STAFF REPORTER
Africa is home to 17 percent of the world’s population but accounts for only 4 per cent of global power supply investment, according to Africa Energy Commission (AFREC). The result is all too familiar: Only half the population has access to electricity, whereas a large part of the households, businesses, and communities that have access suffer from bad and costly service, if not regular blackouts. In 2018, as much as 80 percent of sub-Saharan African companies suffered frequent electricity disruptions leading to economic losses. Add to the fact that only 30 percent of the population in Sub-Saharan Africa have access to clean cooking, with devastating effects on both humans and forests.
Energy Poverty is the lack of access to reliable and modern sources of energy. Two main elements define energy poverty in a household: income and energy consumption. A household that spends more than 10 percent of its revenues to meet its energy needs is in energy poverty.
According to the IEA, 634 million people did not have access to electricity in 2014. Indeed, by 2014, the continent’s overall electrification rate was 45 percent, of which 72 percent in urban areas and 28 percent in rural areas. The countries of North Africa have rates close to 100 percent; only two countries (Mauritius and Seychelles) in Sub-Saharan Africa have rates close to 100percent as shown in the table below. Several sub-Saharan African countries are experiencing energy poverty, particularly in rural areas.
More than 700 million people use biomass as fuel for cooking, accounting for 69 percent of the African population, according to the IEA 2014 data. Biomass is considered as an unsustainable source in sub-Saharan Africa. These IEA data in the table below adequately illustrate energy poverty in this country. Once again, energy poverty is measured on the basis of household surveys. Less than one million people in North Africa use biomass, mainly in Morocco.
When considering the state of energy access and energy poverty in sub-Saharan Africa, it is important to remember that regional and national averages can obscure vast disparities in levels of energy access between and within countries.
Some countries, such as South Sudan and Burundi, have electrification rates in the single digits; whereas the small island states of Mauritius and the Seychelles have energy access rates of 100 percent (see Figure 1).
More needs to be done to address energy poverty in sub-Saharan Africa. Yet Africa faces challenges in using fossil fuels to generate electricity. Fossil fuels are susceptible to major variations in price that have significant impacts on the economic viability of electricity production. Burning fossil fuels in power plants creates significant health risks as a result of dangerous smog.
Although Africa’s limited role in driving climate change means that its citizens should not shoulder the burden of addressing it—especially not when considering the grave levels of impoverishment represented by current levels of energy poverty—Africa’s vulnerability to climate change does give it a real incentive to seek to minimize its greenhouse gas emissions where possible.
While the task of addressing energy poverty and limiting greenhouse gas emissions seems daunting, price reductions in a number of renewable energy technologies are creating new possibilities for achieving energy access in Africa, and as such the policy discussion over how best to prioritize energy investments is changing rapidly.
Many actors now call for a complete overhaul of the traditional focus on investing in centralized power generation and expanding the grid. Instead, they call for a focus on distributed renewable energy technologies, which are believed to be cheaper, faster to deploy, and not reliant on the slow and bureaucratic power utilities that have served African countries so poorly in the past.
In addition, such energy sources are thought to mitigate the local emissions from large, centralized, fossil fuel–burning power stations, which currently impose major health costs on surrounding communities. Other actors reject this argument, suggesting that a distributed approach is incapable of supplying power in the quantities required. Assessing the merits of these arguments is challenging owing to the technical characteristics of energy technologies, the rapidly changing prices of renewable components, and the complex economics and financing questions that dominate the energy sector.
But an alternative energy future for Africa is possible and affordable, says powerforall.org. In the case of cooking, wide distribution and use of LPG and improved cookstoves are the main contributors. In the electricity sector the scenario «would require tripling the average number of people gaining access per year from around 20 million today to over 60 million people». IEA estimates that about half of the new electricity connections will come in the form of mini-grids and stand-alone systems.
The good news is that the least cost-solution of securing reliable electricity for all Africans by 2040 has only very limited implications for total CO2 emissions. In fact, despite the fact that its population will almost double by 2040 and its economy will expand, IEA projects that Africa’s contribution to global energy-related CO2 emissions in the high-growth Africa scenario will increase from 2 to just 4.5 percent by 2040. The transition to clean cooking, on the other hand, will result in a reduction in overall emission of greenhouse gases.
The third major transformation in the Africa Case scenario is the emergence of Africa «as a major player in natural gas markets as a producer, consumer, and exporter». Gas production more than doubles to 2040, and the share of gas in Africa’s energy mix rises to around 24per cent in 2040. The continent led by Mozambique and Egypt become major exporters of natural gas to other parts of the world.
To fulfill the Africa Case scenario, IEA estimates that the yearly investments in power supply would need to increase fourfold, to around $120 billion a year until 2040. Around half of that amount would be needed for networks, and half for generation, mostly solar PV and wind.
A fourfold increase in investments is feasible, says IEA. But it will require reforms from both national governments and a large number of national and multilateral development banks currently active in the green energy investment space across the continent. For governments in Africa, this means energy sector reform with a gradual phase-out of fuel subsidies, and improved financial health and performance of the electricity utility companies. As for the development banks like the World Bank, African Development Bank and others, IEA advocates more focus on designing risk mitigation instruments that can attract private capital to energy investments in sub-Saharan Africa.
The Ethiopian Herald June 19/2021
