Presidential panel pans energy plan
The draft new energy plan fails to show how SA can feasibly escape load-shedding in the next few years, say President Cyril Ramaphosa’s climate advisers. They have also been unable to replicate some of the modelling used in the plan.
The draft integrated resources plan (IRP) 2023, which will replace the 2019 version, has been met with much disapproval since it was published for public comment in January.
It provides a road map for future energy planning and private and public procurement of new generation capacity. However, the draft 2023 version has been criticised, for instance, for not being ambitious enough in the proposed procurement of new renewable generation capacity.
At a recent meeting to discuss its feedback on the draft IRP 2023, the Presidential Climate Commission (PCC), set up in 2020 by Ramaphosa to advise on matters such as the just energy transition, outlined “critical observations” of the plan.
Lebogang Mulaisi, COO of the PCC said the draft plan failed to “address its primary energy security objective”.
The plan, she said, does not provide any analysis to show how energy security might be achieved in the short term.
“At the very least” the IRP 2023 must include a scenario up to 2030 that “more aggressively addresses load-shedding”, said Mulaisi.
According to scenarios in the IRP for the period to 2030, SA will continue to experience electricity supply shortages at least until 2027 unless there is a “significant” improvement in the performance of Eskom’s coalfired power plants.
The only scenarios that achieve adequate electricity supply before 2030 assume either a quick rollout of gas-toenergy projects over the review period or successful implementation of Eskom’s generation recovery plan, resulting in the energy availability factor (EAF) of its generation fleet climbing to about 70% by 2030.
Eskom has been unable to achieve a monthly EAF, which shows actual generation performance as a percentage of total installed capacity, of more than 60% in the past 18 months.
According to Mulaisi, while the PCC agreed with the types of technologies the IRP identifies in its “least cost energy mix” for the period up to 2030 and the 2030 to 2050 “horizon”, it disagreed with “the quantum of each technology deployed”.
The draft IRP 2023’s “least cost pathway” indicates, for the period up to 2023, up to 7,000MW of gas-to-power generation, 4,500MW of new wind power, more than 4,000MW of solar power and 2,000MW of battery energy storage.
For the 2035-50 period, it proposes adding gas power of 15,000MW, 30,000MW of wind power, 13,500MW of solar power and 10,000MW in battery storage.
In the PCC’s energy planning recommendations published in June last year in response to a call from the department of mineral resources & energy for input on the revision of the IRP 2019, it recommended adding 50GW to 60GW of variable renewable energy (from solar and wind) by 2030, supported by battery energy storage and 3GW to 5GW of peaking support (from gas, for example).
The PCC also suggested adding at least 8GW of wind and solar power to the grid each year for the next two to four years to help resolve load-shedding.
By adding 50GW to 60GW of renewables by 2030 the country would be able to increase the share of renewable power in the energy mix from about 7% to 40%, which would support SA in meeting its international climate commitments.
The PCC said it was not clear why the “least cost scenario” arrived at by the department in the draft IRP differed from what other modelling, reviewed by the PCC, had shown. The commission called for more transparency saying that the department should list all the assumptions used in its modelling.
The PCC also recommended conducting a detailed review of air quality and its impacts on the technology choices in the IRP.
Mulaisi said the IRP does not effectively deal with the issues of climate change and air quality, putting it in direct conflict with SA law and with international agreements.
Steve Nicholls, head of mitigation at the PCC, said most models show the bulk of SA’s emissions reductions will be made between 2030 and 2040. For example, one study by the World Bank shows about 58% of emissions reductions being made in that decade for SA to achieve net zero by 2050.
However, proposals in the IRP to extend the life of coalfired power stations would not be in line with achieving these emissions-reduction targets.
“We also have specific concerns about how the emissions were calculated [in the IRP]. For one, the starting point used at the end of 2023 is 180-million tonnes of [carbon dioxide] emissions, which is below modelled expectations of 185-million to 190-million tonnes.”
The reduction in GHG emissions assumed in the IRP also appeared to be disproportionate to the reduction in energy output. The PCC said it could not replicate the modelling presented in the IRP.