Shale gas: dubious game-changer

The United States has always been the climate change renegade. For the past 25-odd years, since negotiations for a global agreement to combat the threat of this potential catastrophe began, the US has been the naysayer, pushing against a deal, weakening the draft and always hiding its inaction behind the legitimate growth of emissions in countries like China and India.

New business for new renewables

It was a trade exhibition abuzz with the restrained chatter of busy suited executives at company stalls making contacts and finalising deals. Nothing out of place except that this trade was about renewable energy technologies, which have unconventional reasons for growth. First, these technologies are seen as the most economical and feasible source of energy for millions of people unconnected to the electricity grid and having no electricity to light their houses or cook their food. This energy poverty is disabling and needs to be eradicated. Introduction of decentralised and improved technologies paves the way to catapult the poorest of the households into the most modern systems. Secondly, these technologies—from wind and solar to biomass—provide cleaner low-carbon energy options to combat climate change. These are future systems critical for survival of all.

See the light

There is no question that India desperately needs to generate more power. The energy indicators say it all. It has the lowest per capita consumption of electricity in the world. This when access to energy is correlated with development, indeed with economic growth.  

Why authorize it?

If it's broken, don't fix it. That's the new motto of the government: forget it and build another. Do not sort out details. I am talking of what the government believes will form the spine of regulation in future. The flavour of the day is 'authorities': separate, independent institutions not bound by departmental morass, not tied down by procedures or personnel--the bane supposedly of any implementation or regulatory initiative. I think it is time to review this gelato of current governance.

Green politics for green technologies

That we need 'green' technologies--wind, solar or biomass gasification--for future energy security is no longer a matter of debate. The critical question, now, is: under what conditions can these emerging technologies be introduced into the market? The answer is not so simple. Most innovation and manufacture in these new sectors lie with private players. At the same time, the creation of 'favourable' conditions for application is at the door of government and public policy.

Frugality is not poverty lessons in energy security

After much vacillation and prevarication, the government has finally done the inevitable--raised the price of petroleum products--by doing a little of everything. But the bottom-line is that even after the cut in customs tax, reduction in excise duty, a 'modest' increase in the cost of petrol, diesel and cooking gas for all and a further request to states to slash their taxes, the oil companies are still left with massive deficits in every litre or every cylinder sold. It is a job half done at a time when the burden of the task is spiralling.

Of fixing price for natural gas

On the face, it seems like a fight between brothers. One brother, in this case the elder, Mukesh Ambani, managed to get control over the country's gas reserves. The other, Anil Ambani, inherited the power generation business. When they were in it together, it worked brilliantly, the gas, priced low, would make it to the power plant, which in turn would yield rich dividends.

Biofuel good idea, bad practice

Now that the reality of climate change has been accepted even by its strongest sceptics, there is a rush to find answers. The latest buzz is to substitute the use of greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuels with biofuels--fuel processed from plants. Unfortunately, the way we are going about implementing this "good" idea could mean we are headed from the frying pan to the fire.

Talk technology, not subsidies, to benefit the poor

The C Rangarajan committee to review prices of petroleum products says that the government should increase the price of liquefied petroleum gas (lpg) cylinders by Rs 75. This is essential for oil companies, which are burdened by financial losses because they sell gas below the cost of production and distribution, says the committee. It also sees no merit in subsidising lpg , which it says is predominantly the cooking fuel of the middle classes and not the poor.

It's dark outside the TV grab

In this day of television grabs, policies are about slugfests. The logic of the grab is that any discussion must be heated, with sharply divided positions -- clear proponents and opponents. It is a caricature of the world; in it, for instance, if one is an environmentalist then s/he must be against nuclear energy, even without logic or rationale; the grab allows it so. But let's discuss India's nuclear option, not as an absolute given or the mother of all things evil but as a possible energy source in a growing and starved nation. What does the future hold?