APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION, ALTERNATIVE LIMITS AND/OR POSTPONEMENT OF THE MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES FOR ESKOM S COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS

Transcription

1 APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION, ALTERNATIVE LIMITS AND/OR POSTPONEMENT OF THE MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES FOR ESKOM S COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS 2 ND ROUND OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PUBLIC MEETING AT AMERSFOORT (NG CHURCH HALL) (MAJUBA POWER STATION) MINUTES OF MEETING MEETING DATE 29 November 2018 VENUE Amersfoort (NG Church Hall) TIME 10:00 12:00 HRS CHAIRPERSON Sean O Beirne (NEC) MEETING Public Meeting Main presentation in English Content of the Minutes of Meeting: 1. Meeting Attendees 2. Discussions Annexure A Attendance Register Annexure B - Presentation 1. MEETING ATTENDEES: Name & Surname Position Abbreviation Naledzi Environmental Consultants (NEC) Sean O Beirne EAP and Meeting Facilitator SOB Marissa Botha EAP and Public Participation Programme (Scribe) MB Sithabisiwe Ncube-Gari EAP and Public Participation Programme (Scribe) SNG Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd (Eskom) Bryan McCourt Manager Air Quality Centre of Excellence BM Faith Kagoda Environmental Advisor, Majuba Power Station FK Solly Ngcashi Acting Power Station Manager: Majuba Power Station SN Hendré Grobbelaar Senior Consultant: Air Pollution Control Plants HG Attendees Coenie Dafel Chairperson: Amersfoort / Mpumalanga Farmers Union CD Tewie Gouws Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort TG Johan Deacon Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort JD Guilliame Smalberger Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort GS Werno Smalberger Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort WS Francois Lotz Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort FL Ignus van Niekerk Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort IVN JJ Du Toit Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort JDT JJ Lambrecht Landowner and Farmer: Amersfoort JL REFER TO ANNEXURE A FOR THE SIGNED ATTENDANCE REGISTER 1

2 2. DISCUSSIONS NO ITEM Presenter 2.1 Welcome and Introduction Welcome and introductions by NEC, Eskom and Majuba power station representatives. Meeting was facilitated in English. Attendees disagreed, since the landowners present were Afrikaans. SOB stated the meeting proceedings will be conducted in English since SOB (NEC) Eskom representatives were English. NEC will translate to Afrikaans as and when required by attendees. Coenie Dafel, Chairperson of the Amersfoort Agricultural Union stated the meeting can continue in English Attendance register The attendance register was circulated and signed. 2.2 Agenda and Purpose of Meeting SOB confirmed the agenda for the meeting Following the presentations there will be a discussion session and opportunity for attendees to ask questions for clarity. The meeting relates to Eskom s intent to apply for postponement from the Minimum Emission Standards (MES) compliance timeframes for its coal fired power stations in the Mpumalanga Highveld and Vaal Region Majuba power station located close to Amersfoort will form part of the application and will be the subject of the meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to present the findings of the Atmospheric Impact Report (AIR) and to present Eskom s overall impact on the ambient air quality. Eskom will provide a presentation on the motivation for the postponement applications and present the requested emission limits. The draft Application Documents for the individual power stations, are available for public review and comment until 31 January Attendees and overall public are encouraged to review and comment on the documents. During the course of discussion NEC will record comments and concerns regarding the project which will form part of the record submitted to the decision making authority, the National Air Quality Officer (NAQO). Applicable Legislation and findings of Atmospheric Impact Assessment (AIR) In 2004, the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (NEM: AQA) was published. In 2009 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) where published under the NEM: AQA. To achieve the NAAQS it is necessary to prescribe MES which set the maximum allowable emissions for various industrial processes. The 2013 MES were published for air pollution sources to achieve the NAAQS. A revision of the MES was recently published in SOB explained the difference between the NAAQS and the MES. SOB (NEC) SOB (NEC) Ambient standards apply to the ambient air quality at ground level to which the environment and humans are exposed. The NAAQS are set to protect people and the environment. MES are limits set to control point source emissions released into the atmosphere. In this particular case the MES relates to coal fired power stations. The MES have two broad compliance timeframes: 1 April 2015 for existing plant limits; and More stringent new plant limits which must be complied with by 2

3 NO ITEM Presenter 1 April Authorities require that from 2015 to April 2020 existing industrial processes must come into compliance with the new plant limits which proves to be a challenge for Eskom. Eskom will detail the reasons in a subsequent presentation. The MES controls three primary pollutants namely: Particulate Matter (PM) constituting the visible smoke, fly ash; two gasses namely Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 ) and Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) The MES for the primary pollutants are set in milligrams/nm 3. SOB specified the new and existing plant limits, the new plant limits being more stringent. The MES Regulations provide the option to apply for postponement, suspension and or request for alternative limits of the MES compliance timeframes. The application is subject to an AIR, justification for the postponement and a completed Public Participation Process (PPP). It is under these provisions that Eskom will apply for postponement from the MES compliance timeframes. This public meeting forms part of the 2 nd round of PPP. The objective of the AIR is to determine the implications of alternative emission limits, requested by Eskom, on the ambient air quality and to determine the implications thereof on the environment and on people s health. The AIR is informed by direct physical measurements retrieved from various ambient air quality monitoring stations (AQMS) located around the Mpumalanga Highveld. The monitoring stations provide a direct unbias reading of the emissions from power stations monitored at ground level to determine the actual concentrations of pollutants at ground level. SOB presented a series of maps showing the position of Eskom s power stations and AQMS throughout the Mpumalanga Highveld and Vaal Triangle. SOB indicated the position of Majuba power station and its relevant AQMS. The AIR is focused in determining if the existing ambient air quality complies with the NAAQS. The results of the cumulative AIR indicate: NO 2 is in general compliance with the NAAQS except for the Secunda area associated with Sasol s operations; SO 2 is in broad compliance with the NAAQS except for Emalahleni owed to the collective impact from power stations cluttered in the area causing high SO 2 loading and noncompliance with the NAAQS; The most problematic is PM which across the board is in noncompliance with the NAAQS. SOB illustrated the principle of the Atmospheric Dispersion Model (ADM). The ADM determines how the requested alternative limits for power stations will impact on the existing ambient air quality. Based on the ADM all power stations are individually fully compliant in respect of NAAQS and there are significant other sources of air pollutants such as other industries, domestic fuel use, motor vehicles. When the ADM models emissions from power stations collectively, gasses SO 2 and NO 2 show formation of a secondary pollutant PM 2.5 into the atmosphere. This particular PM is small and can penetrate deeper into people s lungs. This is considered to be a very significant pollutant. When the secondary pollutant is modeled Eskom contributes to 75% of the NAAQS in the Emalahleni area. Over the larger Mpumalanga Highveld 3

