Like this outlook! (from: Daily Investor)
Karpower … 
Lol, these year-long predictions change a week’s notice.
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.
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,
- the grid is not full → it is full where it is easiest/cheapest to build.
- the grid allocation extension applies to more than karpowership (but the others won’t get clicks… yawn…I know).
- 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.
- 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.
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.
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.
2 Likes
I actually think the renewable side has even more motivation for such a thing, because in their minds 1) they are on the right side of history, and 2) the ends justifies the means, sometimes. That is not to say that it definitely happens, but that “we” are not above that.
I mean, I can tell you there is definitely some strong-arming going on in the industry. People who won’t sell you one product unless you also buy another from them, using this tactic to hurt a competitor. It is happening right here and right now in South Africa. I’m glad to work for someone who is brutally transparent in their dealings, but it is certainly not the case everywhere.
Yes, the “firing squad” is looking for a target, but it is not you.
And thank you for your effort to share your views. I mean it.
Like, as I was reading, “plop” a thought falls in … what if Karpower turns out to be cheaper than diesel, OCGT can be scaled down?
1 Like
9 posts were split to a new topic: “The grand calculator thread derail”
A post was merged into an existing topic: “The grand calculator thread derail”
Ja boet …
I rest my case your honour…
OutrageosGroetnis
Ok, this is serious and deeply sad … but I can see why some have to do it …
From Daly Mavericks, Ferial Haffajee’s Watt the F#*K?
Also …
Gas lighting is definitely iets van die verlede!
Here you go 
The origin of the term gaslighting is extremely interesting. It’s from a play, “The Gaslight”, from the 1930s. It’s about a man attempting to convince his wife that she is crazy, so as to have her committed. It has since become a term used whenever someone tries to tell you that things really aren’t as you remember/perceive them, that really things are a little different.
Personally I find that people use the term a little too easily nowadays. An alternate view – even if highly doctored – isn’t always gaslighting. Gaslighting requires malice to be present, and above all, it requires actual skill. Here, I think we’re just dealing with the usual political spin and BS-ing.
Edit: Just to be clear, my position is that a lot of this isn’t sophisticated enough to qualify as gaslighting. It’s just dumb politicking.
1 Like
I think you mean gas lamp. “Gaslight” is not a word 
This is where I think we have different views …
Take Zuma, anyone who thinks he is stupid, man, is so wrong.
Todays people in charge, if for one moment we think they are just politicking, BS-ing, if one could step back and watch from a distance, the whole picture, you may be able to see how craftily they are playing their game.
It is a very well-thought-out game being played, on how to stay in power, and how not to end up in jail, get rich too, played in 5-year “sections”, with a 10-20 year long-term plan.
Don’t subscribe to malice, stupidity, BS, or politicking when you can be watching well-trained, experienced “chess players” making their moves.
Nope, agreed with you. That man is not only smart. He is what you call slinks in Afrikaans. Sneaky. Crafty.
If we take a look from a long distance, then I am reminded of what we get in the old books of wisdom, about a wise man does, vs what a fool does. A wise man plans in a way that makes everyone rich, usually himself as well. A fool can be quite the clever guy, but he ends up only enriching himself at the expense of others.
This is where the distinction comes in for me. The bad man does not wake up one morning, and say: Hey, today I’m going to kill 500 peasants. No, not at all. The bad man wakes up, notices that 500 peasants are marching on his castle, and then he ends up killing them. He didn’t plan the event, but because of his bad management style, he ended up there anyway.
Similarly, I reject the calls that the ANC planned the downfall at Eskom. That they wanted to destroy it. That is not at all what happened. Like the fool in writings of old, they simply failed to plan, and by doing that, they planned to fail, as the old saying goes.
Politics, is perpetually doomed to the short term. Nothing really matters beyond the next election. If we don’t win it, everything is moot anyway! Politicians, often, are like the selfish fools of old.
I know I am unpopular for refusing to go that last mile, but I insist: We are not dealing with people who are out to hurt us. They would very much like that we are not hurt at all and keep voting for them. The trouble is… they are incompetent beyond measure, and so they cannot help but to end up hurting the people who vote for them anyway.
1 Like
Thank you. … some insightful comments.
Agree with everything you say, but I’m in that last mile … really don’t think that we can, after wot nearly 30 years, think “they” are out to “hurt us”.
They are not … they simply don’t care about any of the consequences for various “good” (their) reasons.
Greed on the other hand … played, is playing, a HUGE role too.
I go one step further, the sheer incompetence year after year, and I’m not looking for “reasons”, has way more behind it than what we think we see.
Will go as far as thinking, this could actually be orchestrated. Like, briefly, my words, short version …
You want to rule till “kingdom” come:
- Make jobs scarce, people then won’t have time to “read newspapers”. Never have time to “think”.
- Then dumb down the next generation and “break” the school system, that they don’t have an education, jobs, and cannot read.
- Then when they complain too much, give them food parcels, T-shirts. (state benefits). Placate the masses.
- And when it gets really bad, give “them” a religion to become their “savior”.
Can’t remember where I read it, was yonks ago … but it screams at me when I see all the above … we just need to get to point 4.
We “say” Eskom was not intentional … methinks, it is, in a very nefarious way It was “planned” to happen over decades.
Now, I will agree, it may not have started with that intention, but it sure as shiite is there now.
In my limited view, It “seems” to have started going down the wrong “track” under Zuma’s reign, intentionally.
I think many of these are “just so” stories.
The risk of the reverse happening is also there. If you make jobs scarce, you will eventually lose the vote. For the first generation or so, you can rely on your struggle credentials. The next generation usually doesn’t care about that as much.
I am not convinced that that measly amount they get in a month is sufficient to buy a vote. I think the vote goes the way it does because people, from their often tainted perspective, see no alternative.
Again, while the Marxist mantra says that religion is the opium of the masses, the reality is that a frightening amount of social reform had a pretty large religious component. Which, on a philosophical level, is understandable. Secular morality is preachy, without a proper excuse 