Search Climate Insights Directory

The report concludes that the combined operation of the proposed Thabametsi power plant with the existing Matimba and Medupi plants would cause SO2 concentrations to exceed South Africa's health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) at several receptor locations. While NOx and PM2.5 emissions from the plants alone might not exceed standards due to stack dilution, the report finds they will likely cause exceedances when added to existing baseline pollution from mobile sources and the Grootegeluk Mine. Additionally, the author argues that PM2.5 emissions from the proposed Thabametsi mine were significantly underestimated in previous reports by at least a factor of five, likely leading to significant impacts on locations to the south-west.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted a letter to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) on 6 March 2018, requesting procedural details for public hearings regarding generation licence applications for the proposed Khanyisa and Thabametsi coal-fired power stations.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), on behalf of Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and groundWork, submitted supplementary objections on 5 March 2018 against the Water Use Licence Application (IWULA) and Integrated Water and Waste Water Management Plan (IWWMP) for the proposed Thabametsi coal-fired power station. The objections argue that the project is unnecessary due to excess electricity capacity, poses severe risks to the water-stressed Mokolo Catchment, and fails to account for climate change impacts and toxic coal ash disposal risks.

The report concludes that the proposed Thabametsi Power Plant's coal ash dump is unsuitable and its mitigation measures are insufficient. Key concerns include the siting of the dump atop fault zones, which could facilitate rapid contaminant transport and hinder monitoring, and a groundwater monitoring program that omits numerous critical trace elements. The author also notes significant discrepancies in the applicant's estimated coal combustion residue (CCR) production and argues that the proposed liner system may not meet accepted safety standards, increasing the risk of hazardous waste leaking into water resources used by local populations.

The peer review concludes that the Greenhouse Gas Assessment (GGA) and Climate Resilience Assessment (CRA) are comprehensive and follow international best practices, though it identifies gaps in the quantification of the Social Cost of Carbon and questions the overall project impact rating. While the project's GHG emissions are rated as 'VERY LARGE' and water scarcity risks as 'HIGH', the reviewer notes that the project's justification relies on existing South African energy policy, which remains a point of contention.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of the Life After Coal/Impilo Ngaphandle Kwamalahle Campaign, urges the Portfolio Committee on Energy to compel the Department of Energy to release key technical data and conduct fair public consultations before finalising the IRP Update and IEP. The submission highlights the Department's failure to respond to PAIA requests for modelling assumptions and tariff implications. It further argues that the current planning ignores the health and water costs of coal, the emissions of nitrous oxide from CFB technology, and the financial viability of new coal and nuclear plants. Citing studies by Meridian Economics and the Frankfurt Institute, the document asserts that accelerating the decommissioning of older coal stations and prioritising wind and solar PV is the most cost-effective path for South Africa's energy future.

The Thabametsi Power Company (Pty) Ltd is applying for a Water Use License for a 630 MW coal-fired power plant near Lephalale, Limpopo. The project will use dry-cooled Circulating Fluidised Bed technology to achieve zero liquid effluent discharge. Water will be sourced via a permanent transfer of 720,000 m3/annum from Exxaro Coal (Pty) Ltd's existing allocation. The application covers several water uses under the National Water Act, including taking and storing water, altering watercourses, and disposing of waste. While the project is expected to create 14,348 jobs and support local industry, it faces challenges regarding water scarcity in the Mokolo Dam catchment and potential groundwater pollution from ash dumps and coal stockpiles. Mitigation measures include HDPE liners for pollution control dams and a comprehensive groundwater monitoring program.

The document is a 'Comments and Responses Report' addressing objections to the Thabametsi Power Station's climate and palaeontological assessments. The developer, Thabametsi Power Company, defends the project's alignment with the 2010 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) and argues that its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while high, are consistent with international standards and comparable to other South African coal plants. It rejects claims that it must calculate the 'social cost of carbon' or assess community-level climate resilience, stating these fall outside the approved Scope of Work. The report also addresses water scarcity risks in the Lephalale region, asserting that Phase 1 will use existing water allocations from the MCWAP-1 scheme and employ dry-cooling technology to minimize consumption.

The report evaluates the Thabametsi Power Station's impact on climate change and palaeontological heritage. It finds that the plant will have a 'High (Negative)' impact due to 'Very Large' annual GHG emissions of approximately 9.88 million t CO2e. While the plant's emissions intensity is slightly lower than some older Eskom plants slated for decommissioning, it remains high. The climate resilience assessment identifies water shortages and quality as high risks. The palaeontological assessment finds a medium risk of impact in the Swartrant Formation and low risk elsewhere, recommending monitoring by a palaeontologist during excavations.

An appeal by Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and groundWork to set aside the environmental authorisation for the 660 MW Namane coal-fired power station in Limpopo, South Africa. The appellants argue the decision is unlawful due to failures to assess climate change impacts, air quality risks, and water scarcity in the Waterberg region, while ignoring renewable energy alternatives and violating national and international environmental commitments.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting for Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, submitted comments on the draft Climate Change Impact Assessment (CCIA) and Palaeontological Impact Assessment (PIA) for the proposed Thabametsi coal-fired power station. The submission argues that the draft CCIA significantly underestimates greenhouse gas emissions, ignores the social cost of carbon, and fails to adequately address severe water scarcity risks in the Lephalale area. The authors contend that the project is not in the national interest due to existing excess energy capacity and that the most appropriate recommendation is a 'no go option' to avoid irreversible environmental and social harm.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting for Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, submitted formal objections on 20 January 2017 to the Integrated Water Use Licence Application (IWULA) for the proposed 1200MW coal-fired Thabametsi power station near Lephalale, Limpopo. The submission argues that the application is fatally flawed due to outdated data, failure to account for climate change, risks to groundwater and wetlands, and a lack of guaranteed water availability for the project's 40-year lifespan.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), on behalf of Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, provides recommendations to improve the scope of the Climate Change Impact Assessment (CCIA) and Palaeontological Impact Assessment Report (PIAR) for the proposed 1200MW Thabametsi coal-fired power station near Lephalale, Limpopo. The CER argues that the current scoping report is too narrow and fails to align with international best practices or South Africa's climate commitments under the Paris Agreement and its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC).

This document is an appeal submitted by Earthlife Africa Johannesburg on 11 May 2015 to the Minister of Environmental Affairs. The appeal challenges the environmental authorisation granted on 25 February 2015 to Newshelf 1282 (Pty) Limited for the construction of the 1200 megawatt (MW) coal-fired Thabametsi power station near Lephalale in the Limpopo Province. The appellant argues that the decision was unlawful, failed to consider critical air quality and water scarcity issues, ignored climate change obligations, and violated the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA).

This document is a formal letter from the Centre for Environmental Rights, acting on behalf of Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg, submitting an appeal to the Minister of Environmental Affairs against the integrated environmental authorisation granted to Newshelf 1282 (Pty) Ltd for the construction of the 1200MW coal-fired Thabametsi Power Station near Lephalale, Limpopo Province.

The Centre for Environmental Rights submitted an Answering Statement on behalf of Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg, appealing the authorisation of the 1200MW coal-fired Thabametsi Power Station in Limpopo Province, South Africa. The submission responds to a statement by Newshelf 1282 (Pty) Limited and complies with the 2010 Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations.

The report examines the World Bank's 3.75 billion dollar loan to Eskom for the Medupi coal-fired power plant, asserting that the Bank's Economic Analysis ignored critical environmental and social costs. It highlights failures to assess transboundary impacts on Botswana, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique, as well as domestic risks regarding water scarcity, water quality, and air pollution. The authors argue that this pattern of under-valuing externalities leads to over-investment in large-scale centralized fossil fuel projects at the expense of decentralized renewables.

This document is a responding statement submitted by Newshelf 1282 (Pty) Ltd (the Second Respondent) on behalf of the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) and Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg (the Appellant). It addresses an appeal against the environmental authorisation (EA) granted by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for the construction of the 1200MW coal-fired Thabametsi power station.

This document is a legal response submitted by NN Attorneys on behalf of Newshelf (the Second Respondent) on 10 June 2015, addressing an appeal against the Environmental Authorisation (EA) granted for the Thabametsi coal-fired power station project in South Africa. The response defends the project's compliance with the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and other regulations, arguing that the project is essential for national base-load energy security and that its environmental and health impacts have been sufficiently assessed and mitigated.

This document is the cover and introductory pages of an Integrated Water Use Licence Application Report dated July 2016 for the proposed Thabametsi Power Project, a coal-fired independent power producer (IPP) plant located near Lephalale in the Limpopo Province.