4 NO ITEM Presenter Region Eskom contributes to 50% of the NAAQS. The PM concentrations are a concern and shows wide spread noncompliance with the NAAQS. When the ADM models compliance with the MES there is a marginal improvement in the circumstance. But, by 2030, 5 Eskom power stations will be decommissioned which will result in reduced emissions and at that point only 50% of the NAAQS will be taken up by Eskom. 2.4 Motivation for Postponement The MES legislation was published in 2013 which gave industry until 2015 to meet the existing plant emission limits and until 2020 to meet the stricter new plant emission limits. Most of Eskom s power stations were built before 2013 in the 1960 and 1970 s. Majuba power station is new and was commissioned in Legislation requires Eskom to install new abatement equipment on power stations that were built in the 1970 s. This presents a problem to Eskom hence the applications for postponement. The new power stations Medupi and Kusile meet the 2015 and 2020 MES and will not apply for any postponements. Eskom is not requesting to increase its emission rate but to operate its power stations at the current emission rate until able to retrofit the power stations in line with its Emission Reduction Plan (ERP). For many years Eskom has worked to reduce its emissions from power stations. Majuba power station has been fitted with Fabric Filter Plants (FFP) to reduce PM thus meets the existing and new plant PM MES. Eskom will apply for postponement of the NO 2 emission limits for Majuba until Low NOx Burners have been installed by It will also apply for postponement or alternative limits for SO 2 until closure of the power station due to the cost of SO 2 abatement equipment. As stated, Eskom has an ERP in place which will see a reduction in emissions of PM by 58%, SO 2 by 66% and NOx by 46% by the year There will be a reduction in emissions yet it is a matter of timing and costs. There will be a reduction in relative emissions from 2020 with implementation of Eskom ERP and power station decommissioning. Based on Eskom s experience it takes 12 years from planning to complete SO 2 emission reduction. Kusile is already fitted with an SO 2 plant and Medupi power station is being retrofitted with SO 2 abatement equipment. But to install the new equipment on older power stations will not deliver a return on investment since it s not financially viable to install equipment for stations which will close down by 2030/2035. Hence some power stations will not be installing Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD). Eskom does recognise that it has an impact on air quality which affects the public therefore the implementation of the ERP to reduce emissions. Eskom has considered the costs and benefits of compliance with the MES and recognises that there are health impacts related to its PM emissions. BM (Eskom) Eskom plans to reduce its emissions through the ERP and the cost to achieve it is R 46 billion and a 2-3% electricity tariff increase. If Eskom is to implement full compliance with the MES it will cost R 187 Billion and a 7-10% tariff increase. SO 2 abatement is expensive, requires significant volumes of water and brings with it social-economic trade-offs. It also results in an additional waste stream. Full compliance with the MES will increase Eskom s water use by 20% which is not desirable owed to current water shortage. If the ERP is implemented Eskom s water use will only increases by 2%. Eskom aims to manage and operate its power stations to minimise risks to the environment and human health. 4

5 NO ITEM Presenter Eskom believes that given the reasons described that the proposed ERP presents a fair balance between cost and benefit whereas full compliance with the MES does not Public Participation Process (PPP) Presenter MB introduced and discussed the PPP approach for the project The PPP comprises two rounds of public engagement. The 1 st round has been completed and took place from 13 August to 11 September During this period the project was announced and the project Background Information Document (BID) was presented at several public meetings. Comments received during the 1 st round were recorded and responded to in an Issues and Response Report (IRR) which is currently available for public review and comment as part of the 2 nd round of engagement. The 2 nd round is conducted from 19 November 2018 to 31 January The draft Application Documents for the individual power stations inclusive of the IRR, are available for public review and comment until 31 January The findings of the assessment are presented at a series of scheduled public meetings, such as at the Amersfoort NG Church. Attendees and overall public are encouraged to review and comment on the documents. NEC will record comments and concerns regarding the project which will be captured in the IRR and form part of the record submitted to the NAQO by 31 March MB detailed the 2 nd round PPP approach and specified the newspapers used to announce the availability of the draft Application documents, libraries/venues where the documents were placed for public review and elaborated on the venues selected for public meetings for the 2 nd round of public engagement. Details on the method to announce the 2 nd round of public meetings were provided. It was highlighted the advertisement for Majuba power station was published in several newspapers namely Volksrust Recorder, Ermelo Highvelder, Highveld Tribune and Beeld. The draft Application documents are available at several public venues in the area, namely Amersfoort and Volksrust library for review and comment. Importantly the draft Application documents are available from the NEC website for download. MB (NEC) Presented in Afrikaans This public meeting at the NG Church Amersfoort is relevant to Majuba power station. The previous meeting took place at the Amersfoort Mayor s Hall in August The IRR Version 1 which records the proceedings of the 1 st round of public engagement is currently in the public domain and will be updated to Version 2 after completion of the 2 nd round of public engagement to capture and respond to issues from public meetings, written comments received on the outcome of AIRs. The IRR Version 2 will be made available to I&APs on the NEC website Attendees are given the opportunity to ask questions to gain clarity and to comment on the project DISCUSSION SESSION Response Francois Lotz (Landowner/Farmer) This application is dealt with from Eskom s viewpoint. There is a price being paid by landowners and not the larger public namely deterioration of our property due to acid rain and having to replace fencing every 5 years due to corrosion. SO 2 trace elements build up in the soils hampering grazing potential of the land forcing us to buy feed and BM (Eskom) Eskom is not pleased that anyone is impacted by its operations. Hence Eskom is commissioning the ERP to reduce its emissions. There are however residual impacts at an individual level. 5

6 NO ITEM Presenter supplementary cattle licks to remain in production. We bear the direct cost for which we are not compensated for. Eskom is destroying the environment and this has a direct impact on the sustainability of farming. Cost to individuals should be managed. There are instances in which Eskom conducts investigations based on individual claims laid by landowners for damages resultant from its power stations. In the past at Arnot power station insurance claims were made to Eskom due to fugitive ash from its ash dam. Eskom evaluated the claims. Eskom has appointed an independent consultant to conduct a health related cost benefit analysis (CBA) to address the health risks and cost to individuals. The CBA considers the financial issues, cost of mortalities and health impact costs as well as the impact on agriculture. Historically it is difficult to determine the impact of emissions on the agricultural sector since the statistics related thereto are limited Coenie Dafel (Chairperson, Agricultural Union) Who is determining acceptable air quality? The CBA is available for download from the NEC website for public review and comment. Eskom / NEC SOB (NEC) The NAAQS were published by government but are derived through a consultative process. The NAAQS are generally in line with international standards. It s only the daily SO 2 limit which is set at 125mg/m 3 similar to the USA, which the World Health Organization (WHO) states should be 20mg/m Does Eskom really think it s morally doing the right thing by postponing the MES and negatively impacting the air quality breathed by people? Eskom can t say it can t afford abatement equipment. One cannot weight up finances against a moral issue. Eskom has not weighed up the broader economic cost to society. Our farm labourers get sick from lung diseases and TB. The true economic impact of the postponement application is not reflected. Eskom just wants to carry on with a bad habit. Fugitive ash from the Majuba s ash dam is a major problem in our area. It must be managed correctly. Is Eskom satisfied with the present management of The AIR determines if the ambient air quality surrounding the power stations comply or exceeds the NAAQS. BM (Eskom) Eskom is legally allowed to request for postponement from MES and is hence applying under these provisions of the MES Regulations. Eskom has appointed independent consultants to conduct a health impact related cost benefit analysis to investigate health impacts and cost to society. The CBA is available for public review and comment at the stated public venues and on the NEC website. Solly Ngcashi (Eskom, Majuba power station) Majuba is experiencing technical problems with its ash dam related to 6

7 NO ITEM Presenter the Majuba ash dam? the profile of air movement, engineering design and increase of The ash dam is poorly managed. All the ash blows onto our farms and into the surrounding area. It the face of the ash dam. Based on design criteria the ash dam should be looks like smoke and as if there is a major veld fire lower and requires pumping in the area. significant volumes of water to suppress the ash. This is a challenge due to water pressure. Majuba s ash dam extension project has been approved. The project manager, Jan Barnard, will be installing a binding polymer to cover the ash dam. The project will be completed by April Eskom has also redesigned the ash dam profile and will provide progress to local farmers in this regard We live in a modern democracy yet air and water quality is substandard. Who is the referee for these standards? If it s international I accept but if it s local I question it. BM (Eskom) stated there is legislation controlling air quality. Does Eskom have legislation internally which controls air quality? Landowner/farmer We have been struggled for 20 years with Eskom to resolve the ash issue; now we are told Majuba has a problem to pump water 120m up to the ash dam to suppress ash? How can Eskom not have an Engineer to pump water 120m from the water pit to the ash dam? Why does Eskom not appoint a consulting engineer to resolve the issue? It s purely because of poor management and incompetency that we are experiencing the ash issue. I can hear from the station manager s response that there is no future plan to address this issue. Guaranteed by April 2019 the situation will not have changed. Tons of ash blow over our land and over Daggaskraal. We breathe the ash in on a daily basis. After April 2019 the fugitive ash emissions will be reduced significantly once the dam is covered and redesigned. BM (Eskom) Legislation for air quality and the environment states that if the power station is exceeding the air quality limits the licensing authorities must conduct an inspection. If it is found that there is noncompliance with the MES, authorities will determine who was responsible for the noncompliance. Eskom have had instances where power station managers were called to a meeting with the National Prosecutor and have had to bring legal representation due to noncompliance issues. Eskom Solly Ngcashi (Eskom, Majuba power station) Majuba does not have sufficient water pressure pumps to suppress the fugitive ash. There is a need to extend and lower the ash dam to a lower wind speed area. The project to extend and redesign the ash dam has been approved and will be completed by April Eskom understands and acknowledges the frustration. Majuba power station does not care about the communities of Amersfoort or their health; there 7

8 NO ITEM Presenter have been no improvements or attempts to address the issue. How can Eskom ask us to assent to the postponement of the MES? There are numerous engineers at Majuba yet nothing is done to resolve the lingering issues. The community is fed up and wants to close Majuba power station. The face of the ash dam has been left open for years; Eskom does not cover it with topsoil and rehabilitate it. Why does this remain an engineer challenge, it s a heap of ash, close it! Guilliam Smalberger Majuba conducts an annual meeting with the local farmers. I have been the only attendee at the last three meetings as there is no improvement or change on the management of the ash dam for the past 20 years. Farmers don t want to attend these meetings anymore; it s a waste of time. The farmers made a proposal to Eskom on how to manage the ash dam and submitted a BID in this regard. Our BID was rejected since we do not comply with the necessary B-BBEE criteria. Eskom BM (Eskom) Eskom notes the statements We then invited the Majuba power station manager to visit our pilot project to prove its effectiveness. The station manager did not even bother to visit the site and we received no feedback or support from Eskom. This was a potential sustainable product which could have been implemented to address the issue. Eskom acknowledged that its emissions cause significant health impacts such as early death. What compensation does Eskom payout to such families were early death is caused as a result of its emissions? Is there medication available to the public? It is the poorer communities who are mostly subject to the pollution and resultant health impacts. What is Eskom doing to address or reduce their emissions? The cost benefit analysis figures provided for the ERP and full compliance to MES are biased. It is indicated the most effective measure to BM (Eskom) Eskom is legally allowed to request for postponement from MES and is hence applying under these provisions of the MES Regulations. Eskom has appointed independent consultants to conduct a health impact related cost benefit analysis to investigate health impacts and cost to society. The CBA is available for public review and comment at the stated public venues and on the NEC website. Eskom has an ERP in place which will see a reduction in emissions of PM by 58%, SO 2 by 66% and NOx by 46% by the year There will be a reduction in relative emissions from 2020 with implementation of Eskom ERP and power station decommissioning. BM (Eskom) Eskom is a state owned entity and its future plans tie in with government and is detailed in the IRP. The IRP 8

9 NO ITEM Presenter substantially reduce emissions is to close down 5 coal fired power stations by 2030 and to move away from coal energy. If these 5 stations close what will happen to the economy? What alternative energy supplies will be added to the energy mix, besides coal? Will it include nuclear energy or will it be renewable energy and if so what is the cost of installing renewables? What plans are in place to reduce the emissions and the health impacts? What are the impacts and cost to the public due to usage of low quality coal? There are a lot of cumulative impacts snowballing the overall impact. guides Eskom s future planning. The decommissioning of 5 coal fired power stations is stated in the IRP with the aim to bring in clean electricity into the energy mix. The new power stations Medupi and Kusile will offset the energy supply of mothballed power stations. Medupi and Kusile comply with the MES and hence will produce cleaner electricity. Eskom does not propose to construct any renewable solar or wind power plants. These proposals are done by independent electricity suppliers. Eskom does experience challenges with low grade coal received at some power stations. HG (Eskom) The ash content of coal is a challenge to power stations. If the ash content at the station is 25% the station can manage, but if the ash content is 32-35% the power station operates under stress. Luckily for Majuba power station it is fitted with FFP which is 98% effective in management of the PM/ash. The FFP is a physical barrier to contain fly ash None of the attendees can agree to the postponement of the MES based on the health related impacts namely early death and diseases. Eskom must come into compliance with the MES otherwise we as a community will close Majuba power station. It has been 6 years since the MES has been published. Why has Eskom not implemented the necessary abatement technology at the power stations to comply? The poor quality of coal can affect/increase the concentration of SO 2 and NO 2 released into the atmosphere. Yet for the Amersfoort area the SO 2 and NO 2 concentrations are in compliance with the NAAQS and do not pose of problem. BM (Eskom) Eskom is legally allowed to request for postponement from MES and is hence applying under these provisions of the MES Regulations. The delay in compliance with the MES is owned to various reasons including design-related limitations of the stations, financial constraints, age of the power stations, the coal quality used, water resources and maintaining a reserve margin. Further, installing abatement technology to achieve full compliance to the MES, on each station for PM, NOx and SO 2, would cost an exorbitant amount of money, 9

