China now reports 1,864 wild pandas – a major rise in just a decade
Panda. Photo credit: brafton.com
It’s good news for panda, the furry black and white bear that has come to symbolise wildlife conservation. China announced the results of its Fourth National Giant Panda Survey, which WWF supported with financial and technical expertise.
The numbers: 1,864 estimated minimum population of wild pandas; 16.8% increase in wild panda numbers over the past decade; and, 11.8% increase of giant panda geographic range since 2003.
“The rise in the population of wild giant pandas is a victory for conservation and definitely one to celebrate,” said Ginette Hemley, Senior Vice President of Wildlife Conservation at WWF. “This is a testament to the commitment made by the Chinese government for the last 30-plus years to wild panda conservation. WWF is grateful to have had the opportunity to partner with the Chinese government to contribute to panda conservation efforts.”
Wild giant pandas, a global symbol of wildlife conservation, are found only in China’s Sichuan, Shaanxi and Gansu provinces. There are currently 67 panda nature reserves in China, an increase of 27 since the last survey. The survey found that 1,246 wild giant pandas live within nature reserves. The approximately 33.2% that live outside protected areas face higher risks to their survival as major infrastructure projects cause large-scale habitat loss.
Saving wild pandas
Giant panda conservation efforts benefit many other rare species of animals and plants in the southwest China biodiversity hotspot. The giant panda’s habitat is also home to species such as the takin, golden snub-nosed monkey, red panda and serow. Forests within the giant panda’s habitat feature major freshwater conservation areas that benefit millions of people.
WWF’s 2015-2025 giant panda conservation strategy sets the course for panda protection efforts over the next decade and will focus on improving panda habitat in a manner that balances conservation with local sustainable development.
According to the WWF, the panda logo is symbolic of its longstanding commitment to conserving pandas in the wild. “We have a 30-year history in China and a strong presence in critical giant panda areas,” disclosed the conservation group.
With a price of 10.31 Eurocent per kWh, the new offshore wind farm, Horns Rev 3, will provide power much cheaper than other recently established offshore wind farms in Denmark and abroad
The winning tender for the wind farm Horns Rev 3 came from Vattenfall Vindkraft A/S who have agreed a price of 10.31 Eurocent per kWh. In comparison with previous price assumptions, this means that Danish consumers will experience a saving of approximately 295 million Euros over the next 11-12 years, which is the period during which the offshore wind farm will be in receipt of subsidies. Thereafter, the Horns Rev 3 facility will produce electricity at the market price and will no longer receive any form of subsidy.
The winning bid is well below the 14.07 Eurocent (15.15 Eurocent in fixed 2015-prices) which is the price being charged by Anholt Offshore Wind Farm. Horns Rev 3 is thus 32 percent cheaper than the last time Denmark built an offshore wind farm. It is believed to be the cheapest offshore wind park in Europe at the moment.
Compared to other wind farms abroad, this appears to represent a rather low price. Though a direct comparison is not possible, in the UK – the largest market for wind turbines – the cheapest parks currently being built cost 15.33 Eurocent / kWh in 2015. In addition to this the subsidies are adjusted for inflation and, in contrast to Denmark, the subsidy period is 15 years instead if the 11-12 years afforded in Denmark.
”With Horns Rev 3 Denmark is making windmill history through realising a significant reduction in the cost of establishing offshore wind farms. There is no doubt that the power from offshore wind turbines will continue to be an essential part of the green transition and contribute effectively to reducing CO2 in the atmosphere,”says Minister for Climate, Energy and Building Rasmus Helveg Petersen.
The low price is due in large part to technological developments throughout the wind turbine industry combined with a very successful tendering process. Through extensive dialogue and subsequent negotiations with the bidders, the DEA have managed to lower the price considerably. At the same time, a good, competitive environment was fostered around the windmill tendering process in which four companies were pre-qualified to participate.
