Eskom ... is there ANY chance? In CPT there is

[Village_Idiot]

tl:dr - karpowership is a false flag operation to divert attention from the petrolium petroleum industry supressing many known viable options for free unlimited energy → i.e. stop being lazy and read the whole post.

@TheTerribleTriplet

Any comment from the Left … or is that the Right … or are they the Moderates?

@Village_Idiot and @plonkster … yeah, talking about you two.

Think I will be lucky to be labelled some variant of hanskakie but based on the prevailing mood might not be afforded the diminutive form (well, maybe the addition of a strategic “k”, rather than dropping the “ie”… to keep it family friendly).

anyhoo,

@TheTerribleTriplet

In December, a government award for 3,200 megawatts of wind energy failed because no grid connection was available.

So hold on a second … how did this Karpower connection magically happen when they are coastal-based, with the above in bold stopped!?

Ag nee man … can someone explain to me in basic letters, simple words, what the dang I’m missing now?

@TheTerribleTriplet

Specifically about Karpower, being coastal, when wot, R100mil later(?), IPPs still cannot connect?

1. the grid is not full → it is full where it is easiest/cheapest to build.
2. the grid allocation extension applies to more than karpowership (but the others won’t get clicks… yawn…I know).
3. if you check the dinosaur map, you will see, that unless they plan to navigate the Orange river as far as possible, then hook them up behind a hilux or two, and then park those ships in a hole in Sishen, that there should be grid capacity available along the coastal ports - possibly even leave some left over for other IPP’s.
4. the R100mil projects can’t connect even if harry potter makes grid infrastructure available tonight. They are so far, paper projects that have not yet built anything - there is nothing to connect even if the lines and switches and transformers were there (bit of a circular process here because grid allocation will make securing financing more likely but it is more complex than just the grid allocation being there). There are various forms of IPP programmes tied into the general national energy plan. These things are complex and involve more than just securing energy/electricity, there are also requirements around creating jobs during construction, running the plants etc. The process ideally, but seldom, takes about 24 months to reach financial closure (securing finance being a very big hurdle) - only then does construction start.

@Sarel.Wagner

Also it being elections soon, they can brag and boast about the power solution they provided, electioneering.

@TheTerribleTriplet

What if Karpower has very little to do with sorting the bigger issue, but mostly to do with “demanded incentives” being paid, and that BEFORE elections? Elections cost big money you know…

And the “marketing credit” they can get for the same elections … oh my. See, we solved the energy crisis, Karpower was “always” the answer.

Based on popular conception the voting base require no more than t-shirts/fastfood to secure votes, so the karpowership deal seems unnecessarily complex just to secure votes. The flip side of the coin is that if the measly 1300MW from karpowership can swing the election then someone obviously stands to benefit from not having the powership actually connect to the grid by mid 2024 and creates the necessity to question who/what etc… Politician personal financial interest remains plausible in either direction.

@mmaritz

BUT how much can they actually make a difference? 1MW (or 1 stage?)

@plonkster

What I caught, sort of, is that the argument is “we have no grid to connect renewables… but for karpowership we’ll make an effort!”. And of course that all hinges on the feeling we’ve all got that there is a kickback scheme behind it: The entire deal is corrupt.

See response to TTT but also:

Karpowership seems to attract noise on 2 not mutually exclusive fronts. Anti-Renewable and corruption.

karpowership was awarded the bulk of a 2000MW risk mitigation IPP “bid window”. A big part of the requirement for these projects would be the dispatchable nature of the energy on demand from Eskom (being told to make available and stop at any stage as instructed by Eskom). This made the suitability of wholly renewable plants problematic. See this for a fairly useful overview of much of the tech requirements. The article just linked though does omit that other than karpowership the remaining preferred bidders are mostly renewable based (Wind/PV, with battery and diesel/gas "failsafe"backup). So, the anti-renewable part is not all that strong. Oh, and at least one of the projects that benefit from the “the karpowership extension” is a PV/battery project.

I also do not like the 20year deal part. There is a possible rationale for this

The 20-year term of the PPA is aligned to the REIPPPP, however there are fundamental differences in the risk allocation to the Buyer. Whereas under the self-dispatch regime of the REIPPPP there is a take or pay obligation from the Buyer, this is not the case under the RMIPPPP. The minimum dispatch commitment from the Buyer means that the projects will have to rely on the Buyer to issue a dispatch instruction. The tariff is an all-in tariff with the IPP taking all risks associated with availability and performance. The PPA provides for a penalty deduction from the Capacity Charge if there is no availability. Energy output will only be paid for if delivered in response to a dispatch instruction, taking into account the minimum load commitment from the Buyer.

The 20-year term of the PPA is necessary to enable the project to recover the cost of establishing the generation capacity and ensure its availability to generate electricity when called upon through a dispatch instruction from the Buyer. The term of the PPA enables the IPP to be able to serve its debt, equity and other obligations including fuel off take agreements. Without this longer term certainty of the 20- year PPA, the prices of these projects could have as much as tripled.

but I will leave it to the folks who know how to operate a HP-12c to determine a more definitive evaluation of this and how other projects would compare. The engineers will have to look at the requirements around dispatchability/availability to determine whether these requirements are obviously nonsense based on the state of the grid and the operation thereof.

Whether the deal is overall corrupt? It involves politicians so likely. But the nature of the corruption is not clear. I suspect it might be skewed to ensure gas remains part of the South African energy mix (i.e. force development of gas infratructure). Russia has gas. So, does the USA (as I pointed out following the Lady R issue, the US bill taking issue with South Africa’s relationship with mainly China, out of the blue also included a call that the US administration must have South Africa add gas as part of the resolution to the local energy crisis).

Much of the corruption allegation seem to come from a losing bidder. This bidder is in a very tight financial spot so again motivation for trying anything to get part of the energy pie should not be discounted.

Maybe Gwede truly believes he will create jobs in the gas industry (I think he is more a mining union man, than a coal man, and while having electorate number implications does not have to be limited to just that).

lastly, in terms of corruption it seems to me that people very easily equate renewable energy with saint status. The beta/vhs/dvd/bluray war in the energy world is a very lucrative pie. If corruption is a way to get part of that pie, I do not think the renewable “side/s” are above greasing the wheels.