UN approves UK and Italian request for high profile Summit to be postponed by a full year, as co-hosts announce new ‘Friends of COP’ advisory board
The UN COP26 Climate Summit has been officially rescheduled for November next year, after the UN approved plans from the UK and Italian co-hosts for the high profile conference to be delayed by a full year in response to the on-going coronavirus pandemic.
Earlier this week, the UK government, which had been due to host the Summit in Glasgow this autumn, submitted a request to the UNFCCC climate secretariat for the meeting to be shifted to between the 1st and 12th of November 2021. A shorter delay had been considered, but Ministers concluded the risk of coronavirus outbreaks running into next year in parts of the world justified a longer postponement.
The UNFCCC rubber stamped the decision last night, firing the starting pistol on a 17 month countdown to the crucial Summit where the international community will strive to finalise the rulebook for the Paris Agreement and come forward with new decarbonisation and funding pledges designed to avert potentially catastrophic levels of climate change this century.
COP26 President and UK Business Secretary Alok Sharma welcomed the confirmation of the dates and confirmed the UK was already working on a new “roadmap” designed to accelerate international climate action in the run up to the Summit.
“While we rightly focus on fighting the immediate crisis of the Coronavirus, we must not lose sight of the huge challenges of climate change,” he said in a statement. “With the new dates for COP26 now agreed we are working with our international partners on an ambitious roadmap for global climate action between now and November 2021.”
He also reiterated the government’s plans to make climate action a key plank in its recovery packages. “The steps we take to rebuild our economies will have a profound impact on our societies’ future sustainability, resilience and wellbeing and COP26 can be a moment where the world unites behind a clean resilient recovery,” he said.
Businesses and campaigners broadly welcomed the full year postponement to the Summit, with observers noting how the rescheduled dates mean governments will have clarity over the result of this autumn’s US election and more time to engage world leaders with the need to strengthen their climate strategies.
The UK and Italy are set to host next year’s G7 and G20 Summits ahead of the new COP26 dates, while China is also preparing to reschedule the UN’s Biodiversity COP for next year, providing a series of high profile diplomatic events where climate action will be at the top of the agenda.
Sergio Costa, Italian Minister for the Environment, Land and Sea Protection, said that “between now and November 2021 we will take advantage of every international opportunity to increase ambition and mobilization, also harnessing the G20 under the Italian Presidency and the G7 under the British Presidency”.
The co-hosts also yesterday announced that they have expanded the team of senior figures working on the Summit with the appointment of a new “Friends of COP” advisory board. The group brings together over 25 experts from multiple global sectors to advise the COP26 Presidency, including Selwin Hart, Special Adviser to the United Nations Secretary-General on Climate Action, Eric Garcetti, Mayor of Los Angeles, and Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, among others.
“Everyone will need to raise their ambitions to tackle climate change and the expertise of the Friends of COP will be important in helping boost climate action across the globe,” said Sharma.
Green groups broadly welcomed the new dates, but also warned governments that urgent action was required now to both drive a green economic recovery and lay the diplomatic foundations for a successful Summit.
The preliminary talks for the conference have faced significant disruption as a result of the coronavirus pandemic and concerns remain that major technical issues relating to carbon market rules, forest protection, and climate financing are all a long way from being resolved. Moreover, campaigners are fearful that a number of governments – with the US and Brazil chief amongst them – are using the cover provided by the coronavirus crisis to drive through new high carbon policies and projects.
“The climate summit can be delayed, but dealing with the climate emergency cannot,” said Greenpeace UK executive director John Sauven. “The Covid pandemic has shown just how badly we need international cooperation and political leadership, and the same holds true for tackling the climate crisis.
“The government now has a short window of opportunity to start delivering on the Paris climate agreement. But what is required is action not words, starting at home by delivering a climate-proof economy that supports millions of jobs. Next year’s climate summit will only be a success if major economies use this opportunity to build a green recovery.”
Neil Morisetti, former Foreign Office Special Representative for Climate Change and current Director of Strategy at UCL Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy Department, similarly urged the government to immediately step up its climate diplomacy efforts. “The UK government must use the additional time created by the delay to COP26 to work tirelessly with its international partners in the coming months,” he said. “We cannot postpone climate diplomacy, without which the odds on a successful summit and the resultant elevation of Britain’s global reputation will swiftly recede.”
Meanwhile, Helen Clarkson, CEO at The Climate Group think tank, stressed that governments around the world still have an obligation under the Paris Agreement to submit updated national climate action plans, known as Nationally Determined Contributions in the UN jargon, this year.
“The announcement of the new dates for COP26 is very important for the international community, as it focuses minds and provides a clear date fornegotiators,” she said. “However, it is important to remember that the NDC submission timelines have not changed, and countries are still expected to submit updated targets this year. The devastating impact of COVID-19 creates extra challenges, but our networks of businesses and state governments will do all they can to support national governments meet this deadline – climate action must not be delayed.”
Patricia Espinosa, UN climate change executive secretary, said governments now had an opportunity to align their climate efforts with their plans to rescue economies left stricken by the coronavirus crisis.
“Our efforts to address climate change and COVID-19 are not mutually exclusive,” she said. “If done right, the recovery from the COVID-19 crisis can steer us to a more inclusive and sustainable climate path. We honour those who we have lost by working with renewed commitment and continuing to demonstrate leadership and determination in addressing climate change, and building a safe, clean, just and resilient world.”
Hive Energy’s proposed 350MW Cleve Hill solar project secures backing from Planning Inspectorate despite local conservation concerns
Plans for Britain’s largest ever solar farm have been given the go-ahead despite concerns over local environmental impacts, paving the way for the 350MW subsidy-free project in Kent to begin operating in 2022.
Cleve Hill Solar Park, which also includes plans for a co-located battery storage facility, would see 800,000 solar panels erected across 900 acres of farmland roughly three miles west of Whitstable. The project is expected to boast enough capacity to power around 91,000 homes, according to the developers.
British firm Hive Energy, which is jointly developing the project alongside German company Wirsol, claims the project is set to attract £27.25m of investment to the region over the next 25 years, but objections have been raised that the project could damage local marshland.
The site in Kent earmarked for the 350MW Cleve Hill solar park
Local politicians and activists raised concerns the battery storage facility could pose a fire risk and that the project may damage local ecosystems. Due to the size of the project, planning consent was called in by the government for a final decision.
But today the plans were given the green light, with Planning Inspectorate chief executive Sarah Richards stressing that it gave “full consideration to local views” before making its recommendation.
Hive Energy said it was “delighted” with the decision, claiming the solar park – plans for which were first announced in 2017 – would help reduce the UK’s dependence on fossil fuels and lower CO2 emissions by 68,000 tonnes a year.
“Our belief is that renewable energy generation is the most important thing that is going to happen to our planet over the next 50 years,” said Giles Redpath, CEO of Hive Energy. “Solar energy is unique. It has the power to transform the world.”
“We are proud to lead the way, together with our partners at Wirsol, to deliver the UKs largest solar park,” he added. “Due to be operational by 2022, the Cleve Hill Solar Park offers a real solution to our urgent climate needs and showcases the potential for the UK to lead the green recovery.”
The news tops off a big week for subsidy-free solar in the UK, with NextEnergy Capital having secured £100m financing for two projects in South Wales and Worcestershire, and Statkraft having signed a deal with Warrington Borough Council to buy electricity from a solar-battery park in York.
Chris Hewett, chief executive of the Solar Trade Association (STA), also welcomed today’s decision, arguing that solar could play a key role in boosting the UK economy in the wake of the coronavirus crisis.
“Today the government has shown that it recognises the vital contribution solar can make to Britain’s energy mix,” he said. “This is a major milestone on the road towards a UK powered by clean, affordable renewables. With the right policies we can expect to see an 8GW pipeline of solar projects unlocked and rapidly deployed, swiftly creating a wealth of skilled jobs and setting us on the path towards a green recovery.”
2020, May – LYS Energy Group (LYS), the leading Singapore home-grown Solar Independent Power Producer (IPP) has signed a collaboration agreement with Chinese top solar cell and module manufacturer Talesun Solar (Talesun), to support both companies’ expansion bolstering clean energy adoption by commercial and Industrial sector (C&I) in the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) regions.
The growing awareness from the corporate sector of the need to tackle climate change challenges is prominent towards the adoption of more sustainable and responsible business practices. This necessity of low-carbon activities has brought about a surge in clean energy demand in the region. LYS’ dedication to foster the use of greener and cleaner energy in the corporate sector is aligned with that of the ASEAN Government’s momentum to boost up the adoption of renewable energy.
The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), remotely signed via online ceremony due to the current global COVID-19 outbreak, comprises the deployment of a total of 30MWp of distributed solar PV systems projects in ASEAN countries. By combining both companies’ excellent proficiency i.e. Talesun’ high-quality technology and trustworthy Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC), and LYS Energy’s robust financing capability and steadfast Operations & Maintenance (O&M) expertise, this new collaboration aims to actively contribute to the development of clean energy fast-growing market.
In addition to the partnership agreement between the two companies, LYS and Talesun concluded on the imminent development of a cumulated size of 2.9MWp rooftop solar PV systems in the region of LongAn province in Vietnam. The corresponding agreement encompasses five solar PV systems installation atop of plastic & rubber product manufacturing industrial factories, using a total of 3810 high-efficiency Mono-PERC Talesun Solar modules, and with emphasis on compliance with best-in-class Quality and Health Environment and Safety (HSE) standards. Talesun will act as the EPC contractor of these rooftop solar PV systems, while LYS will finance the projects and will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the PV systems throughout the contract lifetime. The construction will be executed starting from the second half of this year and is expected to be completed before the end of 2020. The energy generated will be used to power the five factories’ daily operations and offset their CO2 emissions by approximately 3,569 tonnes1 annually. (1https://iges.or.jp/en/pub/list-grid-emission-factor/en)
LYS Energy Group has deployed more than 50MWp of high-performance solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, with a pipeline of more than 500MWp in Singapore and South East Asia. It is one of the fastest-growing clean energy producers and end-to-end solutions providers, with a five-star portfolio of commercial and industrial projects and customers across diversified and multiple industries. These comprise energy-intensive industries such as aerospace, electronics, food and beverage, logistics, manufacturing, pharmaceutical, and real estate.
Mr. Lionel Steinitz, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of LYS Energy Group, said:
“Since its incorporation in 2013, LYS Energy Group has been a pioneer in rolling-out distributed solar solutions and is recognized today as a key figure of renewables in South East Asia. Our holistic approach to sustainable development, through GHG emissions measuring and reporting, carbon emissions reduction, and offsetting, has granted us the praise of our customers and our partners, supportive of the innovative solutions that we tailored for them.
This new achievement acknowledges our Group’s dynamic and robust business solutions, combined with solid technical expertise to innovate and develop high-quality solar PV systems in the region. Furthermore, this collaboration agreement with Talesun Solar will strengthen our company’s expansion and marks another significant milestone in our journey to accelerate the adoption of a low-carbon economy activity is ASEAN countries.”
Mr. William Sheng, Chief Executive Officer of Talesun Solar, said:
“We are thrilled to be partnering with LYS Energy Group for distributed solar PV systems projects in ASEAN countries. We are delighted to see that the superior quality of our products alongside our experienced EPC services are recognized. With cumulative developed and built more than 7 GW PV projects globally, we will carry on executing our growth of development and EPC strategies in the distributed and utility segments while further diversifying our client and optimizing our solution to expand our footprint worldwide. “
LYS Energy Group (LYS) is the leading Singapore home-grown Solar Independent Power Producer (IPP) that builds, owns, and operates Solar PV Systems for Commercial, Industrial, and Public sites in the Asia Pacific region.
The company provides Asia’s trusted Renewable Energy platform offering hassle-free end-to-end clean energy solutions for businesses: from zero-Capex solar energy (PPA), Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), turnkey Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) and Operations & Maintenance (O&M) services, to carbon emissions and energy management consulting. Without expending any resources, our customers can benefit from installing solar PV systems on their unused rooftops and site spaces, lower and predictable utility costs and strengthen their sustainability branding. Through a set of newly developed innovative solutions, future adopters have flexibility in the way they want to consume green and clean electricity. Since its incorporation, LYS has deployed over 50MWp of high-performance solar PV systems, with a pipeline of over 500MWp in Singapore and across the region in Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines.
LYS Energy aims at being a vector of the Energy Transition towards a more distributed, autonomous, and smart model. Incorporating distributed generating facilities, energy storage systems, and smart grid, the company re-invents the energy industry towards a customer-centric prosumer era.
