WTO Ruling Against India's Solar Push Threatens Climate, Clean Energy

[nationalize the fed]

"The U.S. should be applauding India’s efforts to scale up solar energy—not turning to the WTO to strike the program down."

Nadia Prupis | CommonDreams.org | August 27, 2015

The World Trade Organization (WTO) on Wednesday ruled against India over its national solar energy program in a case brought by the U.S. government, sparking outrage from labor and environmental advocates.


India's ambitious solar program was rebuked by the WTO in a decision that climate advocates say shows the potential damage of deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. (Photo: Knut-Erik Helle/flickr/cc)

As power demands grow in India, the country's government put forth a plan to create 100,000 megawatts of energy from solar cells and modules, and included incentives to domestic manufacturers to use locally-developed equipment.

According to Indian news outlets, the WTO ruled that India had discriminated against American manufacturers by providing such incentives, which violates global trade rules, and struck down those policies—siding with the U.S. government in a case that the Sierra Club said demonstrates the environmentally and economically destructive power of pro-corporate deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

"Today, we have more evidence of how free trade rules threaten the clean energy economy and undermine action to tackle the climate crisis," Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program, said on Thursday. "The U.S. should be applauding India’s efforts to scale up solar energy—not turning to the WTO to strike the program down."

According to Indian media outlet Livemint, the U.S. government

has resorted to similar measures, specifying local content requirements and offering a range of subsidies for promoting its renewable energy sector at the federal, state, regional and local levels.

India spoke repeatedly against the US at WTO’s committee on subsidies and countervailing measures, stating that American subsidy schemes relating to local or domestic content requirements for its solar companies are inconsistent with its global trade obligations.

In addition, Livemint reports, the ruling "goes against the spirit of an agreement signed early this year.... [in which] the two sides agreed to promote clean energy and expand solar energy initiatives."

Regardless, Solomon said, the WTO "needs to get out of the business of hampering climate action in countries around the globe. The outdated trade rules on the books now and under negotiation in trade pacts including the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership encourage trade in fossil fuels and discourage countries from developing local clean energy capacity."

"These rules simply do not reflect the urgency of solving the climate crisis and stand in the way of clean energy growth," Solomon said.

The Indian government will appeal the decision to the WTO's highest court, the appellate body. It is the second time that the WTO has ruled against India in a case with the U.S., which first brought legal action against the country's food security program in 2014.

The WTO ruled on that case in June, when it decided that the Indian ban on certain foods from the U.S. was "inconsistent with the global norms."

Note: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
http://commondreams.org/news/2015/08/27/wto-ruling-against-indias-solar-push-threatens-climate-clean-energy

WTO rules against India in solar panels dispute with the US
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/11yE8Bz6bgZZ6LhXXlB8eL/WTO-panel-rules-against-India-in-solar-dispute.html



From the Comments:

MHunter 20 hours ago

Just a precursor to the hell that the TPP and similar trade deals with create. At this rate there won't won't be any legacy of humanity aside from a dead planet and bunches of useless green cloth

Laurenceofberk 18h

India should INDICT the corporate judges of the WTO for vandalism and treason against the planet, and send out agents to arrest them

Laurenceofberk 18h

The project of the the World Trade Organization is to remove economic sovereignty of nations, which the international corporate elite call "socialism," and place it in their own fascist hands.

In other words, the Cold War is not over. It has just been given a new name: GLOBALIZATION.

[DirkGently]

1. WHAT, NOW?

Holy crap.

Bookmarking to read these articles in-depth, but this is EXACTLY the kind of corporate takeover of government people worry about with these massive "free trade" agreements purporting to give business interests the right to supersede governments.

I'm sure a lot of business interests will be harmed by increasing renewable energy. But under no circumstances is that grounds to interfere with its advancement.

[Statistical]

8. it has nothing to do with increased renewables

The complaint was brought forward by US SOLAR manufacturers. India has been offering an incentive/subsidy not for deploying solar but only for deploying solar manufactured in India. That hurts US exports and US jobs. It also means less solar at higher cost than using more efficient US manufactured panels. It creates artificial barriers, hurts US exports, US manufacturing, and US jobs.

