Comparing solar PV (photovoltaic) with coal-fired electricity production in the centralized network of South Africa

• Additional benefits makes solar PV more attractive than coal-fired power plants.
• Large solar PV parks are less beneficial due to transport costs than private PV.
• Investments in on-site solar PV installations lowers additional costs.
• Solar PV can help in lowering pressure on water reserves and CO2 emissions.

South Africa has a highly centralized network, in which almost all electricity is produced in Mpumalanga and transmitted throughout South Africa. In the case of the Western Cape, electricity has to be transmitted over 800–1370 km. This generates losses and entails high transmission costs. Investments in additional production and transmission capacity are needed to cope with the growing demand. Although there is a large potential for solar energy in South Africa, investments are lacking while large investments in new coal-fired power plants are being executed. These coal power plants do not only increase the need for heavier transmission infrastructure, but also have a higher CO2 emission level and a higher pressure on water reserves. This paper performs a more comprehensive cost-analysis between solar energy production and coal production facilities, to make a more elaborate picture of which technologies are more plausible to foresee in the growing demand of electricity. The current centralized electricity infrastructure makes the investment in large production facilities more likely. However, it should be questioned if the investment in large centralized solar parks will be more beneficial than the investments by consumers in smaller solar PV facilities on site.