Dailymaverick logo

Business Maverick

This article is more than a year old

Business Maverick

Business has saved the ANC’s bacon on load shedding. Perhaps a cheer is in order?

Everybody in SA is astounded at how load shedding has suddenly been suspended and the reflexive theory is that it must be because the 2024 election campaign is under way. But it’s slowly becoming clear that the real reason is because business decided to get involved. The government (in desperation) agreed, stood aside, and they got the job done.
Business has saved the ANC’s bacon on load shedding. Perhaps a cheer is in order?

The Business for South Africa (B4SA) group gave a report-back this week and its message was frankly astounding: load shedding will be over, but for Stage 1, by the end of this year and will be a thing of the past by the end of 2025. Really? Can this be true?

Like you, I’m still sceptical. But if it’s true (and it certainly looks as if it may be), then an incredible thing has just happened and business deserves a very large Bell’s. It is not just incredible; it is astonishingly incredible. Think about it: SA has had load shedding for 17 years. Business solved the problem in less than a year.

Of course that is a simplification. A lot of preparatory work was done before this. But the crucial change — and this massively plays to my priors — was that the government got out of the way.  And continues to stay out of the way. That alone, rather than a resurgent Eskom or huge extra expenditure on diesel for the peaking power stations, has made all the difference. 

Just take a look at this graph presented at the function by the business leader of the energy workstream, James Mackay. He used it to explain the path the National Energy Crisis Committee (Necom) has mapped out that will lead to average Stage 1 load shedding by the end of 2024. The aim is to achieve 6GW more power.



The critical thing to notice here is that although an improvement in the performance of Eskom has been factored into the model, the big increases are in new-generation photovoltaic power and wind power. And it is not just that they are important to the process, they are absolutely central. After the increase in Eskom power station performance in the fourth quarter this year, the model assumes Eskom will not get any better through next year, and presumably beyond.

All the improvements that will take SA over the line will be in renewables, plus a bit from the open-cycle gas turbines. Reflecting on this, Mackay said, “We saw huge growth in rooftop solar last year of some 2,600MW. It’s coming down a bit, but we expect the growth will continue for some time. What we also see now is significant growth coming through corporate utility-size projects. Our view is that we will probably exceed the numbers in this pathway by 2025. And, at this stage, there are no grid capacity constraints that will impact that.”

The improvement is not without cost — Eskom is burning masses of diesel but not, it turns out, more than it did last year or the year before. Mackay reportedly told the press conference Eskom burned R19-billion of diesel in 2022, and nearly R30-billion in 2023. Eskom has used less diesel year-to-date than in either 2023 or 2024. 

“It’s not a conspiracy theory. We are having a combination of good work coming together,” Mackay told the media. The head of the Project Management Unit in the Presidency, Rudi Dicks, said that the committee was tracking 22GW of pipeline projects, which are utility-scale projects applying for grid access.

These projects also require grid access, which is why the establishment of a transmission company is so important, and B4SA has pushed this through too. The National Transmission Company of South Africa (NTCSA) has been established with a board put in place to unbundle and separately manage Eskom’s transmission grid.

How did business achieve all of this? Seems it was pretty easy: business deployed about 350 specialists to power stations, Transnet, and various crime initiatives. B4SA estimates that they racked up about 7,000 hours of contributions (amazing they know that).

How is this all going to play out politically? What you would hope is that the ANC recognises the power of standing aside and letting business take up the reins. The problem is that this whole project has been run out of the Presidency. There is no evidence in the political campaign that the ANC or the government in general has any intention of changing its broadly anti-business position. 

What is more, the ANC only changed its stance when the party’s back was really, really against the wall. There has been no public admission that opening the markets in which state-owned enterprises are monopoly players is in any way important, useful, or even vaguely desirable.

What has been achieved is a much more positive set of relationships at the peak of the political process. It remains to be seen if, once the election is over, this newfound friendship and working relationship between at least some government officials and business endures. 

But the interesting thing is that business in SA keeps doing this in modern SA: declining education, suddenly there are Curro and Advtech; declining healthcare, suddenly there are Discovery, Life and Mediclinic; declining SA Post Office, and suddenly there is PEP’s Paxi service. And yet the latest round of legislation — the NHI Bill, the Expropriation Bill, the Copyright Amendment Bill and aspects of the Companies Amendment Bill — are all designed, wittingly or unwittingly, to further degrade the business environment.

