Everything about energy production and storage.
Related communities:
How is coal consumption changing in absolute term? What matter most is the absolute amount of fossiel fuel being burned, and the amount of greenhouse gases released.
Developing renewable is great. But the article focus on share and relative figures. So it's not clear if renewable are increasing faster than coal, and emissions continue to rise. Or if coal use is actually decreasing.
Update: Sadly India keep increasing coal use according to this source. So it's too early to celebrate.
I get the impression that there's huge appetite in India for solar and other renewables, but as with many things, a lot of issues with implementation. A few weeks ago I was traveling in some fairly remote regions of the Northwest and even these tiny little villages in the back-country had a few solar panels scattered around— but it was only one or two. I wonder whether trust issues like a lack of on-the-ground familiarity with how to independently install and repair solar is a contributing factor, since there's definitely no shortage of enthusiasm on the government/NGO level.
I notice this sneaky snarkiness in reportage everywhere. The West's "progressiveness" is flaunted using per-capita nunbers, while the others' "backwardness" is backed up by absolute numbers. Flip the choice of numbers, and the whole picture flips!
All you need to know is whether the big per-capita polluters are driving down their consumption. And they are not, are they?
Big emitters have been dropping co2 emissions for decades.
India has way more solar potential. It's a joke they aren't doing better.
The big emitters are still shy of discussing per-capita numbers, so those numbers might still be unreasonably high. If only there was reportage of those ...
It is a joke that the colonizers didn't return what they stole, India might have done "better" then.