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