Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa Ensuring public participation and improved accountability in policy processes

Compiled by Lucy Baker As a leading African human security research institution, the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) works towards a stable and peaceful Africa characterised by sustainable development, human rights, the rule of law, democracy and collaborative security. The ISS realises this vision by:

Q Undertaking applied research, training and capacity building

Q Working collaboratively with others

Q Facilitating and supporting policy formulation

Q Monitoring trends and policy implementation

Q Collecting, interpreting and disseminating information

Q Networking on national, regional and international levels

© 2011, Institute for Security Studies

Copyright in the volume as a whole is vested in the Institute for Security Studies, and no part may be reproduced in whole or in part without the express permission, in writing, of both the authors and the publishers. The opinions expressed do not necessarily re!ect those of the Institute, its trustees, members of the Council or donors. Authors contribute to ISS publications in their personal capacity.

ISBN 978-1-920422-38-7

First published by the Institute for Security Studies, P O Box 1787, Brooklyn Square 0075 Tshwane (Pretoria), South Africa www.issafrica.org

Cover photograph Steve Kretzmann/West Cape News Design Marketing Support Services +27 12 346-2168 Typesetting Page Arts cc +27 21 686-0171 Printing Tandym Print Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa Ensuring public participation and improved accountability in policy processes

Compiled by Lucy Baker March 2011

Contents

SESSION 1: DEMYSTIFYING THE DYNAMICS OF THE POLICY PROCESS ...... 3 The winding road of energy policy ...... 3 Mark Pickering, Meridian Economics Energy and shifting development paths in South Africa ...... 5 Andrew Marquard, Energy Research Centre ...... Exploring the murky parameters of the policy process ...... 7 David Fig, independent consultant Taking our power: the people’s right to be consulted on energy policy ...... 8 Yvette Abrahams, Commission for Gender Equality ......

SESSION 2: UNDERSTANDING THE NATURE AND INFLUENCE OF INTEREST GROUPS ...... 11 Nuclear: what role for nuclear interest groups post-PBMR, and how will they justify the big costs? ...... 11 Prof Steve Thomas, Greenwich University UK ...... How is civil society holding narrow interest groups to account?...... 13 Muna Lakhani, IZWA and Earthlife Africa ...... Renewable energy potential as a sustainable alternative for South Africa ...... 13 Wikus van Niekerk, Director: Centre for Renewable and Sustainable Energy Studies Renewables: what gains for the wind industry? ...... 15 Dr Kilian Hagemann, G7 Renewable Energies and South African Wind Energy Association

Davin Chown, Genesis Eco-Energy and SAWEA Independent power producers: are these old faces with a new, clean strategy? ...... 17 Mark Pickering, Meridian Economics

Respondent: Tristen Taylor, Earthlife Africa Sustainable Energy and Climate Change Project (SECCP) ...... 18

SESSION 3: LEARNING LESSONS FROM CIVIL SOCIETY ENGAGEMENTS IN 2010 ...... 21 What has civil society accomplished with the campaign against the World Bank? ...... 21 Bobby Peek, groundWork, Friends of the Earth, South Africa ...... Assessing civil society impact on the IRP2 policy processes ...... 22 Samantha Bailey, 350.org Is civil society playing an active role in developing the Climate Change Response Policy? ...... 23 Dorah Lebelo, GenderCC-SA

SESSION 4: INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT OF POLICY ....25 The role of Parliament in energy oversight ...... 25 Lance Greyling, MP, Independent Democrats ...... 25 Can we ever get a fully independent ISMO (Independent Systems Market Operator)? ...... 26 Matthews Bantsijang, Department of Energy ...... 26

Conference Report i Who regulates the energy regulators? ...... 27 Adv Boyce Mkhize, CEO, National Nuclear Regulator Historical and current management of radioactive waste within the Witwatersrand gold!elds ...... 27 Mariette Lie!erink, North-West University Workshop session: justifying the building of the Kusile coal-!red power station – the need and baseload requirements ...... 30 Kannan Lakmeeharan, Managing Director of the System Operations and Planning Division of Eskom ...... Update on the IRP2 policy process ...... 33 Matthews Bantsijang, DoE Launch of the civil society review of the IRP2 ...... 33 Liz McDaid, SAFCEI Update on civil society representation at NEDLAC ...... 34 Richard Worthington, WWF-SA On the position of the ANC, NUM and Cosatu on the new energy mix and matters for the labour unions ...... 36 Sibusiso Mimi, National Union of Mineworkers

SESSION 5: STRATEGISING TOWARDS A COMMON AGENDA ...... 39 Conclusion ...... 39

Appendix A: Programme of the National Civil Society Energy Caucus Meeting...... 41 Appendix B: Principles of the South African Civil Society Energy Caucus ...... 45 Appendix C: Press release ...... 47 About this report

!e Institute for Security Studies’ Corruption and South Africa is still trying to deal with a recent past in Governance Programme hosted the South African which energy policy was considered to have been captured Civil Society Energy Caucus in Cape Town on 14 and by narrow interests. !is gave rise to what was widely 15 September 2010. !e theme for the meeting was known as the minerals–energy complex, the e#ects of Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa: how can we which we are still experiencing today. As government pro- ensure public participation and improved accountability ceeds with Eskom’s new Capital Expansion Programme in policy processes? !e two-day meeting explored South – developed as a response to the electricity crisis of Africa’s willingness and ability to deal with the serious 2008 – the construction of further coal and nuclear power governance challenges which lie ahead, with the aim of stations (upon which the programme is based, to a large creating benchmarks for a sustainable and socially just extent) should make us reconsider in whose interest deci- future. sions are being taken. A number of energy-related policy processes were set We need to understand how to foster accountability in feverish motion in 2010. !e South African govern- and broad-based participation in policy and policy pro- ment announced (almost in one breath) that they were to cesses, so that corruption is reduced and more sustainable "nalise the second Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2), the energy solutions are favoured. We cannot tackle the crises Renewable Energy Feed-in Tari#, the Integrated Energy of energy poverty and climate change adequately without Plan and the Climate Change Response Policy, among this. !e Energy Caucus meeting focused on the issues others. !ese policies hold dramatic implications for the that have been raised by civil society engagement in the country’s energy future. For instance, IRP2 will make key various policy processes. decisions for electricity planning for the next 20 years, !is report is a comprehensive summary of the pres- locking us into particular technology-favoured choices. entations made and key discussions held at that meeting, In this context, the dominant development ideas, inter- based on recordings of the meeting. !e opinions ex- related institutions, incentives and interest groups play an pressed are those of the presenters and not necessarily of important role in the process of dra$ing and shaping the the author of this report, the Institute of Security Studies, new policies and supporting their implementation. or the Energy Caucus.

Conference Report iii iv Institute for Security Studies About the contributors

Yvette Abrahams is an historian by training. She is cur- a Master’s degree in sustainable energy at Stellenbosch rently Commissioner for Gender Equality, working on University. issues concerning gender and poverty, including climate Dr Kilian Hagemann is a wind-power entrepreneur change adaptation and mitigation. She is particularly and director of G7 Renewable Energies. His company is committed to ensuring that decision-making to do with actively developing some of the most e%cient wind farms the economy and climate change entrenches constitu- in South Africa and his vision is to power South Africa tional democracy. with 100% renewable energy by 2050. Samantha Bailey coordinates 350.org’s e#orts in Muna Lakhani is a long-standing activist in the "eld Africa to inspire a global grassroots climate movement. of environmental and social justice. He is founder and In South Africa, her focus is additionally on supporting National Co-ordinator of the Institute for Zero Waste in strategic interventions to help bring about a just and clean Africa, and a volunteer Branch Coordinator of Earthlife energy future. Africa Cape Town. He is active in the areas of energy Matthews Bantsijang is the Acting Chief Director, (including anti-nuclear); zero waste; food justice; toxics; Department of Energy tasked with the responsibility of and gender and children’s issues. He works locally and ensuring development, monitoring, enhancement and globally. implementation of policies that govern the electricity Kannan Lakmeeharan is the Managing Director of and nuclear sectors and to support the achievement of the System Operations and Planning Division of Eskom, universal access to electricity, including the exercising of which is responsible for the real-time security of the oversight over the relevant state-controlled entities. national power system and the long-term electricity Davin Chown is an advocate of green energy and capacity and transmission grid planning for the country. currently runs Genesis Eco-Energy, and Mainstream Previously he was responsible for the System Operator Renewable Power. He is a board member of the South and for the Electrical Engineering disciplines in Eskom African Wind Energy Association and one of the found- Enterprises. He has also had experience in the mining in- ing members of the South African Photovoltaic Industry dustry, with Gencor. He has a Master’s degree in Electrical Association. His interests are environmental justice, green Engineering from the University of the Witwatersrand energy and helping to bring the Green Economy to fruition. and is a registered Professional Engineer. David Fig is a South African environmental sociolo- Dorah Lebelo is currently heading the newly founded gist, political economist and activist. He holds a PhD from GenderCC-SA Women for Climate Justice Network. the London School of Economics, and specialises in ques- Dorah Lebelo and GenderCC-SA are implementing a tions of energy, trade, biodiversity and corporate respon- project focusing on capacity development in gender and sibility. His recent books include Staking !eir Claims: climate change in rural communities in South Africa, Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility in where there is a great need for information about climate South Africa (UKZN Press, 2007) and Uranium Road: change and adaptation. Questioning South Africa’s Nuclear Direction (Jacana, Mariette Lie!erink is an environmental and justice 2005). Fig chairs the board of Biowatch South Africa and activist and CEO of the Federation for a Sustainable works closely with various environmental–justice non- Environment. She is an Associate of the Research Niche governmental organisations. for the Cultural Dynamics of Water at North-West Lance Greyling has been a national Member of University and a member of the board of the National Parliament since 2004 and has served on the portfolio Nuclear Regulator. Her focus is the social and envir- committees for energy, water and environmental a#airs, onmental impact of mining on communities and the and public enterprises. Before he assumed public o%ce he environment, particularly the impact of radiological con- was the regional manager for the environmental organisa- tamination and acid mine drainage in the Witwatersrand tion GLOBE Southern Africa and is currently completing gold"elds of South Africa.

Conference Report v Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

Andrew Marquard (PhD) is a researcher at the Energy international development "nance institutions and inter- Research Centre at the University of Cape Town. He con- national investors. centrates on energy, the environment and climate change Trusha Reddy is a senior researcher in the Corruption and is the lead author of a study on the costs of a large- and Governance Programme’s Climate Change Project scale renewable energy programme for South Africa. at the Institute for Security Studies, based in Cape Town. Andrew’s current research focuses on energy-related Her work is on carbon trading, climate "nance and the climate-change mitigation, as well as South African energy sector. She is motivated by e#orts to attain climate energy policy and governance. He draws on a wide range justice for vulnerable communities and promoting posi- of skills, including energy analysis and modelling, and tive solutions to climate change. policy analysis. Tristen Taylor is the Project Coordinator at Earthlife Liziwe McDaid is an environmental activist, currently Africa Johannesburg and a committed social movement working with the South African Faith Communities activist. He is currently studying part-time towards a PhD Environmental Initiative (SAFCEI). She focuses on climate in Philosophy at the University of Johannesburg. change and her key areas of concern are poverty and the Stephen "omas is Professor of Energy Studies at the need to accelerate renewable energy uptake in South Africa. University of Greenwich. He has more than 30 years of ex- Adv Boyce Mkhize has been the CEO of the SA perience in the "eld of energy policy research, particularly National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) since February 2010. in economics and policy regarding nuclear power, and in He is a lawyer with public health administration experi- the liberalisation and privatisation of the electricity and ence and has extensive experience as registrar and CEO at gas industries. the Health Professions Council of South Africa. Wikus van Niekerk is the Director of the Centre for Sibusiso Mimi has international experience in devel- Renewable and Sustainable Energy Studies at Stellenbosch opment work, having worked in various positions (includ- University. !e Centre is funded by the Department of ing leadership) for non-governmental organisations for Science and Technology to train postgraduate students more than eight years. Much of his work has focused on in renewable and sustainable energy; conduct research; environmental sustainability and sustainable develop- and, in general, promote the implementation of renewable ment. Currently, Sibusiso is a researcher at the National energy in South Africa. For more information visit the Union of Mineworkers’ Parliamentary and Government Centre’s website at www.sun.ac.za/crses. Relations O%ce. Richard Worthington has been the manager of the Bobby Peek is the Director of groundWork and Climate Change Programme at WWF-SA since May 2008. Friends of the Earth, South Africa. Prior to that Richard was the Project Coordinator of the Mark Pickering has been involved in the South Sustainable Energy and Climate Change Project (SECCP), African power sector for the past 20 years, having worked a project of Earthlife Africa Johannesburg (ELA Jhb) for within Eskom, as a consulting policy advisor, and most seven-and-a-half years. He has represented SANGOCO recently in an investor capacity. He has undertaken (the South African NGO Coalition) on the government’s over 50 consulting assignments for a variety of clients, Integrated Energy Planning and Long-Term Mitigation including various national government departments, Scenarios processes. municipalities, foreign governments, investment banks,

vi Institute for Security Studies Introduction

Trusha Reddy, Institute for Security Studies

!e Energy Caucus is a loose network of individuals, !e questions that this meeting asks are: organisations and members of civil society working on energy issues in South Africa. It focuses on how energy Q How do dominant development ideas shape energy issues intersect with a degrading environment, social and policies? health impacts, and fence-line communities who come Q What has the path of government policy on energy up against big, polluting corporations and experience the been thus far and where has it gone wrong? brunt of energy poverty. As we face the newly understood Q What are the parameters within which policy proc- phenomenon of climate change, the caucus "nds that esses operate? How do we consider the following, for these intersections are far more acute. !e issues come instance: legal rights (including access to information into sharp focus, particularly in terms of the decisions and the impact of the new proposed ‘secrecy’ legisla- and development pathways that we choose. tion), public hearings, consultations, multi-stakeholder Energy policy outcomes at a national level are of task teams and recourse? particular concern to the caucus, given that in order to Q What is the nature, value and in&uence of various address climate change, we need to make profound and interest groups on energy policy? urgent changes to the way in which we live and the way Q What are some of the key lessons we have learnt from in which our energy systems are run. Governance plays a engaging in policy processes this year? crucial role in managing the process. A democratic system Q How well developed are the mechanisms of of governance will ensure that there is fairness, inclusive- Q Policy oversight? ness, accountability and transparency in the processes to Q Parliamentary oversight? ensure just outcomes. Q Regulatory oversight? !e meeting of the caucus is about discovering how Q How do we ensure an independent and well-functioning we understand policy processes regarding energy that Independent Systems Market Operator? are currently being formulated at a national level in the Q What is our strategy for a way forward, as civil society, country. Is the caucus able to re&ect on them, contextu- in dealing with policy processes that are ongoing or alise them, understand them and introduce the idea of not yet in existence? future scenarios? !is caucus will enable civil society to strategise on a way forward as civil society in engaging It is hoped that the outcomes of the two days will help the further with the policy outcomes and implementation. Energy Caucus to become a lot clearer, sharper and more !e objectives of the meeting are embedded in a strategic in our thinking and in the way in which civil political economy approach which deals with dominant society engages with policy processes. development ideas, institutions, incentives and interest groups that dra$, shape and drive policy processes.

Conference Report 1 2 Institute for Security Studies Session 1 Demystifying the dynamics of the policy process

THE WINDING ROAD OF ENERGY POLICY Q 1984: !e De Villiers Commission made an enquiry into the supply of electricity in the Republic of South Mark Pickering, Meridian Economics Africa. It revised Eskom’s governance structure and changed its "nancial regime !ere is a great deal of energy in civil society. However, it Q 1992: African National Congress (ANC) Workshop on doesn’t always get through to policy making. !is presen- Electricity in Cape Town, which put issues regarding tation includes a number of personal re&ections from my a#ordability and access on the table involvement in energy policy in South Africa over the last Q 1992–1993: !e National Electri"cation Forum. !is 15 years. included a wide diversity of voices. It recommended My main question is: how well do we make and the establishment of Regional Electricity Distributors implement policy in the electricity sector, particularly in (REDs) and the setting up of an independent regulator generation and planning? And how well is the balance (NER). !e latter happened, but the REDs have not yet between demand and supply managed? I am going to look been set up from 50 years back and into the future and examine the Q 1994: !e Reconstruction and Development institutional issues that are at the heart of why we are not Programme (RDP) created an electri"cation target of getting things right. 2,5 million households over six years. !at went into In terms of a demand–supply balance, our reserve government policy and was implemented margin should be between 15 per cent and 19 per cent, Q 1996–1997: Consultation on Energy White Paper, though there is no clear policy on this. For the last for which I was a "nal editor. A lot of valuable input 60 years or so our reserve margin has been outside went into the white paper, but much of it is still to be this range. Eskom, which is responsible for getting implemented the demand–supply balance right, has either over- or Q 1998: !e Energy White Paper included some good under-invested in generation capacity. In the early 1990s commitments from government: it was 40 per cent over capacity. !is is a very ine%cient Q To require the use of integrated resource planning use of economic capital, which is e#ectively le$ sitting methodologies in evaluating further electricity in stranded assets. !e risk of this has been passed on supply investments and the decommissioning of to consumers as tari# increases. !is is an indication of older power stations (7.1.5.6) failed governance, planning and regulatory systems in Q !e entry of multiple players into the generation that period, leading to a sharp rise in prices. Are we now market will be encouraged (7.1.5.8) at a similar point in history, where sharp tari# rises will Q Government will initiate a comprehensive study lead to ‘action’ concerning the way the electricity sector is on future market structures for the South African structured? electricity supply industry (7.1.6) Some of the key milestones in South Africa’s electricity Q In the long term, Eskom will have to be restruc- governance were: tured into separate generation and transmission companies (7.1.6.1)

Conference Report 3 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

!ese were healthy policy considerations, but little has policy process (for instance, the National Integrated happened in the 12 years since 1998. !e South African Resource Planning [NIRP] process) and there was no gen- reserve margin has steadily decreased since 1999, as no new eration licence application. !e way in which that decision capacity has been added. In 2008 we experienced load shed- was taken was questionable. Decisions on other plants ding, and had to close down the mining sector for a week. such as Kusile and Ngula were taken in a similar manner. In 2009 the reserve margin recovered – due to the "nancial In 2006 the DPE commissioned a ‘Review of Security crisis, rather than good planning. It is expected to decline of Supply in South Africa’. It made some very critical "nd- further by 2013, and more load shedding is likely. It is also ings, including that: highly unlikely that Eskom’s build programme will deliver on schedule. Eskom also has funding issues. Q !ere is no agreed basis or standard for the level of Between 1999 and 2007 virtually no new capacity was supply security to be provided – it recommended added. !e 1998 white paper stated that new capacity had that an unequivocal security standard should be to be on line by 2007, but decisions were only starting to established be made in 2005. Independent Power Producers (IPPs) Q !e reserve margin has fallen to record low levels are expected to add a substantial amount of capacity in Q !ere is now an urgent need, "rst, to determine a 2010, 2011 and 2012. It is highly unrealistic that they will suitable security standard, in order to de"ne what level be able to meet their targets. In 2014 Eskom is expected to of reserve margin should be maintained, and second, add 4500 MW; this is also highly unrealistic. to clarify the responsibility for meeting that security Medupi was meant to be online by April 2012, but this standard, given the Government policy that 70 per week (beginning 13 September 2010), Eskom conceded cent of new generation capacity shall be provided by that there would be a three-month delay in the project Eskom and 30 per cent by the private sector (though the industry’s view is that the delay will be much Q !ere is a strong case for the two separate planning longer than this). In 2001 the Electricity Distribution processes (ISEP and NIRP) to be brought together in Industry (EDI) was restructured, as was the decision a fully transparent process, open to all parties and that generation should be split 70/30 between Eskom and managed consistently and regularly private operators. !ere was quite a lot of inter-depart- mental work done on how to interpret that split. Note that at the time, there were multiple planning proc- At this point, policy-making processes changed esses between the DME, Eskom and NERSA and it was dramatically; from open, consultative types of processes unclear how these three di#erent organisations should to a process that was much more closed and ‘inside talk to each other and who was in charge. !is chaotic government’. !ere was also much more dependence on state was re&ected in the outcomes that resulted. expensive consultants. Many documents and studies were In 2006 the "rst regional load shedding took place (due never published and have tended to have no result, unlike to transmission constraints) and in 2007 the "rst national the earlier processes. load shedding occurred. In the "rst quarter of 2008 there In 2004 the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) was daily national load shedding for two weeks, leading and the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) to the declaration of a national power emergency on 25 explored the possibility of a multi-market model. !ey January 2008. In 2009 and 2010 various signi"cant devel- performed a study which showed that the higher returns opments took place, including: required by private investors may initially result in higher electricity prices than the public path. !e timing of the Q Nuclear procurement was shelved study coincided with Californian blackouts, which were Q NERSA announced the Renewable Energy Feed-in incorrectly blamed on market liberalisation. !e local ide- Tari#s (REFIT), but no procurement process ology of the ‘developmental state’ did not favour market Q In January and February the Minister of Energy issued reforms and so the reform initiatives were subsequently notice of her intent to pass regulations in terms of abandoned. the Electricity Regulation Act, to regulate electricity In 2004 DME commenced a procurement process for supply planning and the procurement of new genera- two peaker projects. !e process was dragged out and tion capacity eventually failed. It is now six years later and there has Q 5 August 2009 saw the electricity regulations on new been no sign that these projects will be built. generation capacity. !ese regulations provide for the In 2005 the Eskom Board took its investment decision development of an integrated resource plan (IRP) to to build Medupi. !at decision was taken in terms of the regulate the licensing of new generation capacity and Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) for cabinet the recovery of costs arising from independent power approval. It was not taken in terms of any other energy producers

4 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

Q On 31 December 2009 the Minister gazetted the Q Sub-optimal industry structure: the electricity market ‘Determination regarding the integrated resource plan structure is sub-optimal. It is dominated by Eskom. and new generation capacity’ (three pages) (IRP1). !is Eskom prevents any innovation covered three years of work in three pages Q Flawed regulatory strategy: we have a &awed regula- Q On 29 January 2010 the Minister gazetted a slightly tory strategy, with tari#s too low for too long di#erent version of the IRP – still three pages, still Q Many vested interests and competing priorities, and three years we have made some bad calls, for example to do with Q !e DoE committed to a public consultation process to the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) develop a 20-year IRP Q Lack of civil society oversight over the sector for some Q In February 2010 the President’s State of the Nation time. It is encouraging to see more interest from civil Speech committed to the establishment of an society in the energy sector Independent System Operator (ISO), though without Q Lack of "nancial discipline: Eskom was in such a good much indication of what that would mean (NB: though "nancial situation for so long that it didn’t need to the President referred to an Independent System borrow, so we have had a lack of "nancial discipline Operator, this has now emerged in the discourse as an Independent Systems and Market Operator – ISMO – Discussion see below) Q Also in February, NERSA ruled on Eskom’s MYPD2 How is energy e!ciency and demand side application, granting 3x25 per cent, rather than the management (DSM) dealt with? requested 3x35 per cent !e electricity intensity of our economy has slowed, but Q By March, a picture was emerging of Eskom’s funding this is probably due more to general structural changes in problems – and the scale of its problems our economy than to deliberate e#ort. !ere is a con&ict of interest in expecting Eskom as a supplier and generator Eskom now has a funding shortfall of R190bn (of a total of electricity to implement DSM as well. !e regulations of R440bn). We are committed to building power stations, supposed to promote DSM have not been "nalised and with no certainty on where the funds will come from. We resourced. We have seen 2000 MW of cumulative savings lack clarity in this. We should have been increasing tari#s achieved by the DoE over the last six or seven years. We more gradually over time; this would have resulted in less have 1700 MW of interrupted demand, but we could of a shock to the system. achieve more than that by international norms. One of In terms of where it all went wrong at the policy level, the great promises of the ISMO is that it would approach there is no complete or coherent answer. But here are supply and demand side options on a neutral basis. some perspectives: ENERGY AND SHIFTING DEVELOPMENT Q Weak/inconsistent political leadership: We have had PATHS IN SOUTH AFRICA six ministers in 16 years (Botha, Maduna, Mlambo- Andrew Marquard, Energy Research Centre Ngcuka, Hendricks, Sonjica and Peters) who have been more focused on minerals than energy until very recently !e words of two outstanding 19th-century economists Q Weak executive capacity/competence: !e energy side are relevant: of the former DME is under-resourced in terms of sta# and budget. !ough NERSA has a healthy budget, it has Production of commodities creates, and is the one and had a huge sta# turnover. It is a critical institution that universal cause which creates, a market for the commod- needs continuity, without which, policy cannot be as ities produced. (James Mill, Commerce Defended, 1808) good as it should be Q Fundamental &aws in our governance structure Men [sic] make their own history, but they do not make between the DPE and the Department of Minerals and it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected Energy (DME), now the DoE. !ough there is a role circumstances, but under circumstances existing emerging for NERSA, which is very encouraging, there already, given and transmitted from the past. (Karl is still a clear lack of an energy planning system and Marx, !e 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, 1852) we have a big blockage of reforms in the distribution sector (relating to the constitutional positioning of James Mill states that supply creates its own demand. municipalities) that hasn’t been resolved in more than Marx points out that we inherit the energy system. Long- a decade lasting decisions are made in the recent and distant past

Conference Report 5 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

that are hard to reverse. !at’s our legacy. Our situation is longer in a position to do so if we want to meet our emis- not as a result of the fact that we have cheap and abundant sions targets. !e Medupi and Kusile coal-"red power coal; rather, it is a creation of the decisions that were made plants make it very di%cult for us to meet our targets. We in that regard. will need to make decisions about running our coal plants Both supply and demand are outcomes of policy in at below their design load factor, which would be a waste the energy sector, which is rife with market failures. of national assets. Viewing demand as God-given leads to obsession with !erefore we need a mix of low-carbon electric- low prices, resulting in overinvestment, surplus capacity, ity options, energy e%ciency measures and shi$s in very low prices, and even faster demand growth, and then industrial and economic policy. !e low-carbon options incentivisation of energy-intensive industries. Supply include an aggressive solar water heating programme creates demand. It takes a long time to change because the and a 25 GW wind energy programme. We could also infrastructure involved in the energy system lasts for a make signi"cant use of organic waste streams for biomass very long time. !ere is no magic bullet. Price signals are cogeneration and generate electricity from land"ll gas very important in the economy. and wastewater gas. !e further generation gap would So one has to think about how to change the infra- be "lled by either nuclear power or solar thermal power. structural base and how the economy responds to price Solar thermal is currently very expensive, so there is a signals. What incentives are being provided to consu- big question mark there. Closing the aluminium smelters mers? Primary energy intensity in the South African would also contribute to a slight reduction in emissions. economy declined as part of a worldwide trend from the !is would require at least a 20-year time horizon, but we 1950s to the late 1960s, even though our economy was also need to start now. gold-mining-based from the 1950s until 1969. !en, from Even if we did all of this we would still have emissions 1969 to 1984, our energy intensity increased drastically close to where these are today. If we undertook all the for two main reasons: "rstly, the synfuels industry and measures mentioned, it would lead to the development its related industrial complex were constructed; and of many new energy industries (wind, biomass, SWH, secondly, we became a much more energy-intensive, energy-e%cient technology and design) with new indus- minerals-based economy. !is continued into the 1990s, trial complexes. Energy prices would go up, which would and that sets the stage for where we are now in terms of lead to di#erent investment decisions in the rest of the the energy intensity of our economy. economy. Demand response would probably be much A substantial amount of the emissions created by more signi"cant than anyone expects, and would lead the South African economy is exported. For instance to a certain amount of economic restructuring. !ere we consume hardly any of the aluminium that is would be a shi$ in the political economy of energy – every produced here. E#ectively, it is a way of exporting coal. wind turbine that is installed (1,5 MW) generates around Consequently, the relationship between our emissions and 4000 MWh per year, which displaces R300 000 of coal development levels is unusual. !ere is little development sales per year (at an approximate price of R150 per ton). gain from increasing emissions from where France is, for In conclusion, e%ciency and demand-side measures example, to where the USA is. South Africa is an outlier are very important; no single measure will solve the in this respect, as we have the same CO2 emissions level problem; doing something e#ective will mean doing per capita as Japan, but our Human Development Index is things very di#erently from how they are done now; and very far behind theirs. We could increase our population’s there are signi"cant uncertainties in technology and welfare without increasing our emissions. !e South demand. !ere will be very signi"cant structural e#ects African development path is carbon-intensive, but we get that we don’t understand clearly right now. little development bene"t per unit of population for each unit of carbon that we consume. Discussion Electricity is a relatively easy part of our economy to quantify. !e key problem is coal, which is the driver of What is the di"erence in costs between coal- our electricity system, and the source of most of our emis- #red, wind and nuclear power, etc – not just the sions. Electricity is responsible for about 45 to 50 per cent build costs, but ongoing operation costs? of our emissions. A lot of industrial process emissions Based on a levelised cost comparison, coal comes out at 45 also come from coal. However, the underlying problem to 64 cents per kilowatt-hour, wind is between 70 and 100 is demand, as we cannot use more than a quarter of our cents, and nuclear power anything between 50 and 100 current coal reserves and still meet our climate targets. cents. In terms of the externalities, the carbon price used !at is a big challenge, as there is a big generation gap that by Stern in his 2006 report to estimate global damages is ordinarily we would have "lled with coal, but we are no about US$85 (R500) per tonne. !is comes out at 50 cents

6 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

per kilowatt-hour, which puts coal in cost competition We don’t have a proper regulatory culture in the with wind. However, other coal externalities such as costs nuclear industry that serves the public well and has of acid mine drainage have not been estimated. It is likely public con"dence. !e regulator is required to be to cost a great deal, but we don’t know how to put a "gure scrupulously neutral; but every time it defends the on it yet. !ere is no good data on it in South Africa, but industry, that’s another nail in the regulatory co%n. the DEAT is looking at this. We expect they will skew !e regulator is under-resourced and su#ers from economics in favour of wind. Solar thermal is R1,50 per a skills shortage – information derived from the kilowatt-hour, and solar PV is much higher. It is likely to regulator’s own documentation. !e National Nuclear drop, but we are not sure when. Wind is the cheapest of Regulator (NNR) appointed someone from the PBMR renewables by far, except for solar water heating, which is company to be its CEO a few years ago. !is created cheaper than coal, and some other limited options such as a crisis of credibility for the institution from which biomass cogeneration. it is still trying to recover. !ere has been collusion between the Department of Environmental A#airs and Can we pinpoint the moment in history when we Tourism (DEAT) and the Department of Water and made the decision to increase mineral bene#ciation Environment (DWE) in EIA processes (see failure 4). in the name of foreign direct investment? !e regulator has a poor history of relating to commu- !e South African economy broadened its manufacturing nities, particularly a#ected communities; and public base into minerals processing in the 1970s and 1980s. concerns are o$en ignored, or excuses are found not to Contracts between Eskom and aluminium smelters were have to deal with them. agreed upon in the early 1990s in order to use up the extra capacity that was on Eskom’s system. BHP Billiton did not 3. Failure to recognise the importance of renewable energy own the smelters at that point. and give it the full political backing it deserves

EXPLORING THE MURKY PARAMETERS Renewable energy has been embraced on the political OF THE POLICY PROCESS level but in practice, attempts to remove the bottle- necks and encourage investment are slow. As long as David Fig, independent consultant nuclear investment is prioritised it will crowd out state investment in alternative energy sources. !ere have been "ve failures in South Africa’s energy gov- ernance. !e question is, can these failures be overcome 4. Failure to ensure the fairness and integrity of EIA without truth and reconciliation in the energy sector? processes by constantly diluting them and bypassing key Is there trust across the sector su%cient to remedy these principles including those of public participation failures? I research the nuclear end of the energy sector, so am perhaps biased in this regard. EIA processes have constantly been diluted by the !e "ve failures are: state, particularly in the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) case in relation to Nuclear-1. !e history 1. Failure to decide energy policy in an open and transpar- of the EIAs for the PBMR is re&ected in the ISS oc- ent way casional paper, Nuclear Energy Rethink: !e rise and demise of South Africa’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor, We have placed too much emphasis on allowing the ISS Paper No 210, David Fig, April 2010, which has utility to in&uence our policy. In the "rst national load been circulated. Civil society organisation Earthlife shedding, Eskom immediately privileged large users of Africa contested it in law. It became clear that the EIA electricity. !e IRP process is constructed the wrong for Nuclear-1 was under way though there was no clear way around, which means that electricity policy is design for the reactor in place. We cannot assess safety decided before broader energy policy. Environmental and environmental impacts without knowing which Impact Assessments (EIAs) are rigged and diluted, design will be adopted; and particularly if we open up instead of being the fair, transparent and public the process to bids from China, Russia and Korea, as attempts to draw the decision makers to the right there is less access to information about their designs. information that they are meant to be. A new EIA process was initiated for the PBMR a$er the Earthlife Africa legal challenge and is still under 2. Failure to build a regulatory culture in the nuclear way, even though the PBMR process has been can- industry that: (a) serves the public well, and (b) enjoys celled. !e design has been changed further since the public con"dence second EIA was launched.

Conference Report 7 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

5. Failure to curb the special pleading of the local and However, this clause has been used as an excuse for international nuclear industries promoting a carbon-emitting economy. Under Section 24: Environment, everyone has the right: Local and international nuclear industries have allowed the PBMR to proceed without proper controls Q To an environment that is not harmful to their health and accountability. !ere has been a revolving-door or well-being syndrome between the regulator and the company. Q To have the environment protected, for the bene"t of Ministers have disseminated industry propaganda, in- present and future generations, through reasonable cluding myths about climate change, the idea that only legislative and other measures that prevent pollution nuclear and coal can provide appropriate baseload, the and ecological degradation; promote conservation; notion of a nuclear renaissance, and accepting bids for and secure ecologically sustainable development and unproven technologies such as the EPR and the PBMR. use of natural resources, while promoting justi"able !e work of the nuclear lobby in South Africa has had economic and social development in&uence over statements made by the South African state. !ere is a growing relationship with France, Climate change and global warming are undermining our which has inappropriate access to our presidential economic and social development. If we don’t take action advisors and to the president himself. !e CEO of soon, we won’t have any economic development. Areva sits on our presidential advisory panel for inter- In terms of Section 33: Just administrative action: national investment. Westinghouse has a large interest in our nuclear engineers and those le$ in the PBMR Q Everyone has the right to administrative action that is programme. Both Areva and Westinghouse have set lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair up o%ces in South Africa to market their wares. Q Everyone whose rights have been adversely a#ected by administrative action has the right to be given written We need to be alert to the work that needs to be done on reasons these di#erent levels. Q National legislation must be enacted to give e#ect to these rights, and must provide for the review of TAKING OUR POWER: THE administrative action by a court or, where appropriate, PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO BE CONSULTED an independent and impartial tribunal; impose a duty ON ENERGY POLICY on the state to give e#ect to the rights in subsections (1) and (2); and promote an e%cient administration Yvette Abrahams, Commission for Gender Equality In terms of Section 195: Basic values and principles govern- ing public administration: !e Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) is an independent watchdog body set up under Chapter 9 of Public administration must be governed by the the Constitution. Our job is to safeguard constitutional democratic values and principles enshrined in the democracy, particularly with regard to gender equality. Constitution, including the following principles: Can constitutional democracy really exist in a situation of e: People’s needs must be responded to, and the public high economic inequality? I would say that it cannot. !e must be encouraged to participate in policy-making middle class is too small and weak; only 41 per cent of our f: Public administration must be accountable. population have a job; and the remaining population are too weak, too poor and too uneducated to be citizens in !e National Energy Act of 2008, section 5 calls for meas- the full sense of the word. As a Chapter 9 institution our ures that will ensure, among other things: job is very di%cult. !e CGE is an activist body. Climate change and energy falls under our poverty programme, !e universal access to appropriate forms of energy or which I head. !e title of our concept paper is ‘No gender energy services for all the people of the Republic at af- equality without an earth to have it on’. fordable prices. !ese measures must take into account To come back to the issue of constitutional democracy: the Constitution is the strongest law that we have and I 1. !e availability of energy resources encourage you to use it. When a state disobeys its own law 2. A#ordability the country is in serious governance trouble. 3. Cost e#ectiveness Section 24 of the Constitution, regarding the envi- 4. !e State’s commitment to provide free ronment, promotes economic and social development. basic electricity to poor households.

8 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

In administrative law one is not remunerated for any costs example, section 4 says administrators must consult incurred. !is is an expensive law to use. the public before important decisions are taken. !e National Energy Regulator Act 40 of 2004: Section 3. Openness. Openness is the opposite of secrecy. 10.3 states that: !e way government works should be open for all to see. Decisions are more likely to be supported by Any person may institute proceedings in the High people if they can see, understand and contribute Court for judicial review of an administrative action to the process of decision-making. !is is why the by the Energy Regulator in accordance with the PAJA says reasons must be given for decisions. Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000. 4. Transparency. Transparency is mentioned in section 195 of the Constitution as one of the basic In other words, anyone has locus standi – you do not have principles of the public administration. (http:// to prove that you are an interest group. www.justice.gov.za/paja/about/review.htm). But this must happen under 180 days prescription, i.e. either within 180 days of internal processes being !is law is very precisely de"ned. exhausted or, in case of there being no internal processes, PAJA Section 6.2. Judicial Review of Administrative within 180 days of an applicant becoming aware of a Action states that: decision. !e NERSA Act is speci"cally about allowing access to A court or tribunal has the power to administrative law. !ere is no question as to whether or review an administrative action if: not energy issues fall under administrative law – they do. (c) the action was procedurally unfair… Anybody has locus standi; what this means is that you do (e) the action was taken... not have to prove your own interest group. Anybody can (iii) because irrelevant considerations were taken into be an interest group automatically under administrative account or relevant considerations were not considered. law. However, you need to be aware of the seldom- mentioned prescription clause, which states that you Discretionary powers must be used within the law. !ey have to take action within 180 days of internal processes must also be used for the purposes that they were given. being exhausted, or in the case of there being no internal Decisions can only be taken for reasons allowed by law process, within 180 days of the applicant becoming aware and not for other reasons. of the decision. It is an interesting exercise to try to work When the administrator is using discretion, they out what NERSA’s and the DoE’s processes are for ap- can only take relevant factors into account. If relevant pealing a decision. However, the prescription clause is not factors are not considered, or irrelevant factors taken into necessarily as strong as it looks. account, then the decision is not taken for good reason. In Administrative law is also expensive, as you do not such a case, a court can review the decision. receive costs. It costs about R500 000 to approach the High Discretionary powers must be used by the person Court, R1 million if it goes to the Constitutional Court. given these powers and not by others. (http://www.justice. So we encourage people to look at the Equality Act, which gov.za/paja/about/review.htm) costs R15 000 a go. You can get 40 Equality Act judgments !ere is a very precise legal de"nition of what discre- for the price of one administrative law judgment. tionary powers actually means. PAJA section 3.1: Procedurally Fair Administrative Action states that: Case law 1

Administrative action which materially and Administrative Law – PAJA s 6(2)(e) adversely a#ects the rights or legitimate expecta- (iii) – name change of Louis Trichardt to tions of any person must be procedurally fair. Makhado reviewed and set aside 1. Accountability means that o%cials must explain the way in which they have used their power. [36] … (2) that the application for the name change had !ey must be able to justify their decisions. not been preceded, as it should have been, by proper 2. Responsiveness. A responsive government is one that consultation with all interested parties; and (3) that listens to the people it governs and responds to their the "rst respondent in considering the objection under needs. An unresponsive government ignores and shuts s 10(3) did not properly apply his mind to the objections itself o# from the people. Many of the provisions of and if he had done so he would have realised that a the PAJA are designed to promote responsiveness. For proper consultation process had not been followed.

Conference Report 9 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

!is case took place in 2007. Excerpts from the judgment ial misstatements of fact had been made, was entitled are attached. !e court was very speci"c in this case. !ey to act on the assumption that the correct facts had been looked at how many people were at the meeting and who placed before him. In this case the "rst respondent was was there. What this case illustrates is that there is a very entitled to assume that the fact conveyed to him by the precise de"nition of what constitutes public consultation. Director-General, viz. that there had been proper con- Should any energy policy be passed that has consulted only sultation, was correct. In my opinion the legal position as 0.3 per cent of the population, it will not be considered set out in the Pepcor case, based as it is on the principle proper consultation. of legality, still applies under PAJA, s 6(2)(e)(iii) of which provides that administrative action taken because ‘irrel- Case law 2 evant considerations were taken into account or relevant considerations were not considered’ can be set aside on [45] In my opinion the statement in the guidelines that review. Where a decision is based on a material misstate- the Names Council ensures that proper consultation has ment of fact it is clear that that subparagraph applies.[eq] taken place is akin to a promise made by a public author- ity to follow a certain procedure, about which the Privy !is case cites precedent. It points out that a reasonable Council said the following in Attorney-General of Hong and just decision can only be taken on the basis of true Kong v Ng Yuen Shiu [1983] 2 AC 622 (PC) at 638E-F: facts. If the decision is taken on the basis of a material misstatement of fact, it is not a just and reasonable When a public authority has promised to follow a certain decision in terms of administrative law. You could use procedure, it is in the interest of good administration this piece of law for IRP or nuclear policy, for example. that it should act fairly and implement its promise, so Material misstatement of fact means one of two things: long as implementation does not interfere with its statu- tory duty. !e principle is also justi"ed by the further Q Insu%cient information lies before the o%cial who consideration that, when the promise was made, the makes the decision, e.g. in the CGE and South authority must have considered that it would be assisted African Faith Communities Environmental Initiative in discharging its duty fairly by any representations from (SAFCEI) submission to NERSA, we pointed out that interested parties and as a general rule that is correct. externalities had not been considered. If IRP scenarios do not look at externalities su%ciently, that would be What this case illustrates is that if government promises considered a material misstatement of fact to consult, it must actually do so. Q Information has been given that is just plain wrong

Case law 3 Finally, it is signi"cant that the Louis Trichardt case never went higher than the Supreme Court of Appeal. !e [48] Under the law as it was before PAJA it was held State Attorney’s o%ce has had a blanket policy since 1994 by this court in Pepcor Retirement Fund v Financial that every single case against the state must be appealed Services Board 2003 (6) SA 38 (SCA) at paras 47 and 48 to the highest level. !is case was not. !ere are some that a material mistake of fact was a ground for judicial interesting anomalies in that blanket policy, but I believe review, provided the fundamental distinction between that basically nobody wanted to challenge it. !is is an appeal and review was not blurred or eliminated. Cloete important precedent on the right to consultation and JA said (at para 47) that the doctrine of legality requires proper information. that the power conferred on a functionary to make deci- In conclusion, we need to explain what climate change sions in the public interest should be exercised properly, and energy is to the people. It is our duty to work on gov- i.e. on the basis of the true facts. In the Pepcor case it ernance and democracy. It is important that we get there was held that the distinction referred to was not blurred before the state does. !e government could outwork us if or eliminated because the Registrar of Pension Funds, we don’t hasten to the work that needs to be done. whose decision was being reviewed and to whom mater-

10 Institute for Security Studies Session 2 Understanding the nature and in&uence of interest groups

NUCLEAR: WHAT ROLE FOR the project was likely to fail, but it believed it was politi- NUCLEAR INTEREST GROUPS cally infeasible for it to exit the project. POST!PBMR, AND HOW WILL A total of R7,6 billion was spent on the project by the THEY JUSTIFY THE BIG COSTS? South African government. From 2006 onwards, only the South African government contributed "nancially to the Prof Steve Thomas, Greenwich project. !e vast majority of the expenditure (60 to 70 per University UK cent) occurred from 2006 onwards, when it was clear that In 1999 I wrote a report on the Pebble Bed Modular the project should have been abandoned. Reactor (PBMR), asking: will it work? And if it does, and Why did civil society fail with PBMR? Why were the even if it is economically viable, will anyone buy it? My parliamentary committees not monitoring expenditure report argued that it is a risky venture and should not be and asking di%cult parliamentary questions? (Lance funded by public money. Greyling was one of the exceptions.) Why didn’t the !e PBMR has "nally been abandoned, but why was it Auditor General investigate? NGO action was limited, the allowed to go on for so long, when it was clear that it was exceptions being Earthlife Africa and the Legal Resource a programme that could not succeed? Who was pushing Centre. !e press were also disappointing, as they printed it? If we don’t understand what went wrong with it, then PBMR press releases uncritically, the Cape Times and the same mistakes will be repeated with a new nuclear Noseweek excepted. !ere were few investigative TV and programme. radio programmes. Were these failures due to incompe- Nuclear power has been a commercial technology for tence, or to political or commercial pressure? more than 50 years but it has never been a competitive In terms of South Africa’s current policy, in 2006 electricity source. !e real costs of nuclear power have the government announced it would create 20 GW of increased throughout its history. Why have learning, nuclear power by 2025, with the "rst plant coming into technical progress and scale economies (size and number) service sometime between 2010 and 2012. !e favoured not reduced costs? technologies are European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) and South Africa announced that it was taking up a failed AP1000. However, EPR has not received generic design or German technology in 1998 and spent 12 years and safety approval anywhere in the world. While France and R9 billion in public money before the government admit- Finland have allowed construction to go ahead, they have ted failure. !e PBMR was never likely to be successful. not completed the regulatory approval process. !ere have !is should have been clear by 2002, given that the time been delays in the process in the UK and the US. !ere scales were slipping, there were no customers and no has been some EPR and AP1000 construction in China, investors and there were serious technical issues raised by but no worthwhile information is available. AP1000 the US regulator. !e government commissioned studies received US safety approval in 2006, but there were major to be carried out by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) revisions made in 2008 which won’t be completed until and a panel of international experts, of which I was one. 2011. AP1000 has also not received regulatory approval !e commissioned reports were kept secret. Eskom knew anywhere in the world.

Conference Report 11 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

In terms of experience with EPR, the Olkiluoto project cost of the proposed new nuclear programme would be in Finland was expected to take four years to build. much more than for the PBMR. However, a$er four years it was four years late and 90 per I have no speci"c knowledge of corruption in the cent over budget. !e vendor, Areva, and the utility are nuclear industry in South Africa, but worldwide it has been now countersuing each other for cost overruns of billions associated with corruption. I would suggest that a judicial of euros. In France, the Flamanville project has been inquiry is needed to "nd out the facts as to where exactly under construction for two years. It is now two years late the money has gone in the case of the PBMR. and about 50 per cent over budget. Even EDF Energy, In terms of the argument that the nuclear industry which runs and manages more than twice as many oper- will create jobs, it is important to bear in mind that the ating nuclear plants as any other utility, has been unable more expensive and out of control the costs are, the more to build an EPR e%ciently. jobs will be created. South Africa has wasted 12 years and !e South African programme was based on very R10 billion, both of which could have been used much over-optimistic cost estimates. In 2007 the government more e#ectively. forecast that a nuclear power station would cost $2 500 !ere are various possible reasons for the irrational per kilowatt to build. !e bids they received were for at pursuit of nuclear energy, including self-interest, self- least $6 000 per kilowatt. !at means that an EPR plant aggrandisement, corruption and quasi-religious belief. would cost at least $10 billion (R70 billion) to build. !at !e nuclear lobby also plays a big part, and may include: puts the PBMR in context. A programme of EPRs would sign South Africa up for an expenditure of R150 billion on Q Government: two plants. Engineering News stated that 1 !e defence ministry, given that civil nuclear power provides a shortcut to nuclear weapons In fact, ratings agency Standard & Poor’s said on 2 !e public enterprise ministry, motivated by national !ursday that South Africa’s National Treasury prestige and pressure from local industry needed to extend ‘unconditional, timely guarantees’ 3. !e energy ministry, given the expectation that across all Eskom’s debt stock if it hoped to sustain nuclear power would increase energy security and the utility’s current BBB+ investment-grade credit reduce energy imports rating. !e National Treasury was still to announce Q Utilities: o$en driven by corporate technological the details of the package. !e Eskom board had, optimism, they have a preference for technologically as a result, decided to terminate the commercial prestigious and challenging technologies and an procurement process to select the preferred bidder apparent reduction in dependence on externalities for the construction of the Nuclear-1 project. (unions, foreign fuel suppliers) Q National nuclear research bodies (NECSA): o$en mo- Despite this, the government is undeterred in its pursuit tivated by self-preservation and links to the military of nuclear energy. Brian Dames (Eskom CEO): ‘South Q Scientists: motivated by technological optimism and Africa also urgently needs to decide on its approach funding opportunities for ‘big science’ toward nuclear energy, which provides the best solu- Q Manufacturing: sees a nuclear industry providing tion for meeting the country’s long-term energy needs.’ work for equipment suppliers, cement, steel and engi- (Bloomberg, 7 September 2010). Dipuo Peters (Energy neering companies and the illusion of cheap power Minister): ‘South Africa must consider using nuclear fuel to meet the country’s power needs.’ (Bloomberg, 7 In conclusion, the economics of nuclear power are poor September 2010). and getting worse. !e PBMR project was based on naive It is likely that South Africa would use Chinese or forecasts of costs, schedules and markets; its consequences Korean technology, as this is cheaper than that from were serious failures in the electricity system and large Western countries. South Africa would be buying tech- opportunity costs. It exposed a serious lack of checks and nology from China that China bought from France in the balances in monitoring South African public spending. 1970s. It is unlikely that it could then be brought up to the Eskom and the South African government seem to have latest standards. !e Korean design is newer but it would learnt nothing from the PBMR failure given that their plans not meet European standards, and expensive modi"ca- are still based on hopelessly naïve forecasts and show little tions – including having a ‘core-catcher’ and protection understanding of foreign experience. If their plans are not against aircra$ impacts – would be needed to do this. !e challenged, costs will be even higher this time.

12 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

Discussion We should have a positive and a negative GDP. We need to challenge ‘trickle-down theory’. !ere is no country in In reference to the Energy Minister’s rationale that the world in which economic growth has led to a trickle the construction of six nuclear power stations down for the poorest. Modern economics is autistic. We would be good in terms of economies of scale: need to challenge our development path more, rather than It is not realistic that we will get six reactors by 2022. If supporting the current paradigm. We need to give greater building started tomorrow, one power plant would be on consideration to what a future economy could look like. line by 2022. !ere is a serious concern about unrealistic Climate change is a symptom, not a problem, and we timescales. !ey don’t allow for proper decisions; nor do are too focused on the symptom. We spend too much they allow the regulator to go through due process. (Steve time arguing over the details, when we should spend !omas) more energy unpacking the systemic causes; for example, consumption – corporate consumption. Who is to blame, In reference to the National Nuclear Regulator’s fundamentally? Would you rather change the behaviour (NNR) licensing of the PBMR despite problematic of 36 companies or 46 million people? !irty-six compa- #ndings by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission: nies use 60 per cent of our electricity. For example, BHP !e Nuclear Regulatory Commission carried out an Billiton use 10 per cent of our electricity but they create initial review of the design of the PBMR. !at is when the 0,1 per cent of GDP and 0,005 per cent of jobs. We import problem of the overheating of the pebbles came to light. aluminium because they get export credits. A$er this the NNR carried out its own preliminary inves- We need to keep our campaigns people-centred, in- tigation into the PBMR and found no problems to prevent cluding political priorities, jobs, poverty alleviation, union the licensing of the plant. What are the reasons for such membership and services for the poor. !e technical di#erent "ndings? (Steve !omas) debates will not bring people along with us because our language alienates people. We do not contextualise our position within governance paradigms. Consequently the HOW IS CIVIL SOCIETY government calls us anti-ANC, anti-development. Some HOLDING NARROW INTEREST portions of the environmental movement may indeed be GROUPS TO ACCOUNT? described as such. But as environmental justice activists, we are being lumped together with right-wing greens. Muna Lakhani, IZWA and Earthlife Africa We need to focus on a just transition and involve the mass population. We think documents and the internet Holding people to account is not straightforward. We are su%cient. We also need to relate to Africa more, as we have had mixed success, as civil society, in doing this. incorporate too much data from Europe and the US. !ere However, we are good at research and consist of lots of is a tension between Africans and Africanists. We also committed people. focus too much on Eskom and Sasol, and should consider !e civil society space has varied greatly in recent the role of corporations in more depth; for instance, those years. Under (former President !abo) Mbeki, it was involved in the automobile industry and agriculture. dramatically reduced. However, we encouraged NUM and COSATU to join us in the campaign against nuclear RENEWABLE ENERGY POTENTIAL energy and waste incineration. AS A SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVE Climate change has now become a ‘sexy’ issue. FOR SOUTH AFRICA Government documents now speak of ‘green jobs’ and Wikus van Niekerk, Director: Centre for the ‘green economy’. We have also been able to chal- Renewable and Sustainable Energy Studies lenge some of the Environmental Impact Assessments. Engaging in the Integrated Resource Plan 2 (IRP2) process has also been a fascinating journey. Some people It is possible to get very accurate wind maps for South see the campaign against World Bank funding for the Africa. !ere is a reasonable amount of wind in South Medupi coal-"red power plant as a failure, but it gave gov- Africa, particularly in the Karoo, on the South Coast and ernment a shake-up, and put this issue on the global map. on the West Coast. Our media does not always work in our favour. We !e Klipheuwel wind farm has two Vestas turbines need to be careful about falling into various traps. !is in- and one Jeumont. !ese are not always turning. cludes the use of meaningless measures such as GDP. !is Klipheuwel was set up as a demonstration site rather than is used as a measure of success, when in fact lots of bad as a wind production facility and has a capacity factor of things are good for GDP, such as sickness and shootings. less than 20 per cent. !e Darling wind farm is newer and

Conference Report 13 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

has four Führlander wind turbines. !e expected capacity returns. But we need gigawatts of electricity, for which we factor was to have been greater than 30 per cent, but the need solar electricity. !ere are two main ways of doing reality is more like 23 or 24 per cent. !ere have been this: i) solar photo voltaics, which do a direct conversion some issues with this project. from sunlight to electricity, or ii) CSP which makes use of !e next wind farm that we expect to see will probably a thermal conversion. !ese solar power plants typically be Skaapvlei, the Eskom Wind Farm near Lutzville (now have curved mirrors called parabolic troughs and a tube known as Sere). !is will have up to 100 wind turbines, in which the solar radiation is concentrated in a hot oil with output of 100 MW in the "rst phase and another or heat transfer &uid. !ere is also a new technology now 100 MW in the second phase. It is funded by loans from available called Linear Fresnel Re&ectors. Another option the French Development Bank and the World Bank, and at very high temperatures is to make use of a tower. A will go out to tender soon. !en there is also a Vestas wind solar power plant is very easy to build, much more so turbine in Coega, the Industrial Development Zone near than a coal-"red power plant. !e energy can be stored Port Elizabeth. !is was put up in a month or two and cheaply as thermal energy, i.e. as hot oil or molten salt. A demonstrates how much quicker a wind power generation CSP plant can be a baseload plant very easily, though you plant can be constructed compared to coal and nuclear. would have to burn fossil fuel to get it going. A GTZ study on grid capacity in the Western Cape In terms of biomass resources, South Africa is water- has predicted that it is possible to integrate 2,8 GW of scarce, so this poses a challenge. !ere is some biomass wind power into the grid without expanding or destabilis- on the eastern side of the country, but not so much in the ing it. We have a list of all the potential wind projects in west. !ere are some agricultural waste products such as South Africa; their potential output comes to 14,6 GW, wood chips, manure, corn and wheat husks, which are which is equivalent to about six Medupis. !ese are either already being burned in boilers to make heat and electric- projects with an EIA, a wind mast erected or where land ity. We can also grow energy crops for bio ethanol. Maize has been secured. and corn are not allowed for this purpose in South Africa, South Africa also has a good wave resource, similar to but sugar cane, sugar beet, jatropha and soya beans are. Australia. We have fronts approaching us from the south- However, there is a biodiversity risk – and a big fuel- west. !e best wave energy resource is along the south and versus-food debate. !e second-generation conversion south-west coast. !ere is a potential annual average of processes are more practical; one can use lignocellulose 40 KW per metre of crest length (more in summer, less in and turn it into ethanol very e%ciently. Biomass has great winter). We can also predict the wind resource through job creation potential. modelling. We don’t have a lot of hydro energy potential available Most of the sun is in the north-western part of the to us as we do not have a lot of water. We have a hydro- country, in the Northern Cape Province. We have solar electric power station at Gariep (producing 360 MW), radiation which equals or surpasses that of Australia and Vanderkloof (240 MW), the Cahora Bassa dam in North America. Our Direct Normal Irradiance (DNI), Mozambique (2 000 MW) and a potential project on the the measurement you would take in advance of planning Kunene river in Namibia/Angola. We have energy storage a Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) plant, is much better schemes at Steenbras (180 MW), Palmiet (400 MW) and than many countries. For instance, in Spain they are Drakensberg (1 000 MW). !e new projects at Ingula building power plants in areas that compare to our lowest (1 333 MW) and Project Lima are on hold. We also have levels of DNI. !e two main issues are that the grid is not some micro hydro, such as the Bethlehem plant capable very strong in the areas where we have a lot of sun so we of 7 MW, of which 3 MW is now online. Lastly, there is would need to reinforce it if we are to build CSP plants. the possible 40 GW Grand Inga dam, in the DRC. !is is Another constraint is water, given that areas ideal for CSP a big political challenge and we would need to invest in a are very dry. However, this can be overcome by using dry high-voltage DC line. air-cooling, in which South Africa has ample expertise. Other options are small-scale biodigesters; the We have done a detailed study and estimate that we could Agulhas ocean current, for which Eskom is currently achieve 548 GW of solar power in the whole of South conducting measurements; energy from waste incinera- Africa, of which 510 GW would be in the Northern Cape. tors which are coupled to boilers; and land"ll to gas, !ere are challenges, such as that the sun only shines which involves harvesting methane from capped land"lls during the day, but we can overcome these. and converting to electricity using a gas engine or turbine. With respect to solar power conversion technologies, !is last includes the Durban Land"ll Projects, La Mercy we should all have solar water heaters on our roofs. It is and Marianhill land"lls and Bisasar Road (6,5 MW now also possible to do this commercially, with guaranteed online).

