POVERTY: Middle East desert solar plan criticised

Mićo Tatalović : 20 May 2011
 Flickr/indigo : Desertec aims to harness sun and wind from the deserts of MENA

A plan to turn the desert sunshine of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) into electricity, both for the region and for export to Europe, has been criticised for ignoring the needs of local people and the science community.
Critics say that the Desertec Industrial Initiative's (Dii) centralised, top-down approach means that electrification may not benefit the desert people and may stifle capacity-building in the region's science community.
They were speaking on the sidelines of the Solar Energy for Science Symposium in Germany this week (19–20 May), held to push the project forward and explore the potential for scientific collaborations between Europe and MENA.
The symposium was organised by the Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY) and the German Aerospace Center (DLR), with Egypt's Academy of Scientific Research and Technology and the Synchrotron-light for Experimental Science and Applications in the Middle East (SESAME), in Jordan.
Desertec aims to harness the huge solar and wind resources across the deserts of MENA, delivering up to 15 per cent of Europe's electricity needs by 2050 via high-voltage transmission lines.
Feasibility studies are on the way after which funding of up to US$400 billion will be sought.
Hamed El-Mously, chairman of the Egyptian Society for Endogenous Development of Local Communities, said the project was ignoring the wishes of local people.
Desert people have not been consulted about their energy needs — despite the fact that a mix of energy options may be more appropriate than a single, large powerplant, he said.
And the swathes of desert needed for such plants will take away the land that many nomadic and pastoral societies use for their livelihoods, he said.
"Desertec is a top-down approach, in both senses — North-to-South and governments-to-local-communities. There is much more needed to engage the communities."
Meanwhile, academics expressed fears that the project would not boost MENA science.
"It is not good for Tunisian researchers," said Samir Romdhane, a professor at the Tunisian Physical Society. The technology will be imported from abroad with little opportunity for MENA researchers to develop. It is not an idea that came from the region, but from a consortium of German firms, he said.
And Abdelfattah Barhdadi, physics professor at Ecole Normale Superieure de Rabat, in Morocco, said that, although there are many experts in the area who could contribute to the development of Desertec, there has "not been enough effort on the behalf of the project to consult them".
A supporter of the project, Odeh Al-Jayyousi, regional director for the International Union for Conservation of Nature, in Jordan, also called for more local engagement.
"We need to promote multi-stakeholder dialogue and bottom-up approaches, and we need to plan with the people not for the people".
Referring to the wave of unrest this year known as the Arab Spring, which has raised concerns about the viability of Desertec, he said: "This wave of democracy will nurture new ideas.
"I think we need this type of big idea that will cross national boundaries and induce a new model of development."
Suhil Kiwan, a professor of mechanical engineering at the Jordan University of Science and Technology and a co-founder of the Desertec University Network, insisted that the project will develop the region's science. Both the original idea and the idea for the university network came from the region's scientists, he said. The export of electricity to Europe will only be the last step.
The aim of the conference was to stimulate new scientific research partnerships between European and MENA institutions, in order to promote renewable energies and sustainable development. It brought together scientists, ministers and stakeholders from both regions — mainly Egypt, Germany and Jordan.
The conference, attended by more than 200 people from over 35 countries, concluded that concentrated solar power generation is already technically feasible and economically sound, and the costs are competitive with fossil fuel electricity generation — so stakeholders in both regions should carry on working to make the project a reality. The conclusions acknowledged a suggestion from an Egyptian delegate to create a regional centre of excellence in solar science.
But there was no consensus on achieving the right balance between the contributions of different stakeholders, the funding mechanism, and whether to involve Sub-Saharan African countries in the project.
The initiative's next conference will take place in Cairo later this year (2–3 November).
http://www.scidev.net/en/news/middle-east-desert-solar-plan-criticised.html

POVERTY: For Energy Poverty, Necessity is the Mother of Innovation

 03.07.11,  Cory Connolly
.

In the bone chilling cold of the high Bolivian Altiplano are numerous rural isolated villages. These villages have existed on subsistence agriculture and without electrification for centuries. In this region of the world, unique and innovative strategies to survive and cope with local circumstances are part of everyday life. With the help of hi-tech innovation in the developed world, developing nations like Bolivia can find innovative ways to pull themselves out of energy poverty.
As an example, the resilient inhabitants of Bolivia have been chewing coca leaves to combat altitude sickness for centuries; this age-old remedy is impossible to fully appreciate until you have personally been relieved of a splitting altitude induced headache. If visiting the Altiplano, you’re likely to finish chewing your coca leaves and look up to see your host pull out a cell phone that has been charged by a solar panel. While seemingly odd given the local circumstances, it shouldn’t be unexpected. In developing Bolivia, one of the poorest countries in South America, solar resources are abundant and 3 million of the country’s 10 million people live without electricity access. In fact, solar panels and solar water heaters are a relatively common site along the roadside in Bolivia and in rural villages.
So how is this still costly technology finding a foot hold in Bolivia? The developing world is more apt, in some cases, to find ingenious and efficient applications for technology. Imagine seeing someone charging their phone from a solar panel in New York City, it’s almost as odd as imagining a person chewing coca leaves as they climb the Empire State building. Yet the adage holds true, necessity and circumstance drive innovation, and developing countries aren’t short on necessity or challenging circumstances.
For six months I traveled through South America: in Bolivia and Ecuador I saw energy systems off of the grid in isolated communities; in Colombia and Peru I saw solar water heaters in rural and urban centers; and in all of these countries I saw examples of extreme energy poverty. Latin America, like much of the developing world, has a serious need and demand for cheap and clean energy.

Clean Energy Poverty
Today, nearly 3 billion people are living without regular access to electricity while approximately 1.5 billion people have no access to electricity at all. A recent piece by Natalie Relich emphasizes the implications that this lack of energy has on education, health, gender, hunger, poverty, and other millennium development goals (MDG). Energy poverty exacerbates the various plights of the developing world and, conversely, if alleviated, has the potential to diminish many of the world’s hardships. In a report released in June 2010, the UNDP found that access to energy has a “boosting” effect in achieving the millennium development goals.
An EIA report projects that world energy consumption will increase 49% from 2007 levels by 2035. Of this growth, it projects that the majority will come from increased fossil fuel capacity in the developing world. Improving access to energy, whether through increasing generation or improving distribution, is a key goal for international development, and it is critical that the energy that fills this gap is clean energy.
According to the EIA energy 2010 energy outlook in 2007, only about 18% of global electricity was generated by clean energy (primarily hydro-electric), while coal accounted for approximately 42% of global energy. Coal and other fossil fuels are used throughout the globe, in the developed and developing world alike, and dependence on such fuels is detrimental for a nation’s energy security, the environment, and as Michael Levi of CFR points out, is potentially detrimental to a nation’s image.
Transitioning from traditional forms of energy to clean energy will require technological breakthroughs and the necessary investments in R&D to achieve them. Making clean energy cheap must be a central goal of America and the rest of the developed world. An example from a National Geographic article is illuminating:
“…a biogas digester that takes less than a day to turn kitchen scraps and other organic waste into clean-burning methane that can be used for cooking and electricity would cost $400. ‘For people living on $2 a day, this is a tough investment,’ said Culhane. But with help to buy such systems for groups of residents, communities could easily switch from primitive cookstoves and tackle waste-related health problems at the same time.”
While providing help to buy such systems would be beneficial, if the US can develop cheap and scalable energy technologies, like these, both the producer and the purchaser would benefit greatly. And for the US, not only will developments in clean energy technology gain it economic competitiveness and energy security, but will also help to improve its international image.
Many will argue that increasing access to energy shouldn’t necessarily prioritize access to clean energy; however, increasing access to energy without it being clean energy will only address some of the problems that energy poverty creates. Energy from traditional polluting sources has negative health impacts, has the potential to cause political turmoil, and has detrimental effects on the environment and climate. As Paul Epstein has pointed out in the past, those that are afflicted by energy poverty are also those people most likely to be vulnerable to the impacts of climate change in areas such as health, education, hunger, and poverty. Energy from traditional sources will help alleviate some immediate concerns from energy poverty, but will create potentially more disastrous impacts for the world’s most vulnerable populations down the road and continue to leave the world in clean energy poverty.
As we look to the future we need to develop innovative practices and technologies that will deliver clean energy to the developed world as well as the developing world, and in doing so, we have the opportunity eliminate clean energy poverty.

Open Clean Energy Innovation
Innovation is defined as a new idea, method, or device. A new device or invention is a critical component of advancing a clean energy agenda for the United States and the world. Making clean energy cheap through invention can be complemented by innovation in practice and use of such technologies. Innovative uses of technologies can lead to efficiency, can create markets, and can address a variety of needs. In the developing world, innovative uses of technology seem to come as second nature as such populations face pressing challenges on a daily basis.
In South American cities like Curitiba, Brazil and Medellin, Colombia world class transportation systems—using technologies largely developed in other parts of the world—help limit greenhouse gas emissions and transport people from place to place using innovative designs and methods. In Peru, solar panels are allowing for rural internet access in 130 Andean communities for the first time. If the US can supply the technological innovation, then the developing world will, out of necessity, provide the methodological innovation. Combine technological innovation with innovative methods of application and we might develop solutions to energy poverty.
Nearly two years ago a presentation by Clay Shirky, a professor at NYU, gave State Department officials a new perspective on innovation and development. The presentation, given at the State Department as an attempt to inject new energy and ideas into development and foreign policy, primarily focused on social networking and communication, yet its lessons can be more widely applied. Shirky emphasized that more than any other time in history, due to the spread of technology and social media, innovation has the ability to be a multidirectional process. Traditionally innovative technology and practices travel from the developed world to the developing, but with the spread of various enabling technologies and social media this is no longer the case—innovation is just as likely to arise in the developing world and travel to the developed.
His simple example is easily extrapolated to other technologies and circumstances: citizens in Nigeria used frontline SMS technology to monitor elections in 2007. This strategy pioneered in the developing world has now been seen in action in elections in the United States and other developed countries. It doesn’t take a great stretch of the imagination to see innovative uses of clean technologies also originating in the developing world.
It’s often said that “necessity is the mother of invention” and who knows more about necessity than the people living in the developing world? Granted, innovation in clean energy production and distribution is an expensive undertaking with a record $243 billion invested in clean energy globally in 2010. In this sense the developed world and large, rapidly developing countries like China maintain an advantage, but in the developing world more problems lead to a need for more solutions.
What seems likely is that developing countries will innovate in practice and uses, while the developed world will address more expensive technical solutions. Innovated uses will surely effect technological goals, the products of which will be uniquely suited to address energy poverty. Clean energy, its advancement, and its production will benefit both parties where they need it most: jobs in the US and electricity in the developing world. We must invest in innovative clean energy generation, distribution, and energy efficiency, but we also must not be afraid to look to the developing world for organic and innovative uses and applications of existing and future technologies.
One such avenue for this sharing of information, and a way to facilitate this exchange, is through the voluntary carbon market that exists in the US. The United States did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol; however, the US is the center of the $387 million dollar voluntary carbon market. This offers a possible forum for exchanges in innovative technologies and applications of technologies. Government initiatives to encourage voluntary carbon reductions and carbon offsets can help garner innovative development of clean energy abroad and at home as a complement to government funding for clean energy research.
For example, the US DOE program Climate Leaders helps companies identify and meet voluntary goals through onsite reductions and the purchase of carbon offsets (domestically and internationally). Voluntary offsets are typically cheaper and more open to new technologies than the regulated CDM or the EU-ETS. This gives US companies and investors a chance to try different technologies and practices to reduce emissions and offers a natural way for technology and funding to be transferred to areas with the necessity and circumstances that will drive innovative usage.

Seeking Boredom
When the US and the Soviet Union engaged in an all out “Space Race” driving innovation and competition in satellite technology and space travel, the benefits weren’t confined to the two competitors’ borders. Satellite technology now helps us watch television, use GPS, track weather patterns, monitor deforestation in the Amazon, and has aided global society in myriad of other ways. As we look forward, energy is the central piece to global development, stability, and resilience. Clearly, innovation will be critical to any US strategy in competing in clean energy and in a clean economy. To transition away from carbon intensive fuels to clean fuels will present the developed world with its own set of challenges, different than installing clean energy in places that are seeking electrification for the first time. US innovation in clean technology will benefit the globe and international development goals; simultaneously, understanding the needs, circumstances, and potential contributions of the developing world will also aid the US push for an economy of innovation.
Clay Shirky has been quoted saying that “…tools don’t get socially interesting until they get technologically boring.” Shirky, a social media guru, was referring to social media and cell phones in this context, but the quote can also be applied to clean technology. We need to make clean energy technology like solar panels and wind turbines, so cheap, scalable, and “boring” that they can be used throughout the developing world. Once technological innovation in clean energies has taken hold then we will see how innovative uses and implementation originating in the developing world can provide new solutions for the world as a whole.
http://leadenergy.org/2011/03/for-energy-poverty-necessity-is-the-mother-of-innovation/

POVERTY: UGANDA: Food, water crisis looms for thousands

 Photo: Charles Akena/IRIN
A boy quenches his thirst at a mobile water point in northern Uganda. Forecasts by the meteorological department indicate that the country is headed for a long period of drought

AGAGO/AMURU, 9 March 2011 (IRIN) - Thousands of people in 36 of Uganda's 112 districts are at risk of serious food and water shortages due to drought attributed to the La Niña weather phenomenon.
Health officials have warned of outbreaks of diseases such as diarrhoea and dysentery, due to poor hygiene.
The situation requires urgent attention, says the Minister for Disaster Preparedness, Musa Ecweru. "We are experiencing food shortages; some families are [already] going without food."
The ministry has issued public alerts, warning of impending severe water shortages and famine in parts of the country.
Ecweru said the government was working out ways of securing money for relief food and identifying the worst-hit families.
Forecasts by the meteorological department indicate that the country is headed for a long period of drought. The department has predicted that La Niña conditions, which started in July 2010, will affect rainfall distribution in 2011.
James Magezi, a senior research officer at the meteorological department and assistant commissioner in the Ministry of Water and Environment, told IRIN several parts of the country were likely to experience abnormal rainfall patterns this year, with regions such as northern Uganda and Karamoja completely dry.
Magezi said sunny and dry conditions, characterized by higher-than-normal daytime temperatures, would occur across the country and were likely to continue up to mid-2011.

Poor rainfall
Although some rains are expected in March, Magezi said they were likely to be insufficient to support agriculture in many areas. Wells are already drying up in some of the 36 affected districts, forcing residents to walk long distances in search of water.
Richard Ongom, a resident of Lira Palwo in Agago district, told IRIN: "It takes several hours for the wells to fill up and we have to walk long distances to fetch water from rivers and streams."
He added that high daytime temperatures and strong winds made movement difficult. "The sun is too hot during the day and the blowing winds crack our lips; at night it is impossible to sleep inside the house because of the heat."
The drought-prone Karamoja region, in the northeast, is one of the areas hardest-hit by the La Niña effect, with households struggling to sustain livelihoods. Strong winds are destroying structures and movement is hampered by temperatures ranging from 35 to 38 degrees Celsius during the day.

 Photo: Charles Akena/IRIN
A dried up stream in Lamwo, northern Uganda

In the north, formerly displaced persons resettling in villages in the Acholi districts are experiencing frequent fire outbreaks and falling water levels in rivers.
Oxfam, an international NGO, warned of impending drought in East Africa as well as the Horn of Africa in an update for March, stating that the situation was "deteriorating quickly and could result in a major humanitarian emergency over the coming months".

Response
While noting that governments in the region had recognized the severity of the crisis and initiated remedial measures, Oxfam cautioned that "responses have generally come later than necessary and are focused on emergency measures such as trucking in water and de-stocking animals - buying up cattle that are too weak or low value".
The drought has also affected electricity generation in Uganda as water levels fall in rivers such as the Nile. Streams such as the Aswa, Ayugi, Unyama and Pager, all in Amuru and Kitgum districts, are drying up.
Pastoralists living along the cattle corridors in Nakasongola district and Bullisa, in Bunyoro region, have expressed concern over loss of livelihoods due to the shortage of pasture and water for their livestock.

Food security
Parts of the country were hit by torrential rains in 2010, causing water-logging and rotting of crops, a situation that has now affected food reserves.
"Where shall we get food; last year's harvest was very poor and the little we had we sold to raise money for family needs such as school fees and treatment?" asked James Onyut, a resident of Agago.
Unless the government intervenes, Onyut said, people were going to face tough times. "We pray the rains come early and remain normal so that we can harvest something good from the first season of March-July," Onyut said.
http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=92146

POVERTY: Drought threatens hydropower in Vietnam

 Photo: FAO Vietnam
Irrigating these fields may reduce power for country

BANGKOK, 9 March 2011 (IRIN) - Low water levels in reservoirs opened in January to irrigate rice fields in Vietnam are threatening to undermine hydropower-fuelled electricity, warn experts.
Approximately 2.7 billion cubic metres of water, equivalent to 500 million kilowatts of electricity, were discharged to irrigate more than 635,000 hectares of crops, according to Nguyen Tri Ngoc, head of the cultivation department in the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.
However, increasingly volatile weather patterns, coupled with heightened water demands from households and local industries, have contributed to a drought that could mean cutting off needed energy. Nearly one-third of Vietnam's electricity is derived from hydropower.
"The government will have to ration electricity. They have already increased electricity prices by 15 percent to reduce consumption and save water in hydroelectric dams," said Koos Neefjes, climate change policy adviser for UN Development Programme.
"Given the increase in severity of droughts being experienced in Vietnam, the country's overdependence on hydropower means it can expect to experience more energy blackouts," said Ame Trandems with the US-based NGO International Rivers.
http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=92148

POVERTY: Solving the Energy Poverty Problem

 02.28.11, Natalie Relich
In the age of iPhones, Facebook, and Twitter, we have instant access to information and constant means of communication. It is difficult to imagine life without these luxuries, but they are just that, luxuries. For a large portion of the world these technologies are not only a rarity, but an impossibility, as there is no access to electricity.



1.5 billion people do not have access to electricity; 585 million of them living in Sub-Saharan Africa and 404 million in India. Three billion people, almost half of the world’s population, rely on biomass, such as wood, charcoal, and dung for cooking and heating purposes. Sub-Saharan Africa is an especially dire case. Only 31% of the population has access to electricity and the Sub-Saharan African population (excluding South Africa) of 791 million consumes as much energy annually as New York State, a population of 19.5 million, according to a recent IEA and UNDP report entitled “Energy Poverty: How to Make Modern Energy Access Universal.”
These people are living in energy poverty, the ramifications of which extend far beyond heating and cooking. Instead of children – usually young girls – going to school, they have to spend hours collecting firewood to heat their homes and cook. If the children are able to go to school, they can only do school work during daylight hours because they have no light to study by at night.
Energy poverty is one of the least discussed aspects of our current energy challenge, yet it poses serious threats to economies, national security, the environment, and public health throughout the world. It is unacceptable that such a massive social problem exists, yet here in the U.S. we do little to alleviate it. This article seeks raise awareness about energy poverty and to describe the threats posed by it and what is being done to remedy them.


Energy Poverty and Economic Development
From an economic standpoint energy poverty is a serious hindrance to growth. Households and countries as a whole cannot develop economically if a significant portion of the population is living in energy poverty. Time that could be spent working must be spent gathering fuel for cooking and heating. This task usually falls on women, preventing them from pursuing economic opportunities like starting their own business.
People cannot charge cell phones, if they have them, limiting their access to information and markets. They have little access to machinery, so their farming techniques (most of the energy poor live in rural areas) are primitive and inefficient. If businesses or households do have access to electricity, there are often power cuts and blackouts, seriously limiting productivity and efficiency.

Energy Poverty and Health Risks
The use of wood, charcoal, and dung cook stoves poses some of the most serious health risks in the developing world today. Primitive cook stoves create indoor air pollution because homes are poorly ventilated and the dirty air sits in the home, breathed in by the occupants. According to the IEA report, the number of deaths from this kind of indoor air pollution currently kills more people each year than malaria or tuberculosis. The report also estimates that by 2030 the number of premature deaths from household air pollution will be more than the number of deaths from HIV/AIDS, malaria, or tuberculosis, all of which are projected to decline over this period. By 2030 the number of deaths from biomass smoke is estimated to increase to 1.5 million per year, or 4,000 deaths per day.

Energy Poverty and National Security
Economic development and security are inextricably linked. In a post 9/11 world, the security of a nation is no longer guaranteed by a large military; the biggest threat to national security is no longer a strong, well organized military of another country, but rather disconnected, unpredictable networks of extremists. When people have a job, food on their table, and an overall good standard of living, they are less likely to turn to radical groups for change. One of the contributing factors to the recent protests across the Middle East is high unemployment and lack of economic opportunities. Instability in the Middle East or any region that is home to extreme groups is a threat to US security. There are of course many reasons why people turn to extremism and poverty is just one of them, but one cannot overlook this important link.

How to solve the energy poverty problem
Alleviating energy poverty poses numerous problems. Most of the energy poor live in remote rural areas making it difficult and costly to connect to the electrical grid. Some energy poor countries simply do not have the infrastructure or economic means to connect rural inhabitants to the grid.
Environmental and climate change issues also makes dealing with energy poverty a tricky situation, mostly because coal remains the cheapest source of energy for much of the world. If electricity was generated from clean, but more expensive sources like wind and solar, rural inhabitants would likely be unable to afford it. Over a billion people are without electricity, so how do they improve their quality of life without adding huge amounts of greenhouse emissions to the atmosphere?
Because of the difficulty in connecting rural inhabitants to the grid, small-scale, off the grid energy projects currently provide the most feasible way of bringing energy to people in remote areas, but achieving this on a large scale is difficult. Large corporations and governments are the most financially and technically equipped to deal with these issues, but corporations lack incentives to do so. Funding a small scale project in rural Africa does not yield as much return as funding a large scale renewable energy project in China. For governments, finding funding for such innovative projects has largely proven tricky.
One potential funding source could come from the developed world. Those countries that signed the Kyoto Protocol are required to purchase carbon credits in order to offset their own emissions. This could be done by funding small scale projects that would greatly enhance the quality of life for rural inhabitants, but for now these offsets are most easily achieved by investing in large utility scale projects. There is also much uncertainty associated with these small scale projects because they are in such remote areas and funding these types of projects is a relatively new concept.
The United States is not a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol and therefore not required to offset carbon emissions, however we still fund renewable energy projects in developing countries. In 2009, the Obama administration announced the launch of Climate REDI (Renewable and Efficiency Deployment Initiative) a program to “accelerate deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies in developing countries.” The initiative created several programs and partnerships as well as funding mechanisms to bring energy efficiency to developing countries.
New programs were:
“The Solar and LED Energy Access Program will accelerate deployment of affordable solar home systems and LED lanterns to those without access to electricity. This program will yield immediate economic and public health benefits by providing households with low-cost and quality-assured solar alternatives to expensive and polluting kerosene.
The Super-efficient Equipment and Appliance Deployment Program will harness the market and convening power of MEF countries to improve efficiency for appliances traded throughout the world.
The Scaling-up Renewable Energy Program (S-REP), under the World Bank’s Strategic Climate Fund, will provide policy support and technical assistance to low-income countries developing national renewable energy strategies and underwrite additional capital costs associated with renewable energy investments. Funding through Climate REDI will accelerate the launch of S-REP.

The $350 million pledged for these programs will come from the United States as well as other developed nations.
Despite modest government lead efforts, most small scale energy production in the energy impoverished world is being taken on by nonprofits and local organizations. The NY Times recently ran an article about small scale renewable energy systems and the role they are playing in Sub Saharan Africa. The article discussed one woman and the arduous process she had to go through to charge her cell phone. She relied on a cell phone for “small money transfers, contacting relatives, and checking prices at the nearest market”, but had no electricity and therefore no means of charging her phone.
“Every week, Ms. Ruto walked two miles to hire a motorcycle taxi for the three-hour ride to Mogotio, the nearest town with electricity. There, she dropped off her cellphone at a store that recharges phones for 30 cents. Yet the service was in such demand that she had to leave it behind for three full days before returning.
That wearying routine ended in February when the family sold some animals to buy a small Chinese-made solar power system for about $80. Now balanced precariously atop their tin roof, a lone solar panel provides enough electricity to charge the phone and run four bright overhead lights with switches.
Since Ms. Ruto hooked up the system, her teenagers’ grades have improved because they have light for studying. The toddlers no longer risk burns from the smoky kerosene lamp. And each month, she saves $15 in kerosene and battery costs — and the $20 she used to spend on travel.
In fact, neighbors now pay her 20 cents to charge their phones, although that business may soon evaporate: 63 families in Kiptusuri have recently installed their own solar power systems.”
These small scale solutions are spreading throughout Africa and other parts of the developing world as a result of small businesses and nonprofits. One such organization called E+Co invests in green businesses in developing country to provide them with the capital to implement off the grid energy solutions. E +Co has offices in 20 developing countries and has invested $40 million in various businesses. Some of E+Co’s investments include a $127,000 investment to Ghanaian company, Wilkin Solar, that sells solar powered lanterns to rural and urban homes in Ghana so homes do not have to rely on kerosene and firewood for lighting; a $224,241 investment to an Indian company, Selco India, that has sold small scale solar systems to more than 70,000 households in India, and an equity investment in Chinese company, DLLD, that manufactures mini hydropower systems that are used to generate electricity in rural China.
Energy in Common is another organization working to fight energy poverty by allowing individuals to make micro loans to entrepreneurs in developing countries. Individuals can choose from a list of green entrepreneurs on their website, make a loan to help fund green energy projects, track the progress of the project, and eventually get repaid. This is a sustainable and affordable way for ordinary citizens to become involved in remedying energy poverty.
Solar CITIES is a nonprofit that works in Cairo to install solar-powered hot water systems and biogas reactors in Cairo’s slums. The Charcoal Project works to raise awareness about the dangers associated with using biomass fueled stoves and bring together stakeholders to work towards potential solutions. The Lumina Project, an initiative of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, works to “enable small companies to innovate more rapidly, advises international organizations how to support these emerging [energy] markets, designing market research and performing market research, and helps students engage in the issue.”
These organizations are doing inspiring work, have noble goals, and continue to make a real impact on the lives of the world’s poorest citizens; however, they are small organizations with limited capacity and funds. Small scale projects are for now, the most feasible and economical way of bringing people out of energy poverty, but the projects are just that, small. For the 3 billion people living in energy poverty, this relief is not coming fast enough.

R&D and the Future of Energy Poverty
At AEL, we have frequently written on the need for energy innovation and the role it has to play in America’s economic growth, competitiveness, and national security. By investing in energy innovation America can simultaneously fuel its economy and help to alleviate international energy poverty. AEL President Teryn Norris and CEO of the Cleveland Foundation Ronald Richard recently wrote an op-ed entitled “Winning Ohio’s Energy Future” that highlights the energy innovation projects occurring in Ohio’s private sector and the 35,000 jobs they have created. The article notes that while Ohio’s private sector has stimulated innovation and growth, there is also a need for the federal government to do the same:
“If America wants to lead the next great growth industry, it’s imperative that we make a serious national commitment to advanced energy technology. Today, the United States spends more on potato chips than federal energy research and development, and continues to spend billions of tax dollars subsidizing fossil fuels.”
The American Energy Innovation Council has issued similar calls for government investment in energy research. The AEIC is a group whose mission is to “foster strong economic growth, create jobs in new industries, and reestablish America’s energy technology leadership through robust, public investments in the development of world-changing energy technologies” and is led by a group of prominent American business leaders such as Microsoft’s Bill Gates, the former CEO of Lockheed Martin, Norman Augustine, and the chairman and CEO of General Electric, Jeff Immelt. The AEIC recommends investing $16 billion annually in energy research, increasing funding of the Department of Energy’s ARPA-E program to $1 billion, and establishing a New Energy Challenge Program to build large scale pilot projects.
To put $16 billion in perspective, the US currently spends $30 billion in health research and $80 billion in defense research and development. In an op-ed Gates and Holliday wrote for the Washington Post last year, they discussed the US’s lack of initiative on energy research, the importance for energy innovation, and why the public sector should be the one to do it:
“But our country is neglecting a field central to our national prospect and security: energy. Although the information technology and pharmaceutical industries spend 5 to 15 percent of their revenue on research and development each year, U.S. companies’ spending on energy R&D has averaged only about one-quarter of 1 percent of revenue over the past 15 years…
…We need a vigorous strategy to invent our future and ensure its safety and prosperity. In the realm of energy, as with medicine and national defense, that requires a public commitment. Why can’t the private sector do this? What makes energy different from, say, electronics? Three things.
First, there are profound public interests in having more energy options. Our national security, economic health and environment are at issue. These are not primary motivations for private-sector investments, but they merit a public commitment.
Second, the nature of the energy business requires a public commitment. A new generation of television technology might cost $10 million to develop. Because those TVs can be built on existing assembly lines, that risk-reward calculus makes business sense. But a new electric power source can cost several billion dollars to develop and still carry the risk of failure. That investment does not compute for most companies.
Third, the turnover in our power system is very slow. Power plants last 50 years or more, and they are very cheap to run once built, meaning there is little market for new models.
It is understandable, then, why private-sector investments in clean energy technology are so small. Yet, while it may make sense for individual companies to make these choices, accepting the status quo would condemn our country to very bad options. There is vast opportunity in energy. Prices are declining in solar energy and wind, and they could fall further with new technology. There is a critical need for better electricity storage technologies to enable electric vehicles and very-large-scale renewable energy.”
Investment into energy R&D would not only help secure America’s future, but could also do much for the billions living in energy poverty. As noted earlier, small scale renewable projects provide the best opportunity for alleviating poverty while not adding to greenhouse gas emissions. By driving down the cost of solar cells, wind turbines, and energy storage electrifying rural areas could become not only become a cost effective proposition for governments, but profitable endeavor for private investors. While renewables remain a tough business pitch in much of the developed world, these margins become even smaller in the developing world, with lower electricity prices and increased technical hurdles. Lowering prices and creating more logistically feasible renewable power could also stem off the growing trend of developing nations looking to coal as the basis for electrification.

