AIR spotlight summary on “India ratifies Paris climate Agreement” : Insights

Introduction

India ratified the Paris Agreement on Climate Change by depositing the instrument of ratification with the United Nations on the 147th birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi. India is the 62nd country to ratify the agreement. The agreement will enter into force one month after 55 countries that account for 55 percent of global emissions ratify the agreement.

Paris Agreement on Climate Change

• This treaty which was agreed in Paris convention took 20 years to come to an agreement. There were divergent views, particularly among the industrialised countries and developing countries. Ironing out of differences took lot of time. The treaty has come out that there is auniversal need and acceptance that something has to be done to contain the rise of the global temperature within 2 degree centigrade.
• For its operationalisation, the Paris Agreement requires the signing and ratification by at least 55 countries which together account for at least 55 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Both conditions need to be met. Once these conditions are fulfilled, the Agreement would come into effect regardless of the number of countries that remain outside. The Agreement only needs slightly more than 3 percentage points to reach the 55 per cent threshold.     

• The Green Climate Fund is too small as compared to the needs and programmes that are envisaged. It is important that the developed countries should pass on the technology, knowhow, and wherewithal for having energy efficient technologies.
• Kyoto protocol had an unfortunate fate. Countries have not adhered to their commitments and have full faulted on that. That is reason we find continuous CO2 emissions.
• The COP-22 will be held in morocco. The information and the experience will be exchanged and get to know the ways and means to achieve the targets.

Significance of the ratification of Paris Agreement

• This is been the major and seminal development to maintain the global climate and reducing the growing temperature which is really a great threat to the mankind, livelihood, health and productivity of the biosphere.
• IPCC study says that beyond 2 degree centigrade rise of the earth’s temperature, then it would be difficult situation, irreversible and will go out of hand.
• All the countries which have submitted their INDCs will be taken on board and they have the commitment to adhere to INDCs and take corresponding measures in their countries to meet those expected commitments. India has to work hard to achieve the commitments made.

India’s Role

• India’s commitments of 100 GW of solar energy, 60 GW of wind energy and by 2022 we would have about 40% of our energy needs to be met from non-fossil fuel energy sources.
• NITI Ayog study says that with the growth scenario of 8%, our energy needs would grow and even then India won’t be high CO2 emitter. It would be much less than the global average. The global average would be 5 to 6 tonnes per capita while we would not exceed more than 4.4 tonnes.
• India needs finance, technology and capacity building support. The climate finance goalsthat have been set have not yet been met.
• India is working towards replacing fossil fuels with non fossil fuel sources and increasing the energy efficiency. More than 6.5 crores LED bulbs are distributed and this has resulted into more than 4000 MW of electricity saving and saving on per day expenditure. The greening of highways, where plantation of trees is envisaged which will sequester the CO2.
• Industry is progressively improving on energy intensity. We have to continue to make our progress to achieve the targets and demonstrate to the public and world at large that we are able to do it.
• India ratified the agreement on the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi who led a simple life and who exemplified simplicity. Through this the world is getting a message that there is a need for change in life style particularly the developed world where their lifestyle is considered extravagant.
• Without losing much it is possible to contain our energy use and emission of CO2. The underlying message of using this day is only to say that the idealism of Mahatma Gandhi is really helpful, provide a philosophical support and guide to contain our energy needs, at the same time improve the quality of life and welfare of the people.
• The silver lining is that the prizes of solar energy is coming down which instils hope to make faster progress. The targets on generating energy through renewable has to be revised upwards.

India should assume a more assertive role : From Hindu

Formulating a credible INDC is the first and most basic step. Working towards developing a meaningful peaking year is the next

The world’s most important climate talks are coming up at the end of this year in Paris. The French presidency is leading an unprecedented climate diplomacy drive — working tirelessly to bring countries together beforehand in the hopes of making progress towards a global deal. The latest such consultations took place last month as “informal ministerial consultations” that brought together 40 delegations and 30 Ministers.

To limit the global rise in temperature to two degrees Celsius, considered the benchmark for ‘dangerous’ climate change, countries have agreed to submit their ‘intended nationally determined contributions’ or INDCs. INDCs are bottom-up commitments from nations defining the extent of their emissions reduction contribution towards this global goal. Nations were requested to submit their INDCs by the end of March 2015, but not later than October 2015. Initial calculations suggest that total submissions account for only 56 per cent of global emissions.

The most significant development in the discussions is the concept of a “peaking year”. A “peaking date” is a time in the future until when emissions are expected to grow, and is likely a function of anticipated growth plans and energy use. China, the world’s largest emitter, says its emissions will peak in 2030. The European Union (EU) is committed to its previously announced target of 20 per cent cuts off 1990 levels by 2020. Ethiopia, one of the world’s poorest nations is set to reduce its total emissions starting 2030. The announcement of a “peaking date” has been extensively applauded as countries’ — more specifically, China’s — willingness to act as a major player in climate change mitigation.

But where is India’s INDC? What will India’s position in Paris be? Like others, India committed to INDCs in 2009. They are expected to soon be reviewed and released, in time for Paris summit.

India is the fourth largest emitter and despite our $2 trillion GDP, over 30 per cent of the population does not have access to electricity. Some 21 per cent lives below the poverty line. This means India needs a lot of “headroom emissions” to grow before it we can think of slowing down.

But, we are also seen as a major economic player. We should act the part. Especially since there is so much happening at home.

Consider just these initiatives: India’s total green energy commitment is 175GW — over five times the current amount. The Indian Railways has announced several energy conservation measures. Urban metro transport is being contemplated as part of the smart cities project. Cars are moving to Bharat-VI emissions norms. The point is, it all adds up. All of this could be bundled into an INDC and become the first step in climate diplomacy. But, to what end? We should keep our eyes on the ball. A two degree goal means that global emissions must peak by 2020. INDCs should therefore be developed with this target in view.

“Peaking years” are a function of economic growth, energy use and population increases.The concept of a “peaking year” is an important step in climate negotiations, not because it sets a particular date per se, but because it begins a conceptual shift away from the current outdated classification of nations under “Annex-I” (so called “developed” economies) and “Non-Annex-I” (so called “developing countries”). According the U.N.’s classification, China the world’s largest emitter is in the same “non-Annex I” bucket as Congo, possibly the world’s poorest country. If the current discussion is on climate finance then a new benchmark must be set for determining reduction rigour.

Per capita GDP as the basis

GDP per capita would perhaps the most logical way of determining a new benchmark. For a diverse country like India, its leadership quotient could be a sum of all actions currently being undertaken to meet its infrastructure needs; and its “additional” quotient could seek financing for meeting the incremental costs of greening more basic energy needs to cater to say, the segment of India without basic energy access.

Either way, it is time that India assumed a constructive role in the international arena. It is time it began to move away from traditional alliances such as “like minded developing countries” and crafted new links that are more in sync with the country’s growth plans. Formulating a credible INDC is the first and most basic step. Working towards developing a meaningful “peaking year” is the next. We have no dearth of skills and institutional capacities to do this, and it should be our imperative as a strong, emerging economy to do so.

(The author is the assistant director-general (designate) of the new intergovernmental Global Green Growth Institute. E-mail: ahua.acharya@aya.yale.edu)

Western Ghat panel submits report

Development activities including thermal power projects, mining and other polluting industries should not be allowed in a 60,000 sq km ecologically sensitive “natural landscape” of Western Ghats, a mountainous range that passes through six states, a Government panel said on Wednesday.

In its report, the 10-member high-level working group, headed by eminent scientist K. Kasturirangan, has not recommended any regulatory mechanism for the remaining 96,000 sq km area of the Western Ghats that is defined as “the cultural landscape” in which there are human settlements, plantations and agriculture. It, however, suggested “incentivise green growth” in such areas.

The report was submitted to Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarjan on Wednesday.

The panel was constituted to examine the Western Ghats ecology expert panel report prepared under the leadership of environmentalist Madhav Gadgil. “Roughly 37 per cent of the total area defined as the boundary of the Western Ghats is ecologically sensitive. Over this area of some 60,000 sq km, spread over the states of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, the working group has recommended a prohibitory regime on those activities with maximum interventionist and destructive impact on the environment,” the panel says in its report.

Moving away from the suggestions of the Gadgil panel, which had recommended a blanket approach consisting of guidelines for sector-wise activities, which would be permitted in the ecologically sensitive zones, the new panel said that environmentally sound development cannot preclude livelihood and economic options for the region.

The answer to the question of how to manage and conserve the Ghats will not lie in removing these economic options, but in providing better incentives to move them towards greener and more sustainable practices, it says.

“The message of the report is very worrying because it is saying to us that 37 per cent of the Western Ghats’ total geographic area (1.6 lakh sq km) is all that is left today is what can be defined as the natural landscape, which is biodiversity rich, and therefore we are saying that area has to be protected at all costs,” Environmentalist Sunita Narain, who is a member of the panel, told PTI.

The Working Group was constituted to advise the government on the recommendations of an earlier report of ecologist Madhav Gadgil-led Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP).

Asked whether the Kasturirangan panel has diluted or rejected Gadgil committee report, Ms. Narain said the new panel’s recommendation is that Western Ghats has to be protected and it has moved to make the Gadgil committee report “implementable.”

“We have accepted the Gadgil basis. We have moved to make the report implementable. Our job was not to accept or reject Gadgil report. Our job was to find a way to implement the agenda,” she said.

The WGEEP had recommended that the entire Western Ghats should be declared as an ecologically sensitive area. It had suggested three levels of categorisation where regulatory measures for protection would be imposed and had recommended the establishment of the Western Ghats Ecology Authority for management of the Ghats.

The Kasturirangan panel constituted after states raised apprehensions about the Gadgil committee suggestions including that it could be a no-development zone across 70 per cent of Western Ghats and a centralised authority should be constituted to the Ghats’ management.

The new panel has suggested a decentralized structure in each village (an estimated 4000 villages consisting of 40 lakh people) in the Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA).

The report draws upon the basic framework suggested by the WGEEP to use remote sensing technologies to demarcate the ecologically sensitive areas of the Western Ghats but with two key differences.

First, it used satellite data, down to 24 m resolution, as against 9 km used by WGEEP. The finer resolution was possible because of the collaboration with NRSC/ISRO, which used datasets to distinguish vegetation types over the landscape of the entire Western Ghats.

Second, the report distinguishes between the cultural and the natural landscape of the region. Using remote sensing technology, it has found that the cultural landscape - which includes human settlements, agricultural fields and plantations - covers 58.44 per cent of the region.

BRICS and mortar for India’s global role

New Delhi finally has a platform to assert its might and rewrite the rules of global, political and economic governance

India is at a unique geopolitical moment. On the one hand its neighbourhood and the larger Asian continent are being unpredictably redefined. The United States has declared, if somewhat ambiguously, its reorientation or “pivot” towards Asia, recognising the region’s economic force moving forward, or perhaps merely countering enhanced Chinese power. India and China are charting new geographies of contests, the Indian Ocean and South China Sea. The “Arab Spring” has exposed the fundamental inadequacies in Middle Eastern and North African governing structures but has also given rise to an uncertain political future in an important energy-producing region. Last, but certainly not least, China’s growing assertiveness in the Asia-Pacific region has led to increased, if sometimes seemingly unnecessary, conflict with neighbours in Southeast Asia and Japan.

On the other hand, the world is seeing a once-in-a-century churn. The global board of directors that sit on the high table and define rules for conduct of political and economic governance are now unrecognisable from the lot just after World War II. India must seize the moment to shape these revisions of rules devised by the Atlantic countries and defend its growth and development interests in areas such as trade, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), space, climate, and energy policy, among others.

Regional order and global governance are both in flux and demanding India’s attention. This is not unique by itself. What is different this time around is that India has the capacity, increased capabilities and enhanced level of demonstrated intent to engage with this dual external relations challenge. In order to attain the global power status it desires, India must walk and chew gum at the same time. It must tend to its immediate and extended Asian neighbourhood while also engaging with the task of shaping a new rules-based political and economic order. BRICS represents a uniquely appropriate platform and flexible mechanism with which India can address this dual imperative.

Role for three

Engaging with China and Russia in an environment free of the sharp edges often wrought in bilateral negotiations will catalyse congruence over an array of mutually important issues. Any stable Asian order must have at its core, a certain level of accord among these three large continental powers. The past would need to be defrayed and the path for future integration would need to sidestep suspicion and history. Annual BRICS summit-level discussions on political and economic matters allow the three countries such an arena of tactical camaraderie. The current moment allows a unique opportunity for the three to shape a new construct for Asia amidst the regional flux. Perhaps at some stage it may be worthwhile having a summit level RIC meeting on the sidelines of BRICS to discuss this Asian project.

On resetting and reshaping economic and political governance, BRICS has the potential to be the new (and often criticised) game changer. The sheer size and rate of growth of intra-BRICS trade and economic exchange will allow each of these countries to exert their collective weight for their individual gains. Who gains more should not matter, as long as every member benefits from this dispensation and the order is visibly equitable.

