Solar leadership beckons India

Rakesh Kamal  |   Published: 29th Nov 2017  12:05 am Updated: 29th Nov 2017  12:14 am

Bullish as usual on coal, US President Donald Trump delivered a message to celebrate the opening of a Pennsylvania metallurgical coal mine. “We have withdrawn the United States from the horrendous Paris climate accord, something that would have put our country back decades and decades; we would have never allowed ourselves to be great again,” Repeated pleas of staying in the Paris climate accord by leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron and Nobel laureate Al Gore have fallen on deaf ears.

During the last few weeks, negotiators and observers from across the world participating in the climate negotiations at COP23 in Bonn were anxious. There was a fear that with the US withdrawing, many others would follow suit.

With Trump’s announcement to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, the focus has shifted to other responsible high emitting countries like China, India and the European Union to tackle climate change. This Bonn Summit showed that climate leadership is now being looked more as a collaborative effort rather than that of an individual country.

Paris Commitments

Right on the first day, it was made clear by India and China that developing countries need to keep their Pre-2020 commitments as the Paris Agreement will come into force only after 2020. Under the Pre-2020 commitments, $100 billion in climate finance has been committed, of which only a fraction has been delivered. The developing countries negotiated and made sure that the Pre-2020 ambition and implementation formed a major part of the COP23 final text.
The discussion on who pays for the loss and damage caused by climate change has been a major contention. With Fiji preceding the talks, there was high expectation that this year will be the year of loss and damage. Developing countries have been demanding that a permanent agenda item on loss and damage and an expert group on finance be included but in the negotiations only succeeded in getting an expert dialogue to be held in 2018.
The snail’s pace of these negotiations also seems very discouraging to many. However, the negotiations have so far managed to give a strong push for countries to better their National Action Plans on climate change with clear targets. The long-term goals set at these conferences also signal positivity to the renewables market and the last few years of growth in the sector could be attributed to the momentum built for these climate negotiations.

Silver Lining

India is lately in a Catch-22 situation — with it being one of the top greenhouse gas emitters (only behind China, US and the EU) as well being vulnerable to climate change. With ever-expanding infrastructural growth, its emissions will only increase. A long coastline, snowy mountains, perennial rivers and dependency of agriculture on the monsoon make the country highly vulnerable to climate change.

But there’s a silver lining in all these dark clouds. Efforts made by the Indian government to promote renewables are now reaping benefits with the cost of renewable energy production falling to record low every month. Five years ago, solar companies in India were producing a kilowatt/hour for Rs 7 but now it is down to Rs 2.44; cheaper than coal. The recent Cabinet approval of the Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency (Ireda) listing will increase equity base and help it raise more debt for funding projects.

The Indian government-supported International Solar Alliance (ISA) is also making headlines with its innovative approach and financial mechanisms to replicate successful programmes and promote solar in untapped markets. With more than 15 countries signing the ISA Framework Agreement, it will become a legitimate entity soon. Similarly, by expanding Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited on the lines of ONGC Videsh to enter the international market, India can sell solar energy in untapped markets in Africa thereby increasing the production demand.

Turning Point

While all the above by the Indian government are good initiatives, greater emphasis must be on the most beneficial and effective mechanisms to deploy solar (and not necessarily the easiest way out). Rooftop solar, rural electrification with renewable energy and solar parks should be prioritised in the same order because the losses are low in the first two options and the benefits are direct even if it is a difficult path.

Now all that is required is the right mix of policy and financial support to nurture the markets so as to take the various green initiatives forward. We must also not pass up on the opportunity of being one of the largest markets for solar energy. India’s dilemma can be its biggest opportunity by giving a thrust to greening businesses and by encouraging holistic and sustainable living. We are at a turning point in the renewable energy sector in the sub-continent and efforts must be made to keep the curve going.

To achieve the targets set by countries, there’s a need for increased efforts in domestic mitigation actions like decentralised rooftop solar and rural electrification. These efforts would be more successful if coupled with a mass awareness campaign. There is also a need for an ecosystem for innovation and technology development in the renewable energy space, which is completely missing.

Get Going

India needs to plan before it is too late and promote research on renewables and support production of solar panels in India. Promotion of microgrids, environmental-friendly biofuels and continued support to the renewable industry is a must for efforts to be sustainable on a long-term basis.

So, to be a new leader in international forums in the ever-changing world energy dynamics, India needs to first internally educate its citizens on climate literacy, empower individuals to make better climate-friendly choices and make it an issue that people can relate to and demand the government to provide better cleaner alternatives. If you can win at home, you can conquer the world.

(The author works for climate reality, and is a clean energy and climate policy expert. @Rakeshkamal)

Originally published i Telangana Today on 29th November

Charge size matters

By Umang Jalan and Rakesh Kamal

An increase in maximum charge size limits for hydrocarbon refrigerants is needed for effective HFC phase down in India 

With the upcoming negotiations at the 37th Meeting of the Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol from April 4 - 8, 2016 which will deal with the Dubai pathway to formulate a HFC phase down agreement, natural refrigerants have been gaining ground over high Global Warming Potential (GWP) Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC).

Natural refrigerants or the "gentle five" include ammonia, carbon dioxide, water, hydrocarbons and air. Perhaps, the most appropriate in an Indian context are hydrocarbon refrigerants. This is because these refrigerants have low GWP, are freely available and have high energy efficiency in high ambient temperature conditions. With the ever-growing need for Refrigeration and Air Conditioning (RAC) in India, moving from HFCs to natural refrigerants provides an opportunity to mitigate emissions and avoid a warming of 0.5 degrees globally.

There are, however, safety concerns related to hydrocarbons because of relatively higher flammability than traditional HFC based refrigerants These concerns, however can now be dealt with new technologies that can be used to make such systems safe enough for wide scale implementation. The only major restriction is the lack of accommodating safety standards.

The amount of refrigerant needed to run a refrigeration cycle of a certain cooling capacity is known as “charge size”. According to reports, the maximum allowed “charge size” of hydrocarbons in RAC systems needs to be increased to 1 kg in order to accomplish large scale implementation of the technology. This amount would be sufficient for large scale implementation of the technologies in the most popular RAC sectors, i.e. medium (2-2.5 tonnes) scale domestic air conditioning. Industry estimates suggest that the domestic air-conditioning sector is expanding in India by 20 per cent per year and accounts for 35 per cent of global emissions from HFCs. More accommodating standards are therefore crucial to achieve an effective HFC phase down in India.

The only suppliers of hydrocarbon-based refrigerators and air conditioners in India currently comply with European standards. These standards mandate construction, design, testing for the safe use of flammable refrigerants. The standards however restrict the maximum charge size to 350-360 g of hydrocarbons. This corresponds to a maximum cooling capacity of around 1.5 tonnes. A change in the standards would allow Indian manufacturers to expand their production line to Hydrocarbon RAC systems with higher cooling capacity.

Currently, there are no standards available in India for the use of hydrocarbon-based refrigerants. The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) takes its cues from the international community for the formulation of most of its standards. This poses a problem in standard development for hydrocarbons as no country allows more than a fraction of the requisite 1 kg maximum charge size limit. There are however leak detection, mechanical system shutdown and ventilation (in case of leaks) technologies available now that may make the case for increasing the charge size in most RAC applications. Currently, the EU, US and China are in the process of revisiting some of these standards in light of the technological improvements.

Perhaps, standards should necessitate safety features that will allow for universal use of the RAC systems without room size limits in Indian conditions. This is important, as oversight over implementation of such limits would be difficult in India. Developing an Indian standard to ensure safe wide scale implementation of hydrocarbon RAC systems is therefore important. Such a standard will help place the local refrigeration industry in a better position globally. It will also help in having an edge in the current negotiations as it will give confidence to the markets/industry that the Indian government is working on providing the framework for transition to natural refrigerants.

Originally published in Down to earth on 22-3-2016

Speech at "Renewable Energy & Climate Change: Problems & Prospects" on February 11-12, 2016 at Shyam Lal College, Shahdara, Delhi

Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen

I am humbled to speak in the presence of such an esteemed and experienced panel.

It is a great pleasure to have the opportunity to address you all today and to deliver a strong message to fight climate change, one of the greatest challenges of our time.

Let me start by sharing the story of Radha, a widow from a village in Telangana. Her husband committed suicide because of the failure of crop. She has two children to raise but now also a farm to take care of. The crop is completely dependent on rain fed agriculture and with erratic power supply, it doesn't really help having a borewell.

The land she owns is seriously degraded; the water she drinks is not safe. While she enjoys great solidarity from neighbours and relatives, Radha's life is precarious. She witnesses changing conditions of her environment, which affect the productivity of her land. Though she had heard people speak about climate change, she had no clue that activities undertaken by fellow Humans, thousands of kilometres away from her village would affect her life.

.

Sadly, This is a story not far from reality. Warming of the climate system is now evident from various scientific findings as well as from observations. As per Intergovernmental panel for Climate change (IPCC), extreme weather events are on the rise around the world. 2015 was  recorded as warmest year in the history. We are seeing more and more hailstorms, floods, droughts, cyclones than ever. Three out of the four metros are coastal cities, any disaster here will take years to cope with.

For a country like India, Climate change is a great challenge and a tremendous opportunity to move towards a low carbon, resource efficient and sustainable development society. Indeed development pathways influence climate change, and climate change could have significant impacts on development.

There is an urgent, but very simple, reason why we need to address the issue of climate change: the world is running out of carbon space. As per IPCC to stay under 2 degrees C, all we have is around 1000 Gt of Carbon space. Crossing that 2 degree target will only mean increase in extreme weather events which the world may not be ready to face. Infact, in the Paris agreement countries negotiated to try and keep the temperature under 1.5 degrees which would have been commendable if only an action plan to maintain it was also discussed.

