22 November 2011 South African state company Eskom has embarked on a pilot project that will see it using the power of the sun to generate electricity at three of its facilities. The power utility, together with Pubic Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba, launched a solar photovoltaic (PV) installation at its Lethabo Power Station near Vereeniging in Gauteng province on Monday. The launch is the first stage of a project designed to introduce renewable energy sources to supply power for internal use at Eskom’s coal-fired power stations and reduce the company’s carbon footprint by about 2 845 tons a year. Solar PV technologies use the power of the sun to generate electricity, and there are currently three types being tested by Eskom. Eskom CEO Brian Dames said there were three pilot facilities – at Lethabo, Kendal in Mpumalanga province, and Eskom’s Head Office at Megawatt Park in Johannesburg – at a cost of roughly R90-million.‘Commitment to lower-carbon future’ This project was a milestone for Eskom and demonstrated its commitment to moving to a lower-carbon future, he said. Dames explained that the company examined its existing generation fleet and looked at ways of reducing its carbon footprint – an initiative in which solar PV would play a significant role. Eskom was also looking into other renewable sources. “We have undertaken to invest in renewable energy projects, and in cleaner coal technologies, and these solar panels are an important first step towards that,” he said. Gigaba said South Africa was committed to reducing its carbon emissions. His department, in particular, was working with state-owned companies, including Eskom, to make a contribution to the mitigation and reduction of climate change.Balancing commercial, environmental objectives “We want to manage this in a manner that is able to balance … the commercial, financial, environmental and economic objectives so that they are aligned,” the minister said. “Eskom, with its two renewable energy projects, the Sere Wind Farm and Concentrated Solar Power, will serve as a catalyst to develop the renewable energy industry. Through these two renewable energy projects, South Africa has the opportunity to be a hub for developing renewable energy technology to the rest of the African continent.” According to Eskom, lessons learned at the pilot plants will support the rollout of these systems across all its coal-fired stations over time. The pilot plants – each at one hectare – are located on greenfield sites adjacent to the three coal-fired power stations. The electricity generated from the solar PV plants at the Lethabo and Kendal power stations will provide power during daylight hours for the administration buildings, security and terrace lighting and unit lighting board, resulting in a reduction of auxiliary power consumption. The units at Megawatt Park will supply 5% of auxiliary power to its administration building. The total electricity generated from all these solar PV plants is 1.55MW and could power about 1 900 standard suburban houses with an assumed consumption of 200 KWh per month. Source: BuaNews
28 June 2013Foreign direct investment (FDI) flows to African countries increased by 5 percent to US$50-billion in 2012 even as global FDI fell by 18 percent, according to the latest annual survey of investment trends by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (Unctad).Unctad’s World Investment Report 2013 was released in Geneva, Switzerland on Wednesday.The report found that, while investment in extractive industries remained the most important driver of FDI to Africa in 2012, there was increased investment in consumer-oriented manufacturing and services, reflecting the growing purchasing power of the continent’s emerging middle class.“Between 2008 and 2012, the share of consumer-related industries in the value of greenfield investment projects in Africa grew from 7 percent of the total to 23 percent,” Unctad said in a statement. Greenfield investment is investment in businesses or economic sectors that are new to a recipient country.SA the continent’s biggest investorThe report found that companies from emerging markets were increasingly active in Africa, with the biggest investors in 2012 being Malaysia, South Africa, China and India in that order.South African companies were active in acquiring operations in industries such as mining, wholesale and healthcare during 2012, pushing FDI outflows from South Africa up to $4.4-billion and elevating the country to the position of largest source country of FDI in Africa.By contrast, however, FDI inflows to South Africa dropped by 24 percent to $4.6-billion in 2012.This mirrored a sharp drop in investment in the southern African region, from $8.7-billion in 2011 to $5.4-billion in 2012 – even as some countries in the region saw substantial increases. Inflows to Mozambique, for example, doubled to $5.2-billion, attracted by