Share

‘SA is building white elephants’

accreditation
(File, iStock)
(File, iStock)

The incomplete multibillion-rand Kusile and Medupi power plants could be white elephants within a couple of decades, the UK’s leading climate change adviser, Sir David King, warned this week.

King said that any country still building coal-fired power stations was building white elephants because there was little room for coal in the economy of the future.

This comes a month before the COP21 climate change conference in Paris, which is expected to yield a climate change deal that will force governments to pursue a low-carbon economy.

“The question is why would any country invest billions in infrastructure that will be obsolete in less than 50 years?” King asked.

“These stranded assets will not yield electricity in 50 years because you would have mothballed them in favour of clean, renewable energy.”

South Africa’s emissions are listed as the 12th highest in the world per person, with the country emitting more than 500 million tons of greenhouse gases annually.

Apart from Medupi and Kusile, South Africa also has plans to procure coal baseload capacity from independent power producers.

While the Paris climate talks will not be a funeral for the coal industry, there will probably be a strong move to kick-start a future without coal. Worldwide, a divestment campaign to force prestigious business to withdraw funds from fossil fuels is also gathering momentum.

Ferrial Adam, energy expert from the nongovernmental organisation 350.org, said she believed that a grass roots push for divestment in coal would be a more powerful force in coal’s downfall than an agreement in Paris.

“For as long as there is vested interest in coal mining in South Africa, and political buy-in for coal as a resource, the government’s policies will not be able to abandon coal,” she said.

“Climate change is a reality. Yet there is strong doubt that anything that emerges out of Paris will hold our government accountable to our coal addiction.”

Despite South Africa’s prominent role in the Paris negotiations and a push for a binding agreement, the country’s own climate change plan has drawn criticism for being “inadequate”.

South Africa’s intended contribution pledges to keep emissions between 398 million tons and 614 million tons of carbon dioxide, but only if it receives financial aid from developed nations.

According to climate research group Climate Action Tracker, this means that South Africa’s emissions would be between 20% and 82% higher than they were in 1990 if it fulfilled all its promises and did not build another coal-fired power station.

“If most other countries were to follow South Africa’s approach, global warming would exceed 3°C to 4°C,” the group warned.

But South Africa’s position is that different countries carry different responsibilities and that historical emitters such as the US and Europe should do more.

In a presentation to Parliament, Hameda Deedat of trade federation Cosatu’s research arm, Naledi, said developed countries’ commitments should exceed those of less developed countries.

“South Africa should push this position. Less developed countries, as minor contributors, should make commitments commensurate to their contributions and should not be forced into commitments that inhibit growth and development needed to develop our economies.”

South Africa’s current pledge was built upon commitments the country made at COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009. Back then, President Jacob Zuma committed the country to reducing its emissions by 42% below business-as-usual levels by 2025.

To achieve this, South Africa would invest in renewable power, build nuclear plants and decommission old coal-fired power stations. Kusile and Medupi would be the last big coal power stations to be built in South Africa.

But a deal was not signed in Copenhagen.

During his state of the nation address this year, Zuma announced that there were plans to build the Coal 3 Power Station in the Waterberg, which will be similar to Kusile and Medupi.

“We were only going to build Medupi and Kusile, but then load shedding happened, and it gave the government the ambition to investigate Coal 3 because we needed more coal to keep the lights on. Our energy crunch has given the government the licence to use more coal,”
Adam said.

King admitted it would be difficult for South Africa to leave coal behind, but said South Africa had to draw up an analysis to manage the transition.

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
Who we choose to trust can have a profound impact on our lives. Join thousands of devoted South Africans who look to News24 to bring them news they can trust every day. As we celebrate 25 years, become a News24 subscriber as we strive to keep you informed, inspired and empowered.
Join News24 today
heading
description
username
Show Comments ()
Voting Booth
Do you believe that the various planned marches against load shedding will prompt government to bring solutions and resolve the power crisis?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
Yes
21% - 103 votes
No
79% - 389 votes
Vote