In order to get its 540MW Richards Bay powerplant off the ground, Karpowership will buy government a game farm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The private Madaka game ranch is a popular hunting destination for American tourists. It sits on the border with Ithala Game Reserve, a provincial park that is home to rhinos and elephants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The details of the proposed deal were outlined in the environmental impact assessment (EIA), which was published in May but came up again in Karpowership\u2019s recent interview with eTV journalist Annika Larsen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Asked if Karpowership was happy with some of the offsets that had been \u201cdirected towards you\u201d, chief commercial officer Zeynep Harezi said:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI think I know what you’re talking about \u2013 the offset for the Richards Bay black heron bird livelihood \u2013 we need to buy and donate a game reserve to DFFE [the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment] or \u2013\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At which point she faltered: \u201cCan I take that back? Because I actually am not super informed about it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Larsen: \u201cYou don’t know whether you were directed to buy a game reserve from a certain person or anything like that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Harezi: \u201cNo, we did whatever the DFFE requirement was.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But, as improbable as it sounds \u2013 promising a game farm in order to secure an environmental permit \u2013 that is effectively what the deal entails.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ezemvelo Kwazulu-Natal Wildlife, which manages both Ithala and the Richards Bay Estuary \u2013 where Karpowership\u2019s floating power plants will be anchored \u2013 described the proposal as \u201cunchartered territory\u201d in a letter sent to DFFE last month, but said it would support it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The game ranch<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The 1 750-hectare Madaka game ranch was supposed to go on auction on 23 March this year, with an opening bid price of R9-million.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Days before the auction, however, the owners withdrew the property without explanation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThere’s been rumours around that we\u2019re moving,\u201d one of the owners, Izak Kirsten, said in an Instagram post two weeks later. \u201cIt’s a long-short story, something that happened very quick.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n AmaBhungane has established that at some point before the auction, Ezemvelo introduced Karpowership to Swiss Safari & Eco Tours, which owns Madaka.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI have no idea how they ended up with us,\u201d Kirsten said. \u201cMadaka was advertised on auction. Then we got a call out of the blue. Ezemvelo notified us of Karpowership.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The property, which includes three lodges, is valued at R30-40-million, according to Kirsten, but up to R72-million with the game and all the assets included.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNegotiations are going on at the moment,\u201d he said, adding that Karpowership was undertaking its own valuation. \u201cWe didn\u2019t get any proposal on [the price].\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Karpowership will only buy the game farm and donate it to government if it is granted environmental authorisation for its Richards Bay floating powerplant project in the form of permits that it has been trying to secure since 2020, and which it desperately needs to get its R280-billion project off the ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No plan B for waterbirds<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If Karpowership\u2019s 540MW project in Richards Bay goes ahead, three ships will arrive next year: two electricity-generating powerships and a floating storage regasification unit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For the next 20 years, these three ships will be moored alongside one of the world\u2019s most important sites for migratory birds, which will have significant consequences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe risks \u2026 include habitat loss, collisions, electrocution, light and noise pollution and disturbance by the movement of people, machinery and vessels,\u201d Karpowership\u2019s environmental consultants wrote in its latest EIA. \u201cOf these, the elevated risk of mortality due to collisions with overhead powerlines are a major concern for larger species, particularly waterbirds \u2026 including threatened species such as flamingos and pelicans.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n To limit the damage, Karpowership has proposed entering into a biodiversity offset arrangement, a controversial scheme whereby developers are allowed to cause damage to one part of the environment provided they make up for it by restoring another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Irreplaceable<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n None of this is strictly by the book.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cOffsets are not appropriate to compensate for impacts on irreplaceable biodiversity,\u201d Ezemvelo\u2019s 2013 guideline on offsets reads. \u201cAs a rule, biodiversity offsets should not be considered when \u2026 Critical Biodiversity Areas \u2026 or ecosystems containing irreplaceable biodiversity \u2026 would be negative[ly] affected.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In these cases, the guidelines say a development should not go ahead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Andy Blackmore, Ezemvelo\u2019s Scientific Manager: Conservation Planning, confirmed that the site of Karpowership\u2019s project \u201cis mapped as a \u2018Critical Biodiversity Area \u2013 Irreplaceable\u2019\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cFurthermore, given the [Important Bird Area] status\u201d \u2013 meaning the site has global significance for bird conservation \u2013 \u201ceven if monitoring shows this to no longer be of its former status, the site should still be considered as irreplaceable.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But in Karpowership\u2019s case, Ezemvelo will make an exception because, the argument goes, this critical bird habitat can be \u201crecreated\u201d by rehabilitating the neighbouring uMhlathuze estuary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe were originally of the opinion that this area was irreplaceable \u2026 What has become evident, in the recent specialist studies, is that this habitat has degraded apparently as a consequence of the harbour operations and beyond. We also have been advised that this degradation is on-going \u2026 Thus \u2018moving\u2019 this habitat to a more conducive area is probably the best medium to long term solution. We have also been led to believe that, unlike our complex midlands grasslands, this marine\/estuarine habitat can reasonably be recreated,\u201d Blackmore said in an emailed response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIn summary \u2026 if the receiving environment is irreplaceable then the application must be refused. As you can appreciate, if the environment can reasonably be recreated \u2026 it will be very difficult to argue that its truly \u2018irreplaceable\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, Blackmore added: \u201c[A]t this point in time, we do not have reasonable defendable grounds to object to the project. If however new information comes to light we will (as we have done in the past) revise our position.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unchartered Territory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem with the proposed offset is timing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Karpowership needed to resubmit its EIA by May, which did not leave enough time to develop a comprehensive plan for the uMhlathuze estuary. What rehabilitation work will be done and how much will Karpowership be required to spend? These details are still being negotiated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This means that if environmental authorisation is granted, the powerships will start operating before the uMhlathuze estuary has been rehabilitated, i.e., before a plan B for waterbirds is in place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, to compensate for the delay and the damage this is likely to cause, Karpowership suggested donating the 1 750-hectare Madaka game reserve to government as a form of \u201cecological compensation\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEzemvelo pointed out that this organisation was concerned about the potential delay in the marine offsets becoming functional,\u201d Blackmore explained. \u201cIn discussion, Karpowership was receptive to making good on the delay… Ezemvelo wanted to secure Madaka, and a few other properties around Ithala Game Reserve for biodiversity and elephant and rhino conservation. We suggested Madaka because we had heard the property might be on the market.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ecological compensation is effectively a last resort when the negative impacts of a development cannot be mitigated or compensated for.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These kinds of trade-offs \u201cshould be approached with extreme caution\u201d, according to the National Biodiversity Offset Guideline, gazetted in June, because the \u201crational link\u201d between the habitat that is impacted and the compensation that is given is no longer there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Karpowership\u2019s case, the acquisition of Madaka will be good for rhinos and elephants but will do nothing to help coastal wading birds as they wait for the uMhlathuze estuary to be rehabilitated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In its letter to DFFE last month, Ezemvelo described Karpowership\u2019s proposal as \u201cunchartered territory\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Asked if this was a euphemism for \u201cirregular\u201d, Blackmore said: \u201c\u2018Unchartered territory\u2019 should be read as \u2018pioneering\u2019 for the good of biodiversity conservation \u2026 I have no idea whether Madaka is sufficient, an overkill, insufficient, etc., to compensate for the delay, as we have not applied our minds to this area of offsetting.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Was Ezemvelo Pressured?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ultimately, it will be up to environment minister Barbara Creecy to decide whether to accept Karpowership\u2019s game farm proposal. The EIA was resubmitted in May for a final decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But securing Ezemvelo\u2019s endorsement will go a long way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When Karpowership\u2019s environmental consultants submitted their original EIA in 2021, Ezemvelo was scathing calling it \u201csubstantially deficient\u201d and \u201cunusable for a source document in decision-making\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n