Type: op-ed snap

Context

The Glasgow Climate Pact was adopted on Saturday and, as was to be expected, it is a mixed bag of modest achievements and disappointed expectations.

Transition away from fossil fuel

• The Pact is the first clear recognition of the need to transition away from fossil fuels, though the focus was on giving up coal-based power altogether.
• India introduced an amendment at the last moment to replace this phrase with “phase down” and this played negatively with both the advanced as well as a large constituency of developing countries.
• This amendment reportedly came as a result of consultations among India, China, the UK and the US.
• As the largest producer and consumer of coal and coal-based thermal power, it is understandable that China would prefer a gradual reduction rather than total elimination.
• India may have had similar concerns.

Recognition of Adaptation

• There is a welcome recognition of the importance of Adaptation and there is a commitment to double the current finance available for this to developing countries.
• Since this amount is currently only $15 billion, doubling will mean $ 30 billion.
• This remains grossly inadequate.
• According to UNEP, adaptation costs for developing countries are currently estimated at $70 billion annually and will rise to an estimated $130-300 billion annually by 2030.
• A start is being made in formulating an adaptation plan and this puts the issue firmly on the Climate agenda, balancing the overwhelming focus hitherto on mitigation.

Disappointment on the issue of finance

• The Paris Agreement target of $100 billion per annum between 2005-2020 was never met with the shortfall being more than half, according to some calculations.
• There is now a renewed commitment to delivering on this pledge in the 2020-2025 period and there is a promise of an enhanced flow thereafter.
• But in a post-pandemic global economic slowdown, it is unlikely these promises will be met.
• In any event, it is unlikely that India will get even a small slice of the pie.
• The same applies to the issue of compensation for loss and damage for developing countries who have suffered as a result of climate change for which they have not been responsible.

Initiatives on methane and deforestation

• Two important plurilateral outcomes could potentially develop into more substantial measures.
• The most important is an agreement among 100 countries to cut methane emissions by 30 per cent by 2030.
• India is not a part of this group.
• Cutting methane emissions, which is generated mainly by livestock, is certainly useful but there is a much bigger methane emergency around the corner as the earth’s permafrost areas in Siberia, Greenland and the Arctic littoral begin to melt due to global warming that has already taken place and will continue to take place in the coming years.
• Another group of 100 countries has agreed to begin to reverse deforestation by 2030.
• India did not join the group due to concerns over a clause on possible trade measures related to forest products.

Implications of US-China Joint Declaration on Climate Change for India

• Declaration was a departure for China, which had held that bilateral cooperation on climate change could not be insulated from other aspects of their relations.
• The declaration implies a shift in China’s hardline position.
• It appears both countries are moving towards a less confrontational, more cooperative relationship overall.
• This will have geopolitical implications, including for India, which may find its room for manoeuvre shrinking.

Conclusion

As in the past, the can has been kicked down the road, except that the climate road is fast approaching a dead-end. What provides a glimmer of light is the incredible and passionate advocacy of urgent action by young people across the world. This is putting enormous pressure on governments and leaders and if sustained, may become irresistible.

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Context

Even though New Delhi has invested in renewable energy and announced a net-zero target, there is a gap between the announcements and the ground reality, as is evident from the promotion of coal.

India’s commitments

•  AT the COP 26 in Glasgow, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that India has set a target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2070.
• India also updated its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) that have to be met by 2030.
• Its new pledge includes increasing the country’s installed renewable capacity to 500 GW, meeting 50 per cent of its energy requirements from non-fossil fuel sources.

India’s achievements on past commitments

• At the COP 21 in Paris, India, made similar ambitious announcements and aimed to reduce the economy-wide emissions intensity by 33-35 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030.
• In August, the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy announced that the country has installed 100 GW of renewable energy capacity.
• The majority of this 100 GW, about 78 per cent, is due to large-scale wind and solar power projects.
• While this is a milestone, India is on track to accomplishing only about two-thirds of its planned renewable target of 175 GW installation by 2022.
•  To achieve its new goals, India will need to do more in different directions.
• For instance, it has a target of achieving 40 GW of green energy from the rooftop solar sector by 2022, but it has not been able to achieve even 20 per cent of that so far.
• In the transport sector, India has targeted a 30 per cent share of electric vehicles (EV) in new sales for 2030.

India’s climate actions against the Paris Agreement targets

•  The Climate Action Tracker, an independent scientific analysis that tracks government climate action against the Paris Agreement targets, deems India’s performance as “highly insufficient” simply because coal represents about 70 per cent of the country’s energy supply. 
• India also needs to cut down subsidies to the fossil fuel industry drastically — not the case currently.
• While in the past seven years, the country has invested Rs 5.2 trillion in renewable energy, the investment in fossil fuel industry, though down by (only) 4 per cent from 2015-19, was Rs 245 trillion.
• Coal production is estimated to increase to one billion tonnes by 2024 from 716 million tonnes in 2020-21.
• According to the Central Electricity Authority, coal capacity is projected to increase from 202GW in 2021 to 266GW by 2029-30.
• The Government of India is not actively discouraging such investments.
• On the contrary, coal subsidies are still 35 per cent higher than the subsidies for renewables and coal-fired power generation receives indirect financial support from the government through income tax exemptions and land acquisition at a preferential rate.

Conclusion

It is also true that India’s energy transition would be in its own interest because, otherwise, economic growth will not be sustainable and human security will be at stake if dozens of millions of climate refugees are created due to the devastating consequences of climate change.

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Context

There has been quite a lot of debate on India’s dependence on coal against the backdrop of the Conference of the Parties (COP26) meeting. The crux of the theoretical argument is that India needs to develop, and development requires energy.

Carbon budget framework

• India has neither historically emitted nor currently emits carbon anywhere close to what the global North has, or does, in per capita terms.
• If anything, the argument goes, it should ask for a higher and fairer share in the global carbon budget.
• There is no doubt that this carbon budget framework is an excellent tool to understand global injustice but to move from there to our ‘right to burn’ is a big leap.
• However, the question is do the countries in the global South necessarily need to increase their share in the global carbon budget?

Why should developing countries aim for development without increasing carbon emission

1) Reducing the cost of renewable energy

• Normally the argument in favour of coal is on account of its cost, reliability and domestic availability.
• Recent data show that the levelised cost of electricity from renewable energy sources like solar (photovoltaic), hydro and onshore wind has been declining sharply over the last decade and is already less than fossil fuel-based electricity generation.
•  On reliability, frontier renewable energy technologies have managed to address the question of variability of such sources to a large extent and, with technological progress, it seems to be changing for the better.
• As for the easy domestic availability of coal, it is a myth.
• India is among the largest importers of coal in the world, whereas it has no dearth of solar energy.

2) Following different development model

•  During the debates of post-colonial development in the Third World, there were two significant issues under discussion — control over technology and choice of techniques to address the issue of surplus labour.
• India didn’t quite resolve the two issues in its attempts of import-substituting industrialisation which worsened during the post-reform period.
• But it can address both today.
• The abundance of renewable natural resources in the tropical climate can give India a head start in this competitive world of technology.
• South-South collaborations can help India avoid the usual patterns of trade between the North and the South, where the former controls technology and the latter merely provides inputs.
• And the high-employment trajectory that the green path entails vis-à-vis the fossil fuel sector may help address the issue of surplus labour, even if partially.
• Such a path could additionally provide decentralised access to clean energy to the poor and the marginalised, including in remote regions of India.

3) Limitation of addressing global injustice in terms of a carbon budget

•  The framework of addressing global injustice in terms of a carbon budget is quite limiting in its scope in more ways than one.
• Such an injustice is not at the level of the nation-states alone; there is such injustice between the rich and the poor within nations and between humans and non-human species.
• A progressive position on justice would take these injustices into account instead of narrowly focusing on the framework of nation-states.
• Moreover, it’s a double whammy of injustice for the global South when it comes to climate change.
• Not only is it not primarily responsible, but the global South, especially its poor, will unduly bear the effect of climate change because of its tropical climate and high population density along the coastal lines.
• So, arguing for more coal is like shooting oneself in the foot.

Way forward

• One of the ways in which this can be done is by making the global North pay for the energy transition in the South.
• Chalking out an independent, greener path to development may create conditions for such negotiations and give the South the moral high ground to force the North to come to the table, like South Africa did at Glasgow.

Conclusion

Even if one is pessimistic about this path of righting the wrongs of the past, at the very least, it is better than the status quo.

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

Context

India joined the other G20 countries in making a “net-zero” commitment, setting 2070 as its target year.

Why was it important to sign up for net-zero?

• India’s topography — its 7,000 km-long coastline, the Himalayan glaciers in the north, and its rich forest areas which house natural resources like coal and iron ore — make the country uniquely vulnerable to climate change.
• An IMF study suggests that if emissions continue to rise this century, India’s real GDP per capita could fall by 10 per cent by 2100.
• India’s traditional position has been that since its per capita energy use is only a third of the global average, and it needs to continue to grow to fight poverty, costly energy reduction targets should not be applied to it.

Opportunities presented by India’s net-zero approach

•  It could give a clear signal of India’s intentions and provide better access to international technology, funding and markets.
• We estimate that 60 per cent of India’s capital stock — factories and buildings that will exist in 2040 — is yet to be built.
• The country can potentially leapfrog into new green technology, rather than being overburdened with “re-fitting” obligations.
• If India can now transition to green growth, it could create a more responsible and sustainable economy.
• If India’s exports achieve a “green stamp”, they may find better market access, especially if the world imposes a carbon tax on exports.
• Around 2-2.5 million additional jobs can be created in the renewables sector by 2050, taking the total number of people employed there to over 3 million.

Challenges

• The finances of power distribution companies need to be improved to fund the grid upgrades necessary for scaling up renewables.
• India needs a coordinated institutional framework that can help overcome multiple levels of complexity like federalism, fiscal constraints and bureaucracy.
• The energy investment requirement will be high, rising from about $70-80 billion per year now to $160 billion per year.
•  While the private sector will be required to fund much of this, the government can play a pivotal role, especially in the early days.
• The transition years will be bumpy.
• Inflation could be volatile till renewables reached their full potential.

Conclusion

India is on the right track but needs to redouble its efforts to remove the obstacles.

UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)