plot one pilkington road, 10th flour worker’s...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Plot one Pilkington Road, 10th Flour Worker’s House,
P.O Box 7317 Kampala, Tel. 0312-264095/0312-264103-5 Fax. 0414-346013
2
PRESENTED BY
GODFREY R. TURYAHIKAYO
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AGENCY
DATE: 10TH JUNE 2009
AFRICAN ELECTRIFICATION INITIATIVE WORKSHOP,
MAPUTO, MOZAMBIQUE, 9 – 12 JUNE 2009
INDICATIVE RURAL ELECTRIFICATION MASTER PLAN
(IREMP) FOR UGANDA
3
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
A. Background
B. Indicative Rural Electrification Master Plan (IREMP) Objectives
C. The IREMP Targets
D. The IREMP Process Establishing Rural Demand
Grid Project Identification
Grid Project Prioritization
Off-Grid Project Prioritization
E. The Master Plan and its Roll-out
F. Implementation Experience and Challenges
G. Conclusion
4
Population – about 30 Million
Growth rate of 3.2% per year
About 85% of the population lives in rural areas
Dependent on agriculture, specifically subsistence farming
National Electricity Access – about 10%
Rural Electrification Access – about 5%
Policy and Legislative Instruments Supporting
Rural Electrification
A. BACKGROUND
5
Energy Policy (2002) promotes “increased
access to modern affordable energy services as a contribution to poverty eradication”
Electricity Act (1999) which liberalized the Sector and created the Rural ElectrificationFund (REF)
Rural Electrification Strategy and Plan (2001) – emphasizing private sector participation
A. BACKGROUND (CONT.)
6
Statutory Instrument No. 75 of 2001 which
established the REF and the Rural Electrification Agency (REA) and Rural Electrification Board (REB)
Renewable Energy Policy (2007) which provides incentives for investments in grid connected generation plants and generation for independent grids.
A. BACKGROUND (CONT.)
7
Main Objective
To enable Government promote the rural electrification
programme through public and private sector
participation in a coordinated manner, with a clear idea
on future options available for accessing electricity
services to different areas, regions, communities and
economic activities.
Specific Objectives
i. Package at least five grid connected short-term Priority
Rural Electrification Projects (PREPs) for private
sector development through a competitive process
B. IREMP OBJECTIVES
8
Specific Objectives (Cont.)
ii. Gather information on regional demand profiles and
the costs on-grid, isolated grid and stand alone
projects, to be included in the Rural Electrification Data
Base for use by the various stakeholders.
iii. Establish priorities for public and private investments in
underserved rural areas, including for “regional equity
projects”.
iv. Indicate a 10-year least cost investment plan for
expansion of the national distribution network in rural
areas.
B. IREMP OBJECTIVES (CONT.)
9
Connect at least 450,000 new rural consumers over a
10-year period
C. IREMP TARGETS
Period Grid Off-Grid Total
Per
Period
Per
Annum
Per
Period
Per
Annum
Per
Period
Yr 1 & 2 150,000 75,000 50,000 10,000 300,000
Yr 3 to 5 100,000 33,333
Yr 6 to 10 100,000 20,000 50,000 10,000 150,000
Total 350,000 100,000 450,000
10
D. MASTER PLANNING PROCESS
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 5
Step 6
Establish Potential Demand
Assess Available and Preferred On and Off-Grid Technologies
Identify Grid Projects and EvaluateFinancial Implications
Identify Off-Grid Projects and EvaluateFinancial Implications
Prioritized Projects
Aggregate Prioritize Projects andPresent as IREMP
D.1 Schematic for the Planning Process
11
D.2 Establish Rural Demand
Use of Demographic Data from Uganda Bureau of
Statistics (UBOS)
Arial reconnaissance to understand nature of
settlement distribution
Corroboration of UBOS data through detailed field
surveys at district level, sector information (health,
education, water) and regional workshops
Capture of data in a GIS Database
Identification and quantification of economic
and social facilities/activities requiring
electrification and their energy requirements
12
D.2 Establish Rural Demand (Cont.)
Economic Sector
Agriculture (Agro-processing and farms)
Mining and quarrying
Telecoms and ICT
Settlements
Small scale economic activities (e.g. trading centres)
District headquarters
Households
Social Sector Health (hospitals and health centres Educational institutions Public water supply
Ability and willingness to pay survey
With the above information, we were able to establish the electricity demand projections (i.e. national load profile determination)
13
D.3 Grid Project Identification
Identification of lines and spurs picking up
the identified loads:-
Resulting into an emerging or proposed
grid extension plan.
Investigation of technical viability of the
proposed grid extension plan:-
Information on loading of existing
substations, transformers and feeders
Assessment of new load relative to the
existing load
14
D.3 Grid Project Identification (Cont.)
Simulation of grid extension plans to
determine if and where network strengthening might be required.
Determination of technology types for:
Network strengthening (e.g. voltage
regulators, reconductoring of lines, grid
embedded small hydro generation, capacitor
banks, etc.)
MV and LV networks (conventional or SWER, spanning length, conductor size and type, structure types, etc.)
Connections
15
D.4 Grid Project Prioritization
i. Use of “Benefit Points” (BP) criteria (first used in Namibia and South Africa).
Proxy method for determining the viability of a project on “least tariff basis”
BP system gives relative weighting to each potential electricity consumer based on energy consumption and broader economic benefits.
Reference point is a household given BP = 1
Small shop: BP = 3
Secondary School: BP = 22
Health Centre (HV IV): BP = 70
Small processing plant (e.g. coffee hulling): BP = 250
Large industries (fish processing, tea factory, etc)
BP = 2,500 – 5,000
16
D.4 Grid Project Prioritization (Cont.)
BP criteria also provides a simple correlation between energy cost against meters of 33KV per benefit point (M/BP).
For a given cluster of a load, sum up total BPs
Calculate number of meters of 33KV line per BP
Least M/BP implies least cost (least tariff)
ii.Tariff-based Prioritization
Prioritization of projects which show “value for money” for a given budget
17
D.4 Grid Project Prioritization (Cont.)
Value for money was determined by considering:
“Marginal investment cost” of each additional section
“Marginal cost” (investment, O&M, energy, etc.) of that section and the “marginal tariff”
“Average tariff” over a number of successively added sections (sum of all costs of participating sections divided by sum of sections’ consumption)
18
D.4 Grid Project Prioritization (Cont.)
If the average cost rises to a point where it exceeds the “affordability” limit, this becomes the cut-off point for grid extension along that line.
Other loads beyond this point are connected more cheaply via an off-grid solution
19
D.5 Off-Grid Project Prioritization
Loads not reachable via main grid are off-grid targets
Islands which are physically unreachable
Loads where capital cost per connection or least cost energy supply option is much higher when supplied by grid connection than another option
Mini-grid projects prioritized on:
Lowest tariff basis
Total Benefit Points” criteria
20
D.5 Off-Grid Project Prioritization (Cont.)
Stand alone solutions (PV, Pico hydros, small diesel/petrol gensets) for loads outside denser settlements
Project areas identified by default as those outside main grid and mini-grid lines
For mini-grids, only diesel based systems were considered (almost 50 mini-grids with about 8,500 consumers)
21
D.5 Off-Grid Project Prioritization (Cont.)
Stand alone systems identified (mainly candidates for PV)
Health facilities – 2,452
Education – 9,500
Water supply – 251
Households – 2.7 million (out of 3.7 million Households)
(75% could afford some sort of PV, 50% of PV systems below 15WP)
22
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT
IREMP assumes that:
All non-domestic connections are made in the first year after construction of a specific line
For on-grid connection
25% of domestic connections made in Year 1
Domestic connections grow at 50% in ten years
E.1 Key Roll-out Assumptions for the 10-Year Plan
23
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
For off-grid (diesel based)
– 25% of domestic connection only can be realized
Identified micro/mini hydros plus others to be identified later will be matched with communities during the IREMP roll-out
E.1 Key Roll-out Assumptions for the 10-Year Plan (Cont.)
24
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.2 Summary IREMP Results
Connections (Rounded)
Region Yr 1-2 Yr 3-5 Yr 6-10 Total Max Connectivit
y
North 54,500 4,400 51,500 110,400 111,800 99%
North-East 5,600 3,400 11,700 20,700 21,500 96%
East 34,700 67,300 28,900 130,900 131,800 99%
Central 22,900 46,500 28,300 97,600 105,300 93%
West 24,800 31,600 28,400 84,900 93,600 91%
West Nile 11,700 9,100 5,200 25,900 49,800 52%
Total 154,200 162,300 153,900 470,000 513,700 92%
Cumulative 154,200 316,500 470,000
Target 150,000 300,000 450,000
Table E1: On-Grid Connections
25
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.2 Summary IREMP Results (Cont.)
MV KM
Region Yr 1-2 Yr 3-5 Yr 6-10 Total
North 1,165 106 1,006 2,277
North-East 273 102 111 486
East 197 84 463 744
Central 679 1,484 726 2,889
West 627 1,099 1,083 2,809
West Nile 747 913 1,079 2,740
Total 3,688 3,788 4,469 11,945
Cumulative 3,688 7,476 11,945
Table E2: MV KM
26
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.2 Summary IREMP Results (Cont.)
Region MVA Rounded
Yr 1-2 Yr 3-5 Yr 6-10 Total
North 11.4 0.9 9.9 22.2
North-East 2.7 0.7 3.1 6.5
East 11.2 14.9 7.0 33.1
Central 9.4 8.8 10.6 28.9
West 11.7 9.0 9.8 30.5
West Nile 3.7 2.0 1.0 6.7
Total 50.1 36.3 41.4 127.8
Cumulative 50.1 86.4 127.8
Target 75 125 150
Table E3: On-Grid MVA
27
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.2 Summary IREMP Results (Cont.)
USD Million Rounded
Region Yr 1-2 Yr 3-5 Yr 6-10 Total
North 27.5 2.4 23.6 53.5
North-East 4.4 2.1 9.0 15.5
East 16.9 34.8 16.9 68.5
Central 14.7 25.3 23.2 63.2
West 17.4 20.6 21.8 59.8
West Nile 12.7 9.0 2.6 24.3
Total 93.6 94.2 97.1 284.9
Cumulative 93.6 187.8 284.9
Table E4: Subsidised Grid Investment
Note: i) Excluding Grid Strengthening and hydros, which adds further USD
79.2 Million (USD 364.1M Total)
ii) The figures used are for the 2003 dollar value
28
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.2 Summary IREMP Results (Cont.)
Table E5: Subsidy Per Connection
Region USD/Conn Hydro% MV% LV% Conn%
North 485 - 73% 12% 15%
North-East 753 - 79% 10% 11%
East 523 - 69% 16% 16%
Central 648 - 73% 14% 13%
West 704 - 75% 12% 13%
West Nile 937 50% 36% 5% 8%
Total 606 4% 70% 12% 14%
29
IREMP has identified a total of 644 MV (33KV) lines (regional distribution lines and spurs) for construction during the 10-year planning period.
Total length of the lines is 11,945km
Information gathered on each line includes numbers per consumption category (see attached spreadsheet):
Trading centres (classified as a, b, c, d)
Villages (household clusters)
Educational institutions
Health facilities (hospitals, health centres II, III, IV)
Mines/quarries
Agriculture (processing plants and farms)
Telecommunication facilities
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.3 National Grid Roll-out Plan
30
Connections (categorized according to consumption)
Maximum “Benefit Points”
Technology (phase, conductor type and size)
Required type and magnitude of strengthening
Capital layout (MV and associated LV)
Subsidy requirements
O & M costs, etc.
Period for implementation on the basis of prioritization (1-2, 3-5, 6-10 years)
Line codes referred on GIS so that more detailed information can be obtained
Regional categorization (based on primary substations) has been used to ease choice of projects to include in a particular package for mobilizing funding with the aim of achieving regional equity.
Proposals have been made on areas to focus on during the first five years for the next wave of PREPS.
E. THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS ROLL OUT (CONT.)
E.3 National Grid Roll-out Plan (Cont.)
31
The original purpose of IREMP was to have an instrument for private sector initiative to invest in RE. However:
The first wave of projects (PREPs) and simulations on priority lines have indicated that private sector upfront investment will remain low.
Bilateral funding partners (Sida, Norad, JICA, etc.) insist on public financing and ownership of infrastructure other than the private sector.
Notable interest in IREMP by bilateral and multi-lateral partners with a view to providing assistance to projects that bring in “value for money”. Several packages have been made using the IREMP (Norad, JICA, AfDB, IDB).
Despite the IREMP, local funding (budget from Government) still tends to favour politically oriented projects.
Achieving targets within the stipulated planning periods will depend on availability of financial resources. Periods for negotiation of assistance and the quanta of the assistance are very critical in meeting the targets.
F. IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCE AND CHALLENGES
32
Master plans can work provided:-
They are updated regularly to capture changing circumstances.
Resources are available in time.
Political influence in project choice and funding is minimized.
G. CONCLUSION
33
THANK YOU
END