Makes it difficult for exactly the reason you give … “just because unequal weights are detestable”.
Meaning, if we stick to " the original definition", you are effectively arguing in favor of the Gov’s definition, ignoring the fact that at one stage 7GW was shedded, an actual fact, hence unequal weights, right?
EDIT: I’m trying to wrap my mind around the “pattern” that is emerging, as we are not being given the full picture if you want, yet we debate and argue between ourselves distracting from the fact that the real GW being shedded, are not acknowledged officially by the Gov. If it was not for ESP, we would have known even less.
Yeah, I know. I’m like that… even if it goes against my own interests, I don’t like it when people move the goalposts. It is bad enough as it is, we don’t have to do that
Also…
^^^ Also this. Just looking at the LS number, as formerly defined, does somehow hide the severity of the matter.
If the evening projection is for 6GW > what is available, you schedule Stage 6 loadshedding. You communicate this in advance, so people can plan.
However, if that evening suddenly demand is 6.5GW, you’re suddenly shedding 6.5GW, Stage 7, even though no more breakdowns or other outages have occurred.
And if the whole of Cape Town decides to turn on their geysers at 18:00, let’s say as part of an ill-advised protest or something, we’re suddenly at Stage 9?
Although it is technically true, it doesn’t help to reason about the system. So obviously their forecasting has to be accurate, otherwise they can cheat, but given that the data is openly available, I don’t think they did.
Unless you’re thinking Eskom should call a press conference to say “Listen, last night we were at Stage 7/8, but it’s over now, go about your business”? That doesn’t make sense either.
None of the above. The Large consumers are asked to drop 1000Mw when this happens. That is the same as do another level of LS blackout, by them, not accounted for. And no their forecasting is better than that, so very infrequently does that scenario happen.
Groetnis
PS: In PR it’s called spin, or lie your way to the bank…
I’m glad to see that De Ruyter has hit a nerve. It’s about time! So much PC talk by the administration trying to present a calm and controlled perception. Much better to have the fur flying so we can get a much better picture of what’s going on.
I was struck by his comment about Eskom’s generation capacity only going one way but that the private sector would fill that gap with Eskom’s distribution network would reticulate that power.
Yup, that’s my thinking as well. You have loud mouths running around saying “Eskom is lying!” meanwhile the spokesperson publishes the damning stats on twitter the same time every evening…
It all just reminds me of that thing CS Lewis wrote about wishing your enemy was worse. In the end, that just turns everyone into devils.
Unbelievable that one man, De Ruyter, has triggered all of this … Respect Andre, Respect.
Whistleblower extraordinaire.
He has blown more lids off in a week than most have done in 2 decades.
Now to get a copious amount of popcorn and beer … let the show begin to see how the officials and Gov spin it all going forward.
OR …
Again it all goes “silent after the news cycle” … at best maybe some “tokens” dished out to appease the masses that the “criminals” have been caught and are being “prosecuted to the full extent of the law”.
Vs there is going to be some real action on all levels this time around (at last), as it probably has gone international with De Ruyter speaking out so publicly spilling the beans on all levels, and backing it with an Affidavit.
I’m on the fence whether De Ruyter made it better or worse with that interview.
One picks up from the Daily Maverick article (of the 4 cartels) that they’ve been sitting on this for a while and that they had to release it now (but withholding key names).
So that makes me wonder if the De Ruyter interview last week forced them to release the article, and if that could impede any investigation?
Or did De Ruyter time it perfectly (having his own affairs in order and to take action now)?
Ethics man, ethics! It is after all a SoE, but so what… Anything to not be accountable, blame something/someone else, always. That may be their opinion, the court may find something else, or n to, considering the judges on the bench and their political leanings, who knows really.
What would be really cute is if they end up doing NHI, wait until Healthcare collapses in SA, and then make the same statement: “The Government is not constitutionally obligated to provide healthcare”
Yes, they aren’t constitutionally obligated, but currently they are interfering in that sector, and have been for many years, so if they want to play this card now, then they have 100% been acting unconstitutionally up until now, but subverting the market’s ability to attempt to give electricity to all citizens.
