Any country can reach high shares of wind, solar power cost-effectively, study shows

Transformation of power systems is necessary to guarantee flexibility over long term, but this will be more difficult in some markets than in others

26 February 2014

Wind power and solar photovoltaics (PV) are crucial to meeting future energy needs while decarbonising the power sector. Deployment of both technologies has expanded rapidly in recent years – one of the few bright spots in an otherwise-bleak picture of clean energy progress – and IEA scenarios indicate that this trend will continue for decades. However, the inherent variability of wind power and solar PV is raising concerns: Can power systems remain reliable and cost-effective while supporting high shares of variable renewable energy (VRE)? And if so, how? 

A landmark study released today by the International Energy Agency addresses these concerns and confirms that integrating high shares – i.e., 30 percent of annual electricity production or more – of wind and solar PV in power systems can come at little additional cost in the long term. However, costs depend on how flexible the system currently is and what strategy is adopted to develop system flexibility over the long term. Managing this transition will be more difficult for some countries or power systems than others, the study says.

“Integrating high shares of variable renewables is really about transforming our power systems,” IEA Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven said as she launched The Power of Transformation - Wind, Sun and the Economics of Flexible Power Systems, the latest in a series of IEA reports shedding light on the challenges and opportunities of integrating VRE into power systems globally.

“This new IEA analysis calls for a change of perspective,” she explained. “In the classical approach, variable renewables are added to an existing system without considering all available options for adapting it as a whole. This approach misses the point. Integration is not simply about adding wind and solar on top of ‘business as usual’. We need to transform the system as a whole to do this cost-effectively.”

Currently, wind and solar PV account for just about 3 percent of world electricity generation, but a few countries already feature very high shares: In Italy, Germany, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, and Denmark, wind and solar PV accounted respectively from around 10 to more than 30 percent of electricity generation in 2012 on an annual basis.

The report says that for any country, integrating the first 5-10 percent of VRE generation poses no technical or economic challenges at all, provided that three conditions are met: uncontrolled local “hot spots” of VRE deployment must be avoided, VRE must contribute to stabilising the grid when needed, and VRE forecasts must be used effectively. These lower levels of integration are possible within existing systems because the same flexible resources that power systems already use to cope with variability of demand can be put to work to help integrate variability from wind and solar. Such resources can be found in the form of flexible power plants, grid infrastructure, storage and demand-side response.

Going beyond the first few percent to reach shares of more than 30 percent will require a transformation of the system, however. This transformation has three main requirements: deploying variable renewables in a system-friendly way using state-of-the art technology, improving the day-to-day operation of power systems and markets, and finally investing in additional flexible resources.

The challenges of such transformation depend on whether a power system is “stable,” meaning no significant investments are needed to meet demand in the short term, or “dynamic” which requires significant investments short-term, to meet growing power demand or replace old assets.

The publication helps to clarify the very different perception of wind and solar around the globe. In stable systems, such as those in Europe, the existing asset base will help to provide sufficient flexibility to increase VRE generation further. However, in the absence of demand growth, increasing VRE generation in stable systems inevitably comes at the detriment of incumbent generators and puts the system as a whole under economic stress. This outcome is based on fundamental economics; market effects are thus not only a consequence of variability. The transformation challenge in stable systems is twofold: scaling up the new, flexible system while scaling down the inflexible part of the old.

Governments with stable systems face tough policy questions about how to handle the distributional effects, in particular if other power plants need to be retired before the end of their lifetimes and, if so, who will pay for stranded assets. Meeting these challenges will only be possible through a collaborative effort by policy makers and the industry. In any case, “these surmountable challenges should not let us lose sight of the benefits renewables can bring for energy security and fighting dangerous climate change. If OECD countries want to maintain their position as front runners in this industry, they will need to tackle these questions head-on,” Ms. Van der Hoeven said.

By contrast, in “dynamic” power systems such as in India, China, Brazil and other emerging economies, wind power and solar PV can be cost-effective solutions to meet incremental demand. VRE grid integration can – and must – be a priority from the onset. With proper investments, a flexible system can be built from the very start, in parallel with the deployment of variable renewables. “Emerging economies really have an opportunity here. They can leap-frog to a 21^st-century power system – and they should reap the benefits,” the IEA Executive Director concluded.

2014 WANGARI MAATHAI DAY AND AFRICA ENVIRONMENTAL DAY

Date and time: 

Thu, 2014-01-30 08:37

Share: Facebook Twitter Google Plus Yahoo LinkedIn Digg Delicious

Introduction

During the 2012 Session of the General Assembly of the African Union, the Assembly decided to recognize Prof Wangari Maathai’s numerous achievements in her capacity as the first Presiding Officer of the African Union’s Economic, Social and Cultural Council (AU –ECOSOCC), African Union Peace Ambassador, Founder of the Green Belt Movement, Goodwill Ambassador to the Congo Basin Forest Initiative, UN Peace Messenger for Environment and Climate, and UNEP Champion of the Earth. In so doing they designated 3 March as Wangari Maathai Day to be observed in conjunction with Africa Environment Day, each year beginning in 2012. The Wangari Maathai Institute, the Green Belt Movement and the United Nations Environmental Program have planned to celebrate this day on 3^rd March 2014. The theme of the day will be the role of youth and higher education in securing our common future.

Further, the UN General Assembly has recently proclaimed 3 March as World Wildlife Day, to celebrate and raise awareness of the world's wild fauna and flora. In so doing, the UN General Assembly reaffirmed the intrinsic value of wildlife and its various contributions, including ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic, to sustainable development and human well-being, and recognized the important role the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) plays in ensuring that international trade does not threaten the survival of the species.

