SA saved 400 MW during Earth Hour Print
Posted by Margaret McKenzie   
Friday, 03 April 2009
Thanks to everyone who supported Earth Hour in Durban.  Eskom has estimated that approximately a million households in South Africa participated in Earth Hour saving about 400 MW of electricity, 400 tons of carbon dioxide, 224 tons of coal and about 576 000 litres of water.

In Durban readings showed that electricity consumption during Earth Hour dropped by the equivalent of 150 000 14W CFL energy efficient light bulbs. The most reduction in electricity in Durban was registered in the central and northern areas.

Durban is still working hard to achieve a target of 10% savings in electricity use.  Over the last two months Durban has managed to achieved a saving of 8% as a result of the implementation of energy efficiency measures and short time instituted by factories impacted by the global economic slowdown.    Please consider instituting electricity efficiency measures in your home or business in order to extend the carbon dioxide and water savings achieved by Earth Hour.  The Imagine Durban blog runs regular stories on electricity saving at http://www.imaginedurban.org/index.php/Electricity/ if you need more information.

South Africa is currently estimated to be the 12th highest emitter of green house gases in the world.  This is largely as a result of the high carbon dioxide emissions from our electricity production process.  As a result reductions in electricity use are a very important way of reducing South African contribution to global warming.
Hits: 785
Comments (12)Add Comment
Mahmood
April 04, 2009
41.213.115.35
Votes: +0
...

All these 'savings' and getting caught up in the global hype - to what end?

Eskom gets hurt, feels the loss of income and increases tariffs to make up for its loss. Whilst it is on a roll, it also pushes for extra to increase capacity to meet the increasing demand for electricity.

It is an ill-considered scenario. SWITCH OFF - UNPLUG - SAVE. Save what!? 'Save' implies money, but clearly there are no savings to be had there.

Increased capacity - increased usage - increased demand - increased tariffs - fatter fat cats - leaner consumers. Are we ever going to benefit from our own technological advancements?

Or is that the reserve of the well connected (?) few?

Mahmood
April 04, 2009
41.213.115.35
Votes: +0
...

All these 'savings' and getting caught up in the global hype - to what end?

Eskom gets hurt, feels the loss of income and increases tariffs to make up for its loss. Whilst it is on a roll, it also pushes for extra to increase capacity to meet the increasing demand for electricity.

It is an ill-considered scenario. SWITCH OFF - UNPLUG - SAVE. Save what!? 'Save' implies money, but clearly there are no savings to be had there.

Increased capacity - increased usage - increased demand - increased tariffs - fatter fat cats - leaner consumers. Are we ever going to benefit from our own technological advancements?

Or is that the reserve of the well connected (?) few?

Helen
April 06, 2009
196.207.35.246
Votes: +0
...

hey mahmood, do you work for Eskom?

by switching off you save electricity, you save the environment and you save money. you don't pay for what you don't use :)

Helen
April 06, 2009
196.207.35.246
Votes: +0
...

hey mahmood, do you work for Eskom?

by switching off you save electricity, you save the environment and you save money. you don't pay for what you don't use :)

Mahmood
April 07, 2009
41.244.67.21
Votes: +0
...

Of course I don't work for Eskom - I'd be a fat cat and not need to blog then, would I?

Switching off doesn't really save electricity - it cannot be hoarded away 'for a rainy day' as can so many other things. But '... the utility would spend R87 billion in the current fiscal year and R103.5 billion next year...' - IOL Business Report 2 April 2009. Eskom plans to spend that to increase capacity. The capacity to delivery more electricity to more people. Resulting in more damage to the environment in shorter periods.

And yes, you don't pay for what you don't use, but when you do, you will pay for new plants and fatter salaries, through increased electricity prices.

One would expect to pay less (and save money) when consuming mass-produced items. Not so with Eskom - we have already had an increase in price of 27.5% last year. Eskom is now expecting about twice that!

My point is that we should not be swept away by little Globally-driven projects, but see the larger, National picture and our positions in it.

Mahmood
April 07, 2009
41.244.67.21
Votes: +0
...

Of course I don't work for Eskom - I'd be a fat cat and not need to blog then, would I?

Switching off doesn't really save electricity - it cannot be hoarded away 'for a rainy day' as can so many other things. But '... the utility would spend R87 billion in the current fiscal year and R103.5 billion next year...' - IOL Business Report 2 April 2009. Eskom plans to spend that to increase capacity. The capacity to delivery more electricity to more people. Resulting in more damage to the environment in shorter periods.

And yes, you don't pay for what you don't use, but when you do, you will pay for new plants and fatter salaries, through increased electricity prices.

One would expect to pay less (and save money) when consuming mass-produced items. Not so with Eskom - we have already had an increase in price of 27.5% last year. Eskom is now expecting about twice that!

My point is that we should not be swept away by little Globally-driven projects, but see the larger, National picture and our positions in it.

Helen
April 07, 2009
196.207.35.246
Votes: +0
...

okay, I didn't know all that.

but then what solutions do you see? should we be investing in a solar panel and going off grid?

Helen
April 07, 2009
196.207.35.246
Votes: +0
...

okay, I didn't know all that.

but then what solutions do you see? should we be investing in a solar panel and going off grid?

Mahmood
April 07, 2009
41.213.115.35
Votes: +0
...

I really don't know what to say, Helen. But here goes ...

Solar panels and a National solar effort would count for a big 'SORRY' and 'MMWAH' to the environment. But then again, the manufacturers must come to the planet's party and make switching affordable for households, in anticipation of units 'flying off the shelves'. But justifying high costs by saying in 10 years the savings would outstrip 'investments' is not on - unless we can pay then. A 24- to 36-month contract, with major discounts for cash (cops give 50% discounts, remember?) would work.

Personally, I believe in the POO (Power of One). I have a small car (42lt tank, filled once a month), I do switch lights off when I leave a room, do use hot water very sparingly, do use the tumble dryer rarely (about 6 times last year), do put just enough water in the kettle for the cuppa, etc.

Can POO make a difference? Yes! I do. YES, I DO!

Mahmood
April 07, 2009
41.213.115.35
Votes: +0
...

I really don't know what to say, Helen. But here goes ...

Solar panels and a National solar effort would count for a big 'SORRY' and 'MMWAH' to the environment. But then again, the manufacturers must come to the planet's party and make switching affordable for households, in anticipation of units 'flying off the shelves'. But justifying high costs by saying in 10 years the savings would outstrip 'investments' is not on - unless we can pay then. A 24- to 36-month contract, with major discounts for cash (cops give 50% discounts, remember?) would work.

Personally, I believe in the POO (Power of One). I have a small car (42lt tank, filled once a month), I do switch lights off when I leave a room, do use hot water very sparingly, do use the tumble dryer rarely (about 6 times last year), do put just enough water in the kettle for the cuppa, etc.

Can POO make a difference? Yes! I do. YES, I DO!

anon
April 15, 2009
196.210.182.147
Votes: +0
...

South Africa will soon be forced to reduce its electricity use (or come up with a new way to generate electricity). There is no way we can continue to be the 12th highest emitter of green house gases world wide without coming under increasing global pressure to make a change. Especially in light of the fact that the latest information on climate change is making for future look very bleak.

anon
April 15, 2009
196.210.182.147
Votes: +0
...

South Africa will soon be forced to reduce its electricity use (or come up with a new way to generate electricity). There is no way we can continue to be the 12th highest emitter of green house gases world wide without coming under increasing global pressure to make a change. Especially in light of the fact that the latest information on climate change is making for future look very bleak.

Write comment
 
  smaller | bigger
 

busy