Home / news / In G20 only India set to meet target of 1.5°C

In G20 only India set to meet target of 1.5°C

In G20 only India set to meet target of 1.5°C

View Reddit by SirBalthazarView Source

21 comments

  1. What’s crazy to me is that whenever there are these talks over ‘agreements’, India has a history of stating that it may be unreasonable for a developing nation like them to try and meet these goals while there are more pressing concerns like lifting a huge portion of their population out of poverty. Despite the skepticism and the extra challenges, India has to managed to meet its goals while many Western countries failed to do so. So congratulations to the people of India for meeting this goal along with the 2019 toilet goals.

    EDIT: Lots of people commenting that India’s GHG is actually going up, not down. It should be noted that:

    1. The fact that developing nations like India have not peaked in GHG is something that is recognized by the agreement so this trend isn’t exactly news – in fact, it’s expected.
    2. The primary goals discussed in the article are NDC’s – basically the country’s action plan to mitigate their GHG. India’s set forth a pretty solid list to decrease their GHG pretty significantly by 2030. Will it be met? Who knows. You may argue this is a tiny first step but keep in mind that it’s a tiny step that most other countries could not even bother to take. Hell, look at the U.S. trying to back out of the agreement.

  2. BuT IT DOeSn’T mATtEr iF THE resT of thE world StICks tO The clImate mitiGaTIoN, yOu’LL nevEr gET coUNtRIeS LIKe india anD CHIna tO FOLLOw it **/s**

  3. I am an Indian and even though the government is conscious about climate change for sure but can someone more informed post that how exactly and through which policies have they managed to control the temperature

  4. How can I contribute? Donate, anything to get the temperature down? Any links would be helpful.

  5. original news source: [https://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/g20report2019](https://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/g20report2019)
    e: that’s the summary site with an interactive country profile, the actual press release is here: [https://www.climate-transparency.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Brown-to-Green-Report-2019-International-Press-Release-FINAL.pdf](https://www.climate-transparency.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Brown-to-Green-Report-2019-International-Press-Release-FINAL.pdf)

  6. Inb4 salty right wingers point out pollution and street shitting which has nothing to do with climate change.

  7. The rest of us need to get our act together and tax carbon.

    The consensus among [scientists](http://bush.tamu.edu/istpp/scholarship/journals/ClimateScientistsPerspectives_ClimaticChange.pdf) and [economists](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf) on [carbon pricing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_price)^§ to mitigate climate change is similar to [the consensus among climatologists](http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/) that human activity is responsible for global warming. Putting the price [upstream](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323611604578396401965799658) where the fossil fuels enter the market makes it simple, easily enforceable, and bureaucratically lean. Returning the revenue as an equitable dividend [offsets any regressive effects of the tax](http://www.nber.org/papers/w9152.pdf) (in fact, [~60% of the public would receive more in dividend than they paid in tax](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081648#s7)) and allows for a higher carbon price (which [is what matters for climate mitigation](https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S201000781840002X)) because [the public isn’t willing to pay anywhere near what’s needed otherwise](http://www.apnorc.org/projects/Pages/Is-the-Public-Willing-to-Pay-to-Help-Fix-Climate-Change-.aspx). Enacting a [border tax](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2026879) would protect domestic businesses from foreign producers not saddled with similar pollution taxes, and also [incentivize those countries](http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/handle/205761) to enact their own. And [**a carbon tax is expected to spur innovation**](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190827111120.htm).

    [Conservative estimates](http://rdcu.be/cLYO) are that failing to mitigate climate change will cost us 10% of GDP over 50 years, [starting about now](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf). In contrast, carbon taxes may actually *boost* GDP, if the revenue is [returned as an equitable dividend to households](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jun/13/how-revenue-neutral-carbon-tax-creates-jobs-grows-economy) (the [poor tend to spend money when they’ve got it](http://www.econ2.jhu.edu/people/ccarroll/papers/cstwMPC.pdf), which [boosts economic growth](https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1513.pdf)) not to mention [create jobs](https://econ.ucalgary.ca/manageprofile/sites/econ.ucalgary.ca.manageprofile/files/unitis/publications/1-7729354/Yamazaki_CarbonTax_JEEM_2017.pdf) and [save lives](https://globalchange.mit.edu/news-media/jp-news-outreach/shift-renewable-electricity-win-win-statewide-level).

    Taxing carbon [is in each nation’s own best interest](http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp15105.pdf) (it [saves lives at home](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09499-x)) and [many nations have already started](https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/29687/9781464812927.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y), which [can have knock-on effects in other countries](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf). In poor countries, [taxing carbon is progressive even *before* considering smart revenue uses, because only the “rich” can afford fossil fuels](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf) in the first place. We [won’t wean ourselves off fossil fuels without a carbon tax](http://news.mit.edu/2016/carbon-tax-stop-using-fossil-fuels-0224), the [longer we wait to take action the more expensive it will be](http://rdcu.be/cZjG). Each year we delay costs [~$900 billion](https://cla.umn.edu/heller-hurwicz/news-events/news/policy-brief-calibrating-price-climate-risk).

    [It’s the smart thing to do](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069698910580), and the IPCC report made clear [pricing carbon is **necessary** if we want to meet our 1.5 ºC target](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/SR15_TS_High_Res.pdf).

    Contrary to [popular belief](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance#Examples) the main barrier isn’t lack of public support. But [we can’t keep hoping others will solve this problem for us](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility). We need to take the necessary steps to make this dream a reality:

    [**Lobby**](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/join-citizens-climate-lobby/?tfa_3590416195188=reddit-CarbonTax&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=CarbonTax) for the change we need. [Lobbying works](https://sociology.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/friends_or_foes-how_social_movement_allies_affect_the_passage_of_legislation_in_the_u._s._congress.pdf), and you [don’t need a lot of money to be effective](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1016.1967&rep=rep1&type=pdf) (though it does help to [educate yourself on effective tactics](http://www.congressfoundation.org/storage/documents/CMF_Pubs/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf)). If you’re too busy to go through the [free training](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/new-member/#climateadvocatetraining), sign up for [text alerts](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/text/) to join coordinated call-in days ([it works](http://www.congressfoundation.org/storage/documents/CMF_Pubs/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf)) or set yourself a monthly reminder to [write a letter](https://www.ted.com/talks/omar_ahmad_political_change_with_pen_and_paper?language=en) to your elected officials. According to NASA climatologist and climate activist [Dr. James Hansen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen), becoming an [active volunteer with Citizens’ Climate Lobby](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/join-citizens-climate-lobby/?tfa_3590416195188=reddit-CarbonTax&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=CarbonTax) is [the most important thing you can do for climate change](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4DAW1A6Ca8), and [climatologist Dr. Michael Mann](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Mann) calls its [Carbon Fee & Dividend](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend) policy [an example of sort of visionary policy that’s needed](https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/06/03/climate-change-requires-collective-action-more-than-single-acts-column/1275965001/).

    § The IPCC (AR5, WGIII) [Summary for Policymakers](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf) states with “high confidence” that tax-based policies are effective at decoupling GHG emissions from GDP (see p. 28). [Ch. 15](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_chapter15.pdf) has a more complete discussion. The U.S. [National Academy of Sciences, one of the most respected scientific bodies in the world, has also called for a carbon tax](https://www.nap.edu/download/21712). According to [IMF research](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/05/how-much-does-world-subsidize-oil-coal-and-gas/589000/), most of the $5.2 trillion in subsidies for fossil fuels come from not taxing carbon as we should. There is general agreement among economists on carbon taxes whether you consider [economists with expertise in climate economics](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf), [economists with expertise in resource economics](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.381.484&rep=rep1&type=pdf), or [economists from all sectors](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Doris_Geide-Stevenson/publication/261884738_Consensus_Among_Economists-An_Update/links/56a7f3fa08ae860e0255a8e3.pdf). It is literally [Econ 101](http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ101/herriges/Lectures10/Chapter%2017H%20-%20Externalities.pdf). The idea [won a Nobel Prize](http://environment.yale.edu/news/article/william-nordhaus-wins-nobel-prize-for-economics-of-climate-change/).

  8. This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://toi.in/vU0R9Y91/a33gj) reduced by 71%. (I’m a bot)
    *****
    > NEW DELHI: Extreme weather events led to around 16,000 deaths and economic losses of $142 billion in G20 nations on average every year during 1998-2017 with India reporting the highest number of deaths among them and figuring in the list of top five countries in terms of economic losses during the period, said a global report that analysed the climate action track records of the global economic power group.

    > The 'Brown to Green Report 2019', released by the the Climate Transparency on Monday noted that India is the only country among G20 nations that is close to 1.5 degree Celsius temperature rise 'pathway' – a scenario which the scientific community has pitched for at this juncture to save the world from the disastrous consequences of average temperature rise.

    > "Limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 degree Celsius instead of 3 degree celsius avoids over 70% of climate-related impacts in the water, health and agriculture sectors," said the report, highlighting necessity of ramping up climate action targets by top emitters.

    *****
    [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/dv4kq2/in_g20_only_india_on_course_to_meet_15_degree/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ “Version 2.02, ~441733 tl;drs so far.”) | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr “PM’s and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.”) | *Top* *keywords*: **report**^#1 **country**^#2 **climate**^#3 **G20**^#4 **emission**^#5

  9. Guess there goes right-wingers talking points of but India.

  10. So I read the headline, then read the article, and I am confused. India is not set to meet the target unless drastic measures are taken. WTF???

  11. Hey. Where’s the UK articles showing Indian slums to go with any headline.

  12. Oh but what about poverty in India? – Typical western/reddit response.

  13. Waiting for right-wing nutters to move the goal posts. Can’t blame India anymore.

  14. May other countries pull up their socks

  15. Congratulations and thank you India!

  16. If a mismanaged and a corrupt country like India can meet its goals, think about how badly the other countries are screwing up their progress.

    PS – I am an Indian.

  17. Can anyone let me know how to contribute?

  18. Aren’t they one of the biggest offenders?

Leave a Reply to ooomayor Cancel reply