adminperhaps.
The consumers note that many electricity bills make no sense at all, with only those based on actual readings rather than weird estimates being worthy of payment.
And even then the calculations based on actual readings can be questioned, thanks to Zesa’s multiple rates even for domestic users.
The solution has been obvious ever since Zimbabwe switched to hard currencies.
The pre-paid meter avoids all the expense of sending out hundreds of meter readers, it avoids the need to find teams who can disconnect errant consumers, it simplifies financial records dramatically, since most consumers will not need such a record, and it forces most consumers to plan their consumption better.
If every domestic consumer, and all commercial consumers below a set consumption level, were on pre-paid meters Zesa would be out of the woods.
The small minority of consumers – mainly mines, factories and very large commercial premises – who still need individual accounts could have whatever meters they need read regularly, with instant disconnection if they do not pay in time.
Everyone else would pay cash upfront and Zesa would need nothing more than sales points to sell “energy cards”, something like what the phone companies now do.
Zesa seems to agree with this. But they do little or nothing to implement it. Thousands of consumers, desperate to avoid the sort of mess that Zesa’s weird billing system leads them into, have applied for pre-paid meters, willing to accept even the limited system now in place where you have to queue in normal business hours at a Zesa office to buy energy.
But they are told month after month: “Try next month”.
Tenders have been sought, and then the rules are changed. It appears that Zesa itself does not know what it wants, with some thinking a simple system would be fine and others wanting the meters to take advantage of modern technologies and allow Zesa to monitor consumption continually as well as sell “energy time”.
We have our doubts that the most advanced technology will be ideal for a Third World country with limited skills.
The present pre-paid meters a fortunate few already have seem robust, they work without faults, and consumers like them. Why not just buy a lot more and roll out the system.
Zesa itself has already answered one of the objections to a compulsory pre-paid scheme, that of accumulated arrears.
It has said it would be willing to take a final actual reading when removing the old meter and putting in the new, and then work out how the consumer would pay off what they had actually used.
Hopefully they are making progress on the second problem, ease of payment.
Pre-paid meters should be more convenient, as well as better. That means that people can buy energy at more points than just Zesa offices. We have suggested that post offices should also sell pre-paid cards and hopefully shops as well. Ideally someone should be able to top up their meter on a Sunday evening.
This does require capital investment.
But Zesa could make a start by abandoning their other scheme, free replacements of filament bulbs with energy-saving fluorescent bulbs.
We totally agree that the replacement is a good idea. Zesa has worked out that it would save 200MW during peak evening demand. But we fail to see why free bulbs should be handed out.
A far simpler solution would be for Zesa to get a total ban on the import of filament bulbs. We do not make any bulbs so there is no local industry to protect, no jobs to save.
The price gap between filament bulbs and fluorescent bulbs is now trivial. Indeed it is possible to buy fluorescent bulbs for 85c, and slightly better makes for $1,15.
Already we are seeing on supermarket shelves fluorescent bulbs of some brands that cost less than filament bulbs on the next shelf. Even the cheapest fluorescent bulb lasts about three times as long as the best filament bulb, so no one could possibly be out of pocket.
So there is no need for Zesa to persuade anyone. If filament bulb imports were banned then within a few months almost all bulbs would be the energy savers, at zero cost to Zesa and its consumers.
The money assigned to that unnecessary scheme could be diverted to pre-paid meters.
Resistance to pre-paid meters would be negligible. The desperate desire by most consumers to escape Zesa’s weird billing system based on even weirder estimates would ensure that.
So if Zesa could simply get organised, expand its already proven system, work out a simple scheme for civil debt for unpaid bills and make sure energy was sold in more places, it would then be in the happy position of telling its own bankers to pay the bill whenever a power company demanded money.
Delay, bickering and argument are no longer acceptable.
Online Reporter