the country’s huge offshore gas deposits.East, central, north Africa gainFDI flows to West Africa also declined, slipping by 5 percent to $16.8-billion, the report show. Of investment channelled to the two major oil-producing countries in the region, FDI to Ghana remained stable at $3.3-billion, but inflows to Nigeria declined by 21 percent to $7-billion, accounting for much of the diminished flows to the region.Energy resources such as recently discovered gas reserves in Tanzania and oil fields in Uganda saw FDI inflows to East Africa expand from $4.5-billion in 2011 to $6.3-billion in 2012.Central Africa, meanwhile, saw its inflows rise to $10-billion, a record high, maintaining a trend of increasing FDI since 2010. The region’s natural resources continued to attract investment from mining companies, with significant FDI, for example, targeting the expansion of the copper-cobalt Tenke Fungurume mine in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.North Africa, the report found, was beginning to see a revival in cross-border investment following the political turmoil of 2011, with FDI flows increasing by 35 percent to $11.5-billion in 2012.Much of this increase was accounted for by a turnaround in Egypt, where inflows climbed from a net divestment of $0.5-billion in 2011 to a positive $2.8-billion in 2012 – though still much lower than the levels reached in Egypt before 2011.SAinfo reporter
This post originally appeared at Yale Environment 360. Northern Germany, from the Polish borderlands in the east to the Netherlands in the west, is the stronghold of Germany’s muscular onshore wind power industry. This is where the lion’s share of the country’s nearly 30,000 wind turbines are sited, a combined force equal to the power generation of about 10 nuclear reactors. Where Germany’s northernmost tip abuts Denmark, soaring turbines crowd the horizon as far as the eye can see. And many more are coming as Germany strives to go carbon neutral by 2050. Yet despite their impressive might, the north’s wind parks are a reminder not only of how much has been accomplished in Germany’s Energiewende, or clean energy transition, but also of what remains to be done. The country has made a Herculean effort to shift to a clean energy economy. In just the past five years, government support and costs to consumers have totaled an estimated 160 billion euros ($181 billion). But Germany’s greenhouse gas emissions have not declined as rapidly as expected in response to the vigorous expansion of renewable energy, which now generates 40% of the country’s electricity. Germany’s politicians are even resigned to falling significantly short of the country’s 2020 goal of reducing emissions by 40% below 1990 levels.RELATED ARTICLESGermany’s Energy RevolutionGermany’s Plus-Energy TownOur All-Renewable Energy FutureDebating Our All-Renewable Energy FutureCost of Renewable Energy Continues to Fall Germany’s failings have come as a vexing shock to its environmentally conscious citizenry. While Germans still overwhelmingly back the energy transition — for years polls showed support in excess of 90% — about three-quarters say the government is not doing enough to slow global warming. Today, the Energiewende finds itself stalled and floundering. Germany’s carbon emissions have stagnated at roughly their 2009 level. The country remains Europe’s largest producer and burner of coal, which generates more than one-third of Germany’s power supply. Moreover, emissions in the transportation sector have shot up by 20% since 1995 and are rising with no end in sight, experts say. German consumers have seen their electricity bills soar since 2000, in part because of the renewable energy surcharge. Now, complex, discomfiting questions loom about the way forward if Germany is to meet even its minimal targets and play the nation’s part in putting the brakes on global warming. From green groups on the left, to independent think tanks, to industry associations, experts have put forth numerous plans to regain the momentum of the Energiewende and decarbonize Germany’s economy. The issue is urgent: The German Energy Agency (DENA), a think tank supported by public and private funds, found that if the country continues along its present course, carbon emissions will fall by only 62% by 2050 — well short of the government’s goal of slashing emissions up to 95% below 1990 levels by mid-century. And analysts say that the challenges Germany now faces will confront other industrialized societies as they attempt to wean themselves off fossil fuels. The effort began as a grassroots campaign The Energiewende began as a bottom-up movement that took off in 2000 when grassroots campaigns persuaded legislators to support renewable energy expansion through feed-in tariffs. In the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011, Chancellor Angela Merkel and her government got behind the energy transition and drafted blueprints to guide it. But in recent years, the government, in the face of auto industry opposition, backed off decarbonizing the transportation sector; has not supported a significant price on carbon; has dragged its feet on grid expansion; has declined to set a date for phasing out coal; and has not implemented significant parts of its own 2050 climate program. Some analysts say that Merkel’s decision to step down in 2021 could be a boon for the Energiewende, as the Green Party is rising in the polls and will likely play an important role in the next government. Against this backdrop, the German government’s Climate Protection Program 2050, the Energiewende’s current road map, has come under a barrage of criticism. “The goals set in the climate program aren’t nearly ambitious enough,” says Benno Hain of the Federal Environment Agency, referring to its vague aim of reducing emissions by 80% to 95% compared to 1990 levels. Germany must shoot for a 95% reduction and nothing less, Hain says, which means new big-picture scenarios and greater rigor in implementing them. Tanja Gaudian, of the renewable energy utility EWS Schönau, argues that Germany is sorely in need of a new energy transition master plan. “It’s not even clear whether this Energiewende will continue to be one driven from below, by communities and citizens as it has so far, or whether the big utilities will be given a special role, even though they don’t deserve it,” she says, referring to their decades-long opposition to renewable energy. “There’s so much that’s up in the air.” Technological “miracles” won’t be necessary The government’s 2050 program, however, is not the only game plan in town for going climate-neutral. German industry, high-level research institutes, NGOs, and think tanks such as DENA have invested heavily in sophisticated analyses that sketch out alternative scenarios for decarbonizing Germany’s energy system. These scenarios address the nature of the technologies of the future; whether coal and other fossil fuels should be forced out of the energy supply or simply left to wither away through market forces; the role of synthetic fuels and hydrogen, as well as carbon capture and storage (CCS); and the extent and type of domestic renewable energy generation. All of these questions are complicated further by the ongoing phase-out of nuclear power, which is not contested in Germany.The major studies — even those conducted with involvement from Germany industry — concur that Germany can hit its 2030 targets if it changes course. At the very least, these pilot studies can inject new ideas into Germany’s energy policy debates. “These scenarios show that Germany’s climate and energy targets can be reached with current technologies and without breaking the bank,” says Toby Couture of the think tank E3 Analytics in Berlin. “We don’t have to pull rabbits out of hats or hope for technological miracles. There are two basic things needed to achieve these ambitious decarbonization goals: political will and investment certainty. In the early 2000s, Germany had both; now it arguably has neither.” Not surprisingly, green organizations and parties — including Greenpeace, Environmental Action Germany, Friends of the Earth Germany, and the German Greens and the Left Party — are calling for a more rapid expansion of renewable energies, a quicker legislated end to coal generation, and the full-scale revamping of Germany’s transportation sector. Greenpeace Germany has authored one of the most extensive models, which starts with the lofty premise that a 100% elimination of greenhouse gases (compared to 1990 levels) is possible in 30 years. Key to this scenario is that Germany can, and should, stop burning coal by 2030. Under this plan, the oldest and dirtiest coal-fired plants, one-third of Germany’s fleet, would have to shut down by 2020. Another third would close five years later, and the rest in 2030. Greenpeace calls for a steep carbon-pricing scheme that rises to 40 euros a ton by 2030. (The EU’s carbon-trading scheme currently lists a ton of carbon at 12 euros.) Wind and solar would bridge the gap The energy generation capacity lost by removing coal and nuclear power from the supply would be made up for primarily by renewables, argues Greenpeace — above all offshore wind, which is still in its early stages in Germany. While the massive rollout of offshore wind power — more than 12 times the current fleet of 1,170 turbines — is the central plank of Greenpeace’s strategy, it also calls for a tripling of onshore wind generation and five times the photovoltaic capacity. In the interim, Greenpeace acknowledges that renewables would probably have to be aided by natural gas-fired generation. These ambitious goals would be achievable, argues Greenpeace, by reducing demand: dramatic energy efficiency measures could slash demand for electricity by 18% and for heat by 46% compared to 2012 levels. Moreover, decarbonizing the transportation sector by 2030 implies not only accelerating the transition to electric vehicles, but phasing out conventional, gasoline-powered cars between 2025 and 2035, Greenpeace says. “It’s definitely feasible to ramp down coal by 2030,” says Jörg Mühlenhoff of the Agency for Renewable Energies, a Berlin-based renewables advocacy organization. Indeed, Mühlenhoff says that if a carbon price hits 30 euros, that would effectively spell the end of coal. He adds that renewables could cover most of the gap left by coal if the German government introduces new policy initiatives to spur investments in green energy. Until quite recently, most of Germany’s industrial sectors, particularly the more energy-intensive among them, had treated Energiewende with acute skepticism. They worried that high energy costs and supply bottlenecks would hurt their competitive edge in international export markets. Yet German industry is becoming more deeply involved in the Energiewende, given the demand for the likes of renewable energy infrastructure (think wind turbines, manufactured by Siemens), electric vehicles, and other green energy technologies. Industry now believes it’s better to jump on the bandwagon and engage in policy discussions rather than carp from the sidelines. Earlier this year, for example, a call for government action signed by 50 prominent businesses — including Siemens and the electronics and construction industries — insisted that “Germany needs a robust strategy for implementing its comparatively stringent emission reduction targets if it does not want to fall behind in the global race to develop carbon-neutral economies.” This turnaround is nowhere more evident than in the pilot study of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), Germany’s largest and most powerful industrial lobby organization. In close collaboration with German businesses, BDI has modeled several Energiewende scenarios that are unapologetically pro-business and pro-industry, yet support the broader goals of the energy transition. “The remarkable thing about the BDI study is that German industry is saying that the Energiewende is technically and economically feasible by 2050,” says Cyril Stephanos of Germany’s National Academy of Science and Engineering, which runs an Energy Systems of the Future program. “It shows that there’s money to be made and not just for industry but for the entire economy.” A need for an international consensus The BDI study, however, underscores that unless there’s a multilateral international consensus about targets, burden sharing, and tools like a global CO2 price, Germany should shoot for reducing emissions by only 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The study claims that, when factoring in savings accrued by dropping fossil fuels from the supply, Germany could reach that target at an additional cost of 240 billion euros, while reducing emissions by a full 95% would cost the country 500 billion euros. This BDI scenario relies strongly on energy efficiency, especially in the housing and building sectors, where the chemical industry has much to gain from retrofitting older buildings and providing new buildings with state-of-the-art insulation. It calls for doubling the rate of retrofitting housing and urges requirements that all new homes essentially be highly energy-efficient “passive houses.” A third approach to fixing the Energiewende combines a rigorous reduction of emissions (95% by 2050) with solutions that appeal to German business. The research institute DENA favors a rollout of sun- and wind-based renewables, but also advocates for a broader mix of technologies that includes a high volume of synthetic fuels. Both the DENA and BDI scenarios also depend on carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the transition’s final phase, when energy intensive industries will have to be decarbonized. “We ran our modeling through several times,” explains Christoph Jugel, head of DENA’s energy systems analysis unit. “And even using other technologies we couldn’t manage to eliminate the last 16 million tons of CO2 left without CCS.” But Jugel notes that the different scenarios don’t factor in technological breakthroughs that can, and most probably will, happen in the decades ahead. Stephanos says the studies show that Germany will need anywhere from four to seven times as much wind and solar power as it has now. “All of the studies mention about 5 to 10 million electric cars by 2030,” notes Stephanos. “We’re ramping up, which is good, but we’re not yet close to even a million. There’s still a lot left to figure out. We don’t even know if electricity, hydrogen fuel cells, or biofuels are the best way to decarbonize transportation. It’s astonishing how much more Germany has to do.” Paul Hockenos is a Berlin-based writer whose work has appeared in The Nation, Foreign Policy, The New York Times, and The Atlantic.
