record-13.3-pg-25-36-ff947e4bf0755a76.pdf

The provided text is an excerpt from the Eskom Air Quality Improvement Plan, detailing the strategic framework, financial requirements, and operational risks associated with reducing emissions at Eskom power stations. It outlines a comprehensive plan for particulate, NOx, and SO2 emission reductions through technology retrofits and air quality offsets, while highlighting significant funding gaps and organizational challenges.

• Eskom requires a total nominal capital expenditure (CAPEX) of R107 billion for its current emission reduction plan, covering the period from FY2017 to FY2030. This figure includes FGD retrofits at Medupi and Kendal power stations but excludes the FGD option for Matimba Power Station. Additionally, R4.3 billion in operational expenditure (OPEX) is required for the air quality offset programme between the current financial year and FY2025.
• The emission reduction programme is divided into three primary technical areas: particulate emission reduction via Fabric Filter Plants (FFP) retrofits and Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) improvements; NOx emission reduction through Low NOx burner retrofits; and SO2 emission reduction specifically via the Medupi FGD retrofit.
• Eskom faces significant organizational and skill-based constraints, including low experience levels in Engineering and at power stations, and a lack of specific skills for operating Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) systems. Furthermore, a lack of alignment between different Eskom divisions has hindered the execution of emission abatement retrofits, such as changing contracting strategies for FFP projects.
• Failure to execute the Air Quality Strategy carries severe legal, reputational, and operational risks. Legal consequences include potential criminal prosecution of individuals or the entity, with penalties up to 10 years imprisonment or fines of R10 million. Operationally, non-compliant power stations may be forced to reduce production or shut down, threatening the electricity supply.
• The document notes that Eskom lags behind both first-world countries and third-world countries like China in clean coal implementation, and observes that South Africa's emission standards are among the most lenient globally.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). record-13.3-pg-25-36-ff947e4bf0755a76.pdf. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Record-13.3-pg-25-36.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. record-13.3-pg-25-36-ff947e4bf0755a76.pdf. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Record-13.3-pg-25-36.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=record-13.3-pg-25-36-ff947e4bf0755a76.pdf |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Record-13.3-pg-25-36.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndrecord133pg2536ff947e4bf0755a76pdf, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{record-13.3-pg-25-36-ff947e4bf0755a76.pdf}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Record-13.3-pg-25-36.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }