How sticking with coal power in SA can cost 50% of future possible direct jobs, with at least 1,000 times more climate destruction (but probably far more).
The comparison here is between Eskom’s 2100MW Arnot Power Station (800 jobs) and the Ilanga-1 Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) with storage facility in the Northern Cape (80 jobs).
Similaire à How sticking with coal power in SA can cost 50% of future possible direct jobs, with at least 1,000 times more climate destruction (but probably far more).
Similaire à How sticking with coal power in SA can cost 50% of future possible direct jobs, with at least 1,000 times more climate destruction (but probably far more). (20)
Top Rated Pune Call Girls Sinhagad Road ⟟ 6297143586 ⟟ Call Me For Genuine S...
How sticking with coal power in SA can cost 50% of future possible direct jobs, with at least 1,000 times more climate destruction (but probably far more).
1. How renewable energy in South Africa is already creating
TWICE as many direct jobs, ONE THOUSAND times less climate
destruction.
COAL: Eskom Arnot: 2100 MW SOLAR: Ilanga CSP1: 100MWe
Total employees: 800 Total employees: 80
Employees per MW: 0.38 Employees per MW: 0.8
Annual economic destruction via climate
breakdown (social cost of carbon at $45
tonne): 0.930kg/kWH: R6.3 billion
Annual economic destruction via climate
breakdown (social cost of carbon at $45
tonne): 0.023kg/kWH: R6 million
Notes: Ilanga-1 is solar thermal with storage, so it is dispatchable renewable energy available after dark. The
social cost of carbon used here is the conservative estimate used by the Obama administration. These
calculations still exclude the impacts of air pollution and other substantial externalities from Arnot, such as the
carbon impact of construction. Full calculations available on the Fossil Free SA website: www.fossilfreesa.org.za.
