President Cyril Ramaphosa’s plan to arrest further decline in the prevailing electricity generation deficit in South Africa has been welcomed by several organisations as a measure that takes into account various perspectives, as well as one that addresses rolling out new generation capacity in an environment-friendly way.

On July 25, Ramaphosa presented an energy plan, which renewable energy advocacy movement 350Africa.org believes represents a major step forward in tackling the country’s energy and climate crisis through renewable energy.

Environmental conservation organisation World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) is encouraged by the “strong role” for renewable energy in the plan, including the acceleration of the Integrated Resource Plan’s (IRP’s) proposed renewable energy development as was called for by a large grouping of civil society.

Ramaphosa revealed plans to scale up renewable energy production and storage, buy surplus energy from existing renewable energy projects and implement an energy efficiency programme by Eskom.

The WWF says this is in line with scientific and technical guidance that renewable energy is both the fastest and the cheapest means of addressing the energy shortfall, especially when coupled with appropriate forms of energy storage.

The Life After Coal Campaign (LACC) says that, although it supports the decision to roll out the remaining renewable and battery storage allocation in the 2019 IRP, South Africa must build at least 5 GW of renewable energy every year just to meet the demand created by the unavoidable retirement of Eskom’s ageing coal plants.

“The decades of delay in taking the 'bold, courageous and decisive action' [Ramaphosa] refers to, and the crisis which has resulted, cannot be used as a justification for rolling out new fossil fuel developments like gas, nor to promote or accelerate privatisation of all new electricity generation, which would risk the further downward spiral of Eskom as a public utility,” avers the LACC.

350Africa.org adds that there are still several big questions and concerns around issues such as the privatisation of energy generation, the role of gas and whether cutting red tape will open the door for projects like controversial powerships, which are subject to various legal challenges.

In mid-July, 350Africa.org joined the Climate Justice Coalition (CJC) in marching to the Presidency’s office, demanding an emergency renewable energy plan. The plan presented in Ramaphosa’s address delivers on some of the CJC’s demands but falls short on others.

350Africa.org climate campaigner and CJC secretary Dr Alex Lenferna says that although Ramaphosa’s plan recognises renewable energy as key to tackling South Africa’s energy and climate crises, significant concerns about several elements of the plan remain.

“. . . coming up with a plan is the easy part, implementing it will be the difficult part, particularly as [Mineral Resources and Energy] Minister [Gwede] Mantashe’s department failed to deliver on the last emergency energy plan,” he says.

The WWF is “heartened” Ramaphosa took the consultation process to heart and welcomes the opportunity that a feed-in tariff creates for tapping the potential of urban areas to provide electricity directly into the grid.

However, the WWF says many households inconvenienced by power cuts are low-income households, for whom electricity is often too expensive to access, and that a nationwide rollout of rooftop solar photovoltaic solutions for low-income households would help to address multiple problems.

This could potentially be linked to the Just Energy Transition Partnership, and aligns well with the electricity plan, the WWF says.

Regarding this plan, 600 W of solar per Reconstruction and Development Programme house could generate up to 1.2 GW of power at any given time, both providing power for those who can least afford it, and potentially supplementing the incomes of these households, the WWF states.

Nonetheless, the WWF cautions against potential flaws within Ramaphosa’s plan, namely that certain environmental assessments and permissions be waived in specific areas of installation of energy infrastructure.

WWF environmental programme head Khungeka Njobe notes that while strategic environmental assessments in areas of potentially low impact, such as grid infrastructure and the renewable energy development zones, appears sensible, waiving environmental considerations can result in long-term problems that are best avoided to start with.

The LACC also opposes any circumventing of essential environmental assessments, climate and social impacts before projects commence, saying South Africa is “extremely vulnerable to catastrophic climate change” and must act to protect people and ecosystems from these impacts.

In addition, a mooted call for fossil gas infrastructure is concerning, as is the mention of “mobile generators” which the WWF is concerned may allude to the powerships owned by Karpowership.

The LACC says Ramaphosa’s plan appears to use the energy crisis as a means to “force” gas into the electricity generation mix, without consideration of its high costs, harmful climate and health impacts and serious financial risks.

The organisation says gas is not a transitional fuel, as numerous studies confirm that investing in gas developments poses a significant risk of lock-in when cheaper alternatives are available and will continue to become cheaper. As a result, the LACC says any new gas infrastructure faces a significant risk of becoming a stranded asset.

While the WWF concedes that hydrocarbons are a potential long-term energy storage mechanism, the organisation also says they are not needed until South Africa has very high renewables penetration in the electricity system, by which time costs of other grid management options, such as green hydrogen, would have fallen further.

Further, while fossil gas may have a short-term role for peaking generation, when compared to the price certainty of batteries it represents both a financial risk and a certain climate impact that must be avoided, states the WWF.

As such, the WWF recommends South Africa accelerate the development of an updated IRP that better reflects the reality of the energy sector and the country’s international climate commitments.

Meanwhile, the LACC takes issue with “repowering and repurposing” proposals by Eskom for power stations scheduled for shutdown soon. 

The LACC says Eskom has proposed the building of new closed cycle gas turbines on these sites with a total capacity of 5 750 MW, at an estimated cost of R198-billion. Converting the plants to run on gas and the construction of the necessary gas supply infrastructure would take at least three years.

The LACC proposes the building of 400 MW of solar power, at an estimated total cost of R6.4-billion for completion within 24 months.