CSIRS COMPREHENSIVE ALTERNATIVE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN (IRP) FOR ELECTRICITY: MISSING COSTS

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, asserts that the CSIR's alternative IRP and the DoE's draft IRP omit substantial externalities associated with coal and nuclear energy. The letter highlights an estimated R33 billion annual economic cost from air pollution due to coal-fired generation and argues that water consumption figures are underestimated or based on inaccurate data. It further notes that the circulating fluidised bed combustion technology planned for the Thabametsi power station results in significant nitrous oxide emissions, making it 60% worse in GHG emission intensity than the Medupi and Kusile stations. Finally, the CER demands the inclusion of nuclear decommissioning, fuel storage, and insurance costs to ensure a fair assessment of energy options.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The economic cost of air pollution from coal-fired power generation in South Africa is estimated to be approximately R33 billion per year, resulting in premature deaths, chronic bronchitis, and hospital admissions.
  • The CSIR and DoE are accused of underestimating water consumption for electricity; while the draft IRP Base Case indicates 1.15 litres/kWh, Eskom's 2016 actual consumption was 1.44 litres/kWh, totaling 314.685 million cubic metres annually.
  • The Thabametsi coal-fired power station's use of circulating fluidised bed combustion (CFB) technology leads to high nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, making its greenhouse gas emission intensity 60% worse than that of the Medupi and Kusile power stations.
  • The current costing models for nuclear energy are insufficient as they omit decommissioning costs, used fuel storage and handling costs, and insurance risk cover.

Cite the original document

APA
Centre for Environmental Rights (2017). CSIRS COMPREHENSIVE ALTERNATIVE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN (IRP) FOR ELECTRICITY: MISSING COSTS. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CER-Letter-to-CSIR-re-IRP_11-Aug-2017.pdf?x21779
Chicago
Centre for Environmental Rights. CSIRS COMPREHENSIVE ALTERNATIVE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN (IRP) FOR ELECTRICITY: MISSING COSTS. 2017. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CER-Letter-to-CSIR-re-IRP_11-Aug-2017.pdf?x21779.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=CSIRS COMPREHENSIVE ALTERNATIVE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN (IRP) FOR ELECTRICITY: MISSING COSTS |date=11 August 2017 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CER-Letter-to-CSIR-re-IRP_11-Aug-2017.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{centreforenvironmentalrights2017csirs, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{CSIRS COMPREHENSIVE ALTERNATIVE INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN (IRP) FOR ELECTRICITY: MISSING COSTS}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2017}, month = aug, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CER-Letter-to-CSIR-re-IRP_11-Aug-2017.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated