The India Climate Observatory

Commentary, action and research on climate and development in India

In 2016, record new renewable energy added, and cheaply

by Leave a Comment

Recent reports bring positive news related to renewable energy investment and the feasibility of a 100% renewable energy future. The UN Environment Programme (UN Environment, or UNEP), the Frankfurt School-UNEP Collaborating Centre, and Bloomberg New Energy Finance released a report titled ‘Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2017,’ which finds that wind, solar, biomass and waste-to-energy, geothermal, small hydro and marine sources added 138.5 gigawatts to global power capacity in 2016, up 8% from the 127.5 gigawatts added in 2015.

The report indicates that as the cost of clean technology continues to fall, the world added record levels of renewable energy capacity in 2016, at an investment level 23% lower than the previous year. According to UN Environment, the added generating capacity roughly equals that of the world’s 16 largest existing power producing facilities combined.

Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2017, published on April 6th by UN Environment, the Frankfurt School-UNEP Collaborating Centre, and Bloomberg New Energy Finance, finds that all investments in renewables totaled $241.6 billion (excluding large hydro). These investments added 138.5 gigawatts to global power capacity in 2016, up 9 per cent from the 127.5 gigawatts added the year before.

Investment in renewables capacity was roughly double that in fossil fuel generation; the corresponding new capacity from renewables was equivalent to 55 per cent of all new power, the highest to date. The proportion of electricity coming from renewables excluding large hydro rose from 10.3 per cent to 11.3 per cent. This prevented the emission of an estimated 1.7 gigatons of carbon dioxide.

The total investment was $241.6 billion (excluding large hydro), the lowest since 2013. This was in large part a result of falling costs: the average dollar capital expenditure per megawatt for solar photovoltaics and wind dropped by over 10 per cent.

Boarding the technology omnibus

by Leave a Comment

RG_ICP_UNEA_blog_201406India’s Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar has attended the first United Nations Environment Assembly, held in Nairobi, Kenya, on 23-27 June 2014. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described the UNEA is an “historic event for all of us, set to define not only the future of the United Nations Environment Programme, but to support further the institutional framework and programmatic platform for sustainable development and set the environmental agenda for the world to follow”.

At the first UNEA assembly, Javadekar made two points we find require critical discussion. The first is: “India strongly feels that technology transfer is the most important means of implementation and an effective and functional Technology Facilitation Mechanism (TFM) is a must for a meaningful Post-2015 Development Agenda.”

We think such a blanket statement concerning ‘technology’ cannot be held up at international fora as being the consensus view of India’s citizens. There has for the last decade been scarcely any public consultation held at the local level – keeping in mind the rights of urban local bodies and panchayats in determining their development options and needs – concerning technology, its forms and the ways in which it may be used. Thus Javadekar’s statement is unrepresentative.

The Technology Facilitation Mechanism he referred to is considered – in UN and other inter-governmental fora – as being able to meet the technology transfer needs of developing countries in various sectors such as health, energy, food, water, sanitation. The view in such fora is that ‘developing’ countries need to be ‘assisted’ in technology needs assessment, adaptation, roll-out and human and institutional capacity building.

Javadekar’s second statement is: “I have a suggestion to make in this regard. It has been agreed to establish Green Climate Fund of US$ 100 billion per year by 2020. This amount should be utilised to purchase IPRs of most crucial technologies for public good and these technologies should then be freely available to the developing countries to facilitate sustainable development.”

We think this is an incomplete statement that rests on a few techno-centric views, which references intellectual property in a casual manner (and which also ignores the central aspects of the widespread opposition in India to genetically modified organisms for example), and which has overlooked entirely traditional and indigenous knowledge. The latter part of this second statement, “should then be freely available”, is useful from a South-South perspective and should be treated as such.