Barry Bredenkamp Senior Manager: Energy Efficiency

1. PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, (PCE)PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY5 September 2012Committee Room V475, 4th Floor, Old Assembly Wing Barry Bredenkamp Senior Manager: Energy Efficiency

2. It is important to note in the context of this presentation that the definition of ‘Energy Efficiency’ encompasses a far broader spectrum than just electrical energy. Secondly, we are probably all familiar with the saying that “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it!”.

3. How Energy Efficient has South Africa become since 2008? or How much energy has South Africa saved through Energy Efficiency interventions over the same period?

5. The ‘Real’ Answer ……………… …….would be a lie or at best, a calculated guess! • Why??? • There is NO existing platform to consolidate the results:- • NERSA/ Eskom – funded projects; • 12-I Industrial Tax Incentives; • SANS 204 and 10 400 XA; • IDC/ DBSA-funded projects; • Commercial Bank-funded projects; • Public Buildings roll-out; • Own-funded projects, etc. With this in mind, the question would

6. Measurement & Verification • South Africa has the perfect enabling environment to make this work! • An approved national standard for this activity, (SANS 50 010). • But it is limited to 7 Universities countrywide. • It is perceived to be ‘rocket science’, which it is not. • Is becoming more important, due to the quantum of money that is being invested in Energy Efficiency.

7. Current Situation • Eskom received R5.4 billion of ratepayer’s money for energy efficiency and Demand Side Management (EEDSM) implementation through its MYPD2 allocation from the National Energy Regulator of South Africa, (NERSA). • The funding window is over a 3 year period and is required to deliver 1 037 MW demand savings and 4 055 GWhof energy savings. • The M & V function to ensure that these targets are indeed achieved, currently resides within Eskom and this is surely a conflict of interest?

8. The Gaps • Does not take the national picture into consideration, eg. 1 million SWH target. • Is focussed on electrical energy & excludes socio-economic impacts, (sectoral economics, job creation, environmental impacts, etc.) • Excludes the possible negative implications to the supply & demand for other energy carriers/ scarce resources, eg. H2O, LPG-availability. • Does not reflect the bigger picture in a transparent & meaningful way. • Has NOT imposed penalties on any one non-compliant project – Customer Service???

9. The Risk • National planning for Energy Efficiency as a resource can potentially be 100% off the mark. • Ratepayers are going to question the ‘value’ proposition for EEDSM-funding through the tariff. • We cannot provide a true reflection on the progress that SA is making in this area. • We are missing the opportunity to create a significant number of ‘new’ jobs in the area of M & V!

10. A Proposed Solution/ Examples • Consolidate the M & V function for ALL EE-initiatives into one common portal, with a central repository of auditable & value-adding data: • Electrical energy & demand savings. • Fuel-switching impacts. • Economic sector impacts. • Jobs created, (Training/ Capacity building opportunities). • Some examples: • Energy Efficiency Tax Incentives, (12-I & 12-L) • AFD ‘Green Credit Line’, (Commercial Banks) • DPW - Energy Efficiency ‘drive’ .

11. Request • Feedback on whether this proposal has merit and if so, • a more detailed feasibility study and transitional Action Plan (in line with • the DoE’s mandate to SANEDI), will be developed. • The PCE’s assistance in lobbying this approach with other stakeholders would be critically important.