In the context of the Conference of the Parties (COP26
), there was much debate about India's dependence on coal.
The Minister of the Environment took a similar position on the eve of COP26, but for the first time, the Government of India promised to reach the Net Zero target by 2070.
At the heart of the theoretical debate is that India needs to develop and the energy to develop.
Does India Emit Higher CO2 Emissions?
India has not emitted CO2 in the past and is currently not emitting even near the amount measured by the North of the world or per capita emissions, so at least in the near future, it will reduce its dependence on coal. However, there is no reason to promise.
Even so, if the debate goes on, a higher and more equitable share of the global CO2 budget should be required. There is no doubt that this carbon balance framework is an excellent tool for understanding global injustice, but the transition from it to our "right to be burned" is a giant leap forward.
It's like claiming that India has the right to do the same since it was colonized, and it's wrong to prevent the country from doing so. Do countries in the Global North and Global South need to increase their share of the global CO2 budget for development?
Fortunately, the answer is no, and you don't sacrifice development. Development is generally defined, so it's not limited.
Industrialized nations have robbed more than a fair share of the world's carbon budget.
Cumulative emissions to zero net determine the temperature reached, so reaching zero net is not enough. India's cumulative and current per capita emissions are significantly lower, well below the fair share of the world's carbon balance. The scope for dealing with global injustices in the CO2 budget is very limited in some respects.
Such injustice is not only at the level of the nation-state. There is such injustice between the rich and the poor in the country and between humans and non-human species.
A progressive attitude towards justice will take into account these injustices rather than a narrow focus on the framework of the nation-state.
Not only is it largely irresponsible, but the Global North and Global South, especially the poor, will unfairly bear the effects of climate change due to the tropical climate and high population density along the coastline.
So arguing for more money is like shooting your feet. Sure, weakening the South alone doesn't make the difference needed to stop the disaster, but burning more coal doesn't necessarily solve the problem.
Infrastructure or construction essential to urbanization and quality of life accounts for two-fifths of the world's carbon emissions from fuel combustion and 25% of total emissions. These emissions come from the production of energy-intensive cement and half of the produced steel used in construction. Neither has a replacement.
India's emission history cannot be in the top three. India has accounted for less than 4.37% of cumulative carbon dioxide emissions since before the Industrial Revolution. However, more than one-sixth of the humans live here. Moreover, India's per capita emissions are less than half the world average, less than one-eighth of the United States' emissions, and have not seen the dramatic increase that China has had since 2000.
But by 2030, India will ensure that 50% of its energy comes from renewable energy sources.
India plans to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 billion tonnes by 2030. India will also reduce emission intensity per unit of GDP by less than 45%.
India will also introduce 500 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030. This is an increase of 50 GW from the existing target.
On the 26th, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the net-zero emission target for 2070. Other companies with a net-zero target are large emitters such as the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, which targets 2050, and China, which targets 2060. In addition to the EU, 12 countries have enacted this goal by law.
Developing an independent, more environmentally friendly development path creates conditions for such negotiations, forcing North to the South to the table, as South Africa did in Glasgow. Moreover, it can give you a moral foundation.
One way this can happen is to pay the North and South for the North and south energy transitions. Net Zero should be a realistic and transformative path to prevent climate change, not a greenwash.
The need for hours is not to force the northern working class to fight the southern working-class but to fight the global working class resisting the elite of the world's ruling class. Progressive agenda. A competitive model of aggressive and dangerous emissions.
As climate change is drastic, CO2 emissions need to be reduced right now, and terrestrial climate change solutions focus on food-first approaches that help achieve zero emissions and zero hunger. The only way to maintain global emission reductions is for governments to make conscious decisions to change energy sources, such as switching to renewable energy sources.