Home Page |
Home Page for Mobile
africafocus by e-mail - analysis that goes beyond the news
africafocus.org - your first stop for Africa policy issues on the web
http://www.africafocus.org/docs19/clim1910.php
|
AfricaFocus Bulletin
From off-grid solar home systems (SHS) to utility-scale solar and
wind installations, the potential for major advances in use of
renewable energy is growing rapidly on the African continent. If
this potential is materialized at a faster pace, Africa countries
could contribute significantly to mitigating the global climate
crisis. This would also reduce the ongoing damage to the
environmental health of their citizens, whether from kerosene lamps
in rural areas or massive coal pollution in South Africa.
This AfricaFocus contains a short commentary by AfricaFocus editor
William Minter summarizing the potential and the obstacles, as well
as excerpts from a number of relevant documents on recent
developments in both off-grid solar and the difficulties of a
transition from coal to renewable energy in South Africa.
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on climate and the environment,
visit
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jennifer Davis, stalwart champion of majority rule in South Africa
and leader in the anti-apartheid movement in the United States,
died on October 15 in Montclair, NJ, surrounded by her family. She
was 85. Her love, curiosity, honesty, and insistent focus on
building movements to fight for social justice influenced and
inspired countless activists and organizers.
...
Throughout her life, Jennifer was known for her clear-eyed focus on
achieving identified goals, ever refusing to respond to public
provocations. Jennifer's ability to bring together broad coalitions
of individuals working on a common goal was a key to her success.
She remained a militant supporter of struggles for a better South
Africa as well as for movements for change in the United States.
For more see remembrance posted on jennifer-davis.org
Also see profile by Gail Hovey and 2004 interview by William Minter
at http://www.noeasyvictories.org/interviews/int09_davis.php
And this 5-minute video from SABC on her life and legacy of determination.
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++
William Minter, Editor, AfricaFocus Bulletin
From off-grid solar home systems (SHS) to utility-scale solar and
wind installations, the potential for major advances in use of
renewable energy is growing rapidly on the African continent. If
this potential is materialized at a faster pace, Africa countries
could contribute significantly to mitigating the global climate
crisis. This would also reduce the ongoing damage to the
environmental health of their citizens, whether from kerosene lamps in rural areas or massive coal pollution in South Africa.
Driven by technological advances lowering costs year by year and by
the visible effects of the climate crisis, this transition is still
hampered by vested interests in fossil fuels and failures of
government planning agencies to adapt rapidly enough. But there is
more and more documentation of the fact that renewable options are
not only better for the climate and for health but also the least-
cost path. There is much untapped potential for replacing kerosene
lamps, backup power generators, and coal power plants with cost-
effective renewable alternatives, and innovative energy companies
and investors are taking note.
East African countries have pioneered in off-grid solar, laying out
a viable model that could be emulated by other African countries,
including Nigeria. While the primary markets for solar home systems
are still in rural areas, power grids in most African countries are
so beset by frequent power outages that many homes and businesses
that are on the grid must rely on gasoline or diesel generators for
backup power. Solar home systems can already begin to replace
smaller generators, and further technological advances could make
even larger systems cost-effective.
In South Africa, overwhelmingly dependent on expensive and
unreliable coal-based power plants, which supply 77% of the
country´s electricity, recent studies show that for new energy
installations, renewable energy is already the least-cost scenario.
But such a shift faces enormous obstacles, not least the multiple
dysfunctions and effective bankruptcy of Eskom, the scandal-ridden
state-owned electricity agency.
Rapid expansion in solar home systems is an option that has been
well-documented as viable. The latest report by the Global Off-Grid
Lighting Association (GOGLA), released in September, for
example, reported on research in Kenya, Mozambique, Rwanda,
Tanzania and Uganda with customers of seven off-grid solar
companies. Researchers tracked 1,419 customers who purchased solar
home systems for 15 months after purchase, with interviews at 3
months and 15 months. The results were clear:
Credit: Solar Works!
According to a recent Forbes article, there are 600 million
people without access to electricity in Africa, 71 million of them
in Nigeria alone. “At this point, we are barely scraping the
surface,” Alistair Gordon, chief executive of Lumos that is the largest
provider of off-grid solar in Nigeria and Ivory Coast, told Forbes
in an interview that they currently have 100,000 customers, and
that they project providing solar power to 100 million people in
the next 5-7 years. Gordon may be over-optimistic about his
company´s prospects, but there is no doubt about the massive market
potential.
There is also the potential to replace back-up generators, notes a
September report by the International
Finance Corporation (IFC). “With rapid improvement in
efficiency, performance and economies over recent years,” the IFC
concludes, “distributed solar and storage technologies now offer a
superior and effective alternative to the back-up generators that
are proliferating across much of the developing world.” In Nigeria
alone, an estimated 22 million small gasoline generators (4 kVA or
less, excluding larger diesel generators) are reported to have a
collective capacity as much as eight times the capacity of the
electric grid, and are essential to many small businesses as well
as households.
According to research
by energy consultancy Access to Energy Institute (A2EI), “an
effective substitute for small gasoline generators, such as solar
systems, can tap into a $12 billion-a-year market in Nigeria
alone.” A2EI notes that upfront costs are still prohibitive, at
$2,500 for a 1.5kVA solar generator, but regular savings come
from eliminating the need to buy fuel. Further research on more
efficient systems, they calculate, has the potential to reduce the
break-even period to 5-7 years. And while gasoline generators last
approximately 5 years, solar systems have a life span of
approximately 20 years.
The release of South Africa´s Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) in
October 2019 was preceded by considerable optimism among renewable energy
advocates. Both a Treasury report and the ANC´s National
Executive Committee had just affirmed that “the Integrated Resource
Plan should articulate the lowest-cost option for the future energy
mix for South Africa, with increased contributions from renewable
energy sources.” Eskom was reported to be planning a tender for the first
large-scale battery storage project, to enable flexible
integration of solar and wind into the grid. And President
Ramaphosa spoke of an $11 billion green-energy initiative, which would lend
money to Eskom at below-commercial rates, contingent on
accelerating the closure of obsolete coal plants. .
But when the IRP was announced on October 18, the plan called
not only for the decomissioning of 10,500 MW of aging coal plants,
but also for launching 1,500 MW of new coal plants. This was
inconsistent was the least-
cost path scenario detailed by the government Council for
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) in November 2018. And it
was vigorously criticized
by South African environmental justice organizations.
“There is no reasonable basis for building new coal plants when the
technology and costs are clearly in favour of renewables and
flexible generation” says Makoma Lekalakala of EarthLife Africa.
Coal plants built in the 2020s are likely to be abandoned as
stranded assets long before they are paid off, the coalition of
environmental groups noted in their press release.
The South African Parliament has just approved a
$4 billion bailout for Eskom´s debt. But Minister of Finance
Tito Mboweni noted that it would only address payment of debt, much
of it due to
cost overruns on the giant ($20 billion to date) Medupi and Kusile
coal plants. The minister also stressed that Eskom required on
an overhaul of management at all levels. A devastating report by a outside
corporate consulting firm concluded that Eskom had become ”an
operationally dysfunctional, financially insolvent, unreliable and
corrupt entity,” while arguing that urgent attention to fixing
these basic problems must take priority over renewable energy.
Renewable energy advocates agree that implementation of any plans,
including integration of renewals into the grid, requires
fundamental reform in Eskom management, but maintain that doubling
down on coal is sure to worsen rather than improve the situation.
Until South Africa resolves the fundamental issue of how to manage
Eskom, it is likely that the potential for advance in renewable
energy is likely to be implemented more rapidly by hundreds of
thousands of off-grid consumers around the continent than by
entrenched power companies such as South Africa´s Eskom.
**********************************************************
Koen Peters, Executive Director
Global Off-Grid Global Lighting Association (GOGLA)
Sep 23, 2019
Credit: d.light
…
With the lives and livelihoods of 250 million now powered with
solar products and services, demand for off-grid solar has never
been higher. It is providing savings, income, and jobs,
fundamentally improving the quality of life of its customers. Our
latest research ‘Powering
Opportunity in East Africa: Proving Off-Grid Solar is a Power Tool
for Change’ adds to the growing picture of how off-grid solar
is fast helping the world progress on meeting SDGs.
Off-grid solar is tackling climate change, all whilst improving
health, wealth, education and income opportunities. It is
transformational in the fight against climate change, whilst
creating prosperity.
58 million metric tonnes of CO2e emissions have been avoided
thanks to off-grid solar to date, from the technology of our
members and affiliates, over the lifetime of their products. That’s
the equivalent of taking 15 coal-fired power plants offline for a
whole year; quite staggering given the modest size and cost of
these products. This reduction happens the moment a household
switches to solar from one of its predecessor products, the dirty
kerosene lamp, which emits dangerous and toxic black carbon with
high climate-warming potential.
An estimated 270,000 metric tonnes of black carbon is emitted from
kerosene lamps worldwide each year, with a climate-warming
equivalent close to 240 million metric tonnes of CO2. That roughly
equates to 4.5 percent of the United States’ CO2 emissions and 12
percent of India’s. Eliminating these emissions would be equivalent
to a five gigaton CO2 reduction over the next 20 years. Research
shows that households that acquire off-grid solar products do this
in the first place to obtain modern lighting, and then stop using
kerosene. We are tackling climate change this way right now.
However, we need to go further, faster.
1. More economic opportunities
Off-grid solar is creating opportunity across the globe, creating
new jobs and growing income. Recent
research in East Africa found that 34% of households report an
increase in economic activity because of their solar home systems.
28% of households using solar home systems report an increase in
income, on average $46 per month – equivalent to 14% of the
national monthly income per household (based on gross national
income). In more than one-third of households, customers use their
systems for business or income generation; 81% see this resulting
in increased revenues.
2. The boosting of small enterprise and education
Improved access to light and power unlocks previously unproductive
hours. Data shows that solar home
systems enable 21% of users to spend more time working and earning
. In another 21% of households, customers reported using their
solar home system to start a new enterprise, the most common being
a phone charging business.
Beyond enterprise, the additional hours of light created by solar
products lead to more time for children to study. 86% of households
with children report that the younger generation now has more time
to do their homework.
3. Resilience building
Solar home systems can act as a catalyst for more climate-resilient
and sustainable economies, getting us ever closer to the UN’s
Sustainable Development Goals. Specifically, solar provides clean,
vital energy to some of the world's poorest communities; to the
very communities who will be worst affected by climate change. This
is already happening in many parts of the world, where solar is
powering health-centers; pumping clean water; lighting schools;
supporting agriculture and boosting local economies. Solar allows
people the means of generating a sustainable, climate-resistant
income; farmers can grow crops out of season or during droughts
with solar irrigation. Quite literally, solar is powering
opportunity.
4. Improved health and safety
Access to off-grid solar can bring significant improvements to
health and safety. Kerosene lamps emit smoke that contains large
amounts of health-damaging fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Typical
PM2.5 levels in households using kerosene lamps have been found to
be five times higher than the level deemed safe by the World Health
Organization. Yet after replacing kerosene with solar lights, one study found that PM2.5
concentrations in rooms fell by as much as 80%, leading to a 70%
reduction in the average exposure of school children.
Unsurprisingly, 89% of households report health improvements after buying a solar home system,
many of which previously relied on kerosene
91% of households feel safer, too, after purchasing a product. For
some customers, safer means a reduction in injuries from kerosene
burns or falling, for others, it means warding off thieves,
attackers or wild animals at night.
Solar absolutely can and does tackle climate change and boost
prosperity simultaneously. We’ve gone beyond the point of solar
power being a win-win situation; it's a no brainer. The ‘win’ is
instant too; from the moment a customer invests in solar, the
impact is immediate. Better light, cleaner light, cheaper light.
More light to do more. More light to earn more.
As a sector, we must take this technology as far as we can, as fast
as we can. For the sake of the planet and for the 840 million
people still living with little or no access to electricity,
and who will be the hardest hit by the affects climate change.
So together, let’s make this transition happen now. It is our time.
See also Off-grid solar is
a ‘Power Tool for Change’, here’s how to make it mainstream, by
Patrick Tonui, East Africa Regional Representative, GOGLA, Sep 16,
2019
*******************************************************************
International Finance Corporation
September 2019
Around the world, nearly 1 billion people live without access to
electricity, and about 840 million more live with unreliable and
intermittent service from electric grids. For many of them, fossil
fuel backup generators are the only source of power. But these
machines offer a problematic, intermediate solution: their cost of
operation is high, they fill neighborhoods and cities with noise
pollution, and the exhaust is hazardous to health and the
environment.
To better understand the impacts of generators on health,
economies, and the climate, IFC has partnered with the Schatz
Energy Research Center at Humboldt State University to embark on
the most comprehensive inquiry to date into the footprint and
repercussions of using backup generators. This study explores
fundamental questions about the scale and impacts of backup
generators that have been largely unanswered beyond anecdote and
local or regionally focused studies.
Key findings include:
* In developing countries, generators serve 20-30 million unique
sites and have the potential to produce the power equivalent of
700-1,000 coal fired power stations. In some countries, back-up
generators provide more electrical capacity than the national power
grid itself.
* Annual spending on generator fuel is roughly $50 billion—nearly
twice the average hourly cost of grid-produced electricity. In much
of sub-Saharan Africa, there is more spending on generator fuel
than on the maintenance and management of the national grid.
* Generators are a significant source of dangerous pollution,
including sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. While
these chemicals are also released by cars, trucks, and motorcycles,
generators are usually operated extremely close to homes,
businesses, and in crowded commercial districts.
* Backup generators emit more than 100 megatons of CO2 into the
atmosphere every year. In sub-Saharan Africa alone, the CO2 emitted
by generators is equal to nearly 20 percent of vehicle emissions —
the equivalent of 22 million passenger vehicles on the road.
*****************************************************************
Center for Environmental Rights
18 October 2019
In the wake of a new bout of load-shedding, the long-overdue
Integrated Resource Plan for Electricity (IRP) was finally
published for implementation today – following nearly a year of
deliberations, behind closed doors, at the National Economic
Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC).
The Life After Coal Campaign (LAC) and Greenpeace Africa (GP) are
appalled to note that the new IRP forces in 1500 MW of dangerous,
expensive, and unnecessary new coal-based electricity: 750 MW in
2023 and another 750 MW in 2027. This is an addition of 500 MW
since the last draft made available to the public in August 2018.
The intensifying climate strikes and the UN Secretary General’s
repeated appeal for “no new coal power plants after 2020” serve as
a stark warning to South Africa – the reduction of greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions must be prioritised if we are to have any hope of
addressing the existential threat of climate change. The President
promised action to address the climate crisis, but this final
IRP suggests that this promise was empty.
Moreover, the new IRP wilfully ignores all evidence that there is
absolutely no need for new coal in the future electricity mix – it
does not form part of a least-cost electricity plan for South
Africa. Any new coal capacity will simply add to rising electricity
costs and further exacerbate inequality and the economic downturn
in South Africa. Coal plants built in the 2020s will be scheduled
to run well past any reasonable deadline for zero carbon emissions,
and are likely to be abandoned as stranded assets long before they
are paid off. “There is no reasonable basis for building new coal
plants when the technology and costs are clearly in favour of
renewables and flexible generation” says Makoma Lekalakala of
EarthLife Africa. “We no longer need to choose between clean and
cheap electricity – clean energy is an affordable, healthy and
feasible alternative.”
The effects of the climate crisis (droughts, floods, rising
temperatures and fires) already impact countless lives in southern
Africa and cost the fiscus billions. This is quite apart from the
severe health impacts caused by coal-fired power stations. “A
decision to build new coal plants, and thus expose South Africa to
further climate risk and impacts, is a clear violation of the
Constitutional rights to human dignity, life and an environment not
harmful to health and wellbeing” says Robyn Hugo of the Centre for
Environmental Rights.
South Africa faces trillions in transition risk costs as a result
of the delays in sufficiently and timeously tackling the move away
from fossil fuels. The IRP could – and should – be a golden
opportunity to clearly delineate a Just Transition path for the
country. Bold and decisive action is required to eliminate
electricity sources that exacerbate our country’s triple challenge
of poverty, inequality and unemployment. Instead, the updated IRP
will exacerbate the current power cuts, by its irrational selection
of risky coal technologies that cannot contribute to energy
security for many years. “The new IRP is an obvious attempt to
serve the few vested interests in the fossil fuel sector, at the
expense of many”, says Bobby Peek of groundWork.
“This IRP contradicts the urgent need for a Just Transition and is
completely out of touch with reality. South Africa is already a
global air pollution hotspot because of the country’s almost
complete reliance on coal. The IRP’s irrational increase in the use
of coal will only result in yet more deadly toxic air, while
wasting precious water resources and pushing us closer to the brink
of complete climate chaos”, says Happy Khambule, Senior Political
Advisor for Greenpeace Africa. The government is already facing
legal action, in the “Deadly Air” litigation launched by the Centre
for Environmental Rights on behalf of groundWork and Mpumalanga
community organisation, Vukani Environmental Justice Movement in
Action, for its failure to protect the health and rights of
communities living in the Highveld from the severe air pollution
impacts of coal-fired power and industry.
It is understood that the IRP’s allocation for new coal is intended
predominantly for the two “preferred bidder” coal independent power
producers (IPPs) – Thabametsi (Limpopo) and Khanyisa (Mpumalanga
Highveld). These ill-fated projects face a mountain of obstacles –
both in relation to their environmental approvals and to their
funding. Instead of simply abandoning these costly coal plants (as
the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy is within its rights
to do), government irrationally continues to grant extensions of
the projects’ commercial and financial close deadlines.
LAC and GP maintain that the inclusion of new coal in South
Africa’s future electricity plans, is a clear violation of the
Constitution. The organisations also argue that a fair process of
determining a new IRP demands that communities affected by the
harmful impacts of coal-fired power generation must be adequately
consulted, and their voices heard. This has not been done, which
makes this IRP fatally flawed.
Reasons for the decision to include new coal capacity in the IRP
will be requested from Minister Gwede Mantashe in terms of the
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, and the response will
inform further legal action.
END
For media queries and comment, please contact:
Makoma Lekalakala, Director, Earthlife Africa, makoma@earthlife.org.za, 082
682 9177
The Life After Coal/Impilo Ngaphandle Kwamalahle is a joint
campaign by Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, groundWork, and the
Centre for Environmental Rights
*******************************************************************
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S175500841730
1795?via%3Dihub
Abstract: With climate change being near unequivocally linked to
anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions there is an ongoing
move to decarbonise economies globally with the electricity sector
identified as a primary focus for most countries’ strategies. This
research presents a Business-as-Usual scenario and electricity
sector capacity expansion plans to determine a least-cost as well
as decarbonised electricity mix for South Africa. A significant
finding is that South Africa has the unique opportunity to
transition from an existing carbon and water intensive coal-based
electricity system to a low carbon and water intense electricity
system at least-cost. The approach applies a generation capacity
expansion optimisation using mixed-integer linear programming
(MILP) to co-optimise energy and ancillary services. The research
finds that it is least cost for any new generation capacity
investment to be solar photovoltaics (PV), wind and flexible
supply-side or demand-side capacity with a >75% renewable energy
(RE) share by 2050, replacing existing capacity as it is
decommissioned and meeting new demand. By 2050, the Least-cost
scenario is conservatively $ 5.1-bln/year cheaper than Business-as-
Usual (≈12%) and $ 7.8-bln/year cheaper (≈20%) when
applying expected cost assumptions. A Decarbonise scenario using
conservative cost assumptions has a >90% RE share by 2050. It is
$4.8-bln/year more expensive when compared to Least-Cost where a
≈60% decarbonised electricity system is possible by 2050.
Business-as-Usual as well as Decarbonise scenarios have similar
costs when applying conservative cost assumptions while the
Decarbonise scenario becomes $ 4.8-bln/year cheaper than Business-
as-Usual (≈11%) when applying expected cost assumpions. This
is while being 95% decarbonised while Business-as-Usual is 20%
decarbonised by 2050.
Additional sources include:
"What you need to know: South Africa’s Integrated Resource Plan
2019,” Mining Review, Oct 21, 2019
“Formal comments on the Draft Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2018,”
CSIR, Date: 2018-10-25
https://researchspace.csir.co.za/dspace/handle/10204/10493
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with
a particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to suggest material for inclusion. For more
information about reposted material, please contact directly the
original source mentioned. For a full archive and other resources,
see http://www.africafocus.org
|