Truth about the end of load-shedding in South Africa

On Saturday, 16 May 2026, Eskom celebrated one year without load shedding. However, the situation is more complicated than what Eskom shared with the public.

In a media statement, Eskom stated that no load shedding is a milestone signalling a structural shift from a recovering grid to a stable, high-performing power system.

“365 consecutive days of uninterrupted power supply represent more than operational progress. It is a restoration of national confidence,” it said.

Eskom chairman, Mteto Nyati, said this moment has been three years in the making since the inception of the generation recovery plan.

The power utility said that the progress is reflected in sustained improvements in generation performance over the past three financial years.

Eskom’s Energy Availability Factor (EAF) improved from 54.56% to 65.16%, an increase of 10.6%, over the last three years.

Unplanned outages declined from 32.34% to 22.88%, reflecting a comparable reduction of 9.46%. This signals fewer breakdowns.

Reliance on diesel‑powered emergency generation declined significantly, with expenditure falling from approximately R33.3 billion to R6.4 billion.

“These gains are underpinned by a strengthened maintenance programme and the disciplined implementation of the Generation Operational Recovery Plan,” it said.

“We intensified planned maintenance to restore long-term fleet reliability, improved outage planning, reduced unit trips, and strengthened operational discipline.”

Eskom CEO, Dan Marokane, said that South Africa now has a stable electricity platform to enable an orderly transformation of the industry.

“No energy market liberalisation in the world has been successful without a stable incumbent,” said Marokane.

Eskom had tremendous help from the private sector

Energy analyst Chris Yelland highlighted that, while Eskom should be commended for its improved performance, it did not achieve the end of load shedding in isolation.

Yelland said that the private sector, including ordinary households and businesses, contributed to ending load shedding. These contributions included:

• 15 GW of capacity from Independent Power Producers (IPPs).

• Wheeling, where power from independent solar or wind farms is transported to end-users through the grid.

• Solar PV and battery backup systems have been installed by businesses and households.

• Massive demand destruction of energy-intensive industries, including the closure of virtually the entire ferrochrome and ferromanganese smelting industry.

• Load reduction across South Africa.

• Massive electricity price increases have been several times the inflation rate for over a decade, making electricity unaffordable to many.

• The steady ongoing reduction in the energy intensity of South Africa’s industry and associated structural changes in the local economy.

“I am not denying the good work by Eskom Generation in improving its terrible plant performance. Let’s give credit where credit is due,” Yelland said.

However, he said that Eskom seems to want to ignore a whole lot of other factors which contributed to ending load shedding.

Eskom should not get a standing ovation for showing up

Nicholas Woode-Smith, a senior associate of the Free Market Foundation, said that Eskom should not be congratulated for doing what it should do.

“South Africans are expected to celebrate Eskom whenever it becomes slightly less unbearable. We should not,” he said.

Woode-Smith said that Eskom’s entire justification for its existence was that it would keep the lights on and make electricity available at scale.

“Eskom exists to provide electricity. It does not exist to protect its revenue, preserve its monopoly, or block alternatives.”

He argues Eskom no longer behaves like a utility committed to producing abundant electricity. It behaves like a monopolist defending turf.

“That is why, whenever it is in trouble, the answer is never serious reform. It is never cost-cutting. It is never opening the market,” he said.

He said that those who installed solar and battery backup systems are faced with higher connectivity charges.

Others, who pay Eskom for electricity, are hit with much higher electricity charges as the power utility protects its revenue.

“That is not the conduct of a public-minded utility. It is the conduct of a failing monopoly exploiting a captive market,” he said.

He said that Eskom has repeatedly shown hostility to privatisation and market reform because competition would expose how little value it provides.

“A competitive electricity market would force producers to win customers by delivering reliable power at a good price,” he said.

“Eskom cannot tolerate that. Its power depends on South Africans having nowhere else to go. That is why it resists self-generation.”

“When Eskom cannot produce enough power, South Africans suffer. When South Africans try to produce their own power, Eskom obstructs them.”