Khan … I would say to the private sector, look at investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency.

The new global climate deal, reached after two weeks of intense negotiations, is a signal to the private sector, local and international, of the need to reassess current investment flows.

Jamaican negotiator Dr Orville Grey said the private sector will be critical, given the stated goal of the new deal of “holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 28C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.58C above pre-industrial levels, recognising that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change”.

“The private sector will at some point have to take the lead because the technologies that are likely to take us to carbon neutrality will likely come from the private sector and not the public sector, at least as it relates to technology,” Grey, coordinator for adaptation for the Alliance of Small Island States during the negotiations, told The Gleaner.

If the world is to meet the ‘well-below-two’ target, it will require a significant shift in the current high levels of consumption of fossil fuels, including coal and oil, towards renewables such as solar and wind.

Colonel Oral Khan, chief technical director in the Ministry of Water, Land, Environment, and Climate Change and himself a member of the Jamaica delegation to the talks, was in full agreement.

“The private sector is encouraged under this agreement to support the mobilisation of finance to support adaptation and mitigation,” he said.

On Jamaica’s private sector, Khan said: “The State has submitted its intended nationally determined contribution commitment to [reducing greenhouse gas emissions] to the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) Secretariat. Our commitment is consistent with the goal of our National Energy Policy. I would say to the private sector, look at investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency. In time, I hope that we will see more entities entering into public-private partnerships.”

A Historic Turning Point

Neither Grey nor Khan is alone in their thinking; international leaders in business have echoed their sentiments.

“The business case for eliminating greenhouse gases by 2050 is irrefutable. Indeed, solving climate change presents the greatest economic and social development opportunity of our time,” said Sir Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group, in a release to the media on Saturday.

“The new climate agreement is a historic turning point. Now business can and must innovate to lead the transition to a clean economy. Together, it is our duty as human beings, responsible citizens and business leaders to protect the environment. A transition to a clean and green economy will lift millions out of poverty, and ensure the planet’s health for generations to come,” he added.

Arianna Huffington, president and editor-in-chief of the Huffington Post, mirrored his comments.

“This is truly a turning point in human history. We now have the chance to advance the well-being of people everywhere, while creating millions of new jobs and ending our reliance on fossil fuels,” she said in the same release.

“This will help us build a safer, more peaceful world for all. This is exactly what business needs in order to thrive in the long run,” added Huffington.

The Gleaner

JAMAICA COULD have saved over a billion dollars last year if we had been using coal.

That’s according to studies presented by Lincoln Bailey, Jamaica-born co-owner of Mchenga Mine in Malawi, that country’s second largest coal mine. Bailey was guest speaker at the Kingston 360 Breakfast Talk Series, hosted by the Mona School of Business and the Spanish Court Hotel.

Using Jamaica Public Service 2011 statistics, Bailey said the company imported a little over seven million barrels of oil for power-generation at a cost of $876 million. The bauxite sector imported about nine and a half million barrels at a cost of $1.1 billion. Bailey calculated that 995,000 tonnes of coal (at $100 per tonne) would equal the power-generation amount of oil.

“So if you take that … it will only cost $99 million. So it represents a saving to the country of over $776 million.” Likewise for bauxite companies, to replace the nearly 10 million barrels would need 1.8 million tonnes of coal. Using the same 100 per tonne, that would be a cost of $185 million, a saving of $954 million.

“Jamaica would have saved $1.7 billion last year if we had used coal. Now that’s not small change. What I’m saying is that it’s really a no-brainer.”

Unhealthy dependence on oil

Bailey was incredulous that a country of Jamaica’s size was so dependent on oil, noting that our oil consumption fits the profile of an oil-producing country. He noted that 53 per cent of oil import goes to power generation for public use and about 30 per cent of that goes to bauxite and aluminium processing. He found it strange that coal was not being readily accepted even though coal has historically fuelled nations, including in Europe, North America and Asia.

He noted that coal was responsible for over 90 per cent of South Africa’s power generation, 79 per cent in China and 77 per cent in Japan. He noted that the reason for coal’s success was that it was cheap, abundant, and could be transported over long distances at low cost.

Bailey pointed out that coal discussions have taken place from the 80’s in Jamaica, but nothing was done. He opined that renewable energy like solar and wind had their place, but were more expensive than coal in terms of megawatt-per-hour cost. He also felt they could not be depended for base load power.

He dismissed the notion that coal was still ‘dirty fuel’, opining that clean coal technology has made strides in the last two decades.

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20120531/lead/lead9.html

About 871lb of coal is needed to power a 100-watt light bulb for 12 months.

 

RESEARCH CONDUCTED by a University of the West Indies energy think tank indicates that coal is the most efficient energy source in powering a light bulb.

Arguing that given the current inefficiencies in the electricity production and distribution system, it takes approximately two barrels of oil to keep a 100-watt light bulb burning continuously for a year, the think tank said using coal-generated energy to do the same job would reduce the cost significantly.

“Using LNG instead of oil would cost roughly half the amount to burn the light bulb, and using coal would be about one-seventh the cost,” the group said.

The think tank said using current prices, it would cost US$178.70 to purchase two barrels of oil to power the incandescent bulb. It said if coal were to be utilised to do a similar job, it would take only 396 kilograms (871lb) of the product at a cost of US$23.8, or 13 per cent of the cost of oil. The think tank also said liquefied natural gas (LNG) would be a more expensive option to coal. The researchers argue that it would require 333 litres of LNG to power the same 100-watt bulb, which would cost US$83.3, or 47 per cent of the cost of oil.

See full column http://gleaner-ja.com/gleaner/20120423/news/news2.html.

‘Using LNG instead of oil would cost roughly half the amount to burn the light bulb, and using coal would be about one-seventh the cost.’

About 871lb of coal is needed to power a 100-watt light bulb for 12 months.

 

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20120423/lead/lead2.html

A map of Jamaica
Image via Wikipedia

THE POPULAR concept is that coal is a dirty fuel, especially with regard to particulates, sulphur and carbon-dioxide emissions. With natural gas, the level of particulates would be lower than with coal, but in the latter instance, the particulate emissions with modern coal-burning boilers equipped with effective particulate-removal equipment would be substantially lower than are currently being experienced with the oil-burning boilers.

Sulphur emissions with either fuel will be dependent on the source of the fuel. Low-sulphur coal (less than one per cent by weight) is available relatively close to Jamaica, for example, Colombia and Venezuela.

However, even at the current relatively high sulphur emissions, complaints from persons in the areas adjacent to the power stations are rare.