Search Climate Insights Directory

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.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) provides critical feedback on the Department of Water and Sanitation's (DWS) draft Mine Water Management Policy Position. The CER argues that the draft understates the crisis of mine water management in South Africa, citing a systemic failure in mine closures and a lack of compliance monitoring and enforcement. The CER recommends that the DWS utilize existing legislative tools—specifically the National Water Act (NWA), the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), and the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA)—to enforce the 'polluter pays' principle and secure financial provisions for water treatment before granting licenses.

An independent review finds that the Water Use License issued to KiPower (Pty) Ltd by the South African Department of Water and Sanitation is legally and technically flawed. The review concludes that the DWS failed to correctly identify and authorise necessary water uses, provided incorrect property and location data, and included compliance specifications that are largely invalid or unmeasurable. Furthermore, the DWS is accused of ignoring critical resource quality objectives for the Wilge River and attempting to shift historic mining remediation liabilities to KiPower, rendering the decision to issue the license unreasonable and an error in law.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) supports the objectives of the Climate Change Mitigation Policies and Measures (PAMs) study but argues that its current methodology is too narrow. The CER contends that limiting the analysis to carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide excludes other critical greenhouse gases and pollutants, such as hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulphur hexafluoride, black carbon, and hydrochlorofluorocarbons, which could undermine the accuracy of the modelling and miss significant mitigation opportunities.

This document contains the legal and technical submissions made by a coalition of eight appellants (including Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and BirdLife South Africa) on August 14, 2017, appealing an environmental authorisation (EA) granted to Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd for the Yzermyn underground coal mine in Mpumalanga, South Africa.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, asserts that the CSIR's alternative IRP and the DoE's draft IRP omit substantial externalities associated with coal and nuclear energy. The letter highlights an estimated R33 billion annual economic cost from air pollution due to coal-fired generation and argues that water consumption figures are underestimated or based on inaccurate data. It further notes that the circulating fluidised bed combustion technology planned for the Thabametsi power station results in significant nitrous oxide emissions, making it 60% worse in GHG emission intensity than the Medupi and Kusile stations. Finally, the CER demands the inclusion of nuclear decommissioning, fuel storage, and insurance costs to ensure a fair assessment of energy options.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), writing on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, submitted additional comments to the South African Department of Energy regarding the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) and Integrated Energy Plan (IEP). The letter argues that current energy modelling fails to account for critical externalities, specifically the health and water costs of coal, the high nitrous oxide emissions associated with circulating fluidised bed combustion technology, and comprehensive nuclear lifecycle costs.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting on behalf of groundWork, is requesting clarification from the Department of Water and Sanitation regarding the "minimum requirements" used to recommend the issuance of an integrated water use licence (IWUL) for the proposed 600MW KiPower coal-fired power station near Delmas, Mpumalanga.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted a formal request to the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for records concerning the implementation of buffer zones around national parks and other protected areas in South Africa, specifically referencing the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 and the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act 10 of 2004.

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 City of Cape Town (CoCT) is challenging the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) over the interpretation of section 34 of the Electricity Control Act (ECA). NERSA maintains that a Ministerial determination is required before it can license an independent power producer (IPP) to generate new capacity. The CoCT argues that section 34 is an empowering provision that does not preclude others from establishing generation capacity if licensed, and further contends that the section is unconstitutional as it interferes with the city's duty to provide electricity to its inhabitants.

This case study details legal challenges brought by groundWork and the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) against the environmental and water authorizations granted for the proposed KiPower coal-fired power station in South Africa.

The document outlines a phased carbon tax for South Africa starting at R120 per ton of CO2 equivalent, designed to internalise the cost of GHG emissions while protecting industrial competitiveness through allowances. Economic modelling suggests the tax could reduce emissions by 26% to 33% by 2035 compared to business-as-usual, with significant growth in renewable energy sectors and relative declines in coal and heavy industry. The policy includes revenue recycling mechanisms to protect poor households and ensure electricity price neutrality during the first phase.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) argues that the Highveld Priority Area (HPA) has failed to meet national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) despite a decade of management. The CER highlights that postponements of minimum emission standards (MES) granted to Eskom and Sasol have hindered progress and suggests that Eskom may be violating even its postponed standards. Furthermore, the CER criticizes the state of South Africa's air quality monitoring network, claiming that a majority of stations produce no data and very few produce quality-assured data. The document urges the Portfolio Committee to question the DEA on its enforcement actions, the legality of 'rolling postponements', and the decline in the number of reporting monitoring stations.

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.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) is calling for a meeting with the Department of Environmental Affairs to address evidence of widespread non-compliance by Eskom power stations with their atmospheric emission licences (AELs). Based on a report by Professor Eugene Cairncross analyzing data from 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016, the CER identifies multiple stations likely exceeding PM10, NOx, and SO2 limits. The CER argues that Eskom is the largest emitter in the Highveld Priority Area and recommends stricter reporting requirements, including the use of daily average concentrations rather than monthly aggregates, to accurately monitor compliance.

A letter from MacRobert Attorneys to the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) regarding the environmental authorisation for a 600 MW coal-fired independent power plant for KiPower (Pty) Limited in South Africa. The letter confirms the developer's intent to conduct a Climate Change Impact Assessment (CCIA) following a specific court judgement.

This document is a cover letter from the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) to the South African Minister of Environmental Affairs, submitting further arguments on behalf of groundWork to appeal the environmental authorisation for the ACWA Power Khanyisa Thermal Power Station.

This document is a legal submission by groundWork, represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights, appealing to the Minister of Environmental Affairs to extend the deadline for filing an appeal against the environmental authorisation of the ACWA Power Khanyisa Thermal Power Station. The appellant argues that the authorisation is unlawful because it lacked a comprehensive climate change impact assessment, a requirement recently affirmed by the High Court in the Thabametsi judgment.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) has called on Anglo American to act transparently in the sale of three operational and four closed coal mines to Seriti Resources. The CER argues that the trend of large mining companies selling assets with significant environmental liabilities to smaller companies often leads to a failure to comply with rehabilitation obligations. The CER requests that Anglo American publicly disclose mining licences, environmental management programmes, social and labour plans, and assessments of environmental liability and financial provision for rehabilitation to ensure these obligations are not ultimately shifted to the South African state and public.