Transcript A Post Carbon vision - Parliamentary Monitoring Group

Submission for the National
Climate Change Green Paper
Parliamentary Hearing
16th March 2011
From Nelson Mandela Bay
Transition Network
Content
• What is our Transition Network ?
• Issues in the Climate Change Green Paper
– Our Crucial concern is that the Framework is not properly based
– Water implications in IRP 2010 and problems under CC
– Agriculture threats and potential but minimal coordination
– Energy as biggest polluter and potential for improvement
• Cost of Nuclear versus PV panels
• IRP2010 scenarios
– Human Health impacts on growth and development
– Commerce and Manufacturing potential in ‘renewables’
– Other sectors
– Waste management needs first a clear VISION
• Roles and Responsibilities and Institutional Framework
• Inputs and Resources Mobilisation - Technology
• Conclusion
What is Transition Network ?
•
We are committed to planning and acting for a transition to a real
low-carbon future with a locally resilient and responsible
society in Nelson Mandela Bay through:
–
–
–
–
–
Awareness-raising about low-carbon, resilience paradigms
The creation of a platform for meaningful networking
Responsible lobbying government and various institutions.
Mobilizing community members towards change
Forming a steering committee responsible for the networking
of specialized groups and projects relevant to the different
aspects of Transition
Crucial issue is the GP Framework
• Lack of a long term vision from the National
Planning Commission that:
- Gives a clear Post Carbon (PC) objective to inform and drive
–
–
–
–
–
Government and the Civil Society understanding and action.
Articulates new growth and poverty eradication paradigms
Questions GDP as the over-riding indicator in dealing with
human and environmental impacts
Is bottom up and people centred through Informed
participation
Defines and explains the needed drastic changes that will cut
through all sectors and demonstrate new ways to live
Recognises the need of a precautionary pro-active strategy in
low carbon development to avoid incalculable costs of weak CC
planning and actions.
Crucial issue = Framework
– Defines a CC national fund sourced from direct
carbon taxes
– Recognise SA’s vulnerability (locally and globally) to
its enormous carbon dependency
– Recognise LOCALISATION of food, energy, water,
employment a pillar of CC response
– Recognise institutional context of mismanagement
and weak implementation capacity
– Recognises “market solution” such as Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM), Cap and
Trade and new but unproven technologies such as
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) delaying tactics
& dangerous distractions.
Crucial issue = Framework
There is NO Post Carbon vision with resulting :
-Weak political will to drive real changes
-Keeping only slightly modified Business As
Usual to try to confront CC
-Too little ambition (16% instead of at least 32%
Renewable Energy in IRP2))
-Weak alignment & contradictions between sect
oral policies
-Weak enforcement strategies to enforce Polluter
Pays Principle
-Weak preparedness to face COP17 immense
responsibility and real undertakings
Water
• Major potential crisis issue
• Unacceptable and unconstitutional to consider
water a commodity, rather than a social right
• We question mega projects in water transfer,
desalinisation with large environmental
impact, operational costs & power needs
• Instead of local water harvesting and recycling in
a true localisation spirit
• Considering the future CC water contexts, we
question DEA choice of scenario (and not the
Low Carbon scenario) that requires much more
water per Kwh produced
Water needs implications in
IRP2010
Water usage
370
330
Low Cost Scenario
310
Balanced
290
270
Low Carbon
250
230
2030
2029
2028
2027
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
210
2010
Water consumption (Ml)
350
Agriculture
• A Post Carbon vision vital to inform decisions with:
– FOOD SECURITY the central issue in the CCGP as it will be
directly impacted by CC and the huge implications of reduced
availability and soaring cost of carbon product inputs
– LOCALISING food production will boost local nutrition and
local markets offsetting lost high CO2 footprint miles markets
– LINK R & D and knowledge between Farmers, Colleges and
Trainers - import proven profitable technologies such as Brazil’s
and others’ Conservation Agriculture and Bio fuels & feeds
– INCREASE mixed, small scale and organic farming to
• Decrease environmental impacts of monoculture with CA
• Create rural employment, local markets and wealth and
‘responsibilise’ local producer, accountable to local clients
• Secure communal land accordingly
– Ban GMO [monopolies] that kill biodiversity and producer
autonomy
Energy
• Post carbon vision would more easily direct this
sector’s decisions including:
– REDUCING this sector’s massive GHG contributions while
seeking out new opportunities.
– LOCALISATION with decentralised energy production to
become a major potential to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Create local employment
Responsibilise producer, accountable to local clients
Reduce transmission losses and environment impacts
Better use natural local energy resources
Better service isolated areas
Stop monopolistic unaccountability and bias
– Hence we refute [off-peak] “base load” as a fixed long term
IRP2010 commitment
Energy
- Medupe is effectively irreversible but Kusile new
power station is unacceptable and money should be
used for Renewable Energy development.
- We must support advanced suppliers of improved
systems such as Oerlikon PV producers
– We consider nuclear unacceptable because of:
•
•
•
•
Monopolistic flavour & unresolved waste management
Long lead times , and historic cost overruns,
Large cost and excessive construction footprint,
Inadequate security against occurrence of any environmental
or [possible] CC related disasters even in supposedly stable
environments.
Cost of Nuclear versus PhotoVoltaic
Source: Via Climate Justice Now
IRP2 scenarios
•POST CARBON scenario enforced
in IRP2 as it is the minimum
requirement for adequately responding to CC and water
scarcity threats
32%
36%
12%
16%
48%
14%
Education and Information
• Historic practice faces huge change. Few appreciate
implications of massive cost escalation and declining
carbon based inputs OR changing temperature and
water supplies under CC.
• Urgent initiatives needed to initiate and collate
information to tackle CC and post carbon complications
in energy, industry, agriculture and food production.
• Curricula and systems in Schools, Colleges and Support
Departments must be revised urgently to incorporate
the dramatic likely problems and opportunities of CC.
• University to become autonomous from funding
sources to offer objective and broad developmental
alternatives in post carbon paradigms to eager students.
Human Health
• Post carbon vision would more clearly
inform this sector’s choices and decisions
• To Mitigate CC health impacts through a
NHI funded by CC global fund
• Potable water and Health service
delivery cranked up and ready ahead of
CC impacts
Commerce and Manufacturing
• Post carbon vision would more effectively direct
sector’s decisions including the initiatives that:
– Polluters pay and GHG inventory be compulsory to
adequately inform and direct emission decreases
– Significant direct Co2 taxes be rapidly installed [or
even closures of even the largest] with NO exceptions
to quickly enforce changes for large GHG offenders
(including Eskom, SASOL and BHPBilliton)
– CO2 taxes income ring fenced for developing
alternatives to the above polluters
– Oerlikon Solar [Swiss PV producer] moved out of SA
to Morocco and Turkey, we suspect because of lack
of local political interest or support,
Other sectors
• Post carbon vision would more easily inform
decisions in the other sectors (such as Mining
and Minerals, Tourism, Transport, Natural
Resources, Human Society, Livelihoods in
Urban , Rural, Coastal Areas)
• Individual as well institutional CC RESILIENCE
build up as well as related awareness/
education programmes should be considered
the corner stones of a rapid and effective CC
Disaster Risk Management strategy
Waste management
• Current externalisation of waste costs to
domestic consumers is unacceptable as the
latter should be clearly attributed to the waste
producers as the only way to force them to
close or adapt to reusable or recyclable
packing
• land fill gas extraction is an afterthought and
disincentive to the zero waste approach with reuse, composting and recycling principles
Roles and Responsibilities and
Institutional Framework
• Has a DOE sufficient influence to enforce the CC
response implementation across all sectors.
• We believe the NPC (that would have to articulate a PC
vision), should be responsible for coordination and
enforcement of a CC response policy across the whole
Government and it would have greater influence with the
Private Sector.
• This Green Paper seems to be a “statement of intent”
that lacks critical details, especially regarding obligations
of CC role players.
• A PC vision, once again would ease decisions on these
details as it would clarify the field and set relevant
benchmarks.
Inputs and Resources
Mobilisation - Technology
• A Post carbon vision together with the
adequate political will would easily inform
decisions related to Inputs and
Resources Mobilisation and
Technology
• Investing as a precautionary [proactive]
response to CC will be a mere fraction
of the costs arising from inaction or too
little action.
Conclusion
• “It is argued that the early adoption of
a low carbon growth path can create
a competitive advantage for countries
taking cognisance of the effects of
climate change and environmental
pollution.”
• Hence the need of a post carbon
vision that aligns and drives each
and everyone.