India’s energy consumption is largely fossil fuel-based and largely inefficient
DR R K PACHAURI, the chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize fame body, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), does not dismiss the use of nuclear energy in the name of waste disposal. The Teri director general says that given constraints of limited options and the wider threat of global warming, nuclear is a serious option for India. In a conversation with Sushmi Dey, Dr Pachauri emphasises the need to have an India-specific energy policy, instead of aping the West. Excerpts:
On the face of global warming, ‘energy versus emission’ has been the point of debate. The issue is more relevant in the context of India, an energy hungry country. How do you evaluate the country’s energy policy in this context?
We have had a very weak energy policy in the past. The policy have been more reactive than proactive. The government has worked in a very fragmented manner so far as our energy policy is concerned. As a result, most of the mechanisms were ineffective. The government of India, in the past, has not been able to come up with a vision and due to that we have lost valuable time. Now, we do not have any choice but to emit. We must try to move away from the use of fossil fuels in a deliberate and planned manner.
It is said that emission is a compulsion for India and it needs to emit for growth. What should be the country’s focus while deciding its energy policy so that a balance between energy generation and emissions is maintained?
The government should do what is good for India. We do not have to repeat what developed world has done. We are different from them. We have poor population living in our country and the policy should not cease development in any way. However, India’s energy consumption is largely fossil fuel-based and it is largely inefficient. We have to keep in mind that India does not have access to fuels like oil and coal in a large scale. We are importing oil to sustain our consumption. In future, it may become difficult to sustain such imports due to rising global oil prices. So, we are left with the choice of using coal for power. This is all the more so because we are slow in developing alternative clean fuels. Thus we will continue using highemission fuels. But at the same time, we can invest in means like public transport. We are not doing that. Investment in public transport would reduce green house gas emission. We have done nothing to speed up our short distance rail transport, why would anyone like to fly if we have high-speed trains?
It is time that India made a diversion by focusing on renewable energy. Even coal is a unique possibility, we must look beyond that. There is a need for a collaborative effort from the government as well as the industry. While the industry needs to make required R&D efforts and investments, the framework of policy has to come from the government.
What kind of government moves are essential to form the right energy policy?
Subsidies on petroleum products is a distortion. The key aspect of promoting renewable energy is to divert resources allocated to distortive subsidies for conventional energy sources. Kerosene, which is more popular as poor man’s fuel, goes into adulteration or black marketing because of subsidy. With oil prices touching $145 per barrel, under-recoveries for kerosene have been projected at more than Rs 60, 000 crore. With increasing subsidies, the adulteration will only increase. Besides, kerosene is also incompatible with climate change mitigation policy. Worldwide, 1.6 billion people lack access to electricity. Of these, about 25% live in India. Kerosene is the primary fuel used by these households. However, it does not reach everyone because of black marketing. We tell the government that give solar energy half the subsidy allotted to kerosene and we will light up every home in two years.
However, India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change is a positive step ahead towards greater use of renewable energy resources. It also highlights India’s opportunities for taking the lead in harnessing initiatives towards a transition to post fossilfuel generation. However, the policy has to be translated to action and we need to come up with specific plans for implementation of the policy.
Cost of generating green energy is still very high. What would you suggest to bring down its cost?
The cost can be brought down only by large scale research and development. The government has to fund these projects and the industry has to take interest. There is also a need to come up with large scale projects, so that you also get benefit from economies of sale.
France is keen on nuclear energy being included as a mitigation measure under the Kyoto Protocol and has been developing bilateral working group with India for the same. What is your stand on this? Does nuclear energy qualifies as clean energy and can it be instrumental in India’s energy security?
There is nothing wrong with nuclear energy. Of course, there are issues like nuclear waste disposals and radiation threats, but that can be dealt with proper infrastructure and management. Nuclear energy is definitely a clean energy source and India must use its potential in it.
We have mentioned nuclear energy in our Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report as well. One cannot dismiss nuclear energy in the name of waste disposal. However, countries with institutional strength, infrastructure and safety regulations should go for it and not every country have these things.
Do you think India is ready to opt for such challenges?
Of course, India has a good record and we have learnt in the past. Also, you have to keep in mind that India does not have access to fuels like coal and oil. Thus, nuclear energy comes as a representative option. India has to weigh the cost, benefits and risks. I agree, nuclear energy may not be a perfect solution but in the absence of other measures, you cannot afford to dismiss it. Given the constraints of limited options and the wider threat of global warming, nuclear is a serious option for India in future.
Hydro power is considered safe and has been included under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). However, such projects also mean dislocation of many rural poor. What is your view in this regard?
You are right, there can be problems if hydro power projects are not properly framed and managed. We have experienced that in the past with the people raising voice against it. One has to be careful in choosing sites. Environmental factors and people of the region have to be taken care of with the right policy back up.
