It is amazing just how much incorrect information about energy is spread in public, and the public just seems to believe it.

Even worse are the journalists who write this stuff – do they really believe it or are they writing and giggling with glee at how many readers will be conned?

This does not happen in other professions. Imagine a news story that stated that some florist had come up with a new brain surgery technique in which you could do your own surgery in your own kitchen, with nothing but a steak knife and a pair of pliers. Who would believe that?

Who would believe a story stating that passenger jet engines are now being repaired by two carpenters and a bricklayer in their garage? But come up with any renewable- energy story, no matter how far-fetched, and people seem to believe it.

I read one rambling load of you-know-what in a newspaper. It was headlined ‘Renewable energy can solve SA’s water scarcity’. It quoted the VP of a solar energy company.

He said that shifting to renewable energy would save South Africa billions of litres of water. He reportedly said: “By investing in renewable energy, [South Africa] will significantly decrease the amount of water used at coal power stations.” Really?

No matter how successful any renewable- energy system is in South Africa, nobody is going to switch off any coal-fired power station. We need extra energy. Get it? We are not planning to switch off any water-cooled coal-fired power stations.

The solar energy VP said: “This means that freshwater which could be distributed to areas in need of water is used for electricity instead.” Really? So, if a coal-fired power station were to stop using water from the river in Mpumalanga, then we would pump that river water to the Free State instead? Come off it.

He did not stop there. Referring to water research, he intoned: “The research also reveals that Eskom uses around 316-billion litres of water a year, and this will impact on the economy going forward.” Really? Why?

What is ‘the economy’ going to do with this water at remote coal power station sites? Remember, the power stations are built in the bundu, where the coal is. It should also be remembered that, many years ago, South Africa became the world leader in building very large air-cooled coal stations.

Another point that continues to irritate me is the silly misunderstanding about water ‘being used up’. Water is not used up – it is only moved around. Water is indestructible in daily life. All the water that was on planet earth in the days of the dinosaurs is still here – every drop of it. All the water that is taken from a river into a plant leaves the plant, either as liquid water back into the river or out of a cooling tower as water vapour. If it goes out as water vapour, it rises into the air and forms clouds. The clouds later form rain and the rain falls back to the ground.
No water is ‘used up’ – it is merely moved to somewhere else.

Let us get something else straight – South Africa is not short of water. Our longest border is the ocean; we have access to all the water we want. If we want to use the seawater, it has to be desalinated and moved to where we want it. The water on Robben Island is supplied in this way.

Water supply is an energy issue. Water is not destroyed – it moves lower and lower, gravitationally speaking, as determined by the laws of physics.

If you want ‘more water,’ you have to pump it to a higher level – if Mother Nature is not doing that for you by raining in a convenient place. It requires energy to lift water.

The article also stated that “South Africa is projected to experience a 17% gap between water supply and demand by 2030.”
Think about that statement. Conveniently, it turns out to be 1% a year from now on. So they claim we should be 1% ‘short’ this year. Oh yeah! That means what exactly?

Perhaps we must drink imported beer and bottled water, like 1% of national water consumption. Oh, but then it will all end up in the loo, and so into a river. Great, South Africa now has 1% more water in the rivers. But wait – the rivers run into the sea.

It is time that readers started to think a bit more deeply when reading wild renewable- energy claims. Journalists should think even more deeply.

The solar energy company VP also managed to slip in this statement: “Photovoltaic solar energy, for example, is practically a water-free process.” Why did the journalist not ask about the word ‘practically’?

When these solar panels are in the dusty Northern Cape, how do you wash the dust off them? At least they have lots of working time – the 75% of a 24-hour cycle when the sun does not shine or when the sun is very low in the sky and so producing virtually no electricity.
If you need electricity for the solar panel washing process, you can always get it from a coal-fired power station – they work 24 hours a day.