Talesun Solar, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Zhongli Group, was founded in 2010. Through more than 10 years of innovation and development, it has become one of the global Top 10 photovoltaic manufacturers, Tier 1 module supplier in Bloomberg Ranking, one of China’s largest photovoltaic power station developers, and a first-class leading enterprise among China’s photovoltaic manufacturers. At present, the annual capacity of Talesun Solar has been expanded to 9 GW photovoltaic monocrystalline high-efficiency cells and 12 GW photovoltaic high-efficiency modules.
Our downstream business includes solar photovoltaic project development, design, EPC construction, operation & maintenance, and one-stop system integration solutions for customers. In 2015, the Company innovated and launched “Intelligent Photovoltaic+ Sci-tech Agriculture and PV Farms in Poor Villages”, thus becoming a leader in the global solar power industry. It has developed and built a total of more than 7 GW photovoltaic projects globally. Thereinto, it has built 1.2 GW “PV Farms in Poor Villages” as poverty alleviation projects for more than 40 poverty-stricken counties nationwide, lifting 750,000 poverty-stricken households out of poverty.
Through constantly improving our conversion efficiencies and the quality of PV cells and modules, and optimizing project solution design, Talesun continues to push the decrease of solar energy cost and makes contributions to the development of clean and environment-friendly energy globally.
2019 Update: 225 Containers Shipped Per Day to Countries with Poor Waste Management and 120 Million Kg of Carbon Emissions
In just two short years, the world has awoken to the hidden, harsh realities of the plastic waste trade that is called “recycling.” More than 100 investigations and reports have shown serious environmental and social harms in receiving countries. In the recent “Plastic Wars,” FRONTLINE and NPR showed plastic waste from the United States (U.S.) dumped and burned in Indonesian communities in 2019. Making climate change worse, millions of tons of carbon have been emitted in shipping U.S. plastic waste to far frontiers where the reports show that the plastic waste may not have actually been recycled.
Now, a new reason to end export of post-consumer plastic waste has appeared: coronavirus COVID-19. The virus is spread from human contact and was found alive on “a variety of surfaces” of the Diamond Princess cruise ship after 17 days, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Since transit times of sea freight shipments can be less than 17 days and the investigations and reports clearly show that exported post-consumer plastic waste is often manually sorted by poor workers of all ages in unsafe conditions, there is the potential for people in receiving countries to be exposed.
Circulating post-consumer plastic waste around the world doesn’t create the clean economy we need to protect human health and ecosystems. There were more than enough valid reasons to stop the plastic waste trade before the outbreak of the global pandemic in 2020. It is clear now more than ever: the harms and risks far outweigh the perceived benefits of avoiding plastic waste disposal to U.S. landfills. Actions to find markets for discarded plastic materials collected in U.S. communities should not negatively impact communities in other countries.
A Brief Recap
Back in 2017, there was little public understanding of what happens to plastic waste that consumers in industrialized countries put in bins for recycling. Outside of the waste and recycling industry, the U.S. public assumed that safe, clean U.S. factories ground up the plastic and American workers made it into new products. With credit to theNew York Times Opinion video “The Great Recycling Con,” some of us thought it was like a scene from Toy Story. The public didn’t know that the U.S. exported 276,200 shipping containers (1.5 million metric tons) of plastic waste to countries with poor waste management in 2017. As shown in the documentary “Plastic China,” it turns out that our plastic waste was not cleanly or efficiently processed into new plastic products that Americans bought. It was sometimes crudely sorted, shredded and melted by impoverished families in unsafe, unhealthy conditions into low quality plastic that never returned to the U.S. in new products. A waste and recycling expert now states that even before China’s policy changes, “a lot of areas fooled themselves into thinking they were recycling when they were really not.”
Two years ago in 2018, China enacted the National Sword policy restricting plastic waste imports to protect their environment and develop their own domestic recycling capacity. In response, many recyclers moved their operations from China to other countries in Asia, leading to the rise of over two hundred illegal operations in Malaysia. Since exporting plastic waste is a convenient way for the U.S. and other industrialized countries to count plastic waste as “recycled” and avoid disposal costs and impacts at home, there was a significant increase of plastic waste shipments to other countries instead of China. As Malaysia’s Environment Minister stated: “Garbage is traded under the pretext of recycling.” The executive director of the New Haven Solid Waste and Recycling Authority agreed: “Ninety percent of our stuff was going over to China. They were taking all of our plastics, cardboard, paper, you name it. We were in essence shipping them our garbage.”
One year ago, we published “157,000 Shipping Containers of U.S. Plastic Waste Exported to Countries with Poor Waste Management in 2018” to quantify the amount of U.S. plastic waste exports and document the harms that were being caused in other countries. Over the past year, we called for an end to this irresponsible method of handling of our nation’s plastic waste and asked U.S. waste companies and cities to stop exporting it.
Now we report that progress was made in 2019 in reducing U.S. plastic waste exports down to 88,000 shipping containers to countries with poor waste management. Much of the reduction was due to the effective enactment of a plastic waste import ban by India in August 2019. Another positive trend has been an increase in public awareness and opposition to this irresponsible practice and commitments from some waste/recycling companies and communities to stop exporting. But we’ve also learned that the social, environmental and economic harms caused by plastic waste exports in developing countries are even worse than we knew a year ago. In addition, the significant carbon emissions from the sea freight of exporting all U.S. plastic waste around the world have been overlooked while contributing to climate change.
As we started 2020, several nations continued to be flooded with U.S. plastic waste and we had hit a plateau in reducing plastic waste exports. Figure 1 shows that the U.S. exported 436 million kg in 2019 and is still exporting over 5,600 shipping containers (30 million kg) of plastic waste every month to countries with high waste mismanagement. That means about 225 large 20-ft (TEU) shipping containers per day landed in countries without adequate environmental, health, safety and labor laws to be processed by “recyclers” who provide no proof of what happens to the imported plastic waste.
The actual amount of U.S. plastic waste that ends in countries with high waste mismanagement may be even higher because the U.S. exports millions of kgs of plastic waste to countries like Canada and South Korea who may re-export U.S. plastic waste to other countries. Figure 1 shows that as plastic waste exports to India declined, exports to Malaysia dramatically increased, more than tripling from 3 million kg/month in January 2019 to 9.8 million kg/month in December 2019.
