An assessment of new coal plants in South Africa’s electricity future

This research report assesses the impact of including two coal-fired independent power producer (IPP) projects—Thabametsi and Khanyisa—in South Africa's electricity system from 2022 to 2052. Using the South African Times Model (SATIM), the study finds that these plants are not necessary to meet demand and would increase both total system costs and greenhouse gas emissions across all analysed scenarios, potentially offsetting national energy efficiency and carbon tax mitigation efforts.

• The study concludes that in all modelled scenarios, neither new coal nor new nuclear power plants are required to meet electricity demand at the lowest cost.
• Including the coal IPPs increases total discounted system costs across all scenarios, with additional costs ranging from R16.4 billion in the best-case scenario to R27.99 billion in the Climate Change Policy (CCP) scenario.
• In the reference scenario, the coal IPPs would increase greenhouse gas emissions by 205.7Mt CO2eq over their lifetime, which represents a negative carbon price of R96/t CO2-eq.
• The GHG emissions from the coal IPPs in the reference and worst-case scenarios would almost entirely offset the projected 214 Mt CO2-eq savings from the post-2015 National Energy Efficiency Strategy to 2050.
• Even in the best-case scenario—which assumes higher costs for renewables and gas and lower GHG intensity for the coal plants—the IPPs still increase system costs by R16.14 billion and emissions by 97Mt.
• The coal IPPs use Fluidised Bed Combustion (FBC) technology, which results in a GHG intensity of 1.23 tCO2eq/MWh. This is approximately 24% higher than the current Eskom fleet average and 58% higher than the Medupi and Kusile plants, largely due to higher nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions.
• Committing to the coal IPPs while attempting to meet the low-PPD (Peak, Plateau, and Decline) carbon budget would dramatically increase costs, requiring higher investment in new generation and forcing the existing fleet to run at lower load factors.
• The coal IPPs are considered unnecessary because electricity demand in South Africa has flattened since 2010, leaving Eskom with a large surplus of inflexible base supply capacity (approximately 5GW).

APA

Ireland, G., & Burton, J. (2018). An assessment of new coal plants in South Africa’s electricity future. Centre for Environmental Rights. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Annexure-10-ERC-Coal-IPP-Study-Report-May-2018.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Ireland, Gregory, and Jesse Burton. An assessment of new coal plants in South Africa’s electricity future. Centre for Environmental Rights, 2018. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Annexure-10-ERC-Coal-IPP-Study-Report-May-2018.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Ireland |first1=Gregory |last2=Burton |first2=Jesse |title=An assessment of new coal plants in South Africa’s electricity future |publisher=Centre for Environmental Rights |date=28 May 2018 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Annexure-10-ERC-Coal-IPP-Study-Report-May-2018.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{ireland2018assessment, author = {Ireland, Gregory and Burton, Jesse}, title = {{An assessment of new coal plants in South Africa’s electricity future}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2018}, month = may, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Annexure-10-ERC-Coal-IPP-Study-Report-May-2018.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }