Pakistan’s Climate Wake-up Call

On April 19, almost a month after a nationwide lockdown had been imposed, Pakistan’s second largest city, Lahore, witnessed a 63 percent plunge in average PM2.5 particulate matter pollution. Lahore was the world’s most polluted city this past October, when seasonal smog takes air pollution to hazardous levels; the air was given a much-needed respite by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Similar falls in air pollutant levels were witnessed across Pakistan’s urban centers – with nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels in five major cities dropping by 20-56 percent – as lockdowns halted transportation, along with industrial and agricultural activities. The unrecognizable blueness of the skies brought out soul-searching vis-à-vis the current development plans and the environmental hazards that they churn out.

According to the U.S.-based Health Effects Institute (HEI), 135,000 people died in Pakistan because of air pollution in 2015. The medical journal The Lancet puts the annual figure over 300,000, maintaining that 22 percent of all deaths in Pakistan are linked to pollution.

A report by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and the Punjab government notes that the transport sector contributes almost half (43 percent) of the air pollution in the province. Industries contribute 25 percent, while 20 percent comes from agricultural activity.

“80 percent of year-round air pollution in Punjab is caused by the transport, energy, and industrial sector. That's mostly the filthy petrol and diesel used in the transport sector and the filthy coal and furnace oil used in the energy sector,” environmental lawyer and Climate Action Now! activist Ahmad Rafay Alam tells The Diplomat.

Environmental activists have long urged the government to upgrade refineries, increase fuel quality and engine efficiency, as well as shelve fossil-fuel based energy sources. In November, Pakistan approved a National Electric Vehicles Policy (NEVP), which aims to have electric vehicles account for 30 percent of passenger vehicle and truck sales by 2030 and 90 percent by 2040. However, according to Alam, the policy has been “stymied by the domestic automobile lobby.”

Another powerful lobby in Pakistan is that of the independent power plants (IPPs). Hence, even though renewable energy tariffs have been calculated to be less than those from fossil fuel-based energy, the state has been dragged by IPPs into long-term, financially disadvantageous, contracts. Meanwhile, Pakistan has reached 1.1 degrees Celsius (C) of warming and is on course for 2 degrees C by 2030.

“Fossil fuel-based energy sources should be considered ecocide. However, powerful IPP lobbies argue that fossil fuel energy somehow meets ‘caseload,’ [which is] a debunked argument. The truth is that long-term IPP contracts have limited the ability of the state to respond to cheaper renewable tariffs,” maintains Alam.

In addition to the caseload argument, those defending the continuation of fossil fuel-based energy also underline the economic repercussions of completely abandoning fossil fuel plants. Those advocating an increase in the share of renewable energy maintain that the government can ensure the financial security of workers employed in the fossil fuel energy sector through progressive policymaking.

“The government should invest in green technology to address the financial concerns. Claiming that we can only improve [either the] environment or economy is like saying that you can’t walk and chew gum at the same time. You don’t have to shut down coal plants, just stop investing in new ones and their share in the energy mix would automatically decrease,” Ali Tauqeer Sheikh, the chief executive officer of the Leadership for Environment and Development (LEAD), told The Diplomat.

Even so, a major stumbling block aggravating Pakistan’s energy mix is the $62 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which has been repeatedly touted as a “game changer” for the country since its inauguration five years ago. CPEC, China’s biggest-ever overseas investment plan, focuses on energy and other projects in Pakistan but poses multiple environmental risks, including the large-scale cutting of trees for the road networks linking Kashgar and Gwadar.

CPEC’s direct impact on air pollution can be gauged by the fact that two-thirds of the energy affiliated with the corridor is slated to be generated from traditional coal-fired power plants. Furthermore, as part of the development project, the Karakorum Highway is projected to carry up to 7,000 trucks per day, releasing up to 36.5 million tons of CO2.

Critics argue that the skewed CPEC deals are rooted in the timing of the agreements, which overlapped with the worst energy crisis in Pakistan’s history. The leadership has been accused of letting the possibility of tens of billions of dollars blindfold them into seeking knee-jerk energy solutions without considering the long-term implications of the Chinese funds. The result was a complete failure to lure investment in green technologies that could both address the country’s energy needs and economic concerns.

