Leaders of the BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India, China), along with Mexico, met during last year’s Group of 20 summit in L’Aquila, Italy.

A key deadline for countries to submit emission reduction goals to the United Nations as part of the recently negotiated Copenhagen Accord passed last Sunday. The U.N. received commitments from 55 nations, but 139 countries remain unsupportive of the political statement, leading the international body to push back the commitment deadline indefinitely.

Since the high-level climate change summit in Copenhagen concluded in December, global climate talks have been in a state of confusion. Two parallel tracks are already under way – one that includes the United States and one that omits this significant world emitter. The Copenhagen Accord, some say, threatens to introduce a third procedural track, complicating the already tense deliberations.

The Accord, a non-binding political statement introduced at the 11th hour of the Copenhagen summit, has been praised by some for garnering stronger commitments from major developing nations, which could in turn deliver a binding global climate treaty. Yet its formulation has also threatened to destabilize the nearly 20-year old process developed under the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the leading international body for climate change negotiations.

The United States, Brazil, South Africa, India and China formulated the Accord with the understanding that the text would later be adopted by all 194 nations. But many participants considered this outcome to be undemocratic and a departure from a U.N. process meant to offer equal voice to every nation.

Implications of the Accord

Many had hoped that the Copenhagen conference would deliver a legally binding international treaty on climate change, or at least provide direction on many of the core components under negotiation. But the Accord itself contains little of these details and provides instead for countries to set their own emission reduction targets unilaterally.

Among other elements, it states that 2 degrees centigrade is the target above which global temperatures must not rise; it proposes the mobilization of $30 billion by 2012 and $100 billion by 2020 for developing countries to address climate change; and it calls on developed and developing countries to submit their national actions on climate change to the U.N. by January 31, a deadline that has now been postponed “indefinitely.”

Sanjay Vashist, director of Climate Action Network South Asia (CANSA) said that without larger consensus, the Accord reflects “an outcome of a flawed negotiating process…negotiated by a small group of countries,” rather than the 194-nation body.

There are further reservations about the Accord’s content itself. While the text addresses several key negotiation issues, many crucial details remain undetermined. “It is far from clear where the funding [for climate change mitigation and adaptation] will come from, if it is genuinely new and additional, and how it will be allocated and channeled,” said Saleemul Huq, a senior fellow with the International Institute for Environment and Development’s climate change group, who co-authored a recent report on climate finance.

(more…)

Copenhagen, Denmark – Climate “witnesses” from Bangladesh, Peru, the South Pacific, and Uganda testified at the world’s first climate change hearing on Wednesday.

The hearing, organized by Oxfam International and Action for a Global Climate Community , was designed to put climate change victims-those whom climate change affects the most yet who have contributed least to the problem-at the center of the climate debate, according to Oxfam Executive Director Jeremy Hobbs.

The concept of “climate justice” is widespread in the negotiation rooms, side events, and rallies at the ongoing international climate talks in the Danish capital.

“Fourteen percent of the world population has produced 60 percent of the world’s carbon emissions since 1850,” said Mary Robinson, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at the hearing. “The poorest have the least role in causing climate change yet they are being hit first, hardest, and worst.”

Wealthy nations have proposed distributing $100 billion in climate aid annually by 2020 to the most vulnerable nations affected by climate change. U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton announced Thursday that the United States would help raise public and private funds for the effort.

Ethiopian President Meles Zenawi proposed on Wednesday that poorer nations receive $50 billion each year in immediate climate funding, with the aid increasing to $100 billion annually by 2020. Other African leaders have criticized the proposal as insufficient.

Pelenise Olafa, a community leader from the island nation of Kiribati, called for additional support for the South Pacific islands, where the highest land area is less than four meters above sea level. “We are on the frontline and may be the first countries to go down,” Olafa said. “Don’t we understand that climate change is not negotiable? It is a matter of life and death.”

Shorbanu Khatun, a single mother of four from Bangladesh, described the loss of her husband and home as a result of rising sea levels, increased ground salinity, and the onslaught of Cyclone Isla. She and her children have lived hand to mouth during the decade since their home was lost to the sea.

“We have lost everything,” Khatun said. “We used to think that God was punishing us, but I have come to know that climate change is manmade. I have come to you to seek justice and compensation. I want my life back.”

