4 No.

4 No.

42778 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 18 OCTOBER 2019
Government Notices • Goewermentskennisgewings

Energy, Department of/ Energie, Departement van
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
NO. 1359 18 OCTOBER 2019
1359 Electricity Regulation (4/2006): Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019) – October 2019 42778
?>
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)
October 2019
This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

STAATSKOERANT, 18 OKTOBER 2019 No. 42778 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................... 5

GLOSSARY........................................................................................................................................... 6
1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 8
2. THE IRP IN CONTEXT.............................................................................................................. 10
2.1 THE ENERGY MIX ............................................................................................................ 11
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................... 14
2.3 PLANT RETIREMENTS DUE TO END-OF-LIFE .......................................................... 15
2.4 ELECTRICITY TARIFFS ................................................................................................... 15
2.5 WATER ENERGY NEXUS ............................................................................................... 16
2.6 ROLE OF ESKOM ............................................................................................................. 16
2.7 MUNICIPALITIES AND RELATED ISSUES .................................................................. 17
2.7.1 Access .......................................................................................................................... 17
2.7.2 Non-Technical Losses and financial viability ......................................................... 17
2.7.3 Distributed Generation and Smart Grids................................................................. 18
2.8 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................ 18
3. THE IRP PROCESS AND CONSULTATIONS ...................................................................... 19
4. INPUT PARAMETER ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................. 22
4.1 ELECTRICITY DEMAND .................................................................................................. 22
4.1.1 Electricity Demand from 2010–2016 ....................................................................... 22
4.1.2 Electricity Demand Forecast for 2017–2050 .......................................................... 25
4.1.3 Impact of Embedded Generation, Energy Efficiency and Fuel Switching on
Demand 27
4.2 TECHNOLOGY, FUEL AND EXTERNALITY COSTS ................................................. 28
4.2.1 Economic Parameters ............................................................................................... 29
4.2.2 Technology Learning ................................................................................................. 29
4.2.3 Emissions Externality Costs ..................................................................................... 30
4.3 INSTALLED AND COMMITTED CAPACITY ................................................................. 31
4.3.1 Existing Eskom Plant Performance ......................................................................... 32
4.3.2 Existing Eskom Plant Design Life ............................................................................ 32
4.3.3 Compliance with Minimum Emissions Standards (Air Quality Regulations) ..... 34
4.4 CO2 EMISSION CONSTRAINTS ..................................................................................... 34
4.5 TRANSMISSION NETWORK COSTS ............................................................................ 35
Page 1 of 94

6 No. 42778 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 18 OCTOBER 2019
5. IRP UPDATE............................................................................................................................... 36
5.1 OBSERVATIONS FROM THE TEST CASES ............................................................... 37
5.2 EMERGING LONG TERM PLAN (IRP 2019) ................................................................ 39
5.3 POLICY ADJUSTMENT CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................. 40
5.3.1 Immediate Term Security Supply ..................................................................................... 40
5.3.2 Energy Mix and Just Transition ........................................................................................ 41
5.3.3 Wind and PV ....................................................................................................................... 41
5.3.4 Coal ...................................................................................................................................... 42
5.3.5 Gas to Power ...................................................................................................................... 42
5.3.6 Nuclear ................................................................................................................................. 43
5.3.7 Regional Power Projects ................................................................................................... 44
5.3.8 Energy Storage ................................................................................................................... 44
5.3.9 Distributed Generation....................................................................................................... 45
5.3.10 Risk Considerations ........................................................................................................... 45
6. APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 49
6.1 APPENDIX A – INSTALLED CAPACITY, MINISTERIAL DETERMINATIONS AND
DECOMISSIONING SCHEDULE ................................................................................................ 49
6.1.1 Municipal, Private and Eskom Generators ............................................................. 49
6.1.2 Eskom Generators ..................................................................................................... 50
6.1.3 Emission Abatement Retrofit Programme and 50-year Life Decommissioning 51
6.1.4 Projected Eskom Plant Energy Availability Factor ................................................ 51
6.2 APPENDIX B – SUMMARY OF INPUT FROM PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS ................. 52
A. POLICY &PROCESSES .......................................................................................................................... 52
B. DEMAND ............................................................................................................................................ 53
C.MISSING TECHNOLOGIES .................................................................................................................... 55
D. GENERAL............................................................................................................................................ 56
E. COAL .................................................................................................................................................. 57
F. GAS .................................................................................................................................................... 61
G. NUCLEAR ........................................................................................................................................... 64
H. CSP .................................................................................................................................................... 67
I. BATTERY STORAGE .............................................................................................................................. 67
J. EMBEDDED GENERATION/RENEWABLE ENERGY................................................................................. 68
K. HYDRO POWER .................................................................................................................................. 70
L.CLARITY COMMENTS ........................................................................................................................... 70
Page 2 of 94

6.3 APPENDIX C – RESULTS OF TEST CASES ............................................................... 75

6.4 APPENDIX D – SUMMARY OF PUBLISHED DRAFT IRP 2018 ............................... 82
6.4.1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 82
6.4.2. RESULTS OF THE SCENARIOS ............................................................................ 83
6.4.3. CONCLUSIONS FROM ANALYSIS OF THE SCENARIOS................................ 87
6.4.4. DRAFT IRP 2018........................................................................................................ 88
6.4.5. PUBLISHED DRAFT IRP 2018 ELECTRICITY TARIFF PATH COMPARISON
92
Figures
Figure 1: IRP Update Review Process ........................................................................................... 20

Figure 2: Expected GDP Growth from IRP 2010 vs Actual (Sources: Statistics SA &
Promulgated IRP 2010–2030) .......................................................................................................... 23
Figure 3: Expected Electricity Sent-out from IRP 2010–2030 vs Actual (Sources: Statistics
SA & Promulgated IRP 2010–2030)................................................................................................ 23
Figure 4: Electricity Intensity History 1990–2016 (Source: Own Calculations based on
Statistics SA Data) ............................................................................................................................. 24
Figure 5: Expected Electricity Demand Forecast to 2050 ............................................................ 25
Figure 6: Technology Learning Rates ............................................................................................. 30
Figure 7: Cumulative Eskom Coal Generation Plants Decommissioning.................................. 33
Figure 8: Emission Reduction Trajectory (PPD)............................................................................ 35
Tables
Table 1: Published Draft IRP 2018 (Approved by Cabinet for Consultation) .............................. 9
Table 2: Local Emission and PM Costs .......................................................................................... 30
Table 3: CODs for Eskom New Build .............................................................................................. 31
Table 4: Test Case Variable Input Parameters ............................................................................. 36
Table 5: IRP 2019 .............................................................................................................................. 39
Table 6: Projected Eskom Plant Energy Availability Factor......................................................... 51
Page 3 of 94

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CCGE Closed Cycle Gas Engine
CCGT Closed Cycle Gas Turbine
CCS Carbon Capture and Storage
CCUS Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
COD Commercial Operation Date
COUE Cost of Unserved Energy
CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
CSP Concentrating Solar Power
DEA Department of Environmental Affairs
DMRE Department of Mineral Resources and Energy
DSM Demand Side Management
EPRI Electric Power Research Institute
FGD Flue Gas Desulphurization
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GHG Greenhouse Gas
ICE Internal Combustion Engine
GJ Gigajoule
GW Gigawatt (one thousand megawatts)
Hg Mercury
HELE High Efficiency Low Emission
IPP Independent Power Producer
IRP Integrated Resource Plan
kW Kilowatt (one thousandth of a megawatt)
kWh Kilowatt hour
kWp Kilowatt-Peak (for Photo-voltaic options)
Page 4 of 94

LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Mt Mega ton
MW Megawatt
NDP National Development Plan
NERSA National Energy Regulator of South Africa; alternatively the Regulator
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
OCGT Open Cycle Gas Turbine
O&M Operating and Maintenance (cost)
PM Particulate Matter
PPD Peak-Plateau-Decline
PPM Price Path Model
PV Present Value; alternatively Photo-voltaic
RE Renewable Energy
REIPPP Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers Programme
SADC Southern African Development Community
SOx Sulphur Oxides
TW Terawatt (one million megawatts)
TWh Terawatt hour
UCG Underground Coal Gasification
ZIZABONA Zimbabwe, Zambia, Botswana, Namibia transmission project
Page 5 of 94

GLOSSARY
“Capacity factor” refers to the expected output of the plant over a specific time period as a
ratio of the output if the plant operated at full-rated capacity for the same time period.
“Collector Station” refers to the substation that connects various renewable energy
generating plants and or substations together in order to connect these plants to the
Transmission network.
“Cost of unserved energy (COUE)” refers to the opportunity cost to electricity consumers
(and the economy) from electricity supply interruptions.
“Demand side” refers to the demand for, or consumption of, electricity.
“Demand side management (DSM)” refers to interventions to reduce energy consumption.
“Discount rate” refers to the factor used in present value calculations that indicates the time
value of money, thereby equating current and future costs.
“Distributed generation” refers to small-scale technologies to produce electricity close to

the end users of power.
“Energy efficiency” refers to the effective use of energy to produce a given output (in a
production environment) or service (from a consumer point of view), i.e. a more energy-
efficient technology is one that produces the same service or output with less energy input.
“Fixed costs” refer to costs not directly relevant to the production of the generation plant.
“Forced outage rate (FOR)” refers to the percentage of scheduled generating time a unit is
unable to generate because of unplanned outages resulting from mechanical, electrical or
other failure.
“Gross Domestic Product (GDP)” refers to the total value added from all economic activity
in the country, i.e. total value of goods and services produced.
“Integrated Energy Plan” refers to the over-arching, co-ordinated energy plan combining
the constraints and capabilities of alternative energy carriers to meet the country’s energy
needs.
“Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)” refers to the co-ordinated schedule for generation
expansion and demand-side intervention programmes, taking into consideration multiple
criteria to meet electricity demand.
“Lead time” refers to a time period taken to construct an asset from scratch to production of
first unit of energy.
“Learning rates” refer to the fractional reduction in cost for each doubling of cumulative
production or capacity of a specific technology.
“Levelised cost of energy” refers to the discounted total cost of a technology option or
project over its economic life, divided by the total discounted output from the technology option
or project over that same period, i.e. the levelised cost of energy provides an indication of the
discounted average cost relating to a technology option or project.
Page 6 of 94

“Operating and maintenance (O&M) costs” refer to all non-fuel costs such as direct and
indirect costs of labour and supervisory personnel, consumable supplies and equipment and
outside support services. These costs are made up of two components, i.e. fixed costs and
variable costs.
“Overnight capital cost” refers to capital cost (expressed in R/MW) of a construction project
if no interest was incurred during construction, assuming instantaneous construction.
“Peaking plant” refers to energy plants or power stations that have very low capacity factors,
i.e. generally produce energy for limited periods, specifically during peak-demand periods,
with storage that supports energy on demand.
“Present value” refers to the present worth of a stream of expenses appropriately

discounted by the discount rate.
“Reference Case (Base Case)” refers to a starting point intended to enable, by means of
standardization, meaningful comparisons of scenario analysis results based on sets of
assumptions and sets of future circumstances.
“Reserve margin” refers to the excess capacity available to serve load during the annual
peak.
“Scenario” refers to a particular set of assumptions and set of future circumstances providing
a mechanism to observe outcomes from these circumstances.
“Sent-out capacity” refers to electricity output measured at the generating unit outlet terminal
having taken out the power consumed by the unit auxiliaries and losses in transformers
considered integral parts of the unit.
“Sensitivity” refers to the rate of change in the model output relative to a change in inputs,
with sensitivity analysis considering the impact of changes in key assumptions on the model
outputs.
“Strategy” is used synonymously with policy, referring to decisions that, if implemented,

assume that specific objectives will be achieved.
“Supply side” refers to the production, generation or supply of electricity.
“Test case” is a specification of the inputs, execution conditions, testing procedure, and
expected results that define a single test to be executed to achieve a particular testing
objective.
“Variable costs” refer to costs incurred as a result of the production of the generation plant.
Page 7 of 94

1. INTRODUCTION
South Africa’s National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 offers a long-term plan for the
country. It defines a desired destination where inequality and unemployment are
reduced and poverty is eliminated so that all South Africans can attain a decent
standard of living. Electricity is one of the core elements of a decent standard of living.
The NDP envisages that, by 2030, South Africa will have an energy sector that
provides a reliable and efficient energy service at competitive rates, that is socially
equitable through expanded access to energy at affordable tariffs and that is
environmentally sustainable through reduced pollution.
In formulating its vision for the energy sector, the NDP took as a point of reference the
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2010–2030, which was promulgated in March 2011.
The IRP is an electricity infrastructure development plan based on the least-cost
electricity supply and demand balance, taking into account security of supply and the
environment (minimize negative emissions and water usage).
At the time of promulgation, it was envisaged that the IRP would be a “living plan” that
will be revised frequently by the then Department of Energy (DoE).
The promulgated IRP 2010–2030 identified the preferred generation technology

required to meet the expected demand growth up to 2030. It incorporated government
objectives such as affordable electricity, reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
reduced water consumption, diversified electricity generation sources, localisation and
regional development.
Following the promulgation of the IRP 2010–2030, the DoE implemented the IRP,
through Ministerial Determinations, in line with Section 34 of the Electricity Regulation,
2006 (Act No. 4 of 2006). These Ministerial Determinations gave effect to the planned
infrastructure by facilitating the procurement of the required electricity capacity.
Since the promulgated IRP 2010–2030, the following capacity developments have
taken place:
Page 8 of 94

A total 6 422 MW under the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers

Programme (REIPPP) has been procured, with 3 876 MW operational and made
available to the grid.
In addition IPPs have commissioned 1 005 MW from two Open Cycle Gas Turbine
(OCGT) peaking plants.
Under the Eskom build programme, the following capacity has been commissioned: 1
332 MW of Ingula pumped storage, 1 588 MW of Medupi, 800 MW of Kusile and 100
MW of Sere Wind Farm.
In total, 18 000MW of new generation capacity has been committed to.
Besides capacity additions, a number of assumptions have changed since the

promulgation of IRP 2010–2030. Key assumptions that changed include the electricity
demand projection, Eskom’s existing plant performance, as well as new technology
costs.
These changes necessitated the review and update of the IRP which resulted in the
draft IRP 2018 as per the Table below:
Table 1: Published Draft IRP 2018 (Approved by Cabinet for Consultation)

Installed Capacity Mix
TOTAL INSTALLED
39 126 1 860 2 196 2 912 1 474 1 980 300 3 830 499 Unknown
2030
2029
2028
2027
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
( %)
2 155 244 300 200

New Additional Capacity (I RP Update)
Committed / Already Contracted Capacity
Installed Capacity
1 433 114 300 200

1 433 300 818 200
711 400 200
--
-
--_-
-
--_-
--_-
500 200
Coal
33 847
44.6
500 200
670 200 200
-_-
-_-
-_
-_-
-_- __--
-_-
-
1 000 1 500 2 250 200
Nuclear
2.5
200 200
1 860
1 000 1 600 1
1 000 1 600 1 800 200

_
1 000 1 600 2 850 200

Hydro
4 696
6.2
2 500 1 000 1 600 200

-___
-___
s <oraßa
(pumped
Storage
3.8
2 912
PV
10.5
7 958
__
Wind
11 442
15.1
Page 9 of 94
_
_--
CSP
0.9
600
--
-- --
Diesel
Gas /
11 930
15.7

-
-
Landfill)
Biomass,
Other
0.7
49
2. THE IRP IN CONTEXT
The IRP is developed within a particular context, characterized by very fast changes
in energy technologies, and uncertainty with regard to the impact of the technological
changes on the future energy provision system. As we plan for the next decade, this
technological uncertainty is expected to continue and this calls for caution as we make
assumptions about the future in a rapidly changing environment. Accordingly, long-
range assumptions are to be avoided as much as possible, to eliminate the risk that
they might prove to be costly and ill-advised.
At the same time there is recognition that some of the technology options we have to
take, require some level of long-range decisions. We try to harmonize this dichotomy,
especially with regard to nuclear, gas and energy storage technologies, which
technologies require more consideration of future developments.
The South African power system consists of the generation options, which are 38GW
installed capacity from coal, 1.8GW from nuclear, 2.7GW from pumped storage,
1.7GW from hydro, 3.8GW from diesel and 3.7GW from renewable energy. The
electricity generated is transmitted through a network of high-voltage transmission
lines that connect the load centres and Eskom and municipalities distribute the
electricity to various end users. Eskom also supply a number of international
customers, including electricity utilities, within the SADC region.
Energy security in the context of this IRP is defined as South Africa developing
adequate generation capacity to meet its demand for electricity, under both the current
low-growth economic environment and even when the economy turns and improves
to the level of 4% growth per annum. Generation capacity must accordingly be paced
to restore the necessary reserve margin and to be ahead of the economic growth curve
at least possible cost.
Page 10 of 94

2.1 THE ENERGY MIX
South Africa continues to pursue a diversified energy mix that reduces reliance on a
single or a few primary energy sources. The extent of decommissioning of the existing
coal fleet due to end of design life and commitment to reduced emissions post-2030,
could provide space for a completely different energy mix relative to the current mix.
In the period prior to 2030, the system requirements are largely for incremental
capacity addition (modular) and flexible technology, to complement the existing
installed capacity.
Coal: In the foreseeable future and beyond Medupi and Kusile, coal will continue to
play a significant role in the electricity generation in South Africa, as it is the largest
base of the installed generation capacity and it makes up the largest share of energy
generated. Due to the design life of the existing coal fleet and the abundance of coal
resources, new investments will need to be made in more efficient coal technologies
(HELE technology, including supercritical and ultra-supercritical power plants with
CCUS ), to comply with climate and environmental requirements. The position adopted
by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and financial
institutions in regard to financing coal power plants, is a consideration upon which the
support of HELE technology is predicated. This ensures that South African coal still
plays an integral part of the energy mix.
Given significant investments required for CCS and CCUS1 technology, South Africa
could benefit from establishing strategic partnerships with international organisations
and countries that have made advancements in the development of CCS, CCUS and
other HELE technologies.
Nuclear: Koeberg Power Station will reach its end of life in 2024. In order to avoid the
demise of the nuclear power programme, South Africa has made a decision to extend
ts design life and expand the nuclear power programme into the future.
1
Carbon capture, utilisation and storage, or CCUS, is an emissions reduction technology that can be applied in the
industrial sector and in power generation. This technology involves the capture of carbon dioxide (CO2) from fuel
combustion or industrial processes, the transportation of CO2 via a ship or pipeline, and either its use as a resource to
create valuable products or services or its permanent storage deep underground in geological formations. CCUS
technologies also provide the foundation for carbon removal or “negative emissions” when the CO 2 comes from bio-based
processes or directly from the atmosphere. Source: International Energy Agency
Page 11 of 94

In line with power system requirements, additional capacity from any technology
deployed should be done at a scale and pace that flexibly responds to the economy
and associated electricity demand. This should be done in a manner that avoids tariff
shocks to the user.
Within this context, and as it is the case with coal, small nuclear units will be a much
more manageable investment when compared to a fleet approach. The development
of such plants elsewhere in the world is therefore particularly interesting for South
Africa, and upfront planning with regard to additional nuclear capacity is requisite,
given the >10-year lead time, for timely decision making and implementation.
Natural Gas: Gas to power technologies in the form of CCGT, CCGE or ICE provide
the flexibility required to complement renewable energy. While in the short term there
is an opportunity to pursue gas import options, local and regional gas resources will
allow for scaling up within manageable risk levels. Exploration to assess the
magnitude of local recoverable shale and coastal gas are being pursued and must be
accelerated.
There is enormous potential and opportunity in this respect and the Brulpadda gas
resource discovery in the Outeniqua Basin of South Africa, piped natural gas from
Mozambique (Rovuma Basin), indigenous gas like coal-bed methane and ultimately
shale gas, could form a central part of our strategy for regional economic integration
within SADC.
Co-operation with neighbouring countries is being pursued and partnerships are being
developed for joint exploitation and beneficiation of natural gas within the SADC
region. SADC is developing a Regional Gas Master Plan which seeks to identify the
short and long-term infrastructure requirements to enable the uptake of a natural gas
market.
Availability of gas provides an opportunity to convert to CCGT and run open-cycle gas
turbine plants at Ankerlig (Saldanha Bay), Gourikwa (Mossel Bay), Avon (Outside
Durban) and Dedisa (Coega IDZ) on gas.
Renewable Energy: Solar PV, Wind and CSP with storage present an opportunity to
diversify the electricity mix, to produce distributed generation and provide off-grid
Page 12 of 94

electricity. Renewable technologies also present huge potential for the creation of new
industries, job creation and localisation across the value chain.
The Wind Atlas developed for South Africa provides a basis for the quantification of
the potential that wind holds for power generation elsewhere in the country, over and
above the prevalence of the wind resource around the coastal areas. Most wind
projects have been developed in the Western Cape and Eastern Cape, so far.
The generation of electricity and heat (to be supplied for industrial processes), through
biomass and biogas holds huge potential in South Africa, recognizing that such
projects range from small (kW) to larger (MW) scale and could be distributed across
the industrial centres. Biomass from waste, paper and pulp, sugar industries could
even be utilized in co-generation plants and deliver electricity at a price competitive
level with minimal transmission and distribution infrastructure requirements.
When deployed together, the nexus between the biomass and a government-backed
biofuels programmes could improve the economics of the initiatives and create job
opportunities in rural and urban centres.
Hydro: South African rivers carry a potential for run-off river hydro projects. These
have been proven feasible projects with a number of facilities in operation by farming
communities.
With regard to import hydro, South Africa has entered into a Treaty for the
development of the Grand Inga Project in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC),
with some of the power intended for transmission to South Africa across DRC, Zambia,
Zimbabwe and Botswana.
In addition to this clean energy generation option, the regional development drivers
are compelling, especially given that there is very little energy trade between these
countries, due to the lack of infrastructure. The potential for intra-SADC trade is huge
as it could open up economic trade.
Page 13 of 94

Naturally, concerns have to be addressed about the political risk associated with such
projects. South Africa does not intend to import power from one source beyond its
reserve margin, as a mechanism to de-risk the dependency on this generation option.
Energy Storage: There is a complementary relationship between Smart Grid

systems, energy storage, and non-dispatchable renewable energy technologies based
on wind and solar PV. The traditional power delivery model is being disrupted by
technological developments related to energy storage, and more renewable energy
can be harnessed, despite the reality that the timing of its production might be during
low-demand periods. Storage technologies including battery systems, compressed air
energy storage, flywheel energy storage, hydrogen fuel cells etc. are developments
which can address this issue, especially in the South African context where over 6 GW
of renewable energy has been introduced, yet the power system does not have the
requisite storage capacity.
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The energy sector contributes close to 80% towards total emissions of which 50% are
from electricity generation and liquid fuel production. Our vast coal deposits cannot be
sterilized simply because we have not explored technological innovations that could
be deployed to use this resource in an environmentally sensitive manner. The timing
of the transition to a low carbon economy must be in a manner that is socially just and
sensitive to the potential impacts on jobs and local economies. It is in this context that
engagements at global forums such as the G20 refer to “Energy Transitions” and not
“Energy Transition” as a recognition that countries are different and their energy
transition paths will also be different due to varying local conditions.
Carbon capture and storage, underground coal gasification, and other clean coal
technologies are critical considerations that will enable us to continue using our coal
resources in an environmentally responsible manner.
Air quality regulations under the National Environmental Management Act: Air Quality
(Act No. 39 of 2004) provide that coal power plants under Eskom’s fleet, amongst
Page 14 of 94

others, have to meet the minimum emission standard (MES) by a certain time, or they
would be non-compliant and cannot be legally operated.
The timing of the requirement for existing, non-compliant power stations to be

decommissioned, must take into account the need to balance energy security, the
adverse health impacts of poor air quality and the economic cost associated with the
transition.
2.3 PLANT RETIREMENTS DUE TO END-OF-LIFE
Plant closures due to non-compliance with environmental regulations should not be

confused with imminent plant retirements due to the plant having reached their end of
design life. There are a number of Eskom coal plants that will reach end of design life
from year 2019. .
Over and above coal plants reaching end of design life, the nuclear plant (Koeberg
Power Station) reaches its 40-year end of design life in 2024 and plans are already in
place to extend its design life and nuclear safety licence for another 20-years.
2.4 ELECTRICITY TARIFFS
As wholesale and retail electricity tariffs rise, we can expect more electricity users to
look for alternatives like rooftop PV systems (residential) or utility scale PV generation
(mines and other big industrial users) and migrate away from the electricity grid.
More fuel switching is to be expected, particularly in regard to the thermal load (water
heating, cooking and space heating) as electricity tariffs increase and alternatives like
LP Gas become available and cost effective.
Non-technical losses (losses due to electricity theft and other problems that are not
related to grid technicalities) are increasing at municipal level. At a certain point the
willingness to pay (WTP) threshold is breached for more and more municipal
Page 15 of 94

customers, and they either actively pursue alternative sources to meet their energy
demand, or they stop paying for the electricity service.
We can expect the electricity disruptions (driven by load shedding or poor quality of
supply) and high tariffs to drive the WTP threshold even lower.
Requests by industrial and commercial electricity users to deviate from the IRP and to
develop their own generation exemplify the trend. While at this stage it is not
quantified, most residential estates, commercial parks and shopping centres have
installed PV systems to supplement grid supply.
2.5 WATER ENERGY NEXUS
The possibilities of a recurring drought problem in the country cannot be disregarded.

Climatic conditions are changing and over the past 3 years we experienced the worst
drought in 30-years due to the El Nino effect covering 5 provinces. This has
devastating impact on agricultural output and the local economies of the affected
areas.
Coastal areas like Mossel Bay and Cape Town have also suffered from extended
drought, despite their proximity to sea water. Consideration should therefore be given
to deploying energy technologies for purposes of desalination, provided they have low
variable costs that would not render the desalination process unaffordable.
Technologies like wind and solar, or SMR with the requisite heating, are suitable in
this regard.
2.6 ROLE OF ESKOM
Eskom has played a crucial role as the dominant vertically integrated utility at all levels
of the electricity value chain. With the 2019 decision to unbundle Eskom, their role is
expected to change once the generation, transmission and distribution functions are
separated.
Page 16 of 94

Eskom’s role as a Buyer under section 34 of the Electricity Regulation Act will have to
be reviewed, taking the ramifications of its unbundling into account.
Taking into account Eskom’s balance sheet limitations and its generation plants
reaching end of design life in future, a clear strategy must be developed as part of
unbundling to enable Eskom’s participation in the development of new generation
capacity in the IRP.
2.7 MUNICIPALITIES AND RELATED ISSUES
2.7.1 Access
South Africa still has 3-million households without access to grid-based electricity.
Electrification through non-grid connections has been effective in providing lighting
and small power, but it is inappropriate for providing thermal energy for cooking and
space heating. A significant thermal energy load still needs to be provided for, by
providing solutions side by side by with off-grid technologies, particularly in those
areas that are too remote to build grid-based infrastructure. Electricity is not efficient
carrier for meeting the thermal load related to cooking, space and water heating.
The cost of providing a grid connection has increased as the areas being serviced
become more remote. There is therefore a need to quantify the off-grid and micro-grid
opportunity and put in place the necessary frameworks for accelerated development.
2.7.2 Non-Technical Losses and financial viability
Most municipalities struggle to keep up with the payment for bulk electricity purchases
from Eskom, and as at March 2018 Eskom’s Chairman indicated that the debt burden
stood at over R13.5 billion and continued to rise. The fiscal framework for some
municipalities (particularly the rural ones) is unviable, posing a serious risk to their
financial sustainability.
Page 17 of 94

The non-payment of electricity, including the theft of distribution infrastructure (copper

and cables) and poor credit control systems, needs urgent attention. The Department
of Co-operative Government and Traditional Affairs leads an initiative to support
municipalities to turn this around.
2.7.3 Distributed Generation and Smart Grids
Distributed generation through biomass, biogas and municipal waste are areas holding
great potential for improving municipal revenues. All municipalities have sites for
processing waste; they also have sewer outfall sites. Technologies are available for
these resources to be added to the generation mix at sub-utility scale. Most small scale
generation technologies have low capacity factors, meaning that typically the power is
not generated throughout the day and night. For a balanced and safe interconnected
power system to be operated sustainably, the intermittent power generators have to
be integrated and controlled through smart technologies.
The IRP already makes provision for distributed generation. This is intended to allow
for power generation embedded within municipal distribution networks and therefore
diversify their supply base.
2.8 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Research and development should focus on innovative solutions, in particular on those

technologies that have the greatest potential to address electricity challenges for
energy consumers in a short timeframe.
It is inevitable that more and more, the traditional energy delivery system will not be
insulated from technological disruptions. The fear about job losses emanating from
artificial intelligence, should be regarded as an opportunity to prepare the youth for the
job of the future.
Page 18 of 94

Solar energy has the potential to address the need for energy access in remote areas,
create jobs and increase localisation.
More funding should be targeted at long-term research into clean coal technologies
such as CCUS and UCG as these will be essential in ensuring that South Africa
continues to exploit its vast, indigenous minerals responsibly and sustainably.
Exploration to determine the extent of recoverable shale gas should be pursued and
this needs to be supported by an enabling legal and regulatory framework.
South Africa’s specific focus on the hydrogen economy and the progress achieved by
the hydrogen initiative (or Hy-Sa) based at the University of the Western Cape, should
be supported with more research and the chance for practical application within the
power system.
Over and above these issues, the research agenda for South Africa’s power system
needs to be expanded on the basis of the clear evidence of a changing energy
paradigm.
3. THE IRP PROCESS AND CONSULTATIONS
The IRP update process undertaken is depicted in Figure 1 below. The update process
started with the development and compilation of input assumptions. Following public
consultations on the assumptions, various supply and demand balancing scenarios
were modelled, simulated and analysed; this process culminated in the production of
the draft IRP 2018. In August 2018 and following Cabinet approval, the Draft IRP 2018
report was published for public comment for a period of 60 days.
Page 19 of 94

POLICY
ASSUMPTIONS AND PRELIMINARY DRAFT IRP 2018 ADJUSTED
BASECASE IRP
Assumptions Scenarios Tested Test Cases

Demand Medium Growth) Reference Draft IRP 2018
Existing Plant se) recommended plan
Performance Low Growth Eskom compliance with
Technology Costs High Growth MES
Technology Parameters No RE Annual Build Limit Eskom non -compliance
New Commissioned Carbon budget with MES
PUBLIC COMMENTS hikL
Plants Market Linked Gas Price Eskom granted extension
Oct 2018 and Nov 2018
Decommissioned Plants Carbon Budget plus Market to comply
8
Other Considerations Linked Gas Price Koeberg 2024 end of Life
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS NEDLAC CONSULTATIONS
Limited Gas to Power by
(Dec 2016 to Mar 2017) 2030
Main Changes
Main Changes Demand Assumptions
Demand Battery Storage costs
Renewable energy costs Pumped storage costs Power
Power Power Hydro costs
Exchange rate System
System System Eskom Plant Performance Modelling.
Modelling, Modelling. Simulation,
Simulation Simulation Analysis
and Analysis and Analysis And Policy
Choices
Assumptions Policy Adjusted

Draft IRP 2018
and Preliminary IRP 2019 Report
Report
Basecase
Figure 1: IRP Update Review Process
As with the consultations on the IRP assumptions and the preliminary base case,
submissions from the public regarding the draft IRP 2018 public varied from opinion
statements to substantive inputs with supporting data. The number of submissions
received was 5 929, of which 242 were substantive comments inclusive of discussions
and at times supporting facts, data or references.
The public mostly welcomed the recommended least-cost electricity supply plan while
advocating for the energy mix in line with the NDP and the IRP 2010–2030.
Key issues raised in the comments included among others, the assumptions regarding
demand forecast; a substantial number of the comments questioned the projected
growth in demand in the context of declining electricity intensity, low economic growth
projections and increasing own generation installations made possible by alternative
energy technology advancements. Some submissions made the case for a higher
demand projection arguing that demand is supressed by limited generation capacity
and that the availability of excess capacity will unlock investment and therefore lead
to electricity demand increase.
Page 20 of 94

Cost assumptions for some of the technologies were questioned. While some of the
submissions provided alternative costs, the information was project specific and
therefore not representative of costs for similar projects or technologies. Where
information received was representative of costs from similar projects and
technologies, this information was adopted and necessary updates were effected.
Concerns and risks were also raised about the capacity provided for and practicality
of gas to power in the recommended plan and the risks it poses since South Africa
does not currently have adequate gas infrastructure.
As part of the comments process, Eskom submitted revised system availability

projections, a revised end of design life (plant shutdown) schedule and a schedule
indicating their planned compliance with minimum emissions standards as included in
Appendix A. Eskom’s existing generation plant dominates installed generation
capacity. The current and future performance of these generation plants is critical for
security of supply and heavily influences the planned capacity in the IRP.
Concerning the recommended published draft IRP 2018, key issues raised include,
the extent of the energy mix, the exclusion of new nuclear capacity before year 2030
and deviation from the IRP 2010-2030. Concerns were also raised about the practical
implementation aspects and the risks associated with gas to power, taking into
account the extent of the capacity recommended in the plan.
The inclusion of coal and hydropower capacity through policy adjustment was
criticised on the basis of being a deviation from the least cost path. The inclusion of
coal was also specifically criticised on the basis of its contribution to emissions and
negative impact on the health of communities where the plants will be located.
The annual allocation for distributed generation (for projects between 1MW and
10MW) was said to be too low and the proposal was that it should be increased to take
into account the requests for deviation from the IRP already received by the
Department of Mineral Resources and Energy.
These comments have been considered and the details are included as part of the
summary report on comments and how they are treated (see Appendix B).
Page 21 of 94

