We humans have exploited our natural resources assuming there to be no consequences at all. Since the dawn of civilization, we have managed to colonize and change tracts of lands making them suitable for our needs. All not for the worse, as it has led to the agricultural, scientific, industrial and informational revolutions which have undoubtedly increased the quality of life of everyone.

But our ambitions have made us ignore the health of our ecosystem for thousands of years. It's not that we haven't cared for our environment, it's just that we haven't cared for it for its own sake, but for our own survival and needs.

Environmental protection is not a novel idea. On the contrary, it has been a part of the oldest civilizations of this world.

I.e. Environmental protection is the practice of protecting the natural environment by individuals, organizations and governments. Its objectives are to conserve natural resources and the existing natural environment and, where possible, to repair damage and reverse trends.

History:
The sewer system in Mohenjo-Daro is one of the oldest systems of environmental protection dating back to almost 4,500 years ago. All the streets had a drain running along them. There were provisions to dispose waste water inside the house itself. This type of protection is called as "brown conservation". It focuses on limiting and mitigating pollution that is generated by human activities, principally industry and agriculture, that affect human health.

The city-states of ancient Greece created laws that governed forest harvesting some 2,300 years ago, and feudal European societies established hunting preserves, which limited game and timber harvesting to royalty, effectively preventing overexploitation, by 1000 CE.

When effects of industrialization and urbanization increased during the late 19th and early 20th centuries and threatened human health, governments developed additional rules and regulations for urban hygiene, sewage, sanitation, and housing.

Growing consensus for environmental protection also led to the creation of world's first national park, The Yellowstone National Park in 1872.

Wealthy individuals and private foundations, such as the Sierra Club (founded 1892) and the National Audubon Society (founded 1905), also contributed to efforts to conserve natural resources and wildlife.

The 19th century saw the advent of "green conservation" inspired by the transcendental writings of Thoreau, Emerson, and the preservationist John Muir, who ascribed an intrinsic value to nature. According to this philosophy, Nature should be protected, not because it has current or future quantifiable value for society, but rather, because of what we don't know about it. At the core of these ideals is a belief that natural, pristine places have a spiritual and magical grandeur, and that we should respect them out of childlike wonder (Emerson 1836).

Environmental protection isn't a philanthropic task we should undertake but our moral obligation. This started to get clearer by the 20th century. People became aware of the harmful effects of emissions and use of chemicals in industry and pesticides in agriculture during the 1950s and '60s. The emergence of Minamata disease in 1956 in Japan, which resulted from mercury discharges from nearby chemical companies, and the publication of Silent Spring (1962) by American biologist Rachel Carson, which highlighted the dangers of pollution, led to a greater public awareness of environmental issues and to detailed systems of regulations in many industrialized countries. She highlighted the cascading ecological and health effects of DDT, arguing that pollution was the primary scourge against humanity.

Even with the evidence in hand there was little progress towards protecting the environment as well as should be. This was evident from the "biologically dead" Thames. The river flows through the heart of London, and was treated as sewer for hundreds of years.

The awful stinking Thames, called "the Great Stink", had finally reached the Houses of Parliament during the Heat Wave of 1857. This, along with the outbreak of cholera, forced the lawmakers to pass a law for cleaning the Thames. And it was not until 1865 that a plan was agreed.

Engineer Joseph Bazalgette masterminded the plan to divert sewage directly into the outfalls at Beckton and Crossness, leaving the Thames in central London sewage-free. This improved lot of central London, but the water downstream became even fouler. Introducing sewage treatment 20 years later fixed the water downstream but increasing industrialisation and London's growing population in the early part of the 20th century continued to put a strain on the Thames. Diverting sewage fixed the smell, but the river became dead. Another mission to clean the Thames was undertaken in 1960. This further improved sewage treatment, industrial discharges were removed, oxygen levels increased, and biodegradable detergents came into use.

After 60 years of vigilant cleaning, it is now home to seals, salmons, porpoises, and even the occasional stray whales and dolphins. After its clean-up, the Thames now supports a huge diversity of fish. The "Great Stink" has become a different place altogether. The Thames is now home to 125 species of fish and more than 400 species of invertebrates living in the mud. Life is thriving in the water and above the water. Waterfowl, waders, and sea birds feeding on the rich pickings from water – all of them now inhabit the environment around the Thames.

