STAFFDEL KILLION ENGAGES INDIA ON CLIMATE CHANGE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 003809 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR OES/PCI, OES/EGC, AND SCA/INS DEPT OF ENERGY FOR TCUTLER, CGILLESPIE, MGINZBERG USDOC FOR A/S BOHIGIAN E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: OREP SENV ENRG TSPL ECON TSPL TRGY KSCA KGHG IN SUBJECT: STAFFDEL KILLION ENGAGES INDIA ON CLIMATE CHANGE REF A: STATE 109657 NEW DELHI 00003809 001.2 OF 002 ¶1. (U) Summary: In a series of meetings with GOI ministries as well as Indian NGOs from August 8 to 10, Senior Professional Staff Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee David Killion introduced H.R. 2420, the congressional blueprint for a post-Kyoto global agreement known as the International Climate Cooperation Re-Engagement Act of 2007, and discussed the Indian position on Global Climate Change (GCC). Across the board, Staffdel Killion heard the same message: India is locked into the Kyoto Protocol; there is no need for any mechanism to address GCC other than the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); India's economic development and poverty alleviation goals require great increases in power generating capacity, including from coal with accompanying increases in green house gas (GHG) emissions; and clean technology transfer must be provided to India and other developing countries at prices affordable to them. End Summary. ¶2. (U) In separate meetings, the Staffdel met with: -- Manjeev Singh Puri, Joint Secretary, United Nations Economic & Social, Ministry of External Affairs; -- R.H. Khwaja, Additional Secretary, Climate Change, Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF); -- Gireesh B. Pradhan, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Power; S.P. Seth, Special Secretary, Ministry of Coal; -- V. Subramanian, Secretary, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE); -- Surya Sethi, Principal Advisor, Energy, GOI Planning Commission; -- Dr. R.C. Bhatia, Director-General, Indian Meteorological Department; -- Ambassador Chandrashekher Dasgupta, Distinguished Fellow and Dr. Prodipto Ghosh, Distinguished Fellow, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI); and -- Chandra Bhushan, Associate Director of Industry and Environment, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE). All of whom conveyed the same position: India is already doing more than its fair share to combat GCC. ¶3. (U) All of the delegation's interlocutors quoted the same emissions statistics - India is responsible for no more than four percent of the world's GHG emissions despite having approximately 18 percent of the world's population. This per capita formula was used by all to argue that reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and GCC is not India's responsibility and that India sees no need to go beyond the principles laid down under the UNFCCC for developing countries via the Kyoto Protocol, meaning India would neither agree to caps on its emissions nor to any mechanism that would limit development. Joint Secretary Puri made it very clear India regards the UNFCCC as a solid, well-negotiated agreement and that India does not see the need for an additional mechanism to address GCC. ¶4. (U) When asked whether India would reconsider its position if the United States were to assume a leadership role, as outlined in HR 2420, the response was again the same across the board and best summed up by Ministry of Power Joint Secretary Pradhan who stated, "India is locked into Kyoto" and its position on India's exemption from GHG reduction targets would not change no matter what may be forthcoming in U.S. policy. However, MEA Joint Secretary Puri stated "nothing can seriously move" without U.S. participation and all acknowledged U.S. initiatives and commitments on reduced emissions would be most welcome. ¶5. (U) The need for economic development was a constant refrain in all meetings with an emphasis on the need to develop in order to fight the potential catastrophes associated with GCC. Joint Secretary Puri noted that all countries need to adapt in order to SIPDIS mitigate the effects of GCC and India does not have the ability to do so without further economic growth. Chandra Bushan, a somewhat radical environmentalist who has often attacked the government on various issues, surprised the delegation by stating his views on GCC are similar to the GOI. Because it is impossible to de-link economic development from increased energy production and consumption, Bushan stated, India cannot make a commitment to reduce its emissions without creating "poverty in perpetuity." ¶6. (U) While the emphasis on economic development was universal, it was Principal Advisor Sethi from the Planning Commission who fleshed NEW DELHI 00003809 002.2 OF 002 out exactly what was meant in India by development. He clearly articulated that China and India should not be linked, that the ideas of development in India were very different from those of the Chinese. He stated India's priorities were not six lane highways crossing the country, nor one car per person, nor all families living in air conditioned homes. India's priorities, according to Sethi, were clean drinking water, education, and health care. He stated the bulk of India's power is used to cook food and that "we cannot deny our people cooked food." Comment: Sethi's description of Indian development, as well as the obvious differences between Beijing and New Delhi in terms of roads, buildings, frequent blackouts, and general infrastructure, resonated with the delegation. End Comment. ¶7. (U) The road to development was also not in dispute. Once again the GOI, TERI, and CSE agreed that India will not develop on outdated models. All mentioned an emphasis on new and renewable energy with Secretary Subramanian informing the delegation the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy was not just a fashion statement set up in response to recent concern over GCC but rather a ministry established over 25 years ago overseeing seven percent of India's power generation capacity, most of which is wind (7000 mw) with the rest coming from biomass (3500 mw). When coupled with hydroelectric, the total of India's clean energy rises to 34% of its power generation capacity. Subramanian, Puri, Sethi, Pradhan, and Bhatia all use these figures to emphasize that India's use of clean energy is far in excess of its contribution to global warming. Candidly, all also admit India is reliant on new and renewable energy due to lack of fossil fuels as opposed to a desire to reduce its carbon footprint. Comment: The relative share of wind power, biomass, and hydro-electricity in India's actual production of electricity is substantially lower that their respective shares of generating capacity, due to their lower load factors. For example, hydropower has 26% of capacity, but only 17% of generation. Conversely, although coal-fired thermal power makes up about 53.5% of power capacity, coal and lignite account for 68% of total power generation in 2006-2007 according to GOI statistics. End Comment. ¶8. (U) As noted, the bulk of India's power generation capacity is made up of coal, which is currently far from clean. However, Special Secretary Seth discussed India's desire to implement clean coal technology; his statements were echoed among all of the delegation's interlocutors with the exception of Chandra Bushan who, as an environmentalist, fears clean coal because it will make it more difficult for wind and solar to compete in the marketplace. Bushan stated that India's path to development will use the cleanest methods available and illustrated a mandate CSE was able to secure from the MOEF requiring all new manufacturing plants in India to use state-of-the-art clean technology. He also confirmed widespread agreement among government, industry, and the Indian public that "climate change is real" (referring to GHG emissions having a causal impact on world climate) and needs to be addressed. ¶9. (SBU) Interlocutors at every level reiterated the desire for clean technology transfer to combat GCC, at low or no cost. All of the delegation's interlocutors raised issues of equity and historical responsibility to argue that the developed world must pay for the developing world to combat GCC. Puri and Subramanian both stated if the United States and Europe were serious about climate change, they should not deal with the issue in terms of profit to companies who develop clean tech and should "get beyond money" for the sake of the planet. Comment: This refrain struck the staff delegation as not only self-serving but also hollow. It appears India is truly concerned about mitigating the likely impact of GCC and will take some financial steps to increase clean energy technology's share of the overall mix. End Comment. ¶10. (U) In addition, MEA Joint Secretary Manjeev Singh Puri confirmed that a GOI delegation will attend the UN General Assembly Heads of State Dialogue on Climate Change on September 24, the President's Major Economies Meeting on September 27-28 (Ref A),and the Bali UN Framework Meeting set to take place in December 2007. Puri did not provide details as to who India intends to send other than that they will be at "the appropriate level." ¶11. (U) This cable was cleared by David Killion. WHITE