“The low price is not just good for Denmark, but also for the international green transition. The general decline in prices in the market for wind power means that offshore wind power is now well on its way to becoming a viable competitive alternative to traditional fossil fuels. At the same time, we have developed an efficient procurement model which the whole of Europe can take inspiration from,” says Petersen.
The successful bid has already been approved by the signatories of the Energy Agreement 2012 and must now be adopted by parliament and signed into law. The government will present the bill on March 18 and the proposal is expected to be adopted during April with the backing of a large political majority in parliament.
Facts about Horns Rev 3:
The winner of the tendering process is Vattenfall Vindkraft A/S.
The agreed price is 10.31 Eurocent per. kWh.
The construction of Horns Rev 3 is to commence as soon as possible and the park is to be completed by 1 January 2020.
The first turbines will be able to be connected to the grid from January 1 2017 when they will be functional and ready to supply power to the grid.
There were four companies pre-qualified to participate in the tender.
Horns Rev 3 will result in the creation of up to 7,000 jobs over a three year period starting in 2016.
Electricity production from the park will be enough to supply the needs of 450,000 households.
Establishing this facility will increase the wind-sector’s share of electricity consumption in 2020 by 4.8% points from 46.2% to 51.0%.
CO2 emissions will be reduced by 1.16 million tons.
Switzerland on Friday became the first Party to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to submit its new climate action plan.
Aerial view of Bern, the Swiss federal capital city. Photo credit: en.wikipedia.org
Switzerland’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) comes well in advance of a new universal climate agreement to be inked by governments at the UN climate conference in Paris in December.
The new agreement will come into effect in 2020 and will pave the way to keep a global temperature rise this century under 2 degrees C.
Governments have agreed to submit their INDCs in advance of Paris with many developed and bigger developing countries expected to do so in the first quarter of this year.
The news from Switzerland comes in the wake of a meeting in Geneva where countries also finalized the negotiating text for the Paris agreement. The next round of formal negotiations will take place at UNFCCC headquarters in Bonn, Germany in June.
INDCs have been chosen as the vehicle for national contributions to the international Paris agreement–they include for example details of emission reductions the country will undertake and can include other action plans covering for example adaptation.
Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, said: “Switzerland is today demonstrating leadership, commitment and its support towards a successful outcome in Paris in 10 months’ time – it is the first but will not be the last. Momentum towards Paris is building everywhere. I look forward to many more INDCs being submitted over the coming weeks and months.”
Countries have agreed that there will be no back-tracking in their contributions. This means that the level of ambition to reduce emissions will increase over time. The negotiating text from Geneva also signals the ambition among many governments for a long-term goal to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the century.
According to the UNFCCC, the INDC of Switzerland, along with additional information such as documentation on designing and preparing INDCs as well as on sources of support for INDC preparation, will be available here: http://unfccc.int/focus/indc_portal/items/8766.php
Switzerland aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% relative to 1990 levels by 2030. At least 30% of this reduction must be achieved within Switzerland itself. The rest may be attained through projects carried out abroad. These objectives were approved by the Federal Council in November 2014 as part of the definition of the negotiation mandate for the climate conference in Lima and were made public on Friday. Switzerland will announce its commitment to reduce emissions by 50% to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Climate change is impacting Switzerland. Photo credit: startribune.com
A new international climate agreement which will involve all States from 2020 is due to be concluded at the climate conference to be held in Paris in December 2015. All Member States of the UNFCCC are required to state their commitments for the post-2020 period in advance of the Paris summit.
This objective of a 50% reduction in emissions reflects Switzerland’s responsibility for climate warming and the potential cost of emissions reduction measures in Switzerland and abroad over the 2020-2030 period. Switzerland, which is responsible for 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions and, based on the structure of its economy, has a low level of emissions (6.4 tonnes per capita per year), should be able to avail of emissions reduction measures abroad to reduce the cost of emissions reduction measures during the period 2020-2030. The fulfilment of part of the targeted reduction abroad will also enable the spreading of domestic measures over a longer period to account for capacities within the economy.
Switzerland’s target for 2020-2030 is also compatible with the pathway defined by climate experts to keep climate warming below two degrees between now and the end of the century.
