Posted By: Abaco local On: 4/10/2010

Title: Erasmus Folly, you are right!

Even utility scale solar PV (wind is cheaper) would save consumers money now and after it is paid off in 15 or so years, would provide many years of very cheap or virtually free electricity, given that solar PV has a 35 year warrantee. Doing this will decrease pollution and create much needed JOBS now!

Posted By: Erasmus Folly On: 4/9/2010

Title: Government is the problem right now.... not the solution. They are lying through their teeth about renewables and they know it - they just scared of losing revenue - that's not good enough.

We need to go green. The sooner the better. We need green/alternate energy backed up with the ability create power from LNG when needed. Our primary goal should be to invest in as much wind and solar energy as possible as soon as we can. The 'cost' of petro products will only go up over time. There is no doubt. China and India are undergoing massive growth. The USA has only 350,000,000. India has just under 1,000,000,000 and China has just over 1,000,000,000. Those two countries alone could drive fuel prices to 200 dollars a barrel within 20 years. We need to get off the black crack and get on to something better... and fast! Not only will it be better for our environment and our tourism, but even more importantly, it will protect our US dollar and foreign currency holdings as we don't have to 'export' hard earned tourist dollars to pay for our energy needs. The Bahamas could even develop a sovereign wealth fund and invest internationally on behalf of its people. We need to really start thinking outside the box! Allowing the government to say, well, we can't do this, we can't do that, because that would deprive government of revenue - who cares - our economy will be 10 times stronger, we can develop other revenue streams and shrink the size of our overly inflated government bureaucracy. Government is here to serve us, not the other way around. We should not be constrained by its needs - it is the other way around.

Posted By: HP On: 4/7/2010

Title: Tourism and thick black smoke

I'd like to add that the negative effect on tourist dollars of seeing the thick black smoke rising from a Bunker C plant would be far more damaging to the entire local and Bahamian economy than a slightly higher electric rate to offset the costs of cleaner fuel would be. This choice doesn't safeguard the Bight from spills or collisions with the local reefs, but it's much less chemically damaging to the downwind settlements and to tourism. When a significant draw of tourists and investment dollars to the Bahamas is pristine natural beauty, destroying that beauty is definitely not in the best interests of the Bahamian government or the Bahamian people.

Posted By: AD On: 4/7/2010

Title: Inform & Educate

Having gone to some of the meetings here in Abaco and learning about the proposed power plant and finding out about Bunker C and Diesel first hand, and through the information provided by Abaco Cares and RDC, I will say that before people make up their minds either way they should do as much as they can to be informed and educated. Look at what BEC said and then compare with the actual facts of cost, environmental impact, etc. Instead of reacting to statements of others do research. In this age of global information the knowledge is there at your fingertips.
Once informed, speak up. Let your voice be heard. Living in Abaco has made me much more aware of community, so be a part of it. We all have to live here together.

Posted By: Ron On: 4/7/2010

Title: The truth is out there

To Stephen,
Having seen the report, I can tell you that the cost analysis is broken down by line item and cost basis so BEC is free to pick it apart. Notice that BEC has yet to produce a cost report and has just thrown out numbers ranging from 3 million to 9 million as the expected cost difference. Given that NTH consultants pegs the cost at about 21 million as mentioned in the article, do you really believe that BEC is going to save almost half of that cost? Okay, maybe the fuel cost by the time it gets to the Bahamas is more than 21 million, but that would be a further negative against bunker C considering the cost of the heaters and stirrers that would be required in the, still to be modified, tankers (according to BEC at the Sept town hall meeting).
It looks like (from their website) NTH consultants are experienced with these sorts of projects and are usually working for the project developers, not as a reviewer. Why would they put their reputation and those large contracts on the line by doing slanted work on this small project, especially when the basis of estimate is broken out? I personally believe NTH Consultants is more accurate than BEC's wild guesses.
The price of electricity will be going up on Abaco regardless of which fuel is used so prepare yourself for the shock. BEC cannot keep the current, Bahamas wide, artificially low prices without government subsidy so it must raise prices.
Regarding the selfish good of the "minority". What would that be? That some Abaconians want their clients and income bringers (foreign vacationers) to keep coming to Abaco considering that probably 80% of the economy is from tourism? Seems like not harming tourism is a benefit to all Abaconians. What about the increased health care costs that will be increasingly apparent in 10 years or so to care for the people that have been exposed to uncontrolled Bunker C emissions on Grand Bahama and Nassau? Avoiding the same costly fate seems like a benefit to all Abaconians. Actually, to all Bahamians since the health costs will be spread out country wide, meaning Abaconians will be subsidizing healthcare cost for Nassau and Grand Bahama.
Lastly, your comment about "the emission [from diesel] can be just as harmful to birds, animals and most importantly man." shows that you have very little knowledge about the subject since your statement is absolutely wrong. Bunker C emissions ARE worse for birds, animals, and most importantly man. NTH consultants said in the report that a Bunker C power plant like planned for Wilson City would NOT be approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), despite BEC's claim that it would. Diesel will not meet US regulations either, however, as noted in the report, it can get there much easier with relatively cheap NOx control since the bad stuff is present at MUCH LOWER concentrations in diesel. And that does not even begin to take into account the uncontrolled toxic emissions that would be coming out of the incinerator, with which BEC planned to burn the Bunker C sludge that can't be used in the engines!

Posted By: confused On: 4/7/2010

Title: Amazed

By reading some of these comments it is amazing that people still think that Abaco Cares or RDA did this for only purely selfish reasons. How sad when you do not read or research like they have done to educate themselves. Shame on BEC and the government for not informing the public on what they proposed to do and have done. Everyone has a right to protect their health and properties. Yes this fight has cost money. But considering the health costs of Bunker c fuel it is a good investment. You should be thanking those who invested time and money to fight to save peoples health, water, environment and tourist dollars.
As far as NTH being paid.... well didn't the company KES get paid by BEC to do the EIA? And how fair and balanced was the Sept 10th meeting? So long that most people tired and left and were unable to ask questions.
As far as more expensive power bills, how do you think they will get the 105 million to pay for this plant? Go to the money tree? Of course they will go up, but not because of diesel. They already use diesel and if they would charge more for diesel then all islands that use diesel should be charged more. They will be targeting Abaco because Abaco Cares!

Posted By: Stephen On: 4/7/2010

Title: The Jury is still out!

To kairosmatt
The article spoke of NTH Consultants findings, however, as someone who is intensely skeptical of any information provided by either side, I would ask for an independent peer review of the study to ascertain its veracity. Consultants are hired and paid money. It would be in the realm of reality that the numbers were 'cooked'. While I am a conservationist myself, I know that each side has an agenda, and the money that is being poured into this Court Case is quite amazing. To think it is all for the sake of Abaco's precious environment is to be deluded. Those involved have financial interests in Abaco and have Environmental Agendas. Not saying that it cannot peacefully coexist, however, with mankind 99 out 100 will side with money over the honorable cause.
I am not ignorant of the fact that there is more to the cost of Bunker C than the price you pay at the pump. However, just as we request the government be transparent in their EIA's we need these RDA and Abaco Cares people to be transparent. What they are doing does NOT reflect the whole of Abaco, however, ALL of Abaco will be affected by what they have done. Who will be responsible if and when the price of electricity goes up? Who will bring relief to those who cannot afford their electricity, a basic necessity of life in these times? I have serious doubts that those who picked up this cause and are running with it have either counted the cost (to ALL ABACONIANS) nor do they care really.
I would dare say, if it came down to it, close to 70% of Abaconians don't want higher prices and will accept whichever fuel gives them the lowest bill.
The most disconcerting thing of this, regardless of the science and the dollars is that the will of the minority will trample the will of the majority. Just as bad, the majority has allowed it by their silence.
I believe, regardless of whatever is decided...which is apparently Diesel, that Friends of the Environment and RDA and Abaco Cares, puts as much effort into ensuring that environmentally safe practices CONTINUE at BEC's new site. Regardless of the fuel, their will be disposal issues, and Diesel can spill in the ocean just as good as bunker c, and can harm the environment just as much (in different ways) and the emission can be just as harmful to birds, animals and most importantly man. So lets see if they disappear or it's just a cause for their own selfish good.

Posted By: kairosmatt On: 4/6/2010

Title: Diesel IS cheaper

To Stephen,
As the article pointed out, the operating costs of both are about the same, but slightly cheaper on the diesel side. The higher energy costs were a threat by the government and BEC to undermine Abaco Cares and RDA community support. It is simply a 'punishment' from government for standing up for ourselves.
As far as health and environment impacts, HFO is far, far worse. This is 100% true. It is only obscured by BEC and, in particular, Fred Gottlieb, who made many deliberately false and misleading statements at the September 10th meeting.
So:
1. HFO is more expensive.
2. HFO emissions are worse for health.
3. HFO will have a much higher environmental impact.
All of Abaco, and the Bahamas, should be cheering this.

Posted By: Stephen On: 4/6/2010

Title: Mixed feelings

It is a great day or maybe not. Here we have two things. The voice of the people (Abaco Cares, RDA et al.) were heard and heeded. With enough effort we can make the government understand the will of the people and conform to it.
However, is this REALLY the will of the people? Being a resident of Abaco I know that the MAJORITY do not support the switch to diesel, because it will come with higher energy costs. The people of Abaco already are having great difficulty keeping up with the bills. The switch from HFO to ADO will not be overwhelming popular in Abaco. This is a case where the voice of a raucous minority has overruled the will of the majority.
I am not speaking at all of whether or not it is environmentally right or wrong...I am merely saying the rights of the majority have been subverted because they were not seeking to change the governments mind, and because the government will bow to the pressures of a few belligerent and loud people. It is also interesting to note that many involved with the Abaco Cares and RDA are not native Abaconians, are wealthier than the average citizen and will not care if their bills go up.
As for the scientific truth behind whether HFO is worse, better or same as ADO too much has been obfuscated purposefully.

Posted By: Alice Kerr On: 4/6/2010

Title: Diesel at Wilson City

"likely to be interpreted as victories"? This IS a BIG victory for RDA, for AbacoCares, and for all the "little people" who have written letters, asked questions, and raised their voices. It is also a lesson for the future: WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE! Thank you, all of you, and congratulations!