The water intensity of energy

Whenever water shortages loom anywhere, we hear about how much “embodied water” there is in various products. According to the Water Footprint Network, producing a slice of bread requires 11 gallons of water and producing a pound of beef takes 1,800 gallons. The same sort of analysis can be done with our energy sources. As with foods, different types of energy have different water intensities.

Electricity:

Electricity generation is highly variable in its water-intensity. Roughly 89% of U.S. electricity is produced in “thermoelectric” power plants. These are plants that use heat from burning coal or natural gas or from controlled nuclear fission to generate steam, which then spins turbines. Water is used to create the steam, and then more water is used to cool that steam, condensing it back into water.

Most thermoelectric power plants built before 1970 have “open-loop” or once-through cooling systems that result in relatively little evaporation–though significantly warmer water is returned to the river or other source from which it was taken (which has its own environmental costs).

Most newer plants use “closed-loop” recirculation cooling; far less water is required, but most of that evaporates (consumptive use). Averaged nationwide, 0.47 gallons of water is consumed (evaporated) for each kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity produced by thermoelectric plants, according to a 2003 paper by researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL),Consumptive Water Use for U.S. Power Production.

Most of our electricity not produced by thermoelectric power plants is generated by hydroelectric plants. This accounts for about 9% of the U.S. total. Hydroelectric plants don’t heat water to create steam, so water isn’t needed for cooling, but they use a lot of water nonetheless. Most hydropower is generated by damming rivers to create reservoirs. These reservoirs have significantly larger surface areas than the free-flowing rivers prior to damming, and evaporation from these reservoirs can be significant. Hydrologists produce “free water surface evaporation” maps to model this evaporation, which varies greatly by climate.

For the NREL study mentioned above, researchers calculated evaporation from the 120 largest power-generation reservoirs in the U.S. (representing 65% of total hydropower generation) and used that data to extrapolate evaporation from all of the nation’s 2,300 power-generation reservoirs: 9.05 billion gallons per day. Here’s how the water consumption from hydroelectric power generation in a few states compares: 18 gallons/kWh in Colorado, 21 gal/kWh in California, 65 gal/kWh in Arizona, and 137 gal/kWh in Oklahoma. Nationally, the average is 18 gal/kWh.

By weighting thermoelectric and hydroelectric power generation sources, the NREL report calculated an average water-intensity of electricity in the U.S. to be 2.0 gal/kWh. So if you use 500 kWh per month, that’s requiring, on average, 1,000 gallons of water.

Oil and gas:

Electricity isn’t the only form of energy that requires a lot of water to produce. According to a 2006 U.S. Department of Energy report to Congress, Energy Demands on Water Resources, conventional onshore oil extraction consumes relatively little water: 0.12 to 0.31 gallons of water per gallon of oil (0.8 – 2.2 gal/million Btu). But “enhanced” oil recovery practices, which are becoming increasingly common, are much more water-intensive. These practices range from 1.9 gal water/gal oil (14 gal/million Btu) to over 300 gal water/gal oil (2,500 gal/million Btu). Extracting oil from tar sands in Alberta takes 20-50 gallons/million Btu. Another 1.0 to 2.5 gallons of water are required to process and transport each gallon of oil (7-18 gal/million Btu).

With natural gas, conventional onshore extraction requires negligible water use, but processing and transport averages 3 gal water/million Btu. New “hydraulic fracturing” techniques (sometimes referred to as “frac’ing”), as are being used to recover natural gas from the Marcellus Shale formation, use a great deal of water (and contaminate that water in the process).

Renewables:

On the renewable energy front, some biofuels, especially ethanol produced from corn, are very water-intensive. A 2008 paper in the journal Environmental Science & Technology reported that a light-duty vehicle driven on an E85 fuel (85% ethanol) “consumes” a remarkable 28 gallons of water per mile! Utility-scale solar-thermal power plants that focus sunlight to super-heat an oil heat-transfer fluid, which in turn generates steam, require a lot of water, and that’s an issue in the desert environment where these are being built. (Some other solar-thermal technologies rely on Stirling engine technology, instead of steam turbines, so use almost no water.)

