Part 1 Revenue Application: Multi-Year Price Determination ... - Eskom

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Overview of Multi-Year Price Determination 2013/14–2017/18 (MYPD 3) 4.5 Impact on economic sectors Page 90 of 144 The vulnerability of sectors to electricity price increases can be measured by the relative electricity intensity of the sector, as indicated in Table 39. Looking at the sectoral impact at such a high level may be misleading, however, as the different subsectors – or even different firms within a sector – will be affected differently. For example, the impact on the mining industry as a whole is vastly different to the impact on the basic metals sector. Table 39: Relative vulnerability of economic sectors to electricity price increases Sectors Electricity intensity (GWh/USD million) Ranking Output share Basic metals 1.095 1 7.1% 7 Mining and quarrying 0.634 2 14.6% 2 Non-metallic minerals 0.524 3 1.6% 12 Agriculture and forestry 0.316 4 6.0% 8 Paper, pulp and printing 0.207 5 2.8% 10 Chemical and petrochemical 0.203 6 16.3% 1 Transport 0.089 7 12.5% 3 Wood and wood products 0.069 8 1.4% 13 Textile and leather 0.067 9 2.5% 11 Food and tobacco 0.021 10 12.0% 4 Machinery and equipment 0.005 11 2.9% 9 Transport equipment 0.003 12 9.8% 6 Construction 0.002 13 10.5% 5 Source: Inglesi-Lotz and Blignaut, 2011. Ranking Generally speaking, mining and manufacturing will be hardest hit. Less energy-intensive sectors, such as the finance and business services sector (not indicated on Table 39), are less likely to be negatively affected. The vulnerability of some economic sectors to electricity price increases should not change the country‟s approach to electricity tariffs in general. A case cannot be made for curbing tariff increases for all in an effort to protect the few: lower prices for all customers would
Overview of Multi-Year Price Determination 2013/14–2017/18 (MYPD 3) Page 91 of 144 disproportionately benefit those who use the most electricity. Such an approach would come at a high cost to Eskom, in lost revenue, and to the economy, by expanding the need for generating capacity. This is especially so given that consumption by vulnerable sectors is likely to be relatively small in the context of total demand for electricity. Generally speaking, it is more economically efficient and socially equitable to implement targeted electricity subsidies for poor households and consider other targeted interventions for vulnerable sectors. Eskom believes these subsidies for industry, manufacturing or other business sectors are a matter of national industrial policy and should be addressed through the fiscus. Eskom would like to point out that, although it supplies electricity directly to its 134 largest customers, including South Africa‟s most energy-intensive firms, most manufacturing and commercial enterprises receive their supply from municipalities, whose pricing structures are different. An Eskom study of the six metropolitan areas it supplies found that average prices charged to end users were between 40% and 110% higher than the prices Eskom charges its direct customers. The impact on municipal customers of electricity price increases is therefore likely to be greater than the effect on non-municipal customers. Any assessment of the effect of the proposed tariff increases on manufacturing and commercial enterprises, and on small business, must factor municipal tariff structures into account. 4.5.1 The role of energy efficiency Any sector or business with the scope to deploy energy efficiency measures in the short to medium term would benefit from doing so. A key question is how much room remains for South Africa‟s businesses to become more energy efficient. This is crucial to assessing the potential severity of the proposed MYPD 3 price increases. The evidence on South Africa‟s current efficiency is mixed. According to a 2011 survey of 32 firms across 17 economic subsectors, conducted by DNA Economics on behalf of the National Treasury, energy efficiency levels in South Africa compare favourably with international norms. This suggests there is not much opportunity for further efficiency gains. Based on the response that Eskom continues to have to its demand-side management initiatives, Eskom believes there is considerable scope for further energy efficiency in South
Page 1 and 2:
Part 1 Revenue Application: Multi-Y
Page 3 and 4:
Overview of Multi-Year Price Determ
Page 5 and 6:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Over
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
ESKOM PROFILE Overview of Multi-Yea
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
1.4.2 Independent power producers O
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Price path: Funding: Other: Overvie
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
2 THE MYPD PROCESS Key points Overv
Page 39 and 40: Electricity Pricing Policy Overview
Page 41 and 42: Accomplishments during MYPD 2 Overv
Page 43 and 44: Base case application Overview of M
Page 45 and 46: Overview of Multi-Year Price Determ
Page 59 and 60: Environmental levy Overview of Mult
Page 63 and 64: Table 17: IPP projects (costs and e
Page 67 and 68: Cost of cover Overview of Multi-Yea
Page 69 and 70: Operating efficiencies target Overv
Page 73 and 74: 3.5.2 Carbon tax Overview of Multi-
Page 75 and 76: Table 34: Eskom’s funding over th
Page 77 and 78: Weaknesses: Overview of Multi-Year
Page 83 and 84: Phasing in price increases over fiv
Page 89: Overview of Multi-Year Price Determ
Page 93 and 94: Figure 9: Current cross-subsidies i
Page 115 and 116: INVESTMENT GRADE RATIOS CAPACITY AN
Page 119 and 120: INVESTMENT GRADE RATIOS CAPACITY AN
Page 127 and 128: Simplify tariff structures Modify s
Page 137 and 138: 7 CONCLUSION Overview of Multi-Year
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Transmission Overview of Multi-Year
show all

Part 1 Revenue Application: Multi-Year Price Determination ... - Eskom

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?