Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

South Africa and coal

80 bytes added, 22:01, 15 April 2011
Groups opposing the project, which includes Climate Justice Now, groundWork and the Federation for a Sustainable Environment, vowed to pressure country directors within the World Bank to vote against the loan and also said they would revive the World Bank "bond boycott" that was launched last decade to end structural adjustment programs and anti-environmental project funded by the Bank.<ref>[http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=552&fArticleId=5363981 "Eskom told to charge companies fair rates "], Business Report, February 23, 2010.</ref>
Inger Andersen, World Bank's director for sustainable development in Africa, said the loan would support the "responsible use of coal as an interim resource for power generation, given lack of viable alternatives". The opposition groups countered, that if granted, the loan would destroy the image the World Bank is portraying of a climate-friendly financier. In order to power the new coal plants, over 40 new mines would have to be opened up in the region. The proposed plants would also increase utility rates to consumers. Large environmental groups such as the Sierra Club have signed on to a petition that opposes the loan.<ref>[http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=566&fArticleId=5363304 "Eskom's R29 billion World Bank loan runs into opposition"], Business Report, February 23, 2010.</ref>{{#evp:youtube|Upj2bMddr8E|World Bank & Coal Power in South Africa .|right|200}}
On March 8, 2010 it was announced that the UK and US threatened to withhold support for a World Bank loan intended to help South Africa build the new coal-fired power station. The UK and US opposed to the loan because they believe it will make it harder for South Africa to deliver emission cuts.<ref>[http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2259097/world-bank-split-controversial "World Bank split over controversial 'clean coal' investment"] Cath Everett March 8, 2010.</ref>

Navigation menu