At national level, a draft revision of the CO2 Act will be submitted for consultation in mid-2016.
Greater commitment for the climate
In line with the measures already implemented at national level, Switzerland emits less greenhouse gases today than in 1990 despite the fact that gross national product increased by 36% over the intervening period. Switzerland fulfilled its emissions reduction target for the first commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol (2008-2012).
This commitment has been increased for the period 2013-2020. The CO2 Act prescribes a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 20% by 2020 to be achieved through domestic measures. The instruments established to fulfil this target include the CO2 tax on heating fuel, the reduction in CO2 emissions from new cars, the obligation for fuel importers to compensate for some of the CO2 emitted by transport and the Buildings Programme.
A clear, transparent and understandable commitment
According to the decisions adopted by the climate conference in Lima, the commitment to be announced by the States for the post-2020 period must be clear, transparent and understandable. Switzerland has provided information under each of the seven key points identified in Lima which ensure the clarity of its commitment:
Reference point for the calculation of emissions reductions: 1990
Period for implementation: up to 2030
Scope of the commitment: sectors covered are energy, industrial processes and product use, agriculture, land-use, land-use change and forestry, waste; the reductions cover seven greenhouse gases: CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs (hydrofluorocarbons), PFCs (perfluorocarbons), SF6 (sulphur hexafluoride), NF3 (nitrogen trifluoride), that is the gases already covered by the current legislation.
Processes: a draft revision of the CO2 Act will be submitted for consultation in mid-2016; the proposed measures will mainly aim to reinforce existing measures.
Assumption and methodology: Switzerland’s commitment is based on the existence of emissions certificates which meet high quality criteria and are sufficient in quantity. The effect of forests will be taken into account. The methodology for non-forest land remains to be developed.
Adequacy of the commitment
Three criteria are taken into account:
Historical and current responsibility for climate change: Switzerland is responsible for 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions today. Its level of responsibility is low.
Capacity to contribute to solving the climate problem: thanks inter alia to its high per capita GNP, Switzerland’s capacity to contribute to solving the climate problem is high.
Cost-effectiveness of emissions reduction measures: due to its mainly carbon-free energy production and lack of heavy industry, the cost of reduction measures in Switzerland is high in the short term.
Contribution to the objective of the Convention (increase in temperature of less than two degrees): the reduction target of -50% relative to 1990 levels is compatible with the recommendations of the IPCC of -40 to -70% below 2010 levels by 2050.
Objective in the context of the two degree pathway
According to the objectives defined by the Federal Council for 2030 and 2050, i.e. -50% relative to 1990 and -70 to -85% by 2050, per capita annual emissions must reach 3 tonnes of CO2 equivalents per year in 2030, and between 1 and 2 tonnes of CO2 by 2050. Hence Switzerland’s targets lie within the ambitious average of the climate experts’ (IPPC) recommendations for 2050. This emissions development is also in line with the Federal Council’s long-term objective of reducing per capita emissions to one or one-and-a-half tonnes.
The proposed UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – a universal set of goals to guide international development to 2030 – will struggle to achieve their stated policy objectives without clearer, more measurable targets, according to a new report by the International Council for Science (ICSU) and the International Social Science Council (ISSC).
Anne-Sophie Stevance, lead coordinator of the report. Photo credit: futureearth.org
The authors find that, overall, the SDGs offer a “major improvement” over their predecessors, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), with a greater understanding of the interplay between social, economic and environmental dimensions. And while the MDGs only dealt with developing countries, the new set of goals will apply to all countries in the world.
The report finds that of the 169 targets beneath the 17 draft goals, just 29% are well defined and based on the latest scientific evidence, while 54% need more work and 17% are weak or non-essential.
The assessment of the targets – which are intended to operationalise the 17 goals set to be approved by governments later this year – is the first of its kind to be carried out by the scientific community, and represents the work of over 40 leading researchers covering a range of fields across the natural and social sciences.
