Rising power bills push families to breaking point as Parliament weighs gas expansion
Communities face rising costs and weakened protections as Parliament considers fossil fuel expansion
Families in KwaZulu-Natal watched snow fall on their homes this past season. Across Europe, record heat and wildfires scorched communities. For South Africans already stretched thin by rising electricity bills, these are not abstract headlines. They are the backdrop against which The Green Connection has taken its fight directly to Parliament, demanding that lawmakers withdraw a proposed Gas Bill it says could bind the country to imported fossil fuels for the next quarter century.
On 7 August 2026, The Green Connection submitted detailed comments to Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Electricity and Energy, calling for the Bill to be scrapped entirely. The legislation would repeal the Gas Act of 2001 and create a new framework for a gas industry that barely exists in South Africa today.
Lisa Makaula, Advocacy Lead at The Green Connection, named the central failure plainly: “The Bill makes no reference to the Climate Change Act, South Africa’s emissions targets or the just transition, despite the need for new legislation to support the country’s climate commitments. It also treats liquefied natural gas as a ‘clean’ or ‘transition’ fuel, despite growing scientific concern about methane emissions and the climate impacts of expanding fossil-fuel infrastructure.” Gas licences under the Bill could run for up to 25 years, stretching well past the point at which South Africa has committed to net-zero emissions.
The science behind that concern is not complicated. Natural gas is primarily methane, which traps roughly 80 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. Cutting methane is among the fastest tools available to slow near-term warming. Yet the proposed Bill contains no explicit requirements to monitor, report or limit methane leaks across the gas supply chain. That omission lands at precisely the moment when communities across South Africa are living through what a warming climate looks like in practice.
Affordability sharpens the stakes further. Imported liquefied natural gas is priced on international markets, where costs can swing sharply and without warning. Expanding gas-fired electricity generation would expose South African households to those global price shocks through higher tariffs, adding pressure to families already struggling with the cost of living. This risk arrives as South Africans face another major electricity tariff increase.
Beyond climate and cost, the Bill strips away protections that communities depend on. Neville van Rooy, Outreach Ambassador at The Green Connection, described what is at stake: “Another huge concern is that the Bill could reduce precious public safeguards at precisely the time when communities need a greater say in decisions affecting their lives, livelihoods and land. Repealing the current Gas Act puts existing protections at risk, including requirements relating to fair processes, notification of affected people, local-language advertising and environmental rehabilitation. Too risky for the people, the proposed Bill leaves many of these matters to ministerial discretion, without guaranteeing that equivalent protections will be put in place.”
The shift in power is significant. Under the current Gas Act, expropriation of land can only happen at a licensee’s request, after a public hearing, and with compensation guaranteed. The proposed Bill hands the Minister authority to determine which activities require licences, to grant exemptions, and to initiate expropriation directly. Independent oversight weakens. Public participation shrinks. Customary and informal land rights, including those of Traditional and Khoi-San communities, receive no adequate protection under the new framework.
Van Rooy pointed to a community that knows this terrain well. “South Africa’s experience shows why strong protections and meaningful participation are necessary. Communities such as those in Xolobeni have had to fight for years to protect their land, livelihoods and way of life from extractive developments.” The Green Connection works alongside small-scale fishers and coastal communities, groups entirely absent from the Bill’s supporting socio-economic assessment despite the potential impacts of coastal gas infrastructure on marine ecosystems and the livelihoods tied to them.
That assessment carries its own problems. The Final Socio-Economic Impact Assessment System report appears to address an earlier version of the Bill, uses incorrect clause numbers, predates key developments in South Africa’s climate legislation, and fails to account for small-scale fishers, fishing co-operatives and fishing-dependent communities.
The Gas Bill does not stand alone. It forms part of a broader package of fossil-fuel legislation moving through Parliament, alongside the Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Act and the proposed South African National Petroleum Company Bill. The Green Connection argues these must be read together, given their combined implications for climate commitments, energy costs, public finances and community livelihoods. Further detail on the organisation’s position is available at https://infrastructurenews.co.za/2026/08/24/extreme-weather-and-rising-electricity-costs-the-green-connection-urges-parliament-to-withdraw-proposed-gas-bill-warns-of-climate-community-and-financial-risks/
Should Parliament press ahead regardless, The Green Connection has set out what it considers the minimum necessary amendments: alignment with the Climate Change Act and national emissions targets; mandatory methane monitoring and reporting; stronger public participation and environmental safeguards; recognition of customary and informal land rights with guaranteed fair compensation; mandated consultation with affected communities; and secured funding for decommissioning and environmental rehabilitation. The organisation is also calling for public hearings in affected coastal provinces and for the Bill to be referred to the National Council of Provinces and the National House of Traditional and Khoi-San leaders.
Makaula’s closing words carry the weight of the whole argument: “The choices made today will affect generations to come. South Africa cannot afford long-term energy decisions that ignore climate science, community rights and economic realities.” Whether Parliament heeds that warning, or locks in 25-year gas licences while communities bear the cost, is the question now sitting before the committee.
Q&A
How would the proposed Gas Bill affect household electricity costs for South African families?
Expanding gas-fired electricity generation would expose households to international price shocks for imported liquefied natural gas, adding pressure to families already struggling with rising electricity tariffs and the cost of living.
What protections would communities lose under the proposed Bill?
The Bill repeals the current Gas Act and removes protections including fair process requirements, notification of affected people, local-language advertising and environmental rehabilitation guarantees. It shifts authority to ministerial discretion without guaranteeing equivalent protections.
Why does The Green Connection argue the Bill conflicts with South Africa's climate commitments?
The Bill makes no reference to the Climate Change Act or emissions targets, treats liquefied natural gas as a clean fuel despite methane concerns, contains no methane monitoring requirements, and allows gas licences for up to 25 years, extending past South Africa's net-zero target.
Which communities are missing from the Bill's socio-economic assessment?
Small-scale fishers, fishing co-operatives, fishing-dependent communities and coastal communities are entirely absent from the assessment despite potential impacts on marine ecosystems and livelihoods tied to coastal gas infrastructure.