South Africa’s biggest C02-emmiting firms are caught in a PR bind. They are accused of working to ‘delay, dilute or derail’ Net-Zero goals in Africa’s wealthiest economy. When confronted, they struggle with vague denials. In May, a report titled ‘The Obstruction Playbook’ reveals the sophisticated, yet subtle tactics some of South Africa’s biggest corporates deploy to frustrate the climate pledges made by the Just Energy Transition Plan committed to by South Africa in 2021.
Corporations cited in the report include Eskom, ArcelorMittal, TotalEnergies, Sasol, and Business Unity South Africa.
Throttling Regulation via Lobbies
Big corporations and industry associations are accused of lobbying extensively to block progress on South Africa’s two key laws, the Carbon Tax Act of 2019 and the more recent Climate Change Act of 2024. Their primary motive was pushing back against stringent requirements for companies to curb CO2 emissions or face specific legal or financial penalties in the event of default, the report outlines.
Backdoor Greenwashing
Most of South Africa’s biggest corporations, like Eskom and Sasol, cleverly expressed ‘feel good’ commitments to decarbonization and the country’s 2030 Net-zero targets. Yet in reality, they double down on resisting proposed laws to punish high emitters in South Africa.
“I will give you an example,” explains veteran climate campaigner Tapuwa Nhachi. “A clever tactic of greenwashing ploy in South Africa is for a coal company to open a modest 1-hectare field with 100 solar panels and claim to be ‘greening coal’, whilst actively prospecting for five, six, seven licenses for new coal mines elsewhere”.
‘Capturing’ the Law
Unlike European Union countries, South Africa does not have specific laws for government departments or private firms to disclose the amount of external lobbying that went into gazette laws.
This has led to speculation that big carbon emitters in South Africa, including Eskom, Sasol, and Total Energies, are being ‘overrepresented’ at parliamentary panel submissions each time new laws against CO2 emissions are being drafted.
In contrast, firms that produce lower direct emissions in South Africa, like tourism or insurance, had much less access to make pro-Net Zero submissions to ministers, lawmakers, or senior civil servants.
“I call this lawfare capture,” says Bantu Holomisa, an outspoken lawmaker in South Africa.
Several South African cabinet ministers, past and present, came from or are lined up for lucrative jobs on the boards of oil, gold or coal firms, he explained.
“That’s why big C02-emmiting firms have easy access to big decision makers,” he says.
‘Polluters’ Responses
Just recently, in June, the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre confronted 18 of South Africa’s biggest corporations and industry associations cited in the Just Share report. 11 (62%) provided vague, defensive responses that revolved around ‘denial and greenwashing’.
The Energy Pioneer went further in October, reaching out to some of South Africa’s largest CO2 emitters, hoping to get more helpful responses on these allegations of anti-climate lobbying.
Their equally fumbled responses to the Energy Pioneer are captured below.
Eskom
The South African state electricity generation agency accounts for 42% of the country’s emissions. In 2024/2025, Eskom’s CO2 emissions were 16,192,092 tons in April, and 17,084,109 tons in May, the agency admitted. Eskom outrightly denied accusations of funding South Africa’s anti-climate lobbies, claiming to be ‘in tune’ with the country’s national climate goals as per the Paris (climate) Agreement.
“Reducing carbon is key to Eskom’s sustainable electricity future. At the same time, Eskom supports South Africa’s Nationally Determined (C02) Contributions which balances the green transition and maintaining jobs,” Dani Marokane, the Eskom chief executive, told the Energy Pioneer.
This is a ‘boiler plate’ response, says Nhachi. Eskom is ‘cautiously supporting NetZero’ whilst boldly doubling down on coal, a standard tactic to avoid outright commitment to decarbonization.
The Fuels Industry Association of South Africa
When asked by The Energy Pioneer, the Fuels Industry Association of South Africa, whose membership includes Total Energies and Shell, used a ‘diversion’ tactic, without directly answering whether it’s funding anti-climate lobbies.
“We reject accusations of funding anti-Net Zero lobbies,” Seelan Naidoo, a senior executive on the association’s board, told The Energy Pioneer.
Instead, Naidoo emphasized that the association lobbying was directed at addressing the government’s fuel price caps to make ‘supply sustainable for refineries and gas stations and pass affordable prices to consumers’.
Floyd Shivambu, a former leftist lawmaker in South Africa’s parliament, is not surprised by the fuel association’s stance. “Presenting oneself as funding the ‘good lobbying’ is the best way to divert accusations of doing the opposite, the ‘dirty lobbying’,” he says.
Minerals Council of South Africa
The Minerals Council of South Africa, the key body protecting South Africa’s gold and coal companies such as Anglo Ashanti, claimed it has ‘leadership’ in renewable activities. Without directly responding to accusations of funding climate lobbies, the council deferred questions to examples of its members, like Seriti, a leading South African coal miner that has installed a 155MW wind farm and inked an agreement with Eskom for ‘carbon reduction’.
“We affirm Net-Zero goals, but hundreds of thousands of coal jobs must be protected,” Mzila Mthenjane, its leader and a former coal executive, told The Energy Pioneer.
Framing carbon emissions as an ‘unavoidable sin’ to do business and protect jobs and incomes in South Africa is the boldest narrative that anti-net-zero lobbies deploy, Nhachi explains.
“This works like a charm because ‘coal and protecting jobs’ is an emotional narrative in South Africa,” the world’s most financially unequal country, he says.
