Eskom has dubbed Kusile, its largest power plant, an “environmentally friendly power plant” – compared to its 14 other coal-fired power plants which do not have flue gas desulphurization (FGD) installed to reduce the sulfur dioxide (SO₂) emissions.

Construction of the Kusile Power Station, one of South Africa’s ‘new’ coal-fired power stations, began in 2008 alongside the Medupi Power Station. It brings 2,880 MW to the network, when everything is working well.

With FGD technology, Kusile emits 500mg/Nm³ (milligrams per cubic meter) of sulfur dioxide, which complies with the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act of 2004.

Kusile’s managing director, Bonga Mashazi, said Our burning planet during a media tour of the facility on June 9 that, without the plant’s FGD, sulfur dioxide emissions would be double, at over 1,000 mg/Nm³.

Mashazi said what is meant by the power plant being “environmentally friendly” is that its use of “new and efficient” technologies such as FGD, a supercritical steam generator, low NOx and pulse jet fabric filters, to name a few, “makes [it able] to deal with issues of environmental interest.

“So when we talk about being [environmentally] friendly, we’re talking about our ability to remove more dust particles from the flue gases so they don’t enter the atmosphere,” Mashazi said, explaining that the power plant uses pulse-jet fabric filters to reduce the amount of opacity (dust particles) released into the atmosphere.

Mashazi said the technologies are reducing the emissions burden that comes with coal-fired power plants, “but if you’re burning coal, it’s inevitable that you have all those emissions that go with it…the question is, do you have a technology to reduce the impact?

Chris Yelland, electrical engineer and energy analyst, said OBP that Kusile being the only factory in Africa with FGD technology was “not something they should be proud of – it is something they should be ashamed of”.

“They proudly tell us that Kusile is equipped with FGDs, but they do not satisfactorily explain why Eskom’s power plants emit more sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere than all generating facilities in the United States and China reunited.”

Yelland was referring to analysis of data from the Center for Energy and Clean Air Research published in October last year.

Lily: Eskom emits more sulfur dioxide than any power company in the world – latest research

Based on the company’s own integrated report for the 2020/21 financial year, Eskom emitted 1.6 million tonnes of sulfur dioxide. India remains the biggest polluter of sulfur dioxide emissions, with South Africa and Saudi Arabia not far behind.

But the report’s lead analyst, Lauri Myllyvirta, told OBP that, relatively, Eskom is the biggest polluting company in the world because no company in India is close to Eskom’s emissions.

Ten years ago, China and the United States were the biggest polluters by a landslide, but due to massive modernization programs and the installation of advanced desulphurization equipment in their power plants, they now rank below SA.

Yelland said China’s population is much larger than ours and has even less SO₂ shows, it “just shows you how far behind the rest of the world we are.”

Yelland explained that a big reason why SA had such a high SO₂ emissions – in addition to just one of our plants having FGD technology – were due to the fact that, unlike other countries, “we mine poor quality coal which has a high sulfur content because it is less expensive”.

Eskom boasts that with its FGD, Kusile meets the 500mg/Nm³ minimum emission standards set by Environment Minister Barbara Creecy.

But as air pollution and climate expert Lauri Myllyvirta said OBPwhereas the European Union requires new coal-fired power plants to limit their emissions to 55mg/Nm³ (when converted to the measurement standard used in South Africa), and China at 25mg/Nm³500mg/Nm Kusil³ “is an extremely lenient limit”.

“The fact that it is considered a success gives an idea of ​​how dirty the rest of the fleet is – emitting around 3,500 mg/Nm³,” she says.

Robyn Hugo, director of climate change engagement at shareholder activist organization Just Share, said Our Burning Planet: “The Minimum Emission Standards (MES), which Sasol and Eskom say are so onerous, are in fact desperately weak and inadequate. The O₂ The MES are about 28 times lower than those of China and 10 times lower than those of India.

The law — postponed

Yelland explained that no other coal plant can meet minimum emission standards without FGD technology.

“So every coal-fired power station in South Africa, except Kusile – if it’s working properly, which it’s not – can never be legal, and for that Eskom should be ashamed. “

Hugo said that although meeting air emission standards is a legal requirement, and despite undisputed evidence of the significant health impacts of sulfur dioxide, “the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Fisheries ( DFFE) decided in March 2020 to double these standards for coal-fired facilities, making them half as low as when they were published in March 2010, and ridiculously low compared even to other other developing countries”.

Hugo explained that the MES was part of a multi-year, multi-stakeholder process in which Eskom and Sasol were active and vocal participants.

Since March 31, 2010 at the latest — the date the MES was enacted — the industry knew that the “new factory”, or 2020 SO2 standards for coal-fired boilers, would be 500 mg/Nm3 by April 2020, and that it would be possible to postpone compliance with these standards.

Eskom and Sasol requested and were granted the maximum deferral of five years, which means they are required to comply with MES 2020 by April 2025.

However, following significant pushback and lobbying from industry, in October 2018 the DFFE made the standard half as low – 1000 mg/Nm³without following the public participation process required by law.

“Despite legislation stating that no postponements beyond April 2025 are permitted (unless facilities are decommissioned by March 2030), and despite Deadly Air’s damning judgment confirming that air pollution air in the Mpumalanga Highveld violates constitutional rights, Eskom and Sasol continue to seek deferrals. and other leniency measures with respect to these legislated MES,” Hugo said.

The battle for clean air

Referring to Eskom’s power cuts, Minerals and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe said, “You can breathe clean air, but in the dark. But not in Mpumalanga.

There’s a reason other countries have emission standards far lower than ours – sulfur dioxide is the number one health-damaging pollutant from burning coal and, according to the World Health Organization , air quality levels in South Africa exceed safe limits.

After a lengthy legal battle, in March 2022 groundWork and the Vukani Environmental Movement were successful in the “Deadly Air” litigation brought by the Center for Environmental Rights, with Judge Colleen Collis of the High Court in Pretoria confirming that air pollution air in the Highveld Priority Area (HPA) violates the constitutional right to an environment not harmful to health or well-being, and that the government must hold large polluters accountable.

Learn more here: If Barbara Creecy Appeals the ‘Deadly Air’ Judgment, It Won’t Be a Good Look for the Government

“The landmark Deadly Air case confirmed that poor air quality in the HPA violates residents’ constitutional right to an environment that does not harm their health and well-being,” said Hugo, who was head of the Pollution & Climate Change program at the Center for Environmental Rights at the time, where she and her team started this case.

Hugo said that Eskom’s coal-fired power stations and Sasol’s Secunda power station are responsible for the vast majority of air pollution in the HPA, and are even responsible by far for most of the air pollution (and greenhouse gas emissions) across the continent. .

FGD challenges and load shedding

As well as having a single power plant with an FGD, Eskom admitted that its FGD has many issues that contribute to load shedding – citing design, operation and maintenance challenges.

Eskom CEO Andre de Ruyter said “the main challenge we have at Kusile is the new flue gas desulphurization (FGD) technology, which we have struggled to master.”

De Ruyter explained that the FGD has a “single point of failure on a unit, so if the unit isn’t working, there’s no way around it, which forces us to shut down the whole unit.”

The Kusile power station has faced massive cost overruns and delays – it was due to be completed in 2014 on a budget of R81 billion, but so far only four of the planned six units have reached operation trade and R152 billion has already been spent.

The expanded budget is over R161 billion after completion and the last unit is expected to be in commercial operation by the end of May 2024. DM/OBP