10 ms·

India, Once a Coal Goliath, Is Fast Turning Green

506 points by scdoshi 9y ago

theprop 9y ago
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-plant_n_13352756.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/12/02/india-solar-power-pl...
- X86BSD 9y ago
  Personally, I think the government there is already guilty of criminal neglect in infrastructure in that country, if they go back to coal and petrol, people WILL start dropping like flies from all sorts of issues because of the air quality. It's horrendous now, if they go backwards... ugh. Hopefully Modi is smarter than that.
- thevardanian 9y ago
  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.
  - woodandsteel 9y ago
    Lots of US states are charging ahead on their own. Take California, for example.
    - propman 9y ago
      Texas is the biggest renewable energy producer in USA and almost all is from wind in the last 6 years. Rick Perry the big fossil fuel Republican did this from a $7B unpopular at the time investment into transmission lines from wind heavy areas to highly populated areas. He was criticized heavily, but is the sole reason for 25% of the entire US Wind power capacity He did it for economic reasons and most of the renewable energy produced in the Statss are from red states. We have to invest in transmission lines and continue the PTC if we want to continue being #1 in Wind and these are both bipartisan issues. Just not very important to either party right now
      - sriram_sun 9y ago
        It was 2009. Wind and Renewables were seen as saviors of the economy and a lot of TARP funding was thrown at these kinds of projects as well. http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/10/14/14greenwire-stimulus-cash-flowed-to-completed-under-way-re-95989.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/10/14/14greenwire-stimulus... So I don't think it was all Perry's foresight, but Governers grabbing any funding that was available just to keep the unemployment numbers down.
    - caliagent 9y ago
      I have lived on California my entire life and all we have managed to accomplish were feel good initiatives which made for great PR puff pieces and were quickly shuffled down the road. I remember the first electric car, hailed as a true step forward, that was subsequently killed. Go to Santa Monica beach patrol stations and see all of the failed electric car station plug poles that were sawed off and tossed onto a heap to rot. The end result of an economy that pushed SUVs over what we are currently seeing. And yes, for the most part those status junkies traded their SUVs for Priuses. We are asked to conserve water when the wasteful farms and elites use more water than every citizen combined and our efforts (I recall as a youth, if it's yellow let it mellow as an allusion to not flushing if you don't have to) are literally a drop in the bucket. I remember my dad putting a brick in our toilet tank to reduce overall water capacity in an effort to 'do our part'; all the while our neighbors ignored the lawn watering rules (like our officials watered their estate grounds). San Fernando Valley stopped watering or used minimal recycled water on the median's vegetation and trees in "an effort to save water". They even went so far to print signs everywhere along these plots and all advertising spaces (bus stop, billboard, etc) which have their own environmental impact that's conveniently ignored. End result is that all of these well matured trees died and cracked or burned in the subsequent year's end. We also get billboards about food waste costing us water (one about eggs is fairly prevalent) which goes back to ignoring the actual major sources of waste. The Nestlé corporation was allowed to do this: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36161580 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36161580 And yet we are expected to 'do our part' to help a corporation's profits? Lastly, recycling. We are asked at every turn to recycle amd separate garbage to an extent, yet there is no punishment for recycling thieves like in New York. So we taxpayers fund recycling efforts, containers, centers and trucks only to have the proverbial gold stolen each night by thieves. I stopped sorting my garbage when I was driven to the brink being woken every trash day at 3 am by opportunists raiding every can thoroughly. I had compassion until then. Most who still do have not had first hand experience in their ivory gated communities. In summation, the best laid plans if the misguided bleeding hearts.
  - guelo 9y ago
    > personal responsibility of the states huh? If the 4 million people of Oklahoma don't take "personal responsibility" for polluting the atmosphere we all pay the price not just them.
    - ntsplnkv2 9y ago
      The less people the better. If every other country follows the Paris accord, and many US states, it really won't matter as much what Oklahoma does.
    - thevardanian 9y ago
      Well yes. That's exactly my point. They need to, and we need those people TO take "personal responsibility". How the treaty will get Oklahoma to take personal responsibility is beyond me.
  - hibikir 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      As a current Missouri resident - I am getting the heck out of here.
      - akg_67 9y ago
        You are not alone. Look into population migration numbers among states.
    - thevardanian 9y ago
      If you don't have faith in states taking initiative then as a whole you can't have the USA change. That's just how our culture, and our governance works. States NEED to take responsibility. If we are to change as a nation we need to stop looking at the globe and do a bit of introspection so that we can change internally. Otherwise if states are left out of the equation then the problem of climate change can never be solved. While the federal government can possibly do that, and it is a huge possibility, trying to get the states to change at the grassroots is of far greater impact, and efficiency, as that is the Number 1 problem that USA faces. Not a lack of federal imposition, but a lack of grassroots understanding in America. And the one thing Americans hate perhaps the most is being told what to do by men in suits.
- throw2bit 9y ago
  The world's first fully solar powered airport is in the small state of Kerala in India. http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/technology/india-cochin-solar-powered-airport/ http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/technology/india-cochin-sola...
- the8472 9y ago
  > India is doing pretty well in green energy on the whole! India has the 4th largest energy generator from wind in the world. The absolute amount is not very useful since you have uneven binning: the size and population of countries varies dramatically. You need to look at percentages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_production_from_renewable_sources#All_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...
L_Rahman 9y ago
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 9y ago
  > 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.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    The same happened in Spain, first time I saw someone doing a payment by mobile was at a bus-stop, as if it was normal he paid his electricity bill. It was the result of a collaboration between Telefonica and one or more banks, I forgot what it was called. Way ahead of the rest of Europe, this probably was early 2000 or 2001.
    - scythe 9y ago
      "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the Earth"
  - danbolt 9y ago
hueving 9y ago
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.
- llccbb 9y ago
  The damage of bringing a billion people electricity?
  - all_usernames 9y ago
    A billion more people who can now participate in the system that's already polluted the planet to the brink.
    - duncan_bayne 9y ago
      Much better to keep them empoverished and undeveloped, right? /s This sort of argument is exactly why I see environmentalism as anti-human at its heart.
      - e9 9y ago
        I agree with you, but can you talk more about this? Is there an article or some other resource that talks more about this topic?
        duncan_bayne 9y ago
        An illustrative starting point is the Golden Rice fiasco: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
      - mikeash 9y ago
        Most environmentalists want to bring a high standard of living to everybody in a sustainable way. Yes, there are some over on the "voluntary human extinction" end of the spectrum, but you shouldn't tar them all with that brush.
NicoJuicy 9y ago
Renewable energy is all automated and mining is innovation and creates jobs. India proves this /s
xparadigm 9y ago
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/2016/07/18/a-new-power-plant-could-devastate-the-worlds-largest-mangrove-forest/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/20...
xrange 9y ago
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-future-generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide.aspx http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and...
- pkhagah 9y ago
  India is still focusing on thorium. But slowly. Design for AHWR if recently finalized and site selection in progress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_heavy-water_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_heavy-water_reactor
- rtx 9y ago
  Western NGOs don't like it.
  - nradov 9y ago
    Which NGOs and what are they doing about it?
- matt4077 9y ago
  Nuclear power is dead. Stop beating it, it's not even a horse any more. Sure, it emits less radiation than coal, and the thorium/fast breeder/fusion/whatever revolution is just around the corner, and I also feel so manly and strong and competent arguing for it when everyone else has moved on ten years ago, and there's absolutely no risk if you do it right, unlike these Russians who were just too unorganised to follow procedures, oh, yeah, and those Japanese, who we always accused of being incompetent with technology. No, nuclear power is simply too expensive. In less than a decade, even wind and solar will be cheaper.
- threeseed 9y ago
  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.
Pxtl 9y ago
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.
- lacampbell 9y ago
  Rural people in the first world often do this as well. It's very common.
  - Pxtl 9y ago
    While carbon is carbon wherever, I'm not talking about rural. Trash fires were a regular sight on the streets of Thiruvananthapuram.
    - zem 9y ago
      you should find this interesting: http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/people-power-waste-management-revolution-kerala http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/people-power-waste-m...
- vkou 9y ago
  The carbon implications of burning your garbage are... Secondary to the air quality implications. You are mostly burning products that were made using renewable sources of carbon. Burning plastic is an exception, but the carbon footprint of plastic is small, compared to coal and oil used for heating, electricity, and transportation.
- esturk 9y ago
  "Burning garbage emits 1.5 times as much carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour generated as coal and three times as much as natural gas." Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/does-burning-garbage-for-electricity-make-sense-1447643515 https://www.wsj.com/articles/does-burning-garbage-for-electr...
- matt4077 9y ago
andrewwharton 9y ago
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 9y ago
  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.
  - digital_ins 9y ago
    This is incorrect. Local, domestic coal has significantly worse project economics, which is why local plants prefer the imported variety.
  - tankenmate 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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.
unlmtd 9y ago
Solar panels aren't green.
jpatokal 9y ago
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 9y ago
  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.
earngurus 9y ago
https://www.earngurus.com/tips-protect-wannacry-ransomware-virus/ https://www.earngurus.com/tips-protect-wannacry-ransomware-v...
marze 9y ago
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.
Abishek_Muthian 9y ago
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 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.
robattila128 9y ago
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 9y ago
  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.
- XorNot 9y ago
  Alex Epstein --> Wikipedia, Career: 1. Ayn Rand Institute. Yeah thanks I'll pass.
jklinger410 9y ago
This seems precisely timed considering how Trump backed out of the Paris agreements partially because India was allowed to build MORE coal.
- matt4077 9y ago
  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?contextual=default http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC?contex...
  - threeseed 9y ago
    > 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.
  - ygaf 9y ago
    >It's disingenuous to insist that India should lower their power consumption, The gp is, to me at least, making a point about the nytimes.
- threeseed 9y ago
  Of course India was allowed to use more coal. Paris is a voluntary agreement. India, like all countries, can do whatever on earth they want. Just like Trump could've stayed in the agreement, behind the scenes done absolutely nothing for the environment (like he is now) and there would've been a lot less criticism. The fact he didn't choose this option tells you everything. It was a political decision only.
sandGorgon 9y ago
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
known 9y ago
Can you unilaterally walk out of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarisation_of_space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarisation_of_space
unsupak 9y ago
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 9y ago
  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_greenhouse_gas_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...
pvsukale3 9y ago
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 9y ago
  Auto-rickshaws are already ALL electric in some cities. Haridwar for one.
  - rajangdavis 9y ago
    India is a large country.
    - pvsukale3 9y ago
      Yeah. But we have got to start somewhere. First we can focus on cities and then move towards rural India.
      - crazystar 9y ago
        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-india.aspx https://www.ibef.org/exports/agriculture-and-food-industry-i...
        pvsukale3 9y ago
        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.
markaius 9y ago
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 9y ago
  I agree about how the site should act, but in my browser (chrome on mac), it does act the right way.
  - markaius 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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.
rustoo 9y ago
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.

506 points by scdoshi 9y ago

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-plant_n_13352756.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/12/02/india-solar-power-pl...

X86BSD 9y ago
Personally, I think the government there is already guilty of criminal neglect in infrastructure in that country, if they go back to coal and petrol, people WILL start dropping like flies from all sorts of issues because of the air quality. It's horrendous now, if they go backwards... ugh. Hopefully Modi is smarter than that.
thevardanian 9y ago
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.
- woodandsteel 9y ago
  Lots of US states are charging ahead on their own. Take California, for example.
  - propman 9y ago
    Texas is the biggest renewable energy producer in USA and almost all is from wind in the last 6 years. Rick Perry the big fossil fuel Republican did this from a $7B unpopular at the time investment into transmission lines from wind heavy areas to highly populated areas. He was criticized heavily, but is the sole reason for 25% of the entire US Wind power capacity He did it for economic reasons and most of the renewable energy produced in the Statss are from red states. We have to invest in transmission lines and continue the PTC if we want to continue being #1 in Wind and these are both bipartisan issues. Just not very important to either party right now
    - sriram_sun 9y ago
      It was 2009. Wind and Renewables were seen as saviors of the economy and a lot of TARP funding was thrown at these kinds of projects as well. http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/10/14/14greenwire-stimulus-cash-flowed-to-completed-under-way-re-95989.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/10/14/14greenwire-stimulus... So I don't think it was all Perry's foresight, but Governers grabbing any funding that was available just to keep the unemployment numbers down.
  - caliagent 9y ago
    I have lived on California my entire life and all we have managed to accomplish were feel good initiatives which made for great PR puff pieces and were quickly shuffled down the road. I remember the first electric car, hailed as a true step forward, that was subsequently killed. Go to Santa Monica beach patrol stations and see all of the failed electric car station plug poles that were sawed off and tossed onto a heap to rot. The end result of an economy that pushed SUVs over what we are currently seeing. And yes, for the most part those status junkies traded their SUVs for Priuses. We are asked to conserve water when the wasteful farms and elites use more water than every citizen combined and our efforts (I recall as a youth, if it's yellow let it mellow as an allusion to not flushing if you don't have to) are literally a drop in the bucket. I remember my dad putting a brick in our toilet tank to reduce overall water capacity in an effort to 'do our part'; all the while our neighbors ignored the lawn watering rules (like our officials watered their estate grounds). San Fernando Valley stopped watering or used minimal recycled water on the median's vegetation and trees in "an effort to save water". They even went so far to print signs everywhere along these plots and all advertising spaces (bus stop, billboard, etc) which have their own environmental impact that's conveniently ignored. End result is that all of these well matured trees died and cracked or burned in the subsequent year's end. We also get billboards about food waste costing us water (one about eggs is fairly prevalent) which goes back to ignoring the actual major sources of waste. The Nestlé corporation was allowed to do this: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36161580 http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36161580 And yet we are expected to 'do our part' to help a corporation's profits? Lastly, recycling. We are asked at every turn to recycle amd separate garbage to an extent, yet there is no punishment for recycling thieves like in New York. So we taxpayers fund recycling efforts, containers, centers and trucks only to have the proverbial gold stolen each night by thieves. I stopped sorting my garbage when I was driven to the brink being woken every trash day at 3 am by opportunists raiding every can thoroughly. I had compassion until then. Most who still do have not had first hand experience in their ivory gated communities. In summation, the best laid plans if the misguided bleeding hearts.
- guelo 9y ago
  > personal responsibility of the states huh? If the 4 million people of Oklahoma don't take "personal responsibility" for polluting the atmosphere we all pay the price not just them.
  - ntsplnkv2 9y ago
    The less people the better. If every other country follows the Paris accord, and many US states, it really won't matter as much what Oklahoma does.
  - thevardanian 9y ago
    Well yes. That's exactly my point. They need to, and we need those people TO take "personal responsibility". How the treaty will get Oklahoma to take personal responsibility is beyond me.
- hibikir 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    As a current Missouri resident - I am getting the heck out of here.
    - akg_67 9y ago
      You are not alone. Look into population migration numbers among states.
  - thevardanian 9y ago
    If you don't have faith in states taking initiative then as a whole you can't have the USA change. That's just how our culture, and our governance works. States NEED to take responsibility. If we are to change as a nation we need to stop looking at the globe and do a bit of introspection so that we can change internally. Otherwise if states are left out of the equation then the problem of climate change can never be solved. While the federal government can possibly do that, and it is a huge possibility, trying to get the states to change at the grassroots is of far greater impact, and efficiency, as that is the Number 1 problem that USA faces. Not a lack of federal imposition, but a lack of grassroots understanding in America. And the one thing Americans hate perhaps the most is being told what to do by men in suits.
throw2bit 9y ago
The world's first fully solar powered airport is in the small state of Kerala in India. http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/technology/india-cochin-solar-powered-airport/ http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/14/technology/india-cochin-sola...
the8472 9y ago
> India is doing pretty well in green energy on the whole! India has the 4th largest energy generator from wind in the world. The absolute amount is not very useful since you have uneven binning: the size and population of countries varies dramatically. You need to look at percentages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_production_from_renewable_sources#All_countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...

L_Rahman 9y ago

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 9y ago
> 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.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  The same happened in Spain, first time I saw someone doing a payment by mobile was at a bus-stop, as if it was normal he paid his electricity bill. It was the result of a collaboration between Telefonica and one or more banks, I forgot what it was called. Way ahead of the rest of Europe, this probably was early 2000 or 2001.
  - scythe 9y ago
    "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the Earth"
- danbolt 9y ago

hueving 9y ago

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.

llccbb 9y ago
The damage of bringing a billion people electricity?
- all_usernames 9y ago
  A billion more people who can now participate in the system that's already polluted the planet to the brink.
  - duncan_bayne 9y ago
    Much better to keep them empoverished and undeveloped, right? /s This sort of argument is exactly why I see environmentalism as anti-human at its heart.
    - e9 9y ago
      I agree with you, but can you talk more about this? Is there an article or some other resource that talks more about this topic?
      - duncan_bayne 9y ago
        An illustrative starting point is the Golden Rice fiasco: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
    - mikeash 9y ago
      Most environmentalists want to bring a high standard of living to everybody in a sustainable way. Yes, there are some over on the "voluntary human extinction" end of the spectrum, but you shouldn't tar them all with that brush.

