Thailand Energy Usage Increased By More Than 63 Million Tons Last Year

[Jai Dee]

Thailand energy usage increased by more than 63 million tons last year

The Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency reports that Thailand's energy usage has increased by 63,180,000 tons last year.

The Director General of the Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency Mr. Panich Pongpirodome (พานิช พงศ์พิโรดม) reported that Thailand's current economy, society, and lifestyle requires increased energy usage. Thailand's energy usage was measured at 63,180,000 tons last year, an increase of 1.3 percent from 2005.

15.4 percent or about 58,383,000 tons of of Thailand's energy is imported from other nations, especially crude oil, resulting in higher capital costs and decreased competitive abilities on the global market.

Mr. Panich reiterated the importance of energy conservation and revealed that the Ministry of Energy will be providing tax incentives to companies which engage in efficient energy practices.

The Director General of the Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency is also supporting the establishment more than 100 energy management companies in Thailand.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 09 August 2007

[Payboy]

tons

[plachon]

tons

My first thought too. Tons of what exactly - bananas? rice? buffalo hides?

As it's the Dept of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, one can only assume they forgot to miss out the magic two words - carbon dioxide - and really just want to make a plug for nuclear (for which the govt. has given a MASSIVE budget for propaganda of this kind), but they are still a bit unfamiliar with the critical terminology. They then kind of blow it further by talking about "tons" in the same sentence as "crude oil", confusing Somchai Satarana even further.

One can anticipate many more such illuminating press releases in the coming years, prolly right up to N-Day in 2021.

[stumonster]

tons

My first thought too. Tons of what exactly - bananas? rice? buffalo hides?

As it's the Dept of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency, one can only assume they forgot to miss out the magic two words - carbon dioxide - and really just want to make a plug for nuclear (for which the govt. has given a MASSIVE budget for propaganda of this kind), but they are still a bit unfamiliar with the critical terminology. They then kind of blow it further by talking about "tons" in the same sentence as "crude oil", confusing Somchai Satarana even further.

One can anticipate many more such illuminating press releases in the coming years, prolly right up to N-Day in 2021.

or he is talking up Bio-fuels - which as many articles are pointing out are increasing the prices of basic foodstuffs

[chownah]

Scrap this news release and start over.....

[pete_r]

The figures are just flying around. I cannot catch them.

[Gnarpjohan]

Propaganda for nuclear power/possibly other energy no doubt. An increase in energy use of 1.3% sounds to me like evidence of a slow economy rather than anything else. Annoying with tons of rubbish spread in the media...

[londonthai]

Thailand's energy usage was measured at 63,180,000 tons last year, an increase of 1.3 percent from 2005. Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 09 August 2007

on top of it - the title of the thread is misliding

"Thailand Energy Usage Increased By More Than 63 Million Tons Last Year"

should be "increased by 1.3" or "icreased by 821 340 tons".

And yes, who has nuclear energy has a bigger chance for a nuclear bomb. After the new airport experience - it might be a nuclear bomb close to Bangkok.

[Tony Clifton]

Emissions from fuel burning plants are usually measure in tons.

[Ricardo]

Propaganda for nuclear power/possibly other energy no doubt. An increase in energy use of 1.3% sounds to me like evidence of a slow economy rather than anything else. Annoying with tons of rubbish spread in the media...

When economic growth is 4-5%, increased energy use of 1.3% surely implies an increase in efficiency, of energy-use ?

Wonder how much extra power the money might generate, if they built more hydro-electric schemes, rather than an unwanted or unsafe nuclear-reactor ?

Or does the latter offer fatter brown-envelopes ?