http://www.financialexpress.com/news/the-energy-mandate/550410/1 THE ENERGY MANDATE Ashish Kothari Posted: Sunday, Dec 06, 2009 at 2043 hrs IST In the global negotiations on saving the planet from catastrophic climate change, India and other G77 countries have refused to accept binding targets to reduce emissions, since we were not responsible for these emissions in the first place. This is justified: we have not been the culprits, why should we be punished? Or wait, is it justified? Would curbing our emissions on our own volition, really be a punishment? Would it hurt our prospects for development, as the government portrays? Still Waiting, a report by Greenpeace, suggests otherwise, at least for energy generation. It shows how current strategies of energy generation and distribution have not only caused enormous ecological damage, but also that they have not helped the poor. Mega-projects feeding power into a centralised grid has not benefited an enormous section of India’s population, and will not in the near future. Instead, there is a quicker, more efficient alternative to reach the poor and reduce emissions. What’s wrong with power? India’s electricity generation has gone up from a few hundred MW at the time of Independence, to over 1,50,000 MW. Yet, over 40% of the country’s households remain without any power, and quite a lot more are without adequate power. Particularly telling is the inequity between cities and villages; while many of the big cities now have nearly 24-hour supply, most ‘electrified’ villages have half of that, and that too unreliable. This inequity is compounded by the environmental impacts of such power generation. Over 53% of the current electricity capacity is from coal-_base_d thermal plants, which are amongst the worst polluters and climate crunchers. Hydro-power, mostly from big dams, contribute about 25% of the power, and has caused enormous submergence of forests and displacement of millions of people. Interestingly, those most badly affected by such power generation are often the ones to get the least electricity. The case of Parli Thermal plant in Beed district, Maharashtra, is illustrative: for years villages around it, such as Dadahari Wadgaon, have been receiving its fly ash, but no power. The ash coats everything in the village, contaminates crops, and is believed to have caused high levels of respiratory diseases. This is a familiar story for hundreds of villages around coal power plants, or coal mines, across India. Third, the report points to the gross inefficiency of centralised power generation. From the utilisation of generating capacity to end uses, rates of efficiency are abysmal compared to global best practices. The “overall end-use of coal power can only be about 10% of its potent energy.” According to the Planning Commission, if we want to sustain an 8% economic growth rate over the next couple of decades, we need a power generation of 8,00,000 MW. The environmental and social consequences of this, if we stick to the same model, are scary. The alternative: decentralised renewables Greenpeace asserts that there is an alternative: decentralised, clean, renewable sources such as solar, wind, biomass, and micro-hydel. The report recommends an integrated use of these, with a mix of different sources that can cater to diverse local conditions and changing seasons (so that there is a back-up to solar during the monsoons). Such an approach would be environmentally much saner, and also reach energy to deprived sections much faster. To prove this, Greenpeace took up the case of Kalavati, a widow who became a media celebrity because Rahul Gandhi visited her powerless hut. Gandhi had made a case for nuclear power using Kalavati’s example, but Greenpeace put up solar panels in the school in her village Jalka (Yavatmal district, Maharashtra) to show that this could reach power much faster. The panels have powered the school fans, making the summer bearable. The village has now sent a proposal to the panchayat asking for solar energy for every house. Decentralised renewables can reduce and eventually eliminate the need for polluting, centralised power generation and provide communities with some control over energy sources. The technologies already exist, but would not be within the reach of poor households without supportive policies, subsidies or incentives. Simultaneously polluting sources should be taxed and discouraged through policy measures. In the long run of course we need to find alternative pathways to development itself, which de-_link_ human welfare from ever-increasing consumption of materials and energy…. a distinct possibility as seen in initiatives around the world. The report’s argument is powerful, and the government would do well to heed it. It would however have been more persuasive with an analysis of how decentralised renewables could be more cost-effective than current sources. It could have dealt briefly with issues like the need for constant maintenance. It could have provided the total potential of such renewables (estimated to be at least 1,00,000 MW). Mention could also have been made of non-electricity sources of energy for cooking, heating, and so on.... Finally, it could have been much harsher on rich consumers, by suggesting ways other than steep tariffs (which it recommends), to curb their irresponsible luxury consumption. These are disappointing omissions in an otherwise strong report. The 11th FiveYear Plan includes a hike in investment into renewables, with an aim to generate 3,000 MW. The National Solar Mission also aims at major expansion. However, most investment continues to be planned in thermal and big hydropower, so renewables will remain a small component of the country’s energy mix. Even the solar mission plans include large plants, which do not solve the equity problems. These aspects have to change, if India is serious is about providing energy to the hundreds of millions deprived so far, in an environmentally responsible manner. In doing so, it would show itself as an active participant in humanity’s response to climate change, and step up pressure on the industrial countries to also become responsible global citizens. The writer is with Kalpavriksh- Environment Action Group