Climate change hypocrisy

THE Kingdom of Eswatini cannot fund a small 300MW thermal power plant to power and industrialise the kingdom despite the fact that it is sitting on huge coal deposits. The rich world’s fossil fuel hypocrisy is on full display in its response to the global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. While the wealthy G8 countries admonish the world’s poor to use only renewables because of climate concerns, Europe and the United States are begging Arab nations to expand oil production, Germany is reopening coal power plants, and Spain and Italy are ramping up African gas production.

Many European countries have asked African countries to mine more coal to be able to triple their exports. A single person in the rich world uses more fossil fuel energy than all the energy available to 23 Africans. The rich world became wealthy by massively exploiting fossil fuels, cheap unclear energy today provides more than three-quarters of its energy. Yes, I get that the developing world has and continues to suffer the most from the negative effects of climate change, however, is it fair that the rich countries continue to benefit from cheap energy and the rest of the world cannot?

Blocking funding

The rich countries are choking off funding for any new fossil fuels in the developing world. Most of the world’s poorest four billion people have no access to meaningful energy, so the rich blatantly tell them to ‘leapfrog’ from no energy to a green nirvana of solar panels and wind turbines. This promised nirvana is a sham consisting of wishful thinking and green marketing. The world’s rich would never accept 100 per cent off-grid, renewable energy themselves — and neither should the world’s poor.

This is why the rich world is on track to continue to rely mostly on fossil fuels for decades. The International Energy Agency estimates that in 2050, even if all current climate promises are delivered, fossil fuels will still provide two-thirds of the rich world’s energy. The developing world sees hypocrisy. As Nigeria’s Vice-president Yemi Osinbajo once said: “No one in the world has been able to industrialise using renewable energy only, and yet Africa has been asked to industrialise using renewable energy when everybody else in the world knows that we need hydro or gas-powered industries for business.”

Instead of immorally blocking the path for other countries to develop, rich countries must invest massively in the innovation needed to ensure that green energy’s costs drop below those of fossil fuels.

This way everyone in the world will be able to afford to switch to renewable alternatives. Insisting that the world’s poor live without fossil fuels is virtue-signalling that plays with other people’s lives.

Germany reopening 5 power plants

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced that Germany was reopening five power plants that burn lignite, low-rank coal. Germany’s return to lignite demonstrates how crucial the electricity situation has become across the European Union (EU). People, businesses and governments are doing whatever they have to do to get the electricity they need.

Germany is dismantling the Keyenberg wind project in the western part of the country to make more room for the expansion of the Garzweiler Coal Mine. Lignite from Garzweiler fuels the Neurath C power plant, which is one of the power plants being brought back online. A spokesperson for RWE told the media: “We realise this comes across as paradoxical.”

World has doubled coal-fired power capacity Carbon Brief, which maps the world’s coal power plants, alleges that since 2000, the world has doubled its coal-fired power capacity to around 2 045 gigawatts (GW) after explosive growth in China and India. A further 200GW is being built, and 300GW is planned. More recently, 268GW have been closed due to a wave of retirements across the EU and the United States (US). Combined with a rapid slowdown in the number of new plants being built, this means the number of coal units operating worldwide fell for the first time in 2018, a Carbon Brief analysis suggests. The world has failed to reach an agreement to phase out fossil fuels after marathon UN climate talks were ‘stonewalled’ by a number of oil-producing nations.

Grand Inga Hydropower Project

The Democratic Republic of Congo’s Grand Inga project is a massive US$80 billion expansion to the existing 351-MW Inga 1 and 1 424MW Inga two plants. The ultimate goal is to construct a complex capable of supplying the entire sub-Saharan region with a cumulative output capacity of 42 000MW of clean energy. The Democratic Republic of Congo is currently working to tender and begin the construction of the project’s first expansion, called the 4 800MW Inga 3 Basse Chute and Haute Chute components. Eventually, the project could also include Inga 4-8 funds allowing.

Former South African Energy Minister Jeff Radebe, in his response to the Inga dam project, said: “Inga is a very good project for South Africa, for SADC and for Africa. It is part of Agenda 2063. At the African Development Bank, it is one of the top priorities of the new boss there, but funding is elusive. It is of benefit to all Africans that it is implemented as soon as possible.” The report also quotes the IRP: “There is a need to finalize the technical solution for the evacuation of this power from the Grand Inga across the transit countries, viz. Congo, Zambia, Zimbabwe/ Botswana into South Africa and Eswatini. The necessary agreements must be concluded as soon as possible if the hydro option from Grand Inga is to materialise.”

The New York Times reported that The US Senate overwhelmingly approved a US$40 billion emergency military and humanitarian aid package for Ukraine, moving quickly and with little debate to deepen the United States’ support for an increasingly costly and protracted fight; a war that is primarily about continued fossil fuels to Europe.

The measure, paired with an initial emergency infusion of aid to Kyiv that was approved in March, amounts to the largest package of foreign aid passed by Congress in at least two decades, bringing to roughly US$54 billion of the total American investment in the war in just over two months. If only the US Senate would approve the US$80 billion (before China) for the Inga Dam with such speed and take Africa out of the darkness. Comment septembereswatini@ gmail.com.