If your household is an above-average user of electricity, say complete with mod cons such as a swimming pool, jacuzzi, a full suite of appliances, not to mention a bar fridge, a couple of television sets and computers, a geyser or two, the odd gaming console and sexy up- and down-lights, chances are you are paying about R2 000 a month in electricity. When you can get it.
Electricity goes up on April 1 by just less than 15%, as agreed by Nersa, the regulator. So the same household could budget to pay R2 300 a month for its electricity.
But the country is fed up with load-shedding, the practice whereby Eskom attempts to share its lack of capacity on an area-by-area basis, so here comes power rationing.
The idea is that rather than subject users to the unpredictability of load- shedding, it would be less painful if rationing is introduced.
Eskom, in the person of its CE Jacob Maroga, has made this proposal both to the Cabinet and to leading industrial users of electricity.
The ball is in government’s court, but all indications are that rationing is the most preferred option, causing the least pain, while the country again builds its electrical capacity.
People in the know are reluctant to speak publicly about the new plan before it is okayed by government. I also get the impression that it is a set of ideas or possibilities rather than detailed proposals, but I did speak on background (as journalists say) with a source familiar with the issue.
While terms such as power rationing have been used to explain the idea, the thinking appears to be much closer to incentivising. At least one country, Brazil, has applied a similar approach with some success.
In Brazil, efficient users sell their surpluses in a secondary market, keeping everybody happy.
Simply put, if you use energy efficiently, if your business or household fits the average, you will not be subject to penalties. Where you exceed the norms, you pay a penalty. In some cases you may have your power cut, but cutting power is not the preferred option as it is administratively cumbersome.
Applying a system of penalties will not be easy because the current management system is not designed to do this, but given the choice between an incentive-based system and the terror of load-shedding, my guess is that most consumers will prefer the former.
There is also likely to be an appeal process for deserving cases who can justify why their consumption should be above the average.
First to be targeted will be large industrial users, where metering management is already in use.
My understanding is that the average suburban home uses about R500 a month in electricity.
The high-end household described above would, therefore, be well above the norm and liable for penalties, which will more or less match the present electricity shortfall of about 15%. So the example household could be paying another 15% in penalties, bringing its monthly bill to about R2 600 a month.
Some will not blink and continue to pay but people are increasingly seeing energy as an important, and costly, issue. Energy diversity and energy security, as opposites of the same coin, matter.
More will switch to energy-efficient lighting and to solar and gas for heating and cooking. There will be a greater consciousness of the need for conserving energy, on good insulation, natural lighting and ventilation.
And a start will have been made in transforming one of the world’s most energy wasteful countries to one that no longer takes cheap and bountiful energy for granted.