Private solar power embarrasses Eskom

Unhappy1 said:
So the ANC are a bunch of morons therefore you hate solar, yes makes total sense.
Click to expand...
Former ANC President, Jacob Zuma, brought a R1-trillion nuclear power deal from Russia to the table. Around 8 plants.

Obviously this was laughed out of the building. "It will bankrupt the country!", haters shouted.

I wonder if there is an accurate account of how many billions have been spend, privately, taxes and from renewable loans investment, on batteries, solar panels, burning of diesel to run the gas-turbines, etc, since Zuma's proposal was sent to the dustbin.

I'd wager we're already past Zuma's R1-trillion nuclear deal. Bangladesh, Turkey and Egypt took those Russian deals and I hear that Bangladesh synced one of its Russian plants to their grid the other day.
 
Unhappy1 said:
Since when do you care what Greta thinks? Beside if you were off grid or loadshedded without solar, you would be in a far off worse position. However for some reason you've got it in your head that you must disdain solar. Baffling.
Click to expand...
Here I was, believing that checking one's privilege is virtuous.
 
LCBXX said:
Former ANC President, Jacob Zuma, brought a R1-trillion nuclear power deal from Russia to the table. Around 8 plants.

Obviously this was laughed out of the building. "It will bankrupt the country!", haters shouted.

I wonder if there is an accurate account of how many billions have been spend, privately, taxes and from renewable loans investment, on batteries, solar panels, burning of diesel to run the gas-turbines, etc, since Zuma's proposal was sent to the dustbin.

I'd wager we're already past Zuma's R1-trillion nuclear deal. Bangladesh, Turkey and Egypt took those Russian deals and I hear that Bangladesh synced one of its Russian plants to their grid the other day.
Click to expand...

Instead of wondering and wagering why dont you check before forming conclusions?

Do you now trust Zuma and co to bring us a functioning R1 trillion nuclear deal?
 
LCBXX said:
Former ANC President, Jacob Zuma, brought a R1-trillion nuclear power deal from Russia to the table. Around 8 plants.

Obviously this was laughed out of the building. "It will bankrupt the country!", haters shouted.

I wonder if there is an accurate account of how many billions have been spend, privately, taxes and from renewable loans investment, on batteries, solar panels, burning of diesel to run the gas-turbines, etc, since Zuma's proposal was sent to the dustbin.

I'd wager we're already past Zuma's R1-trillion nuclear deal. Bangladesh, Turkey and Egypt took those Russian deals and I hear that Bangladesh synced one of its Russian plants to their grid the other day.
Click to expand...
Like the original budget of R160bn for Kusile and Medupi, which ballooned to R300bn and still isn't complete?

How much do you think that R1tn would have ballooned to when you factor in the middle men, and how long would it have taken to complete?
 
Lupus said:
No no, he hates the lack of investments in real power that would benefit us all.
Click to expand...
LCBXX said:
Former ANC President, Jacob Zuma, brought a R1-trillion nuclear power deal from Russia to the table. Around 8 plants.

Obviously this was laughed out of the building. "It will bankrupt the country!", haters shouted.

I wonder if there is an accurate account of how many billions have been spend, privately, taxes and from renewable loans investment, on batteries, solar panels, burning of diesel to run the gas-turbines, etc, since Zuma's proposal was sent to the dustbin.

I'd wager we're already past Zuma's R1-trillion nuclear deal. Bangladesh, Turkey and Egypt took those Russian deals and I hear that Bangladesh synced one of its Russian plants to their grid the other day.
Click to expand...

"Real power" being what exactly? Nuclear, coal, or gas? How exactly do they "benefit us all"? Because all those technologies are more affordable, right?

They definitely won't come at a bigger cost to consumers or be susceptible to corruption, right? They definitely haven't let us down and caused load-shedding, right?

Nuclear, sure, most experts agree there could be a place for it...but the shift is towards smaller modular reactors...and those have yet to prove their commercial feasibility.

The argument that a hypothetical R1-trillion nuclear project would have cost less and delivered more power than renewables is ill-informed conjecture.

Honestly, I cannot take anyone who believes what a Zuma government said something would cost would end up being the real cost seriously.
 
Last edited:
Hanno Labuschagne said:
Riiiight. Like how there are absolutely zero credible sources that explain solar power has had a meaningful effect on load-shedding. Not a major bank's energy analysts nor Eskom itself:
mybroadband.co.za

Why there is no load-shedding — and how quickly that could change

The Eskom System Operator has explained how solar power is impacting to load-shedding, and how quickly the current situation can change.
mybroadband.co.za mybroadband.co.za

Your viewpoint is that solar power is not making a meaningful difference and that the overall decline in demand is actually the big factor.

The evidence points to a complex combination of factors, including vastly more solar and battery power, alongside factors like an overall decline in demand due to economic pressures (but also solar power), the increased implementation of load reduction, a slight improvement in generating capacity (also helped quite a lot by solar's contribution) and Eskom's bigger diesel budget. Which of the two is more correct?

I'm all for a fair argument, but the emotive reasoning against solar power suggests the increased solar uptake is something that damages you personally.
Click to expand...
Firstly lets get some facts straight. I am not against solar power... I am against incorrect information being spread that solar helped stopped load shedding. That is it, simple. I mean I have solar myself and it's greatly benefited myself, but to say that solar has actually reduced load shedding is being dismissive of the real facts.
1758791015324.png
As much as we all hate Eskom and hated load shedding, the correct reason we don't have load shedding is because they've managed to fix things. For how long who knows. This is where I get emotive as you claim, as you clearly just want solar to be the big winner and the somehow saviour, when at most it's a small thing in what really happened.
I'm not arguing against solar, I'm arguing the misinformation in it being claimed as the load shedding saviour, when it wasn't that's it. So saying I jump in for every little positive solar and actually tagging me? WTAF and you want to say fair debates? Come off it, that was rather childish.
 
Unhappy1 said:
Instead of wondering and wagering why dont you check before forming conclusions?

Do you now trust Zuma and co to bring us a functioning R1 trillion nuclear deal?
Click to expand...
I don't hate on a fantastic idea just because it comes from someone I dislike.
 
Hanno Labuschagne said:
"Real power" being what exactly? Nuclear, coal, or gas? How exactly do they "benefit us all"? Because all those technologies are more affordable, right?

They definitely won't come at a bigger cost to consumers or be susceptible to corruption, right? They definitely haven't let us down and caused load-shedding, right?

Nuclear, sure, most experts agree there could be a place for it...but the shift is towards smaller modular reactors...and those have yet to prove their commercial feasibility.

The argument that a hypothetical R1-trillion nuclear project would have cost less and delivered more power than renewables is pure and ill-informed conjecture.

Honestly, I cannot take anyone who believes what a Zuma government said something would cost would end up being the real cost seriously.
Click to expand...
How does private solar power help everyone else? How much of this private solar is feeding back into the grid, how does this private solar benefit industries?
Real power would be power from actual power sources that are on the grid, actual investments in sources of power that can feed industries, homes and businesses. Not private solar generation for us and that brings demand down. Come off it, you're acting like a 13 year old here. We get it, you're a Greenie, but you don't need to acting like a vegan and spreading it left right and center.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Like the original budget of R160bn for Kusile and Medupi, which ballooned to R300bn and still isn't complete?

How much do you think that R1tn would have ballooned to when you factor in the middle men, and how long would it have taken to complete?
Click to expand...
We'll never know.

How much did loadshedding cost the economy after Zuma's proposal was dismissed?
 
LCBXX said:
We'll never know.

How much did loadshedding cost the economy after Zuma's proposal was dismissed?
Click to expand...
The build would still be ongoing even in a best-case scenario. So we wouldn't have avoided any loadshedding...
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
The build would still be ongoing even in a best-case scenario. So we wouldn't have avoided any loadshedding...
Click to expand...
Sadly we've had nothing new being built since the last two coal power stations. It's sad but there hasn't been any investment by Eskom in any new sources of power for almost 18 years now.
 
Lupus said:
Firstly lets get some facts straight. I am not against solar power... I am against incorrect information being spread that solar helped stopped load shedding. That is it, simple. I mean I have solar myself and it's greatly benefited myself, but to say that solar has actually reduced load shedding is being dismissive of the real facts.
View attachment 1850936
As much as we all hate Eskom and hated load shedding, the correct reason we don't have load shedding is because they've managed to fix things. For how long who knows. This is where I get emotive as you claim, as you clearly just want solar to be the big winner and the somehow saviour, when at most it's a small thing in what really happened.
I'm not arguing against solar, I'm arguing the misinformation in it being claimed as the load shedding saviour, when it wasn't that's it. So saying I jump in for every little positive solar and actually tagging me? WTAF and you want to say fair debates? Come off it, that was rather childish.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the ad hominem "stop being childish" when you fail to address the points I raised, and share a graph that says absolutely nothing about the bigger picture.

How is it incorrect information when Eskom itself has said this? How do you separate the EAF and UCLF improvements from a complex electricity system where the reduction in demand from solar uptake has clearly played a major role? That is ignorant and inaccurate.

It's nice commenting and criticising to your heart's content and accusing someone you don't know of inaccurate reporting, but when that someone responds to your silliness, you get personal.
Lupus said:
How does private solar power help everyone else? How much of this private solar is feeding back into the grid, how does this private solar benefit industries?
Real power would be power from actual power sources that are on the grid, actual investments in sources of power that can feed industries, homes and businesses. Not private solar generation for us and that brings demand down. Come off it, you're acting like a 13 year old here. We get it, you're a Greenie, but you don't need to acting like a vegan and spreading it left right and center.
Click to expand...
It's already helped everyone else. It's reduced load-shedding, there is no debate about it, even though you two carry on.

Also, thanks for illustrating a second classic ad hominem example with the "Greenie acting like a vegan." Not that I have to prove anything to you, but for the record: I am no Greta fan, I love my steak and biltong, my beloved family enjoy hunting on a regular basis, and I own an EV because it drives better than a petrol or diesel car, not because it's cleaner.
 
Lupus said:
Sadly we've had nothing new being built since the last two coal power stations. It's sad but there hasn't been any investment by Eskom in any new sources of power for almost 18 years now.
Click to expand...
The money meant for infrastructure investment is being spent on salaries. The story of ANC governance across the country...
 
Hanno Labuschagne said:
"Real power" being what exactly? Nuclear, coal, or gas? How exactly do they "benefit us all"? Because all those technologies are more affordable, right?

They definitely won't come at a bigger cost to consumers or be susceptible to corruption, right? They definitely haven't let us down and caused load-shedding, right?

Nuclear, sure, most experts agree there could be a place for it...but the shift is towards smaller modular reactors...and those have yet to prove their commercial feasibility.

The argument that a hypothetical R1-trillion nuclear project would have cost less and delivered more power than renewables is ill-informed conjecture.

Honestly, I cannot take anyone who believes what a Zuma government said something would cost would end up being the real cost seriously.
Click to expand...
As I said before, Hanno, I understand completely why you must simp for solar.
 
LCBXX said:
As I said before, Hanno, I understand completely why you must simp for solar.
Click to expand...
Again with the ad hominem. My sole source of income is my MyBroadband salary, which does not depend on my promotion of solar or renewable energy. Can you say the same about your income or vested interests not being in any way reliant on coal, gas, or nuclear?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X