[PPT] - Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios (LTMS) g g ( ) for South Africa PowerPoint Presentation

SLIDE 1

Long-Term Mitigation Scenarios (LTMS) g g ( ) for South Africa

Jongikhaya Witi Jongikhaya Witi

Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism Energy Research Centre, University of Cape Town AIM Training Workshop NIES, Tsukuba, Japan 27 31 S t b 2008 27 - 31 September 2008

SLIDE 2

The Context

Climate Change is real

The Context

Climate Change is real and its predicted impacts for SA are serious

SLIDE 3

Climate Change evidence & impacts

Climate change is already having
Scientific evidence for a
Climate change is already having

predominantly negative impacts

n people and ecosystems.

South Africa is suffering and will

Scientific evidence for a rise in global temperature

ver the past century

l

South Africa is suffering and will

suffer serious impacts under global business-as-usual: Water stress

unequivocal

Climate change almost

t i l d i b

Water stress
Floods
Rainfall patterns

certainly driven by increased greenhouse gas concentrations caused by

Spreading malaria

concentrations caused by human activities

SLIDE 4

The Challenge The Challenge

The World has a GHG emission problem Time is limited Time is limited We will have to act globally South Africa is in a unique situation South Africa is in a unique situation

SLIDE 5

Mitigation is urgent time to bend the curve is short

“It is clear that delaying action on this matter of climate change will hit poor countries and communities hardest” Pres Mbeki UN GA 2007 2007

SLIDE 6

SA compared to other countries

E i i it Emissions per capita

12 14 16 n

n c

Emissions intensity

600 700 800

l int'l $

6 8 10 12 2-eq per perso

Deforestatio etc

100 200 300 400 500 600

s CO2 / mill

2 4

South Brazil China India OECD World

t CO

S
u

t h A f r i c a B r a z i l C h i n a I n d i a O E C D W

r

l d tons

Africa

S

Relative to the size of our population, emissions ‘per capita’ are high
Emissions-intensity due to dependency on coal and inefficient use of

energy

Share of cumulative emissions lower than annual - historical

responsibility works best responsibility works best

SLIDE 7

LTMS

Mandate & Objectives

LTMS

j Scenario Building Team Products Products

SLIDE 8

LTMS mandate & objectives

LTMS is a Cabinet-mandated process for

id tif i i f iti ti f li t identifying scenarios for mitigation of climate change d b d b C

Led by DEAT, project managed by ERC,

independent facilitation by Tokiso

Two sets of key outputs:
Robust, broadly supported recommendations for a

, y pp long-term national climate policy

Sound basis for SA negotiating position for

negotiations on post-2012

Follow up with awareness and implementation

SLIDE 9

The work of the Scenario Building Team (SBT)

S i B ildi T bli h d A 2006

Scenario Building Team established Aug 2006 to

carry out the technical aspects

SBT made up of strategic thinkers from government,

industry, labour, civil society, as well as other y, , y, relevant players

Commissioned research teams to provide
Commissioned research teams to provide

information 24 Octobe 2007 afte mo e than a ea of intense

24 October 2007, after more than a year of intense

work, the initial technical work of the LTMS was i d ff b SBT signed off by SBT

SLIDE 10

LTMS products

APPROVED by all members of SBT

All t h i l t

A) Scenario Document B) T h i l S

All technical reports ACCEPTED by SBT as rigorous research best available scientific i f ti

B) Technical Summary Technical Report and Appendix

cess

Technical Inputs:

information adequate basis to inform the further LTMS process

S Proc

Technical Inputs:

Energy emissions
Non-energy emissions

Full texts of the various research groups

LTMS

Non energy emissions

Economy – wide analysis
Climate impacts

p

Facilitated PROCESS with strategic thinkers from key stakeholder sectors y

SLIDE 11

Cabinet on LTMS

Cabinet lekgotla considered LTMS outcomes

Cabinet lekgotla considered LTMS outcomes g (July 2008) (July 2008) S t i i t t i di ti d f k f S t i i t t i di ti d f k f

Set vision, strategic direction and framework for

Set vision, strategic direction and framework for policy directions policy directions p y p y

Policy development process to follow

Policy development process to follow

SLIDE 12

LTMS: Process and research

Robust and broadly supported results hi d th h t h i l achieved through technical methodology and extensive stakeholder involvement

SLIDE 13

Management, Facilitation Team & Secretariat

Joanne Yawitch and DEAT team (Project
Joanne Yawitch and DEAT team (Project

Manager) H ld Wi kl (P j t L d) Pi M kh ibi

Harald Winkler (Project Lead), Pierre Mukheibir

(Administration)

Facilitators: Stefan Raubenheimer (Lead), Edwin

Mohlalehi, and Pascal Moloi (High Level) Mohlalehi, and Pascal Moloi (High Level)

Tokiso Secretariat: Tanya Venter, Yasmin Moola,

Rachel Mosupye Elin Lorimer Rachel Mosupye, Elin Lorimer

SLIDE 14

Scenario Building Team

Government Business Civil society Government

DEAT Environment
DME Minerals & Energy
DST Science & Technology
SASOL
Eskom
EIUG Energy Intensive

U G

y

EcoCity/CURES
Groundwork
SESSA
DST Science & Technology
DoT Transport
Treasury
Foreign Affairs

Users Group

Engen
Grain SA
Anglo Coal
SESSA
Labour (NUM)
SEA
SACAN

g

DTI Trade & Industry
DPE Public Enterprises
DWAF Water Affairs & Forestry

P id

Anglo Coal
BHP Billiton
Chamber of Mines
Aluminium – AFSA
COSATU
SALGA
WWF-SA
Presidency
SAWS Weather Services
CEF / SA Nat’l Energy Research

Institute

Kumba Resources
Chemical – CAIA
Engen
Earthlife Africa

Institute

NERSA Energy Regulator
W Cape Province (DEADP)
City of Johannesburg
Forestry SA
AgriSA
Business Unity SA
Sappi
Sappi

SLIDE 15

Four research teams and inputs from stakeholder experts

Energy Emissions (led by ERC modeling)
Alison Hughes, Mary Haw, Harald Winkler, Andrew Marquard, Bruno Merven
Markal model reviewed by Stephen Pye (AEAT, UK)
Expert input from stakeholders: Sonwabo Damba (Eskom); Energy Efficiency Technical Committee special meeting: Ian Langridge

(Anglo American), Valerie Geen, Tsvetana Mateva, Hermien vd Walt (all three National Business Initiative); Chesney Bradshaw (ABB); Barry Bredenkamp (Nat’l Energy Efficiency Agency); Burt Buissine (British American Tobacco); Rochelle Chetty Sonwabo Damba, (both Eskom); LJ Grobler (NW University); Chris Teffo (Chamber of Mines); Alan Munn (Engen); Egmont Otterman (PPCement); Nico Smith (Mittal Steel); Neal Smither (BP); Theresa Maree (Eon) (PPCement); Nico Smith (Mittal Steel); Neal Smither (BP); Theresa Maree (Eon)

Non-Energy Emissions (led by CSI R)
Rina Taviv, Marna van der Merwe, Bob Scholes and Gill Collet
Industrial process emissions: G Kornelius (Airshed), A Marquard and H Winkler
Expert input from stakeholders: Linda Godfrey (NRE CSIR) Antony Phiri (NRE CSIR) Harma Greben (NRE CSIR) Susanne Dittke
Expert input from stakeholders: Linda Godfrey (NRE CSIR), Antony Phiri (NRE CSIR), Harma Greben (NRE CSIR), Susanne Dittke

(EnviroSense CC), Saliem Haider (City of Cape Town) and Stan Jewaskiewitz (Envitech Solutions); John Scotcher ForestLore Consulting, Howick and Johan Bester from the DWAF. Johan Claasen from NDA, Pietman Botha from GrainSA, Sylvester Mpandeli and Matiga Motsepe from the ARC, Koos van Zyl and Nic Opperman from AgriSA; Guy F Midgley from SANBI and Brian van Wilgen from CSIR.

Economy-wide research (led by UCT economics)

y ( y )

Kalie Pauw, with Celeste Coetzee
Reviewed by Dirk van Seventer (TIPS)
2 special meetings of economists: Roger Baxter (Chamber of Mines). Raymond Parsons (Nedlac); Theo van Rensburg, Louise Du

Plessis, Marna Kearney (all three Naitonal Treasury); Ashraf Kariem (Presidency); Stephen Gelb (Edge Institute); Michael McClintock (Sasol); James Blignaut (University of Pretoria); Simi Siwisi BUSA (Sasol); James Blignaut (University of Pretoria); Simi Siwisi BUSA

Climate Change I mpacts (led by SANBI )
G Midgley, with Pierre Mukheibir
Expert authors: R Chapman, P Mukheibir, M Tadross, B Hewitson, S Wand, R Schulze, T Lumsden, M Horan, M Warburton, B

