How China and India could save the planet–or destroy it
If everyone lived like the average Chinese or Indian, you wouldn’t be reading about global warming. On a per capita basis, China and India emit far less greenhouse gas than energy-efficient Japan, environmentally scrupulous Sweden–and especially the gas-guzzling U.S. (The average American is responsible for 20 times as much CO2 emission annually as the average Indian.) There’s only one problem: 2.4 billion people live in China and India, a great many of whom aspire to an American-style energy-intensive life. And thanks to the breakneck growth of the two countries’ economies, they just might get there–with potentially disastrous results for the world’s climate.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts that the increase in greenhouse-gas emissions from 2000 to 2030 from China alone will nearly equal the increase from the entire industrialized world. India, though behind its Asian rival, could see greenhouse-gas emissions that rise 70% by 2025, according to the World Resources Institute. But the nearly double-digit growth rates that are responsible for those nightmare projections also present an environmental opportunity. “Anything you want to do about clean energy is easier to do from the outset,” says David Moskowitz, an energy consultant who has advised Chinese officials. “Every time they add a power plant or factory, they can add one cleaner and better than before.” If China and India can muster the will and resources to leapfrog the West’s energy-heavy development path, dangerous climate change might be averted. “China and India have to demonstrate to other countries that it is possible to develop in a sustainable way,” says Yang Fuqiang, vice president of the Energy Foundation in Beijing. “We can’t fail.”

The Kyoto accord on climate change did nothing to slow growth in China and India because as developing countries they are not required under the protocol to make cuts in carbon emissions–and that is not likely to change after the agreement expires in 2012. Both countries are desperate for energy to fuel the economic expansion that is pulling their citizens out of poverty, and despite bold investments in renewables, much of that energy will have to come from coal, the only traditional energy source they have in abundance. Barbara Finamore, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s China Clean Energy Program, estimates that China’s total electricity demand will increase by 2,600 gigawatts by 2050, which is the equivalent of adding four 300-megawatt power plants every week for the next 45 years. India’s energy consumption rose 208% from 1980 to 2001, even faster than China’s, but nearly half the population still lacks regular access to electricity–a fact the government is working to change. “They’ll do what they can, but overall emissions are likely to rise much higher than they are now,” says Jonathan Sinton, China analyst for the IEA.

Environmentalism inevitably takes a backseat to development in China and India, but even among many green advocates there, climate change is seen as a less pressing problem than air and water pollution. There is also a widespread feeling that the developed world, which grew rich while freely spewing carbon, should take most of the responsibility for climate change. “Our issue is that, first and foremost, the U.S. needs to reduce its emissions,” says Sunita Narain, director of the Center for Science and Environment in New Delhi. “It is unacceptable and immoral that the U.S. doesn’t take the lead on climate change.” The Bush Administration, in turn, has rejected Kyoto partly because developing countries were exempt from emissions cuts.

The standoff between the U.S. and the Asian giants has stymied international climate-change efforts for years, but that is beginning to change–and some of the push is coming from Beijing. For most of the recent Montreal climate conference, the U.S. resisted any serious discussion of what should be done after Kyoto expires. But several major developing countries, including China as a quiet but present force, supported further talks and helped break down U.S. opposition. “At the moment, China seems more interested in engaging on this issue internationally than the U.S. does,” says Elliot Diringer, director of international strategies for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

That’s because China and India increasingly see climate-change policy as a way to address some of their immediate problems–such as energy shortages and local environmental ills–while getting the international community to help foot the bill. Thanks to poorly run plants and antiquated power grids, China and India are extremely energy inefficient. China uses three times as much energy as the U.S. to produce $1 of economic output. But that means there is a lot of room for improvement, and saving energy by cutting waste is less expensive than building new coal plants. It also reduces dependence on foreign energy and comes carbon and pollutant free. “Efficiency really is the sweet spot,” says Dan Dudek, a chief economist at Environmental Defense. Beijing agrees: the government aims to reduce energy intensity–the amount of energy used relative to the size of the economy–20% by 2010.

Making ambitious pledges is easy–that is what five-year plans are for–but finding the will and the funds to make them stick is trickier. One source of funding is the Clean Development Mechanism, a part of the Kyoto Protocol that allows developed countries to sponsor greenhouse-cutting projects in developing countries in exchange for carbon credits that can be used for meeting emissions targets. Those projects don’t require any technological breakthroughs. A 2003 study by the consulting firm CRA International found that if China and India invested fully in technology already in use in the U.S., the total carbon savings by 2012 would be comparable to what could be achieved if every country under the Kyoto Protocol actually met its targets.

But that window of opportunity is closing rapidly. Every step forward that these countries take today (such as China’s move to make its auto-emission regulations stricter than the U.S.’s) risks being swamped by growth tomorrow (for example, China could have 140 million cars on the road by 2020). What China and India really need to ensure green development is what the world needs: a broadly accepted post-Kyoto pact that is strict enough to make it economically worthwhile to eliminate carbon emissions. Though actual cuts are off the table for now, Beijing and New Delhi seem willing to discuss softer targets, such as lowering carbon intensity. But they feel that Washington must take the lead. “It is possible for these countries to achieve the growth they deserve without wrecking the climate,” says Diringer. “They just can’t do it on their own. It has to go through the U.S.”

Going global, Indian firms create jobs in US
26 Nov, 2007, 1242 hrs IST, IANS

WASHINGTON: Indian firms are not just taking up outsourcing any more, but have in fact invested a whopping $6 billion in the United States and created 40,000 jobs with quite a few of them going to the Americans.

If a Janaki posing as Janet at call centres in India has been servicing customers in the US, many a Jane and John employed by India Inc. in the US is now helping travellers worldwide book a flight or send flowers and gifts to loved ones in America.

A group of 34 Indian companies represented in the India Business Forum (IBF), launched in June 2006, structured at the initiative of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), has made investments in such diverse sectors as technology, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing and gems and jewellery.

The Indian companies with 40,000 employees have invested about $6 billion in the US this year alone through acquisitions and mergers. While there are more Indian nationals in the service sector, the number of local employees goes as high as 95 percent in the manufacturing sector.

“Indian companies are no longer just Indian. They are as much global as any other,” says Kiran Pasricha, the CII deputy director general based in Washington. Besides the US, CII has set up similar forums in Singapore and South Africa with one in the process of being launched in China.

The Tata Group alone has invested over $2 billion in the last couple of years through acquisitions and mergers in the US with 16 of its companies from hotels to manufacturing employing 16,000 people, about 5,000 of them local.

“With very few exceptions, our hires of local employees are on the basis of their skill sets, not on their knowledge of India or international experience,” says David Good, chief representative of the group for North America and the American chair of IBF.

“After all, a coffee producer needs experts in coffee, not India specialists,” quipped Good, a former American diplomat with a long association with India from his last job there as consul general in Mumbai.

The local American employees work in all Tata companies, but heavy concentrations are in the hotels, manufacturing, telecommunications, engineering and software and in beverages besides two call centres in Ohio and Florida.

The Tatas have hotels in New York, Boston and San Francisco, produce Eight O’Clock Coffee, Tetley Tea and Good Earth Tea and have Corus Steel production units in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

The group provides engineering and software services through Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) and INCAT/Tata Technologies with TCS earning 53 percent of its $4.3 billion revenue from the US. And in telecommunications, VSNL, a 74 percent Tata owned company, emerging as the largest voice provider in the US offering competition to the likes of AT&T and Verizon.

Tatas’ call centre business, SerWiz Solutions Limited, has 250 full-time employees at its Milton, Florida, centre and 260 such employees at Reno, Ohio. “Both centres are currently in a hiring mode,” says Ricardo Layun, vice president, Customer Care Operations.