Figure 1 – 2019 U.S. Plastic Waste Exports to Countries with High Waste Mismanagement Rates
1.Food chain contamination: As the BBC reported in November 2019: ”the burning of plastic waste in Indonesia, much of which has been sent there by the West, is poisoning the food chain. Environmental group IPEN found, in one East Java village, toxic dioxins in chicken eggs 70 times the level allowed by European safety standards.”
2.Harm to domestic waste collection and recycling system development in countries that need it most. In June 2019, the Guardian USA reported that “a surge in foreign waste shipments is disrupting efforts to handle locally generated plastics” in Turkey, a country with a 16% waste mismanagement and less than 1% recycling rate. As an Istanbul recycler stated: ‘‘I want to tell people in U.S. this: recycle in your own yard. Don’t bring down our income and put us all in danger of hunger.’’ As Malaysia’s Prime Minister stated: “We don’t need your waste because our own waste is enough to give us problems.” The mayor of a Philippine town flooded with plastic waste imports said: “I think we have enough waste in the country to process, reuse and recycle. We don’t need waste from abroad.” In Indonesia, recycling businesses prefer to process imported plastic waste instead of investing in collection of domestic plastic waste. Proving the point, industrialized South Korea recently restricted import of PET bottle plastic waste in order to promote collection and recycling of domestic PET in their own country.
3.Health and safety impacts to workers and communities: The Center for Public Integrity showed evidence of plastic packaging labeled “Made in USA” being burned and dumped in Malaysia. Burning of plastic is causing breathing problems in residents who live nearby facilities in Malaysia. A village in Indonesia is being buried by plastic waste imports. The Guardian reports that in Valenzuela City, Philippines residents blame recycling plants for pungent smells and respiratory illnesses.
4.Global plastic waste shell game: As some countries restrict imports, there are reports of exporters and brokers mislabeling waste and routing it through Hong Kong to avoid traceability. The Malaysian government found that brokers have been falsifying declaration forms by using other Harmonized System (HS) codes to bring in plastic scraps. As the South China Morning Post reported in January 2020, “Hong Kong is one of biggest re-exporters of waste after mainland China stopped importing it.” While Hong Kong itself has very limited plastic recycling capacity, it has become an intermediate port that enables more shipments into Asia, both legal and illegally. The re-export step creates confusion in the traceability of plastic waste. Environmental groups in Hong Kong are calling on authorities to not accept plastic waste that is not destined for reprocessing there. Even when illegal waste is found, returning the waste to the country of origin is problematic. In October 2019, the Basel Action Network reported that illegal U.S. waste shipments that were supposed to be returned to their U.S. senders were instead shipped to India, Thailand, South Korea, and Vietnam. Inspection of paper imports identified illegal plastic waste hidden in the bales.
5.Potential transmission from post-consumer plastic waste: Stored piles of plastic waste and manual sorting of post-consumer waste are creating risks for disease and virus transmission:
a.Plastic waste piles: The Tamil Nadu (India) Health Secretary said that plastic waste is one of the reasons for mosquito breeding that is causing an increasing number of dengue fever cases. The city of Laredo, Texas sent collected recyclable materials directly to landfill over concerns that storage of materials at the recycling center posed a risk to community health.
b.Manual sorting: The CDC advises that people with the coronavirus should not share dishes and drinking glasses and their waste products should be disposed. But the WHO states that “Some people become infected but don’t develop any symptoms and don’t feel unwell.” The WHO also states that coronavirus can live on plastic surfaces for “up to several days.” While a direct link has not yet been proven, it is logical to reason that post-consumer waste may pose a potential health risk to both U.S. and foreign workers that manually sort collected materials from people who are unaware that they have the virus. The risk is particularly acute in poor countries where workers lack health and safety equipment. At the time of this update in early April, concern over coronavirus spread has led to the closure of some municipal recycling curbside and community collection programs to protect workers, including throughout Orange County, California. The situation is still unfolding and the latest news is being reported by Waste Dive.
Tracing the Paths of U.S. Plastic Waste Flows
Figure 2 shows the 2019 exports of plastic waste by origination and destination for the fifteen states with largest amount of plastic waste exports.
California: With ports on the West Coast and a large population, California shipped the most plastic waste to countries with high waste mismanagement: 78 million kg (14,675 TEU shipping containers). This included 6.6 million kg (1233 TEU shipping containers) to Turkey – a nautical distance of 11,301 miles away. The carbon emissions of sea freight of California’s plastic waste exports to Turkey alone are equal to the annual carbon emissions of 364 U.S. cars. (See carbon emissions estimation below).
Northeast States: Prior to the enactment of India’s ban on plastic waste imports on August 30, 2019, states in the Northeast U.S. were shipping millions of kg each month to the country. At the peak in May 2019, New Jersey shipped 3 million kg to India in one month. By December 2019, this declined 87% to 382,000 kg.
Southeast States: While Southeast U.S. states are cited as a top location for U.S. domestic plastic recycling, the U.S. Census Bureau data shows that these states are major exporters of plastic waste to countries with high waste mismanagement rates. Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Alabama and Tennessee exported 80 million kg of plastic waste to countries with poor waste management in 2019 and did not recycle that plastic waste in their states.
Figure 2: Top 15 U.S. States Exporting Plastic Waste to Countries with Poor Waste Management in 2019
The Forgotten Carbon Footprint of Plastic Recycling: Sea Freight and Long-Distance Trucking Emissions
Commonly cited metrics for carbon emission savings from recycling post-consumer plastic compared to using other materials or new plastic overlook two major sources of carbon emissions: sea freight and long-distance trucking. The Association of Plastic Recycler’s Life Cycle Impacts of Postconsumer Recycled Resins study is based on trucking and rail distances less than 500 miles for moving bales to processors.
Figure 3 shows the top 20 U.S. district dispatch ports exporting plastic waste in 2019. The carbon emissions from the sea freight can be credibly estimated through use of an existing sea freight carbon emissions calculator. While long distance trucking of the plastic waste from inland states to dispatch ports also creates carbon emissions, it is not possible to estimate those emissions due to lack of land logistics and route data.
Figure 3: Top 20 U.S. District Dispatch Ports Exporting Plastic Waste in 2019
Sea Freight Emissions: Employing the Kuehne and Nagel Sea Freight Carbon Calculator, the carbon emissions of dispatch port-to-receiving country port were made for the 451 shipping routes in 2019. For example, the carbon emissions of shipping 4,030 shipping containers from Los Angeles to Hong Kong was 3.45 million kg which is equal to the emissions from 750 cars for an entire year (based on the U.S. EPA’s estimate of 4600 kg of CO2/car/year). Overland transport to Canada and Mexico from nearby states and shipments less than 1 full TEU shipping container were excluded from the carbon emissions analysis.
The total sea freight carbon emissions from 2019 U.S. plastic waste exports is estimated to be 120 million kg which is equal to the emissions from 26,000 cars per year. It should be noted that while import trade from Asia enables low cost return shipping via empty containers, the “carbon cost” of adding freight weight to ships is not free or low carbon. Added tonnage requires additional fuel for transporting the freight weight.
Diversion Goals Are Pushing Plastic Waste Exports and Freight Carbon Emissions
U.S. states and the Federal Government have been promoting “diversion” of waste from landfills for decades. The pressure to “divert” plastic waste appears to be a driver for exporting plastic waste since the U.S. lacks domestic plastic reprocessing capacity. Even in states where secure landfills are available with long term capacity at low cost, plastic waste is being trucked long distances to ports and shipped to countries with poor waste management to meet diversion goals. Too often, the media supports the myth that “diversion” is an admirable goal and achievement without evaluating the final fate and destination of the collected waste.
It is time for every state and community to examine the unintended, harmful consequences of their diversion goals and revise legislation to ensure responsible management of each state’s waste. Actions to find markets for discarded plastic materials collected in U.S. communities should not negatively impact communities in other countries. The carbon emissions of waste thousands of miles around the world also cannot be overlooked.
Public Sentiment to Stop Plastic Waste Exports Grows
There has been good news over the past year as some U.S. waste collection companies and communities have ended plastic waste exports to countries with high waste mismanagement. In 2019, Waste Management adopted a corporate policy to ship post-consumer plastics to only North American plastic recyclers/processors. Casella Waste Systems, the nation’s fifth largest waste collection and sortation company, no longer exports residential plastics.
As investigations and reports showed that plastic waste exports were dumped or burned after being shipped thousands of miles, the awareness has led to growing public and professional sentiment against the offshoring practice. As the Cape May Herald reported, “Even staunch advocates of recycling began to question how this made any environmental or economic sense.”
According to chemical industry experts at Independent Commodity Intelligence Services (ICIS), “China is no longer a route for recycling and the expectation is that countries now deal with their own waste.” A representative of the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) stated: “We’re producing a lot of waste ourselves, and we should take care of it ourselves.”
“We Cannot Turn a Blind Eye to the Hard Truths Being Uncovered”
Faced with the knowledge that their plastic waste could harm communities in other countries, responsible U.S. communities are choosing to stop exports:
Cordova, Alaska: The Copper River Watershed Project has stopped collecting plastic waste because “we cannot turn a blind eye to the hard truths being uncovered. By continuing to recycle plastic, evidence strongly suggests we as a nation may actually do more harm than good because we are simply passing the problem onto countries less fortunate than ours and we are avoiding the inevitable changes society will need to make if we really want to do what is best for the environment.”
Erie, Pennsylvania: The city now instructs residents to only recycle #1 and #2 plastic bottles and jugs, stating: “We cannot collect an item for recycling, unless we have an end user who is willing to purchase and recycle that item. China used to accept most of the #3, 4, 5, and 7 plastics, but it turns out that most of these plastics were not actually being recycled. They were mostly being burned for fuel.”
San Carlos, California: ReThink Waste, a public agency that operates the Shoreway Material Recovery Facility (MRF) in San Carlos, California, publishes a traceable account of the destination of collected plastics and does not export to countries with poor waste management and states that collected plastics #3-7 material is sent to landfill.
Plastic Waste Trade Lacks Transparency and Accountability
But not all waste/recycling companies and communities have stopped exporting plastic waste to countries with poor waste management. Some companies and communities are aware that their waste is being shipped to poor countries and others employ brokers as middlemen in the process. Use of brokers presents a challenge to reducing plastic waste exports to countries with poor waste management because brokers are financially incentivized to maximize shipments and the original waste generators can claim that they don’t know where their waste is going and tell residents that it is “recycled.” Use of brokers to trade waste means that contracts can change hands several times between the source and the destinationwithout accountability. States and cities do not require that brokers or MRFs report the final destination or fate of collected materials, including final destination countries for plastic waste exports.
As a representative from a major waste company stated, “Plastics that are sold to brokers have the potential to be sent overseas, as well as to Canada, as the broker has the ability to do what they see fit with the material.” While some brokers may operate legitimate export businesses, the lack of transparency and accountability creates an open playing field for unethical business practices.
In the comprehensive survey of the 367 MRFs in the U.S. performed for Greenpeace’s Circular Claims Fall Flat report, some MRFs stated that materials collected in their communities are shipped to countries with poor waste management or to brokers. For example:
San Diego, California: City representative states about local recycler: “If they can’t find a domestic buyer for a bale of cardboard or plastic bottles, they’re going look anywhere else in the world — Vietnam, Indonesia, other parts of Asia.”
Charlotte, North Carolina: The local newspaper reports that “the county and its contractor, Republic Services, sometimes give away bales of plastic and mixed paper or even pay countries to take them.” The county’s solid waste director states: “I have no guarantee what someone will do with it once they get it. Where it goes is a bit out of our control sometimes. If it stays in this country, we know it will be taken care of. When it goes to a different country, they aren’t as environmentally safe. Whether they recycle it or landfill it or burn it, we don’t know.”
Illegal Plastic Waste Trade Grows
Reports of illegal plastic waste trade and unethical business practices grew in 2019. By January 2020, Malaysia announced that it had closed more than 200 illegal recycling factories. Flooded with plastic waste exports for more than a year, countries increased inspection and returned more plastic waste to exporting countries. But the lack of traceability made this difficult to do. Throughout Asia, there are many ports of entry that make it difficult for countries to monitor what is actually in shipping containers.
Examples of illegal trade activity and return of plastic waste:
“It’s Our Waste”: Other Countries Take Responsibility
There are compelling reasons for the U.S. and other countries to stop exporting plastic to countries with poor waste management, including reducing plastic pollution to the ocean and freight carbon emissions, increasing the focus on development of domestic waste management and recycling systems in developing countries and spurring domestic innovations to responsibly address plastic use and waste.
Other industrialized countries faced with similar plastic waste and export challenges are moving to take responsibility for their plastic waste:
United Kingdom (UK): The Environmental Bill 2020 would restrict exports of plastic waste to non-OECD countries for recycling.
European Union (EU) Circular Economy Plan: Announced on March 11, 2020, the plan aims to ”restrict exports of waste that cause negative environmental and health impacts in third countries by focusing on countries of destination, problematic waste streams and operations.”
Basel Amendment agreed to by 184 countries: In May 2019, the Parties (countries) to the United Nations Basel Convention adopted the Plastics Waste Amendment to “to specifically include plastic waste in a legally-binding framework which will make global trade in plastic waste more transparent and better regulated.” According to the head of the UN organization that administers the Basel Convention, the Basel Amendment is intended to keep more recycling of plastic scrap in the countries where it is created.
Canada: In February 2020, a bill was introduced to the House of Commons to prohibit the export of non-recyclable plastic waste from Canada to foreign countries. The Member of Parliament introducing the bill stated: “We have the means and capability to ensure the proper disposal of plastic waste right here in our own country, and we shouldn’t be exporting it for someone else to deal with.” But while Canada is a signatory to the Basel Convention, the country recently requested extra time to comply with the treaty, which will be enforced starting 2021.
The Responsible Response is to Stop Offshoring Plastic Waste
Now that the curtain has been pulled back and the harms of plastic waste exports have been exposed, the responsible response is to stop. While exporting may help U.S. communities meet “diversion goals” and avoid the problem and cost of disposing their plastic waste to landfill or incineration, there’s no denying that we’re offshoring the problem, harming other countries and making a carbon intensive, long distance contribution to the plastic pollution in the ocean we share.
Firm and effective bans are not yet in place in many countries and the end of harmful plastic waste imports is not certain as illegal trade flourishes. We cannot expect other countries to restrict and inspect our harmful plastic waste exports or expect them to stop the illegal waste trade at the receiving end. After conducting an investigation of exports to Malaysia, Greenpeace Italy stated: “We know that only a small number of containers leaving Italian ports are properly checked. A civilised country cannot close its eyes and dump the problem on a less developed nation.” In the Philippines, Greenpeace and EcoWaste Coalition identified policy loopholes in Philippine laws as an enabler of illegal and ‘legitimized’ waste trade.
The most effective way to stop the harmful and illegal plastic waste trade is to stop loading U.S. plastic waste onto ships for export.
While the U.S. and other countries have been exporting plastic waste to countries which are ill-equipped to manage it, those same countries are being blamed as the leading polluters of plastics to the ocean. The Save Our Seas 2.0 Bill largely blames Asian countries for plastic pollution to the ocean and does nothing to stop plastic waste exports to those countries. The recent addition of some types of plastic waste to the Basel Convention will not stop the flow of U.S. plastic waste to countries who are not equipped to safely and securely manage it due to illegal waste trade and non-ratification and opposition by the current U.S. Federal Administration. As the Guardian reported in May 2019, “The US is not a party to the convention so it did not have a vote, but attendees at the meeting said the country argued against the change, saying officials didn’t understand the repercussions it would have on the plastic waste trade.”
The Right SOS: Stop Our Ships
There now isproposed legislation in the U.S. Congress to stop plastic waste exports to countries with poor waste management. The plastic waste export restrictions in the “Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act of 2020,” championed by Senator Udall and Representative Lowenthal, are a major step towards taking responsibility for our plastic waste and reducing long-distance plastic pollution to the ocean, as well as here at home. Representative Lowenthal stated that “he was especially proud the bill would prevent plastic waste being exported to less developed countries where it ends up in landfills and waterways, harming human health and endangering wildlife.”
The harms of plastic waste exports to other countries and sea freight carbon emissions are proven. Our response is a measure of our integrity in dealing other countries and our true concern for the ocean and climate. At the federal, state and local levels, we must bring an end to irresponsible, damaging plastic waste exports.
More Facts & Figures: U.S. Plastic Waste Exports from 2010 to 2019
Table 1 summarizes the latest trends in the U.S. plastic waste export and recent news related to plastic waste import bans.
Table 1 – Trends in U.S. Plastic Waste Exports and Latest News
Jan Dell, PE, is an Independent Engineer and Founder of The Last Beach Cleanup. Jan has worked with companies in diverse industries to implement sustainable business practices in their operations, communities and supply chains in more than 40 countries including throughout Asia. Named a 2019 National Geographic Explorer. Appointed by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Jan was the Vice Chair of the U.S. Federal Advisory Committee on the Sustained National Climate Assessment in 2016-2017.Send her an email here.
Last week’s LEAD on Climate 2020 sent a message to Congress that business leaders have not lost sight of the climate crisis — even as they tackle the COVID-19 crisis. Washington should follow their lead.
Last week, we saw digital democracy in action — a record number of leading businesses called on members of Congress to create a climate-sensitive, resilient recovery. And they did it from the comfort of their homes.
More than 300 CEOs and representatives from Fortune 500 firms, and medium and small businesses, logged on for 85 virtual meetings to tell lawmakers on both sides of the aisle that the US must build back better from the ravages of COVID-19.
LEAD on Climate 2020 was the largest business-led advocacy day for climate action in US history. Collectively, the companies represented a combined annual revenue of more than $1 trillion in revenue, a combined market valuation of nearly $11.5 trillion, and more than 3 million US employees. The group spanned the US economy and included retailers, manufacturers, healthcare services, food and beverage companies, outdoor industries and technology companies. Despite the business disruption and uncertainty that many of the companies have faced during the pandemic, they came with a steadfast commitment to climate action and a belief that the US should keep climate in mind as it seeks to rescue the economy.
As Salesforce’s head of sustainability, Patrick Flynn, said:
“We have a health crisis, an economic crisis and a climate crisis all happening at once. The best solutions will tackle all three together.”
Indeed, COVID-19 relief funding was needed initially to meet our immediate health needs and to address the economic downturn. But stimulus funds should go further to accelerate the transition to a net-zero emissions economy; to invest in cleaner, more resilient energy and transportation infrastructure, and ultimately to address the climate crisis. These funds should also contribute to a just, fair transition and to retraining workers who have lost their jobs and are ready to join the clean energy economy.
