International Association For Energy Economics The Energy Journal

India's Non-CO₃ GHG Emissions: Development Pathways and Mitigation Flexibility
Author(s): P. R. Shukla, Amit Garg, Manmohan Kapshe and Rajesh Nair

Source: The Energy Journal, Vol. 27, Special Issue: Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and
Climate Policy (2006), pp. 461-483
Published by: International Association for Energy Economics
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23297096
Accessed: 23-11-2017 09:06 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
International Association for Energy Economics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to The Energy Journal
This content downloaded from 14.139.235.3 on Thu, 23 Nov 2017 09:06:02 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
India's Non-C02 GHG Emissions:
Development Pathways and Mitigation Flexibility
P. R. Shukla*, Amit Garg**, Manmohan Kapshe***, Rajesh Nairf
This paper analyses the future trends (2000-2030) in Methane and

Nitrous Oxide emissions across four scenarios that have been developed for
India. The future state of Indian economy in the next 30-years has been broadly
visualized under four scenarios proposed as combinations of market integration
(extent of liberalization, globalization and integration with the world markets)
and nature of governance (centralization vs. decentralization). The methodology
chosen for the development of these scenarios draws mainly from the IPCC SRES
methodology. The paper presents CH4 andNfD emissions for each of the scenarios
for all the major emitting sectors. The major sources of Methane emissions are
livestock and paddy contributing to about 65% of the total emissions in 2000.
The share of emissions from Municipal Solid Waste is also expected to rise with
increasing urbanization. Nitrous Oxide emissions arise chiefly from synthetic
fertilizer use (contributing 67% of total emissions) and from field burning of
agricultural residue. The paper also presents mitigation analysis for C02 and
CH4 and long-term, hundred-year analysis for C02, CH4 and N20.
1. INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, studies on GHG mitigation have focused on carbon diox

(C02) emissions from energy sources. However each non-C02 greenhouse ga
more effective at trapping heat than C02. As a result, emissions of these g
contribute significantly to climate change. Global emissions of methane, nit
oxide, and all of the high GWP gases (including Montreal Protocol Gases su
as CFCs and HCFCs, which are not addressed by the UNFCCC) accoun
approximately 30 percent of the enhanced greenhouse effect since pre-indus
The Energy Journal, Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Climate Copyright

Policy Special Issue.
©2006 by the IAEE. All rights reserved.
Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India.

** Senior Economist, UNEP Risoe Centre, Roskilde, Denmark.
*** Assistant Professor, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, India.
t Post-Doctoral Fellow, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan.
461
462 / The Energy Journal
times (IPCC 2001). As a contributor to climate change, methane is second only

to carbon dioxide. Over the last two centuries, methane concentrations in the
atmosphere have more than doubled, largely due to human-related activities.
Indian methane (CH4) (18.63 Tg) and nitrous oxide (N20) emissions (0.31
Tg) in 2000 contributed 27% and 7% respectively to C02 equivalent greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions, the remaining being carbon dioxide (C02) emissions (928
Tg) (Garg et al., 2003; Garg and Shukla, 2002). The key source categories and
main sources for Indian emissions are given in Table 1. Coal (46%) and oil product
(15%) consumption together contribute above 60% of the total emissions. The main
consumers of these fuels are the industry (including electric power generation) and
transport sector. Agriculture, including livestock and other activities, contributes
29%. It is interesting to note that India's GHG emissions are predominantly from
urban activities even though the majority of the Indian population (over 70%) live
in villages, where agriculture is the main economic activity.
Table
Table1.1.Important
ImportantContributors
Contributors
to India's
to India's
C02 Equivalent
C02 Equivalent
GHG GHG
Emissions in 2000
Source categories Main emissions Percentage share Main emission sources
Coal based electricity co2 29.9 50 large plants
Steel industry co2 8.8 5 large plants
Cement industry co2 5.1 50 large plants

Livestock related ch4,n2o 12.6 Highly dispersed
Paddy cultivation ch4 6.6 Highly dispersed
Biomass consumption ch4,n2o 5.2 Highly dispersed
Synthetic fertilizer use n2o 4.1 Highly dispersed
Transport sector co2 9.5 Highly dispersed and mobile
Waste disposal ch4 3.8 40 large waste dumps
Other sources 14.4
co2, ch4, n2o Varied and dispersed
All India (Tg) 1442a As above
Global warming potentials used for conversion to C02 equivalent GHG emissions are C02 (1), CH4
(21) and N20 (310) as per IPCC (1996).
Source: Garg et al. (2003) and Garg and Shukla (2002).
*1442=956 (C02)+21*18.63(CH4)+310*0.308 (N O), all emissions in Tg.
Many studies have estimated future carbon emissions for India and the
related mitigation opportunities (Ghosh et al., 2001; Garg and Shukla, 2002; Nair
et al., 2003; Kapshe et al., 2003). However, mitigation flexibility for future Indian
CH4 and N20 emissions is attracting attention due to the basket of GHG approach
and also to utilize the alternate mitigation opportunities for these two gases that
offer synergies with sustainable development, especially in developing countries.
india s Non-CO2 GHG Emissions / 463
A study in Finland has shown that it is profitable to exploit the economic reduction
potential of CH4 and N20, and the inclusion of these two gases decreases the
annual reduction costs by about 20% in 2010 (Tuhkanen et al. 1999). Innovative
technologies offer interesting mitigation opportunities. This paper is an attempt
to estimate these trends for India.
2. METHODOLOGY AND SCENARIO DESCRIPTION
The future CH, and N20 emission trends mainly depend upon
îconomic structure, agriculture sector reforms, irrigation devel
improved technology penetration. The technology dependence o
necessitates disaggregated study of demand and supply projections, en
performance of various technologies, and detailed assessment of tec
progress and future transitions. We, therefore, adopt a bottom-up m
which has the modified Enduse component of Asia Pacific Integ
(AIM) as the central piece (Kainuma et al., 1999). AIM uses an op
framework, where total system cost is minimized for each year. Fut
estimation is based on technology shares following the equation;
Total emissions = Σ Σ (Activity level *

Source Technology Emission coeiricient)
This is in line with the recommended Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change methodology (IPCC, 1996) and follows the same approach as
used by Garg et al. (2001).
The future CH4 and N20 emissions and mitigation flexibility are analyzed
for a reference scenario and CH4 for possible mitigation scenario. The reference
scenario reflects the current official policies of the government and forecasts of
macro-economic, demographic and agriculture sector indicators. The key driving
forces for CH4 and N20 emissions projections are economic growth, population
(livestock and human), urbanization patterns, land reforms, technological progress
and global climate change regimes. Different possible combinations of these key
driving forces would drive the future sectoral technology mix.
2.1 Scenario Description
The future state of the Indian economy in the next 3U-years can be broadly
visualized under four alternate development pathways proposed as combinations
of market integration (extent of liberalization, globalization and integration with
the world markets) and nature of governance (centralization vs. decentralization).
Market integration can be high on globalization or fragmented to make it more
inward looking. Governance could be centralized or with more emphasis on
decentralized development. The scenarios are termed as IA1, IA2, IB1 and IB2
(Figure 1). India is currently on a reasonable high-growth path. The economy is
looking to global markets while simultaneously spurred by expanding domestic

demands. Market is therefore a critical governing factor. On the other hand, the
federal structure of the Indian State, recently initiated reforms in governance at all
levels, and continued economic reforms provide the political will for development
- thus making governance the other critical driving factor.
Figure 1. Matrix of Indian Emission Scenarios

Market Integration
Governance
High Frag mented
IA1 High IA2 Business -
Growth as-Usual
Centralization
IB 1 IB2 Self
Sustainable Reliance
Decentralization
Development
The four scenarios can be best understood as taking a position in

combination of locus points on the two continuums: extent of market integ
and nature of governance. There would be several other scenarios on the cont
which are also likely but not discussed here, as only the most likely represe
sets are presented. One of these, the IA2 scenario comes closest to captur
existing policy trends and economic dynamics in short to medium-terms an
therefore be referred to as the business-as-usual (BAU) scenario. IA2 con
compounded annual GDP growth of 5.5% over 2000-2030, which is comme
with current GDP growth trends. IA2 population projections are also in li
the official population projections. This scenario also adheres to the se
growth assumptions and projections by various ministries of the Governme
is therefore referred to as the business-as-usual (BAU) scenario.
The storylines differ in factors such as how demographic struc
changes with socio-economic conditions, how technological develop
and market integration with the global economy drive economic growth
decentralized economic development activities evolve, and how protect
local and regional environments is implemented. Most of these dynamic
cannot be defined in strictly quantitative terms. They, however, interact in
"cause-effect" relationships with quantitative emission drivers (e.g., ec
activities and growth, population levels, energy consumption).
There is always the danger of too little differentiation in the scenar
short to medium-terms, but each storyline has been articulated so that it
different direction of future development differing in an increasingly irrev
India's Non-CO2GHG Emissions / 465
way over a longer period of time. The main characteristics of future developments
that lead to distinct development paths in the four storylines are
• The extent to which economic liberalization, globalization and increased
economic interactions continue over the next three decades
• The rates of national and state-level economic developments and trade patterns
in relation to the other characteristics of the storyline
• The nature of the national and regional level demographic developments in
relation to the other characteristics of the storyline
• The rates and direction of global and Indian technological change, especially in
relation to economic development prospects
• The extent to which national and local environmental concerns shape the
direction of future development and environmental controls
• The balance of economic, social, technological, or environmental objectives in the
choices made by consumers, governments, enterprises, and other stakeholders.
It is however emphasized here that the IA2 scenario does not represent
a preferred or most likely scenario. The analysis is agnostic about the future and
all the scenarios are considered equally likely. The three alternate scenarios are
called IA1 (high growth), IB1 (sustainable development) and IB2 (self-reliance)
(Table 2).
Table 2. Scenarios, Key Drivers and Impact on Model Parameters

Implications on critical parameters of the
Scenario Key Drivers scenarios and modeling analysis
IA1 : Competition and private Fuel price (T), technology cost (i), efficiency
High participation, Access to global (Î), transmission and distribution losses (i),
growth finance and technology, techno investment capacity (T), technology choices (T),
logy R&D, transfer and capacity discount rate (i), earlier penetration of advanced
building, reduced risk perception technologies, MSW management (Î), synthetic
fertilizer use (T)
IA2: GDP growth, energy efficiency, Sectoral demands (T-l), investment limits (T4-),
BAU case non-fossil fuels vs. fossil fuels, fuel supply (Ti), range of fossil fuel prices (Î-L),
oil consumption, technological relative fossil fuel price adjustments, efficiencies
change, movement on the fuel of technologies using oil and gas
ladder
IB1: Strong environmental awareness Environmental constraints (T), energy and

Sustainable and conservationist values, en materials content of goods/ services (1),
development vironmental integrity, consump electricity consumption due to efficiency
tion changes, dematerialization, improvements (i), transmission and distribution
cooperation, shift away from losses (I), penetration of clean and renewable
fossil fuels, local capacity build technologies (Î), fossil fuel prices (Î), organic
ing, rural energy and electricity fertilizer use (T)
development
IB2: GDP growth, population, local Population growth (Î), sectoral demand (Ti),
investments (4-), penetration of clean and
Regional emissions, productivity, import
development ance of agriculture, resource renewable technologies (Ti), agriculture share
intensity, self-reliance (t), local resource intensive economy, organic
fertilizer use (T)
3. THE REFERENCE (IA2) SCENARIO RESULTS
C02 equivalent GHG emissions grow about 2.6 times during 2000
2030, propelled by high C02 and N20 emissions growth. The C02 share grows
at the expense of CH4 share, although CH4 emissions also rise in absolute terms
(Table 3).
Table 3. Indian Emission Projections (Tg) IA2

Emissions (Tg) 2000 2010 2020 2030
C02 956 1507 2080 2572

Methane 18.63 20.08 21.73 24.36
n2o 0.308 0.505 0.689 0.807
c02 equivalent GHG" 1454 2115 2839 3507
a. Global warming potentials used for conversion to C02 equivalent GHG emissions are C02 (1),
methane (21) and N O (310).
3.1 Methane Emissions
Future CH4 emissions are shown in Table 4. There is a declining trend

for agriculture and livestock related emission shares, while those from waste and
coal mining rise gradually (Figure 2).
Table 4.
4. Methane
Methane Emission
Emission Projections
Projectionsfor
forIndia
Indiaunder
underthe
theReference
Reference
Scenario
Sources 2000 2010 2020 2030
Agriculture residue 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16

Biomass consumption 2.91 3.00 3.07 3.11
Coal production 0.72 1.07 1.86 2.89
Oil & natural gas 0.88 0.85 0.50 0.61
Enteric fermentation in animals 7.59 8.04 8.23 8.25
Manure management 0.95 1.00 1.03 1.03
Paddy cultivation 4.00 3.98 3.93 3.87
Municipal solid waste 1.02 1.46 2.30 3.64
Waste water 0.46 0.56 0.67 0.80
Total CH4 (Tg) 18.63 20.08 21.73 24.36
3.2 Nitrous Oxide Emissions
Agriculture sector activities account for more than 90% of the total N20
emissions presently, including 66% from the use of synthetic fertilizers, about
10% each from field burning of agriculture residues and indirect soil emissions,
and about 5% from livestock excretions. Use of synthetic fertilizers is the
single largest source of N20 emissions presently and is projected to retain this
prominence in future (Table 5).
India's Non-C02GHG Emissions / 467
Figure 2. Changing Contributions for Future Methane Emissions under

the Reference Scenario
Year
India consumed 11 Tg of Nitrogen fertilizers in 2000 (FAI 2001). This

consumption depends upon the area cultivated and local harvesting practices. Th
appropriateness and adequacy of fertilizer used can be estimated from food grain
production per hectare and fertilizer applied per hectare of gross cropped area
It may however be noted that food grain output depends upon a number of other
factors like irrigation, soil, seed variety, pest control etc.
Table 5. Nitrous Oxide Emission Projections for India under the Referenc
Scenario (Gg)
Sources (Gg) 2000 2010 2020 2030
Coal combustion 9.9 16.8 24.0 28.0
Oil product combustion 2.0 3.6 6.4 10.0
Field burning of agriculture residue 33.9 41.5 42.6 33.4

Biological nitrogen fixation 5.6 6.6 7.8 9.1
Natural gas combustion 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Synthetic fertilizer use 206.1 368.4 524.9 626.8

Livestock 12.2 14.1 16.3 18.8
Industrial processes 12.1 23.0 31.0 38.0

Indirect emissions 26.0 30.7 36.2 42.6
Total N,0 (Gg) 307.8 504.6 689.0 806.7
Diverse harvesting practices result in different food grain output per kg

of nitrogen fertilizer applied. Analysis indicates that gross food grain production
per hectare improves up to a certain level with the quantity of fertilizer applied
(FAI 2001). Water availability after fertilizer application plays an important
role in reducing N,0 emissions (Kalra and Aggarwal, 1994). Better agriculture
practices may result in optimization of synthetic fertilizer use, and further
lowering of N20 emissions. India also uses a lot of organic fertilizers that have
much lower N20 emissions.
Another important component of N20 emissions is field burning of

agriculture crop residues. The level and extent of the fraction of crop residue
that is burnt rather than left on fields in India is a debatable issue. The IPCC
default value is 0.45. However, in many parts of the country, farmers preserve
agriculture crop residues for feeding their cattle throughout the year. On the other
hand, in some advanced and rich states, like Punjab and Haryana, mechanized
farming practices are employed that leave almost one-foot high crop residues
after harvesting, and these are mostly burnt on the field rather than recovered.
However, recent droughts in some states have forced the government to direct
these advanced states to provide cattle fodder to the drought prone states. Field
burning of agriculture crop residues may therefore be reduced in the future.
4. COMPARING ACROSS SCENARIOS
4.1 Sectoral Methane Emissions under Alternate Scenarios
The future CH4 emission trends mainly depend upon macro-economic

structure, agriculture sector reforms, irrigation development and improved
technology penetration. Figure 3 gives the future methane emissions under
alternate scenarios. In the BAU (IA2) scenario the emissions increase about one
and a half times from about 17 Tg of CH4 in 2000 to about 25 Tg in 2030. The
agriculture sector contributes more than 65% of Indian methane emissions.
Figure 3. Future Methane Emissions under Alternate Scenarios
35
30
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
—»— ΙΑ1 —»—ΙΑ 2 —a— IB1 -χ— IB 2
The growth in CH4 emissions is the highest for the I

represents the high growth scenario. The emissions incre
CH4by 2030. The major sectors that contribute to increase
base case are the coal-mining sector, livestock and munici
The sustainable development scenario (IB1) has the lowest
mainly due to the increased thrust towards renewable energy sources under this
scenario. The sectoral emissions under alternate scenarios are analyzed next.
4.1.1 Coal Mining
In all four scenarios Coal bed methane emissions increase gradually over
the years (Figure 4). Initially, the increase is due to the rising level of production
mainly from opencast mines, while in later years it is from higher coal production
from underground mines as opencast coalmines get exhausted.
Figure 4. Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Across Scenarios
The present economic coal reserves in India are estimated at 76 billion

tons, capable of supplying coal for over 100 years at expected demand levels
(CMIE Energy, 2004; Garg and Shukla, 2002). As coal demand rises, open cast
mining will not be able to meet the requirements and the share of deep coal
mining will increase substantially. Higher mechanization is also expected to
occur in the future, thereby improving the mine productivity. The growth in
emissions is highest in the high growth (IA1) case. The higher growth in the
economy leads to greater demand for coal especially in the power sector. This
coupled with extraction from deeper mines results in increased domestic coal
prices, also prompting increased usage of imported coal (though substitution is
not large enough to impact domestic emissions from coal mining). Dependence
on underground coal mining results in higher growth in emissions beyond 2015
for scenarios other than the high growth scenario where it occurs at a relatively
earlier stage.
Investigation of coal bed methane (CBM) for its commercial exploitation
is a comparatively recent development in India and is gaining ground. The
government announced in October 2003 that 14 bids for eight blocks had been
received under the second round of bidding for CBM exploitation.
4.1.2 Livestock
Almost 90% of methane produced from livestock is from enteric

fermentation (Garg et al., 2001). Ruminant animals namely cattle, buffalo, sheep
and goats contribute almost the entire methane emissions from this category in
India. These emissions steadily increased during the nineties and this trend
is expected to continue in all scenarios except the sustainable development
scenario (IB1).
Figure 5. Methane Emissions from Livestock Across Scenarios
Following recent trends, the cattle population in the reference scenario is

expected to be reduced in many Indian states. However, in cattle sub-categories,
there is an increase in crossbred dairy cattle numbers while indigenous cattle
population are being reduced. The crossbred dairy cattle have higher per head
methane emissions as compared to indigenous cattle. Non-dairy cattle population
is also expected to be reduced with an increase in beef consumption and export.
In the dairy category, the buffalo share of total milk production in India has
increased rapidly (almost 54% in 2000) as compared to about 40% two decades
back and this trend is expected to continue. Dairy cattle have the highest methane
emissions per head and in this category buffalo related emission coefficients are
the highest. Therefore the IA2 trends indicate a marginal increase in methane
emissions from enteric fermentation in India even though the livestock population
is expected to be decreased.
The increasing emissions in the IA1 (Figure 5) scenario results from the
high growth in buffalo population required to meet the increasing demand for
dairy products. In comparison, the buffalo population decreases, with increasse
in the population of cows in the IB2 scenario. Though the live stock population
does not decrease, emissions from this sector are comparatively lower in the IB2
scenario owing to decreases in the buffalo population.
India's Non-CO2 GHG Emissions / 471
Livestock feeds in India are not scientifically monitored as they are

mostly in the unorganized sector, and agriculture crop residue and common grass
form the main animal feeds (Ranjhan, 1993). Mustard oil cakes, (obtained after
extracting the oil), are also used by some farmers to add nourishment to animal
feed. Improved animal feeds, like Urea Molasses Block (UMB), are slowly being
used in some advanced states like Punjab and Gujarat. These coupled with suitable
feed digesters; mainly given to enhance milk production, also have the potential
to reduce average methane emissions from enteric fermentation. However, due
to the large livestock population, lack of awareness and access to improved feed,
methane mitigation from this category will require substantial efforts.
4.1.3 Municipal Solid Waste:
The increase in municipal solid waste (MSW) related emissions is due

to increasing urban population, higher waste collection and dumping, and deeper
waste dumps. These processes increase methane generation rates. Some of these
trends are already visible in India and are expected to become stronger in the
reference case scenario.
Figure 6. Methane Emissions from MSW Across Scenarios
—♦— IA1 -·— IA2 —A— IB1 —Χ— IB2
The highest growth in MSW emissions occurs in the IA1 scen

the emissions increase about 6 times (Figure 6). This results from
growth in the economy and greater urbanization and population
urban areas. In both the IA1 and IA2 scenarios there are gradual ef
methane recovery from dumpsites. The MSW generation rates in the
are higher than the capture rates and hence the steep growth in e
IB1 scenario however has the best waste management practices and
moderate urbanization and growth in population leads to low em
this sector. In the IB2 scenario, waste generation is the lowest. Ho
Ml ! The Energy Journal
management and waste to energy conversion technologies are not as developed in

the IB1 scenario resulting in larger emissions than the IB1 scenario.
Indian cities are introducing private sector participation in Solid Waste
Management. The aim is to attract funding and new technologies for better
service delivery. The waste to energy technologies in India include incineration,
pelletization and bio-methanation. The incineration plant at Timarpur (Delhi), set
up in 1987 using Danish technology, failed to operate properly because the waste
fed into the plant did not have sufficient calorific value. In the past cities like
Vijayawada, Baroda, Bangalore, Mumbai, and Kalyan tried to set up pelletization
facilities. However most of these projects either stalled in development or were
eventually shut down due to poor pellet quality. In recent years, there has been
much interest in generating power through bio-methanation of MSW. Nagpur,
Lucknow, Chennai, Mumbai, Bhopal, and Delhi plan to set up such facilities.
4.1.4 Paddy Cultivation
Methane emissions from paddy cultivation contributed about 21% to the

total emissions in the year 2000. In all the scenarios except the IB2 scenario
emissions from this sector are expected to decline gradually. Table 6 shows the
future emissions from this sector over the next three decades.
Table
Table6.6.Future
FutureMethane
Methane
Emissions
Emissions
from from
Paddy Cultivation
Paddy Cultivation
Across Across
Scenarios
Year 2000 2010 2020 2030
IA1 4.001 3.964 3.910 3.850

IA2 4.001 3.980 3.930 3.870
IB1 4.001 3.960 3.903 3.840
IB2 4.001 4.016 4.026 4.040
The gradual decline in emissions results from improved irrigation

and cultivation practices. Most of these practices involve changing the water
management regime to reduce the time over which anaerobic conditions in flooded
fields occur, or altering the supplements to the soils to inhibit methanogenesis.
These practices are more widespread in the IA1, IA2 and IB1 scenarios. The IA1
scenario adopts the best farming practices, which also includes corporate farm
management.
Another major source of methane emissions is biomass consumption.
The emissions from this category were about 2.9 Tg CH4 in the year 2000. This
was 16 per cent of the total CH4 emissions in the country. The emissions are
expected to remain stable over the next three decades. While the emissions in
the IA1 scenario reach about 3 Tg in 2030, in the IA2 scenario they are slightly
higher at about 3.1 Tg of methane. The lower emissions in the IA1 scenario can
be attributed to greater and faster penetration of cleaner biomass technologies and
switches to cleaner fuels like LPG for residential cooking and heating. The lower
growth in the IB2 scenario ensures that the emissions from this sector remain
more or less the same during the thirty-year period. In the IB1 scenario, however,
there is a slight decline in emissions, i.e. 2.8 Tg in 2030. This lower emission level
results from initiatives to move away from fossil fuels and greater electrification
The other sources of methane emissions include oil and natural gas
activities, agriculture residues, manure management and wastewater. These
sources together contributed about 13 percent of the total emissions in the year
2000. In the reference case scenario by 2030 the emissions from these sources
contribute about 11.5 % of the total emissions. Among these sources the emissions
from manure management is the highest in 2030 at about 1 Tg of CH4.
4.2 Sectoral Ν,O Emissions under Alternate Scenarios
The major sectors that contribute to N20 emissions are the agricultural
sector and the industrial processes sector. The sources of emissions in the
agriculture sector include use of synthetic fertilizer and the field burning of
agricultural residues. The industrial processes include emissions from the
production of adipic acid and nitric acid. Figure 7 shows the N20 emission
projections across the scenarios.
Figure 7. Future Nitrous Oxide Emissions under Alternate Scenarios
4.2.1 Synthetic Fertilizer
Emissions resulting from the use of synthetic fertilizers contribute about

66% of the total N\0 emissions in 2000 (Figure 8). The emissions increase by
three times in the reference case scenario and reach 0.63 Tg of N20 by 2030. The
emissions are the lowest in the IB1 scenario owing to the increased use of organic
fertilizers.
Figure 8. Future Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Synthetic Fertilizer Sector
-m-W -λ- B1 Β
4.2.2 Field Burning of Agricultural Residues
The second largest contributor to N20 emissi

of agricultural residues (Figure 9). However, emiss
grow as rapidly as in the synthetic fertilizer sector.
emissions decline beyond 2015due to identification of
residues in the future such as incorporation of res
uses. Residues not returned to the soil could be u
construction materials, in paper and cardboard, a
as cover for erosion control and landfill, and in se
except for energy production, none of these uses pr
agricultural residues.
Figure 9. Future N20 Emissions from Field Burni
A1 -·—Ά2 —ή— B1 Β2
India's Non-C02 GHG Emissions / 475
Atmospheric deposition of NH, and NOx (originating from the

application of fertilizers) and formation of N20 in the atmosphere from NH3
have also been estimated as indirect emissions from nitrogen used in agriculture.
These emissions were about 26 Gg in 2000 in the reference case scenario and is
expected to grow between 34-40 Gg by 2030 under various scenarios.
4.2.3 Livestock
A majority of the emissions from this sector arise from the grazing
animal manure-Nitrogen. These emissions increase about one and half times over
2000-2030 in the IA2 scenario (figure 10). As in the case of methane emissions
from the livestock sector, emissions of N20 are the lowest for the IB1 scenario
resulting from a lower buffalo population compared to other scenarios and better
dairy management practices.
Figure 10. Future N20 Emissions from the Livestock Sector
-·——»—142 —B1 -*-B2
The absence of good dairy management prac

except in IB1, results in higher N,0 emissions.
4.4.4 Industrial Processes
The emissions are chiefly from the production of Nitric acid. The
emissions from this sector are therefore correlated with the growth of the
economy. The IA1 scenario has the highest emissions while the IB2 scenario has
the lowest emissions (Figure 11).
Figure 11. Future N20 Emissions from Industrial Processes
—IA1 —·— IA2 —A— IB1 —κ— IB2
4.2.5 Fossil Fuel Combustion
The other sources that contribute to N20 emissions include emissions

from coal, oil and natural gas combustion. The emissions from natural gas
combustion are negligible. Among the fossil fuels, the emissions are the highest
from the coal sector (Figure 12). In the reference case, the emissions from this
sector were about 10 Gg of N20 in year 2000, reaching about 28 Gg in 2030.
Figure 12. N20 Emissions from Coal and Oil Combustion

(a) Coal (b) Oil
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
-·—IA1 —·— 1A2 —ér— IB1 -M—IB2 IA1 -·—IA2 —A— IB1 -H—IB2
The IB2 scenario has the lowest growth in em

increased thrust towards renewable energy sources, w
from coal and oil consumption. The highest growth
and oil sectors is in the IA1 scenario (figures 12). High
from greater consumption of fossil fuels in this scen
India's Non-CO 2GHG Emissions / 477
5. LONG TERM ANALYSIS
This section presents results of hundred-year projections for C02, CH

and N20 emissions for the reference case scenario. The base case storyli
construction depends on an understanding of how the energy sector dynami
specifically the power and transportation sectors for C02 and the agricultur
sector dynamics for CH4 and N20 emissions have been evolving in the past a
well as an analysis of the present situation and most likely future trajectori
Each scenario construction incorporates changes in the economic growth rate
and structural changes in the economy. The key driving forces for these chan
are economic growth, population, domestic energy resource supply, energy pric
local environmental concerns and global climate change regimes. These will dri
the future technology-fuel mix for the Indian energy and environment systems.
5.1 Long Term CO, Emissions
The C02 emissions increase by about six times in the hundred-yea

period - from 956 million tonnes C02 in 2000 to about 6087 million tonnes C
in 2100 under the reference scenario (figurel3). A sector wise break up of C0
emissions shows the share of the power sector to be the highest, which remai
around 45% during the hundred-year period. This is because of the continued
dominance of coal technologies in the energy mix. Industry and transport are t
next major contributors. Though the share of industry goes down from 32%
about 28%, the share of the transport sector increases from 15% to about 22
The share of the agriculture and residential & commercial sectors are relativ
low compared to other sectors (about 1.5 % and 2 % respectively).
Figure 13. Long Term Carbon Emissions for India
Figure 14. Future Intensity Trends for India (Indexed 2000=100)
Carbon per Capita Carbon per GDP
The per capita carbon emissions increases about 3.

1.01 tonnes of carbon per person by the end of the cent
this is below the present per capita emissions of devel
below the world average per capita emissions as per
IPCC scenarios (Nakicenovic et al., 2000). The carbon to GDP ratio in 2100
is approximately one tenth of that in 2000. Indian economy becomes carbon
efficient. There is decoupling between GDP growth and carbon emissions.
5.2 Long Term CH, and N20 Emissions
Methane emissions are expected to increase steadily during the first half
of the present century owing to the dominance of the agricultural sector in the
economy. The emissions increase to about 30 Tg of CH4 in 2050 (figure 15),
reach about 32 Tg in 2070 and then decline to 29.4 Tg in 2100 under the reference
scenario. The major sources of emissions in 2050 are live stock (contributing
about 34% of total methane emissions), paddy cultivation (14%), Municipal Solid
Waste sector (22%), and biomass (12%). The percentage of emissions from the
paddy cultivation continues to decrease beyond 2050 (from about 22% in 2000 to
10% in 2100) mainly due to the development of better methods of cultivation and
the decreasing reliance of the economy on the agricultural sector. It may also be
noted that certain methane mitigation policies do become a part of the reference
case scenario in the long run.
The contribution of emissions from livestock remains more or less
constant beyond 2050. The contribution of emissions from the waste sector is,
however, much greater in 2050 compared to 2000 (22% in 2050 as opposed
to about 5% in 2000). This is due to increasing urbanization and higher waste
disposal in managed dumpsites. However beyond 2050, the contribution remains
more or less constant reaching about 20% in 2100.
N20 emissions increase from about 0.3 Tg in 2000 to about 1.1 Tg by
2060 (Figure 16). The growth in emissions is mainly due to the increasing use of
synthetic fertilizer in agriculture. However beyond 2050 as the economy becomes
Figure 15. Long Term CH4 Emissions for India
15
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Figure 16. Long Term N20 Emissions for India
less dependent on the agricultural sector and with

fertilizers, emissions stabilize and beyond 2070 show
1.13 Tg by 2100.
The agricultural sector (synthetic fertilizer use,
field burning of agricultural residues) and the livestock
about 70% of total N20 emissions in 2060. However t
of this sector is reduced to about 55% in the next fo
emissions from the industrial processes sector.
6. MITIGATION OPTIONS
The earlier sections discussed the methane and nitrous oxide emission
trends for different growth scenarios. An attempt was also made to analyze
the impact of methane removal processes on the reference case scenario. This
analysis was carried out using the AIM/Enduse (India) model, which offers a
technology selection framework for analysis of country-level policies related to
greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and local air pollution control (Hibino et al
2003). The development of bottom up non-C02 gas mitigation options database is
based on the framework of AIM/Enduse database. The major source for technical
information on removal processes has been EPA reports (USEPA 1999, 2001,
2001a) and consultation with sector experts (see Table 7).
Methane Emission Sources and Abatement Technologies

