value between 2016 and 2021. This share for Bitcoin was slightly less than the climate damages as a share of market value of electricity produced by natural gas (46%) and gasoline produced from crude oil (41%), but more than those of beef production (33%) and gold mining (4%).

The authors conclude that Bitcoin does not meet any of the three key sustainability criteria they assessed it against.  Absent voluntary switching away from proof-of-work mining, as very recently done for the cryptocurrency Ether, then potential regulation may be required to make Bitcoin mining sustainable.

Also Read:

Where do high-energy particles that endanger satellites, astronauts, airplanes come from?

Asian tiger mosquito, native to warm climate is now gaining ground in Illinois’s harsh winter

Soon new material to replace rogue plastic; It biodegrades in ocean water within 4 weeks