THE FOURTH Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which emphasised the far-reaching consequences that continued global warming would have across the world, has given fresh impetus to finding solutions to the problem. The summit meeting of the Group of Eight industrialised countries (G8) that will take place in June in Germany could see the launch of new initiatives for collective action by both rich nations and fast-growing developing countries to combat climate change.

In its Fourth Assessment Report, the IPCC, the international body that has the task of weighing scientific evidence on climate change, pointed to definitive evidence that global atmospheric concentrations of key greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide had "increased markedly as a result of human activities since 1750." These gases were trapping the Earth's heat that would otherwise have radiated out into space. If the build-up of greenhouses gases and the resultant warming of the planet was allowed to continue unchecked, it was likely to produce drastically altered weather patterns, lead to considerable land inundation as a result of rising sea levels, adversely affect agriculture and water availability, and put many plant and animal species at risk of extinction, warned the IPCC.

The question now is what to do about global warming. Such concern, however, goes back over a decade. The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, which came into force in 1994, set the objective of stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations "at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic [human induced] interference with the climate system." A few years later, the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated that set legally binding targets to limit or reduce emissions from many wealthy nations and East European countries.

But the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, the United States, refused to ratify the protocol. In addition, the fact that the Kyoto Protocol does not seek to limit emissions from rapidly growing developing countries such as China and India is also becoming a contentious issue. The British newspaper Guardian recently reported that Britain and Germany were drawing up proposals to be discussed at the upcoming G8 meeting for an international partnership involving the industrialised nations as well as developing countries such as China and India to fight climate change.

A key issue is how to spread the pain of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change noted that "the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries, that per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low and that the share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs." Accordingly, the Convention required developed countries to "take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof."

But emissions from developing countries have been growing rapidly. There are reports that this year China could overtake the United States to become the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. In its World Energy Outlook 2006, the International Energy Agency pointed out that the economies and population of developing countries were growing faster than those of the wealthier nations, "shifting the centre of gravity of global energy demand." It estimated that more than 70 per cent of the increase in global primary energy demand between now and 2030 would come from developing countries.

The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report estimates that carbon dioxide emissions from energy use could rise by 45 per cent to 110 per cent between 2000 and 2030. The report indicates that two-thirds to three-quarters of the increased emissions would come from developing countries. The report also makes clear that the greater the efforts to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, the less severe would be the impact of climate change.

The world needs to limit the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to 550 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent and the average global temperature rise to two degrees Celsius in order to prevent the impacts of climate change from becoming very severe, argues Dilip Ahuja of the National Institute of Advanced Studies in Bangalore. For that, global emissions need to be reduced by 60 to 80 per cent from 1990 levels by 2050. "Even if the developed countries can reduce their emissions by as much as 80 per cent, some reductions have to come from the developing countries in order for global emissions to come down by 60 per cent," points out Dr. Ahuja, who was part of IPCC's Working Group III that examined mitigation of climate change for the Fourth Assessment Report.

But for developing countries, ensuring economic growth and lifting people out of poverty are necessarily important priorities. More energy use by these countries and greater emissions from them are therefore inevitable. According to International Energy Agency data, the per capita total primary energy supply of the U.S. was more than six times higher than China's and nearly 15 times that of India's in 2004; the per capita emissions of carbon dioxide by these countries followed a similar pattern.

The imperative of development

In taking steps for mitigating climate change, the "imperative of development" must not be forgotten, says Anand Patwardhan of IIT Bombay who participated in IPCC's Working Group II that examined the impact of climate change. It was climate change's "real interconnection with development" that made it such a difficult problem, he remarked.

India's greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 could be double the level in 2000, according to a journal paper published last year by Subodh Sharma of the Union Government's Ministry of Environment and Forests and others. But "the absolute level of [greenhouse gas] emissions in 2020 will be below five per cent of global emissions and the per capita emissions will still be low compared to most of the developed countries as well as the global average," they pointed out.

"India needs to sustain an 8% to 10% economic growth rate, over the next 25 years, if it is to eradicate poverty and meet its human development goals," according to a 2006 report on an integrated energy policy prepared by an expert committee of the Planning Commission. Consequently, the country needed at the very least to increase its primary energy supply three- or four-fold over the 2003-04 level. India's economic growth would "necessarily involve increase in [greenhouse gas] emissions from the current extremely low levels." Any constraints on such emissions by India, whether direct, by way of emission targets, or indirect would reduce growth rates, the report stated. However, the report also added, "India should be willing to contain her [greenhouse gas] emissions as long as she is compensated for the additional cost involved."

In his budget speech this year, Union Finance Minister P. Chidambaram had promised the appointment of an expert committee "to study the impact of climate change on India and identify the measures that we may have to take in the future." The Union Government has recently constituted the committee, which is to be headed by R. Chidambaram, Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government.

The `National Energy Map for India: Technology Vision 2030,' a two-year study that The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in Delhi completed in November 2006 for the Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser, suggests it might be possible for India to enjoy high rates of economic growth without sending its greenhouse gas emissions shooting out of control. But in order to do so, the country must boost energy efficiency throughout the economy, such as by building energy-efficient thermal power plants and moving to `clean coal' technologies; promoting the efficient use of energy in industries, commercial establishments, and households; increasing the use of public transport and the railways as well as enhancing the fuel efficiency of all forms of motorised transport. In addition, nuclear and renewable energy options will have to be seriously pursued.

TERI's modelling exercise shows that in a business-as-usual scenario with the Indian economy growing at eight per cent per annum, the cumulative carbon dioxide emissions for the period 2001-2036 could be 16,223 million tonnes. But if the high energy efficiency options were implemented, those emissions could be cut by 25 per cent while maintaining the growth rate. If, in addition, nuclear and renewable energy were extensively used, the emissions could be reduced by a further four percentage points.

More interestingly, even in a high growth scenario with the economy growing at 10 per cent a year, high energy efficiency combined with nuclear and renewable energy could mean that emissions may be only eight per cent higher than the business-as-usual scenario.

A multi-pronged approach was essential for meeting the country's growing demand for energy in a sustainable manner, observes Pradeep Dadhich, who was a member of TERI's core team for the project. Implementing such an approach was, however, a challenging task. "There are so many institutions involved, you need to channelise your technologies appropriately, have the institutions to deploy those technologies" and also have necessary capacity in terms of manpower, he told this correspondent.