10 NO ITEM Presenter directly impacting on the electricity tariff and requiring an adjustment Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) was investigated by Eskom some time back yet it was waved due to financial issues. From an environmental point of view UCG is a much cleaner process. It was also waved from a political point of view since it reduces the need for transport and other services. Eskom must reconsider the UCG project. It was a positive project which was to deliver cheaper and cleaner energy. The demand for electricity will grow in future Coenie Dafel (Chairperson, Agricultural Union) I support Guilliam Smalberger. We as a community cannot support the MES postponement application! Majuba power station does not have an emission problem it has a management problem. Daggaskraal is the most affected by the ash dam fugitive dust. There are people living at Daggaskraal. They are suffering the consequences of the mal management of the ash dam. Hence, it is morally impossible for us to agree to Eskom s request for postponement of the MES. Eskom has no money, it s overstaffed. This MES postponement is a smokescreen to run away from compliance. I have heard it is much cheaper to pay the fine for noncompliance than to actually comply. Eskom must agree here today at the meeting to have the ash dam issue resolved by April Landowner/Farmer HG (Eskom) Can you confirm that Majuba s FFP operates properly and is maintained? Can we go for an inspection right now and confirm that the FFP is working properly? BM (Eskom) The UCG project completed to date was a pilot and demonstration project. The project is presently on care and maintenance and Eskom is seeking a partner for further development. SOB (NEC) We are aware that there is severe environmental resistance to UCG. The general philosophy is to move away from coal. The closing down of the older power stations is scheduled since there is significant additional capacity available from Medupi and Kusile power stations which will operate in compliance with the MES. Eskom BM (Eskom) Eskom is legally allowed to request for postponement from MES and is hence applying under these provisions of the MES Regulations. We are recording the issues and concerns raised at the public meeting and will submit a record thereof to the NAQO to consider in the decision making process. In terms of Daggaskraal; Eskom has appointed independent consultants to conduct a health impact related cost benefit analysis to investigate health impacts and cost to society. The CBA is available for public review and comment at the stated public venues and on the NEC website. Solly Ngcashi (Eskom, Majuba power station) Majuba power station undertakes to resolve the ash dam issue based on the current project in place for completion by April We will keep landowners updated on the progress. There are always challenges with the FFP. Yet for the last 3 months station has experienced problems with the FFP owed to poor quality filter bags. Eskom is busy refurbishing the FFP on Unit

11 NO ITEM Presenter Refurbishment will be completed in the next 4 weeks. Once completed the FFP s will operate properly. HG (Eskom) Eskom has its own monitor at the stack which measures the source emissions. The monitor weighs the ash content released at the stack. For Majuba power station the release is Who monitors Eskom s emissions? 50mg/m Landowner / Farmer SOB (NEC) We are not only concerned with Majuba power station. At Amersfoort we suffer the consequence of the cumulative impact from all the coal fired power stations. Former scientific studies conducted in the area show that the airflow from the Vaal Triangle and Mpumalanga Highveld converge at Amersfoort causing a concentration of air pollution in the area resulting in acid rain. Amersfoort experiences the world s worst acid rain showers equivalent to the acid rain experienced in the Black Forest in Germany. This is the significance of the pollution caused at Amersfoort Theo Gouws HG (Eskom) I was employed at Majuba power station when unit number 3 came into production. During this period Eskom used high grade coal which produced low volumes of ash. Now Eskom uses low grade coal which produces higher volumes of ash. Why did Eskom switch from high to low coal grade? Guilliam Smalberger HG (Eskom) We want Eskom to use higher grade coal at the power stations as formerly used. The truck drivers transporting coal to Majuba power station urinate in the rivers. Has the Majuba waste disposal site been approved yet? The power station used to dispose the waste at Middelburg and has now indicated it poses a challenge. The landowners object to the Eskom also appoints independent contractors to test the monitors in the stack during which they physically weight the ash concentration released. The tests are conducted every 2 years. The concern is noted. The most fundamental issues raised at the meeting is the ash fallout from the ash dam and the objection raised to the MES postponement application. NEC will record the issues and submit it to the NAQO to consider as part of the decision making process. The grade of coal supply to power stations is lower than received in former years. Eskom buys coal of a certain specification at the best available prices. It is unfortunately not cost effective to produce electricity from the highest grade coal at the current prices. This applies to all the power station. Refer to response under Section FK (Eskom, Majuba power station) We have identified the issue. Eskom has requested the coal transportation project manager to install and action mobile toilets. MB (NEC) The objection must be lodged with the independent environmental consultants who are conducting the EIA Process for the project. NEC understands that the EIA Process is 11

12 NO ITEM Presenter commissioning of a waste disposal site at Majuba. still being conducted since the details of the project and consultants are available at the Amersfoort public library. The environmental reports are currently available for public review and comment Landowner/ Farmer FK (Eskom, Majuba power station) No. Eskom was requested to monitor the ash fallout for 1 year. It has been completed. 6 Dust monitoring buckets were installed at Does Eskom still monitor the ash fallout at the monitoring points on surrounding surrounding farms? farms. No exceedances were recorded. The ash fallout was monitored for a full year which gave a good indication of the trend. 2.7 Closure Presenter SOB thanked attendees for their comments, indicated the way forward and closed the meeting. SOB (NEC) Attachments: Annexure A Attendance Register Annexure B - Presentation 12

13 I Naledzi Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd ENVfRONMENTRL CONSULTANTS ATTENDANCES REGISTER - 2ND ROUND OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PUBLIC MEETING AT AMERSFOORT (MAJUBA POWER STATION) APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION, ALTERNATIVE EMISSION LIMITS AND/OR POSTPONEMENT OF THE MINIMUM EMISSION STANDARDS FOR ESKOM'S COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS, MPUMALANGA HIGHVELD, VAAL TRIANGLE DATE: VENUE: THURSDAY, 29 NOVEMBER 2018, 10:00-12:00 NG CHURCH, AMERSFOORT NAME ORGANISATION ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE ~\~ i t>,' --.7«~ ~~c;;"-v- Postal: \~ <--..._lo.<2- (y--.v'\[o ~ "'- J2_-~eJ C.o~~ ~~K::s \.b0 ~\\c- Area: ~.... C\IA. \,.~ e V-...A.c-,-",-s-;c-,~\ ~Q~ v...cj.e.j 2,t' ~cr'f'< (SItS.)q(.,~ ~ ~ ~ HQ~(,t"Z Co~L/~u- k b '"'"" p~] Postal: <':> Area: O~-Z If Se c '3(~O ~Lt,) e c s iv'", - Go. ZL! /'l :J Postal: f"$''?<y (07 #~..4'/~~1.--:-- Area: C~. ( --;z "'~ /~~,~ /~.:;.,LAJ;S k~~ <?i~, e-- O<2'3;IflSS?7, ~ ( ;;4~ U.e.~CO'" p(t\rj.e... Fr..) e. f/v7 8( Postal: f..d.60a 51< Area: (:) W\ <t..,i7':>f.t'rc..j (?~ 3C.s.~OZS-bL, cl.e=.c.CiA ciq e "S\c- c;n...-, d~..c. er.} ~ I

14 "- \.. " Naledzi Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd NAME ORGANISATION ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE C~~r~~7.e: > 5~~~ 4cv~ ~ Postal: fo)c '7S--- '!pf~;;2.?>/2d'// --- W~V~O PO&a' f'~ r-s Area: S-~,,\Le?~ ~" r,,\j~~-c- 60'0 ~C!i -.~ Postal: /)1RrJir c.t,ps ejf~'--'. NI?'?~./ ~~:I ~ 4~.,:).~7o ~ Area:. ~ / ~~«.f_/ -e7-..w-6y;~<j,?w, ( \b\ ~~L~1-c::> o&1.r'r~~~ --r-~ L,US """Cl. \@ J~ l(,c~ --~= - o gj J0t,?(5i ~ Area: /D EmeH,»:: ~,"2~ I-' <, C cren ta: \) ff-{--tl. Postal: fi' b~ (w\';5 L+"Z...~ TNUf k.ltjj~p,~ Area: t+mq.('>: i2oe:,r- t' '2 "t4 f.l ~ G; ot.a... f:vr ril- VI". O<g2,~~ ~<4-' '2 VI ~~ Postal: Area: ctcn.. q ~W._~ Postal: Area: ' ' "

15 ./ '< Naledzi Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd ATTENDANCES REGISTER - 2ND ROUND OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PUBLIC MEETING AT AMERSFOORT (MAJUBA POWER STATION) AFPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION, ALTERNATIVE EMISSION LIMITS AND/OR POSTPONEMENT OF THE MINIMUM EMISSION STANDARDS FOR ESKOM'S COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS, MPUMALANGA HIGHVELD, VAAL TRIANGLE DATE: THURSDAY, 29 NOVEMBER 2018,10:00-12:00 VENUE: NG CHURCH, AMERSFOORT NAME ORGANISATION ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE nf)flei6bl1-80 T H" /J!4lEJOZI bwit<oftime/lftjcj-l Postal: lg:;d!v)ite&hrtu S7/&:f:;7 Area: PO(J)/t.rvvrtN5; as rt OglJ, zzz SS<3y> ~ CONSUC71ttV7 5 bothetwte.notied.?j' CO-"6Q. Postal: GSk-OvV\ 0'6277 S Y.,j oc:::xy ~/\ O-~ _ Area: b <:J..j--i ~-::;- M c-couv uq M cco'-'-v'~ lj~j MWP ce! / ~ M~: esh.o"4 ~co.l-:- 1~!7je/ z- ~' =: Postal: sf dj" J f. Area: -'/17'" I itjij.. / ( J t/.odr J/1 tit" /. ((}.,,<JJ tjl}6}oj ztz ~U7j Postal: ljo~bu~ '2.1 ~ I~ ~O U '13S ; ~ flvls.vc{"i"\;{,k.~i( e!jcjdo. "0",",. ; 11'I'-1:, va." fv:e-~d Area: A VY1 1.(~teJ(.Irt - ~~---~""r~; ---;' I1<~"'-:I1~_~ ;t_~k~~iii._"~'''-iii ''~_'"n'''''''''''~'""'f_:~i1i.'"""","~~"'~_,,,,,--...,~;;~,,,,,,--..::~_=~. li

16 Naledzi Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd NAME ORGANISATION ADDRESS PHONE SIGNATURE 05 cj'1 {oi0 Postal: Area: {lw\c? r ~f6 V V l ~ ~ j J,/Af'7C t/( r;(l-/7j Postal: Area:!)".-1/'-t~';1./,..~<.) 0,"1 7" ~".2..(J '<5'";:;" U ~ &,,/..-:77_ Elt -' J/e: c (.)""V0.~ -"ft{, (<l"j.~ mal'~r:),,- 'V Postal: Area: Postal: Area: Postal: Area: Postal: Area: - --2*1--.._.R _. _".~ e

17 INTRODUCTION EMISSION AND AMBIENT STANDARDS Air Quality Act (NEM:AQA) 2004 Ambient Standards (NAAQS) 2009 Emission standards Emission Standards (MES) Power Station Ambient standards 1 2 FOR ESKOM S COAL-FIRED POWER STATIONS FOR ESKOM S COAL-FIRED POWER STATIONS Substance Plant status MES (in mg/nm 3 ) Particulate Matter (PM) New Existing Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) New Existing Oxides of nitrogen (NO x ) New Existing can apply for postponement of the compliance timeframes. Requires: 1. An atmospheric impact report (AIR) 2. A justification for the postponement 3. A completed public participation process 3 4 1

18 THE OBJECTIVE OF THE AIR Pretoria Jhb Emalahleni Carolina Springs V ing Heidelburg Secunda Ermelo Power Station Sasolburg Standerton Volksrust 5 Pretoria Pretoria Jhb Springs KU DU Emalahleni KE MA KR KO HE AR Carolina Jhb Springs KU DU Emalahleni KE MA KR HE KO AR Carolina V ing Heidelburg GR Secunda TU CA Ermelo V ing Heidelburg GR Secunda TU CA Ermelo LE LE Sasolburg Sasolburg Standerton MA Standerton MA Volksrust Volksrust 2

19 NITROGEN DIOXIDE (NO 2 ) Pretoria Springs KU Emalahleni KE MA KR DU KO HE AR Carolina Pretoria Springs DU Emalahleni KE KO MA KR KU HE AR Carolina Heidelburg GR Secunda TU Ermelo CA Heidelburg GR Secunda TU Ermelo CA Standerton MA N Standerton MA N Volksrust Volksrust SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO 2 ) PARTICULATE MATTER (PM) Pretoria Springs KU Emalahleni KE KR MA DU KO HE AR Carolina Pretoria Springs Emalahleni KE KR MA KU DU KO HE AR Carolina Heidelburg GR Secunda TU Ermelo CA Heidelburg GR Secunda TU Ermelo CA Standerton MA N Standerton MA N Volksrust Volksrust 3

20 Power Station DISPERSION MODELLING 1. All power stations individually fully compliant in respect of ambient air quality. 2. Significant other sources of all pollutants other industries, domestic fuel use, motor vehicles and so forth 3. But modelled collectively two important issues: Pretoria Jhb Springs Heidelburg V ing GR LE Sasolburg KU DU Emalahleni HE KE KO MA KR Secunda TU Standerton AR Carolina CA Ermelo MA Volksrust 15 4

21 Pretoria Pretoria Jhb Springs KU DU Emalahleni KE MA KR KO HE AR Carolina Jhb Springs KU DU Emalahleni KE MA Carolina V ing Heidelburg GR Secunda TU CA Ermelo V ing Heidelburg Secunda TU Ermelo LE LE Sasolburg Sasolburg Standerton MA Standerton MA Volksrust Volksrust 5

22 ESKOM S EMISSION REDUCTION PLAN Applications for suspension, alternative limits and/or postponement of the MES compliance timeframes Eskom Motivation 19 November WHY IS ESKOM MAKING THIS APPLICATION? MES legislation was published in 2013 it gave industry until 2015 to meet existing plant emission limits and until 2020 to meet stricter new plant emission limits. Eskom power stations, except Medupi and Kusile, were built before 2013 and need to have extra new equipment installed to meet the limits. Installing equipment to improve emissions is happening but installing all the equipment has challenges and is costly in various ways. If you weigh up the costs and benefits of installing all the new equipment Eskom thinks it does not make sense for South Africa to require Eskom to install all this equipment. 2 Applications to be submitted and/or proposed requested alternative limits Station Pollutant new plant limit (existing plant limit) Coal-fuelled PM 50 (100) NO x 750 (1100) SO (3500) Majuba None- Eskomwill comply OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1400 OPTION1 - Postponement (Decom mg/nm 3 monthly (retrofit only OPTION3 - Alternative limit of ) complete in 2026 then mg/nm 3 until decommissioning (from compliance) 2025until 2051) Kendal (Decom ) Lethabo (Decom ) Tutuka (Decom ) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 85 OPTION 3 - Alternate monthly limit OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 3000 mg/nm 3 from2025 of 750 mg/nm3 from 2025 until mg/nm 3 until decommissioning decommissioning OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 100 OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1100 OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 2600 mg/nm 3 (HFPS only complete in 2025 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until mg/nm 3 until decommissioning then 80 mg/nm 3 ) decommissioning OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 300 mg/nm 3 daily or 200 mg/nm 3 monthly (retrofit only complete in 2027 then compliant) Duvha (U1- None- Eskomwill comply 3) Duvha (U4-6) (Decom ) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 80 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decommissioning OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1200 mg/nm 3 (retrofit only complete in 2027then compliant) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1100 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decommissioning 4 OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 3000 until decommissioning OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 2600 until decommissioning 1

23 ESKOM EMISSION REDUCTION PLAN IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY SO 2 Year PM 38 % 49 % 58% SO 2 18 % 52 % 66 % NO x 15 % 32 % 46 % Coal Prod (GWh) Full compliance with MES Wet FGD at: Medupi, Majuba, Kendal, Matimba & Tutuka. 5 Eskom s emission reduction plan Wet FGD at: Medupi (pilot at Kendal & Matimba) Semi-dry FGD at: Duvha, Matla & Lethabo NO X LNBs at: Majuba, Matla, Tutuka, Lethabo & Duvha LNBs at: Majuba, Matla & Tutuka PM FFP at: Tutuka FFP at: Tutuka ESP Refurb/Upgrade at: Duvha, Matla, Kendal, ESP Refurb/Upgrade at: Duvha, Matla, Lethabo, Matimba Kendal, Lethabo, Matimba Reduction in relative emissions from 2020 with implementation of Eskom emission reduction plan and station decomissioning Eskom s emissions do contribute to the emission levels in the area. Particulate levels are high but are most impacted by low level sources (household fuels, dust from roads). The offset programme Eskom is implementing will help address this. Nitrogen oxide levels as measured at local measuring stations are not in exceedance of limits. SO 2 levels in areas are high but Eskom is not the only source of SO 2 and the Eskom emissions reduction plan and station decommissioning will reduce it. 7 TIME REQUIRED TO INSTALL EQUIPMENT COST BENEFIT STUDY It will take 12 years from planning to complete operation of the SO 2 emission reduction at Medupi. Other technologies may not be as long but big projects take a long time. Some of Eskom s existing emission reduction projects already delayed by several years. There are financial costs and benefits to installing emission reduction equipment. The cost benefit study shows from a high level financial basis it is not prudent to require Eskom to implement full compliance to the MES standards. Once installed the equipment must run for a number of years to be a financially viable project. It is not practically possible to install or financially viable to put in equipment for stations which will close down before 2030/

24 THE COST OF FULL COMPLIANCE Implications Water consumption increase CAPEX cost (2019 overnight costs, excluding interest and interest during construction) Full compliance with MES 20% - (59 million m 3 /annum)* Approx R187 billion Eskom s emission reduction plan 2% - (9.6 million m 3 /annum) R46 billion Annual OPEX costs (2019 costs) Approx R5.9 billion R900 million Tariff increase 7 to 10 % 2 to 3 % Auxiliary power consumption increase MWh/year MWh/year CO 2 emission increase (direct emissions from the FGD process only) Increase in coal consumption due to low NOx burner retrofits million tons/annum tons/annum tons/annum tons/annum Waste (FGD by-product) production 9.7 million tons/annum 2.7 million tons/annum Applications for suspension, alternative limits and/or postponement of the MES compliance timeframes. November 2018 Detailed information Sorbent Consumption 5.2 million tons/annum 1.5 million tons/annum 9 CONCLUSIONS Eskom s emission reduction plan Eskom aims to manages and operates its power stations so that risks to the environment and human health are minimised and socio-economic benefits are maximised. Eskom believes that given the reasons described that the proposed Eskom emissions reductions plan presents a fair balance between cost and benefit whereas full compliance with the MES does not. Existing emission abatement technology: Electrostatic Precipitators (ESPs) at Matimba, Kendal, Lethabo, Matla, Kriel, Tutuka, Komati, 3 of the 6 units at Duvha. In addition SO 3 injection plants have also been installed at those stations with ESPs, except Tutuka, to improve the efficacy of the same; Fabric Filter Plants (FFPs) at Majuba, Arnot, Hendrina, Camden, Grootvlei, Medupi, Kusile and 3 units at Duvha; Boilers/Plants with Low NO x design at Kendal, Matimba, Ankerlig and Gourikwa; Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) at Kusile