In the meantime, would it be too much for President Cyril Ramaphosa to publicly acknowledge that his arse has been saved by the business community? Well, TBH, I think it probably is. Small steps, people, small steps. DM

Comments

francois49 May 13, 2024, 01:34 AM

Not so fast. There is no "taking the reins" by business. Heaven forbid. "Government must step aside" is a philosophy of the blindfolded. The groundwork for this achievement has been coming for years under Ramaphosa's leadership. That Escom is stable is already a massive achievement (which the businessman De Ruyter could not quite accomplish). Without strategic political leadership, the path towards more renewables would not have been opened up so effectively. Business is good at more simple tasks - material systems, productivity, mathematical goal posting. The task of politics is much more complex and yet indispensable. A nation does not live on bread alone, and the hands of business are tied without political facilitation. Yes, cheers for the role of business here, but even bigger cheers for teamwork and leadership that got us past state capture and heavy resistance against change to alternative energy sources. Not to mention the thousands of Escom employees that have persisted against many odds and dismissive attitudes by the media. And do not forget that things really started picking up after the position of a minister of electricity was established, a move that was widely jeered at the time.

michele35 May 13, 2024, 10:10 AM

And the minister and ESKOM started implementing the recommendations and findings of the CEOs they so quickly and enthusiastically jeered.

robby 77 May 13, 2024, 11:47 AM

Government have added practically zero MW to the grid since Stage 6 was reached. Come again...?

robby 77 May 13, 2024, 11:47 AM

Government have added practically zero MW to the grid since Stage 6 was reached. Come again...?

Gerrie Pretorius May 13, 2024, 11:54 AM

Dream on Francois. If the anc was not under political pressure of the coming election, we would not see the (so called?) progress. The anc, with cyril and cele and mantashe etc. will never acknowledge their mistakes and shortcomings and support of state capture via support of jz. This regime is entitled and has no idea how to govern.

francois49 May 14, 2024, 06:15 AM

"Dream on" is the new cliche used when you simply want to dismiss and not argue properly. What you say is factually untrue - point for point - and is more just an expression of an attitude, rather than considered reasoning. As for "..has no idea how to govern" - i am more interested in the basis (intellectual and emotional) behind such a simplistic, absolutist and pretty derogatory statement than in the statement itself.

William Kelly May 14, 2024, 07:07 AM

If you can speak to your own argument and present the basis on which Ramaphosa has been shown how to govern I'd be interested in hearing about it. The simplistic, absolutist and derogatory statement is backed by the facts that under every single metric of leadership Ramaphosa has failed. By ways of example, crime is up. Unemployment is up. Life under him by almost every measure is worse - and as the head of state this falls onto his shoulders - the position is a voluntary one let me remind you. So it would be interesting to see your considered reading as to how factually the statement is untrue on a point for point basis as you allege.

francois49 May 14, 2024, 10:28 AM

Point for point (made by Gerrie) - the progress at Eskom dates since CR appointed De Ruyter and especially thereafter. It was deliberate planning, consultation and collaboration over years that had nothing to do with the upcoming election - CR is consistently open about mistakes made. Just read his speeches and newsletters. The ANC as an organization can be overly proud, but has in general acknowledged the lost years under Zuma, which is significant. - That "this regime has no idea how to govern" is belied by the very criticism that it governs too much

francois49 May 14, 2024, 10:31 AM

As for your challenge to counter that "Ramaphosa has failed under every metric of leadership, just a couple of points: - while deputy president, he was largely written off as ineffective against Zuma's abuses. yet he outmaneuvered him politically in the end. - then he was portrayed as a weak president against the likes of Mkebane and Magashule. Yet he worked hard to rebuild and strengthen the institutions that are supposed to root out corrupt and inept leadership (in stead of taking the short cut route of witch hunting) and he succeeded to a great extent, so far. - Through his leadership decisions, SARS was brought back to its previous success rates, the NPA was rescued from political interference and we have a PP again who can actually read the law. Many more examples - CR is internationally hailed for his leadership during COVID. And it really takes leadership capacity to rebuild after such a crisis and prevent something like the Durban riots to be repeated. - CR is also responsible for a successful major investment drive under very challenging circumstances globally - he is not without his faults and he is not god. our economic metrics are not good, but so are the metrics world wide. - his strong point is his holistic approach - doing a lot of work in the background through legislation and institutional reform - to ensure longer term governmental ability. much of the fruits of these are still to show up because real reform takes time. Eskom is a good example of this.

francois49 May 14, 2024, 10:31 AM

- lastly, CR is consultative. he's been drawing business, civil society and other role players into the decision-making processes from day one. This is not CEO kind of leadership. It is good political leadership. If you ask me, he is on his way to make a similar success as leader, as he did way back in the labour movement, then during the negotiations, then as business leader. Now as president. Mark my words.

megapode May 13, 2024, 03:28 PM

Hmmm... Balls can take a while to get rolling. De Ruyter did set in a motion a program of improved and pre-emptive maintenance, but you can't just turn that stuff on. Other side of the coin: Napoleon once won a famous victory in battle. Afterwards it was put to him that the victory was really won because of a unilateral, bold manoeuvre by a junior officer. Napoleon replied :"Perhaps. But if the battled had been lost it would have been me that lost it." So let Government pat themselves on the back. If load shedding had got worse, or they were burning billions of liters of diesel each week we'd be mad as a snake at them. I don't think "business" had any plan to rescue the country. Lots of businesses, did a lot, it's true, but the motive for each would have been to cover their own ass and continue to make profits. Let's not make super-patriots out of them.

William Kelly May 14, 2024, 07:20 AM

Maybe they didn't. But the point is that if there was not a massive void to be filled in the first place it would mean government had managed to achieve what they were supposed to. Put another way. If business had not stepped in to assist, being in their direct interest to do so, where would we be? I have a problem with your sytatement "motive for each would have been to cover their own ass and continue to make profits". What do you mean by this? If goverment were vaguely competent and delivered on their monoploy and sole control over electricity what ass would business has to cover? It is precisely not their own ass they are covering but the abject and uetter failure of government to deliver what they were mandated to deliver via their own monopoly over electricity. Misdirecting security of supply of a resource solely owned and controlled by the state is not business covering its's own ass whatsoever. As for making profits, the implication I get is that this is a bad thing. Profits are what are used to pay salaries, taxes and to grow an economy. Perhaps you seem to think that profits from a state controlled monoploy over electricity are a bad thing - but if Eskom doesn't generate a profit, it goes out of business - sorry, no, that's not correct - what happens in a monopoly is that your taxes to support it go up. And if it wasn't for business where would we be? I can tell you. Stage 8 and up.

megapode May 15, 2024, 09:23 AM

I'm not saying that profit making is a bad thing. What I'm saying is that collective entity called "business" didn't do anything. Individual businesses moved to protect themsleves - entirely their right. Any making things easier for Eskom was a happy collateral. So, by all means, acknowledge the effect, but don't get too misty eyed about the motive. Unless you own shares.

John Brodrick May 15, 2024, 04:39 PM

Wrong: profits do not pay salaries; revenue does. Salaries come under costs or expenses; profit is what is left after all expenses are paid. A distinction is made between profits and after tax profits.

megapode May 13, 2024, 03:31 PM

A good chunk of that PV is coming from the IPPs which Government opened up to some years ago. Again, balls take a while to get rolling. Recently, up in the NW, one of the biggest solar farms in the world came on line and is already feeding into the Eskom grid. Maybe Cohen counts that as "business".

megapode May 13, 2024, 03:31 PM

A good chunk of that PV is coming from the IPPs which Government opened up to some years ago. Again, balls take a while to get rolling. Recently, up in the NW, one of the biggest solar farms in the world came on line and is already feeding into the Eskom grid. Maybe Cohen counts that as “business”.

William Kelly May 14, 2024, 07:24 AM

What is that if it's not business? A Martian intervention? Of course Cohen counts that as business because that's exactly what it is! The IPPs you reference, are policy. Which Gwede fought against, tooth and nail, as hard as he possibly could I might add. If Eskom had been properly run we'd never have needed IPPs to begin with - and it is only because of Stage 6 and worse that this policy was 'allowed'to help solve the crisis!

District Six May 14, 2024, 08:29 PM

No, that's not true, we do need IPPs. In most countries energy generation is at least partly privatised. IPPs are the thin edge of the privatisation wedge, and so is the massive shift to personal roof top solar a step towards privatisation, along with healthcare, security, education, digital TV, etc.

megapode May 15, 2024, 09:29 AM

The owners of that farm didn't just raise capital, build and wave some cables in the air saying "who wants?". I grant that it is their money and their risk, but also they worked with Eskom, agreed pricing and are selling only to Eskom. So this farm (and it's by no means the only such) is Government policy (late, it has to be said) or Eskom going ahead and who cares what Parliament things bearing fruit. Eskom opened the bid windows for those IPPs years ago, so the intent has long been there.

William Kelly May 14, 2024, 06:58 AM

Not so fast. You don't get off that easy I am afraid. Government alone created the crisis and presented not a single credible plan to fix it. Not one in the decades that followed it's predicted and inevitable outcomes. In fact, government, through Gwede did his level best to ensure that government continued down the path of neglect and cannibilsation of what was left for his model of state centred control. Lest you forget, it was only when the State had it's back against the wall with stage 6 load shedding an actual fact of day to day reality that the only thing that has delivered a measure of success has been the fact that quiet behind the scenes business maneouvering that has positioned this turnaround - the policies you reference and the ertwhilst "Minister of electricity"only came about purely as a result of the self created pressure that is the implosion of the ecomony as a direct result of government policy. I find it astounding that you glibly refer to the groundwork put in place by Ramaphosa as the basis on which Eskom (not Escom) is stable - that is simply pie in the sky fantasy. Eskom is anything but stable - if you just look at the data presensted the contribution towards the end of load shedding is not contingent on Eskom at all - it is contingent on the contributions made by business and industry. And that only because it was sledge hammered into the incompetent governmeny because they had no plan, no capacity and zero leadership to solve the problem.

francois49 May 14, 2024, 07:28 AM

Stage 6 happened the first time in 2019. Ramaphosa's response at the time: “The energy challenges in this country will not be resolved overnight. We have set out on a bold path of restructuring and rebuilding. Despite the setbacks of the past week, we are making progress and will steadily begin to see the fruits of these efforts,” he said in a statement. In 2022 the Energy Action Plan was established. As a result, Eskom now reached 70% EAF again for the first time since 2021. The latest EAP report (pdf) is worth a look at. It is a comprehensive and decent plan, a plan that is evidently working, and gives the lie to your multiple flat-footed statements.

pa May 14, 2024, 05:50 PM

..........and in 1998, the ANC under the leadership of Nelson Mandela, the government denied Eskom's call to start budgeting; planning and building new power stations, as they predicted a growth in demand, and a decline in performance of existing ones due to age. This rot goes all the way back through each president, and their brothers and sisters in power!

megapode May 15, 2024, 09:31 AM

It goes back further than that. Under the Nats already Eskom were expected to start fending for themselves. The Nats imagined that loads of overseas investment would come in.

Stephanie West May 13, 2024, 06:48 AM

Business has also made the ANC look better than it is. This was necessary for business survival, but is a double edged sword. Business's fixing of the ANC's problems also means the ANC stays in power longer. Which means government infrastructure stays neglected, broken and under invested. It only took 30 years and pretty much full blown crises for the ANC to begrudgingly step aside. Not a vision of a future where the people are served and empowered to improve their lives. This will be temporary too, as the ANC doesn't really understand what's gone wrong. Ideologically, they are communists, so state assets must remain under their control. Not because it serves the people best. It serves the elites to keep the trough full enough to eat at - for now.

Murray Izzett May 13, 2024, 10:35 AM

I share your sentiments of the double edged sword Stephanie. However, I do think that the ideological position of the ANC is no longer socialist/communist. It is a veneer at best. I do not want to sound too cynical, but, the centralising of these sorts of services, through SOEs, is mostly aimed at presenting extractive opportunities for the ruling party elites. Ex-President, Motlante, even said so in about 2013, that few major projects were going ahead where the motive for their existence had more to do with corruption than serving a societal need.

Gerrie Pretorius May 13, 2024, 11:56 AM

Exactly!

khoza May 13, 2024, 06:50 AM

Good and patriotic business practice. Thank you?

Geoff Coles May 13, 2024, 08:42 AM

Business certainly didn't do it for the ANC Government but for themselves, understandably , the Economy and the People of SA

Tim Bester May 13, 2024, 08:44 AM

Privatisation by default...

Confucious Says May 13, 2024, 09:06 AM

A cheer? It's a disaster! The anclowns will take 100% of the credit (pun intended)! When electioneering, the anclowns spread hate of private business and the capitalist pigs, but the old begging hand comes out to also ask the very same capitalist pigs for donations and help and to be "patriotic"!

John P May 13, 2024, 09:51 AM

Mr coal, oil and gas Mantashe's heartburn must be killing him.

Kanu Sukha May 13, 2024, 01:12 PM

Regarding the last statement about the "business community" ... is CR not part of it ... while being 'president' as a side hustle ? How did he become a billionaire ?

