Preface
This report is in continuation of an earlier report in November 2009. This reportis the outcome of support and collaboration among various academic and research
institutions - namely; Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India, National
Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Kyoto University (KU) and Mizuho Information and Research Institute from Japan.
We are grateful to Mr Subhash Dhar (UNEP) for the number of discussions we hadwith him for preparing this document. We are also grateful to Dr. Jae Edmond forvery insightful discussions on ‘Global Technology Strategy’ for transition to a low
carbon future and providing carbon price data from the global CO2e stabilization
modelling runs. We are thankful to National Institute of Environment Studies (NIES),
Japan, for access to the Asia-Pacific Integrated Model (AIM) and the Strategic Databases. Above all, we wish to acknowledge numerous Indian researchers, policymakers, industry practitioners, sectoral & domain experts, and NGOs for their cooperation to share valuable information and insights into the complex future transition processes underlying the scenario specifications and nuanced modelling.
This LCS scenario roadmap document is intended to communicate to the policy
makers - how to effectively integrate climate change actions in the development
plans of the country. The actions outlined in the document, we believe, would guideeffective transition towards a Low Carbon India. The proposed analysis is in linewith national position articulated in India’s “National Climate Change Action
Plan”. The LCS transition analyzed in this report, converges with the 2 0 C global“aspirational” stabilization target, as agreed in various global forums. It is foundthat US$ 3 Trillion investment in energy infrastructures is needed till 2050, underthe BAU scenario, most of which is in the power sector. Delayed actions towards
low carbon transitions are likely to result in infrastructure ‘lock-in’ that acts as barrier to make such a transition. It was also found that the marginal abatement costs
under the LCS scenario is significantly lower than the conventional development
scenario.
Our research approach and findings, we hope, shall contribute in sustainable transition of India, one of the world’s fastest growing economy, to a Low Carbon Society.

- P. R. Shukla

Table of Contents
Executive summary

7

About India

9

Background of Low Carbon Society (LCS)

10

Scenario Driver

11

Scenario Description

12

Energy and Emissions in 2050

14

Analysis of Carbon Tax (CT) Scenario

16

Analysis of Sustainable Scenario (SS)17

LCS Policy Actions

18

LCS Infrastructure Choices

22

Water-Energy-Climate Change

24

Scenario Comparison: Beyond Carbon

27

New and Renewable Energy

28

Energy and Environment Policy in India

29

Modeling Framework

32

Component Models

33

References

34

Executive summary
Low carbon society scenarios visualize social,

the reduction is primarily on account of decou-

economic and technological transitions throughpling energy and carbon, whereas the actual

which societies respond to climate change. Alt-energy consumption increases as compared tohough India ’ s GHG emissions on per capita

the base case.

basis are very low as compared to other devel-

However, under the sustainability scenario

oped countries, but the current assessment( f igure 2 ) , the same mitigation target can beconsiders alignment of India ’ s development

achieved by a combination of initiatives on both

pathway with the 2 0 C global “ aspirational ”

supply and demand side, thereby widening thestabilization target. This report assesses twotechnology use. On the supply side, infrastruc-paradigms for transiting to a low carbon future

ture & clean power again plays a crucial role.

in India. First pathway assumes conventional

While on the demand side, measures like de-development pattern together with a carbon

materialization, sustainable consumption andprice that aligns India ’ s emissions to an opti-

8,000

mal 450 ppmv CO2e stabilization global re-

7,000

sponse. The second emissions pathway as-

6,000

pattern

caricatured

bydiverseresponse

measures typical of the ‘ s ustainability ’ para-

Infrastructure
Million Ton CO2

sumes an underlying sustainable development

Device Efficiency

5,000

used for delineating and assessing the alter-

1,000

2020

2030

2040

2050

8,000
Water-Energy
Reduced Consumption

6,000
Million Ton CO2

a major intervention in the infrastructure & the2010

Figure 1: Mitigation Options in Carbon Tax Scenario

under the conventional development pattern

CO2e stabilization scenario is achieved throughResidual Emissions

2000

It can be seen from the figure 1 alongside thattarget of 83.5 billion tCO2for the 450 ppmv

Fossel Fuel Switching0nate development pathways having equal cu-( together with a carbon price ) , the mitigation

Renewable Energy

3,000
2,000

the 21st century.

Nuclear4,000

digm. An integrated modelling framework is

mulative CO2 emissions during the first half ofWater-Energy &othersReycling
Material Substitutions
Device Efficiency

4,000

Renewable Energy
Infrastructure
Fuel Switch

2,000

NuclearResidual Emissions

power sector comprising of measures such as
extensive use of advance technologies like
CCS and greater proliferation of nuclear ener-

0
2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

gy. These measures are predominantly on the Figure 2:Mitigation Options in Sustainability Scenario
supply side. It is also important to mention thatend use device efficiency play a key role.

About India
India faces major development challenges access to the basic amenities like drinking water, electricity, sanitation and clean cooking energy still remain a luxury for both urban andrural dwellers alike. GoI’ s Ministry of Environment & Forests released a recent report titled“ 4 X4 assessment of the impact of climatechange on key sectors and regions of India in
2030s ” . This detailed study examines implications of climate change for India in 2030s. The
study was undertaken for 4 sectors namely;
agriculture, water, forestry and health. The
study highlighted certain impacts on the above
sectors due to climate change, which underscores the fact that appropriate response
mechanism/strategy need to be devised so as
to mitigate the impacts due to climate change.
Developing countries, like India, would requirebuilding adaptive capacity for facing climate
risks with increasing evidence of climatechange ( IPCC, 2006) . Climate change,
which happens due to increase in green housegas ( GHG ) emissions, is in turn related toincreased human activities post industrialization ( IPCC, 2006 ) and therefore industrialization of large developing countries, like China
and India can add significantly to GHG emissions. Hence, in the coming years, India faces
the challenges in economic development whichhave to be met with the limited resources available, with minimal externalities and in presenceof large uncertainties with respect to climate.

2011-12 ) document, the Prime Minister( P M ) of India highlighted the importance ofgrowth to meet developmental needs of thecountry ’ s people. To achieve the developmental targets of the nation, the PM reasserted
the need of high growth to meet the developmental needs. The plan sets a target for 9%
growth in the five year period 2007 – 08 to 2011
– 1 2, with accelerated growth during the period, to reach 10% by the end of the Plan.
From the perspective of the energy sector, theplan document highlights the need of affordable energy as a critical element to achieve thegrowth targets of the plan period, with an eye
on rational energy pricing. Energy security has
also emerged as a key theme in the policy document. The Eleventh Plan reaffirms the commitment to work towards policies for the energy
sector consistent with the optimal use of various energy resources. The Plan also emphasizes the importance of energy conservation,
increasing energy efficiency, and developmentof renewable sources of energy.
Figure 3: Per Capita CO2 emission ( tons/person)

The challenges for India are immense, both on
meeting the development needs of its people
as well as achieving faster and consistent
growth of its economy. Aligning the developmental objectives with concerns for climatechange has emerged as one of the key challenges for India. growth rate of 7.7% during
the plan period.
In the foreword to the 11th plan ( 2007-8 toUpto 33- 6

6 - 1212 - 20> 20

External boundaries are not authenticatedBackground of LCS
In the developed world context, the concept ofa low-carbon society has the following attributes:( 1 ) Actions should be compatible with theprinciples of sustainable development,
however not at the cost of the development needs of all groups in the society.
( 2 ) Make an equitable contribution towards
global efforts in stabilizing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and other
GHG gases, through deep emission
cuts.
( 3 ) Use low-carbon energy sources andtechnologies and demonstrate a highlevel of energy efficiency at all levels ofenergy usage.
( 4 ) Adopt certain behavioral and consumption styles that are consistent with lowlevels of greenhouse gas emissions.
However, the concept of a low-carbon society
has a different meaning for the developingworld. Countries, like India, still have low per
capita emissions, are on an increasing economic growth trajectory and have priorities inmeeting the development needs, like education, healthcare.

come this development paradox is throughadoption of a sustainable development ( SD )paradigm ( Sathaye et. al., 2006 ) . The relation between climate change and SD was recognised in “ Delhi Declaration ” during COP-8
in 2002 ( Shukla et. al., 2003 ) . In fact, it has
been argued that exclusive climate centric vision shall prove very expensive and might create large mitigation and adaptation ‘ burden ’( S hukla, 2006 ) whereas SD pathway resultsin lower mitigation costs besides creating opportunities to realize co-benefits without having
to sacrifice the original objective of enhancing
economic and social development ( Shukla,
2006 ) . Modelling results have predicted substantial GDP loss for India to meet the stabilisation targets ( Figure 4 below ) . This GDP

GDP Loss- India
9%

380 ppmv CO2 (2 deg C)

8%440 ppmv CO2 (2.8 deg C)

7%6%530 ppmv CO2 (3.6 deg C)

5%590 ppmv CO2 (4.2 deg C)

4%
3%
2%

But, the LCS opportunity for developing countries arrives with a window of opportunity, as it
gives a chance for such countries to avoid
critical lock-ins; particularly in long-lived infrastructure assets. From the perspective of acountry, like India, the LCS opportunity is awindow to decide about the future flow of energy through infrastructure and other behavioral and lifestyle related choices and therefore the importance of such a study.
In the coming years, India faces the challenges
in economic development which have to be
met with the limited resources available, withminimal externalities and in presence of large
uncertainties with respect to climate. One of
the growing and accepted approaches to over-

1%
0%
2020

2035

2050

2065

2080

2095

Figure 4: GDP Loss for Indialoss needs to be compensated through international financial transfers ( either directly interms of assistance, or technological transfer or
through various mechanisms like the CDM ) .
The LCS framework should also look at opportunities which create various kinds of cobenefits apart from direct GHG emission reductions. Such co-benefits, like improved air quality, provide an opportunity to minimize social
costs of such a transition. The other advantage
of such an approach would be in achieving

Scenario Drivers
crease in the per capita income and therefore,
an increase in the number of 4W ’ s. Moreover
there is a higher penetration of public transportation. Further, the industrial sector would becontributing the next big chunk of the GDP and
the remaining being contributed by agriculture( w hich declines continuously to reach the level of nearly 4-5% by 2050 ) . The modal split
assumes an initial higher penetration of public
transport, and thereafter towards the later
years an increase of private vehicles poweredby electricity.

Macro Economic

GDP growth for period 2005-2032 is 8% andthis is similar to Planning Commission ’ s 8%
GDP Scenario ( GoI, 2006 ) . Population projections are based on UN Population Medium
Scenario, Version 2008 for India ( UNPD,
2008 ) . The complete population assumptions
are given in Table 1. The GDP assumptions forthe initial period till 2030 is in line with the Planning Commissions 8% scenario. Further, during the period beyond 2030; GDP and population assumptions are based as per Table 1 ( in Table 1: Base Case Scenario Drivers
this study ) .
GDP( 2 005 Prices )Population

Bn INR

Mn

2005

32833

1131

2030

2295731485

2050

774673

1614

Year

On the other macro-economic factors, thetrends and assumptions are given in Figure 6.
We can see from the trends, that there is a
substantial increase in the % of commercial
sector contribution to the GDP; a gradual inFigure 5: Base Case Scenario Drivers
Share in GDP (%)

Total Population

60

1800
1614

1600

50

40

1200

% Share

1400
1000

30

800

1294

1594

400

Trans port
Agriculture

10

1131

1528

600

Indus try
Com m ercial

20

1043

1431

200
0
2000

0
2005

2015

2025

Modal Split—Road

2035

2005

2015

2025

2035

2045

2050

2045

Per capita income (US$)
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Scenario Description
This analysis considers two scenarios. The
scenarios depict two alternative pathways forachieving the Low Carbon Society ( LCS ) .
The scenario stories span the period till 2050.
The descriptions of scenarios are as under.

Base Case Scenario
This scenario assumes the future economic
development along the conventional path. Incase of a developing country, such as India,
the scenario assumes the future socioeconomic development to mimic the resource
intensive development path followed by thepresent developed countries. The scenario assumes improvements in energy intensity similar
to the dynamics-as-usual case and the targeted share of commercial renewable energy. The
recently announced National Action Plan on
Climate Change ( NAPCC ) has certain specified sectoral targets. These targets have been
incorporated under the Base Case scenario in
this analysis.

Low Carbon Scenarios
Conventional Path: Carbon Tax ( CT ) Scenario
This scenario presumes stringent carbon tax( o r permit price ) trajectory compared to milder carbon regime assumed under the basecase. Besides the difference in carbon tax, theunderlying structure of this scenario is identicalto the Base Case. The scenario assumes stabilization target of 450 ppmv CO2e. The carbon
price trajectory for 480 ppmv CO2e concentration stabilization, interpolated from CCSP SAP
2.1a stabilization scenarios is $20 per ton ofCO2 during the Kyoto protocol period and rises
to $200 per ton of CO2 in 2050. The scenario
assumes greater improvements in the energy

intensity and higher target for the share of commercial renewable energy compared to theBase Case scenario.
Sustainability ( SS ) Scenario
This scenario represents a very different world
view of development as compared to the BaseCase. The scenario follows a distinct‘ s ustainability ’ rationale, like that of the
IPCC SRES B1 global scenario. The scenario
perspective is long-term, aiming to deliver intergenerational justice by decoupling the economic growth from highly resource intensive andenvironmentally unsound conventional path.
The scenario rationale rests on aligning the
economic development policies, measures andactions to gain multiple co-benefits, especiallyin developing countries where the institutions ofgovernance, rule of law and markets are evolving. The scenario assumes the society to proactively introduce significant behavioural, technological, institutional, governance and economic measures which promotes the sustainable development paradigm. In addition, this
scenario also assumes a society which is responding to a globally agreed long-term CO2
concentration stabilization target. The global
target assumed for this analysis is also 450
ppmv CO2e concentration target or temperature target within 2o to 3o Celsius.
In comparison with the mild carbon tax assumed in the sustainability scenario, the carbon price trajectory corresponding to the stabilization target is likely to be higher. Hence, India ’ s cumulative CO2 emissions ( from 2005
to 2050 ) in LCS scenario should be lower
than the sustainability scenario. Instead of carbon tax trajectory, the SS scenario assumes acumulative carbon budget for the post-Kyoto
period 2013 to 2050.

Carbon Prices : Carbon price trajectory forbase case scenario and carbon tax scenario
are linked to CO2e stabilization targets. The
price trajectories are obtained from outputs
from global Second Generation Model( S GM ) results.
Energy demand: the final sectoral energy demand is calculated, and is represented in Figure 7 for the various sectors under BAU and
LCS-SUS scenarios.

Industry

Transport

Residential, Commercial & Agriculture

1600

Final Energy Demand (Mtoe)

Energy Prices: A variety of prices are observedin the Indian energy markets especially for coaland gas. The regulatory regime tries to keep
prices aligned to the cost of production. Using
the regulated prices information available inpublic domain, supply curves are created; using a step wise linear structure The price assumptions for imported fuels are based on
price projections given by IEA.

396

1200

416

383

800

227
400

663
173

0

439

108
2005

2050 BaU

2050 LCS

Figure 6: Final Sectoral Energy Demand
Figure 7: Carbon price in US $ per ton of CO2—Base and CT scenario

Energy & Emissions in 2050
The demand for energy increases 5.35 times to2957 Mtoe in 2050 as compared to 553 Mtoe
in 2005, whereas the GDP increases by 23.6
times during the same period. Therefore, decoupling of GDP and Energy takes place as aresult of changes in the structure of economy
and efficiency improvements. The energy intensity decreases at the rate of 3.2% for theperiod 2005-2050.

2050 ) , whereas the energy consumption actually increases as compared to the base case.
However in the SS scenario the carbon intensities are further moderated, by an increase in
the share of renewables ( 32% ) , nuclear andgas at the expense of coal and oil. Besides,
due to many demand side interventions, there
is also a decrease in the energy consumption
as compared to the base case.

The energy mix diversifies from being highly
dependent on coal, oil and traditional biomass
to one which has significant share of naturalgas, other renewable, nuclear and commercial
biomass. It is also important to mention that theemission reduction under CT scenario is primarily on account of decoupling energy andcarbon ( share of renewables is 21.8% in

The CO2 emissions increase from 1297 Million
ton of CO2 in 2005 to 6128 Million ton of CO2 in
2050, under the base case ( no intervention ) . Under the low carbon scenarios, CO2
emissions are reduced to 1939 Million ton CO2
in 2050. This results in a cumulative reductionof 83.5 billion ton CO2 over the period 20102050.

Figure 8: Primary Energy Demand

Figure 9: GHG Emissions per capita

3500

3000
Other renew ables

259

Primary Energy (Mtoe)

2500

Biomass and w aste

636
Hydro

2000

197
447

259

Nuclear

1500
306

Gas

222
293

1000

Oil

251
500

140

616

119
0

Coal

1174

217
2005

2050 BaU

2050 LCS

Figure 10: Energy & Carbon Intensities in CT scenario

Per capita CO2 Emission (t CO2)

4.00

3.00

2.00

3.80

1.00
1.20

1.15
0.00
2005

2050 BaU

2050 LCS

Figure 11: Energy & Carbon Intensities in LCS scenario

Technologies Choices
The CO2 mitigation choices differ between two
LCS scenarios. In SS scenario, mitigation
choices are more diverse and include
measures that are designed to influence several development indicators simultaneously. SS
scenario pays greater attention to public investment decisions, e.g. in infrastructure whichlead to modal shifts in the transport sector; andinstitutional interventions that alter the qualityof development. In case of CT scenario, themitigation measures are more direct and havegreater influence on private investments. In
developing countries undergoing rapid transitions, aligning the development and carbon mitigation measure have significant advantages( S hukla, 2006 ) . In CT scenario where direct
carbon mitigation technologies like CCS findgreater penetration, mitigation in sustainable
society happens through diverse technology
stocks. Implementing diversity of measures in
SS would require building higher institutional
capacity and influencing behaviours to reduce
wasteful consumption as well as recycle andreuse of resources. In brief, in the SS scenario
the mitigation are mainstreamed into develop-

ment pattern causing qualitative shift in the development vis-à-vis Base scenario. In case of
CT scenario the mitigation actions take place at
the margin of the economic development frontier.
Altering preferences and choices through policies
Policies for promoting sustainable development
need to be based on the precautionary principle as this helps in taking care of environmental unknowns. Therefore emphasis is on reducing the anthropogenic influences, which are theroot cause of GHG emissions, in all walks oflife. However, the reduction of anthropogenic
influences does not come at the expense of
economic and social development and instead
believes in expanding the economic and climate frontier ( Shukla, 2005 ) . The policies
are shifting frontier by innovations in technology, institutions, international and regional cooperation, targeted technology and investment
flows, aligning stakeholder interests, focusing
on inputs ( and not only outputs ) and longterm perspective to avoid lock-ins.

Table 2: Contributions to Cumulative Mitigations over Base Case: 2005-50 ( Unit: billion-tonnes of CO2-eq )Mitigation Choices

Sustainability Scenario

Carbon Tax Scenario

Infrastructure

16.6

43.4

Nuclear

11.0

16.3

Renewable Energy

22.6

10.4

Device Efficiency

16.0

7.4

Material Substitutions

5.2

Material Recycling
Reduced Consumption
Fossil Fuel / Switch

3.9
3.6
4.2

3.4

Others

0.4

2.6

83.5

83.5

Total Mitigation

Analysis of CT Scenario
Carbon tax scenario has a steep carbon tax
trajectory, which increases to US $ 200 per tonof CO2. To estimate the inefficiencies and theresultant GDP loss, AIM CGE model has beenused. The tax revenues from the carbon tax get
invested back in the economy. The GDP loss
increases as the carbon tax increases and in
2050 the GDP loss will be around 6.5%.

In case of India there is a decoupling of CO2
emissions post -2030. The decoupling however
takes 25 years as there is an existing stock ofenergy infrastructures and a lot of investments
in energy infrastructures for future have already

The GDP loss though not very significant wasused to recalculate the end use demands forthe carbon tax scenario. The cumulative CO2
mitigation for the period 2005-2050 came to
83.5 billion ton of CO2 and the mitigation happened mainly in the infrastructure sector( F igure 13 ) . Post 2030, when the carbon
prices exceed US $ 70 per ton of CO2, CCS
along with Coal fired electricity generation,
CCS in steel and cement making also turned
up as an option ( CCS is considered as a part
Figure 12: View of Mumbai Skylineof infrastructure ) . The remaining mitigation
happens due to higher adoption of renewableinfrastructure especially biomass, improve- been committed. This indicates that introducments in device efficiencies. The CT scenario tion of a tax and its impacts will have sufficientis corresponding to 450 ppmv CO2e stabiliza- lags due to lock-ins.
tion.
Figure 13 : Mitigation Options in Carbon Tax Scenario

8,000

Water-Energy &others

7,000

Million Ton CO2

Infrastructure

6,000
Device Efficiency

5,000
Nuclear

4,000

Renewable Energy

3,000

Fossel Fuel Switching

2,000

Residual Emissions

1,000
0
2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Analysis of SS Scenario
The approach to SS is using a sustainability creasing reliance on renewable sources likeparadigm; therefore in the first step we keep hydro, wind and solar.
the tax trajectory similar to the base and intro- The SS scenario, however has mitigation equal
duce sustainability measures. The mitigation to that in the CT scenario, therefore a cap onthat happens by adopting the sustainability par- cumulative emissions is kept which is equivaadigm is of 83.5 billion ton of CO2. The CO2 lent to the mitigation in the CT scenario.
mitigation happens due to a diverse portfolio of
measures across sectors. All sectors contributeto the mitigation effort, and infrastructure in all
sectors plays a dominant role. In the transport
sector a large share of mitigation happens due
to modal shifts, reduced demand and fuelswitching. There is a reduction in demand fromindustrial sector as demand for steel, cement
and other energy intensives commodities goes
down due to recycling, reuse, material substitutions, improvement of device efficiencies andfuel substitutions. The demand of energy fromagriculture is lower due to reduced consumption on account of improved agricultural practicFigure 14 : Delhi Metro Railes related to irrigation and cropping patterns.
Electricity demand therefore, which is a derived Source: http://new-delhi-tour-india.blogspot.com/2010/10/delhidemand, is also lower. Finally there is an in- metro-rail-corporation-limited.html
Figure 15: Mitigation Options in SS Scenario

8,000

Water-Energy

Million Ton CO2

6,000

Reduced Consumption
Reycling
Material Substitutions

4,000

Device Efficiency
Renewable Energy
Infrastructure

2,000

Fuel Switch
NuclearResidual Emissions

0
2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

LCS Policy Actions
For realizing this vision of a Low Carbon Society for India, a comprehensive list of policy actions are required for implementation of the mitigation measures. The policy package suggested is a menu of recommended actions which

are needed to be integrated in the development
planning for India.
These set of actions need to be translated into
policy actions, focused on specific sectors.
These options would have to be considered inDetails of Actions
1

2

3

4

5

• The action on Sustainable transport primarily comprises of a shift from private vehicles to public vehicles (bus and train) andincreased penetration of electric vehicles. However there are numerous other actions contributing to this action such as bett er
traffic management, gas/liquid transfer via pipelines and use of waterways for freight transport. But to achieve such a scen ario,
certain indirect actions would be required.

• The action on Low Carbon Electricity aims at decoupling the carbon intensity of power sector by using more renewable sources ofenergy for power generation or by using coal with CCS option. However it should be pointed out here that CCS is an end-of-pipe
technological solution, which would require substantial technological and financial transfers. On the contrary, the LCS optio n withsustainability offers the twin benefit of reducing energy consumption as well as increased share of renewables, particularly windand solar.

• The action on Fuel Switch refers to switching from coal to gas. This switch can happen across sectors. Some examples could be
increased use of gas in industries, piped natural gas for domestic usage and gas -based power production technologies. To achieve
such a transition, huge amount of financial commitments would be required in not only the technology but also in associatedinfrastructure, such as gas pipelines.

• The action on Building Design is also important in terms of controlling energy flows in the established assets. Use of appropriate
building technologies, energy audits and associated standardization across building types, materials and devices would go a l ong
way in controlling flow of energy across these stocks.

• The action on Material Substitution and Recycling aims at promoting resource conservation, dematerialization, and recycling. This
will also provide significant co-benefits in terms of promoting a sustainable lifestyle, better control of energy service flows andresource conservation. These measures would also result in improving livelihood security (generation of employment through lo cal
industries) and enhance energy security by the overall reduction in energy demand.

6• The action on Reduced Consumption & Device Efficiency is focused on efficiency improvements achieved through device
improvements and reducing energy consumption in intensive industrial processes. This efficiency impact is realized across all
sectors. These efficiency improvements can be consistently achieved through implementation of uniform building codes (efficiency
in residential sector), promotion of local and less carbon intensive material for construction and designing an appropriate
institutional mechanism to facilitate such a transition.

7• The action on Urban Planning, targets at increasing the green cover and improving the built environment so as to reduce the urban
heat island effect. This will also offer the co-benefits of enhancing the quality of life, controlling energy flows, and better adaptation
to extreme weather events. Apart from direct mitigation benefits, these are important in realizing other co-benefits such as
promotion of 3R and enhancing the quality of life. Better planning of urban spaces also helps in managing the energy service
demand in a sustainable form.

8

9

10

• The action on Resource Management aims at better management of other natural resources for a substantial GHG mitigation.
Principal among these are ensuring waste to energy projects materializing in various sectors. Also reduced dependence ongroundwater for irrigation and a shift to surface water significantly alters the energy consumption patterns in the agricultu re sector.
It also comprises of creating various infrastructures such as solid waste management facilities and sewage treatment plants.

• The larger framework of Governance comprises of how to govern. To facilitate a smooth transition to a low carbon society, thegovernment would need an effective governance and institutional mechanism. Governance initiatives will have an overlapping
influence in ensuring sustained sectoral emission reductions.

• In the context of developing nations, Financing plays a key role in any low carbon initiative over and above the business as usualtransition. Thus, the deep emission cuts would involve substantial investments in low-carbon infrastructure. Besides, theseinfrastructure and technology choices would also lead to some economic losses (GDP), which would translate into developmental
loss and would have to be compensated through either international investments or technology transfer

Description of Actions—Snapshot
Sustainable Transport

Shift from private to
public transport

Technologies:
Electric vehicles
Vehicle efficiency
Fuel switch (ethanol)

Soft solutions:
Telecommuting
Use of IT
Better urban planning(Compact cities, trade

Infrastructureslikegas/liquid
pipelines
andwires (T&D)

Use of water ways for
freight transport &other infrastructure(ports/dams/canals)

End of pipe solutions: Coal +CCS

Nuclear power
technologies

Low carbon
Electricity

Coal to gas &other renewables

Increased use ofgas in industries& piped natural
gas in domestic

Gas based power
production technologies

Building Design

Appropriate
building technologies

Energy & Water
auditsStandardization
across building
types, material
and devices

Integrated urban
planning

Use of less energy
intensive local
materials

Adequate financing& other incentives

Environmental
infrastructures suchas solid waste
management plans

Integrated urban
planning such asrecharging water
bodiesMaterial substitution andrecycling

Resource conservation, dematerialization and recycling

20

Sustainable lifestyleleading to demand
reduction

Promotion of local
industries

Financing for
promoting local
industries

Reduced consumption and device
efficiency

Device performance
improvements

Reduction of energy
consumption inenergy intensive
industries

Energy efficiency
codes

Promotion of lessenergy intensive/
carbon intensive
material for construction

Energy labelingprogram

Adequate financing
for creation ofmarkets for energy
efficient products

Urban planning

Increase thegreen cover

Improving built
environment

Controlling energy flows andimproved adaptation

Integrated measures
such as river front
development

Standardization
across city types(compact) and integrated with othersectors such as

Resource management

Better management of natural
resources

Modal shift from groundwaterto surface water

Financing

Governance

Effective institutions

Rule of law& effective
creation ofmarkets

Environmental infrastructures
such as solid waste management plants

Appropriate
policies

International
financialtransfers

Technology
finance &transfer

Credit availability frommarkets

Innovative
financingmeasuressuch as using
the bonds

21

LCS Infrastructure choices
Infrastructure is the backbone of a nation ’ seconomic growth, providing a physicalframework through which goods and services are provided to public. Since the energy flows transmit via infrastructure networks,
the policies governing infrastructure choice
are crucial to future energy and carbon intensity path of an economy. Also, being longlife assets, infrastructures cause path dependencies by irreversibly locking-in a certain style of development. Co-incidentally,
low carbon intensity infrastructures are also
low on local pollution and also better interms of several other sustainability indicators.
In past, the infrastructure choices, such as
the transport modes in developed nations,were made when the local air quality as well
as climate change had not emerged as environmental concerns. Now, it is crucial for
emerging economies countries like India
and China, to account for their relative environmental costs and benefits, while making
major infrastructure investments.

ing pressure on constrained infrastructure
capacity, thus necessitating a capacity augmentation in almost all infrastructure sectors. Government of India, in the Economic
Survey ( 2008 ) projects an expected total
investment in physical infrastructure( e lectricity, railways, roads, ports, airports,
irrigation, urban and rural infrastructure ) toincrease from around 5 % of GDP in 200607 to 9 % of GDP by the end of 11th Plan
period, if the targeted rate of growth of 9 %for the Eleventh Five Year Plan period( 2 007-12 ) is to be achieved. The 11thplan is considered to be the point of inflexion( F igure 16 ) . Since sectors like energy andtransport are a major contributor to emissions, and at the same time major drivers of
economic growth, it is important to appreciate the relationship between energy, infrastructure development and climate change .
Thus, there is an increased need for global
cooperation in terms of sharing advanced
low carbon technologies, and financial transfer for supporting these transitions in the
non annex countries.

Already, the high growth trajectory is mountFigure 16: Infrastructure spending of the Government of India

22

Currently, many initiatives are being undertaken for developing low carbon infrastructures, both at the city level and at national
level. Bus Rapid Transit System ( BRTS )( F ig 17 for key cities in India ) , Mass Rapid Transit System ( Metro ) and other suchurban infrastructures such as dedicatedfreight corridors ( Fig 18) are being developed in many cities or are under plan or theassessment has been made under the low
carbon scenario, to alter the transport profile. There is also an increased impetus toalter the energy profile ( Fig 19 ) , as an
input to many such infrastructure. City gas
distribution network is being developed inmany states, so as to shift the use of petroleum oil in transport. An assessment shows
the need for augmenting gas infrastructureof the country ( Fig 20) . Similarly, manystate and national level policy initiatives support the development of renewable energy
infrastructure. It would require an investmentof around US $ 3 trillion till 2050.

Figure 17: Estimated BRT and metro routes for India

Figure 18: Estimated freight routes & corridors

Figure 19: Power sector infrastrucuture in LCS

Figure 20: Gas infrastructure in LCS

23

Water-Energy-Climate Change
The water – energy – climate change linkage has evoked significant interest among
researchers worldwide at present. The highly visible impacts on water resources andthe associated changes in the energy mix
have become important areas of research,
particularly on a century scale. IPCC has
also recognized the climate related impacts
on water resources, and has released findings in its 4th assessment report, showingthat climate change would significantly alter
the water resources profile of nations. This
would lead to serious negative implications
for the energy sector as well.

sector would result in serious affects on“ q uality of life ” and sustainability of life.
From the perspective of providing adequate
clean drinking water to its citizens, decreasein the availability of surface water would seriously hamper the lives of millions of vulnerable Indians. Notwithstanding the impact
due to floods, without adequate protection
systems.
Thus the water sector is an important sector
to be looked at from the mitigation ( hydropower )
and adaptation( f loods,

Thus from the LCS perspective, it becomes
imperative to study the water-energy-climatechange nexus in an integrated framework,embedded within the principles of sustainable development. This would require a serious study on the necessary policies, institution and governance to manage the interrelationships.
The focal point of the inter-relationship is therole of river bodies in India. The rivers in India are either rain-fed or glacier-fed, bothbeing affected by climate change. Researchstudies in India have found an increase in
run-off in the glacier-fed rivers till 2050 withsubsequent decline. Even the rain-fed rivers
are going to be impacted due to increased
spatio-temporal variability in the monsoon
rainfall ( more so without adequate storage
facilities ) . Such changes in water availability would have serious ramifications for various sectors, particularly agriculture, andwould indirectly affect the energy consumption profile in India. It would also affect theamount of hydro-power generation in the
country ( a carbon neutral energy source ) .
However from the perspective of this LCS
study, such transformations in the water

24

Figure 21: Hydro power dam
Source: http://www.einfopedia.com/biggest-dam-in-india.php

droughts ) perspective .
Some of the government programmes are
already addressing, particularly the adaptation side related issues of the water-energyclimate change connection. Such as the programmes like National Rural Employment
Guarantee Scheme, watershed management programme, growth of bioenergy
crops.

There has been a consistent growth in thenumber of electric pumpsets in India, owing
to a phenomenal rise in groundwater irrigation in the country. Surface irrigation growthhas been sluggish ( Fig 23 ) and consequently the water nexus in agriculture has
intensified over the years. In the urban areas, due to rise in urban population and theincreasing rate of urbanisation in the country, demand for water has increased considerably and therefore the energy intensityof water has also increased.
Hydro power growth has been slow ( Fig
22 ) , but due to the recent initiative of thePM, it is expected to touch 50 GW. LCS
Figure 22: Hydro power growth in BAU scenario

scenario model runs reveal a nearly 50%
reduction across all sectors in the energy
intensity of water use. Similarly, the samemodel runs suggest that there is a possibility of aligning hydro power generation to acapacity of 200 GW through regional cooperation.
Low carbon scenarios following a sustainable pathway could mitigate nearly 4.5 btCO2 during 2010-2050 period in the watersector ( Fig 24 & 25 ) . However such apathway provides a significant co-benefit ofwater savings which is under stress and islikely to intensify further.

Figure 23: % irrigated area across sources
100%

2000

80%

1500

60%

1000

40%

500

20%

0
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

0%
1990

1995
Canal

Fossil Nuclear Hydro Other renewables

Figure 24: Mitigation under conventional scenario

2000

2005

2007

2008

Tanks Wells Other sources

Figure 25: Mitigation under sustainable scenario

500

500

Nuclear

Reduced Consumption

Urban planning

400

Reycling
Reduced
Consumption
Device Efficiency
Renewable Energy

300

Hydro power

Million Ton CO2

Million Ton CO2

2006

Nuclear400

Device Efficiency
Renewable Energy
Hydro power

300

Residual Emissions

Residual Emissions

200
2005

2015

2025

2035

2045

200
2005

2015

2025

2035

2045

25

Scenario Comparison: Beyond Carbon
Energy Security

A major concern in transition to Low Carbon
Society is its implications for ‘ Energy Security ’ , i.e. the “ aggregate risk ” related to energy vulnerabilities , especially the energy supply
and its diversity. In the Carbon Tax scenario,
the aggregate energy demand trajectory is almost identical to that in the base case whereas
the energy demand is lower by a third in the SS
scenario. The fossil fuel use declines in both
LCS scenarios compared to the Base scenario,
although the CT scenario has significantly higher use of nuclear energy compared to the basescenario and a relatively higher use of fossil
fuels together with a greater penetration of
CCS technologies compared to the SS scenario. In the SS scenario, the dependence on oil,gas and nuclear energy reduces substantially.
Since India has limited resource availability ofthese fuels, the SS scenario will improve energy security in a conventional sense of dependence on energy imports .
In case of nuclear energy, the base case scenario has a nuclear capacity lesser than that of

CT scenario in 2050. A fraction of this capacity
corresponds to the conventional fuel cycle withdependence on imported uranium fuel. Rest is
the capacity under the three stage nuclear program which would use indigenously available
thorium as fuel.
The CT scenario has a higher share of nuclear,
and which would require higher import of uranium affecting adversely the energy security issues for India.

Figure 26: Solar panel with sun
Source: http://www.dancewithshadows.com/business/moser-baer-india-to-develop1-megawatt-solar-power-project-in-maharashtra/

Figure 27: Fuel mix across CT, SS and Base scenarios ( Year 2050 )Total Energy Demand (mtoe)
Renewable (%)
Base
2957
13.3%
2050 CT
2936
21.8%
2050 LCS
2022
31.6%

1600
1200
800
400
0
Coal

Oil

Gas

Nuclear

Base

2050 CT

Hydro

Biomass andOtherw asterenew ables

2050 LCSCo-benefits of Conjoint Mitigation

Adaptive Capacity

Energy emissions contribute significantly to the
local air quality in urban and industrial areas.
The control of local air pollutants, e.g. SO2, hasbeen a major aim of environmental programs inthe developed world. But at the time when SO2
controls were initiated in the developed world,
climate change was not yet a major concern. In
India where SO2 control policies are being instituted more recently, there are opportunities todevelop conjoint measures to control SO2 andCO2. Whereas base case scenario includes
dynamics as usual SO2 control measures
which by themselves would decouple economic
growth and the SO2 emissions, the LCS scenarios would lead to higher and cheaper reduction in SO2 emissions ( F igure 29 ) since theconjoint measures would share the cost of theirsimultaneous mitigation. Thus, during the low
carbon transition, the conjoint policies can deliver benefits of improved air quality or alternatively through the reduced cost of achieving air
quality targets. Evidently, the ‘ Sustainability ’scenario would deliver greater air quality cobenefits compared to the ‘ Carbon Tax ’ scenario

Sustainable development is characterized byhigher investment in human and social capital

Figure 28: BRTS system in Ahmedabad
Source:http://www.vandeindia.com/ahmedabad-brts-nominated-for-international-award.html

compared to that under the conventional development. In developing countries this translates
into higher capabilities, especially among lower
income groups, to adapt to risks. Thus, a low
carbon society following ‘ sustainability paradigm, would also deliver additional co-benefits

Figure 29 : SO2 Emissions in CT, SS and Base Scenario ( mt-SO2 )
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
2005

2010

2015
Base

2020

2025

2030

CT scenario

2035

2040

2045

LCS scenaro

2050

New and Renewable energy
New and Renewable energy is set to play a
key role in India ’ s future. There are numerous
programs and policies underway in India, withspecial focus on developing renewables. The
Government of India recognised the need, andextended this responsibility to a full fledged
ministry which will look into its development.
It must be noted here that in the base scenario,
the share of renewable in the total energy mixof India is dominated by biomass ( 25.3% ) .
However due to the Indo-US nuclear deal, it isestimated that the BAU scenario would have asignificant penetration of nuclear energy( 1 0.9%. In the conventional scenario, nuclear
energy and CCS would be dominating on the
new energy front. The SS Scenario in 2050 has
a substantially higher share of renewables, ascompared to the base case and CT scenario( s ee figure 31 below ) . Sustainable biomass
and waste to energy would also contribute significantly to the energy mix ( the National Ur-

ban Renewal Program for cities in India has a
special focus on waste to energy projects ) .
The share of hydro power would also increase,with particular emphasis on small hydro energy

Figure 30: Wind farm in India
Source:http://forum.xcitefun.net/dhule-largest-wind-farm-india-

t35556.html

and ensuring its faster deployment on a commercial scale.

Figure 31 : Share of renewable energy in the various scenarios
Primary energy demand (share of renewables inIndia's energy mix)
81.5%
65.7%

40.5%
28.6%

30.9%

22.3%

17.3%

11.9%
1.2%

2005

Hydro

2050 BaU

Biomass and w aste

2050 LCS, w ith
sustaibility
Wind & SolarEnergy & Environment Policies
There have been numerous policy initiatives, legislations and acts enacted and introduced in the environment and energy domain in India. These policies, legislations
and acts have focused either individually on
an environmental sector like water, air orthey have targeted broadly the entire value
chain of the energy sector. For example, thelatest policy document adopted by the Government of India - the Integrated Energy
Policy Roadmap, 2006. This policy roadmap has been accepted by the Governmentof India ( GoI ) in 2009, and which broadly
links energy sector to the goals of Sustainable Development by developing policies that
promote ‘ efficiency ’ and reflect externalities associated with energy consumption.
Further in June, 2008; the Prime Minister ofIndia released India ’ s first National Action
Plan on Climate Change ( NAPCC ) outlining existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation andadaptation. The plan identifies eight core“ n ational missions ” running through 2017and directed ministries to submit detailed
implementation plans to the Prime Minister ’ s Council on Climate Change by December 2008.
No.
1

National Mission
National Solar Mission

2

National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency

3

National Mission on Sustainable Habitat4

National Water Mission

5

National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan
Ecosystem

678

National Mission for a “ Green India ”
National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture
National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change:

Emphasizing the importance of high economic growth rates, the plan “ identifies
measures that promote our development
objectives while also yielding co-benefits foraddressing climate change effectively. ” Itsays “ these national measures would be
more successful with assistance from developed countries ” , and pledges that India ’ s
per capita greenhouse gas emissions “ will
at no point exceed that of developed countries even as we pursue our development
objectives. ”
The eight National Missions and their related targets are elucidated below in the tablebelow. These targets are in line with the mitigation of GHG emissions across many sectors, and therefore are important from theperspective of an LCS study.
Moreover, there are other specific programs
identified for implementation, within the National Action Plan from the mitigation perspective.

Targets
Specific targets for increasing use of solar thermal technologies in urban areas, industry, and commercial establishments
Building on the Energy Conservation Act 2001
Extending the existing Energy Conservation Building Code;Emphasis on urban waste management and recycling, including power production from waste ( 3R )20% improvement in water use efficiency through pricing
and other measures
Conservation of biodiversity, forest cover, and other ecological values in the Himalayan region, where glaciers are projected to recede
Expanding forest cover from 23% to 33%
Promotion of sustainable agricultural practices
The plan envisions a new Climate Science Research Fundthat supports activities like climate modeling, and increased
international collaboration; It also encourage private sector
initiatives to develop adaptation and mitigation technologies

29National Missions & Actions
Table 3: Actions in line with National Missions
S.No.

National Mission

Actions2

National Mission on Sustainable Habitat

Increasing EE in Buildings: building bye laws and standards, energy performance monitoring, national standards for construction & recycling of construction waste
Urban transport: norms integrating congestion charges, parking etc, norms
for pedestrian & cycling, integrating transport planning with spatial planning
Water supply: mandatory rainwater harvesting, water & energy audits

3

National Mission on
Green India

2 m ha of moderately dense forests
4 m ha of degraded forests regenerated/afforested
0.10 m ha of mangroves restored, 0.1 m ha wetlands conservation
0.20 m ha urban/peri-urban forests, 1.50 m ha degraded land under agroforestry

4

National Mission: Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystem

Continuous Monitoring of Himalayan Ecosystems
Identification of desirable Adaptation and Development Policies(Sustainable urbanization, Water security: rejuvenation of springs, Infrastructure development: Green roads)

5

National Mission on Enhanced Energy Efficiency

Specific Energy Consumption (SEC) reduction targets for energy-intensive
units
Incentivising action through Energy Savings Certificates (ESCerts) - Traded& Used for compliance
National Energy Efficiency CDM Roadmap
National Energy Efficiency Financing Platform
Creating markets for energy efficient products and services

6

National Water Mission

Improving efficiency of urban water supply system; Promotion of water
efficient technologies;
Incentives for recycling of water, including waste water; Water Regulationfor equitable water distribution
Incentives for water conservation and efficient use of water ;Incentives for efficient irrigation practices

7

National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture

Use of Genetic Engineering to produce carbon responsive crops; Low input
sustainable agriculture: enhanced water & nitrogen use efficiency, Microirrigation for efficient use of water ( 40 Mha); Water conservation in 35
Mha of rain-fed areas ( 2009 – 2017); Utilizing large fallow lands(development of land lease markets)

8

National Mission on Strategic Knowledge on CC

Climate change research & fellowship program

Table 4: Post – Copenhagen domestic action
S.No.
1
2

3
4

5

30

Actions
Carbon tax on coal to fund clean energy (US $1/ton on domestic & imported coal; fund to be used for
Clean Energy)
Enhanced Energy Efficiency measures (Mandate to reduce specific energy consumption; Energy savings
certificates & trading; Energy efficiency ratings mandatory for 4 key appliances from Jan 2010)
Bachat Lamp Yojana – mass distribution of CFLs (Help reduction in peak load; Potential reduction of 6
GW of electricity demand)
Mission on sustainable habitat (Energy efficiency in residential, commercial and urban transportation;
Better management of water, wastewater and solid waste with recycling, reuse and energy creation)
Green and EE Buildings (Better program implementation and financial incentives; Comprehensive approach to manage water, wastewater and solid waste; Potential used for recycling, reuse and energy
creation)
Refurbishing Urban transportation to achieve energy efficiency (Vehicle Fuel efficiency standards; Enhance Supply of Cleaner Fuels (e.g. Gas))

Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar
Mission (JNNSM)
One of the main thrust area of the National
Action Plan on Climate Change ( NAPCC )has been on energy security, and utilizing
the immense potential of solar energy available over the Indian sub-continent. The mission JNNSM, is a major initiative of the GoI( G oI, 2010 ) and the various state governments in order to promote “ ecologicallysustainable growth ” while at the same time
addressing India ’ s energy security challenge. The objective of the mission is tomake India the global leader in solar energy,
by creating enabling policy framework for its
quick dissemination & adoption across thelength and breadth of the country. The mission will adopt a 3-phase approach: Phase- I( r emaining period of the 11th five year planand the first year of the 12th plan i.e. 20122013 ) , Phase II ( 2013-2017 ) and Phase
III ( 2017-2022 ) . At specified intervals, targets and the achievements would be reviewed. At the immediate level, it is considered that the main aim is to evolve an enabling policy environment for quick penetration of solar technology ( both at the centralized as well as the decentralized level ) .
Key objectives of Phase-I are: capturing all

India has already embarked on an ambitious
path in terms of aligning its development
agenda with the global carbon architecture.
Apart from the National Solar Mission, othermissions have also gained pace and developed their own targets, in line with the national commitments and climate goals( T able 3 & 4 for details) . Salient features
across other missions have been highlighted
in the table before. However some targets
have been more explicit and are mentioned
here and they come as a package underpost-Copenhagen domestic action:( 1 ) Reduction of emissions intensity ofGDP by 20-25% between 2005 and 2020
( 2 ) Carbon tax on coal to fund clean ener-

options in solar thermal, promoting off-grid
solutions, and modest capacity additions in
on-grid systems. The second and subsequent phases would involve aggressive capacity additions in all aspects of solar technology. The mission targets are:( 1 ) T o create an enabling environment todeliver 20 GW of solar power by 2022
( 2 ) G rid connected solar power capacityof 1 GW by 2013, additional 3 GW by
2017 through mandatory purchases
backed with preferential tariff. This capacity could be more than doubled( r eached 10 GW installed power by
2017, based on enhanced international
financial and technology transfer )( 3 ) T o create favorable conditions for solar manufacturing capabilities( 4 ) P romote programs of off-grid applications, reaching 1 GW by 2017 and 2
GW by 2022
( 5 ) T o achieve 15 million sq.m. solar
thermal collector area by 2017 and 20
million sq. m by 2022
( 6 ) T o deploy 20 million solar lighting
systems for rural areas by 2022

gy ( US$ 1/ton on imported & domestic
coal )( 3 ) Perform, Achieve and Trade Mechanism as a part of National Mission on Enhanced Energy Efficiency( 4 ) Bachat Lamp Yojana , mass distribution of CFLs—to help in reducing peak loaddemand and reduce electricity demand by 6GW( 5 ) Green India Mission—doubling thearea to be afforested/ecorestored to 20 Million hectares( 6 ) National Water Mission—reduce water
use by 20%

31Modeling Framework
The integrated framework proposed in Figure below falls under the earlier AIM familyof models ( Kainuma et. al., 2003; Shukla
et. al., 2004 ) . In order to improve the policy
interface one new model AIM SNAPSHOT,
having a simple graphic interface, has been
included. The bottom up analysis was doneby the MARKAL model ( Fishbone & Abilock, 1981 ) .
The need for a revised framework arose as
the climate change discussion with the increasing scientific evidence ( IPCC, 2006 )has become quite central and an intensely
debated topic with politicians and policy
makers. Stern Review and more recently the
Energy Technology Strategies, 2006 ( IEA,
2006a; Stern, 2006 ) were a direct result ofpolitical mandates. In view of this, robust
frameworks are required which convey tothe policy makers in simple terms the impacts of alternative policies. The frameworkuses the modelling resources developed
over the last few years by the AIM team witha widely used energy system model ANSWER-MARKAL and finally combine it witha model ( SNAPSHOT Model ) , that help

present the results with adequate graphic
interfaces.
The framework contains a top down model( A IM CGE ) which is soft linked with a bottom up model ( ANSWER MARKAL )which in turn is soft linked to AIM SNAPSHOT model. Soft linking of models has
been used earlier in literature ( Nair et. al.,
2003; Bhattacharya et. al., 2003 ) . The inputs and outputs of each of the individualmodels are suitable to address specific but
diverse economic, technological, social, environmental and energy sector issues, assuming consistent and similar assumptions
and a shared database.
The top down model, AIM CGE is used for
estimating the GDP for different scenarios
and these are used as an exogenous input
to the bottom up ANSWER MARKAL model.
The ANSWER MARKAL model provides
detailed technology and sector level energy
and emission projections which are in turninputted to the AIM SNAPSHOT model fordoing factor analysis.

Integrated Modelling
Modeling Framework
Framework
DATABASES
Socio-Economic,
Technologies,
EnergyResources,
Environmental
Constraints
Socio-Economic, Technologies,
EnergyResources,
Environment

AIM ExSS Model
AIM SNAPSHOTAIM (SDB)
Database
Database
Strategic
AIM Strategic

32

ANSWER-MARKALANSWER-MARKAL
Model

Database)(Strategic(SDB)

DemandUseDemandEnd
End Use
Model
Model

AIM
AIMCGE/GCAMCGE Model

Component Models
GCAM Model
GCAM is an integrated assessment model,
which are tools for exploring the complex
relationship between economic activity, energy systems, land use systems, ecosystems, emissions and resulting impact on climate change. It focuses on technology
analysis and implications of various technology pathways for emissions abatement. It isa partial equilibrium model that examines
long term and large scale changes in theenergy and emission pathways. The model
includes 14 region and runs from 1990 to
2095 in time steps of 15 years. The end-use
energy service demands associated withtime path of economic activity have been
aggregated as three energy services- industrial energy services, building energy services, and transportation energy services. A
range of energy sources compete to provide
energy to meet the service demands in thethree final aggregate sectors. These energy
sources include fossil fuels, bio-energy,
electricity, hydrogen and synthetic fuels. A
detailed land use module is included for analyzing land use patterns and emissions.

AIM-CGE
AIM/CGE is a top down, computable generalequilibrium ( CGE ) , model is used to study
the relationship between the economy andenvironment ( Masui, 2005 ) . The top down
framework can do cost analysis of both CO2
mitigation and other GHG mitigation( S hukla et. al., 2004 ) . The model includes
18 regions and 13 sectors. The model canbe used to assess the environmental andeconomic effects of new markets, new investment, technology transfer and international trade.

ANSWER-MARKAL Model
MARKAL is a mathematical model for evaluating the energy system of one or several
regions. MARKAL provides technology, fuelmix and investment decisions at detailed
end-use level while maintaining consistency
with system constraints such as energy supply, demand, investment, emissions etc..
ANSWER is the windows interface for the
MARKAL model.

End-use Demand Model

The approach used in the past is to modelthe demands using a logistic regression( E dmonds and Reilly, 1983 ) . First thelong term GDP projections are made using
the past data available from the Ministry of
Finance, GoI. Logistic regression using pastdata is then used to estimate the sector specific shares from industry, transport, commercial and agriculture. These sectoral
shares on multiplication with GDP projections give us gross valued added ( GVA )for each sector. The last step involves estimation of elasticity of each sub-sector( e .g., industry is divided into eleven sub
sectors like steel, cement, etc. ) with thesector specific GVA. The elasticity is thenused for estimating the future demand fromeach sector. The methodology described
helps in capturing past trends and ensuringconsistency with macroeconomic growth( S hukla et. al., 2004 ) .

AIM Strategic Database (SDB )Models require diverse databases such as
economic growth, global and regional energy resource availability, input-output tables,
sectoral and temporal end use production
processes and technologies, emission types
and much more. The data requirements aredifferent for top down and bottom up models. The outputs from different models also
serve as data for other models. There is essentially a complex flow of data between
models and database wherein the models
interact through the database in a soft link
framework. AIM database plays a criticalrole in ensuring data consistency across themodels ( Hibino et. al., 2003; Shukla et. al.,2004, Chapter 7 ) .

33

References
AIM Japan Team (2005), "AIM/CGE [Country] : Data and Program Manual." Tsukuba: National Institute for Environmental Studies.
Bhattacharya, Sumana, N. H. Ravindranath, P. R. Shukla, N Kalra, A K Gosain, and K K Kumar (2003), "Tools for Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation," in Climate Change and India: Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation, P. R.
Shukla and S. K. Sharma and N. H. Ravindranath and Amit Garg and Sumana Bhattacharya, Eds. Hyderabad: Universities
Press.
Clarke, L E, J A Edmonds, H D Jacoby, H M Pitcher, J M Reilly, and R G Richels (2007), "Scenario of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Atmospheric Concentrations," in Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1a: United States Climate Change
Science Program and Subcommittee on Global Change Research.
Edmonds, J. and J. Reilly (1983), "A long-term energy-economic model of carbon dioxide release from fossil fuel use,"
Energy Economics, April, 74-88.
Edmonds, J A, M A Wise, J J Dooley, S H Kim, S J Smith, P J Runci, L E Clarke, E L Malone, and G M Stokes (2007),"Global Energy Technology Strategy: Addressing Climate Change," in Phase 2 Findings from an international publicprivate sponsored research program: Joint Global Change Research Institute; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory &Battelle.
Edmonds, J A (2007), "Personal communication on global carbon price trajectories for various stabilization scenarios," P R
Shukla (Ed.).
Fisher, B. S., Nakicenovic, N., Alfsen, K., Morlot, J. C., Chesnaye, F. d. l., Hourcade, J.-C., Jiang, K., Kainuma, M., E. La
Rovere, Matysek, A., Rana, A., Riahi, K., Richels, R., Rose, S., Vuuren, D. v., & Warren, R. (2007). Issues related to mitigation in the long term context. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental. Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave, &L. A. Meyer (Eds.)]., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Fishbone, L G and H Abilock (1981), "MARKAL, A Linear Programming Model for Energy System Analysis: Technical
Description of the BNL Version," International Journal of Energy Research, 5, 353-75.
GoI, Government of India (2006), "Integrated Energy Policy: Report of the Expert Committee." New Delhi: Planning Commission.
Hibino, Go, Yuzuru Matsuoka, and Mikiko Kainuma (2003), "AIM/Common Database: A Tool for AIM family Linkage,"in Climate Policy Assesment: Asia- Pacific Integrated Modeling, Mikiko Kainuma and Yuzuru Matsuoka and T Morita,
Eds. Tokyo: Springer
IEA (2006a) Energy Technology Perspectives 2006: Scenarios & Strategies to 2050. Paris: OECD/IEA.
IEA (2006b), World Energy Outlook 2006. Paris: OECD/IEA.
IPCC (2000), Emission Scenarios. Cambridge: Cambridge Universities Press.
Kainuma, Mikiko, Yuzuru Matsuoka, and Tsunehuki Morita (2003), "AIM Modeling: Overview and Major Findings," inClimate Policy Assesment: Asia Pacific Integrated Modeling, Mikiko Kainuma and Yuzuru Matsuoka and Tsunehuki
Morita, Eds. Tokyo: Springer.
Kainuma, Mikiko, Toshihiko Masui, Junichi Fujino, Shuichi Ashina, Yuzuru Matsuoka, Reina Kwase, Osamu Akashi, Go
Hibino, Maho Miyashita, Tomoki Ehara, Rahul Pandey, Manmohan Kapshe, and Pedro Piris-Cabezas (2006),"Development of Japan Low Carbon Scenarios," Ministry of the Environment, Japan.
Kumar, K Rupa, K Krishna Kumar, V Prasanna, K Kamala, N R Deshpande, S K Patwardhan, and G B Pant (2003),"Future Climate Scenarios," in Climate Change and India: Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation, P. R. Shukla and S.
K. Sharma and N. H. Ravindranath and Amit Garg and Sumana Bhattacharya, Eds. N Delhi: Universities Press.
Larsen, Hans and Leif Sønderberg Petersen (2007), "Future options for energy technologies," in Risø Energy Report 6.
Rosklide: Risø Energy Centre.
Loulou, Richard, Gary Goldstein, and Ken Noble (2004), "Documentation for the MARKAL Family of Models, October
2004," Vol. 2007: Data downloaded on 26th June 2007 from http://www.etsap.org/documentation.asp

34

Nair, Rajesh, P. R. Shukla, Manmohan Kapshe, Amit Garg, and Ashish Rana (2003), "Analysis of Long-Term Energy
and Carbon Emission Scenarios for India," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 8, 53-69.
Nair, Rajesh (2003), "Energy Security In South Asia: Integrating The Primary Energy And Electricity Markets," Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.
NIES (2006), "Energy Snapshot tool (ESS): Manual." Tsukuba: National Institute of Environmental Studies.
Rana, Ashish and Tsuneyuki Morita (2000), "Scenarios for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Mitigation: A Review of Modeling of Strategies and Policies in Integrated Assessment Models," Environment Economics and Policy Studies, 3 (2).
Rana, Ashish and P. R. Shukla (2001), "Macroeconomic Models for Long-term Energy and Emissions in India,"
OPSEARCH, 38 (1).
Sathaye, Jayant, P. R. Shukla, and N. H. Ravindranath (2006), "Climate change, sustainable development and India:
Global and national concerns," Current Science, 90 (3), 314-325.
Shukla, P R (2006) India's GHG emission scenarios: Aligning development and stabilization paths, Current Science,
90 (3), 384-395.
Shukla, P R (2005), "Aligning Justice and Efficiency in the Global Climate Regime: A Developing Country Perspective," in Advances in the Economics of Environmental Resources, Volume 5: Perspectives on Climate Change: Science, Economics, Politics, Ethics, Walter Sinnott0Armstrong and Richard B. Howarth, Eds. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Shukla, P. R., Ashish Rana, Amit Garg, Manmohan Kapshe, and Rajesh Nair (2004), Climate Policy Assessment for
India: Applications of Asia Pacific Integrated Model (AIM). New Delhi: Universities Press.
Shukla, P. R., Subodh K. Sharma, Amit Garg, Sumana Bhattacharya and N. H. Ravindranath (2003) Climate Change
Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation: The Context. In P. R. Shukla, Subodh K. Sharma, N. H. Ravindranath,
Amit Garg and Sumana Bhattacharya (eds.), Climate Change and India: Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation.
Hyderabad: Universities Press.
UNPD (2008), "The World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision Population Database," United Nations Population Division, 23rd July 2009 <http://esa.un.org/unpp/>
GoI (2007). Report of the Steering Committee on Water Resources for Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-12). Planning
Commission, Government of India
GoI (2008a). Preliminary consolidated report on effect of climate change on water resources. Government of India,
New Delhi
GoI (2008b). National Hydro Power Policy. Ministry of Power, Government of India. Retrieved from http://
www.powermin.nic.in/whats_new/pdf/new_hydro_policy.pdf on 17th March, 2009
GoI (2008c). Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-2012. Vol I. Planning Commission, Government of India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi
GoI (2008d). Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-2012. Vol II. Planning Commission, Government of India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi
GoI (2008e). Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-2012. Vol III. Planning Commission, Government of India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi
GoI (2008f). National Hydro Power Policy. Ministry of Power, Government of India
GoI. (2010). Mid-term Appraisal of the 11th five-year Plan: Water Resources. Planning Commission, Government ofIndia
MNRE. (2010). Annual Report 2009-10. Ministry of New & Renewable Energy, Government of India
MoEF. (2010). Presentations made at the National Consultation Workshop on State Action Plans on Climate Change,
Government of India
MoEf. (2010). Climate Change and India: A 4X4 Assessment—A Sectoral & Regional Analysis for 2030s. Retrieved
from http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/fin-rpt-incca.pdf

35External boundaries are not authenticated