[GummyBearz]

12. Good for India

India's government should take care of its own citizens, not ours. I applaud their efforts to build their own solar tech., as opposed to being extorted by our companies.

[Statistical]

14. The I applaud the resulting penalties on Indian goods.

Remember this is a voluntary agreement. US doesn't put tariffs on Indian goods, India doesn't put tariffs on US goods.

India wants:
US doesn't put tariffs on Indian goods
India puts defacto tariffs on US goods.

You can't have your cake and eat it to. India is free to engage in protectionism and the US and other countries should be free then to slap reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods unless of course you think only American workers should be put at a disadvantage.

[GummyBearz]

16. Not to be a hypocrit

I want us to put tariffs on every country that pays $1/day for labor. Free trade is stupid when countries have such vastly different labor laws. Let them get minimum wage up to that of developed countries, then we can have free trade.

[nationalize the fed]

15. + a few billion

F&CK the WTO and Globalization

[GummyBearz]

13. thanks obama!

it had to be said

[Go Vols]

2. :/

[FlatBaroque]

3. TPP - More of the same

The world must unite against this cancer that aims to dominate and subjugate the vast majority of the earth's population.

[FlatBaroque]

4. FYI, here is what India is doing with solar

India now has an airport completely powered by solar energy
http://mashable.com/2015/08/20/india-solar-powered-airport/



The Indian city of Cochin is now home to the first international airport that is completely powered by solar energy. Local officials in the Indian state of Kerala marked the opening of a Cochin International Airport's massive solar plant Tuesday.

The massive solar plant providing power to the airport is made up of more than 46,000 solar panels spread across a 45-acre stretch of land near the airport's cargo complex. All in all, the airport will have between 50 and 60 thousand units of electricity a day, thanks to the plant — enough to make the airport "absolutely power neutral," according to a statement.

[nationalize the fed]

5. +1

Kind of like Germany but farther south



Neuhardenberg Solar Park
52°36?50?N 14°14?33?E

That's north of Washington State!

[Statistical]

6. Why is this a bad thing again?

Nothing prohibits India from deploying solar, nothing prohibits India from even providing subsidies for solar. India providing incentives only for using Indian produced solar products is anti-competitive. If US or German or Chinese workers can provide solar cheaper then it would mean MORE solar for the same amount expended by using those sources.

Also TWO rulings are not binding. There is no WTO army which will invade India and force them to buy US goods. It simply means that the US would put a reciprocal tariff plus penalties on Indian goods headed to the US (and other countries which produce solar may do the same).

A subsidy is no different than an unfair tarrif. Instead of a 20% subsidy on Indian manufactured solar what if India had put a 20% tariff on imports of US solar. Would that be ok?

Better solar, more solar, cheaper solar plus American workers actually able to compete for global markets. Why is that a bad thing again?

[FlatBaroque]

7. From a globalist's prespective it is not a bad thing

From a localist's prespective it is a devestating blow.

[Statistical]

9. It isn't a devastating blow.

India can ignore this ruling. The US will impose duties and tarrifs on Indian manufactured goods. It is only "devastating" if India wants to export goods to the US but at the same time refuse to import goods from the US. That isn't fair. It is one or the other.

[FlatBaroque]

10. That makes sense to me

thanks for the explanation

[pampango]

11. If they just gave incentives to domestic manufacturers to use solar equipment from anywhere

they would have been fine. India would have been fine "offering a range of subsidies for promoting its renewable energy sector at the federal, state, regional and local levels" without local content rules. And "domestic manufacturers" would probably have used primarily Indian-made solar equipment anyway, since it is a lot cheaper than stuff made in the US. They hardly need local-content rules. Have some faith in your own people, India.

If you want to promote the use of renewable energy, great. Go for it. All governments should. Provide subsidies for renewable energy equipment regardless of where it is from. Don't come back and say "BUT only if the renewable energy equipment is from HERE not from THERE."

If you want to discriminate against products based on where they are made, don't join an organization designed to prevent such discrimination. Subsidies for MY stuff has the same effect as tariffs on YOUR stuff. The WTO grew out of GATT which was part of FDR's International Trade Organization. He was all about reducing tariffs and promoting trade. Quite different from the "subsidize OUR stuff and put tariffs on YOUR stuff" republicans who preceded him.