More Eskom lies?

As for lies - so Eishkom now want NERSA to approve a 24% increase. Well, only to be expected.

Simple maths - assuming current income was 100 eishkom rands. We all save so income drops to ER90. Add back the 14% increase and you get ER102.60. Don't think you can afford more hamsters and their wheels for that ER2.60.

Aesop wrote a fable about the grasshopper and the ants. Seems that that applies.
 
Moederloos said:
It's this new coal that is being produced - not up to the same standards.
O - wait, coal is millions of years old.
Uhm..
:p
Click to expand...

"I will state this again, this post-Apartheid, post-1994 coal and rain are deliberately trying to undermine the government of the ANC. It is obvious that they are not willing participants in the new South Africa. What I ask is this: if you are not willing to co-operate I ask you to please leave the country. I appeal to rain to go to sleep earlier, that the coal may be drierer."
 
Frankie said:
SA's power plants are designed to use very low grade coal and wet coal should not present a problem (it didn't 10 years ago).
The fines are also no problem because the coal is ground ground in the mills before admission to the boilers.

Just dumb ass lies from dimwits in Eiskom.
Click to expand...
The wet coal problem is actually to do with transporting it on conveyers and not with how well it burns. All the coal gets washed and pulverised before being blown into the boilers in any case.

Most of the coal used to produce electricity has a very high ash content. When it rains the ash in the coal forms a kind of sludge which just lies in one place while the conveyer runs on beneath it.

This wasn't a problem in the past because the power stations had massive stockpiles where at least some of the coal would be relatively dry and easily transportable. Nowadays the stockpiles are so small they get soaked through quite quickly when it rains.
 
Rkootknir said:
The wet coal problem is actually to do with transporting it on conveyers and not with how well it burns. All the coal gets washed and pulverised before being blown into the boilers in any case.

Most of the coal used to produce electricity has a very high ash content. When it rains the ash in the coal forms a kind of sludge which just lies in one place while the conveyer runs on beneath it.

This wasn't a problem in the past because the power stations had massive stockpiles where at least some of the coal would be relatively dry and easily transportable. Nowadays the stockpiles are so small they get soaked through quite quickly when it rains.
Click to expand...

So really, the "wet coal" excuse would be best termed "the no coal excuse".
 
Moederloos said:
So really, the "wet coal" excuse would be best termed "the no coal excuse".
Click to expand...

As would be the "fines coal" supplier(i.e. the dust left over when there is no coal). So all in all it comes down to the fact that Eskom appointed (after several "under the table" deals, I'm sure) to appoint an interior decorator as its BEEullschite coal supplier?
 
Moederloos said:
So really, the "wet coal" excuse would be best termed "the no coal excuse".
Click to expand...
Yep, eg. Sasol has to deal with the rain as well, but their coal stockpiles make Table Mountain look like a hill. That's why they keep running.

There may be other issues but I'm pretty sure that the small stockpiles is the biggest one...
 
Rkootknir said:
Yep, eg. Sasol has to deal with the rain as well, but their coal stockpiles make Table Mountain look like a hill. That's why they keep running.

There may be other issues but I'm pretty sure that the small stockpiles is the biggest one...
Click to expand...

Can you say private versus parastatal?
 
The best part about all of this is that the CEO of Eskom and his board get millions in bonus's for a job well done????? This makes me mad with rage. I used to work for Eskom and i was proud of it, thankfully i left when i did. It was still a respectable company and had a good name back then.
 
timgaul said:
"I will state this again, this post-Apartheid, post-1994 coal and rain are deliberately trying to undermine the government of the ANC. It is obvious that they are not willing participants in the new South Africa. What I ask is this: if you are not willing to co-operate I ask you to please leave the country. I appeal to rain to go to sleep earlier, that the coal may be drierer."
Click to expand...

:D :D :D
 
Rkootknir said:
The wet coal problem is actually to do with transporting it on conveyers and not with how well it burns. All the coal gets washed and pulverised before being blown into the boilers in any case.

Most of the coal used to produce electricity has a very high ash content. When it rains the ash in the coal forms a kind of sludge which just lies in one place while the conveyer runs on beneath it.

This wasn't a problem in the past because the power stations had massive stockpiles where at least some of the coal would be relatively dry and easily transportable. Nowadays the stockpiles are so small they get soaked through quite quickly when it rains.
Click to expand...

The conveyors are enclosed hence shielded from the weather, but yes if the stockpile is non existent then you'll have problems with the dregs on the ground in the mud.

There is no washing of coal at any of Esikom's power stations, and washing is done by a few mines for certain buyers.

The ash in coal is "inherent" and cannot separately become sludge - coal with lots of fines getting very wet will make a sludge.

The low stockpiles are a result of Eiskom's severing contracts with the adjoining mines electing road transport from coal sources in the spot market as they could do better underhanded deals this way.
 
I believe Trevor Manuel has ALL the answers to ALL your questions posted here ;)
 
It will be interesting to see which ANC loyalists will benefit from the new R700bn international tender for six nuclear power stations, that has just been put out. This tender is set to make the arms deal look like a mere drop in the ocean.
 
http://www.eskom.co.za/annreport06/tables2.htm

So according to eskom they are not capable of producing nearly what they did in 2006 and yet we are drawing MUCH less than we did then - and theres a problem.....

the truth is quite simple - they are lying about it all so they can increase the prices of electricity.
 
BT6LW said:
http://www.eskom.co.za/annreport06/tables2.htm

So according to eskom they are not capable of producing nearly what they did in 2006 and yet we are drawing MUCH less than we did then - and theres a problem.....

the truth is quite simple - they are lying about it all so they can increase the prices of electricity.
Click to expand...

Don't forget about increasing their bonus's at the end of the year for another outstanding job done.
 
OH FFS!

Total power station nominal capacity, MW 42 011
Total power station net maximum capacity, MW 39 810
Peak demand on integrated Eskom system, MW 33 461
Click to expand...

So how in the hell are we running at 30 000 MW???
 
timgaul said:
"I will state this again, this post-Apartheid, post-1994 coal and rain are deliberately trying to undermine the government of the ANC. It is obvious that they are not willing participants in the new South Africa. What I ask is this: if you are not willing to co-operate I ask you to please leave the country. I appeal to rain to go to sleep earlier, that the coal may be drierer."
Click to expand...

Can you have a rainbow nation without the rain?
 
It gets better:

Total employees:
1996 - 39 857
2006 - 29 697

But we cut back and made a profit. THATS BECAUSE YOU STOPPED BUYING COAL FOR YOU COAL STATIONS YOU IJOTS! :mad:
 
Oh hell, no!

Peak demand on integrated Eskom system, MW
2006 - 33 461
2005 - 34 195
2004 - 34 195

So power consumption has decreased and capacity has remained stable.

w..

T..

F..?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X