groundWork and the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA), represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), have filed a review application in the North Gauteng High Court to challenge the environmental authorisation granted to Karpowership (Pty) Ltd. This is a joint venture between Karadeniz and the Powership Group, for its proposed gas-to-power project in the Port of Richards Bay. The project involves the import and combustion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to generate 450 megawatts of electricity for the national grid.
Karpowership was first announced as a preferred bidder on 18 March 2021 under the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy’s (DMRE) Risk Mitigation Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (RMIPPPP). At the time, South Africa was in the depths of the energy crisis, with rolling blackouts crippling businesses, hospitals and schools. Government positioned powerships, essentially ships fitted with power plants that plug into the grid, as a quick fix to load shedding, despite deep concerns about their costs, carbon emissions, and long-term environmental implications.
The latest legal application by groundWork and SDCEA seeks to overturn the decision to approve the long-term mooring and operation of powerships in Richards Bay for 20 years. This legal challenge is grounded around serious concerns about the lawfulness, rationality, and constitutionality of the authorisation process. The applicants argue that the environmental impact assessment (EIA) and public participation process were fundamentally flawed, and that decision-makers failed to consider climate, air quality, and socio-economic impacts in line with constitutional and statutory obligations.
This case comes on the back of a wave of opposition to the Karpowership projects across South Africa. Civil society organisations including Green Connection, OUTA and Natural Justice have all challenged aspects of the approvals. Just last month, OUTA succeeded in having the NERSA licence for Karpowership set aside. The collective outcry reflects widespread rejection of LNG as a solution to the energy crisis, with communities warning that gas-to-power projects are costly, polluting, and locks the country into long-term fossil fuel dependence at the very moment it needs to accelerate towards a just energy transition.
According to Yegeshni Moodley, Climate and Energy Justice Campaign Manager at groundWork:
“This project is a textbook example of how not to do environmental governance. The authorisation was granted despite glaring gaps in the environmental impact assessment and a deeply flawed public participation process. Communities were sidelined, and critical climate and air quality concerns were ignored. We are taking this matter to court to defend the constitutional right to an environment that is not harmful to health or wellbeing.”
The Minister’s decision-making has also been inconsistent and irrational. In the same period, he refused to grant Karpowership an authorisation for its proposed Saldanha Bay powership project on the basis that new gas-to-power was neither needed nor desirable, particularly given the recent sustained period without load shedding. Approving a 20-year LNG project in Richards Bay under the same conditions defies logic and undermines policy certainty.
The applicants further argue that the project is incompatible with South Africa’s climate commitments and will lock the country into expensive, high-emission infrastructure, when renewable energy alternatives are cheaper, quicker to roll out, and better aligned with a just energy transition.
According to Desmond D’Sa, Coordinator of SDCEA:
“The people of South Durban and Richards Bay have long borne the brunt of industrial pollution. Now, they are being asked to accept a 20-year fossil fuel project without proper consultation or consideration of its impacts. Small-scale fishers, who depend on the ocean for their livelihoods, were excluded from the process. This is not just an environmental issue, it’s a human rights issue.”
Independent modelling by Meridian Economics and others has shown that renewable energy and storage solutions can meet South Africa’s energy needs at lower cost and with significantly lower emissions. By contrast, the Karpowership project threatens the climate, marine ecosystems, and the socio-economic wellbeing of coastal communities.
According to Dr Jonty Cogger, attorney at CER:
“South Africa has committed to a just transition and to reducing emissions in line with the Paris Agreement. Approving a long-term LNG project that locks us into fossil fuel dependence is a step in the wrong direction. The law requires transparent, evidence-based decision-making that puts people and the environment first. This review is about holding government accountable to those principles.”
The applicants are calling for the environmental authorisation to be set aside and remitted for reconsideration, with proper public consultation, transparent decision-making, and a full assessment of environmental and climate impacts.