1. Indian GHG and Local Pollutant Emissions: Present Trends and Future Projections Amit Garg Workshop on Global Air Pollution Trends to 2030 January 27-28, 2005, IIASA, Austria

2. Indian Emission Analysis Greenhouse gases (CO 2, Methane, N 2 O, CFC, HFC, SF 6 ) Local pollutants (SO 2, NO X, CO, Particulates) Large point and Area source emissions mapping Present (1990 to 2000) and future projections (up to 2030) GHG and local pollutants: Policy links and disjoints Development pathways and emission scenarios SO 2 emissions trading and technology push comparison Human health impact assessments due to local pollutant emissions Bottom-up models used: MARKAL and AIM/Local

3.  MARKAL (Market Allocation)  AIM/Local and AIM/Enduse Bottom-UP Models Used

4. Model System for India’s Emissions Policy Analysis Models Top-down Models AIM/Material SGM GEMA ERB AIM/Trend Local Models AIM/Local Inventory Assessment Health Impact Assessment Model Bottom-up Models ANSWER – MARKAL Stochastic MARKAL Demand Projection AIM/End-use Power Sector LP

5. Soft-linked Models Framework

6. Emissions Inventory of India: Present Trends

7. Salient features  Gridded inventory database for 1990, 1995 and 2000 CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O, SO 2, NO X emissions covered District level emission data (466 districts in 1991, now 593) 80% districts smaller than 1 o x 1 o and 60% smaller than 1/2 o x 1/2 o 382 large point sources (LPS) mapped for the year 2000 Collaboration with Space Application Centre, ISRO 2004 database being created IPCC methodology used Indian emission factors used to the extent possible  Future projections Up to 2100 for CO 2 (national emission nos.) Up to 2030 for CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O, SO 2 (finer with LPS and area sources) Up to 2030 for SPM and CO (coarse estimation) LPS increased to 457 (2010), 523 (2020) and 587 (2030)

8. CO 2 Emission Distribution (1995) Power Industry Road Other transport Other sectors Steel Cement Other industries 45% 35% 13% 2% 5% 35% 10% 55%  Power sector has 90% emissions from 50 plants  Industry emissions are relatively dispersed. 10% districts emit 70% (including 5 steel plants) Coal and power sector dominate Indian CO 2 emissions

9. Methane Emissions (1995) 45% 22% 15% 10% 2% 4% 2% Livestock Paddy cultivation Biomass burning Municipal solid waste Waste water Oil & gas production & transportation Coal production Livestock and rice paddy emissions dominate Indian methane emissions

10. N 2 O: Major Contributors (1995)

11. SO 2 : Major Contributors (1995) Power sectorIndustry Agriculture Road Others Other transport Other industriesSteel Fertilizer Cement Industry (non-energy SO 2 ) 46% 36% 8% 6% 3% 1% 42% 27% 14% 10% 7% Emission sources are mostly similar to CO 2 emissions

12. NO X : Major Contributors (1995) % Share Sectors NO x SO 2 Power generation 27.9 46.1 Transport 32.0 7.8 Industry 19.2 34.4 Biomass burning 18.7 5.2 Other sectors 1.9 3.8 Non-energy sources 0.3 2.7

13. Development Pathways and Emission Scenarios for India

14. Development Pathways IA1: High Growth IA2: Fragmented Growth IB1: Sustainable Development IB2: Business-As-Usual High market integration Fragmented market Centralized Governance Decentralized governance Governance Market Integration IA1 IA2 IB2 IB1

15. Scenario Storylines IA1: High Growth 7.7% GDP growth for next three decades Enhanced all-round infrastructure Accelerated market reforms High access to global finance & technologies Technology, information & industry driven IB2: Business-As-Usual 5.5% GDP growth for next three decades Fragmented infrastructure development Inward looking policies Low globalization and liberalization Dematerialization, renewable energy thrust IB1: Sustainable Development 6.5% GDP growth for next three decades Strong environmental integrity of the economy Sustainable consumption all-round Dematerialization, renewable energy thrust Enhanced all-round infrastructure Lower income disparities High access to global finance & technologies IA2: Fragmented Growth 4.5% GDP growth for next three decades Fragmented infrastructure development Slower market reforms High regional disparities in development levels Heavy-industry driven Slower technology improvements

16. GDP Projections Indexed GDP projections GDP per capita projections

17. Population Projections “Chain of generations concept” to be dominant for major part of the 21 st century for IA2 and IB2 scenarios and also for initial 30 years of IA1 and IB1 scenarios. “Single generation concept” becomes dominant for IA1 and IB1 after 30 years, and plays a role in IB2 after 2060 and only later for IA2. These decisions affect the Total Fertility Rates (TFR) and therefore the national population projections. Decadal population growth has declined from 24.8% during 1961–71 to 21.3% during 1991–2001 and is targeted to further decline to 16.2% during 2001–2011

18. Urbanization The drivers of urbanization are different for alternate scenarios

19. Population Density Distribution Maps available for 1990 and 2000

20. Land use Parts of barren, fallow and wastelands (19% in 2000) would be brought into active use Non-agriculture use of land would grow due to rising urbanization and industrial growth Tree and forest cover would also change under alternate scenarios. Government’s internal target is 33% forest and tree cover Agricultural yield is expected to increase although net sown area has almost stagnated over the last 30 years to around 1.42 million km 2

21. Livestock population share projections There is an increasing trend in buffalo (dairy) population resulting in increased share

22. Shares of opencast and underground mining, IB2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 2000200520102015202020252030 Years Mining Share (%) Opencast mining Underground mining Cost: cheap Env.: overburden removal Reserves: limited Cost: expensive Env.: coal bed methane Reserves: higher Increase coal import

23. Emission Projections for India

24. GHG versus Local Emissions in India (IB2 Scenario) Carbon EmissionsSO 2 Emissions

25. Delhi SO 2 emissions from Oil Sulfur Coefficient decrease for Diesel over 1995-2002 has resulted in substantial SO 2 emission reduction in Delhi

26. Carbon Emissions ( Million Ton) 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2000201020202030 IA1 IB2 IB1 IA2 Carbon Emission Pathways

27. Energy, Carbon, Electricity and GDP (IB2 Scenario)

28. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1500350055007500950011500 GDP per capita (PPP$) MT IB2 IB1 IA2 2035 2025 2020 Kuznets’ Analysis – SO 2 Emissions: Development Pathways Vs. Time-frame

29. Projecting Regional Emission Spreads

30. LPS Coverage for CO 2 and SO 2

31. LPS Locations 20002030

32. Million Tons LPS: CO 2 Emissions 1995

33. LPS: SO 2 Emissions Thousand Tons A B C D E F 1995

34. Regional distribution of CO 2 emissions for IB2 Scenario Note: Circles show emissions from large point sources 0 5 10 15 30 40 20 Million Tons < 3 3 - 6 6 - 9 9 - 12 12 - 15 15 - 18 18 - 21 > 21 Million Tons 20002030

35. 2000 2030 < 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.15 < 0.20 0.11 Million Tons < 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.15 > 0.20 0.11 Million Tons < 0.01 0.01-0.017 0.017-0.026 0.026-0.035 0.035-0.044 0.044-0.053 0.053-0.060 > 0.060 Million Tons Note: Circles show emissions from large point sources Regional distribution of SO 2 emissions for IB2 Scenario

36. CH 4 Emissions under BAU Scenario (IB2) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2000201020202030 CH 4 emissions (Tg) Coal production Agriculture residue Waste water Paddy cultivation Manure management Oil & natural gas Coal production Biomass consumption Enteric fermentation Municipal solid waste Increasing urban population, higher waste collection, Increased dumping at land-fills, deeper waste dumps, and their improved management

37. Note: Circles show emissions from large point sources 20002030 Thousand Ton CH 4 Regional distribution of CH 4 emissions for IB2 Scenario

38. N 2 O Emissions Under BAU Scenario (IB2) 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 2000201020202030 N 2 O emissions (Tg) Indirect emissions Industrial processes Livestock Synthetic fertilizer use Natural gas combustion Biological nitrogen fixation Field burning of agriculture residue Oil product combustion Coal combustion Agriculture sector activities account for more than 90%

39. Note: Circles show emissions from large point sources Regional distribution of N 2 O emissions for IB2 Scenario 20002030

40. CO 2, CH 4, N 2 O and CO 2 Equivalent GHG Emissions (IB2) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2000201020202030 Index 2000 =100 CO 2 Methane N2ON2O CO 2 equivalent 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2000201020202030 CO 2 equivalent (% Share) CO 2 MethaneN2ON2O

41. Basket of 6-Gases and CO 2 Equivalent GHG Emissions (IB2)

42. Contributing Factors Towards BAU Emissions (Gap Filling Policies)

43. Carbon Emissions, IB2 (Mt)

44. SO 2 Emissions, IB2 (Mt)

45. NO X Emissions, IB2 (Mt) Reference case Technological freeze Autonomous Energy Efficiency Improvements Structural conversion of economy 0 5 10 15 20 199520002005201020152020202520302035 8.5 17.4 3.46 Reference case Technological freeze Autonomous Energy Efficiency Improvements Structural conversion of economy Reference case Technological freeze Autonomous Energy Efficiency Improvements Structural conversion of economy Autonomous Energy Efficiency Improvements Structural conversion of economy 0 5 10 15 20 199520002005201020152020202520302035 8.5 17.4 3.46 0 5 10 15 20 199520002005201020152020202520302035 Emissions (Mt) 8.5 17.4 3.46 (IB2)

46. CO Emissions, IB2 (Mt)

47. Particulate Emissions, IB2 (Mt)

48. MARKAL Model Applications for India Some Mitigation Results for India

49. Carbon Mitigation Potential Mitigation options Mitigation potential during 2002-2012 (MtC) Long-term marginal cost ($/tC) Demand side energy efficiency450-15 Supply side energy efficiency320-12 Electricity transmission and distribution125-30 Renewable electricity technologies233-15 Fuel switching (coal to gas)85-20 Carbon mitigated120 MtC (up to $30/tC) Cumulative emissions4.4 BtC

50. Marginal Cost of Carbon Mitigation (1995-2035) 6 billion tons of mitigation below $25/ ton of carbon Carbon mitigation (billion ton) Cost ($/Ton of Carbon) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1234567

51. 0 25 50 100 150 -25 1020304050 Cumulative CH 4 mitigation (Million TCE) Marginal Abatement Cost ($/TCE) Methane Mitigation Methane mitigation mostly from coal mining and MSW Agriculture activities are widely dispersed, unorganized, and for sustenance. Therefore mitigation is more difficult than CO 2 emissions. Yield enhancement has to be the driving factor in agriculture and methane mitigation would be additional benefits.

52. Marginal costs for SO 2 mitigation 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 200520152030 Year Marginal Costs (Rs/ton of SO2) Compliance costs over 2010-2030  Technology pushUS$ 12.7 billion  Emissions TradingUS$ 7.1 billion Annual average cost savings over a 20 year period are US$ 280 million

53. Conclusions

54. CO 2 and SO 2 emissions from India, although connected, do not move in synchronization in future and have a disjoint under various scenarios. GHG emissions continue to rise while SO 2 emissions decline after some years under all scenarios. SO 2 mitigation has “where” flexibility in a national context, which is not available for GHG mitigation. SO 2 mitigation under BAU due to sulfur reduction in petroleum oil products (recently) and FGD penetration (later). SPM mitigation due to enforcing electro-static precipitator efficiency norms in industrial units, with cleaner fuels and vehicles also contributing substantially. Conclusions

55. High economic growth is better than lower growth to mitigate local pollution as lack of investible resources limits investments in cleaner environmental measures. Validates the environmental Kuznets’ curve for India as SO 2 emissions peak around per capita GDP of US$ 5000-6000 (year 2000 PPP basis) under alternate scenarios. Co-benefits for direct SO 2 mitigation policy and direct CO 2 mitigation policy are asymmetric. The emission elasticity of SO 2 emissions due to C mitigation policy is around 1.2, and C elasticity due to SO 2 mitigation policy is around 0.1 Conclusions

56. Under simultaneous CO 2 and SO 2 constraints, mitigation depends upon carbon price assumptions. Under high carbon price, coal to gas switch for LPS (SO2 declines) but not much oil substitution in transport sector (urban hotspots still persist). Under low carbon price, marginal coal substitution (so marginal SO2 mitigation). Separate mitigation policies for CO 2 and SO 2 emissions in India, although joint mitigation policies possible mainly through efficiency improvements and fuel switching for certain sectors Conclusions

57. Thanks