Health impacts of Eskomʼs non-compliance with minimum emissions standards

This report analyzes the public health and economic consequences of Eskom's failure to comply with South Africa's Minimum Emissions Standards (MES). It compares various compliance scenarios, concluding that Eskom's current retrofit plan provides minimal health benefits due to a failure to address sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions, and that full compliance or the adoption of Best Available Technology (BAT) would significantly reduce premature deaths and economic losses.

• Under Eskom's current planned retirement and retrofit schedule, the company's power plants are projected to cause 79,500 air pollution-related deaths from 2025 until the end of the plants' operational life, with a 95% confidence interval between 48,200 and 122,000.
• Full compliance with the Minimum Emissions Standards (MES) for plants operating beyond 2030 would prevent approximately 2,300 deaths annually and save R42 billion (USD 2.9 billion) in economic costs per year starting in 2025.
• Eskom's proposed retrofit plan is insufficient, realizing only 25% of the health benefits that would come from MES compliance because it almost entirely fails to address SO2 emissions.
• Cumulative health benefits of MES compliance until the end-of-life of the plants include avoiding 34,400 deaths and R620 billion (USD 41.7 billion) in economic costs. Additional avoided impacts include 140,000 asthma emergency room visits, 57,000 preterm births, 5,900 new childhood asthma cases, 50,000 years lived with disability, and 35 million days of work absence.
• If the compliance deadline were shifted to 2030 instead of 2025, compliance would still avoid 26,400 deaths and R470 billion (USD 32.0 billion) in economic costs.
• Implementing Best Available Technology (BAT) by 2030 would be the most effective measure, avoiding 57,000 deaths and R1,000 billion (USD 68.0 billion) in economic costs compared to Eskom's plan.
• Full MES compliance would reduce emissions of SO2 by 60%, PM by 50%, NOx by 20%, and mercury (Hg) by 40% compared to a scenario with no improvements. In contrast, Eskom's plan only reduces SO2 by 13%, NOx by 11%, and Hg by 3%, though it would bring the fleet into compliance for PM by 2030.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). Health impacts of Eskomʼs non-compliance with minimum emissions standards. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CREA-Report_Health-Impacts-of-Eskoms-non-compliance.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. Health impacts of Eskomʼs non-compliance with minimum emissions standards. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CREA-Report_Health-Impacts-of-Eskoms-non-compliance.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=Health impacts of Eskomʼs non-compliance with minimum emissions standards |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CREA-Report_Health-Impacts-of-Eskoms-non-compliance.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndhealth, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{Health impacts of Eskomʼs non-compliance with minimum emissions standards}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CREA-Report_Health-Impacts-of-Eskoms-non-compliance.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }