Last month ABARE, the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics released its Australian energy projections to 2029-30.

The blow dried picture of a wind turbine on the front page is unfortunately very misleading.

The projections take into account the likely effects of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (if it ever comes in), the Renewable Energy Target, and other measures designed to reduce Australia’s carbon footprint.

ABARE predicts that the amount of electricity generated in Australia will increase by nearly 50% on 2007-08 values, or a growth rate of 1.8 percent per year. That’s only just below our projected population growth rate of 2.1%.

Total energy consumption is projected to grow 35% (1.4% a year). Its expected that in 2029-30 coal and oil will still be supplying the bulk of Australia’s energy needs. Renewable energy is expected to supply just 8% of total energy in 2029-30.

Assuming that the emissions factors for coal, oil and natural gas are similar to what they are today (for example that 1 GJ of black coal still produces around 88.43 kg of GHG when combusted), a quick calculation shows that Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions from the use of fossil fuels are likely to be 21% higher in 2029-30 than they were in 2007-08.

The table below shows the maths, using the data in the ABARE report and emissions factors from the Department of Climate Change website.

I find this data deeply disturbing – it appears as though emissions from fossil fuels will increase from 398 million tonnes to 483 million tonnes. Climate change scientists say we need to reduce emissions. Yet Australia’s emissions from the use of fossil fuels appear to be set to increase, with measures such as the CPRS appearing tokenistic.

Which begs the questions, if the CPRS is supposed to reduce emissions by 5% by 2020, how come my calculations show that our emissions from the use of fossil fuels will be higher in 2030? Or is it expected that the emissions factors will lower for coal (for example via “clean coal” technologies)? Or will the emissions reduction come from international carbon trading? As a developed country with one of the highest per capita emissions in the world is this really the best we can do?

Energy conservation (choosing to waste less energy) and energy efficiency (using less energy to achieve the same outcome) have the potential to decrease our energy use if widely uptaken. The climate change science demands a step change in our ability to save energy if we are to avoid ABARE’s disturbing projections.

delamping demonstration

Brett Muncton (City of Melbourne) and Jake Hallas (Sustainability Victoria) gave a entertaining demonstration of how the workbook can be used. The photos above and below show them demonstrating delamping (step two in the workbook) and setting up power saving settings on a PC (step six).

setting computer power management settings

Written by CarbonetiX, the workbook is based on our successful Greenhouse Gossip program, which was launched in 2008. City Switch signatories in the City of Melbourne and City of Port Philip will also be offered a structured mentoring process, aka the Greenhouse Gossip program.

Presentations by Gadens Lawyers, Telstra and Toyota at the launch showed how its possible to achieve significant energy savings in tenancies. In the case of Gadens Lawyers, a 22% saving was achieved over 12 months at no cost. This was achieved by improving switch off practices, step one of the City Switch Workbook.

city switch work book

Details of the City Switch program can be found here. If you aren’t a tenant in one of the City Switch cities and want to participate in a structured mentored program to achieve guaranteed energy savings please inquire about our Greenhouse Gossip program. Its also suited to those who own their own office building in addition to tenants.

Commissioning is a quality-assurance process designed to increase the likelihood that a newly constructed building will meet client expectations. Commissioning stretches over the entire design and construction process. It should ideally begin at the design phase, with selection of a commissioning provider who helps ensure that the building owners and designers’ intent is written into the project documentation.

The design and construction of ‘green’ buildings pose problems similar to those found in conventional building design. This compromises the intent of the design to achieve a high level of energy efficiency in its function. A good sustainable design will include systems that are “right-sized” (rather than the typically oversized mechanical systems) for the building. Over sizing equipment has become a standard design practice, because—due to design, installation, and/or operation errors, systems rarely function at their intended capacity. These errors occur because of the fragmentation between design, construction and operation, resulting from a general lack of a systems approach in the building process. Commissioning can facilitate improved integration and communication between these phases and can also ensure that right-sized systems function as intended and as specified.

If a building is not properly commissioned, it will not perform according to its design intent and will therefore have a poor energy rating. A common reason for inadequate commissioning is the tendency for projects to go over time and budget and for the contractors to drastically pull back on resources to get started on new projects. For this reason, it is widely recognised that engagement in independent commissioning is best practice, as it is carried out objectively without any conflict of interest.

The cutting of costs and resources at the initial commissioning stage will end up costing the facility more money in the long run, as extensive maintenance issues will ensue. Also, the cost of retrofitting is always more financially intensive than implementation as part of the original build.

In conclusion, it is recommended to allow sufficient investment capital to employ independent commissioning at the construction stage, as it will save countless amounts of energy, money and time overall.

Computing equipment continues to get more efficient, and with LED monitors now available at good prices, there is even more opportunity to save energy.

Good power saving settings should be a given for any computer installation. However as you upgrade your computers there are now many ways to save energy. You can switch to laptops or thin client computers. And a new way is to make sure that your next monitor is backlit with LED lighting.

LCD monitors usually have two cold-cathode fluorescent lights in them, one either side of the screen. These are behind the LCD display, and “back light” the screen to make what is on the screen visible. However monitors are now starting to be readily available on the market that use LEDs for backlighting. As LED lighting is very thin, this can enable more effective positioning of the back lighting – for example a grid of LED lights behind the screen.  The higher lamp efficiency of LED lighting as compared to cold-cathode, combined with more effective positioning equals energy savings.

LCD monitor power use - CCD vs LED

For energy efficiency reasons we only run laptops in our office. However we also operate a second screen on each laptop, to improve productivity. We recently purchased a 24” monitor with LED backlighting, and compared with our other 24” monitors this one uses much less – 21 watts vs 39 watts – almost half the energy use.

A monitor with LED backlighting only costs slightly more than a conventional LCD monitor. In our case we paid only around $30 more, and will be saving around $7 a year in energy costs. If we were buying black power, we would also be saving around 46 kg of greenhouse gas annually, equivalent to 900 black balloons.

The payback on the extra money spent on a LED monitor whilst not bad isn’t good either, however for the sake of only $30 I reckon its worth it for the greenhouse savings. And the cost differential will keep on lowering. Additional advantages are a screen with sharper contrast, a slimmer screen, and a product that is easier to recycle as it doesn’t contain cold cathode tubes that contain mercury.

Also LED backlit monitors are not hard to find. Its likely that your computer supplier has one anyway. We purchase all our computers from a shop in down town Frankston, less than one kilometer from our office, and that’s where we got our LED monitor from.

In an earlier blog post I discussed the technical innovation that should make it possible to have a net zero energy building by 2020. This is one of the many innovations that are making that possible.

This is an article “We Cannot Fight Climate With Consumerism” by George Monbiot from his ZSpace Page, Monday, November 09, 2009 http://www.zcommunications.org/we-cannot-fight-climate-with-consumerism-by-george-monbiot.

It outlines and gives examples of the ‘licensing effect’: Researchers have found that buying green can establish the moral credentials that license subsequent bad behaviour.