
India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green - scdoshi
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/world/asia/india-coal-green-energy-climate.html
======
L_Rahman
Parts of the theory of disruption - specifically that an entity with less
entrenched structures, can solve problems in more efficient ways - applies to
nation states as well.

When 25% of your country has no electricity at all, you get to imagine parts
of your grid from the ground up. If there's an expectation of load-shedding
and your grid doesn't have to be at a 100% in all places, you have room to
make mistakes. Most importantly, if the renewables aren't replacing but rather
adding to your energy generation capacity, you don't have to fight entrenched
fossil fuel businesses and associated regulatory capture to get started.

In many ways it's similar to how telephony spread in the developing world.
They skipped landlines entirely and went straight to GSM.

I'm terribly excited about renewables in parts of Africa and the rural areas
in South Asia. My family is originally from Bangladesh. The local grid is so
unreliable in rural areas and Chinese solar equipment so cheap that most of my
family members who live in villages just bought a solar installation instead
of waiting around for the utilities to run wiring.

~~~
kornish
> In many ways it's similar to how telephony spread in the developing world.
> They skipped landlines entirely and went straight to GSM.

And also how banking/payment is spreading in Africa: mobile-to-mobile,
skipping credit cards entirely.

~~~
danbolt
I love the elegance and futurism of paying with mobile phones like that, but
do the telephone companies operate in a similar manner to financial
institutions there?

For instance, if I deposit money, do I receive interest? What happens to my
funds if the phone company goes bankrupt? Are there similar regulations to
banks?

~~~
orasis
When was the last time you earned a noteworthy amount of interest on a bank
deposit?

~~~
kartickv
Not many in India would see things the way you do. Why lose interest if you
can get it, particularly if you don't have more interest coming in from mutual
funds or someplace else? If anything, the competition is on to see who'll pay
more interest. One payments bank announced 7%:
[http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/personal-
finance-...](http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/personal-finance-
news/airtel-payments-bank-offers-7-25-interest/articleshow/56512588.cms)

~~~
Retric
What's the post inflation adjusted interest rate? Because simply moving your
money to a low inflation currency does the same thing.

 _The only catch is that the payments banks, which do not offer loans and
several other facilities offered by full fledged rivals, are not allowed to
accept deposits beyond Rs 1 lakh in bank accounts, which will have the same
number as your mobile number. Bharti Airtel chairman Sunil Bharti Mittal said
that the higher interest rate and freebies such as life insurance of up to Rs
1 lakh was an "introductory offer" and the rates would go down in a falling
interest rate environment_

Ahh, nm. This is just a fixed amount of cash they hand you for switching banks
not a full time interest rate.

~~~
kartickv
Moving money to a low inflation currency sounds good in theory, but is not an
accessible solution to the average Indian, and is fraught with bureaucracy and
fees even for those it is accessible to. I put my money in a liquid fund (debt
mutual fund) to earn 8% nominal interest rate. That's a much more practical
solution than moving it to dollars, say.

Airtel's offer may be temporary, and interest rates rarely go to 7%, but the
point is that there's always a competition on interest rates.

India's inflation and nominal interest rates are both higher, which means you
lose more if you forgo interest. In a hypothetical country with 5% inflation
and a 5% interest rate, if you forgo interest, you lose 5% every year. In a
country with 2% inflation and 2% interest rate, you lose only 2%.

------
andrewwharton
Ha! Try telling this to the current Australian government...

The current narrative is that India desperately needs coal and our coal is the
cleanest, so we need to dig it up [1] and sell it to them to help fight
climate change, because otherwise they're going to get 'dirtier' coal from
somewhere else. If you disagree, then you believe that Indians don't deserve
electricity.

And this isn't a strawman, this is almost verbatim what's being said in
Parliament. The cognitive dissonance with our current PM is strong.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmichael_coal_mine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmichael_coal_mine)

~~~
fellellor
India imports a huge amount of coal from Australia because of local
restrictions on mining, by the way. Otherwise we have one of the largest coal
reserves on the planet.

Digging up coal to fight climate change is just silly, and I doubt that flies
anywherre.

~~~
tankenmate
The normal industry name for lower quality coal is "brown coal" (the most
common type is lignite, which actually has a brown colour), and higher quality
coal is "black coal". For coal used for steel making / coking has to be purer
so low sulphur black coal is the only option.

~~~
fellellor
This may be true to some extent, but a significant amount of noise was
generated because of the previous government refusing to issue mining
clearances for coal. I think a number of private companies had laid out
infrastructure to use brown coal after the energy reforms by the Vajpayee
government.

------
pvsukale3
I am a young Indian. I have a dream . The dream that we are running electric
vehicles. We have banned plastic everywhere. We have stopped burning our
garbage. We have improved air quality. I think we can start with auto-rikshaws
and public transport. Auto rickshaw constitute to a lot of traffic and
pollution in the cities. We could replace them with smart electric ones. They
move around only in cities so it won't be a big problem to build charging
infrastructure. Then we could replace buses and increase their number.
Ofcourse we need a lot of subsidies and incentives to make it happen. But it
is POSSIBLE. but I need to build billion dollars companies ,sell them . Then
use all that money to build this dream. I think someone did something like
this in USA right? ;)

~~~
sonink
Auto-rickshaws are already ALL electric in some cities. Haridwar for one.

~~~
rajangdavis
India is a large country.

~~~
pvsukale3
Yeah. But we have got to start somewhere. First we can focus on cities and
then move towards rural India.

~~~
crazystar
50%* of our workforce relies on agriculture. Bringing up their standards of
living i.e. rural India is what we need to focus on first.

*[https://www.ibef.org/exports/agriculture-and-food-industry-i...](https://www.ibef.org/exports/agriculture-and-food-industry-india.aspx)

~~~
pvsukale3
Yeah. I sometimes think about it. The problem is most of the farmers have very
less land. Also they use unsustainable methods and weather has been
inconsistent in recent years. We need another agricultural revolution. But
it's lot more complicated to get people on board. People in the rural area are
really hard to work with ( not all of them ).They suffer , but they don't want
change , they want subsidiaries , free loans. maybe we don't understand them
because we live in the cities.

------
theprop
India is doing pretty well in green energy on the whole! India has the 4th
largest energy generator from wind in the world. India has the largest solar
power plant in the world (Kamuthi in Tamil Nadu). I at least hope that India
is not inclined to return to coal with the US's exit from the Paris accord.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_by_country](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_by_country)
[http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/12/02/india-solar-power-
pl...](http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/12/02/india-solar-power-
plant_n_13352756.html)

~~~
thevardanian
The thing I don't understand is why it's assumed that somehow the Paris Treaty
is somehow enforced, or binding, or that it will even actually improve
conditions more-so than independent initiative.

I personally think that the USA can achieve its goal without the Paris Treaty
through personal responsibility of the states, and independent initiatives
through counties, and cities. That type of independent resolution is necessary
for long term improvement at the grassroots level.

The US, I don't think, can get to the level of European in terms with climate,
unless the US, and its states stop being complacent, and reliant on the
Federal government.

~~~
hibikir
Treaties like this have a big signaling component, just like macroeconomics.
Improvements are perfectly possible without them, but even a toothless treaty
affects all kinds of decisions downstream.

We also take into account that energy production is about large capital
investments that aren't looking at tomorrow, but a decade or two ahead at the
minimum. Building a new coal plant today isn't a bad idea because it'll be way
to expensive to run in its first year, but because it'll be less and less
attractive as time goes by, and will probably have its life cut short.

This is why on one hand, Trump's decisions aren't necessarily that hard
hitting in the long run as long as the people building plants can expect his
decisions today to be a historical aberration. It's the long run trendline
that is important, and we can tell about that by what other stakeholders do.

That said, I'd not put much faith in most states caring about climate change
individually. There's plenty of states that are deep red and where most energy
today still comes from coal, and where candidates don't even bother mentioning
an energy stance: Elections are about protecting religion and policemen and
lower taxes. It's not that the states are relying on the federal government on
the environment: If there's a mention of the environment, it's something like
'The EPA is too tough on our farmers'. This was a real talking point in
Missouri's last election for governor, and guess what? the candidate that was
in favor of letting farmers dump more chemicals into rivers won.

The federal government can force those states to make changes, but they'll
have to be dragged kicking and screaming. It's good to have some states that
lead the charge on this, but it's can't be the main way to do this. If this is
decided state by state, the Midwest will be mostly powering itself with coal
for decades.

~~~
tjr225
As a current Missouri resident - I am getting the heck out of here.

~~~
akg_67
You are not alone. Look into population migration numbers among states.

------
sandGorgon
One of the interesting segments was a feature made by a bearded David
Letterman in Nov 2016 - around the problems with solar panel rooftops in the
USA and the success these have in India.

[https://youtu.be/bW_eGAwnfeI](https://youtu.be/bW_eGAwnfeI)

The point it tries to make is that - the demand exists, the challenge is the
govt and the policy makers.

One other point made in the same video is at the end by Prime Minister Modi -
we need tech transfer from the US. Solar and nuclear . India is probably the
only non-NPT country to be authorised by the US Congress for civilian nuclear
technology sale.

