By: Obeth M. Kandjoze
Global warming and climate change are not merely the concerns of a few lobby groups, but rather serious threats to humanity’s livelihood, recognized by 196 countries, including Namibia.
It is therefore regrettable to see Mr. Rowland Brown’s article downplaying the impact this global crisis has on Namibians, suggesting that it may be a lobby-driven hoax to push for renewable energy investments.
Mocking the plight of Namibians—especially in a country that is 90% arid and identified as one of the most vulnerable to climate change—during a severe drought that is devastating the most vulnerable among us, is most unfortunate.
The Government of the Republic of Namibia (GRN) has a real responsibility to consider and deal with the effects of climate change and its debilitating impact on our citizens and those of the broader global community.
I write this piece from Hamburg as Namibia and Germany have just returned from New York having led the world on a precarious pathway to establish a new Pact for the Future.
A new and redesigned multilateralism partnership with climate change, equitable distribution of resources and a more sustainable consumption of our natural resources are at the core of this new endeavour which is to replace the current United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030.
While it saddens us to see privileged analysts cast rocks at the poor populace from their glass castles, it is indeed a feature of our democracy, one which we hold dear and is underpinned with the freest press in Africa.
However, it is incumbent upon us as public servants to provide some basic tenets of how this Government has truly pursued social-economic transformation as it relates to Green Industrialisation, with green hydrogen as a key catalyst for such an outcome.
Green Hydrogen Is Private Sector-Driven
From the onset, the GRN emphasised that a private sector-led economic recovery was key. Green hydrogen was not labelled as the only game in town to help Namibia emerge from the debilitating pandemic.
Rather it was termed as one of the key strategic bets in the 2nd Harambee Prosperity Plan, together with Namibia’s emerging oil and gas industry and opportunities in the mining sector where Namibia is home to several critical raw materials required in the energy transition.
For a relatively small investment in time, and cost which has predominantly been financed by donor funding, in exploring the economic viability of this opportunity, may have an outsized and asymmetric payoff.
At the time, Rowland Brown touted the opportunity as “pie in the sky” and a 2030 phenomenon that would not be impactful for Namibia at all.
Three years on, Namibia raised more than N$2,2 billion in grant funding, established multiple Green Hydrogen pilot projects and has found Namibia elevated to the forefront of global research and development efforts with various Namibians pursuing postgraduate and doctoral studies in this field. Not in 2030, but in 2024!
One would ask “Why does this matter?” It is critical to establish the track record of the naysayers in this space and their consistency in discrediting these efforts. So far, Rowland Brown’s predictions have been questionable at best.
The Tsau //Khaeb A “Pristine And Untouched Area”
One additional argument raised by Dr Chris Brown of the Namibia Chamber of Environment (NCE), and further echoed by Rowland Brown is that the Tsau //Khaeb is a pristine and untouched national park whose biodiversity ecosystem would be destroyed beyond repair with the establishment of green hydrogen projects. In earlier interviews, Dr Brown stated that he thought the green hydrogen projects would impact 40% of the park.
Latest estimates from Hyphen Hydrogen Energy indicate that the project will at most have a 0.07% footprint and is targeting to reduce this impact further, with over 90% of this impact in the least environmentally sensitive areas of the park.
Additionally, every Namibian appreciates that the park is a multi-use park and as such has been the economic backbone of the Namibian economy since the early 1900s.
Excavating billions of tons of earth was required to mine diamonds in the same park, a process that has been crucial to the Namibian economy.
Today, more than 0.76% of the park has supported mining activities for diamonds and currently supports mining prospecting licences for various minerals such as rare earth elements, to name but a few.
Despite these activities, and with increased focus in recent years on advanced mining and environmental preservation practices, these activities have not destroyed the ecosystem of the park.
In addition to this, in 2017, Parliament passed an amendment to the Nature Conservation Ordinance, which included section 17(2)(k), which stipulated that the Minister (Minister responsible for Environment) may “establish a renewable electricity source (in the park) for the purposes of the … protection of the environment or the combating of climate change.”
The intention of the Namibian people has always been that a delicate balance needs to be struck between nature conservation and socio-economic development, as is true for any project. On balance, we are doing our best to strike in all our endeavours.
It is also rather paradoxical to me that both Browns have received significant funding from the hydrocarbon sector. In the case of the Namibia Chamber of Environment (NCE), funding sources appear deliberately structured to obscure their true origins, as one would discover upon reviewing NCE’s financial statements.
Additionally, both Dr. Brown and Mr Brown have openly lobbied for the establishment of oil and gas assets in the same park, some of which, like Kudu gas may increase the emissions of the entire Namibian energy sector by more than 15 times, an estimated published by Cirrus Capital, Rowland Brown’s research firm.
To claim that a maximum 0.07% footprint in the park—is proposed to be developed to the highest international environmental standards, with extreme care taken to locate development in areas of least environmental significance—will cause irreversible damage to a 22,000 square kilometre park, more than twice the size of Qatar.
Is a statement that must be subjected to the ‘true/false’ test, as advocated by the flamboyant analyst.
That being said, the GRN takes any impact on our nation’s biodiversity very seriously. This is why the government has commissioned a Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA), to ensure that we gather the real facts of potential developments within the park.
This study is not solely for green hydrogen developments, but also for projects supporting the emerging oil and gas industry, the five permitted wind projects, the proposed gas-to-power plant, and the expansion of Lüderitz, which will need to grow to accommodate these new industries.
The Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) will help the GRN carefully evaluate, based on facts, both the potential impacts on the natural environment and the corresponding social effects.
Obeth M. Kandjoze is the Director of the National Planning Commission and Chairperson of the General and Green Hydrogen Council. The views expressed herein are his own.
