VZCZCXRO4159
RR RUEHAST RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDBU RUEHDH RUEHHM RUEHLH RUEHLN RUEHMA
RUEHNEH RUEHPB RUEHPOD RUEHPW RUEHSL RUEHTM RUEHTRO
DE RUEHNE #1637/01 2161139
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 041139Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7605
RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHDC
RUEAEPA/HQ EPA WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RUCPDC/NOAA NMFS WASHINGTON DC
RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 001637 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR OES/PCI, OES/EGC, AND SCA/INS 
STATE FOR SECC TODD STERN 
DEPT OF ENERGY FOR TCUTLER, CGILLESPIE, MGINZBERG 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
 
TAGS: SENV ENRG ECON TSPL TRGY KSCA KGHG IN
 
SUBJECT:  SPECIAL ENVOY STERN ENGAGES INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND NGO 
REPRESENTATIVES ON CLIMATE CHANGE 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY AND COMMENT:  Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd 
Stern held a series of meetings July 20-21 in New Delhi with 
Government of India officials and NGO representatives to discuss the 
upcoming Copenhagen Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC as well as 
potential areas for U.S. - India bilateral cooperation in climate 
change and clean energy.  In addition, S/E Stern gave three 
interviews to major Indian media outlets including CNN-IBN, the 
Times of India, and the Indian Express.  The talks proved 
constructive on all levels and produced a strong interest on the 
part of the GOI to pursue further engagement including a formal 
request to conduct bilateral climate talks in Washington in 
September.  END SUMMARY AND COMMENT. 
 
¶2.  Special Envoy Stern held separate meetings with the following 
GOI officials: 
 
Shyam Saran, Special Envoy for Climate Change 
Jairam Ramesh, Minister of Environment and Forests 
Sushil Kumar Shinde, Minister of Power 
Farooq Abdullah, Minister of New and Renewable Energy 
Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission 
Nirupama Rao, Foreign Secretary Designate 
 
S/E Stern's NGO engagement included the following participants: 
 
Ravi Singh, CEO and Secretary General, WWF-India 
Ashok Khosla, President, Development Alternatives 
Ritu Mathur, Associate Director, TERI 
Aditi Kapoor, Economic Justice Lead Specialist, Oxfam India 
¶K. Srinivas, Policy Advisor, Greenpeace India 
Shirish Sinha, Head of Climate Change & Energy, WWF-India 
Sejal Worah, Program Director, WWF-India 
Pradeep Saha, Associate Director, Centre for Science and 
Environment 
 
-------------------------------------- 
TOWARDS COPENHAGEN:  NARROWING THE GAP 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  In all of his meetings, S/E Stern outlined his vision for a 
potential Copenhagen agreement and emphasized the areas of 
convergence between the U.S. and Indian positions.  He stated that 
the United States recognized India's need to develop and that any 
agreement in Copenhagen would not seek to limit India's overriding 
poverty alleviation goals.  He stated developed countries must make 
robust absolute emissions reductions noting pending U.S. legislation 
called for cuts of approximately 20% each decade culminating in an 
80% cut by 2050.  S/E Stern clarified that the U.S. would not demand 
India make absolute reductions in emissions but would require a 
commitment from India to put in place nationally appropriate 
mitigation actions that would reduce India's emission growth from 
Business as Usual (BAU) projections.  He stated that while India 
would not have to commit to specific emission reduction targets, it 
would have to commit to specific mitigation actions that were 
nationally binding, measurable, reportable, and verifiable, and 
could be reflected in an international agreement.  He also noted the 
need for developed countries to create a significant financial 
package to assist developing countries in deploying clean energy 
technology.  He also discussed the importance of adaptation and a 
workable policy regarding Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and 
Degradation (REDD).  In all aspects of his discussion of a potential 
Copenhagen agreement, Special Envoy Stern emphasized the need for a 
practical and pragmatic approach designed to not only achieve 
international consensus, but also the support of the U.S. Congress. 
 
