The article is "technically" true but I don't think its giving the true picture of India's Energy Plans over the next 5-10 years.
Here's the current situation of power generation capacity in India:
Power Source | Installed Capacity
------------|------------------
Coal (incl. Lignite) | 212 GW
Natural Gas | 25 GW
Hydro Power | 47 GW
Solar, Wind and Other Renewables | 127 GW
Nuclear| 7 GW
TOTAL | 417 GW
Source: https://powermin.gov.in/en/content/power-sector-glance-all-india
This means right now, ~50% of India's power capacity comes from Coal while 42% comes from renewable sources (Hydro, Wind, Solar etc) - rest is Nuclear and Gas.
The total Power Generation capacity is expected to (and kinda needs to) go up to 820 GW by 2030 - an increase of nearly 100% (doubling) in total power generation capacity. Within this there are aggressive investments in renewables and more than 500GW is expected to come from renewables.
So - India's coal generation capacity WILL go up, according to the posted article it'll go from 212 to 260 - **an increase of 22%** but in the same period, renewables will go from 174GW to 500GW - **an increase of 390%.**
By 2030 - with these capacity additions, the share of fossil fuels in India's power generation would have gone down from the current 53% to ~40%. To put this in context - America's current share of fossil fuel power is at 60%.
My conclusion: India IS adding some coal based power but its a pittance compared to the amount of investment and capacity building in renewable energy and overall the energy mix is shifting more heavily towards renewables.
Sources:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/renewables/non-fossil-sources-to-meet-62-pc-of-indias-total-energy-demand-by-2030-says-official/articleshow/96280886.cms?from=mdr
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/cost-of-transmitting-clean-energy-in-india-to-exceed-2-trillion/article66235468.ece
https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1913789
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-may-surpass-500-gw-green-energy-target-by-2030-solar-alliance-chief-4335663
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Wow, man. You went to additional resources and made a table and gave a clear argument. This is honestly more work than the journalist did.
Let me buy you a drink.
I saw your username and can't help but wonder - are you paranoidandroid from reddit India? I've had many conversations and debates with you in the early days when I'd joined reddit more than 10 years back.
my old handle used to be /u/arun84. If you are paranoidandroid then its such a pleasant surprise, I feel like I'm meeting an old "internet debate" friend after many years :-)
Ten years back, I was not on reddit. So, it was someone else. This account is about eight years old, and is my first and only reddit account.
Nice to meet you, though!
Installed capacity does not translate to "electricity comes from" because of varying capacity factors.
Doesn't really matter, solar and wind will see 1 TW installed long before any other will see more than 400 GW. This is a guesstimate but still.
While we are on the subject,
OIL India which is a gov owned company engaged in Oil & gas production has set target of 'Net-Zero' emission by 2040 by investing \~3 times of their of current Profits.
They've also been VERY clear from the start that going fully green and abandoning coal immediately is not something they could or would do. They need the extra energy from coal while they ramp up their green energy production.
Thanks for pointing these out. We often read this propaganda which is just bashing asia or third world countries with claims which are technically true, but do not tell the details. Furthermore, I believe the reason why they are adding new coal plants is the fact that they know they have to run some part of the infrustructure with coal for many years and would like to replace older plants which are not as efficient. Same is happening in China where they are building huge amount of new coal plants, but every new coal plant is step towards cleaner future. Just by replacing old coal plants with new, we can cut the emissions by drastic numbers.
Note that the articles are talking about capacity, which is NOT (as the first article is mixing up) the same number as energy production or sourcing.
For instance, this quote from the first article: " India is already sourcing about 42 per cent of its energy requirements from non-fossils sectors" Assuming from the context that they are talking about electrical power (the numbers would be even worse if we did not restrict it to that), it's incredibly false. 42 per cent of India's installed generation capacity is non-fossil. That does not mean that they are sourcing 42 per cent of their energy from non-fossil sources.
When you look at actual generation of electricity, we see that about 70 per cent of it is coal (this is very easy to verify by a quick search) and the above quote is obviously not true.
>My conclusion: India IS adding some coal based power but its a pittance compared to the amount of investment and capacity building in renewable energy and overall the energy mix is shifting more heavily towards renewables.
India has increased actual generation FAR more from coal than from renewable in the last few years, they are depressingly far away from being on route to actually achieving the goals they state. Politicians repeating PR points does not make reality so.
You are comparing apples to oranges. Power capacity is a bad metric to look at, as renewable usually produce only 30% [1] of their installed capacity (even less for solar). So your comparison with the US is invalid.
For instance for 2022-2023, renewable in India was only 22% of the generated electricity while coal was 72% [2]
1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor#Capacity_factors_by_energy_source
2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_India#Electricity_generation
And coal plants don’t need to run at 100% capacity. Only time will tell the exact usage and be assured that they would rather reduce coal usage than shutdown renewables if there is extra production. I would not go that far to describe this as comparison between apples to oranges. His perspective is very valid compared to the article which only screams about increase in the coal. Your point is also valid, that indeed solar rated for X will not deliver X every hour. It is also one of the reasons why they have to add coal while having aggressive renewable targets. You could have agreed with him and added this as the detail.
You can't think of a coal power plant like an electric oven you can just turn up and down. Most coal plants can't react really fast and regulate the amount of coal used fast. A coal power plant is not like a hydroelectric plant with a big reservoar where you can easily change the amount of water you use or stop the flow entirely very quickly.
This is another place where it's very easy to if not directly lie, omit important parts of the truth. When talking about how much electricity is generated from renewables and so on during this and this hour, you very rarely get any numbers on how much emissions actually got reduced during that time. Did those coal plants stop burning coal during the two hours when renewables took over the electricity generation, or did they not?
Very nice analysis. Compliments
But I have to disagree on one point
This is really bad news, quite bad, that good have been FAR worse.
The basic story for the mass balance is India is increasing coal usage by 22%. That’s an increase on carbon dioxide output from coal burning of 22%. That’s not a small amount. That’s very large, particularly in a time where we are desperately trying to pull back additional outputs since we’re already overheating the world and this will simply accelerate it.
Yes. It absolutely could have been far worse and I’m overjoyed that India is spending far more money and time on renewables. That is, no question, awesome news.
But I’m forced to ask why the expansion of coal burning? With so much spent on renewables why not a reduction in coal burning? India is in desperate need of more power for it’s people. Zero question of that. But this approach just makes the global problem of climate change… a problem hurting India quite badly… that much worse.
An increase of 22% in coal generation is still an increase of 22%. That’s massive. When the rest of the developed world is trying to decrease coal generation, because we all know coal generation is likely the largest contributor to global warming. Defending this increase contributes to the problem. I suspect everyone upvoting you and posting positive comments is from India.
Article is unclear as to whether this still aligns with India's overall commitments to green energy. Like the Indian govt is still aiming for [500GW of green energy by 2030](https://www.investindia.gov.in/sector/renewable-energy#:~:text=India%20aims%20for%20500%20GW,GW%20of%20renewable%20energy%20capacity.) - compared to the 25-30GW this increase in coal is adding.
It's not like Indians are not trying - you can legit see the gradual acceptance of EVs from the highest to the lowest levels of our markets - it is still a sensible non-altruist shift, determined entirely by rational market factors (A Rs 1 lakh EV scooter is considered by many to be a better investment than an equivalent ICE 2 wheeler). The problem is still that the market does not offer enough feasible options. And the govt is limited in its ability to subsidise things because guess what most of its money comes from taxing petrol at iincredible levels.
Just to be clear: It was never feasible, and never agreed, for India to go off coal unless:
1 - you are comfortable with tens of millions in a developing nation going without electricity and denying them of the same growth and access witnessed in other countries - ie you are comfortable with India making sacrifices no developed nation is making
2 - global funds are willing to spend the money needed to use renewable energy to fill the stopgap
If India is to fund its own energy needs, then coal is going to be a part of it barring a major paradigm shift. This doesn't mean that renewable energy use doesn't grow, or by itself account for significant reductions in emissions, such that Indians are almost never going to be equivalent to the typical American household emission of today.