But all bets are off now. One does not know how the current regime will
operate due the "coal is best" rhetoric.

Of course, Tesla might still move to India given the repartee between Anand
Mahindra (of Mahindra motors) and Elon Musk yesterday!

[https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/870570686409920512](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/870570686409920512)

------
jpatokal
Last I checked, the reason India's coal power plants were running at 60% was
not because of lack of demand, but because fixed prices make it uneconomical
to produce coal and the government monopoly Coal India is utterly incompetent
and inefficient even by Indian government standards...

~~~
digital_ins
You should look up the NTPC chairman's explanation for why average PLF runs
below 75%.

Apparently, the transmission & distribution network for evacuation is
overburdened already. This results in plants running below their rated
capacities.

------
xparadigm
Yeah unless India influences corrupt politicians of neighboring countries to
make coal based power plants in neighbouring countries and imports electricity
from those plants. Search "Rampal Power Plant", "greatest mangrove forest of
the planet" etc. Also please see: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-
environment/wp/20...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-
environment/wp/2016/07/18/a-new-power-plant-could-devastate-the-worlds-
largest-mangrove-forest/)

------
Pxtl
One thing I learned on a trip to Kerala is that most people in the region
actually burn their garbage - the government doesn't provide disposal service.
While I'm sure the particulate and chemical emissions of this practice are
awful, I'm curious about this carbon implications.

~~~
matt4077
CO_2 emissions are the same if it goes up in big black smokes of clouds next
to some school, or if it's burned in the best incinerator money can buy, or
even if it's thrown in the ocean and slowly degraded by organic means.

The only thing that makes a difference is recycling.

~~~
rsync
"CO_2 emissions are the same if it goes up in big black smokes of clouds next
to some school, or if it's burned in the best incinerator money can buy"

Is that really true ?

I was under the impression that the very best incinerators (what nordic
countries use for garbage disposal as well as cities like Zurich, etc.) had
carbon capture mechanisms ...

Is that not true ?

~~~
SophosQ
I believe carbon capture is a newer innovation whose development had been
stalled due to its prohibitive costs. The first carbon capture experiments
were scheduled to be conducted in 2016. Albeit I'm not aware of their results.

------
xrange
Anyone know more about India's nuclear story? At one time they were focusing
on thorium. I wonder what we could do to spur on a little more competition
with China.

[http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-
and...](http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-
generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide.aspx)

~~~
threeseed
Nuclear power is such a mess though.

There's the political logistics of getting the fuel, figuring out how and
where to dispose of the fuel, the NIMBY problem with plant locations and the
fact that in general its politically very unpopular.

~~~
xrange
That sounds like it is true for western countries, but China has a lot of
nuclear power coming online, and what are the attitudes in India?

~~~
likelynew
It's the same. While liberal class sees nuclear as future, no one wants a
nuclear plant opened in their city. See:
[http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=...](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=10762102)
for an example

------
Abishek_Muthian
I wonder why NYT conveniently chose to ignore the previous US administration's
WTO complaint on India's local component requirements for solar panels and
it's subsequent verdict against India.

India required US solar panel manufacturers to source cells from locally,
which was challenged by US in WTO and subsequently awarded in it's favour. So
it's not just India is moving forward with green energy in spite of 'unfair-
share' in global climate policies but also moving against the hurdles imposed
specifically targeting it's green energy movements.

~~~
threeseed
They didn't ignore it. It's just irrelevant to the current topic at hand.

India and quite a number of other countries e.g. China play this game all the
time with industries. Look at what Apple went through for example to establish
a presence in India.

~~~
likelynew
Wait. I don't think apple example is relevant here. They already has a very
big share in flagship mobiles(I don't know a better word, say of $500 or
more), I think more so than other countries. The problem is India has very low
share of flagship mobiles. Apple now plans to make the cheaper C models in
India, but nowhere forced to, and given some leivy in manufacturing those
locally.

------
rustoo
As an Indian, I'm really proud to read this. I'm hoping that they strategize
this well and execute it well. India can easily harness wind and solar energy,
create an really strong energy surplus and supply it to neighboring countries.

The whole region can benefit. India can be a beacon of peace and use it to
stabilize the region and become a leader.

------
markaius
I know this is completely beyond the topic, and only relevant in regards to
the website, but, as someone who has been convulsively clicking text while
reading articles his whole life, this site design is absolute garbage. When i
double click text I do not expect the site to interact. Double click in my
world is known for highlighting. Not increasing font size. Sorry, end rant.

~~~
jakob223
I agree about how the site should act, but in my browser (chrome on mac), it
does act the right way.

~~~
markaius
Interesting, I'm using chrome on windows. One thing I also dislike, if I may
keep ranting to the internet, is how much windows has fucked with their
windowing system in W10. For example: I'd be playing a game and something
would cause the game to hang. It happens. But in windows 10 I couldn't even
alt-tab because the focus would never leave the hanging 3d area. Couldn't
control + alt + delete. Couldn't Windows key + tab, or alt + tab. Couldn't
ctrl + shift + esc. Just had to hold the power button down. May I ask you:
when was the last time you had to hold the power button down on your mac?

~~~
MichaelApproved
I'm using Chrome on windows too and it highlights normally on double/triple
click. I think you either have malware on your computer or you have an
extension that is... taking some extra liberties with your browser.

As with all initial debugging steps, try in incognito and see if you have the
same behavior.

------
jklinger410
This seems precisely timed considering how Trump backed out of the Paris
agreements partially because India was allowed to build MORE coal.

~~~
matt4077
There are two reasons why Trump backed out: (a) he enjoys the look of horror
on conscientious' peoples' faces, and (b) it was the only quick "win" with his
hardcore supporters that was available.

It's disingenuous to insist that India should lower their power consumption,
considering they currently consume only 1/15 as much as the US per capita:
[http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC?contex...](http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC?contextual=default)

~~~
threeseed
> it was the only quick "win" with his hardcore supporters that was available

Surprised this isn't being covered more.

This decision is basically it for Trump supporters for the rest of his term.
Everything else e.g. the wall, infrastructure spending, budget cuts, repeal
Obamacare etc. all require Congress who will never have the votes to pass
anything in both Senate and House.

When you think about it he almost for political reasons had to pull out.

------
known
Can you unilaterally walk out of
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarisation_of_space](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarisation_of_space)

------
marze
Certainly not just India, the switch is nearly universal. Some countries are
getting a faster start ditching big polluting coal plants than others. Three
closed yesterday in the US, for instance.

------
NicoJuicy
Renewable energy is all automated and mining is innovation and creates jobs.
India proves this

/s

------
unsupak
Article headline is be misleading, India is still using 54% Coal in its Energy
mix. India is still the top emitter of green house gases in the world.

~~~
xxgreg
China 9,679.30 MtCO2e

US 6,668.79 MtCO2e

India 2,432.18 MtCO2e

2010 figures, so India will be a bit closer the US by now.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions)

------
hueving
India, "still a coal Goliath" is a better description. They burn a massive
amount of coal compared to most countries.

They've just scaled slightly back on a massive coal consumption plan they
implemented in the last few years. Nice, but hardly worth any recognition in
the shadow of the damage they have already done.

~~~
topspin
Indeed. India has a coal glut on their hands. India was opening one new coal
planet every month at the end of 2015. Around the same time India's Arvin
Subramanian coined the term “carbon imperialism" during Paris accord
negotiations because India didn't like the terms.

As expected, much more favorable terms were renegotiated to get India on
board; India now gets to grow their CO2 emission as a function of GDP. A
simple extrapolation of this shows they'll double their already huge CO2
output by the end of the decade, far surpassing the US.

Made the deal a lot easier to sign.

~~~
throwawayjava
_> far surpassing the US_

Why is this a problem? India has 4x the population...

~~~
pkaye
For one, health issues related to air quality have no basis on per capita
pollution.

~~~
fellellor
But air quality degeneration does have a lot of basis on per capita pollution.
The per capita argument was good enough to set the tone at Paris, for an
agreement between all the nations on this planet. The argument against per
capita pollution contribution is just willful ignorance.

Besides, none of you have even bothered to look at the figures. India's
current coal consumption is less than 30% of the US, for a population 4-5
times larger. Even if we double our coal consumption, it wouldn't outstrip US
at their current levels.

~~~
pkaye
> But air quality degeneration does have a lot of basis on per capita
> pollution.

Can you explain to me how this works?

------
robattila128
After watching this talk show with Alex Epstein I've realized the word 'green'
is largely bs.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw-1ohbRDrE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw-1ohbRDrE)

Green doesn't automatically mean better, and dirty does not mean coal and
fossil fuels. It is how the technology is used. He argues alternative energy
leads to deforestation, destruction of habitats, and deaths from vegetable oil
which otherwise could be used to prevent some starvation.If you accept these
things then alternative energy becomes extremely selfish by putting the burden
out of your cities.

It's a good interview I hope you guys check it out.

~~~
matt4077
All methods of power generation involve trade-offs. But this is rather
transparent attempt to muddy the waters. Just one short point because this
idiot doesn't deserve more: Hunger isn't a problem of production. We produce
enough calories to feed the world twice. It's a problem of distribution,
infrastructure, and economics.

