With landmark climate accord, world marks turn from fossil fuels

[dray]

Tomorrow, India if does not honor these commitments, Internationally media would go hammer and tongs on India on not honoring the commitment while totally ignoring the fact the developed world did not honor their part of the agreement. Again we are committing the below based on a projection that India would grow rapidly by 2030.

1) Cumulative emission as of today is below 3%.
2) Pledged an emissions intensity cut of up to 25% by 2020
3) Committed to cut the “emissions intensity” of its economy – a ratio of carbon emissions per unit of GDP – by up to 35% by 2030.
4) Pledged to source 40% of its electricity from renewable and other low-carbon sources by 2030.

India's foreign policy is not governed by BBC or CNN, otherwise western world would have had their way with equal responsibilities without any financial commitment on their part.

I have argued for the differentiated responsibilities and financial commitment for the richer countries in simple language a week before this climate agreement in the thread below, these were India's long standing demands, and when these demands are met, I see no reason to complain.

https://defence.pk/threads/narendra-modi-could-make-or-break-obama’s-climate-legacy.411331/

In short, richer countries need to do more, and pay more, otherwise they can suck the middle finger we give them.

 

[Manindra]

Earlier China and India were together in the fight but after US-China agreement earlier this year, India was left high and dry. China even though claimed as developing country, it is in fact developed. For example, China manufactures it's own solar panels. In case of India, we need to spend money to buy these tech for the developed world at a premium to meet the commitments.

U.S.-China Joint Presidential Statement on Climate Change | whitehouse.gov

Who says that we does not manufacture Solar Panels ? But it cost more due compared to imported one due to stupid tax structure.

 

[dadeechi]

India's foreign policy is not governed by BBC or CNN, otherwise western world would have had their way with equal responsibilities without any financial commitment on their part.

I have argued for the differentiated responsibilities and financial commitment for the richer countries in simple language a week before this climate agreement in the thread below, these were India's long standing demands, and when these demands are met, I see no reason to complain.

https://defence.pk/threads/narendra-modi-could-make-or-break-obama’s-climate-legacy.411331/

In short, richer countries need to do more, and pay more, otherwise they can suck the middle finger we give them.

@Manindra


India Worries It Compromised Too Much on Climate Treaty

As the world celebrates reaching an unprecedented global climate treaty, India is praising nations' willingness to compromise for the good of the planet. But many in the country — which had been among the most strident during the negotiations — worry they had to compromise the most.
In the hours after the treaty was finalized in Paris, India's environment minister gave a speech that verged toward complaint, saying that the "actions of developed countries are far below their historical responsibilities and fair share."
"While give-and-take is normal in negotiations, we are of the opinion that the agreement could have been more ambitious," Prakash Javadekar said.
India's goals going into the talks were high. It wanted long-polluting rich nations to make the steepest cuts in climate-warming greenhouse gases, so others like India could continue to expand their economies on fossil fuels. It wanted considerable finance and free access to new technologies to expand its renewable energy capacity and cope with the effects of climate change.
And it wanted the final Paris climate treaty to enshrine the idea that industrialized nations, which have been emitting greenhouse gases for decades, are historically responsible for the climate crisis.
It was disappointed to some degree on all fronts. While the treaty does make distinctions between rich and poor nations in terms of various actions they should take, it ignores the concept of "historical responsibility" for climate change; it denies free access to new energy technologies; and it leaves open the possibility of developing countries still having to make emissions cuts of their own.
"The draft agreement further weakens differentiation between developed and developing countries like India," said Prodipto Ghosh, a former climate negotiator with a Delhi-based research group, The Energy and Resources Institute. "The absence of any target for financial resources to developing countries is disappointing."
At the same time, India was determined to avoid being labeled a spoiler in the talks — something it has been called in the past when it stood staunch on having its demands met.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the Paris treaty as equitable, saying in a Twitter message Sunday that it "has no winners or losers. Climate justice has won, and we are all working toward a greener future."
Experts and analysts are still coming to terms with what the deal might mean for India's development path. Some said the treaty's very existence was a plus for India, as the South Asian nation of 1.25 billion people will need global help with its development goals, and will continue to press the industrialized world for more action.
"As a vulnerable country, achieving a climate deal was important for India," added Navroz K. Dubash, coordinator of climate work at an independent New Delhi think tank, the Centre for Policy Research. "While India should certainly do its part, it is important that these mechanisms keep pressure on developed countries for more ambitious actions, to allow countries like India the carbon space to meet our development needs."
But what is becoming clear is that India could still soon face enormous pressure to do much more.
The 32-page agreement, endorsed by 195 countries, will be implemented only from 2020 — opening a window for India to update its pledges between now and then. Experts say much stronger commitments are still needed to meet the treaty's goal of limiting the average global rise in temperatures to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels. Already, the world has warmed by 0.7 degrees Celsius. India had wanted the target limit set at 2 degrees, and argued unsuccessfully against those who wanted to set it lower.
"India believes that it will not have to do much before 2030," said the New Delhi-based Center for Science and Environment. But "India will be under constant pressure to take more burden for mitigating climate change by 2020 and beyond."
That's largely due to the fact that India — the world's third-largest carbon emitter among nations — has no plans to curb its coal use any time soon. While both the U.S. and China have leveled their coal use in the last few years, India has committed to tripling its coal-fired electricity capacity to 450 gigawatts by 2030.
India, along with many analysts, argues that the country has little choice in the short term, unless it leaves its masses mired in poverty. There are still some 300 million Indians — a quarter of the population — with no electricity at all, while a vast amount of infrastructure is yet to be built.
To allay fears that India intended to pollute without end, the country's top negotiators in Paris underlined plans for a five-fold boost in renewable energy and a firm intention to phase out all coal plants using old, inefficient technology.
Pollution pledges aside, Indian analysts said the Paris treaty confirms India's belief that protecting the climate must be part of an overall plan that also includes developing economically and alleviating poverty.
"Developed countries are expected to take the lead on mitigation and support, while developing countries are expected to take actions within the context of their sustainable development and poverty eradication imperatives," said Lavanya Rajamani with the Centre for Policy Research. "As a large developing country with little historic responsibility for the problem and considerable energy needs, this was an important outcome for India."

India Worries It Compromised Too Much on Climate Treaty - ABC News

 

[dray]

India has committed to tripling its coal-fired electricity capacity to 450 gigawatts by 2030.

Take this line for example! This agreement doesn't have any legal binding or penalty clause, but you can keep manufacturing the fear of enormous pressure out of thin air.

 

[dadeechi]

Take this line for example!

Well we have to read both these lines together not just the first one. Renewable Technology does not come cheap.

India has committed to tripling its coal-fired electricity capacity to 450 gigawatts by 2030.

To allay fears that India intended to pollute without end, the country's top negotiators in Paris underlined plans for a five-fold boost in renewable energy and a firm intention to phase out all coal plants using old, inefficient technology.

This agreement doesn't have any legal binding or penalty clause, but you can keep manufacturing the fear of enormous pressure out of thin air.

Not fear but only caution.



Why India’s plan to fight climate change doesn’t hold water

Why India’s plan to fight climate change doesn't hold water


As the third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases globally, the pressure is on India to offer something meaningful at the Paris climate talks. Yet the country demands the right to develop and lift its population out of poverty.
In its official submission to the summit, the so-called INDC (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) which every country had to provide before negotiations began, India pledges to reduce the emissions intensity of GDP by 33 to 35% by 2030 based on 2005 levels. It proposes to achieve this by investing significantly in low-carbon technologies. But do these numbers stack up?

Indian prime minister Narendra Modi addresses the Paris talks. Guillaume Horcajuelo/EPA
It may have the third highest greenhouse gas emissions on the planet, but India’s emissions per person are much lower than those of all so-called developed countries. This is why stakeholders insist on India’s right to develop.
Key concerns are energy poverty – one in five Indians lacks access to electricity – and the need to provide jobs for the fast-growing population. Both will involve the expansion of energy-intensive industries. Although renewables will contribute up to 40% of India’s electricity by 2030, the country is also forecast to become the largest source of demand growth for coal globally.
The renewables targets, and India’s leadership on solar power, have rightly been lauded for their ambition. Yet important concerns remain.
The trouble with hydro
India has significant growth potential for hydropower, and the INDC contains a pledge to “aggressively pursue” its development. There is no clarification made about what type of hydropower this will be. Of the existing installed capacity in hydro of 46.1 gigawatts (GW), only 4.1 GW is small hydro. There are concerns especially about the 292 dams that are supposed to be built in the Indian Himalaya region, which is extremely earthquake-prone.
Large dams affect millions of lives, none more so than those displaced by construction. The Narmada valley project is a classic case. Land is grabbed from small farmers and rural communities, increasing the pressure on already expanding urban centres. In one state alone, some 100 dams have displaced 700,000 people according to the government’s own figures.

The Narmada dam displaced thousands of people. Amit Dave/Reuters
The electricity generated by large hydro projects is always destined for the national grid. The rural poor living with energy poverty rarely see any benefit. No wonder movements such as the Narmada Bachao Andolan have focused on alternatives to big dams. At the Paris climate talks, a coalition of 300 civil society organisations from 53 countries released a manifesto asking for climate initiatives to preclude large hydropower projects.
Clean coal?
The most glaring aspect of India’s INDC is the classification of coal as a “clean” source of energy. The submission states that India generates 60.8% (167.2 GW) of its power using coal; the mention of mandating the use of “highly efficient supercritical technology” for coal plants indicates that coal will continue to be at the centre of its power generation strategy.
There is a fundamental contradiction between this coal usage policy, which requires a massive expansion of homegrown extraction, leading to large-scale deforestation in India’s coal belt, and its plan to meet carbon emissions reduction target by offsetting 100 million tonnes of CO2 per year by planting trees.
The INDC goes so far as to commit to increasing the forest cover by between 2.5 million and 3 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2030. This is despite evidence that Indian forests are significantly degraded and that between 1980 and 2007, 1,140,177 hectares of forest land were diverted for non-forest purposes with another 180,000 hectares having been diverted in the past five years.
A fatal conundrum
India’s pledges do not effectively reconcile the needs of development with sustainability. Even renewable energy can have severe social and environmental implications, and it is glaringly obvious that coal can never be clean, even with massive carbon offsetting.
India is not alone in this conundrum. As the developing world tries to catch up with countries that have already emitted carbon for centuries, while replicating their energy strategies, the fundamental contradictions of the world’s dominant approach to development become obvious.
The Paris climate talks will not provide new answers to these deep-seated challenges. Countries like India will continue to insist on their right to narrowly defined development. Their elites do not realise that they are following a failed and fatal model.

 

[dray]

@dadeechi so what's the problem? Western world will always say all this, and we will also be happy to use more green energy if they pay for the high cost of implementation. These articles have little value.

 

[dadeechi]

@dadeechi so what's the problem? Western world will always say all this, and we will also be happy to use more green energy if they pay for the high cost of implementation. These articles have little value.

The problem is the demonization of India has already started. The world keeps repeating that India is 3rd largest Polluter behind US and China. But let's look at the Per capita CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita). India is way below the world average. But the world keeps chanting the "India needs to do more" mantra. India has already succumbed to the pressure and committed to much more than it's share. With a value of "1.662" in 2011, India is 145th worst polluter but being tarnished as 3rd worst polluter by volume.

