Search Climate Insights Directory

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) argues that Eskom's requests to postpone compliance with the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (AQA) should be denied due to flawed atmospheric modelling, exaggerated compliance costs, and significant risks to human health. The CER contends that Eskom fails to meet the legal requirements for postponement, particularly regarding the impact on declared Priority Areas. Furthermore, the document critiques Eskom's proposal for emission offsets as lacking a legal basis and sufficient data, while highlighting that granting these postponements would lead to substantial increases in SO2, NOx, and PM10 emissions through 2020.

The Centre for Environmental Rights submitted an updated expert report by Dr. Ranajit Sahu to the Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries regarding Eskom's Kendal power station. The report identifies 2,851 exceedances of the atmospheric emission licence (AEL) limit for particulate matter between April 2016 and March 2020. The authors express concern over Eskom's reporting practices, alleging that contraventions are improperly coded as 'Grace' or 'Section 30' exceedances to avoid shutdown or service. The letter argues that these findings, along with a report by Dr. Andrew Gray on premature deaths, are relevant to the pending decision on Eskom's objection to a compliance notice.

The Eskom CSP project in South Africa is a 100 MW power tower plant utilizing 9-12 hours of thermal energy storage and a dry-cooled steam cycle. Because the levelized cost of electricity for CSP (0.28-0.33 USD/kWh) exceeds that of coal, hydro, and gas, the project relies on 100% public financing, including USD 995 million in highly subsidized debt from six international finance institutions (IFIs) with rates below 2%. Eskom manages technology risks by contracting an Owner's Engineer for design and an EPC contractor for construction and early operation. The project aims to reduce technology costs, create local supply chains, and improve energy security in a country targeting 3.3 GW of CSP by 2030.

The document argues that Eskom's justifications for delaying emissions compliance—including plant decommissioning, water scarcity, and high costs—are untenable. The author contends that Eskom's capital expenditure estimates for air pollution controls are substantially inflated compared to similar projects in India and suggests alternative, lower-cost technologies like Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI) and Selective Non-catalytic Reduction (SNCR) to achieve emissions reductions.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), on behalf of groundWork and Earthlife Africa, submits a formal objection to Eskom's application for exemptions from Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for eight coal-fired power stations under section 59 of the Air Quality Act (AQA). The submission argues that these exemptions violate the constitutional right to a healthy environment, particularly for residents in Priority Areas, and that Eskom has failed to justify its 14-year delay in achieving compliance.

The Life After Coal campaign argues that Eskom's applications to delay or suspend compliance with Minimum Emission Standards (MES) are unlawful under the 2017 National Framework for Air Quality Management. The campaign asserts that the required condition for such applications—that the surrounding area be in compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)—is not met in the Highveld Priority Area (HPA) or Vaal Triangle Airshed Priority Area (VTAPA). Furthermore, the document highlights severe health impacts, claiming that excess emissions could result in approximately 23,000 premature deaths. It criticizes Eskom's decommissioning schedules as vague and its air quality offset programs as ineffective, while providing international benchmarks to refute Eskom's claims that retrofitting older plants is infeasible.

The report finds that granting Eskom's requests for non-compliance with Minimum Emission Standards would lead to significant excess emissions of SO2, NOx, particulate matter, and mercury, resulting in an estimated 16,000 avoidable premature deaths across South Africa, with 3,100 of those in the Gauteng region.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) is urging the South African government to penalize Eskom for chronic air pollution at the Kendal power station. Evidence from 2016-2019 shows frequent exceedances of particulate matter (PM) limits, with some units emitting 12 to 13 times the allowable limit. The CER argues that previous enforcement notices have been ineffective and that Eskom is violating both its AEL and the National Environmental Management Act's duty of care, impacting the health of communities in the Highveld Priority Area.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting on behalf of several environmental organizations, issued a formal request to Eskom on 25 April 2016 for emission reduction plans, compliance roadmaps, and decommissioning schedules for all 15 of its coal-fired power stations. The CER asserts that existing compliance roadmaps provided by the National Air Quality Officer (NAQO) are insufficient to ensure Eskom meets the emission standards set in its atmospheric emission licences (AELs) and the minimum emission standards (MES).

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), representing groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, and the Highveld Environmental Justice Network, filed an appeal on May 20, 2015, against the atmospheric emission licence (AEL) issued to Eskom's Camden Power Station. The appeal argues that the Gert Sibande District Municipality failed to consider the severe health impacts and poor air quality of the Highveld Priority Area (HPA) when granting emission limit postponements that allow pollutants to exceed national minimum emission standards (MES).

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted a formal request to Eskom on 8 October 2018 for records and reports concerning the Medupi and Kusile coal-fired power stations. The request focuses on environmental compliance, Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) installation progress, water supply arrangements, and communications with the World Bank and African Development Bank.

The Life After Coal campaign (LAC) has formally objected to Eskom's attempts to secure exemptions from the Minimum Emission Standards (MES), asserting that such exemptions are prohibited under section 59 of the Air Quality Act (AQA). The LAC argues that Eskom, as South Africa's largest air polluter, cannot be legally exempt from national emission standards, and that granting such exemptions would undermine the rule of law, harm public health, and set a dangerous precedent for future climate change legislation.

The Life After Coal campaign, comprising the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), groundWork (gW), and Earthlife Africa (ELA), submitted formal objections on 28 August 2020 against Eskom's applications for alternative emission limits at the Medupi and Matimba power stations. The campaign argues that these requests are an unlawful attempt to circumvent South Africa's Minimum Emission Standards (MES) and violate constitutional rights to a healthy environment.

The Life After Coal Campaign argues that Eskom's reliance on coal-fired power is economically unsustainable and causes severe health and environmental damage. The campaign advocates for the accelerated decommissioning of ageing stations and a just transition to renewable energy, citing studies that suggest this would reduce costs and save lives.

This annual report details dust deposition monitoring at the Eskom Hendrina Power Station from April 2014 to March 2015. Using a network of twenty single-bucket monitors, the study measured dust fallout rates against the South African National Dust Control Regulations, 2013. The findings indicate that the vast majority of sites remained within residential limits, with only two non-residential sites recording temporary exceedances.

This briefing document, submitted to Eskom's Board Social, Ethics and Sustainability Committee on 29 May 2017, provides an update on the organization's environmental performance, compliance status, and risk management for the 2016/17 financial year. It details emissions and water usage metrics, legal contraventions, the progress of air quality improvement and offset projects, and the implementation of biodiversity and bird mitigation strategies.

The Life After Coal campaign, comprising the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), groundWork, and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, submitted formal objections on 29 January 2020 to Eskom's applications for alternative emission limits at the Medupi and Matimba power stations. The campaign argues that the applications are procedurally and substantively unlawful, violate the South African Constitution and environmental laws, and rely on a flawed air quality modelling approach in a priority area already suffering from poor air quality.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing environmental justice organisations, appealed the Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL) for Eskom's Komati Power Station. The appeal argues that the AEL illegally allows Eskom to exceed national Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for NOx and SO2, ignoring the critical air quality failure in the Highveld Priority Area and the resulting health impacts on the population.

The Life After Coal campaign, representing several environmental and community alliances, strongly objects to Eskom's request to postpone Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for 14 coal and liquid fuel-fired power stations. The submission argues that under the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (AQA) and the associated Framework, postponements are only permissible if ambient air quality standards in the area are in compliance, which is not the case for the Highveld Priority Area (HPA), Vaal Triangle Airshed Priority Area (VTAPA), and Waterberg-Bojanala Priority Area (WBPA). The document highlights severe health impacts, including thousands of premature deaths attributed to PM2.5 emissions, and criticizes Eskom's Background Information Document (BID) for being inaccurate and incomplete. The campaign demands the rejection of the applications, the cessation of 'rolling postponements', and a just transition toward renewable energy.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), acting as part of the Life After Coal campaign and other environmental justice networks, submitted written objections on July 30, 2020, against Eskom's application for a once-off suspension of compliance with New Plant Minimum Emission Standards (MES) and a variation request for the Grootvlei Power Station. The CER argues that the application is procedurally invalid, lacks a detailed decommissioning schedule, and unlawfully seeks to extend polluting activities beyond the station's end-of-life, thereby violating constitutional rights to a healthy environment.