 |
| Fossil fuels case snapshots |
Why this book focuses on the downstream
Upstream fights, such as subsidy reform or anti-lobbying rules, are essential but often unfold slowly. Meanwhile, billions are already being allocated for adaptation in developing countries. If procurement, build quality, maintenance, and monitoring are corrupted, even a perfect upstream policy won’t protect communities. Here is where rhetoric meets rebar: that is why later chapters focus on how money becomes protection, or does not, in flood control, shelters, forests, and social security (IPCC).
Case snapshot: India—subsidy lock-ins and coal-system inertia
India has set ambitious clean-energy goals, such as achieving 500 GW of non-fossil capacity by 2030, and clean-energy investment is rising rapidly. Yet coal still supplies about 70% of electricity, supported by entrenched interests, legacy PPAs, and cross-subsidies complicating price signals. This creates a dual reality: rapid renewable growth, but persistent coal dependence, an inertia that absorbs capital and squeezes fiscal space for resilience outlays, such as drainage upgrades and heat-health systems, at the state and city levels (IEA).
How capture shows up in practice:
- Tariff politics & cross-subsidies: industrial users shoulder higher tariffs to keep household tariffs low; utilities seek stable coal offtake; reform windows open and shut with electoral cycles.
- PPAs and stranded-asset fear: utilities hesitate to retire coal plants tied to long-term contracts or recent retrofits, diverting attention from climate-proofing basic infrastructure.
- Narratives about reliability: opponents of fast transition frame coal as the only “reliable” option, even as grid integration solutions expand.
Why this matters for adaptation: Every rupee locked into coal infrastructure, such as mining logistics, pollution retrofits, or old-plant life extensions, is one not spent on trenches, pumps, shelters, and O&M that keep neighborhoods safe when monsoons intensify. For example, extending a coal plant's life could divert funds that might otherwise be used to build several additional heat-wave shelters, which are critical for protecting vulnerable populations during extreme weather. Quantifying the opportunity cost clarifies these impacts for non-specialist audiences (IEA).
Case snapshot: Indonesia—coal transition delays and the JETP bottleneck
Indonesia has secured a Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) to accelerate the phase-out of coal and expand the use of clean energy sources. Yet progress has been slow, with debates over captive coal units, system planning, and contractual complexities. Analysts warn that new captive coal for industry could exceed peak-emissions goals, while recent reports cite record coal output and a policy environment still favorable to coal expansion. News and academic work underline regulatory capture risks that slow the phase-out (recessary.com).
Why it matters for resilience budgets:
- Debt and guarantees tied to fossil assets reduce fiscal headroom for local governments that must finance embankments, drainage, and mangroves. Comparing local debt ratios before and after coal guarantees shows the impact: even a 1% increase in debt service can mean millions less for adaptation projects in vulnerable regions (Stern, 2016).
- Perverse sequencing: When coal investments persist, grid upgrades and resilience spending are deferred, and disaster losses accumulate in the interim.
- Signal to markets: Investor uncertainty about policy direction raises the cost of capital for all infrastructure, including adaptation.
Even bold political promises to retire fossil plants “within 15 years” have been met with expert skepticism, given coal’s structural role and contractual lock-ins—a reminder that delivery capacity and governance are the real bottlenecks (AP News).
Read the complete content on an eBook, a Hardcover, or a Paperback.
Comments
Post a Comment