Nearly 28 million South African registered voters will go to the polls on 29 May to elect more than 800 representatives to the national assembly and provincial legislatures.
The leader of the party that secures a majority in the 400-member national assembly will become the country’s next president.
For the first time, independent candidates will be allowed to run, although all but 11 of the 14,889 certified candidates were nominated by 70 political parties.
The ruling African National Congress (ANC), which has been in office since the end of apartheid in 1994, retains the most support – despite dwindling fortunes.
Its closest challengers are the right-leaning Democratic Alliance (DA) and the left-leaning Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF).
A new party formed by former president Jacob Zuma, uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK), had been expected to also play a significant role in the election. However, South Africa’s top court has now ruled that due to the 15-month jail sentence he served, Zuma himself is ineligible to run.
South Africa – a country with more than 62 million people and considered the most industrialised economy in Africa – was the world’s 14th largest emitter of greenhouse gases in 2018. (See Carbon Brief’s South Africa profile for more.)
The country is gripped by a severe electricity crisis due to faltering and ageing coal power plants, which account for more than 80% of power generation.
Shortages have forced the government to implement electricity rationing, known as load shedding – helping drive a boom in rooftop solar for those that can afford it.
The ongoing crisis – and a failure to meet wider renewables goals – means coal plants will be kept running for longer and the country’s 2030 climate pledge will be missed.
In the interactive grid below, Carbon Brief tracks the commitments made by South Africa’s leading political party, the ANC, and its closest challengers, the DA and EFF, in their latest election manifestos. The grid covers a range of issues connected to climate change.
Each entry in the grid represents a direct quote from one or more of these documents.
Climate policy
South Africa is already experiencing the impact of climate change, including droughts, floods and an acute water crisis. However, climate change itself is not a key focus for South African voters; as of 2021, only about half of South Africans said they had heard of climate change.
Meanwhile, under the ANC, the South African government has strengthened its commitment to the Paris Agreement, by pledging to cut greenhouse gas emissions to between 350m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) and 420MtCO2e by 2030, from 442MtCO2e in 2020.
The country has also set the goal of net-zero emissions by 2050, although a presidential commission report suggested it would require up to 535bn rand ($29bn) per year to meet its climate targets. South Africa’s national climate plan also emphasises the importance of adaptation in the face of climate impacts.
In its manifesto for the 2024 election, the ANC reiterates its commitment to net-zero, adaptation and mitigation plans, plus pledges to continue to “work with other countries in the fight against climate change, global poverty and inequality in line with applicable international resolutions”.
The DA manifesto also says it is committed to “achieving net-zero carbon emissions to reduce the impact of energy generation on the climate”.
Within its manifesto, the EFF also pitches climate action, although it does not explicitly back the net-zero target. It says:
“The EFF government will reduce carbon emissions by 10% by 2029 and will renegotiate our nationally determined contribution (NDC), which includes components on climate adaptation and mitigation as well as support requirements for both.”
However, a professor of politics at the Wits School of Governance, David Everatt tells Carbon Brief most South African political parties have merely performed a “ritual nod towards climate change” in their manifestos, as climate concerns are not a major campaign issue in the country.
Instead, the focus is on reducing load-shedding and strengthening energy security.
Electricity policy
The revitalisation of South Africa’s power sector is undoubtedly one of the major focuses of the coming election.
“The vast majority of the debate in South Africa is about the power sector and load-shedding,” says Dr Tracy Ledger, head of the energy transition programme at PARI, an African research institute affiliated to the University of Johannesburg and Wits University in South Africa. She tells Carbon Brief:
“Load shedding has ruined people’s lives and devastated the economy; the economy is probably 20% smaller than it would be without load shedding; hundreds of thousands of jobs have been lost. It’s been a disaster.”
During COP26 in Glasgow, South Africa, alongside France, Germany, the UK, US and the European Union, announced a Just Energy Transition Partnership. This is designed to mobilise an initial $8.5bn to support South Africa “to move away from coal and to accelerate its transition to a low emission, climate resilient economy”.
However, South Africa’s worsening electricity crisis has raised concerns that it may struggle to fulfil its climate ambitions. In April 2023, president Cyril Ramaphosa said the government will consider a delay in the decommissioning of coal plants to help ease electricity cuts.
Another concern is the potential job losses associated with coal decommissioning in Mpumalanga province, an area known as South Africa’s coal belt.
In their 2024 election manifestos, the ANC and the DA do not mention coal, instead pledging investments in renewable energy. However, the EFF says that it would “establish a state-owned mining company to manage coal mines owned by Eskom (South Africa’s state-run power utility), ensuring a quality coal supply at affordable prices”.
