A series of recent court judgments against Eskom has sharpened scrutiny of the utility's conduct, raising fundamental questions about transparency, competition, and abuse of both due process and Eskom's dominant position in South Africa's electricity sector. The latest case involving Mulilo Energy centred on grid access and capacity allocation. On 10 April 2026, the Gauteng High Court ordered that a decision by Eskom withdrawing grid access in a private procurement for a 240 MW solar PV project developed by Mulilo and granting the grid access instead to public procurements in REIPPPP Bid Window 7 developed by Scatec was unlawful and set aside with costs. This followed an earlier successful application by Mulilo for an urgent interdict restraining Eskom from executing its decision pending hearing the merits of the case on 9 and 10 April 2026. In a second far-reaching ruling on 23 March 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal found against Eskom in a case brought by AfriForum, ordering disclosure of details in coal and diesel contracts valued at some R70-billion. The judgment rejected Eskom's claims of commercial confidentiality, reinforcing the principle that a state-owned enterprise must operate with heightened transparency where public funds and tariffs are implicated. The judgement has wider implications relating to secrecy surrounding other public sector procurements of oil, coal, liquid fuels, gas, nuclear fuel and renewable energy. The third case was the widely reported High Court judgment of 18 February 2026 in the dispute between Sibanye Gold and Eskom, where the court rebuked the utility for obstructive and anti-competitive behaviour. Eskom's reliance on wayleave processes, internal policies and safety arguments to delay the miner's self-generation plans was found to lack credibility, with the court pointing instead to commercial self-interest and revenue protection as underlying drivers. Together, these judgments point to a troubling pattern: a dominant utility resisting transparency, constraining competition, and exercising discretionary power in ways that undermine investor confidence.
Eskom has concluded a negotiated price agreement (NPA) with the Glencore Merafe Chrome Venture at an electricity tariff of about R0.62/kWh, marking a significant intervention to stabilise South Africa's embattled ferrochrome sector. The deal follows weeks of brinkmanship, with retrenchment processes repeatedly extended under Section 189 as negotiations intensified. The agreed tariff is understood to apply for a limited, multi-year period (widely reported as up to five years), aimed at restoring the competitiveness of energy-intensive smelters facing closure under standard Eskom tariffs. Crucially, the arrangement is not confined to a single smelter. Parallel agreements have reportedly been reached with Samancor Chrome, suggesting a broader policy intent to preserve strategic industrial load. However, it remains unclear whether the framework will be extended to other producers, including those outside the immediate negotiation process. Funding of the discounted tariff is expected to follow Eskom's established NPA methodology, implying a combination of internal cross-subsidisation and system value justification, rather than direct fiscal transfers. The utility argues that retaining large, flexible industrial loads supports grid stability and revenue recovery. The agreement now shifts to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) who must assess and approve the NPA following its formal processes. This is likely to include stakeholder engagements and public hearings, given the material tariff deviation and broader implications for other customers. Key questions for NERSA will include affordability, discriminatory arrangements, precedent risk, and alignment with standard tariff methodologies. In the interim, the deal offers temporary relief to a sector on the brink - but its durability will depend on regulatory approval and the extent to which similar concessions are demanded across other energy-intensive industries.
South Africa is facing a renewed wave of liquid fuel supply disruptions and price shocks, with growing implications not only for transport, industry, agriculture and electricity security of supply. In recent weeks, reports of diesel shortages, rationing and queues at filling stations have emerged across parts of the country, driven less by absolute scarcity than by logistical bottlenecks and panic buying ahead of steep price increases. At the same time, global supply disruptions have pushed up crude prices, feeding directly into higher domestic fuel costs. While government has sought to reassure markets on availability, industry signals point to a more fragile system. South Africa's growing reliance on imported refined fuels, combined with constrained refining capacity, has heightened exposure to supply chain disruptions. The implications for the power sector are also concerning. Diesel remains Eskom's critical balancing and emergency fuel, used in open-cycle gas turbines (OCGTs) to stabilise the grid during peak demand periods and generation shortfalls. Although diesel usage has eased from the extreme levels of the prior year, Eskom still spent about R17-billion on diesel in 2024/25, generating about 2.5 TWh. Energy analysts warn that sustained constraints on diesel supply could compromise Eskom's ability to manage peak demand, particularly as variable renewable generation expands without sufficient storage or flexible backup. The risk is compounded by structural trends: ageing coal plant retirements, rising reliance on flexible generation, and a system profile with pronounced winter morning and evening peaks. In this context, diesel has become South Africa's last line of defence against load shedding - but one that is increasingly exposed to global volatility. Without urgent action to secure fuel supply chains and diversify flexibility options, recent fuel shocks may prove an early warning of deeper energy security risks ahead.
A fresh wave of renewable energy investment announcements over the past two weeks points to accelerating momentum in South Africa's energy transition, reinforced by policy reform and rising private sector confidence. At the forefront of these, Mulilo Energy has signalled a major expansion drive, with investment commitments and pledges running to tens of billions of Rands to scale wind, solar and battery storage capacity. This includes near-term project developments alongside a broader pipeline aimed at supporting industrial customers through private power purchase agreements and wheeling arrangements. In parallel, Seriti Green has unveiled plans to invest about R25-billion in Mpumalanga, positioning the province as a renewable energy hub as coal generation declines. The strategy includes large-scale wind and solar developments, with a strong emphasis on regional economic diversification and job retention. These announcements sit within a broader R2-trillion investment pipeline, highlighted at a recent infrastructure investment forum, where major energy and electricity sector investments reflect improving sentiment as licensing reforms, market liberalisation and transmission expansion efforts begin to unlock capital. Development finance institutions are also mobilising. A partnership between the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) and the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) aims to support energy projects in special economic zones, linking power supply to industrial growth. Regionally, the African Development Bank has approved funding for a 100 MW floating solar project on Mozambique's Cahora Bassa dam, signalling expanding regional investment. While grid constraints and regulatory uncertainty persist, the scale of recent announcements suggests that investment is accelerating, with capital increasingly poised to flow where policy certainty and grid access can be secured.
A series of renewable energy and battery storage project milestones achieved over the past month points to continued delivery momentum in South Africa's power sector, with several projects moving from pipeline to execution and commercial operation. Mulilo Energy announced the company has reached financial close on its flagship Mercury battery energy storage project, a 76 MW / 304 MWh facility in the Free State. The project, procured under the Battery Energy Storage IPP Procurement Programme (BESIPPPP), will operate under a 15-year power purchase agreement with the transmission system operator and is expected to play a key role in grid stabilisation and renewables integration. The financial close follows closely on the project's commercial close, marking a rapid progression through key development stages and signalling strong investor confidence and execution capability. In parallel, Mulilo has also achieved commercial close on a broader portfolio, including a 337 MW solar PV project paired with the BESS facility, highlighting the growing trend towards hybrid projects combining generation and storage. These milestones form part of a wider portfolio expansion, with the company now holding multiple awarded storage projects across successive bid windows, collectively representing several gigawatt-hours of storage capacity. The pace of recent progress is significant. After years of slow project development cycles, the sector is seeing tangible movement in battery storage from procurement to financial close and construction - a necessary step in strengthening system reliability and enabling higher penetrations of variable renewable energy. While grid access and permitting challenges remain, Prof. Anton Eberhard suggests that the clustering of recent solar PV and wind milestone announcements is adding up for a record year in 2026. “We now need lots more battery storage for flexible power and ancillary services”, he adds.
Recent developments point to the enduring role of old coal in South Africa's future energy mix, even as efforts to position it as “clean coal” gather pace - albeit with significant uncertainty. At the centre is a new long-term coal supply agreement between Eskom and Exxaro Resources, securing feedstock for the Matla power station until November 2043. The deal extends a four-decade tied-mine model, ensuring base-supply continuity but effectively locking in coal dependence for nearly two more decades. Alongside this, a coalition including Eskom, the Council for Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR), the South African National Energy Development Institute (SANEDI), Coaltech and others has launched a programme to assess high-efficiency, low-emission (HELE) circulating fluidised bed (CFB) coal technologies. The initiative remains at an early feasibility and pilot stage, aimed at informing future policy decisions rather than near-term deployment. Eskom is also exploring carbon capture options at selected coal stations, positioning these as part of a decarbonisation pathway for its ageing fleet. However, such technologies are widely regarded as costly, complex and unproven at scale in the South African context. These developments reflect a dual-track strategy: maintaining old coal for system stability with rhetoric signalling alignment with emerging and/or still-conceptual lower-emission technologies. However, the tension is evident. Long-term coal contracts risk crowding out investment certainty for cleaner alternatives, while “clean coal” initiatives remain largely unproven and/or economically uncertain. In practice, South Africa's transition appears increasingly defined by conservative pragmatism rather than innovative pace - extending the life of legacy coal assets even as the economics of renewables strengthen. The result is an uneasy compromise: in South Africa, coal remains central to security of supply, but its pathway to meaningfully reducing emissions - and reliance on coal - remains both unproven and uncertain.
On 31 March 2026, the Nuclear Energy Corporation of South Africa (NECSA) issued a request for expressions of interest (EoI) to test market appetite for SMR technologies and potential localisation opportunities in the country. The exercise is framed as an exploratory step to assess vendor readiness, deployment models and industrial participation prospects. “The EoI serves as the first stage of a structured selection process”, says NECSA chairperson David Nicholls. “It prequalifies respondents based on alignment with South Africa's nuclear policy and experience”. However, with some 80 SMR designs already announced or under development globally, the competitive landscape has shifted markedly. Against this backdrop, the window of opportunity for a uniquely South African SMR offering - such as the much-vaunted pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR) project abandoned in 2010 - may well have closed, raising questions about the realism of late-stage localisation ambitions without a clear, timely policy anchor. The EoI sits uneasily with the announcement on 12 September 2024 by Electricity & Energy Minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa of his intention to appoint an 11-member expert panel to advise government on nuclear power. The panel was expected to be chaired by Prof. Bismark Tyobeka, former CEO of the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR), and to include international nuclear technology and finance specialists. Its mandate would be to provide independent advice on the pace, scale and procurement approach for new nuclear capacity, as government reassesses long-term supply options amid electricity market reform and the energy transition. Yet, despite repeated references to the panel in public statements, there is little evidence that it has been formally constituted or has even had a first meeting. This lack of visible progress sits uneasily alongside government's continued signalling that nuclear power - including small modular reactors (SMRs) - will form part of the future generation mix under the forthcoming Integrated Resource Plan 2025.
For more information or to enquire about these articles, please contact Melani De Lima at m.delima@iep-global.com
To see an archive of all energy and electricity sector roundups to date, please visit here