eeco-IRP2018

Energy Minister Jeff Radebe released the Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) 2018 for public comment.

The plan maps out how government intends to manage electricity demand in industry, households and business up until 2030. IRP 2010 was first promulgated in 2011 and is a “living plan” intended to be revised by the Department of Energy (DoE) frequently.

The public have until 26 October to submit their comments.

Please use the form below to add your name and comment.

If you support or object to the plan, please give a reason why. Should you be at a loss for words, read the summary, live input or documents below the form. Feel free to copy and paste into the message area provided.

Top energy advisor Ted Blom will be presenting this public participation at the upcoming hearings.

6372 comments sent so far.

Do you support the IRP 2018?
Yes I doNo I do notNot fully

Check your email address is correct then hit send!

A copy of your message will be sent to you along with an automated proof of receipt. Check your junk mail folder if you can’t find it. [Supported by Dear South Africa – driving participative democracy]

LIVE FEED OF COMMENTS SENT

Displaying newest 5 comments sent.

MARIANA
No I do not
Where must it all end ? In bankruptcy for the middle class ? When electricity tariffs go up, everything goes up. We simply cant keep up with the price of electricity and petrol (levies). Get rid of excess staff and you will see a major change in finances. And stop paying performance bonuses for non-performing staff.. Very few people in the real world get any form of bonus nowadays
Karl
No I do not
We need more independent producers of energy. A separation of production and distribution.
Private home owners and industrial buildings should be encouraged to use solar energy to feed into the grid and get credits for their input.
More independent providers of energy from wind, solar and other renewable sources should be encouraged.
Users of electricity should be able to choose from which service provider they get their supply. This works well in other countries and competition is a way of making service providers more efficient.
Having ESKOM as a monopoly can not be good. Government owned enterprises do not work, as has been shown over the years and the taxpayers are expected to keep on bailing out a huge debt.
We need radical changes to our present system.
Gwen - Lynne
No I do not
They have no idea as to what they are doing to the taxpayers. We are burdened enough and they are squandering money as if it is theirs for the taking with free petrol/diesel and this has to stop.
Wimpie
Not fully
Privatize Eskom, The government would not as they promises free services to their voters when they come into power. If you do not pay you do not get electricity. That simple. Stop running welfare organizations like Eskom and municipalities where a few pay and the masses get for free and eventually no one gets anything. I am going to cut my ties to these welfare organizations which eventually will go under and will provide these services for myself at my own cost that way I will make sure I do not sit in the dark.
Etienne
No I do not
Are the tax payers not burdened enough

Why must we pay the brunt of corruption mismanagement and incompetence.
EsKom top brass are getting ridiculously high salaries yet they don't seem to have a clue on what they are doing

No no they are to ignorant and arrogant to give a shit

Eskom has the monopoly and as the monopoly they will screw us all over and over again as they feel fit

SUMMARY 

  • Regulatory certainty
  • Provides a path to 2030
  • Eskom remains the monopoly and retains current bloated format
  • Signals to South Africans current Government thinking in energy
  • Has identified that SA electricity use is declining
  • Signals that Government will focus on Gas, solar and wind only, with Private IPPs charged with building 2 small coal power stations.
  • Builds on current REIPP program (Renewable Energy IPP).
  • The plan is not based on the IEP (Integrated Energy Plan) as is required by law.
  • The plan has several factual errors.
  • The plan demolishes coal power (12000MW) and replaces it with unreliable RE (12000MW)
  • Robust electricity is required to supply mines and smelters – renewables cannot supply robust power on demand.
  • There is zero nuclear, despite the NDP emphasising “beneficiation” as a key future economic driver of the economy.
  • The plan accepts the current Eskom pricing path, there is no reversion to zero based budgeting and cleanout of inefficiency /corruption and bloated Eskom (35 000 excess headcount) which if sorted out, could immediately save Eskom R22bn per year in costs.
  • The IRP also includes 2500MW of power from the INGA river scheme in the Congo based on nothing but a handshake between the presidents of the 2 countries.
  • If no drastic intervention takes place, Eskom sales will decline by around 5% and tariffs will need to increase by 25% pa until 2030 at least.
  • The GRID is still not opened to foster competition for Eskom and give consumers choice.
  • The energy trio will stand to benefit at R40BN per year – paid for by the public, a renewable deal will cost more than the Nuclear deal and wont resurrect the economy – which is built on mining and refineries.
  • Chinese industrial economic sector in Limpopo – why are they building a substantial coal power station? Because its cheap, sustainable and boosts their ecomomy – endorsed by government.
  • Business as usual – no path to dropping tariffs. Everything in the IRP points to an annual increase of 25% year on year for the next 20 years.

DOCUMENTS