At the moment, the two call centres support one of the world’s leading online travel companies, a large US airline carrier, and the American region of a large Asian airline carrier, large domestic and international airlines. They also seasonally support a leading telephone and online retailer of flowers and gift sales.

The Tatas have been expanding these call centres since acquiring them in April 2006 as “we have found that the US communities in which we operate provide a strong workforce, competitive economic conditions, and positive growth potential,” said Layun.

Both call centres operate 24/7, but “We have not experienced an issue with staffing after hours. We have found that offering these night shifts provides employees opportunities to attend day-time college courses or avoid day-care costs,” he said.

Going global, Indian firms create jobs in US- Jobs-News By Industry-News-The Economic Times

With India being one of the top FDI investor in UK.. Mittal acquiring the European gem Arcelor, Tata’s having acquired Corus, Tetley and closing their grip over Land Rover and Jaguar, Essar Steel buying Minnesota Steel, Reliance becoming the one of the bigger Oil players in Kenya etc. I think Indians are doing the right thing by not following the Chinese way of everything in-house esp considering are screwed political system…

This will show India as a more responsible, quality oriented and sensitive country and would not face the kind of bycott and ill will that Chinese can possibly face..

When 28-year-old Sayeed Musthafa, a graphic artist from Central Mumbai, received his first dividend payout from an infrastructure fund he had invested into last year, Akthar Quereshi, his buddy-next-door (and his investment guru) advised him to set aside a small portion for charity.

Akthar contended that the fund in which Sayeed had invested into was managed by an asset management company attached to a prominent bank and that the dividend Sayeed got would have some impurities. Being a true Muslim, you shouldnt accept money derived out of interest gained. Since you are not sure as to how much money is earned by way of interest in your dividend, pay out a small percentage of your dividend as charity to the local yateemkhana (orphanage). This way you will get rid of the impurities in your earnings, said Akthar.

The growth of sectoral funds, equity funds and index funds has opened up a world of investment opportunities for devout Muslims with a preference for Shariah investments. And if fund managers are to be believed, Muslim investors have begun investing into cent-percent equity funds and sectoral funds.

Muslim investors are investing into pure equity funds and sectoral funds (mainly infrastructure funds). As far as I know, the recently-launched energy funds are also witnessing a good number of Muslim investors. Index funds and growth funds are equally popular with Muslim investors, said a leading fund manager.

All the more certain is the fact that independent financial advisors are selling sectoral funds (energy and infrastructure, in particular) as Shariah funds. A print media advertisement put out by a financial advisor (supporting a recently-launched energy fund) read, Follow the Sheikhs footsteps of ethical-investing in Shariah funds.

Only Tata Infrastructure Fund passes our Shariah screening test as far as funds go. Not that we dont advise our clients against investing in normal funds, but we tell them that their investment universe as a whole is not Shariah compliant. If you look at the stock profile, a normal fund usually contain 8-10% impure investments (due to their exposure to non-Shariah assets). In such cases, we advise investors of these funds to give out 8-10% of their returns in charity, said Parsoli Investments managing director Zafar Sareshwala.

Shariah, the canonical law of Muslims, has strictures regarding financial and commercial activities permitted for believers. Arab investors only invest in a portfolio of clean stocks. They do not invest in assets which are directly or indirectly relate to alcohol, conventional financial services (banking and insurance), entertainment (cinemas and hotels), tobacco, pork, defence and weapons. According to experts in Islamic investments, Muslims are only allowed to invest in companies where interest bearing income is less than 10% in any condition. As far as we know, except for Tata Select Equity Fund, all mutual fund schemes have exposure to debt and overnight call money markets. Investing in interest-related assets is against Shariah principles. We advise our clients to only invest in the Tata fund, said Idafa Investments managing director Ashraf Mohammadi.

Muslim investors own up equity, sectoral funds- Analysis-News & Views-Markets-The Economic Times