The comparison between the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change is lost on no one. Risks for which we are unprepared can result in irreversible harm. Our rapidly warming planet, a risk for which we have the opportunity to prepare, has been wreaking havoc on our health and planet for decades — fueling extreme fires, droughts, floods and loss of life. While climate change has been a slower moving threat than COVID-19, it has the potential to become an infinitely more serious threat if left unchecked.
That’s why the businesses that joined LEAD on Climate 2020 are calling on Congress to build back a better, more resilient economy that prepares us to adapt to a changing climate while at the same time mitigating its impacts. These businesses have also demonstrated a deep commitment to climate action in their own operations and supply chains. They walk the talk. Even in the midst of a pandemic, several have reached key milestones to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions.
In April, General Mills committed to source 100 percent renewable electricity by 2030, while EILEEN FISHER and JLL had their science-based targets approved to limit their own emissions in line with the most ambitious goals of the Paris Agreement. Representatives from other LEAD on Climate participants — such as DSM, Mars and Salesforce — have stated publicly that they are not backing down from their climate goals as they continue to make progress in doing their part to move toward a net-zero emissions future.
These businesses know all too well that reducing emissions and growing the economy go hand in hand. They also know that smart climate policies that benefit both our economy and our planet matter now more than ever. US Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Mike Braun (R-Ind.) said that they intend to listen to the business advocates, emphasizing the importance of uniting Democrats and Republicans around bipartisan climate solutions. Both Senators hosted a virtual roundtable with a group of CEOs during LEAD on Climate, and together they co-chair the Senate Climate Solutions Caucus.
“Keep at us — it’s important to believe we can do big and bold things,” Coons said.
Businesses are already taking Sen. Coons’ “big and bold” message to heart. It was only a year ago that more than 75 major businesses went to Washington to call for a national price on carbon, in what was the largest business gathering on Capitol Hill for climate action in nearly a decade. DSM’s Hugh Welsh said then that this was just the beginning, and that businesses would be back year after year in bigger and bigger numbers. LEAD on Climate 2020 delivered in spades, with more than four times the number of businesses joining the call to action. This was thanks in part to the ability to participate from home — in what was truly a high impact, low-carbon footprint convening.
In fact, for many businesses, the virtual meetings led to more meaningful and productive conversations with lawmakers. They asked probing questions — and they got straight answers. One Congressman was so inspired that he gave the companies he met his personal cell phone number to keep the conversation going.
“To be quite frank, it was some of the most valuable conversations we’ve had with members on climate in a long time,” Meg Villarreal of Nestlé reflected on the day. Who knew that meeting virtually in a relaxed setting complete with a chat box could be both efficient and effective for all sides?
LEAD on Climate 2020 sent a message to Congress that business leaders have not lost sight of the climate crisis — even as they tackle the COVID-19 crisis. Washington should follow their lead.
Renewables have generated more electricity than coal for the last 40 days, surpassing previous records.
Wind, solar and hydroelectricity have produced more electricity than coal since March 25, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration analyzed by the Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis (IEEFA).
That tops the previous record of just nine consecutive days of renewables beating out coal in power generation.
Coal’s decline comes as a number of sectors set goals for renewable generation.
A number of utilities have announced their intention to cease their reliance on coal and close coal-fired power plants by dates ranging from 2030 to 2050.
Big-box retailers like Target have also made pledges to transition to renewable energy to power their stores.
But many states are also pushing the shift toward green energy, increasing renewable energy mandates for utilities within their borders.
The latest streak for renewables comes amid an overall decline in electricity demand as the coronavirus shutters businesses around the country — limiting the need to rely as heavily on coal.
Low natural gas prices and warm weather also help fuel the shift.
IEEFA previously predicted that renewable generation would consistently surpass coal by 2021.
“But in the first quarter of 2020, renewable generation unexpectedly exceeded coal, and with this strong performance continuing in the second quarter, there is an increasing chance that the milestone could occur this year,” the group said.
The City of Houston has committed to 100 percent renewable energy. Mayor Sylvester Turner announced that the city has teamed up with NRG Energy to power all municipal operations with renewable energy beginning in July.
Through the partnership, the City of Houston will receive 1,034,399 MWh of renewable electricity from a utility-scale solar facility each year. The contract with NRG is set to last seven years and is projected to save the city a total of $65 million during its duration.
The transition to renewable energy is part of Houston’s recently released Climate Action Plan. Mayor Turner, along with the City’s Office of Sustainability, released the Houston Climate Action Plan in honor of the 50th anniversary of Earth Day.
“This announcement is a shining example of how the Houston Climate Action Plan is already in motion. Expanding our renewable energy investment through our partnership with NRG helps us build a more sustainable city and save over $9 million per year on our electric bill,” said Mayor Sylvester Turner. “Together, we are leading by example and showing how to reduce emissions in the Energy Capital of the World.”
Houston is no stranger to the impacts of climate change. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey pummeled Houston. The Category 4 hurricane caused widespread devastation and $125 billion in damage. According to Houston’s Office of Sustainability, the Climate Action Plan is a key element of the Hurricane Harvey recovery effort. The City of Houston aims to reduce emissions and reach carbon neutrality by 2050.
“Houstonians have experienced the effects of climate change. Hurricane Harvey was larger, slower, and had 40 percent more rain than it would have if it had occurred 100 years ago. In Houston, spring arrives three weeks earlier than it did even a generation ago and our already hot summers keep getting hotter,” stated Turner.
“Houston is a global city and climate change is a global challenge, which is why as a member of C40 Cities Global Climate Leadership Group and Vice Chair of U.S. Climate Mayors, I am committed to doing our part to make Houston carbon neutral by 2050 in accordance with the Paris Climate Agreement,” said Turner.
“We can’t fix the problem overnight—but if we take bold, transformative action to lead our city down a more sustainable path, we’ll leave behind a better Houston, and a better world, for future generations.”
This story originally appeared in The Planetary Pressand is republished here as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.
The former governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, has added his voice to calls for industrialised nations to invest in a greener economic recovery from the Covid-19 crisis.
He shared his comments in an online discussion about climate change with the former Prime Minister of Australia, Malcolm Turnbull.
Both called on nations to accelerate a transition to cleaner energy.
The event was organised by the Policy Exchange think tank.
Mr Carney said that the pandemic was “a terrible situation, but there was also a big opportunity” at the end of it.
“We have a situation with climate change which will involve every country in the world and from which we can’t self-isolate,” he added.
As has rapidly become the socially distant norm, both participants joined the discussion via video conference from their respective homes – setting out how they saw ways in which countries could emerge from the crisis with cleaner, more sustainable economies.
