Low C Policies BRICSAM Feb2014 Prayas

8/12/2019 Low C Policies BRICSAM Feb2014 Prayas

1/17

Energy policies forpro-poor low-carbon development in India

International meeting on operational pathways forequitable low carbon development in BRICSAM countries

February 17-18, 2014New Delhi

Ashok SreenivasPrayas (Energy Group), Pune

www.prayaspune.org/peg


2/17

Approach

Co-benefits based approach most meaningful forIndia

Pursue low- carbon options where carbon is a co -benefitto other developmental benefits

Many options available

Indian context Very low energy access / usage and large infrastructure

deficit Energy imports drain on resources Very poor socio-environmental management regime

1


3/17

Access deficit

2

Well over 1 USA (400 million) without access to electricity Hours of supply in rural area often as low as 2 hours Approx. 1 Africa (1 billion) living on less than 100 kWh /household/month Over 1.5 EU-28 (800 million) still use solid fuels, kerosene etc. for cooking

Source: Census 2011, NSSO 66th round, Prayas estimates


4/17

Infrastructure deficit

3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Houses withoutconcrete/brick walls

Houses withouttoilets

Habitations withoutall-weather roads

Villages withoutprimary schools

Villages withoutbasic health services

Half the households do not have pucca houses, toilets, basic health care One-fourth villages have no proper road access, one-fifth no primary school

Source: Census 2011, NSSO, PM Sadak Yojana, Prayas estimates


5/17

4

Energy imports financial burden (2010)

Indian imports as % of GDP considerably high contributes 60% oftrade deficitSupply security concerns

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Brazil China Germany India Japan South Korea United States

E n e r g y i m p o r t s a s % o

f G D P

E n e r g y i m p o r t

d e p e n

d e n c e

Net energy import dependence(%) Energy imports as % of GDP Source: EIA, World bank


6/17

Socio-environmental distress

High air and water pollution Primarily a governance failure

Poor compensation / R&R Employment or alternative

livelihoods provided to only ~40%of displaced Less than half the resettled houses

had access to water

None had access to primary healthcentres near by Weak legal regime and governance

5

020406080

100

120140160180

RSPM (g/m3) TSS (mg/l)

Pollution near powerplants

Ratnagiri Dadri Vindhyachal

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

RSPM (g/m3) TSS (mg/l)

Pollution near coal mines

Godavari coalfield Jharia coalfield


7/17

Low-C Solutions for India

Should contribute to improving access Cannot be expensive to the poor at least Should not increase import dependence Should lead to minimal socio-environmental distress Low-C energy policies for India should satisfy these

(potentially conflicting) attributes! Energy sector policies

Not so much about governance, institutional issues,environmental management etc.

All equally important

6


8/17

Energy conservation / efficiency Potential to reduce some very high-end consumption

Life-style / consumption pattern change at the top? Better building designs?

Huge potential for efficiency improvement Very rough estimates for potential savings

30% in agriculture,

25% in residential / commercial 15% in industry

If 60% appliance stock in 2020 is super -efficient, thenannual savings of

60 BU, 20 GW

50 MT CO2 Inexpensive

Prayas estimated cost of conserved electricity fromappliances: Rs. 0.80 2.50 per / kWh

7


9/17

Energy conservation / efficiency Reduced consumption

More energy to go around => can increase access Reduces imports of coal / gas => helps trade deficit Reduces mining => reduced socio-environmental stresses

Energy Efficiency improvement should be first weapon ofchoice

Government programs / actions: NMEEE umbrella Target 19 GW / 23 mtoe saving by 2014-15 Appliance standards and labelling SEEP for ceiling fans being rolled out PAT for designated industries in phase I

Vehicle (car) fuel efficiency norms just announced Issues

Standards could be tighter to accelerate efficiency improvement BEE needs strengthening / support Programs going slower than expected

8


10/17

Renewable energy Good candidate for consideration

Abundant local resources both solar and wind No local pollution, lesser social impacts

But Costlier than conventional power as of now Issues of intermittency and unpredictability

Ambitious targets 22 GW of solar and 100 GW of wind by 2022 through

national missions

Currently 2 GW and 20 GW respectively 15% of electricity by 2020 from renewable sources

(without large hydro) Currently ~5%

9


11/17

Renewable energy Way ahead

Reverse auctions drove down solar prices by ~40% Net-metering for rooftop PV + telescopic tariffs

High end consumers pay for high cost resource Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, AP, West Bengal, Delhi etc. adopting it

Points to ponder Bringing down wind energy costs (auctions?) Start thinking about socio-environmental impacts of

RE particularly land and maybe water Intermittency, grid integration issues Micro-grids and their integration with the grid Promoting jobs and domestic industry?

10


12/17

Transport Urban transport: the Avoid-Shift-Improve framework Avoid

Retain / encourage existing advantages such as dense and mixed-use Reduce travel needs

Shift Protect and encourage pedestrians and cyclists Provide (much) better public transport

Improve Fuel efficiency of vehicles

Improves the access / mobility of poor / disadvantaged Reduce imports (India imports 80% of its oil requirements) Improves urban air quality

11


13/17

Transport Increasing realization of such a shift at the national level

states / cities still catching up Inter-city passenger and freight transport

Encourage larger role for rail About 10 times more efficient than road/air Better corridors, faster trains, better inter-connectivity and

logistics Largely powered by electricity

No pollution at consumption end Shift to RE can gradually reduce pollution at source

Long way to go in this regard Total potential annual savings from transport by 2020

~US $4bn in imports ~50 MT CO2

12


14/17

Cooking fuels Biomass / solid fuels use for cooking

Severe health effects One hour cooking smoking 1000 cigarettes!

Gender impacts Fetching fuel wood / dung

Carbon impacts Black carbon: One estimate of 172,000 tons in 2005 Potential deforestation / denudation due to population pressure

Shifting to more efficient cook-stoves and/or modern fuels canlower impacts

Different implications of improving efficiency / shifting to modernbut fossil fuels

Will involve trade-offs Need to weigh options carefully

13


15/17

Cooking fuels

Some Government schemes to shift to efficient cook-stoves buthighly ineffective so far

Only ~50% of stoves being used in spite of Government paying >= 50% ofcost NPIC

35 million units distributed Criticised for poor stove design, high program cost, low uptake rates

New scheme announced recently

14

30% shift to Efficient stove LPG

Woman hours saved ~9 billion ~28 billionBlack carbon emissions 24,000 tons 78,000 tons

CO2 emissions 2 MT (28 MT)

Import dependence - (USD 8 bn)

Forest / green cover Maybe +ve or ve Definite +ve

Long term sustainability Possible Impossible!?


16/17

Agriculture Contributes about 20% of Indias GHG emissions though mostly

non-energy emissions Consumes about ~11% of the countrys energy

15

Fertilizer39%

Irrigation28%

Transport15%

Mechanization8%

Other6%

Draught animal+ human

4%

Domestic fertilizer production and irrigation

consume about 14 mtoe each Fertilizers: ~10% of oil imports Diesel: ~3% of oil imports

Options for consideration Moving to super -pumps

More reliable, efficient suitable for utility DSM? Gradual shift away from petroleum-based fertilizers? Better crops / cropping patterns?


17/17

THANK YOU

16

[email protected]

Documents

Low C Policies BRICSAM Feb2014 Prayas