New Paper Exposes India’s Climate Hypocrisy
By Paul Homewood
This paper, which is critical of India’s Paris climate contribution, was published in July:
I don’t know why they are so surprised now. They should have read my post from three years ago, “India’s Climate Plan Will Triple Emissions By 2030”, which showed just how worthless India’s INDC was!
The reality is that India’s never seriously intended to cut CO2, or even mitigate emissions going forward.
Still, better late than never. Mohan & Wehnert make several points:
1) The NDC contains two main commitments, as far as emissions are concerned. The first is to to increase non-fossil fuel capacity to 40% of total electricity
capacity by 2030.
However, as Mohan & Wehnert point out, the figure was already 30% in 2015, and is now 34%.
However, India’s commitments were in reality fairly modest and are inconsistent with domestic achievements and progress. For instance, as of October 2015, when India submitted its NDC, non-fossil fuel electricity capacity was already 30% and it stood at more than 34% at the end of 2017 (CEA, 2018a).
Note that the 40% target refers to “non-fossil fuels”, and not just renewables. Currently hydro and nuclear provide 11% of India’s electricity, compared to just 6% for renewables:
BP Energy Review 2018
Even if renewables are used to close the gap to the 40% target, the contribution from wind and solar will still be pretty insignificant.
The simple reality is that India’s INDC about renewable energy was never intended to make any significant difference.
2) The second commitment was to reduce the carbon intensity of its economy by 33–35% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.
This of course refers to emissions per unit of GDP.
But as the authors also point out:
Furthermore, emissions intensity has steadily declined over the past decade, reaching a reduction of 28% from 2005 levels by end of 2016.
As I have repeatedly pointed out, carbon intensity tends to fall naturally as economies mature anyway. In the early stages of industrialisation, heavy industry is obviously very energy intensive. As the economy gradually transitions to light industry, consumer products and services, GDP rises much faster than energy usage.
The 28% reduction in India’s emissions intensity since 2005 has little or nothing to do with climate policy or renewable generation.
Furthermore all of that reduction took place before 2011, which makes a nonsense of any claim that it has anything to do with climate policy.
In my post that I mentioned earlier, I calculated that, based on the Indian government’s own assumptions, emissions would triple by 2030. It may even be worse than that, because, according to this paper, the NDC pledge excludes agriculture.
There is certainly nothing in this new paper which disputes my basic projections three years ago.
3) Future energy plans
As Mohan & Wehnert state:
More worryingly, India’s Draft National Energy Policy (DNEP) released by the Government think tank NITI Aayog in November 2016 outlines ambitious plans to both expand coal mining and coal fired power capacity in the country. According to the BAU scenario, NITI Aayog envisages 440 GW of coal capacity by 2040, which would be a more than a two-fold jump on current levels (NITI Aayog, 2017). This figure is in line with the estimates of Shearer, Fofrich, and Davis (2017) based on the coal projects proposed, in planning, under construction, or operational, as per the CoalSwarm database. Interestingly, most of this build out is projected to happen between 2027 and 2040 as the DNEP states that no new coal plants will be built between 2017 and 2027 apart from the 50 GW already under construction (NITI Aayog, 2017), something which is confirmed by the recently released National Electricity Plan (CEA, 2018b). This indicates that India will be starting a second wave of installing more than 200 GW worth of coal power projects just at the time of the second global stocktake and the final phase of the current NDCs. Even under the ‘ambitious action’ pathway, it estimates 80 GW of new coal capacity to be needed between 2027 and 2040 (NITI Aayog, 2017).
Despite this significant growth in coal, NITI Aayog estimates that India will comfortably meet its NDC commitments in 2030 with more than half of installed electricity capacity potentially from non fossil fuel sources, while emissions intensity is estimated to decrease by 45–53% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels (NITI Aayog, 2017). While India is safely on track to meet and overachieve on its first NDC under the Paris Agreement (Kuramochi et al., 2017), significant new coal expansion has been planned for the 2030s, putting the strength of its second NDC in doubt.
It was evident to those of us not blinded by the rhetoric at Paris that the only thing that mattered to the Indian government was economic growth. This was never going to be compatible with a wholesale switch to renewable energy or emission reduction.
On the contrary, India knew that it would need a massive expansion in electricity generation to achieve its economic plans, and that this would largely have to come from reliable generation, such as fossil fuels and nuclear.
Mohan & Wehnert now confirm that the latest government plans are designed to do just that, mainly via coal generation. This is hardly a surprise, given that India possesses vast reserves of the stuff.
Most significantly, as far as Paris is concerned, is that India is planning to continue expanding coal generating capacity well beyond 2030, extinguishing any hopes that the country might start to reduce emissions at that time.
It is also inconceivable that India would spend billions on new coal plant, just to shut it all down a decade later.
It is about time that anybody, who is seriously concerned about CO2 emissions, recognised the fact that India has absolutely no intention at all of reducing its emissions for the foreseeable future, nor even sees the need to.
As for India taking on leadership in international climate politics, the whole idea is risible, seemingly based on western self delusion as much as anything else.
Comments are closed.
I wonder what it will take to make academics in Europe and North America to realise that Global Warming is a western fetish that doesn’t hold much interest in China and India.
Well if you read ‘hypocrisy’ as ‘rational’ it makes perfect sense to me.
If you sign up to ridiculous nonsense to avoid the derision of idiots then just do what your country needs it seems a pretty good idea to me.
One could only dream that our political ‘class’ would behave in such a sensible way. Sadly they’re not up to it, they actually believe the sh.t.
For india, read China and the other nations classified as ‘developing’ for the purposes of the Paris agreement. These nations are interested in Global Warming insofar as it enables them to develop and consolidate competitive advantage through low energy prices, and receive international subsidies to help them adjust.
How lucky they are to have a government focused on economic growth. We are lumbered with a PM who dances so badly any self-respecting dad would be embarrassed to be seen dancing like that at a wedding, and seeks to destroy our prosperity with a dumb energy policy. As a back-up plan, she has a no deal Brexit to ruin our economy from next March.
Oh! I do hope so!
“I do hope so!”
‘There must be fifty ways to leave your lover!’
It falls in step with the “transfer of wealth” meme that is really behind the AGW scam. India and China are given a free pass and false media attention to their efforts because it fulfills the meme objectives. Why the rest of the world isn’t questioning this charade is beyond me because it’s obvious that any CO2 savings done by the West is negated, and then some, by just China and India alone. Aren’t they part of the same world?
No doubt Pakistan will now ramp-up it’s coal-fired generation just so they can crow that Pakistan produces more CO2 per person than India.
Or probably not if they see it as a threat to the UN/World Bank/IMF funds they already get ($144 BILLION and counting, https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/293335-imf-expects-pakistan-s-external-debt-to-reach-144-billion-by-2023). How unfortunate Pakistan looses to India in the CO2 stakes.
The long time head of the India space program was Prof. Udupi R. Rao, who sadly died last year.
Prof. Rao was an eminent astrophysicist and galactic cosmic ray expert. He has a paper on GCR contribution to global warming last century, which he estimated at nearly half.
Thus the most prestigious scientist and administrator in India, with the ear of government, was a Svensmark mechanism proponent.
That is why India ignores the CAGW scam.
Looking at the figure, how can the nonfossil capacity reach 34% in 2017, when the generation is 17%. Do they count renewables (as well as hydro an nuclear) installed capacity to reach that figure (wind power generates a fifth or so of its installed capacity) I have difficulties to understand why anything else than the actual electric generation by source is interesting to compare when calculating CO2 emissions.
Yes, it’s that difference between capacity and actual generation