Energy,Environment,and Equity in South Africa

Introduction

The first recorded electric lighting in South Africa was a demonstration of arc lighting in Cape Town, then in the Cape Colony, in September 1870. However, after Charles Parsons revolutionized power generation by inventing the steam turbine in 1884 that produced rotary motion, electricity became useful as a source of power for industries and railway traction, and its generation in colonial southern Africa was by small localized power stations that varied in power source. ¹

Electricity became important in South Africa after unification in 1910 because of the need for integrated infrastructure planning on a national scale in the new country as the colonial era ended. Older settler cities had expanded and required power, and the economy had grown with the discovery of diamonds in Kimberley, and gold and other minerals in the northern parts of the country. An expanded coordinated railway system was required for transporting raw materials and other goods, and electric power was vital to accelerating manufacturing and mining. In a move that was contentious at the time, in the 1920s the state instituted what became the national grid through the establishment of the Electricity Supply Commission (ESCOM). ²

The Electricity Act No. 42 of 1922 instituted a single Electricity Control Board, appointed by government, and all municipalities, mines, and industries were compelled by law to obtain power through that board. The rationale for this state monopoly was that “it was utterly futile to expect a Government Department to undertake and conduct the generation and supply of electricity on business lines.” ³ ESCOM operated like a private concern (but without profit or loss) and was subject to the jurisdiction of the board. This remains the situation today. ⁴

Over the years since its founding, Eskom (renamed in 1987) has expanded exponentially as South Africa has developed and its population and economy have grown. However, unlike the situation in many other countries, it remains a state-owned monopoly without any private investors, and for this reason its direction and growth have mirrored government policy. There has been no necessity to heed the wishes of shareholders or the public, and any losses are borne by government. The state's political purpose in owning Eskom was, and remains, the promotion of the policy of modernization and industrial growth, mineral exploitation, and employment, and, historically, has favored the economic and domestic well-being of white South Africans. South African electricity, however, as will become evident, impacts directly, and often adversely, on the lives of many of its black citizens through the environmental effects of coal mining and coal-fired power stations and the use of enormous amounts of water. Literature on this topic is thin. For example, the index of the Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, the publication of the Energy Research Centre at the University of Cape Town that aims to cover the technical, economic, policy, environmental, and social aspects of energy research and development carried out in, or relevant primarily to, southern Africa, has no index heading for “environmental justice.” ⁵

Electricity As Focus for Social and Political Protest

As state monopoly, electricity supply became a flashpoint for political and social protest, appreciating the disruptive effect that this could cause to the railways, mining, and industry, as well as to the provision of municipal services. This became evident during World War II, when the Nazi movement, Ossewa Brandwag (literally Ox-wagon Sentinel), blew up two 6600 V cables and felled 26 major power lines in Johannesburg in January 1942 in “the best planned and most spectacular piece of sabotage in South Africa's history.” ⁶ Workers took matters into their own hands, too, at this time, and in 1944 a crippling strike was organized by black workers in the growing African Gas and Power Workers' Union that compromised many industries as labor was withdrawn. ⁷

In 1948, the National Party became the governing party and instituted full scale and thorough apartheid. In the 1960s, the then militant groups within the black liberation movements turned to violent opposition and a sabotage campaign on electricity pylons and distribution lines began throughout the country and caused considerable disruption.

Particularly between 1961 and 1963, Umkhonto we Sizwe, the military wing of the African National Congress, in the words of leader Joe Slovo, “attacked things that represented the economy …. We wanted to show people that a new phase in the resistance against apartheid had begun.” Further protest sabotage occurred in the 1980s, when Umkhonto we Sizwe, as Slovo describes, “hit Sasol [the oil-from-coal refinery], which is high security. And then [19 December 1982] we hit Koeberg [the nuclear power station near Cape Town].” ⁸ Sabotage was estimated at ZAR500 million and the opening of Koeberg was delayed by 18 months: started in 1974, it was completed only in 1985. ⁹

In line with the policy of apartheid, very little electricity was supplied to urban Africans as they were regarded as “sojourners” not permanent residents of the cities and the Homelands/Bantustans/Independent National States (the nomenclature changed from time to time) in rural South Africa were their designated home localities. In these remote, underdeveloped, and impoverished places, electricity was almost unknown. Writing of his first arrival in Johannesburg in 1941, Nelson Mandela recorded that “… we saw before us, glinting in the distance, a maze of lights that seemed to stretch in all directions. Electricity to me had always been a novelty, and a luxury, and here was a vast landscape of electricity, a city of light.” ¹⁰

