MINISTER’S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED THABAMETSI COAL-FIRED POWER STATION

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) is challenging the South African Minister of Environmental Affairs' decision to uphold the environmental authorisation for the Thabametsi coal-fired power station. Despite a Climate Change Impact Assessment (CCIA) and a peer review by EOH Coastal and Environmental Services identifying 'very high' greenhouse gas emissions and high water scarcity risks, the Minister justified the project based on the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2010. CER argues this reliance on outdated policy is unlawful, ignores South Africa's Paris Agreement commitments, and disregards current electricity surpluses and the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy.

• The Minister of Environmental Affairs decided on 30 January 2018 to uphold and confirm the environmental authorisation for the Thabametsi coal-fired power station, a decision the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) regards as "unreasonable and unlawful".
• A Climate Change Impact Assessment (CCIA) for the Thabametsi plant categorised its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as "very high" when compared to international lender standards and noted that emissions intensity is "relatively high" compared to other plants.
• An EOH peer review of the CCIA suggested that the GHG emissions significance rating should be elevated to "VERY HIGH (NEGATIVE)" due to the high probability of very large emissions and limited mitigation opportunities, while also identifying water scarcity and drought as high significance risks.
• The Minister justified the project by relying on the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2010 – 2030, arguing that the benefits of additional energy generation capacity outweigh the harms of new coal-fired facilities.
• CER contends that the Minister's reliance on the IRP 2010 is flawed because the policy is outdated, was developed before the Paris Agreement and South Africa's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), and contradicts a March 2017 High Court judgment stating that energy policy does not exempt the need for independent impact assessments.
• CER asserts that the project is unnecessary due to current electricity surpluses and that demand can be met more cost-effectively through solar PV and wind rather than new coal capacity.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2018). MINISTER’S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED THABAMETSI COAL-FIRED POWER STATION. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CER-Letter-to-PCEA-re-Thabametsi-16-2-18-1.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. MINISTER’S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED THABAMETSI COAL-FIRED POWER STATION. 2018. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CER-Letter-to-PCEA-re-Thabametsi-16-2-18-1.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=MINISTER’S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED THABAMETSI COAL-FIRED POWER STATION |date=16 February 2018 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CER-Letter-to-PCEA-re-Thabametsi-16-2-18-1.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centreforenvironmentalrights2018ministers, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{MINISTER’S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE PROPOSED THABAMETSI COAL-FIRED POWER STATION}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2018}, month = feb, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CER-Letter-to-PCEA-re-Thabametsi-16-2-18-1.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }