Despite what the cynics say, the respite from load-shedding is proof of the need to keep our coal-fired power plants running

The removal of any generation capacity through deliberate decommissioning of power plants becomes reckless and suicidal even if couched as a requirement to meet climate change targets. The two-month stretch without load-shedding has elicited three notable reactions. The first is from cynics, including politicians, who described it as an election ploy to get the governing party re-elected. This cynicism elevates political mistrust above engineering efforts at the power utility.

The second is a dismissive response akin to saying, “we can’t praise a fish for swimming”. It is correct that the lights should always be on in the same way that swimming is natural to a fish. Nevertheless, the response incorrectly implies that we should overlook the fact that the fish in this case is still alive despite only intermittent water availability.
The third response emphasises the work done to improve generation capacity. Among those who share this perspective are renewable energy advocates. They say renewables have helped by relieving Eskom of demand pressure during windy and sunny days.

This is true to a limited extent. However, one can’t help but note that advocates of renewable energy want to have the whole cake and eat it. When we experience load- shedding, we are told it’s because we are too slow to introduce renewables into the grid. Government statements on energy security become the target of ridicule.
But when there is no load-shedding, as has been the case lately, advocates of renewables celebrate their contribution to the grid without giving credit to the real substantive reasons we haven’t had load-shedding: the improved performance of coal power stations and the Koeberg nuclear facility. These are the baseload sources without which there would be no grid to speak of. Eskom has stated that the lights are on because its operational recovery plan, implemented since March 2023, is bearing fruit. This has helped to improve the reliability of the coal-fired fleet. Eskom has said there had been an acceleration in the execution of planned maintenance, preventive maintenance, plant refurbishment and life extension.

There is no reason to let the momentum of Eskom’s decent performance slip. The government and Eskom have the benefit of three reports that should guide them to ensure uninterrupted power supply in the medium to long term. The first, a report on the closure of Komati power station, was published by the Presidential Climate Commission. It said the shutdown fell short of “procedural justice”.

The plant was decommissioned in violation of the government’s own injunction to “leave no-one behind”. The host community of Komati and local businesses were left desperate. With some investment in modernisation, Komati could be producing 1,000MW. But after its generation units were stripped, there was one unit producing 121MW at the time of shutdown in October 2022. The grid was left poorer. Hopefully, our policymakers learnt some lessons.
In addition to all the right things that Eskom has been doing to keep the lights on, the company announced last month that its board has taken a decision — a commendable one — to prolong the life of Hendrina, Grootvlei and Camden power stations beyond 2027 to 2030.

The decision was taken to meet the country ’s energy security needs. Collectively the three plants contribute 4,680MW to the grid, more than the 4,334MW capacity that Eskom has taken off the grid for planned maintenance ahead of the winter demand period. It would be hard to justify the permanent removal of such capacity without a proven baseload substitute. In taking this step, Eskom is in line with other power utilities around the world that have been forced by energy requirements and the imperative to maintain grid stability to keep their coal plants active. With additional Kusile capacity being synchronised to the grid, Eskom might be able to create a buffer to cushion against plant breakdowns and help beef up planned maintenance.

Significantly, the extension of the life of the three plants was strongly recommended by the second important report the government has in hand to guide the country out of the energy crisis. Commissioned by the National Treasury and produced by a consortium of energy experts led by Vgbe, the report recommended a clear decision be taken on the extension of the life of stations, which was “necessary for strategic planning security and would encourage staff at the power plants to improve their maintenance activities and to execute outage work as per the defined scope”.

The report stated that Eskom did not get value for money for its maintenance budget despite it being way above the maintenance expenditure benchmark among coal-fired plants in Europe, the US and Asia. It said complete outsourcing of maintenance contributed to low plant reliability as Eskom personnel had become unfamiliar with plant requirements, reaction time and administrative interface efforts.

This problem is similar to the one identified by the third report, also at the government ’s disposal. Written by Harvard University economists, “Growth Through Inclusion in South Africa” talks about the importance of building and protecting state capacity. In the context of Eskom, it means building the company’s internal capacity to perform routine maintenance.

In the absence of state capacity, the economists recommend the government consider outsourcing the operations of some power stations, while maintaining state ownership. The Treasury, sitting with a pile of sovereign-guaranteed Eskom debt, mulled the idea as a possible condition for further bailouts but never took a policy decision.

The Vgbe-led report recommended that the planning and execution of maintenance needed to be more stringent, more goal orientated, and more carefully executed. It recommended Eskom workforce needed to be trained and properly incentivised because there was low staff morale.

One recommendation needs Eskom’s meticulous attention if the company is to prevent a load-shedding calamity. This relates to the water-processing plant that Medupi and Matimba power stations share.

The plant, according to the report, needs urgent maintenance because if it fails it will wipe out 9,800MW of capacity. Considering this looming threat, the removal of any generation capacity through deliberate decommissioning of power plants becomes reckless and suicidal even if couched as a requirement to meet climate change targets.
Instead of being cynical or dismissive, or misstating the real reasons the lights are on, we should appreciate the reality that Eskom ’s leadership is navigating and encourage them to be pragmatic. We are certainly not out of the load-shedding woods yet, but pragmatism will be our saviour.

This opinion piece was published in the Sunday Times: https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/business/opinion/2024-06-02-goodbye-coal-plants-means-hello-darkness-my-old-friend/