
Can India modernize without relying heavily on coal? - nkurz
http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/542091/indias-energy-crisis/
======
afarrell
> to the planned construction of an ultra-deepwater natural-gas pipeline
> across the Arabian Sea, from Iran to India’s west coast.

Pakistan's exclusive economic zone extends 370km (200 nautical miles) from its
coastline except where it runs into another nation's EEZ. Given that the
distance from the easternmost coastline of Iran to Oman is 340km, this
pipeline is going to have to run through Pakistan's exclusive economic zone
unless they take great pains to stay within Oman's and then run out past the
continental shelf. Even then, I would be shocked if Pakistan's navy lacked the
ability to cut a pipeline that was only 400km off its shores. That doesn't
seem like a prospect that would make any of the three countries happy.

~~~
g8oz
For decades there have been continued, sporadic albeit unsuccessful attempts
to get a land based pipeline for Iranian gas built supplying both Pakistan and
India. The idea of India paying transit fees to Pakistan for the gas is well
established. The hold up is in other aspects of the effort. Furthermore
according to Wikipedia:

 _" As there are concerns over the pipeline being attacked by Baluchi
insurgents, an alternative offshore route from Iran to the maritime boundary
between India and Pakistan off Kutch was proposed. According to this proposal,
from there one branch was to run to Pakistan while other branch to run to
Kutch"._ So Pakistan is already part of these discussions around a underwater
pipeline.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Pakistan_gas_pipeline](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Pakistan_gas_pipeline)

------
shripadk
This article is very informative but at the same time heavily biased towards
the opinions of Jairam Ramesh who happens to be a member of the Indian
National Congress (the party that lost power in 2014 after a 10 year misrule
in India). For instance he says “We cannot afford to say, ‘We’re going to have
25 years of 8 percent GDP growth, then do a cleanup act later.’”. This is
wrong on multiple fronts. The GDP of India was at 8.5% during the NDA rule
(1998-2004) and after the INC came to power the GDP tumbled to an abysmal
5.3%. After NDA came back to power in 2014, the GDP is now up to 7.4% which is
in itself an impressive feat. If this continues, we'll be seeing a GDP of 12%
with some reports (Centre for Economics Business and Research (CEBR), United
Kingdom) even projecting India to become the 3rd largest economy by 2030 right
behind US and China. But obviously this is something the opposition (INC)
doesn't want to acknowledge.

The Village of Modern India is not the same as Ancient times. Today people
live in villages not by choice but out of necessity. The high cost of living
in the cities coupled with high rate of unemployment forces this large chunk
of the population to live in slums and villages. India is poised to have, via
the Smart Cities Mission lead by Narendra Modi, 100 smart cities (with some
already in the pipeline: Dholera SIR in Gujarat
([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOFpWFLSqgU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOFpWFLSqgU))
and Amravathi in Andhra Pradesh) and rejuvenation of 500 others in the next 15
years which would facilitate movement of the unemployed population from
villages/slums to these Smart Cities. We have seen this happen, for example,
during the real estate boom in Bangalore, where entire population of some
villages in North Karnataka moved to Bangalore because of employment
opportunities in the construction sector. This will put less pressure on the
power companies to supply power to the remotest corners of India when it's
population relocates more and more towards cities.

~~~
pm90
That is an interesting point. It seems similar to when the rural workforce of
the US transformed into an urban middle-class (before transforming into the
suburban-middle class). It seems like in India, this transformation (and the
resulting prosperity) was stunted by the inability of Indian cities to
accommodate this kind of population transfer.

~~~
shripadk
Absolutely! Once the cities are able to accommodate population by providing
employment opportunities the burden on providing power, water and other basic
amenities to remote villages reduces freeing up the Government to focus on
reforms in other sectors. Luckily we have a Government today that works
towards this goal.

------
trhway
Russia and India has recently signed up a pretty big deal for a bunch of
nuclear plants. Though this of course is just lesser (in the current partial
order over the set of current alternatives) evil. India has major share of
world's thorium, so once somebody learn how to use it (unfortunately Russia
who has been long-term India' partner in nuclear is of no help here) it would
be a big boost for India.

Of course, the developed world, if they took heads out of their bottoms, would
be just installing solar panels in India like crazy and on their own dime just
to avoid India building new coal plants - in the long term it is cheaper to
build solar for somebody than that somebody building coal for themselves.

~~~
civilian
I _think_ you're getting downvoted for implying nuclear is evil.

Let's look at deaths per kW of different power sources!
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-
de...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-
price-always-paid/)

You'll find that nuclear is the safest option, even when we include Chernobyl
and Fukushima.

Nuclear also has the benefit of being an "always on"\--- wind and solar create
stresses on power grids.

~~~
zodiakzz
I hope this remains true though, Japan has some of the most rigorous safety
regulations but Fukushima still slipped through. Indian government is largely
corrupt, incompetent and not known for following safety precautions. The risk
will be multiplied by every new nuclear plant built there.

~~~
mahranch
> the most rigorous safety regulations but Fukushima still slipped through

The Fukushima plant was overdue for a complete upgrade. The seawall was also
supposed to be raised. It was an ancient 50 year old plant that got hit by not
just one of the largest earthquakes Japan has ever seen, but also a massive,
catastrophic tsunami. The fact that it took all those factors to knock the
plant out gives me great confidence in nuclear power. Newer plants would not
be susceptible to those kinds of issues. Short of a meteor crashing down on
one (or an actual act of God), newer plants are completely safe. Safer, in
fact, than any other.

------
eggman
ah

------
ZeroGravitas
Modernize and coal in the same sentence already seem oxymoronic to me.

~~~
peterjlee
Even in the United States, 39% of the electricity comes from coal. Coal power
plants are one of the cheapest to build and India may not have the luxury to
support their growth with cleaner power plants.
[https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3](https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3)

~~~
chimeracoder
> Even in the United States, 39% of the electricity comes from coal

Exactly. Put another way: the US emits over 9 times as much carbon dioxide per
capita as India does. (The EU is better, but not by much - nearly four times
as much carbon per capita as India).

When the India is already emitting 33% _less_ carbon per capita than the EU
despite having a population that's nearly three times as large, it's a bit
silly to place the burden for global climate impact on a country that's
already doing so well despite struggling to keep the lights on in many towns
(literally).

------
godzillabrennus
Depends. How's that nuclear fusion project coming along in Germany?

------
SatoshiRoberts
India has enough sun and engineers to figure out how to do solar on a massive
scale.

~~~
ams6110
Given that fully developed western countries have not figured it out, why
would you expect that a largely impoverished emerging country will?

~~~
shripadk
Is this your only argument? Because western countries haven't figured it out
no other country can? Do you imply that western countries have exclusive power
over knowledge that is unavailable to other countries? Necessity drives
innovation. Don't forget that! Today the fully developed Western countries
have no necessity to figure out the solutions that are unique to developing
countries who are poised to take over as developed countries of the future.
Once upon a time, the "fully developed countries" of today were developing
countries who faced problems of similar magnitude and tackled them because it
was necessary to do so. Today the "fully developed countries" have no
"necessity" to move to solar on a massive scale but developing countries do.
Don't think even for once that all the innovation happens only in "fully
developed western countries".

~~~
serge2k
I think the argument would be that a country that is trying to modernize a
massive population isn't likely to go the route of spending a massive amount
of money to R&D a new technology when it isn't really _needed_.

It's not that they can't, it's that probably won't.

~~~
shripadk
I disagree. How did you come to the conclusion that we don't need to fix this
problem? Do you live in any developing country?

We are already spending a good amount of money on building solar power grids.
Some portion of that money will be funded by developed countries based on the
deal signed at the COP21 summit (100 billion USD per year). But obviously this
isn't reported in the Western World. Read more about it here:
[http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-why-is-western-media-
so...](http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-why-is-western-media-so-biased-
against-india-2160264)

If anyone will be most affected by Climate change it is going to be India and
neighboring countries. The recent Chennai floods is a grim reminder of the
impact of climate change. Not to mention receding coastline that is impacting
the livelihood of fisherman and causing relocation of villages. Not just India
but even Bangladesh is also being heavily affected by the receding coastline
problem (Read more about it here:
[http://www.academia.edu/4066475/Changing_Face_of_Bangladesh_...](http://www.academia.edu/4066475/Changing_Face_of_Bangladesh_Coast)).
Maldives (another neighbor) won't even exist by 2100 if this continues (read
more about it here: [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/is-it-too-
late-...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/is-it-too-late-to-save-
the-maldives-from-climate-change-and-islamic-extremism-9901424.html)). And you
expect us to work towards modernizing the country by ignoring this imminent
threat? What will be the point of modernization if it's going to be destroyed
by floods or earthquakes?

But is the West concerned about these problems? Obviously not! And we don't
expect you to. This is a problem of the developing nations and we have to find
the solution ourselves. The only help that developing nations asked from the
developed nations in COP21 summit was monetary aid to carry out building the
necessary infrastructure and R&D to tackle this problem and I think we are
headed in the right direction.

