OPPOSITION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXPERT PANEL ON SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ABATEMENT SOLUTIONS

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, the Highveld Environmental Justice Network, and the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance, opposes the Department of Environmental Affairs' (DEA) proposal to create an expert panel to address sulphur dioxide (SO2) abatement. The CER contends that Eskom and Sasol, the country's largest polluters, are using the proposal to avoid compliance with minimum emission standards (MES) and to secure 'rolling postponements'. The document argues that the necessary solution—retrofitting plants with flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) technology or decommissioning non-compliant plants—has already been established through a five-year multi-stakeholder process. Furthermore, it highlights that South African SO2 standards are significantly weaker than those in other developing and developed nations, and that the DEA has no legislative authority to weaken the MES based on industry claims of economic infeasibility.

• Eskom and Sasol have repeatedly received postponements for complying with minimum emission standards (MES) and have indicated they do not intend to meet the new plant MES for sulphur dioxide (SO2).
• The proposed expert panel is viewed as a tactic to delay the inevitable costs of compliance and the implementation of necessary abatement technology, which would continue to negatively impact human health.
• The necessary technical solution for meeting the new plant SO2 MES is flue gas desulphurisation (FGD), which is recognized as the Best Available Technology (BAT).
• South Africa's SO2 emission standards are significantly more lenient than those of other countries; existing plant MES are 17.5 times weaker than those in China, Germany, and the EU, and nearly 6 times weaker than India's.
• The CER asserts that there is no legal provision allowing the DEA to weaken the MES or exempt industry from compliance based on claims that retrofitting is practically infeasible or too expensive.
• The establishment of a new panel would duplicate a comprehensive five-year multi-stakeholder consultation process that already considered technical feasibility and socio-economic consequences when setting the MES.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2018). OPPOSITION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXPERT PANEL ON SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ABATEMENT SOLUTIONS. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Annexure-2_CER_letter_to_DEA_re_SO2_panel_5_March_2018.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. OPPOSITION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXPERT PANEL ON SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ABATEMENT SOLUTIONS. 2018. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Annexure-2_CER_letter_to_DEA_re_SO2_panel_5_March_2018.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=OPPOSITION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXPERT PANEL ON SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ABATEMENT SOLUTIONS |date=5 March 2018 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Annexure-2_CER_letter_to_DEA_re_SO2_panel_5_March_2018.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centreforenvironmentalrights2018opposition, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{OPPOSITION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXPERT PANEL ON SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ABATEMENT SOLUTIONS}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2018}, month = mar, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Annexure-2_CER_letter_to_DEA_re_SO2_panel_5_March_2018.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }