Electricity tariff calculation methodology must evolve — Department of Electricity and Energy

Swa said:
They can measure it the same way they currently do. The cost can be baked in to average usage patterns like it's supposed to be today with the cost studies. Someone using 0kWh doesn't put the same strain on the network as someone using 5000kWh so there's no reason they should pay the same.

This isn't about practicality but protecting revenue streams by punishing solar and other low usage users.
Click to expand...
Electricity moving through a network doesn't put strain on it as far as I'm aware. Cost remains the same. Overloading it beyond design limits does sure but that's another story.
 
Bliksis said:
If the cost of electricity production changes daily so would the cost of baking bread?
Click to expand...
We're not talking about electricity production though, we're talking just about the guys maintaining the distribution networks.
 
porchrat said:
We're not talking about electricity production though, we're talking just about the guys maintaining the distribution networks.
Click to expand...
What maintenance is required other than replacing stolen stuff?

So what you are saying is that you want an accounting field for financing the theft?
 
wingnut771 said:
What maintenance is required other than replacing stolen stuff?

So what you are saying is that you want an accounting field for financing the theft?
Click to expand...
Transformer and substation maintenance/replacement, cable networks damaged by bad weather etc.

Lots of genuine maintenance that needs to happen.
 
porchrat said:
Transformer and substation maintenance/replacement, cable networks damaged by bad weather etc.

Lots of genuine maintenance that needs to happen.
Click to expand...
Its easy ... ( Numbers are bs , meant to show )
Eskom Generates - Cost R1/kw - Sells ar R1.20
Distribution - Buys at R1.20/kw , Sells at R1.40/kw - Covers costs/maintenance/salaries for bulk distribution
Muni - Buys at R1.40 , Sells at R1.60 - Covers muni network / salaries etc

If Muni want to split out costs for network/services etc then electricity needs to be at their cost + small percentage . Not the gazilion % profit margins when you use IBT in ekh and go over 600 units

Now stop talking BS with no context. Go look at what your muni charges compared to what Eskom charges them.
Muni's are making a killing and everything you say needs to be covered is allready covered multiple times over
 
porchrat said:
Transformer and substation maintenance/replacement, cable networks damaged by bad weather etc.

Lots of genuine maintenance that needs to happen.
Click to expand...
Transformer replacement because they are not maintained. Why must we pay for incompetence? Bad weather damaging cables is about 0.00000001% of the infrastructure, they can take that out of the billions they earn from the markup they put on the price they buy from eskom. Its usually the thieves tie the one end of the cable to the bakkie and drive off pulling the rest of the overhead cable down with it. Again, why must we pay for incompetence?
 
porchrat said:
Sure. You'll hear no objection to that assessment from me.

So what's the solution? Don't pay, have the infrastructure collapse and have no power?
Click to expand...
We are paying already. Lets leave it there. They are creating a problem out of nothing.
 
wingnut771 said:
What maintenance is required other than replacing stolen stuff?

So what you are saying is that you want an accounting field for financing the theft?
Click to expand...

An example although there are more, is the oil used in transformers slowly breaks down over time as it is heat cycled, it needs to eventually be replaced.
 
Major Boredom said:
Its easy ... ( Numbers are bs , meant to show )
Eskom Generates - Cost R1/kw - Sells ar R1.20
Distribution - Buys at R1.20/kw , Sells at R1.40/kw - Covers costs/maintenance/salaries for bulk distribution
Muni - Buys at R1.40 , Sells at R1.60 - Covers muni network / salaries etc

If Muni want to split out costs for network/services etc then electricity needs to be at their cost + small percentage . Not the gazilion % profit margins when you use IBT in ekh and go over 600 units

Now stop talking BS with no context. Go look at what your muni charges compared to what Eskom charges them.
Muni's are making a killing and everything you say needs to be covered is allready covered multiple times over
Click to expand...
Why would the distribution network want that pricing structure? Enough people in an area buying low kWh causes them to run at a loss.

Makes more sense to charge a base maintenance fee to reliably cover the cost of maintaining the network then not markup the units.

This is done all over the world. It's nothing new.
 
Neuk_ said:
An example although there are more, is the oil used in transformers slowly breaks down over time as it is heat cycled, it needs to eventually be replaced.
Click to expand...
Yes, they stopped doing that in 1994.
 
porchrat said:
Why would the distribution network want that pricing structure? Enough people in an area buying low kWh causes them to run at a loss.

Makes more sense to charge a base maintenance fee to reliably cover the cost of maintaining the network then not markup the units.

This is done all over the world. It's nothing new.
Click to expand...
Why are you stuck on people buying low kWh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Swa
wingnut771 said:
We are paying already. Lets leave it there. They are creating a problem out of nothing.
Click to expand...
The issue remains that, if Eskom is going to be split into generation and distribution, (and it needs to be because lets face it the generation part is probably going to fail in the coming years as competition shows up) then the pricing needs to be split too.

I'm not saying people should be paying again as is currently being proposed where they just slap a connection fee on top of existing unit prices. That's a load of BS.

I'm simply saying the pricing structure of having a connection fee makes perfect sense when the group that generates your electricity is not the same group that actually transfers it to your home.
 
porchrat said:
Sure. You'll hear no objection to that assessment from me.

So what's the solution? Don't pay, have the infrastructure collapse and have no power?
Click to expand...
Well, even if you pay it still gets squandered currently

These guys are illiterate . Case in point. An extract from Ekh official budget lol . Look at thelast 4 lines in the 2024/25 column
1722518812380.png
 
porchrat said:
The issue remains that, if Eskom is going to be split into generation and distribution, (and it needs to be because lets face it the generation part is probably going to fail in the coming years) then the pricing needs to be split too.

I'm not saying people should be paying again as is currently being proposed where they just slap a connection fee on top of existing unit prices. That's a load of BS.

I'm simply saying the pricing structure of having a connection fee makes perfect sense when the group that generates your electricity is not the same group that actually transfers it to your home.
Click to expand...
Again, how does this affect users who buy from municipalities that already own their distribution infrastructure. I'll tell you, it doesn't.

This will only affect the wholesale power wheeling side imho.
 
porchrat said:
because it demonstrates that the variable income involved in selling per unit doesn't work well when it comes to a relatively fixed cost of maintaining an electricity grid.
Click to expand...
people use the same amount of energy every month on average, there is nothing variable. They do make plans when the increases start bankrupting themselves though and have to go back to living in the 18th century.
 
porchrat said:
Why would the distribution network want that pricing structure? Enough people in an area buying low kWh causes them to run at a loss.
Click to expand...
IN distribution you dont worry about individuals. It is a bulk supply. So deal with it as a bulk figure. Distribution doesnt have 7 million people accounts. It has a single account per muni
 
wingnut771 said:
Yes, they stopped doing that in 1994.
Click to expand...

Yep, they stopped a lot in 1994, and if you point out how things were better prior to 1994 you are a racist because not everyone had electricity prior to 1994 :rolleyes: So, according to new, woketard logic it is better that no-one has anything instead of maintaining what exists and expanding it to those that don't...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter