Latest news with #NorthernCapeUltraDeep
The Citizen
5 days ago
- Business
- The Citizen
Appeal launched against Shell's approval to drill off Northern Cape coast
Shell were given approval for the 3 200m-deep well by the mineral resources department but environmentalists are questioning the decision. Environmentalists are appealing the government's decision to grant Shell permission to drill deep into the Northern Cape coast. The Department of Mineral Resources granted Shell environmental authorisation for the site in early July, allowing for drilling up to depths of 3 200m. Citing concerns from fishing communities and heritage organisations over the possible infringement of cultural rights, appellants highlighted what they believe are holes in Shell's initial submission. Third-deepest well in the world Shell's Northern Cape Ultra Deep (NCUD) oil and gas project could tap into deep-sea reserves located off the South African coast between Lamberts Bay and Namibia. If Shell is successful, the well would become the third deepest offshore site in the world. Organisations opposed to the project believe the oil giant's environmental impact assessment report did not cover the required criteria. Natural Justice and The Green Connection's appeal states that the modelling used to determine Shell's ability to close the well in the event of a disaster was inadequate. Additionally, full emergency plans were not disclosed, raising the suspicion of the environmentalists. 'How could decision-makers have considered all the risks or fully assess the adequacy of the various contingency plans, without having detailed, site-specific emergency response plans,' stated Neville van Rooy, Community Outreach Coordinator at The Green Connection. The Citizen reached out to Shell for comment. Any response will be included once received. Inadequate emergency plans The plan listed by Shell in the impact report involved the installation of a capping stack within three weeks of a disaster. The appellants questioned whether such an installation was possible at the required depth, within the stipulated timeframe, as Shell's models were based on existing sites, not the conditions specific to the NCUD. The Green Connection's legal advisor, Shahil Singh, said the perceived lack of transparency violated legal protections and sections of the constitution. 'These omissions are not minor. It may violate the principles of South African environmental law, which demand transparency, precaution, and public participation,' said Singh. Noting Shell's failed attempt to drill off the Eastern Cape coast several years ago, which was halted by court action, Singh said this scenario created a 'pattern' of attempting to dodge oversight. 'It is exploitation — because it doesn't uplift communities nor protect the environment — but destroys instead. 'We cannot stand by while our ocean and our future are sacrificed for short-term corporate profit,' Singh concluded. NOW READ: Money was what pushed Shell out of South Africa – expert
IOL News
15-07-2025
- Business
- IOL News
Green Connection slams EIA approval of Shell's Northern Cape oil exploration project
Shell, the oil major, applied for authorisation last year and plans to drill exploration or appraisal wells in the Northern Cape Ultra Deep Block in the Orange Basin. The Green Connection, a South African non-profit organisation focused on environmental and social justice, said on Tuesday it notes with deep concern and surprise the recent approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for Shell's proposed Northern Cape Ultra Deep (NCUD) oil and gas exploration project. Shell has been granted environmental authorisation to drill up to five deep-water wells off South Africa's west coast, the company said on Friday, Reuters reported. The oil major applied for authorisation last year and plans to drill exploration or appraisal wells in the Northern Cape Ultra Deep Block in the Orange Basin, at water depths ranging between 2 500 metres and 3 200 metres. Block NCUD is located off the West Coast of South Africa, roughly between Port Nolloth and Saldanha Bay. This approval comes despite repeated objections raised by coastal communities and civil society, including detailed submissions by The Green Connection and Natural Justice in August and December 2024. Advocacy Officer at The Green Connection, Lisa Makaula said, 'This EIA authorisation is a slap in the face of the small-scale fishers and communities who have consistently raised concerns about the project and its potential impact on their livelihoods.' Walter Steenkamp, a small-scale fisher from Port Nolloth, said, 'We've said before – these oceans are our life. We need a healthy ocean to survive. How can they approve something that could destroy our future? This is why we will not back down.' Small-scale fisher from Doorn Bay, Deborah de Wee said, 'We are deeply disappointed by this decision. We believe that it's a huge mistake that puts our ocean – and our future – at risk. We don't want harmful activities like oil and gas drilling in our waters because we depend on the ocean for our daily bread. This is how we survive, and how our people have survived for generations. These projects don't just threaten our food security – they potentially threaten our entire way of life. If this goes ahead, our children may never experience the ocean the way we did. With this decision, it feels like we are being robbed of our fishing culture. How will we teach the next generation to make a living from the sea when the risks are so high?' The Green Connection said as the climate crisis appears to intensify, and with mounting evidence of the potential harm oil and gas activities pose to marine biodiversity and small-scale fishers who rely on a healthy ocean, this decision by the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources is deeply troubling. The targeted area forms part of South Africa's precious ocean heritage and sustains the livelihoods of numerous coastal communities – especially in the Northern Cape, where many already face social and economic vulnerability. 'Furthermore, despite industry claims, gas is not a transition fuel – it is a fossil fuel that contributes to the climate crisis. Climate scientists confirm that new oil and gas projects are incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C. Approving this kind of development now, actively undermines climate action and endangers the very communities it claims to benefit, especially since gas poses more climate risks – due to methane emissions that have 80 times the heating potential of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period,' said Makaula.
