SA’s first climate-deal step

[caption id="attachment_124907" align="aligncenter" width="551"] LITTLE PROGRESS: Medupi power station is a ‘marginal improvement’ on old plants in terms of pollution PHOTOGRAPH: FILES[/caption]

The government will have to do a lot more to limit global warming in terms of the Paris Agreement, writes Guy Rogers

THE South African government has taken its first step towards meeting its obligations under the Paris climate change agreement.

Environmental Affairs Minister Edna Molewa has published notice of her department’s intention to declare greenhouse gases “priority  pollutants” and has also issued draft pollution prevention plan regulations in terms of these same gases.

Together, once ratified, these proposals will help the government to clamp down on big emitters and ultimately meet their commitments under the Paris Agreement.

But much more is going to have to be done to activate the deal to limit global warming to “well below 2°C” and ensure South Africa’s contribution is not just hot air, commentators warn. Renewable energy and carbon sequestration projects and emission control mechanisms must be ramped up, government policies and incentives must be aligned to allow this to happen and public pressure must be applied to ensure the job is done.

Morgan Griffiths, the Wildlife and Environment Society environmental governance programme manager based in Wessa’s Port Elizabeth office, said the key thing about the historic 32-page Paris Agreement is that it is the first global deal to take action on climate change.

“It makes it patently clear what the world wants and needs.

“The signal from the 196 countries that signed was, ‘it’s time to keep fossil fuels in the ground and time for investors to cut their ties with fossil fuels.’”

But the coal, oil and gas corporations of the world will take comfort in the huge challenge this will pose to the drivers behind this new world order, he said.

“That 2°C pledge will require keeping 80% of the world’s remaining fossil fuels underground. So how much disinvestment will happen in the near future remains to be seen.”

Participating countries arrived in Paris each with their intended contributions in terms of greenhouse gas cuts. But the agreement makes the point that all these intended cuts together will not be enough to hold the global average temperature to well below 2°C, Griffiths noted.

“So the necessity for strengthened ambitions is urgent in the face of our collective tendency to under-achieve.

“The work of all those whose efforts saw sanity prevail on December 12 will have to be redoubled to ensure that we not only stay on track with the accord but get significantly more serious about it.”

Much of the agreement has to do with accounting in terms of what each country contributes going forward and everyone is going to have to “ensure the avoidance of double-accounting”, he said.

It emerged in November last year in the lead-up to Paris, after British and US investigations, that China, the world’s largest carbon emitter, had been dramatically under-reporting its coal consumption. Reports said China had been burning up to 17% more coal each year than previously disclosed by the government.

The Paris Agreement in fact goes further than the 2°C pledge, urging signatories to “continue all efforts to limit the rise in temperature to 1.5°C”.

Theoretically this upping the ante should suit South Africa where climatic and geographical factors mean we will feel the sharp end of the climate stick. The environment department has already warned that “a global increase of 2°C translates to up to 4°C for South Africa by the end of the century”.

New interactive coastal mapping by US-based organisation Climate Central has shown that many coastal towns and cities around the world including Port Elizabeth will be severely effected by a 4°C temperature rise.

In recognition of their responsibility for driving climate change through energy-intensive heavy industry, developed countries must also in terms of the deal donate $100-billion to developing countries to help them address challenges and fix damage.

But clarity is lacking, Griffiths pointed out.

“Who is developed and who developing? Must South Africa donate to other African countries or shall we benefit from donations?”

While there may be donations to the Global Adaptation Fund, most donations will more likely be made in the form of loans for projects, he said.

While some renewable energy, electric cars, improved public transport and carbon taxes will likely soon become part of the mix as we look to meet our Paris obligations,  South Africa will likely remain bound to coal for some time for production of electricity and synthetic fuel via Sasol, he said.

“Eskom needs to allow a greater percentage of renewables in its stable of energy resources but the nuclear proposal will probably curtail these as Eskom tries to contain costs and maximise their own revenue streams.”

In the meantime Wessa will continue with its projects like the Klein Karoo spekboom carbon sequestration initiative and supporting renewables including the Coega windturbine factory. Wessa will further step up its capacity development and education work, making explicit the connections between climate change, biodiversity, water, energy and waste, he said.

“The aim is to help people to live out the choices that will be so critical in actualising the vision of the preferred future encapsulated in the Paris Agreement.”

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) policies and futures unit researcher James Reeler explained that in terms of the Paris deal signatory countries must each now act to achieve their own intended obligations while moving to peak emissions “as soon as possible” and rapid emission reduction from 2050.

“Importantly there is a review mechanism to ensure ‘updating and enhancing’ of pledges starting in 2023 and every five years thereafter.

South Africa’s intended contribution of peaking at no more then 614 mega-tonnes of greenhouse gases falls within the global 398Mt-614Mt “peak and plateau” range in the agreement.  But with South Africa listed last year as the 15th worst emitter of greenhouse gases, this upper limit is not fair in terms of the global share, so WWF is urging for “pushing towards the lower limit”, he said.

Asked to explain the apparent anomaly of South Africa signing in Paris while erecting new coal-burning power plants back home, Reeler said Medupi and Kusile were marginal improvements on the current aging and heavily polluting coal fleet.

“But it is important that coal plants are retired on schedule and that there is investment in renewables.”

Echoing Griffiths, Reeler emphasised that while the Paris Agreement was significant, “it falls far short of what is required for limiting climate change to 2°C much less 1.5°C. “We need to focus on solutions and shifts to improve the commitment.”

These shifts include prioritising feed-in tariffs which can help accelerate investment in renewables by offering long-term contracts based on the generation costs of the different technologies, he said. This mechanism also includes “tariff degressions” to encourage innovation whereby the power price ratchets down over time.