Decoupling resource use from wellbeing to support decarbonization Prof. Mark Swilling Stellenbosch University

International Resource Panel UNEP’s International Resource Panel is conducting a series of assessments that seek to support sustainable use of resources and to reduce the impact of any resources that are being uses. In other words, it is finding ways to decoupling resource consumption and negative environmental impacts from economic development. The study presented here explores some of the challenges of decoupling, drawing of existing literature and case studies from four countries. In future work, it expects to identify ways of meeting these challenges and providing insights from additional country-level case studies.

Sustainable Development Goals on resources SDG 8.4 - decoupling economic growth & natural resource use SDG 2 (ending hunger – food) SDG 6 (providing water and sanitation) SDG 7 (ensuring access to energy) SDG 11 (making sustainable resource efficient cities) SDG 12 (promoting sustainable consumption and production) SDG 13 (combating climate change) SDG 14 (conserving the oceans) SDG 15 (protecting and restoring terrestrial resources)

all 5 previous global growth periods were able to access cheap primary resources ?????

2011-2013

Source: IRP 2016

Source: IRP 2016

Decoupling: resource & impact Resource use Human well-being Economic activity (GDP) Environmental impact Resource decoupling Impact decoupling

Source: IRP 2016

(Source: IRP)

(Murray and Kind, Nature January 2012)

Source: US Energy Information Administration (EIA) World Oil Exports Source: US Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Source: REN 2106

Green Energy Impact Green Energy Choices: The Benefits, Risks and Trade-offs of Low-Carbon Technologies for Electricity Production wind, PV, CSP, hydro and geothermal power generate GHG emissions over the life cycle of less than 50gCO2e per kWh coal-fired power plants: 800-1000gCO2e per kWh over the life cycle

But…. RE would result in an increased demand for steel, cement and copper in comparison to the continuation of the business-as-usual fossil fuel plus increased use of rare earth metals such as indium and tellerium

The Economist changes its tune

32%

Africa’s core challenge Given that 80% of exports are primary resources, future development depends on re-investment of resource rents in: human capital development infrastructure sustainability-oriented technological innovation restoration of renewable resources - water, soils, biomass (incl biodiversity) urbanization

Source: Africa Progress Panel report, 2015

Source: Africa Progress Panel report, 2015

Hydro Geothermal Solar Wind

Rwanda

Quarzazate (wa-za-zat), Morrocco

Lagos BRT

Light rail in Addis

TiT Tigray, Ethiopia

Suame Magazine, Ghana

National – SA case “…secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.” Section 24 (b) of the Constitution

(Source: Padayachee, 2011)

Resource constraints to growth: SA case Water: 98% of available water allocated, yet growth rates coupled to water use rates Coal use for energy estimated to grow by 60% by 2020, yet estimates of peak production are 2007 (Patzek & Croft 2010), 2012 (Mohr & Evans 2009), 2020 (Hartnady 2010) Govt estimate of reserves: from 50 bt – 28 bt (2003); possibly only 10bt (Hartnady)

Critical Sub-Dependencies Economic Growth Energy Oil 20% Coal 70% Other 10%

+ 40% of all electricity consumed attributed to: mining, traction, basic chemicals/refined fuels, non-metallic mineral processing, basic iron & steel production, ferro-allows & non-ferrous metals

REI4P alternative to REFIT, launched in 2011 from nearly zero to over R190 b in 4 years – most rapid growth rate in the world, nearly 5% of GDP, major job creator Managed by the IPP unit in DOE 4 bidding rounds: Dec ‘11, May ‘12, Nov ‘13, April/June 2015 (+ Nov) June 2015: 6327 MW in 92 projects approved, 37 connected by end 2015 (1827MW) R50 billion plus into socio-economic development

Can SA be more ambitious?

Can SA be more ambitious? What are the cost implications of increasing RE from 10% (IRP) to 25% of total power modelled life cycle cost per kWh of all energy generation technologies by 2030 whole grid approach (geographical, distribution capacity), hourly intervals for whole year life cycle cost = capex + opex + fuel Actual plant behaviour: ramp rate, turndown limit, availability (maintenance) & technology-specific characteristics

OUR CHALLENGE AS AFRICANS: WILL WE INVEST IN THE CAPITAL INTENSIVE CENTRALISED 19TH/20TH TECHNOLOGIES AND MISS THE NEXT INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION LIKE WE MISSED THE POST-WWII ECONOMIC BOOM? OR WILL WE RECOGNISE THAT WE ARE IN THE 21ST CENTURY AND RESPOND APPROPRIATELY? MANY AFRICAN COUNTRIES UNDERSTAND THIS DO WE?