@mariusm , can I take this opportunity to say I love your level-headed and factual take on matters. Yes, the sun is shining in our valley today, but I’m stuck at home with two sick kids… during a school holiday, so I’m not feeling the warmth. Thanks for tilting a mirror this way!
1 Like
That was a good post Marius.
From my armchair, I will keep on hoping, but it is the last time, we are at the precipice.
As De Ruyter said, in my words, he needs to be given the reigns/complete control, to do the job, not be hampered by all the different departments when he tries to do it. If he needs to spend R70k, he must be allowed to do that, not hamstrung at every possible actual, and imagined, crossing.
“Radical Transformation” comes to mind. And not in SA, inside the Gov Departments involved and linked to Eskom … incl the likes of individuals like Mantashe.
I’m positive, but once burnt, twice shy … and the forest is on fire.
Let us forget for a moment the politics, ideology and all the rest of them things like crime syndicates etc.
What is left then are really 3 things only:
- Management competency
- Engineering knowhow
- Plant that can still operate
For now let’s leave out the first 2 points, we can discuss those later.
Lets start with this graph on EAF:
Look at Koeberg at the bottom. Fairly good for how old that reactor is. Now when we talking coal plant, Marimba is almost as good as Koeberg. Matimba is 1980s technology and started working 1986.
Have a look at Medupi and Kusile, they not even done yet and look at how low those plants are wrt. EAF. No amount of maintenance will get those 2 up higher, in fact the more maintenance is done, the lower the EAF. They are brand spanking new plant, compared to the other coal plants that are almost End of life.
So no, no matter who said what and who is manning the new board, the outlook remains the same as it was up to now. The EAF will keep on going down.
Ask yourself this question, why are Medupi and Kusile so bad? They are new, so reasonably their EAF should be the highest at the start with a decline, including proper maintenance of the plant life until it’s no longer profitable nor efficient to operate.
Groetnis
1 Like
Yeah, I’m hoping that the new board can provide political cover for long enough for more external generation to come online.
The 75% EAF goal makes no sense, that kind of thinking is partly what got us so deep in trouble. The “pay incentives to employees” is also a bit suspect, because in that kind of environment you’re more likely to get even less cooperation until everyone has received and continues to receive their incentive to do their basic jobs.
But maybe, just maybe the board concludes that the only way to get to 75% is to shut down the worst offenders and buy more private power.
So government gets higher reliability, but lower total GW. Seems fair.
Edit: Regarding De Ruyter specifically, I don’t think he’s the only one that can do the job, but there certainly aren’t many, and no-one was lining up to do it, including him. But he seems competent, forthcoming and he’s showing us his scars and even missteps, which I think is immensely valuable. I think it would be difficult to replace him with someone of the same calibre, but not impossible. However, the opportunity cost of doing so will push us back 3 years minimum, for absolutely no benefit.
As @Sarel.Wagner says, the facts on the ground don’t change based on who’s in charge.
1 Like
The Unions me thinks will have none of that. That would be a total loss of employment and with the centralist mindset and providing (buying votes) employment as the goal, that bitter pill will likely not be swallowed. Hence the thinking to convert the decor plant to solar installs.
Groetnis
They were built at the height of State Capture on top of which, they were not built to specs, and the suppliers of the really important parts, did not meet all the specs, for whatever reason.
As De Ruyter said, they have two choices, my words:
- Finish them to specs, some rebuilding possibly, some new core parts, at an even greater cost.
- Switch them off.
It is that bad.
As long as the current party in Gov runs this country, Eskom is going to struggle.
There are very favorable investments to be obtained, De Ruyter pointed that out, but can the Gov assure the investors that the billions will not be pillaged, again, with the Gov’s track record?
And when the Gov gets a new party in charge, with not one party today strong enough, it would be a coalition Gov at best, and we can see how well works, in like Jhb.
And when Eskom’s problems do get addressed, there will be a reduction in the workforce on the cards under a new Gov, and we all know where that will lead.
Nice breakdown!
Something else to keep in mind. Grootvlei and Camden are previously mothballed stations that were refurbed and brought back in 2003. The disparity between those two makes you wonder if Grootvlei is doing exceptionally good, or Camden is having a bad week/month 
I fully expect that! It is their job to do that too (protect their member’s living, make sure they are treated fairly, etc). One upside is that the unions no longer have the political pull they once had. Cosatu used to be a big player, it was a part of the tripartite alliance even, it practically had government over a barrel (maybe it still does). Then in 2014, Vavi and NUM left. That was the first big crack.
By 2016 there is talk of a new trade union, April 2017 SAFTU is born (I remember actually watching the proceedings at the time, complete with an insistence that they will sing the WHOLE of Nkosi Sikelele, which I thought was interesting, given that it is a hymn).
So maybe, just maybe… the unions don’t have the pull they once had. They still have the same loud voices though.
Mantashe was booed off stage at a recent COSATU meeting.
Commenting on my own post here, but you know when you’re watching a soccer game and they get to the key change part in the national anthem… and nobody knows the words until 4 lines later? Well, watching a bunch of trade unionists trying to remember all the words to Nkosi Sikelele was also a bit like that
Please be patient, your call with be answered.
Wees asb geduldig, U oproep sal beantwoord word.
Nkosi Sikelele i’Africa.
[quote=“TheTerribleTriplet, post:883, topic:1198”]
Die kragvoorsiener ondersoek ook ʼn voorval waarin gekontamineerde water in die stoomketels by die Camden-kragstasie gebruik is.[/quote]
This is typical of operations for a long time already. Sabotage of the systems by either criminal syndicate, or subcontractor or staff or collusion by more than one party here. Think like the following:
We can fix this and charge a lot for our service, sell parts at huge prices because there is no time. Since blackouts are disruptive, due process is either plainly discarded, or people are paid to bypass the processes. So we create our own income stream…
Groetnis
1 Like
@TheTerribleTriplet I sincerely hope CT can do something here. It will be good for all of us!
Go CT
1 Like
I know Cpt can, under this new major.
Initially, I was quite excited till I pondered on the success of CPT making it work vs how many people will then flood to Cpt for jobs.
Like during big elections, some say, when busses arrive from the E/Cape to drop off their passengers to return empty to EC.
Not being pessimistic or negative, just wondering about the realities of a working Cape Town, the rest of SA is not following suit to do the same when we see the mess the parties are making of Jhb and Pta governance, maintenance, and electrical supply payments.
What date will load shedding finally end?
Once again under pressure, Andre de Ruyter has offered a crumb of solace to South Africans. He told a Johannesburg-based radio station on Tuesday that load shedding would start to ease off ‘within the next 10 days’ – meaning we could be blackout-free by Saturday 15 October
“We are doing everything possible to add megawatts to the grid. We have started buying power from Zambia, and we are looking at Mozambique and the private sector to add megawatts. Power cuts should start easing within the next 10 days” | Andre de Ruyter
So I thought, 10 ghost towns built in, on, and around coal, 10 towns must stand in the way of SA’s future, clean air, and renewables because the Mantashes cannot sit down for a moment and think about how to create jobs to save those towns to stop the inevitable … aaag tog, sorry, that is silly of me.
Politicians, more so with vested interests in select sectors, are hampering humankind’s growth.
It’s a slippery slope argument. If we start reducing coal use… we’re going to end up with no coal use at all! And all these people will be out of a job!
(That’s basically the main reason why the Bush administration could not support the Kyoto treaty, too many of his voting block were blue collar people mining or reliant on the mining of coal… he had to pick political survival over the environment).
The argument breaks down for two reasons. The first is that coal mining won’t stop overnight. We will (for a long time) continue to need coal. We cannot make steel without coke for example, and our main source of that? Coal. By reducing the reliance on coal, you may well eventually reduce the employment in that sector, but it won’t happen overnight. Not even close.
Secondly, I always do this thing where I swap in another recognised evil to see if the argument still works. A good one would be slavery. Back in the day, people were arguing that abolishing slavery would kill the economy (and it kinda did too!). Some even argued that it should be phased out slowly. But arguments about the economy doesn’t override moral arguments.
Of course I am not arguing that the two things are (remotely?) similar, I am deliberately substituting something much worse to show that sometimes, there is a hidden assumption: The hidden assumption being that the thing your opponents seek to abolish “isn’t really that bad at all”, and therefore we have the luxury of prioritising other things (the economy, employment, etc). But if that is not the case… if it is a little (or a lot) bad, then you need to phase out or summarily abolish, even if it leaves behind monuments in the shape of ghost towns.
In the end, that is the fundamentals of the whole debate.
Slippery slope indeed.
I read what African leaders said in that article, then I read Tracey Davies comment in that article.
Also listen to some Africans up north on a group. They get it, the young ones, they want to change they want to get in and help, but politics stops the clean growth in their countries.
Also heard what Mantashe said about baseload generation. Then I read what De Ruyter says on how to make Eskom land available for IPP’s to create jobs, and big batteries being tested.
There are many views, some damn good I must add, but that action is needed is a fact. Politics must change, another fact. Big business is going to lose some profits, another fact. The world can change out of free will or change will be forced.