INDC Comparison

Presented By
Nikhil Chaurasia(M1908)
Swarup Mishra(M1914)
Vishesh Dwivedi(M1918)
UN Climate Change Summit: The best and the worst
Under the Paris Agreement, signed in 2016, many countries pledged carbon
emissions caps that weren’t ambitious enough to limit warming to 1.5 degrees
Celsius or below. The Climate Action Tracker follows countries who signed the pact to
assess whether they’re on track to meet their self-set goals. The Gambia’s goal is 6
million metric tons of carbon; the U.S.’s is 1.8 trillion tons.
 TOP OF THE CLASS
Morocco: Morocco is one of only two countries with a plan to reduce its CO2 emissions
to a level consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C. Morocco’s National
Energy Strategy calls for generating 42 percent of its electricity production from
renewables by 2020, and 52 percent by 2030. Already it is at 35 percent, not least
because of investment in such projects as the Noor Ouarzazate complex, the
largest concentrated solar farm in the world, which covers an area the size of 3,500
football fields, it generates enough electricity to power two cities the size of
Marrakesh.

The Gambia: The Gambia is the other country with a 1.5 degrees C emissions
reduction strategy. As with Morocco, one of its principal pathways to reduction is the
use of renewables, in the form of a program that will increase the country’s electricity
capacity by one-fifth partly through construction of one of the largest photovoltaic
plants in West Africa. The country has also launched a large project to restore 10,000
hectares of forests, mangroves, and savannas. It is also replacing flooded rice paddies
with dry upland rice fields and promoting adoption of efficient cook stoves to reduce
the overuse of forest resources.
India: India has emerged as a global leader in renewable energy, and in fact it is
investing more in them than it is in fossil fuels. Having established a goal of generating
40 percent of its power through renewables by 2030, its progress has been so rapid
that it could easily reach that target a decade early, so there is every opportunity for
India to increase that target. India’s plan is compatible with a 2 degree C increase, but
that its National Energy Plan could be 1.5 degrees C compatible if the country
abandoned plans to build new coal-fired power plants.

Costa Rica: Costa Rica aims for its electricity production to be 100 percent renewable
by 2021. It’s already extremely close: in 2018 it generated 98 percent of its electricity
from renewable sources—primarily hydropower—for the fourth consecutive year.
Two-thirds of its greenhouse gas emissions are from transportation, and the country
has made it a national priority to use renewable energy across its roads and rails.
The National Plan for Electric Transportation calls for at least five percent of the bus
fleet to be replaced by electric buses every two years, and for at least 10 percent of
new taxi concessions to be given to electric vehicles. Additionally, in February 2019
Costa Rica extended a moratorium on oil extraction and exploitation from 2021 until
the end of 2050.
European Union: The EU was a comparatively early adopter of climate targets. In
2009, it set a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020; its
Paris target increased that to a 40 percent reduction by 2030. Its present policies, if
fully enacted, would enable it to exceed that target. In May, the EU formally adopted
into law a series of measures that included a binding target for 32 percent of
electricity production to come from renewables by 2030. To achieve that figure
across the EU, different countries within the bloc have adopted different national
targets: For example, for Malta, the goal is 10 percent renewables, while for Sweden
it is 49 percent.
 SHOWS SOME PROMISE
Norway: Norway’s emissions are projected to decrease by only 7 percent by 2030, and its
implemented policies are consistent with warming between 3 and 4 degrees C if all others
followed a similar level of ambition. However, there are signs of progress. It has set an
ambitious target of reducing emissions by 40 percent by 2030; and it has adopted
legislation committing the country to reducing emissions by 80-95 percent relative to
1990 levels by 2050. Its parliament agreed in June to (mostly) disinvest its $1 trillion
Sovereign Wealth Fund from oil, gas, and coal, dumping $13 billion in stocks related to
fossil fuels (though sparing those belonging to ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell) and
diverting resources to renewable energy projects. Norway also leads the world in its
embrace of electric cars; almost 60 percent of new cars sold in the country in March
were electric. Forest cover is increasing. And electricity production is almost entirely from
renewables: 96 percent from hydropower and 2 percent from wind farms.
China: The good news: China is on course to meet its Paris targets. The bad news, Those
targets are woefully inadequate, and not ambitious enough to limit warming to below 2
degrees C, let alone to 1.5 C as required under the Paris Agreement, unless other
countries make much deeper reductions at comparably greater effort. China’s
CO2 emissions—already the largest in the world—grew an estimated 2.3 percent increase
in 2019; in fact, with current policies, China’s greenhouse gas emissions are projected to
rise until at least 2030, although a recent study concluded they may in fact peak a
decade earlier. The Chinese government has heavily subsidized the manufacture of
electric cars and has sought to reduce the number of gasoline-powered cars on the road;
in 2018, Chinese consumers bought 1.1 million electric vehicles—more than the rest of
the world combined. China is the largest manufacturer of solar technology in the world,
but it is also the largest consumer of coal, and is financing the construction of coal-fired
power stations around the world.
United Kingdom: The U.K. is an interesting case. On the one hand, the country reduced
its emissions by 44 percent between 1990 and 2019, even as its economy grew by 75
percent. The government has declared a climate emergency, and in June passed
legislation codifying a goal of net zero emissions by 2050. (That was under the previous
government; new Prime Minister Boris Johnson has shown support for climate deniers.)
However, the government’s own Committee on Climate Change has advised that the
country is lagging far behind many of its stated long-term climate goals, and the nation
is roiled with political uncertainty that could directly affect policy in this area. Should
Britain leave the European Union with a No-Deal Brexit, it would no longer be able to
participate in the EU’s Emission Trading Scheme, for example.
BARELY TRYING
 BARELY TRYING
Russia: Russia is the fourth-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and the only large
emitter that has yet to ratify the Paris Agreement (although it has indicated that it may
do so by the time of the UN Summit on September 23). It is on course to meet its Paris
target, but only because that commitment is so weak: It would allow the country’s
greenhouse gas emissions to increase by 6 to 24 percent over 2016 levels by 2020 and 15
to 22 percent by 2030. The target also does not require the government to adopt a low-
carbon economic development strategy. Internal data on greenhouse gas emissions are
scarce, opaque, and out-of-date, making it difficult to confirm progress, or the lack
thereof.
Russia is for the first time considering legislation to regulate emissions, and President
Vladimir Putin has acknowledged that Russia is experiencing the impacts of climate
change. However, he has cautioned against “the complete abandonment of nuclear or
hydrocarbon energy,” asking metaphorically whether it will be “comfortable for people to
live on a planet with a palisade of wind turbines and several layers of solar panels” and
claiming that “turbines shake so much that worms come out of the ground.”
Saudi Arabia: If anything, Saudi Arabia appears to be going backward in its efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The government’s 2016 “Vision 2030” strategy is
actually less ambitious than a 2013 plan that called for the country’s energy industry to
diversify from oil dependence. Although Vision 2030 states that Saudi Arabia is planning
to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, the government announced in December 2017 that it
would slow down this subsidy phase-out to “enhance the economy.” And the kingdom
maintains a get-out clause for its Paris targets if it decides the agreement places an
“abnormal burden” on the economy by reducing its income from fossil fuels.
In March 2018 Saudi Arabia and the SoftBank Group signed a memorandum of
understanding to build a 200 GW solar plant, the largest single solar project worldwide;
but by December of that year, the project had been canceled. At present, CAT estimates
that present plans are likely to result in an increase in emissions by as much as 80 percent
on 2015 levels by 2030.
Turkey: Turkey is one of only two G20 countries not to have ratified the Paris Agreement,
and although the government has committed to investing almost $11 billion in energy
efficiency measures, the country is seeking to achieve energy self-sufficiency through a
massive expansion in coal-fired power plants. Fully 80 new plants are in the pipeline,
equivalent to the capacity of the United Kingdom’s entire energy sector. The Afşin-Elbistan
power plant in southern Turkey is expanding to become the biggest coal-fired power plant
in the world. CAF has rated Turkey’s Paris targets as “critically insufficient,” calculating that
if most other countries followed Turkey’s approach, global warming would exceed 3 to 4
degrees C (5.4 to 7.2 degrees F).

Ukraine: Ukraine appears to be heading in the wrong direction. The most recent data
(from 2016) shows that the country’s emissions from fossil fuel combustion, industry,
agriculture, and waste sources declined by 64 percent below 1990 levels, a function less of
efficiency goals than of the fall of the Soviet Union. CAT notes that “Ukraine’s current
climate target would see its emissions grow substantially from present levels.”
In 2018, Ukraine published a 2050 Low Emission Development Strategy, which if fully
implemented could enable it to reach its Paris targets. However, the previous government
said it would revisit its Paris pledge after “restoration of its territorial integrity and state
sovereignty,” leading activists to accuse the country of using its conflict with Russia-backed
rebels to justify climate inaction.
United States: Where to begin? CAT already ranked U.S. Paris targets as “insufficient.”
With the Trump Administration’s ongoing hostility toward climate action, it now
categorizes the country’s efforts as “critically insufficient,” their lowest ranking. Among
the swings that the present administration has taken at its predecessor’s climate policy: It
has attempted to roll back the Clean Power Plan; sought to relax vehicle efficiency
standards to such an extent that even vehicle manufacturers have objected; and
announced plans to weaken regulations to limit HFC emissions and regulation of methane
leaks from oil and gas production.
The administration has been working to actively censor climate science within its own
agencies, and has established a climate change review panel tasked with questioning the
findings of the country’s National Climate Assessment. The leader of that panel is a
climate change denier who has stated that “the demonization of carbon dioxide is just like
the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler.”
CAT estimates that, if implemented fully, the administration’s policies could by 2030 cause
an increase in the U.S.’s annual greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the total annual
emissions of the state of California.
Thank you!