However, the report finds the targets suffer from a lack of integration, some repetition and rely too much on vague, qualitative language rather than hard, measurable, time-bound, quantitative targets.
For example, on inequality, the proposed targets are “relevant but inadequately developed. Most are framed as activities rather than endpoints.”
Authors are concerned the goals are presented in ‘silos.’ The goals address challenges such as climate, food security and health in isolation from one another. Without interlinking there is a danger of conflict between different goals, most notably trade-offs between overcoming poverty and moving towards sustainability. Action to meet one target could have unintended consequences on others if they are pursued separately.
Ending hunger is an important goal, but the researchers warn the targets here are not comprehensive, with only two directly addressing hunger and malnutrition, “and even for those the formulation is confusing and potentially contradictory.” They also mention that ending hunger means more than just sustainable agriculture. Inequality is a major factor that is “not explicitly included.”
Further, policy makers need to understand that malnutrition is not simply undernutrition, but also obesity and the presence of micronutrient deficiencies. In addition, care must be taken to simultaneously defeat hunger, increase agricultural productivity and avoid adverse impacts on the natural resource base. As another example of the interlinking of goals, the researchers note that defeating hunger cannot be addressed without ensuring universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation.
The health-focussed SDG suffers from a lack of distinction between the widely varying starting points of different countries and makes no mention of inequalities within countries. The target which focuses on HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, hepatitis and water-borne diseases “sounds like a catch-all for infectious disease”, but neglects emerging infections such as Ebola and new strains of the flu.
“Targets have to be robust, measurable and should effectively guide implementation,” said Anne-Sophie Stevance, lead coordinator of the report. “The report clearly shows how targets could be consolidated and points to interlinkages that will be critical for managing synergies and avoiding trade-offs.” For example, an increase in agricultural land-use to help end hunger can lead to biodiversity loss, as well as overuse and/or pollution of water resources and downstream (likely negative) effects on marine resources which in turn could exacerbate food security concerns.
The scientists’ report highlights the need for an ‘end-goal’ to provide such a big picture vision. “The ‘ultimate end’ of the SDGs in combination is not clear, nor is how the proposed goals and targets would contribute to achieve that ultimate end,” write the authors. They recommend that this meta-goal be “a prosperous, high quality of life that is equitably shared and sustained.”
“This is an opportunity for science to be a partner in the post-2015 development process and support evidence-based decision making. For science, that means connecting the dots across disciplines that usually work independently from each other,” said Stevance.
Earlier this month at a UN meeting, governments negotiated an overall declaration meant to serve as the big picture vision of the SDGs framework.
Another key step towards a new, universal climate change agreement appears to have been taken following the official issuance on Thursday of negotiating text for the agreement by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC
The text was agreed at the UN Climate Change Conference in Geneva earlier this month, and covers the substantive content of the new agreement including mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology, capacity building, and transparency of action and support. See the negotiating text here: http://unfccc.int/documentation/documents/advanced_search/items/6911.php?priref=600008407
UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres said: “I’m delighted that the negotiating text from which the Paris agreement will be constructed has now been officially published. This will allow early consideration of the text on the part of governments.”
The negotiating text will be formally communicated to all governments that are Party to the Convention as soon as it becomes available in all six official languages of the UN. The expectation is that this could be achieved by the end of March, thus amply fulfilling procedural requirements for adoption of the agreement at the end of the year.
This milestone kick-starts a year of intense negotiations and political efforts focused on completing the new agreement and building broad-based momentum across all levels for a unified and lasting response to the challenge of climate change.
“I welcome the broad-based engagement of Heads of State and Ministers ranging from finance to health to energy. The new agreement will not only be of relevance to Ministers of environment, but will be of key relevance across all government ministries and departments committed to the triple intertwined agendas of 2015: namely climate action, the realisation of a suite of Sustainable Development Goals and progressing on disaster risk reduction,” Ms. Figueres stated.
Negotiators will reconvene at the Climate Change Conference in Bonn from 1 to 11 June to seek convergence, find ways to bridge positions and reach common understandings.
