Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Perspective
The United Nations had released its report warning that, if climate
change’s worst impacts were to be avoided, the nations of the world
had about a decade to revolutionize the energy economy. “The
policies are lagging very, very far—miles, miles, miles behind the
science and what needs to be done,” an American economist said.
Current plans and policies, including Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs), result in a similar level of annual
emissions in 2050 compared to today, which risks putting the
world on a pathway of 2.6 degrees Celsius of temperature rise or
higher after 2050.
There are other risks of not taking action now. Infrastructure
investment decisions today lock in energy use and emissions for
decades. Investment in long-term assets, such as in fossil fuel
infrastructure and inefficient building stock, continue unabated.
This not only risks locking in emissions, but will add significant
liability to the balance sheets of energy companies, utilities,
investors and property owners.
The energy transition will result in some asset stranding, totalling
USD 11.8 trillion overall by 2050 in the REmap Case suggested by
IRENA, of which the highest share occurs in buildings (63%) and
upstream investments in fossil fuels (28%). However, delaying
action will almost double the amount of stranded assets, adding
an additional USD 7.7 trillion and increasing the total value of
stranded assets to USD 19.5 trillion by 2050. Delaying action
knnaik@yahoo.com ajitkapadia_cfsrindia@yahoo.co.in Page 1
Centre for Fuel Studies and Research
It’s long been axiomatic that economic growth and energy demand
are linked. As economies grow, energy demand increases; if energy
is constrained, GDP growth pulls back in turn.
Energy demand has long tracked economic growth. So much so that
for the past two centuries, the amounts of energy that economies
need have increased with the amounts of wealth that economies
create. And, to a remarkable degree, wealth creation has depended
on a society’s proficiency at burning things.
O
Obbvviioou
ussllyy tth
hiiss ssh
hoou
ulld
d aan
ndd ccaan
n cch
haan
nggee.. A multiyear research effort
examining the supply and demand of 55 types of energy across 30
sectors in some 146 countries—suggests that we’re beginning to see
a decoupling between the rates of economic growth and energy
demand, which in the decades ahead will become even more
pronounced.
The world needs to change the way of life and adopt technologies
in all pervasive manner that will help break the direct correlation
between energy needs and economic growth.
At the turn of the 20th century, rates of both energy demand and
economic growth took off. From 1900 to 1950—as horses gave way
to cars, oil lamps to electric lighting, and ice boxes to refrigerators—
primary energy demand nearly doubled. Economic growth rates
soared as well; in the United States (by far the largest economy in
the world), GDP per capita in 1950 was more than twice that of
190 0.
The 20th century’s embrace of petroleum (to accompany coal) sent
production and consumption into overdrive. Fossil fuels lose about
40 to 70 percent of their embodied energy when converted into
electrical or mechanical energy.
The decoupling of the rates of economic growth (climbing steadily)
and energy demand growth (ascending, but less steeply) will largely
be a function of the following forces:
• a marked increase in energy efficiency, the result of technological
improvements and behavioural changes
• the rise of electrification, in itself a more efficient way to meet
energy needs in many applications
• the growing use of renewables—resources that don’t need to be
burned to generate power—a trend with the potential not only to
flatten the primary energy demand curve but also to utterly
change the way we think about power
concept of this technology. All that is needed is taking off from there
and adopt it on a much larger scale which can be used to great
advantage in industry and service sectors like hotels, hospitals,
data centres, office complexes etc.
The growth of renewables
With fossil fuel powered systems what is important is the amount of
fuel inputs needed and the efficiency with which it is used in order
to work out carbon, pollution and water footprint. With renewables,
however, those metrics are practically meaningless. We don’t
measure what fuels a solar panel or pushes a windmill—we
measure the energy that comes out.
Most important, the near total absence of any conversion loss is
radically different: nothing is lost in the burning. Nor do
sunshine or wind power need to be generated at large, centralized
plants. Companies, and indeed individual consumers, can
in many cases harness the energy on-site. While most
businesses will not be able to go completely or even largely off the
grid, many will be able to lessen their electrical costs materially—
and some, particularly large retailers, may even in certain locations
produce a net energy surplus.
Of course, these types of renewable energy need to be captured and
stored. Even this problem will be solved once technological
improvements to solve those challenges and reduce costs
substantially is achieved. In India solar and wind power is already
cheaper than electricity generated conventionally by new-build coal
and natural-gas plants.
Among fossil fuels, only natural gas, which is poised to grow rapidly
as a fuel source in the coming 15 years, is likely to maintain a
constant share through 2050, at least. But as mentioned earlier
natural gas based power production should be in Distributed
Generation mode with waste heat recycling.
