Introduction
Recently, the IPCC released its sixth assessment report, according to which a global net zero was the optimum requirement to keep the temperature not rise by, beyond 1.5 degree Celsius by 2050. Numerous countries have declared their goals to achieve net zero emissions by the middle of this century. These include major emitters like the United States, China and the European Union. India, however, chose to be silent about her plans to turn net-zero. India has always been a formidable figure in the fight against climate change and is known as a significant contributor in global policy against climate havocs. The global pressure on India to commit to net zero target is increasing as not only have all the major developed countries in this world implemented it in order to reverse the bane of climate change but also because the path of zero emission would result in avoiding a lock-in to long-term fossil fuel assets by focusing on green infrastructure and sustainable investment as a potential for a new economic growth framework. However, the real question that is in front of us is whether the path of adopting zero emission really feasible for India, considering the numerous hurdles that the country faces with respect to implementation of the same. While India would have to deal with the issues like key trade-offs involving rising power costs for residential energy usage, rising railway passenger ticket prices, budgetary problems for coal-dependent countries, the loss of occupations of half a million coal miners, as well as altering geopolitics around the trade and transition of energy. On top of that there exist reports which suggest that the targets set by net zero emission plans are vague and need to be amended. This article will not only deal with India’s target for a zero emission but also the hurdles and objections it has towards this plan, and what lies ahead for the nation regarding the same.
Net Zero Target
Net zero target basically means having a balance among the various greenhouse gases and those that have been flushed out of the atmosphere. This will put an end to the emission of greenhouse.
gases from fossil fuels but we would have to continue to withstand the effects of the gases that we have been releasing all these years.
The general sentiment that was adopted in the United Nations was to set a limit for global warming from 2 °C, ideally to 1.5 °C. The proposed zero emission target has four alternative possibilites: 2030 peak–2050 net-zero, 2030 peak–2060 net-zero, 2040 peak–2070 net-zero, and 2050 peak–2080 net-zero. The primary indicator for the world in 2050, has to take in consideration in reductions in the intensity of GDP emissions, the percentage of electric cars, and the percentage of renewable energy used in every situation. Among other characteristics, carbon capture and storage with and without (CCS) is to be noted too. While leaders from across the world have given their word to mitigate greenhouse-gas emissions in the later part of this century, so that the total amount of greenhouse gases released by human activity is zero it is yet to be seen how the plan turns out when implemented. Thus, for the targets to be fulfilled, the scope, their practicality as well as concrete road maps for the target of net zero are ought to be presented. It is the duty of the countries to inform which emissions and green-house gases have been placed in its ambit of ‘target’ and check if the intention is to mitigate, eliminate or counterbalance the emissions. Although Paris-compatible pathways use a mix of three measures to achieve net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions, including quick and significant CO2 reductions, further deep non-CO2 greenhouse-gas reductions, and a scaling up of CO2 removal strategies. One pertinent issue that still plagues the world, is that Net-zero goals that were established using measures other than GWP-100, transfer the mitigation load across gases, and therefore among industries and nations to avoid their responsibilities. Giving methane less weight would make it simpler for nations with significant agricultural emissions to proclaim net zero emissions. This, nevertheless, would result in additional global warming until other nations, mostly those with CO2 emissions, agree to achieve net zero soon.
Therefore, we see that strategies on climate change are a win–win situation, although emissions targets are a zero-sum simulation. When one nation does little, the others need to do a lot, to attain the same global temperature, making this path less approachable for everyone.
India’s Issues with 2050 Net Zero Target
It would be unjust, as per the authors, to expect a developing country like India to make equally severe commitments as those of developed nations. Before setting 2050 as a deadline for all countries to be net-zero, it must be considered how nations with varying degrees of economic growth would achieve net-zero at the same time. Can India's per capita energy usage, which is a third of the global average, be compared to the developed worlds? Countries must achieve their peak emissions before reaching net-zero. If the world expects all countries to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, then the industrialized countries should achieve net-zero emissions considerably sooner, maybe by 2030, because many have already reached their limit. As many as 13 nations from the G20 (which account for 85 percent of carbon emissions) surpassed their peak emissions, ranging from 1990-2017.
Undoubtedly, the advent of new economic possibilities and technology will alter the scene considerably for India, and there may be room for a net-zero declaration. But considering the present situation, locking ourselves onto a strict net-zero target may be fatal for the country’s domestic development. A commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by the mid-century of 2050 might hinder India's carefully constructed momentum toward low-carbon growth. It might create domestic political disagreements on carbon reductions-based policies, which have allowed significant progress toward a clean energy transition till now. India's emissions are expected to grow fastest in the world over the next 20 to 30 years, driving higher growth to save hundreds of millions of people from poverty.
No amount of afforestation or reforestation could offset the increase in emissions. Further, most carbon removal techniques today are either unreliable or very expensive. In this scenario, making a promise of net zero target by mid century may boost global momentum but it runs the danger of being a false bowing to global demands.
The net zero target is not addressed in the 2015 Paris Agreement, , the global framework for combating climate change, which was signed in 2015. The only requirement of the Paris Agreement is that signatories pursue the best feasible climate action. Countries must set climate targets and demonstrate progress toward them. Each following timeline's goal should be more ambitious than the one before it. The majority of nations have submitted objectives for the years 2025-2030. Instead of holding a separate conversation on net zero objectives outside of the Paris Agreement, India believes that framework nations should focus on delivering on what they have already agreed.
India is leading the way in terms of delivering on its commitments under the Paris Agreement. India is the only G-20 countries whose climate policies are in line with the Paris Agreement's aim of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius. No major nation has reached its Kyoto Protocol emissions reduction target, the climate policy that preceded the Paris Agreement. Some even publicly abandoned the Kyoto Protocol with no repercussions. Far fewer nations have kept their 2020 commitments. Although some countries are already legally committed, the vow to be carbon neutral by 2050 might face a similar fate. Instead, developed nations should adopt more ambitious climate action to make up for earlier missed pledges, while developing countries like India should carefully choose a target that they can achieve in practise.
Way Forward
India's climate policy must be defined in a way that addresses diplomatic, developmental, and climatic concerns all at the same time. Current suggestions for a commitment of net-zero emissions by 2050, particularly if enshrined in law, would certainly gain us diplomatic favor, but may jeopardize our development prospects, and, possibly, may not speed up our transition to a low-carbon future in practice. India has a chance to take the lead by being bold and focusing on immediate, tangible steps backed by credible institutions, with long-term promises, net-zero or otherwise, as a supporting element. Zero net targets can enable us to better assess at a glance what countries say they will do. But for maximizing the country’s contribution towards climate action, It may be necessary to forego the simplicity of Net zero's promises and allow more differentiated formulations that take into account the political and economic conditions of the country.
The post is authored by Nilabhro Bhattacharya and Harshita Dixit, second-year and third-year students at the Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab, respectively.
コメント