The 2014 Wangari Maathai Day theme is drawn from Wangari Maathai’s 2004 Nobel Peace Prize Lecture:

“Today we are faced with a challenge that calls for a shift in our thinking, so that humanity stops threatening its life-support system. We are called to assist the Earth to heal her wounds and in the process heal our own – indeed, to embrace the whole creation in all its diversity, beauty and wonder. This will happen if we see the need to revive our sense of belonging to a larger family of life, with which we have shared our evolutionary process. In the course of history, there comes a time when humanity is called to shift to a new level of consciousness, to reach a higher moral ground. A time when we have to shed our fear and give hope to each other. That time is now.

I would like to call on young people to commit themselves to activities that contribute toward achieving their long-term dreams. They have the energy and creativity to shape a sustainable future. To the young people I say, you are a gift to your communities and indeed the world. You are our hope and our future.”  

The 2014 Wangari Maathai Day seeks to promote Environmental Education and Community empowerment amongst the Youth and Institutions of higher education; by re-affirming the importance of all levels of education and training towards sustainable development in Kenya and the continent of Africa.

Expiry Date: 

Sun, 2017-12-31 08:37

Contact Person: 

Prof. S.G. Kiama

Should we worry if Africa’s farmers are getting older?

By Jim Sumberg on Jun 04 in Hot topic 1 Comment

A ‘fact’ that is commonly used to support the case for doing something about young rural Africans’ apparent lack of interest in agriculture is that ‘the average age of farmers in Africa is increasing’. An aging population of farmers is seen to be undesirable, with the implication being that if nothing is done the agricultural sector will slowly crumble as the remaining farmers progressively work themselves into the grave.
Thus, according to some commentators, an aging farm population should be a wake-up call for policy makers: inaction risks increasing food insecurity, rural poverty, burgeoning urban slums and economic decline. Others see an aging farm population as a sign of a lost opportunity to bring young people into the sector and benefit from their energy and greater openness to innovation.
But these claims, and the evidence on which they are based, need to be looked at more closely.
In African policy debates it is often assumed that rejection of agriculture by rural young people – and their mass migration to urban areas – is the primary cause of the aging farm population. It is further assumed that among rural young people there is lack of awareness of the actual and potential opportunities offered by agriculture, and that they lack necessary skills and access to key productive resources. Another long-standing assumption is that young people are put off by hard, manual labour that is synonymous with much smallholder farming – the ‘primitive hoe’ much derided in the gender and development literature. These assumptions lead to policies and programmes that seek to promote ‘farming as a business’ through awareness raising, business training, credit provision, mechanisation and help to access other resources such as land.
All this is interesting. But what is the real significance of such claims about an ageing farm population in Africa? What is their basis and their policy relevance, and what kinds of action should they engender?
There are some good reasons for caution. First there is the problem of the generally poor quality of official statistics, and especially demographic data, in much of Africa. (For an excellent new book on this important subject see the 2012 book Poor Numbers: How We Are Misled by African Development Statistics and What to Do about It by Morten Jerven.)
Secondly, and more particularly: how is the category ‘farmer’ defined? Who is a farmer? Is the definition based on full-time, part-time and/or occasional engagement? Does it include those who farm on their own account as well as those who work as farm labour; those who ‘own’ land but do not work it; and/or those who work land they do not ‘own’? Does it include all individuals within a single household who have some involvement with their own or others’ farming? Is it the same definition that was used previously (as the claim that the farm population is aging is about change over time)? Without being explicit about how the category is defined and how the data were collected and analysed, any claim that a population of farmers is aging must remain highly suspect.
Demographic trends in rural Africa reflect a complex set of factors extending far beyond the stereotype of a one way, once-and-for-all movement of work-shy young people to urban areas. For example:

• changes in fertility and mortality rates and their effects on population age structure

• new understanding about the rates of urbanisation in Africa and the role of often complex patterns of migration in this process

• the historical and continuing effects of HIV/AIDS

• the movement of retired civil servants to rural areas where they invest in agriculture.

The effects of factors such as these will not be uniform over time or space: any analysis of the relationship between rural demography and agriculture must surely take account of climate, the quality of natural resources, infrastructure and market accessibility.
Are farmers aging equally rapidly in irrigated and dryland areas; in areas with intensive cash crops and areas without; in areas with contract farming and areas without; in areas of high agricultural potential and areas of low agricultural potential? If not, the common suite of policy responses referred to above become even more problematic.
Let’s assume for a moment that something solid underpins the dominant narrative that: (1) farm populations in Africa are indeed aging, (2) a major cause of this is that rural young people are turning their backs on agriculture and (3) an aging farm population is detrimental to society as a whole.
In other situations, observations such as these would lead to questions (and research) about barriers to entry (i.e. the ‘new entrants’ problem that features so prominently in UK agricultural policy discourse); about incentives to undertake the required training and the relevance and quality of these programmes; about remuneration and career progression possibilities; and ultimately about the broader structure of the industry or sector. To date, though, there has been little analysis along these lines for African smallholder agriculture.
Any such analysis must surely take into account the trends and developments that African agriculture has witnessed over the last two decades – from the rise of export horticulture,  the introduction of some GM crops, and continuing ‘rural livelihood diversification’, to the recent wave of large-scale land deals. Other factors such as young people’s changing aspirations and expectations and widening access to ICTs, such as mobile phones and the internet, would also need to be considered.
But first and foremost there is a need for vision: what kind of agrifood sector will provide work opportunities for young people (and others) that allow real incomes and capabilities to be enhanced, and at the same time address social equity and exclusion issues? This is the question that policy makers and development professionals – whether they start with a focus on young people or on agriculture – and citizens more broadly (women and men, rural and urban, producers and consumers, young and old) urgently need to address.