The Costs of Fuelling Humanitarian Aid

Energy is a vital key-factor for humanitarian actions of different movements and organizations.
The majority of refugee and internal displacement camps are in remote locations, consequently the humanitarian agencies consume large amounts of fuel to reach such places for transporting staff, equipment, food, water etc.
Despite the fact that the case load of humanitarian agencies has continued to globally rise, yet no agency or organoization has come up with a proper strategy for addressing their energy use in such situations.
21 humanitarian aiding agencies, operating in Burkina Faso, Kenya & Jordan, have applied a survey, through which the following problems have been found:

Involved agencies are heavily dependent on oil fuel for electricity generation, for which they are paying too much, even though renewable energy technologies are capable of reducing costs, being deployed in similar conditions.
The way in which fuel is distributed in camps, between agencies who are in contract with UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) does not usually motivate these agaencies to conserve fuel. Hence, these agencies have very few -if any- incentives to perfrom better.
What for and how much is spent on energy by these different agencies lack transparency, as few agencies collect and report on energy use.

Due to the absence of concrete reliable data from the majority of humanitarian agencies with regard to energy costs or potential savings, then any estimates would probably be highly flawed. Nonetheless, this research approximately estimates that around 5% of humanitarian agencies expenditure is on diesel, petrol, and associated costs, indicating that around $1.2 billion have been spent on polluting fuel in 2017.
The paper examines few practices -currently available, affordable and proven in practice-, which are considered the best in terms of helping the individual agencies to create a large saving margins. Based on these mentioned best practices, the humanitarian aiding sector could save at least 10% of fuel costs on ground transport, 37% through behaviour change and more efficient technologies, 60% on generation, eventually leading to an approximate mean operational savings of $517 million/year for the humanitarian sector (~5% of UNHCR funding gap in 2017).
In addition to the financial gains, adopting energy strategies, which promote sustainable energy in countries of operation, would also help humanitarian agencies building positive relations with the host-country governments and societies.

Key Findings in Countries of Operation

Key Findings in Countries-of-Operation
Country	Key Findings
Kenya	The 7 surveyed agencies showed that their annual spending on diesel and petrol in 2017 was approximately $6.7 million. The high cost reflected the remoteness of locations of camps and the agencies' high reliance on diesel for electricity generation. Solar off-grid systems would offer an extending electricity access to refugees and local populations in Garissa & Tukana counties.
Jordan	Solar power is currently powering the majority of camp facilities and many households. The use of grid electricity remains high and expensive in Amman, where humanitarian agencies' head offices run. In order to save costs, buildings' energy efficiency must be improved.
Burkina Faso	NGO offices are desperately short of power in Goudoubo's camp, due to the lack of proper access to computers and air conditioning. Investing in renewable energy technologies would solve such issues as well as street lighting and water pumping. Investing in renewable energy technologies could also drive increased rural energy access among host populations acrocess this area of Sahel.

Fleet sharing and fuel-management practices would make sense in the 3 countries as that would:

Another negative outcome -due to the lack of precise data on energy use, costs and alternatives- is frequently missing opportunities to do things differently by the decision makers.

Demanding humanitarian agencies to provide a breakdown of energy cost projections in budgets, and backing them up with assumptions about consumption and costs.
Investigating what is actually being done by which agencies to reduce fuel costs and emissions in the country of operation.
Supporing the scaling-up schemes, which have already proven feasibility.
Providing guarantees which enable and improve contracting performance with the private sector.

Check the steps -if any- taken by the humanitarian agencies to reduce their vehicle impact & greenhouse gas emissions.
To include and enforce sustainable energy as a priority sector, which will consequently encourage donors to invest in energy projects, leaving a positive and sustainable legacy in the country of operation.
To facilitate infrastructure investments, which will reduce energy and water demand in camps, which fall under the state of prolonged displacement presence.
Considering partnerships with humanitarian agencies, which are operating in remote locations of the country, in order to improve energy access for such locations.