Are We There Yet? Improving Solar PV Economics And Power Planning In. Developing Countries: The Case Of Kenya

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Are We There Yet? Improving Solar PV Economics And Power Planning In. Developing Countries: The Case Of Kenya"

Emma Young
8 years ago
Views:

1 Are We There Yet? Improving Solar PV Economics And Power Planning In Titelmasterformat durch Klicken bearbeiten Developing Countries: The Case Of Kenya IEW - Paris, 19 June 2013 Janosch Ondraczek University of Hamburg Research Unit Sustainability and Global Change

3 Outline: 1. Introduction & motivation Titelmasterformat durch Klicken bearbeiten 2. Background 3. Method & data 4. Results 5. Conclusions

4 1. Introduction & motivation The African Energy Challenge : - 69% of Africans lack access to electricity grid [WEO 2011] - rapid increase in electricity demand forecast - investment required over 10-year period: US$ billion [Rosnes/Vennemo 2012] - severe constraints in capital, skills & governance [Collier/Venables 2012] No role for solar photovoltaic: - hydropower, wind and geothermal energy already exploited - solar PV considered uneconomical beyond off-grid applications But recent drop in solar PV costs merits closer investigation!

5 2. Background Solar PV globally gaining in importance, but exact future role uncertain: - Potential deployment scenarios range widely - from a marginal role of direct solar energy in 2050 to one of the major sources of energy supply. [Edenhofer et al. 2011, p. 390; also: Johansson et al. 2012] Insignificant contribution of solar PV in Africa today, likely to be limited in future too: - installed capacity in 2009: 0 GW / 2035: GW [WEO 2011] - PV assumed to remain limited to off-grid electrification in rural Africa due to its high cost [Deichmann et al. 2011; Collier/Venables 2012; Rosnes/Vennemo 2012]

6 2. Background Solar electricity generation cost estimates ($ct/kwh): World Africa Kenya [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] Sources: [1] IEA/NEA, 2010; [2] IPCC, 2011; [3] WEO, 2011; [4] GEA, 2012; [5] Bazilian et al., 2013; [6] Deichmann et al., 2011; [7] Collier/Venables, 2012; [8] IRENA, 2012; [9] EPIA, 2011; [10] Schmidt et al., 2012; [11] ECA/Ramboll, 2012

7 2. Background Huge solar energy resource in Kenya: - Sunbelt country with vast solar resource: potential of up to 640k TWh (solar heat and electricity) [Theuri/Hamlin 2008] - ca. 16 MW currently installed (largely off-grid) [ECA/Ramboll 2012; Ondraczek 2013] Natural gas Coal 25,000 20,000 15,000 Hydro imports No solar PV in energy planning: - solar energy limited to off-grid PV and SWH [LCPDP 2011] Wind Geothermal Nuclear 10,000 5, Diesel Hydro

8 3. Method & data Method & data overview: (1) Levelized cost of electricity model (2) Base case calculation (3) Scenario analysis (4) Identification of upper/lower bounds (5) Results comparison & interpretation

9 3. Method & data Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) model: LLLLLLLL = PP eeeeeeee = TT tt=0 ( II tt + OO tt + DD tt ) (1 + rr) tt TT SS tt=0 (1 dd) tt (1 + rr) tt tt=0 where: LCOE = levelized cost of electricity per unit in period t P elec = minimum electricity price required to break even T = economic life of project t = year t I t = initial investment O t = operation and maintenance costs D t = decommissioning costs r = discount rate S t=0 = rated energy output in period t=0 d = annual module degradation factor

10 3. Method & data Input parameters and values ( base case ): Input parameter Value Unit Source(s) Plant lifetime (T) 25 years [1-3] Installed capacity 10,000 kwp own assumption Investment cost (I t ) 2,566 US$/kWp [4] Operating cost (O t ) 1.5 percent [2-3,5] Scrap value (D t ) 10.0 percent own assumption Real discount rate (r) 8.0 percent [6] Location Mombasa n/a own assumption Global horizontal irradiation 5.43 kwh/m²/day [7] DC to AC derate factor 76.9 percent [7] System output (S t=0 ) 1,374 kwh/kwp [7] Degradation factor (d) 0.5 percent [2] Sources: [1] IEA/NEA, 2010; [2] Peters et al., 2011; [3] Schmidt et al., 2012; [4] Hille et al., 2011; [5] Bazilian et al., 2013; [6] LCPDP 2011; [7] PVWatts

11 4. Results Kenya solar LCOE estimates ($ct 2011 /kwh): Base case: $ct 21.0/kWh (base year: 2011) Scenario analysis: - discount rate: investment cost: largest sensitivity for location, investment cost, discount rate Discount rate Investment cost Location Plant lifetime Operating cost Degradation factor Scrap value Extremes : $ct/kwh Base case

12 4. Results Solar electricity generation cost estimates ($ct/kwh): ,5 Kenya [1] [2] [3] [4] Sources: [1] EPIA, 2011; [2] Schmidt et al., 2012; [3] ECA/Ramboll, 2012; [4] Ondraczek, 2013

13 5. Conclusions Economics of solar PV may be better than assumed: - solar PV LCOE lower than reported even in recent literature - detailed investigations rather than back-of-the-envelope needed But the technology remains expensive: - estimated LCOE remains above cost of base power - solar PV is a peak shaver, not a base load technology - solar PV may already be competitive with peak load technologies

14 5. Conclusions Merit order of power projects in Kenya ($ct 2010 /kwh): Base power Peak power Sources: LCPDP, 2011; Ondraczek, 2013

15 Further reading Are We There Yet? Improving Solar PV Economics And Power Planning In Developing Countries: The Case Of Kenya Janosch Ondraczek FNU Working Paper 200, available online at

16 Janosch Ondraczek University of Hamburg Research Unit Sustainability and Global Change Titelmasterformat durch Klicken bearbeiten Grindelberg 5, Hamburg, Germany Phone: Fax: Internet:

Energy [R]evolution vs. IEA World Energy Outlook scenario

Energy [R]evolution vs. IEA World Energy Outlook scenario New set of scenarios takes climate crisis into account World Energy Outlook (WEO) 2008 for the first time takes the climate crisis really into