This archive report was first published on 29 June 2019.
A Kenyan tribunal's decision on June 29, 2019, to halt the construction of a coal-powered plant near Lamu, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, has significant implications for the country's energy production plans. The tribunal found that the National Environment Management Authority had failed to conduct a thorough environmental assessment for the proposed plant.
The Kenyan government's Vision 2030 development plan, launched in 2008, aimed to increase the country's energy production to meet growing demands. The plan anticipated that energy demand would increase six-fold from about 1,800 MW in 2000 to 15,000 MW peak load in 2030. Coal was expected to contribute 13% of the total installed capacity by 2030, as outlined in the 2011 Least Cost Power Development Plan Study.
Environmental Concerns ¶
The proposed plant would have burned bituminous coal from South Africa and Kitui in Kenya, releasing massive amounts of pollution into the air, fresh water, and ocean. The coal's poor burning quality and high levels of pollutants would have had devastating effects on the environment and human health. According to a 2018 report by the International Renewable Energy Agency, cleaner fossil and non-fossil fuels are gaining advantage due to their improving cost, energy efficiency, and low environmental impacts.
The plant would have also produced large amounts of ash, which would have been stored in a yard near the plant. The ash yard would have posed a significant risk to the surrounding ecosystem, particularly in the event of rising sea levels. A 2017 report by the Centre for Environmental Rights documented the effects of coal power plants on people and nature in South Africa, which has one of the highest emissions from coal power plants in the world.
Flawed Environmental Impact Assessment ¶
The tribunal found that the environmental impact assessment conducted by the project developers was inadequate, failing to address key concerns such as pollution levels, mitigation measures, and the impact of climate change on the plant and surrounding environment. The National Environment Management Authority was criticized for its failure to ensure that the assessment met the necessary standards. In 2016, the authority had approved the environmental impact assessment, but the tribunal's decision highlighted the deficiencies in the assessment, including the lack of detailed insights into pollution production and mitigation actions.
The court's decision has given the project proponents a clear directive to conduct a new environmental impact assessment if they wish to proceed with the plant. The process is expected to take at least a year or two to complete. The decision shines a light on the importance of thorough environmental assessments and the need for critical scrutiny to ensure that they meet necessary standards.
