Energy And Environmental Issues in Ghana

GHANA NEEDS NUCLEAR NOW!

2011-04-08T02:57:00.000-07:00

Unlike most Greens, I have always maintained, often to the chagrin of my peers, that nuclear is the best way to achieve energy sufficiency in Ghana until renewable energy technologies are accepted by the masses. The reasons, I have always believed are rather obvious. It is cheap, Clean and safe. Nuclear has proved to be the safest source of energy despite the current events at Fukushima. I do not in the least intend to gloat over or downplay the recent tragedy in Japan, the Japanese have indeed suffered greatly, but a nuclear solution to my mind, is still the best solution.

It is easy for the anti-nuclear advocates to dig up old black and white pictures from Time Magazine of mutilated babies and women crying after the Atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What they conveniently forget to tell us is that a nuclear bomb is different from a nuclear powered reactor. A nuclear bomb just as dastardly as it sounds is meant to produce as much deadly radiation that will cover the biggest geographical area in the shortest possible time. A nuclear Reactor like the one found at Fukushima is actually a Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). Nuclear fission occurs; creating very high temperatures which is used to boil water and the steam from the boiling water used to turn the turbines and thus produce cheap electricity.

The quantity of nuclear material used in BWRs is usually quite small, mainly because the end product of the fission is to produce hot water and not to maim or kill. Even though the earthquake in Japan has killed more than 10,000 people with thousands still missing and created a lot of damage, deaths suffered directly as a result of the nuclear crisis at Fukushima is nil. The reactor was built to withstand an 8.4 magnitude earthquake but conveniently withstood an 8.9. The difference between an 8.9 and 8.4 in earthquake terms is about five times the design load. The tsunami after the earthquake was rather unfortunate, flooding stand-by diesel generators and preventing them from producing emergency power that would otherwise have been used to cool the fuel rods after the reactor was shut down. Unfortunate, but it was still an accident and in whatever field you are involved in, no matter how much risk assessment is undertaken, accidents will still occur. We do not end the use of technology when accidents occur but we refine it and try to make it better. This has been the case since a human being first lit a fire, trying to harness the forces of nature in ways that yield benefits despite its inherent risks.

Radiation is indeed harmful, as the major news networks have continually told us ever since the Japan tragedy occured The unit of measurement for radiation absorbed into the body is known as a “Sievert” (Sv), and if one Sievert of radiation is absorbed all at once, it will make you sick. Severe radiation contamination is usually considered 2 Sv and can sometimes be fatal. This is according to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. So unless you’re eating a bar of Golden Tree Uranium, you’re only going to be exposed to very fine amounts of radiation at a time. An X-ray of your arm, for example, will expose you to roughly 1 micro Sievert, or a millionth of 1 Sievert. Scientists estimate the worst exposed areas near the Fukushima complex are roughly 3.6 milli sieverts — 3.6 thousandths of 1 Sievert. Way lower than the doom mongers will have us believe. Living within 50 miles of a thermal power plant like the one we have at Aboadze in the Western Region, will expose you to 1 millionth of a Sievert of radiation over the course of a year whilst the same distance from a nuclear powered plant over the course of a year will expose you to 900,000^th of a Sievert. You do the math.

Until now, the main nuclear disaster since 1969 has been Chernobyl. Despite claims by many anti-nuclear campaigners, particularly my green mentor Dr. Caldicott (A fine mind with 21 honorary Degrees and a Nobel prize nomination), who often quotes an English translation of a Russian paper which amongst other things states that Chernobyl claimed 985,000 deaths and that it will continue to slaughter many more for generations to come. The facts state otherwise. The UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) had this to say about Chernobyl “Of the workers who tried to contain the emergency at Chernobyl, 134 suffered acute radiation syndrome; 28 died soon afterwards. Nineteen others died later, but generally not from diseases associated with radiation. The remaining 87 have suffered other complications, including four cases of solid cancer and two of leukemia.

In the rest of the population there have been 6,848 cases of thyroid cancer among young children –arising "almost entirely" from the Soviet Union's failure to prevent people from drinking milk contaminated with iodine 131. Otherwise "there has been no persuasive evidence of any other health effect in the general population that can be attributed to radiation exposure".

According to The Atlantic Magazine, there have been 25 Oil and coal related disasters worldwide, including the BP Deep Well saga, producing 668 deaths and this is just over a 12 month period. No source of energy generation is completely safe. Even wind power has had its fair share with opponents calling them noisy and often claiming they change the micro-climatic conditions of surrounding areas. Energy is like medicine if there is no side effect it usually does not work. We have come a long way from Chernobyl, and to continue bringing it up is a bit disingenuous.

Like a lot of other energy efficiency advocates, I have always called for the replacement of fossil fuel by renewable power in the generation of electricity. Reduce consumption and produce electricity locally is what I always say. That would work best in an ideal world. But these are not ideal times. Ghana as a nation is stuck in a serious poverty cycle and the only way we can break free is to produce energy that is cheap, safe and causes minimum pollution.

A lot of concerns have been raised about whether our engineers are capable and good enough to handle a nuclear power plant. The only time I had the chance to meet the great Prof. Allotey at a British Council sponsored event in 1998, I put the same question to him ( a little sheepishly, I must add). His answer still resounds in my hollow skull till this day “We had similar arguments when the Akosombo Hydro dam was being built. Considering how the VRA [Volta River Authority] Engineers have fared since then, do you think we passed the test?”

SWITCHING TO A PAPERLESS OFFICE

2011-03-12T10:58:00.000-08:00

One of our core objectives at Builtron Ltd (www.builtron.com) is to produce engineering designs that are environmentally friendly and sustainable. Sometime in June last year, we took the decision to switch to a paperless office. Apart from the obvious advantages (savings in finance and storage space), we thought this was an also an excellent opportunity to make an environmental statement. According to www.epa.gov an average office worker uses about 10,000 sheets of paper a year, which is about 3 trees. The logic was quite simple; saving paper will save trees, which will in turn save the ozone layer etc.

The decision to go paperless was actually the easiest part of the process. Implementation wasn’t that easy. We had drawings, receipts, invoices etc. that we had piled up over several years that had to be digitized. Our office scanner was an A4 size and with some of the drawings as large A1 paper size that was a considerable challenge. The solution? We out-sourced. We got a guy who could scan the drawings in small bits and digitally stich them together. An A1 drawing was scanned into 8 different pieces on the A4 Scanner and joined together on the PC. The files were stored as JPEG and PNG and this allowed them to be stored and retrieved easily.

For an office of less than 10 workers, it was much easier for all of us to buy into the idea. We put up small notices at different parts of the office, reminding each other why we needed to do this and the benefits. One sign for example will ask “Do you really need to print out this e-mail?” and another read “Saving Paper or planting a tree, choose one” and another also read “Preview your document on the monitor, not on Paper”. At our weekly office meetings on Fridays, we discussed some of the problems we had faced during the implementation, and how they could be solved and how much money we, as a business, had saved. It was much easier for the staff to feel the impact once it had been quantified. The money we had saved, which initially wasn’t big was shared equally amongst the staff, to keep motivation up.

One major problem we faced was with storage and with and having an access trail. We needed to now who accessed what document and when. Our initial thoughts were to buy and install a file server, but a quotation from IPMC and Atlantic computers quickly changed our minds. We also did not have the requisite IT knowledge in-house and we were not interested in hiring some body new. That was when we discovered Google apps. This was a free service from Google that allowed us to save our documents in the internet cloud, and install additional softwares (or services as Google called them) that took care of our accounting, document sharing etc. The major drawback to the adoption of Google apps is that we had to be online but with relatively cheap data services and plans from all the major Mobile Networks, we could access all documents and e-mails on the road.

Another free service from Adobe, right signature, and openCA allowed us to digitally sign our documents and emails. This took care of the traditional office stamp and ensured that all documents, drawings, invoices, emails etc. we sent out had our digital signatures and could be trusted.

We are still not at the point where we can completely discard papers in our day to day transactions but when the need to print arises we make sure we use paper that has been clearly labeled as made from recycled paper. So has the switch been worthwhile? That will be a definite yes! Knowing how many trees we have saved since the switch began always puts a smile on my face.

US Oil Spill Highlights Need For Renewable Energy

2010-06-09T04:33:00.001-07:00

Recent technological advances meant that man could finally defy nature in its insatiable quest for fossil fuel. From maximum operational depths for offshore rigs hovering around 1km in 1994, it now stands at around 3km in 2010. The $350 million Deep water horizon well in the US gulf of Mexico was often cited as a prime example and a record of how far man could conquer nature. That was of course until the April 20th oil explosion ( at pressures of over 2000 psi, oil spill is a huge understatement). The well is now synonymous with the worst oil spill in history, having already spewed over 200,000 litres of crude into the pristine sea, with no end in sight. The previous worst spillage was in 1991, when the retreating defeated Iraqi troops from Kuwait, set fire to oils rigs and left oil valves opened. Clean-up in the Gulf of Mexico is expected to cost close to $1.35 Billion dollars, the total GDP of many a third world nation.

The oil explosion has highlighted our over dependence on oil. The excessive demand for oil has led to a great Amount of risk taking by oil companies. This has led to compromises in safety which has in turn led to an increase in the number of accidents on rigs on a daily basis. The case of the Deep water Horizon has made the headlines because of the level of disaster and the the marine and ecological catastrophe that it has entailed. With Ghana about to start drilling oil in the fourth quarter of this year and our notoriously lax enforcement of safety standards by statutory authorities like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National petroleum Authority (NPA), the future looks rather bleak. Can we as a country be able to manage such a disaster? I think not. With the amount of money expected to be generated from the drilling of oil it will be extremely naïve for me to suggest we should put an end to it now. What we should do in the long term is to wean ourselves of fossil fuel by investing and promoting the generation of clean and renewable sources of energy.

Ghana as a nation is blessed with abundant sunshine and strong winds. We can and should set up wind farms and Photovoltaic banks, which can be fed into the national grid to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel based thermal sources of energy generation. Bio-fuels should also be encouraged but regulated to prevent the use of arable lands only for the cultivation of Jathropha. Brazil is a shining example of how a nation can promote the use of Bio-fuels even though it also drills oil. Import duties on cars with hybrid engines should be abolished to promote their use locally.

Promoting renewable energy would do wonders to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and to promoting a new industry of jobs and commerce built on green technologies.

Tips on saving energy (...and money) at home.

2010-06-01T08:47:00.000-07:00

Yesterday's almost 90% increase in electricity tariffs did not come as a surprise to many industry watchers. We've had it coming for a very long time now. To help you control your energy consumption and help keep a few Pesewas in our often hole lined pockets, I have compiled a few tips to help all of us save energy and more importantly money at home.

In the Kitchen...

Energy efficiency should be an important part of any decision. Only buy home appliances that have the highest energy star ratings.
Move your refrigerator away from energy emitting appliances e.g cooker or dishwashers, or even in direct sunlight, whilst ensuring air can circulate around the back of your fridge and freezer. Always make sure the door seals are airtight. Regular cleaning behind the fridges and freezers will also ensure that dust does not build up on the compressors which can make them inefficient and waste more energy.
Only boil as much water as you need. there is no need boiling an electric kettle full of water when all you need is a hot cup of Milo. But remember to cover the elements. Not doing that can be a fire hazard.
Don't keep the fridge or freezer door open for longer than necessary. We all make the mistake of opening the firdge before deciding on what food or drink we want.
Covering food with a microwave-safe lid or pierced cling film will hold moisture and speed up cooking times in the microwave.
Ensure warm foods cool down before placing them in the fridge.
Defrost food in the fridge overnight rather than microwaving it.
If you are using an electric oven, Keep the oven door shut as much as possible; make sure the glass door is clean so you can see what's going on. Every time you open the door you lose heat.

In the Living room...

Only turn on the lights when you need them. Replacing a 100W incandescent with a 20W CFL can save on average around GHC30 per year. They also last up to 10 times longer. For hall lights which are in regular use, this saving could be even greater.
Make sure items that are not in use are unplugged or switched off at the wall. Putting appliances on standby is one of the biggest waste of electricity at home, and can cost ou upto GHC 75 per year! Please don't be like my good friend who enjoys seeing the red LED light on the DVD player even though she rarely uses it.
Remember that the energy consumption of your TV is strongly linked to the screen-size. If you are thinking about buying a new TV think carefully about how big a screen you actually need. Smaller TVs are generally cheaper to run
If you currently have a separate set-top box, or digital recorder, like DSTv or MultiTV, put your television on a different socket so that you can turn the TV off at the mains without disrupting any series link recordings
Make sure the brightness setting on your TV is suitable for your room. The brighter the TV is set, the more energy it uses. The factory settings on TVs are often too bright for home use.
Don’t leave your mobile phone on charge all night – it only needs a couple of hours.
If you have a computer which is downloading or burning a CD switch the monitor off!
When using your computer, turn off all peripheral equipmnet e.g scanners, webcams, printers etc when thwy are not in use.

In the Laundry...

If possible, fill up the washing machine, tumble dryer or dishwasher: one full load uses less energy than two half loads.
Switch to cold when doing your laundry. 85 – 90% of the energy used to wash your clothes is used to heat the water
If possible, save on your energy bills by line-drying clothes whenever possible, rather than using the tumble dryer. Your clothes will feel and smell fresher and probably dry more quickly than you expect..
Spinning your clothes on the washing machine’s highest spin cycle will remove as much water as possible, so they will dry more quickly on the line or in the tumble dryer.
Spinning your clothes on the washing machine’s highest spin cycle will remove as much water as possible, so they will dry more quickly on the line or in the tumble dryer.
If you have a washer/dryer make sure you don’t accidentally use the tumble dryer function when you don’t need it.
Make sure your tumble dryer’s filters are fluff free.
Don’t dry for longer than needed – it wastes energy.
Switch your tumble dryer off at the plug socket when not in use.
Sort out the washed clothes to make sure only the ones that need to be tumble dried get included on the drying cycle

In the bathroom...

Is your water too hot? Your cylinder thermostat should be set at 60°C.
A dripping hot water tap wastes energy and in one week wastes enough hot water to fill 10 plastic buckets, so fix leaking taps and make sure they're fully turned off!

It is always a great idea to hire the services of an energy auditor who is a trained professional and can best advice you on how best to save energy.

PROMOTING ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN GHANA: CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES

2010-04-17T08:29:00.000-07:00

Very few Ghanaians will argue with the need to promote energy efficiency, especially with the visible effects of Global warming and climate change currently being felt. A few years ago no one would have imagined seeing signs of harmattan in March nor expected the heatwave currently being experienced across the length and breadth of the country. Our energy needs are also likely to quadruple by 2020 as our standard of living increases according to a research conducted by the Energy Foundation in 2005. as Ghanaians become more affluent, electrical equipment being used at home has doubled over the last decade. We now have TVs in multiple rooms, microwave ovens, computers, washing machines, mobile phones constantly on charge etc.

One of the major drawbacks to the promotion of energy efficiency happens to be the current Government subsidies in the energy sector. Huge subsidies particularly on electricity and petroleum products have given Ghanaians a false understanding of the true cost of energy. To make the fight for energy efficiency more effective, Government subsidies will have to be abolished. Protecting the poor from the stress of high energy cost is indeed a legitimate concern. Thee are however more effective means of achieving such welfare policies. These subsidies can be channelled into paying a bonus to households who can significantly reduce their energy consumption over a certain period of time, say a month. Government can alternatively provide discounts on the retail price of energy efficient equipment and gadgets like is currently being done with the CFLs(energy bulbs).

Buildings consume between 40% to 50% of the total energy use in Ghana through lighting, ventilation and air conditioning, powering of household electrical fittings etc. Research conducted by the World Energy Commission(WEC) has also shown that the total energy use of a building can be reduced by implementing energy efficient design strategies at the design stage of a building. Passive energy efficient design techniques like proper building orientation, use of sun shading, selection of materials more suitable to our prevailing climatic conditions have often been sacrificed for aesthetics. Excessive use of glazing has suddenly become the yardstick by which good designs are measured. Environmentally conscious Architects and other design professionals have a duty to better inform their clients on the need to have their buildings designed to make them more energy efficient and to educate them on the economic benefits of such a design both in the short and long term.

Government needs to implement a more stringent appliance labelling and building energy performance regime. The appliance labelling program currently in place where every new electrical equipment sold on the market must have an energy star rating is commendable but does not go far enough. Most of the electrical equipment presently in use in the country are imported slightly used and are not subject to the energy star rating. Very few consumers are aware of the current rating system and how to make informed buying decisions based on these ratings.
The standards must also be extended to buildings. Here, designers must provide evidence of the expected amount of energy to be consumed and saved by the building before a building permit will be granted. This is currently being done in Europe through Energy Performance Certification (EPC) and the LEED program in the United States where they have realised that saving a kilowatt of energy is often much more cheaper than generating it. High energy ratings can then be made a requirement for building of the year awards to be instituted by the Ghana Institute of Architects.

Another major drawback to the implementation of efficient energy use at home is a lack of clear and concise information for homeowners. Most consumers associate energy efficiency with expensive technologies like solar panels and wind turbines, even though in reality a considerable amount of energy can be saved through behavioural changes at home. For instance, switching off lights when they are not in use, using washing machines only at full loads etc. can significantly reduce electricity bills.

Even though the barriers to promoting energy efficiency seem huge, they are definitely surmountable. What is needed is a strong governmental will power. Government must set clear leadership example by ensuring that all government and public buildings achieve an appreciable level of energy efficiency. There is also the need for a stronger voice from all those involved in energy efficiency advocacy.

The Sachet Water Brouhaha; What Next?

2010-03-09T03:20:00.000-08:00

The recent furore over the price of sachet water has been unsettling and if you have a good sense of humour like I think I do, then you might find the whole 'poliTRICKING' surrounding the matter a little bit amusing.

First, the Government through Parliament, imposes a 20 percent Ad-Valorem Tax on bottled and "packaged" water, with sachet water presumable part of the range of purified water termed as “packaged”. The sachet water producers through their umbrella association ( I forget the name), shift the burden of the tax to the poor consumer by doubling the price of bagged water from 5Gp to 10Gp. Then all hell literally breaks loose. The poor public is up in arms. Caller after caller on morning talk shows in the Capital accuse the government of being insensitive to the plight of the poor ordinary Ghanaian a.k.a. Kofi Ghana, especially in the wake of the recent, in some cases, up to 1,200 % increase in road tolls.

The Government a little yellow underbelly, eventually chickens out and calls in its spin doctors. Suddenly a raging debate on whether sachet water can be considered as packaged water ensues. It being packaged, semi-packaged or unpackaged depended on which bank of the political river one stood on. Finally, finally the Economic Ministry after a marathon meeting with the sachet water producers decides to suspend the tax sine die.

Lost in all the brouhaha is the reason why the Government found it prudent to impose the tax in the first place. We have all so conveniently forgotten or decided to have a temporary amnesia on the environmental degradation that the sachet water creates. The plastic material used by the sachet water producers are not biodegradable and can last for thousands of years without decomposing. The bagged cold water can be very convenient and refreshing especially on a hot sunny day which these days, with the global warming going on, seems to be every day. We enjoy the water so much so that we do not give a care in the world to what happens to the plastic bags after we are done, littering and choking gutters and drains.

Who benefits? A little bit obvious, isn't it? The packaged water producers are more concerned about the bottom line i.e. increase in profit, so much so that, their social and environmental responsibilities are more often than not relegated to the trash-can. Their feeble attempts at recycling is so amateurish and at best laughable. No wonder the impact of such attempts often turns out to be negligible whilst they blatantly refuse to invest in new technologies, packaging materials or green water purification techniques. There are now oxo-biodegradable plastics which can decompose in both aerobic(compost) and anaerobic (landfill) environments. Paper Packs can also be a good alternative. A few years ago when I was still a little boy, Fan Milk was sold in pyramid shaped paper containers.

The Ad-Valorem Tax was meant to discourage the use of plastics by the packaged water companies. The increase in the prices of the sachet water was to lead to a reduction in consumption which was in turn meant to lead to a reduction in profits for the water packaging companies so that they are forced to use materials that are more friendly to the environment. The use of such environmentally friendly materials will not attract any tax and hence a reduction in the street or vendor price of the packaged water. What the Government did not foresee was the near monopoly of the sachet water cartel and the insatiable and near inelastic demand for packaged water by Ghanaians.

Personally, I don't think the Government should forget about the tax completely. What they should do is wait a few months till the public outcry quietens a bit then reimpose the tax, albeit at a lower rate. If it worked in the past for the Value Added tax (VAT), National Health Insurance Levy (NHIL) and the recent hikes in road tolls, they will work just as well for Ad-Valorem Tax on sachet water. That is if the Government is really serious about protecting the environment and is prepared for a political kamikaze.

Talkacks are always welcome