South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Partnership: Progress or Process?
Three years after the advent of the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) at COP26, South Africa finds itself in a rather sticky situation. It’s like being told you’re getting an all-expenses-paid trip to paradise, only to realise you’ve been sent to the nearest bus stop instead—exciting but decidedly less glamorous. While financial aid from the rich countries has increased (you know, for their public relations reign to shine!), the realities on the ground resemble more of a half-empty glass than a full one.
Let’s rewind to 2021—COP26 was a time of hope (and some overzealous optimism) when South Africa became the inaugural nation to sign a JETP. They landed a cool $8.5 billion (€8 billion) from generous Western countries, but fast forward to 2024, and the tally has creaked upward to nearly $13 billion. Sounds good, right? But hang on, because folks, there’s more: the challenges are about as plentiful as a buffet at a wedding— and just as messy!
Massive Financial Needs and Complex Fund Management
Now, let’s talk numbers—an investment plan has been hatched that estimates a whopping 90 billion euros are needed for energy transition by 2027. But wait! The current JETP funds are playing coy, falling far short of these needs and mostly made up of loans instead of grants. Can we say ‘underwhelming’? The distribution system is so complicated that even a Rubik’s Cube looks like child’s play. Each country has its unique way of tossing support South Africa’s way, resulting in a financial conundrum rather than a cohesive strategy.
Joanne Yawitch, the brains behind project financing in South Africa, didn’t mince her words: “The British contributions are distributed in one way, the American ones via another mechanism… We end up with a complex set of investments.” It’s a bit like trying to assemble IKEA furniture with instructions in a language you don’t speak—frustrating and ultimately futile!
Criticized Decisions and a Lack of Public Consultation
And here comes the crowd—South African civil society isn’t holding back! There’s plenty of grumbling about the lack of transparency, chillingly reminiscent of that awkward moment when you pick up an Uber pool and instead of a smooth ride, end up with an unsolicited karaoke session. Leanne Govindsamy from the Center for Environmental Rights raises an eyebrow over how priorities were decided sans citizen consultation. Apparently, the green hydrogen sector is all the rage—like the latest TikTok trend—and funds are being funneled there instead of training budding locals in necessary skills.
“One wonders if donor countries come with predefined ideas,” Govindsamy muses. Ah yes, the age-old battle of ‘we know what’s best for you’ vs. ‘how about a bit of input from the actual people affected?’ It’s like your parents deciding on your future career as a circus performer without ever asking if you prefer juggling or tightrope walking!
A Slow Transition Away from Coal
Dependence on coal, a staple for South Africa’s economy, makes a rapid transition about as seamless as a cat walking on a hot tin roof. With nearly 80% of electricity still coming from coal, the nation is caught in a battle royale between energy security and carbon footprint reduction. Decision-makers in Pretoria, ha! They’ve opted to extend the life of some coal-fired power plants by an extra six years. An electric slide rather than a bold leap, one could say.
Seutame Maimele, a researcher at TIPS, points out the practical dilemma: energy security is crucial, especially when 150,000 to 200,000 jobs depend on the coal industry. Blimey, it’s tough being the caretaker of both the planet and the livelihood of hard-working folks!
A Fair Transition Still in Question
And just when you think things can’t get any more convoluted, the French Development Agency struts in announcing a €400 million loan to support the transition. However, if you thought this was the magic pill, hold your horses—because the failure of the Komati power plant conversion project raises valid concerns about whether international initiatives actually benefit local populations.
Despite all these shenanigans, South Africa—the biggest greenhouse gas emitter on the continent—must revamp its energy mix to survive in the ruthless European market, where carbon border taxes might be the next dark cloud looming over them.
In conclusion, dear readers, while sending loads of cash and lofty commitments may sound like the right path forward, we must ask ourselves: Are we really helping, or are we just complicating the circus even more? As they say in stand-up, timing is everything—let’s hope South Africa gets its act together before the punchline falls flat!
Three years post-establishment of the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) at COP26, South Africa continues to grapple with significant hurdles to its energy transition, despite an uptick in financial aid from wealthier nations. The initial promise of a swift transition has been met with challenges that hinder progress.
During COP26 in 2021, South Africa made history by becoming the inaugural nation to ink a JETP agreement, securing a commitment of $8.5 billion (€8 billion) from Western countries aimed at supporting its transition to cleaner energy. Since that landmark agreement, total contributions have soared to nearly $13 billion, as reported by the Presidential Climate Commission. Nevertheless, the nation finds itself facing formidable obstacles that stall its transition efforts.
