[Split from Re: Uhuru]
Hello, and welcome to the forum, Pets — glad you find it entertaining and a little useful.
Admittedly, my prior post which amused you was more than a bit harsh and I agonised over it before posting while re-reading Boer’s message in search of any cogent argument possibly tucked away amidst all that vehement rhetoric. Finding none, I despatched the thing on a “Aw, what the heck” moment.
Regarding Eskom’s current practices (pun very definitely intended), their term “load shedding” is an inaccurate and euphemistic bit of eye-wipe, no doubt chosen by a team of spin-doctors and/or marketing types. It would be more correct to speak of “load shrugging” (as in “shrugging off”) because “load shedding,” as an engineering term, assumes that there is additional infrastructure available that will handle the excess load and thereby alleviate that placed on the primary infrastructure. The latter prerequisite clearly does not exist.
But this is the “Conspiracy Theories” board, so here goes: A case could made for Eskom deliberately downplaying their actual power capacity, i.e. that the energy picture in SA is not as dire as the “load shrugging” exercises seem to suggest. While the Western Cape has suffered energy problems for some time now, the rest of the country’s troubles started quite recently and quite abruptly rather than gradually becoming more pronounced. Also, the problems manifested in summer when domestic energy use late in the day is quite a bit lower than in winter. All of this is just a wee bit too suspicious…
Could it be that Eskom is softening the public up to the idea that the pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR) programme is the best solution?
Perhaps someone would care to start a new thread, expanding on this speculation.