Climate impacts are being observed in the mountain regions of South America as well. Cayetano Huanca, a farmer from Peru’s Ocongate district, described new emerging diseases in his homeland. “The weather seasons have changed completely and are affecting our culture, cattle herding, and the life of human beings,” Huanca said, noting that crop failures, glacial melt, and large temperature swings are becoming more regular. “We the indigenous people will not pay for the consequences. Are we guilty?”

Constance Okollet, a farmer from Uganda, described the devastating drought, flooding, and disease that has occurred in her village of Tororo since 2007. “We want our seasons back. We want our generations. Children and old people are dying. We want them to stop the emissions because we are suffering and dying as a result of them. We want money to adapt with the changes of climate because we are dying,” she said.

“All of us are seeking to be heard,” said Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, who oversaw the session. “People who are living on the frontline of climate change…are the ones that must be listened to more than anyone else. They are the voices that must be heard…heeded…and acted upon.”

Most of the individuals currently suffering from the impacts of climate change have not taken legal action to collect repayment for damages done.

However, on Wednesday the International Court for the Environment Coalition, a campaign run by “lawyers and environmentalists throughout the world,” announced plans to create an International Court for the Environment where victims of climate-related human rights violations could air their grievances, said Philip Riches, the coalition’s director.

At the conclusion of the testimonies, Commissioner Robinson delivered her verdict, observing that climate change is a “deep and global injustice” that is “undermining human rights on an unprecedented scale.”

Archbishop Tutu closed the session with words of caution: “We are here to tell the leaders of the world we have one Earth home. If it is destroyed, there is no other. And we are in it together. We are going to swim or drown together. We are interconnected. We are bound together. If one slips down inexorably, he or she brings down the whole lot. We are here to call for action.”

Worldwatch Staff Writer Ben Block contributed to this report.

Cross-posted from Eye on Earth, Worldwatch Institute

“Carbon Dioxide” is definitely the phrase of the day when it comes to climate change talks. This greenhouse gas has become synonymous with the challenge of rising global temperatures, and indeed, it is estimated to be responsible for nearly 40 percent of climate change. However, there are other greenhouse gases that have, until now, received less attention. These gases, such as hydroflourocarbons (HFCs), chloroflourocarbons (CFCs), nitrous oxides and other pollutants are crucial for quickly reducing climate change.

Black carbon is a form of particulate air pollution, released through the incomplete burning of biomass, biofuels and fossil fuels, such as coal and diesel. According to Professor V. Ramanathan, of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, it is estimated to have as much as 60 percent of the global warming effect of carbon dioxide. Yet until recently it was not recognised as a warming agent at all. Although of significance across the globe, black carbon has a particularly concerning effect on tundra regions, which include the North and South poles, as well as mountainous areas.

“Over 90 percent of the black carbon emitted by nations in the Arctic-region (which lie above 40 degrees latitude), comes from agricultural, forest or peat fires”, said Elena Koblets, Director for Development at Russia-based Bellona Foundation, an international environmental NGO based in Norway, at a UN climate summit side event this week. In the southern hemisphere, Koblets said, the main source is different. Far more comes from the burning of diesel for transport and power, as well as from biomass burning for heat and cooking.

When sunlight reaches suspended black carbon particles in the air, it is absorbed as heat, warming the air directly around it. Furthermore, when this sooty residue deposits on snow and ice, it darkens the surface causing the ground to absorb more light as heat and melt at a faster rate than it would otherwise. On a large scale, melt may accelerate the loss of stable water resources in the form of glaciers and snow. It can also cause changes in local ecosystem dynamics with each species responding differently to the changes in snow and ice availability.

Despite its significance, black carbon is barely on the agenda in Copenhagen. It receives a brief mention in one of the negotiating texts (the “LCA text”) and they are hoping to get it into one other (the “vision text”). At this late stage of the negotiations, observers said it seems too difficult to introduce new greenhouse gases but that strong voluntary actions and domestic policy change to address black carbon emissions is essential.

“Black carbon projects are not eligible for clean development mechanism funding at this time, but that’s the kind of step that the UN could take,” said Pam Pearson, of the International Cryosphere Climate Initiative.

