Search Climate Insights Directory

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) and allied environmental groups are calling for the urgent withdrawal of an amendment to the List of Activities published on 31 October 2018. The amendment doubles the permissible sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions for existing solid-fuel combustion installations, such as Eskom's coal-fired power stations and Sasol's coal boilers, from 500mg/Nm3 to 1000mg/Nm3. The CER argues that this change was made without public consultation, violating the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 and the National Environmental Management Act's requirements for transparency and public participation. The group has set a deadline of 10 December 2018 for the withdrawal of the provision, threatening High Court litigation if the request is not met.

The Life After Coal Campaign urges the South African Minister of Finance to withhold guarantees for the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power stations. The campaign argues these projects fail 'value for money' tests, violate the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), and would cause irreversible harm to the climate and public health. They highlight that the projects are not part of a least-cost electricity plan and would increase greenhouse gas emissions by 205.7Mt CO2eq over 30 years, potentially exposing the National Treasury to liabilities between R25.2 billion and R225.2 billion.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting on behalf of several environmental campaigns and alliances, requested that the South African Department of Environmental Affairs urgently withdraw a provision in the amended List of Activities published on 31 October 2018. The CER argues that this provision improperly weakens the sulphur dioxide (SO2) minimum emission standards (MES) for existing solid-fuel combustion plants without public consultation.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), writing on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, calls on ABSA Group Limited to cease financing the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power stations. The CER argues that these projects are not 'procured' due to missing or challenged legal authorisations, including atmospheric emission and water use licences. The document asserts that the 2018 draft Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) incorrectly includes these projects despite a 'least cost' option consisting only of solar, wind, and gas. The CER highlights that the plants would be located in polluted air quality priority areas, causing severe health impacts and producing greenhouse gas emissions nearly 60% higher than the Medupi and Kusile stations. Financially, the CER claims the inclusion of new coal in the draft IRP would cost South Africa nearly R20 billion more than necessary, increasing costs for consumers.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing the Life After Coal Campaign, argues that financing the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power plants is unjustifiable. The document asserts that these projects are not 'least-cost' options, face significant legal challenges regarding environmental and water licenses, and would cause severe health and climate damage. It specifically calls on FirstRand Bank to cease support for Thabametsi to avoid reputational risk and align with its own commitments to a lower-carbon economy.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), writing on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, calls on Nedbank to cease financing the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power stations. The CER argues that these projects, part of the Coal Baseload Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (CBIPPPP), are not 'procured' as claimed in the draft Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2018 because they lack essential legal authorisations, including atmospheric emission and water use licences. The document asserts that these plants are unnecessary for electricity supply, excessively expensive, and would cost South Africa nearly R20 billion more than required. Furthermore, it highlights severe health risks for residents in the Waterberg-Bojanala and Highveld Priority Areas and warns that the plants' high greenhouse gas emission intensities would undermine South Africa's Paris Agreement commitments. The CER criticizes Nedbank for excluding these 'existing commitments' from its 2018 policy against financing new coal-fired power plants.

ClientEarth has challenged Ernst & Young LLP (EY) regarding its audit of EnQuest PLC's 2017 Annual Report and Accounts. ClientEarth contends that EnQuest failed to disclose material risks and trends associated with climate change and the low carbon transition, which should have been identified by EY under International Standards on Auditing (ISAs). The letter argues that EY's own institutional knowledge and public support for the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) make its failure to flag these omissions particularly problematic. ClientEarth has submitted a complaint to the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) and requested that EY explain its processes for integrating climate risk knowledge into its audit programmes.

ClientEarth has notified KPMG of its intent to complain to the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) regarding the audit of Balfour Beatty PLC's 2017 Annual Report. ClientEarth argues that Balfour Beatty failed to provide an adequate description of principal risks, main trends, and long-term viability by omitting the impacts of climate change and the low carbon transition. The letter asserts that KPMG, despite its public support for the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and its own institutional expertise, failed to apply professional scepticism and judgement as required by International Standards on Auditing (ISAs). ClientEarth specifically questions KPMG's processes for ensuring climate knowledge is integrated into audit programmes and how it identifies material inconsistencies or misstatements in strategic and directors' reports.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing the Life After Coal Campaign, is challenging the progression of the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power stations. The CER argues that these projects fail the 'value for money' test, would increase greenhouse gas emissions, and are unable to reach commercial close due to missing licenses and pending High Court reviews. The letter requests detailed information on the status of the procurement process and the specific regulatory approvals required before PPAs can be signed.

