SA risks $9.3bn climate finance over coal plant delays

South Africa stands on the brink of losing a vital $9.3 billion climate finance pact due to delays in decommissioning several coal-fired power plants, a move seen as essential for its Just Energy Transition Partnership. Despite significant pledges from some of the world’s richest nations to help South Africa reduce its coal dependency, the nation’s ongoing power crisis has led Eskom to extend the life of its dirtiest plants. This decision jeopardizes both the funding and the nation’s environmental commitments, as noted by a report commissioned by Environment Minister Barbara Creecy, which highlights severe health and environmental repercussions from continued coal reliance.

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

Join us for BizNews’ first investment-focused conference on Thursday, 12 September, in Hermanus, featuring top experts like Frans Cronje, Piet Viljoen, and more. Get insights on electricity and exploiting SA’s gas bounty from new and familiar faces. Register here.

By Antony Sguazzin

South Africa is risking a $9.3 billion climate finance pact by delaying the closing of a number of coal-fired power plants, a panel appointed by the country’s environment minister said.

In an agreement known as the Just Energy Transition Partnership, South Africa won the bulk of the pledges from some of the world’s richest nations in loans, grants and guarantees in 2021. They offered to help the country reduce its dependence on coal for power generation on condition it phased out a number of its older plants using the dirtiest fuel.

The worst power cuts on record last year prompted Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd., the state power utility, to delay shutting down the facilities. Eskom has said it has decided to postpone the decommissioning of three power plants — Grootvlei, Hendrina and Camden — until 2030.

A unit in the South African presidency earlier this month made a presentation about the nation’s new plans to the World Bank-linked Climate Investment Funds, which is considering allocating $500 million to South Africa. Financing from the fund could trigger a further $2 billion in investment from other partners. The content and outcome of those discussions haven’t been disclosed.

The JETP partner nations have been understanding of the energy security concerns but a misalignment with the goal of rapid decarbonization to the lower level of an emissions target range the government submitted to the United Nations could risk this finance, the National Environmental Consultative and Advisory Forum said in its report. They are unlikely to tolerate a significant reversal of the plans, according to the report.

Read more: Eskom wins appeal to keep polluting coal plants running

The UK, US, France, Germany and the European Union signed up to the pact in 2021 while the Netherlands and Denmark joined later. South Africa generates about 80% of its electricity from coal and has the most carbon intensive economy of any of the Group of 20 nations, which compromises most of the world’s largest economies.

The 531-page report, parts of which were redacted, was commissioned by Environment Minister Barbara Creecy to advise her on an appeal by Eskom to keep power plants capable of producing 16 gigawatts of electricity open despite the breaching of emission limits. She accepted the recommendation that retrofitting five of the oldest plants with equipment to reduce sulfur-dioxide pollution was impractical and granted them exemptions until 2030.

The panel expressed concern about Eskom’s plans to keep the plants open for longer than initially planned, saying they emit the most greenhouse gases per unit of power produced of any of Eskom’s 14 facilities.

It also said a separate report commissioned by the minister on sulfur-dioxide pollution from Eskom’s plants, which it studied, showed that the health impact of the pollutant has been underestimated.

“Morbidity impacts are likely to be orders of magnitude greater than any of the likely underestimated mortality impacts calculated to date for sulfur dioxide in South Africa,” it cited the authors of the report, which hasn’t been released publicly, as writing.