Difference between revisions of "Case Studies on How to Achieve Inclusive Energy Access"

From energypedia
***** (***** | *****)
***** (***** | *****)
Line 25: Line 25:
  
 
<u>'''Lessons learned'''</u>: Low level of financing for clean cooking solutions is one of the biggest obstacles for clean cooking.
 
<u>'''Lessons learned'''</u>: Low level of financing for clean cooking solutions is one of the biggest obstacles for clean cooking.
 +
  
  
 
== Case Study 3: Nepal Rural Energy Development Programme, 1996–2011 ==
 
== Case Study 3: Nepal Rural Energy Development Programme, 1996–2011 ==
Nepal has huge hydropower potential and hydropower plants started in Nepal since 1980s and it continued to  1990s through donor-funded
 
programmes and government financial incentives. However, challenges us system operation, maintenance and tariff recovery remained. To address these problems, the Rural Energy Development Programme (REDP), was implemented from 1996 to 2011. This program installed community-owned and managed micro-hydro systems. This program installed 454 micro-hydro systems and reached nearly 58,000 households (600,000 people).
 
  
Program activities: Community mobilizers were assigned six months prior to the program to raise awareness, provide training in productive uses, and ensure empowerment of vulnerable groups.Regarding the financing, 50% came from the central government, 10% from the local government, 20% from the target communities through in-kind labour, land and construction materials and 20% in the form of cash either upfront or via a bank loan.  
+
Nepal has a huge hydropower potential. Hydropower plants started in Nepal since 1980s and continued to 1990s through donor-funded programmes and government financial incentives. However, challenges such as system operation, maintenance and tariff recovery from hydropower plants remained. To address these problems, the Rural Energy Development Programme (REDP), was implemented from 1996 to 2011. This program installed 454 micro-hydro systems and reached nearly 58,000 households (600,000 people). These micro-hydro systems are all community-owned and managed.
 +
 
 +
'''<u>Program activities</u>''': Community mobilizers were assigned six months prior to the program to raise awareness, provide training on productive uses of eelctricity, and ensure empowerment of vulnerable groups. Regarding the financing, 50% came from the central government, 10% from the local government, 20% from the target communities through in-kind labour, land and construction materials and the remaining 20% in the form of cash either upfront or via a bank loan.
  
Lessons learnt: Strong community mobilization, an innovative financing mechanism and decentralized program management has helped to deliver energy to the remote villages in Nepal.
+
'''<u>Lessons learnt</u>''': Strong community mobilization, an innovative financing mechanism and decentralized program management has helped to deliver energy to the remote villages in Nepal. Focusing on female-driven community also helped to involve women into these projects. However, challengs such as lack of finance, [[Grid_Interconnection_of_Micro-hydro_Projects_(MHPs)_in_Nepal|grid interconnection of the micro-hydro]] and demand from the local community still remains.&nbsp;

Revision as of 13:54, 10 February 2019

Introduction

The Poor People's Energy Outlook (PPEO) 2018 Report - Achieving Inclusive Energy Access at Scale from the Practical Action looks at six case studies/lessons learned from clean cooking, decentralized electricity, and grid-extension programs to explore how energy access could be provided to the most marginalized population all over the world.

This article shortly summarizes each of the case studies.

Case study 1: Ghana clean cookstoves programme, 2002–07

The Government of Ghana promoted clean cookstoves already since 1989 but due to high unit cost of the stoves, the scheme failed as soon as governement funding stopped. EnterpriseWorks/VITA (EWV) then introduced the Kenyan jiko stoves as Gyapa. These stoves meet the tier 2 of the International Workshop Agreement (IWA) and targeted low-middle income households. These stoves were widely successful such that by the end of 2017 about 900,000 Gyapa stoves were sold, resulting in 800jobs and affecting 1.1 million Ghanaians.

Program's approach: The program  identified and trained local artisans for building the stoves,ceramic and the metal builders collaborated with the project and capacity-building training was provided to 200 retailers. Retailers were connected with manufacturers and received free transport as well as stoves on credit. The artisans also received upfront payment up to 50% to buy raw materials. The manufacturers also provided warranty to end-consumers for broken ceramic lining. EMV also carried out intensive marketing campaigns to boost the demand.

Lesson learned: The cookstove program focused on removing barriers by building capacity, smoothing financing challenges, and running an effective demand-creation programme.


Case Study 2: Kenya Biogas Programme, 2009-18

Since 1950, the Kenyan Government has promoted biogas programme in Kenya. The Kenyan biogas program (KBP) in 2009 actually became the driving force for promoting biogas projects in Kenya. By the end of 2017, 17,134 biogas were constructed benefiting some 103,000 people.

Program activities:The program before 2009 focused on end-user awareness raising and on building confidence in the technology through training in usage and maintenance. After 2009, it focused on 22 biogas marketing hubs which are associated with specific agricultural sectors such as dairy, coffee and tea farming (along with the farmer cooperatives). during the phase I, the biogas were subsidized but in the phase II, it offered result-based incentives to financial institution who could then provide loans to farmers. To incooperate more women, the program trained women masons, sought to reach women customers, and also encouraged participation in the national biogas users’ association.

Challenges: Building biogas plant as well as the appliances using biogas (burners, lights and even small generators) are still expensive. Affordability of biogas is therefore one of the biggest challenges. This is acute for women who have less access to credit and on average are poorer. The demand for biogas also partly slowed as some of the plants were of poorer quality. The farmers also requested for more trainings to learn how to use the bioslurry from the biogas.

Lessons learned: Low level of financing for clean cooking solutions is one of the biggest obstacles for clean cooking.


Case Study 3: Nepal Rural Energy Development Programme, 1996–2011

Nepal has a huge hydropower potential. Hydropower plants started in Nepal since 1980s and continued to 1990s through donor-funded programmes and government financial incentives. However, challenges such as system operation, maintenance and tariff recovery from hydropower plants remained. To address these problems, the Rural Energy Development Programme (REDP), was implemented from 1996 to 2011. This program installed 454 micro-hydro systems and reached nearly 58,000 households (600,000 people). These micro-hydro systems are all community-owned and managed.

Program activities: Community mobilizers were assigned six months prior to the program to raise awareness, provide training on productive uses of eelctricity, and ensure empowerment of vulnerable groups. Regarding the financing, 50% came from the central government, 10% from the local government, 20% from the target communities through in-kind labour, land and construction materials and the remaining 20% in the form of cash either upfront or via a bank loan.

Lessons learnt: Strong community mobilization, an innovative financing mechanism and decentralized program management has helped to deliver energy to the remote villages in Nepal. Focusing on female-driven community also helped to involve women into these projects. However, challengs such as lack of finance, grid interconnection of the micro-hydro and demand from the local community still remains.