Dear Stakeholder,
Kindly note that due to numerous requests from stakeholders, coupled with the Department of Energy's commitment to ensuring thorough engagement on the Draft IRP2010, we have decided to extend the original thirty (30) day period for submission of written comments from the public, by a further thirty (30) days.
This means that the new deadline for submission of written comments on the Draft IRP2010 is 10 December 2010. Please still ensure that you send your comments (in the prescribed format) by this time to IRP2010@mweb.co.za
Kindly also note that due to the nature and volume of requests we have been receiving for slots to present at the Public Hearings, we have decided to set aside a total of four (4) days for Public Hearings, across three (3) regions as follows:
1. 26 November 2010 - Durban
2. 29 November 2010 - Cape Town
3. 02 and 03 December 2010 - Johannesburg
Kindly indicate to us the following:
1. Which Public Hearing you will be attending;
2. The number of attendees from your respective organisation that will be attending;
3. If you have been allocated a slot to present by Ms Angelique Kilian, please indicate which region you intend presenting to Ms Angelique Kilian at IRP2010@mweb.co.za by close of business on
01 November 2010.
4. All final presentations to be presented must be emailed to IRP2010 by 19 November 2010.
Kindly note that you will be advised of the actual venues per region, in due course.
We thank you for your valued participation and interest in the development of our Draft IRP2010.
Kind regards,
Angelique Kilian
PROJECT MANAGER
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Eco-Kettle and Efergy help to save money
"Just in case your mates are skeptical, you should actually buy an Efergy Elite. It is an energy use monitor that will record every watt you use. This way, when you mates ask you to prove your point, you just show them the numbers and "Bang!" you've started a revolution. You see, most people tend to ignore what they do not see. With an Efergy Elite you will see the results. This way you, your family and your mates will be able to track the results and feel more involved. They will go out and buy their own and you can have a contest. You'll have intelligence in the war on global warming."
More at Alternative Energy Centre.
More at Alternative Energy Centre.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Pick 'n Pay and Villiera Wine Estate install grid-tie net-metering systems
It seems like NERSA are allowing grid-tie net-metering systems as long as they are "under the radar."
This means that as long as the systems never have a credit balance at month or year end, they are ok.
See Pick 'n Pay and Villiera who have installed systems in the past month.
If this is the case, then it is a win for South Africa. We have long awaited a ruling from NERSA regarding grid-tie and net-metering and perhaps by NERSA allowing these two high profile systems, it is telling South Africa, it's ok.
Note that grid-tie and net-metering is completely left out of the new IRP2010 process, ie the Integrated Resource Plan which sets out South Africa's electricity policies for the next 20 years.
This means that as long as the systems never have a credit balance at month or year end, they are ok.
See Pick 'n Pay and Villiera who have installed systems in the past month.
If this is the case, then it is a win for South Africa. We have long awaited a ruling from NERSA regarding grid-tie and net-metering and perhaps by NERSA allowing these two high profile systems, it is telling South Africa, it's ok.
Note that grid-tie and net-metering is completely left out of the new IRP2010 process, ie the Integrated Resource Plan which sets out South Africa's electricity policies for the next 20 years.
Government caught out
See http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/solar-park-not-out-in-the-cold-government-insists-2010-10-18
This just shows what the government is saying in the media (propaganda and window dressing) vs what they strategically think. It's about time that this misalignment is brought out into the open.
This just shows what the government is saying in the media (propaganda and window dressing) vs what they strategically think. It's about time that this misalignment is brought out into the open.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Security of Supply
Durban refinery shut due to major power failure in Durban.
We need security of supply. The fastest way to get this is with grid-tie inverters and net-metering. This will be at zero cost to the country.
Email me for more information.
We need security of supply. The fastest way to get this is with grid-tie inverters and net-metering. This will be at zero cost to the country.
Email me for more information.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Nuclear Project Shelved in Favour of Wind Project
Constellation Energy has shelved its proposal to build a new reactor at its Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant, Obama administration officials said Friday, even though the administration had decided to award the project a $7.5 billion loan guarantee.
More details at The Washington Post.
This is yet another nuclear project that has been shelved. Nuclear projects require huge government subsidies, loan guarantees and insurance guarantees. Why aren't these subsidies, loan guarantees, etc, provided to renewable energy.
More details at The Washington Post.
This is yet another nuclear project that has been shelved. Nuclear projects require huge government subsidies, loan guarantees and insurance guarantees. Why aren't these subsidies, loan guarantees, etc, provided to renewable energy.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Net Metering: selling at the same price you pay
See this article from a New Zealand newspaper.
It shows that it is possible to make an income with Net Metering.
Net Metering means that one sells electricity at the same price one pays for it.
Note that the main point about Net Metering is to maximise one's renewable energy electrical output in order to reduce one's electrical bill and provide security of supply to one's house or business.
It shows that it is possible to make an income with Net Metering.
Net Metering means that one sells electricity at the same price one pays for it.
Note that the main point about Net Metering is to maximise one's renewable energy electrical output in order to reduce one's electrical bill and provide security of supply to one's house or business.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
RE < C ? Is Renewable Energy cheaper or more expensive than fossil fuels?
I am publishing this post in the interest of getting discussion going.
"The Thanet wind farm will milk uk of billions"
The media remain conspicuously silent about the real price we pay for wind
energy, says Christopher Booker.
By Christopher Booker
The Telegraph
Published: 6:04PM BST 25 Sep 2010
Blown out of proportion: the wind farm at Thanet Photo: REUTERS
In all the publicity given to the opening of "the world's largest wind farm"
off the Kent coast last week, by far the most important and shocking aspect
of this vast project was completely overlooked. Over the coming years we
will be giving the wind farm's Swedish owners a total of £1.2 billion in
subsidies. That same sum, invested now in a single nuclear power station,
could yield a staggering 13 times more electricity, with much greater
reliability.
The first all-too-common mistake in the glowing coverage accorded to the
inauguration of this Thanet wind farm by the Climate Change Secretary, Chris
Huhne, was to accept unquestioningly the claims of the developer,
Vattenfall, about its output. The array of 100 three-megawatt (MW) turbines,
each the height of Blackpool Tower, will have, it was said, the "capacity"
to produce 300MW of electricity, enough to "power" 200,000 (or even 240,000)
homes.
This may be true at those rare moments when the wind is blowing at the right
speeds. But the wind, of course, is intermittent, and the average output of
these turbines will be barely a quarter of that figure. The latest official
figures on the website of Mr Huhne's own department show that last year the
average output (or "load factor") of Britain's offshore turbines was only 26
per cent of their capacity.
Due to its position, the wind farm's owners will be lucky to get, on
average, 75MW from their windmills, a fraction of the output of a proper
power station. The total amount of electricity the turbines actually produce
will equate to the average electricity usage not of 240,000 homes, but of
barely half that number.
A far more significant omission from the media reports, however, was any
mention of the colossal subsidies this wind farm will earn. Wind energy is
subsidised through the system of Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs),
unwittingly paid for by all of us through our electricity bills.
Our electricity supply companies are obliged to buy offfshore wind energy at
three times its normal price, so that each megawatt hour of electricity
receives a 200 per cent subsidy of £100.
This means that the 75MW produced on average by Thanet will receive
subsidies of £60 million a year, on top of the £30-40 million cost of the
electricity itself. This is guaranteed for the turbines' estimated working
life of 20 years, which means that the total subsidy over the next two
decades will be some £1.2 billion. Based on the costings of the current
French nuclear programme, that would buy 1 gigawatt (1,000MW) of carbon-free
nuclear generating capacity, reliably available 24 hours a day
- more than 13 times the average output of the wind farm.
The 100 turbines opened last week cost £780 million to build, which means
that the £100 million a year its owners hope to earn represents a 13 per
cent return on capital, enough to excite the interest of any investor. And
these turbines are only the first stage of a project eventually designed to
include 341 of them, generating subsidies of £1 billion every five years.
A final claim for the Thanet wind farm (which Mr Huhne boasts is "only the
beginning") is that it will create "green jobs" - although the developers
say that only 21 of these will be permanent. These are thus costing, in
"green subsidies" alone, £3 million per job per year, or £57 million for
each job over the next 20 years. The Government gaily prattles about how it
wants to create "400,000 green jobs", which on this basis would eventually
cost us £22.8 trillion, or 17 times the entire annual output of the UK
economy.
If all this sounds dizzyingly surreal, the fact remains that we must begin
to grasp just what the green fantasies of Mr Huhne, the EU and the rest are
costing us. Even the Queen, we learn, tried to claim a "fuel poverty"
allowance for her soaring electricity bills, which have risen 50 per cent in
the past year. But a crucial first step towards getting some grip on reality
must be for those who report on these wind farms to stop hiding away the
colossal price we are all now having to pay for one of the greatest scams of
our age.
"The Thanet wind farm will milk uk of billions"
The media remain conspicuously silent about the real price we pay for wind
energy, says Christopher Booker.
