Civil Engineering August 2022 | Vol 30 No 7

Civil Engineering August 2022 1 From the Pres ident ’ s desk Transport, the environment and gender inclusion I n 2008 I had the privilege of being part of a group of scientists investigating transport and the environment for the National Transport Master Plan (NATMAP). While consortia around the country were undertaking extrapolation studies on the demand side, this group of scientists recognised the risk that South Africa would not have sufficient energy to power the transport system. Four energy availability scenarios were calculated: the ‘well planned journey’ (pro-active action), ‘riding the wave’ (reac- tive action), ‘taking the back road’ (delayed action), and the ‘bumpy road’ (lack of, or significantly delayed action). The expecta- tion at the time was that, by 2030, South Africa would need an additional 80% of energy for transport if consumption is not capped (see Figure 1). Figure 1 assumes that government and industry would have a pro-active energy approach 1 . If they don’t, as in the other scenarios, the 80% becomes even higher. The fact that Eskom and fuel prices are escalating at a rapid rate is an indication that South Africa has not been pro-active since the scenarios were developed. The transport scientists examined measures to close the energy gap, first reviewing road-related energy measures, then measures for other modes (rail, air and shipping). As a last resort, new technologies, such as magnetic levitation (Maglev), were added. Without trying to start a debate regarding where we are, it needs to be realised that time does not stop in 2030, and that South Africa will inevitably need transport options that are much more efficient than those currently avail- able. I learned at the 2022 Southern African Transport Conference (SATC) that urban low- and medium-speed Maglev systems are now used in China. Considering these technologies in the African context is recommended, assuming energy security and theft issues can be addressed. GREEN HYDROGEN The SATC also highlighted that hydrogen can now be produced more cleanly (at least that is what some recent sources indicate). So, the debate on whether to back battery electric vehicles (BEVs) or hydrogen needs to be revisited. Green hydrogen is an important piece of the energy transition puzzle. It is de- fined as “hydrogen produced by splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen using renewable electricity.” 2 The by-product of green hydrogen is water vapor, which can be considered clean. However, in cities and fragile ecosystems, the water vapor may need to be captured to avoid unintended negative impacts. Globally, “we will need green hydrogen to reach net zero emissions, in particular for industry, shipping and aviation. Unlike renewable power, which is the cheapest source of electricity in most countries and regions today, electrolysis for green hydrogen production needs to significantly scale-up and reduce its cost by at least three times over the next decade or two.” 2 However, we need electricity and BEVs to tie us over until green hydrogen can be produced en masse. 2 Issues such as the flammability of hydrogen and charging Bu mp y roa d Ta kin g t he ba ck ro ad Ri din g t he w ave Figure 1 Energy and transport scenarios – NATMAP 2010 1 200 Index (2008 =100) 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 W ell pl an ne d jo ur ne y Bus ine ss as usu al Only energy efficient new technologies can bridge the gap Also mode shift measures required All mode efficiency measures required Only road passenger and freight efficiency measures required