Cement Energy and Environment

( ,.. towards sustainability and, at the same time, sustain economic growth. Do you think that one can strike a balance between the two? We have to strike a balance between development and environmental considerations. India's Environment Minister once said that we need to "balance idealism with realism". In some countries we have had some big arguments over this. China, for instance, wanted to build a big hydropower dam, and for that, move millions of villagers. There was a big argument that whether it is the right thing to do. But, you need power to develop, for prosperity, and for lifting people out of poverty. When a country grows, there is always a conflict with the existing system. These confli cts, on the one hand, do not produce enough wealth and, on the other, create m'assive poverty. We need to think about the people who do not have a house, rather than those who might have a house, but are worried about the house getting knocked down for "development". There is a clear debate between developed and developing countries as far as the emission reduction targets is concerned. What is your stand on this? Science has told us, and most of us accept it, that as their economies grew, developed countries produced GHGs. Also, if we continue to emit GHGs at the rate at whi ch we are emitting at the moment, then we will have climatic changes. This is why everybody is trying to limit, by various programmes, the increase in the temperatures in the world . However, if you are going to have growth that only produces a certain amount of GHGs, how would you proportion that between different countries? For example, at Copenhagen, the US negotiator said that the US has the same GHG emission as China, so they both should cut back their emissions. But, if you measure it per capita, you will find that the US has got gas emissions of 20 tonnes per person; for China, it is 6; Europe1 0; and India 2. We cannot just let the rich countries, which have all the technologies and the resources, grow at whatever pace they prefer, indifferent to the needs of the world. We have to find the money to help countries like India to develop an economy that does not produce as much carbon, but still gets the growth to reduce problems like unemployment and poverty. This is called "social justice" and "equity". We cannot afford environmental damage; we better manage the world economy in a different way than we do at the moment. Do you think that countries will adhere to their voluntary emission reduction .:ommitments? A very important question. And, this was at the heart of Kyoto, where we laid down and gave targets to the countries. The countries had to deliver on those targets and we were able to measure their progress. But, the question is that if countries do not meet the targets, what do you do? Send in the army? No, we cannot do that. So, what we have now decided to do is to have an international inspection, so that there can be a verification of the progress of the countries as far as emission reduction targets are concerned. If they say that they are going to have their own targets and they are going to deliver them, then there has to be an international body that can monitor and verify that they are actually delivering what they have promised. Then, we can reassess the entire process after a period of time. This is the detail that has to emerge from South Africa. In your opinion, what are some of the steps that developed countries can take to help developing nations move towards a sustainable future? That is the critical part. We are the wealthy part of the world; we are the minority and have got the majority of the wealth. We control this wealth through institutions like the Group of Twenty (G-20), Group of Eight (G8), even the UN, and through trade. This is changing now. The growing power, in terms of resources and wealth , is going from the West to the East. Dr. Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India, once said that the polluter should pay. Well, we certainly polluted the planet and got many benefits from it. What we need to do now is to give you some of our technology, so that you can develop more solar energy than coal, for example; work on new innovations; and get finance for the afforestation programmes. The rich countries have to provide the money that would allow others to build a low-carbon economy. The reality for the rich world is that if we do not do something about it now, we will all be affected by the changing climate; nobody is free of that. It is in our interest to find an ag reement. The developed countries should provide resources to the developing countries, which represent the 25