Search Climate Insights Directory

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing several environmental justice organisations and community groups, submitted comments to the Department of Environmental Affairs regarding the declaration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) as priority air pollutants. The submission specifically argues that natural ecosystems should be excluded from the requirement to submit pollution prevention plans.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing several community and environmental groups, submitted a formal reply on 24 March 2014 challenging Eskom's applications for postponement from the Minimum Emission Standards (MES). The CER disputes Eskom's claims that its power stations have a marginal impact on air quality and health, arguing that Eskom's Atmospheric Impact Reports (AIRs) are anecdotal, use insufficient modeling domains, and fail to quantify the health risks associated with secondary PM2.5 formation and mercury emissions.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting for several environmental justice organisations, submitted comments on the Department of Environmental Affairs' (DEA) Draft Air Quality Offset Policy. The CER and its clients oppose the use of offsets in principle, arguing they serve as a "cheap option to avoid compliance" with emission standards and could undermine the constitutional right to a healthy environment. The submission highlights significant gaps in the draft policy, including a lack of clear criteria for determining offsets, poor institutional capacity for monitoring and enforcement, and failure to address equity and distributional effects.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing several environmental justice organisations, submitted comments on 21 February 2014 regarding the Draft National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory System (NAEIS) Reporting Regulations. The submission primarily argues that the draft regulations fail to ensure adequate public access to atmospheric emission data and provides recommendations to align the regulations with constitutional rights to information and a healthy environment.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing various community and environmental groups, submitted formal objections on 14 February 2014 against Eskom's application to vary the Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL) for the Duvha Power Station. The objections center on the potential for increased particulate matter (PM) emissions, flawed environmental modelling, and the contradiction of the Highveld Priority Area's air quality goals.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing several community and environmental groups, submitted preliminary representations opposing Eskom's applications to postpone compliance with Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for its coal-fired power stations. The CER argues that Eskom's applications are based on flawed atmospheric modelling, exaggerated compliance costs, and a failure to meet the legal requirements of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (AQA) and the 2012 National Framework for Air Quality Management. The submission highlights that granting these postponements would increase pollution in declared Priority Areas and cause significant detrimental impacts on human health.

The report analyzes the Save Mapungubwe Coalition's five-year campaign against Coal of Africa's Vele Colliery project in South Africa. It details how a combination of strategic litigation, which impacted the company's share price, and eventual participation in the project's Environmental Management Committee (EMC) provided leverage to hold the company accountable. The study concludes that diverse coalitions and community pressure are essential for changing corporate behavior, while warning against corporate 'divide and rule' tactics and the risks of superficial project planning.

This position statement by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) outlines the minimum legal and regulatory requirements necessary to govern the environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in South Africa. The document argues that current proposed regulations under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) are inadequate, as they lack binding obligations, rely too heavily on industry standards, and ignore critical water and environmental legislation. The CER advocates for a comprehensive regime aligned with the Constitution and the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), emphasizing the precautionary principle, public transparency, and the establishment of a specialized inter-departmental regulatory unit.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing several community and environmental groups, submitted a response to the Nkangala District Municipality opposing Eskom's application to vary the atmospheric emission licence for the Kriel Power Station. The CER argues that the variation would permit increased emissions of particulate matter (PM10) and mercury, leading to significant public health risks and economic costs, while challenging Eskom's dispersion modelling and cost calculations for abatement technology.

The 'Air Quality Offset Policy' is a draft framework published by the Centre for Environmental Rights in January 2014. It proposes the use of environmental offsets—measures that counterbalance adverse atmospheric emissions—to balance South Africa's economic growth and industrial development with the constitutional right to a healthy environment. The policy outlines principles for offset design, specific application scenarios such as license variations or postponements, and the roles of applicants, licensing authorities, and communities in implementing these measures.

The National Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Report 2014-15 provides a comprehensive overview of the activities of South Africa's Environmental Management Inspectorate (EMI), known as the 'Green Scorpions'. The report details the growth of EMI capacity, national compliance and enforcement statistics, legislative developments, and specific operational outcomes across the 'green' (biodiversity), 'brown' (pollution and waste), and 'blue' (marine and coastal) sectors. It highlights a significant increase in the number of designated inspectors and a focus on high-risk areas such as rhino poaching and industrial pollution.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing various community and environmental groups, submitted formal objections to Eskom's application to vary the Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL) for the Kriel Power Station. The CER argues that the requested increase in particulate matter (PM) emissions would exacerbate poor air quality in the Highveld Priority Area, cause significant health impacts, and result from Eskom's own poor planning rather than a genuine emergency.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) provides a detailed critique of the proposed Technical Regulations for Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation published by the South African Minister of Mineral Resources on 15 October 2013. The CER argues that the regulations are non-binding guidelines rather than enforceable laws, lack sufficient environmental impact assessment requirements, and fail to provide for meaningful public participation or access to information. The document suggests that fracking-specific regulations should be promulgated under a broader suite of environmental laws, including NEMA, NEMWA, and the National Water Act, rather than solely under the MPRDA.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) provides a set of minimum legal and regulatory requirements for hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in South Africa. The report argues that the proposed fracking regulations published by the Minister of Mineral Resources on 15 October 2013 are inadequate, as they rely primarily on industry standards from the American Petroleum Institute (API) and fail to provide for meaningful public participation or sufficient penalties for non-compliance. The CER advocates for a comprehensive regulatory regime grounded in the South African Constitution and the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), emphasizing the precautionary principle and the need for a specialized, inter-departmental regulatory unit.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) published a set of Minimum Requirements for the Regulation of the Environmental Impacts of Fracking in December 2013 to address the potentially severe effects of the shale gas industry.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), supported by the Environmental Monitoring Group and the Federation for a Sustainable Environment, submitted comments on the draft Infrastructure Development Bill (B49-2013). The CER argues that the Bill violates Constitutional rights, disregards national environmental policies, and undermines the legal framework for sustainable development and integrated environmental management in South Africa.

The PAIA Civil Society Network's 2013 Shadow Report documents a decline in the implementation of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) in South Africa between August 2012 and July 2013. The report highlights a significant increase in 'deemed refusals'—where information holders fail to respond to requests—and a decrease in the full release of records. It identifies systemic failures in records management, lack of funding for PAIA compliance, and widespread non-compliance with the requirement to publish PAIA manuals, calling for an independent regulator to ensure accountability.

The Minamata Convention on Mercury is a global treaty established to protect human health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing several community and environmental groups, submitted a letter to the South African Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs and the National Air Quality Officer. The letter challenges Eskom's applications to postpone or be exempt from Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter across 17 power stations, arguing that the current application process lacks necessary health risk assessments and adequate public participation.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted comments to the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources regarding the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill, 2013. The CER criticizes the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) for failing to meaningfully consult civil society and mining-affected communities, identifies numerous drafting errors in the Bill, and provides detailed legal objections to proposed changes concerning environmental authorizations, penalty regimes, and the granting of mining rights.