25 Legal basis for the applications MES published in terms of NEMAQA section 21 GNR 893 (Nov 2013) and amended in GNR 1207 (31 Oct 2018): Description: Application: Substance Particulate matter Sulphur dioxide Nitrogen oxides Subcategory 1.1: Solid fuel combustion installations Solid fuels combustion installations used primarily for steam raising or electricity generation. All installations with design capacity equal to or greater than 50 MW heat input per unit, based on the lower calorific value of the fuel used Plant status mg/nm 3 under normal conditions of 10% 0 2, 273 Kelvin and 101,3 kpa. 13 Sub-category 1.2: Liquid fuel combustion installations Liquid fuels combustion installations used primarily for steam raising or electricity generation. All installations with design capacity equal to or greater than 50 MW heat input per unit, based on the lower calorific value of the fuel used. mg/nm 3 under normal conditions of 15% 0 2, 273 Kelvin and 101,3 kpa. Existing New SO 2 Existing New 500* 500 NO x Existing New Applications to be submitted and/or proposed requested alternative limits Station Pollutant new plant limit (existing plant limit) Coal-fuelled PM 50 (100) NO x 750 (1100) SO (3500) Majuba None- Eskomwill comply OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1400 OPTION1 - Postponement (Decom mg/nm 3 monthly (retrofit only OPTION3 - Alternative limit of ) complete in 2026 then mg/nm 3 until decommissioning (from compliance) 2025until 2051) Kendal (Decom ) Lethabo (Decom ) Tutuka (Decom ) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 85 OPTION 3 - Alternate monthly limit OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 3000 mg/nm 3 from2025 of 750 mg/nm3 from 2025 until mg/nm 3 until decommissioning decommissioning OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 100 OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1100 OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 2600 mg/nm 3 (HFPS only complete in 2025 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until mg/nm 3 until decommissioning then 80 mg/nm 3 ) decommissioning OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 300 mg/nm 3 daily or 200 mg/nm 3 monthly (retrofit only complete in 2027 then compliant) Duvha (U1- None- Eskomwill comply 3) Duvha (U4-6) (Decom ) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 80 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decommissioning OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1200 mg/nm 3 (retrofit only complete in 2027then compliant) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1100 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decommissioning 15 OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 3000 until decommissioning OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 2600 until decommissioning Legal basis for the applications There are 3 options available to Eskom to support compliance with the MES, these include: OPTION 1 (paragraph 11A of GN 1207) - Apply for a postponement from only the MES new plant standards until 2025 OPTION 2 (paragraph 11B of GN 1207) Apply for suspension from the new plant standards until decommissioning and Eskom must comply with the existing plant standards OPTION 3 (paragraph 12A of GN 1207) Apply for alternative emission limit to the new plant standards with assurance of compliance to the national ambient air quality standards in the area or demonstration of no increased health risk where there is no increase in the ambient air quality standards. As such, the applications that Eskom is submitting, or the alternative emission limits that are requested during normal operating conditions 14 Applications to be submitted and/or proposed requested alternative limits Station Pollutant new plant limit (existing plant limit) Coal-fuelled PM 50 (100) NO x 750 (1100) SO (3500) Matla(U1-4) (Decom ) OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 200 mg/nm 3 from 2020 to April 2021 (when ESPs are upgraded) Alternative 100mg/Nm 3 fromapril Alternative limit of 80 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decom Matla (U5&6) OPTION1 - Postponement (Decom OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 100 mg/nm 3 34) from2020to 2025 Alternative limit of 80 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decom Kriel (N stack) (Decom ) OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 125 mg/nm 3 until 2025, then 100 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning Kriel (S stack) OPTION2 SUSPENSION (Decom OPTION3 - Alternative limit of 100mg/Nm 3 29) Arnot (Decom None- Eskomwill comply ) 16 OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION3 - Alternative limitof 1200 mg/nm 3 (retrofit only complete in 2027 then compliance) OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION 3 Alternative limit of 1600 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternative limit of 2600 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning (from 2025 until 2034) OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION3 Alternative limit of 2800 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION 2 SUSPENSION OPTION 3 Alternative limit from2025until 2029 of mg/nm 3 until OPTION3 Alternative limit of decommissioning 2500 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning 4

26 Applications to be submitted and/or proposed requested alternative limits Station Pollutant new plant limit (existing plant limit) Coal-fuelled PM 50 (100) NO x 750 (1100) SO (3500) Hendrina None- Eskomwill comply OPTION2 SUSPENSION Eskom will comply until 2025 as AEL limit is (Decom OPTION3 Alternative limit of mg/Nm 3 until ) mg/nm 3 until decommissioning Camden None- Eskomwill comply (Decom ) Komati (Decom ) OPTION 2 SUSPENSION OPTION 3 Alternative limit of 100 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION 3 Alternative limit of 1 100mg/Nm 3 until decommissioning OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION3 Alternative limit of 1100 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning None- Eskom will comply. The AEL limit is 3 500mg/Nm3. OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION 3 Alternative limit of 2600 mg/nm 3 until decommissioning Grootvlei* None- Eskomwill comply OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION2 SUSPENSION (Decom ) Matimba* None- Eskomwill comply OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION1 - Postponement (Decom OPTION 3 Alternate monthly limit OPTION 3 - Alternate limit of mg/nm 3 41) of 750 mg/nm 3 from 2025 until decommissioning monthly from2025until decommissioning Medupi* None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply OPTION1 - Postponement OPTION 3 - Alternate limit of mg/nm 3 monthly from2025until 2028 Kusile None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply *Due to the recently promulgated new regulations (GNR 1207, Oct 2017) in conjunction with lengthy SoE procurement processes Eskom reserves the right to submit applications at a later stage with a possible request for condonation. Reasons for the postponement, suspension or alternative limit applications 19 Applications to be submitted and/or proposed requested alternative limits Liquid fuel PM 50 (75) NO x (1100) SO (3500) Acacia* (Decom2026) Port Rex* (Decom2026) None- Eskomwill comply OPTION2 SUSPENSION None- Eskomwill comply OPTION2 SUSPENSION OPTION2 SUSPENSION None- Eskomwill comply Ankerlig None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply Gourikwa None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply None- Eskomwill comply *Due to the recently promulgated new regulations (GNR 1207, 31 Oct 2017) in conjunction with lengthy SoE procurement processes Eskom reserves the right to submit applications at a later stage with a possible request for condonation. 18 Reasons for the postponement, suspension or alternative limit applications Implications SO 2 NO X PM Full compliance with MES Wet FGD at: Medupi, Majuba, Kendal, Matimba& Tutuka. Semi-dry FGD at: Duvha, Matla & Lethabo LNBs at: Majuba, Matla, Tutuka, Lethabo & Duvha FFP at: Tutuka ESP Refurb/Upgrade at: Duvha, Matla, Kendal, Lethabo, Matimba Eskom s emission reduction plan Wet FGD at: Medupi LNBs at: Majuba, Matla & Tutuka FFP at: Tutuka ESP Refurb/Upgrade at: Duvha, Matla, Kendal, Lethabo, Matimba Water consumption increase 20% - (59 million m 3 /annum)* 2% - (9.6 million m 3 /annum) CAPEX cost (2019 overnight costs, excluding interest and interest during Approx R187 billion** R46 billion construction) Annual OPEX costs (2019 costs) Approx R5.9 billion** R900 million Tariff increase 7 to 10 % 2 to 3 % Auxiliary power consumption increase MWh/year* MWh/year CO 2 emission increase (direct emissions from the FGD process only) Increase in coal consumption due to low NOx burner retrofits million tons/annum tons/annum tons/annum tons/annum Waste (FGD by-product) production 9.7 million tons/annum* 2.7 million tons/annum Sorbent Consumption million tons/annum 1.5 million tons/annum 5