Dr Ledger tells Carbon Brief:
“The DA is very much in favour of the just energy transition. The official line of the ANC is that they support the energy transition, but the ANC is in so many factions, and there are a lot of factions within the ANC that are anti-energy transition.
“The EFF is trying to keep everyone happy at the same time. They are saying we need security of supply and we need to address climate change, but we can’t close any coal-fired power stations because people will lose their jobs.”
Meanwhile, despite the continued support for coal in South Africa, particularly in Mpumalanga province, the ANC, DA and EFF all acknowledge the importance of renewable energy in their manifestos.
Dr Ledger believes that regardless of the rhetoric around coal, renewables have a place in South Africa’s energy mix:
“There is now so much embedded [renewable] generation making up the deficit [in supplies from the central grid]. The coal plants will eventually have to shut down. We can’t afford a nuclear power plant and the treasury will never approve it. So, the only practical option available is the private sector and renewables. The energy transition is kind of happening by stealth.
“Electricity generation in South Africa is being privatised and what the private sector is interested in is renewables and maybe a little bit of gas. But gas can’t compete on price with solar. Nothing can compete with solar. Solar in South Africa is already 30% cheaper than the power being produced by Eskom from its coal-fired power stations. And in ten years time, it will be 70% cheaper. That’s what is going to drive the energy transition in South Africa.”
Water policy
Alongside the power crisis, South Africa is also suffering a water crisis, as droughts become increasingly common. In March, thousands lined up for water in the country’s largest city, Johannesburg.
Record temperatures have exacerbated the problem, but the issue has also been politicised with the DA, for example, blaming the ANC for mismanaging the country’s water resources.
Meanwhile, sewage systems are leaking and polluting the country’s freshwater supply, further complicating the matter.
According to Prof Richard Meissner, a water governance expert at the University of South Africa, water-related issues are set to play a more significant role in the 2024 election than in previous years. He tells Carbon Brief:
“It’s important to note that South Africans use 61.8% more water than the global average, which is 173 litres per day. This is largely due to issues such as leaks, wastage and illegal connections, which can be addressed through proper infrastructure maintenance.”
He adds that political parties have also focused on water security in their manifestos, proposing specific solutions to improve water and sanitation services.
For example, the ANC promises it will allocate more powers to the national and provincial government to provide clean water to citizens. The EFF has a similar solution – prioritising government intervention.
The DA, on the other hand, wants to involve “private companies in water infrastructure projects through a performance-based private-public partnership model”.
The post South Africa election 2024: What the manifestos say on energy and climate appeared first on Carbon Brief.
South Africa election 2024: What the manifestos say on energy and climate
Months after a collapsed pipe pushed nearly 250 million gallons of raw sewage into the river, residents say the area still smells.
Members of a congressional subcommittee this week questioned utility leaders and state officials about their knowledge of preexisting problems with the sewage line that collapsed on Jan. 19 near the Potomac River.
Congress Grills Officials About the Potomac River Sewage Spill
A formal petition to the U.S. government calls for sanctions on Chinese seafood imports as it highlights China’s loophole-ridden illegal shark fin trade.
For migrant workers trapped onboard Chinese distant water fishing fleets, cutting the fins off sharks as they writhe violently on rusted decks in the Indian Ocean isn’t accidental. It’s an intentional and lucrative act that marks the start of a bloody half-a-billion-dollar offshore supply chain, tacitly supported by Beijing yet covertly concealed from port inspectors globally.
New data on international climate finance for 2023 and 2024 suggests that wealthy countries are highly unlikely to have met their pledge to double funding for adaptation in developing nations to around $40 billion a year by 2025 amid cuts to their overseas aid budgets.
At the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in 2021, all countries agreed to “urge” developed nations to at least double their funding for adaptation in developing countries from 2019 levels of around $20 billion by 2025. Funding for adaptation has lagged behind money to help reduce emissions and remains the dark spot even as the data showed overall climate finance rose to a record $136.7 billion in 2024.
A United Nations Environment Programme report warned last year that wealthy nations were likely to miss the adaptation finance target and the data released on Thursday by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows that in 2024 adaptation finance was just under $35 billion.
The OECD, an intergovernmental policy forum for wealthy countries, said the increase between 2022 and 2024 was “modest”, adding that meeting the doubling target would require “strong growth” of close to 20% in 2025.
