SA’s new forestry, fisheries & environment minister, Dion George, has confirmed an earlier decision by his predecessor to allow Sasol to deviate from established regulations when measuring sulphur dioxide emissions at its prized Secunda synfuels facility.
In April, former minister Barbara Creecy upheld the chemical and energy giant’s appeal against an earlier decision by the national air quality officer, allowing it to switch to a load-based limit for measuring its emissions rather than the concentration of particles as required by law. However, the decision was suspended pending a final determination of the appropriate concentration-based limits to be applied with the load-based limit.
George last week provided more details on the exemption, and issued a notification of the concentration-base limits. This clears the way for Sasol to apply to the local licensing authority to incorporate both limits in the atmospheric emissions licence for its Secunda operations, to give effect to the minister’s earlier decision.
The decision allows for permitted sulphur dioxide emissions generated from the boilers at Secunda’s steam plants to be regulated on the alternative emission load basis from April 1 2025 to end-March 2030.
While the decision was welcome news for Sasol, activists warned this could open the door for other polluters to also avoid compliance with minimum emissions standards (MES).
Panic had gripped the energy and chemicals group in 2023 when the national air quality officer rejected Sasol’s request to have sulphur dioxide emissions from its Secunda boiler plant measured differently, putting the petrochemical giant at risk of violating air quality laws and facing legal consequences.
But in April, Sasol announced it was successful in its appeal to have emissions at Secunda measured differently. The Secunda plant is regarded as the world’s largest single-point emitter of greenhouse gas.
However, Creecy upheld the appeal, allowing Sasol to switch to measuring its emissions on load of emission rather than the concentration of particles.
The decision was contingent on finalisation of a further regulatory requirement for it to take full effect and on July 26 Sasol received notification of the concentration-based limits the minister has determined to be applied with the load-based limit.
Sasol can accordingly continue with the implementation of its load-based integrated solution and will apply to the local licensing authority to incorporate the limits in the atmospheric emissions licence (AEL) for its Secunda operations, to give effect to the minister’s decision.
“The varied AEL will enable lawful operations from April 1 2025,” it said.
Shareholder activist group Just Share, which opposed Sasol’s appeal, said Creecy’s interpretation of the provision in the Air Quality Act (12A of the List of Activities) on which Sasol relied to seek its load-based emission limit, opened the door to the possibility of multiple noncompliant facilities continuing to avoid meeting the MES by seeking an “alternative” emission limit or load.
“Minister Creecy, as advised by the National Environmental Consultative and Advisory Forum, and relying on a legal opinion that has not yet been made available to Just Share, despite our requests, decided that ... 12A of the List of Activities has no set end-date,” Just Share director for climate change engagement Robyn Hugo said.
Though Creecy indicated that the indulgence to Sasol was for a “limited period”, she also did not impose a firm deadline for Sasol to comply with the legislated MES limit.
“The failure to set any deadline within which Sasol must comply with the already-weak SO2 MES means that Sasol may well again seek 12A leniency after March 31 2030,” said Hugo.
It also created an opportunity for other polluting companies to seek similar indulgences.
Hugo also referred to recent decisions by the forestry, fisheries & environment minister that granted Eskom certain postponements and suspensions from meeting MES at some of its power stations.
“In relation to the decisions on Eskom’s MES applications, Eskom has been invited to seek exemption from the MES. This in circumstances where it has been made clear, for over a decade, that no MES exemptions are legally permissible.
“These decisions on Eskom and Sasol appeals significantly undermine the entire air quality management regime and will mean that significant health impacts of air pollution continue indefinitely,” said Hugo.
According to Sasol’s data, the Secunda plant accounts for 83.7% of its scope 1 and 2 emissions, followed by Sasolburg with 8.4%.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.