Allow me space in your publication to respond to a letter in which Member of Parliament Lisa Hanna defends her thesis on ‘clean coal‘ as a possible energy source on which to build our economic future.
I’m quite in agreement on the points made in her first two paragraphs, but must violently disagree on her postulation about Jamaica’s economic future being built on cheap energy source, and that source being clean coal. Her view about the stability of coal price is myopic.
May I remind her about our cheap bauxite in the 1970s, how it became expensive when we thought that all and sundry were benefiting – except us, the primary producer. All commodities are subject to market manipulation, politically or otherwise.
Here is my solution for building our economy, by marrying two renewable resources, our people and renewable energy, we will create a symbiosis which has perpetuity. Consider the vehicle you love, the great value lies in the head of those who manufactured it, so will the solution to solve our energy needs. For it is the value that is added to any resource that gives value, by developing our human resource to harness the abundant energy which bathe our beloved island daily we will have a dependable source of energy, and can even be net exporters of energy-harvesting equipment.
No good foundation
MP Hanna points to the competitiveness of economies having cheaper energy source, but here are the calculations. For solar energy, the most expensive at present price using a life of about 40 years, the cost is US 13 cents per kilowatt-hour and set to go down as the industry matures.
She said coal-based power supplies 40 per cent of the world’s electricity and this is set to go up with China’s ever increasing wealth and its desire to improve the lot of its citizens. Coal, whether clean or not, is set to see greater demand and, hence, price movement. That’s not a good foundation on which to base a country’s future, when we have a source of energy that is in our hands, for a better way to build one’s future.
Global warming
We are all concerned about the global state of the world environment; research indicates that global warming is due, in part, to the use of fossil fuel. A shift to renewable energy will lead to a reduction of our carbon footprint. Over time, this could be brought near to zero.
This approach will render the development of resources in the constituency she now represents feasible, but further arguments can be made about the country as a whole. The natural scientists, business persons, civil engineers, manufacturers, artisans and even casual labourers will be beneficiaries of this policy approach. This is development.
In the final paragraphs of the letter, the issue of liquefied natural gas (LNG) was discussed. Again, as with her discussion on coal, the decision to embrace LNG as the fuel of choice is wrong. Proponents of both fuel miss the key issue. It is the human resource that should be at the centre of policy.
Both sets of proponents see the Jamaican people as objects to be exploited while a bone is thrown their way. I can show a policy path that can lead us into wealth, creativity and, finally, a proud people which have the capacity to solve our problems. My friends say there is a dinosaurian tendency among the young politicians, by association, and they are about to redo the failure of the last 48 years. We can point them the way to a better future.
I am, etc.,
AUBREY MURRAY
Atlantic Solar Corporation
10 Chisholm Avenue
Kingston 10
Jamaiaca Gleaner
see Lisa Hanna article below
Coal can supply north coast with power, says Hanna
Member of Parliament (MP) for South East St Ann, Lisa Hanna, is suggesting that, using the clean coal technology to safeguard the environment, a coal power plant located in St Ann could generate enough power to satisfy demands on Jamaica’s north coast.
“Right now Jamaica is producing energy at US$0.30 per kilowatt hour whereas countries which are competitive are producing at five cents,” Hanna told The Gleaner. “And you are not going to have persons running to do business in Jamaica if the energy costs are eating up their profit, which is also what is happening.”
The St Ann MP said she wanted efforts to be made to export limestone and bring in coal.
“If you look at a constituency like South East St Ann or South West St Ann, if you put a clean coal power plant up there you can power the entire north coast with it,” she argued. “That is something that I would like to realise.”
Hanna argued that the Government’s pursuit of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a solution to Jamaica’s energy problems would be an expensive venture when compared to using coal.
Energy and Mining Minister James Robertson has stated that Government’s LNG project was expected to save Jamaica US$1.2 billion in energy cost.
Expensive venture
However, according to Hanna, the cost would still be high as Jamaica would have to import the LNG.
“That is going to be an expensive venture and clean coal technology is technology that is being used in different places of the world quite successfully,” Hanna said. “And there are places that have the coal and need limestone and the ships could export (limestone) and import the coal at the same time.”
In the United States, the cost of a megawatt of electricity produced by coal runs between $20 and $30, while a megawatt of energy produced from natural gas ranges between $45 and $60.
Hanna’s comments reflect a concern expressed by Jamaicans who over the years have been calling for alternate sources of energy in order to reduce Jamaica’s dependency on oil. Solar, wind and hydropower sources have been suggested as viable alternatives.
Loan programme
The National Housing Trust (NHT) has taken a step in this direction by introducing a loan programme to assist home owners install solar powered water heaters in their homes.
Research shows that approximately 40 per cent of the world’s energy was derived from oil, while 23 per cent was derived from coal.
Experts estimate that, by 2025, 80 per cent of the world’s oil reserves would have been used. Coal reserves, on the contrary, are capable of lasting 1,000 years.
One drawback of the use of coal however, is that its negative impact on the environment is greater than oil and natural gas
