SPECIAL ENVOY STERN ENGAGES INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND NGO

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 001637

SIPDIS

STATE FOR OES/PCI, OES/EGC, AND SCA/INS
STATE FOR SECC TODD STERN
DEPT OF ENERGY FOR TCUTLER, CGILLESPIE, MGINZBERG

E.O. 12958: N/A

TAGS: SENV ENRG ECON TSPL TRGY KSCA KGHG IN

SUBJECT: SPECIAL ENVOY STERN ENGAGES INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND NGO
REPRESENTATIVES ON CLIMATE CHANGE


1. SUMMARY AND COMMENT: Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd
Stern held a series of meetings July 20-21 in New Delhi with
Government of India officials and NGO representatives to discuss the
upcoming Copenhagen Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC as well as
potential areas for U.S. - India bilateral cooperation in climate
change and clean energy. In addition, S/E Stern gave three
interviews to major Indian media outlets including CNN-IBN, the
Times of India, and the Indian Express. The talks proved
constructive on all levels and produced a strong interest on the
part of the GOI to pursue further engagement including a formal
request to conduct bilateral climate talks in Washington in
September. END SUMMARY AND COMMENT.


2. Special Envoy Stern held separate meetings with the following
GOI officials:

Shyam Saran, Special Envoy for Climate Change
Jairam Ramesh, Minister of Environment and Forests
Sushil Kumar Shinde, Minister of Power
Farooq Abdullah, Minister of New and Renewable Energy
Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission
Nirupama Rao, Foreign Secretary Designate

S/E Stern's NGO engagement included the following participants:

Ravi Singh, CEO and Secretary General, WWF-India
Ashok Khosla, President, Development Alternatives
Ritu Mathur, Associate Director, TERI
Aditi Kapoor, Economic Justice Lead Specialist, Oxfam India

K. Srinivas, Policy Advisor, Greenpeace India
Shirish Sinha, Head of Climate Change & Energy, WWF-India
Sejal Worah, Program Director, WWF-India
Pradeep Saha, Associate Director, Centre for Science and
Environment

--------------
TOWARDS COPENHAGEN: NARROWING THE GAP
--------------


3. In all of his meetings, S/E Stern outlined his vision for a
potential Copenhagen agreement and emphasized the areas of
convergence between the U.S. and Indian positions. He stated that
the United States recognized India's need to develop and that any
agreement in Copenhagen would not seek to limit India's overriding
poverty alleviation goals. He stated developed countries must make
robust absolute emissions reductions noting pending U.S. legislation
called for cuts of approximately 20% each decade culminating in an
80% cut by 2050. S/E Stern clarified that the U.S. would not demand
India make absolute reductions in emissions but would require a
commitment from India to put in place nationally appropriate
mitigation actions that would reduce India's emission growth from
Business as Usual (BAU) projections. He stated that while India
would not have to commit to specific emission reduction targets, it
would have to commit to specific mitigation actions that were
nationally binding, measurable, reportable, and verifiable, and
could be reflected in an international agreement. He also noted the
need for developed countries to create a significant financial
package to assist developing countries in deploying clean energy
technology. He also discussed the importance of adaptation and a
workable policy regarding Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and
Degradation (REDD). In all aspects of his discussion of a potential
Copenhagen agreement, Special Envoy Stern emphasized the need for a
practical and pragmatic approach designed to not only achieve
international consensus, but also the support of the U.S. Congress.


4. Indian Special Envoy Saran began his meeting with S/E Stern by
stating he did not see a big gap in substance between the Indian and
the U.S. position on climate change. He noted both countries agreed
the issues of climate change and energy were inseparable and that
the two needed to be worked on together. He was pleased to note
Stern's statement that developing countries would not be required to
restrict their efforts toward poverty alleviation. He also stated
that developing countries were not only willing to take actions to
mitigate emissions, but also recognized the pressing need to do so
as they would be most impacted by climate change. Saran added a
caveat saying the developing countries were prepared to accept a
reduction from BAU emissions in a normative, but not quantitative,
sense as long as the developed countries provided resources to do so
and if the incremental costs of new technology were compensated. He
emphasized that the extent of the reduction from BAU was directly

NEW DELHI 00001637 002 OF 003


linked to the amount of resources made available by developed
countries. He also stated all mitigation efforts supported by
international funds would be subject to being measured, reported,
and verified (MRV) internationally. Stern responded that he felt
all developing country mitigation efforts, autonomous and supported,
should be subject to MRV in order to give the process transparency
noting purely voluntary measures would not be sufficient. Saran
stated all mitigation efforts of the GOI were subject to public
scrutiny and inquired as to what level of precision would be needed
for an agreement, noting the importance of getting the language
right.


5. Saran emphasized India's requirement that whatever shape a new
agreement took, that it be in line with the UNFCCC and Bali Action
Plan. S/E Stern stated that the UNFCCC and the Bali Action Plan
should guide the process of developing a new agreement but should
not be considered a straight jacket, drawing a comparison between
the Berlin Mandate and the Kyoto Protocol. He stated simply because
a concept such as an international registry was not discussed at
Bali, didn't mean it shouldn't be raised at Copenhagen. Saran took
the point stating discussion of new measures that enhanced the
implementation of the UNFCCC was appropriate as long as key
provisions of the convention or the Bali Action Plan were not set
aside.


6. Minister of Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh discussed the
domestic politics of a Copenhagen agreement noting that as a
politician, he had to sell the agreement to his constituency. He
stated that the Indian system will find it infinitely easier to
accept something legislated domestically than imposed
internationally. Ramesh said he would look at legislating various
mitigation plans found in India's National Action Plan on Climate
Change in order to give them the force of law. S/E Stern welcomed
the proposal and asked whether it would be possible to use executive
regulation as opposed to legislation. Ramesh affirmed that while it
was possible, legislation was necessary in order to gain
credibility, because "there is a sanctity to a law." Ramesh also
raised the issue of REDD and India's plans to spend 3 billion
dollars on reforestation. He asked for U.S. support for India's
proposal on reforestation in the UNFCCC talks. S/E Stern suggested
a technical meeting between the two countries experts to review the
proposal.


7. Deputy Planning Commissioner Montek Singh Ahluwalia told S/E
Stern that the developing countries rhetoric regarding historical
responsibility was a negotiating tool and while India publically
projected that it had no intention of reducing emissions, it was
putting in place measures to deploy wind and solar energy that would
reduce its emissions from business as usual. In addition, Ahluwalia
said the GOI was actively seeking to create political awareness of
the climate change issue among youth and NGOs and that it was very
interested in adopting low carbon energy technology.


8. Minister of Power Shinde focused on accelerating the
distribution of clean technology under an international agreement.
He was joined by Ajay Mathur, the Director General of the Bureau of
Energy Efficiency who noted the primary barrier to adopting clean
tech in India was cost stating India would like to see the
incremental costs of clean technology borne by developed countries.
S/E Stern raised the possibility of utilizing an ESCO-type
arrangement in the context of renewable energy investment, in which
initial capital costs would be paid back from the savings of the new
technology. In addition, an ESCO arrangement would protect
intellectual property rights (IPR). Shinde and Mathur were familiar
with the ESCO concept and noted it may have some potential though
questioned whether the IPR issue could be resolved in the same
fashion as IPR issues surrounding AIDS drugs. Stern responded that
to Americans, the AIDS drugs analogy sounded like compulsory
licensing for energy technology which was non-starter in the United
States.

--------------
NGO PERSPECTIVE
--------------


9. The NGO representatives all agreed there was a tremendous
momentum building in India to address climate change, lead largely
by the media, due to India's vulnerability. While they also agreed
much more needed to be done to raise awareness, at the village
level, they were largely appreciative of GOI efforts towards energy

NEW DELHI 00001637 003 OF 003


efficiency and its focus on renewable energy. They noted an
enthusiasm in the industrial sector to move away from business as
usual energy investments and added that world class demonstration
projects that showcase viable clean technologies would further
encourage the private sector to adopt new technologies. In a
deviation from the other NGO representatives, Development
Alternatives President Ashok Khosla raised the issue of population
reduction and noted the role demographic transitions can bring in
lowering emissions. Khosla lamented the limited scope of UNFCCC
negotiations as they do not allow for discussion of reduced
emissions from population reduction.

--------------
PRESS INTERACTION
--------------


10. S/E Stern conveyed the U.S. position in a television interview
with CNN-IBN and in print interviews with the Times of India and the
Indian Express. The reporting was reasonably balanced with a mix of
statements noting the constructive engagement between the two
countries but still highlighting the perceived areas of difference.
The interview and articles are currently available at the following
links:

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/ obamas-man-talks-of-climate
-change-deal-with -india/97751-2.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/NEWS/India/Copenhagen
-deal-Indias-demand-for-75bn- is-unrealistic/articleshow
/4805262.cms

http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/NEWS/India/US-Drop-
dependence-on-coal/ articleshow/4805270.cms

http://www.indianexpress. com/news/us-envoy-
for-quantified-emission-cuts /492494/0

--------------
BILATERAL COOPERATION AND NEXT STEPS
--------------


11. In all of his meetings, S/E Stern asked his interlocutors to
discuss potential areas for bilateral cooperation. Special Envoy
Saran noted the importance of coal to India and suggested working
together on clean coal. Minister Shinde suggested bilateral
cooperation on co-generation technologies and an ultra-supercritical
pilot coal power plant. Minister of New and Renewable Energy Farook
Abdullah stated there was a great deal of room for bilateral
cooperation in second generation biofuels, wind, and solar.
Minister Ramesh reiterated the proposal he made to Secretary Clinton
for joint research, development, demonstration and dissemination of
solar energy, biomass, clean coal, high voltage power transmission,
smart grids, and wastewater utilization projects under a potential
Indo-US Foundation for Climate Change Technology.


12. S/E Saran and Minister Ramesh both recommended additional
bilateral meetings with Ramesh suggesting India and the U.S. hold
bilateral climate talks in September in Washington, DC. Ramesh
noted his intention to attend UN Secretary General Ban, Ki-Moon's
climate conference on September 22 and informed S/E Stern he would
spend as much time in Washington as needed. Ramesh also raised the
GOI's strong interest in having Secretary of Energy Chu speak on
energy security and climate change at the Delhi High Level
Conference on Climate Change: Technology Development and Transfer
scheduled October 22-23, 2009 and asked S/E Stern to discuss the
conference with Secretary Chu. Ramesh summed up the GOI position on
bilateral engagement by stating that the bridges the U.S. built with
China on climate change and clean energy could also be built with
India.


13. This cable has been approved by Special Envoy Stern.

ROEMER