\u201cIf you want coal, we will give you coal,\u201d South Africa\u2019s minister of mineral resources and energy said in February. \u201cKing coal is back.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Gwede Mantashe was speaking in Cape Town at the Africa Mining Indaba, an annual conference to attract investment. He was responding to the recent growth of South Africa\u2019s coal sector. In 2023, coal production grew<\/a> by 0.7% and in 2024 it grew an estimated 0.8%, according to the International Energy Agency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mantashe\u2019s words signal potential resistance to South Africa\u2019s transition towards clean energy; wind and solar produced<\/a> 12% of the country\u2019s power in 2023, up from just 2% in 2015. And it comes as South Africa prepares to host the G20 in November.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Two months before the remarks, environmental activists had gathered<\/a> in jubilation outside the Pretoria High Court. A landmark ruling in December had declared unconstitutional South Africa\u2019s plan to build 1,500 megawatts (MW) of new coal-fired power by 2027. The court ruled that the government had failed to properly consult stakeholders and assess the serious health and environmental risks of coal power. The decision was seen as a turning point towards renewables for a country that still relies on coal for 83%<\/a> of its energy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Brandon Abdinor is an attorney at the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), a non-profit that led the charge against the procurement of the new coal power. He told Dialogue Earth the court\u2019s decision indicated that \u201ctechnical considerations often put forward by the state \u2013 like enabling the grid to be stable and its integrity to be sustained \u2013 do not constitute sufficient reason to limit fundamental rights\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, could the minister\u2019s comments signal an intent to challenge this, and do they raise questions about the future direction of South Africa\u2019s energy sector?<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to experts consulted by Dialogue Earth, though much more needs to be done to ensure a just transition, and though coal will remain part of the energy mix for many years, South Africa can still achieve its 2050 net zero target.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The high court case, referred to as \u2018Cancel Coal,\u2019 challenged<\/a> the government\u2019s decision to expand coal-fired power as part of its 2019 Integrated Resource Plan, which proposed adding 750MW\u00a0by 2023 and another 750MW by 2027. They argued that the decision violated Sections 24 and 28 of South Africa\u2019s constitution \u2013 the right to a healthy environment and the rights of children, respectively. A 2017 report<\/a> had found that, annually, coal-fired power stations cause over 2,200 deaths in South Africa and cost the nation USD 2.4 billion (ZAR 30 billion) in healthcare and lost workdays.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Pretoria court found<\/a> that the government had \u201cflouted their constitutional obligations towards children\u201d by disregarding the health and environmental impacts of expanding coal power. It therefore declared \u201cunlawful and invalid\u201d the inclusion of the 1,500MW of coal power in the 2019 plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sibusiso Mazomba, Cancel Coal campaigner at the ACA, explained that the judgment mandates the protection of the environment for the benefit of both present and future generations. \u201cMoving forward, children \u2013 who will bear the brunt of decisions that exacerbate climate change \u2013 must now be consulted and actively involved in government decision-making that affects their future,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, energy expert Chris Yelland clarified that the ruling does not ban coal outright. He explained that the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy will need to strike a balance between energy needs and legal obligations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe government can still add new coal power, but only if it meets the necessary legal and environmental requirements,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI can\u2019t guarantee a new power station tomorrow,\u201d Mantashe said at a media briefing<\/a> during the Cape Town mining conference, \u201cbut global developments suggest we could build one.\u201d He then mentioned South Africa\u2019s experience with carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) as a way to reduce the climate-warming impact of coal power stations. He highlighted a pilot site<\/a> in Mpumalanga with a borehole capable of storing 34 gigatonnes of CO2. However, he acknowledged the uncertainty of the policy landscape. \u201cWhether we will build a coal power station, I don\u2019t know,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n CER attorney Abdinor argues that a full assessment would show new coal is too harmful and not a viable option. Cancel Coal campaigner Mazomba advocates for renewables like solar, hydro and wind, noting that G20 peers such as India, China, Brazil and Turkey have outpaced South Africa in renewable-energy adoption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A key concern for the government is the sluggish progress of South Africa\u2019s Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP). The initiative was launched in 2021 with an initial pledge<\/a> from international partners to mobilise USD 8.5 billion between 2023 and 2027. Despite this, only USD 2.5 billion of the pledge has been spent<\/a> to date. South Africa\u2019s Just Energy Transition Investment Plan states<\/a> that approximately USD 98 billion would be needed between 2023 and 2027 to fund its long-term decarbonisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A lack of skills remains a significant hurdle in South Africa\u2019s shift to a low-carbon economy. Blessing Manele, spokesperson for the Presidential Climate Commission (PCC), warns that there is no clear understanding of how this transition will impact jobs or what specific skills the future workforce will need.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The need for clarity on this is \u201cmade more urgent by the fact that transition planning is developing in the context of already high unemployment, poverty and inequality,\u201d he told Dialogue Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese dynamics make South Africa\u2019s skills diversification more complex as the just transition ought to manage job losses and create employment opportunities in a country with an unemployment rate of 31.9%.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Coal is the country\u2019s second-largest mining employer after platinum group metals, directly employing<\/a> over 100,000 people. At the mining conference, Mantashe also argued that coal should be classified as a \u201ccritical mineral\u201d, not only for energy security but also for employment stability. <\/p>\n\n\n\n However, green industrialisation presents diverse job opportunities across multiple sectors in South Africa, according to energy expert Nick Hedley. Reflecting on the loss of jobs in areas like coal transport, he said: \u201cThe transition will create employment in the transportation of low-carbon goods and the production of sustainable materials like low-carbon steel, iron, cement, glass, chemicals, and fertilisers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hedley said many coal workers in Mpumalanga province, the country\u2019s coal heartland, could transition into renewable energy roles, but added that additional job opportunities in agriculture and tourism will also be needed. \u201cThe three coastal provinces, with the best wind and solar resources, offer the greatest potential for new industrial hubs, ensuring South Africa\u2019s reindustrialisation through cleaner and more competitive manufacturing processes,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Cancel Coal judgment has also reignited debates over the legacy of the 1948-1994 apartheid on land ownership in South Africa. Renewables projects benefit landowners who can use their land to generate electricity or rent it generation companies, says Letitia Jentel, a researcher at the South African Institute for International Affairs (SAIIA). This \u201cperpetuate[s] energy inequality, favouring a select few in government and the private sector \u2026 rather than promoting energy democracy,\u201d she told Dialogue Earth. Jentel advocates for a \u201cwellbeing economy\u201d that redistributes land and supports community-owned energy projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While on the one hand, Western countries have supported South Africa\u2019s transition away from coal, most tangibly via the JETP, new tensions with the US present significant headwinds. In February, Secretary of State Marco Rubio boycotted the G20 Foreign Ministers\u2019 meeting, claiming South Africa was using the event to promote \u201csolidarity, equality, and sustainability.\u201d President Cyril Ramaphosa downplayed concerns, saying<\/a> it was \u201cnot a train smash\u201d since a US representative still attended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u2018Cancel coal\u2019<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The case had been brought in 2021 by African Climate Alliance (ACA), Vukani Environmental Justice Movement, Groundwork Trust and CER.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe government can still add new coal power, but only if it meets the necessary legal and environmental requirements<\/blockquote>Chris Yelland, energy expert<\/cite><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
Space to expand coal?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Social and economic challenges<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Geopolitical crossfire<\/h2>\n\n\n\n