Eskom aims to reduce total carbon emissions by 2050

Electricity utility Eskom – which last year set a self-imposed target of 2025 for reducing its absolute carbon-dioxide (C02) emissions – believes it could be back to current emission levels by 2050.

But the State-owned enterprise, which generated 224-million tons of C02 last year alone, is wary of setting a target date for when its emissions might peak, and stresses that emission reductions cannot be made in isolation and will require collaboration with government and other social actors.

In its 2008 annual report, the utility unveiled its climate change strategy for the first time, with the then chairperson Valli Moosa writing that the utility would reduce its relative CO2 footprint until 2025 and thereafter continually reduce absolute emissions in line with national and international targets. 

This was a significant step, given Eskom’s heavy reliance on coal and given that fact that it was building two new coal-fired stations at a cost of R211-billion. Indeed, the utility’s carbon footprint is derived mainly from this heavy reliance on coal, with it having burned a total of 125-million tons of coal in its 2008 financial year.

Its coal consumption is likely to rise materially as the new stations come on line, raising serious questions not only about the 2025 commitment, but also about whether the utility will be able to reduce its total emissions.

Speaking earlier in the month, CEO Jacob Maroga reported that Eskom had an internal goal of reducing “total emissions” by 2050, despite the fact that its system would have to more or less be doubled from its current size of around 40 000 MW.

“It is not clear when the peak will be, though,” he acknowledged, noting that the entry of nonemitting nuclear facilities had been delayed owing to funding strains.

“Therefore, a lot of discussion is still needed for Eskom to achieve that 2050 target, because we need to construct a funding structure that recognises the cost of CO2,” Maroga added.

Such a framework would enable Eskom to properly compare the cost of coal with nonemitting technologies, such as nuclear and renewables. But Maroga stressed, too, that coal and nuclear provided the only realistic base-load technology options.

“We are starting to feel that if we continue with coal we will pay a price.

“The issue is how to fund nuclear and how partnerships can be used to fund it,” Maroga added.

Maroga suggested that the capital costs associated with nuclear were about four times that of coal, which means that the cancelled Nuclear-1 project could have cost anywhere between R250-billion and R300-billion.

But this a figure has been strongly disputed by nuclear vendor Areva, which has argued that, on average, the capital associated with nuclear is 1,7 times that of a coal-fired station.

Eskom is also targeting large-scale solar and wind projects, with the aim of having at least 1 600 MW of renewable capacity by 2025 – a modest target relative to its initial, but now questionable, target of having 20 000 MW of new nuclear capacity by that same date.

source