Managing the nexus for a low carbon future. Prof Mike Muller Wits P&DM, NPC, DBSA

Transcription

1 Managing the nexus for a low carbon future Prof Mike Muller Wits P&DM, NPC, DBSA

2 Outline Context, low carbon for what, for whom? Origins of current water-energy-food nexus Linkages of nexus to low carbon Boundaries of planning and management Importance of regional options Areas of contention and cooperation Some conclusions

3 Low carbon for what, for whom Scientific cooperation should explicitly:- Seek mutual benefit Recognise conflicts of interest Identify and narrow uncertainties Good example, German-SA links in the 1960s Germany needed nuclear fuel for domestic power SA sought technology for nuclear weapons Both achieved their goals then abandoned them! Choose goals, as well as instruments, carefully

4 Origins of the nexus Long known that water is inter-connected UN Mar del Plata water conference 1977 So what?! SA, 1970s Moved to dry cooled thermal power Highlighted supply transfer from agriculture to urban etc. Global: 1980s Drinking water, sanitation decade 1990s MDGs Natural resource neglected Highlighted by World Economic Forum 2008 Commercial/Environmental interests After carbon, could water be the next big thing?

5 How nexus links to carbon, climate Series of linkages Water essential for all development especially agriculture and food Water can help to reduce emissions Hydropower Energy storage (pumped storage) Water as contributor to emissions Operation of water services systems Wetlands (prolific generators of methane) Water impacts of low carbon strategies Notably biofuels

6 How water resource development & management supports economies Flow Maximum flood flow Management interventions Maximum flood flow Reliable Flow Reliable Flow Time

7 Reliable supplies = More investment, greater productivity better livelihoods

8 Cooperation in water in : The WSSD WaterDome, birthplace of historical Incomaputo agreement Swaziland, Mozambique, and South Africa made water history for the African continent when they signed a water-sharing agreement governing the use of two of their shared rivers. The Interim IncoMaputo Agreement, which involves the Incomati and Maputo rivers, provides significant benefits to all three nations. The agreement immediately unlocked financial support for a major new irrigation development in Swaziland, the Lower Usuthu Smallholder Irrigation Project, which will create direct employment for 10,000 people through the development of over 11,000 hectares, providing much needed poverty relief in this area of otherwise limited economic potential.

9 produces food and livelihoods LUSIP, Swaziland, in 2010

10 Contention and cooperation Recognise interests Are they mutual? Germany s interests: low carbon renewables smart technologies COMPETITIVENESS! Make ambition pay - South Africa s interests - Decent livelihoods - Structural change - Regional development - Make it work! Our future - make it work

11 Planning and management boundaries Boundaries of analysis have major impact Germany: City, Lander, Nation, Europe? South Africa: City, Province, Nation, SADC? Water, food and energy security in SA Enhanced by regional cooperation Food and water resources Clean energy potential

12 Regional approaches for lower carbon Germany: integration with the European energy market is limited, in particular given the needs for interconnected networks created by the RES development. In Denmark, where wind represents 20% of annual electricity production, interconnection capacity is equivalent to 80% of total peak demand and has a major role in providing flexibility to the electricity system. By comparison, interconnection capacity in Germany was around 23% of 2009 peak demand. South Africa :

13 Is drought, variability a problem? Droughts risk and vulnerability (economic loss, as a proportion of GDP density) UNEP/GRID-Arendal, Droughts - risk and vulnerability (economic loss, as a proportion of GDP density), UNEP/GRID-Arendal Maps and Graphics Library,

14 The ZAMBEZI A case for cooperation

15 The issues and opportunities Zambesi offers substantial opportunities All the energy needs of Zambezi states (= 5 SA nukes) hectares of irrigation = livelihoods Environmental and social challenges Floods and ecological protection Trade-offs need to be made Regional approaches greater benefits than national Must balance interests upstream/downstream, power/irrigation/ecology

16 Question: future hydropower What is the development potential of the hydropower sector? How would its expansion affect the environment (wetlands in particular), irrigation, tourism, and other sectors? What gains could be expected from the coordinated operation of new hydropower facilities? plan of the SAPP would require an investment of $10.7 billion over an estimated 15 years. That degree of development would result in estimated firm energy production of approximately 35,300 GWh/year and average energy production of approximately 60,000 GWh/ year, thereby meeting all or most of the estimated 48,000 GWh/year demand of the riparian countries.. coordinated operation of the system of hydropower facilities can provide an additional 23 percent generation over uncoordinated (unilateral) operation.