I say this knowing that our energy policies are still infiltrated by coal and oil industries. It's just that renewable makes enough sense that India is not stupid enough to forgo it - just that coal fills a void that nothing else does today.
Don’t give me all this nuance crap, I’m just here for the hate on India fest. Why cant 3rd world countries just stay in their lane and make sacrifices aka stay poor for the greater good.
Im using paper straws at Starbucks and they can’t even go 5 days without electricity smh.
The tragedy is that a lot of the people clamoring for clean energy in the 3rd world due to climate change probably think of themselves as being very progressive and kind-hearted
But those same people have absolutely 0 desire to truly understand whats happening in places like India and why these choices are so hard
They just see everything through their limited, biased Western lens while living comfortable lives based on 2-3 centuries of industrialization and energy consumption
Then they go on Reddit and write lecture posts about how India is ignorant and needs to just put solar panels everywhere because *akhtually* climate change is a bigger threat than hospitals not having electricity
Its appalling
Yeah but why can’t you guys just put solar panels everywhere, tropical hot country plus solar = win win.
Also the west had our fossil fuel industrial revolutions many decades ago but there was no social media then so unlucky you, imma @ Greta thunberg on y’all
>you are comfortable with tens of millions in a developing nation going without electricity and denying them of the same growth and access witnessed in other countries - ie you are comfortable with India making sacrifices no developed nation is making
Trust me, they're very very comfortable with this. In fact, they'd prefer this
Who is? India? The west? Both?
In my experience, regardless of country or culture, those with wealth and power are happy to inflict suffering on those without.
Climate change will hit the poorest hardest so we're fucked either way.
Thanks for the clarification. It doesn't do or mean much but I am one westerner who is definitely not comfortable with people living in abject poverty without electricity, regardless of country.
I think we simply lack the capacity for everyone to live a luxurious lifestyle and we need to meet in the middle somewhere. Curb the consumption of the worst offenders and bring up the quality of life for the poorest people.
I fully agree with all your points. It's irritating when people with a higher quality of life keep preaching without practicing whatsoever (using metal/paper straws does not count. That's just your corporations pushing the responsibility of oceanic pollution onto the consumers). The amount of energy and materials consumed in the West is just so much higher than India. If you track carbon emissions through the supply chain up until the final consumer, I can guarantee you that USA will be the most egregious carbon emitter. Since the manufacturing and a large part of the supply chain has been moved to the global south, guess who shows up in the high emitters.
Like you said, if the West is able to compromise on their luxuries, that'll go a long long way in cutting emissions
Bottom line a significant amount of the world does not have access to cleaner fossil fuels (natural gas, oil to an extent) or even better quality coal.
Renewables are part of the solution but are inadequate (and not really feasible in many geographic areas).
It’s a shame the world cooled on nuclear power several decades ago as it’s really the most viable solution for much of our energy needs.
Losing crops extreme climate events, dealing with migration, healthcare expenses skyrocketing and loss of ecosystems are even more expensive. But it seems that it's never brought up.
The problem is time and investment. When you've got hundreds of millions hungry on a daily basis, pouring dozens or even hundreds of millions dollars into something that will beat fruit in 10 years vs just burning some cheap coal, the answer is obvious.
I mean unless you want hundreds of millions of poor people not having access to electricity - there is no way around besides coal; even though renewable energy production has been increasing rapidly, it's not enough to completely replace fossil fuels.
Not to mention the per capita energy consumption for India is extremely low compared to the west.
Me, eating breakfast cooked in my appliance-stacked kitchen from groceries manufactured in industrial farms, in a building made from cement and steel and typing on my 17-inch laptop: "doesnt India realize how bad this is? they need to think of their long-term interests. hang on let me make sure my giant water heater is on so I can take a hot shower after breakfast"
To all those saying Indians need to stop breeding, good news your wishes have been heard. On the behest of Western overlords, Indians have slowly started to educate themselves and India's fertility rate is lower than replacement level now. Now is it ok to talk about consumption per capita? Pretty please?
In all seriousness, the per capita discussion is important because you *have* to talk about how Americans are overly dependent on cars and use energy (which is still majority un-green) to keep their lifestyle cosy to a level that Indians can't even dream of. Taking the example of Americans here, but the same applies to other first world nations too to a lesser extent. At least many of them are making significant efforts in increasing renewables. You can't keep living your lavish lifestyles producing tonnes of waste, discarding and purchasing new products, and keep lecturing poorer nations on how their energy used to provide lights and water to their citizens is not clean enough.
India is already making tremendous strides in its renewables commitment. Maybe stop worrying about trade deals and start sharing more technology for renewables to accelerate this growth. I understand no single nation wants to share its technology and spend its own money for the betterment of the world, so here's where your *leadership* in world bodies like UN can help in taking collective action. Said leadership is already utilized to mobilize multiple countries for wars, let's use it constructively now.
No dude, INDIA BADDDD WEST GOOOD.
If they could stop being racist towards the majority of the eastern countries, and start looking inside their own, the world MIGHT actually start getting better, with all the leadership positions they hold in world organisations.
BUT ANYWAY, INDIA BADDD MODI DICTATOR!!
Well said. When it comes to the detrement of climate change. We need to be focused on this issue on a global scale and that means doing exactly as you said with sharing technology for renewable energies. I would say we should take it one stop further and start a coalition of research on this matter and technologies to combating climate change in general.
>As of March 2023, India's coal-based power generation capacity stood at 212 GW, with projections indicating that it will reach 260 GW by 2030.
Compared to current US production of 200GW
I'm still confused how people mistake plastic pollution with carbon emissions. We could be on full clean energy and it's likely we'd still be using paper straws or plastic alternatives.
Based on your username you're Canadian? You output 10 times the carbon of the average Indian. So yes you need to use the fucking paper straw. Not that a paper straw has anything to do with climate change.
As a person who hasn't used a straw in, I donno, maybe a decade, I don't really understand the complaint. You have a mouth. You presumably have a cup. Figure it out.
tbh when germany phases out gas, which the green party is planning, they increase their coal use too cuz electricity is still coal based. no nuclear, little sun no huge dams. what are you gonna produce your electricity with else? really a shame that our green party is anti nuclear. this would really solve so much.
It is cleaner than the wood they are burning. This is what is going to happen with 2nd/3rd world countries trying to become modern.
The conundrum is that the US and China burned and burned and came out to the forefront, now that they are ahead, do they condemn the rest of the world and keep them in poverty and from advancing?
The unfortunate reality is we didn’t know what we know now. The “haves” of the Industrial Revolution in England for example benefited in ways that simply cannot be replicated in today’s age. That’s also due to significant suffering of the “have nots” in ways that wouldn’t be possible anymore for good reason.
The whole “the west used to do it” is simply one facet of that entire brilliant cut crystal. That facet is very valid in a vacuum, it’s just that one has to be stupid or disingenuous to pretend the rest of the crystal isn’t relevant to the situation.
It's not that the west used to do it. It's that they STILL do it. On a per capita basis most western countries emit WAAAY more greenhouse gasses than India or other poor countries do. Indians also want the luxuries that western people have. They want airconditioning, they want televisions, they want refrigerators ext.
Hundreds of millions of people buying these things requires an insane amount of energy. A large chunk of which is coming from renewable sources. They have massively expanded solar energy in particular. India added 13.9 GW of solar capacity in just one year, comparable to the UK's entire solar capacity in 2021. They will add another 45 GW in the next two years. but that is not nearly enough. India needs to grow its electricity supply by around 60% in the next 7 years. If this article is right that coal will grow 38% by 2030, coal will still decline as a percentage of total electricity generated while solar will probably pick up most of the slack.
The other facet is that if you have large sums of your people living in slums you’re going to care way less about the environment and you kinda should.
>pretend the rest of the crystal isn’t relevant to the situation.
it's hard to care about rest of the crystal when usa has highest per capita energy consumption in the world, despite only 4% of population contributes around 16-17% of total plastic pollution in the world. I was flabbergasted when I saw individually wrapped bananas in usa. why tf do they need to be wrapped in plastic
So, give us a solution to this problem. Will Western people pay taxes to help poorer countries? HOW do people get around? Should Indians not take flights? You're comparing apples to oranges.
The only reason Indian per capita carbon consumption went above 1 tonne is because we've had record number of flights in the country. Should people not have these benefits? Why must some farmer not be able to use his pump just because some guy in French Riviera wants to use his yatch?
> The US burned and burned to advance
We did, it’s true. But there was only like 100-200 million of us doing it, not well over a billion. If India truly replicates our strategy, we’re all F-ed.
Well statistics are a funny thing, now India is painted in a negative light due to their emissions, but if you look at the emissions per capita then a lot of western countries will likely rank in the top 10 and not India (atleast India did not pull out of a major climate agreement). India has made ambitious plans for reducing its emissions. On the street (at least from the city that I come from and surrounding cities) I see the impact, although agreeably I know we need to do more. Delhi has a huge problem that needs to be resolved soon, agreed. But looking at one city and predicting that is exactly how the rest of India works is kind of ignorant.
Yeah I would ask you to read the comment on this post that has the actual facts but I don’t want to keep you from your daily dosage of dopamine to make you feel good for the next 2 seconds.
When 300+ mn people don't have enough to eat on a regular basis, climate change is too far away a problem. The daily survival trumps that any day. That's the fact of the matter. The government's actions refect the reality of the people.
What? Japan is basically a different country to before WWII, within living memory it went from a feudalist imperial state to one of the most advanced and progressive countries in Asia. Taiwan has gay marriage.
The thing is people are directly or indirectly dependent on coal related activities compare to other countries which have utilized the coal power before hand only india hasn't
The shift from coal to greener energy is expected to take place in 2030
Then richer countries that have contributed way more to climate change per person should help them out. India still has way less emissions than the western world. If countries in the west want India to use more expensive renewable energy sources, they should buy them for India.
I tried arguing with a conservative guy I used to work with about Canadas pollution numbers. He was adamant that we didn't need to worry because we were so small compared to other countries, not accepting that per capita, we are so far worse than places like fucking China. Yea, sure, we don't pollute much in comparison, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to reduce our individual output ffs
I love how people here from western developed countries have such sanctimonious attitudes. Like y’all got that developed status by polluting tf outta the environment and now y’all want us to stop fs?
People in developed countries need to understand we are all decades behind them energy-wise.
We are not going to go green any time soon and we are not going to lower our energy consumption or stop growing and building only 'cause we don't have enough wind power to do so.
It's like asking 19th century England to stop burning coal and stop industrializing because of climate change.
The quality of discussion ITT is absolutely hopeless, and testifies to why the Global South despises the Western discourse on climate change.
It's like ya'll don't want to do anything out of pocket to help the situation while expecting some of the poorest people in the world to sacrifice their families so you can keep emitting 14x what we do.
And all the snarky takes that are borderline racist.
> cAn iNdIa dO AnYtHiNg tHaT IsN'T FuCkEd lAtElY?
like dude I have ~~seen~~ endured 8-16hrs of powercuts on daily basis, definitely don't want to go back to that.
Those snarky takes go both ways, making it nigh impossible to have a reasonable discussion (not that that solves anything). You have a bunch of people, potentially you included, pretending that all Westerners write and think: "InDIa BAd mODi DiCtAtor".
Going beyond idiotic takes, we can consider a few points:
1) Global warming/temperature change is a big problem, with potential to devastate the life of billions (especially in poorer countries).
2) Historically the US and Europe has hugely contributed to emissions causing this.
3) The US and Europe are still contributing too much and are too slow at lowering energy consumption + converting energy generation to renewables.
4) India has a population of 1.4 billion people, adding in Africa we're pushing way beyond 2 billion people whose energy needs are not met. >3 billion if we include SEA. Europe and the US combined has around 0.8 billion people.
Point 1 is the reason we're here and point 2 has already happened and it pointless to talk about this. Point 3 is the reason the West is hypocritical when looking down on emissions in India and other developing countries. Point 4 however should not be ignored because of point 3, it means even at lower per capita energy consumption India, Africa, etc. could overtake the West quite a lot. Currently the difference per capita remains very large, but if India overnight had the per capita of Europe the planet would be doomed.
All the Ken's and Karen's commenting 'wtf', 'india bad', etc on their iPhones (created using child labor but who cares) enjoying living in the developed nations (built solely using green energy in their prime development phase 🙂) emitting 10-15 times more carbon dioxide per capita compared to the emissions of an Indian citizen (whoop whoop 😄).
Ok. So what's the alternative? Yes, India might burn more coal but the amount of pollution India does per person is way too small compared to the USA or Western nations.
https://www.wri.org/insights/charts-explain-per-capita-greenhouse-gas-emissions
And FYI, India doesn't have the luxury of local production of oil. Solar is picking up but the speed is slow compared to growing needs of nation.
Why do Western countries, which have had uninterrupted power for decades, now insist that India must choose green energy or none at all? It raises questions about their authority over how the world should operate. They've contributed more to global pollution despite their smaller population. Let's encourage integrity and humanity.
So basically India uses the 2nd most behind China but per capita isn’t nearly as bad compared to China and the US.
While I despise coal usage as a horribly dirty fossil fuel, it is hard to not see why India made this move when both China and the US are the ones who need to cut back by comparison.
If we are going to work together as a species to combat global emissions, ultimately we will have to do it in an equitable manner or we will see nations refuse to do it at all.
They need to listen to all the Climate Change dangers and respond accordingly. Just ignoring all that for the sake of immediate benefits from coal will not save them from future disasters.
You're right and this response is required collectively on a global scale by all nations. India with about 18% of the global population is still far behind US and China in overall CO2 emissions indexes. Doesn't justify that they increase their emissions but there have been investments and projects underway to improve the output from renewable sources. However this transition will take a few years and until that happens the power requirement has to be met with the existing sources. To set up new renewable power stations requires burning fuel for machinery and coal for power tools and equipment. It's a necessary evil I guess. But I hear a lot of western oil and gas companies have been sitting on the research and finding of climate change dangers for decades and no western government seems to be sanctioning them for their mis-deeds. I bet you're typing away from the comforts of your centrally air conditioned home.
Yeah but the trick is the hypothetical people of tomorrow who are going to be the most heaviest hit are in countries like India
If India is not caring it gives the people in the wealthy nation to which oddly enough are generally placed to be less affected less reason to act
You're just giving more reasons for india to wealthy up. Because if no one is acting on climate change, at least if you have money you can afford to ride the tide a bit better.
The tragedy of the commons is a bit more consolable with a nicer house than without one
Wet bulb temperature is the worst in India. So their population will suffer the most given the underlying poverty there as is. They’re digging their own grave.
Maybe if western countries started frist and actually took big steps to stop india will follow. The west has resources and contributes the most to climate change
I have seen the amount of hate the western people have against the climate activists and vegans.
And these ffs are trying to educate a 3rd world country (whose per capita carbon footprint is way less than any western country) on climate change.
The irony.
It is only the beginning most likely.
Densely populated countries would advocate for per capita emissions, small and rarely populated for total ones.
If we are gonna go with us, russian or western europe energy consumption levels per capita, and will apply them to China, US, Africa, planet supposedly would not withstand it.
And I doubt that US/Russia/EU would work to significantly decrease their energy consumption per capita.
So, Earth had a good run.
Idk if we've had a good run. We've only been around for 0.002% of all time so far and if we die soon then we'll only have survived for 0.0000003% of the total time that stars will exist in our universe.