Country Name Per capita CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita)in 2011
============================================================
Qatar 44.0189264
Trinidad and Tobago 37.1400542
Kuwait 28.1026618
Brunei Darussalam 24.3920134
Aruba 23.9224121
Luxembourg 20.8978117
United Arab Emirates 20.4338376
Oman 20.2038945
Saudi Arabia 18.0724507
Bahrain 17.9473298
United States 17.0202163
North America 16.7319858
Australia 16.5192099
Kazakhstan 15.8100975
New Caledonia 15.1732953
Canada 14.1358134
Estonia 14.0498825
Russian Federation 12.6473282
Greenland 12.440341
Turkmenistan 12.1836666
Korea, Rep. 11.8407569
Faeroe Islands 11.7212117
High income: nonOECD 11.6603933
High income 11.0702805
High income: OECD 10.9778371
Palau 10.8554305
Czech Republic 10.4310881
Cayman Islands 10.3049311
Finland 10.1640461
Netherlands 10.0644897
OECD members 9.90716841
Caribbean small states 9.69296027
Japan 9.2918343
South Africa 9.25721647
Norway 9.19287907
Israel 8.95241353
Germany 8.91783285
Equatorial Guinea 8.90724154
Belgium 8.8493983
Poland 8.33578671
Malaysia 7.89882357
Ireland 7.88075933
Iran, Islamic Rep. 7.80214509
Austria 7.76998342
Greece 7.55605777
Europe & Central Asia (all income levels) 7.54133423
Slovenia 7.5042597
Denmark 7.24832872
Euro area 7.132483
New Zealand 7.12405087
United Kingdom 7.08573209
European Union 7.06979787
Mongolia 6.91514653
Central Europe and the Baltics 6.91113121
Seychelles 6.83570636
Serbia 6.799115
Cyprus 6.73537582
Bulgaria 6.71438251
China 6.71030199
Italy 6.70255761
Belarus 6.6825104
Venezuela, RB 6.41633358
Slovak Republic 6.36754592
Ukraine 6.26235196
Libya 6.20491434
Bosnia and Herzegovina 6.19665215
Bermuda 6.07721021
Malta 6.03432164
Turks and Caicos Islands 6.01014908
Andorra 5.96868547
Middle East & North Africa (all income levels) 5.96286531
Iceland 5.89682898
East Asia & Pacific (all income levels) 5.85954849
Antigua and Barbuda 5.82380434
Spain 5.79076423
Upper middle income 5.7106586
Hong Kong SAR, China 5.69526854
Barbados 5.58017762
Sweden 5.51842148
Europe & Central Asia (developing only) 5.4127074
East Asia & Pacific (developing only) 5.30249935
Bahamas, The 5.19984402
France 5.18504342
St. Kitts and Nevis 5.05096419
World 4.94467601
Hungary 4.86298993
Croatia 4.80153001
Arab World 4.7244997
Portugal 4.70984962
Lebanon 4.66831251
Switzerland 4.62522992
Chile 4.61644538
Argentina 4.56204851
Lithuania 4.53755851
Thailand 4.53449173
Macedonia, FYR 4.51921014
Turkey 4.38310452
Singapore 4.32015144
Romania 4.21056012
Iraq 4.20163513
Montenegro 4.14554758
Uzbekistan 3.91492127
Middle East & North Africa (developing only) 3.87821927
Mexico 3.87610761
Latvia 3.78680144
Suriname 3.64991336
Azerbaijan 3.64737915
Jordan 3.60114706
Small states 3.46439687
Middle income 3.42443389
Algeria 3.31603789
Maldives 3.25962294
Cuba 3.17231509
French Polynesia 3.16795268
Mauritius 3.12707082
Low & middle income 3.1031956
Korea, Dem. Rep. 2.98718211
