Difference between revisions of "Hydropower - Grants & Subsidies"

From energypedia
***** (***** | *****)
(New page: <span style="display: none;" id="1244721846111S"> </span> If the price of the energy supplied by micro hydro is too expensive for poor people who need it, then the issue of subsidie...)
 
***** (***** | *****)
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
There is also weight in the argument that people in remote locations ‘deserve’ electricity as much as poor people in other parts of the country. Furthermore, subsidies to micro hydro may well be justified because they are the least cost way of achieving other development objectives, such as motive power to secure livelihoods, lighting for health and education, refrigeration for the storage of food or medicines.  
 
There is also weight in the argument that people in remote locations ‘deserve’ electricity as much as poor people in other parts of the country. Furthermore, subsidies to micro hydro may well be justified because they are the least cost way of achieving other development objectives, such as motive power to secure livelihoods, lighting for health and education, refrigeration for the storage of food or medicines.  
 +
 +
----
  
 
'''Source''': Best Practices for Sustainable Development of Micro Hydro Power in Developing Countries; URL: http://www.microhydropower.net/download/bestpractsynthe.pdf
 
'''Source''': Best Practices for Sustainable Development of Micro Hydro Power in Developing Countries; URL: http://www.microhydropower.net/download/bestpractsynthe.pdf

Revision as of 12:07, 11 June 2009

If the price of the energy supplied by micro hydro is too expensive for poor people who need it, then the issue of subsidies and/or grants cannot be avoided. The political acceptability of subsidies has undergone wild fluctuations in recent years. All governments provide subsidies, but it is clear that some have done more harm than good. The essential question that has emerged from the ideological posturing of recent years is less about the rights and wrongs of subsidies in principle, but rather whether a particular form of subsidy actually achieves its intended purpose. The arguments for using money that is supplied at less than full commercial rates of interest are overwhelming if large numbers of people are to be given access to improved energy services. This ‘soft money’ will be required to enable people with insufficient purchasing power to gain access to electricity, and to other more convenient forms of energy. In the most general terms, the reasons why agencies of the state, whether national or multinational, should provide soft money are well known:

  • to capture the existence of many positive ‘externalities’ not reflected in market prices, such as the benefits of health, education, welfare, and environment;
  • to redistribute income from richer to poorer parts of the community for reasons of equity and or human rights;
  • to kick start an ‘infant’ industry by enabling the volume of production to be increased and skills developed to the extent that unit costs of production fall to levels where the target consumers can afford to buy them on a sustainable basis in the future;
  • to remove or reduce the barriers associated with inefficient operation of the market. Usually including the unequal distribution of information between buyers and sellers, monopoly elements among both buyers and sellers, and hostile features of the ‘enabling’ environment, such as the unintended consequences of taxes, subsidies to competing options, lack of appropriate regulation, inadequate financial and physical infrastructure, etc.; and
  • to assist users in overcoming the high initial costs of purchases that are ‘least cost’ when considered over the their operational lifetime.

While subsidies to ‘pump prime’ markets are quite different from those intended to lower the cost of ‘social infrastructure’, perhaps the most persuasive argument for subsidising micro hydro is made in terms of ‘levelling the playing field’ with other competing options and concern about ‘fairness’. This arguments suggests that:

  • micro hydro should receive subsidies that are equivalent to those received by competing options such as the grid or PV;
  • micro hydro needs to be compensated as it is unfairly discriminated against in-so-far as it does not get the same tax breaks and other concessions as other technologies;
  • micro hydro needs to be compensated because the full cost of other options is not included in the price. For example, the environmental costs of using fossil fuels such as petrol, or biomass fuels such as woodfuel.

There is also weight in the argument that people in remote locations ‘deserve’ electricity as much as poor people in other parts of the country. Furthermore, subsidies to micro hydro may well be justified because they are the least cost way of achieving other development objectives, such as motive power to secure livelihoods, lighting for health and education, refrigeration for the storage of food or medicines.


Source: Best Practices for Sustainable Development of Micro Hydro Power in Developing Countries; URL: http://www.microhydropower.net/download/bestpractsynthe.pdf