Let’s compare trajectories & requirements. If HI emitters' ref = decline to zero in 30 yrs, their *failure to reduce* over last 10 yrs was greater than the future continued rise from LO emitters (at present rates of rise). By the time many LDCs grow, technology will decarbonize.
Emissions from the poorest are a rounding error.
A Billion people supplied coal-based electricity (35 kWh/month/home =TV, fan, fridge) =0.25% of global emissions. The push to "leapfrog to RE" distracts from their real need: access.
Good news: Electricity is easy to decarbonize.
I’m no coal apologist, but while we rush to end coal (used disproportionately in developing regions), financiers still funds lots of oil & gas. Half the coal was used in China. India was #2, but India’s per capita consumption (normalized for C content) was ½ the world 2019 avg.
Zero by 2050 is usually “net-zero”, relying on offsets. Many of these are accounting tricks; some rely on unproved or at least expensive technology in the distant future. Also, many offsets unfairly rely on developing regions.
Why are offsets unfair? Some folks claim “all carbon is equal” (then what about historical emissions?) but the economics are NOT equal. Developed countries should clean up their tail end of emissions, which is expensive. Some offsets should also accrue to the developing country.
It would be naïve/impractical to expect meaningful emissions trajectory shifts downwards by developing regions without massive support: technology and finance. We're nowhere near the $100B by 2022 support by developed countries pledged at COP15.
Unfortunately, “Climate Finance” has also involved accounting tricks, often including loans for renewable energy projects, some of which are simply the new BAU. We need additional & permanent displacement of carbon at the least. nature.com/articles/d4158…
Net-zero by 2050 doesn’t mean everyone 0 simultaneously. 30 yrs decline to 0 = high emitters will still over-emit & low emitters won’t emit much (compared to *remaining* carbon budget allocated by popn).
BTW, China's emissions were 50% > avg per capita. India’s were < ½ the avg.
High popn in LDCs? Their per capita C is so low that total C is still low. Take the lowest 3 per capita: Sub-Saharan Africa (excl ZA), India, and Other S. Asia. Total emissions just 9.2%, for 36.5% of world’s popn.
Flip: top 20% of world popn. responsible for half the emissions.
BUT developing regions shouldn’t get a pass to ignore C; they will be the most vulnerable to its impacts.
+ These changes represent an opportunity for equitable energy futures (& lots of economic activity). They should also introspect if their C space is used up by their elites.
Common But Differentiated Responsibilities should convert to Universal But Different Action. HI emitters need to come down immediately & to true zero ASAP. LO emitters have to decouple GDP and carbon, and avoid carbon-locking pathways.
We all need to do as much as we can!
(Pl. read the full OpEd before yelling at me)
cc'ing a few folks on #energytwitter and #ClimateTwitter for joining this perhaps unpopular (but inconveniently real) issue.
India doesn't bid for power, it bids for power plants.
You may get the cheapest coal plant, but not the cheapest power. RTC (“round the clock”) bids indicate trends but are also misleading. India needs Time of Day WHOLESALE pricing to improve generation portfolio signaling.
Far more worrying is whether such a long term PPA is needed, given power purchase agreements (PPAs) by the state (MP) exceed visible needs. Problem is a legacy mindset, including financing (who funds without a PPA? – same for #RenewableEnergy). Fuel is also linked to PPAs.
(1/n) #9pm9minutes PRELMINARY Analysis carbontracker.in timestamps are limited!
Key points:
1)Total demand fall DUE TO EVENT was ?~29 GW.
2)Demand fall started before 9 pm
3)Most balancing was done by hydro [BIG TIME]
4)Grid rise (aka “recovery”) finished ~10:30 pm
(2/n) Demand fall was not just due to lighting.
Too much fall, and some of load fall began as early as 8:45. All evenings “normally” decline 3.5-5.5 GW after peak ~7:30. Fall after 8:45 was measurably more than normal trend. See carbontracker.in for other days.
(3/n) [speculation] Folks were switching off loads to protect their devices. Really doubt so much load is lighting! That too participating.
Fall during the 9 minutes was less than the total event - if one wants to estimate "household lighting" in India.
(1/n) Thread on 9 PM lights-out & candles-on plan by @narendramodi
TL/DR – it should *likely* not be a problem because (1) we can plan; (2) the lighting load is modest (maybe 10% of total grid at most. (3) We have enough fast acting supply options that can manage.
(2/n) SCIENCE: 3 factors that matter; 1) how much switches off/on? 2) How fast does this happen? 3) What does the grid look like to be able to cope? Oversimiplification – we’ll only look macro level (means frequency, not voltage), and ignore transients.
(3/n) Earth day is usually not as high participation in India – but it also involves switching off more loads than just lights. We handle that easily. (NOTE in graph (from carbontracker.in), as I predicted before, after stabilizing, daily high is trending up – summer/ACs!)
(2/n) [DISCLAIMER: I helped set up India's smart grid space. Am ~evangelist, but also a realist]
Discoms have high losses, partly due to theft/poor billing (and collection); other reason is tariffs < costs. A smart meter (esp. in prepaid mode) offers promise to cut down losses.
(3/n) But it's wrong to claim ONLY smart meters cut down losses - Haryana, Ajmer, etc. prove so. Smart meters can't detect theft alone - requires analytics and political will. 1st Q: are discoms harnessing the data they already have? 2nd Q: what of theft "above" the meter?
1/15: [THREAD] Unpacking the Headlines:
20 GW of #NuclearPower planned in India by 2030
2 ways to analyze:
1)Can it happen - and should it happen?
2)What’s nuclear’s role, and what’s special/different about India?
I combine both aspects in this thread
2/15: The plans tick many of the right boxes – standardized designs, fleets, etc. There is also talk of encouraging the private sector – but will they bite? Global private sector is even harder given #DifferencesOfOpinion on the nuclear liability bill.
3/15: Nuclear has many concerns for different people – fuel disposal, accidents, proliferation, etc. Latter is a non-issue as India is a proven mature actor, and it also can island safeguard civilian reactors. But what about the economics? Esp. fully loaded costs.