China deadly serious about emissions
THE world’s three largest economies – US, China and the EU-28 – have all announced their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission peak targets.
China announced its “peaking” jointly with the US in November last year. Peaking refers to the maximum levels of greenhouse gases a country will emit within a given timeframe, with a view to reducing them thereafter.
Politically, for a major developing country to announce a peaking year is significant. Developed countries need to reduce their emissions in absolute terms right now. On the other hand, developing countries still have to address poverty. Yet while the developing countries’ time for peaking may be somewhat later, this must be done sooner if the impact of climate change on the poor is to be minimised.
China has also committed to adaptation, as a means to enhance “overall climate resilience”. That broad goal is elaborated on through actions across a wide variety of sectors and themes – with much focus on water, but also transport, energy, agriculture, coastal zones, biodiversity, and forestry.
For another country, indicating it will “increase budgetary support” may not be much, but given China’s financial clout, and the detailed fiveyear plans it cites, this is serious. Specific mention is made of new funds, investments, financing mechanisms, taxation policies, green procurement. There’s even a hint at subsidy reform – though when you can place an outright cap on coal, fossil fuel subsidies may be less of an issue. Funding for adaptation is mentioned briefly, as is improved “disaster insurance policy”.
China says it will make “best efforts to peak early”. Is 2030 peaking “early”, and early enough? Let’s consider peaking by 2030 in analytical terms. Cutting-edge research from Chinese colleagues Jiang Kejun and his colleagues at Energy Research Institute and Renmin University published an article titled “China’s role in attaining the global 2°C target”. This is analysis that pushes the envelope to what is
Wang Yi, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, and International Relations and Co-operation Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane. South Africa and China are members participate as partners on international bodies, including the Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and SA) and the Basic Group on Climate Change (Brazil, SA, India and China). needed, and ambition – while understanding the context of what is feasible in China’s political economy.
The authors examined what would be needed for 2°C, a reference case, business as usual (BAU), a low carbon scenario (LC), and enhanced low carbon scenario (ELC).
The graph (above right) shows the trajectories. Their analysis shows that GHG emissions peaking by 2030 is a major departure from BAU. Those who might be tempted to claim that China’s announcement is all “easy” should read the article carefully. China’s target is no small effort.
Yet neither LC nor ELC get to what is needed for 2°C. For that, as Jiang and his co-authors clearly state, emissions would have to peak by 2025. China’s official target leave “earlier” peaking open.
Yet it falls short of stating a specific level for that peak. A trajectory consistent with keeping temperature increase below 2°C above preindustrial levels or 450 ppmv (parts per million by volume) concentrations) suggests China’s CO2 emission should remain below 10 Gt (gigatonnes); they are currently just over 9Gt CO2 (9 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide). The trajectory needs to peak at the latest in 2030 (preferably earlier), then decline to 2050.
So China’s target is not quite clear enough to be consistent with 2°C. But it is consistent with enhanced low-carbon scenarios that are ambitious-but-realistic. The realism lies in details that China has provided as to how to achieve the peak. It has made clear that it is on a pathway to decarbonise. China’s contribution on mitigation sets a more ambitious goal to reduce carbon intensity of GDP by between 60% to 65% from the 2005 level. That’s a significant step up from the 40-45% intensity goal by 2020, that was set after Copenhagen.
Through previous five-year plans, China is on track to meet its earlier emissions and energy-intensity goals. There may be some doubts about quality of data, but lit- tle doubt that China is serious. And the sheer level of intensity reduction means that China will shift from carbon-intensive development. Given its influence globally, this is an important signal.
China’s State Council was reported to have placed a cap on coal consumption through its Energy Development Strategy Action Plan.
In 2014, coal consumption already dropped by 2.9 percent from the previous year. Last year, China indicated an increase in the non-fossil fuel share of all energy to around 20 percent by 2030. China’s ambition on clean power is clearly big. The INDC says the country will install capacity of 200GW of wind and 100GW of solar power by 2020. Earlier annoucements had indicated an additional 800-1 000GW of nuclear, wind, solar and other zero-emission generation capacity by 2030.
For South Africa, just the 200GW difference between those two numbers is five times larger than SA’s grid. The total new RE (Renewable Energy) is 40 to 50 times our entire electricity system. Such a massive investment, together with signals from India that they want to install 100GW solar energy and about another 70GW of other renewables, will dramatically grow the renewable energy market. Will China and India perhaps lead the world out of fossil fuels?
There is good evidence the costs of renewable energy technologies fall further with global installed capacity increasing. Indeed, wind and solar PV (Photovoltaic) power are already cheaper than coal in SA.
The announcement of China’s INDC (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) sends a positive signal for a new Climate Agreement in Paris in December. However, South Africa and everyone else will have to follow up. The Paris Agreement will have to show how the regime can be strengthened over time, and the ambition particularly of major players ratcheted up. The current targets are unlikely to put the world on a path to below 2°C. Paris will need to include a strong multi-lateral rules-based system, with reporting and review for all, so that we know how far off track we are. And the regime will have to address adaptation, supporting poor countries and communities to recover from the impacts of climate change.
South Africa will need to consider the implications of China’s INDC in formulating its own contribution.
In 2009, President Zuma put forward our own trajectory to “peak, plateau and decline” (PPD). This was formally communicated in a letter to the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) in January 2010, indicating that with financial, technology and capacity building support from the international community, the mitigation action will enable SA’s greenhouse gas emissions to peak between 2020 and 2025, plateau for approximately a decade and decline in absolute terms thereafter. SA will have to show a progression on this pledge. And perhaps we can learn from China how this can be achieved.
Professor Winkler (Energy Research Centre, University of Cape Town), writes in his personal capacity