India’s action plan against global warming could, along with the US’ and China’s, set the ‘climate’ for a constructive engagement in Paris this December. Also called ‘intended nationally determined contribution’ (INDC) in global climate jargon, it makes an affirmative push for ‘sustainable development’, a term that otherwise has a tired, hollow ring to it. Surprising those who expected an unequivocal ‘growth first’ approach from the Modi government, India has, in fact, sought to strike a balance between the ‘Copenhagen path’ and the Kyoto Protocol. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol rightly said that the developed world should clean up greenhouse gases, not only because it is responsible for the mess but also because poorer countries with low per capita GHG emissions cannot be denied their right to grow. However, the Copenhagen ministerial in 2009 implicitly argued that emerging economies such as China and India are major emitters as well and should participate in emissions management, even if they do not spell out specific targets. India has now committed to reducing the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33-35 per cent by 2030 over 2005 levels — without, and for good reasons, saying when its emissions would peak, or over what period it would come down. This position upholds its right to the atmosphere, given its very low per capita emission levels, to address the needs of electricity-deprived households. The reduction in emissions intensity can be achieved by investing in renewables and afforestation. There is no reason — going by Germany which is on its way to ‘decarbonising’ its economy by 2050 — to believe that India cannot achieve an energy transition to renewables, at a time when solar photovoltaics prices are rapidly falling.

Those who feel that Copenhagen marks a rupture after which developing countries went down a slippery slope should realise that the world has seen too much change (economic, technological and climatic) for countries such as India to be completely out of global climate management. If the Lima meet in December 2014 called for INDCs, demanding commitments of some sort from the emerging economies, it should also be taken into account that both the US and China (the top two emitters) have agreed to emission cuts, something that looked unthinkable a decade ago. (Whether that involves a transfer of GHG technologies to other regions is a moot point.)

For INDCs to have any meaning, it is important for the developed world to be less tight-fisted about technology and funds. India has estimated a requirement of $2.5 trillion till 2030 to achieve its energy transition and adapt to climate change. Paris must focus on the vexed issue of technology and resources. With Chancellor Angela Merkel on a visit to India from today, India should engage Germany, which is involved in cutting edge research in solar PVs. Meanwhile, improvement in energy efficiency of appliances and buildings can be promoted without much ado. Emission reductions have little to do with growth in such cases.

comment COMMENT NOW