More cuts likely
The OECD’s figures do not go up to 2025, but several nations announced cuts to climate finance last year. The most notable was the abandonment of US pledges to international climate funds by the new Trump administration but the UK, France, Germany and other wealthy European countries also pared back their contributions.
Joe Thwaites, international finance director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said developed countries were “not on track” to meet the adaptation funding goal.
Power Shift Africa director Mohamed Adow said adaptation finance is needed to expand flood defences, drought-resistant crops, early warning systems and resilient health services as the world warms, bringing more extreme weather and rising seas. “When that money fails to arrive, people lose homes, harvests and livelihoods – and in the worst cases, their lives,” he warned.
Imane Saidi, a senior researcher at the North Africa-based Imal Initiative, called the $35 billion in adaptation finance in 2024 “a drop in the ocean”, considering that the United Nations estimates the annual adaptation needs of developing countries at between $215 billion and $387 billion.
-
UN General Assembly backs “climate obligations” set by world’s top court
A UN resolution endorses a landmark climate ruling by the International Court of Justice that states should reduce fossil fuels and repair the damage from global warming -
Electrification emerges as COP31 priority
The Turkish COP31 President has called for “a truly global conversation” about shifting the global energy system from fossil fuels to electricity -
UK halves Green Climate Fund contribution, as it spends more on security
After promising £1.6 billion to the UN’s flagship climate fund in 2023, the UK government has now said it will only hand over half as much
If confirmed, a failure to meet the goal is likely to further strain relations between developed and developing countries within the UN climate process. A previous pledge to provide $100 billion a year of total climate finance by 2020 was only met two years late, a failure labelled “dismal” by the UAE’s COP28 President Sultan Al Jaber and many other Global South diplomats.
Missing that goal would also raise doubts about donor governments’ commitment to meeting their new post-2025 adaptation finance goal. At COP30 last year, governments agreed to urge developed countries to triple adaptation finance – without defining the baseline – by 2035.
African and other developing countries have pointed to lack of funding as a key flaw in ongoing attempts to set indicators to measure progress on adapting to climate change.
Speaking to climate ministers from around the world in Copenhagen on Wednesday, Turkish COP31 President Murat Kurum stressed the importance of climate finance. “It is easy to say we support global climate action,” he said, “but promises must be kept.”
He said the COP31 Presidency will use the new Global Implementation Accelerator and recommendations in the Baku-to-Belem roadmap, published last year, to scale up climate finance – and will hold donors accountable for their collective finance goals.
He noted that developed countries should this year submit their first reports showing how they will deliver their “fair share” of the new broader finance goal set at COP29 in 2024, to deliver $300 billion a year in climate finance by 2035. They are due to report on this once every two years.
Broader climate finance
The OECD data shows that the overall amount of climate finance – including funding for emissions cuts – provided by developed countries grew fast in 2023 before declining in 2024. In contrast, the amount of private finance developed countries say they “mobilised” increased in both 2023 and 2024, pushing the top-line figure to a record high.
While the OECD does not say which countries provided what amounts, data from the ODI Global think-tank suggests that the 2024 cuts to bilateral climate finance were spread broadly among wealthy nations.
Thwaites of NRDC welcomed the fact that overall climate finance provided and mobilised by developed countries exceeded $130 billion in both 2023 and 2024. He said that this was “well above earlier projections” and “shows that when rich countries work together, they can over-achieve on climate finance goals”.
But Sehr Raheja, programme officer at the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment, said these figures are “modest” when set against the new $300-billion goal.
“While the headline total figure of climate finance remains alright,” she said, “declining bilateral climate spending raises important questions about the predictability of high-quality, concessional public finance, which has consistently been a key demand of the Global South.”
She also lamented that loans continue to dominate public climate finance and that mobilised private finance is concentrated in middle-income countries and on emissions-reduction measures rather than adaptation projects. “Private capital continues to follow bankability rather than climate vulnerability or need,” she added.
Ritu Bharadwaj, climate finance and resilience researcher at the International Institute for Environment and Development, said the figures painted an outdated picture as climate finance has since declined as rich countries shrink their overseas aid budgets and increase spending on defence.
Last month, the OECD published figures showing that international aid – which includes climate finance – fell by nearly a quarter in 2025. The US was responsible for three-quarters of this decline. The OECD projects a further decline in 2026.
With Thursday’s climate finance report, the OECD is “publishing a victory lap for 2023 and 2024 at almost the same moment its own aid statistics show the funding base eroding underneath it,” Bharadwaj said.
The post New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance appeared first on Climate Home News.
New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测