NicoJuicy 9y ago

Renewable energy is all automated and mining is innovation and creates jobs. India proves this /s

xparadigm 9y ago

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/2016/07/18/a-new-power-plant-could-devastate-the-worlds-largest-mangrove-forest/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/20...

xrange 9y ago

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

pkhagah 9y ago
India is still focusing on thorium. But slowly. Design for AHWR if recently finalized and site selection in progress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_heavy-water_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_heavy-water_reactor
rtx 9y ago
Western NGOs don't like it.
- nradov 9y ago
  Which NGOs and what are they doing about it?
matt4077 9y ago
Nuclear power is dead. Stop beating it, it's not even a horse any more. Sure, it emits less radiation than coal, and the thorium/fast breeder/fusion/whatever revolution is just around the corner, and I also feel so manly and strong and competent arguing for it when everyone else has moved on ten years ago, and there's absolutely no risk if you do it right, unlike these Russians who were just too unorganised to follow procedures, oh, yeah, and those Japanese, who we always accused of being incompetent with technology. No, nuclear power is simply too expensive. In less than a decade, even wind and solar will be cheaper.
threeseed 9y ago
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.

Pxtl 9y ago

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.

lacampbell 9y ago
Rural people in the first world often do this as well. It's very common.
- Pxtl 9y ago
  While carbon is carbon wherever, I'm not talking about rural. Trash fires were a regular sight on the streets of Thiruvananthapuram.
  - zem 9y ago
    you should find this interesting: http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/people-power-waste-management-revolution-kerala http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/people-power-waste-m...
vkou 9y ago
The carbon implications of burning your garbage are... Secondary to the air quality implications. You are mostly burning products that were made using renewable sources of carbon. Burning plastic is an exception, but the carbon footprint of plastic is small, compared to coal and oil used for heating, electricity, and transportation.
esturk 9y ago
"Burning garbage emits 1.5 times as much carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour generated as coal and three times as much as natural gas." Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/does-burning-garbage-for-electricity-make-sense-1447643515 https://www.wsj.com/articles/does-burning-garbage-for-electr...
matt4077 9y ago

andrewwharton 9y ago

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 9y ago
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.
- digital_ins 9y ago
  This is incorrect. Local, domestic coal has significantly worse project economics, which is why local plants prefer the imported variety.
- tankenmate 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.

unlmtd 9y ago

Solar panels aren't green.

jpatokal 9y ago

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 9y ago
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.

earngurus 9y ago

https://www.earngurus.com/tips-protect-wannacry-ransomware-virus/ https://www.earngurus.com/tips-protect-wannacry-ransomware-v...

marze 9y ago

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.

Abishek_Muthian 9y ago

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 9y ago
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 9y ago
  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.

robattila128 9y ago

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 9y ago
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.
XorNot 9y ago
Alex Epstein --> Wikipedia, Career: 1. Ayn Rand Institute. Yeah thanks I'll pass.

jklinger410 9y ago

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

matt4077 9y ago
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?contextual=default http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC?contex...
- threeseed 9y ago
  > 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.
- ygaf 9y ago
  >It's disingenuous to insist that India should lower their power consumption, The gp is, to me at least, making a point about the nytimes.
threeseed 9y ago
Of course India was allowed to use more coal. Paris is a voluntary agreement. India, like all countries, can do whatever on earth they want. Just like Trump could've stayed in the agreement, behind the scenes done absolutely nothing for the environment (like he is now) and there would've been a lot less criticism. The fact he didn't choose this option tells you everything. It was a political decision only.

sandGorgon 9y ago

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

known 9y ago

Can you unilaterally walk out of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarisation_of_space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarisation_of_space

unsupak 9y ago

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 9y ago
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_greenhouse_gas_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...

pvsukale3 9y ago

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 9y ago
Auto-rickshaws are already ALL electric in some cities. Haridwar for one.
- rajangdavis 9y ago
  India is a large country.
  - pvsukale3 9y ago
    Yeah. But we have got to start somewhere. First we can focus on cities and then move towards rural India.
    - crazystar 9y ago
      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-india.aspx https://www.ibef.org/exports/agriculture-and-food-industry-i...
      - pvsukale3 9y ago
        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.

markaius 9y ago

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 9y ago
I agree about how the site should act, but in my browser (chrome on mac), it does act the right way.
- markaius 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.

rustoo 9y ago

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.