COP30 and G20 versus common sense 101: Chuck Stevens
Key topics:
COP30, G20 and shifting global energy priorities
LNG and on-board hydrogen as practical transition options
Youth jobs via labour-intensive green technologies
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.
If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.
By Chuck Stephens
Environmental news has become an everyday thing. Today COP30 is ending – thirty years later. Questions are being asked whether these annual palavers should continue. South Africa decided to switch Environment Ministers at a rather awkward moment. The new minister is said to be more pragmatic, less confrontational. Environmentalist Fred Daniel won a R400 million award in his lawsuit against the late David Mabuza, after 20 years of litigating. This month, the USA became the first country to export more than 10 million tonnes of Liquified Natural Gas in one month. The same USA is boycotting the G20 talks this week-end in South Africa, even though it will be hosting the same talks in 2026. All these signals are not just confusing, they are bewildering.
The German philosopher Hegel is famous for his observation of a dialectical process – thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Initially there is a thesis, which comes to be opposed by an antithesis. A synthesis resolves the conflict by integrating aspects of both extremes – usually a complex idea that goes beyond the initial two. This is what seems to be happening. It’s déjà vu all over again.
The thesis was something like – natural resource are there to be exploited regardless of the inherent environmental degradation. The antithesis arose with Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, Nader’s Raiders, Al Gore’s The Inconvenient Truth and Greta Thunberg’s echo. In the eyes of the antithesis, carbon dioxide is public enemy number one. So any fuel to generate energy that belches carbon emissions into the air we breathe has to go, sooner or later. One of the four priorities adopted for this week’s G20 summit is “mobilising finance for a just energy transition”.
The synthesis points to LNG, which is cleaner, but not “clean”. It is dirty, but its carbon footprint is only about half that of coal or petroleum products. LNG is really the focus of the new mantra articulated by Donald Trump: “Drill, baby, drill”. Energy policies are being pragmatized, taken out of the realm of ideology. This is echoed by another phrase coined by Elon Musk – sustainable abundance.
Clean energy is still optimal, but is not available everywhere. For example, Canada and Norway have plenty of water in rivers and waterfalls that can generate hydro-electricity. Solar is catching on, but makes more sense in hot sunny climates than cold rainy countries. Wind has been harnessed but the windmills have their drawbacks. One perennial clean technology is the hydraulic ram. It not only captures water to pump uphill, it captures the energy from the falling water to pump that water to a reservoir far away and above the stream. These opportunities are the best, but do not exist everywhere.
In South Africa, coal is abundant. We have no crude oil or natural gas so we import those to refine and distribute. This is a perennial drain on resources and one trigger of inflation.
Green Hydrogen will take forever to roll out. It also has drawbacks in terms of safety and roll out. However, in due course it will be a welcome addition to the energy mix. Some G20 countries like Japan are far ahead of South Africa on this one.
Yet if you read South Africa’s energy policy, and its transport policy, you will find that they call for a transition from petrol and diesel automobiles to Electric Vehicles (EVs) after 2030. How realistic is that, and what could be the consequences?
There are three key guideposts - the 2025 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) still in draft, the Just Energy Transition (JET) Plan, and the long-term goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. These policies emphasise a significant shift from coal to a diversified energy mix including renewable sources, supported by LNG and battery storage. They belong somewhere between the ideological antithesis and the emerging new synthesis.
In the talks running up to the G20 meetings attended by a wide scope of stakeholders (business, NGO and government) terms like “technology” and “green jobs” are often being used. But they can become overly-generalized platitudes if not grounded in real tangible opportunities. Another favorite theme in these forums is the marginalization of youth, whose ranks are rising proportionally as never before. Oliver Tambo said that a nation that does not take care of its youth has no future. And doesn’t deserve one.
Take for example South Africa’s automobile industry. Since Ford started building Model Ts here over a century ago, this sector has grown. However, most vehicles manufactured here are exported. The industry employs about 100 000 workers. This raises a key question. If government policy forces the hand of auto manufacturers to re-tool for building EVs – will that open new opportunities for youth employment? Or will good business sense prevail in terms of retraining current employees?
Solutions are needed that are going to add value, not just recycle. The ANC has a way of shrinking the number of jobs in the economy. That is being speeded up by robotics and AI. At the worst possible moment, if you look at a population map of SA. We need labour-intensive, intermediate-technology niches that can pry open space for youth to enter the job market. Optimally, green job creation.
One such technology is called “on-board Hydrogen”. It is one of the best technologies you’ve never heard of. This is a simple circuit that piggy-backs on any diesel or petrol engine. It is not rocket-science and youth can be trained to fit the kits. At the moment, these kits are imported from Bulgaria and used mainly on big trucks in the mines. But they can be fitted on any internal-combustion engine.
In short, a small reactor powered by the car battery performs electrolysis. This vapourises water into hydrogen (2) and oxygen (1) gas. It passes through two filters to clean out impurities and is then fed into the air intake manifold. The engine does not just breathe in normal air. It breathes in air enriched with hydrogen and oxygen. This improves the internal combustion, with the following results… First, a fuel savings of between 10-25 percent. Second an 80 percent drop in carbon emissions – less pollution means cleaner air to breathe thus better health. You also get a longer engine life because so many impurities are burned away. Plus a fourth bonus – a bit more power on the pedal!
This is a largely untapped resource. Let’s place it in perspective. Recent data from August 2025 shows the South Africa imported approximately ZAR 6.21 billion worth of crude petroleum oils in that month. This figure represents the cost of crude oil, which is then refined into various petroleum products. From there is enters a functioning distribution system.
Wouldn’t it be nice to cut 10 – 25 percent of that consumption down?! We have the technology. Youth are already being trained to fit these kits onto internal combustion engines. It’s not clean energy, but it’s cleaner.
What about the payback period? This is what delayed the take up of solar water heaters and photo-voltaic panels – the up-front cost. Well the average diesel engine can run for about 500 000 kilometres. At the guzzling rate of 1 litre for every 10 kilometres, that is 50 000 litres of fuel. Imagine cutting down the pollution of burning that 50 000 litres by 80 percent! But wait! If you install on-board Hydrogen you could reduce fuel consumption by 20 percent – that’s 10 000 litres over the life of one engine. One litre of diesel costs R22. So your fuel savings will be (10 000 x R22 =) R220 000. You could buy 15 on-board Hydrogen kits for that!
Your break-even point is thus about 35 000 kilometres out. Most people drive a car a lot farther than that! Wake up and smell the opportunity in this labour-intensive, easy to install, renewable energy for automobiles. Government incentives should be introduced to induce a transition – not from internal combustion engines to EVs, but by blessing normal engines with on-board Hydrogen. This is pragmatic synthesis, no more ideological antithesis. It’s just plain common sense.