Citizen Primaries 2.0 : Energy
On the eighth of January 2006 I wrote the following on the Blog: "Until today, it was our employees that held the primaries. Now the time has come for the employers to hold the primaries". For a number of months, the topics suggested by the world’s experts, namely Energy, Healthcare, Transportation, Economics and Information were discussed on the Web by thousands of different commentators. What emerged from all of this was a document that I personally took to Prodi. I explained while Valium fell asleep bit-by-bit. Then I too fell asleep. It was the eighth of June 2006. I understood one thing, namely that the political parties were dead, all of them, with no exceptions. What was born on that day was not Grillo the “politician” but Grillo the citizen wearing a helmet, who is involved in politics. Then came the V-Days, the gathering of signatures calling for a Clean Parliament and for the Freedom of Information. Then I understood something else, namely that the citizens have no voice and that referendums and popular laws are nothing more than a bad joke. Then followed the Five-Star Civic Lists, the Florence Declaration for Municipal Administration and the decision to establish the National Liberation Movement. The Movement’s election Programme will emerge from the Primaries 2.0’s thanks to your new contributions. The full programme will be posted on this blog on 4 October. Today we are going to look at the issue of Energy.
ENERGY
"If the provisions of Law 10/91 were to be applied strictly, we would use 14 litres of heating oil, or cubic metres of Methane per square metre of net floor area per year to heat our buildings. We are currently using more than this amount.
Since 2002, the German regulations, and more recently the regulations in force in Bolzano Province, set the maximum permissible consumption limits for heating environments at 7 litres of heating oil, or cubic metres of Methane per square metre of net floor area per year. That is less than half of the current Italian average consumption.
Using the labelling convention currently in use for domestic appliances, the level in Bolzano Province would correspond with Class C, while Class B would correspond to a consumption of not more than 5 litres of heating oil, or cubic metres of Methane, and Class A to a consumption of not more than 3 litres of heating oil, or cubic metres of Methane per square metre per year.
As regards the heating of environments, an energy policy aimed at reducing CO2 emissions, in part to avoid incurring any of the fines envisaged in the Kyoto Treaty for any non-compliant Country, must include the following:
- the immediate application of the regulations as envisaged in Law 10/91 and stipulated in European Union Directive 76/93 regarding the energy consumption certification of buildings;
- the establishment of Bolzano Province’s Class C as the maximum permissible consumption limit in order to obtain building permits both for new buildings and for the renovation of existing buildings;
- a reduction of at least 10 percent in the energy consumption of all public buildings over a period of five years, with monetary fines being imposed for non-compliance;
- Reduced rates on bank advances and regulatory simplifications on energy efficient renovation contracts using the esco (energy service company) method, in other words any renovations carried out at the renovator’s expense and recouped from the anticipated energy savings achieved over time;
- the establishment of regulations regarding consumption-based payment for heating energy in apartment buildings, as envisaged in European Union Directive 76/93, which has already been applied in other European Countries.
The average yield of Enel’s existing thermo-electric power stations is currently around 38%. The standard applicable to the construction of new generation combined cycle power stations is 55/60%.
The widespread co-generation of electricity and heat, where heat is used at the electricity generation facility and the electricity generated is delivered to users in other locations, allows up to 97% of the fuel’s energy potential to be exploited. The current levels of inefficiency and waste resulting from thermo-electric production are technologically, financially and morally unacceptable, both because of its devastating effects on the environment and because it speeds up the rate at which our fossil fuel resources are exhausted as more stocks are hoarded by the wealthy Countries to the detriment of the poorer Countries. As it is, denying essential resources to those who need them is an unacceptable practice, but if the resources then go to waste, it becomes totally inconceivable.
It is not necessary to build new power stations of any kind in order to increase the supply of electrical energy. The first thing to do is to increase efficiency and reduce waste at the existing power stations, while simultaneously increasing the efficiency with which the energy produced is utilised by appliances (light globes, electrical appliances, air conditioners and industrial machinery). Then, and only then, we may decide to build new electricity generation plants if demand continues to exceed supply.
When it comes to the production of electricity and heating energy, an energy policy aimed at reducing CO2 emissions while also increasing the supply must include the following:
- the upgrading of existing thermo-electric power stations while reducing their environmental impact;
- the provision of incentives for the widespread production of electricity by means of technologies that make the most efficient use of fossil fuels, such as the widespread co-generation of electricity and heating energy, beginning with the more energy guzzling buildings, such as hospitals, shopping malls, industries utilising processes that make use of heat energy, sports complexes, etc;
- the expansion of the possibility for micro-generation plants with a total generating capacity of less than 20 kW to sell and to feed excess electricity back to the power grid;
- the provision of incentives for the widespread production of electricity and the extension of the energy account regulations to include electricity from renewable sources and other micro-generation facilities, limiting this to the kW fed into the grid at peak times and excluding the kW fed into the grid during off-peak periods;
- the strict application of the regulations contemplated in the decrees relating to energy efficiency certificates and also taking into account the incentives for the production of electricity from the applicable renewable sources;
- the elimination of the incentives linked to the burning of refuse as included in the CIP6 arrangements and including this amongst the renewable sources without and technical-scientific foundation;
- the legalisation and encouragement of the production of biofuels, subject to the crops being grown for this purpose increasing the organic content of the soil;
- the encouragement of widespread production of heating energy from renewable sources, virgin biomass in particular, in small plants designed for self-sufficiency, including strict controls to ensure that the wood is obtained from differentiated refuse collection and excluding any incentives for long distance distribution of heating energy due to the inherent inefficiency and environmental impact;
- the provision of incentives to encourage the production of biogas obtained from the anaerobic fermentation of organic waste."
Posted by Beppe Grillo at 07:18 PM in Citizen Primaries
| Comments
(2) | Comments in Italian (translated)
Post a comment
| Sign up
| Send to a friend |
| GrilloNews
|
Listen
|
View blog opinions
Tweet |
|
Condividi





















Comments
Who is right ?
Mr Grillo or Mr Wikipedia :
Can be an economical issue the waste ... per wikipedia wast cost 0.001$ per kwh (1)
Can be an issue the cost and the amount of uranium?
Doubling the price of uranium would add only 7% to the cost of electricity produced.
The world's present measured resources of uranium are enough to last for "at least a century" at current consumption rates
(1) To pay for the cost of storing, transporting and disposing these wastes in a permanent location, in the United States a surcharge of a tenth of a cent per kilowatt-hour is added to electricity bills.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_new_nuclear_power_plants
Posted by: Ugo Belli | September 14, 2009 04:43 PM
Who is right ?
Mr Grillo or Mr Wikipedia :
Can be an economical issue the waste ... per wikipedia wast cost 0.001$ per kwh (1)
Can be an issue the cost and the amount of uranium?
Doubling the price of uranium would add only 7% to the cost of electricity produced.
The world's present measured resources of uranium are enough to last for "at least a century" at current consumption rates
(1) To pay for the cost of storing, transporting and disposing these wastes in a permanent location, in the United States a surcharge of a tenth of a cent per kilowatt-hour is added to electricity bills.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_new_nuclear_power_plants
Posted by: Ugo Belli | September 14, 2009 04:42 PM