, “therefore investing in gas infrastructure will only worsen our climate crisis, rather than solve it”.
In their appeal papers the organisations describe how, since the project’s environmental review was completed more than five years ago, the circumstances and context have changed. “First, there is now clear legal precedent that the applicant must assess the full climate change impacts of the project. This legal mandate is essential because, in the last five years, the need to curtail the climate crisis has become more urgent, including the need to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
They said the plant is not necessary to meet South Africa’s energy needs because cleaner, more cost-efficient alternatives are available. “Advancements in renewable energy technology have been staggering, and the cost of such technology has dramatically reduced in the past five years.
“The 2020 impact statements do not consider these projects, the impacts they will have on the environment or cumulative effect of those impacts with each other and the impacts of the project, such as on the health of nearby communities and greenhouse gas emission levels,” the organisations said. “We see this future being enabled by a just transition from coal to technologies such as renewables. This transition will be carried out over time and in a phased manner to ensure we do not compromise socio-economic development of our country.
South Africa Latest News, South Africa Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.