In the later years of the apartheid regime when South Africa was wracked by war and violence throughout the country as well as on its borders, and when black liberation movements were banned and in exile, the tactics of protest escalated. Along with the destruction of pylons and substations came the protest policy of nonpayment for services in “black” areas. However, electricity was not withdrawn from those townships that did not pay, and the state bore the economic consequences of nonpayment. As the major users of electricity were mining and industry, nonpayment by the black domestic sector did not bring Eskom to its knees. ¹¹

This type of protest has continued into the present. Many urban townships where most black South Africans reside are now a sea of solar panels that supply hot water, but it is electricity from the grid that powers mobile phones, televisions, kettles, and other vital domestic appliances. Political, social, and economic protest currently include dangerous illegal connections, cable theft from pylons and substations, and nonpayment of electricity accounts. ¹² Theft and nonpayment have brought numerous towns to their financial knees, as they are liable for the debt to Eskom and users are not paying. ¹³ However, although there is active sabotage and protest by this means, there is little popular environmental activism around the polluting and dangerous aspects of electricity, and no single strong non-governmental organization regularly takes Eskom to task to ameliorate the lives of people who are adversely affected. ¹⁴ Moreover, the matter is complex as there are many worker organizations that protest against renewable energy fearing that jobs will be lost. ¹⁵

Slow Violence: Power Stations and Coal

Electricity and its impacts cannot be separated from the manner of production. In a now well-established phrase, Rob Nixon's “slow violence” ¹⁶ resonates in the energy sector. South Africa's electricity comes at a massive cost in coal, water, and pollution, which impact on the health of many millions of citizens and, indeed, on the country's future environmental health. South Africa has what is probably the cheapest steam-generated electricity in the world. Christie has summarized the three major reasons for this: the coal seams are thick, shallow, and unfaulted; there is ample cheap black labor for mining; and, as already explained, the electricity industry is structured by the state to support mining, transport, and manufacture. ¹⁷

The size of this industry can be appreciated from the figures. Deloitte's 2017 analysis explains that South Africa produces ∼51,643 MW from all types of plants, nonrenewable and renewable, and imports 1500 MW of hydropower. Currently, South Africa has 25 power stations located around the country (although most are close to the coal fields in the northern areas), all belong to the state, and most were constructed between 1960s and the 1990s. ¹⁸ Most of the annual production (240,300 GWh) is consumed locally, but some 12,000 GWh is exported to other countries within the Southern African Development Community. South Africa imports ∼9000 GWh from Cahora Bassa in Mozambique. ¹⁹ The point to note is that almost two-thirds of South Africa's total electricity consumption (62%) is used by mining and manufacturing, households use only 20%, and many rural areas still do not have electricity. ²⁰

Around 77% of South Africa's energy comes from local coal, which is abundant in the Ecca deposits, a geological stratum that covers some two-thirds of South Africa. Most of the coal—the third largest reserves in the southern hemisphere—lies in the northern and eastern parts of the country, and this is where most of the large power stations are situated. ²¹ The largest coal mines, responsible for 85% of production, are near the town of eMalahleni (formerly Witbank), ∼150 km east of Johannesburg; currently 51% of them are subsurface (underground), whereas 49% are opencast. ²² Almost one-third of South Africa's mined coal, and that of the highest quality, is exported. Despite its small geographical area, South Africa is the fourth largest coal-exporting country worldwide. ²³

Coal mining ruins the land as well as the air. In coal mining areas, in addition to air pollution, there are poisonous old mine dumps, long-burning fires, water pollution, and acid mine drainage. ²⁴ Although, legally, land must be rehabilitated after mining ceases, this does not always happen, because the law is not strictly applied and fresh areas are being targeted for mining, some contracts being awarded in environmentally sensitive, even conserved, areas. ²⁵

Air pollution and energy have been rare topics in South African environmental history. However, there is a significant thesis by Michal Singer who wanted her work to “serve the struggle of a brave new South African environmental movement,” a wish that has not come to pass. As Singer argues, the pollution around eMalahleni that accompanied mining and coal-fired power stations was considered to be fundamental to industrial progress, indeed, it was the inevitable consequence of modernity. Unregulated African townships grew apace and often in places where pollution was worst. ²⁶ There is little change today and the black poor remain unable to escape the hazards of living in a toxic environment. In the townships near eMalahleni, inhabitants suffer from sinus, burning eyes, lung infections, and other ailments. ²⁷

Water, Hydropower, and Renewable Energy

Environmental injustice around the supply of electricity is compounded by the fact that South Africa is an arid country and water is a precious commodity. The average rainfall is 497 mm: evaporation is high, rivers are few, and distributed unevenly, as is the rainfall. Groundwater is scarce and there are no major aquifers. Not only is water distribution skewed, but at present, ∼98% of the country's water is already allocated. ²⁸ From the 1920s onward, the South African government has actively dammed rivers and catchments to ensure agricultural and urban water supplies. Water security is fragile, and additional water is purchased from neighboring Lesotho. Furthermore, the eastern watershed of South Africa has been transformed by storage dams and electricity-devouring pumps that divert water that would flow eastward naturally toward the Indian Ocean to the west into industrial Gauteng. ²⁹ Thus, although South Africa has abundant supplies of coal to produce electricity, the country is extremely short of water that is needed for the same purpose. There are 13 major coal-powered plants in South Africa and 8 of the 10 baseload stations use wet recirculation cooling technologies that are extremely wasteful of water. The older plants that have been brought back into service are referred to as “water guzzlers,” ³⁰ a situation worsened because they are located in water-scarce regions.

