SEDA Malaysia clarifies on 1% surcharge in electricity bills

Lately, people have been talking in the negative tones and putting the 1% levy on electricity bills in a bad light.

The social media talked about this surcharge as 'an increase in the electricity bills' that is inevitable as the government is looking to recover some of its expenses in the run up to the election. This is NOT TRUE.

I have been following the FiT Scheme development in Malaysia and the 1% surcharge is imposed only on consumers consuming higher-than-average energy - as a rough guideline, consumers with monthly bill of RM77 and above.


This is what SEDA Malaysia has to say:

KUALA LUMPUR, May 2 (Bernama) -- The Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA) Malaysia has clarified that the one per cent surcharge in electricity bills is a contribution towards the Renewable Energy (RE) Fund for the Feed-in Tariff (FiT) mechanism, which commenced on Dec 1, 2011.

SEDA Malaysia today issued a statement to clarify the purpose of the surcharge imposed by Tenaga Nasional Bhd in its electricity bills to consumers.

Chief Executive Officer Badriyah Abdul Malek said: "This clarification is necessary because we noticed that the surcharge has become an issue in the online social network over the past few weeks.

"The main function of the RE Fund is to pay the tariff for the electricity generated from renewable sources by renewable energy producers and individuals under the FiT mechanism, which is managed and administered by SEDA Malaysia," she said.

The fund, established through the enforcement of the Renewable Energy Act 2011, is an important part of the FiT mechanism to spearhead the growth of renewable energy in the country.

The public is urged to seek clarification with SEDA Malaysia on any questions regarding the one per cent surcharge.
Source: SEDA website.


TheGreenMechanics: Don't take the stories in the social media at face value.

Battle of the Currents: Is AC better than DC?

A somewhat strange question, isn't it?

If you ask someone in the plywood and wood veneer or paper industry, you would probably hear a lot more  about direct current (DC) applications than those in other sectors. If you are in water production, almost all of your pumps would be driven by induction motors powered by alternating current (AC).

So which system or technology is better?

Two of the pioneers in electrical engineering field have different preference: Thomas Edison is advocating DC and Nikola Tesla on AC. We continue to argue and these gentlemen would have been proud of that long legacy, and the fact that we are still caught in the loop of disagreement.

Image courtesy of ABB

A global leader in both AC and DC technologies, Asea Brown Boveri (ABB), takes a look at pitting these two from the perspective of modern technology, the Data Centres:
(ABB says it didn't take side)

1) DC is more efficient than AC: DC proponents claim 25-30% efficiency improvement, AC advocates counter with data that implies marginal if any differences in power supply efficiencies.
The fact is, if you compare a state-of-the-art AC power supply with a similarly advanced DC power supply, the efficiency improvements for DC are indeed only in the range of 2%.

 However, when comparing true efficiency “from grid to chip,” DC power architecture is typically 8-12% more efficient, depending on the IT power supply. Granted there is no disagreement that other factors such as server loading and cooling have a more profound impact on data center efficiency than the power architecture but every improvement matters.

2) DC is more reliable than AC: Independently collected empirical data as well as laboratory tests give evidence that DC power systems increase reliability over comparable AC systems by a factor of up to 100.Flip that coin, and you could say that DC allows simplification of power systems architecture without jeopardizing availability.

3) DC is cheaper than AC: This angle of the debate has seen a fair amount of cheating but ABB says that, analysis shows that the true cost of a DC power system (including switchgear, UPS, cabling etc.) is at least 20 % lower than that of a comparable AC architecture.

However, as pointed out above, the biggest cost savings lies in the potential to simplify the architecture and achieve the same (or greater) savings with significantly less equipment.


Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication!

Speaking of simplicity, an indisputable advantage of DC is that it allows to connect multiple energy sources such as the utility grid and on-site generated power (e.g. from fuel cells, solar, wind etc.) onto a common bus without complicated controls and synchronization.

This, I agree totally, 100%. Sophistication should simplify things and not make it difficult.



Reference: ABB

Fire risk: GM recalls 43,500 hybrid cars in North America

Oh no. This is not a good news at all for hybrid vehicles big community.

In a rare incident, GM is recalling hybrid car models for issues related to 'potential overheating of the circuit board' that could lead to a loss of battery charge and cause the engine to stall. Models affected are:

• Chevrolet Malibu Eco 2013
• Buick LaCrosse 2012 - 2013
• Buick Regal sedan 2012 - 2013

Recalling is uncommon in vehicle industry, but let's hope this will not halt the progress and dim people's enthusiasm for energy-efficient cars.

BTW, this hybrid is powered by a combination of a 2.4-liter 4-cylinder gas engine and a 15-hp electric motor, is priced at $25,995 in the US. That's about RM77,036 in Malaysia in dollar-to-dollar conversion. I bet it will cost you no less than RM160,000 in our 'import-friendly' car market!

The Chevrolet Malibu Eco

As reported by the press:

General Motors is recalling nearly 43,000 hybrid vehicles in the United States and around 500 in Canada to fix a defect that could cause a fire in the trunk, the automaker said Monday.

The recall affects Chevrolet Malibu Eco models from the 2013 model year and Buick LaCrosse and Regal sedans from 2012 and 2013 which are equipped with eAssist hybrid gas-electric engines.

"The issue is the potential overheating of the circuit boards in the generator control module, but it does not involve the eAssist battery," GM said in a statement.

GM said an overheating circuit board could lead to a loss of battery charge and cause the engine to stall.

"In addition, there may be a burning or melting odor, smoke, and, in rare instances, a fire in the trunk," GM spokesman Alan Adler said in a statement.

Most of the incidents occurred within the first 1,000 miles of operation, GM said and only two led to trunk fires. One was during an October screening in a dealership and the other occurred in March.

No injuries or crashes were reported as a result of the defect, GM said.
Source: The Bangkok Post