People in South Africa may understand fully the inconvenience of having a six-hour power cut (in the case of Cape Town several days in mid-winter) more than many other nations out there might understand, experience and tolerate.
How can it be that a nation’s power utility was not fully prepared and anticipated the growth in demand, given the prosperous outlook of nationals and government alike, let’s say about 10 years ago? Seems that it was inclined to plan for slow growth scenarios, instead of recognising that this southern tip of Africa was to become a serious global economic hub — maybe as a result of apartheid leftovers, or perhaps it had something to do with lack of vision of the newly appointed powers over the past decade? I’m not to judge that.
Fact is, as so eloquently and almost innocently put by Eskom CEO Jacob Maroga, the country will experience more power cuts and tariff increases over “at least” the next five years, with the emphasis on “at least”. You know, I would be inclined to fire every single last person responsible for this predicament were I in the position to do so, but unfortunately this would not alleviate the crisis. We as consumers will have to bite the bullet and try to assist with solving the energy crisis in this country if any of us want to actually see the end of this decade and start dreaming about things like 2010’s World Cup and other potentially reputation-threatening events to be hosted by this country.
What I do find somewhat entertaining is the dead-pan expression with which Mr Maroga delivers this news to the nation, matter-of-factly as only a person on death row may endeavour to deliver a truly liberating (from all sin) address to appreciative followers. I would at least expect some display of if not remorse, then something closely resembling it! This is like our president stating that we are actually at war with our neighbours, but there’s no way we could have foreseen this and unfortunately we did not plan for this eventuality (now that may even frighten the living bejesus out of me).
I guess like so many other citizens I am feeling the pangs of frustration welling up inside of me when I cannot cook my supper, make me tea or read my book without having to scratch around in the (now front, used to be back) of the cupboard to try to find my gas appliances and matches. This is not on; it is not acceptable. It is the result of poor planning and insufficient expenditure, leading to a “false” economic boom on the back of cheap and dirty power. Unsustainable!
I hope that the future of Southern Africa and its black outlook will not suffer the same dysfunctional planning (or lack of) fate and that some of the powers that be will have the foresight, insight and conviction to change the face of power on our dark continent. I am not someone to dwell on the past, but my oath, this past should have taught some serious lessons and I hope they have made an impression where it matters.
As for straight-faced expression of indifference regarding the current status, I think the nation is owed an explanation and not a swept-under-the-carpet expression of incompetence by the responsible organisation(s).
I look forward to living in a country that does not excuse every single misgiving by powerful figures and institutions and dress them up in summer frocks in order to win the next election; a place where people and organisations are held to task and a land where honesty and integrity are valued, while deception, lies and incompetence are met with sincere rejection.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, January 8th, 2008 at 8:31 pm and is filed under Perspective, Lifestyle, Business.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
12 Responses to “Eskom’s black presence”
C’mon Sandy - The powers that be were far more interested in denying the linkage between HIV/AIDS and lining their pockets with cash from the arms deal… Power/infrastructure management wasn’t on the agenda!
Mbeki, Zuma and co bought the Arms deal instead of power stations. They know what they did (Mbeki recently apologised) but lack the balls to fall on their swords. They should be fired by the electorate for such a lack of foresite as they have condemned the poor to more years of poverty as the economy cannot grow.
In any normal democracy they will not get re-elected. In 2009 when darkness is really biting will the electorate kick them out?
> How can it be that a nation’s power
> utility was not fully prepared and
> anticipated the growth in demand,
> given the prosperous outlook of
> nationals and government alike, let’s
> say about 10 years ago?
That’s easy: Just follow a policy to set the price of electricity low enough so that even poor people can afford it (which is definitely the right thing to do from the social perspective, BTW), but too low to allow any substantial investment into infrastructure after the theft of electricity has been accounted for (which will lead to disaster from a technological point of view).
Eskom is in a dilemma and the recent price hikes may probably be an economic necessity.
The rumour is that Eskom did forsee the capacity crisis but Mbeki & co delayed giving them permission to go ahead (which Mbeki uncharacteristically admitted to) until they could involve an “empowerment” (front for cronies?) firm.
Mind you, if Alec Erwin was stoopid enuff to blame the Koeberg bolt on sabotague (and then egg-dance that he hadn’t) what do you expect.
The good news is that Zuma does not seem as keen on Stupid White Men and animus-ridden women as Mbeki.
“I look forward to living in a country that does not excuse every single misgiving by powerful figures and institutions and dress them up in summer frocks in order to win the next election; a place where people and organisations are held to task and a land where honesty and integrity are valued, while deception, lies and incompetence are met with sincere rejection.”
