The applications for environmental authorisations to locate three powership projects at South Africa’s three main industrial ports, has been refused. This is a triumph for environmental activists who have questioned the validity of the huge energy generation project.
The applicant, Karpowership, had proposed to locate the three powership projects at the ports of Richards Bay, Ngqura and Saldanha. The aim was to generate electricity from natural gas to be evacuated through transmission lines to substations linking to the national grid.
The powerships were to be assembled off-site and be delivered fully equipped and functional to the different ports.
The applications were in response to the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy’s requests for emergency power supply interventions linked to the Risk Mitigation Independent Power Procurement Program.
Back to the Drawing Board. Saldanha Gas to Power Powerships Project Suspended
The Devil is in the Detail. Paying the Price for Powerships
Decision
The decision was made public by the Minister of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment today.
The applications are clearly not of a standard the DFFE expected as it is apparent that there are several gaps in the information provided. This includes that:
- the minimum requirements, specifically the public participation process, were not met. The PPP had been rushed, did not comply with the prescribed legislation and was not comprehensive enough.
- actual and potential impacts on the environment as well as socio-economic conditions could not be evaluated properly (especially that of small-scale fisheries). This was especially because of the lack of a proper underwater noise impact study and the contradictory information that was made available.
- effects of activities on the environment could not receive adequate consideration because one of the major impacts, underwater noise generation, was not fully investigated. It was noted that most of the specialists complained that they had limited time to apply to their respective studies which also had to be undertaken in the wrong season. Furthermore, the environmental assessment practitioner had not clarified what the discrepancies and contradictions were between specialist studies.
The Department concluded that under the circumstances it was not able to decide about the significance of potential impacts or consequences for the environment, the effectiveness of potential mitigation measures or whether the project under consideration constitutes a sustainable development.
You can read the full reports for each of the projects here:
