comments2

Advert

Advert – scroll down

Displaying the 15 latest comments.

Submitted
first-name
support
concern
top-concern
message
2026-08-26 09:48:02 +02:00
Clinton
I support with amendments
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 09:05:36 +02:00
Jano
No I do not
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
I support transparent, cost-reflective charges for the actual cost of maintaining a customer's grid connection. I object to fixed, capacity, legacy or service charges being used to recover historical electricity-sale revenue lost as consumers reduce consumption, improve efficiency or install privately funded embedded generation.

Any fixed charge imposed on residential customers should therefore be independently demonstrated through a cost-of-supply study to represent efficient and prudent costs directly attributable to providing and maintaining that customer's grid connection and associated services. Lost electricity sales, municipal revenue shortfalls, historical inefficiencies, bad debt and unrelated municipal expenditure should not be recoverable through such a charge.
2026-08-26 09:00:52 +02:00
Oupa
No I do not
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 09:00:22 +02:00
Jean
No I do not
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 08:32:12 +02:00
Natalie
I support with amendments
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
We have been sabotaged by Eskom, forced into getting solar to protect our livelihoods and now getting penalised for their disaster. Absolutely no way should any one have ot cover the costs of self made disaster.
2026-08-26 08:14:14 +02:00
Yvonne
No I do not
All of the above
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 08:01:54 +02:00
Martin
No I do not
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
We were forced to invest in solar due to loadshedding and unreliable electricity supply from COJ. Electricity outages affected us working from home causing loss of revenue and stress.
2026-08-26 07:44:28 +02:00
Liz
No I do not
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
As a pensioner electricity prices are out of hand as well as sewerage, water and property taxes.
2026-08-26 07:43:09 +02:00
tj
No I do not
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 07:40:53 +02:00
S.S.
No I do not
All of the above
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 07:37:10 +02:00
Vandra
No I do not
All of the above
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
2026-08-26 07:29:42 +02:00
Yolandi
No I do not
All of the above
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
FORMAL PUBLIC COMMENT AND OBJECTION
I hereby submit my formal objection to the Electricity Sector Market Transformation Position Paper in its entirety, particularly any provisions that may result in additional fixed network, connection, capacity or other charges being imposed on residential consumers who have invested in solar and battery systems.
South African households that have invested in solar have already made a substantial private investment in reducing their dependence on Eskom and the electricity grid. They have paid VAT and other applicable taxes on the purchase and installation of their systems and have undertaken this investment at their own expense.
Solar users also continue to pay their existing monthly basic and network-related charges, despite generating a significant portion of their own electricity.
These consumers are therefore not simply “free-riding” on the grid. They remain connected, continue contributing financially, and at the same time reduce demand and pressure on the electricity network by generating their own electricity.
I strongly object to any policy that effectively penalises consumers for reducing their electricity consumption.
Electricity tariffs in South Africa are already excessively high and increasingly unaffordable for ordinary households. The solution cannot continually be to require consumers to pay more.
Increasing tariffs or introducing additional fixed charges will not, by itself, resolve the serious concerns surrounding financial management, waste, inefficiency, governance and corruption within the electricity sector. Consumers should not be expected to carry an ever-increasing financial burden while these underlying problems remain unresolved.
If government wants South Africans to invest in renewable energy, battery storage and energy independence, it is counterproductive to introduce policies that make these investments financially less viable.
I therefore object to any tariff structure that:
unfairly penalises residential solar users;
uses fixed charges to recover lost electricity-sales revenue;
makes electricity increasingly unaffordable;
treats solar users as a financial burden rather than part of the solution; or
discourages private investment in renewable energy.
I accept that maintaining the electricity network has genuine costs. However, any network charge must be transparent, proportionate and based on demonstrable actual costs, rather than being used simply to compensate for reduced electricity sales.
Residential consumers should not become a captive source of additional revenue.
I therefore formally object to the proposed framework in its entirety and request that the interests of ordinary residential consumers and solar users be fully considered before any such policy or tariff structure is implemented.
South Africans who have invested their own money to generate electricity and reduce pressure on the national grid should be encouraged — not financially punished for doing so.
2026-08-26 07:23:30 +02:00
G
No I do not
Captive Consumer Tariff Protection
2026-08-26 07:08:14 +02:00
Dawn
No I do not
All of the above
Municipal Financial Collapse
as a pensioner electricity prices are out of hand as well as sewerage and water but after years off paying have to go without alot its ridiculous
2026-08-26 06:56:35 +02:00
Marius
Yes I do
Fixed Charges & Solar Penalties
Eskom when installed 45 years ago,promised that all line rentals and fixed charges would go to nil after the lines capital cost had been recuperated.Never occurred and we are now feeling the wrath of a socialist energy producer.What lies.
    • Ending Monopolies and Unlocking Private Investment:
      Decades of Eskom’s single-buyer monopoly led to catastrophic load shedding, debt bailouts, and stifled innovation. Establishing the South African Wholesale Electricity Market (SAWEM) allows private generators, renewable energy developers, and traders to compete directly, deploying private capital to build generation capacity without burdening national taxpayers.
    • Transparent Price Discovery and Long-Term Cost Reductions:
      Open day-ahead and intra-day wholesale trading forces generators to bid at competitive, marginal costs. Over time, this market mechanism removes operational inefficiencies, penalises unreliable power stations, and drives down the baseline wholesale cost of electricity for the entire economy.
    • Fair System Cost Allocation (“Anti-Free Riding”):
      The physical grid requires billions of Rands in fixed maintenance costs regardless of how much energy is consumed. Supporters argue that grid-tied rooftop solar owners still rely on the national grid for nighttime power and system stability. Shifting toward mandatory fixed capacity charges ensures that network costs are fairly shared across all connected users, rather than being disproportionately subsidised by poorer households without solar systems.
    • Level Playing Field via Network Unbundling:
      Legally unbundling the National Transmission Company of South Africa (NTCSA) and forcing distribution companies to separate physical “wires” from electricity trading ensures non-discriminatory grid access for everyone. Independent power producers will finally compete on equal terms with Eskom Generation.
    • Professionalising Municipal Electricity Accounts:
      Forcing municipalities to separate their retail trading businesses from network maintenance creates transparent accounting, prevents councils from diverting grid maintenance funds to cover unrelated administrative shortfalls, and establishes cost-reflective pricing models.
    • A “Sun Tax” on Private Capital and Rooftop Solar:
      Millions of households and businesses invested private savings into rooftop solar and batteries to keep their lights on when the state failed to do so. Replacing consumption-based billing with mandatory, high fixed monthly network charges penalises energy-conscious citizens, extends solar payback periods, and discourages private decarbonisation.
    • The “Captive Ratepayer Trap” and Municipal Insolvency:
      Large industrial and commercial users exceeding demand thresholds (e.g., 1 MW) will be allowed to exit municipal supply to buy cheaper wholesale or private power. This strips municipalities of high-margin corporate revenue used to cross-subsidise indigent households and basic services, leaving captive residential ratepayers to shoulder skyrocketing local tariffs and degraded grid maintenance.
    • Wholesale Price Volatility and Market Power Manipulation:
      Eskom Generation still controls the overwhelming majority of South Africa’s dispatchable baseload power. In unbundled spot markets worldwide, dominant suppliers have engaged in economic or physical withholding to artificially spike market clearing prices. Without hard statutory bid caps and aggressive oversight, wholesale price volatility will be passed directly down to retail consumers.
    • Severe Conflicts of Interest Within the NTCSA:
      Consolidating transmission grid ownership (TNSP), system dispatch (SO), market clearing (MO), and legacy state off-take contracts (CPA) within a single entity under Eskom Holdings creates structural conflicts of interest. NTCSA could face internal commercial pressure to favour Eskom assets or delay third-party grid connections.
    • Premature Market Launch Amid Unresolved Municipal Debt:
      Opening an advanced wholesale market with mandatory imbalance penalties in 2026/2027 while municipal distribution debt to Eskom remains unresolved is premature. Financially distressed municipalities that fail prudential credit requirements will be excluded from trading platforms, creating a divided nation of well-supplied metros and failing, power-starved rural councils.