By Christopher Booker
The Telegraph
Published: 6:04PM BST 25 Sep 2010
Blown out of proportion: the wind farm at Thanet Photo: REUTERS
In all the publicity given to the opening of "the world's largest wind farm"
off the Kent coast last week, by far the most important and shocking aspect
of this vast project was completely overlooked. Over the coming years we
will be giving the wind farm's Swedish owners a total of £1.2 billion in
subsidies. That same sum, invested now in a single nuclear power station,
could yield a staggering 13 times more electricity, with much greater
reliability.
The first all-too-common mistake in the glowing coverage accorded to the
inauguration of this Thanet wind farm by the Climate Change Secretary, Chris
Huhne, was to accept unquestioningly the claims of the developer,
Vattenfall, about its output. The array of 100 three-megawatt (MW) turbines,
each the height of Blackpool Tower, will have, it was said, the "capacity"
to produce 300MW of electricity, enough to "power" 200,000 (or even 240,000)
homes.
This may be true at those rare moments when the wind is blowing at the right
speeds. But the wind, of course, is intermittent, and the average output of
these turbines will be barely a quarter of that figure. The latest official
figures on the website of Mr Huhne's own department show that last year the
average output (or "load factor") of Britain's offshore turbines was only 26
per cent of their capacity.
Due to its position, the wind farm's owners will be lucky to get, on
average, 75MW from their windmills, a fraction of the output of a proper
power station. The total amount of electricity the turbines actually produce
will equate to the average electricity usage not of 240,000 homes, but of
barely half that number.
A far more significant omission from the media reports, however, was any
mention of the colossal subsidies this wind farm will earn. Wind energy is
subsidised through the system of Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs),
unwittingly paid for by all of us through our electricity bills.
Our electricity supply companies are obliged to buy offfshore wind energy at
three times its normal price, so that each megawatt hour of electricity
receives a 200 per cent subsidy of £100.
This means that the 75MW produced on average by Thanet will receive
subsidies of £60 million a year, on top of the £30-40 million cost of the
electricity itself. This is guaranteed for the turbines' estimated working
life of 20 years, which means that the total subsidy over the next two
decades will be some £1.2 billion. Based on the costings of the current
French nuclear programme, that would buy 1 gigawatt (1,000MW) of carbon-free
nuclear generating capacity, reliably available 24 hours a day
- more than 13 times the average output of the wind farm.
The 100 turbines opened last week cost £780 million to build, which means
that the £100 million a year its owners hope to earn represents a 13 per
cent return on capital, enough to excite the interest of any investor. And
these turbines are only the first stage of a project eventually designed to
include 341 of them, generating subsidies of £1 billion every five years.
A final claim for the Thanet wind farm (which Mr Huhne boasts is "only the
beginning") is that it will create "green jobs" - although the developers
say that only 21 of these will be permanent. These are thus costing, in
"green subsidies" alone, £3 million per job per year, or £57 million for
each job over the next 20 years. The Government gaily prattles about how it
wants to create "400,000 green jobs", which on this basis would eventually
cost us £22.8 trillion, or 17 times the entire annual output of the UK
economy.
If all this sounds dizzyingly surreal, the fact remains that we must begin
to grasp just what the green fantasies of Mr Huhne, the EU and the rest are
costing us. Even the Queen, we learn, tried to claim a "fuel poverty"
allowance for her soaring electricity bills, which have risen 50 per cent in
the past year. But a crucial first step towards getting some grip on reality
must be for those who report on these wind farms to stop hiding away the
colossal price we are all now having to pay for one of the greatest scams of
our age.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Thorium?
The government has just stopped the massive investment over the past decade in the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor. You'd think they would start funding Renewable Energy adoption in South Africa, but no, our esteemed ministers are off on a tangent exploring Thorium. See http://www.energyforecastonline.co.za/index.php/water-and-energy/173-energy
What do you think?
Why is Germany installing half the world's solar photovoltaic panels even though they have 3 hours average sunshine and Cape Town has 5 hours average sunshine and Upington has 8 hours average sunshine? Why did China install 37 gigawatts (37,000 megawatts) of renewable energy last year?
Why is South Africa being left behind whilst the first world goes full steam ahead installing renewable energy? Why is Africa being left behind? Why should South Africa build these massive coal and nuclear plants that first world countries don't want anymore?
There are solutions. We need to embrace them now before it is too late.
What do you think?
Why is Germany installing half the world's solar photovoltaic panels even though they have 3 hours average sunshine and Cape Town has 5 hours average sunshine and Upington has 8 hours average sunshine? Why did China install 37 gigawatts (37,000 megawatts) of renewable energy last year?
Why is South Africa being left behind whilst the first world goes full steam ahead installing renewable energy? Why is Africa being left behind? Why should South Africa build these massive coal and nuclear plants that first world countries don't want anymore?
There are solutions. We need to embrace them now before it is too late.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)