Environmentalists protest at African Energy Week in Cape Town

Climate activists picketed outside the African Energy Week conference in Cape Town on Tuesday. They called for an end to new oil and gas exploration across Africa. Greenpeace Africa and Extinction Rebellion said more fossil fuel investment could worsen climate change and harm vulnerable communities.

Police removed the protesters, who wore “Make polluters pay” T-shirts. Shell plans to drill up to five deepwater wells in the Northern Cape Ultra Deep block. Its environmental approval has drawn appeals, while campaigners say exploration could lock countries into fossil fuels.

South Africa is seeking oil and gas investment to strengthen energy security. The government presents gas as support for renewables when wind and solar output falls. Activists warn fossil fuel use conflicts with Paris agreement goals and could worsen fires, floods, migration, and unrest.

Greenpeace Africa and Extinction Rebellion organized the protest outside African Energy Week in Cape Town. They demanded an end to new oil and gas exploration across Africa. They also accused energy companies of putting profits ahead of people and nature.

Campaigners wore “Make polluters pay” shirts before police removed them. New drilling could lock countries into fossil fuels and increase emissions. That conflicts with Paris commitments to cut emissions. Campaigners also warned about fires, floods, higher food prices, migration, and unrest.

South Africa still wants more oil and gas investment for energy security. It presents gas as backup power when wind and solar production falls. Shell plans up to five deepwater wells off the west coast, despite legal setbacks and appeals against environmental approval. The dispute is whether development brings needed investment or prolongs fossil-fuel dependence.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel, mainly methane, burned to produce heat and electricity. It matters because gas plants can generate power when renewable output is low.

South Africa describes gas as a complement to wind and solar, not a replacement. When clouds reduce sunlight or winds weaken, gas-fired plants can supply electricity and help keep the grid running. At the conference, this argument supported expanding oil and gas for energy security and investment.

The plan remains controversial. Despite legal setbacks, Shell plans up to five deepwater wells off South Africa’s west coast. Environmental approval has drawn appeals. Activists say new exploration could prolong fossil-fuel dependence and increase emissions. The practical trade-off is clear: gas can steady electricity supplies, but burning it still contributes to climate change and could delay cleaner energy systems.

Shell plans to drill up to five deepwater wells off South Africa’s west coast. The wells are part of exploration, designed to search for and assess possible oil and gas deposits.

The project is located in the Northern Cape Ultra Deep block. Shell wants to learn whether deposits exist. South Africa hopes expansion will attract investment and strengthen energy security. Approval has faced appeals, while protesters argue exploration could deepen fossil-fuel dependence.

This plan is unfolding amid calls to reduce emissions under the Paris climate agreement. Greenpeace Africa and Extinction Rebellion warn that drilling could worsen climate change. They link climate impacts to fires, floods, rising food prices, migration, and unrest. The government says natural gas could support renewable power when wind and solar output falls.

Expanding oil and gas exploration could lock communities into fossil-fuel dependence, increasing pollution and climate-warming emissions. It could damage ecosystems and deepen risks for people already facing fires, floods, rising food prices, migration, and social unrest.

A concrete example is Shell’s plan to drill up to five deepwater wells off South Africa’s west coast. Drilling could disturb marine ecosystems and lead to further oil and gas production, releasing emissions that worsen climate change. Protesters say those projects threaten communities and accuse companies of prioritizing profits over people.

South Africa is seeking investment and energy security, presenting gas as backup when wind and solar output falls. Yet Shell’s approval faces appeals, and activists say new exploration conflicts with Paris Agreement emissions goals. Without a shift away from fossil fuels, communities may face greater environmental damage and wider climate disruption over time.

Reliable power does not require opening new oil and gas fields. A mix of wind and solar can be backed by batteries and pumped-storage dams. Stronger power lines and flexible electricity use can cover weather-driven gaps. This matters because protesters warn new fossil projects could prolong dependence and increase emissions.

A real-world South African example already exists. Ingula pumped-storage station can deliver 1,332 megawatts for several hours. It pumps water uphill when electricity is plentiful, then releases it through turbines during high demand. Batteries work similarly, responding faster and helping smooth short gaps.

These tools are not instant replacements. They require investment, upgraded grids, accurate forecasts, and careful planning across neighboring countries. The article says South Africa presents gas as backup when wind and solar drop, while Shell plans five deepwater wells. Storage and regional power sharing offer lower-emissions backup. That could reduce pressure to approve new projects while improving energy security.

Nearly every country adopted the Paris Agreement, a global pact for limiting dangerous climate change. It aims to keep warming well below 2°C and pursue 1.5°C. Countries submit and strengthen plans because heat-trapping gases drive rising temperatures and climate harms.

For example, South Africa says gas-fired plants can supply electricity when wind and solar output falls. Yet activists warn new drilling, including Shell’s planned five deepwater wells, could lock in fossil-fuel use. That would make emissions harder to cut and could worsen fires, floods, food-price rises, and displacement.

The agreement does not ban oil and gas, but it sets a shared direction: reduce emissions and strengthen climate action. At the conference, Greenpeace Africa and Extinction Rebellion demanded an end to new exploration. South Africa’s debate shows the challenge: energy security and investment must be balanced against long-term climate risks.