I also heard that Eskom did foresee the rise in demand but were prevented by government from increasing capacity. However, I wonder what investment Eskom has made in researching and developing, e.g. solar power infrastructure. I would also ask of the government what they are doing to incentivise home-owners and businesses to install solar panels. Why can’t low-cost housing be better insulated and come equipped with solar panels and low-consumption lighting for example? Surely these measures would substantially assist in moderating our power consumption?
AFAIK, Eskom did realise in the mid-90s that they would need to add new generating capacity to meet expected demand in SA. Mbeki recently admitted that they were informed about this way back then. However, the international economic context at that time was to allow the private sector to play a more prominent role in public utilities, if not privatising these utilities outright. It was in this time that many state parastatals were fully or partially privatised - think Telkom, SAA, SAFCOL (forestry), Tollroad agencies, etc. SA did not fully privatise many of these parastatals, with govt retaining a significant share. “The freemarket meeting the socialist needs of SA.”
So, instead of privatising Eskom, I believe govt opted to allow private sector companies to provide the necessary extra power plants that SA needed. In addition, it was during this time that the idea of Regional Electricity Distributors (REDs) came to the fore (semi-private institutions), causing further confusion in the electricity market. And not many questioned this rationale for the electricity market at that time. With hindsight it is easy to say this decision was wrong, or that the conditions to allow the private sector to participate was not sufficient for them to do so. E.g. the price of electricity was simply too low (they could never have competed with Eskom), govt did not provide sufficient incentives to offset this (we had other priorities at that time with taxpayer monies), many investors were pull out of investing in emerging markets over the long term following the 1997-1998 economic crises in Asia, Russia and Brazil; not enough thought, consultation and planning went into the RED concept causing underinvestment and maintenance in distribution infrastructure. Etc Etc Etc
I simply believe it is a hard lesson for SA to have learned - we made a decision hoping, in our naitivity, that the private sector will fill the gap. Blame the govt, blame Eskom, blame the many consultants who advised govt at that time, blame the private companies that never invested, blame poor timing, blame municipalities for not investing,… the list goes on and on and on. There are many excellent reports by experts in the area written about this. By the time govt gave the go ahead to Eskom in 2003/4, it was accepted that we will not have enough capacity for a few years. Planning takes 18months to 2 years alone, construction another 4-7 years.
We are in this situation now and what are we doing about this? Many strategies have been developed or suggested by people with more knowledge and experience than me on how to go about this. All I can say is that it is easy to suggest remedies, but difficult to change the culture that will be needed to make them happen. Its cheapest and easiest to build coal power stations, and SA has massive amounts of coal reserves for this to be feasible. But environmental concerns about coal in this day and age makes it not the best long term solution. Similar arguments could be made for nuclear energy. Wind and solar power, though environmentally sound, are very expensive (5 to 10 times as much as grid electricity) and provides electricity only when the sun shines or wind blows. Globally, there is an energy shortage, so most countries are suddenly searching for energy. As a result, there is a global shortage of silicon for solar panels, so even if we want to provide solar panels, we will have to either pay high prices, or stand in the queue. Even if we could, providing enough solar panels for just the residential market in SA will take at least 10 years or more. Govt and Eskom should do more to promote these types of electricity generation, and I believe that will happen in the next year or two. Nevertheless, it will not fix the problem overnight.
SAns are highly electricity inefficient due to our cheap electricity policy of the past few years. We must become more efficient. But changing culture is one of the most difficult things to do. Buying more expensive lights, either getting equipment to regulate the geyser, remembering to switch it on/off everyday, or getting an expensive solar heater. The best way to force people to become more energy efficient is to make it expensive to be inefficient. Raising prices by 50% to a 100% may make this happen, but is not socially feasible. Just remember all the boohaahaa about Eskom raising prices 14%. Even then, we will remain one of the cheapest electricty providers in the world.
But why wait for govt - if you can afford it, start generating your own power: solar water heater to replace the standard geyser, solar panels for std electricty or get a small wind turbine (for an SA manufacturer, see www.kestrelwind.co.za), batteries and other necessary equipment. Alternatively, get the body corporate/owners of housing complexes/estates to build these and supply the residents with power.
Sandy says: “I hope that the future of Southern Africa and its black outlook will not suffer the same dysfunctional planning (or lack of) fate and that some of the powers that be will have the foresight, insight and conviction to change the face of power on our dark continent.”
Exactly what is ‘black outlook’? I also thought labels like ‘dark continent’ were deemed racist. I understand that the context is the Eskom power cuts, but the undertones here are offensive.
Soweto by Starlight on January 15th, 2008 at 10:20 am
SbS, I celebrate the fact that there is no substance to support your concern noted here, but thanks for sharing your opinion. Black and dark here refer to the absence of light and power and there is nothing more to read into it. I think it’s time to advance past interpreting terminological inexactitudes and accept that words are sometimes still used in their true literal context. sincerely
Sandy, ‘true literal context’, you say. My my my… I guess you sipped your ginger and lemon herbal tea with an outstretched pinky after this response… how self righteous. How colonial.
