|
|
Line 279: |
Line 279: |
| | | |
| |- | | |- |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(103, 153, 0);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> | + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> |
| | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(154, 103, 0);" | | | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(154, 103, 0);" | |
| <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Legual Basis</span><br/> | | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Legual Basis</span><br/> |
Line 289: |
Line 289: |
| | | |
| |- | | |- |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(103, 153, 0);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> | + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> |
| | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(205, 52, 0);" | | | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(205, 52, 0);" | |
| <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Price/Tariff Regulation</span><br/> | | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Price/Tariff Regulation</span><br/> |
Line 299: |
Line 299: |
| | | |
| |- | | |- |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(103, 153, 0);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> | + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> |
| | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(32, 56, 100);" | | | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(32, 56, 100);" | |
| <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Finance</span><br/> | | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Finance</span><br/> |
Line 309: |
Line 309: |
| | | |
| |- | | |- |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(103, 153, 0);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> | + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/> |
| | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(0, 100, 100);" | | | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(0, 100, 100);" | |
| <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Non-Financial Interventions</span><br/> | | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Non-Financial Interventions</span><br/> |
Line 326: |
Line 326: |
| {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" | | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" |
| |- | | |- |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(103, 153, 0);" | <br/> | + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <br/> |
| | | | | |
| Public-Private partnerships offer the potential to combine the benefits of both models, with public security being combined with private efficiency, innovation and flexibility. Bringing in private finance can extend the capacity for electricity provision beyond that which the public sector alone can offer, while public financial support can be used to attract private finance and make electricity affordable for users. Combining public and private inputs is not, however, simple. Significant expertise is required to ensure that private investment is attracted while making optimum use of public resources. Moreover the appropriate form of public-private partnership will change as markets develop and levels of electricity access increase – and this must be recognised while at the same time creating regimes which can give the private sector the confidence in the future they require to invest. | | Public-Private partnerships offer the potential to combine the benefits of both models, with public security being combined with private efficiency, innovation and flexibility. Bringing in private finance can extend the capacity for electricity provision beyond that which the public sector alone can offer, while public financial support can be used to attract private finance and make electricity affordable for users. Combining public and private inputs is not, however, simple. Significant expertise is required to ensure that private investment is attracted while making optimum use of public resources. Moreover the appropriate form of public-private partnership will change as markets develop and levels of electricity access increase – and this must be recognised while at the same time creating regimes which can give the private sector the confidence in the future they require to invest. |
Line 338: |
Line 338: |
| {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" | | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;" |
| |- | | |- |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(103, 153, 0);" | <br/> | + | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(100, 203, 248);" | <br/> |
| | | | | |
− | *<span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">Clean </span><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">Energy Solutions Centre & </span><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">iied</span><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">. (2015). Policies to Spur Energy </span><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">Access<u><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">[https://cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access https]</span></u><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">[https://cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access ://]</span></u><u><span style="font-size: 16pt; font-family: "Calibri Light";">[https://cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access]</span></u></span> | + | *<span>Clean </span><span>Energy Solutions Centre & </span><span>iied</span><span>. (2015). Policies to Spur Energy </span><span>Access<u><span>[https://cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access https]</span></u><u><span>[https://cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access ://]</span></u><u><span>[https://cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access cleanenergysolutions.org/resources/policies-spur-energy-access]</span></u></span> |
| | | |
| |} | | |} |
Line 348: |
Line 348: |
| == Relevante Case Studies: == | | == Relevante Case Studies: == |
| | | |
| + | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Bangladesh,_IDCOL_Solar_Home_Systems|Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation|Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation|Cambodia “Light Touch” Regulation]]<br/> |
| + | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Costa_Rica,_Distribution_Cooperatives|Costa Rica, Distribution Cooperatives]]<br/> |
| + | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Ethiopia,_Solar_Market_Development|Ethiopia, Solar Market Development]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030|Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030|Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Mali, Rural Electrification Programme|Mali, Rural Electrification Programme]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Mali, Rural Electrification Programme|Mali, Rural Electrification Programme]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme|Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme|Nepal, Rural Energy Development Programme]]<br/> |
| + | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Peru,_Concession_Model_for_Standalone_Systems|Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives|Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives|Philippines, Islanded Distribution by Cooperatives]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning|Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning|Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning]]<br/> |
| + | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_South_Africa,_Integrated_National_Electrification|South Africa, Integrated National Electrification]]<br/> |
| *[[NAE Case Study: Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework|Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework]]<br/> | | *[[NAE Case Study: Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework|Tanzania, Mini-Grids Regulatory Framework]]<br/> |
− | | + | *[[NAE_Case_Study:_Vietnam,_Rapid_Grid_Expansion|Vietnam, Rapid Grid Expansion]]<br/> |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | = Standalone Systems =
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;"
| + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 130px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" |
| + | |
− | '''<span style="color:#FFFFFF;"><span style="font-size: 13.6px;">Definition:</span></span>'''<br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 618px;" |
| + | |
− | '''<span><span>A system for generating and supplying electricity to a single user (separate from any distribution system).</span></span>'''<br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | '''<span><span></span></span>'''Standalone systems may use any locally available source of energy (including solar, wind, hydropower, biogas, biomass, biofuels or diesel generators). While these include fossil-fuel based generation, technology advances combined with environmental concerns mean that policy-makers are increasingly focussing on encouraging Renewable Energy based generation. They may serve a single purpose (such as lighting or irrigation water-pumping) or be designed to meet all the electricity needs of the user. They range in size from solar lanterns, through small household systems to larger installations serving industrial enterprises (though for the purposes of this review the focus is on systems suitable for households, community facilities and SMEs).<br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |}
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Internactions wiht other NAE Categories: ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;"
| + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <br/>
| + | |
− | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(51, 103, 152);" |
| + | |
− | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Delivery Model</span><br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 616px;" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span>
| + | |
− | Standalone systems are most frequently supplied to users through a purely private-sector chain of manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers. In a number of cases (such as shown in the [[NAE Case Study: Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems|NAE Case Study of the IDCOL programme in Bangladesh]]), public-private partnership models have been used. In general this has been through use of public finance (grants, subsidies and loans) to enhance affordability and support market growth, though there could be benefits in certain circumstances for government energy agencies to become directly involved in the standalone system market, by forming a joint entity to supply systems or by taking on one of the roles along the value chain (eg providing a distribution service for all system providers). More rarely a purely public model is used to provide standalone systems to users, for example where the grid company provides standalone systems to those it is not economic to connect to the grid (eg in [[NAE Case Study: South Africa, Integrated National Electrification|NAE Case Study South Africa]]). <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/>
| + | |
− | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(154, 103, 0);" |
| + | |
− | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Legual Basis</span><br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 616px;" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span>
| + | |
− | Standalone system providers are rarely subject to regulation (beyond general business licensing requirements), though they may be required to meet certain standards in order to access subsidies and tax exemptions. In part this reflects policy-makers’ perception of them as product retailers rather than infrastructure providers, but also that without long-term fixed capital investment, private companies have not needed the protection of a concession or license to attract private capital (and would regard it simply as a regulatory burden). Concessions for standalone systems may however, as in [[NAE Case Study: Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems|NAE Case Study Peru]], be used to bring standalone system companies into a market which they might otherwise be unwilling to enter by protecting them from competition (though the long-term risks of market distortion under such an arrangement should be carefully considered). Standalone systems may also be included as one means of providing electricity within an integrated electricity concession also encompassing mini-grid and/or grid system access. It’s also possible that with standalone system providers increasingly looking to pay-as-you-go arrangements, where they retain ownership of the system until the user has bought it through monthly payments, or even over its full life with the user simply paying for electricity used, regulating electricity supply through standalone systems may become more appropriate.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/>
| + | |
− | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(205, 52, 0);" |
| + | |
− | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Price/Tariff Regulation</span><br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 616px;" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span>
| + | |
− | Prices of standalone systems supplied by the private sector are generally unregulated. Where public funding is used to support provision of standalone systems it may (as with the [[NAE Case Study: Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems|NAE Case Study of the IDCOL programme in Bangladesh]]) be appropriate to regulate prices. Also, if the move towards pay-as-you-go, with users paying for electricity as they do from grid or mini-grids, while suppliers retain ownership of the capital equipment, continues or accelerates, regulation of the prices they pay may become more relevant. Regulation of prices for standalone systems, or of electricity supplied through these systems, on an individual basis is impractical given the multiplicity of systems. Uniform price regulation, where a standard price or tariff is set is more likely to be viable. However, any such regulation should recognize the differentials in costs between different types and sizes of standalone system, and parity<br/>with grid (or mini-grid) prices should only be attempted if subsidies are available to balance the cost differentials between these different Technologies.<br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/>
| + | |
− | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(32, 56, 100);" |
| + | |
− | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Finance</span><br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 616px;" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span>
| + | |
− | Though provision of standalone systems requires less capital investment than investment in grid or mini-grid systems, those establishing standalone system business nevertheless require capital for business development and working capital to fund the period (typically three months or more) between purchase/ import of the product by the business and sale to the end-user. Because standalone systems are often imported, this also brings a requirement for access to foreign capital. Where standalone systems are sold to users, it is to these users that much of the requirement for capital investment falls. This need for up-front user finance has formed one of the most substantial barriers to growth of markets for standalone systems (even where these systems are demonstrably an economic option for the user in the longer term). This barrier can be alleviated through micro-finance and similar programmes, and has also driven the growth of pay-as-you-go arrangements whereby the need for up-front finance is transferred to the supplier (though users remain the ultimate source of finance through their payments for electricity). Though most standalone system providers are private companies, many have struggled to access private finance, reflecting private financiers reluctance to invest in start-up companies without established track-records seeking to grow a new market. Instead many have relied on finance from donors and social funders. This has been one of the main constraints on standalone system market growth. Public finance, through grants, subsidies and concessionary loans (to both suppliers and users) and tax exemptions (eg VAT and import duty exemptions) have been used to make standalone systems more affordable to users. <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;"></span><br/>
| + | |
− | | style="width: 117px; background-color: rgb(0, 100, 100);" |
| + | |
− | <span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Non-Financial Interventions</span><br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | | style="width: 616px;" |
| + | |
− | Clear national policies and targets and availability of market information have been identified as key factors enabling standalone system providers to assess market scale and so encourage market entry. Regulatory reform, particularly in the finance sector to enable pay-as-you-go arrangements is also seen as vital, as is establishment and enforcement of quality standards to give consumers confidence in products. Exemption from taxes and duties (particularly where this is needed to create a level playing field with other forms of energy access) can catalyse market development, and user awareness raising and development of a workforce with the technical and business skills need to support business growth are also important (and beyond the capacity of individual standalone system businesses) to support its growth.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |}
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Advantages and Disadvantages (Including Level of Electricity Provided) ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;"
| + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <br/>
| + | |
− | |
| + | |
− | Standalone systems encompass a wide range of technologies from solar lanterns, to solar home systems and pumps, to larger scale diesel, hydro, biomass and wind-powered generators. Because they lack the economies of scale provided by grid (or even mini-grid) systems, the cost per unit of electricity from standalone systems is generally higher than from a grid (or mini-grid) connection. However in areas which are remote from the grid system and are sparsely populated (or lack a substantial energy source), standalone systems may provide the lowest cost option for electricity supply because they avoid the cost of distribution infrastructure. In addition, while the cost per unit of electricity may be relatively high, for low-demand users (eg those only looking for lighting and phone charging) they can still offer the most economic solution. Standalone solutions are also used by those who want back-up for an unreliable grid or mini-grid supply, or who want independence from the grid system.
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | In line with the wide range of technologies encompassed by standalone systems, they can be designed to provide any level of electricity. In general, however, the differential in cost between grid/mini-grid and standalone systems increases as the level of supply goes up (particularly for solar standalone systems), and standalone household systems therefore most often provide only Tier 1 (or even lower) access and rarely provide more than Tier 2-3 access, though systems for enterprises and community facilities may be larger and provide a higher level of access (with larger systems often being supported by hydro or fuel rather than solar generation).
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |}
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Further Informaiton and Guidance ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | {| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" style="width:100%;"
| + | |
− | |-
| + | |
− | | style="width: 10px; background-color: rgb(171, 211, 141);" | <br/>
| + | |
− | |
| + | |
− | *Practical Action, ODI, Solar Aid, GOGLA. (2016). Accelerating Access to Electricity in Africa with Off-grid Solar [https://policy.practicalaction.org/policy-themes/energy/off-grid-solar https://][https://policy.practicalaction.org/policy-themes/energy/off-grid-solar policy.practicalaction.org/policy-themes/energy/off-grid-solar] | + | |
− | *UNEP & GOGLA, (2015), Developing Effective Off-Grid Lighting Policy. [https://www.gogla.org/sites/www.gogla.org/files/recource_docs/developing-effective-off-grid-lighting-policy.pdf https://][https://www.gogla.org/sites/www.gogla.org/files/recource_docs/developing-effective-off-grid-lighting-policy.pdf www.gogla.org/sites/www.gogla.org/files/recource_docs/developing-effective-off-grid-lighting-policy.pdf]
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | |} | + | |
− | | + | |
− | <br/>
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | == Relevante Case Studies: ==
| + | |
− | | + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems|Bangladesh, IDCOL Solar Home Systems]]<br/>
| + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)|Brazil, Luz para Todos (Light for All)]]<br/>
| + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: Ethiopia, Solar Market Development|Ethiopia, Solar Market Development]]<br/>
| + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030|Kenya, Off-Grid for Vision 2030]]<br/>
| + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems|Peru, Concession Model for Standalone Systems]]<br/>
| + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning|Rwanda, Sector-Wide Approach to Planning]]<br/>
| + | |
− | *[[NAE Case Study: South Africa, Integrated National Electrification|South Africa, Integrated National Electrification]]<br/>
| + | |
| | | |
| <br/> | | <br/> |
None of the examples examined have had a purely private sector delivery models (ie no public involvement in either ownership or funding).
The Review was prepared by Mary Willcox and Dean Cooper of Practical Action Consulting working with Hadley Taylor, Silvia Cabriolu-Poddu and Christina Stuart of the EU Energy Initiative Partnership Dialogue Facility (EUEIPDF) and Michael Koeberlein and Caspar Priesemann of the Energising Development Programme (EnDev). It is based on a literature review, stakeholder consultations. The categorization framework in the review tool is based on the EUEI/PDF / Practical Action publication "Building Energy Access Markets - A Value Chain Analysis of Key Energy Market Systems".
A wider range of stakeholders were consulted during its preparation and we would particularly like to thank the following for their valuable contributions and insights:
- Jeff Felten, AfDB - Marcus Wiemann and other members, ARE - Guilherme Collares Pereira, EdP - David Otieno Ochieng, EUEI-PDF - Silvia Luisa Escudero Santos Ascarza, EUEI-PDF - Nico Peterschmidt, Inensus - John Tkacik, REEEP - Khorommbi Bongwe, South Africa: Department of Energy - Rashid Ali Abdallah, African Union Commission - Nicola Bugatti, ECREEE - Getahun Moges Kifle, Ethiopian Energy Authority - Mario Merchan Andres, EUEI-PDF - Tatjana Walter-Breidenstein, EUEI-PDF - Rebecca Symington, Mlinda Foundation - Marcel Raats, RVO.NL - Nico Tyabji, Sunfunder -