“Over 12 million hectares of agricultural fires take place every year in Russia alone and 97 percent of forest fires are started by agricultural fires,” Pearson said. These agricultural fires are started by farmers to improve soil cultivation and to drive animals from the fields.
In Russia, state and national laws to prevent farmers from burning their crops, along with training on farming methods that avoid fires, are urgently needed in the region, said Vladimir Chouprov, head of energy projects at Greenpeace Russia. In Asia, particularly in the countries of the Greater Himalayan Region, similar discussions are being initiated, with clean development emerging as a key requirement if black carbon emissions from diesel combustion and biomass burning are to be addressed. The government of India recently rolled out an improved cookstove program in this regard.

Steven Chu, US Secretary of Energy, also announced plans today, along with Australia and Italy to provide LED lights in areas reliant on hurricane lamps and wicked lamps.

“We want to replace the hurricane and wicked lamps with high quality LED,” Chu said, adding that additional research would be dedicated to improving the lights’ quality. “If we introduce new technology and some don’t work as well, it’ll cause classic market spoiling.” The program also expects to lower the price of LEDs globally.

“Addressing black carbon will be key to slowing down the rate of global warming”, said Pearson, who explained that unlike carbon dioxide, which stays in the atmosphere for more than 100 years, black carbon remains for only a few weeks. This means that changing practices that release black carbon can have a rapid effect on the warming of our atmosphere and rapid ice and snow melt, through being removed from the atmosphere far more rapidly that carbon dioxide. “A lot of science still needs to happen, but this is no reason for lack of action” she added.

Staff Writer Ben Block contributed to this report. Cross-posted from Dateline:Copenhagen

It’s day two of the climate negotiations here in Copenhagen, and the global youth are out in force. Today, on the anniversary of John Lennon’s assassination, they held a “bed-in” against climate change.

Camping out in the main hall, with bed linen, pyjamas, pillows and teddy bears, a group came together and sang to the tune of John Lennon’s song, ”Give Peace a Chance,” to ask delegates from around the world to, “give youth a chance” and deliver a deal that will ensure the survival of all peoples, all species and all nations.

“John Lennon used to do bed-ins for peace,” said Anna Rose, from the Australian Youth Climate Coalition. “This action is to represent the treat that climate change poses to our peace and survival.” Rose added, “We want this to remind world leaders that these negotiations are about young people.”

Swetha Stotra Bashyam, one of the other youth participants from the Indian Youth Climate Network, said that this action was a way for global youth to get the attention of domestic as well as international media and the climate negotiators. “We have not lost hope, and we have not given up on our negotiators,” she added.

Youth, who make up the majority of the world’s population, will be most impacted by climate change as its effects strengthen over time. On September 28, 2009, youth gained a formally recognised constituency within the United Nations, called YOUNGO (”Youth non-governmental organisation.”)

Cross-posted from Dateline: Copenhagen, Worldwatch Institute

As I made my way to the Bella Centre here in Copenhagen this morning for the first day of the two week-long international climate talks, there was something historic in the air. Walking down into the subway, out of the cold morning air, I passed beneath a sign that said, in bold letters, “The time is now.”

And indeed, if there ever was a time for action on climate change, now is that time. Climate change impacts are growing in number and severity day by day in every region of the world. In addition, new threats to our national security, economic stability, resource availability and the very ecosystems that sustain us are emerging. There is no more time to wait for action.

These global climate negotiations are one of the most important and complex political negotiations to have taken place in humanity’s long and winding history. Indeed, this meeting in Copenhagen alone has brought together 25,000 attendees from every corner of the earth. They will be joined by an astonishing 110 heads of state and government next week. The sheer size and level of this meeting signifies its importance and the potential it brings.

So, as the first in a series of dispatches from Copenhagen, I, along with my fellow delegates, am taking the opportunity today to ask the question: What do I really want to see from this historic meeting? What took me by surprise was the difficulty I experienced in answering this question, as I found myself met by the conflict of so-called “political reality” and “personal aspiration.”

Despite a more collaborative political dynamic on climate change than there has ever been, we are still very far from achieving the kind of ambitious, equitable, and binding deal that our global society needs to see in Copenhagen. Yet time is running out. The challenges of domestic politics and the barriers they represent loom large in the negotiating arena, but in truth, what kind of “political reality checks” will we continue to impose on our survival that are stronger than the ecological, economic and social stability of our world?

In reality, anything is possible and the only true limit to change is our ability to imagine it and truly wish to make it happen. Perhaps that is aspiration, but we have the capacity as a global community to achieve the change we wish to see; if only we can work together, and make commitments in line with science and with our past and future responsibilities and capabilities.

With this in mind, I choose to hope that here in Copenhagen, at this historic meeting, we will see aspiration win out over “political reality.” That we will see true political leadership, meaningful acceptance of responsibility from all nations and true change-making politics to give us the strong, global deal on climate change that the world needs.

In the words of Yvo de Boer at the opening conference plenary, “After two years negotiating Copenhagen, the time has come to deliver. Copenhagen will only be successful if it delivers solid action that will begin the day Copenhagen ends. I urge you to…deliver [and] reach for success.”

Or, as Lars Lokke Rasmussen, Denmark’s Prime Minister said, “Let us not focus on what divides us, but on what brings us together. We can change and we have to change.” The time is now.

Cross-posted from Dateline: Copenhagen, Worldwatch Institute

After months of speculation marked by rumors, leaks, and high-level approvals, India formally launched its national solar mission, known as “Solar India,” last week. The move confirms the country’s intention to assume a global leadership role on solar energy and to stake out a low-carbon development path at home.

The policy confirms India’s much-touted plans to install 20,000 megawatts (MW) of solar power over the next 12 years – a 6,666-fold leap from the current 3 MW of installed capacity, and the equivalent of 13 percent of India’s total installed power generation capacity. The supply would be met with solar thermal technologies that convert the sun’s light to heat as well as solar photovoltaic (PV) systems that convert sunlight to electricity, for use in both grid-connected applications and off-grid applications such as solar water heaters and solar lanterns.

Speaking at the launch of Solar India in Delhi, India’s Minister of New and Renewable Energy, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, described the mission as a “historic and transformational initiative.” He outlined his country’s wish to pursue solar energy as a means to support “India’s long term energy security as well as its ecological security.”

Ambitious plans for scale-up

Solar India’s primary aim is to create an enabling policy environment for rapid diffusion of solar technology across the country. According to the final policy document, the mission hopes to “attract industry and project developers to invest in research, domestic manufacturing, and development of solar power generation and thus create the critical mass for a domestic solar industry.”

(more…)

Cross-posted from Dateline: Copenhagen, Worldwatch Institute

We’ve heard a lot in recent months about India’s international positioning on climate change, but what is opinion like at home? Is everyone in agreement with the formal government position? And what is the key to stronger Indian engagement with the international climate regime? A  working paper [PDF] on this subject was recently released by Navroz Dubash, a Senior Fellow at India’s Centre for Policy Research. It looks not only at the state of opinion within India’s government, corporations and civil society on how India should respond to the climate challenge, but also proffers that what is most needed in advance of the negotiations in Copenhagen is to build trust.

Dubash suggests that there is broad domestic agreement in India on three key points. Firstly, that India is being unfairly labelled a major emitter by the international community, secondly, that India has an ongoing and considerable development challenge, and thirdly, that India is moving in the right direction climate change mitigation is concerned. ”Climate diplomats from other countries would do well to recognize this reality,” says Dubash.

(more…)

Worldwatch has just launched its State of the World 2009 Report in India. Into a Warming World is the 26th edition of the State of the World series, which since its inception has functioned as a platform to discuss some of the most pressing sustainability issues of the day. “State of the World 2009 is a research masterpiece’, said Alex Steffen, Executive Editor of Worldchanging.com, ”the single most important reference guide to climate change yet published.”

Through the eyes of 47 expert authors, Into a Warming World outlines not only the serious challenge that climate stabilization now presents to the global community, but also the multitude of economic, social, environmental, and security opportunities that exist to manage and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.

Bearing in mind that each country will need to adopt a unique yet coordinated response to address this challenge, Worldwatch has collaborated with the Centre for Environment Education (CEE) to tailor State of the World 2009 for an Indian audience. This has been done through the inclusion of a Preface by Kartikeya Sarabhai, CEE’s Director, in which he offers an overview of India’s engagement with the issue of climate change to date and elaborates on the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the country.

Into a Warming World was first launched in Washington in January 2009, a year that is set to become the most crucial year yet for climate change in 25 years of global warming diplomacy. 2009 is a year that has seen a new and more proactive U.S. administration, borne witness to a growing number of climate change-related impacts around the world as well as considerable growth in global awareness of the challenge and the opportunities that exist to address the problem, and is the year that will end with a meeting of global leaders in Copenhagen this December to decide the shape and form of a new global treaty on climate change within the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (more…)

As international climate negotiations progress this week in Bangkok, Thailand, India has shown signs of more proactive engagement on climate change issues both internationally and at home.

While the Indian government continues to emphasize poverty alleviation and economic development as the country’s highest priorities, recent stances on domestic emission reductions indicate that India is taking considerable steps to encourage more constructive global climate talks.

India joins a growing contingent of developing countries that “are making very significant efforts to show what they are doing to address climate change and indicate what more they are willing to do,” according to U.N. climate chief Yvo de Boer.

Until recently, India had repeatedly rejected calls to quantify its targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions on the grounds that this would jeopardize national poverty alleviation goals.

“India cannot and will not take emission reduction targets because poverty eradication and social and economic development are first and over-riding priorities,” Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said in June.

But two weeks ago, in a surprising reversal, India agreed to quantify its efforts to mitigate climate change. Ramesh said India would reduce emissions by “a broadly indicative number,” although the reductions would still not be bound by international law.

At the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate in Italy in July, India joined 16 other countries in declaring that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels should not exceed 2 degrees Celsius. This goal remains somewhat controversial, however, as there is still no clear agreement on how countries will share the burden for reducing global emissions.

At the subsequent Major Economies Forum in Washington, D.C., this September, India proposed that it could submit more detailed and regular information to the international community on its domestic climate change efforts as a step toward greater transparency.

All countries that are party to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are required to submit periodic “national communications” that report on their carbon emissions and climate mitigation activities. But India, like other developing countries, has not had to submit these reports as regularly or in as much detail as industrialized countries, especially for those actions that are not internationally funded.

“We are prepared to…incorporate [self-funded actions on climate change] in our national communication [and]…to consider making the national communication more detailed and more regular,” said Shyam Saran, India’s Special Envoy on Climate Change, speaking to Worldwatch. But, he said, all parties to the UNFCCC would need to agree to such changes.

These recent overtures from India’s government are a sign of the country’s growing investment in the success of the Copenhagen climate negotiations in December, Ramesh said.

“The single most important message we need to give the world is that we are proactive, constructive, [and] we want a fair and equitable agreement in Copenhagen,” he told the Indian Express. (more…)

Scientists, policymakers, and community representatives from across South Asia met earlier this month to discuss the many threats that climate change poses to the continent’s Greater Himalayan region.

Across Nepal and Tibet, average temperatures have been up to six times warmer in the mountains than in the plains, triggering changes in regional weather patterns. These changes have been accompanied by increases in pest and disease populations, losses in local biodiversity, and more than 3,500 forest fires in the Himalayas this spring alone.

“Accelerated melting of glaciers in the Himalayas is…posing a catastrophic threat to the 1.3 billion people in [the region's] river basins,” said Uday Sharma, secretary of Nepal’s Ministry of Environment, who attended the meeting in Kathmandu in early September.

Unseasonal weather, including floods, droughts, and late frosts, has also prompted crop failures from Tajikistan to northern India, according to Brian Peniston, Nepal and India country director with the Mountain Institute. 

The unprecedented changes led leaders in the mountainous region to seek closer collaboration to address their shared climate challenge. The Kathmandu-to-Copenhagen conference, the first formal meeting of Himalayan nations on climate change, provided an opportunity for delegates to discuss joint development opportunities in the region and to develop a common statement to the international community on the region’s climate challenges.

Participants at the event called on climate change negotiators gathering in Copenhagen, Denmark, this December to give greater attention to the plight of the Himalayan region as they finalize a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol. So far, they said, the international community has paid little attention to the impacts of climate change in the Himalayas, compared to the significant coverage given to low-lying coastal countries such as Bangladesh and the Maldives.

“[During the 2007 climate summit] in Bali, climate change was seen exclusively for island states and coastal areas, but we have to see mountain states as highly sensitive and fragile also,” said Andreas Schild, director general of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD). 

The Greater Himalayan region is home to the world’s highest mountain peaks and spans more than 7 million square kilometers in eight Asian countries. Its more than 112,000 square kilometers of snow and ice feed 10 major rivers that flow far into surrounding lowland plains, including the Ganges, Mekong, Tarim, and Yangtze. This immense hydrological system, together with rain deposited by regional weather patterns, supplies water to an estimated 35 percent of the global population.

Mounting impacts

At the Kathmandu summit, more than 30 high-profile speakers spoke about the many changes being observed across this ecologically dynamic region.

Pradeep K. Mool, an ice-and-water remote-sensing specialist with ICIMOD, observed that “mosquito nets are now needed in Lhasa,” Tibet’s administrative capital. Residents of the city, located 3,490 meters above sea level, have reported seeing mosquitoes for the first time ever.

There are similar reports of flies at Mt. Everest base camp in Nepal. The presence of these insects suggests the possible spread of vector-borne diseases, such as malaria and dengue fever, to areas where cooler temperatures previously protected people from these threats.

The region’s tremendous expanse of snow and ice has also experienced major changes. According to local researchers, permafrost is melting in high-elevation areas of China, causing houses to crumble, railway tracks to buckle, and roads to pucker. Snow lines have receded to higher altitudes, revealing plains that are now being degraded by rats in some areas. Lower-altitude glaciers are showing signs of rapid melt as well.

“Most of the glaciers are shrinking in mass at low and mid altitudes in the Himalayas and elsewhere, but very few are being scientifically monitored,” Mool said.

Ang Tshering Sherpa, president of the Union of Asian Alpine Associations (UAAA), observed that in 1960, Nepal was home to more than 3,000 glaciers and no high-altitude lakes. But today, “almost every glacier is melting, and we have between 2,000 and 3,000 lakes,” he said. Studies suggest that if the present trend continues, most valley-glacier trunks (where smaller tributary glaciers join to form a larger glacial system) and smaller glaciers will disappear by 2050.

Glacial melt provides as much as 70 percent of the summer flow for the region’s 10 major river systems, supplying a large share of the water needs for an estimated 3-4 billion people downstream. With seven of the rivers spanning more than one country, delegates expressed concern that regional resource conflicts may develop if there are long-term decreases in river flow. Government officials and scientists said that mitigating this threat will require international and regional collaboration on data sharing and analysis, water management, and adaptation measures.

Glacial lake outburst floods

Glacial lakes are a relatively recent phenomenon in the Himalayan region and a source of great concern for local populations. As the water from melting glaciers builds up, these lakes can burst from their rock or ice barriers and cause rapid flash floods, known as “glacial lake outburst floods,” that inundate surrounding areas with water, boulders, and sediment.

“When they burst, many infrastructures, livelihoods, and innocent lives are washed away in a minute,” said the UAAA’s Sherpa. “They can affect the whole region, even down to Bangladesh.” (more…)

The McKinsey & Co study  was co-authored by Sahana Sarma. Below is an interview with Ms. Sarma.

What do you hope will be the main impacts of this report?

The aim of this analysis is to provide a fact base on measures that could have the greatest potential to reduce emissions for India. Our report has three key messages. First, India has the opportunity to reduce its energy consumption by 22 percent, and halve its emissions by 2030. Second, this will not be easy, given that only 10 percent of the abatement opportunities outlined in the report is readily feasible. Third, embarking on such a path has several benefits for India, including reduced energy consumption, improving energy security, numerous societal benefits such as reducing pollution, and business opportunities where India could take a leadership role such as in clean technology products and services.

We hope that this report provides a fact base for both policymakers and the business community and helps point to key opportunities to reduce India’s emissions.

Having conducted such an exhaustive analysis, what, to your mind, are the “biggest wins” in terms of single technologies, policies, or other measures that could help reduce India’s emission growth?

There are five major areas where significant emission reductions are possible for India: clean power, energy efficient industry, green transportation, sustainable habitats, and sustainable agriculture and forestry.

Are there any transformative technologies on the horizon that were not included in the analysis but that you feel could be of significance to future abatement scenarios?

We didn’t assess how technologies might evolve in the future in this case, but certainly innovations that could reduce the costs of these technologies over time, for example through increasing their scale of production, would be on the list.

To what extent was India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change taken into account in your mapping of India’s emission pathway today? And if it was not entirely incorporated, what sort of emission reductions do you believe could be achieved through the implementation of the full National Action Plan as it stands?

Our analysis does factor in certain existing initiatives undertaken both by government and industry across a range of sectors. We do not take a view on government institutions but really aim to have created a fact base to support further prioritization.

One of the remarkable things about the McKinsey cost curve is its revelation of so-called “negative-cost” opportunities. Could you explain why, if they are truly negative, these costs are not being captured automatically?

The first part of our analysis focused solely on making it clear which are the negative and positive cost solutions. However, in order to actually capture these cost savings, there are a number of barriers that would have to be overcome. These include market imperfections that do not transfer cost savings to the appropriate people, need for a supportive regulatory framework to incentivize such change, and supply-chain and skill-level challenges. All of these would need to be addressed to allow the cost savings of the negative-cost solutions to be captured.

(more…)

Growth in India’s carbon emissions could be nearly halved by the year 2030 through the use of known practices and technologies, according to a new report from McKinsey & Company.

Through a “step-change in…efforts to lower emissions,” India’s carbon output could grow from 1.6 billion tons in 2005 to only 2.8 billion tons in 2030 as the country’s population expands and its economy develops, the report said. This is down from a previously projected 5-6 billion tons for 2030.

If achieved, this dynamic shift could significantly enhance India’s energy security by reducing energy import requirements and shrinking domestic power demand by a quarter, the report concluded. Such measures would also make India one of the world’s most carbon-efficient countries, spawning new high-growth industries, increasing environmental sustainability, and improving the quality of life, particularly in rural areas.

“Eighty percent of what India could be in 2030 is yet to be built, providing the country an opportunity to effectively manage the economic and environmental costs of growing energy requirements,” said McKinsey & Company Director Rajat Gupta, a co-author of the report.

Despite the potential, 90 percent of the identified emissions-reduction opportunities for India will prove difficult or expensive to achieve, the report said. Just to implement the solutions, the country will require additional investment of between US$869 billion and $1.1 trillion between 2010 and 2030-roughly 1.8-2.3 percent of India’s GDP over this period. The projection also exceeds India’s expected energy infrastructure investment needs of $1.3 trillion between 2006 and 2030, according to data from the International Energy Agency.

(more…)

Cross-Posted from Worldwatch Institute, Eye on Earth, www.worldwatch.org

India’s National Solar Mission was approved “in principal” last week by the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change.

The solar mega-project, aimed at expanding India’s solar capacity from the current 3 megawatts (MW) to a reported 20 gigawatts (GW) by 2020 and 200 GW by 2050, will form the centerpiece of a National Climate Change Strategy and cost an estimated US$20 billion to implement.

With worldwide installed solar-generation capacity totalling just 16.5 GW, and India’s power generation capacity at 150 GW, the plan is notable for its scale and ambition.

Speaking at the launch of India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change in June 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the sun would occupy “center stage” in India’s climate strategy and that the success of the solar endeavour would “change the face” of the country.

Already, India’s Solar Mission represents one of the world’s largest renewable energy plans to date, with promises to establish India as a global solar leader, draw new investment to the country, and spur the creation of new industries and jobs. 

Early drafts of the Solar Mission indicated that domestic funds could finance a significant share of the plan’s budget. Newer reports imply that the government will ask for full funding from international sources. “We have kept several options open – budgetary support, taxes on fossil fuels, and international funding or a combination thereof,” said Shyam Saran, India’s special envoy on climate change, in an interview with Worldwatch. (more…)

Cross-Posted from Worldwatch Institute, Eye on Earth, www.worldwatch.org

India’s government has set a new international standard for engaging youth on climate policy.

