<p>India refused to vote on a UN General Assembly resolution calling on nations to comply with their obligations on climate change, raising concern over the draft, which "undermines" the "sacrosanct architecture" of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The resolution was passed in the 193-member UN General Assembly on Wednesday with 141 countries voting in favour, eight against it and 28 abstaining, including India. New Delhi stated that it had engaged constructively during negotiations on the resolution and consistently articulated its concerns and positions during the process.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>"We are therefore disappointed that our concerns were not addressed, despite our best efforts to find common ground," it said. Explanation India's vote, First Secretary at India's Permanent Mission to the UN, Petal Gahlot, said adoption of the resolution by the General Assembly does not impose any legally binding obligations on India. b"Our obligations arise only from outcomes adopted under the UNFCCC process. Hence, in line with our stated position on climate change-related issues, India was not in a position to vote in favour of this resolution," she said.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The resolution, titled ‘Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States in respect of climate change’, welcomed the unanimous advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in July 2025 on countries’ responsibilities regarding climate change. It also recognised the opinion as an authoritative interpretation of existing international law.</p><h3>Why does India abstains to vote?</h3><p>India has consistently raised concerns in the past that climate obligations must be negotiated through the UN climate framework, as it recognises the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". Under this principle, developed countries, which are the largest historical emitters, are supposed to take the lead on emissions cuts initiatives and provide finance and technology support to developing nations.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Introduced by Vanuatu, the resolution urged all nations to fulfil their obligations under international law to safeguard the climate system and environment from human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. It also called on countries to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. India, however, maintained that the draft resolution does not adequately emphasise the advisory and non-binding character of the ICJ opinion.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>"We are therefore seriously concerned that the resolution undermines the sacrosanct architecture of the UNFCCC process, by elevating an Advisory Opinion to a binding or quasi-binding status, attempting to impose obligations on developing countries that have not been multilaterally agreed upon. This is a dangerous precedent that we must all be wary of," Gahlot said.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><strong>Also read:</strong><a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-issues-health-advisory-amid-ebola-outbreak-passengers-from-these-countries-warned-1779344734077"> 'Those with direct contact...': India's DGHS issues health advisory amid Ebola outbreak; Passengers from THESE countries warned</a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>India found that the resolution directs a specific mitigation roadmap, imposes external benchmarks for ambition, and setup environment that may invite judicial or quasi-judicial scrutiny of nationally determined contributions. "This seriously undermines national policy space and disrupts the bottom-up architecture of the Paris Agreement," Gahlot said.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>India, along with several developing nations, has previously voiced concerns that efforts to assign greater legal significance to the International Court of Justice opinion could subject national climate commitments and domestic policy decisions to international legal scrutiny beyond the framework of the negotiated UN climate process.</p><p>India also raised objections over the omission of the term “climate finance” from the resolution. Calling it a “serious omission”, Petal Gahlot said the climate finance target agreed upon in 2024 is widely acknowledged to be insufficient for the requirements of developing nations and therefore warranted greater emphasis in a resolution dealing with states’ obligations on climate change.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>She further said India considers the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement to be balanced and internationally agreed frameworks for addressing climate challenges. Gahlot also underlined that sustainable development and poverty alleviation continue to be the foremost priorities for developing countries.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>"Any transition in energy systems must therefore be just, orderly, and equitable, taking into account the need for energy access, economic growth, and social development. The resolution does not adequately recognise these imperatives and constrains policy space for developing countries.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>"It is further a case of insult to injury that there is absolutely no reference to the necessity of developed countries continuing to take the lead in mitigation and providing adequate and predictable financing, technology transfer and capacity building to developing countries in order for them to undertake such transitions," Gahlot said.</p>

The resolution urged all nations to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. 

India refused to vote on a UN General Assembly resolution calling on nations to comply with their obligations on climate change, raising concern over the draft, which "undermines" the "sacrosanct architecture" of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The resolution was passed in the 193-member UN General Assembly on Wednesday with 141 countries voting in favour, eight against it and 28 abstaining, including India. New Delhi stated that it had engaged constructively during negotiations on the resolution and consistently articulated its concerns and positions during the process. "We are therefore disappointed that our concerns were not addressed, despite our best efforts to find common ground," it said. Explanation India's vote, First Secretary at India's Permanent Mission to the UN, Petal Gahlot, said adoption of the resolution by the General Assembly does not impose any legally binding obligations on India. b"Our obligations arise only from outcomes adopted under the UNFCCC process. Hence, in line with our stated position on climate change-related issues, India was not in a position to vote in favour of this resolution," she said. The resolution, titled ‘Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States in respect of climate change’, welcomed the unanimous advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in July 2025 on countries’ responsibilities regarding climate change. It also recognised the opinion as an authoritative interpretation of existing international law. Why does India abstains to vote? India has consistently raised concerns in the past that climate obligations must be negotiated through the UN climate framework, as it recognises the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities". Under this principle, developed countries, which are the largest historical emitters, are supposed to take the lead on emissions cuts initiatives and provide finance and technology support to developing nations. Introduced by Vanuatu, the resolution urged all nations to fulfil their obligations under international law to safeguard the climate system and environment from human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. It also called on countries to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. India, however, maintained that the draft resolution does not adequately emphasise the advisory and non-binding character of the ICJ opinion. "We are therefore seriously concerned that the resolution undermines the sacrosanct architecture of the UNFCCC process, by elevating an Advisory Opinion to a binding or quasi-binding status, attempting to impose obligations on developing countries that have not been multilaterally agreed upon. This is a dangerous precedent that we must all be wary of," Gahlot said. Also read: 'Those with direct contact...': India's DGHS issues health advisory amid Ebola outbreak; Passengers from THESE countries warned India found that the resolution directs a specific mitigation roadmap, imposes external benchmarks for ambition, and setup environment that may invite judicial or quasi-judicial scrutiny of nationally determined contributions. "This seriously undermines national policy space and disrupts the bottom-up architecture of the Paris Agreement," Gahlot said. India, along with several developing nations, has previously voiced concerns that efforts to assign greater legal significance to the International Court of Justice opinion could subject national climate commitments and domestic policy decisions to international legal scrutiny beyond the framework of the negotiated UN climate process. India also raised objections over the omission of the term “climate finance” from the resolution. Calling it a “serious omission”, Petal Gahlot said the climate finance target agreed upon in 2024 is widely acknowledged to be insufficient for the requirements of developing nations and therefore warranted greater emphasis in a resolution dealing with states’ obligations on climate change. She further said India considers the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement to be balanced and internationally agreed frameworks for addressing climate challenges. Gahlot also underlined that sustainable development and poverty alleviation continue to be the foremost priorities for developing countries. "Any transition in energy systems must therefore be just, orderly, and equitable, taking into account the need for energy access, economic growth, and social development. The resolution does not adequately recognise these imperatives and constrains policy space for developing countries. "It is further a case of insult to injury that there is absolutely no reference to the necessity of developed countries continuing to take the lead in mitigation and providing adequate and predictable financing, technology transfer and capacity building to developing countries in order for them to undertake such transitions," Gahlot said.

<p>The resolution urged all nations to take steps, consistent with the Paris Agreement and their respective national circumstances, to limit the increase in global average temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.&nbsp;</p>

Why did India abstain from voting on the UN climate change resolution?

<p>The 2015 Paris Agreement is the first pact under which all nations commit to taking actions to curb global warming, caused mainly by emissions from burning coal, oil and gas.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Key facts about the agreement:</p>

<p><strong>&nbsp;The climate club&nbsp;</strong></p>

<p>A total of 196 governments, including the Palestinian Authority, have endorsed the landmark deal and 183 have officially ratified it as of December 1.</p>

<p>International agreements can be signed, but only become binding through ratification.</p>

<p>The accord which becomes operational in 2020 &nbsp;entered into force in November 2016 when it crossed the threshold of 55 ratifying parties representing at least 55 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.</p>

<p>The world's top carbon polluters, in descending order, are China, the United States, the European Union, and India.</p>