Luckily, there are a few redeeming features in your essay. I, too, look forward to living in a country where integrity is valued above deception. Literary deception. Good day, ma’m.
Soweto by Starlight on January 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Oupoot, can you substantiate your statement that “Wind and solar power, though environmentally sound, are very expensive (5 to 10 times as much as grid electricity)…”?
In the 2003 White Paper on Renewable Energy, DME (I guess we should be skeptical of any figures quoted by DME) gives a table of Turnkey investment cost per kW for different renewable energy sources. Wind power is listed as costing $1100 to $1700 per kW.
The only price I have thusfar for a large wind turbine, is in an article in Farmer’s Weekly of Jan 25 2008, referring to a Scottish dairy farm using Vestas V52 850kW turbines, which cost £2.3M for 3. This equates to £901 per kW, or R14 000 per kW.
Eskom’s Medupi power station will cost at least R80 billion for 4 700MW. This equates to R17 020 per kW!!!
If a V52 wind turbine, which starts producing electricity with a windspeed of 16km/h,generates on average one third of its rated capacity, this would increase its effective cost to R42 000 per kW, or 2.5X that of Medupi. Medupi costs are rising all the time, and rumour has it that projected costs are already R84 billion.
Eskom is budgeting R700 billion for 20 000MW from Koeberg style nukes, to be built from around 2015 - 2025. This equates to R35 000 per kW, not much less than a giant wind turbine generating at one third of its capacity.
In fact, a tiny 2kW Savonius rotor wind turbine from HelixWind ( www.helixwind.com ) costs $8500 for a low wind version, which equates to R33 000 per kW. So economies of scale don’t seem to apply to wind generation. Wind generation, whether using a tiny 2kW turbine or a giant 1MW turbine costs roughly the same CAPEX per kW as a nuke. Apart from environmental concerns, nukes require foreign engineers to maintain. (Koeberg’s reactors are maintained by French engineers, not South Africans)
Unfortunately, the experts say there is not enough wind and solar energy potential to provide all South Africa’s energy needs.
About the lowest cost giant generation plant is the proposed Grand Inga on the mighty Congo river. $50 billion for 50 000 MW, or around half the cost per watt of Medupi.
Transmission costs will be high, but Eskom is reportedly already purchasing a small amount of electricity from Inga1/Inga2 which were built decades ago.
MagLev Wind Turbine Technologies based in Arzona, USA plans to build giant Vertical Axis Wind Turbines (VAWTs) which use Magnetic Levitation to reduce friction of the enormous rotor. Zhongke Hengyuan Energy Technology in China will be building small vesions of this VAWT. Capacities of as much as 1000MW for a single rotor are claimed to be possible. Details, including timecales to reach such large capacities, are unavailable at this stage. Its also unclear as to whether the idea of giant skyscraper sized VAWTs is actually technically feasible, or just pie in the sky.
We should already start developing renewable energy power sources (wind, solar, biogas,…), and constantly investigate the latest developments in this field. Entry barriers are relatively low, and there is scope for South African companies to develop and produce renewable energy generation plant.
While wind and solar energy farms may be impractical for supplying energy needs of large cities, they are practical for agriculture if there is sufficient wind or solar energy potential in the area. Dairy farmers alone are losing R100 million per month due to load shedding.
Eskom has let the country down with its inability to maintain coal stockpiles at its coal power stations, and to properly maintain its ageing power plants. There is no guarantee that we will not be let down again by Eskom.
All comments must be approved by our editors, click here to read the editorial guidelines for comments. Please allow some time for our editors to approve your comment after posting.
profile
Sandy has extensive experience related to the mining industry, including senior management positions in various disciplines and departments.
She owns an environmental strategy business, Lime Green, which focuses on climate change and mitigation activities and project implementation to reduce impacts on land, water and air.
She is also an energy consultant and actively promotes the implementation of renewable energy technologies and the development of the industry in South Africa.
There have been many attempts to put a date to the start of the Age of Aquarius. Proponents of some dates include Carl Jung, Sir Isaac Newton and of c...
It is so easy to be a victim, to blame someone else and to shrug off responsibility. I'm referring to things such as crime and education, employment e...
It seems as if Earth orbits faster around the sun every year. There is this theory that it is the result of us all being connected 365-24-7 and having...
Loading ...
C’mon Sandy - The powers that be were far more interested in denying the linkage between HIV/AIDS and lining their pockets with cash from the arms deal… Power/infrastructure management wasn’t on the agenda!
(Report abuse)