2010-2020: DECADE OF PEACE, STABILITY & DEVELOPMENT/DEKADA PAZ, ESTABILIDADE NO DEZENVOLVIMENTU
Media service of the FRETILIN party.
Servisu media partidu FRETILIN nian.
Deputadu Jose Teixeira
Tel. Mobile: +670 728 7080
Monday, January 18, 2010
Comment from Rob Wesley_Smith regarding heavy fuel power station in Hera
Response to Hera power station, and Fretilin comments
email@example.com on behalf of robert wesley-smith (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Mon 1/18/10 12:07 PM
Ee spending nearly $400 m on massive old technology power stations,
and a massive power grid
Kangaroo Valley late last year in conjunction with, and relying on the
technological expertise of ATA (Australian Technology Association),
installed 120 Solar power lighting systems for house in remote
villages in Remexio. At $150 each installed, it gets power to places
it is hard to imagine power lines reaching in the near future if
ever. Each supplied house gets a solar panel, high tech battery, 2
general lights and a brighter LED array to allow for reading and home
work. Early experience indicates that neighbouring children are
coming over to study. The installation was primarily done by village
locals after some training, and similarly will be maintained. Plans
are developing for beneficiaries to do some community work such as
planting trees on the contour to improve water retention. The
installations emit NO atmospheric pollution or global warming gases.
Another brace of lights is planned for this year. Also, it is quite
feasible to add in battery charging stations etc for little extra cost.
Lets look at costs per fitting 100,000 rural households, even at $150
per house, though one imagines with bulk supplies this cost may come
100,000 x $150 = $15 million.
200,000 homes X $150 = $30 million.
500,000 homes (are there that many?) x $150 is less than $100 million.
Then add in clay stoves like Haburas is making and selling for $6,
with recycled cooking blocks:
or say $100 for american designed bigger 2 burner cooking plus clay
100,000 x $6 = $600,000 100,000 x $100 = $10,000,000
200,000 x $6 = $1.2 million 200,000 x $100 = $20 million.
500,000 x $6 = $3 million
So, for $100 m, all homes in East Timor could be fitted with light and
fuel efficient cooking, all built by locals, and easily maintained or
replaced. The clay stoves have yet to be carefully experimented with
to ensure maximum efficiency for various types of fuel, and minimal
smoke, so there is improvement to come. They are 'cooked' over
unsophisticated fairly open fires which also could be improved a great
deal. In my experience few Timorese understand the concept of
experimentation to improve design, to instill this concept will also
result in more 'home' improvement. Also, of course, this is not for
24 hour/day power, but hey, people sleep, and daylight is available
most days for many hours.
If agreement had resulted in some Bayu Undan gas coming to its country
of origin, then industry which relies on that might have been promoted
for years. If agreements over Greater Sunrise results in some gas
available for East Timor use, then again some industry will be possibe.
Bear in mind the East Timor government is talking about $400 million
for a Chinese supplied power scheme which many do not believe will
succeed as claimed. Well it may, I'm not claiming expertise in that
matter. But East Timor is a very mountainous country. Will
powerlines require clearing underneath? If so, how many trees will
be lost, how much erosion will be caused? How many East Timorese have
the skills or will gain the skills to build and maintain all this?
(One could ask, as comparison, how many East Timorese are gaining
skills in the oil and gas industry with Conoco Phillips?) How much
global warming will be caused? Will remote villages get power? As
against gaining credits for tree planting which can be sold as
necessary. Just a few questions which spring to mind. Do the
Ministries for Environment, and Social Security, have a say, and an
informed say, in these massive decisions?
This contribution has been inspired by the Fretilin comment on the
President's PR re doing environment assessment on an ongoing basis,
something considered 'innovative' and illegal. But many have tried to
make such points before, without success. Maybe it is too early in
the self-government cycle for enough experience to have been gained.
Does the ETG appreciate informed advice??
Ph in Darwin, Australia 08 89832113