SUBMISSION ON THE APPLICATIONS FOR, AND DECISIONS ON, POSTPONEMENT/SUSPENSION OF MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE RELATED APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF PROVISIONAL AELS, TO THE MES NECA FORUM

This submission by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), on behalf of groundWork and Earthlife Africa, opposes Eskom's applications for the postponement and suspension of Minimum Emission Standards (MES) compliance. The document argues that Eskom's failure to comply with air quality laws violates constitutional rights to health and a safe environment, particularly in the Highveld Priority Area. It provides evidence of extensive emission exceedances, high emission intensity compared to international standards, and severe public health impacts, while asserting that abatement technologies are technically and economically feasible.

• Eskom's coal-fired power stations exhibit significantly higher emission intensities than international benchmarks. Between April 2021 and March 2022, the average particulate matter (PM) emission intensity was 0.33 g/kWh, which is "over 3 times greater than the Chinese fleet average (as of 2015) of 0.09 g/kWh". For sulphur oxides (SOx), the average was 9.50 g/kWh, ranging from "3 to 30 times more SOx per unit of energy than Chinas 2015 fleet average of less than 0.49g/kWh". Nitrogen oxide (NOx) intensity averaged 4.29 g/kWh, which is substantially higher than the US average of less than 1.00 g/kWh since 2009.
• Eskom has a poor record of compliance with its Atmospheric Emission Licences (AELs). Between April 2021 and March 2022, 15 power stations reported 2,309 exceedances of AEL limits. PM was the most frequent pollutant with 2,003 exceedances across 13 stations, followed by NOx (194 exceedances by 6 stations) and SOx (112 exceedances by 3 stations). Overall exceedances increased by 81% compared to the period from April 2016 to March 2017.
• Non-compliance with the MES has severe projected health and economic consequences. A report by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) projects that under Eskom's planned retirement and retrofit schedule, emissions would be responsible for "79 500 air pollution-related deaths from 2025 until end-of-life". Full compliance with the MES for plants operating beyond 2030 would avoid an estimated 2,300 deaths per year and economic costs of "R42 billion (USD 2.9 billion) per year".
• The SO2 Panel Report concludes that it is "technologically feasible and economically beneficial" for all plants operational after 2030 to meet an MES of 1000 mg/Nm3 or lower, and for most plants to meet limits of 250 mg/Nm3 or 500 mg/Nm3. The report suggests that the earliest compliance provides the largest net benefits to society, as most costs are one-off investments. A "BAT scenario" (Best Available Technology) of 250mg/Nm3 by 2030 would deliver a 92% reduction in SO2 emissions, requiring a 14.6% increase in the electricity tariff.
• The CER argues that the National Air Quality Officer's (NAQO) decisions to grant certain postponements and suspensions were unlawful. Specifically, the postponement for Majuba power station is contested because the granted limit of 1300mg/Nm3 for NOx is "even weaker than the existing plant standard for NOx, which is 1100mg", violating Section 11D of the List of Activities. Additionally, suspensions for Camden, Hendrina, Arnot, Komati, Grootvlei, and Kriel are challenged because they were granted without the "detailed and clear decommissioning schedules" required by law.
• The Highveld Health Study, commissioned by the DFFE, indicates that improving air quality to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) would save lives. The study estimated a 5,125 decrease in PM10 attributable mortality and a 4,881 decrease in PM2.5 attributable mortality if annual NAAQS were met. It also found that lung function decreased after exposure to PM10, PM2.5, SO2, CO, and NOx, with effects observed within days or even the same day as exposure.
• The CER rejects the use of air quality offsets as a substitute for regulatory compliance. They argue there is "no legislative framework for offsets" and that such mechanisms risk targeting the cheapest pollutants rather than the most harmful ones. They maintain that reducing indoor pollution should be an addition to, not a replacement for, reducing outdoor air pollution, as vulnerable communities near power stations would still be harmed.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2023). SUBMISSION ON THE APPLICATIONS FOR, AND DECISIONS ON, POSTPONEMENT/SUSPENSION OF MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE RELATED APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF PROVISIONAL AELS, TO THE MES NECA FORUM. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/gw-and-ela-1.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. SUBMISSION ON THE APPLICATIONS FOR, AND DECISIONS ON, POSTPONEMENT/SUSPENSION OF MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE RELATED APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF PROVISIONAL AELS, TO THE MES NECA FORUM. 2023. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/gw-and-ela-1.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=SUBMISSION ON THE APPLICATIONS FOR, AND DECISIONS ON, POSTPONEMENT/SUSPENSION OF MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE RELATED APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF PROVISIONAL AELS, TO THE MES NECA FORUM |date=31 January 2023 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/gw-and-ela-1.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2023submission, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{SUBMISSION ON THE APPLICATIONS FOR, AND DECISIONS ON, POSTPONEMENT/SUSPENSION OF MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES INCLUDING THE RELATED APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF PROVISIONAL AELS, TO THE MES NECA FORUM}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2023}, month = jan, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/gw-and-ela-1.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }