This was news, atleast to me. I have never seen a gas-fired water heater being sold to a household before in India. I walked over to the Croma website and they don't have one. Similarly, all the water heaters at ezone are electric. Amusingly enough, the P. K. L. Ltd. website also does not talk about a gas-fired water heater. So either this is vapourware or their website is not updated. Do you know any firm selling gas-fired water heating for homes in India, and do you know any home that has one?
Search interesting materials
Sunday, November 06, 2011
Residential water heating and the rise of the gas-fired economy
This was news, atleast to me. I have never seen a gas-fired water heater being sold to a household before in India. I walked over to the Croma website and they don't have one. Similarly, all the water heaters at ezone are electric. Amusingly enough, the P. K. L. Ltd. website also does not talk about a gas-fired water heater. So either this is vapourware or their website is not updated. Do you know any firm selling gas-fired water heating for homes in India, and do you know any home that has one?
Monday, March 19, 2007
Carbon tax questions
Greg Mankiw criticises David Friedman who is worried about what politicians will do with the gigantic tax revenues that come out of a carbon tax.
I think there is a way out which can satisfy all parties: this is Martin Feldstein's idea of having tradeable carbon vouchers. In brief, the idea is that the government should only setup an enforcement machinery, and every citizen should get a voucher entitling X amount of carbon emissions a year. After that, the rich will buy vouchers from the poor, thus achieving a new distribution of the emission rights, in a way that avoids having this money flow into the exchequer [link, link]. This is the ideal solution for the carbon problem: a target level of emission is achieved, using the most efficient solution in terms of modified technology and consumption, while avoiding the political economy problems of a large tax/GDP ratio.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Global warming aspects of the Indo-US nuclear deal
The major focus about the Indian nuclear deal has been on proliferation issues. However, CO2 emissions is also an important dimension of the deal [link]. Ila Patnaik has two articles on nuclear energy [one, two] and one on global warming [link].
In the weeks leading up to the vote at the US Senate, David G. Victor of Stanford has done a document The India Nuclear Deal: Implications for Global Climate Change:Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The abstract reads:
The nuclear deal probably will lead India to emit substantially less CO2 than it would if the country were not able to build such a large commercial nuclear fleet. The annual reductions by the year 2020 alone will be on the scale of all of the European Union's efforts to meet its Kyoto Protocol commitments. In addition, if this arrangement is successful it will offer a model framework for a more effective way to engage developing countries in the global effort to manage the problem of climate change. No arrangement to manage climate change can be adequately successful without these countries' participation; to date the existing schemes for encouraging these countries to make an effort have failed; a better approach is urgently needed.
You can access the PDF file via `esocialsciences.com' (free registration required): link.
Friday, February 10, 2006
Global warming and the Indian nuclear deal
Kirit Parikh headed a group which has produced a report presenting an integrated view on Indian energy policy, looking out into the next 25 years.
There has been considerable debate on the "Nuclear Deal" where India separates out civilian from military nuclear facilities, and gets access to imports of reactors and Uranium. Generally, discussions about this subject are rooted in questions of India's choice of retaining the right to build nuclear weapons. Business Standard has an editorial today which looks at the energy dimensions of this problem. They worry about the gigantic scale of CO2 emissions that will come about as India moves forward with a primarily coal-fired energy system. As they say:
Nuclear energy is the only scalable source of energy which avoids CO2 emissions. The Parikh plan is based on the views of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). Over the 1947-2030 period, the DAE is supposed to have figured out how to use our plentiful Thorium to generate essentially infinite nuclear energy. But along the way, the DAE plans insignificant nuclear generation. Nuclear energy is too important to be left to the nuclear establishment. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's nuclear deal with the US has thrown up the opportunity to get to a sound integrated energy policy. Indias best path today is to import world-class reactors of perhaps 100,000 Mw over the next decade. These should become the mainstay of the emerging private electricity generation industry. In global negotiations on CO2 emissions, India should insist on a per capita cap, which will generate huge revenues for Indian citizens from selling excess permits. Energy security can be obtained by holding a 5-10 year inventory of fuel.
Any OECD lawmaker who tries to interfere with Indian import of nuclear reactors and fuel should be given a copy of the Parikh plan, so that the consequences of India staying on the DAE trajectory can be seen. The whole world has a stake in Indian nuclear energy policy being freed from the DAE.
Elizabeth Kolbert had a marvellous three-part article in New Yorker a while ago, on global warming. It's a bit hard to find through google, so here's a text file with the content.
Update: Shekhar Gupta has an excellent big-picture piece in the Indian Express, about India's evolution on the nuclear question.