Home › Research › Power & Carbon
✓ Live Market Analysis (Oct 2026)
India's Coal Power Structural Decline: Why the GEF Trajectory Is the Most Important Number for Industrial Carbon Compliance
India's power sector CO₂ fell in FY25, marking only the second time this has happened in half a century. Looking ahead, the Central Electricity Authority projects non-fossil generation to rise from 25 percent to 44 percent by FY2029-30. For every industrial entity connected to the grid, this trajectory is delivering a free, automatic, and passive Scope 2 GEI improvement of approximately 0.020 to 0.030 tCO₂/t each year, without requiring any capital investment. Understanding this trajectory forms the true foundation of every CCTS compliance plan.
Key Takeaways
- India's power sector CO₂ emissions officially fell in FY 2024-25, marking only the second time this has occurred in the past half-century. This was driven by renewable generation growth outpacing demand growth, representing a structural shift rather than pandemic-era demand suppression.
- The CEA's optimal generation mix projection forecasts the non-fossil generation share rising steeply from ~25 percent in FY24-25 to roughly 44 percent by FY29-30. This implies the Grid Emission Factor (GEF) will decline from the current WAEF of 0.710 tCO₂/MWh down toward approximately 0.50 tCO₂/MWh by 2030.
- For industrial CCTS compliance, a declining GEF makes BEE's GEI targets progressively easier to meet for grid-connected entities. For instance, a steel plant consuming 1,000 kWh of grid electricity per tonne of crude steel sees a passive improvement of 0.190 tCO₂/t simply by shifting from the 2020 GEF baseline to the current 2026 GEF.
- The PLF of Indian thermal power plants has been steadily declining from ~64 percent in FY19-20 toward 58-60 percent in FY24-25. This creates severe stranded asset risk for older captive coal power plants.
- A captive coal CPP at 0.90 to 1.05 tCO₂/kWh exposes an industrial user to a widening gap against the declining grid GEF. As grid-connected peers automatically improve their CCTS Scope 2 GEI, the captive coal user is structurally penalized.
- This passive GEF benefit reduces net demand for compliance CCCs in the early phases of the CCTS, creating a structural supply-side surplus that keeps early market prices restrained.
Throughout half a century of rapid industrial development, India's power sector carbon emissions had fallen only once before FY25. That single occurrence was during the extraordinary demand collapse of the pandemic year in FY2020-21. Every other year in the post-Independence history of India's power sector saw emissions rise steadily, driven by the consistent growth in electricity demand from an industrialising economy and the heavily coal-dominated generation mix that powered it. The FY25 decline is therefore not merely an interesting data point; it serves as a structural signal that the relationship between economic growth and power sector CO₂ is finally beginning to decouple in India, manifesting a reality that decades of policy aspiration had promised but struggled to deliver.
Carbon Brief's analysis of the FY25 data attributed the decline directly to renewable generation additions, primarily solar, growing faster than national demand. This dynamic is not the same as actively shutting down coal-fired generation. Most of India's coal plants continued to operate, but at reduced utilisation rates as renewable energy smoothly absorbed their incremental generation share. However, the direction of travel is now firmly established: renewables are absorbing incremental demand growth, coal PLFs are declining, and absolute coal generation is stagnating. The CEA's own optimal mix projection confirms this trajectory, forecasting the non-fossil generation share to rise from 25 percent in FY24-25 to 44 percent in FY29-30. Under this scenario, coal generation grows slightly in absolute volume but declines significantly as a percentage of the growing total.
The GEF Arithmetic: What the Trajectory Means for Each Industrial Sector
GEI Scope 2 (FY2024-25, WAEF 0.710): 14,500 × 0.710 ÷ 1,000 = 10.3 tCO₂/t aluminium
GEI Scope 2 (FY2029-30, WAEF ~0.50): 14,500 × 0.50 ÷ 1,000 = 7.25 tCO₂/t aluminium
Passive improvement (no RE investment): 10.3 - 7.25 = 3.05 tCO₂/t aluminium
At 500,000 t/yr production: Total passive improvement = 1.525 Mt CO₂e/year by FY2029-30
At an expected CCTS CCC price of Rs 750/tCO₂e: Annual CCTS compliance value = Rs 1,144 crore
Entity: Steel plant consuming 1,000 kWh/t grid electricity (auxiliary operations):
GEI Scope 2 (FY2024-25): 1,000 × 0.710 ÷ 1,000 = 0.710 tCO₂/t
GEI Scope 2 (FY2029-30): 1,000 × 0.50 ÷ 1,000 = 0.500 tCO₂/t
Passive improvement per tonne: 0.210 tCO₂/t steel
At 5 MMT/yr production: 1.05 Mt CO₂e passive improvement leading to a Rs 788 crore/yr CCTS compliance value
Let's look at what this passive benefit actually means in financial terms. A 500,000 tonne per year aluminium smelter running entirely on grid electricity, taking absolutely no action on renewable procurement, will nevertheless see its CCTS Scope 2 GEI improve by approximately 3.05 tCO₂/t between 2025 and 2030. This happens purely because the national grid is decarbonising around it. Based on projected Phase 1 CCC prices, this passive improvement holds a CCTS compliance value of approximately Rs 1,144 crore per year by FY2029-30. This is not a small number. It represents a massive compliance cost avoided and potentially generates a CCC surplus that can be sold on the open market to less-efficient compliance entities.
Passive Scope 2 GEI Improvement from GEF Decline: Key Sectors from FY25 to FY30
| Sector | Grid Electricity Intensity | GEI Scope 2 at WAEF 0.710 | GEI Scope 2 at WAEF ~0.50 | Passive Improvement | CBAM Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Aluminium (grid) | 14,500 kWh/t | 10.3 tCO₂/t | 7.25 tCO₂/t | Minus 3.05 tCO₂/t | ~€244/t CBAM reduction at €80/tCO₂e |
| Steel (grid auxiliary) | 800 to 1,000 kWh/t | 0.57 to 0.71 tCO₂/t | 0.40 to 0.50 tCO₂/t | Minus 0.17 to 0.21 tCO₂/t | Not direct; CBAM steel focuses on Scope 1 only |
| Fertilisers (grid power) | 500 to 700 kWh/t urea | 0.36 to 0.50 tCO₂/t | 0.25 to 0.35 tCO₂/t | Minus 0.11 to 0.15 tCO₂/t | ~€9 to 12/t CBAM reduction (Scope 2 included) |
| Cement (grid auxiliary) | 100 to 120 kWh/t | 0.071 to 0.085 tCO₂/t | 0.050 to 0.060 tCO₂/t | Minus 0.021 to 0.025 tCO₂/t | Not currently CBAM-covered |
The Captive Coal CPP Paradox: Why a Declining Grid GEF Makes Captive Coal Increasingly Indefensible.
Industrial companies utilizing captive coal power plants determine their Scope 2 GEI using the captive plant's actual emission factor, which typically hovers around 0.90 to 1.05 tCO₂/kWh, rather than relying on the national WAEF. As the national WAEF declines toward 0.50 tCO₂/MWh by 2030, the glaring gap between the captive coal CPP emission factor and the grid GEF widens dramatically, moving from approximately 0.19 to 0.34 tCO₂/kWh today up to approximately 0.40 to 0.55 tCO₂/kWh by 2030. A company heavily reliant on a captive coal CPP will discover that its CCTS Scope 2 GEI target becomes progressively tighter relative to peers. This tightening happens not because BEE is setting stricter rules, but because the grid-connected peer group improves without effort while the CPP-dependent company stands still. This represents the captive coal CPP's hidden compliance risk: while it may temporarily insulate the company from electricity price volatility, it actively exposes the company to a progressive CCTS compliance disadvantage as the broader grid decarbonises.
Coal power stranded asset risk and its carbon market implications
India's coal power fleet stranded asset risk is essentially a carbon market event just as much as a power sector event. Plants that become commercially uneconomic, either because renewable electricity proves cheaper at the margin or because rising carbon compliance costs make coal generation painfully expensive for captive industrial users, will inevitably exit the market. This sequence of exit will be determined primarily by age, operating efficiency, and the raw cost of continued operation relative to cleaner alternatives. The carbon market implications tied to this exit process are twofold.
First, as legacy coal plants systematically exit, the total supply of coal-fired generation naturally falls, which actively accelerates the GEF decline beyond what simple renewable additions alone could produce. Each single percentage point reduction in coal's overall share of total generation translates directly into a GEF reduction, a shift that financially benefits every grid-connected industrial consumer's CCTS Scope 2 position. Consequently, the CEA's optimal mix projection may actually understate the pace of GEF decline if coal plant retirements happen to accelerate beyond current projections.
Second, coal plant retirement creates highly valuable physical assets, including cleared land, heavy grid connections, robust water infrastructure, and a skilled local labour force. In many cases, these assets can be efficiently repurposed for large-scale renewable or storage development. For industrial companies burdened with captive coal plants fast approaching their end of life, the repowering option—replacing a retiring coal CPP with captive solar or wind on the exact same land parcel utilizing the existing grid connection—may represent the absolute most capital-efficient pathway to achieving clean electricity at the plant level.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is India's coal power decline structural or cyclical?
It is structural. The FY25 decline was driven by renewable generation additions outpacing demand growth, not pandemic demand suppression. CEA's optimal mix projections confirm non-fossil generation is expected to rise from 25% to 44% by FY2029-30, driven by a committed renewable pipeline and declining RE costs.
Does the coal power decline affect CCTS target setting for industrial entities?
BEE's Phase 1 targets are set against historical GEI trajectories, so passive GEF decline naturally benefits grid-connected entities early on. However, BEE is expected to account for this automatic improvement in Phase 2 target-setting, capturing the GEF benefit via tighter intensity reduction percentages rather than allowing indefinitely large CCC surpluses.
What does the coal power decline mean for the CCTS CCC market price?
It reduces net compliance demand by passively improving the GEI of grid-connected entities. This acts as a supply-and-demand reducing factor for Phase 1. When combined with incoming renewable offset CCC supply, the coal power decline reinforces a structurally supply-heavy market, keeping opening CCC prices likely toward the lower end of the Rs 600 to 900 per tonne range.
Sources
- Carbon Brief, India's power sector CO₂ falls for only second time in half a century, September 2025
- Central Electricity Authority, CO₂ Baseline Database V21.0 December 2025 detailing WAEF 0.710 tCO₂/MWh
- Central Electricity Authority, Optimal Generation Capacity Mix for FY2029-30 and non-fossil generation share projections
- Ministry of Power, Installed capacity data from January 2026 showing 520.5 GW total with 52.57% non-fossil
- IEEFA, India coal power plant utilisation and stranded asset analysis, 2025