National Energy Plan Requires More Thought: Thai Editorial

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

National energy plan requires more thought

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Thailand's economic development will see rising demand for power, but public understanding of supply options must be part of the equation

Thailand has to look at various energy options in order to ensure the sustainability and security of the nation's power supply. The diversification of energy sources is essential for the country because demand for power is set to rise by 5 per cent annually over the next 10 years, in line with an estimated economic growth rate of 4-5 per cent per annum.

Therefore, the government must step up its efforts to find new and sustainable sources of energy. But this task will not be easy because the energy issue is sensitive. If local people have mistrust regarding power projects in their localities, power plant operators will find it hard to operate in a hostile environment. The recent incident at Mae Moh in Lampang province is a case in point.

The majority of Thailand's energy supply comes from non-renewable sources. According to Energy Minister Arak Chonlatanon, natural gas accounts for 70 per cent of fuel used in the Kingdom. But natural gas is not an inexhaustible source. Natural gas supply from the Gulf of Thailand will be depleted within an estimated 15 to 20 years.

Coal has always been one of the country's traditional power sources. But this controversial issue requires trust and understanding on the part of the public. On the other hand, the power generating agencies must ensure that the power production process is clean and safe for surrounding communities. The power agencies should increase communications efforts with local people about the necessity to set up power plants in certain areas.

The crisis at Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant after the earthquake and tsunami disaster in March last year gives us a telling example of how things can go wrong. It shows that even in a country with one of the highest safety standards in the world, accidents can cause massive damage. The incident prompted the Japanese government to review its nuclear power policy.

In the meantime, the Thai government wants to raise the proportion of power from alternative energy sources from 11 per cent currently to at least one-quarter of the total over the next decade. But this plan will not be realised if all parties involved are not adequately prepared. They must explore the options and educate the public about the need to diversify energy sources to ensure the sustainability and security of energy consumption.

The cost of some kinds of alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power may be higher than traditional fossil fuels. Thus, consumers should be educated about the concept of polluters' pay. Thai consumers should be aware of the real cost of energy consumption; that the cost of consumption is not only limited to the production cost but the future of sequences that energy consumption can lead to. This includes effects on the environment and people's health.

If we do not develop an environmental conscience, the government's plan will be difficult to implement because people won't realise the necessity of paying more for alternative energy. Greater understanding of this issue will make energy management and consumption more efficient.

The government needs to come with a "big picture" plan to lay down national energy management in line with the country's future development. The choice of energy sources must be in line with how the country envisages its future development direction. The increase in energy supply should not merely respond to the rising need, but must come from careful calculation to ensure that every unit of energy is efficiently used and every baht is wisely spent.

-- The Nation 2012-05-17

[RickBradford]

The cost of some kinds of alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power may be higher than traditional fossil fuels.

No maybe about it -- they are much more expensive.

Since the vast subsidies used to keep these feel-good industries alive is passed onto the consumer, it inevitably produces very damaging effects, including:

* 15% of Germans are now considered to be in "fuel poverty", as are an estimated 12 million people in the UK.

* Germany expects power blackouts this winter as "Because the production of wind and solar power have been given priority in the electricity market, the building of gas-fired power plants is no longer profitable."

It's so bad that even the Greens are calling for new fossil-fuel plants.

Winfried Kretschmann (Green Party), the prime minister of the state of Baden Wuerttemberg, is urging Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) to encourage the construction of new gas-fired power plants. Especially in southern Germany energy security is at risk, according to Kretschmann.

If these environmental fantasies can beggar a powerhouse like Germany, just think what they could do to the Thai economy.

More thought required, indeed.

[OzMick]

"....the Thai government wants to raise the proportion of power from alternative energy sources from 11 per cent currently to at least one-quarter of the total over the next decade."

What source is the 11%? Hydro Electric Power

What source will the next 14% be? Ditto

Get used to it

'Cause they'll be around

Yeah, ya better get used to

All those dams. Apologies to Roger

[whybother]

National energy plan requires more thought

That implies that it has had some thought.

[Reasonableman]

Those "feelgood" projects some disparage are routes, not yet highways, to sustainable power. The world needs to develop a far more multifaceted power strategy. Get used to it.

[Morch]

The headline itself could be used to conserve energy: National *insert something here* plan requires more thought. Rince repeat. Very green and echo-friendly.

[RickBradford]

Those "feelgood" projects some disparage are routes, not yet highways, to sustainable power.

Oh, please.

The world needs to develop a far more multifaceted power strategy

Why? There's enough shale gas around to keep us going for hundreds of years, by which time we should have cracked fusion power, assuming we don't fritter away all the money on useless windmills.

[allan michaud]

The cost of some kinds of alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power may be higher than traditional fossil fuels.

No maybe about it -- they are much more expensive.

Since the vast subsidies used to keep these feel-good industries alive is passed onto the consumer, it inevitably produces very damaging effects, including:

* 15% of Germans are now considered to be in "fuel poverty", as are an estimated 12 million people in the UK.

* Germany expects power blackouts this winter as "Because the production of wind and solar power have been given priority in the electricity market, the building of gas-fired power plants is no longer profitable."

It's so bad that even the Greens are calling for new fossil-fuel plants.

Winfried Kretschmann (Green Party), the prime minister of the state of Baden Wuerttemberg, is urging Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) to encourage the construction of new gas-fired power plants. Especially in southern Germany energy security is at risk, according to Kretschmann.

If these environmental fantasies can beggar a powerhouse like Germany, just think what they could do to the Thai economy.

More thought required, indeed.

What about the massive subsidies given to the oil sector by most countries, this is invariably much, much higher than the subsidies given to eco friendly power. How much money is Thailand wasting on fuel subsidies right now. US oil subsidies are many times higher than their support for solar, wind etc.

[Reasonableman]

Those "feelgood" projects some disparage are routes, not yet highways, to sustainable power.

Oh, please.

The world needs to develop a far more multifaceted power strategy

Why? There's enough shale gas around to keep us going for hundreds of years, by which time we should have cracked fusion power, assuming we don't fritter away all the money on useless windmills.

Thankfully, the world does not need to rely on your brilliance to develop a long-term power strategy. Shale gas extraction is a short-term fix, since it not inexhaustible. Extracting the gas from shale beds also has its own problems--polluting waterways with mud and sludge, increasing the risk of earthquakes, releasing methane (a greenhouse gas) into the atmosphere, among them. The cost of producing and distributing shale gas has actually been estimated as higher than coal or oil. Wouldn't it be great if we had a silver bullet solution to the power problem? Unfortunately, we don't. Good luck with the cold fusion solution. Please let me know when it is up and operational.

Edited May 17, 2012 by Reasonableman

[Moruya]

Thailand is far from alone in not having a cohesive energy plan.

However the countries that develop the new technologies will be the ones that make the money and the ones that don't will pay the cost.

Double glazing and insulation to keep cooling bills down

Solar panels on buildings

All that water that passed through the Chao Praya delta and didn't generate one watt

What will happen if Burma decides it needs all the electricity it produces to power it's "industrial revolution"?

[OzMick]

Thailand is far from alone in not having a cohesive energy plan.

However the countries that develop the new technologies will be the ones that make the money and the ones that don't will pay the cost.

Double glazing and insulation to keep cooling bills down

Solar panels on buildings

All that water that passed through the Chao Praya delta and didn't generate one watt

What will happen if Burma decides it needs all the electricity it produces to power it's "industrial revolution"?

Countries that have the capacity to develop HEP (mountains and plentiful rain) have a huge advantage. Developing technology is expensive and currently HEP is 5 - 10 times more efficient as far as energy in to energy out.

As with Laos, richer countries will pay for their infrastructure for the right to buy their power.

[RickBradford]

Shale gas extraction is a short-term fix, since it not inexhaustible.

Nothing is inexhaustible.

Even wind power relies on some rather exotic materials (in the magnets, chiefly) such as neodymium, 90% of which is to be found in ..... China.

So the US, for example, can bet its energy security on neodymium from China to make expensive and unreliable electricity, or shale gas under the Appalachians to make cheap and reliable electricity.

To all but eco-druids, the choice is simple. Especially when you consider how un-green wind power really is.