Billiton must lift veil on Eskom prices |
Publication |
Fin24 |
Date | 2013-03-15 |
Web Link | www.fin24.com |
The bosses of global miner BHP Billiton
Johannesburg – Fin24’s sister
publication Sake24 on Friday won a long
legal battle in which the Court of Appeal
ruled that BHP Billiton must make public the
prices it pays Eskom for electricity.
This follows after a long legal battle
between BHP Billiton, Sake24 and Jan de
Lange, specialist-journalist of the
publication.
BHP Billiton appealed an earlier ruling of
Judge Frans Kgomo in the South Gauteng High
Court in Johannesburg that BHP Billiton and
Eskom are compelled, in the interest of the
public, to reveal the pricing formula by
which Eskom sells electricity to BHP
Billiton's two aluminium smelters, Hillside
in Richards Bay and Mozal in Maputo.
According to the ruling they also have to
reveal the duration of the contracts, as
well as the names of the individuals who
signed the contracts.
BHP Billiton fought tooth and nail against
revealing the information in terms of the
Promotion of Access to Information Act in
both the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Eskom offered no resistance and was merely
present as an observer at both court cases.
Eskom is making massive losses because of
the low prices that BHP Billiton is paying.
The two BHP Billiton smelters alone use
5.68% of Eskom's power generation
capabilities, and all indications show they
may receiving the power at lower than cost
price from Eskom.
Hillside, the bigger of the two smelters,
uses 1 200MW, which makes it the third
biggest electricity user in the country.
This usage is only surpassed by the cities
of Cape Town and Durban, which each uses 1
300MW.
The country would hence not have had an
electricity crisis if Eskom had not supplied
power to the two smelters.
The electricity prices for Hillside and
Mozal are partly or wholly determined by the
aluminium price on the London Metal Exchange
(LME) according to a highly secretive
formula in a contract that was signed in the
1990s. The agreement is valid for decades.
According to Sake24’s information, these two
contracts are entirely responsible for the
R9.5bn loss Eskom suffered in the year to
end-March 2009, which it blamed on
“derivatives”, an accounting term for prices
that are calculated on the basis of external
factors.
With acknowledgement to Fin24.
This is not
Arms Deal stuff, but indirectly related.
Firstly, it's about PAIA. I won all my Arms
Deal PAIA cases which has partly given me my
knowledge base about the Arms Deal.
It's alot, but there's still plenty more
fresh stuff out there (fresh in this
instance meaning old but as yet uncovered).
Secondly I also took up the cudgels on the
Eskom/Alusaf debacle circa 2008, viz. the
Carte Blanche article and my piece entitled
"Eskom's Voodoo Economics" dated 2008-02-04.
Thirdly I believe that this mess cost the
citizens of this country more than the R9,5
billion loss Eskom suffered in the year to
end-March 2009.
It was a major contributing factor to the
rolling blackouts in 2008. That cost
billions of Rands in lost production,
wastage, etc.
Fourthly, watch out for the great
electricity rip-off that's happening in
front of our eye's right now. It's going to
make the Arms Deal look like a toddler's
picnic.