Reject this inequitable climate proposal

Livemint     18th September 2020     Save    
QEP Pocket Notes

Context: The U.N. Secretary’s call for India to give up coal immediately and reduce emissions by 45% by 2030 is a call to deindustrialise the country and abandon the population to a permanent low-development trap. 

Arguments against the U.N. Secretary’s Call: Rationale for India’s consumption of coal - 

  • Against the foundational principles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): which distinguishes sharply between the responsibilities and commitments of developed countries vis-à-vis those of developing countries.
  • The latest climate report by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has asked China and India to reduce their emissions by 45% by 2030,
  • Low Per Capita income: Economically weak among G-20, India, with the lowest per capita income among the G-20, requires more cheap energy resources to tackle the recession.
  • India has kept its climate promise:  
    •  India’s renewable energy programme is ambitious while its energy efficiency programme is delivering, especially in the domestic consumption sector. 
    • India is one of the few countries with at least 2° Celsius warming compliant climate action and is currently on track to fulfilling their Paris Agreement commitments. 
    • Low emission: 
      • India’s annual emissions, at 0.5 tonnes per capita, are well below the global average of 1.3 tonnes; lower than China, the United States and European Union.
      • In terms of cumulative emissions, India’s contribution by 2017 was only 4% for a population of 1.3 billion, whereas the European Union, with a population of only 448 million, was responsible for 20%.
  • High future energy requirements: With the current decommission rate, India will have only 184 GW of coal-based generation by 2030:
    • This will require anywhere between 650 GW to 750 GW of renewable energy to meet the 2030 electricity consumption target of 1,580 to 1,660 units per person per year.
    • Oil and gas are not feasible: Unlike the developed nations, India cannot substitute coal substantially by oil and gas.
  • Constraints to Increasing Renewable Energy Usage:
  • Huge dependence on technology development
  • End of legally binding commitments by developed countries:  the Copenhagen Accord signalled the end of legally binding commitments to emissions reduction by the developed countries
  • Decline in the annual filing of patents: Annual ?ling of patents shows a marked decline, ranging between 30% to 50% or more from 2009-10 to 2017, across all subsectors and across all developed countries, 
  • Lack of production capacity in renewable energy technologies and their large-scale operation
  • Job creation:  Renewables alongside coal will generate, directly and indirectly, far more employment than renewables alone.
  • Stagnation in Industrial growth:  since renewables at best can meet residential consumption and some part of the demand from the service sector and cannot really drive industry, particularly manufacturing

First World Strategy: in order to force the developing nations towards “de-growth.”

  • Abdication of commitment by the developed nation: While the United Nations has dictated the responsibilities to the developing counties, it felt overlooked the lack of commitment of developed nations:
  • Continued use of oil and gas by the global North.
  • Double Standards by the Secretary-General: He had not called out the U.S. for its withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.
  • Diverted the attention of Paris Commitments: by through unclarified commitments towards “carbon neutrality” by 2050 and displaying a false high moral posturing.
  • Putting the onus on developing countries: due to Failure of the developed countries in garnering domestic political support required for climate action led to putting pressure on developing countries.
  • Their strategies include: 
        • Demonising of coal mining and coal-based power generation
        • Promoting claims that immediate climate mitigation would miraculously lower domestic in equalities and ensure climate adaptation,
        • Promoting Third World natural resources as active sites of mitigation and not adaptation, and 
        • Promoting theories of “degrowth” or the neglect of industrial and agricultural productivity for the pursuit of climate change mitigation. 
  • Utilising multilateral intuitions: for furthering their agenda; For, E.g. the Secretary-General had no comments over the withdrawal of the U.S. from Paris Agreement.
  • Youth- Unsensitised to global inequalities: have promoted the rhetoric where developing and developed nations are forcefully held equally responsible despite actual capabilities and issues.

Conclusion: India must unanimously reject the U.N. Secretary General’s call and reiterate its longstanding commitment to an equitable response to the challenge of global warming. 

QEP Pocket Notes