[ad_1]
The development of an industrial zone that burns coal and consumes water is a potential threat to the approximately 18 million people in South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Mozambique who depend on the Limpopo River basin.
An introduction posted on the website of the China-led “Energy and Metallurgical Special Economic Zone” (EMSEZ) in northern Limpopo lists the range of planned heavy industries.
They include a coal washing plant capable of processing 20 million tons per year, a 3,300MW coal-fired power plant, a coking coal plant, a ferrochrome plant, a ferromanganese plant, a stainless steel plant, a lime plant and a titanium dioxide. plant.
See Limpopo’s Big Dirty White Elephant, Limpopo’s Dirty White Elephant Part 2: Doubtful Designation, and Dirty White Elephant Part 3: Limpopo, The Weakest Link, for more information on the extraordinary genesis of this project.
The EMSEZ introduction helpfully points out that “the Limpopo River is 30 kilometers from the EEZ, which is the important water source for the EEZ.”
But the reality is that the river is already overloaded.
As a recent University of Florida study observed: “The Limpopo River, once perennial, is now dry for several months in an average year … The basin has experienced severe droughts alternating with flooding for several decades, with 1.2 million people in need of immediate food assistance in 2016 after a drought. “
In these circumstances, EMSEZ, as planned, would extract a crippling amount of water.
To give an idea of the impact, a 2014 document (produced by the Chinese company that promotes development) estimates the water use of the fully-built industrial zone at 44.5 million cubic meters per year, that is, 44.5 billion liters of water.
According to Africa Check, the average per capita water use in South Africa is 85,775 liters per year.
In other words, if the Chinese company’s estimate is correct, this industrial area will use more water than half a million people.
But an official report states that the water requirements are 123 billion liters per year, which means that the project will use as much water as 1.43 million people.
As this 2017 article points out: “The Limpopo Basin is a high-risk area for potential [local and international] conflict: your water is already over-allocated [too many parties are extracting water]”
Given the strategic nature of the resource, one might have expected the responsible national minister, Barbara Creecy, to take direct control of the environmental assessment process.
In fact, that’s what the Center for Environmental Rights (CER) has begged you to do.
In October last year, CER wrote to Creecy and its top officials from the Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries, as well as to Delta Built Environmental Consultants (DeltaBEC), the firm that produced a final scoping report for the industrial zone.
A scoping report is not an environmental impact assessment (EIA) but rather sets out the terms and scope of the EIA.
The CER letter raised three main concerns:
- The extensive environmental footprint of the proposed industrial zone, in particular the irreversible impacts on South Africa’s water resources and biological diversity.
In a detailed response to the scoping report, CER argued that the industrial zone was a matter of national concern as the project affected an area of Limpopo that was already so stressed by water that the scoping report itself admitted it was a ” Ultimate source of sustainable water for the SEZ is still under investigation. “
He argued that the various components of EMSEZ would contribute to climate change through greenhouse gas emissions, but would also exacerbate the area’s vulnerability by using and polluting limited freshwater resources, making it even more difficult for communities to resist impacts. of climate change.
Given national and cross-border concerns, CER told Creecy that the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism was not a “competent authority” to award the final environmental authorization.
Instead, they asked him to take over, arguing that the national and international impact of the project gave him legal authority to do so.
The environmental watchdog also argued that the EIA should be preceded by a “strategic environmental assessment,” which comprehensively analyzed development and environmental problems.
CER noted that the current scope of the EIA was formally only an assessment of the impact of land clearing, which has minimal environmental impact.
Thereafter, each individual project, such as a power plant or a coal washer, would have to apply for a new environmental authorization.
The CER argued: “This EIA, which is supposed to focus only on land clearing, should not proceed because it is unable to assess the full extent of the cumulative impacts of EMSEZ and its associated projects … There is also no discussion about … the risk that the entire EMSEZ and all its associated infrastructure will become a stranded asset. “
CER was also critical of DeltaBEC’s analysis of water use and availability.
“Overall, the … estimates of water availability in the region are inaccurate, vague, and significantly exaggerated. There is a high probability that there is not enough water to meet EMSEZ’s water needs.”
In addition to the use of water from the industrial zone itself, it was necessary to consider the impact of the new coal mines that would feed the project.
He said that “there was no estimate of the water requirements during the operation of at least five new coal mines that will span more than 1,000 km2 in the region” and “there was no analysis of the potential impacts of the mines on the waters underground and surface of the region, which could alter the amount of water available for use in EMSEZ facilities, as well as all other uses. “
The DeltaBEC report itself recognized the risks.
He noted: “Detailed studies on water availability should be carried out, since the Limpopo river, which is the proposed water source for development, is already under strong pressure from a large number of existing water users.
“Furthermore, the impact of the proposed development on the region’s air quality would have to be investigated. A recent project … found that the air quality in the Limpopo region would be severely affected by particulate emissions from power plants. existing and future proposals along the Limpopo River in South Africa and Botswana. “
Given these inconvenient facts, one would have imagined that Creecy would have been substantially committed to the issues raised by the CER.
Instead, in a letter dated December 5, 2019, the minister simply confirmed that the Limpopo provincial department was the designated competent authority.
The minister did not address any of the arguments for a strategic environmental assessment, she simply stated her opinion that “there was no legal requirement for a strategic environmental assessment to be conducted at this time.”
We put detailed questions to the minister, including to “explain why we should not conclude that the attempt to leave decisions to provincial entities represents a serious, perhaps deliberate, abrogation of national responsibility.”
She did not answer.
DeltaBEC responded to criticism of the scoping report by emphasizing that the EEZ would take place in several phases.
“In addition to this EIA for site establishment, legislation requires that each future factory or other development, such as mass boundary infrastructure services, have to conduct its own basic environmental assessment … or a full-scope EIA and request your own [environmental authorisation], water use license … atmospheric emission license … heritage permits and waste management license … Therefore, there will be more opportunities for future public comment before industries are built and operated heavy. “
DeltaBEC said independent specialists were appointed for the EIA phase to carry out 21 specialized studies to investigate development impacts.
“We suggest that, until the independent specialist impact evaluations and the draft EIA are completed, it is currently premature, unscientific and, at best, speculative to draw conclusions about the environmental impacts and sustainability of the EEZ” .
In other words, consultants and the government seem to argue that environmental and other risks can be managed by considering and approving each step gradually.
As CER points out, this approach allows the SEZ locomotive to move without first considering the interconnected nature of the mines, the power station and the processing plants that will make this development complete.
Allow the vested interests in this project to build strength and momentum.
Before we know it, we have a runaway train.
Or, to adapt another metaphor, a dirty white elephant turned rogue.
The amaBhungane Center for Investigative Journalism, an independent nonprofit, produced this story. Like? Bean AmaB supporter to help us do more. Sign up for our Newsletter to get more.
[ad_2]