Bottom line: Save Energy to Conserve Water!

The bottom-line conclusion from all this–you saw this coming!–is that by conserving energy we save a lot of water. Replacing incandescent light bulbs with CFLs, upgrading to Energy Star appliances, insulating your house–virtually any energy improvement you make–will also save water. Some experts say this is really important; in the coming decades fresh water could become a more limited resource than energy.

Article by D Appleyard.

By unveiling a solar heating and cooling programme that could create 25,000 new green jobs, generate US$2.6 billion in revenue and see 2 GW of new solar thermal capacity installed in the state over the next decade, New York has revealed its ambition to become America’s national leader in solar heating and cooling.

Setting out its solar thermal roadmap, which was published at the NYSEIA conference in May 2010, the Solar Thermal Consortium (STC) plan focuses on improving uptake of solar thermal technologies through consumer education and incentives, installer training, promotions to attract manufacturers, investments in R&D, and permitting improvements.

Developed by more than 130 industrial, academic and governmental representatives, the Solar Thermal Roadmap creates a path to move New York State toward the equivalent of 1 million solar hot water collectors, or half a million residential systems, by 2020.

While these figures are still dwarfed by the German market, where around 200,000 solar hot water systems are installed annually for example, the measure is deeply significant in the US, where so far federal efforts have largely foundered and, as in many other nations, solar thermal is still the neglected poor cousin of other renewable energies like wind and solar PV.

With individual states left to devise and implement their own renewable energy programmes, the solar thermal plan for New York stands out.

The logic behind such a scheme is irrefutable, the New York Solar Energy Industries Association claims. ‘Sixty percent of the energy consumed in New York State buildings is to provide heat and hot water’, said its president, Ron Kamen, who noted that with the Roadmap: ‘New York is moving to become the national leader in the research, development, deployment and manufacture of solar thermal technologies.’

Focused on solar heat and hot water applications for buildings in New York State, the Roadmap is modeled on global best practices, as well as new ideas from the consortium. Its goal is to develop the New York State solar thermal industry so that the total installed statewide capacity grows from its current estimated level of 6 MWth to 2000 MWth by 2020, with 70% coming from residential and 30% from commercial installations.

The Roadmap’s proposed implementation would save an estimated 6 million US gal. (22.5 million litres) of oil, 9.5 million ft³ (270,000 m³) of natural gas and displace 320 GWh of electricity production annually by 2020, translating into consumer savings of more than $175 million per year, the STC claims.

Barriers To Implementation

While the total U.S. installed solar thermal capacity of some 7.6 GWth is close to the German installed capacity of 8 GWth, the majority of this capacity is derived from swimming pool heating rather than domestic hot water or space heating. On a per capita basis, the contrast is stark, with 100 Wth/person installed in Germany and 0.3 Wth/person installed per person in New York State, a factor of close to 1000. Indeed, the Roadmap acknowledges that the state lags the world in terms of solar thermal usage.

Nonetheless, despite the small base, since heating and cooling makes up around 30% of the total energy use in the U.S., and current total installed solar thermal capacity equates to approximately 0.06% of the entire U.S. energy consumption, there is an opportunity for solar thermal to make a significant impact.

Solar thermal has certainly seen growth in cold climates such as those encountered in the region. For example, in 2008 Canada installed 40 MWth of solar thermal capacity for both space and water heating. Even so, the report does recognise that levels of adoption and market growth are a result of many factors, including energy cost, governmental regulations, aggressive marketing and educational programmes, and incentives.

In New York State the authors contend that solar thermal systems can provide 50%–70% of the domestic hot water used in a typical residence and that the state has an opportunity to expand this sector of the economy and position itself for a strong export base. However, there are significant hurdles to overcome. For example, the technology and its benefits are not widely known by consumers. Furthermore, sufficient industry knowledge and certified installers to support successful installations are lacking, and there are gaps in the value chain from materials to end-user. In addition, potential bar

riers to development of the industry in the state include poor awareness and perception based on experiences from the 1970s and 1980s. At that time the systems were perceived to be unreliable and with short life expectancies. Poor system integration and installations were primarily to blame for these experiences, the STC says.

Public sector support is also required in order for large-scale solar thermal adoption levels to be achieved. A public education campaign will require the support of both industry stakeholders and public officials to be successful. Governmental support is required initially to make the systems cost effective and to attract manufacturing capability to the state. This requires an educational and lobbying effort on the part of the industrial partners targeted at state, federal and national officials.

The development of a trained workforce is also critical to achieve the goals of the Roadmap. It is vital that the quality of installations is high and that the systems function properly. An installation workforce needs to be developed and trained to ensure that this occurs. Courses are available which can provide this training, but few are currently located in the state.

System costs are another significant barrier to widespread adoption. While there is a segment of the market that identifies environmental issues as the primary driver for adoption, the Roadmap goals cannot be achieved by this segment alone and current system and permitting costs need to be addressed to grow the industry significantly.

The ability to fully realise the potential of solar thermal technologies is currently further limited by long-term technology development. Advanced technologies such as solar assisted cooling, integrated PV/solar thermal systems, and low temperature solar thermal electric generation are potential areas of opportunity. Thermal storage is also an area that, if effectively solved, would allow for additional advancement of the industry.

Costs of Solar Thermal in New York State

The rationale for developing a strong solar thermal industry in New York State comes from three areas: end-user energy cost savings, environmental impacts, and economic development through job creation systems and industry sales.

A model for direct hot water (DHW) systems was developed

to determine the potential impact of the adoption of solar thermal technologies, and to investigate incentive and growth levels needed to reach the roadmap goal. Based on industry input, systems were modeled with initial installed costs of $8000 for residential systems and $18,000 for commercial systems. The costs were held fixed for three years and then reduced at an annual rate of 5% thereafter on the basis of increased competition and supply, as well as future technological improvements.

The price of energy in New York State is among the highest in the USA. In 2009, electricity averaged 17.8 US cents/KWh and a four person ‘model’ family would be expected to spend between $390 and $1100 (depending on the fuel source) to provide domestic hot water in 2010. Over the past 10 years energy prices in New York State have increased at a substantial rate averaging 9% and 11% annually for fuel oil and natural gas respectively. A conservative 8% annual escalation in fuel prices is assumed in the model, which by 2020 drives the cost for heating hot water to between $620 and $170

0 per household, again depending on the fuel source.

In this analysis, assuming the 8% annual increase in energy prices, by 2020 the savings for a four person model family supplying 50% of their water heating needs from solar are projected to increase to between $310 and $850 annually. Fuel savings, from residential DHW applications alone, show the potential for a dramatic reduction in emissions too. In 2010 the model family with a solar thermal system could save approximately 100 US gallons of fuel oil, 125 therms of natural gas or 3100 KWh of electricity.

According to the model, combined residential and commercial sales start at $5 million in 2010 and rise to $629 million in 2020. Total revenues from 2010–2020 are projected to be $2.6 billion. Furthermore, the analysis is based only on the development of a state-wide domestic hot water market. The potential impact is obviously multiplied when other technologies such as solar space heating, ‘combi’ systems and solar assisted cooling are considered, as well as potential opportunities elsewhere in the US and overseas.

Job creation associated with the solar thermal market development is modeled using current job levels in Europe as a basis. And in Europe, one job is created and sustained for every 1000 ft² (93 m²) of newly installed panel area, the Roadmap states. These jobs include manufacturing, installation and maintenance, and under the developed growth model, in total approximately 24,000 jobs will be created and sustained by 2020, significantly up from the current estimated level of some 36 solar thermal employees. Clearly, the im

pact of a vibrant solar thermal market is significant to the state.

Solar Thermal Roadmap Recommendations

Recommendations set out in the Roadmap aim to address market barriers in a logical, cost effective manner and are grouped into five main categories including organization; awareness and marketing; institutional issues; workforce development; and, research and development.

The key recommendations are to:

• Create a state-wide educational campaign and electronic resource to inform consumers about solar thermal and its benefits;
• Initiate a solar thermal financial incentive programme to encourage installations by shortening payback time;
• Promote New York State as a location for manufacturers;
• Invest in research and development to create a scientific base which systematically develops next generation technologies; and,
• Clarify permitting procedures and union jurisdiction to simplify installations.

Funding for these solar thermal-focused efforts could come from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), the New York State Public Service Commission or similar programmes, the authors say.

Addressing public awareness, the roadmap recommends that a solar thermal website should be created to provide a central resource in the state. And, in order to track consumer awareness and satisfaction, it is recommended that a consumer survey be conducted each year focused on installers, consumers, and the general public. Data from the surveys will be used to determine market conditions — for instance the number of installs, system costs and such like — as well as an indication of consumer satisfaction, and the effectiveness of the marketing campaign.

Furthermore, growth in sales can also lead to job increases beyond installation jobs through increased manufacturing capability within the state, the report’s authors argue. For example, they say, interactions with European manufacturers during the course of developing the Roadmap have indicated their desire to locate manufacturing capabilities within the US.

In order to take advantage of these growth opportunities, it is recommended that within three months a committee led by economic development organizations be formed to develop a statewide marketing plan, for the expansion and attraction of manufacturing capabilities into the state. The marketing plan should address state and US market potential, state incentives, the existing workforce capability and industrial base, as well as R&D capabilities.

Current tax incentive programmes (30% federal, 25% state) for solar thermal systems provide a payback period for the average system of about 11–15 years for modelled residential systems. Payback for commercial systems can be significantly shorter due to accelerated depreciation. It is recommended that an incentive programme be combined with the current tax rebate programme to reduce the payback term further. It is additionally recommended that all available incentives be tied to an installer certification scheme to encourage high installation standards.

A fixed rebate model would pay a fixed amount based on system size and capability, as well on the primary heating source. Such an incentive programme could include residential as well as commercial, industrial, institutional, and agricultural consumers, though they may be structured differently. The incentive programme should be designed to sunset as system costs decline and energy prices escalate, the authors say, adding that such a model is attractiv

e as it decreases the upfront out of pocket expenses, which may be a barrier to adoption.

Incentives could also be tied to utility companies. For example, the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) Solar Rebate Program is designed to offset electric usage through the adoption of renewable energy sources. This is particularly attractive to those consumers which use electricity to provide heat and hot water. LIPA reports that since 2000 it has paid out approximately $59 million in incentives resulting in more that 2400 installations (mostly PV) on Long Island and the creation of over 50 companies to conduct those installations. PV system costs have dropped to 35% through this programme and a combination of state and federal incentive schemes, and such programmes could

be expanded or developed to include gas and oil customers, the Roadmap document says.

Addressing a number of key institutional issues, the Roadmap also recommends that a permit system is developed so that a single permit can be applied for and granted for an installation. Such a permiting process would simplify installation procedures and reduce costs, while still ensuring that the installation complies with relevant zoning and building requirements.

It is also recommended that certain levels of renewable energy be mandated directly into the building code. Generating a significant proportion of a building’s energy from clean sources is clearly possible given current technologies and it is proposed that all new buildings over 10,0

00 ft² (929 m²) in area must generate 10%–20% of their energy from onsite renewables.