History of environmental protection in India:

After independence, the Indian constitution did not deal with the environment or its protection up until the Stockholm Conference in 1972. Indian approach after independence was focussed more on economic development and poverty alleviation.

One of the seminal issues that emerged from the conference is the recognition for poverty alleviation for protecting the environment. The Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in her speech in the Stockholm Conference brought forward the connection between ecological management and poverty alleviation. As per the declaration, states were required to take legislative measures in order to protect and improve the environment.

The Stockholm Deceleration was one of the most influential moments in history that decided the direction in which human ingenuity and wastefulness was headed. After seeing the horrors of the two world wars in less than half a century, the world realised that more was needed to be done to bring the world back to it's natural normalcy. The meeting among 114 governments agreed upon 26 decelerations ranging from asserting human rights, to safeguarding natural resources to elimination of WMD's.

As per the declaration, states were required to make legislations and take legislative measures to protect and improve the environment. As a result, Article 48A was added as the Directive Principle of State Policy along with Article 51A through the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 making the duty of government and the citizens to protect the environment.

Article 48A of the Indian Constitution laid down that "the state must try to protect and preserve the environment but also safeguard the wildlife and forests of the country.

Article 51A (g) of the Indian Constitution laid down that "the citizens of India must protect and improve the natural environment, including forest, wildlife, lakes, and rivers, and also to have compassion for the living creatures.

In MC Mehta vs. Union of India, the Court held that under Article 21 of Indian Constitution, it is a fundamental right to live in a pollution-free environment and if there isn't any healthy environment for the citizens to live in then this right would not mean anything.

Provisions under IPC:

Even though environmental protection wasn't a part of the policies of the Indian state, there are various sections in the IPC, 1860 that make polluting the environment punishable.

Chapter XIV of the IPC, containing Section 268-294-A, deal with the offences that are related to safety, public health, etc. These provisions make public health a priority and make any act punishable which pollutes the environment and makes the life of an individual dangerous. These provisions will be considered as "brown conservation" laws as they help improve the human quality of life and not meant for the inherent protection of the environment.

Section 268 of the IPC defines the term "public nuisance" and states that if any person does any illegal act, or omission then he/she is guilty of an offence. Public nuisance is considered a crime in India. Such an act must have caused a 'common injury', danger or annoyance to the public at large, or to the people of a vicinity or such an act must violate someone's public right.

Nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage.

Moreover, Section 290 makes the offence of public nuisance punishable with a fine extending up to Rs. 200. Therefore, if any act or omission of polluting the environment is committed, harming any citizen, then the same shall be subject to prosecution. Section 290 also makes noise pollution an offence.

In K Ramkrishnan v. the State of Kerala AIR 1999 Ker 385, the court held the smoking in public places is an offence and the same shall amount to public nuisance. It is punishable under Section 290 of the IPC. Moreover, according to the reports published by the World Health Organization (WHO), carbon dioxide emission from cigarettes contributes to almost 5% of the global greenhouse gas production.

Section 277 of IPC states that if anyone who voluntarily corrupts or fouls the water of public spring or reservoir, so as to make it unfit for ordinary public use, shall be held punishable with imprisonment for up to 3 months or with fine up to Rs. 1000 or with both.

However, the interpretation of the term "public spring or reservoir" by the courts is quite restrictive as it does not include flowing water of rivers, streams, and canals.

Fouling of running river water in a continuous stream is not an offence under this provision, however, if there is sufficient evidence to show that the act has caused common injury or danger to the public then it can be an offence punishable under section 290.

In Emperor v. Nama Rama, the accused and nine others were charged under this provision for fouling river water and making it unfit for drinking by steeping therein aloe plants to extract fibres from it. The trial Court convicted them. The Bombay High Court, after an appeal was filed, held that a river is not a public spring as mentioned in Section 277.

Yet still the District Magistrate was informed that though the act of the accused might not be an offence under section 277, from the description given it might well be a nuisance under section 290 of the IPC. The Court was therefore called on not to interfere.

According to Section 278, whoever voluntarily vitiates the atmosphere of any place so as to make it harmful for any person's health in a general dwelling, or carrying on a business in a neighbourhood or passing along the public way, shall be liable to a fine of up to Rs. 500.