27 Public participation Conclusion A detailed public participation process, as stipulated within the NEMA EIA Regulations, was conducted for the purposes of these applications Eskom is committed to ensuring that it manages and operates its coalfired power stations in such a manner that risks to the environment and human health are minimised and socio-economic benefits are maximised. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, there is the need to recognise the interrelationship between the environment and development. There is a need to protect the environment, while simultaneously recognising the need for social and economic development. There is the need therefore to maintain the balance in the attainment of sustainable development. Eskom believes given the emission reduction plan, its implications, and the specific detail in each of the motivations, that the applications and/or the requested alternate limits are appropriate and in line with the relevant regulatory and policy requirements and as such the applications should be approved by the NAQO Emission offsets The Air Quality Implementation Plans for each affected District Municipality (refer to covers the period from March 2018 to March 2025, and aims to improve ambient air quality in several communities around Eskom s coal-fired power stations. 22 KwaZamokuhle and Ezamokuhle have been selected as a lead implementation sites in the Nkangala and Gert Sibande District Municipalities respectively. Implementation in KwaZamokuhle and Ezamokuhle is planned to commence in the first half of

28 APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION, ALTERNATIVE LIMITS AND/OR POSTPONEMENT OF THE MES COMPLIANCE TIMEFRAMES FOR 10 OF ESKOM S COAL FIRED POWER STATIONS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS 2 ND ROUND OF PUBLIC MEETINGS DRAFT APPLICATION DOCUMENTS FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PURPOSE OF PUBLIC MEETING Present the findings of the Atmospheric Impact Report (AIR) and summary of overall impact from power stations To provide a motivation for the postponement applications and present therequestedemission limits Bring to attention of public that draft Application Documents are available for public review and comment until 31 January 2019 Facilitate and record comments and concerns regarding the project andoutcomes of theair DRAFT AGENDA Welcome & Introductions Purpose of the Meeting Findings of Atmospheric Impact Reports Background & Motivation for the applications Public Participation Process Discussion Session Way forward & Closure Presented by Naledzi Environmental Consultants Marissa Botha 1

29 HOW IS THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS GEARED MES POSTPONEMENT APPLICATION PROCESS IN A NUTSHELL 1 st Round Inform the public through BID, meetings Completed 13 August to 11 September 2018 Public registration and comment period 1 st Round of Public Participation: 13 August 11 September 2018 Press Advertisements Site Notices Distribution of BID to Stakeholders for review Registration of I&APs Present project at several public meetings Provide opportunity for comment on approach In the process 2 nd Round Present Findings of AIR, CBA, Applications 19 November January 2019 Public review & comment period on Motivation Documents, AIRs, CBA and PPP Report NAQO Decision making March 2019 Atmospheric Impact Assessment Phase, CBA & 2 nd Round of Public Participation 19 November 2018 to 31 January 2019 Prepare Motivations, AIRs, CBA, Public Participation Report Press advertisements to announce availability of documents Availability of documentation for public review Present results of AIRs at several public meetings and facilitate comments Provide opportunity for comment on the motivations and AIRs Decision Making Phase 11 February to 18 March 2019 Finalise Motivation, AIR and PP Report Submit Motivation, AIR and PP Report to National Air Quality Officer: by 18 March 2019 NAQO reach a decision on applications: no legislated time frame Notify Applicant of decision: 5 days from date of decision Notify I&APs of decision: within 14 days from issuance of decision 7 2 nd Round Notification letter & Press Advertisements of draft Motivations, AIRs, PP Report availability Place Motivations, AIRs and PP Report at public venues Public review period & comment on Draft Motivations, AIRs, PP Report (19 November to 31 January 2019) Present results of AIRs at series of public meetings (Now) Update and Distribute of Issues and Response Report Advertisement Notices 2 nd Round Press Advertisements have been published in following newspapers: Die Beeld Daily Sun Die Ster Vaalweekblad Ermelo Hoevelder Highveld Tribune Volksrust Recorder Witbank News Middelburg Observer Direct notification s have been sent out to registered Interested and Affected Parties on 9 November 2018 as notification of scheduled public meetings for the project and the availability of Draft Application Documents available for public review and comment Communicate with stakeholder forums, agricultural forums to assist in notification of community 8 2

30 DRAFT APPLICATION DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The Draft Application Documents are currently available for public review and comment during the 2 nd round of engagement: 19 November 2018 until 31 January 2019 At the following public venues and internet: Naledzi website: Table 2. Overview of Public libraries identified per power station for distribution of documents Scheduled Public Meetings 2 nd Round Table 8. Schedule for second round of public engagements Date Venue Power Station 20 November 2018 Thubelihle (Community Hall) Kriel (Volle Evangelie Church) 21 November 2018 Ogies (NG Church) Emalahleni Banquet Hall 22 November 2018 Hendrina (Kosmos Hall) Kwazamokuhle (AME Church) 23 November 2018 Midrand (Eskom Academy of Learning) All Kriel, Matla Duvha, Kendal Arnot, Hendrina, Komati 26 November 2018 Vereeniging City Hall Lethabo 27 November 2018 Sharpeville (Community Hall) Zamdela (Harry Gwala Multipurpose Centre) Lethabo 28 November 2018 Ermelo (Ella Du Bruyn Hall) Camden, Majuba 29 November 2018 Amersfoort (NG Church Hall) Majuba 9 11 Components of Draft Application Documents 1 st Round ISSUES AND RESPONSE RECORD IN 1 ST ROUND Set of Documents forming Draft Application Documents Summary Motivation Document (all power stations) Motivation per individual power station Annexure A_Atmospheric Impact Report per individual power station Annexure B_Summary AIR (all power stations) Annexure C_Health impact focus Cost Benefit Analysis Report Annexure D_Public Participation Report & IRR IRR Version 1 in public domain (1 st round) IRR to be updated to Version 2 after 2 nd round of public engagement to capture and respond to issues from public meetings, written comments received on outcome of AIRs, requested limits; IRR Version 2 will be made available to I&APs on the Naledzi website 3