Due to global warming, there is an escalated need to move towards cleaner energy solutions. Almost 85% of South Africa's electric energy is provided via Eskom's conventional coal-fired power plants. Globally, coal-fired power plants have a significant share in the power generation energy mix and this will be the case over the next 20 years. A study, aligned with the aspiration of improving the thermal efficiency of the coal-fired power plants, was initiated, with a focus on the accuracy of energy accounting. The goal is that: if we can accurately quantify efficiency losses, the effort can be prioritized to resolve the inefficiencies. Eskom's thermal accounting tool, the STEP model, was reviewed against relevant industry standards (BS 2885, BS EN 12952-15, IEC 60953-0/Ed1) to evaluate the model uncertainty for losses computed via standard correlations. Relatively large deviations were noted for the boiler radiation, turbine deterioration and make-up water losses. A specific review of OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) heat rate correction curves was carried out for the determination of turbine plant losses, where these curves were suspected to have high uncertainty, especially when extrapolated to points of significant deviation from design values. For an evaluated case study, the final feed water correction curves were adjusted based on an analysis done with the use of power plant thermodynamic modelling tools namely: EtaPro Virtual Plant® and Steam Pro®. A Python® based computer model was developed to separately propagate systematic (instrument) and combined uncertainties (including temporal) through the STEP model using a numerical technique called sequential perturbation. The study revealed that the uncertainties associated with thermal efficiency, heat rate and individual thermal losses are very specific to the state of operations, as demonstrated by individual unit performance and the power plant's specific design baseline performance curves. Whilst the uncertainties cannot be generalized, a methodology has been developed to evaluate any case. A 3600 MWe wet-cooled power plant (6 x 600 MWe units) situated in Mpumalanga was selected to study the impact of uncertainties on the STEP model outputs. The results from the case study yielded that the thermal efficiency computed by the “direct method”, had an instrument uncertainty of 0.756% absolute (abs) versus the indirect method of 0.201% abs when computed at the station level for a 95% confidence interval. For an individual unit, the indirect efficiency uncertainty was as high as 0.581% abs. A study was conducted to find an optimal resolution (segment size) for the thermal performance metrics to be computed, by discretizing the monthly data into smaller segment sizes and studying the movement of the mean STEP model outputs and the temporal uncertainty. It was found that the 3-hour segment size is optimal as it gives the maximum movement of the mean of performance metrics without resulting in large temporal uncertainties. When considering the combined uncertainty (temporal and instrument uncertainty) at a data resolution of 1 minute and segment size of 3 hours, the “direct method”, had a combined thermal efficiency uncertainty of 0.768% abs versus the indirect method of 0.218% abs when computed at the station level for a 95% confidence interval. This would mean that the temporal uncertainty contribution to the combined uncertainty is 2.915% for the “direct method” and 14.919% for the “indirect method” of the above-stated uncertainties. The term “STEP Factor” can be used synonymously with effectiveness (percentage of the actual efficiency relative to the target efficiency). For the case evaluated, the mean “indirect method” STEP Factor at the station level moved from 86.698% (using monthly aggregated process data) to 86.135% (when discretized to 3-hour segments) which is roughly a 0.189% abs change in the station's thermal efficiency. This would appear fairly small on the station's overall efficiency but had a significant impact on the evaluation of the STEP Factor losses and the cost impact by the change in the plant efficiency, e.g. the final feed water STEP Factor loss at a unit level moved from 2.6% abs to 3.5% abs which is significant for diagnostic and business case motivations. Later the discrepancy between the direct STEP Factor and indirect STEP Factor were investigated as the uncertainty bands did not overlap as expected. The re-evaluation of the baseline component performance data resulted in the final feed water and the condenser back-pressure heat rate correction curves being adjusted. The exercise revealed that there could be potentially be significant baseline performance data uncertainty. The corrected indirect STEP Factor instrument uncertainty was now found to be 0.468% abs which translates to 0.164% abs overall efficiency. The combined uncertainty was corrected to 0.485% abs at a 3-hour segment size which translates to 0.171% abs overall efficiency. It has been deduced that the figures stated above are case-specific. However, the models have been developed to analyse any coal-fired power plant at various operating conditions. Furthermore, the uncertainty propagation module can be used to propagate uncertainty through any other discontinuous function or computer model. Various recommendations have been made to improve: the model uncertainty of STEP, data acquisition, systematic uncertainty, temporal uncertainty and baseline data uncertainty.