The R440bn private transmission gamble that could finally end load shedding
South Africa's electricity salvation is called the Independent Transmission Projects (ITP) Programme – a joint venture between Kgosientsho Ramokgopa's Department of Electricity and Energy and Enoch Godongwana's National Treasury – and it's racing the clock to unlock billions in private investment and build the 14,000km of new transmission lines needed to connect renewable energy projects and end the country's electricity crisis.
Speaking to the parliamentary committee on electricity and energy last week, Minister of Electricity and Energy Ramokgopa painted a picture of a country on the cusp of an energy revolution, but one that required unprecedented national rewiring coordination between government, the private sector and state-owned entities to succeed.
Ramokgopa knows the stakes. It was his Integrated Resource Plan that estimated a desperate need of more than 14,000km of new transmission lines and 170 transformers over the next decade – requiring a minimum of the N1 road length from Joburg to Cape Town's worth of new lines annually – South Africa's current grid expansion pace is 'wholly inadequate', according to government briefings.
Private sector rush
The appetite for private sector involvement is clear. Between December 2024 and February 2025, the government conducted a request for information that received more than 130 formal responses from local and international developers, financiers, operators and equipment manufacturers.
More than 44% of local participants indicated they intended to partner with international entities, suggesting the scale of investment required exceeds domestic capacity alone.
The feedback was instructive: the industry reported a need for stable regulatory frameworks and a programmatic roll-out for pipeline predictability, while also flagging permitting, right-of-way acquisition and supply chain constraints as key risks requiring proactive mitigation.
The government listened.
First came the ministerial determination, gazetted on 28 March 2025, designating the Department of Electricity and Energy as the procurer and the National Transmission Company South Africa (NTCSA) as the buyer under Transmission Services Agreements. The determination defines Phase 1 scope as 1,164km of 400kV transmission lines across the Northern Cape, North-West and Gauteng.
Expropriation trump card
Next came the Draft Electricity Transmission Regulations, on 3 April, with public consultation closing on 22 May. The IPP Office will run the Phase 1 procurement, with pre-qualification tenders expected by end-July and requests for proposals by November.
A persistent obstacle that the NTCSA inherited from Eskom is the complexities of securing land for its transmission lines. Ramokgopa confirmed that expropriation with compensation would be used 'as a final instrument' after exhausting other engagement options.
For ITP projects, the government aims for 'late-stage tender' – resolving land acquisition, environmental impact assessments and statutory authorisations before developers take over execution, de-risking projects for private investors.
Some discussions have stretched over four years without resolution, but the NTCSA says it is committed to meticulously adhering to proper procedures to mitigate the risk of litigation as it navigates these challenging negotiations.
The R440bn funding puzzle
The Transmission Development Plan requires R440-billion over the next decade. Ramokgopa was blunt about the funding reality: 'The sovereign balance sheet cannot provide a blanket sovereign guarantee for this investment, nor are Eskom's or NTCSA's balance sheets strong enough alone.'
The government's solution is a 'bespoke financing instrument' backed by a Credit Guarantee Vehicle (CGV) developed with the World Bank. The CGV will be incorporated as a private non-life insurance company in South Africa and is expected to become operational in 2026.
For the first five years, R155-billion will be spent on transmission infrastructure, with R30-billion expected from third-party debt by 2028. NTCSA's board has increased its five-year budget by about R40-billion to R130-billion, with 76% allocated for network expansion.
A R219-billion provision from Budget 3.0 (part of the R1.03-trillion medium-term expenditure framework) was noted for strengthening the electricity supply network, from generation to transmission and distribution.
Supply chain nationalism
Ramokgopa pointed to the government's intention to build local industries on the back of energy investments rather than 'exporting opportunities'. The Department of Trade, Industry and Competition is coordinating interventions to ensure local production of Class 4 transformers and steel.
The progress is evident: 22 factories have been accredited for various transformer classes, while five of six identified steel tower suppliers have been certified. Eskom announced a panel of transformer suppliers in June 2024 to address demand for 101 large transformers over the next decade.
Racing against time
With the competitive electricity market targeted for April 2026 and the Credit Guarantee Vehicle becoming operational the same year, timelines are tight. The NTCSA is simultaneously developing market codes, managing infrastructure roll-outs and preparing for its role as market operator once the Electricity Regulation Amendment Act is passed.
The South African Wholesale Electricity Market School will launch at Wits Business School to build market participant capabilities, while synchronous condensers are planned to strengthen grid stability as renewable penetration increases.
That said, for the first time in years, South Africa has a comprehensive plan, committed funding mechanisms and private sector interest to transform its electricity system. Whether it can execute fast enough to meet the 2026 competitive market deadline – and finally end load shedding – remains the R440-billion question. DM
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
15 hours ago
- IOL News
Eskom moves forward with Duynefontein nuclear power project amidst environmental concerns
With the anticipated new Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) set to be released soon, Eskom stated its intention to maximise the capacity permitted under this new framework, potentially adding an extra 4 000 megawatts (MW) to the site. Image: File/Dean Hutton Banele Ginidza Eskom has announced plans to deploy Large Conventional Nuclear Power Reactor (PWR) units at the Duynefontein Nuclear Plant, a critical step forward following the Department of Forestry, Fisheries, and the Environment's (DFFE) recent decision to allow this development. With the anticipated new Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) set to be released soon, Eskom stated its intention to maximise the capacity permitted under this new framework, potentially adding an extra 4 000 megawatts (MW) to the site. This plan follows a tumultuous period surrounding previous nuclear procurement strategies, notably when Electricity and Energy Minister Kgosientso Ramokgopa withdrew a Ministerial determination to procure 2 500MW of new nuclear capacity after widespread public consultation concerns. The ensuing legal challenges led to the determination's revocation, highlighting the necessity for transparent dialogues around sensitive energy projects. Eskom on Thursday clarified that any deployment of nuclear power will align with the forthcoming IRP and Section 34 determination to be issued by the Department of Electricity and Energy (DEE), taking into account significant regulatory changes that have unfolded in recent years. "The previous Section 34 determination allocated the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (now the DEE) as the Procurer. This determination has since been withdrawn by the DEE Minister. Once the new IRP and new Section 34 are issued, DEE and/or Eskom will determine the funding options for the Nuclear Programme," Eskom said. "This Environmental Assessment (EA) allows an additional 4 000MW to be deployed on the Duynefontein site. The capacity to be deployed on the site will depend on the nuclear power capacity allocated in the new IRP." However, the announcement hasn't gone without criticism. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Environmental advocates, including the Koeberg Alert Alliance (KAA), have raised grave concerns regarding the outdated nature of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, initiated in 2007. According to KAA's spokesperson, Peter Becker, significant changes in population density and the economic viability of alternative energy sources necessitate a reassessment of Duynefontein as a suitable nuclear site. "It is of note that the EIA consultants found that Duynefontein (Koeberg) was not the best site for a new plant, due to seismic risks and population density in the area," Becker said. "It appears the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment has been pressured to override the consultants' view due to economic factors. It is of course far cheaper to build a new plant where there is already existing infrastructure." However, Eskom rebuffed these claims, asserting that the EIA indicated that both Thyspunt and Duynefontein were appropriate sites, with Thyspunt suggested as the preferred location. Des Muller, managing director of NuEnergy Developments, said both Duynefontein and Thyspunt were sound sites to build large-scale nuclear power plants on. "These sites are both licensed for 4 000MW but, in the short-term, only two power plants will be built on these sites, leaving ample capacity for Small Modular Reactors (SMR)," Muller said. "Because they don't need the ocean to cool them, SMRs can be built anywhere and closer to the industrial load centres in our country. SMRs are also ideal to repurpose our retired coal power stations and keep those communities sustained and contributing to our economy." Muller also said that given South Africa's old coal power retirement program in the 2030s, both sites will have to be developed, converting these regions to net exporters of clean, reliable and affordable electricity. "These regions will also experience economic prosperity during the build and the 60 years of operation and maintenance, as well as from the energy security they will enjoy," Muller said. BUSINESS REPORT
The Star
a day ago
- The Star
Joburg mayor blames DA-led coalition as city faces R24. 4bn wasteful spending crisis
Simon Majadibodu | Published 7 hours ago Joburg Mayor Dada Morero has blamed the previous DA-led administration for the city's ballooning unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, which has reached R24.4 billion over the past year. Speaking at a media briefing on Thursday, Morero confirmed he had submitted a comprehensive financial recovery plan to Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana, who had given the City of Johannesburg 14 days to respond after raising alarm over its financial mismanagement. This comes after Auditor-General, Tsakani Maluleke, flagged serious governance failures, including poor financial controls, weak revenue collection and chronic underinvestment. The National Treasury has cautioned that failure to resolve the crisis could result in the withholding of national grants. Morero said he received the letter from Godongwana on July 30, 2025, outlining the minister's concern over the city's ongoing non-compliance with the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA), specifically relating to unauthorised and irregular expenditure. 'The Honourable Minister requested that I respond within 14 days. I can confirm that I have now submitted a comprehensive response on behalf of the City of Johannesburg,' Morero said. The response, he said, includes a full account of the issues behind the R23.6 billion in unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure as reported in the city's 2023–2024 financial statements. Morero, who has served as mayor since August 2022, again blamed the Democratic Alliance-led coalition, which governed the city between 2016 and 2021. He previously served as an MMC for Finance at the metro in 2023. 'Our beloved city endured a period of mismanagement and poor leadership under the DA-led coalition. The R23.6 billion is a cumulative figure that increased progressively over several years, largely unaddressed and not regularised as required by the MFMA,' he said. He broke down the R23.6 billion figure, which includes R13 billion (55%) in unauthorised expenditure, R9.9 billion (42%) in irregular expenditure, and R735 million (3%) in fruitless and wasteful expenditure. Morero said most of the unauthorised spending, comes from bulk purchases of electricity and water that exceeded the approved budget. 'These bulk purchases are driven by resident consumption as well as both technical and non-technical losses during service delivery,' he said. Irregular expenditure mainly arose from procurement processes that failed to comply with supply chain regulations. 'It's important to clarify that irregular or unauthorised expenditure doesn't necessarily mean that the goods or services weren't received. It points to non-compliance in procurement procedures,' he said. Morero said to address these issues, he implemented key interventions including an enhanced expenditure reduction strategy focused on investigations, consequence management, and regularisation of non-compliant spending in line with MFMA Section 32.2. He said he also re-established the city's disciplinary board for financial misconduct and initiated criminal proceedings where necessary. 'In February 2025, I approached President Cyril Ramaphosa for technical support through the Presidential Working Group,' Morero added. He said the city also established a 'War Room' and introduced a 'Bomb Squad' to oversee financial recovery and monitor service delivery progress weekly. These interventions, he claimed, are beginning to show results. 'As of June 30, 2025, R12.9 billion of the R23.6 billion has been regularised. The balance of R6.7 billion is under investigation. The remainder has been investigated and is now being processed by municipal committees,' he said. Morero said he expects a 'significant reduction' in irregular expenditure in the city's 2024–2025 annual financial statements. He said the disciplinary board has completed preliminary investigations into six matters totalling R535 million, with outcomes to be presented to the Council during its next ordinary sitting. On July 31, the Council approved 12 further matters for investigation, amounting to R2.5 billion. These relate to alleged financial misconduct and unresolved unauthorised expenditure. Morero also claimed there were improvements in revenue collection through the War Room initiative, with the city achieving an 87% collection rate between April and June 2025 - a 2.7% increase from the same period last year. He said the city is now targeting a sustainable daily revenue collection of R200 million. 'The impact of the Presidential Working Group and Bomb Squad is beginning to be visible through accelerated service delivery,' he said. He said a new board has been appointed to oversee municipal entities, while oversight through the Group Audit Committees and the Mayoral Committee is being strengthened. He added, 'Reducing unauthorised, irregular and fruitless expenditure is now a key performance indicator for senior managers. The disciplinary board will continue expediting investigations into allegations of financial misconduct.' [email protected] IOL Politics
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
Why foreign loans are a self-imposed straitjacket for SA's economy
Loans from international financial institutions are often celebrated as victories. But we need to ask what these loans are actually financing – and to whose benefit. The increased presence of international financial institutions in South Africa since 2020 should not be seen simply as a turn to cheaper lending. Rather, they are playing a key role in legitimising policy reforms that are aimed at dismantling state power over key economic resources, benefiting domestic and international capital. At first glance, it may seem like South Africa has caught a break. International financial institutions, most recently the World Bank and the African Development Bank (AfDB), have funnelled billions of dollars and euros in loans into the public purse. These loans have been provided at below market interest rates and with generous grace periods, at a time when the debt markets are charging the government a premium to borrow money. These loans are often celebrated in headlines as victories: ' South Africa secures World Bank funding ' or ' AfDB backs green growth reforms '. But we need to ask what these loans are actually financing – and to whose benefit. Curiously, these loans are not for the construction of bridges, roads, rail or tied to mega infrastructure projects such as Medupi. Moreover, according to the media statements and project documents published by the institutions, these loans are not intended to help South Africa refinance foreign currency-denominated debts. In other words, they cannot be regarded as an alternative to the high cost of market borrowing. Instead, these loans are meant to finance the legal and regulatory infrastructure deemed necessary to dismantle the state's control over key economic resources and often include policy conditions in their terms. National Treasury is therefore voluntarily approaching international financial institutions for money it could otherwise acquire elsewhere without the conditionality and political baggage associated with such borrowing. Reading the clues The first clue lies in how these loans are structured. They are neither earmarked nor set aside for a particular infrastructure project, as is often suggested by media reports. Instead, National Treasury classifies these loans as 'general budget support'. This means they are lumped together with all the taxes, market debt and government income generated in a fiscal year. While it is good for the government to have discretion on spending, as is allowed by general budget support loans, this is problematic where there is a hidden or contentious agenda behind the lending. Fortunately, reports provided by international financial institutions provide some more clues: in assessing South Africa's readiness for new loans, institutions evaluate the extent and speed at which the government has been undertaking policy reforms. Let's take the 2025 World Bank loan as an example. The loan agreement document explicitly states that the release of the $1.5-billion is conditional on the World Bank's satisfaction with the 'programme being carried out by the Borrower [Republic of South Africa]'. This 'programme' comprises several pillars largely related to legislative and regulatory changes that are designed to increase the role of the private sector. In the energy sector (pillar one), the World Bank cites the government's mandate for the National Transmission Company of South Africa (NTCSA) to enter into electricity transmission services agreements with independent transmission providers. This, it says, is to promote 'private sector participation' and acts as proof of South Africa's adherence to 'the programme'. Similarly, in the transport sector (pillar two), the government is commended for expediting the unbundling of Transnet through the Transport Economic Regulator Act of 2024. Self-imposed straitjacket That World Bank loan is not an isolated case. The recently approved $476.6-million loan from the AfDB follows the same pattern. The AfDB board was thrilled with the success of the previous $300-million 2023 loan, which they say 'delivered key reforms that bolstered financial stability and increased renewable energy capacity'. The project appraisal for the 2023 AfDB loan outlined the bank's specific contribution. It included its support for the Electricity Regulation Act, which, in their view, would 'provide the legislative framework to restructure and unbundle the electricity industry to create a modern and competitive sector, crowd in large investment into renewable energy, and establish a transmission system operator'. Unlike the classic 'structural adjustment' loans prevalent in the Global South following the 1980s, these loans are a self-imposed straitjacket on economic policymaking as well as an undoing of the developmental principles underpinning the establishment of the South African democratic movement. Government commitments to international financial institutions, as argued by the IMF, are viewed by global capital as a stamp of approval for a country's 'readiness' for investment. It assures the private sector that the government will not reverse its policy stance. No surprises Greater policy certainty is viewed as a precondition for crowding in private sector commitments. The push by the National Treasury and the Presidency to pass these reforms, all of which fall under the banner of Operation Vulindlela, should come as no surprise. Civil society and organised labour have consistently raised the alarm about the nature of these reforms and about whose interests they serve. The South African Federation of Trade Unions views Operation Vulindlela as 'a neoliberal structural reform agenda that is accelerating the privatisation of South Africa's public infrastructure'. The Congress of South African Trade Unions has also expressed concern about the ongoing unbundling of Eskom. Meanwhile, the Alternative Information and Development Centre has noted the link between the acquisition of these loans from international bodies and the acceleration of reforms proposed in Operation Vulindlela. It argues that it serves 'to satisfy the narrow interests of private investors and business elites at the expense of the public good'. In sum, for the National Treasury, the proliferation of foreign loans not only provides certainty to the market that reforms will be carried through and maintained, but also makes it difficult for dissenting voices to trigger policy changes. Ultimately, protecting South Africa's economic sovereignty means ensuring that the vision for our economy is shaped by the people the economy is meant to serve – that is the general public. This would necessitate opening up the space for Parliament and the public to scrutinise and debate the uptake of loans granted by international financial institutions, including their terms, conditions and long-term consequences. It is about ensuring that economic decisions reflect the needs and voices of the people above the preferences of markets or the priorities of lenders. The call by Parliament's Standing Committee on Finance for greater transparency – despite resistance from the National Treasury – must now be taken up more widely. Decisions about who controls our electricity grid, our ports, our budgets, and our future cannot be made behind closed doors. The time for making lending decisions that foreground the interests of South Africans is now. DM