¶4.  Indian Special Envoy Saran began his meeting with S/E Stern by 
stating he did not see a big gap in substance between the Indian and 
the U.S. position on climate change.  He noted both countries agreed 
the issues of climate change and energy were inseparable and that 
the two needed to be worked on together.  He was pleased to note 
Stern's statement that developing countries would not be required to 
restrict their efforts toward poverty alleviation.  He also stated 
that developing countries were not only willing to take actions to 
mitigate emissions, but also recognized the pressing need to do so 
as they would be most impacted by climate change.  Saran added a 
caveat saying the developing countries were prepared to accept a 
reduction from BAU emissions in a normative, but not quantitative, 
sense as long as the developed countries provided resources to do so 
and if the incremental costs of new technology were compensated.  He 
emphasized that the extent of the reduction from BAU was directly 
 
NEW DELHI 00001637  002 OF 003 
 
 
linked to the amount of resources made available by developed 
countries.  He also stated all mitigation efforts supported by 
international funds would be subject to being measured, reported, 
and verified (MRV) internationally.  Stern responded that he felt 
all developing country mitigation efforts, autonomous and supported, 
should be subject to MRV in order to give the process transparency 
noting purely voluntary measures would not be sufficient.  Saran 
stated all mitigation efforts of the GOI were subject to public 
scrutiny and inquired as to what level of precision would be needed 
for an agreement, noting the importance of getting the language 
right. 
 
¶5.  Saran emphasized India's requirement that whatever shape a new 
agreement took, that it be in line with the UNFCCC and Bali Action 
Plan.  S/E Stern stated that the UNFCCC and the Bali Action Plan 
should guide the process of developing a new agreement but should 
not be considered a straight jacket, drawing a comparison between 
the Berlin Mandate and the Kyoto Protocol.  He stated simply because 
a concept such as an international registry was not discussed at 
Bali, didn't mean it shouldn't be raised at Copenhagen.  Saran took 
the point stating discussion of new measures that enhanced the 
implementation of the UNFCCC was appropriate as long as key 
provisions of the convention or the Bali Action Plan were not set 
aside. 
 
¶6.  Minister of Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh discussed the 
domestic politics of a Copenhagen agreement noting that as a 
politician, he had to sell the agreement to his constituency.  He 
stated that the Indian system will find it infinitely easier to 
accept something legislated domestically than imposed 
internationally.  Ramesh said he would look at legislating various 
mitigation plans found in India's National Action Plan on Climate 
Change in order to give them the force of law.  S/E Stern welcomed 
the proposal and asked whether it would be possible to use executive 
regulation as opposed to legislation.  Ramesh affirmed that while it 
was possible, legislation was necessary in order to gain 
credibility, because "there is a sanctity to a law."  Ramesh also 
raised the issue of REDD and India's plans to spend 3 billion 
dollars on reforestation.  He asked for U.S. support for India's 
proposal on reforestation in the UNFCCC talks.  S/E Stern suggested 
a technical meeting between the two countries experts to review the 
proposal. 
 
¶7.  Deputy Planning Commissioner Montek Singh Ahluwalia told S/E 
Stern that the developing countries rhetoric regarding historical 
responsibility was a negotiating tool and while  India publically 
projected that it had no intention of reducing emissions, it was 
putting in place measures to deploy wind and solar energy that would 
reduce its emissions from business as usual.  In addition, Ahluwalia 
said the GOI was actively seeking to create political awareness of 
the climate change issue among youth and NGOs and that it was very 
interested in adopting low carbon energy technology. 
 
¶8.  Minister of Power Shinde focused on accelerating the 
distribution of clean technology under an international agreement. 
He was joined by Ajay Mathur, the Director General of the Bureau of 
Energy Efficiency who noted the primary barrier to adopting clean 
tech in India was cost stating India would like to see the 
incremental costs of clean technology borne by developed countries. 
S/E Stern raised the possibility of utilizing an ESCO-type 
arrangement in the context of renewable energy investment, in which 
initial capital costs would be paid back from the savings of the new 
technology.  In addition, an ESCO arrangement would protect 
intellectual property rights (IPR).  Shinde and Mathur were familiar 
with the ESCO concept and noted it may have some potential though 
questioned whether   the IPR issue could be resolved in the same 
fashion as IPR issues surrounding AIDS drugs.  Stern responded that 
to Americans, the AIDS drugs analogy sounded like compulsory 
licensing for energy technology which was non-starter in the United 
States. 
 