“The June session will be of crucial importance,” Ms. Figueres said. “I would like to call on all governments to empower their negotiators to come prepared to make choices in June and to converge on outcomes all Parties can accept,” she added.
Additionally, negotiators will identify elements within the negotiating text that are of a durable nature and therefore need to be enshrined in the agreement, and aspects that are more suitable to be contained in decisions at the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris. This could mean, for example, that the establishment of a mechanism that boosts the response to climate change would be enshrined in the agreement, but the details of how this mechanism would operate would be captured in an accompanying decision.
Following the June conference, two further formal sessions have been scheduled in Bonn, from 31 August to 4 September and from 19 to 23 October.
Besides being unquantified, some of the 169 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets lack focus to enable effective implementation, the International Council for Science (ICSU) and International Social Science Council (ISSC) have said.
The UN Open Working Group in session. Photo credit: utahimf.org
In a recently released report coordinated by the ICSU in partnership with the ISSC, the groups reviewed the 17 SDGs and 169 targets, as submitted to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly by the UN Open Working Group (OWG). The SDGs are expected to be endorsed at a UN meeting in September in New York.
The proposed SDGs offer major improvements on the outgoing Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The SDG framework addresses key systemic barriers to sustainable development such as inequality, unsustainable consumption patterns, weak institutional capacity, and environmental degradation that the MDGs neglected.
According to the scientific organisations, the SDG framework would benefit from an overall narrative, articulating how the goals will lead to broader outcomes for people and the planet. They added however that an overarching goal could be formulated, for instance in the political declaration framing the Post-2015 Development Agenda, binding together the 17 goals, thus providing a clearer means-to-end continuum.
“The current SDG framework does not identify the wide range of social groups that will need to be mobilised to deliver on the goals as agents of change alongside governments. Key trade-offs and complementarities among goals and targets should be specified in a follow-up document,” the bodies stated in the report.
Out of 169 targets, 49 (29%) are considered well developed, 91 targets (54%) could be strengthened by being more specific, and 29 (17%) require significant work. According to the ICSU and ISSC, the analysis of the targets provided in the document could support a technical review of the targets around several criteria.
Consistency with existing international agreements and processes
The success of the SDGs is partly dependent on aligning targets and goals with existing international agreements and political processes. These include the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (to be agreed in Sendai, March 2015), the UNFCCC negotiations with the new climate agreement expected in December 2015, and the process on Financing for Development. All of these depend on each other for success. In addition, the report suggests harmonisation of targets with the Aichi Biodiversity targets, and International Labour Organisation social protection floors.
Implementability
Some targets lack the focus to enable effective implementation. Recommendations are made where possible for specifying potential fields of application. Many of the targets may also contribute to several goals, and some goals and targets may conflict. Action to meet one target could have unintended consequences on others if they are pursued separately. Research suggests that most goal areas are interlinked, that many targets might contribute to several goals, and that there are important trade-offs among several goals and targets. By tackling targets in an integrated way, the desired results can be achieved for many targets.
For example, progress on ending poverty (SDG 1) cannot be achieved without progress on the food security target under SDG 2, macroeconomic policies related to targets on full and productive employment and decent work under SDG 8, the reduction of inequality under SDG 10, and without enhancing resilience to climate change under SDG 13. Success in these will lead to better health and wellbeing, thus contributing to the achievement of SDG 3.
There are also important trade-offs between targets: For example, an increase in agricultural land-use to help end hunger can result in biodiversity loss, as well as in overuse and/or pollution of water resources and downstream (and likely negative) effects on marine resources, which in turn could exacerbate food security concerns.
Measurability
A number of targets are not quantified, and wherever possible the report proposes minimum levels of ambition that could be specified. For example, figures are suggested for targets to reduce water pollution, increase recycling and safe reuse of waste water, or to prevent new and reduce existing marine pollution.
“This report does not focus on indicators for measuring progress, but does identify some apparent gaps where key indicators may need to be developed and make recommendations to support an ambitious framework for monitoring and review of implementation.
