ESKOM comments on everything of interest!

This is a very interesting interview, with comments about Coal, Renewables and IPPs that make for very interesting reading! A few highlights below. Frank

From: http://www.eepublishers.co.za/view.php?sid=18119 Coal is cheap, and this has been a driving force in developing the industrial economy that we have in South Africa today. Now we should diversify, and we are serious about reducing our carbon footprint and introducing renewable energy. But we all know that this is more expensive, and that we cannot deal with the current energy deficit through the provision of renewable energy now. Of the renewable energy resources that we have in the country, the most abundant one, solar, is certainly not at a stage of development that it could meet the country’s current energy deficit. Eskom is still committed to nuclear energy, and we believe that there is a policy in the country that is very clear about nuclear energy and its future, and that nuclear energy should play a role in South Africa. Water is going to become a significant restraining resource, and you have already spoken about our carbon footprint. My personal view is that nuclear energy is South Africa’s best response. Eskom supports that it should have a nuclear programme, and that it should be based on the pressurised water reactor technology that we have at Koeberg, which is our existing skills base in South Africa. We have decided to put the 100 MW wind farm project on hold. In terms of Cahora Bassa, we have worked on the purchase of a fifth generator at Cahora Bassa, we have upgraded our Apollo substation to be able to import more power, and certainly we would be looking for the upgrade of the Tsonga substation in Mozambique to then facilitate the increased import through the HVDC line. There is no specific plan in Eskom to keep IPPs out. But the one debate that nobody has is how much do you pay for this lot? And I can say to you, it’s not the price we have just got from the Regulator, and it’s not what we asked for – it is at least double. But that debate is never had. Unless we deal with how to fund, not only Eskom’s operation, how to deal with IPPs, and pay for this, and fund this as an industry, we cannot commit. You cannot expect us to commit into an agreement without having the money to pay for it. You will agree with me – like you said for the build programme – that would be irresponsible.