Presentation by South Africa Major Economies Forum National actions and how they can address long-term objectives to combat climate change Presentation by South Africa

Two Scenarios frame South Africa’s options

To close this gap, a wide range of mitigation actions or wedges were modelled and costed. (Wedges refer to “triangles” showing emissions reductions over time. Emission reductions are the difference between emissions in the reference case (GWC) and the mitigation case. If the reductions increase over time, the graphs have the shape of a wedge.) In this graph, all the small wedges make up one medium wedge; and all medium wedges would make up one BIG wedge. All BIG wedges are concentrated in four sectors: electricity, liquid fuels, transport, and industry. The largest wedge is CO2 tax. The costs (indicated in bottom right corner), includes negative costs: e.g. efficiency in industry and vehicle efficiency, and positive cost options. We went through this in detail during our previous discussion in Cabinet.

Three Strategic Options 1800 Current development trends 1600 Reach for the Goal 1400 1200 Low cost SD-PAMs 1000 Incentivised mitigation action 800 600 Incentivised GHG pricing Start Now. closes less than half of the gap Scale Up: closes almost two-thirds of the gap Use the Market goes three-quarters of the way Neither Scale Up (the regulatory approach) or Use the Market (economic instruments) – completely closes the gap; but they can work together. And that is the point where we ended our discussion in Cabinet last time. My sense was that we are all ready to proceed with the ‘no brainers’, those in the negative cost zone, right away. That is mostly Start Now. We are already implementing elements of this in our response to the electricity crisis. And we are committed to the Reach for the Goal package - investing in long term R&D and so on. The proposed policy framework to which I will turn in a minute answers the question on how we can combine Scale Up, i.e. state-led regulation, with the Use the Market set of economic instruments. That is the nut to crack if we are serious about reaching for what is required by science. Before I turn to the Proposed Policy Framework that will bring this together, a few words on the economic modelling – as requested at the previous Cabinet. 400 IPCC lowest scenario 200 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 2030 2033 2036 2039 2042 2045 2048 2050

Peak, plateau and decline trajectory

Differentiation in IPCC Box 13.7

Assumptions IPCC Box 13.7: distinction between absolute and relative reductions is fundamental Equitable approach: development space for developing countries (peak, plateau & decline) & nearer term peak and decline for developed countries Adequate, predictable and binding international support Annex I QERC’s: aggregate at least 40% by 2020; 80 – 95% by 2050; 1990 base year Neither a pathway nor the domestic actions needed to achieve the pathway can substitute for a quantified emission reduction commitment (QERC)

Discussion on long term pathways should not… For developed countries: Divert attention from Bali Roadmap, incl. mid-term targets & comparability of effort Introduce approaches that will not form part of legally-binding international regime For developing countries: Introduce new layer of conditionality to access international climate funding &technology (it is a domestic planning tool) Dilute the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities & respective capabilities

Thank you