Mr Turnbull, who was Australia’s prime minister from 2015-2018, issued blunt, broad criticisms of many governments for failing to take the science of climate change seriously.
Drawing bleak parallels with the pandemic, Mr Turnbull said Covid-19 was a case of “biology confronting and shaking the complacency of day-to-day politics with a physical reality of sickness and death”.
“The question is, when will the physics of climate change mug the complacency and denialism – just as biology has with respect to the virus.”
‘Leapfrog ahead’
Mr Carney, who stepped down as Bank of England governor in March, just before the UK lockdown began, explained that, at a time when many industries would have to restructure, this would be a chance “to try not go back to the status quo”.
As countries re-launched and rebuilt their economies, they “should try to leapfrog ahead”, he said.
He recommended regulatory policies that would push economies more quickly towards greener growth – and a more sustainable future – citing the UK’s plan to phase out petrol and diesel cars by 2035. Governments, he added, should also take the opportunity to invest in wind and solar power to accelerate the transition to greener energy.
Many countries would have the opportunity to invest in sustainable infrastructure, Mr Carney said, pointing out that that opportunity was missed after the 2008 financial crisis.
“You can’t wish away the systemic risk,” he said. “In the end, a small investment up front can save a tremendous cost down the road.”
The satellites were programmed to detect plastic particles larger than 5mm (macroplastics) and distinguish these patches of plastic debris from natural floating objects (like seaweed or driftwood); on average, there was a 86 percent accuracy rate. The researchers used four coastal case study sites: Canada’s Gulf Islands, the east coast of Scotland, the coastal waters off Ghana, and the coastal waters off Da Nang, Vietnam.
Generally, pieces of ocean plastic are too small for satellites to detect from far away — so how did the Plymouth Marine Laboratory team pull this off? They did so by using the satellites to detect plastic’s reflected light signature in the water rather than the plastic itself.
“You’re never going to see an individual plastic bottle floating on the sea, but we can detect aggregations of this material,” author Dr. Lauren Biermann told BBC News ahead of the study being published.
“Vegetation has a good signature that we can look for, whereas plastic has a different signature,” Biermann explained to the news outlet. “So, we can start to un-mix the pixel and say, ‘Right, how much of this pixel that I’ve detected that is nice and bright in my new floating debris index — how much of it seems to be plant material, and how much seems not to be plant material?’”
So, what will the Plymouth team do with this research? Moving forward, they have three steps planned. First, they will work on automating the manual steps for detecting and classifying plastic using the Sentinel-2. Second, they will work on making the detection algorithms more reliable in water with higher turbidity (cloudiness), where it’s harder to visually detect floating objects. And third, they plan to optimize their overall approach to satellite plastics detection, which they will do by gathering data from large rivers, tidal areas, and turbid areas.
Additionally, the researchers believe that their methods can be reproduced using various other remote sensing platforms that are similar to the Sentinel-2, such as drones.
Plastic pollution is a huge issue.
“Plastic pollution is a global issue,” Dr. Biermann said in a statement on Plymouth Marine Laboratory’s website. “This method will hopefully provide a stepping stone for satellites and drones to be used to tackle the marine plastics problem at the end of the product lifecycle. However, we will only ever make meaningful progress if we also tackle the source and reduce the amount of plastics produced.”
How many million tons of plastic are dumped in oceans every year?
The Green Outcomes Fund (GOF), a first of its kind structure, incentivises local South African fund managers to increase investment in green businesses.
Through a partnership officially signed on 31 January 2020 between National Treasury’s Jobs Fund and GreenCape, the R488m fund provides outcomes-based matched (concessional) funding to local investment funds to support investments into small, medium and micro-sized enterprises (SMMEs).
The SMMEs should make a demonstrable contribution to South Africa’s green economy, as well as job and enterprise creation in priority impact areas.
Solar PV panel manufacturing. Image: GreenCape
This has been made possible by catalytic grant support from the RMB Fund, a division of the FirstRand Foundation. The four local catalytic finance partners of the Green Outcomes Fund are Mergence Investment Managers, Edge Growth Ventures, Conservation International Ventures, and Business Partners South Africa.
National Treasury’s Jobs Fund partners with innovative, high-impact projects that contribute to accelerated job creation and offer practical and lasting solutions to South Africa’s employment challenges.
The world urgently needs to move towards models where economic growth is decoupled from natural resource use, while supporting climate change mitigation pathways. In South Africa, this means investment in businesses that can generate verifiable green outcomes, while creating jobs, including in energy, water, waste, infrastructure, and land management.
AgriTech business. Image: GreenCape
According to Najwah Allie-Edries, Head of the Jobs Fund: “Through the Green Outcomes Fund partnership with GreenCape, we seek to be a catalyst for innovation and investment in activities which directly contribute to sustainable job creation initiatives, as well as long term employment creation in the green economy. This initiative will also provide the Jobs Fund with valuable learnings and appealed to us as public funds will only be triggered by the delivery of independently verified jobs.”
The Green Outcomes Fund, in partnership with the Jobs Fund, will incentivise the local catalytic finance partners that it has partnered with to invest in green businesses, as well as track verifiable green metrics. Investment funds partnering with the GOF can choose from a portfolio of green outcomes metrics when selecting green SMMEs to invest in.
The green outcomes have been developed in line with international impact investing standards.
Sustainable agriculture. Image: GreenCape
“The Green Outcomes Fund aims to achieve clearly defined green outcomes, encourage greater capital allocation to green businesses by local fund managers, and catalyse increased and higher quality, consistent, reporting of green impacts,” said Megan van Vlaanderen at GreenCape. “GreenCape is the Green Outcomes Fund implementation partner, primarily accountable to the Jobs Fund for delivery and reporting on the green outcomes measurement and evaluation.”
UCT GSB’s Bertha Centre for Social Innovation led the design and fundraising for the Green Outcomes Fund development and continues as the primary knowledge partner. “We are excited about the ground-breaking role of the GOF in demonstrating an innovative financial model that combines de-risking SMME investing with demonstrated positive social and environmental impact,” said Tine Fisker Henriksen, Innovative Finance Lead, Bertha Centre for Social Innovation.
She added: “It’s a first of its kind in the international impact investing landscape and we are thrilled to launch this unique blended finance partnership in South Africa, which is made possible through local contributions only.”
