From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Zoran__Stani=E6?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Vinayak Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: California blackouts and conservation Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:33:14 +0100 Dear Vinayak, Mehrdad, Ali and other interested LEADers, The subject we have selected for our discussion is very relevant and in the same time that is a great challlenge. At this early rethoric stage, sustainability is not so compatible with liberalization and deregulation, which purpose is only economic efficiency. But, this is new and different that why made a good choice for LEAD. As you know, the UN Commission for Sustainable Development will devote its ninth session to Energy. For this purpose, there was a Study prepared called World Energy Assessment Study. Please look at Website: www.undp.org/seed/eap/activities/wea I hope this will give us some insights what is going on at UN playground, though probably quite far away from practical experiences of liberalization and deregulation. Both, World Energy Council and European Commision have ongoing studies (with help from consultants PwC and ERM)on world-wide assessment of energy markets deregulation and liberalization, including environmental implications. It would be interesting to see to what exent and which sustainability criteria are applied in this assessments. Best regards, Zoran Stanic -----Original Message----- From: Vinayak Rao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 4:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: California blackouts and conservation Dear Mehrdad It is heartening to catch up on some talk via LEAD. I thought I will pick up on the security and sustainabillity aspect that you raise in both your emails. Of course, I do not wish to divert the ongoing discussion on deregulation etc ...and the upcoming chat on that score. You rightly point out : ............. In any case, none of the above addresses wider sustainability issues, such as reducing climate change impacts from this particular sector with the exception that increase in prices normally go hand-in-hand with improving energy efficiency which is surely needed .............. Sometime back I was going through the chapter in Agenda 21 that deals with integrating environmental concerns in economic decision making.....all very well stated and pretty ambitious too. Coming to the point, when we talk about all these big power projects happening around the developing world including the transitional economies, I wonder what is the level of this integration. In India, my understanding is that the pursuit of investment in this sector is needed but unfortunately, it is not happening in the right direction when one examines it from the point of sustainability. One of the reasons is that we still do not have fullfledged or comprehensive sector wise reforms ........reforms are still happening incrementally. And this will remain the case for most part. Not a single project includes integrating climate change considerations and whatever general environmental criteria are employed while we access loans and assistance from multilateral development banks (MDBs) is the minimum threshold that the MDBs would have set for themselves. Secondly, these huge invvestments are still happening in the traditional energy sector.....thermal power plants for instance.....and given the life cycles of these plants and projects one can well imagine the consequences in the medium term. Zoran was reminding us how the UNCSD is to deal with sustainable energy theme in its upcoming sectoral/cross sectoral discussions........but am a bit pessimistic if such macro policy issues ever get debated.......other than submissions from governments and major focal points talking about some steps they have taken ostensibly in that direction. It would be politicaly correct on my part to say ...well, India needs to access investment in the power sector and current ways of doing it are also in her national interest and go well with national development priorities. And given the paramount need for development and growth, there is no going slow on this score. It is like the imperative to catch up with the LPG (liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation) so that one is not left out or is lagging behind ( our Vancouver session terminology comes in handy here....nah?). But the big question is does it make sense in terms of being environmentally correct ? One can also foresee the baggage we are accumulating today and the potential problems it creates if were to indeed address issues of climate change, environmental security and development. I recognise that we are talking about macro issues here but the dilemma needs to addressed nevertheless......knowing for ourselves if we are raising the right questions that deserve answers may still be a good part of the battle won. Even when the answers are not easy to come by. For instance, can we think of precisely the kind of dialogue and policy intervention that is required in such a crucial area as energy and financing for sustainable development that attempts to harmonise the - here and now - philosophy with what-ought- to- be ? It is also my fervent hope that LEAD delegations to CSD and the like will endeavour to make more direct and perhaps visible interventions in the days to come. Energy is too important issue to be left in the hands of power-that-be alone. It goes without saying that discussions such as this will enable us to derive comparative insights and in some preliminary way inform us what a LEAD intervention too could look like. That's all for the moment, Cheers, Vinayak (LEAD India, C - 7) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mulai langganan: kirim e-mail ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Stop langganan: kirim e-mail ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive ada di http://www.mail-archive.com/envorum@ypb.or.id