Latin America & Caribbean (all income levels) 2.93332918
Jamaica 2.87265569
Syrian Arab Republic 2.73699094
Egypt, Arab Rep. 2.63511522
Panama 2.62527624
Grenada 2.40813743
Tunisia 2.40245564
Latin America & Caribbean (developing only) 2.38417561
Guyana 2.35772203
Ecuador 2.35401739
Botswana 2.32334501
Indonesia 2.30378098
Uruguay 2.29620068
St. Lucia 2.27042359
Brazil 2.19139356
Dominican Republic 2.18290789
St. Vincent and the Grenadines 2.17992336
Macao SAR, China 2.1330609
Vietnam 1.97188917
Marshall Islands 1.95420719
Peru 1.78323314
Georgia 1.76915052
Dominica 1.74614156
Morocco 1.73791555
Costa Rica 1.7049745
Armenia 1.67165692
Belize 1.6709043
India 1.66287348
Albania 1.60703771
Bolivia 1.59949904
Colombia 1.5606291
Other small states 1.55111217
Lower middle income 1.50899267
Fiji 1.42481325
Gabon 1.41816575
South Asia 1.4090298
Liechtenstein 1.4050962
Moldova 1.39882179
Angola 1.35400753
Samoa 1.25211008
Micronesia, Fed. Sts. 1.24033592
Namibia 1.23916049
Kyrgyz Republic 1.19959163
El Salvador 1.10399857
Honduras 1.10374505
Pacific island small states 1.09799975
Lesotho 1.08226961
Tonga 0.98356196
Pakistan 0.94117113
Yemen, Rep. 0.91996762
Philippines 0.86784534
Swaziland 0.86498831
Cabo Verde 0.85906143
Fragile and conflict affected situations 0.85862885
Nicaragua 0.84354195
Paraguay 0.84191524
Sub-Saharan Africa (all income levels) 0.83094112
Sub-Saharan Africa (developing only) 0.82359608
Bhutan 0.76620562
Guatemala 0.74805506
Papua New Guinea 0.74689523
Sri Lanka 0.72992084
Zimbabwe 0.6916979
Mauritania 0.62722546
Kiribati 0.5956221
Vanuatu 0.59126577
Senegal 0.58833415
Sao Tome and Principe 0.58790926
West Bank and Gaza 0.57240688
Djibouti 0.56194093
Congo, Rep. 0.53809838
Nigeria 0.53749756
Benin 0.50996223
Afghanistan 0.4252621
Ghana 0.4043798
Bangladesh 0.37201717
Solomon Islands 0.36830417
Tajikistan 0.35894763
Sudan 0.34954872
Kenya 0.32756917
Togo 0.31944362
Cote d'Ivoire 0.3128777
Cambodia 0.30807315
Low income 0.27096449
Least developed countries: UN classification 0.26870727
Cameroon 0.26809179
Gambia, The 0.24109842
Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) 0.23019332
Guinea 0.22942342
Comoros 0.22023347
Liberia 0.21842501
Haiti 0.21796205
Zambia 0.21244964
Myanmar 0.20028521
Lao PDR 0.18891051
Timor-Leste 0.16364808
Nepal 0.15947445
Tanzania 0.1549349
Sierra Leone 0.15204417
Guinea-Bissau 0.14681068
Mozambique 0.13118981
Burkina Faso 0.11998056
Madagascar 0.11299281
Uganda 0.11088658
Eritrea 0.10871836
Niger 0.08395818
Ethiopia 0.08394312
Mali 0.07995638
Malawi 0.07923148
Central African Republic 0.06312781
Rwanda 0.0628742
Somalia 0.05870688
Congo, Dem. Rep. 0.05030269
Chad 0.04383042
Burundi 0.02134993
American Samoa
Channel Islands
Curacao
Guam
Isle of Man
Not classified
Kosovo
St. Martin (French part)
Monaco
Northern Mariana Islands
Puerto Rico
San Marino
South Sudan
Sint Maarten (Dutch part)
Tuvalu
Virgin Islands (U.S.)

CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita) | Data | Table