Search Climate Insights Directory

This document is a formal response from the South African Department of Environmental Affairs to a notice issued by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) under Section 28(12) of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), 1998. The CER had requested that the Department direct ArcelorMittal South Africa (AMSA) to address pollution and environmental degradation at its Vanderbijlpark operations. The Department declined to issue a new directive, arguing that existing measures—including a Remediation Order, waste management licenses, and compliance notices—are sufficient to address the concerns.

This document contains the heads of argument for an application for leave to appeal a High Court decision regarding the legality of mining operations conducted by Tendele Coal Mining (Pty) Limited. The applicants argue that the mining company failed to obtain necessary environmental authorizations under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), violated town planning legislation for new mining areas, operated without a required waste management license, and unlawfully relocated traditional graves.

This document is an Atmospheric Emission License (AEL) application for the Tutuka Power Station, detailing the facility's emission sources, pollutants, and the proposed monitoring and mitigation strategies to comply with South African environmental standards.

This research paper examines the legal framework and practical application of environmental authorizations for mining activities in South Africa, specifically focusing on the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) and the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). The author argues that the current system of 'environmental authorizations' is often treated as a mere formality rather than a substantive tool for sustainable development, leading to inadequate environmental protection and a failure to properly integrate social and environmental costs into mining operations.

The document argues that hydraulic fracturing in South Africa's Karoo Basin is likely to induce seismicity and that current proposed regulations are insufficient. It recommends the implementation of a risk-based Traffic Light Protocol (TLP) and a transparent, multi-tiered earthquake monitoring system to mitigate risks of building damage and public harm.

The briefing examines how CETA's requirements for licensing procedures—that they be clear, objective, established in advance, and as simple as possible—provide Canadian companies with legal avenues to challenge environmental and social regulations in EU Member States. It argues these disciplines are incompatible with a precautionary approach to environmental protection and allow international arbitration panels, often lacking technical expertise, to supersede the judgment of local regulators.

The report contends that CETA threatens the regulatory sovereignty of EU Member States regarding pesticides by promoting regulatory harmonization, requiring 'sufficient scientific evidence' over the precautionary principle, and introducing procedural burdens and financial risks through dispute resolution mechanisms.

The report examines how CETA's domestic regulatory disciplines may conflict with the EU's Industrial Emissions Directive (IED). It highlights that CETA's requirements for licensing processes to be 'objective' and 'established in advance' could be used by Canadian investors to challenge the discretionary judgment of regulators, the use of Best Available Techniques (BAT), and the inclusion of public participation in environmental permitting.

The document examines how expanded definitions of 'indirect expropriation' in investment treaties allow foreign investors to challenge environmental and public health regulations. It highlights the rise of investor-to-state arbitration, noting a significant increase in cases handled by the World Bank's International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Through case studies in Canada, Bolivia, and Mexico, the text illustrates how these rules can override international agreements like the Basel Convention or local community decisions regarding hazardous waste. The author concludes by calling for a reformed international framework that balances investor protection with the sovereign right to regulate in the public interest and ensures transparency in arbitration.

The report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) contends that the Korea-U.S. FTA violates the Trade Act of 2002 by providing foreign investors with greater substantive rights than U.S. investors. It specifically criticizes new expropriation tests, the classification of all contract rights as property rights, and the use of secretive investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms. CIEL warns that these provisions allow ad hoc arbitral tribunals to override good faith public interest regulations, particularly in emerging technology sectors like biotechnology and nanotechnology, while lacking a general environmental exception.

The document examines the legislative hurdles preventing the United States from ratifying the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). It analyzes four proposed bills intended to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), concluding that only the Solis TSCA bill (H.R. 4800) aligns with the treaty's health-based standards and supports state-level environmental protections.

A letter dated February 28, 2006, from several U.S. state Attorneys General to the House Committee on Energy & Commerce opposing specific provisions of HR 4591. The bill aims to implement the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs Treaty), but the signees argue it contains overly broad preemption language and flawed EPA review procedures that would hinder state and federal environmental protections.

The report examines 38 cases of international arbitration brought by mining companies against Latin American states, highlighting a pattern where corporate legal protections are used to bypass national courts and penalize governments for implementing public health, environmental, or indigenous rights policies. It identifies Canada as a primary source of mining investment and litigation in the region and argues that the current ISDS framework creates a 'chilling effect' on democratic regulation. The document details specific cases in countries such as El Salvador, Colombia, and Venezuela, and proposes a shift toward a legal framework that prioritizes human rights and environmental protection over investor profits.

ClientEarth proposes amendments to a proposed EU regulation to ensure the European Parliament can scrutinize and oppose implementing acts. The briefing argues that 'control by Member States' should include the European Parliament as representatives of citizens. Proposed changes include a right of scrutiny to flag power excesses, guaranteed public access to documents under Regulation 1049/2001, and the ability for the Parliament to oppose or amend draft measures in the examination procedure based on legality, subsidiarity, or proportionality.

The Minerals and Mining Policy of Ghana outlines a strategic framework to balance mineral exploitation with sustainable economic, social, and environmental development. It details the transition from state-controlled mining (1957-1983) to a privatized sector, emphasizing the need to diversify the mineral base beyond gold, diamonds, manganese, and bauxite. The policy sets objectives to enhance local value addition, improve geo-scientific data, and support artisanal and small-scale mining, which is reserved for Ghanaian citizens. It establishes regulatory roles for agencies like the Minerals Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency, while committing to international climate goals, including the UNFCCC. Fiscal policies aim for a transparent regime that balances investor attraction with the optimization of government revenue, while social policies focus on community participation, sustainable livelihoods for displaced persons, and the prevention of child labour.

The report identifies three critical environmental challenges for Canada's mining sector: inadequate mine closure and reclamation, the risk of tailings dam failures, and the cumulative impact of infrastructure on biodiversity. It highlights a legacy of abandoned mines and the 'bankruptcy loophole' that allows companies to avoid cleanup costs. The document compares various Voluntary Sustainability Initiatives (VSIs) and regulatory frameworks, noting Quebec's leadership in financial assurance and British Columbia's Cumulative Effects Framework. It argues that mitigating these risks is a precondition for securing the community support and investor confidence necessary to scale up critical mineral production for the clean energy transition.

The report examines the historical and current state of Indigenous engagement in Canada's resource sector, focusing on the transition to clean energy and critical minerals. It argues that while regulatory frameworks like the Impact Assessment Act have improved since the colonial era, they remain too complex, costly, and onerous, often failing to adequately recognize Indigenous sovereignty. Through case studies in Quebec, Nunavut, Saskatchewan, Yukon, and British Columbia, the document illustrates the spectrum of engagement from successful modern treaties and equity partnerships to ongoing conflicts over land title. The authors recommend a shift toward Indigenous-led evaluation and approval processes, the formal acceptance of Indigenous laws, and increased capacity support for communities to ensure the energy transition is equitable and grounded in free, prior, and informed consent.

The report identifies mine closure, tailings management, and biodiversity loss as the three critical environmental challenges facing Canada's critical minerals sector. It argues that failing to address these risks undermines social acceptance and investor confidence, which are essential for the energy transition. The document highlights the 'mixed and controversial' legacy of abandoned mines and tailings disasters, such as Mount Polley, while contrasting varying provincial regulatory effectiveness, noting Quebec as a leader in financial guarantees. It recommends that Canadian governments reduce bureaucratic discretion in enforcement, mandate early and transparent closure planning, restrict high-risk 'upstream' tailings dams, and adopt regional cumulative effect assessments to protect biodiversity and respect Indigenous land-use planning.

The report examines the historical and current state of Indigenous participation in Canada's resource regulatory frameworks. It argues that while the transition to clean energy requires increased extraction of critical minerals on Indigenous lands, current regulatory processes—including the Impact Assessment Act—are often too complex, costly, and slow, failing to fully recognize Indigenous sovereignty. Through various case studies, the document highlights that successful projects are those based on genuine collaboration, modern treaties, and the recognition of Indigenous laws, rather than mere consultation. It recommends a shift toward Indigenous-led assessment and monitoring processes to ensure economic prosperity and environmental protection.

The document identifies five coal ash generating facilities in Alaska, noting that 46,179 tons of ash are produced annually. It argues that because Alaska excludes coal ash from the definition of industrial solid waste, disposal is virtually unregulated, leading to the use of unlined landfills that risk leaching toxins like arsenic, vanadium, and mercury into groundwater. The report also notes that low-income individuals and people of color are over-represented in zip codes containing these power plants.