How much our lives have changed after we could turn on the light at the flip of a switch. We have gained several hours of “productive” time – either for work or leisure. Our existence has been made better, yes better, by the introduction of electricity. But are we guilty of “Biting the hand that feeds us” syndrome when we say we should cut the carbon emissions of electricity?
Not quite. Why?
First, a quick primer: Most of the electricity in the world comes from burning some form of fossil fuel –coal, oil, gas. Burning of these fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide (CO2) into the air which then begins to trap heat, thus warming the Earth. But, having the benefits of electricity is quite different from emitting CO2. For better understanding, let me split the explanation into three parts: first, where our electricity comes from; second, how much of it is “lost” on the way and why; and finally, how much electricity we consume for performing a given task.
Let us quickly take a whirlwind world tour to see how electricity grids across different countries are powered. Canada’s or Brazil’s grids are very green – that is, they emit very little CO2 for every unit of electricity generated because of the plentiful hydropower they have at their command. France’s grid emits very little CO2 – but then France is the leading user of nuclear energy. This is not a very palatable option for a world recovering from Fukushima. China’s grid is still powered primarily by coal (the most CO2-emitting source per unit of power) but it’s getting greener by the day.
India’s grid is not-so-green, powered 60% by coal, although the windmills of Tamil Nadu and the hydroelectric power of the North East play an important role. In smart grids in some parts of the world, and perhaps in our future, we can choose how green our electricity is – whether we buy power generated from solar, wind, hydro or coal. Today, we’re stuck with what we have. And this means, each unit generated in India emits a lot more CO2 than say in Brazil, so we need to be more careful
Next, let us consider how much electricity is “lost” on the way to our home. This is important because CO2 is emitted mainly at the point of generation, and whether or not the electricity is “usefully” consumed is not relevant. In India, our Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses hover around 23% - from J&K with 60% losses to Kerala with “only” 12% loss. Think about that for a second: 1 out of 4 units generated is lost – either due to friction or more often, not paid for. For comparison, Japan’s T&D loss is four per cent while America’s is six per cent.
This brings us to an important point: you will not try to optimise what doesn’t cost you. We saw this point frighteningly proved in our agricultural sector – farmers in India don’t optimise their choice of crop for water, because for them water is essentially free. Similarly, many in India do not pay for their power – so they do not use it efficiently. RBI governor, Dr.Raghuram Rajan, made an interesting point in one of his speeches: "The tolerance for the venal politician is because he is the crutch that helps the poor and underprivileged navigate a system that gives them so little access.” This point is brought home by a paper by Min et al, 2013 that showed higher electrical line losses occurred just before elections in Uttar Pradesh in India. Look at it another way: it cost India Rs. 5.01, on average, to produce a unit of electricity in 2012-13. India realized, or received, Rs. 3.76 for each unit – suggesting that only 75% of its units were paid for. The numbers are worse for the Agriculture sector: India received only Rs. 1.46 for each unit costing Rs. 5.01 to make. A losing business proposition if ever there was one.
Now it becomes clearer – we are caught in a vicious cycle: Many do not pay for their electricity and so don’t use it in the best manner. Electricity boards do not have enough to make ends meet, so do not invest enough in infrastructure. Net result: high power tariffs for those of us who do pay and endless power cuts.
The last part of the carbon-electricity link is in how efficiently the end-consumer uses the electricity. We see that those who don’t pay for it are unlikely to use it wisely, but what do those of us who pay for our power do? We carry the weight of our coal-heavy grid and the added weight of our non-paying fellow citizens. What can we do to reduce our carbon footprint? That’s the topic of the next article.
(Climaction is a fortnightly column that is published in MetroPlus Weekend on alternate Fridays. The views expressed in the articles are those of the author.)
The next article in this series will appear on October 16.
Feedback and questions may be e-mailed to climaction2015@gmail.com
(Mridula Ramesh is the Executive Director of Sundaram Textiles. She is also a student and teacher of global warming.)
