Eskom is biggest polluter, says Valli Moosa
Steve Hayes
Environment Institute (SAFCEI) earlier this week, and am putting up some
reports of it on the SAFCEI blog at:
One very interesting contribution was from Valli Moosa, former Minister of
Environmental Affairs, and now chairman of the board of Eskom, South Africa's
main electricity provider, which has been in the news recently because of the
power cuts being applied as Eskom's generating capacity has failed to meet
demand. He said that Eskom is the biggest producer of greenhouse gases in the
world.
He also said that there would not be a power crisis if the big aluminium
smelters closed down. See:
http://methodius.blogspot.com/2008/04/storm-in-aluminium-smelter.html
as the capitalist dogs fight.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Ampers Taylor
Minister of
> Environmental Affairs, and now chairman of the board of Eskom, South Africa's
> main electricity provider, which has been in the news recently because of the
> power cuts being applied as Eskom's generating capacity has failed to meet
> demand. He said that Eskom is the biggest producer of greenhouse gases in the
> world.
>
> He also said that there would not be a power crisis if the big aluminium
> smelters closed down. See:
Personally, even if I lived in Cape Town, I would rather see the ZAR
19,100,000,000 (ZAR19.1B) spent on improving power stations rather than
an Underground System so they can bid for the 2016 Olympics. And what
huge slice of the ZAR19.1B will be taken up on a line to Robbin Island
(all under the sea which is costly to say the least) so visitors can be
told how terrible the white South africans were to Mandela.
Ampers.
Mungo Campbell
"Steve Hayes" <haye...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aap8v31cl53ihjmdk...@4ax.com...
If Valli Moosa is saying Eskom 's contribution to greenhouse gas pollution
is the largest of any single corporation he may well be right.. However
comparisons can also be usefully be made on other bases e.g. by comparing
countries, or continents, or classes of industry.
The European Space Agency's Envisat satellite is one of the world's largest
and most sophisticated instruments for monitoring atmospheric pollution on a
global scale. It carries a spectrometer which makes it possible to image
concentrations of different particulate and gaseous matter in skies across
much of the world.
Observations made in this way reveal high columns of nitrogen dioxide and
other gases rising from major cities across North America, Europe and China
as well as from concentrations of pollution producing industry in other
parts of the world. South Africa's highveld power stations show up as a
significant source of pollution in such spectrometry-based imagery, but by
no means the worst source.
Last year an American think tank ranked the world's greenhouse gas
polluters on a country by country basis using a per capita measure. The
study looked at the power producing sectors of each country's economy.
It found that Australian power stations were producing around 11 tonnes of
pollution per person followed by the United States at around 9 tonnes.
Looked at in terms of total output per country however, the United States
moved into first place, China into second place and so on down to Australia
at seventh place and South Africa at eighth. The United States' power sector
was found to be producing nearly 3 billion tonnes of greenouse gas compared
toSouth Africa's 222 million tons. Looked at in terms of individual power
station, Taiwan's Taichung Power Station, with an emissions rate of over 40
million tonnes of CO2 per year, was judged the world's worst .
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/nov/16/pollution
Mungo Campbell
Steve Hayes
<mungo.c...@redyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Last year an American think tank ranked the world's greenhouse gas
>polluters on a country by country basis using a per capita measure. The
>study looked at the power producing sectors of each country's economy.
>It found that Australian power stations were producing around 11 tonnes of
>pollution per person followed by the United States at around 9 tonnes.
>Looked at in terms of total output per country however, the United States
>moved into first place, China into second place and so on down to Australia
>at seventh place and South Africa at eighth. The United States' power sector
>was found to be producing nearly 3 billion tonnes of greenouse gas compared
>toSouth Africa's 222 million tons. Looked at in terms of individual power
>station, Taiwan's Taichung Power Station, with an emissions rate of over 40
>million tonnes of CO2 per year, was judged the world's worst .
>
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/nov/16/pollution
Thanks for the link!
Konrad Krause
Steve Hayes schrieb:
geotek
better; what about nuclear medicine and all that waste? Plastic too, should
be banned. Let's bring Africa back to the glory days!
geotek
"Steve Hayes" <haye...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aap8v31cl53ihjmdk...@4ax.com...
Clarissa Schmied
> Yes, get rid of aluminum and electricity. Why stop there? Iron isn't much
> better; what about nuclear medicine and all that waste? Plastic too, should
> be banned. Let's bring Africa back to the glory days!
> geotek