In Conclusion
Energy poverty is one of the most important and devastating social issues of our time that has been neglected for too long, and bringing half of the world’s population out of energy poverty is an enormous task. Innovative policies are needed to bring energy to people who live away from the grid and financing is needed to implement those solutions. America’s Climate REDI initiative is certainly a step in the right direction as are the efforts of groups like E+Co and Energy in Common. Projects like E+Co and the Energy in Common need continued sources of funding so they can reach the small businesses and local entrepreneurs in energy poor areas who are trying to make a difference.
Ultimately, more public-private investment in these initiatives — especially those based around energy R&D and technology transfer — and strategic partnerships between developed and developing countries are needed to truly reach all of those off the grid. Nonprofits and small businesses alone will not be able to bring electricity access to billions of people. Meanwhile, technological innovation is needed to drive down the cost of clean technologies so they are competitive and no longer need international subsidies. New ways of connecting remote rural areas to the grid are needed, and in cases where connection to the grid is impossible, improved storage mechanisms for distributed generation resources would improve electricity access in remote areas.

Natalie Relich is a Contributor in AEL’s New Energy Leaders Project and her work will be regularly featured on the website. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of AEL.
http://leadenergy.org/2011/02/solving-the-energy-poverty-problem/

POVERTY: VIETNAM: Struggling to cope with rising prices

1 March 2011 (IRIN)


Photo: David Gough/IRIN: Eight out of 10 people in Vietnam live in rural areas,which like the rest of the nation, is hit with record price increases

HO CHI MINH CITY,  - Vietnam's inflation rate is among Southeast Asia's highest and its population is struggling to keep up with sharp increases in food, fuel and electricity prices.
On 1 March the government increased electricity prices by a record 15 percent to an average 1,242 dong (US 6 cents) per kilowatt per hour. The week before, petrol prices were raised by 18 percent to 19,300 dong (93 cents) per litre.
In Vietnam, inflation has increased every month since August 2010, reaching 12.2 percent in January.
"Things are getting really uncertain," said Nguyen Bich Hanh, 25, a public school teacher who lives on the outskirts of the capital, Ho Chi Minh City. "We are struggling to pay for electricity, and food [prices are] getting extreme."
In the past two months, Nguyen said the price of high-quality rice, for example, had increased by almost one-third to 22,000 dong ($1.13) per kilogramme.
She earns $150 a month and spends most of it on food and transportation for her family of five.
The World Bank ranks Vietnam as a lower middle-income country. Still, worries about poverty run deep in a country where 80 percent of the population lives in rural areas and most of the workforce is agricultural.
Half the population lives on less than $2 a day, and many could slide into poverty because of economic shocks and natural disasters, according to AusAID, the Australian government's aid agency.
Nguyen saves money by turning off the electricity at home at all times, and increasingly, by skipping meals.
"Fewer kids are coming to school because they need to help their families," she said.

Coping
Sudden price fluctuations are forcing Vietnam's poorest to find quick and creative ways of coping, said Ben Kerkvliet, a Vietnam scholar at the Canberra-based Australian National University.
"Many rural households in Vietnam have small gardens, small fish ponds or other aqua-raising opportunities, chickens or ducks... that help to feed their families," he told IRIN. "In hard times, these sources of food become even more important.
"Youngsters in the household may go to school without school supplies. They may have to quit school altogether," he added. So far, Vietnam has performed well in enrolling students in primary school and keeping them there.
In 2009, net enrolment in primary school was 97 percent and 88.5 percent of children who enter primary school complete at least five years, according to the UN office in Vietnam.
But should inflation increase sharply beyond current levels, said Kerkvliet, general stability could slide. "Should shortages of key commodities like rice and wheat become extreme, villagers are likely to protest in various parts of the country," he said. "At present levels of inflation, the likely political change will be policies aimed at addressing the problems."
This year, the government hopes to limit inflation to 7 percent, compared with 11.75 percent last year.
For Nguyen, poverty is more pressing than numbers on paper. "They say our country is becoming richer," she said, "but this does not matter if regular people cannot afford anything."
http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=92058

POVERTY: Seawater greenhouse plan for Jordan

Hanan Al Kiswany : 9 February 2011

 Artist's impression of the Aqaba demonstration centre: The Sahara Forest Project Foundation/Screenergy

[AMMAN] Seawater greenhouses, solar power plants and other new green technologies will be brought together in Jordan in an attempt to turn its desert into a producer of crops, fresh water and electricity.
The governments of Jordan and Norway signed an agreement last month (11 January) to build a 20-hectare demonstration centre near Aqaba on the Red Sea. They will work with the Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority (ASEZA) and the Sahara Forest Project (SFP), an environmental technology group based in Norway, to start building the centre in 2012, and expect it to be operating by 2015.
The project would channel sea water into the desert where 'greenhouses' would be able to grow crops without any need to pipe fresh water. This is achieved by evaporating the seawater on grilles at the entrance to the greenhouse so that the air which is entering becomes moist and cool. As it leaves the greenhouse the air is then exposed to heating and cooling, at the end of which pure water condenses out and can be used to water the greenhouse crops.
The concentrated solar power plant, which uses the sun's heat to create steam that drives a turbine to produce electricity, would power the greenhouse and in turn be cooled by greenhouse water.
"The Jordanian government supports investing in such technologies that could help save water in a country suffering water scarcity," Mohammed S. Turk, chief executive officer of the Aqaba Development Corporation (ADC), told SciDev.Net. He said the project would provide a cheaper way to desalinate water for use in desert land reclamation than current desalination technologies, but added that the "feasibility studies that will be done on it will show if it will be successful in Jordan or not".
"This project will face many challenges, such as cost, expandability, sustainability and system reliability in sometimes harsh desert conditions in Jordan," Issa Batarseh, president of the Princess Sumaya University for Technology, told SciDev.Net.
According to Batarseh, there are two further advantages for Jordan in hosting such a project. The first is that it will raise public awareness about green technology. The second is the opportunity it will provide for Jordanian engineers and researchers to gain hands-on experience and the expertise needed to make these technologies suitable for large-scale production.
"I expect this system to be very expensive in capital cost, but it might prove to be profitable in the long run," said Anwar M. Battikhi, professor of soil physics and irrigation at the University of Jordan. "Instead of conventional crops, like tomatoes, cucumber and watermelon … the centre would plant profitable crops, like strawberries, flowers and hybrid seed, aimed for export to Western markets."
According to the agreement, Jordan will provide the 20-hectare site in the Aqaba governorate, 360 kilometres south of the capital, Amman, and a corridor to pipe sea water from the Red Sea, and Norway will provide US$600,000 for three feasibility studies. Further investment from the private sector is also expected for the construction of the demonstration centre.
If the project is economically successful, the Aqaba authorities will provide another 200 hectares for expansion, Turk said.
The world's first commercial example of a seawater greenhouse, a 2,000-square-metre unit in Port Augusta, Australia, harvested its first crop of tomatoes in December.

