As we celebrate the landmark accession of India, the world's third biggest carbon emitter accounting for 4.1 per cent of global emissions, into the Paris Agreement and the momentum it creates for accelerating the pace of clean energy adoption and climate preparedness in India and internationally, we also need to keep working to ensure that the fossil fuel industry does not stand in the way of needed progress.

Keeping in line with my previous article on why the UNFCCC must ban the fossil fuel industry from the climate negotiations, on account of the conflict of interests it would generate, now let?s discuss about the accountability of the fossil fuel industry for racketeering.

?Meet the sponsors of Paris talks?

Engie is a massive energy company emitted as much greenhouse gases in 2014 as the entire country of Belgium. And Engie was also a prominent sponsor of the Paris climate talks, present everywhere from a wind-power installation outside of the negotiating complex at Le Bourget to a large stall at the Solutions COP21 exhibit at Le Grand Palais in downtown Paris. And Engie isn?t the only company with ties to fossil fuels to be included as a sponsor at the Paris talks — corporations like Électricité de France (EDF), which operates 16 major coal plants worldwide, and BNP Paribas, one of the world?s top banks for financing coal production, are also prominent sponsors of the event.

?These are actors that are still driving the climate crisis, and meanwhile they are sponsoring the very forum that is supposed to create the solution,? Katherine Sawyer, international organizer for Corporate Accountability International, told ThinkProgress. ?

Organizations like Corporate Accountability International, Corporate Europe Observatory, Friends of the Earth, and 350.org worry that by allowing corporate sponsors like Engie and EDF, the climate conference essentially helped the brands ?greenwash? their image, lending them an air of environmental credibility that masks their real interests. Sponsoring the climate talks, Sawyer argues, also allows these corporations to position themselves as stakeholders in the process, which could ultimately have an impact on the final agreement.

?The idea that is prevalent within the general public, and unfortunately here in the negotiations, is that these corporations are stakeholders and need to be part of the solution,? Sawyer said.

Private sponsorships account for a relatively small part of the overall climate conference — 20 percent of the $185 million total cost, according to the Guardian — but a sponsorship still affords the companies a great deal of visibility. EDF, for instance, gets its name associated with a digital screen in Parisian metro stations that ticks of Twitter responses to COP21 and climate change, while Engie gets to hang a massive COP21 banner in front of its Paris headquarters.

?They knew it all but didn?t tell you?

"If you want to understand what's driving this movement, you have to look at what's going on behind the scenes."

The largest, most-consistent money fueling the climate denial movement are a number of well-funded conservative foundations built with so-called "dark money," or concealed donations, according to an analysis.

The study, by Drexel University environmental sociologist Robert Brulle, is the first academic effort to probe the organizational underpinnings and funding behind the climate denial movement. It found that the amount of money flowing through third-party, pass-through foundations like DonorsTrust and Donors Capital, whose funding cannot be traced, has risen dramatically over the past five years.

In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010. Meanwhile the traceable cash flow from more traditional sources, such as Koch Industries and ExxonMobil, has disappeared. The study was published in the journal Climatic Change.

For nearly three decades, many of the world's largest fossil fuel companies have knowingly worked to deceive the public about the realities and risks of climate change.

?Now pay the price of your own poison?

Climate justice for people, climate accountability for polluters.

From extraction to distribution the entire supply chain of fossil fuels have been producing massive negative externality by triggering long-term effects of climate change (mass migration, falling crop yields, loss of biodiversity etc.) and endangering public health as well. So, how do we put price on pollution and make the fossil fuel companies pay?

There are two very well established policies that adhere to the ?polluters pay principle? to reduce carbon emission.

According to economists, a reduction in carbon emissions can be carried out through either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade approach.

1. A carbon tax is a fee-aimed to make fossil fuel companies pay for climate damage their fuel use causes by discharging carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and also to persuade a shift to cleaner energy.

2. In a carbon tax the quantity of pollution depends on the level of tax determined. A firm will have the incentive to reduce carbon emission as long as doing so would cost less than paying tax. Sweden has been using carbon tax to reduce greenhouse gas emissions since 1991.

According to an estimation by the Swedish Ministry of Environment, carbon tax has cut emissions by an additional 20%, allowing the country to succeed its target under the Kyoto Protocol.

In a cap-and-trade policy, government puts a firm limit, or cap, on the overall level of carbon pollution from industry and reduces that cap year after year to reach a set pollution target. The pollution quota is set and distributed through fair auction regulated by the government.

The European Union has a cap-and-trade system since 2005 to cut down greenhouse gas emissions from about 10,000 big industrial polluters.

By adopting either a tax on carbon or a cap-and-trade policy we can make the fossil fuel companies pay for the pollution and at the same time limit global warming through putting price on carbon emissions.

Most importantly, it is necessary that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change device a suitable mechanism to hold the fossil fuel industry legally and financially accountable for the damages they have created. Only then can we switch to a cleaner and greener future.