India and US agree: Coal is not the answer

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Modi-Obama energy agreement brings all three of the world’s biggest emitters – India, the US and China – into alignment on climate action and proves that the ‘all of the above’ credo that once dominated their thinking on energy is steadily morphing into ‘anything but coal.’

share
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Whatever you might read in the mainstream media about the important bits of US president Barack Obama’s summit with Indian prime minister Narendra Modi, you can be sure it went beyond concerns about fashion.

ObamaModi

The agreement struck between Obama and Modi now means that all three of the world’s biggest emitters – India, the US and China – are at least agreed on the importance of striking a strong climate agreement in Paris this year, even if they are not yet on the same page about how this should be done.

But the underlying theme of these agreements, and the position taken by the leaders of the world’s three most influential national economies, is that coal no longer rules. The “all of the above” credo that once dominated their thinking on energy is steadily morphing into “anything but coal.”

The US is cracking down hard on emissions as the primary means of meeting its climate targets, and will likely force the closure of 50GW to 100GW of coal-fired generators in the next few years.

China is talking openly of an emissions cap by 2030, an achievement that could be preceded by at least a decade by a cap on coal use, and a rapid decline in coal imports. It is closing many of its coal-fired generators along its coastal strip and pushing generation inland, away from the markets that could be serviced by imports from countries such as Australia.

Now India is also engaging in the issue about pollution and energy access, and concluding that coal is the major culprit in the former and not the ready answer that the coal lobby wishes it was in the latter.

Sure, a bunch of new coal plants will be built in coming years in India, and attempts made to remove the blockage that means current coal plants are operating at only half their capacity.

But the contents of the India-US energy and climate deal make this much clear – the overwhelming portion of new investment in India’s energy industry will go towards renewables, and smart grid and storage technologies.

India is currently committed to investing in more than 100GW of solar by 2022, and possibly 60GW of wind (that bit is yet to be confirmed).

Indian energy minister, Piyush Goyal, says $250 billion needs to be spent across the power sector. More than $100 billion will go directly on renewables, another $50 billion will go on transmission and distribution, and just $60-$70 billion on stalled and new thermal projects (coal).

Tcoalindiacoalhe biggest challenge for India’s coal plans is that they either centre around unlocking its domestic reserves, which requires a massive injection into infrastructure, or importing from overseas (such as the contentious Galilee Basin in Queensland), in which case the commodity is simply priced out of the market.

The agreement between Modi and Obama includes a range of commitments – such as working towards a successful and ambitious climate agreement in Paris, and various partnerships on clean energy, finance, climate research, and adaptation.

But the details of the partnership indicate exactly where the two countries are heading on technology.

A $125 million program jointly funded by the US and Indian governments will focus on solar energy, energy efficiency, advanced biofuels, and smart grid and grid storage technology.

America’s Export-Import Bank is looking for projects with the Indian Renewable Energy development agency for up to $1 billion in clean energy financing. This will focus on off-grid and utility-scale projects.

The two countries will look to promote “super efficient” off-grid appliances to help address the lack of grid access for more than 300 million people.

There is also nuclear, and attempts to remove the impediments that have prevented US nuclear giants such as Westinghouse and General Electric operating in that market.

India is one of the few countries in the world that wants nuclear, but wants nuclear equipment suppliers to accept liability if something goes wrong – most other governments underwrite that risk.

India’s position has meant that even companies like GE – with a balance sheet bigger than just about any other corporate and many countries – are not prepared to accept the risk that something will go wrong with the nuclear plants they build.

The India-US agreement says it is addressing the problem, but it doesn’t say how. As the Westinghouse CEO told Bloomberg, he needs to read the fine print before getting to excited about any such investments.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

7 Comments
  1. Elisabeth Meehan 5 years ago

    Can I add, anything but the COALition in Australia if we are to have rational, responsible and timely action on climate change.
    Tony Abbott is a climate denier, and is addicted to the donations the coal lobby gives for election campaigns.
    Campbell Newman is even worse, and is now hiding the names of the donors – but his action speak volumes – he’s moved from being a coal hater to a coal lover.
    Love of money and power are the root of all evil.

  2. rhjames 5 years ago

    There are a lot worse problems than coal when it comes to pollution. It’s interesting that they don’t think coal is the answer? I wonder what the question was?

    • john 5 years ago

      The question was; Energy supply?
      Because 300 million do not have electricity the cheapest and most affordable answer is remote distributed energy.
      This does not mean central power stations and long distribution systems.
      It means locally made power that is able to be used near the generating sauce and if that happens to be PV then storage will be utilised.
      As to long term low cost power wind will be used to a large degree.
      No doubt in the short term some black coal stations will be built to the detriment of the country.
      Nuclear Energy will also be used, at a huge cost.

      • rhjames 5 years ago

        So what do they do when there’s no wind at night, or a week of no wind, and rain?

        • john 5 years ago

          Storage
          However to implement a complete system all of the parameters have to be taken into consideration.
          Do you realise here in Australia right now we are actually using diesel powered very costly power to augment the disturbing system?
          WHY?
          Because when the cost of power is high it is actually cheaper to start up a very costly gen set to supply power.
          So do not look down on India and say the only way to go is stable centralised power generation.
          Having said that yes there needs to be an integration of all supply methods.
          Perhaps this country will be able to put into operation a grid with decentralised assets that will actually work and be cheaper than the traditional methodology.

  3. david_fta 5 years ago

    It’s looking more and more like this is the greatest president the US has had since FDR – to the eternal shame of the fuck-knuckles who would stymie what he does.

  4. Brad Sherman 5 years ago

    Giles, ‘corporate’ is an adjective according to every dictionary I can lay my hands on. I think you meant to say ‘corporation’. The growing trend in Australian media to butcher a perfectly good English language by sloppily redefining ‘corporate’ as a noun is quite frustrating for us old farts who were taught grammar in school. It’s right up there with replacing ‘video’ with ‘vision’ and using the pronoun ‘I’ as a direct object. Yeah, I know, language evolves, blah, blah, blah.

    I promise I won’t go off-topic again!

Comments are closed.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.