Search Climate Insights Directory

Eskom Holdings SOC Limited responded to a 3 October 2016 request from the Centre for Environmental Rights, agreeing to provide access to records while redacting commercial, financial, and staff-related information in accordance with the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000.

A response letter from Eskom to the Centre for Environmental Rights regarding a request for information under the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000. Eskom agrees to provide various records related to air quality strategies and board submissions, while noting that specific separate documents for emission reduction plans and decommissioning schedules for its coal-fired power stations do not exist.

A letter from the South African Department of Environmental Affairs to Eskom regarding an application for the postponement of compliance time-frames with the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 for the Port Rex Power Station.

This document is an annexure containing templates and a declaration for Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd's proposed pollution prevention plan, signed on June 21, 2018, by the Climate Change and Sustainable Development Department.

This document is a formal exchange between the Life After Coal (LAC) campaign—a joint effort by the Centre for Environmental Rights, groundWork, and Earthlife Africa—and Eskom. The LAC objects to Eskom's applications for alternative emission limits and exemptions from the Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for the Medupi and Matimba power stations. Eskom defends its use of legal mechanisms for postponement and exemptions, citing financial constraints, the need for energy security, and the principles of sustainable development.

Eskom's formal response to an appeal by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) regarding the Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL) of the Hendrina Power Station. Eskom argues that the requested variations to the AEL would make the station unable to operate from 2020 and maintains that the current postponements of Minimum Emission Standards (MES) are lawful and necessary due to the station's age and resource constraints.

This document is a formal response from Eskom to an appeal filed by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) regarding the Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL) of the Komati Power Station. Eskom argues that the requested variations to the AEL would make the station's operation untenable from 2020 onwards and maintains that its application for a postponement of Minimum Emission Standards (MES) was lawful and technically justified.

A letter from the South African Department of Environmental Affairs to Eskom stating that the postponement application for compliance with the 2015 Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for the Tutuka Power Station is on hold due to missing information.

This memorandum from the Mpumalanga Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs (DARDLEA) evaluates an appeal by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) and its clients against the environmental authorisation granted to Atha Africa Ventures (AAV) for the proposed Yzermyn underground coal mine. The department recommends that the appeal be dismissed, concluding that the authorisation process was legally sound and that potential environmental impacts can be mitigated to acceptable levels.

This document is a statement of grounds of appeal filed by eight environmental and community organisations against an environmental authorisation (EA) granted on 7 June 2016 to Atha Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd for the Yzermyn underground coal mine near Wakkerstroom, Mpumalanga. The appellants argue that the EA was granted without lawful authority, based on a deficient Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), and ignores critical biodiversity and socio-economic risks.

This document is an affidavit by Karen King, a professional hydrologist and soil scientist, submitted to the High Court of South Africa Gauteng Division. King confirms her professional qualifications and her role in co-authoring a review of the proposed Yzermyn Colliery in Mpumalanga.

This document is an affidavit by Mark Adrian Botha, an independent environmental services professional, submitted to the High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria) in Case No: 50779/17. Botha provides his professional qualifications and confirms the accuracy of specific allegations made in a founding affidavit by Thelma Thandekile Nkosi.

This document is an expert affidavit and accompanying report by Dr. Michael Robert Holland, provided to the High Court of South Africa. It quantifies the health impacts and economic costs associated with air pollution from coal-fired power stations operated by Eskom in South Africa, arguing that these external costs must be integrated into national energy planning.

This expert affidavit by Professor Brett Cohen provides a critical appraisal of the climate change impact assessment (CCIA) and the need and desirability analysis for the proposed Lephalale Coal Mines Colliery project. Professor Cohen concludes that the project's climate impacts were not adequately considered in the Environmental Authorisation and that the analysis supporting the mine's necessity is based on outdated policies and lacks sufficient detail regarding alternatives.

This document is an expert affidavit provided by Vanessa Stone, a professional with experience in environmental management and sustainability, submitted in the context of legal proceedings in South Africa. The statement outlines Stone's professional qualifications, her methodology for analyzing environmental impacts, and her reliance on specific scientific literature and reports to assess environmental risks.

This report by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) evaluates the air quality, health, and economic impacts of the proposed Lephalale Coal Mine (LCM) and its associated independent power plant (IPP) in South Africa. The analysis identifies significant underestimates in a previous environmental impact assessment (EIA) and projects substantial premature deaths, morbidity, and economic losses over the project's 35-year lifecycle, particularly if coal is burnt at existing power plants lacking emission controls.

This document is a submission of a Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP) for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by Exxaro Coal (Pty) Ltd - Grootegeluk, including a declaration of accuracy for the provided information.

This case study examines the application processes for prospecting and mining rights for coal on the farms Zoekop, Blyvooruitzicht, and Leewbank in the Belfast district of Mpumalanga. It highlights systemic failures in public participation, discrepancies in property designation, and the disregard of environmental constraints and state department objections by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) and the applicants, Eyesizwe Coal (Pty) Ltd and Exarro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd.

This case study describes a dispute regarding a coal prospecting right granted to Eyesizwe Coal (Pty) Ltd in Mpumalanga, South Africa. The document highlights systemic failures in public consultation and the disregard for recommendations from the Regional Mining Development and Environment Committee (RMDEC) and the Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Authority (MTPA).

Business Unity South Africa (BUSA) submitted a statement in August 2009 expressing concerns over proposed minimum emission limits. BUSA argues that the standards are unjustifiably stringent, deviate from previous industry discussions during the SABS process, and fail to account for the operational realities of upset conditions, potentially harming the competitiveness of South African manufacturing and exports.