home > by publication type > backgrounders > India’s Energy Crunch
Email
| Author: | Carin Zissis |
|---|
Updated: October 23, 2007
India’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth hit 9.2 percent for the period from July through September of this year—an increase over the already robust rate of 8.4 percent during the same period last year. But along with an ascendant economy comes a mounting hunger for energy, and New Delhi fears it cannot sustain growth in the long term without continually boosting the country’s energy supply. India’s per capita energy consumption rates remain low in comparison to those of countries like the United States and China. But India, the world’s fifth biggest energy consumer, is projected to surpass Japan and Russia to take third place by 2030. Doing so will test India’s ability to create a domestic policy for its semi-privatized energy sector, as well as its capacity to develop relationships with foreign energy exporters.
The country faces “formidable challenges” (PDF) in meeting its energy needs, according to India’s Planning Commission. The government hopes to maintain an annual GDP growth rate of about 8 percent over the next quarter century to meet its goals for poverty eradication. That level of growth will require India to at least triple its primary energy supply and quintuple its electrical capacity. This will force India, which already imports a majority of its oil, to look beyond its borders for energy resources. “There’s a tremendous amount of concern” that the gap between the energy demand and supply will slow down the economy, says researcher Tanvi Madan, author of a recent Brookings Institution report on Indian energy issues.
Furthermore, India’s energy sector is plagued by sporadic nationalization efforts. During the 1990s, India began liberalizing its economy, allowing for privatization of some sectors historically under state control. But, of India’s various industries, the energy sector remains most firmly in the hands of the state, says Pramit Pal Chauduri, an Asia Society fellow and foreign editor of the Hindustan Times. Chauduri says the real need for reform “lies not within what we do overseas, but the need to liberalize our markets internally.”
Experts say lack of coordination among competing government ministries has slowed the effort to institute effective energy policies. “India has yet to develop a coherent policy,” says Ganguly, who adds that the four main energy ministries act like “different countries at work.” India did have a central energy ministry until 1992, which was then broken down into the ministries of Coal, Petroleum and Natural Gas, Nonconventional Energy Sources, and of Power. Several other government agencies, including the Planning Commission and Department of Atomic Energy, play a role in energy policy. Madan says there are common policy goals, but the lack of integration causes problems with implementation.
India’s tradition of state-dominated, centralized planning slows progress in the energy sector. Privatization efforts have been “entirely piecemeal” and “investors are jittery,” says Sumit Ganguly, the India studies chair at Indiana University, Bloomington. Private firms waver over investments when they see preferential treatment for state-owned companies. For example, the production of coal, India’s most highly-consumed energy source, remains largely in state control, with 90 percent of production accounted for by the mines of state-run Coal India.
The national government also subsidizes energy prices, at times limiting profitability for both private and state investors. Experts say the government would probably prefer to set energy prices at market rates, but doing so results in risking a vote loss in elections. Chaudhuri says governments introduce the idea, “but then an election comes and they say ‘no, no, no, subsidize.’”
The primary challenges facing India’s energy sectors are:
In July 2005, President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reached an agreement to provide India with assistance for its civilian nuclear energy program. New Delhi has pledged to allow inspections and safeguards of its nuclear facilities. Proponents say the deal could help India meet its energy needs over the medium to long term by opening the door to investment in the country’s nuclear energy sector. Before taking effect, the agreement requires approval by U.S. and Indian legislative bodies as well as the international Nuclear Suppliers Group, which oversees guidelines for sale of the nuclear materials. Chaudhuri says an important element of the deal involves a “clean coal agreement” to help counteract the environmental hazards of burning India’s low-quality coal, as well as to improve the coal industry.
But critics of the deal say it will hurt international nonproliferation efforts because India, which has tested nuclear weapons, is not a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). The U.S.-India deal only safeguards civilian nuclear facilities made by India when the deal was reached and it does not limit the number of nuclear weapons India produces.
The nuclear deal has also faced opposition from the left-wing bloc in India’s parliament, comprised primarily of the Communist parties who form part of the ruling coalition. They contend that the deal compromises Indian sovereignty. The coalition government headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh depends on the support of the left parties to remain in power.
India’s decision to forge energy partnerships with countries such as Syria, Sudan, Myanmar, and, particularly, Iran has also raised concerns in the United States. India signed a $150 million gas exploration deal with Myanmar in September 2007 when Myanmar’s ruling junta was facing international sanctions for cracking down on pro-democracy activists. The United States and the United Nations have repeatedly urged India to use its influence with Myanmar’s government to usher in reform.
Despite U.S. concerns over India’s energy dealings with Iran, this year India supported the United States in an International Atomic Energy Agency vote that referred the matter of Iran’s nuclear program to the UN Security Council. At the same time, the presence of some 150 million Muslims in India raises concerns over stirring trouble in relations with Iran. Also, says Ganguly, India’s desperate need for energy means if Iranians will supply petroleum “we’re going to sup with them.” However, a 2005 deal between Iran and India proposing a natural gas pipeline has so far come to naught because of political difficulties with securing the project in Pakistan as well as the unreliability of agreements with the Iranian government, says Chaudhuri.
As one solution to the energy crunch it’s facing, India has sought to diversify the number of source countries for energy and sought deals in Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America. New Delhi finds itself competing with the other power-hungry Asian giant, China. Beijing frequently outbids New Delhi or “sweetens the deal” with other projects, explains Madan. She also says India is new to learning how to negotiate deals. “India came to this game later. It doesn’t have the kind of resources China does.”
Earlier this year, Shankar Aiyar, India’s former petroleum and natural gas minister, signed an agreement with China aimed at advancing energy cooperation (China Daily).The two countries have worked together in Sudan and Syria. But experts say the China-India pact has had little effect on the two countries’ competition for oil, particularly since pro-China Aiyar has since been replaced by a more market friendly minister.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.