Many countries rely on hydropower, and of this type, South Africa produces only 3573 MW in total by plants of various sizes. ³¹ Although water is short in South Africa, like coal, sunshine is abundant. ³² Although the provision and use of solar power remains minimal, mining and heavy industry cannot rely on it. However, domestic solar energy is growing and houses for the poor that are constructed by government are fitted with small solar hot water panels. ³³

As a government enterprise, Eskom mirrors the political landscape of South Africa, and there are many bureaucratic and other challenges. Essentially, owing to corruption and mismanagement, electricity tariffs have tripled in recent decades. Rolling blackouts of the years between 2012 and 2016 (and those still occurring) caused businesses and industries to decrease their reliance on Eskom by purchasing diesel generators, and by cutting down on electricity use. ³⁴ In addition, there is strong trade union rejection of renewable energy. When, under a new minister of energy, an agreement was finally reached with independent power producers early in 2018 to accelerate renewable power supplies, coal miners threatened to go on strike, fearing job losses. ³⁵

Environmental Justice?

There has been little popular protest in South Africa against the environmental effects of coal-fired plants or their detrimental consequences on water sustainability. This may be because issues around unemployment (officially 25% and unofficially far higher) and inequality are more important in the daily lives of the poor, and these are the targets for mass action. ³⁶ Those who live in the shadow of emissions, pollutants, tar pits, effluent ponds, and slagheaps are usually black and poor with limited lifestyle options and choices. They say, “There is nowhere to complain to. Neither government nor industry take responsibility.” ³⁷ Large and violent protest action against the lack of services that government should provide-potable clean water, sanitation, housing and health-wrack South African cities almost daily. Tires are burnt, streets blockaded, and buildings and infrastructure damaged. However, there is little protest in rural areas where the environmental hazards and pollution from mining operations are most visible. The reasons for this are endemic, but often slow, subtle, and difficult to solve, whereas social activism can produce immediate physical and policy results. ³⁸

There is some visible activism, but it is very limited. An opencast coal mine is planned for the Fuleni Reserve near the iMfolozi wilderness in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, and the lives of vocal opponents have been threatened. In addition, strategic lawsuits against public participation are the order of the day, with government apparently colluding in them; such is the pressure to demonstrate a will to create employment. ³⁹ Recently (2017), however, Earthlife Africa has won an important court case that has forced government to reassess the environmental impact of another proposed coal-fired power plant, Thabametsi, in Limpopo province. Apparently, although the impact of the plant had not been “comprehensively assessed or considered,” the minister of environmental affairs granted environmental approval. ⁴⁰ Another lawsuit is pending as a coalition of civil society and community organizations threatens to approach the constitutional court to prevent decisions of the minister of mineral resources and the minister of environmental affairs to allow an opencast coal mine in the Mabola Protected Area near Wakkerstroom in Mpumalanga, which is a strategic water resource area. ⁴¹

Conclusion

The South African Constitution of 1996 that replaced that of 1961 (when South Africa became a republic and left the Commonwealth) has a bill of rights that makes clear that all citizens have the right to a clean and healthy environment, both in the present and in the future. The absence of environmental enforcement under apartheid was driven by the need to survive economically in a hostile global environment. Now that same absence persists because government priority is to reduce poverty and generate employment. Although sometimes advocated, there are no prospects of privatizing Eskom and, in any event, the benefits of doing so are not clear. ⁴² The population of South Africa continues to grow very fast, and the prospect of a future without employment is a reality for many citizens, particularly as economic growth declines. ⁴³ Some 17 million South Africans survive on monthly government social grant payments of various kinds and the encouragement of employment opportunities is paramount. ⁴⁴ The state is hard pressed to maintain an adequate level of services in a contracting economy with a fast-growing population. In addition, although some aspects of environmental law are excellent, lack of funding and poor human capacity often make implementation impossible. ⁴⁵

A recent article concluded that South Africa is a “weak green state” owing to the unresolvable tensions between economic and environmental values. ⁴⁶ It has, as yet, not been possible to marry the social justice and environmental agendas for many reasons embedded in our past and that continue to exist in the present.