14 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

In conclusion G7 Renewable Energies is a wind-farm developer with high ambitions. We currently have "ve wind-farm projects in the pipeline, totalling between 500 and 1 000 Q South Africa has a reasonable wind energy resource MW. We plan to participate in the "rst Renewable Energy that is geographically dispersed to assist security of Feed-In Tari# (REFIT) request for proposals (RFP) and/ supply or request for quali"cations (RFQ), with construction Q South Africa has a world-class wave energy resource, starting in 2012 and commercial operation in 2013 (the predominantly along the south and west coasts. !e larger projects possibly by 2014). One criticism of the Agulhas ocean current is an attractive long-term wind industry is that we are all ‘pale males’. However, we source have attained BEE level four. Forty-four per cent of our Q South Africa has one of the best solar regimes in the sta# is black, including senior management, and there are world; of all the renewable energy resources it is by far a number of similar companies out there. the most abundant available in the country In terms of the history of studies done on South Q South African biomass and hydro energy resources are Africa’s wind resource, this began in 1995 with the limited, due to a lack of water Roseanne Diab Wind Atlas, which is now obsolete. In Q Energy from waste, agriculture and municipal solid 2001 Eskom, the Council for Scienti"c and Industrial waste are more readily available and exploitable Research (CSIR) and the Danish Aid Organisation (now Q Wind energy is a mature technology and can be rolled Danida) teamed up and produced another wind atlas. out immediately in South Africa. It has the potential Unfortunately this was never "nished and had a number for establishing a local industry for tower and blade of problems. I argue that it is now also obsolete. I came manufacturing in the short to medium term up with my own Mesoscale Wind Atlas in 2008, with Q Wave energy convertors are still not commercially an 18 km resolution. However this will also be obsolete viable but may have some role in South Africa in the by 2011, when the "rst map of the Wind Atlas of South medium to long term Africa (WASA) comes out. !is is a publicly funded Q Photovoltaic (PV) systems will play a role in the short project from UNDP, GEF and some Danish funds. It’s to medium term, on various scales, but large-scale a multi-institutional work done by the Climate Systems local manufacture of PV cells and modules will be Analysis group at the University of Cape Town, the challenging Danish organisation Risoe, CSIR, Saneri and the South Q Concentrated solar power (CSP) is the most promising African Weather Services. I have also been involved in the medium- to long-term technology for application in process. SA, with signi"cant advantages including the possibil- Note that every subsequent study has found a higher ity of establishing a manufacturing industry wind resource. !e Roseanne Diab study in 1995 con- Q A large number of jobs can also be created in the cluded that wind could provide around three per cent of biomass and energy-from-waste sectors our electricity, while my study concluded that a realistic Q South Africa can choose to be a follower or a leader estimate was around 35 per cent of current consumption, or about 26 GW of wind power capacity. While the 2001 Eskom/CSIR map was done at 10 RENEWABLES: WHAT GAINS metres, my map from 2008 included many more vertical FOR THE WIND INDUSTRY? levels around hub height. Eskom/CSIR’s map is patchy because they used existing weather stations and applied Dr Kilian Hagemann, G7 Renewable some micro-modelling, with limited success. For instance, Energies and South African it indicates that the wind speed at the weather station at Wind Energy Association Giant’s Castle is between 20 and 30 metres per second; but this would imply hurricane levels every day. I would I have been involved in the wind sector since 2001, when hypothesise that they used the WASP micro-scale model I became a board member of the South African Wind beyond its parameters. !is model is not designed to be Energy Association (SAWEA), a position which I held used in complex terrain such as Giant’s Castle, which has until 2002, but I have been a member since then. In very steep gradients. 2008, as part of my PhD, I published the Mesoscale Wind !e Roseanne Diab Wind Atlas concludes that all Atlas of South Africa. I have been the director of my own the wind is along the coast and there is nothing inland. company, G7 Renewable Energies, since 2009. My vision However this is not true. It seems that many of the inland is for 100 per cent renewable energy penetration in South areas have more wind than the coastal areas. In addition, Africa by 2050. coastal areas are very sensitive due to tourism, environ-

Conference Report 15 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

mental impacts, objections from the public to the visual development activity. !ere are dozens of potential wind impact, etc. developers vying for projects all over the country and a In terms of the total resource estimation, it is not only virtual land grab is taking place. Developers are signing a question of where the wind blows, but also of where the up land with long-term leases le$, right and centre, but infrastructure is and where it is viable. I integrated the there is likely to be quite a bit of consolidation in 2011 and total wind potential by considering the following criteria: 2012. About 6 000 MW is currently in development and Q Proximity to roads, because you need to transport being considered under environmental impact assess- your turbines. I took secondary roads as a minimum ments (EIAs). A "rst large wind farm (greater than Q Proximity to transmission lines. For a large wind farm 20 MW) will probably be built in 2011. !e industry is you need at least 66 kV of distribution/transmission now readying itself for the "rst bids under the REFIT capacity programme, which could start in November 2010. Q Minimum capacity factor, based on a standard 2 MW SAWEA has a 6 000 MW target to be achieved by Vestas turbine. !is tells you how much your wind 2015 and a target of 25 per cent wind by 2025, as part of farm generates on average over a whole year, compared our ‘yes to renewables’ campaign (www.yestorenewables. to output at full capacity over the same period. My co.za). SAWEA is busy lobbying the Department of assumption is that this will be much higher than in Energy (DoE) and the National Energy Regulator of South Europe, as there is more wind in South Africa than in Africa (NERSA) right now. We are pushing for a high Denmark or Germany, for instance. Policy-makers do wind allocation in IRP2 so that we can make this happen. not always understand this We are keen to deliver a low-cost, low-carbon solution Q Given hub height. !e higher above ground you go, the with high employment potential. more wind there is, for example at 60m, 80m or 100m. !e di#erences are very signi"cant RENEWABLES: WHAT GAINS Q Density of one turbine per square kilometre. !ese FOR THE WIND INDUSTRY? days you can get about four turbines per square kilo- Davin Chown, Genesis Eco-Energy and SAWEA metre, but this accounts for non-feasible areas such as nature reserves, mountains, etc. I want to re&ect on the questions that we have raised as Taking all this into account, the areas in South Africa an industry association. A lot of work has been done to with potential are limited areas in the Northern Cape and con"rm that there are renewable energy resources out KwaZulu-Natal and quite a lot in the Western Cape and there, be they wind, solar or other. We now need to move the Eastern Cape. beyond the technical debates of whether renewable energy We are trying to disprove the baseload reliability is possible. Other countries have been able to move ahead argument (regarding ‘what do we do if the wind doesn't much more quickly and in a much more robust way than blow’) by scienti"c research. We investigated the impact South Africa has. For instance, in Kenya there is already of 30 GW of wind farms spread across the entire country. 300 MW of wind power under advanced development. We took the 8pm ‘winter peak’, when the electric grid is !e Sudan and Namibia are also moving ahead. Why is most strained, and looked at how reliable the 30 GW of South Africa not able to move at the same speed? wind power is. We asked: what is the probability that a How we go about the process of investment – as well as given percentage of that capacity is online at load peak? the quality of investment – is very important. Discussions We found that even in a low-wind scenario there would about the need to de-risk the economy, and the bene"ts still be 10 per cent of capacity generating at any given of doing so, are not in the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) time, guaranteed. !ere is no uncertainty about that. process, despite the research, pleas and information that Another argument put forward by Eskom and others: have been submitted. Why are authorities not responding what do we do when there is too much wind? However, to this and looking at these critical questions? We know because the country is so large and the potential so that it is easy to implement a number of these technolo- distributed, that scenario will never occur. We will never gies and localise the manufacture of several components have a full 30 GW on stream. So Eskom would not be over the medium term. What is hard to understand managing a variability of between 0 and 100 per cent, as it about rolling out an energy future and an energy plan claims to fear, but rather a variability of between 20 or 25 that would help to deal with issues such as land reform, per cent and 75 per cent. job creation, energy access, poverty alleviation and rural REFIT was announced in March 2009, with a tari# development, and inward investment? !ese are the issues level of R1,25 per kilowatt-hour. It kick-started a lot of we are putting on the table in relation to the IRP. !ere is

16 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

plenty of evidence to support this, and examples north of You are more likely to succeed in getting accountability the border where it is happening already. entrenched. As you interrogate nuclear power, interrogate Who is jigging the debate internally? As an industry us. We are happy to answer the questions. !is will give association, we are asking: who is taking the "nal deci- people con"dence that we are open, honest and transpar- sion? A$er much analysis we believe that it is the Inter- ent and can move forward. Ministerial Committee on Energy (IMC). Should it not be the Minister of Energy? As an industry association we have INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCERS: spent a lot of time with the Minister and her colleagues. We ARE THESE OLD FACES WITH A have found that much of the information that is presented NEW, CLEAN STRATEGY? does not "nd its way into the decision-making portals. For Mark Pickering, Meridian Economics instance, the Minister has turned round and said to me, ‘but I haven’t seen this document’. I ask: how can such a thing happen when the document has been submitted? To state my interests up front: I have been employed by A frank, honest, straightforward discussion is needed independent power producers (IPPs) on and o# for the last around energy issues. "ve years. I am also a member of the interim management We have a lot of issues concerning economic and committee of the IPP association of South Africa. My political transformation in this country. !ere are a lot of brief is to make a pitch for IPPs and what needs to happen vested interests in certain sectors of the economy. to make them work. Civil society should be interested What should we say to former miners in the Northern in this, in the interests of better governance. Economic Cape, to workers in the automotive industry who are development needs power. worried about their job security? We need to show an Central America has 80 per cent access, while alternative path to government. Either we are not making sub-Saharan Africa has 25 per cent. Central American the case clearly enough, or someone doesn’t want to listen. companies have adopted private power production for Who owns the mining companies? What are the real generation (though not for transmission and distribution). interests of the coal industry? Are there a lot of vested !ere is no natural monopoly in generation and it is an interests? I get asked this about the wind industry. I have obvious place to introduce private sector innovation and been asked if there are deals taking place between certain funding. In Africa, a quarter of the power is provided by wind companies and certain big industrial companies private producers. Kenya is an exception. South Africa who will undercut the Renewable Energy Feed-in Tari# has no IPPs. !ere are at least 50 IPPs operating across the (REFIT). We should not be scared to interrogate these whole of Africa, the majority of which are successful and things. contributing to economic and social development. We are on a once-o# transition to sustainability. !e !e lessons from Central America are that tari#s, clear sustainability transition won’t come round a second time. rules and policy, and a political commitment to private As an industry association, we raise these issues from a power are necessary. Tari#s have to be cost-re&ective and point of concern; we understand that some people will feel based on risk-re&ective returns. !e REFIT tari#s are a a#ronted and exposed. good step in that direction. Good tari#s are necessary !e notion that project developers in the wind indus- for "nancially healthy utilities. In South Africa we have try are mostly white men has been raised by journalists had positive intentions. !e government, NERSA and and others. We should have a discussion about this across Eskom all make positive noises about the bene"ts of IPPs the industry. We must address this issue, but without that will relieve stress on Eskom’s balance sheet and the getting sidetracked. national "scus and bring diversity and innovation. !ey We ask: who has been running the governance of the are far more likely to introduce renewable energy than IRP process? Will the people who are currently running introduce six new nuclear power stations. However, there it continue to do so? Independent voices have struggled has been no progress with procurement. to gain access to the process. It is easier for civil society to As an example, there are "ve procurement pro- regulate industry and raise the issues than for an industry grammes which have been launched but for which the association such as us. We are told that we have vested processes have either stalled or failed. interests. But we are putting up our own money and taking the risk. !e state will take limited risk. !is has 1 !e Department of Minerals and Energy’s (DME) not entered the main debate. peaker project (which commenced in 2005) for a !e Energy Caucus has a huge opportunity to ask the potential 1 000 MW of Open Cycle Gas Turbines. A hard questions that the wind industry and others cannot. preferred bidder was selected in 2007, but the project

Conference Report 17 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

failed to reach "nancial close in early 2008. Its status Q Clarify who should approve long-term power purchase and legality is unclear agreements (PPAs) Q Ensure fair dispatch between SOE generators and IPPs 2 Eskom launched its Pilot National Cogeneration Programme (PNCP) in 2006. !ere were expressions !e new generation regulations of August 2009 leave all key of interest for about 5 000 MW, but very few proposals processes in Eskom’s hands. !is means that the Minister were made due to investor concerns with the bank- makes determinations based on reports produced by ability of the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) and a Eskom. !ough this has become more complex, with the sense that better-priced programmes might be o#ered Inter-Ministerial Committee on Energy (IMC), Eskom is in the future still in a con&icted position. !ough we have a proposal for an ISMO, there is no information out in the public domain 3 Eskom launched its Medium-Term Power Procurement about what it will do. Programme (MTPPP) in 2007. !is was delayed for Professor Eberhard and I have made a proposal that the two years pending the resolution of Eskom’s funding ISMO becomes a fully &edged grid operator. Eskom has model. Only 400 MW has been signed up, of which attacked this proposal in the press recently. 215 MW is operational IPPs can most de"nitely contribute, but "rst we need to get the basics in place. First, we need to make sure our 4 Eskom’s Multi-Site Base Load Independent Power tari#s are heading towards "nancially sustainable levels, Producer Programme (BLT) in 2008 had a target of and second, we need to clarify our market rules. !e IRP 2 100 to 4 500 MW. Eskom pre-quali"ed 23 developers process should improve understanding, but this is just in October 2008 but the programme is now on hold, one step in the process. We need to resolve the evident pending the resolution of Eskom’s funding model con&icts of interest between Eskom’s roles as a generator, planner, system operator and procurer of new capacity – 5 Renewable Energy Feed-in Tari#s (REFIT) were pub- through vertical disaggregation and clear role de"nitions lished almost two years ago but it is still unclear who in law. We need to dramatically improve transparency the o#-taker will be – Eskom or the ISMO? with regard to sector performance. Lastly, we need to take advantage of the bene"ts of competition, initially for the I argue that the lack of a clear market structure is what is market and then later within the market. !ere appears holding up IPPs. South Africa is not following the market to be political will, but it has still to follow through into model pursued by the UK, Chile and other economies action. across the globe. Instead, it is aiming for a model in which Eskom stays in place and new generation comes in at the Respondent: Tristen Taylor, Earthlife margin. !is is known as a hybrid model. Sound imple- Africa Sustainable Energy and mentation of this model requires that government admin- Climate Change Project (SECCP) istrators have to do things properly. Eberhard and Gratwick (2010) argue that to achieve this model you need to: Earthlife Africa did a presentation on the Renewable Energy Feed-in Tari# (REFIT) in which they expressed Q De"ne a standard for security of supply concern that IPPs would take excessive pro"t. Our obliga- Q Allocate responsibility for achieving this standard tion is not to pro"t, but to poor and working-class people. Q Monitor whether the standard is being achieved If we lose sight of that, we will get lost. For poor and Q Allocate responsibility for generation-expansion plan- working-class people, electricity is a social good like water ning; update generation-expansion plans regularly; and food, not a commodity. clarify whether plans are mandatory or indicative, !e non-provision of electricity is a method of rein- particularly in relation to generation-licensing pro- forcing poverty in a modern economy. If you don’t have cedures; allocate new-build opportunities between electricity in your house, then you will not participate in incumbent state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and IPPs a modern economy. However, liberalised energy markets Q Allocate responsibility for initiating IPP procure- don’t treat electricity as a social good. ments; de"ne a framework to deal with unsolicited !erefore: we want wind farms, but do we want pro"t? bids Progressive organisations now have to look at industry Q Allocate responsibility for undertaking contract nego- as their saviour. However, a pro"t motive has been estab- tiations with new IPPs lished in the electricity sector. We don’t ask our health Q Address potential con&icts of interest when the in- care service to make a pro"t. But electricity, for ordinary cumbent SOE is both a generator and a single buyer people, is the same thing.

18 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

Mainstream Renewable Power is a ‘good IPP’; but there mercially viable, we will end up relying on the usual are others – such as Sasol, who have just signed a con"- suspects dential Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Eskom. We Q Many wind farms are on land belonging to emerging know what Mainstream Renewable Power will get, but we farmers. Wind farms and solar parks will lease land do not know what Sasol will get from cogeneration and gas. from farmers, which will a#ect land reform When Eskom says they’re not going to build Coal 3, Q !ere is a perception that solar water heaters (SWH) they mean they won’t build it. But an IPP such as AES are of lesser value than electricity from the grid might. Q Electricity is one of the most regulated sectors around. It is not possible for a member of the public to build a We need to be determined about driving localisation; solar panel on his or her roof and sell electricity back to for example, if we buy from China, the goods will be the grid. !ere is a need for civil society and organised built by Chinese labour, who will also operate those labour to wrest control back from Eskom. From a civil plants. !e instructions will be in Chinese. Our society point of view, IPPs need to be interrogated. nuclear engineers are leaving to work in the UK and In conclusion: IPPs are not necessarily good just Europe. !e French are still operating Koeberg because they are wind farms. Q An element of competition is necessary to move forward. Regulations will not stop people from behav- Discussion ing di#erently. South African Airways, for instance – a state-owned entity – is more expensive than using pri- vately owned planes. Competition is healthy and "ne Q What direction will the new industry take? Can South to have in electricity generation. MICs have almost all Africa become a leader? Can we create a locally owned gone that route – India, Chile, !ailand, Indonesia. industry, or will companies from abroad come in and South Africa is unusual in that regard. Eskom is the run things with token local participation? fourth- or "$h-biggest utility in the world. However, Q !e cost of electricity needs to be considered. If we it still runs by a pro"t motive. It has a shareholder want to create an industry, it will cost more. How will compact with government (though this is secret). we fund these IPPs? !e state will not give its blessing !ere is a gap between wholesale and retail sales which to renewable energy. It is more likely that we will have determines cost allocations. In South Africa we have to borrow money from abroad social pricing policies, free basic electricity, etc., and a Q Civil society needs to be careful about opposing IPPs serious funding gap at the generation end. We need to as we may end up shooting ourselves in the foot. We bene"t from competition should also consider a role for cooperatives here Q On local economic development: there is potential Q NERSA was supposed to produce a local feed-in tari# in the wind industry, potential to manufacture some to enable ordinary people to feed into the grid parts locally. For instance, blades can be manufactured Q What about job creation? Is it possible to "nd a match to a high degree of local ownership. However, some between the jobs we would lose in traditional indus- parts (such as turbines) are specialised and will need tries and the new ones that would be created in the to be imported. You cannot avoid some overseas renewable energy sector? equipment, as no bank will fund you if you go with a Q IPPs aren’t only about pro"t seeking. !ere are also purely local project. !ere is a choice between raising some being run by non-governmental organisations, electricity tari#s and su#ering power cuts. Either the such as Oxfam/Just Energy government (and therefore, the taxpayer) pays, or the Q !e use of terminology needs to be clear. What does consumer pays. Coal costs are linked to oil; but with IPP mean? An IPP could also produce nuclear wind there is no risk of an increased cost power Q Because of caps prescribed in REFIT and IRP there Q !ere are di#erent models of IPPs and the challenge is a scramble for renewable energy. Meanwhile, Sasol to civil society is to "nd alternatives and implement is getting subsidies at the same time as our comrades them. As a caucus, we should engage with industry in Sasolburg are coughing up blood in the mornings. associations and discuss these issues in order to chal- We need to interrogate IPPs much more closely. !e lenge them to come up with di#erent models and ways majority of IPPs right now are not renewable. AES will of doing things. Unless this industry becomes com- come in and build Coal 3

Conference Report 19 20 Institute for Security Studies Session 3 Learning lessons from civil society engagements in 2010

WHAT HAS CIVIL SOCIETY opportune time. When the vote was taken, "ve countries ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE CAMPAIGN abstained. AGAINST THE WORLD BANK? Local residents supported by Earthlife Africa and groundWork requested that the World Bank’s internal Bobby Peek, groundWork/Friends accountability arm, the Inspection Panel, carry out an in- of the Earth, South Africa vestigation into the loan. A preliminary investigation took place over "ve days in May. On 29 July the World Bank’s Firstly, many thanks to everyone who supported the executive directors debated whether a full investigation World Bank campaign. It made inroads into di%cult should take place and 13 executive directors opposed this. spaces and places. It has positive things to say about the However, it has since been agreed that a full investigation kind of impact we can have. will take place. Government is responding to pressure. !e question Helen Zille, the Democratic Alliance opposition is whether the government response is meaningful, or leader, gave a speech on this project and sounded like an whether it is creating a better spin machine as we prepare environment justice activist. She was very eloquent and for the 17th Conference of the United Nations Framework had an hour to say things that Earthlife Africa and other Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which will NGOs have been saying for many years. be held in South Africa at the end of 2011. Within the ANC this loan was problematic. Di#erent !e campaign received a strong political response. people were saying di#erent things about it at di#erent It made politicians start thinking and talking. Hogan, times. Gordhan and Peters all &ew to the UK to try to garner !is campaign brought diverse community organisa- support before the World Bank took a decision. !ey tions and non-governmental organisations within South argued that it would support the poor. Africa to the fore, as well as international organisations Eskom was in "nancial trouble because its credit and international networks. Indian civil society was rating was downgraded. !erefore it had no choice but to particularly supportive; which is key, given that Sasol go to the World Bank. Prior to that it had received money is now going into India to sell coal-to-liquid. !ere is (to the tune of $2,5 billion) from the African Development a community process happening in which people are Bank, in 2008. !ere will now be an inspection of this now discussing what we should be doing about coal to loan. !ere was a lot of direct pressure (by Hogan and be better prepared to challenge future projects such as the South African government) on the 24 directors of Kusile. Coordination between NGOs such as WWF, the World Bank who would take the decision of whether Earthlife Africa and groundWork and communities in to approve the loan to Eskom. It created tension within Witbank will be critical. the World Bank because funding for coal was being !e US has been playing a two-faced role. !e US questioned by various parties, including the US. !ere agency for International Development (USAID) has is currently an energy review taking place within the written a letter saying that they will not fund any more World Bank; therefore our campaign came together at an coal, while the US Export Import Bank (Exim) is consid-

Conference Report 21 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

ering giving money to Kusile. But there is a strong coali- as well as the implications that it will have on the lives tion of civil society working on this at the moment. of ordinary people. !e timelines are also problematic. We need to monitor the activities of Eskom and the Once the scenarios are released at the end of September, World Bank, as well as future IPPs. civil society will only have 30 days to comment on them. In terms of community links we met with agricultural- Apparently it will be reviewed on an annual or bi-annual ists, local politicians and traditional healers in Lephalale. basis, but once a decision is made (for instance, on Kusile) In conclusion, the key points for consideration and it will be hard to back out of contracts signed. discussion are: On 24 May the South African Faith Communities Environmental Initiative (SAFCEI) sent a letter to the Q How do we get the unions to talk to us about coal? DoE outlining various concerns and suggestions for im- Q How do we mobilise ourselves to make sure there is proving public participation. !ey received no response. energy justice as well as climate justice? !is is key for !en, on 10 June, 350.org put together a letter to the DoE, poorer households who have limited access to energy signed by a large group of NGOs, reiterating concerns Q We are clear that the World Bank does not have a role about the process. !e Minister responded to this on 13 to play in energy and we need to keep working on this June. We asked for a time extension but they said 30 days were generous enough. We asked for the technical task team to include civil society observers and for the meet- ASSESSING CIVIL SOCIETY IMPACT ings to be open and the minutes to be put on the DoE’s ON THE IRP2 POLICY PROCESSES site. !is was refused – we were told that these experts were technical and were not supposed to be representing Samantha Bailey, 350.org stakeholders. We asked for a ‘comments and response’ document to log civil society concerns and outline what I am a member of 350.org and the Climate Justice Now! action will be taken. !is was agreed to, but has not been South Africa (CJN!SA) Western Cape working group, done – though some of our comments have been included both of which played a key role in the IRP2 campaign. in the parameters. One of the successes of the World Bank loan campaign We suggested running a public awareness campaign for was the amount of solidarity that was generated around it. citizens without access to the internet and who didn’t speak !is should be considered a success. English, and providing funding for poor communities who In May 2010, as part of the Electricity Governance wanted to attend stakeholder meetings. We were told there Initiative, IDASA ran a process to help inform civil was no budget for this, though it was a good idea in prin- society about what was happening with the IRP2 and ciple. We asked that there would not be any predetermined get them as involved as possible. !ere were workshops energy mixes before the IRP is concluded. !ey said that in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg. In addition, their statements would not be prejudicial to any outcomes, Ompi Aphane from the Department of Energy (DoE) but this &ies in the face of recent announcements about six attended the Energy Caucus in May in order to talk about nuclear power stations. We asked that the IRP be aligned the IRP. !e DoE released parameters or assumptions with the Integrated Energy Plan (IEP), the Industrial Policy that were going to inform the scenarios. Initially the DoE Action Plan and the Climate Change policy. !ey respond- gave people one week to respond. A$er pressure from civil ed that logically the IEP should be done before the IRP and society this was extended to 30 days, even though more that the IEP is the best tool to ensure that social needs are time than that was requested. Some of us asked for a 60- met (such as a#ordability and access, and sustainable job to 90-day extension because of the technical nature of the creation) but their focus is now on the IRP. material and the time needed to translate it into ordinary !e positive thing was that we received a response, and language and consult with the person in the street. we have a DoE representative at this meeting. Much input was given, including from Earthlife 350.org also conducted a public information inquiry Africa, Greenpeace Africa and the World Wildlife Fund for information on the technical team, including details (WWF). !e DoE held ‘stakeholder engagement work- of who the members were, the con"dentiality agreements shops’ on 7 and 8 June, but these should really be consid- signed, how the members were appointed and copies of ered ‘hearings’ given that there was no room for discus- the minutes. !e response con"rmed the names, provided sion or questions and answers. !e original date given con"dentiality agreements and a copy of the mandate but for the release of the scenarios was July. !ey have been said that the minutes could not be shared. We hope to delayed and are now expected to be available for further appeal this. public comment by the end of September. !e process is WWF have released a report on a 50 per cent-renewa- very technical. It is hard to understand the language used, ble target to be achieved by 2030 and Eskom are coming

22 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

to talk to us this a$ernoon. We are seeing more openness climate change’ which was used as the basis for a round- by the department in terms of interacting with us, but we table meeting of a few selected people held in Sandton on still have a long way to go. We also need to up our e#orts 17 May. in making information presentable to community groups. I was there. A number of civil society organisations In terms of gender and youth those issues are not being (such as Climate Justice Now, South Africa-Climate adequately addressed. NGOs also need to make clear Action Network and Adaptation Network) made some that if government talks to NGOs, this does not count as inputs. But that document is being used as a basis for the government having spoken with the public. !is is not Green Paper to be tabled by Parliament in October. !is is appropriate public consultation. a concern. I feel that we are legitimising an unfair process. !at document was very con"dential, and only a select IS CIVIL SOCIETY PLAYING AN ACTIVE few were able to participate. How can we allow something ROLE IN DEVELOPING THE ‘CLIMATE like this to go on? What does a ‘public participation CHANGE RESPONSE POLICY’? process’ actually mean? Is it the department hand-picking those with whom they would like to consult? What is our Dorah Lebelo, GenderCC-SA mandate as South African civil society? !ere is a danger that some of us end up as professional ‘consultees’ and GenderCC is part of an international women-for-climate- will form part of a government box-ticking exercise. justice network which is involved in climate-change We don’t have constituencies. Who informs our posi- discussions and debates. !is is my own personal account tion? Do we really know what people want on the ground? and re&ection. To re&ect on our civil society participation Who do we represent? in the national climate change conference in March last We need to get our basics right and take people with us year, what kind of roles did we play? !ere was an attempt – or the government will keep calling on us when it suits at joint civil society input into that conference, but this them. We need to build an active and robust movement proved to be almost impossible. In terms of content issues that brings civil society movements with it. it is very time-consuming for civil society to have one Earthlife Africa has done some amazing work, for common voice. instance at a women’s grassroots conference on 5 August. Who was there and what were they doing? !ere were We asked them what participation has meant for them. comrades who were excluded or not allowed to participate !ey said they would like to be involved and would like to who organised parallel side-events outside the o%cial see government use the same energy as when they mobi- forum. !ey said ‘nothing about us can happen without lise for election campaigns. !ere will be no understand- us’. What impact did those of us allowed inside have ing of what climate change is all about without this. and what role did we play? Did we make a satisfactory Why are we not seeing new issues at these caucuses? contribution? It is our responsibility to go to others who are "ghting I also refer to the publication of a con"dential docu- other struggles and engage with them. We must integrate ment called the ‘background information document on indigenous knowledge.

Conference Report 23 24 Institute for Security Studies Session 4 Institutional arrangements for monitoring and oversight of policy

THE ROLE OF PARLIAMENT erly, including environmental sustainability, job creation, IN ENERGY OVERSIGHT industrial policy objectives and a host of other factors. Unfortunately, passing that legislation did not lead Lance Greyling, MP, Independent Democrats to this new energy planning regime; because the depart- ment has still not lived up to its provisions in dra$ing an !ank you for inviting me to present at this civil society integrated energy plan. Instead the department has only Energy Caucus once again. As I said last year, I really do concerned itself with the Integrated Resource Plan, which share your values in "ghting for a just and sustainable is only mentioned in one line of the Electricity Regulation energy future. I am sorry that my Public Enterprises com- Act of 2006, and the factors that need to be modelled mittee chairperson, Ms Vytjie Mentor, is unable to be here are le$ up to the discretion of the department. We are today to share the panel with me as planned. clearly doing things back to front when it comes to energy !e role of Parliament in providing oversight over planning and Parliament should not be endorsing this ap- the energy sector should be clear-cut, but unfortunately proach. So why has this happened? !is brings me to the this year has proven that this is certainly not the case. second role of Parliament, namely approving budgets. In fact I would go so far as to say that Parliament – and, !e Department of Energy claims that it only received particularly, the energy committee – has been negligent the budget to set up any kind of modelling capacity at the in its duties at providing proper oversight over the energy beginning of this year, which explains the delay in getting sector; and in particular, energy planning. started on the integrated energy plan. On this I have sym- Parliament essentially has three roles which are laid pathy with the department, and I think that Parliament out in the Constitution, namely that of dra$ing legislation, should be playing a far more vociferous role in arguing approving government budgets and performing oversight for a larger budget to be allocated to this department so over the work of government departments. Unfortunately that we can "nally capacitate it to the extent that it can it is the last role of performing oversight that is not clearly perform its planning mandate properly. de"ned and there have been big debates over what consti- !is brings me to the last role of Parliament, namely tutes proper oversight. I will return to this issue later. this poorly de"ned concept of oversight. !ere is a big On the "rst issue, of dra$ing legislation, I believe that debate over what Parliament’s precise role is concern- Parliament initially lived up to its role in completing the ing policy-making. Some people argue that Parliament 2008 Energy Act. I was on the committee at the time and doesn’t have much say over policy, as this is the preroga- I remember stating in my speech in the House how this tive of the department or the executive. Act would usher in a new regime of energy planning in I believe, though, that at the very least Parliament has South Africa. We had worked very hard in that committee a duty to ensure that the integrity of the policy-making to ensure that energy planning no longer took place in process is upheld and that the South African public is not an ad hoc fashion, but that the department (through the short-changed due to the in&uence of special interests. mechanism of the integrated energy plan) would be forced In the case of this latest IRP I believe that we have been to model all factors pertinent to our energy future prop- completely remiss in this duty.

Conference Report 25 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

Firstly, Parliament has not su%ciently questioned were the consumer associations? Why are the public only the department as to the composition of the so-called interested in energy at the point of tari# increases? We Technical Advisory Panel tasked with coming up with the need to get them involved earlier. assumptions that would feed into the IRP process. When An independent panel looked at the role of oversight I asked the minister who sits on this Technical Advisory and came up with very good recommendations to Panel, I received a very interesting reply. It is basically a improve it. However, nothing has happened thus far. !e Who’s Who of the coal-mining and energy-intensive users energy committee has been particularly remiss and has in South Africa, such as Xstrata Coal, BHP Billiton, Sasol, not lived up to its mandate, and the public enterprises the Energy Intensive User Group and Eskom. !e only committee has played a much more robust role in terms of person from a renewable energy company who was suppos- oversight. edly sitting on this panel was Glynn Morris from Agama Energy – except that when we contacted him he informed CAN WE EVER GET A FULLY us that he had in fact never been invited to sit on this panel! INDEPENDENT ISMO "INDEPENDENT Essentially then, the department has succeeded in SYSTEMS AND MARKET OPERATOR#? locking all vested-interest groups into the Technical Matthews Bantsijang, Department of Energy Advisory Panel and even though they claim that it is just about technical expertise, we are not allowed to see the minutes of these meetings; nor are we allowed to see the We need to understand that even though the department thinking behind the di#erent energy assumptions that is tasked with challenges concerning energy, there are they come up with. other stakeholders who need to be involved, and there are Given the importance of this 20-year energy plan one issues relating to these stakeholders. would also have expected Parliament’s energy committee A fully ring-fenced Independent Systems and Market to have had a tight rein on this process, constantly ques- Operator (ISMO) entity would be established within tioning the department over problematic issues such as Eskom's Systems Operations and Planning. Its establish- the short space of time that was allocated for public par- ment is still ongoing. !e Cabinet has also mandated us to ticipation. Despite my best e#orts though, the chairperson say that the ISMO should be responsible for electricity dis- of the portfolio committee chose not to have any brie"ngs tribution, for which the modalities are still to be discussed. on the IRP until the process was about three months !ere are critical issues and serious debates about what down the track and we were not in a position to iron out type of ISMO is to be established, and what responsibili- these problems. We still have had only one parliamentary ties the entity would have. But we need an ISMO as soon meeting on the IRP and it is unclear whether we will have as possible. !e entity will be responsible for the work any more before this process is over. that has been done by Eskom’s systems operator. !e In conclusion then, I believe that Parliament has a main challenge is around infrastructure and the deadlock huge role to play in strengthening energy governance in and backlog of maintenance. !e Department of Public South Africa. Unfortunately I don’t think it has come Enterprises, who are not here today, would be able to close to truly living up to this responsibility. I will con- speak further on this. tinue to "ght for this, but ultimately it is for civil society !e "rst phase of establishing the interim ISMO and the public at large to put greater pressure on what is would ring-fence "nances and governance using Eskom’s essentially your Parliament to ensure that this takes place single buyer’s o%ce, while the second phase would seek in the future. to establish a fully independent ISMO. All costs, and the procurement of power from independent power producers Discussion (IPPs), would be handled in this ring-fenced entity. Eskom employees would populate the interim On the role of NERSA, the capacity of the ISMO, while an investment committee with external DoE, and the oversight of the di"erent representation from government departments such as the parliamentary portfolio committees: Department of Energy and the National Treasury would It is clear that the DoE is not properly capacitated. !ey play a role in decision-making. !e ISMO would initially do not have enough budget or sta#. We really need to turn procure power only from IPPs. It is envisaged that this them into an independent-minded department that can entity would evolve, over time, into a fully-&edged system hold Eskom and all the other vested interests at bay. and market operator, outside Eskom. NERSA took a lot of &ak over the tari# increases, but !e creation of the ISMO is an important mechanism they were only working within their mandate and had for facilitating investment by IPPs into the power genera- to work within the requirements of the IRP. I ask, where tion sector in South Africa, as it would remove the con&ict

26 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker of interest caused by having Eskom as both generator and WHO REGULATES THE transmitter, as well as the ‘single buyer' of all co-generated ENERGY REGULATORS? and IPP power. !e clarity and agreement needed on the Adv Boyce Mkhize, CEO, National identity, composition and mandate of the entity that will Nuclear Regulator eventually buy power from IPPs is viewed as an impedi- ment to getting projects started in the country, but it should be noted that the ring-fencing exercise was fairly !e NNR plays a critical role. !e bene"t of a democracy simple once agreed to. A fully-established ISMO can be is that there are democratic institutions, structures and fast-tracked if we agree sooner. frameworks that guide the way you can operate. An important element in our Constitution is the separation Discussion of powers. !is means that bodies such as the NNR are held to account should they deviate from accepted norms How independent will the ISMO be if it is using Eskom and principles. Chapter 9 on state institutions talks about employees? Will employees remain as Eskom workers? democratic structures with a view to providing oversight !e entity will be a new, private entity. Ultimately the and being able to hold the NNR and the like to account. employees will be independent. !e interim ISMO might !is is another layer of accountability. not be quite so clear-cut. We uphold the rule of law, including administrative justice and rules of natural justice. We have robust legisla- What are the links between the ISMO and the EDI? tion, including access to information. !ese create a very !e maintenance backlog has never been the responsibil- neat framework within which the NNR operates and can ity of the EDI. !ese modalities need to be discussed and be deployed by any member of the public. !is guides and the Cabinet needs to make a decision. informs the NNR in its operation. It means that the public becomes the watchdog of the regulator. Will the envisaged 30 per cent private/70 per South Africa can no longer sustain the ‘go-it-alone’ cent public split in energy generation shape the mentality. We have peer-review mechanisms and bilateral procurement policy of the ISMO? Will the process be agreements with a number of countries, which under- driven by the DPE or the DoE – who has the #nal say? scores the importance of us operating at a level of respon- !e DoE and the DPE have a dual responsibility. !e DoE sibility. We have to interact with civil society and public is responsible for policy and the DPE is responsible for interest groups. !e NNR is a regulator and a public body. the management of public enterprises, of which Eskom !e public need to be involved in issues that a#ect them. is a part. !ere is a need for change of governance and NNR should not be scared to share pertinent information policy. !e DoE needs to make sure that policy is changed with the public. We also need cooperative governance so that it incorporates the ISMO. !e DPE will be pivotal with other departments, such as Health. We need to be in removing o%cials and for the governance. !e DoE is able to show that the public is protected from any harmful responsible for new procurement in the sector as per the e#ects of nuclear power. We need to continue the robust Electricity Regulation Act of 2006. In terms of implemen- engagement with civil society and relevant stakeholders. tation this might be done by ISMO as well, but this would be at the discretion of the DoE. HISTORICAL AND CURRENT What is the capacity of the department to provide MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE extensive modelling and intellectual input? WASTE WITHIN THE WITWATERSRAND GOLDFIELDS !e DoE separated from the DME. We still need addi- Mariette Liefferink, North-West University tional funds for additional capacity. We hope that as soon as we get funding we can advertise for more posts. !e Minister is working very hard on that. I am presenting in my capacity as the CEO of a federation of NGOs and civil society and Associate Researcher of the Why are there no civil society groups Water Dynamics Niche of the North-West University; and involved in the setting up of the ISMO? not as a board member of the National Nuclear Regulator. !is is a challenge. In terms of the legislative mandate, !e Constitution is the supreme law. In terms of we frequently report to NEDLAC and have a round-table the Constitution, everyone has a right to life and an discussion every month with them. In terms of legislation environment that is not harmful to health and wellbeing. there is no documentation without the consultation of Everyone also has a right to freedom of speech, of the NEDLAC. press, to protest, to present petitions and to picket, and to

Conference Report 27 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

disclose information truthfully, accurately and in good Please note that all my quotations have been faith to one or more of the news media. With regards to taken from o%cial reports in the public domain and the law of evidence, there is admissibility of evidence of peer-reviewed academic journals. !ey are not based past management which tends to guide future manage- on hearsay evidence, personal opinion or alarmist ment of radioactive waste. speculation. I can make all these documents available if South Africa has embarked on a nuclear expansion necessary. programme aimed at, among other things, extending the Most of these tailings dams are unfenced, with no mining, processing and enrichment of uranium. South warning signs in place. Communities live alongside them. Africa has a legacy of 120 years of gold and uranium Radon exposure is of great concern. Children play in close mining, and the historical management and regulatory proximity. Poorer communities plant their crops in the control of large concentrations of radioactive material can wetlands surrounding these tailings dams, where heavy adduce evidence of the future management and regulatory metals (including uranium and its progeny) are absorbed. control of radioactive waste. I would like to highlight a case of RDP/informal South Africa’s 120 years of gold and other mining housing that has been built on uraniferous tailings. !ey has le$ a legacy of 270 tailings dams containing depos- have no concrete &ooring and very poor ventilation with ited uranium. !ese dams have been found to contain no windows and it can logically be assumed that the resi- 100 000 tons of uranium. !ese have o$en been poorly dents are exposed to elevated levels of radon and radon managed and monitored, and sited on dolomitic land. gas. I visited the area yesterday; children were playing in !ey are an extensive source of air and water pollution. It the area, and crops were being planted on uraniferous is incorrect that tailings dams contain ‘naturally occur- tailings. ring radioactive material’. !e correct term is ‘radiologi- !e Tudor dam is a dry dam that has been declared a cally enhanced’. !e main health concern with regards to radiological ‘hot spot’ or ‘priority area’ by the NNR. It is uranium is its chemical toxicity, as opposed to its radioac- unfenced and there are no warning signs around it. It has tivity. However the progeny of uranium – such as radon, been found to have up to 100 000 becquerels per kg (bq/kg). radium, radon gas, bismuth, strontium, proactinium and !e regulatory limit determined by the NNR is 500 bq/ polonium – are also a concern, as are two isotopes of lead kg. !ere are 17 families who live in the area, as well as an that also manifest radioactivity. informal settlement. !ese are poor communities who live In the West and Far West Rand gold "elds, 100 000 o# the land. !ey collect scrap metal, wood and reeds. tonnes of uranium have been deposited on these tailings Kagiso is another example of recent development of RDP dams. !e spillages that have occurred are contraventions houses adjacent to tailings dams. !is development took of environmental laws and are examples of constant place on land that was declared radioactive by the NNR infractions by mining companies. Fi$y tonnes of uranium Status Report of 2007. We are faced with a challenge with reach the watercourses of the West and Far West Rand regards to cooperative governance between di#erent depart- annually. !ough I may focus on the West and Far West ments, including the Department of Housing. Rand gold "elds, the impacts I am describing are mir- Below are excerpts from the NNR’s Status Report rored elsewhere in the Central Rand, the East Rand and on the Actions Arising from the Study of Radiological the Kosh gold "elds. Contamination of the Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment In addition, air pollution is typical during wind Area (WCA), of 29 October 2007. As you will see, a survey events. Airborne pollution contains toxic and radioac- was carried out. Of 47 sites sampled, 50 per cent were tive dust particles. Small particles are carried by the found to have radioactive waste present. inhaled air stream all the way into the alveoli. Here the particles can remain for periods from weeks up to years, Q !e measured uranium content of many of the &uvial depending on their solubility. Highly insoluble uranium sediments in the Wonderfonteinspruit, including those compounds may remain in the alveoli, whereas soluble of mine properties and therefore outside the bounda- uranium compounds may dissolve and pass across the ries of licenced sites, exceeds the exclusion limit for alveolar membranes into the bloodstream, where they regulation by the National Nuclear Regulator may exert systemic toxic e#ects. In some cases, insoluble Q For approximately 50 per cent of the 47 sampling sites, particles are absorbed into the body from the alveoli by the calculated incremental doses of the respective criti- phagocytosis into the associated lymph nodes. ‘Insoluble’ cal group are above 1 mSv per annum up to 100 mSv particles may reside in the lungs for years, causing chronic pa radiotoxicity to be expressed in the alveoli. Dust pollution Q !e radioactive contamination of surface water bodies from mine tailings dams is not benign, as it contains toxic in the Wonderfonteinspruit catchment area caused by and radioactive dust fallout. the long-lasting mine water discharges, di#use emis-

28 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

sions of seepage and runo# from slime dams poses spikes in uranium and other toxic and radioactive heavy radiological risks to the public resulting from the metals. usage of polluted environmental media We call for an independent epidemiological study or Q !e sediment pathway (‘SeCa’) can cause radioactive a toxicological study to quantify the health risks. Right contamination of livestock products (milk, meat) now we have a body of anecdotal evidence of cancers resulting in e#ective doses absorbed by the public and mental retardation within the gold "elds of the some orders of magnitude above those resulting via Witwatersrand. We cannot ascertain its accuracy without the water pathway (‘WaCa’) these studies.

With reference to the fourth bullet point, the most sig- !ose who cannot remember the past are con- ni"cant pathway for ingestion is the ‘sediment pathway’, demned to repeat it. (George Santayana) which begins when radioactive sediment in river and stream beds is disturbed by cattle when they go to drink. Discussion !e cattle swallow radioactive particles in the water. !en the radioactivity is ingested by humans in the form of Response to questions on the role of the NNR and meat or dairy. !is results in doses of radioactive con- Mariette Lie"erink’s presentation, by Adv Boyce Mkhize tamination several orders of magnitude higher than those We need to understand the role of the NNR in the context resulting from the water pathway (‘WaCa’). Preliminary of its legislative mandate. !e NNR licenses operators results of analyses conducted on produce grown in the and places conditions and terms upon them. !e issue of area have indicated that the dose levels are of radiological nuclear and radiological safety, including that of workers, concern to the regulator. is in the hands of the operator. !e operators have to !ere is also evidence, based on reports by the operate within standards that have been set by the NNR. Department of Minerals and Energy (DME), that bricks We are empowered to monitor adherence to those stand- are being made with radioactive tailings, including for ards and can intervene in a way that will improve the RDP houses. An airborne radiometric survey of the West workers’ safety. People may have been a#ected by certain Rand and Far West Rand area carried out by the DME outcomes of our monitoring and inspection issues. We found that ‘interpretation of the data shows many of the need to ensure that those individuals are able to get the residential areas (Carletonville, Westonaria, Khutsong, relevant information and access relating to their health. Kagiso, Randfontein) fall within areas of high risk of ra- !e studies that have been conducted are varied. dioactivity contamination’. !is study was peer-reviewed Mariette has articulated some of the issues that have by the CSIR, the Council of Geoscience and Mintek. emerged. !ese "ndings need to be put in context so My call – with great deference to the NNR – is that that we do not give the impression that people are going these communities be informed. !ere should be no to drop dead. Without downplaying the importance of shortcuts when we consider radioactivity. !ere is a precautions and interventions, the risk of radiological nuclear renaissance taking place worldwide. !ese issues contamination exists anywhere and everywhere. In the must be addressed before we embark on a nuclear road. last month the NNR has conducted studies in the same Radioactive material is not just inhaled, but also taken area to determine the risks to which people have been in via the pasture pathway, ingestion, crop, sediment exposed. We have conducted tests on some of the indi- and water pathway. !is results in cumulative doses of viduals who live in those areas. We found that in order for radioactivity. your levels to get to an unacceptable level of radiation you !ere is a strong interrelationship between acid mine have to be playing outside for eight hours a day, seven days drainage (AMD) and radioactivity. AMD is currently a week, 365 days a year. If you are eating "sh in the area, taking place within the West Rand Basin. All heavy you need to be eating a certain amount of "sh in order to metals (including uranium in the gold "eld) are absorbed be at risk. I am not suggesting that there isn’t a risk, but into the sediment. AMD can cause the mobilisation of what is important is how we i) communicate with a#ected these heavy metals. AMD caused the Robinson Lake to people, ii) issue precautions, and iii) rehabilitate those become a declared radioactive dam with uranium levels sites for the people who live there. National and provincial 40 000 times above natural uranium levels. It caused the governments need to work together to ensure that decent Hippo dam to become a sludge pit full of radioactive ma- housing is provided and that hazardous sites are cordoned terials and toxic heavy metals. Two poor mute hippos live o#. We will be putting out public statements shortly. in it. !e Tweelopiespruit River is now a class "ve river On whether the NNR will help civil society to cam- system – that is, a highly acute toxic river – because of paign on the Freedom of Information Bill: it is not within AMD. !e crust that has formed on the riverbed contains the mandate of the NNR to help civil society to "ght for

Conference Report 29 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

the Freedom of Information Bill. We do not lobby on to 53,3 GW (excluding IPPs and possible capacity in the legislation unless it will impinge on our ability to function IRP). as the NNR. However we support the principles of access In terms of demand, 29 per cent of South Africa’s to information. We are working to make sure that the energy demand is provided by electricity. !ere is a public is adequately informed. However, if the informa- forecast of about 37 GW of peak demand in 2010 and over tion poses serious threats to the state, we may not be at 228 terawatt-hours of energy demand. !e largest 138 liberty to disclose that information. customers consume nearly 40 per cent of the country’s I cannot speak for my predecessors with regard to energy and the largest 80 000 customers consume nearly civil society engagement with the NNR, and claims by 75 per cent. Approximately eight million customers civil society that there have been calls for information consume about 20 to 25 per cent of the energy. that was not forthcoming. Going forward, you have my !ere are over 28 000 km of transmission lines (over commitment and that of the NNR board that informa- 132 kV to 765 kV AC), which cover an area similar to the tion requested by civil society will be disclosed to the part of Western Europe from Berlin to Madrid. extent that it can be. We have engaged with Mariette, for !e System Operator is responsible for: example, and her organisation, and saw her presentations about a month ago. Q Managing the tight balance of supply and demand to the second and ensuring there are adequate reserves Mariette Lie"erink, on her role in the NNR for credible contingencies I was appointed to the NNR board by the Minister of Q Managing the voltage pro"le throughout the grid by Energy. I hoped to be able to give a voice to the concerns ensuring the e#ective &ow and quality of power to end of civil society and communities a#ected by nuclear customers activities in this role, but I was cautioned by the chair- Q Monitoring and managing real-time risks that occur person not to lobby. I sent my resignation to Minister on the power system by managing system stability Peters. Civil society organisations then requested that I Q Restoring power a$er an interruption for which speed, withdraw my resignation, which I did. !e chairperson of accuracy and safety are critical the board also told me that I had not been following the Q Providing real time information on the status of the correct protocol. I should raise my concerns as CEO of the power system Federation for A Sustainable Environment and not as a board member. I have done this repeatedly, orally and in Hierarchical control has prevented blackouts, as it ensures written form. a clear command and control system. One of the reasons for blackouts in the US in 2003 was that people were not WORKSHOP SESSION: JUSTIFYING coordinating with each other. THE BUILDING OF THE KUSILE COAL! A supply–demand balance is essential because of the FIRED POWER STATION: THE NEED basic premise that electricity cannot be stored in a large AND BASELOAD REQUIREMENTS power system. It has to be used in some way as soon as it is produced, i.e. transformed into another form of energy Kannan Lakmeeharan, Managing or used to do some ‘work’. Director of the System Operations A reserve margin gives an indication of the medium- and Planning Division of Eskom to long-term adequacy and the short-term security of the power system. Adequacy enables us to deal with !e System Operator is the electricity transport and medium- to long-term issues such as growth spurts distribution supervisor. Generation makes the electricity, and supply chain problems. It is the ability of the power the System Operator ensures delivery and quality and system to supply the aggregate electrical demand and Distribution then sells the electricity to the customer. energy requirements of the customers at all times, taking In terms of supply, there are 27 operational power into account scheduled and reasonably anticipated un- stations in South Africa, and 40,9 GW of operational scheduled outages of system elements. Short-term security capacity in total. Just over 80 per cent of this is coal-"red enables the power system to withstand sudden distur- and the remaining 20 per cent a mix of nuclear, open cycle bances such as short-circuit faults or unanticipated loss of gas turbines, hydro electricity and pumped storage. South system elements. !e two key components to the reserve Africa imports about 1500 MW. It is also returning to margin are the operating reserve margin and the genera- service two mothballed coal-"red stations and building tion capacity net reserve margin. !e recommendation for two new coal-"red power stations, a wind farm and a the total reserve margin is between 15 and 29 per cent. pumped storage station. !is will raise Eskom’s capacity In terms of supply requirements and options:

30 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

Q 24 000 to 26 000 MW of supply is required to run all needed in order to calculate the reliability of these tech- the time. !is is known as baseload. For example, a nologies. !ere is a host of wind-generation issues under nuclear plant cannot be switched on and o# every day consideration, including the impact on maintenance Q 6 000 to 8 000 MW is required to run during the day, decisions and coal stockpiles; the impact on commitment known as mid-merit. For example, a Combined Cycle of capacity requiring long noti"cation; the impact on Gas Turbine (CCGT) is &exible and ideal for switching dispatch and pumped storage cycles; and the impact on on and o# reserves. Q 2 000 to 6 000 MW is required to run during peak As the penetration of wind and solar increases, new hours only – known as peaking; for example, pumped forecasting tools will be needed to provide short-term pre- storage plant. Peaking means the availability to gener- dictions for dispatch. Due to the instantaneous changes ate is restricted to a few hours a day in wind speeds and the possibility of rapid changes in power output, very &exible backup generation is required; In terms of predictability it is important that supply usually provided by gas generation, transmission inter- and demand are exactly matched at all times. However, connections or pumped storage. Dynamic stability is demand and supply are uncertain. !erefore we must important, meaning that due to the nature of the genera- consider: tors used it is important to ensure that the units are able to ride through faults that occur on the networks. Q Lead times: the longer the time the supply (or demand) ‘Reactive’ power contribution is also signi"cant; as measure takes to implement, the further ahead we the generators are at the end of the networks, they need to must plan provide support and not act as ‘sinks’ for reactive power. Q Level of uncertainty: the higher the level of predict- 2000 MW of wind capacity is required for 500 MW of ability, the fewer measures are required to counteract "rm wind capacity, based on current studies. It is likely uncertainty that at certain times we will have lots of wind and at Q Type of uncertainty: depending on the cause of the other times we will have none. In light of this we expect uncertainty, di#erent mitigation measures may be that more mid-merit plants will be needed to provide required. For example, di#erent plant types deliver stop-start generation at relatively short notice. When the di#erent speci"c services wind stops blowing, something else must take over. We don’t have gas or interconnections: therefore, we need to Main supply and demand balance-planning activities are: be self-su%cient, as well as change the way we look at our maintenance and stockpiles. Q Expansion planning (a 20-year planning horizon): Lessons from Spain indicate that incentives can play a the IRP 2010 is under development. We consider all role in stimulating the development of renewable power supply technologies; capital, "xed and variable costs, generation. However, incentives can cause de"cits in retail fuel supply and plant characteristics; uncertainty; and and/or wholesale power markets and must be o#set with combinations of demand probability distribution with government subsidies or increases in the price of electric- plant supply probability distribution ity, to avoid amassing debt (in Spain the tari# de"cit is Q Medium-term adequacy (a 5-year planning horizon): estimated to be approaching 20 billion euros). Requiring for which the modelling process has just started. !is transmission and distribution entities to provide access includes a new plant, as decided in Eskom’s expansion to the power system at no cost is a clear incentive to assist plan; running costs only; fuel supply and detailed developers. Country-wide regional planning of transmis- plant characteristics; and uncertainty, best handled by sion with cost allocation across all areas served – regard- Monte Carlo simulation of stochastic input parameters less of the location of the transmission – eliminates cost Q Outage planning (an 18-month planning horizon), allocation issues. scheduling (a 1-week planning horizon) and dispatch Having a centralised authority which can approve (on-the-day planning horizon): this continues weekly, planning and appropriate sites will streamline the imple- daily or hourly and includes new plant from as soon as mentation of system reinforcement and expansion and it is in commercial operation eliminate roadblocks to development. Renewables are considered in the same manner as Intermittent (variable) resources will require sub- other technologies. !e amount of wind and solar capa- stantial new balancing resources and/or a combination city required by 2019 to achieve the emission targets is of balancing resources and strong interconnections with signi"cant, much more so in the event that Kusile is not neighbouring countries. !e cost of these resources and built. !ere is uncertainty as to how fast wind and solar interconnections must be included in the cost of renew- power can be established. More data on wind and solar is ables. Aggressive development of all balancing resources

Conference Report 31 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

applicable to the country should take place, while incor- minimum of 8 to 15 per cent reduction through energy ef- porating operation and control and establishing appropri- "ciency. Wind will require some gas and hydro resources ate market products. !is should include: to provide backup, which will initially be provided by the existing coal &eet and pumped storage facilities. Q Storage in any form, particularly pumped-storage hydro, batteries, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and Questions and discussion from the "oor electric vehicles Q Fossil units which can be cycled, particularly combus- tion turbines With regards to e!ciency, are you saying that you Q Demand–response programmes, including direct load either have to build Kusile or build something else? control, interruptible and curtailable rates, real-time Unfortunately we no longer have time to implement many or critical-peak pricing and dynamic pricing (‘prices- credible alternatives. We have committed 3,4 GW of DSM to-devices’) over the next "ve years. Potentially we could do more but Q As environmental constraints on fossil-fuel power a lot of it depends on how we set the price and incentives plants tighten and their market participation becomes for people to start changing consumption patterns. We threatened, allowances and incentives may be needed are currently doing a pilot demand response programme to sustain their participation and availability for use as with the smaller industrial and large commercial sector balancing resources. !is must include consideration and hope to aggregate that at the residential level. We of the increased operations and management cost are paying large industrial users to reduce and have burden on these balancing resources gained a 500 MW demand–response programme. Our target over the next "ve years is to achieve a 2000 MW Large control areas allow greater &exibility and lower demand–response programme. costs of operating – as does controlling a portfolio of resources; much more so than the use of multiple smaller Will Eskom be ready for the integration of renewable control areas. Establishing national and regional control energy projects when the projects are ready? For centres for renewables with mandatory monitoring and example, could it be the case with the 500 MW solar control, coupled with establishing incentives for curtail- park in the Northern Cape that the Eskom sta" on ing wind and providing frequency regulation by ‘spill- the ground say they are unable to integrate, while ing’ wind (and other intermittent resources), provides at the higher level approval has gone ahead? operational &exibility to maximise renewable energy It will take seven years to set up the transmission line and production while maintaining reliability. !ese centres gain environmental approval. !ere will also be issues should include: with water. !e clear constraint for wind is which speci"c substations to involve. When we understand what the Q State-of-the-art renewable forecasting technology, renewable energy goal is then we will have to build more including ramp-rate prediction so$ware transmission capacity. A target of 3000 MW over the next Q ‘Grid codes’ which require all renewable resources three to "ve years is "ne; a$er that, we will need more over a certain size to provide zero voltage ride-through lines. For 5 GW of solar we will need a corridor in the capability and mandate some level of reactive power Western Cape and transmission lines. controllability On transmission, a grid code was established a$er the incidents of 2006. It gives a guideline for reliability levels. Kusile’s "rst unit would come into commercial service To catch up would take us to 2017 and there are limita- by the end of 2014 and the "nal sixth unit before winter tions on how much we can spend. Generators pay for 2018. Not building Kusile means signi"cant energy supply shallow connection costs. Deep connection is a social cost shortages from 2017. Kusile has to be built to deal with for which everyone pays. Shallow connection takes you to the demand requirements between 2014 and 2018. !e the nearest substation. In Kusile a cost for shallow con- only credible alternatives are coal and gas projects in nection is included. In the case of wind we are trying to the region (from 1050 to 1500 MW), some level of wind identify the best resources. For solar, we are working with and aggressive demand-side management programmes. the major developers and need to think about alignment Concentrated solar power (CSP) requires a learning with our generation (IRP) plan. We are working with period. We need to commit to a ramping up of wind and the regulator and will have a public ten-year plan that is a CSP programme following REFIT phase 1 to allow debated so it will be possible to see in what direction the for localisation and learning. We need to commit to a network is going.

32 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

If you shut down the aluminium smelters instead of When will REFIT be #nalised? If there is a PPA building Kusile, would you #ll the generation gap? agreement, can we then go ahead? If we don’t build Kusile and Medupi then we will have Eskom has a procurement plan. !ere are contradictory an energy security risk. !ere have been reports that views and two major concerns about the role of REFIT. Medupi is delayed and Kusile will not happen. !ese are Treasury is concerned that people will try to recover just scenarios. We are putting out statements for the dates money up front and bolt a$er a few years. Some people of these power stations. We have to keep the smelters as are saying that the PPAs are too Eskom-friendly. !ere valued customers and value their contracts – and also is a question of whether the government should provide consider the economy, for instance, of Richard’s Bay. explicit guarantees. However, otherwise we are ready to go !e suggestion to replace Kusile with wind generation and cannot spend the money on anything else. It should is not credible within the time frame, but government be easy to achieve 1000 MW. will need to take a decision on this. Studies have been done with Kusile in, with Kusile delayed and with Kusile On credible alternatives to Kusile, have you asked out. A decision will be made over the next few weeks. !e the renewable energy industries what is realistic? government hasn’t made a "nal decision yet. !e systems We have based our assumptions on what the industries operator believes that if Kusile doesn’t get built, it is likely say they can do. For instance, wind has said that that the risk of interruptions will be signi"cant. 7 000 MW is being developed at present. Eskom has proposed three or four solutions for funding Medupi, including an additional guarantee, a UPDATE ON THE IRP2 POLICY PROCESS Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) and additional equity. If Matthews Bantsijang, Department of Energy Kusile is to be cancelled (and we have spent R20 billion already), the cost of penalties will be around R30 billion. Eskom has made those proposals and government will !e IRP2 process started in March. We managed to make a decision. !e penalty depends on the length of the extend consultation by an extra time-period. !e model- delay. ling has now been completed and we have a dra$ plan, which is still a departmental document. On 30 August we Have you considered or done any presented it to the Inter-Ministerial Committee on energy modelling on the impact of increased oil (IMC). !ey wanted a summary of the whole plan, a$er prices on the cost of coal for Kusile? which we would take it to Cabinet for further consultation We have looked at a short-, medium- and long-term and approval. During October we expect to have "nalised mix of contracts. We have been accused of putting in a it. Some institutions are already preparing for a review high-end price for coal, but we haven’t yet signed all the of IRP next year. !ere is a possibility of nuclear power medium-term contracts. stations being part of the energy mix. Some stakeholders may not be satis"ed and may consider that there are holes What attempts are being made at a mass in the consultation. roll-out of solar water heaters? Nelson Mandela Bay has done schemes for the high-end market. !ere is also a challenge with funding given that LAUNCH OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY our prices are three to four times higher than China or REVIEW OF THE IRP2 India. Economies of scale could lower prices. !e DoE Liz McDaid, SAFCEI intends to implement one million solar water heaters.

The modelling process for Kusile We looked at how our inputs were developed by the isn’t in the IRP. Why not? Department of Energy (DoE). Most people in the country We will do this soon and are hoping to make it public. It is have not heard of the IRP, even though it will dictate the not just Eskom who decides on this matter. We have done electricity plan for the country for the next 20 years. We low-growth scenarios. All our scenarios have the same wrote a letter to the ministry asking who the members reliability criteria. Kusile is part of the original plan and are. !ey are listed in this table. we feel that there is no credible alternative. !ere may be a decision to start to reduce the units as alternatives present themselves.

Conference Report 33 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

stated its ‘commitment to meaningful engagement with NAME SECTOR INSTITUTION/ stakeholders in the development of the IRP, 2010 – as AFFILIATION evidenced by our kick-o# stakeholder plenary sessions on Nelisiwe Government DG Dept of Energy 07 and 08 June 2010, in Pretoria’. However, it then stated Magubane that because of budget constraints it was unable to fund Ompi Aphane Government Dept of Energy the ‘participation of community members in the plenary Ria Govender Government Dept of Energy sessions’ or develop a public awareness campaign. !is Thabang Audat Government Dept of Energy demonstrates that it is only committed to stakeholders Kannan State enterprise Eskom systems who are rich enough to be able to attend. !e comment Lakmeerharan operations and planning period was extended from seven days to 30 days to meet the Callie Fabricius State enterprise Eskom planning and minimum legal requirements. !e DoE also committed to market development putting a comment and response document on its website. Mike Roussouw Business – coal Xstrata !e process issues raised by civil society included: Ian Langridge Business – coal Anglo American time constraints and a rushed process; task-team compo- Brian Day Business – coal/RE Exxaro sition; decision-making process; targets issued; and scope Piet van Staden Business – fossils Sasol of parameters limited. Kevin Morgan Business – BHP Billiton Of more than 300 inputs made by civil society, includ- smelters/coal ing the Energy Caucus and the Climate Justice Network, Paul Vermeulen Local govt-owned City Power company only about a quarter of our comments were responded to. But o$en these were disregarded. !erefore there is little Doug Kuni Business SA Independent Power Producers Association point in engaging with a department that appears not to Roger Baxter Business Chamber of Mines take what we are saying on board. Professor Anton Academic Graduate School of Eberhard Business, UCT UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY Shaun Nel Business – project Gobodo systems (Eskom REPRESENTATION AT NEDLAC manager is listed as one of their clients) Richard Worthington, WWF-SA

Q (Please note: !is presentation represents the views As you can see, no NGOs are represented. In addition, of the speaker in his personal capacity, not as a repre- there is no expertise on gender, social and poverty sentative of WWF-SA) issues, or on externalities such as acid mine drainage and carbon emissions. Apparently there is also a union NEDLAC is the formal space for consultation among representative on the team, but this has not been men- stakeholders on highly relevant matters to the country’s tioned publicly by the DoE. !e composition of this task future, such as the IRP. NEDLAC was told by Ompi team demonstrates that we are working according to Aphane, the Acting Deputy Director of the Department business as usual. of Energy, about six weeks ago that full assumptions, Eskom’s own submission with regard to the tari# parameters and data would be discussed with stakehold- increases in 2009 stated that, ‘considering that electric- ers in NEDLAC before scenarios were produced and the ity generation utilises approximately 50 per cent of the modelling took place. To the best of my knowledge this country’s coal production, the continued operation of has not happened. Eskom is an integral aspect of ensuring sustainability of !ere are a lot of issues surrounding participation in the coal-mining and related industries’. !is means that NEDLAC and a lot of formality around it. For instance, we are being asked to subsidise the coal industry. community constituencies are only represented in the de- Ompi Aphane of the DoE came to the last Energy velopment chamber. !ere is now a set of people who rep- Caucus and promised to respond to a list of questions resent the community constituency who have a gatekeep- by the following Wednesday. As yet there has been no ing role over who else can get involved in it. Previously response. Aphane said that I could attend a technical there was a process involving an NGO called SANGOCO, meeting, though he suggested that I would not "nd it the South African NGO Coalition, through which people very interesting. I have accepted the invitation and am could be mandated for involvement. SANGOCO has now awaiting con"rmation of when I (and anyone else who ceased to exist. I heard from the business constituency would like to be there) can attend. that the IRP2 was to be discussed. I ended up representing In a letter from the DoE to civil society in June 2010 the community constituency, as no-one else turned up on (see Samantha Bailey’s presentation), the department the day.

34 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

!ere is a task team in NEDLAC that has been set Discussion up speci"cally to look at the IRP2. It has been assured that inputs to modelling are to be discussed and debated Matthews Bantsijang represented the DoE. within NEDLAC. !is commitment was driven by the business constituency but is supported by labour and There is a recent statement from the DoE about six business. !e NEDLAC energy task team is not just nuclear reactors for South Africa. Will this be part looking at IRP. !ere is a work programme with 12 di#er- of the IRP 2010 process? Who/where is the pressure ent priority areas, including mitigating tari# increases for coming from on the move to nuclear energy? the poor. NEDLAC requested a study and report on this. Response from the DoE: !e DoE cannot divulge !is has been carried out and is publicly available. anything on the dra$ IRP2 for now but there is pressure Civil society representation within NEDLAC is messy from di#erent stakeholders in terms of moving towards and inadequately represented. !e Energy Caucus needs renewables. !e Copenhagen statements talk about a to think more formally about a mandated representative. move to renewables and more, greener energy sources, of Business has said repeatedly that we must have coal or which nuclear is part. nuclear as a baseload, but more coal is not possible in light of our Copenhagen commitment. Business Unity South After the IRP2 consultations were done, Africa is now actively putting forward a new wave of what happened to the inputs? nuclear within NEDLAC. !e comfort zone is to discuss DoE: !e DoE states that all comments were considered issues of process, but the base load is a baseline issue that holistically, but it is not clear how many were incorpo- everyone is concerned about with regard to the future of rated or responded to. !e Electricity Act of 2006 says industry. Because of the formality of NEDLAC, labour that the Energy Minister is responsible for the electricity is very guarded within it. !ere is reluctance within the plan. !is also applies to procurement. Even though the forum to discuss content. plans might be drawn up with the assistance of Eskom Acting Deputy Director General Ompi Aphane said and NERSA, the department is still responsible and the at the last NEDLAC meeting, and the last Energy Caucus buck stops with the minister. We have hard copies of all meeting, that the kind of decisions that they are looking the inputs sent to the department. to have mandated by IRP2 would be small decisions such as extra renewable energy or cogeneration. In contrast, The DoE states that the comments on the IRP were Eskom have told us that they need to be making invest- considered holistically. However, if this is the case, why ment decisions about the next big baseload plant to come has there been no mention of inputs by BUSA, IDASA, on line a$er Kusile, around about 2018. !e DoE gets all the WWF and others? It seems that the DoE is not its modelling for this process from Eskom. !is implies using NEDLAC as a forum for consultation and that that someone is being economical with the truth. assurances have been made that were not honoured. !ere has been a commitment to explore the decision- A timeline was put forward in a presentation to making criteria. !ere should be a set of criteria to guide the parliamentary portfolio committee, which decision-making, but there is already a dra$ plan. We said that the scenarios and criteria would be have had no discussion in NEDLAC, which is the formal released on 16 August. This has not happened. place for it. We are told that it will be a policy-adjusted DoE: Presently we have "ve scenarios in the plan. !ese scenario, but it is very vague. !ere is still the opportunity were presented to the IMC on 13 August. !e IMC wanted to hold government to account through NEDLAC. !ere to see a summary of those scenarios. !ere was supposed is a formal set of documentation that provides NEDLAC to be another meeting at NEDLAC about some of the with the mandate; and because the business constituency things emanating from the modelling. !ere might have has the appetite to insist on a proper process for this. We been a misunderstanding within NEDLAC about who could therefore engage with them on process even if we do had seen what. However we have presented everything not agree with outcomes. at NEDLAC, including all the parameters. It is just some I should "nally acknowledge that a climate change na- of the issues on the recommendations that have yet to be tional response policy is being considered within NEDLAC. discussed.

Conference Report 35 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

There was a commitment to align the renewable energy review with the IRP and national climate ON THE POSITION OF THE ANC, NUM change response process. At one stage the Renewable AND COSATU ON THE NEW ENERGY MIX Energy White Paper was due in mid-November, AND MATTERS FOR THE LABOUR UNIONS and the IRP2 in September, but now the Renewable Sibusiso Mimi, National White Paper has been postponed to March 2011 and Union of Mineworkers the IRP2 to November 2010. There is lack of clarity on the stage of climate change response policy. !e basis of our dialogue on energy is that our economy DoE: We discussed this at NEDLAC. !e department should be designed away from the apartheid-inherited surmised that the renewable energy community might trajectory, towards a new long-term development path to see the Renewable Energy White Paper as intertwined improve living standards for the working class and the with the IRP. But they are not actually related. !is means poor. Our national policy must be integrated in a way that the Renewable Energy White Paper targets will be that allows for e#ective planning to achieve social and included in the review of the IRP2. economic objectives. As NUM we believe that we need national consensus on the energy mix for the future. IDASA submitted a substantial input to the IRP !is should be based on debate, dialogue and improved process. At the parliamentary portfolio committee consultation on the part of government. meeting where the DoE reported back on the !is can be based on the founding documents of our comments they had received, the Deputy DG gave democracy, the Freedom Charter and the Constitution. a completely incorrect impression of what the We should all be actively involved in the policy-making comments had been. The Deputy DG, with the DG process. sitting next to him, created the impression for the !e spending on new infrastructure is going to be parliamentary committee that the comments were one of our biggest investments. We can’t a#ord to spend largely favourable and there were no problems. money on inappropriate technologies. So we need to think The fact that IDASA had been misrepresented in about which technologies to go for. Parliament and on the record was raised privately Our democracy should de"ne the new growth path for with the parliamentary committee chair. She said that South Africa, and use energy as a measure. IDASA could write to her and explain our problem. !e ANC’s position on the new energy mix, from the DoE response: I cannot say whether or not this happened 52nd national conference at Polokwane, calls for a diver- and to what extent the comments were discussed and si"cation away from coal and for the inclusion of nuclear debated. But from our understanding, everything was and renewables; in particular, solar. !ere has been a call discussed. We had frequent parliamentary questions from to escalate national e#orts towards a greater contribution di#erent political parties. We answered the questions and of renewable resources, including solar and wind. submitted some to the minister, including (for instance) NUM’s position on the new energy mix has a clear on the criteria in coming up with the parameters. Some of anti-nuclear and anti-PBMR position. !is was con"rmed the parliamentary questions are really assisting us. Please in 2008 by its central committee, which opposed any form bear with us as a department. We are trying our best. of nuclear energy development but said it would investi- gate other useful uses of nuclear. At the 13th national con- The IRP2 has been held back by the Inter- gress in 2010 the NUM was mandated to consider their Ministerial Committee on Energy (IMC). previous position and to engage COSATU to do a study However, the task team minutes are closed on the use of nuclear. NUM is currently developing a to the public. Can these be opened up? policy document. Earthlife Africa, the WWF, government For any government department to agree at NEDLAC and members of the executive and others were invited to that constituencies have the right to approach them is contribute at a workshop. Hopefully we will soon have a meaningless. Citizens have the right to approach govern- policy document that will form the basis of our project ment departments. !is does not constitute consultation. on the new energy mix. We will also convene another !e commitment was to all constituencies in NEDLAC, workshop that will focus on liquid fuels. not just business, as happened. !is is engagement in COSATU’s tenth congress in 2009 called for labour bad faith. A high-level chat with business does not meet and civil society organisations to be actively involved in consultation requirements. energy policy matters. It called for government to lead in promoting a collective approach to short- and long-term planning and solutions to energy issues. It challenged gov- ernment to lead a promotion of renewable energy sources,

36 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker particularly solar. !e eighth congress of COSATU in On the green economy 2003 adopted a position against nuclear and the PBMR. !ere is nothing to say that COSATU supports nuclear or How will it work and link with the developmental state any form of nuclear energy development. ideal and the national democratic revolution? !e work We need help from the Energy Caucus on the issue of force transition from coal mining, coal power stations and decent jobs. Proponents of fossil fuels and nuclear always nuclear is key for us. It is not an overnight thing and we exaggerate the issue of job creation in these sectors. But need help thinking about these matters. For instance, we you have been quiet, especially in the mainstream media. have comrades who will lose their jobs when the PBMR Or maybe the media is not picking up your work. shuts down. Can we move them into another sector?

On a just transition to a low- On the issue of sustainable development carbon economy We know that mining will not be here forever. NUM is a Anyone who calls for the mines to be closed will become caring union and sustainable development is key to us. an enemy of the mineworkers. !is poses a serious threat to livelihood and you need to be careful with your lan- guage and how you make your arguments.

Conference Report 37 38 Institute for Security Studies Session 5 Strategising towards a common agenda

Ways forward? CONCLUSION Q Develop common strategy and messages Participants of the Energy Caucus broke up into smaller Q A focused campaign on nuclear, which argues that discussion groups to talk about key issues concerning en- nuclear power compromises our water, food security, gagements in energy-related policy processes. Each group health and economy then submitted key points underlining their thinking Q Consolidate popular education material into a cam- about the way forward for campaigns and issues. paign kit so that all organisations can use it Q Convene an anti-nuclear summit, convened by the 1. Nuclear Energy Caucus but open to much wider civil society participation Q However, we must acknowledge the positives of our What has been done? long-term campaigning. For instance, the PBMR is Q Media coverage and liaison work being shut down. Some democratic spaces are open. Q Lobbying Instant success is a lot to hope for. Just because we Q A set of questions that have gone to the Regulator don’t achieve this doesn’t mean that we are not being Q Protests to Parliament listened to. Not everyone in government is pro-nuclear. Q Community education in the Western Cape Treasury was the biggest opponent of PBMR Q Tours of waste sites Q NUM is monitoring the PBMR project 2. IRP Q Popular education materials are being developed What has been done? What are the gaps? Q We have had little impact at a lobbying and policy Q An alternative/shadow IRP2 level. Questions have gone unanswered and civil Q !e WWF’s Sustainable National Accessible Power society has been treated in a tokenistic way Planning (SNAPP) tool Q !e current democratic channels are not working for us. Our rational arguments are ignored due to high What is planned? levels of vested interests Q Research into the technical side of IRP2 and Q How do we expose the power, and the revolving door collaboration syndrome? Q Potential for women in energy hearings Q !e argument that nuclear is a better solution than Q A shadow IRP2: a real alternative would require tech- coal in the context of climate change needs to be nical modelling confronted Q Capacity building and mobilisation Q Our organisations need more unity in action

Conference Report 39 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

What are the ways forward? What are the gaps? Q Find out what is going on within the renewable energy Q Awareness industry, and the di#erent positions of di#erent Q Work on adaptation, as most of the focus is on stakeholders mitigation Q Formal inputs Q !e way in which we talk about climate change: we Q !e legal route: keep a paper trail and challenge it as need to de-science it something that has not undergone su%cient consulta- Q We need to link climate change to the way people live tion. Possible ‘vote of no con"dence’ Q Perceived lack of continuity among NGOs Q !e political route: push the parliamentary committee to take a much stronger line Ways forward Q Find out what is happening with the Clinton Q We need to build a positive alternative Foundation and the SARI initiative. We need to get a Q We need to bring indigenous knowledge back into the brief on what is happening political process Q Get the story right for the audience we are presenting 3. Climate change policy to, in appropriate language Q Identify which department and person to talk to

What has been done? 4. Policy from NEDLAC Q A CJN!SA formal submission Q Women’s engagement in climate change forum !ere are four constituencies in NEDLAC: government, Q A number of local-level activities, including work- labour, business and community. !ere are three di#erent shops, submissions from churches and youth groups options on how we engage with NEDLAC: Q Research on water waste management and energy 1 Engage with SANCO (the South African Civics What is planned? Organisation) and consider engaging with SANGOCO Q Global day of action, involving numerous groups (the South African Non-Governmental Organisations Q Earthlife Africa actions in the run up to the 16th Coalition) in its current form Conference of the Parties of the United Nations 2 Ensure that the Energy Caucus is represented via Framework Convention on Climate Change in Mexico another organisation at NEDLAC in December 2010 3 !e Energy Caucus must approach NEDLAC directly. Q A bishops’ conference is working on the Catholic We will have a separate session on this at the next church’s position Energy Caucus. !e Energy Caucus could provide Q !e gender and climate change group will team up technical expertise for NEDLAC with other groups Q !e youth and climate change forum will send state- ments to the department and the presidency

40 Institute for Security Studies Appendix A Programme of the National Civil Society Energy Caucus meeting 14–15 September 2010, Townhouse Hotel, Cape Town

THEME: SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS FOR SOUTH AFRICA

How can we ensure public participation and improved accountability in policy processes?

DAY 1: TUESDAY, 14 SEPTEMBER

08:30 Registration 09:00 Welcome and outline the objectives of the meeting Trusha Reddy - ISS 09:15 Review of last Energy Caucus meeting Lerato Maregele – Earthlife Africa 09:25 Elect a chair for sessions 1 and 2, and elect a team to dra$ press release

Session 1: Demystifying the dynamics of the policy process 09:30 Going down the winding road of government policy Mark Pickering, Meridian Economics 09:50 Development paths and sustainable energy Andrew Marquard, Energy Research Centre 10:10 Exploring the murky parameters of the policy process David Fig, independent researcher and Yvette Abrahams, Commission on Gender Equality 11:00 Refreshments

Session 2: Understanding the nature and in&uence of interest groups Panel 1 11:30 Nuclear: what role for nuclear interest groups post PBMR and how will they justify the big costs? Prof Steve !omas, Greenwich University, UK 12:00 How is civil society holding narrow interest groups to account? Muna Lakhani, Institute for Zeo Waste in Africa and Earthlife Africa, Cape Town 12:15 Open discussion 12:45 Lunch

Conference Report 41 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

Session 2: Understanding the nature and in&uence of interest groups continued… Panel 2 13:30 Renewables: an overview of the industry’s potential to move SA to a sustainable energy future Prof Wikus van Niekerk, Stellenbosch University TBC 14:00 Renewables: what gains for the wind industry? Kilian Hagemann, Director of G7 Renewable Energies and member of SAWEA and Davin Chown, SAWEA Board 14:30 Independent Power Producers: are these old faces with a new clean strategy? Mark Pickering, Meridian Economics, and Tristen Taylor, Earthlife Africa SECCP 15:00 Refreshments

Session 3: Learning lessons from civil society engagements in 2010 15:30 Assessing civil society impact on the IRP2 policy process Samantha Bailey, 350.org 15:45 What has civil society accomplished with the campaign against the World Bank? Bobby Peak, groundWork 16:00 Is civil society playing an active role in developing the ‘Climate Change Response Policy’? Dorah Lebelo, GenderCC-SA 16:15 Open discussion 16:45 Workshop session: justifying the building of the Kusile coal-"red power station: !e need and baseload requirements? (Not compulsory) Presentation by Kannan Lakmeeharan, Eskom 19:30 Closing: Day 1

DAY 2: WEDNESDAY, 15 SEPTEMBER

08:30 Refreshments 09:00 Review of Day 1 and elect chair for sessions 4 and 5

Session 4: Institutional arrangements for monitoring and oversight of policy 09:15 What role for Parliament in energy oversight? Ms M. Mentor, Portfolio Committee Chair on Public Enterprises; and Lance Greyling, Independent Democrats. Open discussion to follow 09:45 Can we ever get a fully independent ISMO (Independent Systems Market Operator)? Matthews Bantsijang, Department of Energy and Ms M Mentor, Portfolio Committee Chair on Public Enterprises. Open discussion to follow. 10:15 Who regulates the energy regulators? Advocate Boyce Mkhize, CEO, National Nuclear Regulator, Mariette Lie#erink, Federation for A Sustainable Environment and the North West University. Open discussion to follow 10:45 Refreshments 11:00 Update on the IRP2 policy process Matthews Bantsijang, Department of Energy 11:30 Launch of the civil society review of the IRP2 Liziwe McDaid 11:45 Update on civil society representation at Nedlac Richard Worthington, WWF-SA 12:30 Lunch break

42 Institute for Security Studies Compiled by Lucy Baker

13:30 Session 5: Strategising towards a common agenda !is session is designed for everyone to bene"t from learning what everyone is working on, for the purpose of assisting organisations in their particular strategic thinking a$er the caucus. A ‘map’ will be developed by initially highlighting di#erent policy engagements and potential advocacy interventions, and then overlaying this with information provided by participants on what they/their organisations are doing. !is exercise should provide a broad overview, possible common areas or overlaps, and identify gaps. !e backdrop to the session will be the past two days of discussion where we have been trying to understand policy processes, and how to maximise the direct/indirect input by civil society and other interest group into policy processes. Samantha Bailey will provide a dra$ map prior to the meeting for feedback (based on information shared at the May Energy Caucus session). !en, when participants register on Day 1, they will be asked to list the advocacy and policy-related activities they have been and plan to be involved in based on the map created. !ese may include research, submissions, campaigns, seeking access to information, coordination with di#erent organisations and trade unions, for example. During the course of the Caucus, we will add any new information on potential policy/advocacy interventions, and then have the overall map ready for presentation and discussion at this session 5. If called for, we will arrange break-away groups on particular interest areas/gaps. Facilitation of group discussion proposed to be done by the following people: Webster Whande – ISS, Liziwe McDaid, SAFCEI and Mark Weinberg, AIDC. 14:30 Refreshments 15:00 Discussion in plenary Session 5 continued 15:30 Plan of action and "nal press release 16:00 Closing: Day 2

Conference Report 43 44 Institute for Security Studies Appendix B Principles of the South African Civil Society Energy Caucus As amended at Energy Caucus meeting 14 April 2005

DEFINING PRINCIPLES 16. Ensuring communities have a voice in provision of household energy and all energy policies 1. Call for a just transition to sustainable energy (in- 17. Call for a stepped block tari# cludes no net job loss, a#ordability, accessibility and 18. Support integrated public transport minimisation of pollution) 19. Support investigation of biomass-based additives as a 2. Access to basic energy services is recognised as a replacement for heavy metal additives in transport fuel human right 20. Call for the implementation of the ‘polluter pays’ 3. Call for free energy services for basic needs, allocated principle per person, recognising survival strategies 21. Call for application of cradle-to-grave responsibility 4. Call for an energy services needs approach to energy and liability policy 22. Call for corporate accountability and transparency 5. A holistic approach to energy, supporting and 23. Opposed to outsourcing of labour (in dirty industry) exploring alternatives rather than over-emphasis on 24. National Key Points Act should not be used to block electricity access to information 6. Reject privatisation of state assets in the energy sector 25. Emissions and impact data must not be withheld as 7. Fair and equitable access to the transmission and proprietary information distribution network, with two-way metering 26. Opposed to gagging orders and/or suppression of 8. Promote putting a value to natural resources that testimony of workers or local communities re&ects their true value to society 27. Worker health and safety should never be 9. Internalisation of the externalised costs of energy compromised production 28. Call for rationalisation of tari#s to promote equity 10. Full cost accounting in the energy sector, including 29. Call for phasing out of coal and oil within a just full lifecycle analysis with comprehensive assessment transition to sustainable energy, without losing jobs or of the energy balance in energy planning and project generating negative social impacts assessments 30. Oppose geological disposal/repository of radioactive 11. We call for policies and measures to improve energy waste and support above-ground monitored storage e%ciency 31. Call for decentralised energy provision, including 12. Promote local content, ownership and participation in producing energy as close as possible to demand energy developments 32. We call for and will work to empower and promote 13. Reject large dams, based on World Commission on women’s voices and participation in energy decision- Dams (WCD) de"nition of large dams, and call for making and provision implementation of the guidelines of the WCD 33. Recognise indigenous knowledge and energy service 14. Reject waste incineration options that may not be fashionable and call for greater 15. Opposed to nuclear power support of o#-grid non electrical options (OGNEOs)

Conference Report 45 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

RESOLUTION POLICIES AND MEASURES THAT ARE CALLED FOR Adopted on 17 February 2006, Booysens Hotel Q Air pollution taxes/charges (on particulates, NOx, SOx, volatile organic compounds and greenhouse Consistent with the Principles of the South African civil gases), with an exemption for households society Energy Caucus (EC), the EC participants call on Q Codes, standards and preferential "nancing to ensure the Department of Minerals and Energy to consider a energy-e%cient housing suite of public bene"ts, particularly job creation, equity Q Energy e%ciency codes and standards for buildings in and poverty reduction, as a primary driver of one of the government and commercial sectors scenarios to be modelled as part of the Integrated Energy Q Energy e%cient labelling and standards for appliances Planning process. We further call for a timeline of at least Q Energy e%ciency performance standards for industrial 30 years to be used in the scenario modelling process. and commercial equipment Q Preferential "nancing (e.g. so$ loans) to support solar TARGETS water heating Q Include analysis of options for providing energy ser- Q Fi$y per cent of total energy supply from renewable vices in local integrated development plans energy by 2050 Q Call for multiple-occupancy vehicle lanes on highways Q A target for solar water heating (SWH), for example, Q Call for vehicle fuel-e%ciency standards, starting with half a square meter per person SWH within ten years government and commercial &eets and one square metre per person within 20 years Q Call for equity impact assessments to measure em- Q Support developing a target for bio-fuel production powerment of local communities

COMMITMENTS TO BE DISCUSSED

Q Work on a local level to develop energy policies that Q Land"ll gas: A new principle needs to be developed in support the poor and indigent, based on real evidence which the EC discourages the use of land"lls for waste of the impact of current energy policies management, and encourages waste separation at source Q !e role of gas as a transitional energy source SECONDARY PRINCIPLES Q Call for most appropriate technology standards or guidelines Q Support the subsidisation of renewable energy within Q Need to call for alternative measures of development a just transition by shi$ing current subsidies (part of (investigate GDP vs. job creation) full cost accounting) Q A principle calling for integrated energy planning and Q Support equitable access to distribution and transmis- integrated resource planning sion networks

46 Institute for Security Studies Appendix C Press release 15 September 2010

Energy Caucus

CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS CALL ON !e need to question any expansion of the South GOVERNMENT TO ADDRESS BIG African nuclear industry was underscored by a key pres- ISSUES ON ENERGY URGENTLY entation from Mariette Lie#erink of the Federation for a Sustainable Environment. Her presentation pointed to the !e Energy Caucus – civil society organisations con- likelihood of a widespread public health tragedy across cerned with electricity, energy and climate change issues the Witwatersrand, resulting from pollution by uranium – met with representatives of the Department of Energy, and other heavy metals from neglected mining tailings. Eskom and the National Nuclear Regulator in Cape Town !e Energy Caucus acknowledges the need for on 14 and 15 September. greater public mobilisation and consultation on energy !e caucus noted substantial problems with the and climate change issues. !ere is insu%cient public IRP2010 electricity planning process. !e Department knowledge of climate change issues, and surprisingly little of Energy has not engaged with civil society in good public engagement on electricity policy. faith, has not met commitments made in the course of !e civil society Energy Caucus calls upon: the process, and has largely ignored the substance of civil society proposals. The Inter-ministerial Questions asked in Parliament regarding criteria for Committee on Energy: decision-making have not been answered; and the DoE has not honoured the commitment made to all constitu- Q To stop development work on Kusile, at least until the encies at NEDLAC: that a full and detailed set of input full costs and bene"ts have been analysed within fully- data, parameters and criteria for decision-making would &edged Integrated Energy Planning as required by the be tabled and debated at NEDLAC, within the Energy National Energy Act of 2008 Task Team. Q To consider a national aspiration and target for !e integrity of the IRP2010 process appears particu- 50 per cent of electricity generation to be derived from larly &imsy in the light of the Minister of Energy’s recent renewable resources by 2030 call for six new nuclear power stations, a call that com- pletely pre-empts the conclusions of the IRP2010 process. The Department of Energy: !e Energy Caucus noted that the market economic costs of nuclear energy are frequently under-estimated, Q To extend the Integrated Resource Planning process excessive and prohibitive. !e Energy Caucus opposes any for electricity supply and provide for meaning- roll-out of new nuclear power stations, while acknowledg- ful stakeholder engagement, and incorporate the ing that excluding nuclear energy from the electricity outcomes of the review of renewable energy policy mix will demand particularly ambitious programmes of and targets and align them with the White Paper on energy e%ciency and renewable energy. Climate Change Response Policy

Conference Report 47 Sustainable energy solutions for South Africa

The Parliamentary Portfolio The National Nuclear Regulator Committee on Energy: and the Department of Health:

Q To insist on a detailed debate of IRP scenarios and Q To ensure epidemiological studies su%cient to ascer- decision-making criteria (not simply a discussion tain the extent of harm to public health and ecosystem of a proposed dra$), as well as interrogation of the integrity of widespread toxic and radioactive pollu- public participation processes and concerns presented tion resulting from gold and uranium mining and directly by civil society, not misrepresented by govern- radioactive waste management in South Africa, and to ment o%cials institute an urgent programme of action to minimise and manage the impacts Q To increase public participation in the work of the NNR

48 Institute for Security Studies ISS Head O!ce Block C & D, Brooklyn Court, 361 Veale Street New Muckleneuk, Pretoria, South Africa Tel: (27-12) 346 9500 Fax: (27-12) 346 9570 E-mail: [email protected]

ISS Addis Ababa O!ce 5th Floor, Get House Building Africa Avenue, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Tel: (251-11) 515 6320 Fax: (251-11) 515 6449 E-mail: [email protected]

ISS Cape Town O!ce 2nd Floor, The Armoury Building, Buchanan Square 160 Sir Lowry Road, Woodstock, South Africa Tel: (27-21) 461 7211 Fax: (27-21) 461 7213 E-mail: [email protected]

ISS Dakar O!ce Stèle Mermoz, 100x Elhadji Ibrahima Niasse MZ83, Senegal Tel: (221-33) 824 0918/21 Fax: (221-33) 824 2246 E-mail: [email protected]

ISS Nairobi O!ce ISS Conference Report Braeside Gardens, o! Muthangari Road Lavington, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (254-20) 386 1625 Fax: (254-20) 386 1639 E-mail: [email protected]

ISS Pretoria O!ce Block C, Brooklyn Court, 361 Veale Street New Muckleneuk, Pretoria, South Africa Tel: (27-12) 346 9500 Fax: (27-12) 460 0998 E-mail: [email protected]

www.issafrica.org

This publication was made possible by general Institute funding provided by the governments of Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.