“Measurability will depend on the availability of data and capacity to measure the targets. The capacity to collect reliable data at the national level consistently across member states is considered, as well as the availability of data and commonly agreed definitions to enable comparison. Also, the veracity of some existing indicators needs to be confirmed before relying on them for performance assessment, and the importance of baselines that are country-appropriate is raised,” declared the bodies in the report.
Evaluating the role of science, they point out that it plays an important role for sustainable development from informing the formulation of evidence-based targets and indicators, to assessing progress, testing solutions, and identifying emerging risks and opportunities.
“In recent decades, Earth-system research has provided critical inputs into our understanding of the interlinkages and interdependencies between natural and social systems which can support integrated policy-planning, monitoring and review at different scales. The SDG framework poses a number of conceptual as well as implementation challenges that will require enhancing the close collaboration between the policy and scientific communities and other stakeholders.
“Global research initiatives such as Future Earth aim to mobilise scientists to collaborate tackle these issues in partnership with policy-makers and stakeholders, and more broadly to provide the knowledge needed to support transformations towards sustainable development.”
The COP 21 in Paris, France is an important Conference of Parties and there are many reasons for this.
Prince Lekan Fadina
In New York on 10th February, 2015 on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, experts and high level officials discussed specific ways to build mutually reinforcing processes on climate change and post-2015 development agenda.
The link between the two important United Nations meetings in September in New York to discuss the 17 issues in the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Paris in December to agree on having a global agreement on emission reduction call for a more detailed understanding of the two.
Jeffrey Sachs, Director, Sustainable Development Solution Network (SDSN), who was a co-host of the event, said: “Sustainable development means the holistic combination of the economic advance, social inclusion and environmental sustainability, the greatest threat to which is climate change.”
Therefore sustainable development and climate change are one and same. He further said that sustainable development is a more inclusive concept. The process culminating in Addis Abba, New York and Paris should be viewed as long, continuous, interconnected negotiation with the ultimate result of a new global framework for sustainable development.
“It is one agenda, we have to succeed,” said Prof Sachs, who was of the view “that the Paris Climate Change Conference (COP21) is the world’s final chance to cap warming at two degree Celsius – which is the last guardian against disaster.”
There are different opinions about financing to meet the expectations of both the SDGs and the climate change. It is expected that climate financing should be secured at the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD) in Addis Ababa because waiting for the outcome of the Paris Conference may mean panic.
The need to agree on net zero carbon by 2070, according to Prof. Jeffrey Sachs, is “not too complicated, it is just not too pleasant”.
The $100 billion Green Climate Fund approved by the UNFCCC, according to a number of experts, must be linked to official financing of climate-related issues and not only markets. It is expected that the SDGs outcome must agree with the agreement in Paris in December.
There are views going round the globe that, for the SDGs to be effective and achieve the objectives, the 17 SDGs should be condensed into 12 goals without losing the substance. In this regard the agenda should be an educational and advocacy document that is simple to follow, implement and not a technocratic one.
In a recent contribution, Isabella Lovin, Minister for International Development Co-operation of Sweden, said that none of the SDGs can succeed if humanity does not seriously submit itself to address climate change. She argued that SDGs put climate in a larger context than the numbers and technical terms characterising UNFCCC negotiations and they explain why we must avoid dramatic climate change because we want a fair, inclusive, sustainable and dignified society.
Joe Colombano of the Executive Office of the UN Secretary-General on Climate Change is of the view that a key to greater coherence between the climate negotiations and post 2015 agenda is financing. He noted that the $100 billion Green Climate Fund is too small but it can be a good starting point to unlock the $90 trillion that will actually achieve the needed changes.
Pasztor went on further to priotise integrating climate change throughout the SDGs, saying that if all of the targets that directly or indirectly relate to climate change can be met, it will be a lot easier for climate negotiators to reach an agreement.
It is important to highlight that the two degrees Celsius cap leaves about 100 countries behind and the issue of loss and damage must be stressed especially as it relates to risk, disaster and other unexpected happenings.
