Centre for Environmental Rights – Advancing Environmental Rights in South Africa

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DATE: 16 August 2024

PRETORIA, SOUTH AFRICA — Gas producer Tetra4 (Pty) Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Renergen Ltd, which holds the only onshore Gas Production Right in South Africa, has been directed to resubmit its environmental authorisation application for its proposed production expansion to the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) for reconsideration.

In his 1 August 2024 decision upholding Appeals against the environmental authorisation by community-based organisations, Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network-South Africa (MEJCON-SA) and Mining Affected Communities United in Action (MACUA), and non-profit organisation, Natural Justice respectively, the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment called for an expanded climate change impact assessment, given the inadequate analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in Tetra4’s reports, as raised by MEJCON-SA and MACUA in their appeal.

The Minister directed Tetra4 to provide a more detailed analysis of the impacts of climate change on the proposed project and on the environment and affected communities. Notably, the Minister also questioned Tetra4’s submission that Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) is a “bridging fuel” and directed it to provide further information to substantiate that claim.

The Minister also found that impacts of the proposed project on rivers requires assessment before the application is considered. He found that the potential geohydrological impacts of Tetra4’s proposed activities were not clearly defined – impacts on water quality, the source of the water for the project, the construction of the gas wells and the possible leakage of deep groundwater into shallow aquifers, among other problems were flagged.

The Minister directed Tetra4 to revise its environmental impact assessment report (EIAR) once it has addressed these shortcomings and to consult with interested and affected parties on the revised EIAR and reports before submitting its application for environmental authorisation to Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) for reconsideration.

Despite having based his decision on expert reports filed by MEJCON-SA and MACUA with their appeal, the Minister criticised the community organisations for “surreptitiously” filing expert reports at the appeal stage rather than in the public participation stage of the application. He labelled doing so as “inappropriate conduct”. This is alarming and deeply concerning in a number of ways. Firstly, his criticism suggests that the Minister does not understand the nature of the Appeal process – which is a wide appeal. This means that it is his role to determine the appeal with regard to all information available to him at the time of the appeal. It is akin to a rehearing of the application for environmental authorisation and an appellant is fully within their rights to submit the evidence available to them at that time. Secondly, his criticism suggests that communities affected by proposed developments have the financial resources to appoint geohydrologists, climate impact scientists, and the like, and do not do so for nefarious reasons. This suggests a deeply misguided understanding of the socio-economic circumstances of fenceline communities who most certainly do not have these resources and rely, where available, on assistance from law clinics such as the Centre for Environmental Rights NPC.

Tetra4’s Production Right was granted in 2012 and spans an area of approximately 187 000 hectares in the Free State near the town of Virginia.

The environmental authorisation that has been set aside and remitted to the DMPR for reconsideration is one of the approvals needed for an enormous expansion of its production operations. It refers to that expansion as Cluster 2.

In July 2023, the then DMRE granted the integrated environmental authorisation to Tetra4 for its proposed Cluster 2 expansion. MEJCON-SA and MACUA, represented by CER, have successfully appealed that licence. In addition to concerns about climate change impacts and impacts on groundwater, MEJCON-SA and MACUA challenged the environmental authorisation on the basis that there was a failure to conduct public participation on the proposed expansion. They also appealed on the basis that the proposed Cluster 2 project is neither necessary nor desirable, that there would be adverse impacts on farming and tourism in the area and the livelihoods associated with those sectors, and that those negative socio-economic impacts had not been assessed and accounted for.

In an attempt to highlight the lived experience of communities impacted by existing fossil fuel extraction, these community organisations also asserted that it is irrational and dangerous to authorise projects with egregious impacts when the state lacks the resources and capacity to adequately ensure compliance with the conditions of environmental authorisations and environmental laws at those operations.

The Minister paid these grounds of appeal scant regard, satisfied that the DMPR had had enough information from Tetra4 when it granted the environmental authorisation.

In speaking on the decision to set aside Tetra4’s environmental authorisation for its proposed Cluster 2 project, Margaret Molomo, chairperson of the Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa said “This is a victory for local communities not only in the Free State but around the country. The decision resonates with activists involved in the struggle for environmental justice. Government should continue to consider the voices of communities affected by the extractives industry as well as ensure that a thorough investigation of the impacts of these projects are conducted.”

“The decision to set aside and remit the EA application back to the DMPR is a win for the environmental justice movement at large” says Paul Lado, an attorney at the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER). “An enormous gas production operation – the first of its kind onshore in our country – has been halted on the basis that the climate change impacts and the impacts on groundwater must be comprehensively assessed and understood before a decision is made to allow such a project to go ahead. This accords with the Thabametsi judgment, South Africa’s first climate change case, particularly around the need for detailed assessments of Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Furthermore, in a water scarce country, it is critical that assessment of impacts on the already short supply of water was required. This is important not only for the present generation but for future generations that will be more heavily reliant on South Africa’s underground water aquifers in an era of climate change.”

Tetra4 must now undertake crucial assessments and submit a revised EA application for reconsideration after affording Interested and Affected Parties a chance to review and comment thereon.

-END-

Notes:
Read the full decision here 

Read more on the litigation MEJCON-SA & MACUA’s Legal Challenge to Proposed Gas Production Expansion

About the Mining Programme

CONTACT:

Nomatter Ndbele, CER Communications Coordinator, nndebele[@]cer.org.za

Paul Lado CER Attorney, plado[@]cer.org.za