Building new sources of power is not enough to tackle South Africa's energy challenges. The electricity grid also needs to be better planned, smarter and more flexible, writes Steve Hedden.
Energy planning is not just about generating more power. More attention must be paid to the transmission and distribution of electricity from production to consumption.
A more flexible and better planned grid would give South Africa a much better return on its energy investments. It would also make renewables a bigger part of the energy mix.
SA's energy policy makers are under pressure, with sustained power cuts causing economic damage. The response has been a belated thrust towards more power supply, from coal-fired plants, oil and gas, wind and solar, and potentially a fleet of new nuclear power stations.
But it doesn't make sense to invest heavily in generation capacity without also rethinking transmission and distribution. National energy planning to date has largely neglected how energy moves from generation to consumption.
The 2010 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for Electricity 2010-2030 did not address the grid at all, though an update in November 2013 includes the need for new transmission corridors.
Grid planning can't be an afterthought. It has to be built into the planning process from the start.
This was much easier when a few big power stations provided energy mostly to a few big cities, with one organisation running the whole system. In South Africa it was Eskom producing electricity in Mpumalanga, the largest net supplier, and delivering it mostly to Gauteng, the largest consumer.
All changing
Now it's all changing. By 2040, Limpopo's new coal-fired plants will make it the largest net supplier; and new gas and renewable capacity will make the Cape provinces net producers.
Planners must also consider the addition of independent power producers (IPP) and small-scale residential generation as citizens frustrated by load-shedding and rising prices install their own energy systems.
Much of this new generation is in the form of intermittent wind and solar power.
At the same time, the electricity sector is moving away from a centralised monopolistic model, with new players taking on roles historically controlled by Eskom.
Small-scale residential power generation from solar panels could account for 30 GW of electricity-generating capacity in South Africa by 2050.
The forecast in the 2013 IRP assumes an average residential installation of 5 kilowatts (kW). This means the 30 GW of energy in 2050 would come from six million citizens.
The complexity is further increased with Eskom and some municipalities introducing tariffs, which change the electricity price according to demand, and by feed-in tariffs which pay small producers, including private citizens, for electricity they supply to the grid.
Instead of a small number of power stations owned and operated by one utility, South Africa may have millions of producers, each with unique production and consumption patterns, buying and selling electricity at changing prices through the day.
However, the potential contribution from small-scale residential generation is constrained by an absence of clear policies.
Lack of integrated planning is also constraining the integration of IPPs. All of South Africa's planned IPPs could contribute as much as 20 GW. That is nearly 45% of all of South Africa's power-generating capacity from all sources in 2013.
But Eskom has expressed concern over its ability to integrate IPPs into the grid. It has connected 32 projects, totalling 1 600 MW, and the process is increasingly difficult and expensive.
The struggle to connect IPPs will continue if energy planning continues along the same lines as the 2010 IRP and the 2013 update, and does not account for the impact of decentralised capacity on the grid.
Additionally, the intermittent nature of wind and solar power is making it more difficult to coordinate supply and demand. This shifting capacity requires a very different grid to the one we have today, and a very different planning approach.
We have modelled the impact of an intelligent and efficient grid planned around future generating capacity and demand, and with policy and operations adjusting to decentralised power sources.
In this desired scenario, energy planning incorporates grid planning from the beginning, system operators have flexible capacity and innovative strategies to adapt to intermittent power supply, and clear policies unlock the potential of small-scale residential generation.
Incorporating grid planning into energy planning allows IPPs to be integrated more rapidly. There are no delays between construction of generating capacity and transmission infrastructure.
Generating capacity is more flexible and can be ramped up and down depending on the contribution from wind and solar.
Policies and regulations encourage private renewable energy production, allowing citizens to sell their excess power back into the grid. This unlocking of the potential of private power generation helps municipalities to provide electricity to all citizens.
Due to more efficient transmission and distribution of electricity, less capacity is required.
Greater use of renewable energy pushes down coal production, cutting carbon emissions and reducing industrial water demand. Our models show that with these interventions, by 2050, renewable energy could contribute 24% more energy than in a business as usual scenario.
It is all achievable. But it needs better planning, and not just more power.
IOL
Steve Hedden is a researcher in the African Futures and Innovation division at the Institute for Security Studies (ISS)