The issue of SDGs and climate change must be properly addressed by governments’ private sector and civil society. We must ensure that people understand that these issues are about them, their livelihood and existence.
We must invest in human capital development through education, capacity building, public awareness and hands-on training workshops. It is then we can be confident that we are on the way to make the world a better place and for greater number of people to be able face the challenges ahead.
The year 2015 is important for addressing global governance on climate change, environmental sustainability and sustainable development. We should all see that Nigeria and other developing countries unite to ensure they have the knowledge and expertise to play significant roles.
By Prince Lekan Fadina (Executive Director, Centre for Investment, Sustainable Development, Management and Environment (CISME). He is a member of the Nigeria Negotiation Team, Africa Group of Negotiators and member, AGN Finance Co-ordination Committee)
The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) in South Africa on Tuesday announced its decision to approve almost all Eskom’s applications to postpone compliance with atmospheric emission standards for 14 of its coal-fired power stations.
Eskom’s Komati power station. Photo credit: www.eskom.co.za
A condition of these postponements is that Eskom is required to “implement an offset programme to reduce (particulate matter) pollution in the ambient/receiving environment. A definite offset implementation plan is expected from Eskom by 31 March 2016”.
But a team of civil society organisations (CSOs) who work with and support numerous affected communities in South Africa’s pollution hotspots – Centre for Environmental Rights, Earthlife Africa (Johannesburg) and groundWork (Friends of the Earth South Africa) – has expressed disappointment with the DEA’s decision. The CSOs claim that this would allow Eskom to continue to pollute in excess of what has been agreed as safe standards of emissions for another five years. They describe the decisions as slapdash, with no attempt to set strict and enforceable conditions to ensure that Eskom comes into compliance in the next five years.
“This shows a complete disregard for DEA’s constitutional responsibility to protect the health of South Africans,” they stated.
Background to the minimum emission standards
Over a period of about five years prior to 2010, the DEA, industry (including Eskom) and a few civil society organisations negotiated “minimum emission standards” (MES) for activities that have a significantly detrimental impact on human health. All such polluting industries must meet certain standards by 1 April 2015, and stricter standards by 1 April 2020. Despite knowing since 2004 that they would have to meet MES, Eskom – and about 20 other industrial facilities, largely following Eskom’s lead – applied to postpone such compliance, having failed to make the necessary investments to meet the MES.
Health impacts
One of the main grounds on which Eskom’s postponement applications were opposed by groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and many community groups was that granting the postponements would violate the Constitutional right to an environmental not harmful to health or well-being. An expert who analysed these health impacts found that, if Eskom’s applications succeeded, this would result in about 20,000 premature deaths, over the remaining life of the power plants – including approximately 1,600 deaths of young children. The economic cost associated with the premature deaths, and the neurotoxic effects of mercury exposure, was estimated at 230 billion rand.
In a desktop report released by groundWork last year, it is clear that Eskom’s existing non-compliance with emission limits is proving extremely harmful to the health of the residents of the Highveld. The report indicated that air pollution from coal-fired power stations is:
responsible for 51% of hospital admissions and 51% of mortalities due to respiratory illnesses caused by outdoor air pollution. This is three times the impact from outdoor pollution due to domestic coal burning; and
responsible for 54% of deaths from air pollution-related cardiovascular diseases, compared to 16% attributable to domestic coal burning.
Permission to continue polluting given in areas already out of compliance
Twelve of the coal-fired power stations for which Eskom sought postponement are located in the air pollution hotspot known as the Highveld Air Quality Priority Area, with Matimba and Medupi power stations falling within the Waterberg-Bojanala Air Quality Priority Area and Lethabo falling within the Vaal Triangle Airshed Priority Area. Most of these stations are already out of compliance with the existing ambient air quality standards. This means that Eskom’s applications do not meet the requirements of the Framework for Air Quality Management (which is regarded as part of the Air Quality Act), which only permits MES postponement applications to be made for facilities in areas where air quality meets the ambient air quality standards.
