Eskom burns nearly R6 billion on diesel to keep lights on during winter
Eskom says it plans to return a total of 3 280MW of generation capacity to service, while it burned nearly R6 billion worth of diesel to meet winter demand
This comes as the country rides the wave of more than 80 days of no load shedding.
According to the power utility, there have been no rolling blackouts since 15 May 2025, with load shedding only implemented for 26 hours recorded between 1 April and 31 July 2025.
Diesel budget
Eskom insists that its expenditure on diesel is within budget despite burning nearly R6 billion in fuel to run its open cycle gas turbines (OCGT) in the first four months of the financial year.
Eskom spokesperson Daphne Mokwena said between 1 April and 1 August, it spent R5.84bn on fuel for its OCGT plant.
'From 1 April to 7 August 2025, diesel spend remains within the allocated budget. The winter outlook, published on 5 May 2025, covering the period ending 31 August, remains valid.
ALSO READ: Eskom adds more power to electricity grid as G20 summit approaches
'It indicates that load shedding will not be necessary if unplanned outages stay below 13 000MW. If outages rise to 15 000MW, load shedding would be limited to a maximum of 21 days out of 153 days and restricted to stage 2,' Mokwena said.
Winter
Mokwena said with just over three weeks of the utility's winter outlook period still remaining, the system remains well-positioned to maintain stability and meet demand effectively.
'To further strengthen grid stability, Eskom is planning to return a total of 3 280MW of generation capacity to service ahead of the evening peak on Monday, 11 August 2025, and throughout the coming week.'
Mokwena said between 1 April and 7 August 2025, the Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (UCLF), which reflects the percentage of generation capacity lost due to unplanned outages, further decreased to 28.35%.
Mokwena added that with load shedding suspended and electricity demand rising during the winter period, they are urging all customers to act responsibly and 'help safeguard the power system' by avoiding Illegal connections and meter bypassing.
ALSO READ: Is Joburg ready to host G20? Gauteng on frenzy to repair potholes and streetlights [VIDEO]
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
6 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Activists raise concerns as nuclear site close to Cape Town given go-ahead
South Africa is one step closer to a second nuclear power station after Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment Minister Dion George last week upheld a contested, almost decade-old environmental authorisation. South Africa's long-running bid to expand its nuclear power capacity has cleared a key and contentious hurdle. Environment Minister Dion George has upheld an environmental authorisation allowing Eskom to develop a new 4,000MW nuclear power station at Duynefontein, about 35km north of Cape Town. The decision affirms a 2017 approval that had been under appeal for years. It paves the way for Eskom to pursue a nuclear build at the roughly 265-hectare site. That, however, does not mean shovels will hit the ground any time soon. 'In the end, my decision was made in respect of the principles of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), and with full appreciation of the environmental, social and economic considerations involved,' said George. He said that the granting of an environmental authorisation 'does not exempt an applicant from complying with any other applicable legal requirements or obtaining permits from other competent authorities'. The news is one step forward after a previous step back on the contested journey towards new nuclear capacity. Daily Maverick previously reported that at the end of 2023, Minister of Energy and Electricity Kgosientsho Ramokgopa announced that all the 'suspensive conditions' to start procuring 2,500MW of new nuclear power immediately had been met. Months later, in August 2024, Ramokgopa announced that he would withdraw that gazette to procure new nuclear power capacity in response to the 'substantive' legal challenges posed by the Southern African Faith Communities' Environment Institute and Earthlife Africa Johannesburg — and that is where things have stood until George's announcement last week. Government and industry proponents have hailed the move as a milestone. The South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa), in a statement, said it reflected confidence in nuclear technology as a contributor to the country's energy mix. Necsa CEO Loyiso Tyabashe added that 'this approval marks an important milestone for the nuclear industry and South Africa's journey towards implementing a balanced energy mix that enables socioeconomic development and is climate friendly. The minister's decision shows rigour of the process that was followed to choose an appropriate site for nuclear new build and reflects confidence in nuclear technology as a safe, clean and reliable energy solution.' While the environmental approval is a prerequisite, Eskom still faces a gauntlet of steps before any concrete is poured. These include securing licences, obtaining design and construction approvals, sourcing financing for what is likely to be a multihundred-billion-rand project, and government sign-off on procurement. This drawn-out pathway is not just procedural. South Africa's last major nuclear procurement drive under former president Jacob Zuma collapsed amid allegations of secrecy and corruption risks and procedural failures. Environmental activists, however, are not as welcoming of the news, warning that the country's financial, operational and governance challenges make a major nuclear build risky and unnecessary. The 2018 Goldman Environmental Prize winners and anti-nuclear activists, Makoma Lekalakala and Liziwe McDaid, said in a statement that 'Earthlife Africa is considering the minister's decision and our next steps. Our concerns include the length of time taken to conduct the environmental impact assessment and to make the appeal decision. 'We are also deeply concerned about the affordability of nuclear power, particularly the high upfront capital costs, the risk of construction delays, and the cost overruns that have been experienced worldwide. 'In addition, there has been no assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of a major beyond-design-basis nuclear incident, nor of the generation of long-lived high-level radioactive waste for which no final disposal solution yet exists.' Peter Becker, a former board member of the National Nuclear Regulator and anti-nuclear activist, told Daily Maverick that above and beyond these concerns, South Africa had bled the requisite nuclear industry expertise to safely operate a nuclear power station. He also questioned the logic and application of timelines as they related to environmental authorisations. 'When an Environmental Assessment (EA) is issued, it has a time limit. This one had a 10-year limit. So the idea of having a 10-year expiry date on environmental authorisation is an acknowledgement that the environment might change. 'The surrounding population might change, the needs and desirability of the projects might change, and that is particularly true when it comes to such a fast-changing environment as the electricity sector where we are seeing disruptive changes. And those disruptive changes are in terms of dramatic learning curves and dropping of prices of alternative sources of energy, such as renewables, battery storage, etc, and also vast changes in demographics. 'So there's a bit of a gap in the legal system in this country in that once an EA is issued, you can appeal it, and that suspends the EA, but when does the expiry start?' Becker explained that depending on how this was interpreted legally, it could either mean Eskom would need to begin construction at the site within less than two years, or the 10-year period started only on Friday after the minister's approval. In the time since the original approval, the underlying expert information that informed that original authorisation may have significantly changed. The July 2023 Review of Environmental Impact Report and Specialist Studies commissioned for Eskom largely confirms as much. That review concluded that the 2017 Environmental Authorisation can still stand without re-assessing impacts, even though much of the underlying data and assumptions are more than 10 years old. This is significant because the review was not a technical re-evaluation. It assumed the original data and impact findings were correct, focusing instead on whether or not they were still relevant. Moreover, the review admits that the original statement that renewables 'could not provide adequate baseload' may 'no longer be correct' due to rapid renewable energy development since the Environmental Impact Assessment was finalised. This is important because it validates a key argument used by those opposed to new nuclear capacity: that the energy context has changed and might affect the rationale for new nuclear energy. DM
IOL News
11 hours ago
- IOL News
Old Mutual takes B20 to the people
At a time when the voices of ordinary citizens matter the most, Old Mutual is championing inclusive dialogue through its Add Your Voice campaign, an initiative designed to bridge the gap between global policy discussions and everyday South Africans. Central to this effort is the People's Podium, a platform that invites citizens from diverse backgrounds to share their perspectives on critical economic and social issues, ensuring their voices are heard in shaping a more equitable future. Borne out of a desire to encourage active citizenship during South Africa's G20 Presidency, the Add Your Voice campaign endeavours to promote inclusive dialogue, leading to inclusive growth. 'Guided by B20 South Africa's theme of inclusive growth and prosperity through global cooperation, we want to host and participate in discussions that address some of the world's leading economic challenges. The result is policy recommendations that are not only actionable but reflect the values of collaboration and inclusivity,' said Celiwe Ross, Director for Group Strategy, Sustainability, People and Public Affairs at Old Mutual Limited. The multi-channel, digitally led campaign coincides with and builds on Old Mutual's partnership with the B20 Summit. As part of the partnership, several members of the Old Mutual team will help guide discussions across four of the eight B20 task forces, ensuring that the talks feature localised input and perspectives. Envisioned as an open space that invites and champions the input of every South African, Add Your Voice gives people the chance to engage with B20 via popular social media platforms, supported by other channels to amplify as many voices as possible. People can share their experiences, both social and economic, their views on national policy and objectives, and their overall thoughts on how the country and leaders can best achieve them. At the heart of Old Mutual's Add Your Voice campaign is The People's Podium, which South Africans can engage with through relevant channels. The podium enables citizens to share their personal aspirations and definitions of progress, thoughts on how to combat the nation's systemic challenges, and visualise their economic future. 'The People's Podium is an explicit response to the need to bridge the gap between people and policy, eliminating the disconnect that many South Africans feel towards policy decision-making. Big, meaningful conversations are never and should never be limited to boardrooms or the corridors of power. We have an opportunity to hear directly from South Africans on what matters most to them,' Ross explained. The campaign will also feature a wide range of content that aims to amplify voices, educate audiences, simplify complex information, offer expert insights and position Old Mutual as an information bridge between ordinary South Africans and the B20 proceedings. 'Policy is not always discussed and shared in an accessible way, using terms and overarching ideas that do not connect or even resonate with people's lived realities. By demystifying economic policy and gathering citizen input, we're not just facilitating public engagement, but empowering people to have a say in how we put South Africa on the right path to transformation,' Ross explained. Add Your Voice is a rallying call for South Africans to rise up and be heard. Old Mutual encourages everyone to be on the lookout for campaign material and activations and get ready to share their ideas, thoughts and aspirations as we forge our future together.
IOL News
19 hours ago
- IOL News
NECSA backs Eskom's Duynefontein nuclear power station for energy security
Eskom has received environmental authorisation to proceed with the construction of the 4 000 megawatt (MW) power station in Duynefontein, near the Koeberg Nuclear Power Station in the Western Cape. Image: Mike Hutchings/Reuters Banele Ginidza The South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) has voiced robust support for Eskom's plans to initiate the construction of a new nuclear power station in Duynefontein, situated adjacent to the Koeberg facility. This initiative signifies a critical move towards enhancing South Africa's energy security and is set to adhere to the highest standards of safety, environmental protection, and regulatory compliance, as previously demonstrated by Eskom at the Koeberg nuclear power plant. Necsa is keen on expanding its role in nuclear fuel manufacturing and, in April, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC). In this context, the organisation on Monday welcomed the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE), Dion George's announcement that Eskom has received environmental authorisation to proceed with the construction of the 4 000 megawatt (MW) power station in Duynefontein, following a successful appeal against an earlier decision issued in 2017. This announcement unlocks the pathway for Eskom to secure several essential statutory authorisations. These include a Nuclear Installation Licence from the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR), approval from the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa), and a water use licence from the Department of Water and Sanitation, alongside various other approvals from the Minister of Mineral and Petroleum Resources. "This approval marks an important milestone for the nuclear industry and South Africa's journey towards implementing a balanced energy mix that enables socio-economic development and is climate friendly," said Necsa CEO, Loyiso Tyabashe. "The Minister's decision shows rigour of the process that was followed to choose an appropriate site for nuclear new build and reflects confidence in nuclear technology as a safe, clean, and reliable energy solution." Tyabashe said nuclear power remained a crucial component of South Africa's baseload energy mix, and part of the government's strategy to reduce greenhouse emission. "Necsa supports initiatives that reinforce the use of nuclear technology and its applications for power and beyond power for peaceful means and development," Tyabashe said. "Necsa continues to work with the Department of Electricity and Energy as well as Eskom as a partner and commits to contribute its technical expertise to maximise the benefits of nuclear energy." In addition to expanding its role in nuclear fuel manufacturing and intergrating small modular reactors (SMRs) into South Africa's energy plans, Necsa is also pursuing a R60 billion nuclear build programme. Environmentalists and civil society advocates are objecting to the decision to uphold Eskom's 2017 environmental authorisation, particularly due to reliance on outdated Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies, which raised alarms about the risks posed by high seismic activity and dense human populations in the area. In reaction to this announcement, Koeberg Action Alliance (KAA) spokesperson Peter Becker described the decision as a surprise, adding that civil society will be meeting to discuss the options. Becker said as the EIA process was started in 2007, and so much has changed since then, including population density, and the cost of alternatives, thus it was not rational to ignore these changes in the environment of the proposed plant and to base such a crucial decision on thoroughly outdated studies. "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 DFFE 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." BUSINESS REPORT
