It was reported that, “following months of delay, Mineral Resources and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe [had] published the Gazette opening the way for the procurement of 4 800 MW of onshore wind, 2 000 MW of solar photovoltaic (PV), 3 000 MW of gas- or diesel-to-power, 1 500 MW of new coal and 513 MW of energy storage on September 25, having formally received the National Energy Regulator of South Africa’s concurrence with the determination earlier in the month”.

Well. Raise high the roof beam, carpenters! Splice the jolly main brace! Gooi die dop! So, let’s do the numbers – new renewables: 4 800 MW (wind) + 2 000 MW (solar) = 6 800 MW. Then, 3 000 MW (gas or diesel) + 1 500 MW (new coal) + 513 MW (storage) = 5 013 MW.

Thus, this genius proposal means that, in the middle of a windless night, all of this new generation will be in deficit by 5 013 MW less 6 800 MW = (–1 787 MW). In other words ( I’ll write this slowly so even the dof can follow). If all the renewables are running and then the sun stops, and the wind drops, then the renewable power will not be there and will have to be replaced by something else, since there will be a deficit of 1 787 MW, which will have to come from the existing grid.

How about this for a smart idea? What is wrong with this government? Has it not occurred to them that solar power and wind power are intermittent? That they have to be backed up 50% of the time? That installing intermittent power generation must be backed up when it is not available? It is all a mystery. Not a week goes by when I read some overseas politician saying that South Africa has good wind resources. Really? In Gauteng, the air is mostly as still as a grave. There are thin stemmed flowers which grow in Johannesburg and Pretoria and in no other place, since the air is often still. It’s hard to fly even a simple kite in Gauteng in winter. Perhaps they mean the Cape. Or Port Elizabeth. The latter, yes, but the Cape is really not that windy (I can send you figures if you like). So why? Perhaps a clue: “South Africa should focus on renewable energy,” says German Chancellor Angela Merkel. (Forbes, February 2020). Then perhaps, given the failure of the Energiewende policy (as many claim), Merkel is keen to sell South Africa some second-hand wind turbines. Perhaps. It is a fact that, in South Africa, you can drive for miles and miles and just see veld, which could support huge solar farms. There is nowhere the same area for wind turbines. You could always have offshore wind turbines. But in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans? The beaches in the UK are covered with fine pebble stones. In Africa, they are covered with sand. Go figure.

There has always been something sinister with wind turbine farms in South Africa. When the initial renewable-energy bids were awarded, Eskom was forced to pay more for the energy than it could sell it. Thus, Nersa invented the Multiyear Price Determination model, which theoretically compensated Eskom for this, allowing Eskom to offset energy costs against income. But! Not entirely! If Eskom had to start some gas turbines to cover the generation loss when the wind stopped, tough luck. No compensation for that. So Eskom loses a sum for each renewable unit bought. The most immediate energy problem in South Africa is that a very corrupt bunch of politically connected people resulted in two new power stations, Medupi and Kusile, which don’t work properly and were massively over budget. Plugging that gap with power generation which works 50% of the time will not help. There are some very simple ways to fix the problem, temporarily (spoiler alert – not batteries). Yes, do build renewables. But please, in a way which doesn’t make things worse.