CHINA/INDIA: ‘Business as Usual’ for Carbon Emission Targets

• Analysis by Darryl D'Monte * - IPS/TerraViva (mumbai, india)
• Sunday, December 06, 2009
• Inter Press Service

The U.S. has proposed a 17 percent cut below 2005 levels by 2020—less than one-seventh of what the European Union has committed. India, the fifth largest emitter, was forced to fall in line, so as not to be seen as recalcitrant.

Both China and India have toed the U.S. approach in citing their voluntary reductions from 2005 levels, whereas the Kyoto Protocol regime has stipulated emission cuts from 1990. This puts China’s offer of reducing its carbon intensity by 40 to 45 percent by 2020 and India’s 20 to 25 percent in a different perspective.

Since emissions have been rising in these two giant economies between 1990 and 2005, the reductions are not so ambitious and do not deviate that much from business as usual.

China has also taken the lead in cobbling together a new BASIC coalition— consisting of Brazil, South Africa, India and China. The four have listed their 'non-negotiable' demands: no legally binding cuts, unsupported mitigation actions, international monitoring of unsupported mitigation actions and use of climate as a trade barrier. They threaten to walk out of the United Nations climate change December conference in Copenhagen if industrial countries browbeat them.

Reportedly, China’s Premier Wen Jiabao summoned India’s Environment Minister, Jairam Ramesh, who was in Beijing in late November, to an unscheduled meeting and told him that China planned to lead the developing world in presenting a united front against the West. He was literally given a night to read the BASIC draft and sign on the dotted line.

This is a far cry from the precursor to Copenhagen, the U.N. Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, when India represented G77 developing countries (now increased to 130). India’s Environment Minister at the time, Kamal Nath, baited the U.S., led by President George Bush, Sr. The White House was so incensed that it admonished then Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, who had to tone down his rhetoric at the summit.

India has tied itself in knots on its stand on climate. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed to abide by the two degrees Celsius cap on rise in global temperatures at the Group of Eight wealthiest nations meetings in Italy in July.

Indian negotiators criticised him for compromising India’s future growth prospects. Subsequently, Ramesh wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, leaked to the media, suggesting India offer voluntary cuts in emissions and subject these to international verification. This triggered off a political furore in India, prompting him to retract his letter. China, by contrast, is consistent in its policy.

'India is a leader of the developing world,' says Sunita Narain, director of the Centre for Science and Environment in New Delhi. 'It should campaign for the voice of the marginalised and victims of climate change.'

She adds: 'India should avoid sitting at the high table with polluters (rich countries). Therefore, we have to put pressure on the North to take effective emission cuts. That will be a real leadership role.'

On Dec. 3, when India announced its policy, Qin Gang, the spokesperson of China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, reiterated that China and India were developing countries and victims of climate change. China understood the Indian situation on climate change and would support India's adaptation and mitigation plan that was based on its own national situation and capacity.

However, there are vast differences between the two countries. Between 1990 and 2005, per capita energy use increased by half in China—three times more than in India. Jairam himself has referred to China’s carbon intensity— the amount of carbon emitted per 1,000 U.S. dollars of GDP— 2.8 tonnes as against India’s one tonne.

As Huo Weiya of the independent online publication ‘Chinadialogue’ in Beijing observes: 'Three decades of economic growth have given the Chinese citizenry ample material desires; a lifestyle has by now taken root that hopes to keep up with the rich, particularly to keep up with the Americans.'

Some Chinese and Indian experts are uneasy about their countries unilaterally offering carbon intensity cuts. Qi Jianguo, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, believes that the targets would put 'great pressure' on China's development.

Before India announced its policy, Sunita Narain, who is also a member of the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change, warned: 'There needs to be a proper deliberative process if India needs a carbon or energy intensity number. That has still not been done. It must not make a laughing stock of itself by announcing new numbers every day; it should stick to its own 20 percent by 2020 domestic commitment.'

She alleged that India’s changing position reflected U.S. interests, not its own. 'It is clearly at the behest of the U.S. president. It will derail the multilateral negotiations,' she said.

* Darryl D’Monte is president of the International Federation of Environmental Journalists.

© Inter Press Service (2009) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Where next?

Advertisement