17 Question: irrigation potential Development of the irrigation sector through unilateral or cooperative implementation of projects identified by the riparian countries. How might the development of irrigation affect the environment (wetlands), hydropower, tourism, and other sectors? What incremental gain could be expected from cooperative as opposed to unilateral development of irrigation schemes? Implementation of all presently identified national irrigation projects would expand the equipped area by some 184 percent (including double cropping in some areas) for a total required investment of around $2.5 billion. However, this degree of development of the irrigation sector, without further development of hydropower, would reduce hydropower generation of firm energy by 21 percent and of average energy by nine percent. If identified irrigation projects were developed alongside current SAPP plans, the resulting reduction in generation would be about eight percent for firm energy and four percent for average energy. Cooperative irrigation development (such as moving approximately 30,000 hectares of planned large irrigation infrastructure downstream) could increase firm energy generation by two percent, with a net present value of $140 million. But complexities associated with food security and self-sufficiency warrant closer examination of this scenario.

18 Question: floods and ecology Flood management, restoration of natural floods, reduced flood risks: Effect on existing and potential hydropower and irrigation infrastructure on the Zambezi River? with full cooperation of the riparian countries, a reasonable balance between hydropower and irrigation investment could result in firm energy generation of some 30,000 GWh/year and 774,000 hectares of irrigated land. Those goals could be achieved while providing a level of flood protection and part restoration of natural floods in the Lower Zambezi.

19 Zambezi conclusions With existing infrastructure, regional rather than national operation yields large benefits With new infrastructure, gains from cooperation are even greater Trade-offs between irrigation and power:- Greater in national rather than regional options Greatest trade-off Location of irrigation development Social issues must determine final choices

20 If opportunity so obvious, why is hydropower so under-developed?

21 DIMENSION Economic Nature of water Priority of economic instruments Priority setting Role of private sector Characterised as:- PRAGMATIC RIO Economic and social good Economic instruments balanced by social considerations Within national economic development policy Major role for government, recognition of private role Developmental PRESCRIPTIVE DUBLIN Economic good High priority for economic instruments Stakeholder participation, economic instruments High priority for role of private sector, limited government Washington Consensus Competing water management paradigms: The differences between Rio and Dublin Institutional, national Institutional objectives Participatory approaches Governance Characterised as:- Institutional, international: Transboundary approaches Institutionalisation of global water Characterised as:- Environmental Infrastructure Decision making River basin organisation (RBO) Characterised as:- Importance of national development strategies Where there is clear demand Appropriate institutions Public administration Basin specific approaches United Nations system Multilateralism continued Infrastructure development, a key element Effective implementation and coordination required Manage in basin context Balance needs of people and environment Focus on enabling environment Heavy emphasis on participatory approaches Performance based institutions New Public Management Water s Washington Consensus River basin organisations World Water Council outside inter-governmental domain Retreat from multilateralism Development deleted Emphasis on full stakeholder participation RBO the most appropriate entity Ecosystem approach EX: Muller M, The challenges of implementing an African water resource management agenda (in) Africa In Focus Governance in the 21st century, (ed) Kondlo and Ejiogu, HSRC Press, 2008 (available at: oduct.php?productid=2283&ca t=0&page=1&featured&freedo wnload=1)

22 DIMENSION Economic Nature of water Priority of economic instruments Priority setting Role of private sector Characterised as:- PRAGMATIC RIO Economic and social good Economic instruments balanced by social considerations Within national economic development policy Major role for government, recognition of private role Developmental PRESCRIPTIVE DUBLIN Economic good High priority for economic instruments Stakeholder participation, economic instruments High priority for role of private sector, limited government Washington Consensus Competing water management paradigms: The differences between Rio and Dublin Institutional, national Institutional objectives Participatory approaches Governance Characterised as:- Importance of national development strategies Where there is clear demand Appropriate institutions Public administration Focus on enabling environment Heavy emphasis on participatory approaches Performance based institutions New Public Management Institutional, international: Transboundary approaches Institutionalisation of global water Characterised as:- Environmental Infrastructure Decision making River basin organisation (RBO) Characterised as:- Basin specific approaches United Nations system Multilateralism continued Infrastructure development, a key element Effective implementation and coordination required Manage in basin context Balance needs of people and environment River basin organisations World Water Council outside inter-governmental domain Retreat from multilateralism Development deleted Emphasis on full stakeholder participation RBO the most appropriate entity Ecosystem approach EX: Muller M, The challenges of implementing an African water resource management agenda (in) Africa In Focus Governance in the 21st century, (ed) Kondlo and Ejiogu, HSRC Press, 2008 (available at: oduct.php?productid=2283&ca t=0&page=1&featured&freedo wnload=1)

23 One outcome of the donor ban on dams: 8000 MW of coal fired power stations (& 9600 MW of nuclear)

24 Conclusions Nexus emphasises systemic importance of water Linkages vary greatly, by location Boundaries of analysis are critical Southern Africa offers water-based opportunities Food security and livelihoods Low carbon hydro based energy Cooperation best in areas of mutual advantage Needs mutual respect, recognition of difference