--------------- 
NGO PERSPECTIVE 
--------------- 
 
¶9.  The NGO representatives all agreed there was a tremendous 
momentum building in India to address climate change, lead largely 
by the media, due to India's vulnerability.  While they also agreed 
much more needed to be done to raise awareness, at the village 
level, they were largely appreciative of GOI efforts towards energy 
 
NEW DELHI 00001637  003 OF 003 
 
 
efficiency and its focus on renewable energy.  They noted an 
enthusiasm in the industrial sector to move away from business as 
usual energy investments and added that world class demonstration 
projects that showcase viable clean technologies would further 
encourage the private sector to adopt new technologies.  In a 
deviation from the other NGO representatives, Development 
Alternatives President Ashok Khosla raised the issue of population 
reduction and noted the role demographic transitions can bring in 
lowering emissions.  Khosla lamented the limited scope of UNFCCC 
negotiations as they do not allow for discussion of reduced 
emissions from population reduction. 
 
----------------- 
PRESS INTERACTION 
----------------- 
 
¶10.  S/E Stern conveyed the U.S. position in a television interview 
with CNN-IBN and in print interviews with the Times of India and the 
Indian Express.  The reporting was reasonably balanced with a mix of 
statements noting the constructive engagement between the two 
countries but still highlighting the perceived areas of difference. 
The interview and articles are currently available at the following 
links: 
 
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/  obamas-man-talks-of-climate 
-change-deal-with -india/97751-2.html 
 
http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/NEWS/India/Copenhagen 
-deal-Indias-demand-for-75bn- is-unrealistic/articleshow 
/4805262.cms 
 
http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/NEWS/India/US-Drop- 
dependence-on-coal/ articleshow/4805270.cms 
 
http://www.indianexpress. com/news/us-envoy- 
for-quantified-emission-cuts /492494/0 
 
------------------------------------ 
BILATERAL COOPERATION AND NEXT STEPS 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶11.  In all of his meetings, S/E Stern asked his interlocutors to 
discuss potential areas for bilateral cooperation.  Special Envoy 
Saran noted the importance of coal to India and suggested working 
together on clean coal.  Minister Shinde suggested bilateral 
cooperation on co-generation technologies and an ultra-supercritical 
pilot coal power plant.  Minister of New and Renewable Energy Farook 
Abdullah stated there was a great deal of room for bilateral 
cooperation in second generation biofuels, wind, and solar. 
Minister Ramesh reiterated the proposal he made to Secretary Clinton 
for joint research, development, demonstration and dissemination of 
solar energy, biomass, clean coal, high voltage power transmission, 
smart grids, and wastewater utilization projects under a potential 
Indo-US Foundation for Climate Change Technology. 
 
¶12.  S/E Saran and Minister Ramesh both recommended additional 
bilateral meetings with Ramesh suggesting India and the U.S. hold 
bilateral climate talks in September in Washington, DC.  Ramesh 
noted his intention to attend UN Secretary General Ban, Ki-Moon's 
climate conference on September 22 and informed S/E Stern he would 
spend as much time in Washington as needed.  Ramesh also raised the 
GOI's strong interest in having Secretary of Energy Chu speak on 
energy security and climate change at the Delhi High Level 
Conference on Climate Change:  Technology Development and Transfer 
scheduled October 22-23, 2009 and asked S/E Stern to discuss the 
conference with Secretary Chu.  Ramesh summed up the GOI position on 
bilateral engagement by stating that the bridges the U.S. built with 
China on climate change and clean energy could also be built with 
India. 
 
¶13.  This cable has been approved by Special Envoy Stern. 
 
ROEMER