http://www.scidev.net/en/news/seawater-greenhouse-plan-for-jordan-.html

POVERTY: A Light in India

January 10, 2011 :   DAVID BORNSTEIN

David Bornstein is the author of “How to Change the World,” which has been published in 20 languages, and “The Price of a Dream: The Story of the Grameen Bank,” and is co-author of “Social Entrepreneurship: What Everyone Needs to Know.” He is the founder of dowser.org, a media site that reports on social innovation.

  © Harikrishna Katragadda/Greenpeace : Students in the village of Tahipur in Bihar used kerosene lanterns for studying.

When we hear the word innovation, we often think of new technologies or silver bullet solutions — like hydrogen fuel cells or a cure for cancer. To be sure, breakthroughs are vital: antibiotics and vaccines, for example, transformed global health. But as we’ve argued in Fixes, some of the greatest advances come from taking old ideas or technologies and making them accessible to millions of people who are underserved.
One area where this is desperately needed is access to electricity. In the age of the iPad, it’s easy to forget that roughly a quarter of the world’s population — about a billion and a half people (pdf) — still lack electricity. This isn’t just an inconvenience; it takes a severe toll on economic life, education and health. It’s estimated that two million people die prematurely each year as a result of pulmonary diseases caused by the indoor burning of fuels for cooking and light. Close to half are children who die of pneumonia.
In vast stretches of the developing world, after the sun sets, everything goes dark. In sub-Saharan Africa, about 70 percent of the population lack electricity. However, no country has more citizens living without power than India, where more than 400 million people, the vast majority of them villagers, have no electricity. The place that remains most in darkness is Bihar, India’s poorest state, which has more than 80 million people, 85 percent of whom live in households with no grid connection. Because Bihar has nowhere near the capacity to meet its current power demands, even those few with connections receive electricity sporadically and often at odd hours, like between 3:00 a.m and 6:00 a.m., when it is of little use.
This is why I’m writing today about a small but fast-growing off-grid electricity company based in Bihar called Husk Power Systems. It has created a system to turn rice husks into electricity that is reliable, eco-friendly and affordable for families that can spend only $2 a month for power. The company has 65 power units that serve a total of 30,000 households and is currently installing new systems at the rate of two to three per week.
What’s most interesting about Husk Power is how it has combined many incremental improvements that add up to something qualitatively new — with the potential for dramatic scale. The company expects to have 200 systems by the end of 2011, each serving a village or a small village cluster. Its plan is to ramp that up significantly, with the goal of having 2,014 units serving millions of clients by the end of 2014.

  © Harikrishna Katragadda/Greenpeace : A biomass gasifier owned and operated by Husk Power Systems.

Husk Power was founded by four friends: Gyanesh Pandey, Manoj Sinha, Ratnesh Yadav and Charles W. Ransler, who met attending different schools in India and the United States. Pandey, the company’s chief executive, grew up in a village in Bihar without electricity. “I felt low because of that,” he told me when we met recently in New Delhi. He decided to study electrical engineering. At college in India, he experienced the Indian prejudice against Biharis — some students refused to sit at the same table with him — which contributed to his desire to emigrate to the U.S.. He found his way to the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, in Troy, N.Y., where he completed a master’s degree before landing a position with the semiconductor manufacturer International Rectifier in Los Angeles. His job was to figure out how to get the best performance from integrated circuits at the lowest possible cost. This helped him develop a problem-solving aptitude that would prove useful for Husk Power.
He was soon earning a six-figure income. He bought his family a diesel-powered electric generator. As a single man living in Los Angeles, he enjoyed traveling, dining out and going to clubs. “I was basically cruising through life,” he recalled. “But along with that pleasure and smoothness was a dark zone in my head.” He began meditating — and he realized that he felt compelled to return home and use his knowledge to bring light to Bihar.
Back in India, he and his friend Yadav, an entrepreneur, spent the next few years experimenting. They explored the possibility of producing organic solar cells. They tried growing a plant called jatropha, whose seeds can be used for biodiesel. Both proved impractical as businesses. They tested out solar lamps, but found their application limited. “In the back of my mind, I always thought there would be some high tech solution that would solve the problem,” said Pandey.
One day he ran into a salesman who sold gasifiers — machines that burn organic materials in an oxygen restricted environment to produce biogas which can be used to power an engine. There was nothing new about gasifiers; they had been around for decades. People sometimes burned rice husks in them to supplement diesel fuel, which was expensive. “But nobody had thought to use rice husks to run a whole power system,” explained Pandey.
In Bihar, poverty is extreme. Pretty much everything that can be used will be used — recycled or burned or fed to animals. Rice husks are the big exception. When rice is milled, the outside kernel, or husk, is discarded. Because the husk contains a lot of silica, it doesn’t burn well for cooking. A recent Greenpeace study (pdf) reports that Bihar alone produces 1.8 billion kilograms of rice husk per year. Most of it ends up rotting in landfills and emitting methane, a greenhouse gas.

  Courtesy of Husk Power Systems :
The mini-power plant during the day.