Gerrie Pretorius May 13, 2024, 01:40 PM

His riches were given to him by BEE and AA. He has no idea how he got it. Believes ge is entitled - remember - nobody joined the “struggle” to be poor.

francois49 May 14, 2024, 06:30 AM

If ever there was a more racist statement, Gerrie. You clearly never ventured out of your priviledged bubble to get a sense of what the struggle was really about for millions of people in this country. Again you use "no idea." Can i translate this for you? "Blacks are intellectually inferior. Even if they seem to be smart, they have no idea how they are actually doing so. It's just chance, or they have it given to them, or they stole it. No matter how much they sacrifice, do not blink, they all just do it for the money" Right?

District Six May 14, 2024, 08:50 PM

You are actually revealing why erm... certain demographics, hate him so much. You're just angry about BBEEE.

Penny Philip May 13, 2024, 04:07 PM

CR was given very lucrative directorships of mining companies & access to finance allowing him to buy the franchise for 145 Mc Donalds outlets. He was also appointed to the Unilever & Coca Cola advisory boards. As the old saying goes 'money makes money'. Once you've got money you can afford the best financial advisors.

megapode May 13, 2024, 03:37 PM

There is a lot of rooftop PV around now. That's true. When I had mine installed nearly 5 years ago it was a novelty. Now many houses in my suburb, the local mall, and any mall within 10km has panels on the roof. But how much generation into the grid is happening here? I don't know about anybody else, but I charge my batteries up during the day and then run off of them at night. At least in part because sell back tariffs are not attractive. I wonder if all those hospitals with PV are busy feeding back into the grid to keep the neighbours lights on, or if they're doing as I do and keeping to their usual routines whilst saving on the bill. What does happen though is that each PV installation takes some demand off of the grid. Which Eskom have mentioned recently - demand is down.

Ntlai Mosiah May 13, 2024, 06:19 PM

Tim Cohen article about a “cheer”. Other facts to consider: 1. SA runs a “mixed economy” so private sector should always be allowed space to enter and participate 2. Govt started Renewables programme from 2009 with first round bidding in 2011 3. The IRP has catered and provided for private participation in generation 4. President Ramaphosa announced the lifting of the generation MW cap, NERSA relaxed generation licensing, Environmental Affairs lightened EIA requirements 5. Minister Ramokgopa announced the imminent end of load-shedding a couple of months ago 6. Finance Minister Godongwana provided roof-top PV tax incentives etc. 7. DMRE and NT continue to push out new programmes through the IPPO, lately Battery Storage, and BW1 of Gas-to-Power. 8. Let alone various initiatives by Provinces and Munics, including all the hard work that industry participants are putting into the Wheeling Frameworks. But why rush to focus on de Ruyter and Mackay? If it’s because their surnames are easier to type out for you, am sure other role-players won’t mind if you use auto-correct for their surnames ? in order to present a more balanced perspective on what the key economic actors are doing.

District Six May 14, 2024, 09:12 PM

2. Correct. Jasper was set in motion around 2009. About 10 years too late. Kusile and Medupi both over-ran by eight years, and are still incomplete. 3. Correct. Pity that government has not once properly implemented any IRP in respect of power generation. They started mumbling about "baseload". Soon every politician learned to throw in "baseload" each time they were challenged. 3. Correct. The IRP 2009 did make provision for private participation in generation. Then what happened? NERSA blamed Eskom and Eskom blamed NERSA for the lack of feed-in tariff agreement, and this went on for 10 years. 4. Correct. Caps increased. (Note: not capacity, just the cap. We could always put more renewables into the grid but for the caps.) Mantashe was dragged kicking and screaming all the way to increasing the IPP input caps. Ramasopha had to intervene because we were hitting stage 8. 4. Obviously, the tardiness to solve the blackouts was in some measure driven by the campaign to make oodles of moola on nuclear generation. We actually have a whole government department dedicated to driving the nuclear aganeda. This might have been the next a-la-arms-deal looting frenzy.

gideoncldw May 14, 2024, 07:44 AM

...let's wait for the anc ricochet

Rob vZ May 14, 2024, 08:55 AM

Government is still burning huge amounts of diesel and billing tax payers for it. And through PetroSA, making a comfortable profit. The parasites haven’t gone anywhere. They have just been removed from the news cycle.

zuzi May 14, 2024, 03:32 PM

Zuzifa Buthelezi

N SP May 14, 2024, 05:11 PM

This article and the comments have been the most interesting that I have seen for a long time. As usual it has a lot of "lets be reasonable, lets do it my way". In spite of this, food for thought, if you are trying to keep an open mind. Thanks all.