“Using CPEC money to install retired Chinese coal-fired power plants was mindless,” suggests nuclear physicist Abdul H. Nayyar, the author of Pakistan and the Energy Challenge. “Chinese investment has not gone into setting up manufacturing industries, not even those owned by the Chinese entrepreneurs. China could have been asked to set up many gigawatts of windmills in Pakistan, or production units for manufacturing wind turbines and blades. A local production of these most essential and expensive components could have boosted local investment in windmills.”

However, Nayyar maintains that CPEC investment is helping the nuclear energy vision of Pakistan, which has been hindered by international restrictions on account of Islamabad not signing the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).

“The nascent Chinese nuclear power industry needed to earn money from its heavy investment in developing nuclear power technology. Pakistan has found a way to break the international restrictions and a seller who is keen to even lend money to buy it too. Thus, China has already installed four reactors each of 300 MW in Chashma and is currently installing two 1,100 MW reactors in Karachi. The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission had planned several years ago to have a nuclear power generation capacity of 8,600 MW by 20230. The Chinese investment through CPEC is coming very handy in realizing this plan,” he tells The Diplomat.

There have been calls for the Pakistani government to review the CPEC agreements on multiple accounts. Among these is the significantly higher cost of production of CPEC-linked energy projects, with the corridor being labeled a “debt trap” by its detractors.

The incumbent Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government looked to rejig the CPEC agreements immediately after coming to power. However, sources within the finance and climate change ministries reveal that the request put forth was based on pricing and economic considerations, more so than any environmental concerns. Meanwhile, with the much-delayed second phase of CPEC finally commencing at the turn of the year, Beijing has reaffirmed itself as the one calling the shots.

“It is too late to reconsider CPEC [energy] agreements,” former Federal Secretary of Climate Change Ministry Abu Ahmad Akif tells The Diplomat, as Pakistan already has the infrastructure in place to double its current power generation capacity. This means that despite the fossil fuel share gradually decreasing, as things stand, it remains on track to form the bulk of Pakistan’s energy mix over the coming decade. Pakistan’s predicament is compounded by its failures to adhere to its own National Climate Change Policy 2012 and Climate Change Act 2017.

“The implementation of those policies has been like the implementation of any other policy in Pakistan. The climate change ministry especially doesn’t function so as to actually complete the plans that have been put in place,” says Akif.

Like many other fields, Pakistan’s quest for energy efficiency is marred by the lack of work efficiency. Critics have called out the governmental and bureaucratic structures, which hinder the smooth execution of policies. Furthermore, climate change being a provincial subject in Pakistan renders the federal climate change ministry largely ineffective. Political experts maintain that, given that environment still isn’t a part of election debates, the political leadership rarely pays any heed to climate policies.

The ruling PTI, however, has prominently featured the environment in its election manifestos. Its tree planting drive, the “billion tree tsunami” inaugurated in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in 2014, has now evolved into a nationwide “10 billion tree tsunami.” The government’s employment of out-of-work laborers for planting trees during the COVID-19 lockdown has been lauded by the World Economic Forum.

However, the government has been criticized for giving the impression that all it can do for the environment is plant trees, which won’t help improve the air quality if there’s no change in the country’s developmental and energy policies.

“Planting trees… has to be a part of an overall strategy to contribute to climate mitigation. Any climate policy needs an adaptation element – a policy supported and endorsed by UNFCCC. I do not see any movement or strategy toward an adaptation policy in Pakistan. I envision that a quick and dirty – and useless – one will be formalized once the Green Climate Fund is operational,” environmentalist and climate change activist Saima Baig told The Diplomat.

With COVID-19 bringing new perspectives to the world, like its counterparts around the world, the Pakistani government is also being pushed to revamp its climate policies. As things stand, the country’s strategy is largely based on ticking a sufficient number of boxes to satisfy international donors and justify environmental funding.