Special Report: India, the World and Us

If you wanted to examine all the stunning complexity of the world from an environmental perspective, and distill it into one place on the map, you might as well tackle India. How does a country lift a billion people out of poverty, give them access to water, electricity, and basic transportation, and keep its mighty economic engines firing on all cylinders -- yet not exhaust and despoil its natural resources? (Bear in mind that 55 percent of the country's energy comes from coal-burning power plants that spew carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, with potentially devastating consequences for us all.) We have been asking these questions for years about China. India, by contrast, has received relatively little attention in the U.S. media.

Which is one reason OnEarth articles editor George Black spent several weeks traveling through India to better understand the challenges that lie ahead for the second most populous nation on earth. Black made a similar trek through Bangladesh for his last OnEarth cover story. I feared this time he might return in despair, but what he discovered gave him reason instead for a cautious optimism. At the very least, he discovered that India has a variety of options, which range from very good to very bad. In a country as large as India, there's a natural tendency for government to apply big solutions to big problems -- new eight-lane highways, even entire new cities. But there are risks to this approach. Black found, for example, that a series of enormous hydroelectric projects proposed for the sacred Ganges River could have a potentially disastrous impact, especially as global warming shrinks the Himalayan glaciers that feed not only the Ganges but also major rivers throughout Asia.

In contrast, Black visited remote villages embarking on small-scale -- though still ambitious -- solar-energy and water-conservation projects. By spreading "laterally" through other rural communities, these NGO- and government-supported programs hold the promise of directly benefiting tens of millions of people. One project rents solar-powered lanterns to villagers for a modest fee, encouraging a local entrepreneurial culture and strengthening the economic foundations of the community. The fee for the lanterns is comparable to the cost of using kerosene lamps (found in tens of millions of homes), but the solar devices are safer, cleaner, and more reliable.

In other words, to make big changes, sometimes it's best to think small. This is one of several paradoxes yielded by Black's reporting. Other examples abound: for instance, that for millions of impoverished villagers, living off the nation's vast but unreliable power grid may represent the best opportunity to join the economic mainstream; or that SUVs may be better for India's fragile environment than the cheap, fuel-efficient cars that are now becoming widely available.

Black's report demonstrates that the solutions to our global environmental crises are sometimes more complex than one might imagine, or even counterintuitive. That's worth pondering as the international community heads to Copenhagen later this year to hammer out a new treaty to limit carbon emissions, fix the climate, and, perhaps, save the planet. Because as India (or China) goes, so goes the world.