The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) advised State-owned power utility Eskom on Wednesday to apply for a five-year postponement to the Kriel coal-fired power station’s full compliance with its atmospheric emission licence. However, it also stressed that there was no legal provision for the plant to be exempted from the licence conditions.

The utility acknowledged this week that the 3 000 MW power station had been unable to comply with the licence since its introduction in July and that it could be forced to shut up to 2 400 MW of capacity should it it fail to find a remedy ahead of a self-imposed compliance deadline of the end of the year.

Its statement resulted in concern being expressed about electricity supply security, particularly in light of the country’s already constrained power balance.

Group executive for sustainability Dr Steve Lennon told Engineering News Online that a process had been initiated to seek a “variation order” for Kriel, which was emitting at levels well above the daily thresholds set for particulate emissions.

Eskom had been able to find solutions to ensure that the Duvha and Matla power stations – which, like Kriel, also fell under the Mpumalanga Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism’s jurisdiction for atmospheric emission licensing – were compliant with the requirements of the Minimum Emission Standards of the Air Quality Act.

But Kriel could only be made compliance through fabric filter plant retrofits, which were currently scheduled for between 2017 and 2022.

Eskom had placed newspaper advertisements indicating that it planned to apply for a postponement and exemption from the Minimum Emission Standards as they applied to Kriel. But the DEA indicated that, although Section 59 of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (AQA) provided for exemptions to provisions of the Act, no exemptions could be granted from a provision of Section 22, which related to the Atmospheric Emission Licence.

Therefore, following high-level engagements involving the DEA, the Department of Public Enterprises, the Department of Water Affairs, the Department of Energy and Eskom, the DEA has advised Eskom to seek recourse under the Section 21 Notice of the AQA. Under the notice, any operator could submit an application for the postponement of the compliance timeframes to the National Air Quality Officer at the DEA.

“The postponement of the compliance timeframes may be granted for a period of five years per postponement. Eskom has been advised to explore this regulatory opportunity to address this matter,” the DEA said in a statement.

Lennon said that Eskom could not and would not continue to operate in breach of its licence, but he said he was confident of a “favourable outcome” in the timeframe outlined. However, he could not entirely discount the possibility that loads at Kriel might have to be reduced to ensure compliance.

The DEA stressed that all decisions would be made in line with its Constitutional mandate to enhance the quality of ambient air for the sake of securing an environment that is not harmful to the health and wellbeing of people.