• Energy Research

The impacts of increasing natural climate disasters are threatening food security in the Asia-Pacific region. Rice is Asia’s most important staple food. Climate variability and change directly impact rice production, through changes in rainfall, temperature and CO2 concentrations. The key for sustainable rice crop is water management. Adaptation can occur through shifts of cropping to higher latitudes and can profit from river systems (via irrigation) so far not considered. New opportunities arise to produce more than one crop per year in cooler areas. Asian wheat production in 2005 represents about 43 % of the global total. Changes in agronomic practices, such as earlier plant dates and cultivar substitution will be required. Fisheries play a crucial role in providing food security with the contribution of fish to dietary animal protein being very high in the region – up to 90 % in small island developing states (SIDS). With the warming of the Pacific and Indian Oceans and increased acidification, marine ecosystems are presently under stress. Despite these trends, maintaining or enhancing food production from the sea is critical. However, future sustainability must be maintained whilst also securing biodiversity conservation. Improved fisheries management to address the existing non-climate threats remains paramount in the Indian and Pacific Oceans with sustainable management regimes being established. Climate-related impacts are expected to increase in magnitude over the coming decades, thus preliminary adaptation to climate change is valuable.

Abstract Transformation of Asia's transport sector has vital implications for climate change, sustainable development and energy indicators. Papers in this special issue show how transport transitions in Asia may play out in different socio-economic and policy scenarios, including a low carbon scenario equivalent to 2 °C stabilization. Accounting for heterogeneity of national transport systems, these papers use diverse methods, frameworks and models to assess the response of the transport system to environmental policy, such as a carbon tax, as well as to a cluster of policies aimed at diverse development indicators. The analysis shows that CO2 mitigation in a transport system is achieved more effectively by aligning mitigation policies with sustainable development policies and measures such as mandates for mode share and choices such as urban design, information and communication systems, and behavioral measures. Authors therefore advocate policies that target multiple dividends vis-a-vis carbon mitigation, energy security and local air quality. Whereas four papers focus on emissions mitigation policies, one paper examines challenges to adapt fast growing transport infrastructures to future climate change induced risks. Collectively, the papers exemplify a set of policies and measures that can deliver co-benefits, and, also, demonstrate the use of methods, frameworks and models to delineate the optimal mix of such policies and measures.

This paper analyses the impact of postponing global mitigation action on abatement costs and energy systems changes in China and India. It compares energy-system changes and mitigation costs from a global and two national energy-system models under two global emission pathways with medium likelihood of meeting the 2 °C target: a least-cost pathway and a pathway that postpones ambitious mitigation action, starting from the Copenhagen Accord pledges. Both pathways have similar 2010–2050 cumulative greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis shows that postponing mitigation action increases the lock-in in less energy efficient technologies and results in much higher cumulative mitigation costs. The models agree that carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear energy are important mitigation technologies, while the shares of biofuels and other renewables vary largely over the models. Differences between India and China with respect to the timing of emission reductions and the choice of mitigation measures relate to differences in projections of rapid economic change, capital stock turnover and technological development. Furthermore, depending on the way it is implemented, climate policy could increase indoor air pollution, but it is likely to provide synergies for energy security. These relations should be taken into account when designing national climate policies.

This paper describes two variants of the Indian MARKAL model: a long-term technology oriented optimisation model for energy-environment planning for India. The first variant uses stochastic programming to include future uncertainties in the analysis. Details of model formulation, results and sensitivity analysis are described here. The second variant uses an innovative approach to simulate price sensitive demands within a linear formulation. The analysis incorporating future uncertainties suggests that it is prudent to reduce carbon emission in anticipation of a global regime in future. Modelling with price elastic demands estimates up to 10% reduction in carbon emission due to reduced demands, under a severe carbon tax.

