Averting a Power Crisis: Is Curtailing Electricity Consumption the Best Option?

It seems logical, doesn’t it? If there was a hole in your boat, through which the water entered, what would you do? Plug it. If you lifted a box that proved to be too heavy for you, what would you do? Let it down a while, and unload a little. If you had colds, and it was making it hard for you to breathe, what would you do? Blow your nose.

The parallel couldn’t be clearer: If electricity was not enough, and consumption was outstripping the supply, what would a country, a province or a city do? Curtail the demand by all means, even if it means limiting work hours and mandating energy savings. But, does it really solve the problem, or is such a solution merely palliative?

Many hydropower-dependent countries around the world are facing an electricity shortage, owing to prolonged droughts brought about by the El Nino weather phenomenon. The absent or extremely low rainfall levels is choking off hydroelectric dams essential for supplying a lion’s share of the countries’ electricity resources. Because the countries’ power generation is severely hampered, governments and utility providers are forced to implement drastic electricity-conservation measures to make do in the face of the energy challenge.

Aside from load shedding and peak shaving, some countries have started rolling out a mandatory additional day-off for certain sectors, in an effort to control power consumption. While some employees welcome such directives, others are feeling apprehensive. Marta, 45, government employee, shares her thoughts. “I should be happy that I have more time to catch up on sleep and play with my kids, but I am worried about our productivity.” Just a few months ago, Marta’s office cut the working time short by two hours. “A lot of things are not getting done, because we were only working for six hours a day for five days. I cannot imagine what happens now that we will only be working for four days.”

Economists share Marta’s perspective, when they said that decreasing the number of working hours and shortening the work-week for government offices and private companies could worsen the countries’ already reeling economic performance. They said that the implementation of such measures could bring about devastating effects to the countries’ economic productivity, already depressed from the power crisis.

Alberto, 51, restaurateur, does not subscribe to the four-day work-week. “I cannot afford to have my restaurant closed for three days a week. It’s just not possible from a business stand-point.” Unfortunately, Alberto’s restaurant is in front of Marta’s office, so the four-day work-week affects its footfall. “Most of my customers are from that office. They take lunch here, and used to take something out for dinner. When they started working for two hours less, most of them stopped ordering for dinner, but at least they still eat lunch. Now, that they are off for three days, I don’t know how I can fill up the seats.”

Power-conservation measures, such as shortening work-hours, may have merits in immediately controlling electricity consumption, but there could be productivity-related drawbacks underneath the surface. As most businesses and industries need electricity to be productive, requiring them to suspend operations to save on power may be counter-productive to a certain extent.

In times when a country’s power generation is no longer enough to support the demand, governments and power utility providers may find benefit in turning to temporary power solutions to urgently supply the necessary electricity.

By having temporary power solutions on board, governments and power utilities need not spend scarce resources on capital purchase, which is usually the case when building permanent power plants, or refurbishing/rehabilitating old permanent power stations. Moreover, governments and power utilities can pay for the electricity produced by the hired power plants from their operating revenues. Hiring temporary power solutions also brings considerable cost savings, owing to the efficiency and reliability of temporary power technologies. Governments and power utilities will be able to save on fuel- and maintenance-related costs, vis-à-vis running or maintaining dated permanent power facilities.

Temporary power plants are flexible in power and voltage, and their capacity can be increased or decreased according to demand, so governments and power utilities can choose to add power modules as the requirement for power increases. Readily available and rapidly deployed and installed anywhere in the world, they temporary power plants are able to function in virtually any locations, including in areas where traditional power infrastructure, like grids and substations, is outdated, damaged or absent.

Temporary power plants are capable of supplying reliable electricity while droughts persist. As soon as the weather conditions improve, and dams have enough water to generate sufficient electricity, governments and power utilities can simply end the contract, and the temporary power solutions will be demobilized, leaving no idle permanent infrastructure or equipment.

Power supply insufficiency adversely affects big and small businesses alike, like Alberto’s restaurant; government services, as in the case of Marta; and an entire country’s economy. Persistent power outages result in hampered economic productivity that reins in the development of any country. In times of power-related challenges, such as drought for hydropower-dependent countries, temporary power technologies can supply the necessary electricity to keep businesses and industries going, while natural conditions eventually turn favorable.

End

PRESS INQUIRIES

Altaaqa Global

Tel: +971 56 1749505

rbagatsing@altaaqaglobal.com

For more information on temporary power solutions, visit: http://www.altaaqaglobal.com