Search Climate Insights Directory

The document is a legal filing or court submission from September 2013 regarding a case involving 'VEJA v AMSA' in the South Gauteng High Court. It outlines the legal arguments and factual basis for a challenge against the South African Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA), focusing on the failure to provide adequate safety and environmental protections in the maritime sector.

The document examines a 1955 legal case where the court ruled that conditions of title registered against agricultural holdings in Walkerville constrained the respondents' ability to conduct slate quarrying, despite the respondents holding the mineral rights.

The document details the environmental and social costs of coal-power generation in South Africa, specifically focusing on the Kusile power station. It highlights that water-related externalities for Kusile range from R0.95 to R1.86 per kWh, driven largely by water use in generation and mining. The text argues that the Draft Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2016 misrepresents the total cost of coal by ignoring these externalities. It further notes that coal mining and power generation consume 3% and 2% of South Africa's water respectively, with severe regional impacts in the Upper Olifants. The report emphasizes the long-term costs of acid-mine drainage and the disproportionate health and water-security burdens placed on poor communities, concluding that a decarbonised energy future would require four times less water by 2050 and create more jobs than the coal-reliant base case.

The Water Tribunal issued a ruling on 20 August 2010 regarding an appeal by Gideon Anderson (T/A Zonnelbloem Boedery) against a water use licence granted to Vuna Enterprises (Pty) Ltd. The Tribunal determined that the appellant lacked the legal standing (locus standi) to lodge the appeal because he had not submitted a formal written objection within a prescribed time period as required by the National Water Act (NWA).

The document serves as a practical manual for South African citizens to enforce environmental rights against mining operations. It details indicators of illegal mining activity, the legal framework governing environmental crimes, and a step-by-step procedure for filing criminal charges with the police. It also explains the subsequent prosecution process and the legal protections available to whistleblowing employees.

This document is a response filed by UX Inc. on behalf of William Patrick Bower (Pty) Ltd (WPB) to an appeal lodged by Birdlife South Africa against the granting of a mining right. WPB argues that the appeal is out of time, that Birdlife South Africa lacks standing, and that the environmental concerns raised are based on outdated data and ignore the fragmented state of the land due to historical farming.

The document details a case where the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) approved a mining right for Xstrata South Africa (Pty) Ltd despite the fact that wetlands occupy 51% of the 1385 ha area. Key issues include the failure to provide the final EMP for public comment, the lack of consultation with land claimants, and the DMR's decision to grant the right despite clear objections from the Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Authority (MTPA). The EMP acknowledged that damage to wetlands would be "irreparable" and failed to address pollution from final voids.

A letter from the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) to the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy requesting that a decision on the suspension of an amended mining right for the Tormin Mine be deferred until the CER can respond to objections raised by the right holders.

This briefing document is a recommendation to the Deputy Director-General of the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy to approve amendments to mining rights held by Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd and Tormin Mineral Sands (Pty) Ltd. The proposed changes include adding magnetite as a mineable mineral and extending the mining area for Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd in the Magisterial District of Van Rhynsdorp.

A consent and power of attorney issued by the South African Department of Mineral Resources on June 19, 2020, authorizing the addition of magnetite to mining rights held by Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd and Tormin Mineral Sands (Pty) Ltd, and extending the mining area for Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd.

Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd has applied for consent under section 102 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) to expand the mining area of the Tormin Mine in the Western Cape. The request includes adding the 'Northern 10 Beaches', an inland 'Strand' line area, and infrastructure for a Mineral Separation Plant.

This research paper examines the legal framework and practical application of environmental authorizations for mining activities in South Africa, specifically focusing on the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) and the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). The author argues that the current system of 'environmental authorizations' is often treated as a mere formality rather than a substantive tool for sustainable development, leading to inadequate environmental protection and a failure to properly integrate social and environmental costs into mining operations.

This document is a Record of Recommendation (ROR) from the Mine Environmental Management sub-directorate to the Regional Manager of Mineral Regulation in the Western Cape Region. It recommends granting an Integrated Environmental Authorisation (IEA) to Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd for the mining of heavy minerals across several farms and beaches in the Vanrhynsdorp Magisterial District.

The Western Cape Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (DAFF) issued a formal objection on 18 October 2018 to the proposed extension of the Tormin Mine and its infrastructure expansion. The Department cites the applicant's history of unlawful expansions and non-compliance with existing environmental authorisations as primary reasons for adopting a 'risk-averse and cautious approach' and objecting to the development.

The Quarterly Activities Report for Mineral Commodities Ltd for the period ending 31 December 2016 details production records for ilmenite concentrate, financial positions including cash and debt facilities, and ongoing regulatory challenges regarding prospecting rights and environmental management applications for the Tormin mine operations.

This Terrestrial Ecology Specialist EIA report, produced by Simon Todd Consulting for SRK Consulting, assesses the ecological impacts of the proposed expansion of the Tormin Mineral Sands Mine on the West Coast of South Africa. The expansion includes ten beach mining areas, an inland 'Strand line' mining area on farm Geelwal Karoo 262, and an infrastructure/plant expansion area. The study concludes that while the project will result in moderate habitat loss, it is environmentally acceptable provided specific mitigation measures—such as rotational mining and topsoil management—are implemented.

This terrestrial ecology EIA report, produced by Simon Todd Consulting in June 2017, assesses the ecological impacts of expanding the Tormin mineral sands mine operated by MSR. The project involves expanding beach mining across ten discrete beaches and implementing inland strip mining on farm Geelwal Karoo 262, alongside infrastructure expansions including a Mineral Separation Plant and a 22 kV powerline.

This document is a summary page from an Issues and Responses report by SRK Consulting regarding the Tormin Mine Extension, detailing environmental assessments, regulatory applications under NEMA, and ecological concerns regarding the Namaqualand Strandveld.

This document is a formal statement from CapeNature, dated 16 October 2018, providing comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report for the proposed extension of Tormin Mining activities on Farm Geelwal Karoo No 262, Graauw Duinen No 152, and Klipviey Karoo Kop No 153. CapeNature expresses significant concerns regarding the loss of habitat within a Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA), the uncertainty of rehabilitation in the Namaqualand Strandveld, and the inadequacy of proposed biodiversity offsets and mitigation measures.

This guide outlines a four-tier classification system for biodiversity priority areas to regulate mining activities. It specifies that mining is generally prohibited in the highest-importance areas (e.g., National Parks and Ramsar Sites) and requires rigorous environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and potential biodiversity offsets for areas of high or moderate importance to ensure environmental sustainability.