<p>The biggest polluter not to have ratified the deal is Russia, which ranks 5th. Turkey and Iran have also failed to ratify.</p>

<p><strong>Exit strategy&nbsp;</strong></p>

<p>The agreement allows parties to quit, but notice can be given only three years after entry into force. Withdrawal would take effect a year later.&nbsp;</p>

<p>In June 2017, US President Donald Trump announced that the United States would pull out. Under treaty rules, that cannot formally take place until November 4, the day after the next US presidential election.&nbsp;</p>

<p>A country can also withdraw from the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) under whose authority the deal was negotiated. Withdrawal takes effect a year after notification, which can be given at any time.</p>

<p><strong>The goal</strong></p>

<p>Nations have agreed to hold global warming to 'well below'&nbsp;two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-Industrial Revolution levels and to strive for a lower limit of 1.5C, if possible.</p>

<p>A major report from the UN's science advisory body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), concluded in October that the 1.5C cap is technically feasible but would require a rapid and wholesale transformation of the global economy.</p>

<p>Even the two-degree ceiling is a huge challenge, according to the IPCC, which calculated that emissions must drop 40-to-70 per cent by 2050 (compared to 2010 levels) to hit that target.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Signatories have undertaken to ensure that global emissions peak "as soon as possible". They rose in 2017, and are on track to go up again this year.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Voluntary national pledges annexed to the treaty would see the planet warm by at least 3C, a recipe for catastrophic floods, heatwaves, drought and storm surges made worse by sea level rise, say scientists.</p>

<p><strong>&nbsp;Tracking progress&nbsp;</strong></p>

<p>Starting in 2020, countries will take stock every five years of their collective progress in curbing global warming, with an eye toward boosting national efforts to cut emissions.</p>

<p>Most current pledges extend to 2030, with a few including the plan submitted by the United States under Barack Obama running to 2025.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>But faced with the inadequacy of those pledges and dire warnings from climate scientists that emissions must peak and sharply decline as soon as possible, nations are under pressure to enhance their carbon-cutting commitments sooner.&nbsp;</p>

<p><strong>&nbsp;Financing</strong></p>

<p>Rich countries are required to provide funding to help developing nations make the costly shift to clean energy and to shore up defences against climate impacts.</p>

<p>The treaty mandates climate aid of $100 billion (88 billion euros) per year starting in 2020.&nbsp;</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/global-warming-outpaces-efforts-to-slow-it-un-179838">A running tally published last week by the UN </a>showed that climate finance is roughly on track to hit that total, but disagreements remain over the sources of funding and how much will be earmarked for adapting to climate change.</p>

<p>Importantly, one of the Paris Agreement's long-term goals is to make all finance flows consistent with low-carbon and climate-ready economic development, which will be measured in trillions, not billions.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


The 2015 Paris Agreement is the first pact under which all nations commit to taking actions to curb global warming, caused mainly by emissions from burning coal, oil and gas.

The 2015 Paris Agreement is the first pact under which all nations commit to taking actions to curb global warming, caused mainly by emissions from burning coal, oil and gas. Key facts about the agreement: The climate club A total of 196 governments, including the Palestinian Authority, have endorsed the landmark deal and 183 have officially ratified it as of December 1. International agreements can be signed, but only become binding through ratification. The accord which becomes operational in 2020 entered into force in November 2016 when it crossed the threshold of 55 ratifying parties representing at least 55 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The world's top carbon polluters, in descending order, are China, the United States, the European Union, and India. The biggest polluter not to have ratified the deal is Russia, which ranks 5th. Turkey and Iran have also failed to ratify. Exit strategy The agreement allows parties to quit, but notice can be given only three years after entry into force. Withdrawal would take effect a year later. In June 2017, US President Donald Trump announced that the United States would pull out. Under treaty rules, that cannot formally take place until November 4, the day after the next US presidential election. A country can also withdraw from the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) under whose authority the deal was negotiated. Withdrawal takes effect a year after notification, which can be given at any time. The goal Nations have agreed to hold global warming to 'well below' two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-Industrial Revolution levels and to strive for a lower limit of 1.5C, if possible. A major report from the UN's science advisory body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), concluded in October that the 1.5C cap is technically feasible but would require a rapid and wholesale transformation of the global economy. Even the two-degree ceiling is a huge challenge, according to the IPCC, which calculated that emissions must drop 40-to-70 per cent by 2050 (compared to 2010 levels) to hit that target. Signatories have undertaken to ensure that global emissions peak "as soon as possible". They rose in 2017, and are on track to go up again this year. Voluntary national pledges annexed to the treaty would see the planet warm by at least 3C, a recipe for catastrophic floods, heatwaves, drought and storm surges made worse by sea level rise, say scientists. Tracking progress Starting in 2020, countries will take stock every five years of their collective progress in curbing global warming, with an eye toward boosting national efforts to cut emissions. Most current pledges extend to 2030, with a few including the plan submitted by the United States under Barack Obama running to 2025. But faced with the inadequacy of those pledges and dire warnings from climate scientists that emissions must peak and sharply decline as soon as possible, nations are under pressure to enhance their carbon-cutting commitments sooner. Financing Rich countries are required to provide funding to help developing nations make the costly shift to clean energy and to shore up defences against climate impacts. The treaty mandates climate aid of $100 billion (88 billion euros) per year starting in 2020. A running tally published last week by the UN showed that climate finance is roughly on track to hit that total, but disagreements remain over the sources of funding and how much will be earmarked for adapting to climate change. Importantly, one of the Paris Agreement's long-term goals is to make all finance flows consistent with low-carbon and climate-ready economic development, which will be measured in trillions, not billions.

The Paris climate treaty: A snapshot

<p align="JUSTIFY">As part of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP21) in Paris in 2015, countries across the world came together and adopted a climate agreement whereby they indicated their long term climate goals post 2020. These goals or targets were laid out in each country&rsquo;s Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) with the aim to hold the increase in global average temperature to well below 2&deg;C.</p>

<p>India and China have both made significant commitments as part of their INDC. For instance, in case of India, these include reduction of the emission intensity of GDP by 33 to 35 per cent from 2005 levels, increase the percentage of non-fossil fuel electricity to 40 per cent of total electric power capacity and create a carbon sink.&nbsp;China similarly has made a commitment to peak Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2030, lower carbon intensity of GDP by 60 to 65 per cent below its 2005 levels by 2030, and&nbsp;increase it&#39;s non-fossil fuel energy to 20 per cent of the total primary energy supply (TPES) by 2030. It has also pledged to increase its forest stock.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>One problem that India faces along with the other BRICS countries includes the financing of clean energy.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=One problem that India faces along with the other BRICS countries includes the financing of clean energy." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>In line with India&rsquo;s pledge of generating 40 per cent of TPES through non-fossil fuels, India has declared an aim to have installed renewable energy capacity of 175 gigawatts (GW) of which solar photovoltaics (PV) is 100 GW by 2030. This includes increasing ground mounted grid connected solar power to 60 GW and increasing rooftop grid interactive solar power to 40 GW. Earlier, in 2010, with the launch of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission, 100 GW of solar installations were planned by 2022.&nbsp;</p>

<p>India&rsquo;s current solar generation capacity is about 13 GW in 2017. In 2016, rooftop solar contributed to an approximate total of 1 GW of generated solar power. This means that an additional 87 GW has to be installed in the next twelve years, which roughly translates to an addition of 4GW (9.6 GW) of the mounted grid and 3.25 GW (7.8 GW) of rooftop every year till<strong> </strong>2030 (2022). Many have suggested that this is not possible.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>China constitutes about 75 per cent of the Indian solar PV market. The main reason is the cost competitiveness of the Chinese, with the cost of solar modules and cells being 25-50 per cent lower than in India.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=China constitutes about 75 per cent of the Indian solar PV market. The main reason is the cost competitiveness of the Chinese, with the cost of solar modules and cells being 25-50 per cent lower than in India." target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Solar power is generated by converting sunlight into electricity using either&nbsp;PV&nbsp;or using concentrated solar power (using lenses or mirrors and tracking systems to focus a large area of sunlight into a small beam) or a combination. For generating photovoltaic solar power, crystalline silicon PV module is used. This silica is used to make polysilicon, ingot, wafer, PV cell all of which are used to make crystalline silicon PV module. Eight firms worldwide make about 80 per cent polysilicon. Others buy from them. Companies who buy polysilicon may sell wafers or carry out all of the subsequent steps of the wafer, cell, and module manufacturing and assembly. Some PV manufacturers such as Yingli make their own polysilicon.</p>