Pandey and Yadav began bringing pieces together for an electric distribution system powered by the husks. They got a gasifier, a generator set, filtering, cleaning and cooling systems, piping and insulated wiring. They went through countless iterations to get the system working: adjusting valves and pressures, the gas-to-air ratios, the combustion temperature, the starting mechanism. In they end, they came up with a system that could burn 50 kilograms of rice husk per hour and produce 32 kilowatts of power, sufficient for about 500 village households.
They reached out to people in a village called Tamkuha, in Bihar, offering them a deal: for 80 rupees a month — roughly $1.75 — a household could get daily power for one 30-watt or two 15-watt compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs and unlimited cell phone charging between 5:00 p.m and 11:00 p.m. For many families, the price was less than half their monthly kerosene costs, and the light would be much brighter. It would also be less smoky, less of a fire hazard, and better for the environment. Customers could pay for more power if they needed it — for radios, TVs, ceiling fans or water pumps. But many had no appliances and lived in huts so small, one bulb was enough. The system went live on August 15, 2007, the anniversary of India’s independence.
It worked. Back in the United States, their colleagues Sinha and Ransler, who were pursuing M.B.A.s at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, put together a business plan and set out to raise money. They came first in two student competitions, garnering prizes of $10,000 and $50,000. The company received a grant from the Shell Foundation and set up three more systems in 2008. It has since raised $1.75 million in investment financing. In 2009, they had 19 systems in operation; in 2010, they more than tripled that number.
Technically, most of the problems were solved by 2008. But to make the business viable has required an ongoing process of what has been called “frugal innovation” — radically simplifying things to serve the needs of poor customers who would otherwise be excluded from basic market services due to their limited ability to pay.

  © Harikrishna Katragadda/Greenpeace : Shops in the Sariswa Village market use power generated by Husk Power Systems.

In order to bring down costs, for example, the company stripped down the gasifiers and engines, removing everything non-essential that added to manufacturing or maintenance expenses, like turbocharging. They replaced an automated water-aided process for the removal of rice husk char (burned husks) from gasifiers with one that uses 80 percent less water and can be operated with a hand crank. They kept labor costs down by recruiting locals, often from very poor families with modest education levels (who would be considered unemployable by many companies) and training them to operate and load machines, and work as fee collectors and auditors, going door-to-door ensuring that villagers aren’t using more electricity than they pay for. (Electricity theft is a national problem in India, resulting in losses to power companies estimated at 30 percent. Husk Power says it has managed to keep such losses down to five percent.)
When the company noticed that customers were purchasing poor-quality CFL bulbs, which waste energy, they partnered with Havells India, a large manufacturer, to purchase thousands of high quality bulbs at discount rates, which their collectors now sell to clients. They also saw that collectors could become discount suppliers of other products — like soap, biscuits and oil — so they added a product fulfillment business into the mix.
And they found ways to extract value from the rice husk char — the waste product of a waste product — by setting up another side business turning the char into incense sticks. This business now operates in five locations and provides supplemental income to 500 women. The company also receives government subsidies for renewable energy and is seeking Clean Development Mechanism benefits.
With growth, human audits have proven inadequate to control electricity theft or inadvertent overuse. So the company developed a stripped-down pre-payment smart-card reader for home installation. The going rate for smart-card readers is between $50 and $90. Husk Power is near completion of one that Pandey says will cost under $7.
Alone, none of these steps would have been significant. Taken together, however, they make it possible for power units to deliver tiny volumes of electricity while enjoying a 30 percent profit margin. The side businesses add another 20 percent to the bottom line. Pandey says new power units become profitable within 2 to 3 months of installation. He expects the company to be financially self-sustaining by June 2011.
From a social standpoint, there are many benefits to this business model. In addition to the fact that electricity allows shop keepers to stay open later and farmers to irrigate more land, and lighting increases children’s studying time and reduces burglaries and snakebites, the company also channels most of its wages and payments for services directly back into the villages it serves.
For decades, countries have operated on the assumption that power from large electricity plants will eventually trickle down to villagers. In many parts of the world, this has proven to be elusive. Husk Power has identified at least 25,000 villages across Bihar and neighboring states in India’s rice belt as appropriate for its model. Ramapati Kumar, an advisor on Climate and Energy for Greenpeace India, who has studied Husk Power, explained that the company’s model could “go a long way in bringing light to 125,000 unelectrified villages in India,” while reducing “the country’s dependence on fossil fuels.”
It’s too soon to say whether Husk Power will prove to be successful in the long run. As with any young company, there are many unknowns. To achieve its goals, it will need to recruit and train thousands of employees over the next four years, raise additional financing, and institute sound management practices. Many companies destroy themselves in the process of trying to expand aggressively.
But the lessons here go beyond the fortunes of Husk Power. What the company illustrates is a different way to think about innovation — one that is suitable for global problems that stem from poor people’s lack of access to energy, water, housing and education. In many cases, success in these challenges hinges less on big new ideas than on collections of small old ideas well integrated and executed. “What’s replicable isn’t the distribution of electricity,” says Pandey. “It’s the whole process of how to take an old technology and apply it to local constraints. How to create a system out of the materials and labor that are readily available.”
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/a-light-in-india/?ref=opinion

POVERTY: Goal Looms for U.N.: Ending ‘Energy Poverty’

ELISABETH ROSENTHAL




Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
A baby receiving a vaccine at a health center in the Bugasera district of Rwanda last month.

Electricity is considered vital to meeting United Nations goals like reducing infant mortality.The United Nations Millennium Development Goals were adopted in 2000 as a commitment to improve health and education as well as end poverty in less fortunate parts of the globe. The eight goals include targets like universal childhood education, reducing infant mortality and ensuring environmental sustainability.
This year there has been a growing movement to add a ninth goal: ending energy poverty. Some 1.4 billion people lack access to electricity. Energy experts like Nobuo Tanaka, executive director of the International Energy Agency, say that erasing energy poverty should be added because providing people with electricity is often a precondition for solving the eight other problems.
Hospitals without electricity have a hard time keeping vaccines and medicines cold enough or sterilizing equipment properly. If a village lacks electricity to light schools and homes, it is hard for children to do their homework.
In a new report released in part last month during a high-level gathering of the United Nations General Assembly, the International Energy Agency calculated that it would take $36 billion a year for the next 20 years to achieve “universal access to modern energy” by 2030.
That could be accomplished with only a minor bump in global greenhouse emissions because many parts of the world -– principally rural regions not yet connected to an electricity grid –- can best be electrified with renewable energy sources.
An earlier version of this post misstated the amount that the International Energy Agency calculates it would take per year to achieve “universal access to modern energy” by 2030. It is $36 billion, not $36 million.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/goal-looms-for-u-n-ending-energy-poverty/