Cooperation of large developing countries such as India would be important in achieving a low carbon future, which can help in restricting the global temperature rise to 2 °C. Global modeling studies of such low carbon scenarios point to a prominent role for renewable energy. This paper reports scenarios for a low carbon future in India. An integrated modeling framework is used for assessing the alternate development pathways having equal cumulative CO2 emissions. The modeling period ranges from 2005 to 2050. The first pathway assumes a conventional development pattern together with a carbon price that aligns India’s emissions to an optimal 450 ppmv CO2-eq. stabilization global response. The second emissions pathway assumes an underlying sustainable development pattern. A low carbon future will be good for renewable energy under both the development pathways, though the share of renewable energy will be higher under a sustainable pathway. Renewable energy faces competition from low carbon technologies like nuclear and carbon capture and storage in the electricity sector. Solar, wind, biomass, and biofuels emerge as the four competitive renewable energy choices for India. Renewable development however depends critically on the reduction in the costs and in the ability to integrate the intermittent renewables within the existing systems for which technology transfer and capacity building hold the key.

Abstract The anticipated economic and population growth in India will increase demand for material resources, energy and consequently carbon emissions. The global ambition to limit global warming to 1.5 °C by the end of the century calls for rapid and unprecedented action. As the most carbon-intensive sectors, India's steel and cement industry will require a more transformative shift, both on the demand and supply side. Strategies from both supply and demand-side are analysed for steel and cement sector to understand consequences for energy and emissions using two modelling approaches i) energy system and ii) material flow models. A portfolio of technically feasible options to reduce the material, energy and CO2 intensity is explored under four alternate scenarios spanning till 2050 differentiated by their mitigation ambition and development paradigm. Results show that current policies in India will provide adequate incentives for achieving the climate targets India has submitted within its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) however, dematerialisation, reuse and recycling will be necessary for achieving the global ambition of 1.5 °C. The study concludes that a stringent carbon policy in combination with strong sustainability principles can reduce CO2 emissions by 68% in the steel and cement sector in 1.5 °C Scenario compared to NDC Scenario.

This note is a final response to the debate raised by Mr. Castles and Mr. Henderson (for brevity, we refer here to the two authors simply as C&H) in this Journal ( vol 14, no 2&3, and no 4) on the issue of economic growth in developing countries in some of the emissions scenarios published in the IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) (Nakicenovic et al., 2000). We first outline areas of agreement and then the remaining areas of disagreement. Two important areas of agreement have emerged from the debate according to our view. First, both parties agree that scenarios assuming a conditional convergence in income levels, i.e., a higher growth in per capita income in poorer countries when compared to countries with higher levels of affluence, are both “plausible and well attested in economic history” (C&H, p. 424). Thus, the fundamental, structural characteristic of some of the SRES scenarios contested by C&H are not challenged per se, but rather how fast such trends could unfold in the future. Second, there is agreement on the value of considering purchasing power parities (PPP) in the international comparison of income levels and the need for further research to improve on the paucity of reliable PPP estimates for developing countries within the International Comparisons Project (ICP) (C&H, p. 432). We appreciate that C&H have now acknowledged that PPPs were considered in developing the SRES scenarios and that they are reported in the data appendix of the report (C&H, p. 422–423). Thus, it was not ignorance as suggested by C&H but rather sound empirical and methodological reasons that led the SRES team to use market exchange rates (MER) as the main metric in developing long-term emissions scenarios. This is in agreement with the underlying scenario literature. However, we do agree with C&H on the value of considering PPP as a complementary metric, and have indeed reported corresponding PPP scenarios in SRES. We disagree with C&H that PPP ought to be used as the sole measure in developing long-term emissions scenarios. This leads us to the remaining areas of disagreement. (1) An important area of disagreement is that emissions do not depend on the metric used to measure economic activities. Evidently, historical emissions do not change as a function of whether historical development is measured in PPP or MER and both measures can be used interchangeably given appropriate model calibrations are deployed to assess the resulting emissions. More importantly, future emissions depend first of all on the physical characteristics of the energy system, land use and other human activities that need to be represented in models to calculate future emissions of greenhouse gases. These physical model representations are unaffected by the choice of PPP or MER for measuring economic growth. This fact explains why many of the emissions scenarios in the literature do not include economic development paths but rather determine emissions from human activities, such as energy and food services. We have addressed this argument extensively in the earlier issue of this Journal ( vol 14, no 2&3). (2) There also remains an important disagreement on the issue of using market exchange rates (MER) GDP in developing emission scenarios. C&H hold the extreme view that MER – a directly observable economic variable, as opposed to PPP, which is an elaborate statistical construct – should not be used at all in economic comparisons and in developing scenarios of GDP growth. We reiterate that there are good theoretical, methodological, and empirical reasons for using MER. Contrary to their claim of “unsound” practices, the SRES scenarios are consistent with the underlying literature, available methodologies, and existing practices of economic growth projections of leading international (e.g., the World Bank) and national institutions (e.g., the US DOE Energy Information Administration). (3) A final area of disagreement is whether the C&H criticism is significant or a “red herring”. C&H (p. 428–429) claim that by lowering the economic growth rates for developing countries in the lowest SRES emission-scenarios, one should obtain even lower future emissions. Thus, they claim that the SRES scenarios have failed to represent the lower bound of uncertainty of future emission levels. Here C&H display either a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of economic activity as the sole, independent driver of future emissions. Higher economic growth generally results in higher R&D, more rapid capital turnover, more energy efficiency and higher preferences for pollution controls, all of which tend to reduce GHG emissions. Depending on how these are modeled, lower GDP growth may actually result in higher GHG emissions, and may not, as C&H contend, significantly lower the SRES emissions in the absence of climate policies. We disagree that lower economic development would necessarily result in lower emissions. We conclude our response with some suggestions for improved clarity in the debate and the need to quantify differences in opinion through alternative scenarios published in the peer-reviewed literature.