We at CSE have analysed that to develop to a certain level, the required amount of carbon space is only going to come down in the future. We are only going to get more and more efficient but there is a need to apportioning of the global atmospheric commons, which is arguably the most important political challenge the world faces today.

India inspite of being the fourth largest emitter of CO2 has a Human development index of 0.6 and a per capita emissions 1.7 tonnes which is way below the world average. It is also because historically we have not emitted due to various reasons. The targets committed by India in the recent Paris conference to reduce its emission intensity and its commitment to increase the share of renewables  are commendable. It is evident that renewable energy is meant to grow, our energy potential is meant to grow but It is also evident that we need to change the way we do business if we want to grow efficiently. We have a billion aspiring people to provide more than just food, clothing and shelter.

In the run up to the Paris conference on climate change, there were 5 things india wanted in the Paris agreement text which will decide the way forward

1. Equity
2. CBDR
3. Loss and damage
4. Finance and tech transfer
5. Capacity building

What India got is the agreement under United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC);

• a mention of the fact that this agreement will be guided by principle of equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR)
• the words climate Justice for some and Lifestyle changes in the preamble.
• A section on loss and development,
• Mention of finance but no clear guidelines

But if you observe the text carefully, you will notice that there are still some threads still left to negotiate further.

The reason why India was not able to get everything it rightfully deserves is also because it was pushed into corner for claiming that coal will still be the major source of energy in 2030 but its announcement of the solar alliance was seen as a major push from a developing country that they are serious about climate change.

Renewable energy not only stands out as a potential solution for reducing our emissions but also as a tool to place India as an efficient developing country in race for being a super power. As per some estimates all we need is a land as big as the Jodhpur district to provide electricity t everyone in this country. But it is not easy as it is being made to sound, there are many technical, financial issues to deal with first.

As per India’s climate action plan (INDC), in 2030 India will need triple the electricity demand it has now. It is a humongous challenge. Coal is proposed to be a major source of energy even in 2030. But the good news is that renewable energy is going to grow. India has committed to increase its share in non fossil fuel to 40% in installed capacity by 2030. When Renewable energy and Energy efficiency go hand in, the gains are only going to be bigger.

With the challenges ahead of us we have to enter a new era of partnerships. Over the last 10 to 15 years, leaders in the political, environmental, scientific, and economic fields have recognized that environment and climate change will require cooperation across disciplines, and that the solutions are not only technical but also connected to our moral obligations of providing a better life to all.

States, international organizations and the public sector in general are expected to push commitments and show political will to help policies that preserve our environment, create jobs and leave no one behind. We need leaders and champions, and it is by working together that we will achieve our sustainable development and climate action goals. Let morality and not economics alone drive the leaders.

This, Ladies and Gentlemen, is why we are here today. We may or may not know this, Radha from the story I told today and her poor family place high hopes in meetings like this where the next big change could happen.

Thank you very much.

The Price of Paris

Though India promised to reduce emissions at the Paris meet, it faces a huge financial hurdle of $2.5 trillion and several challenges before it can come anywhere close to fulfilling its pledges.

By Swati Prasad

The world recently cheered the agreement at the Paris Climate Conference (COP21). It has been termed as the “triumph of international diplomacy” as it struck a balance between the interests of the developed and the developing world.

India had a big role to play in arriving at this historic pact. Being the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases and a developing economy with 300 million people living without electricity, India did not set an emission cap and stressed its inability to drop coal from its energy mix.

In its INDC (intended nationally determined contributions), submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Modi government said India intends to reduce emissions intensity of its GDP from 35 to 33 percent by 2030, and aims to achieve about 40 percent cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel-based energy resources during this time-frame. “It’s a very ambitious target,” said Damandeep Singh, director, CDP India, which works with corporations to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions. But there are several challenges India will need to address before it comes anywhere close to fulfilling its pledges.

FINANCING PLEDGES

India’s commitments in Paris have huge financial implications. It has put the cost of meeting these pledges at $2.5 trillion between now and 2030. This includes several costs, including that of adapting to climate change, implications for agriculture, disaster management, etc.

But then, there is little India can expect in terms of foreign aid. “The international commitment is only $100 billion for climate finance and that too for all developing countries together,” says Rakesh Kamal, program officer, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE).

India, in its INDC, has stated its intention to install a capacity of 175 GW of renewable energy, up from around 25 GW today. “This implies an investment of around $175 billion,” says Singh.

India’s commitments in Paris have huge financial implications. It has pegged it at $2.5 trillion between now and 2030. And 

little can be expected by way of foreign aid.

India needs equity, rather than debt, in renewable energy projects. Today, businesses lack confidence while investing in green energy. For instance, some state regulations don’t permit companies to transmit power generated (through renewables) to other states, says Singh.

Such bottlenecks have been cited by big companies like Wipro in joining CDP and The Climate Group’s RE100 global platform, wherein companies commit to becoming carbon neutral by relying 100 percent on renewable power. Infosys recently became the first Indian company to join RE100 and aims to become carbon neutral by 2018. “India needs to create business confidence, so that companies are willing to put in money in renewables and greener technology,” adds Singh.

