India woke up to telecommunications through the reforms of the late 1990s: the power of DOT was curtailed, VSNL was privatised, private and foreign companies were permitted, new methods of working were permitted. At the time, wired lines were mainstream and wireless communications was novel. However, setting up wire lines in India is very hard. India leapfrogged, and jumped into the mobile revolution for both voice and data. The concept of not having a land line at home was exotic in the US when it was normal in India. In similar fashion, India was an early adopter of electronic order matching for financial trading, and of second generation pension reforms: these things became mainstream in the world after they were done in India.
Could similar leapfrogging take place in the field of electricity?
Game-changer.
This can be done since it is already being done in off-the-grid housing in many countries, including the United States, where building out the grid would be profitably expensive unless it were subsidized. Less expensive to subsidize decentralization, which California undertook some time ago with a 50% credit initially and later scaled back.
There are now university level programs in sustainable living in the US, as well as non-profits dedicated to promoting sustainable living. A wide range of products and services is also available commercially.
It's happening. Moreover, the issue of scale is minimized since decentralization through on-site and local provision are fundamental. The only issue of scale is producing enough products and training enough service people to meet the growing need. This, of course, provides a host of new job opportunities.
Surprisingly (or not) Shah does not mention negative externalities in his market-based analysis, although he does mention positive externalities. When negative externalities are accounted for, the true cost of carbon-based energy is far higher than the market price, and the difference is being socialized. That is uneconomic as well as anti-social.
This can be done since it is already being done in off-the-grid housing in many countries, including the United States, where building out the grid would be profitably expensive unless it were subsidized. Less expensive to subsidize decentralization, which California undertook some time ago with a 50% credit initially and later scaled back.
There are now university level programs in sustainable living in the US, as well as non-profits dedicated to promoting sustainable living. A wide range of products and services is also available commercially.
It's happening. Moreover, the issue of scale is minimized since decentralization through on-site and local provision are fundamental. The only issue of scale is producing enough products and training enough service people to meet the growing need. This, of course, provides a host of new job opportunities.
Surprisingly (or not) Shah does not mention negative externalities in his market-based analysis, although he does mention positive externalities. When negative externalities are accounted for, the true cost of carbon-based energy is far higher than the market price, and the difference is being socialized. That is uneconomic as well as anti-social.
Can India leapfrog into decentralised energy?
Ajay Shah
