{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"climate_tags":["social cost of carbon"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'social cost of carbon' for facet 'climate_tags' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":2,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?climate_tags=social+cost+of+carbon","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"cer-001096","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/cer-001096","title":"COMMENTS ON THE INTENDED DRAFT GUIDELINE FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLIMATE CHANGE IMPLICATIONS IN APPLICATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATIONS, ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS LICENSES AND WASTE MANAGEMENT LICENCES","publisher":{"name":"Centre for Environmental Rights","organization":"centre-for-environmental-rights"},"document_type":"statement","language":"en","date_published":"2021-07-23","source_url":"https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/LAC-Submission-National-Guideline-for-Climate-Change-Considerations_26-July-2021.pdf?x21779","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing groundWork and Earthlife Africa, submitted comments on July 23, 2021, regarding the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment's (DFFE) draft Guideline for considering climate change implications in environmental authorisations and licenses. While welcoming the initiative, the CER argues that the draft is insufficient to address the climate crisis and fails to meet the legal requirements of the Constitution and the National Environment Management Act (NEMA). The submission advocates for a 1.5°C warming limit as the primary benchmark for emissions assessments rather than Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and calls for the inclusion of social costs of carbon and full lifecycle GHG emissions in project evaluations.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The CER contends that South Africa's Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are an inadequate benchmark for assessing an activity's climate change mitigation impacts because they are based on executive discretion and may not align with a safe emission reduction pathway. The CER argues that the benchmark should instead be a 1.5°C warming limit, noting that the draft NDC update from March 30, 2021, is 'insufficient' and the 2015 NDC is 'highly insufficient' according to Climate Action Tracker.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The submission urges the DFFE to require an assessment of the external and social costs of carbon emissions for proposed projects. The CER suggests using the USA's social cost of carbon (SCC) protocol or an equivalent methodology to quantify damages—such as impacts on GDP, biodiversity, and human health—that are typically not paid for by project proponents, aligning with the NEMA principle that costs of remedying pollution must be paid by those responsible.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The CER argues that climate impact assessments must adopt a full lifecycle and cumulative approach rather than assessing activities in isolation. This includes examining the full footprint of a project, its effects on carbon sinks, and how a single proposal contributes to the cumulative effects of other past, current, and future projects.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The CER emphasizes the need to integrate equity and socio-economic considerations into climate assessments, specifically focusing on vulnerable groups such as women, children, the elderly, and poor communities who disproportionately bear the brunt of climate impacts. They recommend that the Guideline explicitly require the identification of disproportionate impacts on these groups to enable proactive public participation.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The submission recommends expanding the definition and assessment of 'stranded assets' to include risks related to the economics of renewable energy, stricter GHG emission limits, regulatory risks, and market changes. The CER notes that the impacts of stranded assets extend beyond owners to include costs to public funds and society through job losses and decommissioning.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The CER suggests that the climate impact guidance should be extended beyond the DFFE's mandate to include other licensing processes, such as water use licensing, electricity generation licenses by the National Energy Regulator, and scheduled trade permitting by local governments, to ensure consistency across government decision-making.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-001096#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["ghg emissions","nationally determined contributions (ndcs)","1.5°c warming limit","social cost of carbon","environmental impact assessment (eia)","stranded assets","climate justice","lifecycle assessment"],"geography_discussed":["Southern Africa"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy_commentary","legal_submission"]},{"id":"cer-000333","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/cer-000333","title":"SUBMISSIONS ON DRAFT CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THABAMETSI IPP COAL-FIRED POWER STATION","publisher":{"name":"Centre for Environmental Rights","organization":"centre-for-environmental-rights"},"document_type":"statement","language":"en","date_published":"2017-02-27","source_url":"https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Annexure-1-ELA-Comments-on-draft-CCIA-PIA-27-2-17.pdf?x21779","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting for Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, submitted comments on the draft Climate Change Impact Assessment (CCIA) and Palaeontological Impact Assessment (PIA) for the proposed Thabametsi coal-fired power station. The submission argues that the draft CCIA significantly underestimates greenhouse gas emissions, ignores the social cost of carbon, and fails to adequately address severe water scarcity risks in the Lephalale area. The authors contend that the project is not in the national interest due to existing excess energy capacity and that the most appropriate recommendation is a 'no go option' to avoid irreversible environmental and social harm.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#summary","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The draft CCIA's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions calculations are significantly underestimated because they only account for carbon dioxide (CO2) and omit nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4). The submission notes that N2O emissions from the proposed circulating fluidised bed (CFB) unit can be 43 times greater than those from a pulverised fuel boiler, potentially representing about 14% of total GHG emissions.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The project fails to consider the social cost of carbon, which includes external costs to human health, property damage from flood risk, and agricultural productivity. Using a US Environmental Protection Agency protocol, the submission estimates the social cost of the Thabametsi power station could exceed USD 12 billion per year by 2030.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"There is a critical failure to assess how the project will exacerbate climate change impacts for local communities and the environment in Lephalale, particularly regarding water scarcity. While the Climate Resilience Assessment (CRA) identifies water shortages as a high risk to the project's viability, it does not analyze how the plant's own water demands will further deprive local farmers and residents in a 'heavily stressed' river basin.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The project's long-term feasibility is threatened by water availability risks and the potential for the plant to become a 'stranded asset'. The submission highlights that the proposed Mokolo Crocodile Water Augmentation Project Phase 2 (MCWAP2), which the plant relies on, has not yet commenced its EIA scoping phase, creating significant uncertainty.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The submission argues that the project is not necessary for national energy security, citing that Eskom had 11,000 MW of excess capacity daily as of May 2016 and that renewable energy alternatives are more affordable and efficient.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The draft CCIA contradicts previous claims that the plant would use 'cleaner' technology. The assessment concludes that the plant's emissions intensity is relatively high compared to other plants and does not represent an improvement over the current South African grid intensity, partly because the chosen technology is designed for low-cost, lower-quality coal rather than maximum emission reduction.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-08-17"},{"text":"The Palaeontological Impact Assessment (PIA) identifies a risk of 'irreversible damage' to fossil materials during construction. While the probability is rated low to medium, the severity is potentially 'extremely high' for Cenozoic deposits due to their scientific significance.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cer-000333#insight-7","date_modified":"2026-08-17"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power","greenhouse gas emissions","water scarcity","climate resilience","social cost of carbon","energy transition"],"geography_discussed":["Waterberg","Limpopo river basin","Mokolo river catchment","Crocodile River"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["impact assessment review","legal submission"]}]}