Outa says Eskom must cut costs instead of hiking prices

Daniel Puchert

Journalist
Staff member
Joined
Mar 6, 2024
Messages
2,133
Reaction score
1,868
Fight against Eskom's 66% tariff hikes

The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) has presented its submission on Eskom's proposed electricity tariff hikes to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa). It says the power utility should cut costs rather than apply for hefty price hikes.

It recognises the requirement for Nersa to allow Eskom to recover its operating costs and a fair return on assets through electricity tariffs. However, it rejected the utility's application, saying it amounts to a 66% increase in three years.
 
What is this western world colonialist thinking of not stealing money and wasting it and then charging your users more to recover it?
 
I'm just perplexed on how their acronym manages to dodge the HRC.
 
OUTA is such a useless organization, only good for asking for donations.
 
I most probably said this thousands of times, but ESKOM is sitting on a timebomb if the individuals and companies must pay for the electricity that they use otherwise price increases like these are the only way ESKOM could survive. But because of this, people install solar solutions at homes and businesses, which is cheaper in the long run and will also make this situation even worse.
 
People need to understand 1 of the most important items which must be replaced and the tariff increases should cover this. The items are, the most specialized and technologically advanced....... R200,000 each, brooms and mops. *sarcasm*
 
I most probably said this thousands of times, but ESKOM is sitting on a timebomb if the individuals and companies must pay for the electricity that they use otherwise price increases like these are the only way ESKOM could survive. But because of this, people install solar solutions at homes and businesses, which is cheaper in the long run and will also make this situation even worse.
It's called a death spiral.
 
It's called a death spiral.
I'm not disagreeing with you but it also depends on how you look at it it. It could also be a long term survival tactic. Reduce demand to a level where primary and cheapest generation meet demand and then hope that private generation (IPPs) surpasses the rate at which Eskom's coal fleet needs to be decommissioned and focus on simply playing the reseller (for some), transit and distribution role.
 
I'm not disagreeing with you but it also depends on how you look at it it. It could also be a long term survival tactic. Reduce demand to a level where primary and cheapest generation meet demand and then hope that private generation (IPPs) surpasses the rate at which Eskom's coal fleet needs to be decommissioned and focus on simply playing the reseller (for some), transit and distribution role.
What year do you think it will be when IPP will generate 20GW at 2am?
 
Well if an IPP can build a coal or nuclear power station hopefully sooner than Eskom's power stations disintegrate, literally.
IPP are not allowed to build coal and nuclear, only gas, solar panels, windmills and batteries.

Eskom's power stations will disintegrate in 10 years.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter