India has put all developed countries to shame by coming out with its provisional targets .

According to a Reuters report India thinks it is possible to cut its carbon intensity by 24 percent by 2020 compared with 2005 levels.

Carbon intensity is the amount of carbon dioxide emitted for each unit of gross domestic product.
By 2030, India estimates it could achieve a reduction in its carbon emissions by 37 percent from 2005 levels. The figures were arrived at after an analysis by various government departments.

A senior government official who declined to be named said India’s final targets, likely to be presented at next week’s global climate change talks in Copenhagen, could reflect a broad range rather than a specific figure.

This is not surprising that India had a figure in mind, only that nobody in the delegation wanted to attend their maths classes. We had the initiatives and plans in order but we just weren’t voicing it in the form of targets.

Officially, they weren’t going to open their bargaining chips right infront of the world before the negotiations have started. And in any case , this is probably the first time we have seen that countries have laid down their cards before the negotiations , out for public view.

Given that these would be the no’s we would project as a result of already released enhanced renewable energy mission, solar mission as well as the National Action Plan on Climate change, it would be ridiculous for US and China who project that they are reducing oh so much by taking so called “ambitious” targets.

Government sources said India’s Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh will make a statement in parliament on Thursday in which he could announce the targets.

We have definitely put the developed world to shame considering that we actually could voluntarily reduce more emissions than they binding-ly promise.

Who’s the real hero? and who’s the dealbreaker?

I think India can stand to play a crucial role in the Copenhagen conference, not by blocking the negotiations , but by taking such a strong stance that puts the developed nations to shame.

Just remember, the game is not over.

It just started……..

India has put developed nations to shame

I’ve been in Bangkok for a scant 36 hours, and already the shame is sickening. I’m an American tracking the American position at these international negotiations where America stands clumsy and tall as the biggest obstacle to an effective agreement. An agreement which–it’s no hyperbole to say–could mean the difference between a manageable future and utter climatic catastrophe.  An agreement that everyone with a shred of conscience wants to be fair, ambitious, and binding. Indeed, all of us trackers in this Adopt-a-Negotiator program, and everyone in the TckTckTck campaign that we’re a part of, are working to ensure that an eventual treaty in Copenhagen could be rightly described by these three characteristics. The U.S. positions, as figured at present, can’t possibly be defined as either fair, ambitious, or binding.

So as I step out of the American bubble where the villains are clear and discreet–a bunch of Senators, the Chamber of Commerce, Fox News, ACCCE, ExxonMobil–to the grand stage of international diplomacy where the perception is of a single, simple villain: the United States of America. The nuances of the American climate challenge that I spend most of my waking life fretting over–that our Senators have bastardized and abused the filibuster, that a huge chunk of our public is purposefully deceived by a major national news network, that a small number of very rich people have corrupted healthy debate with violent and malicious lies–don’t matter a lick here. All that matters is what the United States brings to the international table. And what we’ve served up thus far has been received like a steaming pile of turd.

It’s embarrassing. I’m terrified to face my counterparts from around the world if the U.S. doesn’t get its act together. I’m feeling continuously compelled to defend bits of the American approach to these negotiations. (”The public has been conned!” “What good’s a treaty if our screwed-up Senate won’t ratify it?” “It’s not Obama’s fault!”) And I hate acting the apologist.

Now the good news: our position can only improve. And I’m confident that it will. For starters, we’ve got as solid a squad managing this team as you could ever hope for. Holding the playbook here in Bangkok is Jonathan Pershing, the State Department’s Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change, formerly of World Resources Institute, one of the lead authors of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (and, thus, Nobel Prize winner), and a guy who absolutely and unequivocally knows exactly what the science demands in terms of international action and agreement on climate change. Pershing works alongside Todd Stern, the U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change and Obama’s lead negotiator, who has been more active so far in bilateral talks (most notably with China) and who testified before the House earlier this month about the importance of being a positive force heading into Copenhagen and, significantly, explained the need for the U.S. to put new money on the table. And then, of course, there’s President Obama, who did more in his first 100 days to kickstart America’s transition to a clean energy economy than we’d seen in all of our country’s history (though admittedly little since), and who we all know can churn public support with bold words deliberately delivered.  (Many who were hoping for such a speech last week at the U.N. were sorely disappointed, but Beltway insiders seem to think it’s coming.) We know that Pershing and Stern can–and want to–deliver American positions that are fair, ambitious, and binding. Obama can set them free to do so, if Americans demand it of him.

For the next couple of weeks, though, Pershing will be the one to watch, and I’m here in Bangkok to watch him.