Knowing when to reduce light on set is just as important as knowing how to set it up. Let’s take a look at smart ways to shape light.Cover image via Shutterstock.Adding light to a scene is a powerful way to tell a story. However, sometimes it’s even more powerful to take light away. This can create a richer mood, a more cinematic image, and a more intriguing story than you first imagined. In this article, let’s take a look at how to strategically remove some light after you’ve set up your initial lighting rig. Negative FillNegative fill can be a cinematographer’s best friend. We often talk about lights and tools to add more light to a scene. However, we often don’t talk about how to control that lighting — or even take it away, if necessary. Negative Fill is a powerful way to take away light and create more contrast to enhance the mood of your film.We can achieve negative fill using a black solid flag. These flags come in all sort of sizes and varieties. They can range from an 18×24 all the way up to a 48×48 floppy, which converts to a 48×96. These solids allow you to shape light and create mood. Think of a solid as the exact opposite of a reflector. Instead of adding light into a scene, they can simply take it away and reshape your talent’s features or remove light from the background.NetsNets are another powerful way to control light, but less intense than a black solid. Nets, are just that: nets. They’re netted fabric that comes in two different strengths: single and double. Much like scrims for lighting fixtures, these nets carry one of two labels: red for a double and green for a single. A double (red) takes away one stop of lighting, while a single (green) takes away half a stop. So if you’re looking to lose a stop of exposure on your background to make your talent stand out a bit more, then a double would be just what you need.DiffusionDiffusion is really more about shaping your light for a desired look than about taking it away. However, I like to think that when filming day exteriors, various diffusion materials act in different ways to reduce light in a scene. Taking away light from a day exterior scene is an important step to reducing contrast and making the image more pleasing to the eye.Image via Shutterstock.For example, if you were to set up an 8×8 solid and completely block the sun from your talent, this would create a much softer lighting. The reason why is that the ground and the surrounding environment have now becomes the sources of reflected lighting, not direct sunlight. If you were to set up two double nets to cut down the sun on your talent, they would still have the same harsh lighting as before. Knowing and understanding how each of your tools works is important because cutting down and taking away the harshness and intensity of the sun is key to creating a cinematic outdoor image.Looking for more on lighting? Check out these articles.What You Need to Know About High Key vs. Low Key LightingCinematography Tip: Lighting Your Production with the Inverse Square LawLearn How to Enhance Your Film with Ambient LightThree Ways To Light A Tent Scene On a Low BudgetHow to Shoot Interior Locations with Limited Lighting
Expressing concern over the inflow of drugs from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nigeria and other countries, seven northern States and a Union Territory on Thursday decided to set up a joint working group, involving officials of the health and social justice departments, to share experiences and best practices in their respective campaigns against drugs.Two of the BJP-ruled States — Haryana and Himachal Pradesh — disclosed that they were considering a legislation on the lines of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) to tackle the drug menace in their States. Chief Ministers of the northern States, including those of Punjab, Rajasthan, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, joined by top officials from Delhi, Jammu & Kashmir and Chandigarh, agreed on a series of measures to eradicate the drugs scourge from the region, they said in a statement after their second joint conference.‘Joint operations’“These included joint operations at the inter-State borders, information sharing and implementation of the best practices of the participating States,” the officials said in the statement. “There was consensus among the States on the importance of strengthening the information sharing mechanism on drugs and drug dealers-smugglers, for a more effective crackdown against them,” they added.It was also agreed that all the States would initiate major awareness programmes and strive to make eradication of drugs a peoples’ movement. The conference recognised drugs as a national problem, requiring the collective effort of all the States for its successful eradication. It proposed, therefore, to jointly press the Centre to come out with a national drugs policy in order to effectively tackle the growing menace.“We believe that these efforts will go a long way in eradicating this scourge from the region, thus protecting our youth and our future generations, and ensuring a safe, secure and healthy society,” they said in the joint statement. The States also reiterated their commitment to “continuing and strengthening the process of consultation and cooperation, to collaborate even more closely and actively for making the region ‘Nasha Mukt’.