There are a few benefits that India must seek through and with the BRICS. First, there are many multilateral organisations within which a “BRICS-bloc” can exert significant leverage. The U.N. and World Trade Organization are two such forums. While geopolitical and economic thinking among BRICS is not always in-sync, where there is consensus (and the areas are increasing rapidly) BRICS could be a compelling voice. Like they did on the debates on non-interference and “Responsibility to Protect.” Similarly, India’s views on climate change, financial norms, trade rules and so on could also benefit from BRICS’s aggregate voice. Of course the UNSC membership issue strikes a discordant note but it should not cannibalise the possible coming together on other matters.

Barrier against slowdown

Second, as economic powerhouses and regional hubs, intra-BRICS market integration can insulate these nations from western economic slowdown. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) stagnation is impacting BRICS growth, with multi-percentage point GDP dips in India and China. BRICS market integration could leverage the economic power of emerging world economies by sparking increased trade and foreign investment, especially if done in local currencies. Only China is part of India’s top 15 trading partners, making the BRICS forum an attractive stage from which India can promote economic ties with other dynamic economies. The BRICS development bank, option of holding each others’ currencies as reserves, stronger trade facilitation and eventually a comprehensive BRICS economic partnership agreement are all worthy possibilities.

For inclusive growth

Third, the BRICS are each experiencing rapid development with uniquely national characteristics. However, despite growing middle class populations, BRICS hold the lion’s share of the world’s impoverished population. These nations must take increased responsibility for a new global development agenda, incorporating inclusive growth, sustainable development and poverty alleviation. BRICS is a platform not only to learn from each other’s development experiences but also the instrument that can define new rules for health care, education and IPR for the billions at the bottom of the pyramid.

The collective BRICS experience around social policy could be beneficially shared with others as well. A forum (like the OECD) or clearing-house to disburse this information would prove a relatively low-cost measure producing substantial insight into development efforts, technology sharing, low-cost and sustainable energy generation, information technology and manufacturing.

By drawing on collective BRICS brainpower, local development efforts will be catalysed. For example, sharing China’s experience on infrastructure development or poverty reduction or Brazil’s in clean-fuel generation could be beneficial for India currently lacking the ability to take full advantage of its economic potential.

Is BRICS just a catchy acronym masking the haphazard, slapping together of five developing, yet ultimately incompatible, nations? India should respond with an emphatic no. At this unique moment, when India faces a multitude of challenges seeking its attention both towards the region and the global stage, BRICS provides a flexible platform to respond to both.

(Samir Saran is vice president and Daniel Rubin is Henry Luce Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.)

National Electric Mobility Mission Plan 2020”, 6-7M electrified vehicles by 2020, total investment up to $4.1B

India’s National Council for Electric Mobility (NCEM) has adopted the National Electric Mobility Mission Plan 2020 (NEMMP 2020), which is the mission document for National Mission for Electric Mobility (NMEM). The NEMMP 2020 lays the vision, sets the targets and provides the roadmap for achieving significant penetration of electric vehicles (including hybrids) in India by 2020.

The NEMMP 2020 has set a target of 6-7 million units of new vehicle sales of full range of electrified vehicles, along with resultant savings of liquid fuel of 2.2 – 2.5 million tonnes to be achieved in 2020. This will also result in substantial lowering of vehicular emissions and a decrease in carbon dioxide emissions by 1.3% to 1.5% in 2020 as compared to a status quo scenario.

In view of the large barriers that currently exist, the NCEM supported the strong upfront and continued support for electrification by Government. The Government will provide the initial impetus through demand support measures to facilitate faster consumer acceptance of these newer technologies which have a higher cost of acquisition. In addition, Government will also facilitate automotive R&D and put in place charging infrastructure.

It is estimated that the total investment required will be in the range of Rs 20,000–Rs 23,000 crores (US$3.6–$4.1 billion) , of which the support required to be provided by the Government will be to the tune of Rs 12,250–Rs 13,850 crores (US$2.2–$2.5 billion) over the next 5-6 years. The industry will also partner the Government and make large investments for developing the products and creating the manufacturing eco-system.

Aside from the benefits by way of liquid fuel savings, lowering of carbon emissions, lowering of other emissions, and job creation, the intervention is projected to also encourage the Indian industry to shift to newer, cleaner technologies so that it builds its future competitive advantage around environmentally sustainable products, high end technologies, and innovation, thereby helping to improve the competitiveness of domestic automotive industry.

