How will climate change impact Malaysia? Part 3

In this last blog post of the series where I read Malaysia’s report to the UNFCCC (read part 1 here and part 2 here), I’m going to highlight some of the actions the government is taking to mitigate climate change.

Honestly, the government has done a fair bit in some areas, with varying levels of success. What we can do now is to track the outcome of these policies and examine where are the gaps.

Biggest source of GHG: Energy (31%)

Main points: Diversify away from fossil fuels in the energy mix and increase energy efficiency

National Renewable Energy Policy and Action Plan

1. Large Scale Solar — a competitive bidding process where winning developers generate solar energy and sell the electricity to the grid.
2. Net Energy Metering (currently in its third version, replaced the Feed in Tariff) — generating electricity from renewables for one’s own use and selling the excess to the grid at the same price at which electricity is purchased.

A lot of these goals are identified in the Green Technology Master Plan (2017–2030).

In 2018, renewable energy contributed to only 2% of our energy mix (latest data I can find). The minister set a goal to reach 25% by 2030. Watch this space!

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Economy) Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed mentioned in March that a National Energy Policy will be launched second half of this year, and it will pave the way towards a low-carbon future. Let’s keep our eyes on this, see how different it is from the existing Green Technology Master Plan.

Second biggest source of GHG: Transportation (20%)

Main points: Majority of the emissions in this sector come from road transport, so the plans focus on public transportation and next-generation vehicles.

Other actions:

1. National Biofuel Policy — Technical issues have resulted in implementation delays.
2. National Automotive Policy 2014 (NAP) — The goal is to make Malaysia a regional hub for Energy Efficient Vehicles (including fuel efficient ICE vehicles, hybrid and electric vehicles). The NAP 2020 was released as well, covering areas such as creating an industrial zone for circular economy in the sector.

I haven’t looked deeply into this sector, but I’m sure you can find news stories talking about why our biofuel policy is lagging (most recent one here) and weaknesses of the NAP.

Other categories

Main points: A focus on increasing recycling rates, capturing biogas from palm oil mills and optimal use of fertilisers.

Waste

1. National Solid Waste Management Policy targets 22% recycling rate by 2020. You can read reports by WWF, C4 Malaysia & KRI to find out recycling problems in Malaysia.

Methane

1. In 2014, the government mandated new palm oil mills and old mills that are expanding their capacity to install methane avoidance facilities. But uptake has been slow, with only 80 out of 445 facilities have it installed by 2015. (Many studies have been conducted to find out the challenges. How can we address it? I featured a company talking about this before)

LULUCF (Land use, land-use change and forestry)

Main points: Implement sustainable forest management.

1. Forest certification scheme was started from 2002, and Malaysian Timber Certification Council established. Read this series from Macaranga and BFM to find out more.
2. REDD plus Strategy will help enhance sustainable forest management and reduce deforestation, while maintaining 50% forest cover. Again, read this story by Macaranga and BFM.

Agriculture

1. Malaysian Good Agricultural Practices was launched in 2013 (a certification scheme) and Malaysian Organic Scheme was launched in 2007.
2. Currently, most big oil palm plantations are certified by Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) or by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO).

Three scenarios for climate change mitigation

What if we did nothing to mitigate climate change? What if we did some things only? What if we did some things — and more? We have to also take into consideration that population growth probably means higher GHG emissions.

Business As Usual (BAU) scenario

1. No additional policy intervention is made from 2015

Planning (PLAN) scenario

1. Takes into consideration existing policies and plans for the period of projection. A total of 17 mitigation actions are reported. I took a screenshot of all the actions here. Keep track of it!
2. Includes things like assuming that all new vehicles from 2017 onwards have 0.6% annual efficiency improvement.

Ambitious (AMB) scenario

1. Looks at potential emissions reduction when additional mitigation measures are implemented
2. For instance, all new power plants after 2025 is envisaged to be natural gas-based instead of coal with the latest technology, and energy efficiency savings from electricity would increase to 10% by 2030. Greater methane capture from the waste sector by converting existing landfills into sanitary ones.
3. Assumes 100,000 electric cars and motorcycles on the road by 2030. Also assumes East Coast Rail Link, High Speed Rail (KL-Singapore) and new rail lines in Penang after 2025.

Before we go further, remember that Malaysia pledged to reduce its GHG emissions intensity by GDP by 45% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels (35% on unconditional basis).

1. The projection results (considering GHG emissions from energy, IPPU, agriculture and waste) show that Malaysia would achieve about 35.3% of GHG emission intensity per GDP reduction by 2030 compared to 2005 levels for the PLAN scenario, and 40.6% for the AMB scenario.
2. When LULUCF emissions are included with the four sectors, Malaysia would be able to achieve about 42.4% of GHG emission intensity per GDP reduction compared to 2005 levels under the PLAN scenario, and 47.9% under the AMB scenario.
3. When LULUCF emissions and removals are included with the four sectors, the GHG emission intensity per GDP compared to 2005 levels actually increases in 2030 by 65.2% under the PLAN scenario and 31.2% under the AMB scenario. (This is because forest areas are not increasing, so the increase in emission from other sectors increases at a faster rate than the LULUCF sector can remove the GHG.)

Malaysia’s pledge is drawn from the second scenario, which shows that we can meet the 45% target. Why not the third one — which takes into consideration LULUCF removals — I’m not sure.

In order to achieve the AMB scenario, we’ll require substantial financial assistance, the report points out. The report also breaks down the plans under the PLAN and AMB scenarios by sector. I’ve compiled it in this page, so take a look if you want to keep the government and industries accountable.

Other actions taken:

1. Research agencies are developing heat and drought tolerant varieties of oil palm, rice, rubber and cocoa.
2. Research in the livestock sector is focused on feedstock that can result in low methane emissions from ruminants (cows fart methane, but if you give them better feed, they fart less.)
3. TNB Research is researching low carbon electricity generation, emission and waste management, smart grid and renewable energy
4. Malaysia Palm Oil Board is researching the use of biodiesel and bio-natural gas. Biogas capture or methane avoidance has been recommended for all mills by 2020 (Palm Oil Mill Effluent, which is the liquid discharge from palm oil mills, is a major pollutant of waterways & generates methane when left in open ponds)