Protection of Forests and mangroves
At any time, forests account for as much as double the amount of
carbon in the atmosphere. Forests remove around three billion tons
of carbon every year. This amounts to about 30% of all carbon
dioxide emissions from fossil fuels Therefore, an increase in the
overall forest cover around the world would mitigate global
warming.
Forests are being destroyed for commercial purposes and this needs
to stop forthwith. E.g. in India recent example is destruction of age
episodes almost every year. River Varuna and Assi are the two
tributaries of the Ganga flowing through the city of Varanasi. The
present situation of both the Varuna and Assi illustrates an
unfortunate scenario. Unplanned urban and industrial
developmental activities result in both the rivers becoming mere
‘nallahs’ or ‘sewers’ carrying sewage water and effluents through the
city of Varanasi.
The rejuvenation efforts of rivulet Sasur Khaderi in Fatehpur
district of Uttar Pradesh and Kali Bein (Doaba region) of Punjab
could act as potential models towards resurrection of India’s lost or
near-lost rivers and rivulets.
Ways in which Businesses Can Lead the Transition to a Low-
Carbon Economy
As of May, 553 companies collectively representing more than a $10
trillion market cap have committed to adopting emissions-reduction
targets.
These actions aren't just good for the climate. Research shows they
can be good for companies' bottom lines.
Achieving the 17 Sustainable Development Goals—which include
clean water, clean energy, sustainable cities, climate action,
responsible consumption, reduced inequality and more—could open
a market opportunity of $12 trillion by 2030.
Businesses can unlock the economic benefits of low-carbon growth
in following way:
• Companies can build their competitive advantage early and
benefit from the increased economic productivity associated with
"circular" business models.
• Companies can also adopt other policies to ready themselves for
the transition to a low-carbon economy. Almost 1,400 major
companies have committed to apply a shadow internal
carbon price to "future-proof" their investment
decisions. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. used its internal carbon
fee program to shift investment to the faster adoption of LED
lighting (which uses less energy and therefore emits less carbon)
for its vehicles and manufacturing facilities, increasing energy
savings and giving it a competitive advantage.
• Businesses can use their marketing influence to shift consumer
behavior toward a lower-consumption, sustainable pathway.
Companies are realizing this and starting to develop business
knnaik@yahoo.com ajitkapadia_cfsrindia@yahoo.co.in Page 11
Centre for Fuel Studies and Research
WWee ccaan n eelliimmiin naattee eexxttrreem mee ppoovveerrttyy,, pprreevveen ntt ddaan nggeerroou uss
cclliim
maattee cch haan nggee,, aanndd iimmpprroovvee tth hee lliivveess aan ndd lliivveelliih
hooooddss ooff
mmiilllliioon
nss.. B
Bu utt oonnllyy iiff w
wee sseett oou
utt ttoo ddoo ssoo ddeecciissiivveellyy n
nooww.. T Th hiiss
iiss nnoott jjuusstt aabboou utt aavvooiiddiinngg aa ffuuttu urree w wee ddoo n noott w waan ntt.. IItt iiss
aabboou utt ccrreeaattiin
ngg tthhee ffuuttu
urree tthhaatt w
wee ddoo w waan ntt..
Concusions
Coal offers the largest emissions reductions for the least loss in
financial value:
• Transitioning away from coal can achieve 80% of the needed
emissions reductions for just 12% of the asset value at risk.
• Reducing the cost of financing renewable energy plants can
significantly lower the cost of transition across the world.
• Gas can be a bridge fuel for some regions till 2030. This is
particularly true for China and India but to limit loss in asset
value, global usage of gas would need to decrease after this time.
• A circular economy (CE) is one in which products and materials
are recycled, repaired and reused, and in which waste from one
industrial process becomes an input into another. The concept is
fast becoming a new model for resilient growth and low-carbon
development.
Here are five ways the world can shift to a low-carbon growth path:
1. Put a price on carbon
Requiring companies to pay for the carbon they put into the air
encourages them to invest in cleaner energy and low-carbon
innovation. Putting a price on carbon would unleash market
forces in the fight against climate change.
2. Phase out fossil fuel subsidies
Now is the time to phase out fossil fuel subsidies that encourage
waste and discourage low-carbon growth. Nearly $550 billion
went into direct fossil fuel subsidies worldwide in 2013.
Evidence shows that fossil fuel subsidies don’t benefit
the poor as much as the rich. Studies show the wealthiest
20% of the population captures six times the benefit from fossil
fuel subsidies as the poorest 20%. The savings from removing
fuel subsidies can be reinvested where they are most needed,