BEC's Unfriendly Plans for Abaco

by Dave Ralph

For all our concerns about the environment, no one seems to be perturbed about the potentially serious consequences of the proposed power plant on Abaco by the Bahamas Electricity Corporation. This plant is being considered inland from Wilson City, and calls for generators using Bunker C fuel oil.

The use of Bunker C has the potential to lower the cost of electricity as it is the next cheapest energy source after coal. It is sometimes referred to as liquid coal as it is nearly as messy and polluting as coal. Bunker C is a thick, black semi-viscous liquid similar to the liquid tar used to surface roads. It is thick enough to require being heated to push it through pipelines or be used as an engine fuel.

The exhaust emissions from a Bunker C-fueled plant are high in sulfur compounds, contributing to acid rain. As a country, we have not had any direct experience with the consequences of acid rain. However, our prevailing southeast winds will carry the exhaust plume from Wilson City over farm lands and water reserves to the north and further on to Central Abaco. Perhaps the emissions are small enough and the dispersal area is large enough to minimize the consequences.

Equipment using Bunker C has much higher maintenance requirements and associated costs than engines using diesel fuels. We do not know the net effect of cheaper fuel coupled with higher maintenance. But as a country, we are not noted for being particularly good at maintaining equipment.

One of the key requirements for the new BEC plant is a location that allows direct tanker access for fuel oil deliveries. The present plant on Abaco is using approximately 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel each day, delivered by truck. A shallow draft coastal-tanker delivering 100,000 gallons is providing only a five-day supply.

Since BEC’s present policy is to maintain a uniform price for electricity throughout the islands, A higher or lower cost at any one plant would make a minimal difference to their overall production costs. BEC is mandated to make electricity and to this end our laws discourage or prohibit innovations which might cause BEC to sell less electricity.

The need for more electricity to service a growing economy is met with expansion plans with little apparent thought to conserving power by consumers or for environmental consequences. Aggressive electrical conservation measures in many parts of the world have resulted in power plants being able to service growing populations. Typically, there is unused capacity to produce power between midnight and dawn.

Some power districts have found innovative ways to capitalize on this underused capacity to offset power requirements during the day. A simple example is a cheaper electric rate for customers making their hot water after midnight, controlled by a clock. However, we recognize that devices controlled by conventional clocks on Abaco have problems giving reliable time due to power outages.

We expect to hear more from government as plans for the new BEC plant become known. As a country, we are short of water; yet there is minimal effort directed to conservation. Shortages of water are usually met with expansion plans to produce more, followed by grumblings over the foreign exchange needed to pay for the added fuel requirements.

The Water and Sewerage Corporation is mandated to sell us water; therefore, water saving measures are not widely encouraged. Our politicians and upper level civil servants are beginning to recognize various conservation measures. Global warming issues have brought some of this concern to our attention. Being a low-lying coastal country, rising sea levels are a major concern for future generations.

While the Bahamas attends global conferences and agrees with the various treaties and strategies, very little is done locally in support of these global strategies. Agreeing with decisions in the Pacific to show that we are in accord with world concerns does not mean we have to scrap existing technology. But it strongly implies that designing a power plant from scratch gives the opportunity to show that we care about global issues and can take the necessary steps to cooperate in these matters.

For example, reducing carbon emissions globally is an often mentioned goal. Since we don’t have smokestack industries, we are left out of this solution. However, we do have the opportunity to show that we are concerned by installing a carbon-friendly generating plant on Abaco. On a global scale, this would be a minuscule contribution, but it fits Abaco’s image as being a leader in issues of this nature. Installing a carbon belching power station deep in the woods does not fit with Abaco’s goals or image.

Our new sanitary landfill is an example of an upgrade, and using the latest technology. A new dump was needed. Rather than replicating a similar dump further out of sight, a state-of-the-art land-fill was designed. If it was done right, it will pay dividends to our environment for years to come.

We have been told that The Bahamas is the largest emitter of carbon in the Caribbean, probably from our extensive fleet of motor vehicles. We will be adding to these emissions when a new Bunker C generating comes on-line.

Remedies to reduce these emissions here might be as simple as a graduated duty based on engine size, a vehicle with a small engine would pay lower duty while large engines would pay higher duty. How much horsepower does it take to move around on New Providence, an island 21 miles long, where most of the engine time is spent stuck in traffic?

We are dismayed that none of our various environmental groups are engaged in these issues of which Bunker C is only a minor component. Individually, we install compact fluorescent light bulbs or adjust our water heaters to reduce electricity consumption, but there is no collective effort on these conservation measures. Some countries distribute or subsidize energy-efficient light bulbs because when these bulbs are widely used, the energy savings to the power plant are significant. These are just two examples of the ways we can conserve electricity.

We are not aware of the status of the new BEC plans. It is possible that the engines are on order. This is another case where some public consultation would have been in order. We should commend government for recently establishing a high-level group to explore alternate energy sources and to consider legislative changes to facilitate energy innovation. Hopefully, suggestions from the public will be welcomed.

•Dave Ralph is editor/publisher of the Abaconian newspaper based in Marsh harbour. For more information click here.

Comments

[Tim Roberts]

Unfortunately this may end up in the pile of 'things we should have been more vocal about'.

It seems government moves too quickly toward ill advised solutions, while long overdue needs continue to languish.

It certainly is worth engaging the government concerning this power plant, which is ALSO going to be built precariously close to an area that holds a part of Abaco's history.

Yet another part of history and culture disregarded. When will the Bahamas' Government wake up and realize that our history, culture and environment are our #1 industry? Certainly we could use a reliable power plant, but not at the the expense of our heritage.

[EB Christen]

Wake up Bahamas!

That should be the slogan of a new political movement/campaign that is focused on environmental, cultural and transparency issues in the country. It's key policy issues could be:

1. Pressing for a REAL and MEANINGFUL Freedom of Information Act
2. Pressing for a stronger and independent environmental organization that evaluates proposed projects
3. Pressing for the preservation of the Bahamas cultural and historical treasures and attempting to bring them in to the concept of our tourism product so that their preservation pays for itself.
4. Pressing for energy conservation and renewable energy throughout the Bahamas for power production and transportation.
5. Pressing for government policy reform on pertinent issues as they arise. Flexibility here, but keeping the inspiration from the first four. EG Downtown restoration, Education Reform, Shipping/Container port relocation etc

The Bahamas needs to stop sleeping in our drunken sunshine stupor and WAKE UP!

[John Hedden]

It is with much interest and support that I have been following the new awareness of environmental protection being exhibited by our senior politicians. Various ministers have made statements that truly warm the rapidly fading heart of the Bahamian vocal minority.

The minister of works has indicated that the removal of hills and ridgelines long exploited for fill must be halted. He also indicated that he is complicit with the protection of valuable marshes, dune ridges, and other marine barriers.

The deputy prime minister has intimated that golf courses and marinas are environmentally damaging and, as such, will only be constructed when absolutely necessary.

The prime minister has stated several times that a new awareness of family island development will include a special attention to the natural environment, and its protection for future Bahamians.

However very recently I am becoming confused and disoriented over these planned developments

I understand that the minister for works, and the chairman of B.E.C. both want to provide lots of cheap energy to the consuming public here; and as such are planning to install a (bunker C fired) poli-megawatt power plant on the east coast of the Abaco mainland. The long suffering public has become so fed up with high electricity prices that they have even demonstrated against their exploitation by one Mr. Watt.

I also understand the minister of works decision to safeguard the respectable citizens of Marsh Harbour by arresting the destruction of the hills protecting them from the ravages of storms from the east and south.

I also understand the idea behind the implementation of the landfill and waste project designed to efficiently and cleanly eliminate waste from our settlements and the metropolis of Marsh Harbour.

I also try to understand that the planned developments in the South, and to the North, and in the middle will ultimately benefit the growing population of the Abaco’s.

However I do have a problem marrying these high and elevated ministerial statements with the reality of the implemented activities that appear at lowly ground level where most of us actually live.

The planned BEC expansion will be using a fuel that is the left over of the distillate production of gasoline, diesel, and heavier oils. Bunker C is full of sulphur compounds, as well as other toxic and corrosive chemicals that have over the years significantly contributed to the ‘acid rain’ that continues to dog the industrial world. The chemicals contained in this fuel are also highly corrosive to the engine components of the machinery it powers. I would surmise therefore that by using a ‘cheap fuel’ the Bahamian government will also be significantly contributing to atmospheric pollution. In addition the maintainance scheduling for the engines will also be extremely high, and expensive, thus driving up the cost per kilowatt hour of the electricity produced. I also wonder about the fact that our local engineers have major problems with maintainance of presently existing power plants? (This question of course waxes rhetorical).

In the same breath it would appear to me that continued ridge removal is occurring on Abaco, in the form of excavations and levelling taking place a short distance before Turtle Rocks, south east of Treasure Cay. Will this breach eventually separate the large island of Abaco again?

In another breath, the department of environmental health continues to implement the waste collection and disposal project here on Abaco even though the minister for health has admitted the mistake of locating two transfer stations over valuable large fresh water aquifers, one of which supplies the anchor project of Winding bays, as well as the settlement of Cherokee. Perhaps the minister would also care to explain the effectiveness of both transfer stations, and their impact on the surrounding forest?

In another breath again it would appear that planned anchor development projects outside of Sandy Point, Schooner bay, Hole in the Wall, Angel Fish Point,(and possibly) Snake Cay; will out of necessity involve golf courses, marinas, and possibly airports. How will the infrastructure (funded by the Government) ever be able to keep up without more taxes, and less concessions? How will the Bahamian labour pool be able to cope?

More importantly to the VOCAL MINORITY of course is the planned integration of these ecologically destructive projects into habitats of protected Abaco Parrots, creek and fish nurseries, water run off systems, and the wetland barrier against catastrophic storms? (Again the question becomes rhetorical).

I would therefore humbly suggest that our illustrious ministerial cadre come back down to earth (like the rest of us) and allow the whole Bahamas to take a breath while we still have enough oxygen!

[Tim Roberts]

EB Christen:

I totally agree. Transparency AFTER the fact is not transparency, and if thats what they think the Bahamian people ought to expect they got another thing coming!

Unfortunately, the MASSES are not concerned enough, and therefore the government is not concerned enough.

I am a proponent of getting the right amount of environmental education to our youth. Take them on field trips to see and 'handle' to a certain degree. The younger they are the better. Teenagers loose the sense of wonder at a cave or tree or an old building.

And if we don't start now it will be too late. I am disheartened (I know they are all politicians) that the PM has been speaking of this transparency and yet is feeding us only half truths. He is talking of being environmentally friendly, yet they are not being good stewards.

Its frustrating to see that the government appears to understand what they OUGHT to do, and they still go ahead with things they OUGHT NOT to do.

[HELGA HOFFMANN]

HELLO, I WAS READING MANY LETTERS ABOUT THE COMING POWERPLANT IN ABACO.
THERE IS NOWHERE ANY INFORMATION OF THE REAL EMISSIONS. MAYBE IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO INFORM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THAT.
THERE IS AN INTERNATIONAL LAW ABOUT THAT.

HOW HIGH IN % IS THE EMISSION OF:

SULFUR DIOXID
NITROGEN MONOXID
CARBON MONOXID
CARBON DIOXID CO2

ARE THEY UNDER THE ALLOWED LIMITS OF EMISSIONS INTERNATIONAL.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE EASY TO GET AN ANSWER OF MAN WHICH IS BUILDING THE PLANT.
SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE TALKING TOO MUCH BECAUSE THEY DON´T REALLY HAVE THE RIGHT INFORMATION.
THANKS