India Hits 50% Non-Fossil Power Milestone Five Years Ahead of Paris Agreement's 2030 Target (reuters.com)
- Reference: 0178407934
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/07/18/0731210/india-hits-50-non-fossil-power-milestone-five-years-ahead-of-paris-agreements-2030-target
- Source link: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-hits-50-non-fossil-power-milestone-ahead-2030-clean-energy-target-2025-07-14/
> The announcement comes as India's renewable power output rose at its fastest pace since 2022 in the first half of 2025, while coal-fired generation declined nearly 3%. Fossil fuels still accounted for over two-thirds of the increase in power generation last year. India plans to expand coal-fired capacity by 80 GW by 2032 to meet rising demand.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-hits-50-non-fossil-power-milestone-ahead-2030-clean-energy-target-2025-07-14/
Well done! (Score:2)
Sensible humans will save human civilization, despite the many stupid humans who aren't smart enough to care, or who benefit (in the short term) from fighting against what is very obviously right.
Re: (Score:2)
Remind me how much emissions have declined in India, and how much the climate has cooled?
Re: (Score:2)
As the effect of CO2 lasts for times in the order of thousands of years, the climate won't cool. At least not in your lifetime. It can only heat up slower.
Re: (Score:2)
Sensible humans? The ones in India? The most populous nation on the planet? The one where air pollutants are so thick in major cities it looks like fog? Where farmers [1]openly burn their fields [reuters.com] to make way for next year's crops contributing to the air pollution? The country which the article states will increase its use of coal-fired power plants? Those sensible humans?
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/india/indian-farmers-short-time-burn-crop-waste-despite-toxic-smog-2024-11-19/
It's cheaper (Score:5, Interesting)
Even if you don't account for the externalized costs of fossil fuels wind and solar are cheaper so long as you've got land and India has that.
The only reason to keep using fossil fuels is the prop up fossil fuel companies and fossil fuel dependent countries like Saudi Arabia.
We all know that but those companies spend a lot of money buying our elections. Mostly with propaganda to trick us into voting for people who are currently crashing our economy and getting ready to lay us all off
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting that India is a democracy and has managed to do this 5 years ahead of their goal. Their goal wasn't as aggressive as China's, but still.
It's a good sign because it proves that democracies can do this kind of thing. Of course for India it's been a massive benefit. Not just cleaner air, but lots of jobs in manufacturing and installation. It has helped develop their energy grid too, improving it and getting power to under-served areas. They have new micro and mini grids too.
It's a shame so man
Re: (Score:2)
You mean solar plus batteries, right? You can't do a cost comparison between pure solar (without storage) and fossil fuels. Since pure solar can't produce power when the sun is not shining. The batteries drive up the cost quite a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
> The only reason to keep using fossil fuels is the prop up fossil fuel companies and fossil fuel dependent countries like Saudi Arabia.
That's the only reason? Not to keep the lights on when the sun doesn't blow and the wind doesn't shine?
Metrics like LCOE, levelized cost of energy/electricity, make certain assumptions when making their calculations. One common assumption for wind and solar is that there's an existing backup somewhere on the grid. It's pretty safe to make that assumption if half of your electricity comes from fossil fuels still, and there's ample reserves in that given that for large portions of the year there could be i