Why I am a fan of Energy Efficiency, Clean Enery Manufacutring, and anti-nuclear...

Energy efficiency in US could create 333,000 jobs

California funds US$90m clean and renewable energy

Nuclear Power Does NOT Help to Combat Climate Change

Frank

Smoke (CTL) and mirrors (nuke)

At Copenhagen Pres Zuma indicated that South Africa would like to move to a low carbon economy, and meet the targets of the long term mitigation strategy to reduce carbon emissions by 34%. Since then, there have been many movements within national, provincial and local governments to be thinking about the green economy and green jobs.

This will all be for naught.

Not only are we planning to build 3 new huge coal power stations (which would make it simply impossible to meet these targets, and Carbon Capture and Storage is a pipe dream), but SASOL is rolling out a major expansion plan to boost its Secunda Coal to Liquid (CTL) plant by 5% at a cost of R12billion. To think Secunda is already the largest point source or carbon emissions in the world, and now they want to make it worse! (Well, on the bright side, that may not be the case for long, with SASOL building CTL plants in China, possibly China might overtake us in converting coal into petrol.)

Then, looking at nuclear, I have argued before that nuclear is too costly and takes too long to build to make any difference to climate change. The money would be much better used investing in other carbon emission reducing technologies and alternative energies. But it is now clear that the French Preseident Sarkozy is on the payroll of the nuclear industry. Not surprising really, since France has so much nuclear power (58 reactors), and Areva, the big nuke company, is stationed there. He is pushing to make the financing cheaper (i.e. shift more of the risk onto the taxpayer) and get developing countries to build them (i.e. another form of energy imperialism – more money flowing South to North).

If the SA government is srious about reorientating our economy to compete in the new green world, tehn they need to catch a wake up now, and deal with the carbon emission problem that is predominantly based in ESKOM, SASOL and their big customers.

Frank

Energy Efficiency Subsidy

South Africa is the unfortunate position of having it’s friendly behemoth ESKOM run it’s Solar Water Heater subsidy program, in the name of energy efficiency. Great idea, poor execution. Let’s see what the UK & US are doing:

Obama Announces Cash for Caulkers Program

* Small-scale upgrades like insulation, duct sealing, water heaters, HVAC units, windows, roofing and doors would be eligible for 50 percent rebates up to $1,500 or combined upgrade rebates of up to $3,000.

* Entire-home retrofits would be eligible for a rebate of $3,000 towards an energy audit and upgrades amounting to 20 percent energy savings. Any savings over that would be eligible for more rebates.

* Safeguards would be put in place to ensure that the upgrades actually improve efficiency: all contractors must be certified in energy efficient installations and independent auditors will perform surveys to make sure upgrades were installed correctly and are saving energy.

* The program would also help state and local governments create financing options for these retrofits so more consumers can participate.

UK launches Pay as you Save “Greener Homes Strategy”

* Cut emissions from homes by 29% by 2020.

* Give up to 7 million homes eco upgrades by 2020.

* Create up to 65,000 jobs in the green home industry.

Guess we could do a lot more to ramp up our Energy Efficiency programmes...

Frank

ESKOM's finance director Paul O'Flaherty is a DOFF BALL

On what planet does ESKOM’s finance director Paul O'Flaherty live?

The World Bank is considering loans to South Africa to the order of R29 Billion for new coal (3600 MW), nuclear (3000 MW+), and tiny little insignificantly solar plant (100MW). Commenting on this last week, in a news article entitled “Eskom goes low carbon”, he said, “The funding is well-aligned to jump-start progress on South Africa's commitment to a lower carbon footprint”. Lower carbon-footprint? What planet does he live on? Certainly not the rapidly heating up planet called Earth! How on this hot earth can the long term plans of THREE coal power stations + ONE nuclear + One tiny solar plant equal a commitment to a lower carbon footprint? This is a commitment to a HIGHER carbon footprint!

If ESKOM’s finance minister can’t get his math right, can we trust him with the World Bank’s money?

Frank

PS See also:

Gordhan pans opposition to Eskom's World Bank loan

Clean Energy for South Africa, not Coal