 You have already met the presenter, Chetana, Elizabeth and Sudakara and you haven't met me yet. Since I'm the least important panelist, I get introduced last. My name is Augustin Fosu. I am deputy director of UNIWIDER, Helsinki. Now, it is your turn, audience. Questions, comments, please be precise and brief. Please proceed. Thank you for the stimulating presentations. My question is from Mr. Sudakara. You talked about estimating costs for cooking, water lightening, water eating and lightening. Can you just give us an idea how you did it? You know, there are several methodologies. Estimating the costs of cooking, water eating and lightening. How did you go about it in your own case? Because one of the things I'm looking forward to here is to get some practical solutions to problems. And then you also talked about aligning the actors at the various levels. Whose responsibility will that be precisely? Thank you. Shall we take a few questions and then the presenters can respond? Please proceed in the centre. Thank you very much. My question is a follow-up to what she just mentioned. In estimating the costs, the losses, for example, the economic losses you made mention about. On what did you base those estimates? On which parameters, for example, did you base your estimates? Thank you. Third question, comment. Please proceed. Yeah, please. Hello. I basically have three maybe observations or questions. One is a simple one to Mrs. Remedio. Do you include mind coal as a biomass? Fossil coal. I don't mean charcoal, but fossil coal. Do you include that as biomass as well? You don't. Because it originates from biomass. The other aspect is to Mrs. Chowdhury, you gave all those tabulations, etc. But I might have missed the early part as to whether that relates to the whole of India or to a part of India. The whole of India. Well, roughly speaking, I can tell you that what you have shown would not relate to GOA. To GOA, you see, because over there it's a very different scenario with fuel use. A lot of LPG is used, etc., and less biomass, actually. But I don't have figures to prove what I'm saying, but that's my observations. And then the last thing is there's a tremendous tabulation of solutions to the question, the last speaker, Mr. Basiredi. My question really is that India is full of tabulated solutions, but what are the chances that India can implement those solutions? Sure, please proceed. Thank you. Thank you so much all three of you for wonderful presentations. Perhaps I should stand. My question goes to the first presenter, the second presenter, Mrs. Chowdhury. Why are you talking about CDM at this point in time? CDM is almost into greatest degree of uncertainty at the moment. Could you just justify why you're actually talking about CDM at this point in time? First point. The second point I think, the point that he made is, I think India is full of heterogeneity as it comes. The national picture that you present may not actually reflect the actual situations in the real situations in the states. So why didn't you try to see what exactly happens at some states, representatively selected, one food state, one richer state, that would have probably given a real picture, then absolutely a macro picture which cannot be attributed to any state, as he's saying Gover could be different, Orissa could be different from what observations you made at national level. One question for the first presenter is, you have rightly shown that the wood fuel, our biofuel, is presenting about 12.2% of the total energy the consumer demanded whatever it is. One problem with renewable energies is, can it really take care of the growing demands of energy in the world? That limitation perhaps is there, and with that limitation, how do you justify wood-art biofuels as good energy alternative for years of mitigation? Thank you very much. One more. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Ababa from the European Development Research Institute, Ethiopia. Just a small question for the first presenter. She said that income is one of the most important determinant for energy choice. Though I haven't seen anything that relates income with energy choice, but the literature also emphasizes the role of non-economic factors in determining the choice of energy, especially by households like education, attitude, culture, and so on, are much more important than income as some literature shows. In the future, if it is possible, I would like you to just look at the role of these non-economic factors in affecting fuel choice or in just making a transition from lower quality energy sources like biomass to higher quality, or moving up the energy ladder hypothesis. Thank you. Thanks, Malcolm Smart from DFID. My question, I guess, is to the first and maybe the second presenters. Where you've done analyses of the introduction of fuel-efficient stoves, have you looked at the rebound effect? This is the effect whereby if you bring in a more efficient form of equipment, there's an income effect and people may very well consume more. So you may cut by half the amount of fuel you use, therefore you may start cooking things that take longer to cook because it's cheaper. Has there been analysis of this? Thank you. Anyone else? All right, I think you probably have enough. Perhaps you can start from the seat in permutation, Chetana, followed by Lisbeth and then Sudhakara. The first question is about the estimation of cost of cooking. It is simple. One is biogas plants. We have a community biogas plant for a village, 100 households village. We have estimated the costs and we also have estimated the infrastructure cost, that is pipelines, etc. We also estimated the wages. There is an NREGA wage structure is there. We all have to take into consideration and the number of households in different villages, how many number of plants are required, and the cost for infrastructure. There are three. One is the capital cost for constructing the biogas plant, then infrastructure cost, then is operation and maintenance cost, which includes wages. That is the way we have estimated the cost for cooking. And for lighting, what we have taken was, we have categorized households into three types. The first type of households, it is not at all possible to supply centralized electricity, particularly the hilly areas. We know the estimation of number of households in hilly areas. The second type of households, that is nearly 8% of the population, even though central electricity can go, but at present it is not served with electricity. That is the type of household, second type. Third type of households are those, even though in the village electricity is available, households cannot be obtained because of affordability problem. So, we have estimated the cost, how much it is a combination of decentralized, but centralized electricity, capital cost as well as operation and maintenance cost we have taken. And secondly, about the economic losses. Economic losses, what we have taken is how many hours starting from going to the nearly 2 to 3 kilometers per day, how many hours each household has to spend for obtaining the fuel load, for cutting it as well as for cooking it. And there is a wage structure, NREGA, Government of India, wage rate. We have taken into consideration for 8 hours, how much it is going to cost. So, total economic losses we have estimated using this information. And regarding tabulated solutions, my dear friend might have forgotten about the cable network. It is almost in all the villages cable network is being operated by the uneducated social enterprise. Same is the case with telephones and network, particularly in rural areas. What I just wanted to tell you is, I am not telling it is simple, but it is not at all difficult. It is not at all difficult for the government to facilitate. The role of the government is to facilitate. I did discuss with many government organizations, actually I was in the planning commission for preparing the 12th plan report, particularly pertaining to energy efficiency. I interacted with stakeholders and I actually made my presentations. But the only problem is indifference. Just like we have seen many models like this, it is not going to work. But I am from a village, I interact with many, there are many young entrepreneurs and that is the reason I told. I need not have to tell them. Actually, they are very good at it. What they need is financial backing and as a mentor, somebody has to tell them how to go about. Not as an academician, as an industrialist. So it is some sort of parental attitude. That is what is important. For the past 10 years, I interact with various stakeholders. It is feasible, it is possible and it is practical. Thank you. So the question of whether renewable energy is enough for the world's energy demand. I am not really an expert in renewable energy but my guess is that at the moment definitely it is not. The costs are prohibitive and it is very interesting for instance during the World Forestry Congress in 2009 in Argentina, there was a rotation and it turned out whether you are pro or anti-bioenergy and the result was 49 and 50. So 49 and 51. So it is like a tie. It is very interesting and definitely if climate change is caused by the use of fossil fuels and so on, the offer, the proposal to counter that is to use none, you know, fossil fuels and so the renewables would come into play. But whether or not it is sufficient to feed the world, I don't think so at the moment because of the cost, the technology and so on. So the question of whether income is the sole determinant or influences the use of bioenergy and wood fuels. Well, it is an area-based situation. It is a case-to-case situation but according to our study it does play a major role in the choice of primary cooking field. But then whether primary or secondary, it is a matter of culture. It is a very socioeconomic situation and particularly in the Philippines, you know, we have a major cooking device in the kitchen but outside the kitchen, outside the house, we have an improvised charcoal stove, for example, to heat water or to tenderize meat. So that's why we have secondary, so we use multiple fuels. So income really plays a major role there. And to the question of the rebound, thank you for that idea. We have not done it but I think it's a very interesting thing to do in the next round of things and particularly in 2008, there was a group that came to us and doing work in cook stoves and it was very interesting that charcoal now is a very dramatic increase in the demand for charcoal. But I waited for this time so that we have a 10-year gap for our studies but definitely I will include that. Thank you. But I suppose I would need to ask for more information about this rebound effect. Thank you, Elizabeth Machetana. Thank you for the questions. For the answer of why I am discussing CDM, obviously there are controversy regarding the CDM. But before scrapping the thing, we should need to discuss the cost and benefit analysis of that. In India, people are facing problems. I mean, there are so many people who are dependent on biomass and fossil fuel. They are using some inefficient equipment for cooking and lighting. And they don't have that much fund to buy a new efficient equipment. So we are discussing whether the CDM can provide them with those efficient equipment. Additionally, if we think the socioeconomic benefit of the CDM project, it is not only the case that it increases efficiency, but also it increases work participation rate and the spread of education will be more because people are now incurring huge opportunity costs because of collecting the fuel. Because a huge amount of time is spent by women and children, as Professor Reddy also said, for collecting the fuel. And the study of it would be more. I mean, the socioeconomic benefit should be also considered apart from the economic costs. And about the heterogeneity thing, obviously there are heterogeneity in different states in India. The characteristics of states' energy consumption is different. But my aim was to show how many people are there who are still depending on the biomass and how much biomass they are using. So, I mean, it is a cumulative number which is showing that in India this much percentage of people are still using biomass. So, I mean, for that reason I took the total India, not the states. The analysis of states can be done in a similar way. I mean, it would be another study. And the rebound effect about the rebound effect I have not seen. But the thing is that when I see the cross-section data, as people move from lower income to higher income, as we go from lower income group to higher income group, there are people who are using more efficient energy, even if that is expensive. So, I mean, we can think that maybe there is some rebound effect that people will stick to the cheaper fuels, but still there will be people, considerable number of people, who will shift to the efficient fuels. That's all. Actually, in India, when I work on energy efficiency, not many studies of the real rebound effect, I know it pretty well. Suppose, earlier the expenditure is 10 dollars, due to energy efficiency, the energy expected comes down to 5 dollars. We try to purchase some of the devices and there is an increase in your energy consumption. Any study, particularly about rebound effect, but west, there are quite a few studies. Thank you. I'm afraid it is time. Just to add, we have a kind of a range of income within which it will predominate, in a different range of income levels that may be as predominant as it will be. So, in the case of developed countries, I really wonder it will be as predominant as it is observed in the developed world, because the range of income levels essentially matters. The change is okay, but the range within which it falls perhaps matters a lot, as I understand. I think this is getting more and more interesting and exciting, but I've also been informed that I need to keep the time. That's my responsibility. May I leave the residual to bilateral interaction? If you don't mind, the next plenary is now, actually, maybe one minute from now, and I would observe the time. I would like to see the opportunity to thank the presenters for enriching us this afternoon, and to also thank you, the audience, for first being here, and secondly, productively contributing to the discussion, and having a real excitement this afternoon. Thank you all for being here. Thank you.