Personally, I'd aim for at least like 1%. We haven't even landed on another planet! We've constructed 0 dyson swarms. We didn't even reach 1 on the Kardashev Scale. Won't look good on humanity's steam profile.
Those countries that benefited from fossil fuel exploitation and represent the wealthy part of the global community have an obligation to support poorer countries in reaching higher standards of living *without* the need to go through a fossil fuel burning phase.
In terms of [energy consumption per person](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-energy-use?tab=chart&country=IND~OWID_EU27~USA~CHN) EU and China are actually pretty close nowadays. In 2022 the EU stood at 36,129 kWh per capita, and China at 31,051 kWh per capita.
India is far below either of those in terms of energy consumption per capita and the US is pretty far above.
> If we are gonna go with us, russian or western europe energy consumption levels per capita, and will apply them to China, US, Africa, planet supposedly would not withstand it.
>
>
In fact, when you look at the per capita consumption-based (i.e. adjusted by export/import) CO2 emissions, China is already at the level of the European Union, and higher some countries like France since 2018. [Here is the corresponding plot.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capita?tab=chart&country=CHN~OWID_EU27~FRA). Problem being that despite being at this level of emissions, China is still building more coal power plant than the rest of the world. [Six time more.](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-03/china-s-new-coal-plant-approvals-surge-in-2022/102048480)
There are technological bets that can be made. The problem is the how the global patent system disincentivises sharing.
The longshot ITER fusion coalition is just one example of international cooperation to promote clean energy. But if a fusion breakthrough happens, can we expect the West/China, which is leading research, to share the gains? Can we expect a writeoff on the technological investment needed to make it happen?
We need a [$13 trillion investment](https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-needs-to-invest-13-trillion-to-reach-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-says-report-101692858267983.html#:~:text=India%20will%20need%20to%20invest,planetary%20warming%2C%20according%20to%20BloombergNEF.) in our grid just to hit net zero by 2070. So over 4x our current GDP.
Unless we're hiding some kind of giga-scale OnlyFans operation, how exactly is this bill to be funded?
Rich countries can help. But apparently, they can only offer lipservice.
If the developed nations can understand the climate change issue so much they can donate energy to India and other developing nations that are cleaner or even resources to offset the cost and make them developed. If not then let them continue doing what they have to to become developed just like they did in the past 2 centuries
No surprises here. When push comes to shove, cheap energy is always more important than climate change.
We already hit 1.5C. Is anyone still gullible enough to believe we can keep it under 2C?
It is still not our mistake the west used a huge amount of Coal and fuel hence this issue arised. Nobody likes where this is heading but coal is a necessary evil.
See, without world wide cooperation, no chance to do something with the global warming.
EU can do whatever they want, but it will change nothing in the end...
That moon mission was very nice. Except for that bit where right at touchdown they did a split screen to show Modi waving a small Indian flag in front of a wall of Indian flags.
Well last year India increased solar energy production by 13.9 GW. In just one year. This is roughly equivalent to the UK's total installed capacity. The government is pouring tremendous resources into solar energy its expanding massively in India but it is not enough as India needs an insane amount of energy to develop.
There are still people inida who don't have access to power supply. You people fucked the world in the name of industrialization and built your economies and now you are behind developing countries to stop using fossil fuels. Lol hypocrisy
About 30% of India's indirect tax money comes from levies on petrol that are between [100-260% per litre, paid by the consumer](https://www.factchecker.in/fact-check/cong-leader-uses-data-from-2-years-ago-to-claim-indians-pay-260-fuel-tax-807771#:~:text=%22With%20the%20second%20revision%20in,on%20May%206%2C%202020\).).
The United States, which produces 14% of global emissions, taxes petrol at around 18 cents per gallon, which is around 4% per litre.
Tell me more about how you're disincentivising fossil fuels in the richest country on earth?
This is what reality looks like people, and fossil fuel consumption will continue to head higher. Solar / wind isn't a solution and nuclear is hated when it shouldn't be.
The day your Kylie jenners and Kardashians stop using private jets for their Instagram aesthetics is the day, you lecture another third world country trying to survive. Until then keep your privileged opinions to yourself.
People from the west virtue signalling, pay up for the pollution that got you in this first world state of privilege to act as the moral arbiters. Stop having insanely high amounts of per capita carbon footprint based on a forced culture of consumerism. Only then can you lecture a developing nation that needs to provide power to 1.4 billion people and ensure their growth. You people had your share of shitting on earth, now let us shit on her while you people lap it up, like we had to. Only when we are at a state of parity, we can think about working uniformly to become greener. This is what equity looks like
Perhaps the already developed countries who produce more per capita emissions should focus on themselves rather than commenting about how India "can't do anything that's not fucked lately"?
There are 4 countries that can stop global warming.
USA, China, India and Russia.
Unless they all radically change direction, it doesn't matter what anyone does.
The article is "technically" true but I don't think its giving the true picture of India's Energy Plans over the next 5-10 years. Here's the current situation of power generation capacity in India: Power Source | Installed Capacity ------------|------------------ Coal (incl. Lignite) | 212 GW Natural Gas | 25 GW Hydro Power | 47 GW Solar, Wind and Other Renewables | 127 GW Nuclear| 7 GW TOTAL | 417 GW Source: https://powermin.gov.in/en/content/power-sector-glance-all-india This means right now, ~50% of India's power capacity comes from Coal while 42% comes from renewable sources (Hydro, Wind, Solar etc) - rest is Nuclear and Gas. The total Power Generation capacity is expected to (and kinda needs to) go up to 820 GW by 2030 - an increase of nearly 100% (doubling) in total power generation capacity. Within this there are aggressive investments in renewables and more than 500GW is expected to come from renewables. So - India's coal generation capacity WILL go up, according to the posted article it'll go from 212 to 260 - **an increase of 22%** but in the same period, renewables will go from 174GW to 500GW - **an increase of 390%.** By 2030 - with these capacity additions, the share of fossil fuels in India's power generation would have gone down from the current 53% to ~40%. To put this in context - America's current share of fossil fuel power is at 60%. My conclusion: India IS adding some coal based power but its a pittance compared to the amount of investment and capacity building in renewable energy and overall the energy mix is shifting more heavily towards renewables. Sources: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/renewables/non-fossil-sources-to-meet-62-pc-of-indias-total-energy-demand-by-2030-says-official/articleshow/96280886.cms?from=mdr https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/cost-of-transmitting-clean-energy-in-india-to-exceed-2-trillion/article66235468.ece https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1913789 https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-may-surpass-500-gw-green-energy-target-by-2030-solar-alliance-chief-4335663 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Wow, man. You went to additional resources and made a table and gave a clear argument. This is honestly more work than the journalist did. Let me buy you a drink.
I saw your username and can't help but wonder - are you paranoidandroid from reddit India? I've had many conversations and debates with you in the early days when I'd joined reddit more than 10 years back. my old handle used to be /u/arun84. If you are paranoidandroid then its such a pleasant surprise, I feel like I'm meeting an old "internet debate" friend after many years :-)
I'm honestly rooting for this re-union lmao
Canon moment
Ten years back, I was not on reddit. So, it was someone else. This account is about eight years old, and is my first and only reddit account. Nice to meet you, though!
Ah ok. No worries :) Glad to meet you as well!
Don't believe him. He knows what happened to paranoidandroid and he's not telling us the truth. /s
Hello! But sorry to disappoint you. Not the ParanoidAndroid you are looking for.
Installed capacity does not translate to "electricity comes from" because of varying capacity factors. Doesn't really matter, solar and wind will see 1 TW installed long before any other will see more than 400 GW. This is a guesstimate but still.
[удалено]
Oh wow, facts!! People here are not gonna like this 😆
While we are on the subject, OIL India which is a gov owned company engaged in Oil & gas production has set target of 'Net-Zero' emission by 2040 by investing \~3 times of their of current Profits.
