The countdown to the Paris climate ministerial in December this year has begun, with countries drawing up their respective plans on how they will contribute to the overall goal of curtailing carbon emissions — so that the planet does not warm up to catastrophic levels, driving innumerable species to extinction. These plans — called intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) — are supposed to be submitted by India in another month or so. Broadly, the emission reduction plans are expected to translate into a 40-70 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions over 2010 levels by 2050. The goal is unexceptionable, but the path adopted so far less so. Developed countries under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) grouping have not only contributed overwhelmingly to the stock of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but continue to account for a significant chunk of annual emission flows. The OECD countries, with a collective population equal to India’s, account for 37 per cent of total emissions, whereas India accounts for just 6 per cent. China, the largest emitter, accounts for nearly 25 per cent of total emissions. Yet, the pressure is on India, now that China has belatedly agreed to peak its emissions by 2030, to assume a central role in emission reduction. India, which has waffled on this issue, should defend its right to raise living standards in its INDC submission. India may be emerging as the fastest growing economy, but it would be wrong to compare it with China, which is way ahead in terms of per capita income and living standards. The Kyoto protocol principle — of the developed world assuming a larger responsibility for emission reductions for having created the problem in the first place — should be woven into the INDC framework. A slowdown in China alone, apart from the crisis of growth in the OECD, will not by itself take care of carbon emissions. A proactive, coordinated approach by countries and corporations is called for.
There are measures that India can list out in its INDC without compromising on its entitlement to the atmosphere. Indeed, providing for a threshold level of living is environmentally beneficial, as a shift from firewood to clean cooking fuel brings out. While insisting on its right to raise electricity consumption to a threshold level of 500 kwH per annum per household — today, half the population consumes less than this — a shift to renewables can make a huge difference. India would, however, require major financial and technological support to achieve a capacity of 100 GW of solar and an equal capacity of wind energy over the next decade. INDC commitments must be followed by the advanced economies coughing up the money.
There is also much that India can do of its own accord. A shift from personal to mass-based transport is long overdue. Inequalities in energy consumption and access contribute to energy inefficiency at the upper end. A ‘cap and trade’ model on emissions, now in its infancy, must be worked on. Development and environmental regulation, if sensibly conceived, can go hand-in-hand to achieve optimal outcomes.