Mantashe's claim that Eskom's EAF can magically improve is misleading the public

Jan

Jan

Who's the Boss?
Staff member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
13,889
Reaction score
11,826
Location
The Rabbit Hole
Energy minister's load-shedding lie

Energy expert Chris Yelland said claims that there can be a sudden improvement in Eskom’s energy availability factor to stop load-shedding is misleading the public.

Mineral Resources and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe told eNCA South Africa’s energy crisis could be solved within six to twelve months.
 
The decision makers at Eskom and Mantashe’s ministry seem intent on normalising heightened load shedding. Stage 2 isn’t where it will be at.
 
Jan said:
Energy expert Chris Yelland said claims that there can be a sudden improvement in Eskom’s energy availability factor to stop load-shedding is misleading the public.
Click to expand...

Not if the reason the EAF is low is because Mantashe's faction has been using it as a ransom tactic to apply political pressure.

We will know in 6-12 months...
 
To be fair, it's only the mycadres like theclamp that thought Mantashe spoke the truth, mostly because their ideology makes them subservient and unquestioning towards their central command, you'd have to be hugely ignorant to have listened to BigM and go you know what I think he may have a point..
 
It's every man for himself now.

The ANC has lost control of yet another SOE, there is no easy way out here
 
Bubble boep Mantashe is a liar like Ramapoes is a liar. It is one of the top things the cANCer does.
Can we really expect this vermin to change their ways and put South Africa first?
 
Load shedding could dramatically be reduced by the following:
1) Order as many power ships as possible and put them on a fixed-year contract (like 10 years, enough time to get other projects up an running). Once this contract is over, it is over. No renewals.
2) Split apart Eskom into the three entities as planned.
3) Allow any organisation to enter into a power supply arrangement with Eskom distribution. Give preferable terms to those can come online within 4 years.
At this point grid would be stabilized.
4) Split each power station off into its own entity, which operates independently of Eskom.
 
konfab said:
Order as many power ships as possible and put them on a fixed-year contract (like 10 years, enough time to get other projects up an running). Once this contract is over, it is over. No renewals.
Click to expand...
Do these ships already exist, or is there some extended lead time?

Why not just install CCGTs on land?
 
For the next 6-12 months it will just be generic waffle about how they're making progress, how load shedding will be fixed, sabotage and every other excuse.

Next year there will suddenly be money for diesel ahead of elections. Gweezy will take credit, they'll say "look the ANC fixed it", the muppets will vote for them again and we're back to where we are now.

BT/DI/MyBB should contact me for my expert opinion...
 
konfab said:
Load shedding could dramatically be reduced by the following:
1) Order as many power ships as possible and put them on a fixed-year contract (like 10 years, enough time to get other projects up an running). Once this contract is over, it is over. No renewals.
2) Split apart Eskom into the three entities as planned.
3) Allow any organisation to enter into a power supply arrangement with Eskom distribution. Give preferable terms to those can come online within 4 years.
At this point grid would be stabilized.
4) Split each power station off into its own entity, which operates independently of Eskom.
Click to expand...

One flaw with your plan... the gravy troughs are missing.
 
I am glad that he was called out on that, it is clear that the EAF will take years to recover. Gwede is a liar, he now needs Eskom to produce electricity by the time that De Ruyter leaves his office in order to justify his poor treatment of him, and he cannot do that, so all he does is postpone Eskom's supposed miraculous recovery further down the road, but not too far. In 6-12 months time he will have another excuse.
 
Ϲhristopher said:
Do these ships already exist, or is there some extended lead time?

Why not just install CCGTs on land?
Click to expand...
They do not exist afaik. There is no grid for them to plug into aswell. They will also destroy most of the marine life in the area. We would need about 50 ships to reverse stage 6.

Good question to your second question.
 
I wonder whether Chris Yelland and Ted Blom trust their coffee at the moment?
 
Benedict A55h0le said:
The solution is a tax revolt, and to use that money to purchase private solar systems.
Click to expand...
Honestly this would be the best system to follow

Government keeps breaking the social pact between citizens and government, yet, we continuously pay taxes despite the horrendous service delivery. In some cases, taxpayers are forced participants of enabling corruption!

Best way to bring these wannabe social celebrities to ground is to remove their funding and show them where they belong - as servants, not as leaders!
 
wingnut771 said:
They do not exist afaik.
Click to expand...
That is incorrect

wingnut771 said:
There is no grid for them to plug into aswell.
Click to expand...
Not that difficult to build.


wingnut771 said:
They will also destroy most of the marine life in the area.
Click to expand...
Because container ports are renowned marine sanctuaries. Besides which, the noise pollution they make is temporary. It sucks that the animals have to suffer, but right now there are hospitals and water pump stations without electricity. If you want to tell me you value the life of sea cucumbers more than people, then by all means say so.

wingnut771 said:
We would need about 50 ships to reverse stage 6.
Click to expand...
No. They come in at about 480MW each. Which means you would need 12 to completely reverse stage 6.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter