Renewables critic errs

Philip Lloyd is either being mischievous again, or perhaps he has just missed the point (Renewables claims false, June 7).

The first contracts for renewable energy did indeed have relatively high prices, which Eskom contracted into and now has to live with. But to compare these prices (he quotes R2.32/kWh) with Eskom’s current average cost (he quotes R0.81/kWh) is nonsensical.

The most recent prices received by the Department of Energy from independent power producers were R0.62/kWh for solar photovoltaic and wind, compared to R1.03/kWh for coal. These are the costs that should be compared. Furthermore, solar and wind will not be burdened with future carbon costs, but coal will.

Shell, BHP Billiton and others have recently published the view that to achieve the aims of the Paris Agreement on emissions reduction (a maximum global average temperature rise of 2°C in 2100 over pre-industrial times) a global carbon price of about $50/t CO² equivalent will be required by 2030. This will add more than 60c/kWh to the cost of coal-fired electricity. Even if the world continues to stumble along on its current emissions trajectory towards 3°C, a lower carbon price will still add about 30c/kWh.

Lloyd says renewable energy is not a panacea. Yes it is, but fudging numbers is not.

Dave Collins

Sandton