Kgope, B Mantlana, A Knowles, A Abayomi, G Ziervogel, R Cullis and A Theron g p , , , y , g ,

SLIDE 16

The Gap

Two Scenarios presented by the SBT

The Gap

Two Scenarios presented by the SBT frame the choices for South Africa

SLIDE 17

Two Scenarios:

Growth without Constraints and Required by Science

1,800 1,400 1,600 1,000 1,200 uivalent

Growth without Constraints

THE GAP

Gap: difference between where emissions might go and where they need to go

600 800 , Mt CO 2-equ

Current Dev Path

THE GAP

y g (GWC – RBS, emissions in 2050) Gap is 1300 Mt CO2-eq in 2050 More than three times 2003 annual emissions

400 600 M

R i d b S i

2003 annual emissions

200

Required by Science

SLIDE 18

The Technical Options The Technical Options

Wedges = Individual Mitigation Actions g g Showing Emission Reductions & Costs (and savings) & Costs (and savings)

SLIDE 19

150 300

R 20

Nuclear, extended 50

SW H subsidy

25 50 Electric vehicles in

GWC grid S f l th

450 600

Escalating CO2 tax 5 10

R 4,404

Limit less eff

Electric vehicles w ith 50

CCS 20 Mt

25

R 208

25

R 607

25 50

R 203

Commercial efficiency Manure management

5 10

R 8 Synfuels methane

150 300

R 42 150 300

R 102

nuclear, renew ables 300 Renew ables, extended 25

R 72

50

Biofuel subsidy

25 50

R 524 Biofuels

R 203

5 10

R 19

g

10

R 0 Aluminium

150

R 92

25

R 697

25 50

Hybrids

150 300 Im proved vehicle efficiency

All Medium Wedges 150 300 All Small Wedges 25 50

5 10

Enteric fermentation

5

R 0

150 300 Subsidy for renew ables 25

R 1,987

150

R 269

25 50Residential efficiency

150 25

5

R 50

5 10

Reduced tillage

Waste management

150

R 125

25 50

R 5 Cleaner coal

Passenger modal shift

25

R 198

5

R 24 25 50

R 14 aste a age e t

5 10

R 39 Afforestation 150 300 Renewables with learning, extended

R3

150 300

R 34

Industrial efficiency

R 5

25 50

R 1,131

Passenger modal shift

25 50

R15

Fire control

R 39

5 10

R 476 Synfuels CCS 2 Mt

50

Synfuels C C S 23 M t

R3

150 300

R 18

Nuclear 150 300

R 52

Renew ables

R 15

5 10

R 346 Coal mine methane

25 50

R 105

SLIDE 20

Strategic Options Strategic Options

Four packages of actions to get from GWC to get from GWC towards the goal of Required by Science

SLIDE 21

Four Strategic Options

1800

Start Now is a combination of aggressive energy efficiency + Scale Up is a combination of Start Now Use the Market is as an

300

Industrial efficiency

300

Industrial efficiency Escalating CO2 tax

1400 1600

Growth without Constraints

+ 27% nuclear and 27% renewable energy generation + extension of energy generation to 50% nuclear and Use the Market is as an alternative instrument to Scale Up; it applies a carbon tax (starting from R100

150

R 34

300

Renewables

150 300

R 34

300

Nuclear, extended

150 300 450 600

R 42

1000 1200

Constraints

Reach for the Goal

energy generation by 2050 50% renewable by 2050 (starting from R100 (slowing emissions growth); R250 (stabilising emissions) to R750 (absolute

150

R 52

300

Nuclear

150

R 20 Renewables, extended

150 300

Subsidy for renewables

1. New technology
2. I dentify resources

600 800

Start Now Use the Market Scale Up

to R750 (absolute reductions 2040ff) plus incentives

300

Passenger modal shift

150

R 18

150 300

R 92

300

Synfuels CCS 23 Mt

150

R 125

300

Biofuel subsidy

3. People-oriented measures
4. Transition to a low carbon economy

400 600

Required by Science Use the Market Scale Up

150

R 1,131

300

Improved vehicle efficiency

150 300

R 54

300

Electric vehicles in GWC grid

150

R 697

300

SWH subsidy

200

Required by Science

150

R 269

150 300

R 607

150 300

R 208

SLIDE 22

Key steps by Strategic Option

Start Now Start Now Scale Up Scale Up Use the Use the M k t M k t Reach for Reach for p Market Market the Goal the Goal

New

New

150 300

Industrial efficiency

150 300

R 34 Industrial efficiency

600

Escalating CO2 tax

technology technology

Identify

Identify

R 34

150 300

R 52 Renewables

R 34

150 300

R 20 Nuclear, extended

150 300 450

R 42

resources resources

People

People-

i

d i d

R 52

150 300

R 18 Nuclear R 20 Renewables, extended

150 300 150 300

R 125 Subsidy for renewables

riented
riented

measures measures Transition to Transition to

150 300

R 1,131

Passenger modal shift R 18

150

R 92

150 300

R 54 Synfuels CCS 23 Mt

150 300

R 697 Biofuel subsidy

Transition to

Transition to low carbon low carbon economy economy

,

150 300

R 269

Improved vehicle efficiency R 54

150 300

R 607 Electric vehicles in GWC grid

150 300

R 208 SWH subsidy

economy economy

R 269 R 607

R 208

SLIDE 23

Costs Costs & Economy-wide y implications

SLIDE 24

Total mitigation costs in relation to the size of the economy

1.5%

0 Limit on low-efficiency vehicles 1 + Passenger modal shift

1% Threshold

0.5% 1.0% e of GDP Without industrial efficiency 14 15 14 15

1 + Passenger modal shift 2 + Improved vehicle efficiency 3 + SWH subsidy

0.5%

0.0%

st as share

industrial efficiency 10 11 12 13 9 11 12 13 14

y 4 + Commercial efficiency 5 + Residential efficiency 6 + Industrial efficiency 7 Cl l

1.5%
1.0%

Mitigation co With i d t i l ffi i 10 1 2 3 7 9 8 10 9

7 + Cleaner coal 8 + Nuclear 9 + Escalating CO2 tax 10 + Renewables

2.5%
2.0%

5 000 10 000 15 000 20 000 M industrial efficiency 5 4 3 7 6 8

10 + Renewables 11 + CCS 20 Mt 12 + Subsidy for renewables 13 + Biofuels

5,000

10,000 15,000 20,000 Mt CO2 reduced, 2003-2050

14 + Electric vehicles in GWC grid 15 + Hybrids

Mitigation costs as share of GDP, for runs of combined wedges each time adding another as in list at right

SLIDE 25

Economy Wide Impacts

I mpact on GDP Employment (change in jobs) I mpact on poverty (change in income distribution) + 0.2% in 2015 2% in 2015 Jobs slightly below that

f

the reference case. Not large, but any job loss is

f

concern and would household welfare rises 3%

n average

Start

f

concern and would have to be off-set Lowest figure is -2.5% for semi-skilled workers in 2010

Start Now

+ 1% in 2015 Overall 1% improvement in 2015 Semi-skilled jobs peak at 3% in 2015

Scale Up

2 % 2015

Negative effect on economy, unless off-set by other measures Jobs increase for lower- skilled (+ 3% semi- skilled, 0% for unskilled in 2015) Overall, negative welfare effects, except poorer households 0%

Up Use the

measures in 2015) Decrease for higher-skilled workers (-2% for skilled and

4%

for highly skilled)

Market

SLIDE 26

POLICY DIRECTIONS

The feedback from the LTMS high

The feedback from the LTMS high-

level process, taken with

level process, taken with C bi t’ di ti d li li t l i h b C bi t’ di ti d li li t l i h b Cabinet’s direction and a policy alignment analysis, has been Cabinet’s direction and a policy alignment analysis, has been translated into translated into 6 broad policy direction themes

6 broad policy direction themes.

Theme 1: Greenhouse gas emission reductions and limits

Theme 1: Greenhouse gas emission reductions and limits

Theme 2: Build on, strengthen and/or scale up current initiatives

Theme 2: Build on, strengthen and/or scale up current initiatives , g / p , g / p

Theme 3: Implementing the “Business Unusual” Call for Action

Theme 3: Implementing the “Business Unusual” Call for Action

Theme 4: Preparing for the future

Theme 4: Preparing for the future Th 5 V l bili d Ad i Th 5 V l bili d Ad i

Theme 5: Vulnerability and Adaptation

Theme 5: Vulnerability and Adaptation

Theme 6: Alignment, Coordination and Cooperation

Theme 6: Alignment, Coordination and Cooperation

See Annexure A – LTMS Policy Directions

SLIDE 27

Theme 1: GHG emission reductions and limits (Cont.) ( )

Peak Decline Plateau Decline

SLIDE 28

Thank you Thank you

For additional information visit www.environment.gov.za: go to Hot Issues, wait for LTMS http://www.environment.gov.za/HotIssues/2008/LTMS/A%20LTMS%20Scenarios %20for%20SA.pdf