In June, the Ministry of Environment and Forests invited the Indian Youth Climate Network (IYCN) to comment on the government’s climate change regulations. Inputs from the youth movement were then raised in India’s lower house of parliament, the Lok Sabha, in an unprecedented gesture to the nation’s youth.

“The Government is aware of the recommendations and duly keeps these in mind when finalizing documents [and] actions,” the Ministry stated in a press release.

Youth – defined as people under the age of 35 – are a significant political stakeholder in India, representing nearly 70 percent of the population. The youth stake in the climate debate is arguably higher still, with the effects of rising temperatures and other climatic disruptions likely to be felt well into the future.

The IYCN was founded in March 2008 and is a rapidly growing coalition of individuals and organizations across India that are united around solutions-oriented action on climate change.

Kartikeya Singh, co-founder and former executive director of IYCN, praised the government’s efforts to connect with young voters.

“It is a great leap forward to see the government acting on the promises it made when it signed the Agenda 21 declaration at the Rio Summit,” Singh said, referring to a 1992 commitment from more than 180 nations that includes a call to formally engage youth in climate policymaking.

Among other resolutions, the declaration states that governments must “establish a process to promote dialogue between the youth community and Government at all levels and…provide them with the opportunity to present their perspectives on government decisions.”

So far, India is one of the few nations to have taken steps toward this commitment. Last December, two young people were invited to join the official Indian delegation to the United Nations climate discussions in Poznań, Poland.

But the latest invitation seems to mark an increasing level of governmental engagement on climate issues following this spring’s national election. During the election, all three major parties mentioned the need for climate action in their campaign platforms.

(more…)

Cross-Posted from Worldwatch Institute, Eye on Earth, www.worldwatch.org

Environmental activist Vandana Shiva has been working to build an organic agriculture movement across India for the past 22 years through the Navdanya Trust, an organization that she founded and directs. She recently spoke with Worldwatch India Fellow Anna da Costa about the connections between sustainable agriculture, climate change, and poverty alleviation.

What led you to work on the environment, and particularly on sustainable agriculture?

The big transition to agriculture really came in 1984, which was incidentally a very Orwellian year for me. We had the invasion of the Golden Temple as a result of the extremist terrorist movement that had grown in Punjab. In response and retaliation, [then Prime Minister] Indira Gandhi was assassinated. People think this violence began with Al Qaeda, but terrorism has been around for a while, and one of the first extremist responses was in fact to the Green Revolution [the 20th-century movement to boost agricultural yields through increased use of chemical fertilizers and other inputs] in Punjab. A little later, we had the Bhopal disaster, the worst industrial disaster from a pesticide plant in history.

By the end of the year, my head was spinning and I was asking myself why agriculture had to be so violent. During that period, 30,000 people had been killed in the extremist Punjab violence and 30,000 in Bhopal. So we are talking about six times [the effects of] 9-11 in Punjab and six times [the effects of] 9-11 in Bhopal.

Food is too important, and agriculture is too important, to be left to more disasters like the ones we witnessed in 1984. And that’s why I dedicated myself from then on to building a non-violent agriculture. That became my life’s mission.

Could you describe the work and philosophy of your organization, Navdanya?

The first element of Navdanya’s philosophy is to establish an agriculture at peace with nature – that leaves farmers in peace and doesn’t push them into the kind of violence we saw in Punjab in the 1980s or to the new, self-directed violence that we have seen since then in the form of farmer suicides.

Second is the celebration of diversity. Biodiverse systems produce more nutrition per acre than the most intensive industrial systems and also have a higher land-equivalent ratio. That means you can grow much more on the same piece of land because you are creating symbiotic relationships between the plants.

Third is the importance of keeping in the commons that which belongs to the commons, like biodiversity and knowledge. The dominant market philosophy today is based on competition, but to my mind, the only things that sustain themselves in the long term are solidarity economies – economies based on mutual trust, on give and take.

Our work has grown out of this three-tiered philosophy. We are working to build non-violent, biodiverse agriculture  -namely, organic farming. We have trained nearly half a million farmers across the country either through large camps or through attendance at our schools. We run teacher training and research on farms and have also set up freely accessible community seed banks, with at least 50 around the country now. We also help the farmers with direct marketing and fair trade of their wonderful produce.

(more…)