The substantial savings on account of decrease in liquid fossil fuel consumption as a result of shift to electric mobility will more than offset the support provided thereby justifying this initiative as an economically viable proposition, according to the NCEM principals. In addition, given the substantial mitigation of adverse impact of transportation on the environment, the NCEM was of the firm belief that supporting the faster adoption of hybrid & electric vehicles and their manufacture in India will be a wise investment for future generations.

The Government of India last year had approved the NMEM and the establishment of a high-level apex structure in the form of the NCEM and the National Board for Electric Mobility (NBEM) for faster adoption of electric vehicles and their manufacture in India. NMEM ranks among the most significant recent initiatives taken up by the Government for the automotive sector with the potential to vastly change the automotive paradigm of the future.

The NEMMP 2020 is based on an in-depth primary data based study conducted jointly by government and industry, with detailed stakeholder consultations involving all related Government Ministries, automotive industry, battery manufacturers, academia and research institutes.

The NEMMP-2020 document is planned to be formally unveiled to the public soon. The work for implementation of the plan is being headed by the Department of Heavy Industry (DHI) with the support of National Automotive Testing and R&D Infrastructure Project (NATRiP) and will involve finalization and roll out of comprehensive array of interventions, schemes, policies and projects during the next few months.

Disaster Management Japan Vs India

Japan’s disaster management, India’s management disaster…

Even as horrific images of the disaster that struck Japan continue to linger in our minds, one cannot but wonder what would happen if a similar disaster were to strike India.

There have been a spate of natural disasters in recent years that have beleaguered both wealthy and poorer nations, resulting in humanitarian crises of colossal proportions. These incidents have been a rude awakening to international bodies and over the last decade, several international attempts were made at forging a consensus on the best ways to build a systemic process to mitigate disaster damage. The adoption of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) 2000, the World Conference on Disaster Reduction 2005, the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015, and the recent 2010-2011 World Disaster Reduction Campaign are efforts in that direction.

The Japanese double disaster, earthquake followed by tsunami, is testimony to the fact that a reliable early warning system, state-of-the-art infrastructure and a strong political commitment can go a long way in saving lives during a disaster. Japan has handled the disaster exceptionally well. If one were to draw comparisons between Japan and India, the results may be quite unsettling.
India has had its share of calamities in the past 10 to 15 years.

The recent disasters like the 1999 Orissa cyclone, the 2001 Gujarat earthquake, the 2004 tsunami and the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, impelled India to recognise the urgent need for proactive and effective disaster management systems in the country. The passage of the National Disaster Management Act in 2005, the establishment of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), and the ensuing State Disaster Management Authorities (SDMAs) and the National Institute of Disaster Management (NIDM) in Delhi were steps in the right direction aimed at amalgamating disaster management into state functioning.

However, it is a cause of great worry that many of the proposed measures towards preparedness are lagging behind with respect to implementation, operational capacities, and adequate resources, or suffering due to lack of political will/commitment and an attitude of indifference by the public.

One cannot imagine the consequences if a similar disaster were to strike Mumbai. This coastal city is prone to multiple natural and man-made disasters, the July 2005 floods being a case in point. Although Mumbai has conducted a vulnerability assessment and has a Disaster Management Plan, there is no denying that there is still much to be done to make Mumbai a ‘safe and resilient’ city.

Besides the traditional reactionary nature of the Indian government, Mumbai in particular has specific issues that hinder inclusion of resilience into its developmental plans. More than 60% of the population resides in informal settlements that are dangerously close to bio-chemically hazardous materials. The existence of a ‘land mafia’, gross violation of CRZ norms, constant reclamation of land for developmental projects, destruction of natural barriers like mangroves and existence of over 15,000 highly unsafe buildings exacerbate the city’s vulnerability.

While in no way belittling the tragedy suffered by the Japanese, this is an opportunity for us in India and especially in Mumbai to learn a valuable lesson in coordinating action during a crisis. The need for coordination between the multiple stakeholders through resource mobilisng strategies like public-private partnerships is a dire necessity.Strong political will and public cooperation is indispensable for assertion of structural safety and retrofitting of vulnerable structures.

Also, the establishment of effective early warning systems and the identification and strengthening of emergency shelters is crucial. Decentralisation of disaster management plans and disaster education to increase public awareness is fundamental to enhance resilience.

While millions flock to the City of Dreams in hope of a better life, let us contribute towards its realisation by ensuring the city’s continued existence and resilient progress.

The author is a researcher at the Observer Research Foundation
Mumbai, specialising in Disaster Management and Risk Reduction studies.