Earthjustice and a coalition of environmental organizations oppose BSEE's proposed revisions to the 2016 Blowout Preventer Systems and Well Control Rule. They argue the proposed changes—specifically regarding drilling margins, verification organizations, blowout preventer (BOP) requirements, and real-time monitoring—increase the risk of catastrophic oil spills and worker fatalities. The authors contend that BSEE failed to provide the necessary data or quantitative risk analysis to justify these rollbacks and violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, the Highveld Environmental Justice Network, and the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance, opposes the Department of Environmental Affairs' (DEA) proposal to create an expert panel to address sulphur dioxide (SO2) abatement. The CER contends that Eskom and Sasol, the country's largest polluters, are using the proposal to avoid compliance with minimum emission standards (MES) and to secure 'rolling postponements'. The document argues that the necessary solution—retrofitting plants with flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) technology or decommissioning non-compliant plants—has already been established through a five-year multi-stakeholder process. Furthermore, it highlights that South African SO2 standards are significantly weaker than those in other developing and developed nations, and that the DEA has no legislative authority to weaken the MES based on industry claims of economic infeasibility.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting for Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and groundWork, submitted a letter to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) on 16 February 2018 requesting the postponement of public hearings for the proposed Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power stations. The CER argues that pending litigation over environmental authorisations, missing water and atmospheric emission licences, and the lack of a promulgated new Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) prevent NERSA from making a legally consistent and public-interest-based decision.

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.

Environmental groups, represented by Earthjustice, filed a lawsuit on September 22, 2017, to stop Lucky Minerals from conducting extensive gold exploration in Emigrant Gulch. The project, approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, involves 24-hour drilling over two years and is viewed as a precursor to large-scale mining that could threaten the local tourism economy and the environment of Paradise Valley and the Custer Gallatin National Forest.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) has challenged the Development Bank of Southern Africa's (DBSA) financing of the Thabametsi coal-fired power plant. The CER highlights a March 2017 North Gauteng High Court ruling that suspended the project's environmental authorisation because climate change impacts were not adequately considered. The CER notes that Thabametsi's own assessments indicate it would be one of South Africa's highest greenhouse gas emitters and faces high water availability risks. The document argues that financing new coal projects contradicts the DBSA's stated goals of supporting a low-carbon economy and its status as a UN Green Climate Fund entity, warning that the plant is likely to become a stranded asset given South Africa's commitments under the Paris Agreement.

A coalition of environmental and animal welfare organizations urges the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to withdraw proposed incidental harassment authorizations (IHAs) for five industrial seismic surveys off the U.S. East Coast. The document argues that NMFS used outdated scientific thresholds to underestimate the 'take' of marine mammals, failed to account for cumulative impacts of multiple surveys, and ignored significant harm to prey species and acoustic habitats. It specifically highlights the risk to the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale, asserting that the proposed activity could be a "tipping point" for the species' survival. The coalition further claims that the proposed mitigation measures, such as seasonal closures and visual monitoring, are insufficient and not based on the best available science.

The document argues that the EPA's proposed 20-month delay of the Chemical Disaster Rule is unlawful, arbitrary, and dangerous to public health and national security. It contends that the delay violates the Clean Air Act's three-month limit on reconsideration stays and ignores the agency's own findings regarding the urgent need for updated risk management programs to prevent catastrophic chemical releases.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and groundWork, sent a letter to the South African Department of Energy's IPP Office on 6 April 2017. The letter alerts the Department that two preferred bidders under the Coal Baseload Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (CBIPPPP)—Thabametsi Power Company and ACWA Power Khanyisa—appear unable to meet the legal qualification criteria for financial and commercial close due to missing or contested environmental and generation licenses.

The document criticizes the Trump administration's "one in, two out" executive order, which Earthjustice claims is illegal and prioritizes corporate profits over public health. It highlights the role of the EPA in preventing pollution-related illnesses and argues that the economic and health benefits of environmental regulations far outweigh their costs to industry.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted a formal statement to the Dr Pixley Ka Isaka Seme Local Municipality challenging a land use application for Portion 1 of the Farm Yzermyn 96 HT. The CER argues that the application for rezoning is legally flawed because no town-planning scheme exists for the area, and that the process has failed to meet statutory requirements for public notice and inspection.