Tech Promise: US researchers have come out with a way to use any window or sheet of glass to generate solar energy.

RENEWABLE TARGETS

Analysis of INDCs conducted by international research organisations reveal that there are two pillars to achieving its goals—first, reducing the energy intensity of the GDP and second, reducing the carbon intensity of electricity. Both require green technologies. The first pillar requires efforts at reducing energy demand through energy efficient infrastructure, appliances and lighting options (such as increased reliance on LED bulbs). The second requires non-fossil, fuel-based power generation.

India is harnessing both wind and solar energy to meet its renewable energy targets. Unfortunately, both these energy sources have downsides, which need to be overcome through further research and investment in new technologies. Take the case of wind energy. According to a report published by CSE in 2013, wind power can substantially impact ecology and human health. A lot of the potential for wind lies in the Western Ghats, which have considerable forest area. At present, there is no regulation that prevents wind installations from being set up in areas that can damage the ecology.

A senior scientist working with the government on renewable energy confirms this. “India is not taking strategic steps to counter the negatives of wind energy. There is no planning to mitigate ecological and health impact or even an adequate focus on economic viability and efficiency of wind energy projects,” he said.

Even solar energy is not entirely safe. There are reports that solar modules contain several potentially dangerous materials such as silicon tetrachloride, cadmium selenium and sulphur hexafluoride. Most solar panels have an expected lifespan of 20 years. India is also a dumping ground for Chinese solar cells, which have a lower lifespan of around 15 years. So by 2030, India will have a significant number of dead panels piled up, which are said to be carcinogenic.

According to Aruna Kumarankandath, program officer, CSE, there is a huge market worldwide built around recycling of solar panels and up to 80-90 per cent of the solar cell can be recycled.

“Unfortunately, no such disposal industry is prevalent in India. Since this is not an immediate problem, there is little in terms of policy and regulation in the country,” she says.

INCREASE R&D

India has a long to-do list for meeting its Paris pledges. The first step is research. Let’s take the case of solar panels. “India is not doing any research on module efficiency (the ratio of the electrical output of a solar cell to the incident energy in the form of sunlight),” said the senior scientist. Module efficiency in India is only 12 to 16 percent as compared to several other countries that use advanced solar panels of efficiency up to 25 to 28 percent. When module efficiency doubles, you need lesser panels for generating the same amount of electricity. This also saves space.

Power Goal: India plans to install a capacity of 175 GW of renewable energy, up from only 25 GW today. (AnilShakya)

The second step is to go in for newer technologies. There are innovations that need a huge market like India. One such technology is by researchers at Michigan State University—a fully transparent solar concentrator, which could turn any window or sheet of glass (like your smartphone’s screen) into a photovoltaic solar cell. It holds tremendous promise for India. “If this technology is widely adopted, the windows of tall buildings in cities like Bangalore, Mumbai or Gurgaon can become energy generators,” said Singh.

The third step is to rely on economies of scale. Quoting the example of how the price of LED bulbs has come down due to increased demand, Singh is of the view that greater focus on renewables will encourage energy firms to reduce the price of their equipment. Companies like Siemens AG are working on reducing the price of its renewable energy solutions.

Citing the example of offshore wind energy, which is today prohibitively expensive for a country like India, Bernd Eilitz, a spokesperson of Siemens Wind Power and Renewables Division, said: “Siemens’ cost out target (to reduce cost of technology) is to bring technology to the market that allows to produce offshore wind energy for less than Euro 0.10 per kilowatt-hour by 2020 (a 50 percent reduction from the current rate).” India has suitable sites in terms of wind conditions and water depths for offshore wind.

Windy Wonder: A policy to harness wind energy is the need of the hour. (Wikipedia)

UNREALISTIC TARGETS

Perhaps the biggest hurdle before India emanates from the unrealistic targets set by the Paris agreement and the fact that it doesn’t set limits on how much countries can emit. The agreement’s aim is to keep the global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius and to drive efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrialization levels.

The INDCs of all countries imply a 2.7 degree Celsius of global warming by 2100. “Comparing the existing INDCs to the available budget indicates that for a better than even chance of meeting the 1.5-degree target, the remaining carbon budget is exhausted well before 2030,” says Kamal.

The carbon space for a 1.5-degree Celsius target is so limited that developed countries will have to reach net zero emissions in the next five to 10 years. “Developing countries will have some more time, but their development space will be so constrained that they will need massive support in terms of finance, technologies and capacity so that they are able to meet their basic development and poverty alleviation needs while remaining within the available carbon budget,” Kamal adds.

Then again, India needs to be self-reliant, and can’t expect much support from the developed world. With a poor track record on delivering projects and lack of adequate awareness amongst India’s 1.25 billion pollution and its policy-makers on the hazards of climate change, there is a lot of ground India has to cover before its pledges in the Paris agreement come up for review in 2023.

Originally published in India legal on January 20, 2016

Was on panel of Desh Deshantar - Climate Change conference: India's commitments & constraints on Rajya Sabha TV on 30/11/2015

Climate change: What are we trying to achieve in Paris?

Deccan Chronicle | Rakesh Kamal | December 06, 2015, 08.13 am IST

If “nice weather” is your favourite ice-breaker when you meet someone, you better start thinking of something else to say. Thanks to climate change, the weather is no longer so nice in many places. Think Chennai this week.

But what is climate change?

Since the Industrial Age began nearly 200 years ago, human activity around the world, but especially in the industrialized countries, has  caused the earth to warm up, which we now call Global Warming. It refers to the overall warming of the planet, based on average temperature over the entire surface of the earth. Global Warming happens mainly due to carbon dioxide, but also some other gases that are collectively called greenhouse gases (GHGs), released when we burn fossil fuels such as coal, oil, natural gas, etc., to produce electricity or goods or to power our vehicles, etc. Even agricultural activity produces GHGs. These gases trap sunlight, instead of reflecting it back into space, and so heat up the atmosphere. The warming earth’s atmosphere is causing climate change, such as changes in weather patterns, unseasonal rains, and severe weather events such as the Chennai rains last week.

What’s the worry?

The earth’s temperature has risen by nearly 1 degree Celsius since around 1850, and the pace of that rise has increased in the past few decades. It has been estimated that if the temperature rises by more than another degree Celsius, climate change will have disastrous effects on the planet and all of us. The world’s food production will be hit, we will see more extreme events such as the Chennai rains, Tsunamis, etc., diseases caused by germs will become more severe and widespread, many island nations will sink into the oceans, and so on.  We must therefore begin to curb carbon emissions, the main culprit in global warming, to ensure that the earth does not heat up by more than another degree Celsius before 2100, or by 2 degrees Celsius cumulatively between 1850 and 2100.

So, how much more carbon can we put into the atmosphere safely?

According to the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), that limit is 2,900 billion tonnes. Of that, some 1,900 billion tonnes have already accumulated in the atmosphere since 1850. So, the world collectively has a ‘Carbon Space’ of 1,000 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide that we can emit into the atmosphere until about 2100.

So, we can still burn fossil fuels, drive guzzler SUVs, etc., for some more decades then?

No, and that’s why climate change is now called a crisis. At the rate at which the human race is emitting carbon, we are on track to exhaust the 1,000 billion tonnes limit by as early as 2030 if we do not act now. That’s why more than 150 countries, including the biggest polluters China, US, the European Union, India, etc., are all pledging to cut their carbon emissions.      

So, what’s the fight about in Paris?

It’s about who should bear more responsibility and more burden for cutting carbon emissions, and it’s about dividing up the remaining carbon space fairly. Industrialized countries such as the US have been most responsible for the carbon emissions so far and continue to be so. They are also the ones that are rich enough to fund development of new green technologies as well as fund poorer countries to adopt them. Developing countries, led by India, are demanding that the rich countries do more. The US and other rich nations are pressuring developing countries to do more to cut carbon emissions while their own plans to cut their emissions are not ambitious enough.

(Rakesh Kamal is Programme Officer, Climate Change Programme, at the Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi)

Originally published in Deccan Chronicle 

Montreal Protocol: Some consensus on HFC-related challenges, but solutions still far fetched

The session on the fourth day of the Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol (MOP) began with applause over how the meet could assist parties in managing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and moved to a discussion on why it was so relevant before the Paris climate deal. The meet to discuss “Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer” is being held in Dubai.

Rashid Ahmed Bin Fahad, Minister of Environment and Water of the United Arab Emirates, congratulated all the participants for the progress made so far. He motioned that UAE was committed in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and working on ozone depleting substances (ODS) and has adopted its national policies in line. He stressed the importance of discussing challenges and solutions and hoped that all the items on the agenda will be completed. This was followed by a roundtable discussion on “How the institutions and mechanisms of the Montreal Protocol could assist parties in managing HFCs”.

He also stressed upon the importance of funding and how objectives of developing countries need consideration. He reiterated that Vienna Convention and Montreal Protocol have been important and unique models that haveproved that success can be achieved in coordinated consultation model.  How the outcome from MOP will be important in discussions of the Conference of Parties (COP 21), to be held in Paris next month, was also on the agenda.

Achim Steiner, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)mentioned how we were in one of the great cross roads to know one another where international diplomacy and sustainable agenda are merging rapidly. He reminded about an article written by Mario J Molina & F S Rowland for Nature magazine, in 1974. A report in the magazine states, “Chlorofluoromethanes are being added to the environment in steadily increasing amounts. These compounds are chemically inert and may remain in the atmosphere for 40–150 years, and concentrations can be expected to reach 10 to 30 times present levels. Photodissociation of the Chlorofluoromethanes in the stratosphere produces significant amount of chlorine atoms, and leads to the destruction of atmospheric ozone.” The discovery made everyone realise that CFCs need to be phased out as they are causing harm to the environment.

A ray of hope

He said that back then, everyone thought that there was a hole in ozone layer and there was no hope that it can be repaired.Buttoday, 98 per cent of ODS has been phased out. Instead of being destructive to economies, it helped economies grow. With 3.5 billion dollars being provided to the developing countries to phase down and phase out of gases, it is estimated by UNEP that 1.8 trillion dollars in health costs is saved and losses in food production of around 460 billion dollars have been avoided by 2060.  

He further stated how Montreal Protocol could be the key to make sustainable development goals a success. Also, with improved science and technology and working together, Montreal Protocol will be able to achieve what no country individually can achieve.

Later in the day, financial challenges, flexibility and exemptions were the core discussions. A wide consensus that the executive committee of the Multilateral Fund (MLF) needs to be directed by MOP to develop guidelines was achieved.

A Duraisamy Director of Ozone Cell, a representative of India, seemed focused on the need of addressing technology transfer, including cost of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), compensation of lost profit streams or gradual production of facilities of HFCs.The need for aid in production plants that help full conversion cost of HFCs to low global warming potential (GWP) or zero GWP was also talked about. Meanwhile, Canadian and the US representatives were quick to clarify that MLF includes patent, royalty fees and designs in some cases. Responding tothis, the Indian representative said that the methodology is inadequate and not implemented.

Countries with low volumes of gases again insisted on how adequate funding is not available for servicing sector and should include training of technicians, awareness, and equipment support to technicians, etc and also on the need for early financing and disposal of the gases.

Developed countries were open to discussing all the issues mentioned by the developing countries. In the last two days, more or less understanding of the needs of developing countries on flexibility, exemptions and financial challenges were put across the table and was agreed that more issues will be discussed on Friday. It is yet to be decided how the discussions in the contact group will be presented as a paper was opposed by some of the parties as it will limit the challenges.

Originally Published in http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/montreal-protocol-some-consensus-on-hfcs-but-solutions-still-far-fetched-51700 on Thursday 05 November  2015

MOP: Challenges galore, but solutions few

The Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol (MOP) on “Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer” is debating the switch over to cleaner alternatives even though talks on subsidies and time frame are still not clear.

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were introduced as a substitute to Ozone-depleting Substances and do not harm the ozone layer. But as HFCs cause global warming, they have the potential to cause climate change if not properly managed.

The last two are important for the penetration and acceptability of the proposed new technology, which will be accepted, after HFCs are phased out.

Challenges or solutions: the way forward

The morning plenary session on Monday was open for only a brief period and discussed the previous day’s agenda. The contact group meeting started at 11.45 am on Monday with Saudi Arabia nominating a representative from China to be the co-convener.

The co-convener was clear that the only possible way forward was to hold a discussion on the challenges being faced by all the parties. He said, “(The) mandate is about feasibility and ways to manage HFCs. And feasibility includes issues related to challenges, so at this stage discussing challenges is more important than amendment itself.”

It was quoted by many developing countries that the challenges had been debated and discussed over years and concerns of the parties and solutions need to be discussed now.

Argentina, Brazil, Kuwait and India did not like the fact that the challenges were not being addressed in the midst of finding solutions.

Some of the major points touched upon by the A5 countries included technology, availability of alternatives to HFCs, funding mechanisms, exemptions under special circumstances, flexibility with scheduling phase down and capacity building requirements.

Many developing countries said they wanted to leapfrog the chemical treadmill followed in the developed countries and move to natural alternatives.

Manoj Kumar Singh, joint secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, emphasised on 20 challenges put forward in the Indian proposal for amendment to the Montreal Protocol and one by one mentioned the challenges being faced by the developing countries.

He said that these countries were being forced by the executive committee of the Montreal Protocol to switch over to a particular technology.

Only after the delegate from Argentina made a comment that it looked like developing countries had all the challenges and the developed countries had only the solutions, many developed countries raised the flag to talk about challenges out of embarrassment.

Most developed countries said their biggest challenges were not having trained technicians and having capacity-building programmes on new technologies.

For arriving at solutions, they repeated the standard answer of how the developing countries have the grace period before switching over to alternatives.

They also said funding would follow the same tested route through multi-lateral funds and the executive committee. However, the developing countries think this is not sufficient.

The day ended with the co-convener suggesting that they come up with a draft of the day’s proceedings, noting down the challenges and solutions for continuing discussion in a more structured way.

However, Argentina, Kuwait and India opposed it as these challenges had been discussed a number of times and no new solutions were proposed by the developed parties. They suggested that the co-convener should wait a day or two till all challenges and solutions were discussed.

Originally published in http://www.downtoearth.org.in/test/news/mop-challenges-galore-but-solutions-few-51678 on Tuesday 03 November  2015

Understanding India’s Climate Action Plan (INDC)

According to the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), to meet the 2°C temperature increase target, the world has an emission budget of only 1,000 billion tonnes of CO2 till 2100. With Kyoto Protocol coming to an end by 2020, UNFCCC has urged countries to come up with ‘Intended Nationally Determined Contributions’(INDC) by COP21 so as to negotiate and come up with a legally binding document to cut down emissions.

India has submitted its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) at midnight on 1st October to The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)., making it one of the last countries to submit its climate action plan in run up to the climate change conference – Conference of Parties (COP21)—that will be held in Paris this December. A total of 146 countries, representing 87 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions have submitted their INDCs to UNFCCC before the deadline.

Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Mr.Prakash Javadekar said “even though India is not part of problem, it wants to be part of solution”. India has historically not been responsible for the emissions, has per capita emissions of 1.6 tons/person and ranks 135th – standing along with most of the least developed countries. But with total CO2 emissions of 1.97 billion tons, it is currently the 3rd biggest emitter making India’s stand a very complex case.

Why Emission Intensity?

It has been historically observed that Green House Gas (GHG) emissions and development of a country increase proportionally. India has a Human development Index of 0.586 and it needs to develop for better quality of living, but at the same time not emit as much as the developed countries since India is highly vulnerable to climate change. So India in its INDC has not made a commitment on reducing its emissions like most of the developed countries have, but has pledged to reduce its Carbon intensity, which means that the emissions would increase for its development but the intensity will be low. In simple terms India will be very efficient unlike the developed countries which have their development models designed on consumption.

India had in the past declared a voluntary goal of reducing the emissions intensity of its GDP by 20–25%, over 2005 levels, by 2020, despite having no binding mitigation obligations. A slew of policy measures were launched to achieve this goal. As a result, the emission intensity of India’s GDP has decreased by 12% between 2005 and 2010. India has further pledged in its INDC that it will increase its target to reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33 to 35 percent by 2030 from 2005 level.

Ambitious Renewable Energy and Enhancing Forestry cover commitment

India has also committed to increase its share in renewable energy to 40% in installed capacity by 2030. Its current share of renewable energy is around 13% (36 GW) making it a very ambitious goal. India says that the ambitious goal will be attained by the following

• Solar and Wind energy will increase from current 4060 MW and 23.76 GW in 2015 to 100 GW and 60 GW by 2022 respectively and an increase even after that.
• It is envisaged to increase biomass installed capacity to 10 GW by 2022 from current capacity of 4.4 GW.
• Special programmes to promote small and mini hydel projects, new and efficient designs of water mills have been introduced for electrification of remote villages and will continue to be promoted.
• Nuclear energy will be promoted from the current capacity of 5780 MW to 63 GW installed capacity by the year 2032, if supply of fuel is ensured.
• Clean coal will be promoted by increasing the efficiency standards and old inefficient thermal stations will be assigned mandatory targets for improving energy efficiency

India has also agreed to enhance its forest cover from 24% of the geographical area in 2013 to 33% of its geographical area in long term. And it also mentions that its forest cover will absorb 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2030 making it a major sink for absorbing Carbon Dioxide

Finances

Overcoming all these challenges comes at a cost. Based on estimates made by NITI Ayog (National Institution for Transforming India), India will need USD 2.5 trillion (at 2014-15 prices) for meeting India’s climate change actions between now and 2030, which will partially be generated domestically and the rest is expected to be supported by the developed countries which have pledged to provide USD 100 billion a year till 2020 as a part of Green Climate fund (GCF). India will need around USD 206 billion (at 2014-15 prices) between 2015 and 2030 for implementing adaptation actions in agriculture, forestry, fisheries infrastructure, water resources and ecosystems. It is projected that the economic damage and losses in India from climate change to be around 1.8% of its GDP annually by 2050. Also, mitigation activities for moderate low carbon development would cost around USD 834 billion till 2030 at 2011 prices.

Some other important statements India has made through the INDC were to increase the usage of Fly ash to improve air quality, Promotion of Zero liquid discharge and use of treated effluent for irrigation, Amendment to Municipal Solid Waste Management rules, improving pollution monitoring systems to name a few. The Indian INDC also talks about various programmes that are currently run by the government like the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Smart cities mission, Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) and National Heritage City Development and Augmentation Yojana (HRIDAY), existing national missions and addition of new missions for water and waste to energy, green highways program, National Mission for Clean Ganga etc.

What does all this mean?

India is on the edge of a cliff, with it having to mitigate its emissions, adapt to the problems of climate change it faces and at the same time develop. Because of its delay in development, it is both a victim and the culprit of the problem of climate change. This is the precise reason why it cannot commit to an emission reduction pledge or to an emission peaking year. Expectations from India have anyways been low because of its need for development and India’s INDC has been applauded as fair and its renewable energy program as ambitious by many. Even otherwise, India has always stated that as it is a growing economy and has major developmental challenges to deal with, it expects the countries which have historically emitted Greenhouse gases to come forward and commit more ambitious goals and make a change in their living standards if need be.

Some of the key highlights of the India’s INDC are

• India plans to reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33 to 35 percent by 2030 from 2005 level.
• 40 percent cumulative electric power installed capacity from non-fossil fuel based energy resources by 2030. A jump of 33% over non-fossil fuel capacity of 2015
• To create an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent through additional forest and tree cover by 2030.
• USD 2.5 trillion (at 2014-15 prices) required for meeting India’s climate change actions between now and 2030

Originally published in Factly on OCTOBER 6, 2015

Climate talks: INDCs and the role of land use

It is a well-known fact that vegetation and soils can remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it in different forms of carbon as carbon sinks. And human activities, including land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), impact these sinks that can store carbon dioxide. Historically, deforestation has been a major source of emission for many countries, with large forest reserves. Therefore, the emissions for these countries have been high too.

Scare of forest fires

LULUCF emissions are usually hard to measure as they require estimates of the land area affected as well as the depth of peat soil that has burnt. Forest fires usually occur naturally, but many are initiated deliberately and illegally to clear the land for crops, such as palm oil. Similarly, in dry years, forest fires can run out of control and can cause major spikes in greenhouse gas emissions, making it difficult for countries to maintain their commitments. Although remote sensing has become increasingly powerful in estimation of loss and damage, calculating the emissions based on degradation of forests, density of forest and type of vegetation, cannot be understood without on-the-ground sampling. Land use and land change for agriculture, to an extent, can be considered as a necessity for countries to improve their developmental status. But when used for commercial purposes like, it is looked upon as a luxury.

In this context, emissions proposed to be reduced from LULUCF play a major role in the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) being submitted by countries. Countries like Brazil, Indonesia and some African countries are highly vulnerable to climate change and have been high emitters because of land use patterns as it has been one of their major economic drivers.

Brazil has a plan

A closer look at the Brazilian INDC says that it takes into account the role of conservation units and indigenous lands as forest-managed areas. The footnote explains “conservation units” as federal and state-level protected areas and “indigenous lands” as areas at the minimum in the “delimited” stage in the demarcation processes. In simple terms, indigenous lands, inhabited and exclusively possessed by indigenous people and mostly the forest lands not managed by the government, are also being taken into account. Without the role of these managed areas, Brazil’s contribution in the INDC would represent “a reduction of 31 per cent in 2025 and 37 per cent in 2030 in relation to 2005 levels”. Brazil, however, has stated that it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 37 per cent below 2005 levels in 2025 or an indicative 43 per cent below 2005 levels in 2030. Brazil’s INDC also mentions how it did not consider removals (by planting trees or managing forests) from conservation units and indigenous lands prior to guidelines in its first national communication and explains how it would neither be compatible with current guidelines, nor comparable to other Parties’ contributions. Disregarding these “removals” compromised the comparability of the Brazilian initial inventory with other Parties’ inventories. Brazil’s second communication revised this approach.

Brazil INDC also states that it is anyway willing to further enhance its contribution towards achieving the objective of the convention, in the context of sustainable development. But according to a report in Thomson Reuters Foundation, SEEG, an independent emissions measuring system has calculated that Brazil's greenhouse gases had already fallen 33 per cent from 2005 to 2013 due to successful policies to repress illegal deforestation. So, we also need to question if 37 per cent reduction is ambitious enough and if Brazil can do a lot more and not just rely on its reserves to show emission reduction.

Indonesia’s developing policies

Indonesia, on the other hand, in its INDC has stressed on how the emissions of the country have been high because of the land use change, peat and forest fires. The INDC mentions that around 63 per cent of its emissions are from LULUCF. But as Indonesia has pledged to reduce its emissions by 26 per cent unconditionally and up to 41 per cent conditionally below 2009 levels, it has been working on developing policies and mechanisms to reduce its emissions from LULUCF. And so the country aims to reduce up to 29 per cent unconditionally of business as usual by 2030 and has shown leadership with Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA) proposals and voluntary commitments.

Russia’s not-so-ambitious pledge

It is not surprising that even in Russia’s INDC, a lot of stress is laid on LULUCF as Russia has around 25 per cent of the world’s forest resources. The INDC mentions how forest management is one of the most important elements of the Russian policy to reduce greenhouse emissions up to 25 to 30 per cent with LULUCF. The INDC clearly states that it will include maximum possible account of absorbing capacity of forests. Such accounting of LULUCF emissions would allow Russia’s emissions to increase by 30 to 38 per cent above 2012 levels, according to a report by Climate Action Tracker. So with the fall in Soviet economy from 1990 and addition of LULUCF data, the pledge seems hardly ambitious.

Apart from these issues of how LULUCF is being reported in INDCs, other problems include inconsistency in its historically recorded data, transparency, fluctuations and methods of calculating it. Annex-1 countries (countries classified as industrialised countries and economies in transition) are mandated by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to report any change in their LULUCF data, so a number of non Annex-1 countries tend to have inconsistent inventory. The accounting of LULUCF is a very complex issue that needs to be discussed and agreed upon in detail for the climate deal in Paris to be meaningful without unfair advantage to some countries over others.

Originally published in http://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/climate-talks-indcs-and-the-role-of-land-use-51362 on Thursday 01 October 2015