“We welcome CBAM.” Indian trade representatives have echoed this on the United Nation’s twenty eighth Conference of Parties (COP28) referring to Europe’s new carbon tax launched final October.

As local weather talks strategy the slog overs on the climate conference being held in Dubai, the conversations have gotten shorter and frank. This consists of representatives from India talking at dozens of facet occasions.

Some of them are already coping with a brand new ache level which is the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Simply put, it’s a carbon tax on the imports of carbon-intensive sectors, initially like iron and metal, cement, fertiliser and aluminium relying on the carbon emissions emitted throughout the manufacturing course of. It is predicted to drive up costs; for instance, for aluminium it’s estimated to be within the vary of 2-5%.

Also Read | Watch | COP28: What are the key outcomes expected?

However, whereas Indian authorities leaders have described it as an “unfair” tax and are taking it up with the World Trade Organisation (WTO), trade representatives on the UN Climate Change convention are advocating a change of tactic.

Rajiv Mangal, Tata Steel’s Vice President of Safety, Health and Sustainability spoke to me at a facet occasion on metal decarbonisation. “CBAM is good. CBAM is good because it will force the market to pay the price. So I would go to the extent that something similar should come up in most of the countries. Otherwise there is no economic incentive for a steel maker to reduce emissions. Because today, the reduction of emissions is a high cost. Market is not going to support you to say just because you are making green steel you can compromise on your profitability. The market does not do that. So there has to be some economic incentive or a stick for greening.”

Seema Arora, Deputy Director General on the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and head of the CII-ITC Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Development, echoes this strategy. “I don’t think there is any point in saying we can’t accept it because it is not non-discriminatory. They are saying the same rule applies to our companies also. So you can’t fight it in the WTO although I know they are going to fight which is okay. But I don’t think much result will come out of that.”

Also Read | COP28 Climate Summit | Global Stocktake draft calls for phasing out fossil fuels

The query then is what’s to be finished. Ms. Arora backs a technique which the federal government can be contemplating, which is to gather and hold the tax inside India. “If there is any kind of tax that is to be collected, we collect it here. And we use it to then decarbonize our companies, even the MSME (micro, small and medium enterprises) sector. So those are the kind of things we are actually discussing and the government is also discussing.”

However, Tata Steel, which has a market cap of virtually $20 billion, is advocating a special sort of coverage help, like subsidies, alongside the traces of the United States’ Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) which is basically incentivising ‘green’ financial measures. Mr. Mangal says, “Europe (is) getting into CBAM. The U.S. has got IRA. If you produce hydrogen up to $3.5 per kg of hydrogen it is subsidised by the government. So that’s why after a few years the U.S. will be the largest consumer of hydrogen, largest consumer of carbon capture and use. Largely because of the incentives that the government has been giving. So there is a need for policy support.”

Carbon Capture, Use and Storage or CCUS is a controversial methodology of ‘carbon management’ supported by main fossil gasoline producing corporations and international locations. However, evaluation, together with new stories launched throughout COP28, present that the applied sciences to seize carbon are costly and cut back little emissions in comparison with how a lot is required—43% minimize in emissions by 2030—to maintain to the worldwide warming goal of 1.5° celsius. The International Energy Agency chief warned the oil and fuel sector for banking on CCS to take away emissions on a big scale, calling it an “illusion.”

Mr. Mangal says India ought to set a base normal for carbon under which individuals will profit and above it carbon emitters can be penalised. “It should start with that. Based on that you can put an import parity. Otherwise India will get dumped with high carbon steel, if it is just left to the lowest price.”

Also Read | COP28 pledges meet only 30% of needed energy emission cuts: IEA

Taking a broader view of carbon tax, Ms. Arora says India must be “a little creative” about CBAM and hear-out the considerations of industries. “We can build our own reporting, companies don’t want to share the data with the European Union, but they can share it with the government here, right? If the government can maintain that confidentiality and they can also then see that okay, realistically we have to counter this CBAM, let’s put a levy because if they pay a levy here then they don’t have to pay it there. So let it remain in the country and use it for your own purposes.”

Bringing the gamers collectively, she acknowledges gained’t be straightforward as some might not even agree as a result of there can be various quantities of levies on varied corporations, relying on dimension and know-how. This is why trade representatives are urging the federal government for coverage course.

(The creator is a contract reporter attending COP28)