Consumer power-saving exceeds expectations

Obviously demand will reduce if the price gets increased by freakin 80%+. Not sure that counts as a win. Hell you can increase prices 20 000% then well see some *really* impressive "consumer power saving".

Would be awesome if our parastatal power company would produce power instead of profits derived from increased tariffs. Parastatals aren't supposed to make any profit anyway. They should supply reliable infrastructure at the lowest possible cost to the economy. Eskom is (continuing to) fail miserably on both counts: The infrastructure isn't reliable and the cost is sky high. Hell Medupi is like 15 months behind schedule or something. Even worse its not just direct cost - any investor armed with Google can see that its better to not invest in any energy intensive operations in SA since Eskom will fck it up. Who knows how many billions that image will cost SA...

Electricity tariffs are not yet at cost-reflective levels.
Nice euphemism. So its already above cost, but not yet enough to cross subsidize the industrial customers, pay for investment in infrastructure *and* produce massive profits?

I don't quite get the angle Leon Louw is taking though. Sure its academically correct, but the effect he is pointing out is a storm in a teacup compared to the others. Sure it incentivizes companies to do nothing, but that much better than the alternative: Blackouts.
 
They need to pad their bank balances for the future costs of Mercs and BMWs
 
...but Eskom’s profits have nevertheless soared by 60% to R13.2-billion in the past financial year. “It’s almost entirely due to the massive tariff increases that South Africans have had to endure in the recent past,” Michael said.

... Eskom will soon apply to the regulator for more tariff increases....

:wtf: Why do a state owned company need to make that much profit, other than lining the pockets of some fat cat politicians.
 
I can't believe they're trying to credit Eskoms stupid electricity campaigns as part of the reason for the reduction in usage. It is totally a result of higher costs of electricity.
 
Residents subsidising Business

Residents subsidising Business:

Residents pay almost [-]double[/-] triple per unit of electricity than major power consuming companies do. ... Mining and industry customers paid 36.2c/kWh in 2011 and direct residential customers paid on average 66.4c/KWh.
I'm a low user of electricity and I keep accurate records of my electricity consumption.

The JHB CityPower pre-paid rates for 2011/2012 were (Incl VAT):
  • 0-500: 80.30c/KWh
  • 501-1000: 108.09c/KWh
  • 1001-2000: 110.30c/KWh
  • 2001-3000: 112.96c/KWh
  • more than 3001: 114.38c/KWh
The post paid rates are similar, but have a R350 (Inc VAT) service/network/DSM charge.
City Power Post Paid (Incl VAT) (remember to add R350):
  • 0-500: 90.41c/KWh
  • 501-1000: 91.94c/KWh
  • 1001-2000: 93.47c/KWh
  • 2001-3000: 95.74c/KWh
  • more than 3001: 96.89c/KWh
Business can claim the VAT back, residents can't.

114.38c is 3.2x more than business pays.

I don't understand why business get to abuse the system and only pay 36.2c/KWh, and we pay more than 114.38c/KWh.
Surely, the same principle that applies to residents, should apply to business.
The more you use, the higher the rate. This will encourage saving.
If Eskom is losing money, then offering discounts just increases Eskom's losses.
The current business discounts encourage business to waste.

Q. Whatever happened to the Access to Information application done by the press to expose the costs of electricity to business?
 
lol... I don't trust these guys at all.

Watch them cancel some of the future projects and pocket the money because "consumer demand has decreased!"
 
Residents subsidising Business:


Some industrial and mining companies are locked into long term electricity contracts with Eskom and generally electricity rates were kept low to encourage investment in those sectors. Also those companies buy a lot more electricity than consumers. Goldfields spent R 2.5 billion on electricity last year. If they paid the same rate as consumers the companies would not be sustainable.
 
I don't mind them becoming expensive so long as legislation doesn't make alternative self provisioning illegal or unnecessarily costly.
 
Some industrial and mining companies are locked into long term electricity contracts with Eskom and generally electricity rates were kept low to encourage investment in those sectors. Also those companies buy a lot more electricity than consumers. Goldfields spent R 2.5 billion on electricity last year. If they paid the same rate as consumers the companies would not be sustainable.

According to the Greenpeace report:
industry and mining consume over 60% of the electricity produced in the country, and the inclusion of commerce takes this figure to almost 75%
It's not sustainable for residents to subsidise business.
Australian mining company BHP are on a winning wicket
  1. supply coal to Eskom at international benchmark prices, even though the coal is local.
  2. have a fixed contract price for electricity
  3. use as much electricity as possible (smelters), to drive the consumption of coal
  4. profit
It's not sustainable for Eskom to keep driving up the cost of electricity to residents, but mining to have fixed low rates.

Eskom often quote ZA as having some of the cheapest electricity in the world, what they forget to mention is:
  • Industry, mining and business have the cheapest electricity
  • Residential have some of the most expensive electricity
The 2011 average cost of residential electricity in USA is USD0.125 = ZAR1.025, we pay up to ZAR1.1438
In Wyoming the residential cost is USD0.095 = ZAR0.779 (using $1=R8.2, rate was less in 2011)

So cut the BS, residential electricity is expensive in ZA
This is without factoring in the average income of a South African, or the high taxes paid in ZA.
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X