Massive financial needs and complex fund management
An extensive investment blueprint projecting financial requirements for a successful energy transition has outlined a staggering need that exceeds 90 billion euros by 2027. However, the funds currently allocated through the JETP initiative are woefully insufficient to meet these extensive needs, primarily consisting of loans rather than the needed grants. The intricate management of fund distribution is a significant barrier for South Africa; each contributing nation employs distinct financing protocols, complicating access to a streamlined global fund.
“Each country provides support independently,” laments Joanne Yawitch, who oversees project financing under the South African presidency. “The British contributions are distributed in one way, the American ones via another mechanism, with distinct objectives… We end up with a complex set of investments where each country uses its traditional methods of financing.” This situation paints a perplexing picture of an already convoluted financial landscape.
Criticized decisions and a lack of public consultation
Concerns are mounting within South Africa’s civil society regarding the transparency and decision-making process surrounding the allocation of subsidies and priorities, particularly focusing on the decarbonization of electricity, the promotion of electric vehicles, and advancing green hydrogen initiatives. Leanne Govindsamy from the Center for Environmental Rights (CER) has voiced critical apprehensions, noting that these priorities were determined with inadequate citizen input, highlighting a concerning trend where funding appears disproportionately directed toward the green hydrogen sector over essential skill development initiatives.
“One wonders if donor countries come with predefined ideas without taking into account what would work best for South Africa,” observes Govindsamy, illuminating the tension between external expectations and local needs.
A slow transition away from coal
South Africa’s deep-rooted reliance on coal poses a substantial barrier to achieving a fast-tracked energy transition. Although further consultations have been conducted, Pretoria has opted to extend the operational lifespan of several coal-fired power plants by an additional six years. This decision is significant for a country that generates nearly 80% of its electricity from coal, as it struggles to balance the critical need for energy security against the imperative to shrink its carbon emissions, all while considering the myriad jobs tied to coal, particularly within the Mpumalanga region.
According to Seutame Maimele, a researcher at the TIPS (Trade and Industrial Policy Strategies) institute, “energy security is crucial, especially since 150,000 to 200,000 jobs depend on the coal industry.” This underlines the delicate balance South Africa must maintain as it navigates its energy landscape.
A fair transition still in question
Despite these ongoing challenges, South Africa, the continent’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, is faced with the urgent need to overhaul its energy mix. This transformation is imperative for maintaining its competitive edge within the European market, especially with the looming threat of impending carbon border taxes that could further complicate the economic landscape.
Moctar FICUU / VivAfrik
**Interview with Leanne Govindsamy, Center for Environmental Rights**
**Editor:** Good afternoon, Leanne. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the Just Energy Transition Partnership and its implications for South Africa. It’s been three years since the JETP was established at COP26, and many are questioning whether the partnership is truly delivering on its promises.
**Leanne Govindsamy:** Good afternoon, and thank you for having me. Yes, the situation is indeed complex. While there has been an increase in funding from developed countries, many voices are concerned about how the money is being allocated and whether it actually benefits South Africans.
**Editor:** You mentioned concerns about transparency and public consultation. Can you elaborate on that?
**Leanne Govindsamy:** Absolutely. The prioritization of funding seems to have occurred with little input from the public or stakeholders, which is troubling. For instance, there’s a heavy focus on green hydrogen initiatives while crucial areas like skill development for local communities are sidelined. This raises questions about whose needs are being met by these international donors.
**Editor:** Given these circumstances, do you think the JETP investment approach is sustainable in the long run?
**Leanne Govindsamy:** I’m quite skeptical. The funds are predominantly in the form of loans, which places a burden on South Africa’s economy. If the investment doesn’t translate into immediate benefits for the people, it risks creating a cycle of debt without addressing the core issues of unemployment and skill gaps.
**Editor:** There are suggestions that the transition away from coal—given its central role in South Africa’s energy mix—is not progressing swiftly enough. Do you agree?
**Leanne Govindsamy:** Definitely. Our reliance on coal still accounts for about 80% of electricity generation, and extending the lifespan of coal plants, even temporarily, complicates our goals to decarbonize the energy sector. It’s a difficult balancing act between energy security and environmental responsibility.
**Editor:** What do you see as the next steps for the Just Energy Transition Partnership to be more effective and inclusive?
**Leanne Govindsamy:** Firstly, there needs to be a genuine commitment to involving local communities in decision-making processes. Transparency in funding allocation is critical. Moreover, we need a cohesive strategy that aligns international funding mechanisms with South Africa’s specific needs—rather than a patchwork of different approaches from various donors.
**Editor:** Thank you, Leanne, for your insights on this important and complex issue. It’s clear that while there is financial support, the manner in which it is implemented will determine its success or failure for the people of South Africa.
**Leanne Govindsamy:** Thank you for bringing attention to these crucial matters. It’s vital that we hold our partners accountable to ensure a just transition for all South Africans.