The next section details the key assumptions after taking into consideration inputs
from the public.
4. INPUT PARAMETER ASSUMPTIONS
The assumptions for the recommended plan in this report take into account comments
from the public consultation process undertaken between September 2018 and
November 20182 as already outlined.
4.1 ELECTRICITY DEMAND
Electricity demand as projected in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030 did not materialise
due to a number of factors which resulted in lower demand. These include, among
others, lower economic growth; improved energy efficiency by large consumers to
cushion against rising tariffs; fuel switching to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) for
cooking and heating; fuel switching for hot water heating by households; and the
closing down or relocation to other countries of some of the energy intensive industry.
4.1.1 Electricity Demand from 2010–2016
Reported Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the period 2010–2016 was significantly
lower than the GDP projections assumed in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030. This is
depicted in Figure 2.
The compound average growth rate for the years 2010 to 2016 was 2,05%. This lower
GDP growth compared with the expectations in 2010 had an impact on the resulting
electricity demand as depicted in Figure 3.
2
The consultations and inputs from NEDLAC were incorporated in August 2019.
Page 22 of 94

3600
Expected GDP IRP 2010
3400 ---S-- Actual GDP
3200
3000
2800
2 600
2400
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Figure 2: Expected GDP Growth from IRP 2010 vs Actual (Sources: Statistics SA &
Promulgated IRP 2010–2030)
8ó8ó888óóó8
W LOW
Net sentout in South Africa (TWhj
NNCO
NNW
NJ
IV
4
I
0
W
0
0
CC
C1
J
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
A
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
F1
VI
Figure 3: Expected Electricity Sent-out from IRP 2010–2030 vs Actual (Sources: Statistics SA &
Promulgated IRP 2010–2030)
The actual net electricity energy sent-out for the country declined at an average
compound rate of -0,6% over the past years. That was in stark contrast with the
expectation of an average growth rate of 3,0% in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030.
The result was that the actual net sent-out electricity in 2016 was at 244TWh in
comparison with the expected 296TWh (18% difference).
The underlying causes of the reduced electricity demand were many-sided, including:
 General economic conditions as shown in Figure 2 above, which specifically

impacted energy-intensive sectors negatively.
Page 23 of 94

 The constraints imposed by the supply situation between 2011 and 2015 with the
strong potential for suppressed demand by both industrial and domestic
consumers. It was expected that suppressed demand would return once the
supply situation had been resolved, but factors attributed to electricity pricing and
commodity price issues might have delayed, or permanently removed, that
potential.
 Improved energy efficiency, partly as a response to the electricity price increases.
 Increasing embedded generation. There is evidence of growing rooftop PV
installations. Current installed capacity is still very small, however this is likely to
increase in the medium to long term.
 Fuel switching from electricity to LPG for cooking and space heating.
Further analysis of the historic electricity intensity trend indicated that electricity
intensity also continued to decline over the past years, exceeding the decline
expectation in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030 forecast. See Figure 4 below.
Figure 4 also points to possible decoupling of GDP growth from electricity intensity,
which generally indicates a change in the structure of the economy.
0.125 170
0.120
0.115
X.'"
,x-'.
x x x
.x 160
150
ii
0.110
`f 140
r-I
i
xt
0.105 130 0
0
0
Xo
0.100
0.095
e 120
110
(-4
axi
0.090
-- .. 100
.X
Electricity Intensity Ohs)
4$;:x_x rc r,nP ioriPx (ncc)
0.085 90
___ Eletricity sent-out index (rhs)
0.080 80
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Figure 4: Electricity Intensity History 1990–2016 (Source: Own Calculations based on Statistics
SA Data)
The expected electricity demand as forecasted in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030 did
therefore not materialise and the forecast was updated accordingly to reflect this.
Page 24 of 94

4.1.2 Electricity Demand Forecast for 2017–2050
The electricity demand forecast was developed using statistical models. The models
are data-driven and based on historical quantitative patterns and relationships.
Historical data on electricity consumption was key and information in this regard was
obtained from various sources in the public domain. Overall consistency between
sources was maintained by ensuring sector breakdowns corresponded with totals from
Statistics SA data.
Using regression models per sector, sector forecasts were developed using sourced
data. Sectoral totals were aggregated and adjusted for losses to obtain total forecasted
values. Adjustments were also made to account for electricity energy imports and
exports.
Figure 5 below depicts the total energy demand forecast as contained in the demand
forecast report but adjusted to reflect the lower actual year-2018 demand as a starting
point. The 2018 actual recorded demand is about a 3 percent lower than what was
assumed in the draft IRP 2018.
Expected Deman/Net Sent-Out (TWh)
0
W
W
0
N
0
N
v 2034 _
_
20441
2018
2020
2024
2026
2028
2030
2036
2038
2040
2046
2048
2050
2022
2032
2042
<
,
Figure 5: Expected Electricity Demand Forecast to 2050
Page 25 of 94

The upper forecast3 is based on an average 3.18% annual GDP growth, but assumed
the current economic sectoral structure remained. This forecast resulted in an average
annual electricity demand growth of 2.0% by 2030 and 1.66% by 2050.
The median forecast4 is based on an average 4.26% annual GDP growth by 2030, but
with significant change in the structure of the economy. This forecast resulted in an
average annual electricity demand growth of 1.8% by 2030 and 1.4% by 2050. The
median forecast electricity intensity dropped extensively over the study period (from
the current 0.088 to 0.04 in 2050). That reflects the impact of the assumed change in
the structure of the economy where energy-intensive industries make way for less
intensive industries. The resultant electricity forecasts were such that, even though the
median forecast reflected higher average GDP growth than the upper forecast, the
average electricity growth forecast associated with the upper forecast was relatively
lower than the average electricity growth forecast for the median forecast.
The lower forecast5 had a 1.33% GDP growth to 2030, which resulted in a 1.21%
average annual electricity demand growth by 2030 and 1.24% by 2050. The lower
forecast assumed electricity intensity initially increased before dropping all the way to
2050. In developing the forecast, the main assumption was that mining output would
continue to grow while other sectors of the economy would suffer as a result of low
investment. This scenario was developed when the country faced possible
downgrading decisions by the rating agencies.
A detailed demand forecast assumptions report, including electricity intensity, can be

downloaded from the DMRE website (http://www.energy.gov.za/files/irp_frame.html).
Comments on the limitations of the forecasting methodology based on historical
relationships as used in this IRP have been noted and will be considered for future
enhancement of the forecast for IRP updates.
3
The moderate forecast in its detailed forecast report.
4
The high less intense forecast in its detailed forecast report.
5
The junk status forecast in its detailed forecast report
Page 26 of 94

4.1.3 Impact of Embedded Generation, Energy Efficiency and Fuel Switching

on Demand
With the changing electricity landscape and advancements in technology, there is an

increasing number of own-generation facilities in the form of rooftop PV installations
in households. There is also an increasing number of commercial and industrial
facilities that are installing PV systems to supplement electricity from the grid.
High electricity prices, as well as technological advancements (improved equipment

efficiency), are resulting in increased energy efficiency among consumers.
Equally, there is an increasing use of LPG for cooking and space heating that will
impact both energy (kWh) and peak demand (kW). In line with municipal bylaws and
building codes, new housing developments are installing solar water heaters in the
place of full electric geysers. Voluntarily, consumers are also increasingly replacing
electric geysers with solar water heaters to reduce their electricity bills.
These developments impact on overall electricity demand and intensity and must
therefore be considered when projecting future demand and supply of electricity.
Due to the limited data at present and for the purpose of this IRP Update, these
developments were not simulated as standalone scenarios, but considered to be
covered in the low-demand scenario. The assumption was that the impact of these
would be lower demand in relation to the median forecast demand projection hence
the projected capacity was not discounted from the forecast.
Page 27 of 94

4.2 TECHNOLOGY, FUEL AND EXTERNALITY COSTS

The IRP analyses mainly entailed balancing supply and demand at least-possible cost.
Costs of technology, fuel and externalities6 were therefore major input assumptions
during option analyses.
As part of the development of the promulgated IRP 2010–2030, the DMRE, through
Eskom, engaged the Electric Power Research Institute7 (EPRI) in 2010 and 2012 to
provide technology data for new power plants that would be included in the IRP. That
resulted in an EPRI report, which was revised in 2015, taking into account technical
updates of the cost and performance of technologies, market-factor influences and
additional technology cases.
Following the public consultations on the assumptions, the EPRI report was updated
to reflect the costs based on the January 2017 ZAR/US dollar exchange rate. The
2015 baseline cost for each technology was adjusted to January 2017 US dollar, using
an annual escalation rate of 2.5%. The baseline costs were then converted to ZAR,
based on the currency exchange rate on 01 January 2017.
The EPRI report incorporates cost and performance data for a number of power-
generation technologies applicable to South African conditions and environment. It
presents the capital costs; operating and maintenance (O&M) costs; and performance
data, as well as a comprehensive discussion and description of each technology.
A detailed EPRI technology cost assumptions report can be downloaded from the
DMRE website (http://www.energy.gov.za/files/irp_frame.html).
While EPRI provided costs for PV and Wind, the costs adopted in the plan for these
technologies were from the South African REIPPP. The nuclear technology costs are
based on the DMRE-commissioned study (referred to as the Ingerop study). The study
expanded the analysis by EPRI to include a technology cost analysis from projects in
6
In economics, an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or
benefit.
7
EPRI is an independent, non-profit organization that conducts research and development related to the
generation, delivery and use of electricity to help address challenges in electricity, including reliability, efficiency,
affordability, health, safety and the environment.
Page 28 of 94

the East (Asia). A copy of the Ingerop Report can be downloaded from the DMRE
website (http://www.energy.gov.za/files/irp_frame.html).
Information on combined cycle gas engine cost is based on inputs obtained during the
public consultations process. This can be can be downloaded from the DMRE website
(http://www.energy.gov.za/files/irp_frame.html).
4.2.1 Economic Parameters
For economic parameters, the following assumptions are applied:
 Exchange rate as at the beginning of January 2017, which was R13.57 to $1

(USD);
 the social discount rate of 8.2% net, real and post-tax as calculated by National
Treasury; and
 the COUE of R87.85/kWh as per the National Energy Regulator of South Africa
(NERSA) study.
4.2.2 Technology Learning
Learning rates used in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030 are maintained in the IRP
update, with PV and wind technology learning rates adjusted to reflect the decline in
prices experienced in South Africa already. Battery learning rates are obtained from
the Lazard’s Levelized Cost Of Storage Analysis—Version 3.0.
Page 29 of 94

Technology Learning Rates
0.45
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2029 2024 2026 2027 2026 2029 2030
CSG TOw __ PVTacking NUClear

TEAR
-Wind Learning -05P Para_gbr -05P Para_66r -05P Para_abr

-PVFxed
-CoalwS
o CL_9nr-CS Tow
.gatt y
_6M1r
Figure 6: Technology Learning Rates
4.2.3 Emissions Externality Costs
With regard to externality costs associated with emissions, the IRP update considers
the negative externalities-related air pollution caused by pollutants such as nitrogen
oxides (NOx), sulphur oxides (SOx), particulate matter (PM) and mercury (Hg). These
externality costs reflect the cost to society because of the activities of a third party
resulting in social, health, environmental, degradation or other costs.
For all these externalities the cost-of-damage approach was used to estimate the
externality costs. The overall cost to society is defined as the sum of the imputed
monetary value of costs to all parties involved. The costs are indicated Table 2. The
costs associated with carbon dioxide (CO2) are not included as the CO2 emissions
constraint imposed already indirectly imposes the penalties or additional costs. The
technical model achieves this by applying the CO2 constraints and choosing cleaner
electricity generation options even if they are options that are more expensive.
Table 2: Local Emission and PM Costs
NOx (R/kg) SOx (R/kg) Hg (Rm/kt) PM (R/kg)

2015–2050 4.455 7.6 0.041 11.318
Page 30 of 94

4.3 INSTALLED AND COMMITTED CAPACITY
Installed capacity assumed in the IRP Update includes both Eskom and private
generation (generation for own use and municipal generation) as filed and licensed
with NERSA.
A list of Eskom and private and municipal generators, as licensed with NERSA, is
included in Appendix A.
In line with the planned capacity in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030 and in accordance
with Section 34 of the Electricity Regulation Act No. 4 of 2006, the Minister of Energy
has, to date, determined that 39 730 MW of new generation capacity must be
developed.
Of the 39 730 MW determined, about 18 000 MW has been committed8 to date. This
new capacity is made up of 6 422 MW under the REIPPP with a total of 3 876 MW
operational on the grid. Under the committed Eskom build, the following capacity has
been commissioned: 1 332 MW of Ingula pumped storage, 2 382 MW of Medupi (out
of the 4 800 MW planned), 800 MW of Kusile (out of the 4 800 MW planned) and 100
MW of Sere Wind Farm. 1 005 MW from OCGT for peaking has also been
commissioned.
For the IRP Update analysis, the remaining units at Medupi and Kusile were assumed
to come on line as indicated in Table 3: CODs for Eskom New Build
Table 3: CODs for Eskom New Build
Medupi Kusile
Unit 6 Commercial operation Unit 1 Commercial operation
Unit 5 Commercial operation Unit 2 April 2019
8
Committed refers to the capacity commissioned or procured and officially announced by the Minister of
Energy.
Page 31 of 94

Unit 4 Commercial operation Unit 3 January 2020

Unit 3 June 2019 Unit 4 January 2021
Unit 2 June 2019 Unit 5 September 2021
Unit 1 December 2019 Unit 6 July 2022
4.3.1 Existing Eskom Plant Performance
The existing Eskom’s generation plant energy availability factor (EAF) was assumed
to be averaging 86% in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030. The actual EAF at the time
was averaging 85%. Since then, Eskom’s EAF declined steadily to a low average of
71% in the 2015/16 financial year before recovering to average around 77.% in the
2016/17 financial year. Information as at January 2018 indicates that EAF has
regressed further to levels below 70%. This low EAF was the reason for constrained
capacity early in December 2018 and January 2019 that resulted in load shedding.
Eskom’s existing generation plant will still dominate the South African electricity
installed capacity for the foreseeable future. The current and future performance of
these Eskom plants is critical for security of supply and heavily influences the capacity
planned to be introduced under the IRP.
As part of the comments process on the draft IRP 2018, Eskom submitted revised
system availability projections per power station. The submission contains two
scenarios of which scenario 1 and scenario 2 project an average EAF of 80% by 2030
and 75% by 2030, respectively.
Plant performance projections in the final plan contained in this report are based on
the scenario with EAF of 75% by 2030. In this scenario, EAF starts at 71% in year
2020, and increases to 75.5% by year 2025 and beyond (see Appendix A).
4.3.2 Existing Eskom Plant Design Life
Existing generation plant life is a major consideration in the IRP as it will affect supply
and demand balance. The IRP considers both Eskom and non-Eskom plants
(municipal and large private sector plants) in this regard.
Page 32 of 94

Eskom coal plants were designed and built for a 50-year life, which falls within the
2050 study period of the IRP 2018 update.
Eskom has also submitted a revised plant end of design life (decommissioning) plan.
This submission brings forward the shutdown of some units at Grootvlei, Komati and
Hendrina.
Figure 7 shows that about 5 400 MW of electricity from coal generation by Eskom will
be decommissioned by year 2022, increasing to 10 500 MW by 2030 and 35 000 MW
by 2050. The revised decommissioning schedule is attached in Appendix A.
TOTAL CUMMULATIVE DECOMISSIONING (MW)

40000
35000
see 3e'
see
woos
30000
25000
3.0000
s °
ïÍllll 21186
° 5 A A
Figure 7: Cumulative Eskom Coal Generation Plants Decommissioning

AA g
1
s A °
The socio economic impact of the decommissioning of these Eskom plants has not
been quantified or included in this IRP.
It is also expected that by year 2024, 1 800 MW of nuclear power generation (Koeberg)
will reach end-of-life. Eskom has initiated preparations and processes to extend the
life of this plant to 2044, subject to the necessary regulatory approvals. In light of the
projected lower EAF for Eskom coal power plants, the IRP plan is based on the
assumption that Koeberg plant life would be extended to 2044.
Page 33 of 94

Mitigation of the risks associated with the adopted assumption is included in the risk
section of this report.
4.3.3 Compliance with Minimum Emissions Standards (Air Quality Regulations)
A number of Eskom power plants (Majuba, Tutuka, Duvha, Matla, Kriel and Grootvlei)
have been retrofitted with emission abatement technology to ensure compliance with
the law (viz. National Environmental Management Act: Air Quality, 2004 or NEMA).
In 2014 Eskom applied for postponement of the date for compliance and permission
in this regard was granted for a period not exceeding 5 years. To date, Grootvlei is the
only station that has been brought to compliance and this failure to undertake
abatement retrofits is likely to result in non-compliant plants becoming unavailable for
production from year 2020, unless further postponement is granted. Eskom is in the
process of applying for further postponement in line the provisions of the law.
In light of projected lower EAF, the assumption adopted in the IRP is that NEMA-
affected Eskom coal plant will remain available for production.
4.4 CO2 EMISSION CONSTRAINTS
In line with South Africa’s commitment to reduce emissions, the promulgated IRP
2010–2030 imposed CO2 emission limits on the electricity generation plan. IRP 2010-
2030 assumed that emissions would peak between 2020 and 2025 as Medupi and
Kusile are brought on line, then plateau for approximately a decade and decline in
absolute terms thereafter as old coal-fired power plants are decommissioned.
Figure 8 shows the emission reduction trajectory (referred to as the peak-plateau-

decline (PPD)) for electricity generation adopted in the promulgated IRP 2010–2030.
Page 34 of 94

Tr'
3C0
100
200
SO
Total Annual OHO Emissions Limit

Figure 8: Emission Reduction Trajectory (PPD)
While PPD was applied as the primary assumption, a scenario was tested as part of
the draft IRP 2018 where the carbon budget approach was used for emission
constraints. A carbon budget is defined as a tolerable quantity of carbon dioxide
emissions that can be emitted in total over a specified time. The scenario was based
on carbon budget targets divided into 10-year intervals which meant a total emission
reduction budget for the entire electricity sector up to 2050 must be 5 470 Mt CO2
cumulatively.
4.5 TRANSMISSION NETWORK COSTS
The IRP update takes into account the costs of the transmission networks associated
with the energy mix.
The transmission network costs have been incorporated by including the estimated,
direct transmission infrastructure costs, including collector station and substation costs
in the total overnight generation technology costs. The costing was based on a high-
level estimate from recent Eskom average costs for transmission infrastructure.
For renewable energy technologies (like wind and solar PV), the transmission
infrastructure costs entailed collector stations and the associated lines connecting to
Page 35 of 94

the main transmission substation, as well as the transmission substation costs. For
conventional technologies, the costs entailed only the main transmission substation
costs. Imported hydro and CSP transmission costs were treated the same as
conventional technology costs.
The transmission infrastructure costs considered different capacity increments or

penetration per technology in different parts of the country. Transmission corridor
costs and ancillary costs required for network stability, particularly inertia, were not
included as these are not directly associated with any technology but are part of
strengthening the transmission backbone. A detailed transmission network costs
report can be downloaded from the DMRE website
(http://www.energy.gov.za/files/irp_frame.html).
5. IRP UPDATE
Inputs from the public and the consideration of all the comments necessitated the
updating of planning assumptions, including updated information from Eskom.
Modelling work, simulation and analysis of a further set of test cases was completed
on the basis of this updated input data. The test cases were developed to assess the
following:
 impact of the changed assumptions on the draft 2018 recommended plan,
 the impact of plants shutting down in case of non-compliance with minimum
emissions standards (MES),
 the impact of Koeberg plant shutting down in 2024 if its design life is not extended,
 the impact of the removal of the policy adjustments adopted in draft IRP 2018, and
 realistic assumptions for gas to power capacity by year 2030.
The details of input parameters for respective test cases are contained in Table 4.
Table 4: Test Case Variable Input Parameters
Page 36 of 94

Reference Case Test Case 2 Test Case 3 Test Case 4 Test Case S Test Case 6
Updated EAF Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Early shutdown Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Actual 2018 energy & demand Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
RE Annual Limit Yes Yes Yes Yes Ves Yes Yes
MES No MES MES 1 MES 2 No MES MES 2 No MES No MES
Treatment of Inga & IPP Coal Forced Forced Forced Forced Optimised Forced Forced
Koeberg life (Years) 60 60 60 40 40 60 60

Gas volumes Restrictions No No No No No Yes Yes
Reference case refers to recommended draft IRP 2018
For implications of MES on Eskom installed capacity, see Appendix C
Test case 6 also adjust down lead times for wind projects from 48 months to 36 months
5.1 OBSERVATIONS FROM THE TEST CASES
The analysis of the results from the simulation of test cases shows (Appendix C) that
in addition to a need for additional capacity in the long-term, there is an immediate risk
of energy shortage in the immediate term.
 Immediate term
o Power system simulations show that due to the low EAF of Eskom’s generation
plants and the early shutdown of non-performing units (Grootvlei, Komati and
Hendrina), there is an immediate risk of huge power shortages. This is likely to
result in Eskom running diesel peaking plant for an extended duration, or
manifesting in load shedding to avoid high expenditure on diesel. It is also clear
that there are inadequate capacity reserves in the event of emergency plant
breakdowns in the immediate term.
o This risk plus the associated energy shortages gets worse when considering
the non-compliance status of some Eskom plants vis a vis NEMA. Eskom is
also unlikely to meet the deadline for compliance (postponements granted in
year 2015) with MES due to constrained finances and project execution delays.
Assuming that non-compliant power plants are shut down, the reality of power
disruptions manifests significantly from year 2019 onwards.
Page 37 of 94

o Medupi and Kusile are now de-rated at below name-plate rating, meaning that
these plants are unable to provide the full complement of energy for their rating.
It must be noted that this energy shortage occurs notwithstanding the already
committed capacity from renewable energy projects and the commissioning of
the remaining units at Medupi and Kusile. Continued underperformance and
late commissioning by Medupi and Kusile units will exacerbate the load
shedding risk.
o Simulations also indicate that shutting down Koeberg in 2024 in line with its 40-
year end of design life of plant worsens the situation.
The recently experienced load shedding as well frequent alerts of possible shortages
corroborate the observations from the power system simulations.
While the purpose of the IRP is to balance supply and demand on a least-cost basis,
implementation lead times for various generation technologies limit the options
available for deployment immediately and in the short term.
Simulations indicate that the option available to Eskom is to run diesel-fired peaking
plant at load factors averaging about 30% for the period 2019 to 2021. Running these
plants at higher than contracted load factors creates logistical challenges as there is
insufficient infrastructure to support the volumes of diesel required under these
circumstances. This arrangement will also worsen the already delicate Eskom financial
situation. In addition, electricity users will suffer high tariff increases.
The results from the simulation also show that in the long term, the system uses the
combination of renewable energy, gas and storage to meet demand.
The following specific observations are made with regard to the long-term:
 Long Term
o The system only builds renewables (wind and PV) and gas if unlimited
renewable and gas resources are assumed.
o Despite decommissioning of old power plants and preference by the power
system for renewables and gas, coal remains dominant in the energy mix for
the planning period up to year 2030.
Page 38 of 94

o The removal of annual build limits on renewables results in large erratic annual
capacity allocations in the plan.
o When annual build limits on renewables are imposed and realistic gas
availability assumptions are applied, the system builds battery storage and coal
to close the gap.
o Imposing annual build limits on renewables for the period up to 2030 does not
affect the capacity from wind or solar PV in any significant way.
5.2 EMERGING LONG TERM PLAN (IRP 2019)
Following the observations from the analysis of technical simulations and the adoption
of the positions discussed earlier (continued operation of plants affected by MES,
Koeberg power station design life extended beyond year 2024, imposing annual build
limits on renewables, diesel fired peaking plants operating at high load factor), the
following plan emerges.
Table 5: IRP 2019

% Total Installed Capacity (%
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPACITY by

-
Contribution (96 of MWh)

Short term capacity gap is estimated at 2000 MW
within the same property with the facility
Other / Distributed generation includes all generation facilities in circumstances in which the facility is operated solely to supply electricity to an end -use custo
Koeberg power station rated / installed capacity will revert to 1926 MW (original design capacity)following design life extension work.
2030 Coal Installed Capacity is less capacity decommissioned between years 2020 and 2030
%Annual Energy
Current Base
2030(MW)
of MW)
2030
2029
2028
2027
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
Includes Distributed Generation Capacity for own use
Committed / Already Contracted Capacity

Installed Capacity
Extension of Koeberg Plant Design Life
New Additional Capacity
Capacity Decommissioned
37149 1860 2100 291 1 474 1 980 300 3 830 499
2 155 -23 244 300

Allocation to
1433 -557 114 300 the ex-tentof
the shod tare
1 433 -1403 300 opacity Pd
energy PP.
M=
-------
711 -844 400 600
1000 1600 500
Coal
1860 1600 1000 500

1000 1600 500
-1219 1600 SOO
33364
58.13
(Decommissioning)
43
-847 1 600 2000 500

-475 1000 1 600 SOO
Coal
-1694 1000 1600 SOO
-1050 2 500 1000 1 600

--
-
-
---
Nuclear
1860
2.36
4.5
--
--
--
--
---
Hydro
4600
5.84
8.4
Storage
5000
6.35
1.2.
PV
10.52
8288
6.3
17742
Wind
22.53
Page 39 of 94
17.8
--
CSP
0.76
600
0.6
Diesel

6380
1.3
8.1
(Distr
Gene
Biom
Lan
Co
O
5.3 POLICY ADJUSTMENT CONSIDERATIONS
After due consideration of the modelling and simulation outcomes, and taking into
account the plan under Table 5 above, the following decisions were adopted for
practical implementation of the IRP.
5.3.1 Immediate Term Security Supply
In the short-term supply and demand side interventions will have to be deployed to
minimise the risk of load shedding and/or extensive usage of diesel peaking plant. The
short-term gap in this regard is estimated to be about 2 000 MW. A medium-term
power purchase programme (MTPPP) similar to that adopted following the IRP 2010
must be considered with the goal of avoiding extensive diesel usage and load
shedding. Development of generation for own use must also be encouraged through
the enactment of policies and regulations that eliminate red tape without compromising
security of supply.
Policy Position 1: Immediately initiate a medium-term power purchase programme

to assist with creating reserve capacity needed to complement Eskom’s declining plant
performance and to reduce the utilisation of diesel generators.
Taking into account supply and demand balance and the impact of load shedding on
the economy, shutting down of MES non-compliant power plants and Koeberg power
station in 2024 (at the end of its design life) are not recommended. Koeberg is one of
the best performing power plants with a low operational cost (it is fully depreciated).
Policy Position 2: Koeberg power plant design life must be extended by another 20
years by immediately undertaking the necessary technical and regulatory work.
Page 40 of 94

Policy Position 3: Support Eskom financially and legally to comply with MES over
time, taking into account the energy security imperative and the risk of adverse
economic impact.
5.3.2 Energy Mix and Just Transition
Due to the expected decommissioning of approximately 24 100 MW of coal power

plants in the period beyond 2030 to 2050, attention must be given to the path adopted
to give effect to the energy mix and the preparation work necessary to execute the
retirement and replacement of these plants. In order to ensure a socially just transition,
the engagement process must commence to put in place the plans and interventions
that mitigate against adverse impacts of the plant retirement programme on people
and local economies. This plan will then inform the next iteration of the IRP update.
Policy Position 4: Convene a team to put together a “just transition” plan within a
year, in consultation with all social partners.
5.3.3 Wind and PV
As already stated under modelling observations, the application of annual build limits
on renewables does not significantly impact the projected capacity up to the year 2030.
The application of renewable build limits “smoothes out” the capacity allocations for
wind and solar PV which provides a constant pipeline of projects for investment; this
addresses investor confidence.
In the long run and taking into account the policy of a diversified energy mix, the annual
build limits will have to be reviewed in line with demand and supply requirement.
Policy Position 5: Retain the current annual build limits on renewables (wind and PV)
pending the report on a just transition.
Page 41 of 94

5.3.4 Coal
HELE coal technologies including underground coal gasification, integrated

gasification combined cycle, carbon capture utilization and storage, ultra-supercritical,
super-critical and similar technologies are preferred for the exploitation of our coal
resources. Due consideration must be given to the financing constraints imposed by
lenders and the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
countries, insofar as coal power plant development.
Due consideration must also be given to the pace and scale of the coal-to-power
programme taking into account the lessons from Medupi and Kusile mega projects.
Procurement under the IPP programme has shown that there is a business case for
modular and smaller power plants (300MW and 600MW).
Policy Position 6: South Africa should not sterilise the development of its coal
resources for purposes of power generation, instead the planning framework for
energy and environment must support a just transition
5.3.5 Gas to Power
Whilst the plan indicates a requirement for 1000 MW in 2023 and 2000 MW in 2027,
at a 12% average load factor, this is premised on certain constraints that we have
imposed on gas, taking into account the locational issues like ports, environment,
transmission etc. This represents low gas utilization, which will not likely justify the
development of new gas infrastructure and power plants predicated on such sub-
optimal volumes of gas. Consideration must therefore be given to the conversion of
the diesel-powered peakers on the east coast of South Africa, as this is taken to be
the first location for gas importation infrastructure and the associated gas to power
plants. It must be noted that that the unconstrained gas is a ‘no regret option’ because
the power system calls for increased gas volumes when there are no constraints
imposed.
Page 42 of 94

Policy Position 7: To support the development of gas infrastructure, convert all

diesel-fired power plants (Peakers) to gas.
5.3.6 Nuclear
The extension of design life of the Koeberg Power Station is critical for continued
energy security in the period beyond 2024, when it reaches the end of its 40-year life.
This extension, once all the necessary regulatory approvals have been received, will
increase the capacity to its original design capacity of 1926MW.
Whilst the IRP does not assess system dynamic stability, the relative location of
Koeberg at the opposite end of the transmission backbone, when compared to the
power stations located around Mpumalanga, poses certain advantages that include
improved system stability.
Post 2030, the expected decommissioning of 24 100 MW of coal fired power plants
supports the need for additional capacity from clean energy technologies including
nuclear. Taking into account the existing human resource capacity, skills, technology
and the economic potential that nuclear holds, consideration must be given to
preparatory work commencing immediately with the development of a clear road map
for a future expansion programme. This IRP proposes that the nuclear power
programme must be implemented at an affordable pace and modular scale (as
opposed to a fleet approach) and taking into account technological developments in
the nuclear space.
The Inga Treaty provides a 10-year window, ending in 2023, within which South Africa
is obliged to offtake 2 500MW. Given that the DRC has not yet concluded the project
development work required for South Africa to offtake, there is a risk that the Treaty
might lapse by 2023. As an alternative and to replace the 2 500MW from Inga, the
nuclear option becomes feasible, despite its relative cost when compared to the Inga
option.
Policy Position 8: immediately commence the nuclear build programme to the extent
of 2 500MW because it is a no-regret option in the long term and in case the Inga
project does not materialize.
Page 43 of 94

5.3.7 Regional Power Projects
South Africa has entered into a Treaty regarding the Grand Inga Hydropower Project.
Whereas the draft IRP 2018 was modelled by forcing the 2 500 MW from Inga, the
IRP 2019 used the commercial parameters that were submitted by the project
developers for Inga, and 2 500 MW (and even more beyond 2030) of hydropower was
selected on its own merits. South Africa has the responsibility to develop the
necessary transmission infrastructure to evacuate the power from Grand Inga across
the transit counties viz. DRC, Zambia, Zimbabwe/Botswana into South Africa. The
necessary agreements must be concluded as soon as possible if the hydro option from
Grand Inga is to materialize.
To de-risk the transmission interconnection through the transit countries,

consideration must be given to the countries participating in the ownership structure
of the transmission entity that will operate the lines. In addition, the regional
interconnection projects sponsored under SADC and SAPP must be encouraged.
Policy Position 9: In support of regional electricity interconnection including

hydropower and gas, South Africa must support strategic power projects in
neighbouring countries that enable the development of cross-border transmission
infrastructure needed for the regional power pool.
5.3.8 Energy Storage
When energy storage costs were revised to the latest information, and taking into
account the longer gas infrastructure lead time, the power system selects more energy
storage. This can be expected, given the extent of the wind and solar PV option in the
IRP.
It must be noted that Eskom is already preparing to pilot an energy storage-technology

project based on batteries. The pilot will enable the assessment and development of
Page 44 of 94

the technical applications and benefits, the regulatory matters that relate to a utility-
scale energy storage technology and the enhancement of assumptions for future
iterations of the IRP.
5.3.9 Distributed Generation
Public inputs suggested that the allocation for distributed generation (also referred to
as embedded generation) needed to be increased, taking into account that the DMRE
is inundated with requests from companies, municipalities and private individuals for
deviation from the IRP in terms of section 10(2)(g) of the Electricity Regulation Act, in
order for NERSA to approve their application for a generation licence. Given the
observation concerning energy shortage in the immediate term, increasing the
embedded generation allocation as reflected in the capacity plan table present the
opportunity to address the shortage.
5.3.10 Risk Considerations
AREA OF RISK RISK MITIGATION
Demand Forecast The risk is that actual demand  Medium Term System Outlook by
may turn out to be lower or NERSA as submitted by system
higher than forecasted. Current operator (Eskom) in line with their
indications are that demand is license conditions provides necessary
more likely to be lower than information to monitor actual and
forecasted because of grid projected demand and supply.
deflections for various reasons.  This risk will further be mitigated by
managing the pace and scale of new
capacity implementation in the IRP
through acceleration or deceleration of
implementation of Ministerial
Determinations.
Technology Costs Continuous improvements in  As in the case of demand forecast, this

technology driven by research, risk can be mitigated by managing the
innovation and innovative pace and scale of new capacity
Page 45 of 94

project financing will continue to implementation through regular reviews

lead to reduction in new of the IRP.
generation technology costs.  Undertaking feasibility studies to inform
any procurement in line with New
There is a risk of the cost
Generations Regulations will also help
assumptions to be outdated
mitigate against this risk.
within a short time period.
Existing Plant The IRP update takes into  This can be mitigated by implementing
Performance account the current low average a threshold and monitoring plant
energy availability factor (EAF) performance trends for decisions. In
of Eskom’s generating units. the short term, emergency power will
have to be procured, as was the case
If current EAF trends is anything
in the past. In the long run this will imply
to go by, there is a likelihood of
accelerating or bringing forward
the EAF deteriorating further
capacity proposed in the plan.
and resulting in inadequate
supply to meet demand.
Variable Capacity from There is an inherent risk  At low levels of penetration, fluctuating
Renewable Sources associated with the renewable energy will have only
impacting on System intermittency of renewable marginal impact on the system.
Security and Stability technologies such as wind and However, considering the South
PV as requirement to balance African energy generation mix and
the system increases (energy demand profile, there is a point at which
and ancillary services). an isolated system would have to adjust
system and network operations if not
configured to cater for the variability of
this energy. Indications from the
system operator is that at about 20% of
renewable energy in the energy mix,
ancillary service requirements will start
to increase and this is in line with global
trends.
This is therefore not an issue for the
proposed plan up to the year 2030.
 The draft IRP update has
recommended further work in this area
following the finalisation of the IRP in
order to inform the next IRP iteration.
Import Hydro Options The main risk associated with  The Treaty spells out the various
import hydro options are delays conditions for the project. Power
in the construction of both the purchase agreements will also
power plants and the grid to contract the timelines with regard to
evacuate the power. first power and the associated
Page 46 of 94

There is also generally a cost penalties if either party does not keep
risk in that the assumptions its commitments. RSA does not have
used may change as the project any payment obligations if there is no
development is finalised with energy flowing from the project
developers.  The IRP assumed costs are based on
feasibility costs provided by the
There is also a risk of security of
developers. It is the government view
supply as the power line may
that the cost per kWh will be capped at
traverse multiple countries or be
the feasibility study cost, which is very
transmitted through a number of
attractive. Any cost above this level
countries networks.
will result in ‘no deal’.
 As a principle South Africa does not
import power from one source beyond
its reserve margin, as a mechanism to
de-risk the dependency on this
generation option.
Coal There is risk of 900 MW of coal  The Department is monitoring the legal
procured not materialising due challenge on the environmental
to financing and legal approvals issued by DEA and will be
challenges. There is also guided by the outcome of this process
likelihood of future coal to power as applicable.
capacity not being realised due  Regarding the financing of the
to financing challenges. The Pulverised Fuel projects, there is a
stance adopted by the deadline for the projects to reach
Organization for Economic financial close and commissioning. The
Cooperation and Development Department will be guided by progress
(OECD) and financial as the deadline approaches.
institutions concerning financing  The assumption in the IRP is that all
coal power plants, limits the use new coal to power capacity beyond the
of coal to power technologies to already procured 900 MW will be in the
High Efficiency Low Emission form of clean coal technology, which is
(HELE) option. still generally financed.
As proposed in the draft IRP update,
work to enable implementation and
investments in flexible HELE will be
undertaken following finalisation of the
IRP.
Nuclear Koeberg Power Station reaches  Eskom is at an advanced stage with

end of life in 2024. technical work required for the
extension of the life of Koeberg plant.
Eskom is also in the process of
applying for the necessary approvals
from the National Nuclear Regulator.
 The Department is monitoring progress
with Eskom on a regular basis.
Page 47 of 94


Gas The availability of gas in the  For the period up to 2030 gas to power
short to medium term is a risk capacity in the IRP has realistically
as South Africa does not taken into account the infrastructure
currently have gas resources. and logistics required around
ports/pipelines, electricity transmission
There is also a supply and
infrastructure.
foreign exchange risk
The IRP has therefore adjusted the
associated with likely increase
lead times.
in gas volumes depending on
the energy mix adopted post  As proposed in the draft IRP update,
2030 when a large number of work to firm up on the gas supply
coal fired power stations are options post 2030 is ongoing. This
decommissioned. work will inform in detail the next
iteration of the IRP.
Page 48 of 94

6. APPENDICES
6.1 APPENDIX A – INSTALLED CAPACITY, MINISTERIAL

DETERMINATIONS AND DECOMISSIONING SCHEDULE
6.1.1 Municipal, Private and Eskom Generators
Tables 8 and 9 below provide information on installed municipal, private and Eskom
generators.
Table 8: Municipal and Private Generators
Installed Capacity Decommissioning Planned Outages Unplanned
(MW) Date (%) Outages ( %)
Kelvin 160 Dec 2018 4.8 20
Sasol Infrachem Coal 125 Post 5050 4.8 15
Sasol Synfuel Coal 600 Post 2050 4.8 15
Other Non -Eskom Coal 18 Dec 2024 4.8 15
Other NonEskom Gas 16 Dec 2019 6.9 11
Sasol Infrachem Gas 175 Post 2050 6.9 11
Sasol Synfuel Gas 250 Post 2050 6.9 11
DOE IPP 1005 July 2045 7 5
Colley Wobbles 65 Post 2050 6.9 11
Other Non -Eskom Hydro 12 Post 2050 6.9 11
Cahora Bassa 1500 Post 2050 4 4
REBID Hydro 19 Post 2050 4 4
Steenbras 180 Post 2050 4 10
Sappi 144 Post2050 10 10
Mondi 120 Post2050 10 10
Page 49 of 94

6.1.2 Eskom Generators
Table 9: Eskom Generators9
POWER STATION CAPACITIES

as at 31 March 2018
The difference between installed and nominal capacity reflects auxiliary power consumption and reduced capacity
caused by the age of plant.
Years conurissioned, Nsenber and instalad capacity Total installed Total nominal
Location feit to Ost unit of generator sets. MW capacity. MW capacity. MW
Best -leed stations
Coal -fired (151 40 180 37 868
Arnot Middelburg Sep 1971 to Aug 1975 Ix37o- Ix390: 2x396: 2x400 2 352 2 232
Camden' ErmNo Mar 2005 to Jun 2008 3x200; 1x196; 2x195: 1x190; 1x185 I 541 1 481
Duchas Ennlahleni Aug 1980 to Feb 1984 5x600 3 000 2 975
Grootvlei' Balfour Apr 2008 to Her 2011 4x200: 2x190 1 190 1 120
Hendrinar t Middelburg May 1970 to Dec 1974 Ix2111. 4x200: 2x195; 1x170; 1x168 1 736 1 618
KmdaF Eewlahlmi Oct 1988 to Dec 1992 6,496 4 116 3 840
Remati' Q Middelburg Mar 2009 to Oct 2013 4x100: 4x115: 1x90 990 904
Kriel Bethel May 1976 to Mar 1979 6x500 3 000 2 850
Kusilets Oyes Aug 2017 1,799 799 720
Under construct on 5x800
Lethabo Vereeniging Dec 1995 to Dec 1990 6x619 3 708 3 558
Maiuba: Volksrust Apr 1996 to Apr 2001 3x457: 36713 4 110 3 843
Mat mba - Leplcalale Dec 1997 to Oct 1991 66665 3 990 3 690
Mula Bethal Sep 1979 to Jul 1983 4x600 3 600 3 450
Medup- Lephalale Aug 2015 to Nat 2017 3x794 2 382 2 157
Under construct on 3x794
Tundea Standerton Jun 1985 co Jun 1990 64409 3 654 3 510
Nuclear (I )
Kotberg Cape Town Jul 1984 to Nov 1985 2x970 1940 1 860
Peaking stations
Gacliquid fuel turbine stations (4) 2 426 2 409
Aato Cape Town May 1976 to Jul 1976 3x57 171 171
Anke.1.g Atlantis Mar 2007 to Mar 2009 4x149.2= 5x149.3 I 339 13 27
Gounkwa Hosed Bay Jul 2007 to Nov 2008 5x149.2 746 740
Port Rex East London Sep 1976 to Oct 11976 3x57 171 171
Pumped storage schemes 13l' 1 732 1 724

Drakensberg Berge ne Jun 1981 to Apr 1992 4x150 1 000 1000
Ingula Ladysmith June 2016 to Feb 2017 4x333 1 332 13 24
Palmist Grabouw Apr 1988 to May 1988 2x200 400 400
Hydroelectric stations (2)2 600 400

Gariep Norcalspont Sep 1971 to Mar 1976 4x90 360 360
Vanderkloof Petrusrille Jan 1977 to Feb 1977 2x120 240 240
Total used for capacity management purposes 47 878 45 461

Renewable energy
Wind energy (I )s
Sere Vredendal Mar 2015 46x2.2 100 100
Total capacity including renewable energy 47 978 45 561

Other hydroelectric stations (4)t 61
Colley Wobbles Mbashe River 3x14 42

First Falls Umtata River 2x3 6
Ncora Ncora River 2x0.4: 1x1.3 2
Second Falls Umtata Ruer 1364 I
Total Eskom power station capacities (30) 48 039 AS 561
Available nominal capacity - Eskom -owned 94.84%
9
Source: Eskom 2018 Integrated Report
Page 50 of 94

6.1.3 Emission Abatement Retrofit Programme and 50-year Life

Decommissioning
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 ### 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 ### 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050
Majuba LNB
Kendal
Matimba
Lethabo
Tutuka FFP & LNB
Duvha FFP
Matla FFP & LNB
Kriel FFP
Arnot
Hendrina
Camden
Grootvlei FFP
Komati
Emission Abatement Retrofit

50 Year life decommissioning
Early shutdown
Figure 26: Emission Abatement Retrofit Programme and 50-year Life Decommissioning
6.1.4 Projected Eskom Plant Energy Availability Factor
Table 6: Projected Eskom Plant Energy Availability Factor
IMEME1MW3M M:337:M=32:212M32=3
=ZMI-----
MMI=M 2cizo 2 2 c En3 =1E7E:3E1:METZ)!!!
1=10111MMEZIIMEMIIMMEIIMEMI
=MEE=
89.66
f2=E====1E:1====11M1=MOI =CM =MOM=
94-03 IMECIIMEIMI 98-03
96.16 =::n1==g
IMMSIEMME3 95.65
95.89
96.02
=MIMI=MEEI 96.70
1=32=ZW1=721M=ZEMI=ZEM1=7:MI 96.16
GARIEP IMMil 95.96 1=MX:I=M12111WX2IMMIIMI 92.94 =MICIM:MI=MEEIIMEMOI 96.90
VANDERKLDOF 94.73 IIMEEEIIMMEMI84.44 IIMMEZIMEEDI INIEMBEIMME311=3=111E31111i=1 98.45
DRAKENSBERG 75.36 Mnall=:a101 91.09 90.05 IMEMI 1=MIE:I=MESI=MIEUEEMEI=MEEI 89.90
ING ULA INEME3INEXEIIMMIEEIIMEMENINIMIMMEIZINNIMEM ® -'- EIMEHMEMEMMEEMINEECI
PALM Er IIMEMIMIZIEMEMEEIIMEMEMM=IMEMEINEEMIEREMIESIMIMEMMINEZEIMMEI
1:17==ME:1=======Z:IMEMIMIEDMIE:Mi==1E2Z3====1
PEANI NG 91_79 94_34 9219 1114B1 96,70 91_76 a1AR 96_711
r2=CEIIMMETMINEEIMINIEZEIMIMMINEXEIIMEMINNIZMINEZETIMMEEIMIIMEMEMEMEHME351
92_71 SEEM ffi_7S 92M.
GIESIECEMMEEIE3M1M7ri==IMMEIMMMI=7:1=1=71E3=====1101==01
IMEHZ2IIMEIM---------
99_a8 86_46 99_04 89_59 92_31 84_56 84_54 84_72
12=0====1=721EZI=MEI=ME1===:311=M1
1:2=11MIZIE:IIMEZMI
60.80 =7273=EBEI-
60-16 IMMZEIMMEMIIMMENIMMUMMEMIMMI 60-91 MMEMIIMEZIE3
74_93.
-------
60.93
ESI=111 69.10 INEMEIIMMEEI® 69.03 INEMEIMMEMEEIMMENIMIIMEMINNIMI®
1=171111MMETHEMMIIMIMMIMEMEZIOMIMEMEZKEIMMEMIIMI=I®1MEMINEIMIM-
131=1::::=======301:3MME3M13:3=MESI==1===1==3=Mill3=MMI
C2=INIIMEMINEMEI®INIMIMINNEMINIMMINNEMINIMIMINEZZIIMEMINNE7=11M1=1
172=23EM1==MEIEMMEDMI=MMI=EKEIMMIMI=E1E3=========1
C23M1I =MO IMME3 EMI IMEXEI IM=E3 IME:01==E3IMIZZEMMOZ3IMEMEIMMIMIIMME3
IGIIIMM1 56.06 MI= INIZE211NIMI INEEZIIMEMINIMEM®IMEMINIZEMNIZE3INIMI
'®=E3E3=Min3 67.69 =MU =TM MEE01
ra=2MIKEI-----------
---- -
EMICEI 60.00 IMEZIMIIMMEMIMIMI
1=InaMMEZI-----------
--
13:5:9C
71.00
63.05
63.21 IMEMIIMMI
63Z1 55_81
®MMEZI
69.46 =3:101=ME3
GI_24
69.48 69.49 =Mini
64.67
GA-GJ
EfI.4: 69.20
FR_44
63.05
63_05
7iL41 FfI_-0F ER_ ST E9_49 E9_7LT
1=21112:122ME J1_W J1_53 J1_49 r2_Jl

72.71 T3.63
I3 _G3 IMIMIIMZIMIMMEIIMMEI
fJ_!G ß_913. r3_31. JA_21 74.06
FLOE. b-i1
74.28 IM73113 JA-.7.11
KUSILE
123=1E®=EMI
MEDUPI ® '-
11=3=IIMEMINMEMEMEDIMIIIMMEEIIMEMIMIBMIIMEEDIIIMMIIIMMEINIMZEIIMEE=1
EZMIEMI=MIKIIEEE:11======:21=11=2MIEDEMI=MIE31=23=1
1=2= ®®®EEIRI®®121312131213®®®
NEW BUILD
ESNOM TQrAL
EEMEEIMIMMIZZIMIMIMMIESI=ME3==r21===M1
745 755
75_31
755
78.29
71S
84-W 82_54
72S
83_42 82_53
84 -(X1
73S
82_12 84_55 H0_59 H0_95 310a
75S
79_77
75_5 75_5 75_5 75,5 75,5
Page 51 of 94

6.2 APPENDIX B – SUMMARY OF INPUT FROM PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
SUMMARY KEY COMMENTS FOR DRAFT IRP 2018
56 No. 42778
COMMENTS RESPONSE NO. OF COMMENTS

1 The overall methodology of the draft The process of future iterations of
IRP document was welcomed and the IRP will be looked at following 54
deemed to be clear and concise. A the announcement about electricity
proposal for future iterations of the planning made by the President
IRP is to include independent experts during the State of the Nation
(organisations and individuals) and Address.
international organisations.
2 The publication of the IRP in English This request is noted. It is proposed

only and not in other official that a condensed final approved
languages was raised as a concern as version of the IRP (possibly in
it limits participation by other graphics) be developed and
members of the public. published. This will obviously lag the
- final published IRP.
3 Publication of documents Noted. A workable solution needs to
electronically on the Department be found and suggestions are
website and through government welcome. In the past, the IRP
gazette was raised as a concern since consultation process was expanded
GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 18 OCTOBER 2019
not everyone has access to the to cover all provinces and to include

internet. all communities, but this proved to
- be ineffective for whatever reason
4 It was stressed that the IRP must be The regulations for planning provide
revised more regularly, at least every for a timeline regarding IRP updates
2-3 years, due to technology
advancements and changes in other
assumptions.
A. POLICY &PROCESSES

5 The promulgation of this IRP was As stated in the draft IRP,
encouraged to be released soon and Ministerial Determinations issued
articulate the status of the Ministerial will be looked at and revised in line
determination on gas and how it will with the latest approved IRP. This
be included into the proposed new will be done in concurrence with
built program that is planned for NERSA as required by law.
2026.
7 There was a concern on the silence of South Africa still supports the
the IRP with regards to cross border development of strategic regional
coal based power projects. While power resources in support of
another view cautioned against the regional economic development.
reliance on cross border projects in The strategic merits of each cross-
general. border power opportunity will be
weighed in line with government
policy
8 Concern was raised about the Each technology option is justified
alignment of the draft IRP to the by its merits when considered
National Development Plan and other against other options under a
policies such as the Nuclear Energy modelling scenario. The draft IRP
STAATSKOERANT, 18 OKTOBER 2019
Policy of 2008 as the plan does not does not contradict the Nuclear
contain additional nuclear capacity. Energy Policy, in fact IRP2010-2030
is proof of that. What is under

-
consideration is whether there is a
need for nuclear prior to 2030
9 Concern is raised regarding the The drivers of demand are explained
projected electricity demand. in detail in the draft IRP. Projected - 46
 Majority of the comments demand has been re-based to 2017
question the projected growth in actual demand as a starting point
and we utilize the “cone” in respect
B.
DEMAND
demand in the context of falling
No. 42778 57
Page 53 of 94

58 No. 42778

demand and increasing own of low, medium and high scenarios
generation installations. of demand. This ensures that we
 There is also an opposing view take all possible demand scenarios
that says that the projected into account, and only have to
demand is very low as it ignores adjust the pace of implementation
suppressed demand and the fact as the actual demand manifests.
that electricity is a catalyst. The likely impact of distributed
Availability of excess electricity generation is acknowledged and the
will lead to demand increasing draft IRP states that distributed
and economic growth. generation registered or licenced by
the NERSA will have to be
discounted from the projected
demand when Ministerial
Determinations are made.
Historic trends with regard to
electricity intensity, energy
switching and levels of energy
access suggest that even if the
economy turns electricity demand
growth will likely not go to the rates
seen pre- 2007.
As no one has a crystal ball for the

future, frequent revision of the IRP
will ensure upwards or downwards
adjustments to the demand forecast
can be incorporated.
Page 54 of 94
10 There are concerns raised about Most of the technology options

technologies that did not appear on relate to utility scale technologies. - 20
the plan, including CSP, biomass, fuel Technologies that do not appear in
cells, battery storage, mini-hydro and the draft IRP could be either due to
others. scale (relatively small) or because of
cost and system requirements.
Stakeholders have made
suggestions that capacity
procurement in the future must be
based on system requirements and
not technology to allow
technologies to compete based on
their ability to provide for system
requirements at the least possible
cost.
11 To encourage flexibility of the plan, it See response to 10

was proposed that the use of

technologies and primary energy titles
be done away with a rather outline
the characteristics of the particular
planned generation – base load, mid-
merit, renewable etc.
-
12 The EPRI study does not contain any See response to 10
C.MISSING TECHNOLOGIES
information cogeneration
Page 55 of 94
No. 42778 59

60 No. 42778

-
13 - There is a view that The role and impact of EVs on the
Electric Vehicles will soon form part of power system has been taken into
the South African transport system consideration. EV influences on the
and the IRP should include them in its IRP are projected to be minimal in
analysis. this IRP window up to 2030. Future
- iterations will include a scenario to
test EV penetration
14 There was a suggestion that provisions The IRP is about supply and demand
to be made for Local Government to balance. It is only at the point where 26
directly arrange for either self- a Ministerial Determination is made
generation or concluding their direct that their procurer and buyer are
procurement with independent determined.
service providers outside of Eskom. The suggestion is therefore noted.
15 There is also a proposal by local The suggestion is noted and could

government that IRP must be done in be considered for the next iteration
a bottom up approach with full of the IRP. Municipal capacity to
involvement of local government. undertake this role varies across the

municipalities. Following both
approaches (top down and bottom
up) has proven to be very useful in
other energy planning jurisdictions
- 16 Concerns were raised about the IRP See response to 10.
being silent on the role Eskom in the Further capacity allocations and the
future. Especially in renewable role of Eskom will be guided by the
D. GENERAL
energy. work be carried out as part of its
Page 56 of 94

- reconfiguration and turn around.
The policy position does not
preclude Eskom from building RE
plants; challenge is that the scale
Eskom is used to is much larger than
for RE-type technologies.
17 The 3 year procurement gap for The concern is noted and will be
renewables was raised as a concern looked at taking into account costs,
and it was indicated that it is not good system requirements and
for the sector localisation. implications for the energy mix.
18 The inclusion of 1000MW of coal Noted. All adjustments or

through policy adjustment was raised deviations from a least cost plan 98
as a concern. Issues of concern raised come at additional costs. This must
include: be considered on the basis of cost
 The additional costs compared to vs benefit.
gas, wind and PV combination, Procured projects are expected to
 Emissions and health impact comply with all environmental

associated with coal fired power requirements. In so far as the draft
IRP is concerned, the inclusion of

plants,
 The current legal challenges the coal projects would be subject
regarding environmental to non- violation or exceedance of
authorisations, emissions constraints limits
 The funding challenges as banks imposed.
are no longer willing to finance In order not to pre-empt the
coal to power projects. outcome of the court challenges,
the projects are included provided
E. COAL
-
No. 42778 61
Page 57 of 94

62 No. 42778

they comply with prevailing
environmental legislation.
Funding for these projects is indeed
a risk. The Department will have to
monitor these projects and decide
on the “dead stop date” without
compromising security of supply.
- 19 There are also those who supported RSA has an abundance of coal; the
the inclusion of 1000MW of coal. strategic value of considering
While they welcomed this inclusion, imported coal projects under the
they are demanding that the IRP would have to be evaluated
allocation be increased to include: against government policy. As
 The full Ministerial determination indicated the draft IRP will make
previously issued for 2500MW of reference to coal projects, without
local coal to power, indicating that it is for imported
 The Ministerial determination of coal projects.
3600MW for cross border coal to Ministerial Determinations issued
power. under the IRP2010 will be reviewed
in consultation with NERSA, once
the updated IRP is approved.
- 20 Eskom current coal challenges (cost Part of IRP technical studies include

and availability) were raised as a a “system adequacy” test which
concern. The concern is that the IRP is takes care of this concern. Eskom is
quiet on this challenge and its impact also required as part of their license
on Eskom meeting the projected condition to submit to NERSA
demand. medium term system adequacy
outlook. This report also looks at
primary energy projections.
Page 58 of 94

Government is also looking to
resolve the coal sector regulatory
issues through a revised Mineral
and Petroleum Resources
Development Act.
- 21 Clarity was sought regarding the Cleaner coal in the form of HELE is
inclusion of “ Cleaner Coal” included in the assumptions. For
These include: the costs to be revised, this must be
 High efficiency, low emission based on at least one operational
(HELE) technologies in the IRP project experience (ideally 3)
including their costs. One coal anywhere in the world, to
generation equipment substantiate claims by
manufacturer and supplier manufacturers etc.
submitted what is said to be latest
costs which are lower than what
was used from the EPRI report.
 The inclusion of Underground Coal
Gasification (UCG).
- 22 There is a view that the assumptions

around the completion of Medupi and Our approach is based on the

Kusile should be changed. The reality that Medupi/Kusile are
proposal is for the remainder of already committed. The proposal to
Medupi and Kusile units not be stop the completion of Medupi and
considered but to be reviewed against Kusile has to be looked at in the
additional capacity from “cheaper” context of commitments to date
clean energy sources. The cost of and implications of that on Eskom
energy from these stations, the and the national revenue fund,
financial challenges of Eskom and The should breakage costs be incurred.
No. 42778 63
Page 59 of 94

64 No. 42778

IPCC report are some of the reasons
advanced for the proposal.
- 23 The decommissioning of coal plants Accelerated decommissioning has

that would reach their 50 - year life the potential to compromise the
attracted different views. security of supply because the
 There are comments that support capacity has not been discounted
the decommissioning of the plants prior to scheduled lifespan in the
to the extent that there are previous energy plan.
proposals to fast track the Job losses will also have to be
decommissioning of these plants. considered beyond the energy
The concerns raised from these context. .
comments are about climate and
health impacts of coal.
 There are also comments that do
not support the decommissioning
of coal power plants. The
concerns raised from these
comments are about potential job
losses in affected communities as
well as the need for base load
power.

- 24 Concerns are raised regarding Eskom EAF (at the aggregate level)
assumptions used for the Eskom is just a useful indicator but
generation Energy Availability Factor individual plant performance
(EAF) EAF in the draft IRP. projections have been obtained
Assumptions are said to be optimistic from Eskom and are used to inform
as current actual EAF is lower than the technical studies. Sensitivity
what is projected. The EAF is therefore analysis will also be conducted to
Page 60 of 94

not improving as per the projections ensure the final proposed plan is
obtained from Eskom with the robust.
likelihood that additional capacity
maybe required sooner than what the
draft IRP indicates.
25 Consideration of the job losses in the The solution for potential job losses
coal sector and a reskilling of and economic impact as a result of
employees in this sector and a closing down of power plants must
detailed socio-economic impact look at options beyond replacing
analysis of communities affected by like with like. Job losses will have to
the decommissioning must be fast- be considered beyond the energy
tracked to achieve effective sign-off context, hence the proposal in the
with all stakeholders and in doing so draft IRP for detailed analysis and
prevent the creation of ghost towns, consultations outside of the IRP
unemployment and social upheaval. process. The reality is that a lot of
coal plants will soon reach end of
life.
26 A proposal is made to address job See 25 above.
losses in the coal industry by
introducing spatial component into

the implementation of the IRP for a
just transition. The proposal is that

new generation capacity must be
closer to where existing power
generators will be phased out.
27 The inclusion of gas was critised to be Gas is considered a transition fuel

neither least cost option nor clean globally and it provides the 68
F.
GAS
energy. The extraction of gas was flexibility necessary to run a system
No. 42778 65
Page 61 of 94

66 No. 42778

further argued to be harmful to the like we have in a cost effective
environment. Moreover it was viewed manner. It is cleaner than other
as an additional greenhouse gas on fossil fuels. The extent of the gas
top of the coal that is reflected in the contained in the draft IRP is within
recommended plan. the imposed emissions reduction
trajectory.
28 A concern was raised on the source of Two options are available in the
gas. A request is also made for this short-medium term, being
information to be reflected in the IRP. imported Liquefied Natural Gas, or
- piped gas from the sub-region (or
even domestic)
29 Caution was raised about the likely See 28. The IRP will not cover the
availability of gas infrastructure within implementation details because
the envisaged IRP timelines. Once this is not its intended scope. The
more, there is a request to reflect Gas Infrastructure Plan will address
implementation details in the IRP. this concern
- 30 The likely volatility of imported gas The proposal is noted.

prices was raised as a point of
concern. It was proposed that to
mitigate against this, the following
should be considered during

implementation:
 Introduction of ‘real time pricing’
on a platform similar to that of a
day-ahead and a balancing
market. This could significantly
mitigate the exposure to
potentially high import costs of
gas.
Page 62 of 94

 Customers could be allowed to
utilise alternative measures i.e.
demand-side management or
energy storage in lieu of expensive
gas generation etc.
31 - The exchange rate The proposal is noted and will be

exposure as a result of importing gas considered when the gas supply
and the likely impact on the electricity options are weighed.
tariff were raised as a concern for the
inclusion of gas.
 It is proposed that greater
consideration is given to those
flexible renewable generation
and/or energy storage
technologies able to mitigate the
price and supply risks associated
with gas technology
 Alternative methods of balancing
the renewable energy other than
gas were proposed such as CSP,

energy storage and small hydro

were proposed.
-
32 There is a request to consider and to This is noted and will be effected.
include in the IRP additional
information regarding the anticipated
capacity factors and number of
start/stops that would be expected of
the gas capacity.
No. 42778 67
Page 63 of 94

68 No. 42778
33 The IRP should consider latest This is noted. Also see 21 above.
information regarding some of the gas
technologies compared to that in the
EPRI report. Generation equipment
supplier submitted “Latest
information” for consideration by the
technical modelling team.
34 Consultation with gas industry experts This is being done as part of the Gas
was proposed and the idea to conduct Infrastructure Plan development.
more studies on the gas industry was
welcomed and a willingness to share
information on studies already done
was communicated
35 Government policy is based on an

energy mix that includes nuclear - 33
etc. A such rational basis must be
advanced as to the exclusion of one
technology option or the other, and
the same applies to nuclear. Where

there is sound basis for the
inclusion of nuclear in the energy
mix, it will be included.
36 Other comments made a case for Noted.

Nuclear rating high on a security of
supply scale as compared to
G.
NUCLEA
R
renewable, coal and gas.
Page 64 of 94
37 It is said that the exclusion of nuclear This is not the case. IRP2010-2030
from the proposed new additional contradicts this assertion. Capacity
capacity is in contradiction to the NDP additions to the system are based
and Nuclear policy of 2008. on demand and system
- requirements. The absence of new
additional capacity from nuclear is
therefore not in contradiction to
policy. It is more of a timing issue. It
is for this reason that the draft IRP
called for detailed analysis to be
undertaken to ensure the energy
mix is maintained post 2030 when
most power plants are being
decommissioned.
38 It is recommended that the future cost The technical model takes into
of decommissioning nuclear power account Life cycle costs for all
plants should be built into the current technologies under consideration.
price paid for nuclear.
39 It is recommended that the DoE look The technical team has considered
into the studies that have been all studies made available to the

conducted over the years by various team about nuclear, during the
stakeholders and industry players with development of the draft report.
regards to nuclear. No additional studies have been
- submitted as part of the
consultation on the draft IRP.
No. 42778 69
Page 65 of 94

70 No. 42778

40 It is proposed that Policy adjustment Policy adjustment of the IRP is the
must be extended to include nuclear prerogative of Cabinet, and they
energy given it’s a clean source of will have the opportunity to do so.
energy with huge socio-economic
advantages including investment with
long-term returns to South Africa.
41 It is proposed that the IRP should Nuclear is included as one of the

include nuclear as the least cost in the technologies the technical model
long term. Koeberg is referenced as a should consider. Due to the relative
case in example. It is also indicated marginal cost of generation, in
that nuclear will create more jobs than comparison to other options, no
the current plan which consist of new capacity from nuclear comes
renewables and gas. through before 2030 but there is a
scenario that builds new nuclear
capacity post 2030.
This will be looked at in details as
part of the post 2030 energy mix.
42 There is a proposal for the In 2007 Eskom issued an RFP for

Department to nuclear power RFI/RFP nuclear plants and the outcome is
like in the case of renewables which is well established. There is also

said to be the only way to ascertain plenty of information about the
the cost of power from nuclear. cost of nuclear plants to estimate
the marginal cost of generation.
This should not be confused with
the fully depreciated operational
cost of a nuclear plant, like
Koeberg.
Page 66 of 94

43 A call is made for the inclusion of CSP The proposal is noted. This will be -
even though it does not fit least cost considered under implementation in
criteria. The argument advanced is line with the proposal to procure
that CSP is clean and unlike other solutions and not technology.
renewables, it has the ability to
provide ancillary services.
44 There is a proposal to amend See 43

procurement and go beyond 16
procuring a technology but a
solution. The proposal is to allow the
procurement of CSP in the base load
programme, mid merit or peaking
demand profiles, with PPAs
structured for such operations.
45 It is said that the CSP costs used in Latest information for CSP is used for
the draft IRP are high and the the IRP. Some of the information
Department should consider the proposed for use could not be
learning curves for CSP to date based verified or supported.
on SA and international markets.
H. CSP

46 It was pointed out that the cost of The comment is noted.
energy from renewable sources with This will be considered under 41
battery storage technology is implementation in line with the
becoming cost competitive and proposal to procure solutions and
comparable to that of renewables not technology.
with gas. Additional benefits of
battery storage for system operations
I. BATTERY
STORAGE
are highlighted as reasons for
No. 42778 71
Page 67 of 94

72 No. 42778

inclusion of battery storage in the
IRP. It is proposed that energy
storage be included in the final IRP as
the prices are falling at a fast rate.
47 It is recommended that the See 46

Department look at latest cost of
batteries together with the learning
curve.
48 There is a proposal for distributed See 46

energy storage allocation to match
the allocation for embedded
generation.
49 The inclusion of embedded Proposal is noted.

generation was welcomed with the 84
proposal that it be referred to
distributed generation which is a
common name used.
50 Clarity is being sought on how the The allocation will be reviewed as

embedded generation cap of 200MW proposed.
was arrived. The proposal is to
increase the annual allocation. There
is also a proposal to use applications
already received by the Department
as a starting number.
J. EMBEDDED
GENERATION/RENEWABLE
ENERGY
Page 68 of 94

51 There was a concern that a cap on See 50
embedded generation would
encourage a noncompliance. Another
view proposed that if the cap
remains, there should be at least a
compounded growth per year.
52 It was proposed that the off grid These are exempt from licensing and
connections not be part of the therefore not part of IRP.
embedded generation cap.
53 It was pointed out that microgrids The policy stance is that

and backfeeding onto the grid for less municipalities have the prerogative
than 10MW was not addressed. whether to allow this or not, in line
- with the Constitution. The IRP does
not prescribe this
54 There are concerns regarding the These installations will still need a
embedded generation installations Ministerial deviation in line with the
that are greater than 10MW whether Electricity Regulation Act.
they are included in the IRP allocation
or not.
55 It is recommended that the annual See 50

embedded generation be increased
and that provision must also be made
for industrial co-generation and self-
generation
-
No. 42778 73
Page 69 of 94

74 No. 42778

56 It was proposed that work to capture NERSA in the process of finalising
accurate and current information is the registration process which is in
urgently undertaken reduce line with this proposal.
uncertainty in the next IRP review in
two years.
57 A call was made for supporting small Noted.

hydropower 32
58 There was a caution against Inga Noted. The same applies to any
project due to Congo’s political cross-border project, including
instability. Cahorra Bassa in Mozambique.
K. HYDRO
POWER
59 Whether an environmental impact Need clarity regarding which
was conducted in line with the environmental impact this question 16
legislative framework that governs is referring. In any event the scope
this requirement. of the IRP does not extend to EIAs,
this is an implementation issue
60 Community development/benefit - Job numbers analysis of the final

Whether job creation was factored proposed plan for the period up to

into the development of the IRP, year 2030 together with potential
particular in relation to community jobs impact due to decommissioning
development, long-term impact on of old Eskom power plants will be
communities and impact on undertaken as part of the proposed
communities upon decommissioning. work to be undertaken.
L.CLARITY COMMENTS
Page 70 of 94

61 Economic outflows of opportunities: Question reads incomplete.
Black emerging miners, Mining Expansion will assist to ensure
Charter. response is adequate and relevant.
62 IPP contracts and current tariff A presentation in this regard can be

structure – would want to have sight arranged for interested members of
of this information: proposed a the Task Team at a suitable time.
presentation of applications for tariff
applications.
63 Eskom’s financial instability should Eskom issues are being attended to

feature in discussions, particularly its as announced by the President. The
high debt levels, R400billion. proposal for the secretariat to
Unsustainable business model - it was provide feedback from other
agreed that while Govt should engagements is supported.
respond to the points raised, the
Secretariat would in addition provide
feedback from the work of the
Sovereign Ratings Downgrade task
team, already engaging on this

matter.

64 Future of the electricity industry – See response to Question 5. IRP at
any consideration been given? this stage looks at mainly balancing
supply and demand irrespective of
the market structure.
No. 42778 75
Page 71 of 94

76 No. 42778

65 Eskom as a producer of renewables: See response to Question 63.
Labour was of the view that

Eskom should continue to enjoy
its monopoly in the energy
sector;
Eskom should therefore be part
of the process of moving towards
renewables; and
Also separate issue for noting in
the Nedlac report: Eskom’s role
in producing renewables (not
purpose of the IRP to determine
who produces what; rather to
renounce on the energy
generation mix required for
security of supply).
66 The proposed retrenchment of There is a process dealing with

17 000 workers at Eskom were Eskom and as announced in SONA,
concerning. various stakeholders will be engaged
as announced.

67 Decreasing demand on the national Actual historical data obtained and
grid: How did Government arrive at a as measured by Eskom confirms that
conclusion that the demand was demand projected in 2010 has not
decreasing or had decreased, given been realised. Data also indicates
that many communities are still that the electricity intensity is
without electricity? coming down. This is seen from
energy used per unit of GDP.
Page 72 of 94

While historically demand has
remained flat, the IRP projects that
demand will continue to grow into
the future and this makes provision
for increasing access.
It should also be noted that the
challenges of access are being
addressed under the electrification
programme, which is a distribution
issue (not a generation or IRP issue)
68 Quality control/assurance in respect The simulation models and data set

of models used and research input used were independently
undertaken. verified by CSIR, NREL as well as
PLEXOS developers for quality
assurance. Most utilities in the world
follow the methodology we are
using
69 Drafting process – should be shared The request is not clear. An
expansion of the request and
relevance to the report contents as

presented will assist.

The report was compiled by the
Department of Energy with support
from the technical modelling team.
70 The IRP stated that there was a need The report actually states that due
for detailed studies on nuclear energy to the significant change in the
and other forms of energy such as energy mix post 2030, a number of
clean coal. The NDP had already detailed studies must be undertaken
No. 42778 77
Page 73 of 94

78 No. 42778

called for these in 2012. If the studies as assumptions made today can
were done, they should be shared. significantly alter the energy mix
outcome. There are various studies
that have been carried out and
continue to be carried out by a
number of institutions. Future
iterations of the IRP always take into
account the latest technology
developments

Page 74 of 94
1
202
6.3 APPENDIX C – RESULTS OF TEST CASES
4
5
11
2026
-
BASE CASE: Koeberg 60 years; No MES; Coal & Hydro forced in
2
9
4
17
Coal Landfill Gas Import Hydro CCGT CCGE OCGT ICE 12MW PV Wind
2025
2020
2021 250 996
2022 900 1000
1
5
18
13
2023 500 900 1000
2024
2024 500 132 1000 1200
2025 1000 1400
2026 1950 1000 1800
2027 1200 1000 1800
4
24
14
2028 1000 1800
2023
2029 1200 1000 1800
2030 2500 1000 1800
2
19
41
2022
Base Case Gas Load Factors
2020
635212 3
26
2021
34
12
42
2019
11 12 11
18
15
--------
-----
---

gi
rl
CCGT
O CG T
CC-CE
DoE_IPP
An ke
Gourikwa
ICE-12MW
No. 42778 79
Page 75 of 94
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019) 80 No. 42778
TEST CASE 1: Base Case + MES 1

2020
2021 250 6384 70
2022 3600 1000
2023 500 1000
2024 500 1000 1800
2025 1000 1800
2026 1000 1700
2027 1000 1400
2028 1000 400
2029 1000 1800
2030 2500 1000 1800
Test Case 1 Gas Load Factors

2 2 3 3 3 5 9 13 14 19 26 ICE-12MW
8 7 5 15 8 11 11 17 18 24 41 CC-GE
2 2 3 4 4 5 OCGT

_
CCGT
1 1 5 3
_
4 94 52 G ouri kwa
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 87 24 Do E_I PP
1 1 1 5 4 6 94 59 Ankerlig
_
2030 2029 2028 2027 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019
_
Page 76 of 94
TEST CASE 2: Base Case + MES 2
Coal Landfill Gas Import Hydro CCGT CCGE OCGT ICE 12 MW PV Wind
2020
2021 250 8892 1000
2022 4500 1000
2023 750 732 450 1000
2024 7250 1464 1000 1800
2025 1000 1800
2026 1000 1800
2027 2250 1000 1800
2028 1000 1800
2029 1000 1800
2030 2500 1000 1800

CC-CE
CCGT
DoE_IPP
Ankerlig
kwa ri u o G
MW ICE-12

55
37
62
2019
94
88
94
2020
4
4
77
2021
No. 42778 81
Page 77 of 94
3
1
4
95
76
2022
TEST CASE 3: Base Case + Koeberg 40 years

82 No. 42778
2020
2021 250 1104
2022 750 1000
2023 500 1050 1000
2024 500 1000 1800
2025 1000 1800
2026 3750 1000 1800
2027 1350 1000 1800
2028 1000 1800
2029 900 1000 1800
2030 2500 1000 1800

4 18 9 8 11 14 14 21 40 27 ICE-12MW
7 30 12 15 16 17 17 23 47 CC-GE
OCGT
3 16 5 3 10 12 8 19 16 23 ICE-2MW
CC GT
-__
3 2 3 2 2 6 4 4 15 29 Gourikwa

1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 11 12 DoE_IPP
1 5 3 3 3 1 3 8 8 7 18 41 Ankerlig
-----------_
2030 2029 2028 2027 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019
-----------_ _
Page 78 of 94
TEST CASE 4: Base Case +MES 2 +Koeberg 40years + Inga & Coal optimized
2020
2021 250 8892 1000
2022 5100 1000
2023 1464 1000
2024 7500 1000 1800
2025 750 1000 1800
2026 1500 1000 1800
2027 2250 1000 1800
2028 1000 1800
2029 1000 1800
2030 2500 1000 1800

w
1
) <<111.: 1 ;1()t,,,[,,, ;+,( '. ), r ),` a, (1 J. } ) (1i;1! )[ )1 ; ( ,X ?',) t) I,I uyr,r,- ),. (1)) i rt.
(r)
i[ ,.11
'\lfllra ll ',
i1 j I ÉSi
- I
CCGT
CC-GE
OCGT
II?k(,)I','. Ili"li'' , il. > 11. 11. ll. I. II. 11. 11.
DoE_IPP
Ankerlig
Gourikwa
ICE-12MW
.r,
)l(!11f11k(\v,vt 1 ,:-i A,1 11.
,
i, .`
;[r°r( ï II ' .x;i ;;,/ /,, j`;) /rnnj 1:; 1.

55
37
2019

r( l', '(( i 11'
_
111 ?!`il )1I IL', 11.,% 11.ï11 1111 z:i 111';) ,

94
88
94
II ,U, il. ',1`'111 +,b¡1 I ;%f :i II.,.) ill! 11:'t `;)

2020
4
4
26
2021
3
2
1
No. 42778 83
19
41
Page 79 of 94
2022
4
6
14
24
88
023
TEST CASE 5: Base Case + Gas Limit

84 No. 42778
Battery Storage
1 hour
2020
2021 250 840
2022 150 1000 162
2023 1250 1000

2024 500 450 1800
2025 450 70 1800
2026 600 1800
2027 750 820 1800
2028 1000 1800 252
2029 1000 1800 1821
2030 2500 150 840 1800
Test Case 5 Gas Load Factor

4 18 9 8 11 14 14 21 40 27 ICE-12MW
7 30 12 15 16 17 17 23 47 CC-GE
OCGT
3 16 5 3 10 12 8 19 16 23 ICE-2MW

CCGT
3 2 3 2 2 6 4 4 15 29 Gourikwa
1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 11 12 DoE_I P P
1 5 3 3 3 1 3 8 8 7 18 41 Ankerlig
2030 2029 2028 2027 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019
-
Page 80 of 94
TEST CASE 6: Base Case + 30 Months Wind Lead Time + Gas Limit
Coal Landfill Gas Import Hydro CCGT CCGE ICE OCGT ICE 12MW PV Wind BatteryStorage
2019
2020
2021 250
2022 1000 1800 462
2023 500 1000 1800
2024 500 450 1700
2025 450 540 1800
2026 2 96 1800
2027 750 1500 490 1600
2028 1000 1800 66
2029 990 1800 1821
2030 2500 150 1000 800


No. 42778 85
Page 81 of 94
6.4 APPENDIX D – SUMMARY OF PUBLISHED DRAFT IRP 2018
6.4.1. INTRODUCTION
This section contain the results of the analysis that resulted into the draft IRP 2018
published plan. These scenarios can be categorised into projected demand growth
scenarios and key input scenarios. The scenarios looked at some of the key factors
such as the use as carbon budget for carbon dioxide emissions reduction, assumed
gas prices variation to analyse the impact of changing gas prices, and the removal of
annual build limits imposed on RE.
Key Scenarios Modelled and Simulated in Developing Draft IRP 2018
Test Case IRP 3 IRP 4 IRP 2 IRP 1 IRP 6 IRP 5 IRP 7
No Renewables
No Renewables Carbon Budget
Key Input Change Demand
Demand Demand Demand
Demand Market Linked
Market
Annual Build Carbon Budget And Market
Forecast
Forecast Forecast
Forecast Forecast
Forecast Gas Price
Limit Linked Gas Pric
Price
Demand Forecast Median Lower Hi Median Median Median Median
Peak Plateau Peak

Peak Plateau Peak Plateau
Plateau Peak Plateau Peak
Peak Plateau Peak Plateau
Plateau Peak Plateau Peak Plateau
CO2 Mitigation Carbon Budget Decline
Decline Decline Decline
Decline Decline Decline Decline
Decline
Renewable Annual
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Build Limit
MarketLinked
Market linked
Fuel Prices Constant
Constant Constant
Constant Constant
Constant Constant
Constant Constant
Constant Constant
Constant
Transmission Grid
Collector Stations Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Costs
Key assumptions and considerations included in the scenarios modelled and

simulated included, among others:
 The demand forecast for various growth trajectories;

 maintenance of the RE annual build rate as previously assumed in the promulgated

IRP 2010–2030. The Plan assumed 1000MW for PV and 1600MW for wind per
annum;
 the carbon dioxide emission reductions constraint using the PPD , except for one
scenario that used carbon budget approach;
 the performance of the Eskom coal plants as per their performance undertakings;
 the decommissioning dates of existing generation plants;
 the cost associated with the dedicated transmission infrastructure costs for that
energy and capacity mix; and
 committed, planned generation plants, such as Medupi, Kusile and RE (up to Bid
Window 4).
Following the development of the reference case taking into account the assumptions,
the scenarios listed were simulated and analysed.
Technical modelling and simulation was performed using PLEXOS software. The
objective function of PLEXOS is to minimise the cost of investments and electricity
dispatch using complex mathematical models. The cost function is determined by the
operational costs, start-up costs, fuels cost and penalty costs for unserved energy or
for not meeting the reserve requirements.
Constraints can be applied to the model in the software if necessary. These constraints
include, among others: energy balances; emission constraints; operational constraints
(limits on generation, reserve provision, up and down times, ramp rates and
transmission limits); regional capacity reserve margins and ancillary services;
maximum number of units built and retired; fuel availability and maximum fuel usage;
minimum energy production; and RE targets.
6.4.2. RESULTS OF THE SCENARIOS
The analysis of the results from the simulations were analysed by looking at the energy
mix for three periods (2017–2030, 2031–2040 and 2041–2050). The degree of
certainty of the assumptions decreases the longer we project into the future and hence
the depiction of the periods in
Page 83 of 94

IRP KEY PERIODS
IRP Study Key Periods
The assumptions for the period between now and year 2020 are of high certainty as
they actually fall within the Eskom operations plan for the year.
The period 2021–2030 is termed a “medium-to-high” period of certainty, with new

capacity requirements driven by the decommissioning of old Eskom power plants and
marginal demand growth. While demand and technology costs are likely to change,
the decommissioning of old plants will definitely result in the requirements for
additional capacity.
The period 2031–2040 is termed an “indicative period”, as the uncertainty regarding

the assumptions begins to increase. The output for this period is relevant to the
investment decisions of the 2021–2030 period because it provides information needed
to understand various future energy mix paths and how they may be impacted by the
decisions made today.
The period 2041–2050 is even more uncertain than the period before 2040.
The results were analysed in line with the objectives of the IRP, which are to balance
cost, water usage, emission reduction and security of supply.
From the results of the scenario analyses, the following are observed for the period
ending 2030:
Page 84 of 94

 Committed REIPPP (including the 27 signed projects) and Eskom capacity rollout
ending with the last unit of Kusile in 2022 will provide more than sufficient capacity
to cover the projected demand and decommissioning of plants up to around 2025.
 The installed capacity and energy mix for scenarios tested for the period up to 2030
does not differ materially. This is driven mainly by the decommissioning of about
12GW of Eskom coal plants.
 Imposing annual build limits on RE will not affect the total cumulative installed
capacity and the energy mix for the period up to 2030. See Table 7 and Table 8 for
details.
 Imposing carbon budget as a strategy for carbon dioxide emission reduction or
maintaining the PPD approach used in 2010 will not alter the energy mix by 2030.
 The projected unit cost of electricity by 2030 is similar for all scenarios, except for
market-linked gas prices where market-linked increases in gas prices were
assumed rather than inflation-based increases.
 The scenario without RE annual build limits provides the least-cost option by 2030.
For the period post 2030, the following are observed:

 The decommissioning of coal plants (total 28GW by 2040 and 35GW by 2050),
together with emission constraints imposed, imply coal will contribute less than 30%
of the energy supplied by 2040 and less than 20% by 2050.
 Imposing annual build limits on RE will restrict the cumulative renewable installed
capacity and the energy mix for this period.
 Adopting no annual build limits on renewables or imposing a more stringent carbon
dioxide emission reduction strategy implies that no new coal power plants will be
built in the future unless affordable cleaner forms of coal to power are available.
 The projected unit cost of electricity differs significantly between the scenarios
tested. It must be noted that a change in fuel cost (gas, for example) can affect the
projected cost significantly.
 The scenario without RE annual build limits provides the least-cost option by 2050.
 Overall, the installed capacity and energy mix for scenarios tested for the period
post 2030 differs significantly for all scenarios and is highly impacted / influenced
by the assumptions applied.
Page 85 of 94

350 - 321 322 322 321 321

Modelling Output
Year 2030 Energy Mix 300 - 272
- 3%
250 - 7^
200 -
1%
- 4%
%
46 396, 6 1%
3%
i
150 -
100 -
Projected Peak Demand
Year 2020 - 40GW so -
Year 2030 - 48GW O - s% a a 496
F FOP 3 I Fie S FFiP6 F2P7
2020 2030
Installed GW 61 78 78 78 78 78
Capacity
Environment CO2 (Mt / year) 23.
236 217 215 213 215 207
Water Usage (bn Ltr /year) 260 199 199 198 199 191
Cost* Unit Cost (c/kwh)

Cost (c /kwh) 115 115 117 115 119
Cumulative Cost Difference 0 13 822 19 150 14 265 24 361

(R'million)
Security of Grid Stability and Fuel Supply Envisaged levels of renewable energy supported by flexible gas plants is
Supply Exposure expected not to affect Grid Stability and Reliability. All scenarios contain
similar volumes of
similarvolumes of Gas
Gas to
to power
power which is likely to be imported.
* Year 2017 Rands
Scenario Analysis Results for the Period Ending 2030
Output
Modelling Outpu
Year 2040 Energy Mix So
300
250
222
t 361
i
2 00
Projected Peak Demand a0o

Year 2020 - 40GW
Year 2030 - 48GW
Year 2040 - 54GW
so
1 2020
IRP5
tono
IRP6 I12P7
Installed GW 61 120 105 105 105 105

Capacity
Environment CO2 (Mt / year) 236
6 123 153 1.68 116 119
1
Cost* Unit Cost (c /kwh) 125 132 1341140

134 135 140
Cumulative Cost Difference O 116 979 198 173 192 673 336 275
(R'million)
Security of Grid Stability and Fuel Supply Reliance on coal significantly reduces to around 30% from between 60% and
Supply Exposure 80% pre year 2030. Significant reliance on renewables and gas. Depending
on source of gas, there is potential price and supply risk. Grid stability at high
levels of renewable energy will need to be studied in detail
renewable ener detail and
and confirmed
confirmed
* Year 2017 Rands Nuclear toa
Scenario Analysis Results for the Period 2031–2040
Page 86 of 94

Modelling Output
Year 2050 Energy Mix
Projected Peak Demand

Year 2020-
Year 2020 40
-40GW
GW
Year 2030 - 48GW
Year 2050 - 61GW
Installed GW 61 148 126 126 126 126

Capacity
Environment CO2 (Mt / year) Mr 236
IF236 82 160 178 92
92 90
Cost* Cost (c
Unit Cost (c/kwh)
/kwh) MD
135 143 144 148
148 151
Cumulative Cost Difference 0 282 315 466 286 515 081 857 073
(R'million)
Reliance on coal continues significantly decline to around 30% from between
Security of Grid Stability and Fuel Supply 60% and 80% pre year 2030. Significant reliance on renewables and gas.
Supply Exposure Depending on source of gas, there is potential price and supply risk. Grid
stability at high levels of renewable energy will need to be studied in detail
and confirmed before a path is decided.
* Year 2017 Rands c_oai hod,o import Hydro CCOt U -c
Scenario Analysis Results for the Period 2041–2050
6.4.3. CONCLUSIONS FROM ANALYSIS OF THE SCENARIOS
The following conclusions are drawn from the results of the analyses:
 The review of the IRP implies that the pace and scale of new capacity developments
needed up to 2030 must be curtailed compared with that in the promulgated IRP
2010–2030 projections.
 Ministerial Determinations for capacity beyond Bid Window 4 (27 signed projects)
issued under the promulgated IRP 2010–2030 must be reviewed and revised in line
with the projected system requirements.
 The scenario without RE annual build limits provides the least-cost electricity path
to 2050.
 Without a policy intervention, all technologies included in the promulgated IRP
2010–2030 where prices have not come down like in the case of PV and wind, will
not be deployed because the least-cost option only contains PV, wind and gas.
Page 87 of 94

 The significant change in the energy mix post 2030 indicates the sensitivity of the
results observed to the assumptions made. A slight change in the assumptions can
therefore change the path chosen. In-depth analysis of the assumptions and the
economic implications of the electricity infrastructure development path chosen post
2030 will contribute to the mitigation of this risk.
6.4.4. DRAFT IRP 2018
Drawing from the conclusions of the scenarios analysed, the scenario of RE without
annual build limits provides the least-cost path up to 2050. The significant change in
the energy mix post 2030 and the sensitivity of the energy mix to the assumptions are
key points to note.
It was therefore recommended that the post 2030 path not be confirmed, but that
detailed studies be undertaken to inform the future update of the IRP. These studies
should, among others, include the following:
 Detailed analysis of gas supply options (international and local) to better understand
the technical and financial risks and required mitigations for an RE and gas-
dominated electricity generation mix post 2030.
 Detailed analysis of the appropriate level of penetration of RE in the South African
national grid to better understand the technical risks and mitigations required to
ensure security of supply is maintained during the transition to a low-carbon future.
Some work has been done on the impact of increasing shares of variable generation
on system operations in South Africa (Flexibility Study). There is a need to expand
this work to include an in-depth analysis of technical options such as reduced
inertia, reduced synchronizing torque, reduced voltage support and reduced
contribution to short-circuit currents to overcome stability issues resulting from non-
synchronous generation and distributed generation. There is also a need to
determine whether the stability issues will become relevant in the near, mid and
long term. The above-mentioned technical options are most suitable to overcome
the challenge. This part of work is already under consideration.
Page 88 of 94

 Detailed analysis of other clean energy supply options (coal, hydro, nuclear and
others), including their associated costs and economic benefits. The NDP Update
acknowledges the potential to increase the efficiency of coal conversion and calls
for any new coal-power investments to incorporate the latest technology. The NDP
Update calls for cleaner coal technologies to be supported through research and
development, and technology transfer agreements in ultra-supercritical coal power
plants; fluidised-bed combustion; underground coal gasification; integrated
gasification combined cycle plants; and carbon capture and storage, among others.
The NDP Update further acknowledges the role of nuclear in the energy mix and
calls for a thorough investigation of the implications of nuclear energy, including its
costs; financing options; institutional arrangements; safety; environmental costs
and benefits; localisation and employment opportunities; and uranium-enrichment
and fuel-fabrication possibilities.
Such an analysis would therefore be in line with and in support of commitments in

the NDP Update
.
 Detailed socio-economic impact analysis of the communities impacted by the
decommissioning of old, coal-fired power plants that would have reached their end-
of-life. Such an analysis would go a long way in ensuring that communities built on
the back of the coal-to-power sector are not left behind during the transition.
For the period ending 2030, a number of policy adjustments is proposed to ensure a
practical plan that will be flexible to accommodate new, innovative technologies that
are not currently cost competitive, the minimization of the impact of decommissioning
of coal power plants and the changing demand profile.
Recommended policy adjustment is as follows:
 Adopt a least-cost plan with the retention of annual build limits (1000MW for PV
and 1600MW for wind) for the period up to 2030. This provides for smooth roll
out of RE, which will help sustain the industry.
 Make provision for 1000MW of coal-to-power in 2023–2024, based on two
already procured projects. Jobs created from the projects will go a long way
Page 89 of 94

towards minimizing the impact of job losses resulting from the decommissioning
of Eskom coal power plants and will ensure continued utilisation of skills
developed for the Medupi and Kusile projects.
 Make provision for 2500MW of hydro power in 2030 to facilitate the RSA-DRC
treaty on the Inga Hydro Power Project in line with South Africa’s commitments
contained in the NDP Update to partner with regional neighbours, The Project
has the potential to unlock regional industrialisation.
 Adopt a position that all new technologies identified and endorsed for localisation
and promotion will be enabled through Ministerial Determinations utilising
existing allocations in the IRP Update. This approach is supported by existing
electricity regulations. The Electricity Regulations on New Generation Capacity
enables the Minister of Energy to undertake or commission feasibility studies in
respect of new generation capacity taking into account new generation capacity
as provided for in the IRP Update. Such feasibility studies are, among others,
expected to consider the cost of new capacity, risks (technical, financial and
operational) and value for money (economic benefits).
 Adopt a position that makes annual allocations of 200MW for new generation-
for-own-use between 1MW to 10MW, starting in 2018. These allocations will
not be discounted off the capacity allocations in the IRP Update initially, but will
be discounted during the issuing of determinations taking into account
generation for own use filed with NERSA.
The recommended updated Plan is as depicted in the table below. Impact on price
path is discussed later.
Page 90 of 94

Proposed Updated Plan for the Period Ending 2030
 Coal Installed Capacity is less the 12 000 MW capacity to be decommissioned

between years 2020 and 2030
 Existing and committed Coal, Nuclear, Hydro and Pumped Storage Capacity is less
auxiliary power. Stated numbers are therefore based on sent out capacity not rated
capacity.
 Two additional units at Medupi have since been commissioned which is earlier than
previously assumed.
 Distributed generationfor own use installed base is unknown as these installations
were exempted from holding a generation license or were not required to be
registered.
Page 91 of 94

6.4.5. PUBLISHED DRAFT IRP 2018 ELECTRICITY TARIFF PATH COMPARISON
Tariff path analysis was done for the five key input scenarios , namely no RE annual
build rate (IRP1), median growth (IRP3), market-linked gas price (IRP5), carbon
budget (IRP6) and carbon budget plus market-linked gas price (IRP7).
Data for the Price Path Model (PPM) used for the analysis came from Eskom’s
Financial Statements and Revenue Application of April 2017, and output of the
scenarios from technical models.
The PPM simulates the regulatory pricing methodology for South Africa. The model
forecasts Eskom’s total costs, including generation, transmission, purchases and
distribution. The PPM does not forecast municipal costs.
Key assumptions in the Model can be summarised as follows:
 from financial year 2017/18, the tariffs will immediately move to ‘cost-reflective’
levels as per the NERSA methodology.
 No change in Eskom’s current level of performance and efficiency.
 Eskom will build nuclear and the rest of the capacity will be built by another party.
 Eskom will be responsible for developing new transmission and distribution
networks.
The table below shows the comparative tariff projections for each of the five input
scenarios and the cumulative difference between the scenarios10 by 2030.
10
No RE annual build rate (IRP1), median-growth (IRP3), market-linked gas price (IRP5), carbon budget (IRP6)
and carbon budget plus market-linked gas price (IRP7) scenarios.
Page 92 of 94


Average Tar ft (2017 Rc/kWh)
Comparison of Tariffs for the Scenarios in 2017 (Cents per Kilowatt Hour)
8
§
8
§
§
8
8
8
ZAR million -2017
8
8
§
8
8
8
8
Cumulative Comparison of Tariff Paths for the Scenarios
There is a marginal difference in the projected price path for the period up to 2030.
This is to be expected, since technical analysis resulted in the observation that the
energy and capacity mix for the period differs marginally between the five scenarios.
Page 93 of 94

Beyond 2030, and driven by the difference in the energy and capacity mix, the price
paths are significantly different. The scenario where annual build limits on RE is
removed (IRP1) provides the lower-tariff path, with the scenario where carbon budget
as emission mitigation strategy is imposed and market-linked gas prices are assumed
(IRP7) resulting in the highest tariff path. A further observation was that the adoption
of carbon budget as emission mitigation strategy, with the targets as currently
suggested, results in the tariff path of this scenario being the second highest by 2050
(see IRP6).
There is therefore no difference in tariff path for the different scenarios up to 2030,
while the choice of technologies and their associated costs, taking emission mitigation
requirements and capacity building into account, will drive the price path beyond 2030.
Cumulative by 2030 deviation from the least cost case (IRP1) will results in additional
costs to the consumer.
Hence, it makes no difference for this version of the IRP Update which scenario is
adopted up to 2030. The huge difference between scenarios beyond 2030 will,
however, make it necessary to undertake a detailed energy path study that will inform
a next update of the IRP.
The policy adjusted scenario will result in about 5% higher tariff by year 2030
compared to the least cost scenario. This is the results of the smoothing out RE rollout
plan which commissions plants earlier than they are actually required by the system
as well as the introduction coal and hydro power. It must be noted this financial
analysis does not take into account the economic benefits of a consistent and
predictable RE rollout, the likely regional economic benefits of Inga hydropower as
well as the economic benefits of continued beneficiation from coal.
Page 94 of 94

Uploaded by

Uploaded by

4 No.

42778 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 18 OCTOBER 2019

Government Notices • Goewermentskennisgewings

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................... 5

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

6.3 APPENDIX C – RESULTS OF TEST CASES ............................................................... 75

Figure 1: IRP Update Review Process ........................................................................................... 20

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CCGE Closed Cycle Gas Engine

CCGT Closed Cycle Gas Turbine

CCS Carbon Capture and Storage

CCUS Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

COD Commercial Operation Date

COUE Cost of Unserved Energy

CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research

CSP Concentrating Solar Power

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DMRE Department of Mineral Resources and Energy

DSM Demand Side Management

EPRI Electric Power Research Institute

FGD Flue Gas Desulphurization

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GHG Greenhouse Gas

ICE Internal Combustion Engine

GW Gigawatt (one thousand megawatts)

HELE High Efficiency Low Emission

IPP Independent Power Producer

IRP Integrated Resource Plan

kW Kilowatt (one thousandth of a megawatt)

kWh Kilowatt hour

kWp Kilowatt-Peak (for Photo-voltaic options)

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

LNG Liquefied Natural Gas

LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas

NDP National Development Plan

NERSA National Energy Regulator of South Africa; alternatively the Regulator

NOx Nitrogen Oxides

OCGT Open Cycle Gas Turbine

O&M Operating and Maintenance (cost)

PPM Price Path Model

PV Present Value; alternatively Photo-voltaic

REIPPP Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers Programme

SADC Southern African Development Community

SOx Sulphur Oxides

TW Terawatt (one million megawatts)

TWh Terawatt hour

UCG Underground Coal Gasification

ZIZABONA Zimbabwe, Zambia, Botswana, Namibia transmission project

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

“Demand side” refers to the demand for, or consumption of, electricity.

“Demand side management (DSM)” refers to interventions to reduce energy consumption.

“Distributed generation” refers to small-scale technologies to produce electricity close to

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

“Present value” refers to the present worth of a stream of expenses appropriately

“Strategy” is used synonymously with policy, referring to decisions that, if implemented,

“Supply side” refers to the production, generation or supply of electricity.

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

The promulgated IRP 2010–2030 identified the preferred generation technology

This gazette is also available free online at www.gpwonline.co.za

Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2019)

A total 6 422 MW under the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers

In total, 18 000MW of new generation capacity has been committed to.

Besides capacity additions, a number of assumptions have changed since the

Table 1: Published Draft IRP 2018 (Approved by Cabinet for Consultation)

2 155 244 300 200