<p>The lack of upstream segments in this value chain adds to the vulnerability of Indian manufacturers. India does not produce polysilicon, ingot or wafer. However, crystalline silicon PV module is produced in India. The share of the Indian modules is about 10 per cent with imports from China constituting about 75 per cent of the Indian solar PV market. The main reason is the cost competitiveness of the Chinese, with the cost of solar modules and cells being 25-50 per cent lower than in India. India imports polysilicon, as well as wafers, and other ingredients such as ethylene vinyl acetate, which adds to the cost of production of modules.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Incidentally, the price of solar cells has fallen from 50 cents per kWh to 33 cents per kWh, in three years since 2010, when launch in 2010 of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission, the target of which was dramatically upgraded in 2014 to 100 GW of solar installations by 2022. In 2016, the WTO ruled against India that the domestic content requirements for solar cells and modules under the Jawaharlal Nehru Solar Mission amounted to trade-related investment measures as they favour domestic products over imported products. The Indian Solar Manufacturers Association have recently had launched an anti-dumping investigation against China, Taiwan, and Malaysia of alleged dumping of &#39;solar cells whether or not assembled partially or fully in modules or panels or on glass or some other suitable substrates&#39;.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>China&rsquo;s top solar module manufacturer, are in talks with India&#39;s Essel group to set up a solar module manufacturing facility in India.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=China?s top solar module manufacturer, are in talks with India's Essel group to set up a solar module manufacturing facility in India. " target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>It has been debated that Indian solar PV industry should be developed with support from policies of the government like a capital subsidy and lower interest loans. However, the scale of Indian manufacturing is too small (in comparison to China). Four states - Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, account for over three-quarters of today&rsquo;s installed capacity. Rooftop solar also has the potential to become a more important part of India&rsquo;s solar portfolio and is being taken up by Indian Railways and on canals as well.&nbsp;</p>

<p>One problem that India faces along with the other BRICS countries includes the financing of clean energy. It has been estimated that India might need USD 175 billion in this regard. India has emerged as the second most attractive destination for investment in renewables ahead of the US according to a ranking by Ernst and Young (EY) last year. China is the most attractive destination. The New Development Bank&nbsp;has sanctioned a USD 250 million loan for India to fund its renewable energy. Clearly, more is needed.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Chinese firms such as GLC-Poly Energy, China&rsquo;s top solar module manufacturer, are in talks with India&#39;s Essel group to set up a solar module manufacturing facility in India. Cooperation between China and India in this regard could go a long way in achieving the NDC target of both countries.</p>


India and China need to work simultaneously to curb the increase in global average temperature.

As part of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP21) in Paris in 2015, countries across the world came together and adopted a climate agreement whereby they indicated their long term climate goals post 2020. These goals or targets were laid out in each country’s Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) with the aim to hold the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C. India and China have both made significant commitments as part of their INDC. For instance, in case of India, these include reduction of the emission intensity of GDP by 33 to 35 per cent from 2005 levels, increase the percentage of non-fossil fuel electricity to 40 per cent of total electric power capacity and create a carbon sink. China similarly has made a commitment to peak Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2030, lower carbon intensity of GDP by 60 to 65 per cent below its 2005 levels by 2030, and increase it's non-fossil fuel energy to 20 per cent of the total primary energy supply (TPES) by 2030. It has also pledged to increase its forest stock. One problem that India faces along with the other BRICS countries includes the financing of clean energy. × In line with India’s pledge of generating 40 per cent of TPES through non-fossil fuels, India has declared an aim to have installed renewable energy capacity of 175 gigawatts (GW) of which solar photovoltaics (PV) is 100 GW by 2030. This includes increasing ground mounted grid connected solar power to 60 GW and increasing rooftop grid interactive solar power to 40 GW. Earlier, in 2010, with the launch of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission, 100 GW of solar installations were planned by 2022. India’s current solar generation capacity is about 13 GW in 2017. In 2016, rooftop solar contributed to an approximate total of 1 GW of generated solar power. This means that an additional 87 GW has to be installed in the next twelve years, which roughly translates to an addition of 4GW (9.6 GW) of the mounted grid and 3.25 GW (7.8 GW) of rooftop every year till 2030 (2022). Many have suggested that this is not possible. China constitutes about 75 per cent of the Indian solar PV market. The main reason is the cost competitiveness of the Chinese, with the cost of solar modules and cells being 25-50 per cent lower than in India. × Solar power is generated by converting sunlight into electricity using either PV or using concentrated solar power (using lenses or mirrors and tracking systems to focus a large area of sunlight into a small beam) or a combination. For generating photovoltaic solar power, crystalline silicon PV module is used. This silica is used to make polysilicon, ingot, wafer, PV cell all of which are used to make crystalline silicon PV module. Eight firms worldwide make about 80 per cent polysilicon. Others buy from them. Companies who buy polysilicon may sell wafers or carry out all of the subsequent steps of the wafer, cell, and module manufacturing and assembly. Some PV manufacturers such as Yingli make their own polysilicon. The lack of upstream segments in this value chain adds to the vulnerability of Indian manufacturers. India does not produce polysilicon, ingot or wafer. However, crystalline silicon PV module is produced in India. The share of the Indian modules is about 10 per cent with imports from China constituting about 75 per cent of the Indian solar PV market. The main reason is the cost competitiveness of the Chinese, with the cost of solar modules and cells being 25-50 per cent lower than in India. India imports polysilicon, as well as wafers, and other ingredients such as ethylene vinyl acetate, which adds to the cost of production of modules. Incidentally, the price of solar cells has fallen from 50 cents per kWh to 33 cents per kWh, in three years since 2010, when launch in 2010 of the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission, the target of which was dramatically upgraded in 2014 to 100 GW of solar installations by 2022. In 2016, the WTO ruled against India that the domestic content requirements for solar cells and modules under the Jawaharlal Nehru Solar Mission amounted to trade-related investment measures as they favour domestic products over imported products. The Indian Solar Manufacturers Association have recently had launched an anti-dumping investigation against China, Taiwan, and Malaysia of alleged dumping of 'solar cells whether or not assembled partially or fully in modules or panels or on glass or some other suitable substrates'. China’s top solar module manufacturer, are in talks with India's Essel group to set up a solar module manufacturing facility in India. × It has been debated that Indian solar PV industry should be developed with support from policies of the government like a capital subsidy and lower interest loans. However, the scale of Indian manufacturing is too small (in comparison to China). Four states - Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, account for over three-quarters of today’s installed capacity. Rooftop solar also has the potential to become a more important part of India’s solar portfolio and is being taken up by Indian Railways and on canals as well. One problem that India faces along with the other BRICS countries includes the financing of clean energy. It has been estimated that India might need USD 175 billion in this regard. India has emerged as the second most attractive destination for investment in renewables ahead of the US according to a ranking by Ernst and Young (EY) last year. China is the most attractive destination. The New Development Bank has sanctioned a USD 250 million loan for India to fund its renewable energy. Clearly, more is needed. Chinese firms such as GLC-Poly Energy, China’s top solar module manufacturer, are in talks with India's Essel group to set up a solar module manufacturing facility in India. Cooperation between China and India in this regard could go a long way in achieving the NDC target of both countries.

Cooperation between India and China over the energy sector can keep the earth safe

unfccc

Unfccc, News on Unfccc, stories on Unfccc, articles on Unfccc, Unfccc stories at Wion, Unfccc news, Unfccc latest news