Director of groundWork, Bobby Peek, adds: “No one disputes that Eskom is in crisis. But the costs of compliance with the MES cannot trump other considerations. For too long, government, Eskom, and other polluting industries have failed to account properly for the devastating health impacts and costs of air pollution. The DEA’s decision simply reinforces the massive environmental injustices suffered by those who have to breathe poisonous air on a daily basis. This is undemocratic and unconstitutional – it makes polluted air, legal air. This is not what we planned for in 2004 when we got mandatory minimum emission standards.”
South Africa’s current electricity crisis has forced Eskom to perform massive maintenance to its plants at huge cost to the economy. Eskom should have been forced to retrofit its plants at the same time to ensure MES compliance, and to avoid a similar situation in the future, especially because these power stations will have to work longer because of the electricity deficit.
The DEA has also granted some applications to postpone compliance with MES that only apply from 2020. Although not prohibited by the legislation, we regard this as inappropriate and premature – the considerations that would influence a postponement application could be vastly different in five years’ time.
Nevertheless, as set out above, MES postponements have been granted on condition that Eskom implements an “offset” programme to reduce particulate matter in the receiving environment. Dominique Doyle, Energy Policy Officer at Earthlife Africa (Johannesburg) explains that this amounts to nothing short of an attempt to “offset” Eskom’s non-compliance with MES:
“It is completely inappropriate for the NAQO to have allowed Eskom to implement “air quality offsets”. Quite apart from the fact that there is no legal framework for such “offsets”, that pilot offsetting projects have not been concluded, and that these are contrary to internationally recognised principles around mitigation of environmental harm, monitoring compliance with such a vague requirement will be extremely difficult, if not impossible.”
Robyn Hugo, attorney heading up the Pollution & Climate Change Programme at the Centre for Environmental Rights, says: “As currently phrased in the decisions, there are no specific requirements for these “offset” programmes. They do not, for instance, indicate by how much Eskom must reduce pollution. Who will monitor this? What will DEA do if Eskom simply doesn’t comply?”
Next steps
The CSOs claim that they will now evaluate the postponement decisions and speak to community organisations in affected areas to determine the possible options to challenge the decisions. In the interim, they add, Eskom must be forced to comply with each and every term of the MES postponement conditions, with severe consequences if it fails.
The Kaduna State Government has commenced disbursement of loans to farmers in the state under a partnership with the Bank of Agriculture (BOA) with a total sum of N1 billion ready for access by the farmers.
Governor Mukhtar Ramalan Yero of Kaduna State. Photo credit: elombah.com
The state governor, Mukhtar Ramalan Yero, disclosed this at a flag-off ceremony and distribution of cheques to benefiting farmer cooperative groups and individual farmers in the state.
Governor Yero said the scheme is aimed at providing finance to farmers in a bid to increase performance in the sector.
“The Agricultural loan scheme has a convenient means of raising funds to finance agriculture and agro allied businesses in view of the attractive interest rate chargeable which is only 5%, with a very short period of loan processing and disbursement.
Yero said the Technical Committee established by the State Ministry of Agriculture had screened six cooperative associations and nine individual farmers to benefit from the first phase of the scheme.
“The beneficiaries have been drawn on equal basis from the three senatorial zones of the state. Each cooperative association has an average of ten farmers and will receive agricultural loan ranging from N2.5 million and above.
“On the other hand, each individual beneficiary will receive the sum of N250,000. The Bank of Agriculture will continue to disburse the facility to other beneficiary Cooperative Associations and individual farmers. I therefore urge farmers that have not indicated interest to hasten to take advantage of the opportunity being provided by this scheme,” he said.
He further reiterated the commitment of the present administration towards improving the agriculture sector in the state as a way of diversifying the economy.
“With a population of approximately 170 million people in the country, government at both federal and state levels cannot afford to neglect the agricultural Sector. Especially with the ever dwindling Statutory Allocation from the Federation Account and the need to diversify the sources of revenue to fund government programmes and activities,” he said.
