Search Climate Insights Directory

A letter from Sasol Limited to the South African Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs regarding the process for seeking postponements from minimum emission standards under the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act.

The Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET) of the Limpopo Province refused an Environmental Authorisation (EA) for the proposed Meletse Iron Ore Mining project. The project, proposed by Aquila Steel (S Africa) (Pty) Ltd, would have involved an open pit mining operation and associated infrastructure on the farms Donkerpoort 448 KQ and Randstephne 455 KQ. The refusal was based on the determination that ecological, visual, and traffic impacts could not be mitigated and that the project conflicted with required land use for the site.

The document examines the application of environmental taxes, fees, and charges across different sectors in the U.S., including water, air, solid waste, and hazardous waste management. It distinguishes between revenue-raising taxes and cost-offsetting fees, noting that while many instruments are designed to recover administrative costs, some—such as the federal tax on ozone-depleting chemicals and certain state-level hazardous waste taxes—have demonstrated significant incentive effects in reducing pollution. The report also details specific state-level experiments with variable-rate waste collection and wetland compensation fees.

The report argues against doubling the SO2 emission limit, asserting that the government's rationale regarding water use and cost is flawed. It contends that Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) is more effective and not prohibitively water-intensive, while Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI) poses significant risks to particulate matter control, mercury emissions, and groundwater quality. The author recommends reducing the MES to 200 mg/Nm3 to align with international norms.

A letter from Eskom to the Centre for Environmental Rights clarifying the distinction between the shutdown and decommissioning of its coal-fired power stations, noting that while shutdown dates are based on a 50-year plant life, firm decommissioning dates and detailed plans do not yet exist.

This fact sheet provides a detailed table and analysis of current pollutant emission rates (SO2, NOx, and PM10), estimated stack concentrations, and the emission limits requested by Eskom for 13 power stations. The document highlights inconsistencies in Eskom's reported data and argues that Eskom is effectively seeking exemptions from future Minimum Emission Standards (MES).

The Department of Water Affairs (DWA) expresses strong opposition to the proposed Yzermyn Underground coal mine in the Mpumalanga Region, citing critical risks to wetlands, water quality, and protected environments. The DWA identifies the project's location within a National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area as a "fatal flaw" and notes that the mine could cause significant groundwater contamination and the drying up of wetlands.

The document is a Record of Decision (ROD) issued by the South African Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) on September 21, 2006. It grants conditional authorization to Eskom Holdings Limited: Generation Division for the construction of a 4800MW coal-fired power station and associated infrastructure near Lephalale, while specifically excluding authorization for waste and ash disposal pending further investigation into alternatives.

The Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) submitted a formal objection to the proposed Yzermyn underground coal mine project by Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd, arguing that the project is illegal and environmentally devastating due to its location within protected biodiversity areas.

The Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa (MEJCON-SA) and Mining Affected Communities United in Action (MACUA) have appealed a decision by the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) to grant environmental authorisation (EA) to Tetra4 (Pty) Ltd for the Cluster 2 Virginia Gas Production Project. The appellants argue that the decision is unlawful and unreasonable due to flawed groundwater and climate change assessments, inadequate public participation, a failure to consider renewable energy alternatives, and the state's lack of capacity to monitor gas operations.

A formal request sent on 29 November 2016 by the Life After Coal Campaign and other environmental organisations to the South African Minister of Energy, seeking an extension for public comment on the Integrated Energy Plan (IEP) and the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Update and demanding the release of critical supporting documents.

This document is a database listing 220 data providers registered under regulation 5 of the National Greenhouse Gas Emission Reporting Regulation, GN 275 of 2017. The list comprises a wide array of South African entities, including major mining companies, energy producers, industrial manufacturers, and municipal bodies like the City of Cape Town.

The Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa (MEJCON-SA) and Mining Affected Communities United in Action (MACUA) have lodged an appeal to the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment to set aside an environmental authorisation (EA) granted by the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE) on 09 May 2025 to Tetra4 (Pty) Ltd. The EA allows Tetra4 to extend its production right to incorporate 18 additional wells across 80 farm portions in the Free State Province. The appellants argue that Tetra4 used a Basic Assessment Report (BAR) process under section 102 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) to circumvent a previous ministerial order from 01 August 2024, which had set aside a larger 'Cluster 2' expansion due to inadequate climate and groundwater assessments.

A letter from the South African Department of Environmental Affairs granting Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd a postponement for compliance with minimum emission standards for sulfur dioxide (SO2) at the Matimba Power Station.

A submission from Eskom to the South African government regarding proposed minimum emission standards for combustion installations, arguing for practical limits based on technological, resource, and cost constraints.

This document is a formal record of refusal issued by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) regarding an application for Environmental Authorisation (EA) for a project on ERF 252 Coega, Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality. The DFFE refused the application based on several factors, including the lack of a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and failure to address specific environmental and legislative requirements.

The document is a record of refusal for an Environmental Authorisation (EA) application related to a project in Saldanha, issued by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) on June 23, 2021. The refusal is based on the applicant's failure to meet legislative requirements and provide sufficient environmental impact assessments.

The report argues that the proposed 1.2 GW Karpowership gas power plants are not aligned with a least-cost investment pathway for South Africa. Drawing on a study by Meridian Economics and the CSIR, it finds that the grid should prioritize rapid renewable energy build-out and storage, with new gas capacity not being economically optimal until the mid-2030s. The document concludes that commissioning these plants by 2022 would create an unnecessary economic burden for ratepayers and that the procurement process (RMIPP) was biased against renewable energy options.

The South African Department of Environmental Affairs granted Medupi Power Station a postponement for SO2 emission compliance for existing plants (limit of 3500 mg/Nm3) until 31 March 2020, while maintaining a 500 mg/Nm3 limit for new plants from 1 April 2020, with full compliance required by 1 April 2025.

The report evaluates Wet FGD and Dry FGD (specifically Circulating Fluidized Bed - CFB) technologies for the Medupi Power Station. It recommends the implementation of Wet FGD without a flue gas cooler, citing its superior cost-efficiency, technical maturity, and potential to support local socio-economic development through the use of regional limestone.