As the old saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. That is what has happened with the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) that Modi announced on behalf of India at the very start of the Paris Conference on Climate Change. By the end of the conference, the INDCs had been converted into NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions) written into the "pledges" made by each participating party. India has now to convert Modi's INDCs into Indian NDCs backed by a road map showing how exactly we propose to meet the goals - a roadway to results. That is where the problem arises of the "pledged" NDCs having now to be realized as international commitments freely entered into.
Till Modi decided to steal the show at Paris, our INDCs were relatively modest. We showed our commitment to fighting climate change but based these commitments on the principles evolved at the first global environment meet held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. Of these Rio principles, the basic one was that the war on climate change would be based on "common but differentiated responsibilities" (CBDR) as between developed and developing countries. This meant that while both developing and developed countries accepted "common" responsibilities for mitigating climate change, the responsibilities would have to be "differentiated" as between the developed and the developing countries. Clearly the more the developed countries do to discharge their "historic responsibility" for polluting the atmosphere that causes climate change, the more would the burden on developing countries be diminished. This is known as "climate justice".
By upping the ante on INDCs, Modi undermined developing country solidarity but succeeded in earning plaudits from the developed countries - unsurprisingly because the higher the level of INDCs committed to by a major developing country, the lower need be their own commitments. Thus, one more consequence of rushing in where angels fear to tread was that the way was opened for the whole concept of "historic responsibility" to be ejected through the window. The basic rationale for differentiation thus became understated.
But the real problem for us lies not in the international arena of verbose and obscure diplomatic jargon but in the very real steps that will have to be taken on the ground in India to give credence to Modi's INDCs as we convert them into pledged NDCs requiring Plans of Action.
Modi proclaimed that within the next 15 years - that is, by 2030 - we would cut carbon emissions by 33% to 35% by ensuring that 40% of our installed capacity would be from non-fossil fuels, principally solar and wind energy. Our earlier stand had been that by 2022, we would install 20,000GW of non-fossil power. In one uninhibited leap, Modi increased that figure five-fold to be attained within eight years of the earlier target date, viz, 2030. To this end, he pledged the nation to adding 175,000 Gigawatts of non-fossil power by 2022, of which 100,000 would be contributed by solar energy and 75,000 GW by wind power.
Desirable as these end-results might be in themselves, neither solar nor wind power comes without costs. As far as solar power is concerned, the current cost of generating solar power is some three times the cost of generating power from coal or gas. The India consumer is, therefore, going to end up finding a huge hole in his pocket. Or, alternatively, Government would end up with a huge hole in its pocket subsidizing solar-generated energy. Moreover, technical problems relating to storage and transport remain unsolved as of now. Equally, solar power is not suitable for vehicular transportation. There is also the need to supplement solar power with traditional sources of energy when the sun does not shine.
But the most serious problem of all is that vast stretches of land are required for the installation of solar panels. Rajasthan is ahead of the rest of the country on solar energy principally because vast acreage of uninhabited land is available in the Thar desert. But wherever there is habitation, displacement on a humungous scale will be required to meet the Modi pledge. Modi is, of course, indifferent to peoples' displacement as he so dramatically established in Gujarat. Indeed, the essence of the "Gujarat model" was the forcible acquisition of land at a pittance, throwing the people off it, and then handing over the vacated land to fat cats at a derisory price or even for free.
This column has earlier drawn attention to the Twelfth Plan finding that while Gujarat's tribal population is only 8 percent, 76% of those displaced by Modi were tribals. It is only if human suffering on such a scale is marked up as the inevitable cost of development that the Modi model works. That is why he was so anxious to amend the Land Acquisition law. While the law did not get amended despite the Modi government promulgating and re-promulgating the amendments three times over, it is impossible to see how so much solar power as pledged in Paris can be installed without displacing lakhs, perhaps crores, of poor, voiceless people. These issues of displacement and rehabilitation have to be thought through before thoughtlessly undertaking international pledges. It would not be in keeping with Modi's authoritarian style to do so, but these niggling doubts are bound to surface as Modi's government turns easily given international pledges into a credible Plan of Action to show how 100,000GW of solar power is to be added to our grid within the next six to seven years.
A further 75,000GW of Modi's pledge is to be redeemed through wind power. Clean though wind power is, it suffers from the same technological gaps that trip up solar power. But while wind power does not have as serious consequences for the displacement of people as solar power does, its basic paradox is that it saves the environment by damaging the environment. Madhav Godbole's report on the Western ghats has convincingly demonstrated that generating wind power in the ghat areas requires situating the wind-mills on the top of hills. Roads have to be built to each of these hill-tops. The environmental consequences of extensive road works in the ecologically sensitive ghat areas would lead to environmental disaster. Has Modi taken this paradox into account while unthinkingly pledging his country to wind-power generation targets that can be met only by causing environmental damage to contain environmental damage?
Modi rounded off his pledges by also pledging to "enlarge our forest cover to absorb at least 2.5 billion tonnes worth of carbon dioxide". Had his audience been Indian, he might have been laughed out of court. For, far from adding to our forest cover, we have been seriously depleting it. The depletion of forest cover, and the consequent displacement of tribal populations, has been the root cause of the Naxal movement in central India. Every Act designed to protect and promote tribal interests, from the Rights of Forest Dwellers Act to the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act has been undermined and subverted. In India as a whole, 55% of the burden of displacement has fallen on the tribals who constitute less than ten percent of our population. Moreover, forest lands are not always lands with forest cover; they include lands which were once forest covered but are now barren wasteland with little or no forest cover, yet continue be designated as forests because the century-old Indian Forests Act, 1927 say so. Neither knowing what our real forest cover is, nor the pace at which it is being eaten up, nor putting in place general measures of relief, rehabilitation, alternative employment and self-governance for the displaced millions, Modi has blindly pledged a staggering increase in our forest cover without answering the problems that are bound to arise as the Paris pledges are converted into specific Plans of Action.
Of course, there is one way out. That is to go back on what Modi promised to the world. Does the man have the integrity of character to admit that he was wrong, that he got carried away playing to the gallery, that he cannot redeem the solemnly pledged Indian word?
(Mani Shankar Aiyar is a Congress MP in the Rajya Sabha.)Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.