Jump to content
BANGKOK 24 January 2019 12:13
Sign in to follow this  
webfact

Power plan ‘a setback for sustainable energy’

Recommended Posts

Power plan ‘a setback for sustainable energy’

By PRATCH RUJIVANAROM 
THE NATION

 

52b80be2d4dcb5e166f984315e151850.jpeg

 

Greenpeace finds little to commend about fossil-fuel dependent approach to future.

 

69a00cf61fee898827d88af955b9d0fe.jpeg
 

ENVIRONMENTAL watchdog Greenpeace has called Thailand’s Power Development Plan 2018 (PDP) “sugar-coated” despite its embrace of more renewable energy, saying it still hinders efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

 

The Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO), which drafted the PDP, affirmed at public hearings last week that it had removed plans for the Krabi and Thepa coal-fired power plants from the document. It said natural gas would remain the primary fuel for power generation, renewable energy would play a 20-per-cent larger role, and more electricity would be derived from private solar-panel rooftops.

 

bb26ede49374ecfa4649274fec4edfcd.jpeg

 

Nevertheless, environmentalists remain sceptical, musing about “hidden agendas” within the PDP.

 

Tara Buakamsri, Thailand director for Greenpeace, said yesterday fossil fuels and other harmful sources of energy – such as waste and hydropower – still dominated the PDP. The approach would not only hinder progress on achieving the Paris Agreement’s goal for stabilising climate change, he said, it would jeopardise sustainable-energy development and “environmental justice”.

 

“The energy sector is by far the largest greenhouse-gas producer, so the PDP has very strong influence over the country’s efforts to reduce emissions and prevent severe global warming beyond two degrees Celsius,” Tara said.

 

“But it is now clear that the Thai authorities are not really serious about pursuing Paris Agreement goals, because the PDP contains many serious flaws that will backfire and hurt the global struggle to minimise the impacts of climate change.”

 

fa900ea419a19a2f7a38a743528d3e2e.jpeg

 

EPPO said the PDP was revised to reflect shifting conditions, in which renewable energy, especially solar photovoltaic (PV) energy, has become much cheaper and more widely accessible to all. Thus, renewable energy’s share of total power sources will be increased to 18 per cent, or 20,757 megawatts, by 2037.

 

And 10,000 megawatts from renewable energy will be earmarked for the private sector’s solar PV, the agency said.

 

EPPO deputy secretary-general Wattanapong Kurovat stressed that the PDP’s main objective was to ensure that each region has enough power and stable sources. It was thus important for every region to have its own base-load power plants as reliable sources, he said.

 

However, because proposals for new coal-fired plants have drawn strong opposition and two such plants listed in the 2015 PDP were shelved, Wattanapong said, natural gas remains the primary fuel for generating electricity. It has a 53-per-cent share of overall power generation in the new PDP, up from 30 per cent previously, while coal’s share has dropped from 23 per cent in 2015 to 12 per cent.

 

To fill the electricity gap left by cancelling the Krabi and Thepa coal plants, which were expected to generate 870 and 2,200 megawatts respectively by burning imported coal, two 700-megawatt gas-power plants will be built in Surat Thani, he said. These will ensure energy stability for the South.

 

“With many improvements made in electricity-generation plans for the next 20 years, we are delighted to report that PDP2018 will lower greenhouse-gas emissions compared to the previous plan,” Wattanapong said.

 

“If this revised PDP is fully implemented, Thailand’s electricity generation sector will only release 103.248 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2036, which is lower than the estimated greenhouse-gas emission under PDP2015 for the same period, of 104.075 million tonnes.”

 

Tara said that, despite the reduction in coal dependency, Thailand remains overly reliant on natural gas, which also emits significant amounts of greenhouse gases when it’s burned, contributing further to climate change.

 

“And many people are also suspicious as to whether the Krabi and Thepa plants are truly off the table, because Strategic Environmental Assessments on those projects are still continuing and those findings could be used to revive proposals for the two plants,” he said.

 

Tara also claimed that some of the renewable energy sources and electricity that the PDP envisions being purchased from neighbouring countries are not actually clean or environmentally friendly.

 

6484cf3ab4d772a138bae118a5dbf943.jpeg

 

The document includes waste-to-energy plants producing 400 megawatts, for example, which are neither clean nor safe for either the environment or public health. The waste burned to produce energy releases massive amounts of greenhouse gases, Tara said.

 

“Even buying hydropower from neighbouring countries is not clean or cheap, as the authorities say,” he added, pointing out how dams outside Thailand still cause severe suffering for Thais and the environment here.

 

“This is why the authorities must make sure that the PDP is consistent with global climate-change-mitigation goals and include genuine public participation.”

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30360098

 
thenation_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-12-10

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thailands ability to have a ''Sustainable conference agenda''...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, webfact said:

Tara Buakamsri, Thailand director for Greenpeace, said yesterday fossil fuels and other harmful sources of energy – such as waste and hydropower........

So Greenpeace has now excluded hydro-power as a clean energy source. Is there really any power generation that isn't "clean" in one way or another? If Tara had his way all power generation would be banned and everyone would have pedal power generators in their homes to keep the lights turned on and the a/c's running. 

Things are not looking good for the PM's monster energy guzzling dream called the Eastern Economic Corridor. But perhaps he is a step in front and has what they refer to as a “hidden agenda”; he's good at those.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, webfact said:

ENVIRONMENTAL watchdog Greenpeace has called Thailand’s Power Development Plan 2018 (PDP) “sugar-coated”

They put sugar in everything . 

 

4 hours ago, webfact said:

EPPO said the PDP was revised to reflect shifting conditions, in which renewable energy, especially solar photovoltaic (PV) energy, has become much cheaper and more widely accessible to all. Thus, renewable energy’s share of total power sources will be increased to 18 per cent, or 20,757 megawatts, by 2037.

Wow the 20 year plan strikes again.  2037?  Its imaginable that either price or efficiency of solar cells will continue to be more attractive within  a few years from now.  Though they recognize their usefulness, they do not do an ROI study which shows when to buy and replace, as they do have service life.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cadbury said:

So Greenpeace has now excluded hydro-power as a clean energy source.

Greenpeace is likely referring to imported Hydro-Power from its neighbors such as Vietnam. Hydro-power plants are site specific and are not group common such as fossil-powered plants.

 

A hydropower facility that is sited, operated, and mitigated responsibly can be considered clean energy.

https://www.americanrivers.org/threats-solutions/energy-development/hydropower/

When environmental laws are inadequate and/or poorly enforced, plant operates inefficiently, and may rely on fossil fuel backup power, it can be said in the broadest sense 'not a clean energy source.'

Whether Thailand can build its own new hydro-power plants responsibly is a reasonable question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tradewind777 said:

18% RE by 2037. Australia is already at this market share today. WDF planet are these clowns on?

 

60% RE by 2030 would be entirely achievable and based on economics WILL be achieved, it’s just that these bozos are too dumb to forecast it properly.

 

Thailand needs decent feed in tariffs for solar PV if they want to get out of the backwaters.

Australia has a problem with too much Non Synchronus Generation so there a need to be selective...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Greenpeace is likely referring to imported Hydro-Power from its neighbors such as Vietnam. Hydro-power plants are site specific and are not group common such as fossil-powered plants.

 

A hydropower facility that is sited, operated, and mitigated responsibly can be considered clean energy.

https://www.americanrivers.org/threats-solutions/energy-development/hydropower/

When environmental laws are inadequate and/or poorly enforced, plant operates inefficiently, and may rely on fossil fuel backup power, it can be said in the broadest sense 'not a clean energy source.'

Whether Thailand can build its own new hydro-power plants responsibly is a reasonable question. 

I agree. I guess some debate could be made in the "broadest sense" about fossil fuel backup for solar and wind power generation. It is only clean when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing and the big battery isn't flat. 

Also there could be debate about environmental negatives in the construction and manufacturing processes of wind turbines and solar panels and batteries for power storage. 

The points of views on the clean power issue are endless.

Thailand presently has 22 operational hydro power plants but except for about 4 the rest are mostly Mickey Mouse ones. Whether they are "clean" by Greenpeace's definition is anybody's guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government is putting in street lamps on the highway to our village along a 10km stretch of the highway.  Two overhead street lamps every 100 meters for 10km.  So 200 street lamps.  Some of the local villages have already put in the exact same kind of street lamps, but new ones are being placed side-by-side with the older ones.  My guess is that this is occurring in other places in Thailand.  Now the question is: how much energy is it going to take to power all those new lights and who pays for that energy?
Now, I remember the Energy Crisis in the 1970s.  During that time the US government was mandating that all extraneous street lights be shut off - and they did.  So my guess is that either a new energy crisis or a financial crisis or a global climate change mandate will eventually shut the power down to these new lights, probably sooner than later.  Well until then, our stretch of highway is gonna be nice and bright!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wonder at these reports

How can energy be sustainable? It is a meaningless concept.

Also how is it possible to 'renew' energy? Again a meaningless concept akin to perpetual motion and possibly in defiance of the first law of thermodynamics.

And why do they keep talking about carbon? Clearly muddled thinking when they are presumably talking about carbon dioxide. And dont get me started on 'clean' energy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sponsors
×