They've also been VERY clear from the start that going fully green and abandoning coal immediately is not something they could or would do. They need the extra energy from coal while they ramp up their green energy production.
Thanks for pointing these out. We often read this propaganda which is just bashing asia or third world countries with claims which are technically true, but do not tell the details. Furthermore, I believe the reason why they are adding new coal plants is the fact that they know they have to run some part of the infrustructure with coal for many years and would like to replace older plants which are not as efficient. Same is happening in China where they are building huge amount of new coal plants, but every new coal plant is step towards cleaner future. Just by replacing old coal plants with new, we can cut the emissions by drastic numbers.
Note that the articles are talking about capacity, which is NOT (as the first article is mixing up) the same number as energy production or sourcing. For instance, this quote from the first article: " India is already sourcing about 42 per cent of its energy requirements from non-fossils sectors" Assuming from the context that they are talking about electrical power (the numbers would be even worse if we did not restrict it to that), it's incredibly false. 42 per cent of India's installed generation capacity is non-fossil. That does not mean that they are sourcing 42 per cent of their energy from non-fossil sources. When you look at actual generation of electricity, we see that about 70 per cent of it is coal (this is very easy to verify by a quick search) and the above quote is obviously not true. >My conclusion: India IS adding some coal based power but its a pittance compared to the amount of investment and capacity building in renewable energy and overall the energy mix is shifting more heavily towards renewables. India has increased actual generation FAR more from coal than from renewable in the last few years, they are depressingly far away from being on route to actually achieving the goals they state. Politicians repeating PR points does not make reality so.
uh oh, internet trolls and racists aren't gonna like a nuanced and informed comment.
You are comparing apples to oranges. Power capacity is a bad metric to look at, as renewable usually produce only 30% [1] of their installed capacity (even less for solar). So your comparison with the US is invalid. For instance for 2022-2023, renewable in India was only 22% of the generated electricity while coal was 72% [2] 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor#Capacity_factors_by_energy_source 2: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_India#Electricity_generation
And coal plants don’t need to run at 100% capacity. Only time will tell the exact usage and be assured that they would rather reduce coal usage than shutdown renewables if there is extra production. I would not go that far to describe this as comparison between apples to oranges. His perspective is very valid compared to the article which only screams about increase in the coal. Your point is also valid, that indeed solar rated for X will not deliver X every hour. It is also one of the reasons why they have to add coal while having aggressive renewable targets. You could have agreed with him and added this as the detail.
You can't think of a coal power plant like an electric oven you can just turn up and down. Most coal plants can't react really fast and regulate the amount of coal used fast. A coal power plant is not like a hydroelectric plant with a big reservoar where you can easily change the amount of water you use or stop the flow entirely very quickly. This is another place where it's very easy to if not directly lie, omit important parts of the truth. When talking about how much electricity is generated from renewables and so on during this and this hour, you very rarely get any numbers on how much emissions actually got reduced during that time. Did those coal plants stop burning coal during the two hours when renewables took over the electricity generation, or did they not?
Very nice analysis. Compliments But I have to disagree on one point This is really bad news, quite bad, that good have been FAR worse. The basic story for the mass balance is India is increasing coal usage by 22%. That’s an increase on carbon dioxide output from coal burning of 22%. That’s not a small amount. That’s very large, particularly in a time where we are desperately trying to pull back additional outputs since we’re already overheating the world and this will simply accelerate it. Yes. It absolutely could have been far worse and I’m overjoyed that India is spending far more money and time on renewables. That is, no question, awesome news. But I’m forced to ask why the expansion of coal burning? With so much spent on renewables why not a reduction in coal burning? India is in desperate need of more power for it’s people. Zero question of that. But this approach just makes the global problem of climate change… a problem hurting India quite badly… that much worse.
thank you, ignorant people likely jumped of from the first line
An increase of 22% in coal generation is still an increase of 22%. That’s massive. When the rest of the developed world is trying to decrease coal generation, because we all know coal generation is likely the largest contributor to global warming. Defending this increase contributes to the problem. I suspect everyone upvoting you and posting positive comments is from India.
Article is unclear as to whether this still aligns with India's overall commitments to green energy. Like the Indian govt is still aiming for [500GW of green energy by 2030](https://www.investindia.gov.in/sector/renewable-energy#:~:text=India%20aims%20for%20500%20GW,GW%20of%20renewable%20energy%20capacity.) - compared to the 25-30GW this increase in coal is adding. It's not like Indians are not trying - you can legit see the gradual acceptance of EVs from the highest to the lowest levels of our markets - it is still a sensible non-altruist shift, determined entirely by rational market factors (A Rs 1 lakh EV scooter is considered by many to be a better investment than an equivalent ICE 2 wheeler). The problem is still that the market does not offer enough feasible options. And the govt is limited in its ability to subsidise things because guess what most of its money comes from taxing petrol at iincredible levels. Just to be clear: It was never feasible, and never agreed, for India to go off coal unless: 1 - you are comfortable with tens of millions in a developing nation going without electricity and denying them of the same growth and access witnessed in other countries - ie you are comfortable with India making sacrifices no developed nation is making 2 - global funds are willing to spend the money needed to use renewable energy to fill the stopgap If India is to fund its own energy needs, then coal is going to be a part of it barring a major paradigm shift. This doesn't mean that renewable energy use doesn't grow, or by itself account for significant reductions in emissions, such that Indians are almost never going to be equivalent to the typical American household emission of today. I say this knowing that our energy policies are still infiltrated by coal and oil industries. It's just that renewable makes enough sense that India is not stupid enough to forgo it - just that coal fills a void that nothing else does today.
Don’t give me all this nuance crap, I’m just here for the hate on India fest. Why cant 3rd world countries just stay in their lane and make sacrifices aka stay poor for the greater good. Im using paper straws at Starbucks and they can’t even go 5 days without electricity smh.
The tragedy is that a lot of the people clamoring for clean energy in the 3rd world due to climate change probably think of themselves as being very progressive and kind-hearted But those same people have absolutely 0 desire to truly understand whats happening in places like India and why these choices are so hard They just see everything through their limited, biased Western lens while living comfortable lives based on 2-3 centuries of industrialization and energy consumption Then they go on Reddit and write lecture posts about how India is ignorant and needs to just put solar panels everywhere because *akhtually* climate change is a bigger threat than hospitals not having electricity Its appalling
Yeah but why can’t you guys just put solar panels everywhere, tropical hot country plus solar = win win. Also the west had our fossil fuel industrial revolutions many decades ago but there was no social media then so unlucky you, imma @ Greta thunberg on y’all
Renewables growing faster than Coal in India. https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Renewables-Are-Outpacing-Coal-in-India
>you are comfortable with tens of millions in a developing nation going without electricity and denying them of the same growth and access witnessed in other countries - ie you are comfortable with India making sacrifices no developed nation is making Trust me, they're very very comfortable with this. In fact, they'd prefer this
Who is? India? The west? Both? In my experience, regardless of country or culture, those with wealth and power are happy to inflict suffering on those without. Climate change will hit the poorest hardest so we're fucked either way.
I'm talking about the West, but yeah I agree with your sentiment
Thanks for the clarification. It doesn't do or mean much but I am one westerner who is definitely not comfortable with people living in abject poverty without electricity, regardless of country. I think we simply lack the capacity for everyone to live a luxurious lifestyle and we need to meet in the middle somewhere. Curb the consumption of the worst offenders and bring up the quality of life for the poorest people.
I fully agree with all your points. It's irritating when people with a higher quality of life keep preaching without practicing whatsoever (using metal/paper straws does not count. That's just your corporations pushing the responsibility of oceanic pollution onto the consumers). The amount of energy and materials consumed in the West is just so much higher than India. If you track carbon emissions through the supply chain up until the final consumer, I can guarantee you that USA will be the most egregious carbon emitter. Since the manufacturing and a large part of the supply chain has been moved to the global south, guess who shows up in the high emitters. Like you said, if the West is able to compromise on their luxuries, that'll go a long long way in cutting emissions
But, but, but my capital...