Abstract This paper provides the trends of greenhouse gas (GHG) and local air pollutant emissions of India for 1985–2005. The GHGs covered are six Kyoto gases, namely carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). The local air pollutants are sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO) and total suspended particulates (TSP). These estimates incorporate some of the most recent scientific assessments for India. The multigas emissions have varied sectoral and fuel-based dominance, as well as regional distribution patterns. Coal consumption in power sector dominates CO2 and SO2 emissions, while power and road transport equally contribute to NOX emissions. Rice cultivation and livestock-related emissions from the agriculture sector dominate CH4 emissions, while synthetic fertilizer use in the same sector is the major source of N2O emissions. PFC emissions are dominated by C2F6 and CF4 emissions from aluminum production. The majority of HFC emissions are contributed by HFC-23, a by-product during the production of HCFC-22 that is widely used in refrigeration industry. CO emissions have dominance from biomass burning. Particulate emissions are dominated by biomass burning (residential sector), road transport and coal combustion in large plants. These varied emission patterns provide interesting policy links and disjoints, such as—which and where mitigation flexibility for the Kyoto gases, exploring co-benefits of CO2 and SO2 mitigation, and technology and development pathway dependence of emissions. The present inventory assessment is a pointer to the future emission pathways for India wherein local air pollutant and GHG emissions, although connected, may not move in synchronization and therefore would require alignment through well crafted development and environment strategies.

India has reasons to be concerned about climate change. Over 650 million people depend on climate-sensitive sectors, such as rain-fed agriculture and forestry, for livelihood and over 973 million people are exposed to vector borne malarial parasites. Projection of climatic factors indicates a wider exposure to malaria for the Indian population in the future. If precautionary measures are not taken and development processes are not managed properly some developmental activities, such as hydro-electric dams and irrigation canal systems, may also exacerbate breeding grounds for malaria. This article integrates climate change and developmental variables in articulating a framework for integrated impact assessment and adaptation responses, with malaria incidence in India as a case study. The climate change variables include temperature, rainfall, humidity, extreme events, and other secondary variables. Development variables are income levels, institutional mechanisms to implement preventive measures, infrastructure development that could promote malarial breeding grounds, and other policies. The case study indicates that sustainable development variables may sometimes reduce the adverse impacts on the system due to climate change alone, while it may sometimes also exacerbate these impacts if the development variables are not managed well and therefore they produce a negative impact on the system. The study concludes that well crafted and well managed developmental policies could result in enhanced resilience of communities and systems, and lower health impacts due to climate change.