By Somit Dasgupta & Diya Dasgupta
On January 11, 2021, the Executive Director of the International Energy Agency (IEA) issued a statement announcing the release of a roadmap to attain net zero by 2050. While the IEA aims at delivering an all-encompassing strategy, it may well not be in a position to totally capture nation-particular challenges, specially due to the fact nations have distinctive emission levels, distinctive levels of renewable generation and, above all, distinctive levels of financial improvement. So, one cannot adopt a one-size-fits-all strategy. Incidentally, more than one hundred nations have currently declared their purpose of becoming net zero emitters by 2050 and, separately, some cities/corporations have also announced the exact same intent.
In addition, some estimates indicate that more than 1,000 corporations have announced becoming net zero by 2050 and numerous more are anticipated to adhere to suit prior to COP26, to be held in Glasgow towards the finish of 2021. In truth, some of the more enterprising corporations have decided to minimize their ‘legacy emissions’ as nicely, which includes having rid of previous cumulative emissions that the corporation(ies) may well have emitted.
Now, what is net zero? While there is no regular definition of net zero, the broad understanding is that it includes a mixture of approaches targeted at minimizing and removing emissions. The thought is to retain a balance in between greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions developed and removed from the atmosphere. The truth that more than one hundred nations have announced their net zero ambitions puts some sort of stress on India, specially when China as well has declared that it would grow to be a net zero economy by 2060. This is not to say that all nations that have declared net zero ambitions are really working towards it.
Under the Paris Agreement, all nations have been to submit their revised Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) in 2020, bringing in stiffer targets than what they had set out for themselves in 2015. It is reported that about 71 nations have currently submitted their revised INDCs (January 2021), but only a handful of of them have introduced stiffer targets, although not necessarily net zero complaint. India and a one hundred other signatories are however to submit their revised INDCs.
The moot point is irrespective of whether India is in a position to declare that it as well would turn net zero by the middle of this century or a handful of years soon after that. To fully grasp that, one has to initially familiarise oneself with the macro image as far as emissions are concerned. To do so, one can rely on the information out there in the Second Biennial Update Report (BUR) ready by India in 2018, providing information till 2014. No doubt, the information is old, although it can nonetheless be relied on provided the truth that in terms of ratios absolutely nothing substantially would have changed. The BUR mentions that India emitted about 1.99 gigatonnes (GT) of carbon dioxide (CO2) in 2014.
The biggest share of CO2 emissions is accounted for by electrical energy production (54%), followed by manufacturing industries and building (25%) and transport (12%). While India emitted 1.99 GT of CO2 in 2014, it emitted other GHGs as nicely like methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases. The combined impact of all GHGs was equivalent to possessing about 2.6 GT of CO2 (as against pure CO2 of 1.99 GT) in the atmosphere. Though the quantum of other gases compared to CO2 is minimal, they are far more lethal in terms of their capacity to make atmospheric temperature rise. Going by the information provided in the BUR (2014), although the quantum of methane in GHG (in gigagrams) is only about 1% (exactly where CO2 is 98%), it is 21 occasions more potent than CO2 when it comes to worldwide warming.
The CO2 emissions that have been 1.99 GT in 2014 are estimated at about 2.3 GT in 2019 (IEA). Even if one focuses only on CO2, India will have to locate strategies and implies to absorb this higher dose of CO2, which is not feasible at present. In 2014, the total sink that was out there was only about .3 GT. Sinks are processes that absorb CO2, the plant kingdom being the very best instance. Considering the truth that coal nonetheless accounts for a small more than 70% of our standard energy generation and also maintaining in thoughts that our peak demand happens at 8:00 pm when there is no solar energy, we have no option but to continue with coal-based generation for numerous years to come. Even batteries, although their capital expenses have gone down by 80% for the duration of the final 10 years, can’t provide economically-viable storage for more than 4 hours. Similarly, in the transport sector, 90% is accounted for by road transport, which implies burning of fossil fuels. Besides, our penetration of electric automobiles is minuscule.
The only way India can turn net zero is by removing CO2 utilizing carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. CCS refers to capturing CO2 from point sources, transporting it to preselected areas and storing it underground. CCS technologies is absolutely nothing new and has been identified due to the fact 1938. The initially plant came about in the 1970s in the US, which had a capacity of removing 1.4 million tonnes (MT) of CO2 per year. Today, there are about 19 big CCS plants (like two plants in the energy sector, although one has due to the fact been mothballed getting economically unviable) and their combined capacity is about 40 MT of CO2 per year.
CCS is an incredibly high-priced technologies and it has a host of other challenges like acquiring possible reservoirs for storage possessing steady geological atmosphere, low seismic activity, and so on. Given the higher expenses involved, there is virtually no demand for CCS technologies. Some reduction in capital expenses, even so, has been observed as described in the Global CCS Report (2019), which states that the expense of capturing carbon has decreased from $one hundred per tonne of CO2 at the Boundary Dam facility (Canada) to $65 per tonne of CO2 at the Petra Nova facility (the US) more than a span of 3 years.
The story of CCS is mainly a chicken-and-egg story. Developers of the technologies will only venture into the field when there is enough demand, and the flip side is that demand will only develop when expenses are low. It is only the government that can break this impasse by investing in CCS technologies, at least for a handful of demonstration units. The government of India has a big presence in the energy sector, which in any case accounts for about 54% of the emissions and, hence, it is right here exactly where the action ought to originate.
The government ought to recognize centrally-owned producing stations that nonetheless have enough life and set up CCS units in these plants. Other emitting sectors, such as industrial, transport and agricultural, are dominated by private enterprise that, of course, do not have the implies to invest in this technologies. Initial government investment may well trigger a fall in capital expenses, which may well lead to additional adoption of the technologies. Finally, it would not be out of spot to mention that the very best way to market this technologies would be to make it a component-and-parcel of the INDCs, which would have assured rapid percolation at decreased expense due to economies of scale.
Somit is former member, CEA, and senior going to fellow, ICRIER Diya is study assistant, ICRIER