To encourage minimum installation quality standards state financial incentives could eventually be offered for systems that are installed by professionals who have passed – as a minimum – an entry-level solar hot water certification exam. The North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) does currently offer a solar thermal certification test, though any requirement to sit this exam would most likely exclude the majority of the exisiting installers and restrict the initial growth of the industry, the authors argue. Currently there is no ‘entry-level’ exam, though NABCEP is reportedly developing one. Thus, in order to prevent a bottleneck in installation certification it is proposed that New York develop a staged programme of certification.

To properly train and qualify New York installers and inspectors, the preparation of a multi-faceted education scheme is another sensible goal, the authors say. Although there are many educational offerings already, a more robust and comprehensive educational programme and some governmental support for it are recommended.

In addition, despite the significant advances in solar thermal, further R&D is also needed to continue to reduce system costs, improve quality and performance, and develop new technologies.

While New York State has a substantial R&D base, there are few research groups within the state that directly focus on solar thermal. To facilitate the development of a R&D base within the state, the creation of a Solar Thermal Center of Excellence (COE) is recommended in the Roadmap.

The centre would encompass a collection of researchers with varied technical skills and interests aligned with solar thermal needs. Participants would be spread over a number of institutions and this would allow for the leveraging of existing expertise. In this way the state would nurture a developing specific

research base. The authors argue that the cluster should be developed and funded based on existing models in the state for academic/industrial partnerships.

Funding for the Solar Thermal COE would initially come from the state. The funds would be used for administrative purposes and to support initial research efforts.

Research would be awarded through a competitive proposal process, with matching funds required from industrial sources. Over time, however, the funding for the centre would predominantly come from industrial sources. The development would also help to attract new industrial capability to the state as it would allow for strong academic/industrial collaboration supporting the local development of new technologies, the Roadmap says.

The creation of a solar thermal system certification testing centre is also recommended by the analysis, which points out that New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) currently has an effort underway to develop small wind (less than 100 kW) and PV certification testing centres. A similar operation could be developed for solar thermal. Currently there is a bottleneck in the system certification process as the number of systems being submitted is greater than the available capacity. It is expected that within three years the certification centre would be fully self-sufficient with revenues from testing funding its operations.

While 42 million solar thermal systems have been installed worldwide, the US has been slow to adopt this technology. However, sentiment is changing. As the nation’s focus on renewable energy continues to grow, the expectation is that the adoption of solar thermal technology will, too.

Consequently, leading international solar thermal companiesare looking to establish production facilities in the US and the Roadmap’s authors believe that an organized effort to promote the industry could position the state as the solar thermal leader. They note that most states will be aggressive in trying to attract new business, especially given the recent business climate, and New York State aims to win first mover advantage to secure its share of a new industry that will create manufacturing, jobs and investment.

The STC is led by the collaborative efforts of Clarkson University’s Center for Advanced Materials Process (CAMP), the NYSTAR Center for Advanced Technology (CAT); the New York Solar Energy Industry Association (NYSEIA); The Solar Energy Consortium (TSEC) and Droege & Company, an international management consultancy firm.

This helps inform our customers about the broad rage of products we install and the extensive experience we have in the field of solar thermal technology. The particular job we have posted for today was in Broadacres, Johannesburg.

This system is a Split Active Direct Solar Thermal System. That simply means that the solar collector is separated from the geyser (on top of the roof) and the solar geyser is installed internally.

We use a solar driven pump to reticulate the water from the solar geyser in the roof to the collector (solar panel) on the roof. The collector transfers the suns heat into the water, which is then returned to the solar geyser in the roof.

Because this system is direct it means that the liquid heated is the liquid used (the water from the geyser).

Keep it Green

Greencon

It very important to size the right heat pump for the right application. No use over sizing a unit that does not realise its investment amount early in the life cycle of the piece of equipment.

Have a look at some systems we installed in Meyersdal, Johannesburg. These heat pumps were actually being used to heat a Jacuzzi.

Sounds like a whole lot of Greek? Basically you can look at a saving of up to 70% on electrical usage for heating water.

We have installed heat pumps in areas from the Pilanesburg Game Park, to Johannesburg, Pretoria and along our coastal regions with very good results.

Please contact here if you need any further help.

China’s National Development and Reform Commission’s Institute for International Economic Research senior fellow and director Dr Haifeng Wang reiterated that for developing nations, the issue of climate change was one of the biggest developmental challenges facing countries, thus more cohesion on the matter was “urgently” needed.

Actions taken should be according to each country’s capacity and ability, and this would likely require a new ideology of global consensus, which was fair and balanced, based on morals and respect, and propelled the universal interest.

In determining different country responsibilities, he said it was important to look at a number of issues, namely: taking a historic perspective on accumulated emissions; taking congnisance of per capita emissions to get a fair perspective; making agreements binding for the rich, and voluntary for the poor; making technology transfer unconditional; and ensuring financial assistance in line with ability to do so.

Wang further explained that China’s domestic policy response on climate change was closely linked to the country’s five-year plans. The economic and social development plans set specific targets on pollutant emission and energy saving. The country aims to cut pollutant emissions by 10% per unit of GDP, and energy consumption by 20% per unit of GDP.

China had clear targets and projects related to climate change at the national, provincial and county level, and also compiled progress reports after mid-term assessments were conducted.

The South African Institute of International Affairs’ China in Africa project head Dr Chris Alden commended China on the institutionalisation of climate change policy at all levels, as well as the fact that the issue has been taken out of the purely environmental domain, and integrated into politics in a “serious way”.

With regard to international negotiations, China put forward a proposal under the Copenhagen Accord stating that it would cut between 40% and 45% of carbon-dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by 2020.

Similarly, the government had set a 2020 target for non-fossil fuel in primary energy – including nuclear and renewable energy – whereby the country would aim for 30 GW of installed capacity, which equates to about 15% of the country’s primary energy consumption.

Wang stated that China was still in the very early stages of the development of its economy, and faced many significant constraints in terms of capacity, financially, and environmentally.

“I don’t pretend to say that China wont emit – we need to [in order to] develop, and we have the right to develop. We need advanced economies to act more responsibly, otherwise it is very difficult for poor nations,” Wang said.

Wang also voiced concern over China being labelled a “very strong emerging power”, and said that country’s role was over estimated in certain instances.

“China is not a major player like the US or the European Union. It still plays a role with developing countries.”

He added that while the Basic countries (Brasil, South Africa, India, China) were playing an increasingly important role, that role was still limited, and the Basic forum was largely to facilitate dialogue and communication between the countries and share experiences and lessons learned.

“Basic can play some roles, such as encouraging developing countries to address climate change, and to ensure that the countries understand each others strategies,” Wang noted.

Further, when questioned on the impact of climate change denialism and the Email scandal which erupted before the global climate change conference in Copenhagen, on Chinese climate change policy, Wang said that he felt that China would continue to implement domestic policy.

“China will do it no matter what happens, but we hope for collective actions,” he concluded.

Commentators expect global demand for NdFeB to almost quadruple by 2030 and quantities required for specific applications can be significant. Industry sources quote, for instance, that the 60 kW fast speed electric motor fitted in a Toyota Prius hybrid vehicle contains at least 0.5 kg of NdFeB magnet material. For a PM-type generator fitted in a 5 MW direct drive wind turbine, these same sources quote a figure of up to 200 kg of NdFeB per MW power rating, around one tonne per machine. This is a much higher quantity compared to the relatively light and compact fast speed systems.

Former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping observed years ago that the ‘Middle East has oil, but China has rare earth-elements.’ Xiaoping’s quote reappeared in the world’s press as the issue of supply of the materials resurfaced last year. This coverage followed a leaked Chinese government report named ‘Rare Earths Industry Development Plan 2009-2015’, which stated that China currently accounts for 93% of the world’s production of rare earth-elements (other sources speak of at least 95%). China also produces more than 99% of the output of dysprosium and terbium, which are vital for a wide range of green energy technologies and military applications.

The report stated that within six years (2015) Chinese rare earth-material exports might be restricted to 35,000 tonnes annually. By comparison, global demand during the past decade increased three-fold to about 125,000 tonnes and might reach 200,000 tonnes annually by 2014. By that time, China is expected to need its full annual rare earth-metals output for its local industries, with exports being reduced to zero. Simultaneously, China is said by the report to contain ‘only’ 53% of the world’s cumulative rare earth-element deposits. A major reason for this huge discrepancy between resource availability and China’s current near-monopoly market position is said to be largely economic.

During the 1990s a combination of surplus production, resulting low price levels and stringent environmental legislation led to a spate of mine closures in the West. China kept its mines open, benefitting from lower wage levels and, it is claimed, less stringent environmental legislation. Any prospect of rare earth-element/materials scarcity represents a worrying scenario for the many non-Chinese high-tech industries that increasingly depend upon their unrestricted availability on the open market.

Options to counteract a looming future shortage include – as some have already done – shifting industrial activity that depends on these materials to China itself, in order to safeguard supply.

However, besides the potential conflict with strategic and national security interests, this strategy might also severely hamper goals in other countries and regions to build strong ‘green Industries’.

A second option is accelerated mine reopening outside China, which is already being implemented in the US at Mountain Pass and Australia’s Mount Weld. Apart from these mines there are at least four additional, but smaller, mining locations spread over Canada and Australia. A third option is to search for other solutions outside the rare earth-material scope.

In a sign of its concern, the Japanese government has compiled a ‘Strategy for Ensuring Stable Supplies of Rare Metals’. Europe, like Japan, is not in a favourable strategic position as it lacks any significant resources in this area leaving the continent, according to some experts, fully dependent on imports for supplies.

It is estimated that around 90 t a year of carbon dioxide would be saved using the solar panels.

Japanese Ambassador Toshiro Ozawa said that the embassy had decided to switch to solar power generation, owing to South Africa’s solar friendly climate and to showcase its commitment in tackling the serious issues of climate change.

The new system is one of the largest solar power generation systems for office use in South Africa, and Ozawa noted that there were a number of other Japanese companies that were interested in contributing to the growth of the solar power industry in South Africa.

The panels, supplied by Sanyo, are able to produce 100 kW/h of electricity, which would cover between 80% and 90% of the Embassy’s power needs. Ozawa said that the Embassy would still be connected to State-utility Eskom’s power grid that would mainly be used at night.

Meanwhile, Ozawa commented that often the issues of economic development took precedence over climate change issues, especially in developing countries, which could lead to “disastrous consequences” in future.

At the Copenhagen conference in December 2009, the Japanese government committed $15-billion, over a three-year period, to assist developing countries with adaptation, mitigation and access to renewable energy.

Under the Copenhagen Accord, South Africa has committed to a 34% deviation below the ‘business as usual’ emission growth trajectory by 2020, but said that it would need financial assistance from developed countries to do so.

Ozawa said that Japan had recently signed a $5-million agreement with Lesotho for the adaptation and mitigation of the adverse effects of climate change. He noted that Japan was prepared to do more in the region, including in South Africa.

From: Creamer Media

The scheme, which would be known as the Standard Offer, would enable electricity consumers to claim a rebate in respect of the amount of energy they had saved from the electricity system.

Department of Energy director-general Nelisiwe Magubane told journalists at a media briefing in Cape Town that the incentive was linked to the new electricity tariffs and allowed for a rebate to be paid for every megawatt hour saved.

It was understood that the National Energy Regulator of South Africa would shortly hold public hearings on the Standard Offer initiative and it was anticipated that the standard offer would be operational before the end of May.