In a revision petition filed in the Kerala High Court by a Padinjaraknnu Joseph, it was held that the revision petitioner had drained filthy water to the nearby river from his pigsty resulting in his conviction under section 278. The High Court found no grounds to interfere with the subordinate court's judgement in relation to section 278.

Moreover, sections like section 269 provides for negligent acts likely to spread dangerous infection like if the pollution is caused by an act which spreads the infection of disease dangerous to life.

Section 429 of the IPC states that anyone who mischievously killed, poisoned or maimed any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox irrespective of their value or any other animal of value of or more than value of Rs. 50 should be punished with an imprisonment up to 5 years or with fine or both.

Section 430 of the IPC states that anyone who mischievously done any act which caused a diversion of the water used for agricultural purposes or for food or drinking by human beings or by animals or for manufacturing by industry should be punished with imprisonment up to 5 years or with fine or both.

The IPC basically can be used to prevent pollution of atmosphere noxious to health of person in general. Furthermore, sections 426, 428, 431 and 432 of the IPC provides for general pollution caused by mischief.

Similarly, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 can be invoked as well to prevent pollution. Sections 133 to 143 and; Section 144 (under chapter X, part A and B respectively) provide most effective and speedy remedy for preventing and controlling public nuisance causing air, water and noise pollution.

Conclusion:
This entire field of environmental protection stems from the need to control global warming. Over the last century meteoric advancement in meteorology, computing power and artificial intelligence has helped us map the history of the climate. It has also helped us in projecting the development of the climate over long periods of time.

The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report projects a 0.26 m to 0.77m rise in the sea level by the year 2100 for 1.5°C global warming and about 0.1m more for 2°C. A difference of 0.1 m may correspond to 10 million more or fewer people exposed to related risks.

Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have already contributed 0.8–1.2 °C of warming. Nevertheless, the gases which have been emitted so far are unlikely to cause global temperature to rise to 1.5 °C alone, meaning a global temperature rise to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels is avoidable, assuming net zero emissions are reached soon.

To reach net zero emissions, the Paris Agreement was open for signatures on the 22nd April 2016. 193 UN members are parties to the agreement.

The Paris Agreement's long-term temperature goal is to keep the rise in mean global temperature to well below 2 °C above pre- industrial levels, and preferably limit the increase to 1.5 °C, recognizing that this would substantially reduce the effects of climate change. Emissions should be reduced as soon as possible and reach net-zero by the middle of the 21st century. To stay below 1.5 °C of global warming, emissions need to be cut by roughly 50% by 2030.

It aims to increase the ability of parties to adapt to climate change effects, and mobilise sufficient finance. Under the Agreement, each country must determine, plan, and regularly report on its contributions. No mechanism forces a country to set specific emissions targets, but each target should go beyond previous targets.

As environmental protection has its initiation in controlling climate change due to anthropogenic causes, it should be considered as "brown conservation", because up until we manage our global temperatures to stable levels, we are taking care of the environment only for our own survival. Green conservation doesn't even start before we correct our mistakes.

We have managed to substantially transform the thick dense forest on this planet into a concrete jungle in a matter of a few hundred years. This world has had to go around the sun 4.5 billion times before humans could safely breath in its atmosphere. And if we aren't cautious and careful about co-existing with this blue marble floating in this vast vacuum of nothingness, rest assured, even if we find a planet suitable for Earth life, we'll be long dead before we reach it.

These laws are considered to be "brown conservation" laws. Brown conservation is conservation which focuses on limiting and mitigating pollution that is generated by human activities, principally industry and agriculture, that affect human health.

We need to work towards "green conservation" which is protecting the environment for its own sake. This environment contains countless species and we are the only one who can destroy it all. Environmental protection is not a philanthropic task we should undertake but our moral obligation.

We have managed to substantially transform the thick dense forest on this planet into a concrete jungle in a matter of a few hundred years. This world has had to go around the sun 4.5 billion times before humans could safely breath in it's atmosphere. And if we aren't cautious and careful about co-existing with this blue marble floating in this vast vacuum of nothingness, rest assured, even if we find a planet suitable for Earth life, we'll be long dead before we reach it.