APPEAL RESPONSE REPORT

This Appeal Response Report, submitted by Eskom Holdings SOC Limited to the Minister of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE), appeals the National Air Quality Officer's (NAQO) decisions regarding applications for postponements from the Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for various coal-fired power stations.

• Eskom is appealing the 'Adverse Decisions' (full refusals) for the Matla, Duvha, Matimba, Medupi, and Lethabo power stations, as well as 'Partial Refusals' for the Majuba, Tutuka, Kendal, and Kriel stations. Postponements were granted for Grootvlei, Arnot, Komati, Camden, Hendrina, Acacia, and Port Rex because they are scheduled for decommissioning before 31 March 2030.
• Eskom argues that the NAQO's decisions are irrational and unlawful because they failed to consider critical socio-economic and environmental factors, including water scarcity, financial costs, and the potential for massive electricity supply losses. Eskom estimates that the decisions could lead to the immediate loss of 16,000 MW of capacity (37% of installed coal capacity), potentially increasing to 30,000 MW (69%) by 2025, which could trigger Stage 8 and eventually Stage 15 load-shedding.
• The report claims that implementing the required flue-gas desulphurisation (FGD) retrofits across eight power stations would cost at least R300 billion, leading to a 10% tariff increase. Eskom asserts that such an investment is unsustainable for a developing country and would create stranded assets.
• Eskom highlights a conflict between air quality goals and other environmental imperatives. Specifically, wet FGD technology would increase water consumption by 15%-30% (up to an additional 43 million cubic meters per annum) in a water-scarce country and would produce approximately 3 million additional tons of CO2 per annum, potentially breaching international climate commitments and increasing Carbon Tax liabilities.
• The report argues that the NAQO's strict interpretation of the MES ignores the principles of 'sustainable development' and a 'Just Energy Transition' (JET). Eskom contends that environmental management must balance social, economic, and environmental pillars, and that the current decisions would cause significant economic damage, including a 33% negative impact on Mpumalanga's GDP and an 18% negative impact on Limpopo's GDP.
• Eskom claims that the decisions would lead to significant job losses, estimating that at least 5,500 direct jobs and 93,000 indirect jobs would be lost by 2025. Additionally, the economic cost of the resulting unserved energy (load shedding) is estimated at R1.7 trillion.
• Eskom disputes the NAQO's assertion that it has made 'minimal effort' to comply with the MES. It cites the successful PM abatement retrofit at Grootvlei, the construction of Kusile with FGD, and a JET strategy that aims to close 22 GW of coal capacity between 2022 and 2035 to reduce CO2 emissions by 50% by 2035.
• Eskom challenges the legality of conditions attached to the adverse decisions, such as the requirement to provide SO2 offset plans within 90 days for Medupi and Matimba. It argues that regulation 13(b) of the MES does not empower the NAQO to impose conditions when an application is refused.
• Eskom requests that the Minister refer the matter to conciliation under section 17(1) of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) or appoint a facilitator under section 17(2) to resolve the disagreement between various organs of state (including DFFE, National Treasury, and the Department of Water and Sanitation).

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2021). APPEAL RESPONSE REPORT. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Eskom-MES-Appeal-12-12-2021-.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. APPEAL RESPONSE REPORT. 2021. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Eskom-MES-Appeal-12-12-2021-.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=APPEAL RESPONSE REPORT |date=3 November 2021 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Eskom-MES-Appeal-12-12-2021-.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2021appeal, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{APPEAL RESPONSE REPORT}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2021}, month = nov, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Eskom-MES-Appeal-12-12-2021-.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }