PRETORIA, Gauteng — South Africa’s Revised Electricity Pricing Policy aims to establish a transparent, cost-effective tariff path for the next decade, according to Minister of Electricity and Energy Dr Kgosientsho Ramokgopa. However, following the announcement, energy analyst Chris Yelland cautioned that significant contradictions remain regarding funding, cross-subsidies, and the practical implementation of the proposed framework.
During a media briefing in Pretoria, Dr Ramokgopa detailed the revised policy, which is designed to provide greater certainty for electricity users. The framework is expected to offer clear guidance to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) and Eskom, the dominant player in the national electricity sector.
The minister highlighted three primary pillars of the revised policy: the implementation of cost-reflective tariffs that align pricing with actual costs across generation, transmission, distribution, and retail; the introduction of a 10-year pricing forecast to give households and businesses long-term visibility for financial planning; and the protection of low-income households by expanding the baseline for free basic electricity without increasing the national tax burden.
Despite these stated goals, Chris Yelland noted that the briefing lacked critical detail, emphasizing that a full, critical assessment will only be possible when the complete policy document is published later this week. Based on the available information, Yelland pointed to several mathematical and structural contradictions in the minister’s proposals.
Regarding the expansion of free basic electricity, Dr Ramokgopa stated that the allowance would increase by a factor of four to six times without placing additional burden on the national fiscus. Yelland challenged this assertion, noting that approximately 80% of indigent individuals who qualify for free basic electricity currently do not receive it due to misappropriation of funds by municipalities.
Yelland explained that the current misappropriated amount sits at roughly 28 billion rand per year. If the free basic electricity allowance is increased from 50 kilowatt-hours to 200 or 300 kilowatt-hours per customer, the cost to the fiscus would have to increase dramatically to supply all qualifying households, directly contradicting the claim that the national tax burden would remain unchanged.
Furthermore, Yelland raised concerns about the push for strictly cost-reflective tariffs, which would entail removing existing cross-subsidies. Currently, larger, wealthier, and urban customers subsidize smaller, poorer, and rural customers. Yelland warned that eliminating these cross-subsidies would cause electricity prices to rise dramatically for rural, poor, and small-scale customers, while prices for wealthier consumers would decrease.
The analyst also questioned the financial viability of expanding special pricing agreements within the smelting industry. Currently, a subsidized, below-cost tariff of 62 cents per kilowatt-hour is offered to only two smelting companies. The minister indicated an intention to expand this highly subsidized rate to a much wider group of industrial players. Yelland noted that simultaneously expanding free basic electricity for the poor and deepening industrial subsidies makes it difficult to understand where the funding will originate, especially if the fiscus is not meant to bear the cost.
On a more positive note, the briefing addressed the issue of capping reseller charges. The minister announced plans to clamp down on overcharging by landlords and property managers in gated communities, residential estates, and township backyard dwellings. These entities often purchase electricity in bulk at a municipal discount and resell it to tenants at significant markups.
Yelland welcomed the intention to protect vulnerable tenants from detrimental overcharging but cautioned that administering and policing such a rule will be highly challenging. He noted that in township environments, where illegal connections are prevalent and backyard dwellings are common, monitoring and regulating these informal resale arrangements will require substantial enforcement efforts.
Stakeholders and industry experts now await the release of the full policy document to evaluate the detailed mechanisms that will supposedly reconcile these competing financial demands.
Â