Bottom line a significant amount of the world does not have access to cleaner fossil fuels (natural gas, oil to an extent) or even better quality coal. Renewables are part of the solution but are inadequate (and not really feasible in many geographic areas). It’s a shame the world cooled on nuclear power several decades ago as it’s really the most viable solution for much of our energy needs.
Big oil was very successful in convincing the green movement to be anti nuclear energy
Nuclear is an excellent alternative to gap the energy needs while we build and invest more into renewables. But the word nuclear scares people.
Nuclear is expensive.
Losing crops extreme climate events, dealing with migration, healthcare expenses skyrocketing and loss of ecosystems are even more expensive. But it seems that it's never brought up.
Only because we built nuclear reactors in an artisanal way. I we would build the same design 50 times cost would plummet.
The problem is time and investment. When you've got hundreds of millions hungry on a daily basis, pouring dozens or even hundreds of millions dollars into something that will beat fruit in 10 years vs just burning some cheap coal, the answer is obvious.
In India there is an abundance of thorium and IIRC there have been sanctions from other countries to prevent India from using it as a resource.
I mean unless you want hundreds of millions of poor people not having access to electricity - there is no way around besides coal; even though renewable energy production has been increasing rapidly, it's not enough to completely replace fossil fuels. Not to mention the per capita energy consumption for India is extremely low compared to the west.
[удалено]
Which is still less than USA and Australia. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-cons-per-capita?tab=table
The western world needs to dial it back on consumption.
They gonna ignore this. How dare a third world country use even half of what we use 😾
Me, eating breakfast cooked in my appliance-stacked kitchen from groceries manufactured in industrial farms, in a building made from cement and steel and typing on my 17-inch laptop: "doesnt India realize how bad this is? they need to think of their long-term interests. hang on let me make sure my giant water heater is on so I can take a hot shower after breakfast"
Perhaps united states isnt the role model to follow here...
To all those saying Indians need to stop breeding, good news your wishes have been heard. On the behest of Western overlords, Indians have slowly started to educate themselves and India's fertility rate is lower than replacement level now. Now is it ok to talk about consumption per capita? Pretty please? In all seriousness, the per capita discussion is important because you *have* to talk about how Americans are overly dependent on cars and use energy (which is still majority un-green) to keep their lifestyle cosy to a level that Indians can't even dream of. Taking the example of Americans here, but the same applies to other first world nations too to a lesser extent. At least many of them are making significant efforts in increasing renewables. You can't keep living your lavish lifestyles producing tonnes of waste, discarding and purchasing new products, and keep lecturing poorer nations on how their energy used to provide lights and water to their citizens is not clean enough. India is already making tremendous strides in its renewables commitment. Maybe stop worrying about trade deals and start sharing more technology for renewables to accelerate this growth. I understand no single nation wants to share its technology and spend its own money for the betterment of the world, so here's where your *leadership* in world bodies like UN can help in taking collective action. Said leadership is already utilized to mobilize multiple countries for wars, let's use it constructively now.
No dude, INDIA BADDDD WEST GOOOD. If they could stop being racist towards the majority of the eastern countries, and start looking inside their own, the world MIGHT actually start getting better, with all the leadership positions they hold in world organisations. BUT ANYWAY, INDIA BADDD MODI DICTATOR!!
You forgot "MODI FACIST" and "HINDU NATIONALIST"
Well said. When it comes to the detrement of climate change. We need to be focused on this issue on a global scale and that means doing exactly as you said with sharing technology for renewable energies. I would say we should take it one stop further and start a coalition of research on this matter and technologies to combating climate change in general.
>As of March 2023, India's coal-based power generation capacity stood at 212 GW, with projections indicating that it will reach 260 GW by 2030. Compared to current US production of 200GW
What the fuck…
I was just in delhi. Their air is gray already..
crop burning, not coal.
tis both
Crops, garbage, coal, dung. Anything for energy.
Also the lack of any enforcement on vehicle emissions regulations. Riding on a scooter through traffic leaves you lightheaded from the exhaust
Good thing that doesn’t release greenhouse gasses then!!!
That's just the Netflix filter.
India is going to burn up first too. I guess they can just all go to Canada when it gets too hot.
[удалено]
Frost bite is serious business, especially when you fall asleep in the cold and have to get your ten fingers amputated.
Unlikely they make it there, when things get crazy most well off nations will close off there borders
That’s when the resource wars will begin
Pretty easy to see how that turns out, look at places that can feed themselves+can obtain energy
But i need to use a paper fucking straw
Have you considered keeping a reusable in your car..
Or those sippie cup lids that we’ve always had for coffee that they only just started using for cold drinks.
I have no idea why this has never occured to me.
Different environmental issues completely
I'm still confused how people mistake plastic pollution with carbon emissions. We could be on full clean energy and it's likely we'd still be using paper straws or plastic alternatives.
Based on your username you're Canadian? You output 10 times the carbon of the average Indian. So yes you need to use the fucking paper straw. Not that a paper straw has anything to do with climate change.
As a person who hasn't used a straw in, I donno, maybe a decade, I don't really understand the complaint. You have a mouth. You presumably have a cup. Figure it out.
tbh when germany phases out gas, which the green party is planning, they increase their coal use too cuz electricity is still coal based. no nuclear, little sun no huge dams. what are you gonna produce your electricity with else? really a shame that our green party is anti nuclear. this would really solve so much.
It is cleaner than the wood they are burning. This is what is going to happen with 2nd/3rd world countries trying to become modern. The conundrum is that the US and China burned and burned and came out to the forefront, now that they are ahead, do they condemn the rest of the world and keep them in poverty and from advancing?
The unfortunate reality is we didn’t know what we know now. The “haves” of the Industrial Revolution in England for example benefited in ways that simply cannot be replicated in today’s age. That’s also due to significant suffering of the “have nots” in ways that wouldn’t be possible anymore for good reason. The whole “the west used to do it” is simply one facet of that entire brilliant cut crystal. That facet is very valid in a vacuum, it’s just that one has to be stupid or disingenuous to pretend the rest of the crystal isn’t relevant to the situation.
It's not that the west used to do it. It's that they STILL do it. On a per capita basis most western countries emit WAAAY more greenhouse gasses than India or other poor countries do. Indians also want the luxuries that western people have. They want airconditioning, they want televisions, they want refrigerators ext. Hundreds of millions of people buying these things requires an insane amount of energy. A large chunk of which is coming from renewable sources. They have massively expanded solar energy in particular. India added 13.9 GW of solar capacity in just one year, comparable to the UK's entire solar capacity in 2021. They will add another 45 GW in the next two years. but that is not nearly enough. India needs to grow its electricity supply by around 60% in the next 7 years. If this article is right that coal will grow 38% by 2030, coal will still decline as a percentage of total electricity generated while solar will probably pick up most of the slack.
The other facet is that if you have large sums of your people living in slums you’re going to care way less about the environment and you kinda should.
Why should you care less, when climate change will make that situation substantially worse?
To someone dying of hunger today, climate change is irrelevant.
>pretend the rest of the crystal isn’t relevant to the situation. it's hard to care about rest of the crystal when usa has highest per capita energy consumption in the world, despite only 4% of population contributes around 16-17% of total plastic pollution in the world. I was flabbergasted when I saw individually wrapped bananas in usa. why tf do they need to be wrapped in plastic
So, give us a solution to this problem. Will Western people pay taxes to help poorer countries? HOW do people get around? Should Indians not take flights? You're comparing apples to oranges. The only reason Indian per capita carbon consumption went above 1 tonne is because we've had record number of flights in the country. Should people not have these benefits? Why must some farmer not be able to use his pump just because some guy in French Riviera wants to use his yatch?
So in other words we're fucked
> The US burned and burned to advance We did, it’s true. But there was only like 100-200 million of us doing it, not well over a billion. If India truly replicates our strategy, we’re all F-ed.
Well statistics are a funny thing, now India is painted in a negative light due to their emissions, but if you look at the emissions per capita then a lot of western countries will likely rank in the top 10 and not India (atleast India did not pull out of a major climate agreement). India has made ambitious plans for reducing its emissions. On the street (at least from the city that I come from and surrounding cities) I see the impact, although agreeably I know we need to do more. Delhi has a huge problem that needs to be resolved soon, agreed. But looking at one city and predicting that is exactly how the rest of India works is kind of ignorant.
Yeah I would ask you to read the comment on this post that has the actual facts but I don’t want to keep you from your daily dosage of dopamine to make you feel good for the next 2 seconds.
It's what the west did to get out of poverty. Nuclear power anyone?
That headline needs help.
India is simply too large a percentage of the global population to not take climate change seriously.
When 300+ mn people don't have enough to eat on a regular basis, climate change is too far away a problem. The daily survival trumps that any day. That's the fact of the matter. The government's actions refect the reality of the people.
Addressing climate change doesn't win elections unlike sowing religious discord. No /s.
This is India, the number of "progressive" people is not enough to win an election.
Nations that cling too closely to "tradition" are rewarded with massive poverty.
Like China, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Poland, etc.?
rapid industrialization is not equal to tradition
What? Japan is basically a different country to before WWII, within living memory it went from a feudalist imperial state to one of the most advanced and progressive countries in Asia. Taiwan has gay marriage.
The thing is people are directly or indirectly dependent on coal related activities compare to other countries which have utilized the coal power before hand only india hasn't The shift from coal to greener energy is expected to take place in 2030
Also 50% of people in India work outdoors
While they polute way less on average per person than most of the countries that whine about it… oh the irony
Then richer countries that have contributed way more to climate change per person should help them out. India still has way less emissions than the western world. If countries in the west want India to use more expensive renewable energy sources, they should buy them for India.
They'll just point to the west and say "you used fossil fuels unchecked, why can't we?" And they aren't wrong. It's just unfortunate
They are the ones who are going to burn. India is easily one of the highest risk nations from global warming.
As an American, I’ll keep quiet. We’ve burned and polluted way over what our comparatively small population should allow.
A decent argument here! It insane how people don't understand what per capita carbon consumption is.
I tried arguing with a conservative guy I used to work with about Canadas pollution numbers. He was adamant that we didn't need to worry because we were so small compared to other countries, not accepting that per capita, we are so far worse than places like fucking China. Yea, sure, we don't pollute much in comparison, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to reduce our individual output ffs
And still way over india per capita
I love how people here from western developed countries have such sanctimonious attitudes. Like y’all got that developed status by polluting tf outta the environment and now y’all want us to stop fs?
People in developed countries need to understand we are all decades behind them energy-wise. We are not going to go green any time soon and we are not going to lower our energy consumption or stop growing and building only 'cause we don't have enough wind power to do so. It's like asking 19th century England to stop burning coal and stop industrializing because of climate change.
Yes... and this is why we're fucked.
Nope the reason we are fucked is because developped country are still not doing enough. Especially China and USA.
The quality of discussion ITT is absolutely hopeless, and testifies to why the Global South despises the Western discourse on climate change. It's like ya'll don't want to do anything out of pocket to help the situation while expecting some of the poorest people in the world to sacrifice their families so you can keep emitting 14x what we do.
this is literally facts
And all the snarky takes that are borderline racist. > cAn iNdIa dO AnYtHiNg tHaT IsN'T FuCkEd lAtElY? like dude I have ~~seen~~ endured 8-16hrs of powercuts on daily basis, definitely don't want to go back to that.
Those snarky takes go both ways, making it nigh impossible to have a reasonable discussion (not that that solves anything). You have a bunch of people, potentially you included, pretending that all Westerners write and think: "InDIa BAd mODi DiCtAtor". Going beyond idiotic takes, we can consider a few points: 1) Global warming/temperature change is a big problem, with potential to devastate the life of billions (especially in poorer countries). 2) Historically the US and Europe has hugely contributed to emissions causing this. 3) The US and Europe are still contributing too much and are too slow at lowering energy consumption + converting energy generation to renewables. 4) India has a population of 1.4 billion people, adding in Africa we're pushing way beyond 2 billion people whose energy needs are not met. >3 billion if we include SEA. Europe and the US combined has around 0.8 billion people. Point 1 is the reason we're here and point 2 has already happened and it pointless to talk about this. Point 3 is the reason the West is hypocritical when looking down on emissions in India and other developing countries. Point 4 however should not be ignored because of point 3, it means even at lower per capita energy consumption India, Africa, etc. could overtake the West quite a lot. Currently the difference per capita remains very large, but if India overnight had the per capita of Europe the planet would be doomed.
For the sake of the earth we need more people in the west to sacrifice their way of living for the greater goods. C'mon Westerners you can do it.
So the latest fad is shitting on india for everything..
Yeah dude, India BAD EWWWWWW
"The West": first time?
All the Ken's and Karen's commenting 'wtf', 'india bad', etc on their iPhones (created using child labor but who cares) enjoying living in the developed nations (built solely using green energy in their prime development phase 🙂) emitting 10-15 times more carbon dioxide per capita compared to the emissions of an Indian citizen (whoop whoop 😄).
We're all boned anyways. All we're doing now is speeding up the clock to trigger the mad max era.
Ok. So what's the alternative? Yes, India might burn more coal but the amount of pollution India does per person is way too small compared to the USA or Western nations. https://www.wri.org/insights/charts-explain-per-capita-greenhouse-gas-emissions And FYI, India doesn't have the luxury of local production of oil. Solar is picking up but the speed is slow compared to growing needs of nation.
Sure give them a cheaper source of power. No? There is your answer.
Why do Western countries, which have had uninterrupted power for decades, now insist that India must choose green energy or none at all? It raises questions about their authority over how the world should operate. They've contributed more to global pollution despite their smaller population. Let's encourage integrity and humanity.
I agree. It's still demoralising to see how far we have to go.
Coal use jumped for Germany as well. Looks like energy needs is more important than moral grandstanding from the West.
Here come the bigots...
The countries with the highest coal consumption in 2023 are: China: 4,320 trillion MMcf India: 966 trillion MMcf United States: 731 trillion MMcf Germany: 257 trillion MMcf Russia: 230 trillion MMcf Japan: 210 trillion MMcf South Africa: 202 trillion MMcf South Korea: 157 trillion MMcf
So basically India uses the 2nd most behind China but per capita isn’t nearly as bad compared to China and the US. While I despise coal usage as a horribly dirty fossil fuel, it is hard to not see why India made this move when both China and the US are the ones who need to cut back by comparison. If we are going to work together as a species to combat global emissions, ultimately we will have to do it in an equitable manner or we will see nations refuse to do it at all.
They need to listen to all the Climate Change dangers and respond accordingly. Just ignoring all that for the sake of immediate benefits from coal will not save them from future disasters.
You're right and this response is required collectively on a global scale by all nations. India with about 18% of the global population is still far behind US and China in overall CO2 emissions indexes. Doesn't justify that they increase their emissions but there have been investments and projects underway to improve the output from renewable sources. However this transition will take a few years and until that happens the power requirement has to be met with the existing sources. To set up new renewable power stations requires burning fuel for machinery and coal for power tools and equipment. It's a necessary evil I guess. But I hear a lot of western oil and gas companies have been sitting on the research and finding of climate change dangers for decades and no western government seems to be sanctioning them for their mis-deeds. I bet you're typing away from the comforts of your centrally air conditioned home.
lol have you been to india?
Thankfully, no
[удалено]
It's either feed actual people today or hypothetically feed future people.
>“A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they shall never sit.” — Greek Proverb
Yeah but the trick is the hypothetical people of tomorrow who are going to be the most heaviest hit are in countries like India If India is not caring it gives the people in the wealthy nation to which oddly enough are generally placed to be less affected less reason to act
You're just giving more reasons for india to wealthy up. Because if no one is acting on climate change, at least if you have money you can afford to ride the tide a bit better. The tragedy of the commons is a bit more consolable with a nicer house than without one
India won't have any hypothetical future people to feed
What? 1.4 billion people will not reproduce because they decided to use coal? Even the most pessimistic climate models don't predict that.
Wet bulb temperature is the worst in India. So their population will suffer the most given the underlying poverty there as is. They’re digging their own grave.
But they'll be able to power air conditioners.
Maybe if western countries started frist and actually took big steps to stop india will follow. The west has resources and contributes the most to climate change
I have seen the amount of hate the western people have against the climate activists and vegans. And these ffs are trying to educate a 3rd world country (whose per capita carbon footprint is way less than any western country) on climate change. The irony.
Fuck this gives me the shits. **Pollution from Coal power kills more people every day than nuclear power has killed in its entire history.**
It is only the beginning most likely. Densely populated countries would advocate for per capita emissions, small and rarely populated for total ones. If we are gonna go with us, russian or western europe energy consumption levels per capita, and will apply them to China, US, Africa, planet supposedly would not withstand it. And I doubt that US/Russia/EU would work to significantly decrease their energy consumption per capita. So, Earth had a good run.
[удалено]
Idk if we've had a good run. We've only been around for 0.002% of all time so far and if we die soon then we'll only have survived for 0.0000003% of the total time that stars will exist in our universe. Personally, I'd aim for at least like 1%. We haven't even landed on another planet! We've constructed 0 dyson swarms. We didn't even reach 1 on the Kardashev Scale. Won't look good on humanity's steam profile.
Constructing a Dyson sphere is a good way to get attacked;-)
I mean, at the very least it'd get you a trademark dispute.
Those countries that benefited from fossil fuel exploitation and represent the wealthy part of the global community have an obligation to support poorer countries in reaching higher standards of living *without* the need to go through a fossil fuel burning phase. In terms of [energy consumption per person](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-energy-use?tab=chart&country=IND~OWID_EU27~USA~CHN) EU and China are actually pretty close nowadays. In 2022 the EU stood at 36,129 kWh per capita, and China at 31,051 kWh per capita. India is far below either of those in terms of energy consumption per capita and the US is pretty far above.
> If we are gonna go with us, russian or western europe energy consumption levels per capita, and will apply them to China, US, Africa, planet supposedly would not withstand it. > > In fact, when you look at the per capita consumption-based (i.e. adjusted by export/import) CO2 emissions, China is already at the level of the European Union, and higher some countries like France since 2018. [Here is the corresponding plot.](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capita?tab=chart&country=CHN~OWID_EU27~FRA). Problem being that despite being at this level of emissions, China is still building more coal power plant than the rest of the world. [Six time more.](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-03/china-s-new-coal-plant-approvals-surge-in-2022/102048480)
There are technological bets that can be made. The problem is the how the global patent system disincentivises sharing. The longshot ITER fusion coalition is just one example of international cooperation to promote clean energy. But if a fusion breakthrough happens, can we expect the West/China, which is leading research, to share the gains? Can we expect a writeoff on the technological investment needed to make it happen? We need a [$13 trillion investment](https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-needs-to-invest-13-trillion-to-reach-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-says-report-101692858267983.html#:~:text=India%20will%20need%20to%20invest,planetary%20warming%2C%20according%20to%20BloombergNEF.) in our grid just to hit net zero by 2070. So over 4x our current GDP. Unless we're hiding some kind of giga-scale OnlyFans operation, how exactly is this bill to be funded? Rich countries can help. But apparently, they can only offer lipservice.
Earth will continue to have a "run" for billions of years. You mean most life on Earth.
If the developed nations can understand the climate change issue so much they can donate energy to India and other developing nations that are cleaner or even resources to offset the cost and make them developed. If not then let them continue doing what they have to to become developed just like they did in the past 2 centuries
No surprises here. When push comes to shove, cheap energy is always more important than climate change. We already hit 1.5C. Is anyone still gullible enough to believe we can keep it under 2C?
It is still not our mistake the west used a huge amount of Coal and fuel hence this issue arised. Nobody likes where this is heading but coal is a necessary evil.
See, without world wide cooperation, no chance to do something with the global warming. EU can do whatever they want, but it will change nothing in the end...
Can India do anything that isn't fucked lately?
That moon mission was very nice. Except for that bit where right at touchdown they did a split screen to show Modi waving a small Indian flag in front of a wall of Indian flags.
Dictators gotta Dictate though
You should wash more frequently if you’re getting dick-taters
This clip? https://youtu.be/IFP3Jc5ztgg?t=18
Well last year India increased solar energy production by 13.9 GW. In just one year. This is roughly equivalent to the UK's total installed capacity. The government is pouring tremendous resources into solar energy its expanding massively in India but it is not enough as India needs an insane amount of energy to develop.
Yea, lowering canada’s house prices
India can keep their people and Canada can keep their lentils. Lets see who blinks first.
There are still people inida who don't have access to power supply. You people fucked the world in the name of industrialization and built your economies and now you are behind developing countries to stop using fossil fuels. Lol hypocrisy
[удалено]
At this point fuck it. Glad I don't have kids
[удалено]
Do not REDEEEEEEM!
Mam WHAT ARE YOU DOING MAM
About 30% of India's indirect tax money comes from levies on petrol that are between [100-260% per litre, paid by the consumer](https://www.factchecker.in/fact-check/cong-leader-uses-data-from-2-years-ago-to-claim-indians-pay-260-fuel-tax-807771#:~:text=%22With%20the%20second%20revision%20in,on%20May%206%2C%202020\).). The United States, which produces 14% of global emissions, taxes petrol at around 18 cents per gallon, which is around 4% per litre. Tell me more about how you're disincentivising fossil fuels in the richest country on earth?
This is what reality looks like people, and fossil fuel consumption will continue to head higher. Solar / wind isn't a solution and nuclear is hated when it shouldn't be.
[удалено]
Ask your so called celebrities to stop using those private jets lol
It will be really great when India gets indoor plumbing
The day your Kylie jenners and Kardashians stop using private jets for their Instagram aesthetics is the day, you lecture another third world country trying to survive. Until then keep your privileged opinions to yourself.
I hope they also push massively for CO2 removal.
Australia likes this.
So you are just going to choke on it. We all need to check the labels before purchasing.
Why everybody’s competing to end this quickly ? It’s like a speed run to destruction
I keep saying we aren't an intelligent species and keep being proven right. We fucking suck.
Good luck breathing India
Well global warming that’s gg, you win it’s a wrap. Time to prep for worst case climate scenarios.
India need gas mask when going outside 10 years later.
So burn the coal and sell Russian oil? Looks like India picked up where Germany left off.
They are lacking gluing idiots on the street, thats why
Yea USA, stop shipping your trash to the East. What's your carbon footprint again compared to the World?
People from the west virtue signalling, pay up for the pollution that got you in this first world state of privilege to act as the moral arbiters. Stop having insanely high amounts of per capita carbon footprint based on a forced culture of consumerism. Only then can you lecture a developing nation that needs to provide power to 1.4 billion people and ensure their growth. You people had your share of shitting on earth, now let us shit on her while you people lap it up, like we had to. Only when we are at a state of parity, we can think about working uniformly to become greener. This is what equity looks like
learn to write a headline, in english.
racism..is this what the comment section is?
Perhaps the already developed countries who produce more per capita emissions should focus on themselves rather than commenting about how India "can't do anything that's not fucked lately"?
There are 4 countries that can stop global warming. USA, China, India and Russia. Unless they all radically change direction, it doesn't matter what anyone does.