Rich countries’ renewed commitment to assist will catalyse its march.
A suo moto declaration by India at the forthcoming 26th Conference of the Parties to the 2015 Paris Agreement (or COP26) to desist from adding further coal fired generation capacity after 2025 should be received well. Such a voluntary declaration, despite having a significant comparative advantage in using fossil fuels to generate most of its electricity, will be a meaningful commitment to addressing global climate change.
Giving ourselves some time before ceasing to add new facilities or expanding existing coal-based plants is a desirable approach. Similarly, it is only fair that new regulations are not suddenly effected, howsoever pressing the State or public concerns might be. Regulatory predictability and tempered roll-outs are welcome practices, particularly where no compensatory measures are contemplated.
The transition to becoming a net zero carbon emitter will only be effective after we stop adding new capacity to burn coal, and let the “peaking” of coal consumption occur. Without doubt, the fall in coal usage would be met with a high degree of objections from several quarters. Apart from the coal mining industry, which is the mainstay of livelihood in at least five eastern and central India states (Jharkhand, Bihar, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh), the Indian Railways too would experience the depletion of a sizeable portion of its revenue which comes from carrying coal, and is used to significantly subsidise passenger fares. More importantly, for a successful switchover from coal, the rehabilitation of about two million miners, transporters, their families and the impacted regions has to receive the highest priority. Coal bearing states would also find their fiscal positions weakened devoid of the significant royalties and levies from coal-extraction.
For coal-based power to be shut down altogether, while we achieve the critical objective of meeting our per capita electricity consumption of near doubling at least once every ten years, the total installed capacity for electricity-generation will need to grow at a 7.5% CAGR from here out, compared to the under 3% achieved during the last seven decades. This action by India is premised on participating heads of governments responding to the likely COP 21 call to lower the global mean temperature rise to 1.5 degree Celsius, rather than the COP 15 consensus-goal of 2 degrees.
Accepting 2060 as the year for attaining carbon neutrality, the same year China has so far set for itself, is a fair proposition. Many would argue that even 2060—let alone 2050, which many wealthier nations such as the US and EU countries may go for—is itself too ambitious. Getting there would involve tapping all possible alternatives of energy to the hilt, and includes hydro especially mini, nuclear, biomass, hydrocarbons, viz., gas and oil. More importantly, it is the renewables which would need to carry the cross.
At present, 12.4% of our global energy requirement is being met by renewables. There is sufficient scientific and economic evidence for such green power to grow rapidly to fulfil our entire need viz. 100% of global energy required. With the steep recent fall in production-costs of solar cells, panels and turbines, it is already more economical to produce solar and wind-based electricity relative to establishing new sources based on fossil fuels, hydrocarbons, radioactive materials and hydro stations. Once the requisite financial and technological help from industrialised nations becomes more widely available to developing countries, the world may be able to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.
To have success in India, we need to break down how carbon-neutrality can be made palatable by 2060. The recently revised higher goal of 450 Gw of renewables by 2026 (instead of the earlier target of 175 Gw by 2022) should meet the anticipated increase in demand during the following five years. Undoubtedly, in the last six years, there has been progress with the addition of 64 Gw of solar capacity; however, in line with the new goal, another fourfold increase to 250 Gw is called for in 5 years. Of the remaining 200 Gw, about 45 Gw, mostly wind capacity, stands established, and has to be ratcheted up quickly.
To accord the further creation of renewable capacity, a high level policy decision, however, is now required vis-à-vis the newly conceived Aatmanirbharata or the self-sufficiency mission. In the longer run, the two objectives can co-exist and need not necessarily remain at odds. A firm commitment towards renewables in a big way, combined with the expanding size of the Indian energy market, should make it commercially viable for overseas developers and exporters to set up manufacturing-bases for the equipment in India.
Replacing coal as the source of energy by 2060 is a pre-requisite of attaining our goal. While its burning has to fully cease by then, that by itself would not be enough to altogether eliminate our carbon imprint. There are a host of other emitters, especially in transportation that uses hydrocarbons to create the needed motive-power, various manufacturing and processing industries, agriculture, and animal-rearing where CO2 and other pollutants are produced. In the move to carbon neutrality, all such culprits have to be tackled.
Ultimately, all users have to be moved to deploying renewables, be it for locomotion or processing. Where that is not feasible, we must consider the option of altogether giving up consumption of their end products, and making do with substitutes. Bold moves in that direction should in any case be in place since recent technological progress in producing solar- and wind-based power has already made coal-based generation through new plants economically unviable. Unsurprisingly, we see that fresh coal-fired accretion has slowed down globally and several existing facilities are generating way below capacity.
Making use of open-sourced technologies to incorporate innovative materials and processes to decarbonise industry, transport and city infrastructure such as buildings is urgently called for. Alongside this, we can add “green hydrogen” to the list of previously stated renewables—this sunrise option is capable of performing almost all operations using electrical power, and can be adopted in processing in energy guzzling industries such as steel, cement, crude refining and industrial heating. Its production is currently primarily through electrolysis using electricity for splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen. Through a shift to electrolyzer production using the much cheaper renewable solar and wind power, a significant reduction in cost is feasible. This would enable more extensive adoption, and help eliminate the 18 mt of imported natural gas already used in India to produce 6 mt of green hydrogen, or 8.5% of the global demand.
A further lowering of the cost of electricity produced, including its large-scale storage, has also to be constantly worked on. A promising technique currently under evaluation involves having more than one layer of heat capturing cells in a solar panel. Such multi-tiering would reduce the vast land-requirement for solar farms. Access to such technology, as well as the constantly evolving other clean energy technologies, has to be significantly eased and made affordable. Materialising of the $100bn annual public and private financing announced by the rich nations at COP15 and using it for this purpose can certainly be a way forward. In addition to funding, these nations must move swiftly to ease their regulatory frameworks to allow for extensive transfer of technology.
While not a perfect corollary, poor and medium countries are not particularly enthused by happenings during the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, where technology and resource sharing has been restrictive. Of 1.1 bn vaccinations hitherto administered, a vast majority have gone to citizens of wealthy nations. Reportedly, the US, where one-half of the population has received at least one dose, has millions of surplus vaccines lying around, while poorer African countries are struggling to find enough to jab even 5% of their residents. India, presently in dire straits, has covered just 9%.
Repeated demands from South Africa, Brazil and India to waive the drug companies’ patents for these vaccines so they can ramp up their own production have fallen on deaf years. The governments of countries where these pharmaceutical companies are headquartered have so far sided with their vaccine-makers, opposing the freer sharing of intellectual property, and have even become parties to their “hoarding” of the vaccines.
South African Tasneem Essop, now executive director of Climate Action Network, an advocacy group, sums up the fears when she states: “where the rich countries took care of their own needs first, took care of their companies, did not recognise that this is an opportunity to reach out and demonstrate solidarity—then there’s no good track record for how they will conduct themselves in the face of other global crises such as the climate crisis, where poorer countries will bear the highest burdens.” Though this may be an extreme reaction, it is certainly cause for concern. If this becomes the common refrain among low and middle-income countries in the months ahead, a successful outcome at the forthcoming COP21 would become difficult.
While we march towards our objective, we must also keep in mind the human side of any transformation, and manage it with particular care and compassion. In the context of the United States’ own transition, the Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman wrote in the New York Times recently that there was a need for “a true energy transition that will enhance opportunities for miners, their families and their communities”.
In developing countries such as India, the need is even more stark. The use of the industrialised world’s financial and technical contributions towards such welfare activities must remain an integral part of any agreement. Domestically thought will have to be given to policies – for instance, to avoid the large scale relocation of workers and their families, new work and living arrangements must be provided nearby. Perhaps, the thousands of solar parks and wind farms needed to generate the requisite energy could be viewed as alterative vocations and places of work for many displaced.
There remains no doubt that in almost all matters of carbon-neutrality, developing countries need to be treated differently from industrialised nations. India, which has shown a real willingness to engage, must continue to push this understanding. The reduction in its carbon-intensity (the extent of carbon-dioxide emitted per unit of GDP) by a respectable 26% from 2005 levels, while continuing to make significant progress in growing renewable power, demonstrates its level of commitment. By now joining the much wealthier nations in further giving up our dependence on coal, we will be taking another extraordinary step in our push to addressing a global problem.
Dr Ajay Dua, a development economist and a public policy expert, is a former Union Secretary.