1 / 10

ENERGY EFFICIENCY: “Reducing Electrical Energy consumption AT ALL COST” WHY ??????

ENERGY EFFICIENCY: “Reducing Electrical Energy consumption AT ALL COST” WHY ?????? 6 September 2012 Prof Wilhelm Leuschner Pr Eng D Eng. DEPT. OF ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC & COMPUTER ENG. LIGHT & VISION LABORATORY. OUTLINE. ELECTRICAL ENERGY – “BAD NAME”

dleblanc
Download Presentation

ENERGY EFFICIENCY: “Reducing Electrical Energy consumption AT ALL COST” WHY ??????

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ENERGY EFFICIENCY: “Reducing Electrical Energy consumption AT ALL COST” WHY ?????? 6 September 2012 Prof Wilhelm Leuschner Pr Eng D Eng DEPT. OF ELECTRICAL, ELECTRONIC & COMPUTER ENG. LIGHT & VISION LABORATORY

  2. OUTLINE • ELECTRICAL ENERGY – “BAD NAME” • SUSTAINABLE OR COST EFFECTIVE ENERGY SAVING WHY DOES ENERGY SAVING NOT HAPPEN SPONTANEOUSLY & HAS TO BE “FORCED” ? • SHOULD WE INVEST IN ELECTRICAL ENERGY / POWER REDUCTION, OR IN RENEWABLE ENERGY / POWER GENERATION? • ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING • PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER / ENERGY – PHOTOVOLTAIC GEYSERS? • ELECTRIC / BATTERY VEHICLES (busses, trucks, cars, etc.) • CONCLUSION

  3. ELECTRICAL ENERGY – “BAD NAME” “ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION IS HIGH. SWITCH OF UN-USED LIGHTS, GEYSER ANS SWIMMING POOL PUMPS” “SWITCH OFF AND UN-PLUG” – and save a few milliwatts? PERCEPTION CREATED: “DON’T USE ELECTRICITY - IT IS BAD” “ELECTRICITY”? ARE WE TALKING ELECTRICAL POWER OR ENERGY? POWER: BECAUSE IT IS PEAK TIME AND ESKOM HAS INSUFFICIENT GENERATING CAPACITY CONSUMERS ARE INCONVENIENCED AND USE THE SAME ENERGY LATER AT NIGHT, WHILE THEY PAY THE SAME ENERGY TARIFF R1.50 / kWh (or more) What does ESKOM and the Municipalities do with the extra profit (as they pay less later at night) ????

  4. ELECTRICAL ENERGY – “BAD NAME” WHAT ABOUT OTHER FORMS OF ENERGY – CARS? DOES ANYBODY TELL US TO DRIVE SLOWER TO SAVE ENERGY? (a reduction of 1 l / 100 km in fuel consumption can save 5000W or more) + air pollution HOW DO WE PROMOTE BATTERY VEHICLES (Charged from photovoltaic panels) IF WE WANT TO REDUCE ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION AT ALL COST TURNOVER DROPS, PROFIT DROPS, DOWN-SCALING, INCREASED ELECTRICITY PRICE, MORE GOVERNMENT SUSIDIES (HIGHER TAXES)

  5. SUSTAINABLE OR COST EFFECTIVE ENERGY SAVING • CONSUMERS WILL INVEST IN ENERGY SAVING IF THEY ARE CONVINCED THEY GOING TO SAVE MONEY! • MOST ENERGY SAVING SYSTEMS ARE EXPENSIVE: • WE HAVE TO CONVINCE THE CONSUMER THAT SHE / HE WILL SAVE MONEY - IMMEDIATELY OR OVER A PERIOD OF TIME (REASONABLE PAY-BACK PERIOD?) • WE HAVE TO PROVIDE SUBSIDIES • WE HAVE TO HAND-OUT FREE GEYSER BLANKETS, CFL’S, LED LAMPS etc. • 2. AND 3. ARE VERY EXPENSIVE MOTIVATIONAL TOOLS – WHO PAYS EVENTUALLY? • WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE “HAND-OUTS” OR “SUSIDIZED EQUIPMENT” FAIL? • WHO BENEFITS MOST FROM 2. & 3. AND WHO PAYS FOR IT AND WHO MISSES OUT? • DO WE KNOW WHETHER ACTUALLY SAVED ENERGY AND HOW MUCH?

  6. SHOULD WE INVEST IN ELECTRICAL ENERGY / POWER REDUCTION, OR IN RENEWABLE ENERGY / POWER GENERATION? ELECTRICAL POWER & ENERGY IS ONE OF THE MOST CONVENIENT AND EFFECTIVE FORMS OF ENERGY WE SHOULD LEARN FROM OTHER COUNTRIES WE SHOULD PROMOTE ELECTRICAL USE v. OTHER FORMS OF ENERGY – COAL, GASOLINE, etc. ONCE WE HAVE ESTABLISHED HIGH CAPACITY OF RENEWABLE “POWER STATIONS” – WE ARE GOING TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO USE MORE ELECTRICITY TO REDUCE THE PER UNIT COST (e.g. charging batteries of Electric Vehicles – cars, busses, trucks, etc.) EXTRA POWER GENERATION IS GURANTEED TO WORK- MOST ENERGY SAVING TECHNOLOGIES ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO BE SUCCESSFUL

  7. ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING IS THE UPGRADING OF LIGHTING TO MORE “ENERGY EFFICIENT” LIGHT SOURCES A SUCCESS? SOMETIMES YES IS IT COST EFFECTIVE WITHOUT REDUCING THE QUANTITY & QUALITY OF LIGHT? SELDOM: IF IT WAS, WHY DON’T MORE CONSUMERS BUY SUCH LAMPS, WITHOUT BEING DISAPPOINTED? THEY DO IT TO REDUCE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL HAS IT GOT GREAT POTENTIAL? YES – LED IS THE LIGHT SOURCE OF THE FUTURE – WITH GREAT COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL FOR RETROFIT AND “SMART LIGHTING” especially when it reaches > 200 lumen / Watt SUCCESS EXAMPLE OF STIMULATING MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING OF LED RETROFIT LAMPS: USA – DOE: L-PRIZE PAR38 LED RETROFIT LAMP COMPETITION (ROUND 2: FIRST PRIZE $5M – made in USA by Americans)

  8. PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV) POWER / ENERGY – PHOTOVOLTAIC GEYSERS? TECHNOLOGY IS RELIABLE & WELL DEVELOPED PRICE IS DROPPING ON LARGE QUANTITIES (< R15 / W) HIGH SOLAR IRRADIANCE IN MOST OF RSA SIMPLE TO INSTALL DIVERSE APPLICATIONS: CONSUMERS CAN GO “OFF-GRID” EXTENDABLE GOOD BATTERY TECHNOLOGY CAN BE MANUFACTURED LOCALLY CONSUMERS CAN SELL BACK ENERGY PHOTOVOLTAIC GEYSER? INTERESTING RESEARCH: SIMPLE INSTALLATION FOR MULTIPLE EXISTING GEYSERS FROM ONE PV PANEL ANYWHERE ON THE PROPERTY OR ROOF. SURPLUS ENERGY CAN BE SOLD TO UTILITY, CHARGE UPS, HEAT SWIMMING POOL etc. MOST ENERGY REQUIRED IN WINTER

  9. ELECTRIC / BATTERY VEHICLES (busses, trucks, cars, etc.) THE TECHNOLOGY FOR NOW AND THE FUTURE: ENERGY SAVING, ENERGY STORE, NO POLLUTION (GAS / NOISE), RELIABILE, SIMPLE TO USE AND MAINTAIN SUPPORTS ENERGY SAVING MANY NICHE MARKETS DID “ENERGY REDUCTION AT ALL COST” SINK THE BATTERY CAR IN SOUTH AFRICA?

  10. CONCLUSION COST EFFECTIVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY, WITHOUT REDUCING QUALTY RESEARCH, DESIGN, DEVELOP, INTRODUCE, MAINTAIN, QUANTIFY / EVALUATE THANKS WILHELM LEUSCHNER leuschner@up.ac.za

More Related