Considered for Modeling
Source Sector Abatement technologies
Coal Production Energy - Fugitive Degasification techniques for electricity
Emissions (solids) generation and degasification, ventilation
for electricity and oxidizer for heat.
Livestock (manure) Agriculture Covered anaerobic digester, plug flow

digester, and complete mix digester
Livestock Agriculture Partial replacement of roughages with
(Enteric) concentrates
Gas production Energy- Fugitive Low bleed pneumatic devices and

and distribution Emissions (oil and gas) Instrument Air
Paddy Agriculture- Rice cultivation Mid season drainage, replace urea with
AS and alternate flooding/drainage
Waste Sector Waste - Solid Waste Converting methane to electricity and
Disposal on Land as a direct source for gas.
As a starting point these linkages are kept simple for modeling purposes.
Figures 17 and 18 give examples of the coal and manure management sector linkages
with the removal processes as modeled (Ree. CH4 indicates recovered methane).
Most of the above technologies are under various stages of use and
development in developed countries like the US and several of the EU countries.
For India, it is assumed that these technologies would become available for
application on a large enough scale by 2005. Using the AIM/Enduse (India) model,
the Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) curves for Methane for 2010 illustrates the
amount of reductions possible at various values. Methane and C02 abatement
results are presented together for 2010 in Figure 19.
The above figure illustrates that CH4 emission reductions can be cost
effectively achieved at energy market prices with no additional emission reduction
values (i.e. even at $0/TCE). It is also interesting to note that CH4 and C02 mitigation
options will compete till about 5 US$ per ton of carbon equivalent. Thereafter it is
much cheaper to mitigate C02 than CH4. Above $110/TCE the CH4 MAC starts to
become inelastic. However the development of new mitigation options in the future
may result in an increase in cumulative emission reductions at higher levels of taxes.
Figure 17. Emission from Coal Sector and Linkages to Removal Processes
—^ KTEngnet —
Ventila Hon
System»
■£ c«*Jy* _
OudHen ^[ThermalTurbnc
Heil
Steam
OI4ídoiU
Coi Mm« Abatement
Technology I
Power
Defaaficatx
Generator
Syaeai»
Nal pi
Abatement Gai enrichment
Ree CH4 -*> Pyelaie
Technology 2 technology
Figure 18. Emission from Manure Management Sector and Linkages to

Removal Processes
Waste Water
Electncity
Manure CovtrcdAnaaobc Ree
Slush Ψ CH4 ICEnpnc

Qgester
Figure 19. Marginal Abatement Cost Curves for CH4 and C02 for
India in 2010
MtCE
7. CONCLUSIONS
This paper highlighted the emission trends of greenhouse gases

C02, CH4 and N20 in India for short to medium, and long terms. The s
most prominently contributing to total CH4 and N20 emissions is the agricu
sector. The present dominance of this sector ensures a steady rise in t
emissions under the reference case scenario in the short to medium run. How
a more environmentally conscious society (as depicted by the IB2 scenario)
help reduce the growth in these emissions while not compromising the econ
growth. Reducing the growth rates of these emissions depend as much on po
initiatives to move towards a more sustainable society as on the expected decl
contribution of the agricultural sector to the country's GDP in the long te
Developing countries like India may also be coupled with competing mitigat
options for different greenhouse gases and scarce resources. Policy initiati
introduce technology options for utilizing gases like methane as an energy s
in India can provide much-needed flexibility in the GHG mitigation program
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We express our sincere gratitude to Dr. T. Morita (posthumously

M. Kainuma and other experts from National Institute for Environment
Tsukuba, Japan for their valuable comments on the drafts of the paper.
our thanks to Dr. Jae Edmonds, Dr. Richard Richels Dr. Ron Sands and P
Weyant for their suggestions during the Indo-US Workshop on Econom
Environmental Modeling, January 2004 at New Delhi. The authors
benefited from discussions with Dr. A. R Mitra, Dr. Subodh Sharma, D
Singh, Dr. N. Kalra, Dr. H. Pathak, Dr. P. V. Rao and Dr. M. Swamy.
REFERENCES
CMIE Energy (2004). India's Energy Sector. Center for Monitoring Indian Economy, M
FAI (2001). Fertilizer Statistics 2000-01. The Fertilizer Association of India, New Delhi,
Garg, Α., Bhattacharya, S., Shukla, P. R., and Dadhwal, V. K. (2001). Regional an
assessment of greenhouse gas emissions in India. Atmospheric Environment 35, 2679-2
Garg, A. and Shukla P. R. (2002). Emissions Inventory of India. Tata McGraw-Hill
Company Ltd., New Delhi.
Garg, Α., Shukla, P. R., Ghosh, D., Kapshe, M. M. and Nair, R. (2003). Future GHG
emissions for India: Policy links and disjoints. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies f
Change. 8/1(2003). Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 71-92.
Ghosh, Debyani, Shukla, P. R„ Garg, Amit and Ramana, P. V. (2001). Renewable Energy
for Indian Power Sector. CSH Occasional Paper. Centre De Sciences Humaines (French
Institute in India), New Delhi, India.
Hibino, G. R. Pandey, M. Kainuma and Y. Matsuoka (2003). "A Guide to AIM/Enduse
Kainuma et al Climate Policy Assessment: Asia-Pacific Integrated Modeling. Spring
Tokyo, Japan.
IPCC (1996). Revised IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories'. Ref
Manual, Vol. 3. Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change, Bracknell, USA.
IPCC (2001). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the
Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Kainuma, M., Matsuoka, Y., Morita, T. and Hibino, Go (1999). Development of an end-use model for
analyzing policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. IEEE Trans on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics - Part C: Applications and Reviews, 29 (3) 317-324.
Kalra, N. and Aggarwal, P. K. (1994). Evaluating water production functions for yield assessment in
wheat using crop simulation models. In: Nitrogen Economy of Irrigated Rice: Field of Simulation
Studies. H.EM, ten Berge, M.C.S. Wopereis and J.C.Shin (Eds.), SARP Research Proceedings,
AB-DLO, Wageningen, 254- 266.
Kapshe, M., Garg, A. and Shukla, P. R. (2003). Application of AIM/Local Model to India Using
Area and Large Point Sources, in Kainuma M., Matsuoka, Y., and Morita, T., (ed.) Climate Policy
Assessment: Asia-Pacific Integrated Modeling, Springer-Verlag, Tokyo, Japan.
Nakicenovic, N., J. Alcamo, G. Davis, H. J.M. de Vries, J. Fenhann, S. Gaffin, K. Gregory, A. Grübler,
T.Y. Jung, T. Kram, E.L. La Rovere, L. Michaelis, S. Mori, T. Morita, W. Papper, H. Pitcher, L.
Price, K. Riahi, A. Roehrl, H-H. Rogner, A. Sankovski, M. Schlesinger, P. Shukla, S. Smith, R.
Swart, S. van Rooijen, N. Victor, and Z. Dadi (2000). Special Report on Emissions Scenarios.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Nair, R., Shukla, P. R., Kapshe, M., Garg A. and Rana, A. (2003). Analysis of long-term energy and
carbon emission scenarios for India. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.
8/1(2003). Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 53-69.
Ranjhan, S. K. (1993). Animal Nutrition in Tropics. Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi.
Tuhkanen Sami, Lehtila Antti and Savolainen Ilkka (1999). The Role of CH4 and N20 Emisión
Reductions in the Cost-Effective Control of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Finland.
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Kluwer Academic Publishers 4: 91-111.
USEPA (1999). U.S. Methane Emissions 1990-2020: Inventories, Projections, and Opportunities for
Reductions, EPA, Washington, DC, September, 1999. (http://www.epa.gov/ghginfo).
USEPA (2001). U.S. High GWP Gas Emissions 1990-2010: Inventories, Projections, and Opportunities
for Reductions. June 2001.
USEPA (2001a). Non-C02 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Developed Countries: 1990-2010.
September 2001. EPA-430-R-01-007.

International Association For Energy Economics The Energy Journal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Association For Energy Economics The Energy Journal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

India's Non-CO₃ GHG Emissions: Development Pathways and Mitigation Flexibility

Author(s): P. R. Shukla, Amit Garg, Manmohan Kapshe and Rajesh Nair

International Association for Energy Economics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

P. R. Shukla*, Amit Garg**, Manmohan Kapshe***, Rajesh Nairf

This paper analyses the future trends (2000-2030) in Methane and

Traditionally, studies on GHG mitigation have focused on carbon diox

The Energy Journal, Multi-Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Climate Copyright

Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India.

times (IPCC 2001). As a contributor to climate change, methane is second only

Source categories Main emissions Percentage share Main emission sources

Coal based electricity co2 29.9 50 large plants

Steel industry co2 8.8 5 large plants

Cement industry co2 5.1 50 large plants

All India (Tg) 1442a As above

*1442=956 (C02)+21*18.63(CH4)+310*0.308 (N O), all emissions in Tg.

2. METHODOLOGY AND SCENARIO DESCRIPTION

Total emissions = Σ Σ (Activity level *

This is in line with the recommended Intergovernmental Panel on

2.1 Scenario Description

looking to global markets while simultaneously spurred by expanding domestic

Figure 1. Matrix of Indian Emission Scenarios

High Frag mented

IA1 High IA2 Business -

The four scenarios can be best understood as taking a position in

Table 2. Scenarios, Key Drivers and Impact on Model Parameters

IB1: Strong environmental awareness Environmental constraints (T), energy and

3. THE REFERENCE (IA2) SCENARIO RESULTS

Table 3. Indian Emission Projections (Tg) IA2

C02 956 1507 2080 2572

n2o 0.308 0.505 0.689 0.807

c02 equivalent GHG" 1454 2115 2839 3507

3.1 Methane Emissions

Future CH4 emissions are shown in Table 4. There is a declining trend

Agriculture residue 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16

Total CH4 (Tg) 18.63 20.08 21.73 24.36

3.2 Nitrous Oxide Emissions

Figure 2. Changing Contributions for Future Methane Emissions under

India consumed 11 Tg of Nitrogen fertilizers in 2000 (FAI 2001). This

Oil product combustion 2.0 3.6 6.4 10.0

Field burning of agriculture residue 33.9 41.5 42.6 33.4

Natural gas combustion 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Synthetic fertilizer use 206.1 368.4 524.9 626.8

Industrial processes 12.1 23.0 31.0 38.0

Total N,0 (Gg) 307.8 504.6 689.0 806.7

Diverse harvesting practices result in different food grain output per kg

Another important component of N20 emissions is field burning of

4. COMPARING ACROSS SCENARIOS

4.1 Sectoral Methane Emissions under Alternate Scenarios

The future CH4 emission trends mainly depend upon macro-economic

Figure 3. Future Methane Emissions under Alternate Scenarios

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

—»— ΙΑ1 —»—ΙΑ 2 —a— IB1 -χ— IB 2

The growth in CH4 emissions is the highest for the I

4.1.1 Coal Mining

Figure 4. Methane Emissions from Coal Mining Across Scenarios

The present economic coal reserves in India are estimated at 76 billion

Almost 90% of methane produced from livestock is from enteric

Figure 5. Methane Emissions from Livestock Across Scenarios

Following recent trends, the cattle population in the reference scenario is

Livestock feeds in India are not scientifically monitored as they are

4.1.3 Municipal Solid Waste:

The increase in municipal solid waste (MSW) related emissions is due

Figure 6. Methane Emissions from MSW Across Scenarios

P. R. Shukla, Amit Garg, Manmohan Kapshe, Rajesh Nairf

1442=956 (C02)+2118.63(CH4)+310*0.308 (N O), all emissions in Tg.