Eg Phd, Mphil, Dclinpsychol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. The International Politics of Low Carbon Technology Development: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in India Rudra V. Kapila Doctor of Philosophy The University of Edinburgh November 2014 Declaration I declare that this thesis was composed by myself, that the work contained herein is my own except where explicitly stated otherwise in the text, and that this work has not been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification except as specified. (Rudra Vidhumani Kapila) i Abstract This thesis explores the international political dynamics of developing low carbon technology. Specifically, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology as a climate mitigation strategy in a developing country context is examined. CCS is a technological solution that allows for the continued use of fossil fuels without the large amounts of associated CO2 emissions. This entails capturing the CO2 emitted from large point sources, such as a coal-fired power station, and transporting the captured emissions to be injected and stored permanently into geological media. Consequently, CCS is a bridging technology that could provide more time for transitioning to a low-carbon economy. A case study of India is used, which is an emerging industrialising economy, and is also the third-largest coal producer in the world. India faces a dilemma: poverty alleviation and infrastructure development to support its billion plus population requires vast amounts of energy, which is predominantly based on fossil fuels. Therefore, it was envisioned that CCS would be a sustainable option, which could enable industrialisation at the rate required, whilst preventing the exacerbation of the negative effects of climate change. However, during the period of study (2007-2010), CCS was not embraced by India, despite there being a growing impetus to develop, demonstrate and transfer the technology. India was reluctant to consider CCS as part of a mitigation strategy, and this thesis focuses on the reasons why. An interdisciplinary approach is used, coupling perspectives from science, technology and innovation studies (STS) with concepts from International Relations (IR) scholarship. This sociotechnical conceptual framework is applied to gain a more holistic picture of the failed attempt to transfer CCS technology to India. Key technical challenges and blockages are identified within India’s existing energy system, which have restricted CCS technology implementation. In addition, the political challenges associated with the rejection of CCS by the Indian Government are explored. Empirical evidence is on the basis of elite interviews, an expert stakeholder survey and relevant documents. Another case study on the Cambay basin is used to further demonstrate the influence of political factors on CCS implementation, even in an area considered to have suitable technical conditions. The outcomes of this study have implications for policy addressing global challenges, especially by means of international cooperation and technological change. ii Lay Summary This study looks at how low-carbon, or green, energy technologies are developed in rich countries, which could also be applied in poor countries. The main focus is on Carbon Capture and Storage technology, shortened to CCS, which was being developed in rich countries such as the UK, Norway, Australia and USA. This technology involves capturing carbon dioxide gas, which is a polluting gas that contributes to climate change when it is released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is released as a waste product from large industrial processes, such as a power station that burns coal to produce electricity. The captured carbon dioxide gas is then transported, usually by pipelines, to be stored, or injected deep underground, around three kilometres below the surface, so that it does not escape into the atmosphere. Good storage locations for captured carbon dioxide can be found either on land, or offshore, deep below the surface of the seabed. Many of these suitable storage sites are places where oil or natural gas have already been discovered. Most countries around the world depend on fossil fuels, such as coal, oil and natural gas to produce electricity to power their factories, buildings and homes. Burning fossil fuels can be quite a polluting process, therefore CCS can be useful for cutting down the amount of carbon dioxide produced by industry and energy sectors. CCS could be especially useful for those countries that are less-developed and need a lot of energy to support their population. One such country is India, which uses a lot of coal because it is cheap and easily available. India needs this fuel to develop its industries, such as steel production, and also to produce electricity for powering its cities and villages. Therefore, India and other poor countries need cheap and clean energy to help lift their people out of poverty. At the time of this study, many experts in rich countries thought that this technology might also be useful if applied in India as part of a global effort to combat climate change. However, this study found that India was not keen to apply CCS technology. And so, this thesis looks at the technical and political reasons why India rejected CCS. This information was gathered from a series of interviews and surveys with very senior decision-makers in India, as well as technical experts in CCS technologies. The results of this study give a good understanding of the realities of the relationships between rich and poor countries. The findings also show how important these international relationships are and how they can influence key decisions, especially about new technologies which can be useful for limiting the effects of climate change. This work is also useful for understanding the complications for transferring a technology from one country to another. iii Acknowledgements This study encapsulates perseverance in the pursuit of a genuinely bad idea, which is essentially the entire reason anything important ever happens in the first place. And so, there are many to thank for their part in this challenging yet rewarding journey. First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisors: Stuart ‘Beardy’ Haszeldine, who kept a sense of humour when I had lost mine; Heather Lovell, whose selfless time and care were sometimes all that kept me going. I would also like to acknowledge my mentor Jon Gibbins, for his relentless enthusiasm and encouragement, but mostly for getting me into this mess in the first place. I must also thank Nils Markusson for his excellent advice in the early years of this project, and also for opening my eyes to the social science perspective. I am indebted to this global and eclectic fellowship of CCS professionals: Hannah Chalmers, Heleen de Coninck, Tim Dixon, Trevor Drage, Stuart Gilfillan, Meade Harris, Ian Havercroft, Sam Holloway, Grant Nicoll, Andrew Prag, Malcolm Rider, Jen Roberts, Andy Rutherford, Rob Schneider, Vivian Scott, Stuart Simmons, Phil Sharman, Navraj Singh-Ghaleigh, Jamie Stewart, Derek Taylor, James Verdon, Matthew Webb, Neil Wildgust, Mark Wilkinson, Mark Winskel, Rachel Wood. This group has been a source of friendships, great advice and collaboration. I would also like to thank the helpful individuals at Cairn Energy Plc in Edinburgh, Pierre Eliet, Mike Mackie and Malcolm Thoms, who were all very generous with their time and provided assistance in setting up fieldwork with Cairn Energy India. In India, I am indebted to TERI University, Suresh Babu, Gracy Oinam, Ram- Karan Singh and Smita Varma for hosting me in New Delhi, and providing great advice for fieldwork. I also thank the various participants of this study, who I cannot name, but would like to express my appreciation for their time and insights that form the basis of this research. It has been an honour to be chosen as one of the select-few UKERC interdisciplinary PhD projects. I am especially grateful for the financial support provided by the NERC and ESRC funding bodies, as well as the additional grants from Edinburgh University, which made this research possible. I also thank these compassionate souls at Edinburgh University, who have provided crucial practical and emotional support during the more testing times of this journey: Kate Heal, Rachael Palmer, Nicola Reid, Helena Sim, and Iris Sloan. Sport has been my lifeblood throughout this journey and I must show appreciation for the incredible individuals who kept me sane, on and off the pitch, as well as in and out of the boat or pool. Firstly, I thank my heroic coaches, Derek Docherty, Ian Dryburgh and Carole Taylor, who think I am totally cray-cray in a very good way. I also thank the following athletic miscreants of immense valour and talent: Laura Crossland, Charles Dane, Anna Donald, Nicole Greenhorn, Kirsty Liddon, Kathryn McIntosh, Ben O’Mahony, Rachel Pocklington, Jennifer ‘J-J’ Stewart. A special mention and thanks to the bling-swinging Gold Medallists and Camanachd Cup Winning Shinty Champions of 2010: Ruth ‘Stacey’ Bordoli, Jenny Durkin, Maz Lawson, Sophie Moyles, iv Una Rea, Aisling Spain, Katy Smith, Holly Webster and Coach Steve Dormer-Thornhill. These guys made me a legend (in Oban).