United Nations Development Programme
Global Environment Facility
Namibia
Project Document
Barrier Removal to Namibian Renewable Energy Programme
Response to GEF Council Comments
The project was provisionally approved by the GEF Council at its meeting 10 May 2001
with some Council Members indicating concern regarding impediments to the successful
implementation of the project. UNDP, as the GEF Implementing Agency, indicated that a
number of provisions will be included in the final project document submitted for CEO
endorsement to ensure that the project achieves its ultimate objectives. Principally,
UNDP has designed an institutional arrangement that provides a high likelihood of
success and assures a high degree of accountability. Government of Namibia will be the
Executing Agency.
Following are specific comments from the Council members, and including a discussion
of how these comments are addressed in the Project Document.
1. Project replicability: The recurring problem of the financial package for such
projects (external subsidies pay for over 70 percent of the equipment) raises questions
of the replicability and sustainability of arrangements for off-grid rural equipment
(France).
One of the main barriers to the use of solar energy technologies (SETs) is that they have
high first costs when compared to other business-as-usual technologies. The reasons for
this high comparative cost are multiple and include duties and tariffs, the low demand,
and hence number of systems installed (limited economy of scale), dispersed applications
and, with respect to PVP, the lack of specialised technologies to deal with variations in
water quality and solar regimes. In this context it is interesting to note that most current
rural grid connections are fully subsidised, one argument being that only the larger
market size achieved eventually will lead to a reduction in subsidies and a more
sustainable grid operation. Clearly, off-grid customers in Namibia do not as yet enjoy
levels of support comparable to grid clients. So the subsidies which range between an
average of 10 and 40% for private through NGO to public installations will be phased out
as an economy of scale is achieved, tariffs and duties are removed, financing is put in
place and other market barriers removed or reduced. In respect of PV electrification, part
of the Namibian off-grid electrification programme will release an estimated US$550 000
and US$1.1 million per year.
2. Financial viability of solar technologies in Namibia: There is very little information
about the financial viability of the solar technologies in Namibia. A comparative costs
2
analysis between traditional technologies and solar technologies would be needed
before project appraisal (Switzerland).
One goal of the barrier removal project is the compilation of techno-economic data,
which will establish a firm basis from which to compare the financial viability of solar
technologies in Namibia, refer to B1.5.1. The issue was raised in the GEF STAP review
and was answered there saying that this is one of the technical/public awareness barriers
that will be addressed by the project see Annex C. The limited information that does
exist, indicates that primary research has established the competitiveness of solar water
heaters and electric hot water storage geysers despite the low price of electricity in
Namibia. The price of electricity is likely to rise in the future as South Africa rationalizes
its electricity industry and plans the building of further generation that the real cost and
hence price of electricity is likely to rise in the near future.
3. Experiences gained in this field by other projects: The experiences gained in this
field by other projects are apparently not taken into consideration as potential inputs
for the proposed programme (Germany).
Section A.3, and E4 i.e. Prior and ongoing assistance, describes the considerable efforts
by the German GTZ has been included.
4. Specify the institutional set-up and the implementation strategy of the
programme: The programme proposal does also not clearly specify the institutional
set-up and the implementation strategy of the programme, which implies a
considerable risk for the overall success of the programme due to the lack of ownership
(Germany).
Section B7 describes the proposed institutional set-up and programme implementation
strategy.
5. Inputs from GTZ: There is no indication upon the inputs from GTZ, only UNDP
and SADC-FINESSE activities are mentioned, on which the proposed programme will
build upon (Germany).
Section A.3, and E4 i.e. Prior and ongoing assistance, describes the considerable efforts
by the German GTZ.
6. Rationale, objectives and strategy: The MME/GTZ Renewable Energy Programme
(RE Programme) has provided valuable inputs to the Energy White Paper and should
at least be mentioned (Germany).
Section A.3 and E4, have been amended.
7. Capacity Building Barriers: The solar industry in Namibia is working according to
market conditions, there is an open competition, so why should there be a ”regulatory
framework?”
A regulatory framework for off-grid activities will address one of the key policy
objectives as stated in the White Paper on Energy Policy, namely level the playing field
between grid and off-grid technologies, a barrier that inhibits the rapid market penetration
of RET’s.
8. Comparative SET data: There is neither a lack of comparative SET data and
information (see technical specifications in the various tender documents of MME’s
Home Power! Programme), nor a lack of trained technicians (in total about 100,
distributed all over the country)(Germany).
Section A.3 and E4 describes the efforts that have been undertaken to date.
3
9. Institutional Barriers: Outsourcing of non-core functions was one of the main
objectives of the re-structuring of MME and was discussed in detail and decided upon
during a number of planning workshops (Germany).
Considerable work to overcome institutional barriers remain, and the proposed barrier
removal programme is well-suited to address these, refer to section B7 which describes
the institutional arrangements.
10. Public Awareness: DWA do not promote PV pumping systems due to budgetary
restrictions (Germany).
The programme is designed to address the problems experienced by institutions such as
the DWA and the private sector. In an addition to the assistance given to DWA, the
project provides measures to reduce the financing barriers to the use of PV pumps by
amongst other measures creating financing mechanisms and to provide an economy of
scale subsidy to these technologies. See D1.4.
11. Public awareness: According to the experience of the RE programme, the in-depth
knowledge about the electricity demand patterns of urban households, the efficiency of
solar and electrical water heaters, their economic comparison and the macro-economic
implications of their large scale dissemination is indispensable to successfully promote
the use of solar water heaters (SWH).For this purpose, 4 studies were conducted, with
the aim of designing a meaningful public awareness campaign and to eventually
propose price adjustments or subsidies based on macro-economic considerations.
These studies are not mentioned at all by the authors of the proposal (Germany).
These comments have been inserted. Refer to section A.3.
12. Public awareness: In conclusion it can be stated that the social and public
awareness barriers for SWH’s in Namibia are well known and the measures to
overcome these barriers are already in progress (Germany).
The programme seeks to build on these initial public awareness efforts.
13. Financial Barriers: There is no review of the existing revolving fund, its size and
performance, its advantages and shortcomings foreseen in the proposal. However, this
experience should be used to develop alternative strategies of financing, combining
new approaches with successful features from the past (Germany).
Mention of the HomePower! Fund has been included. Refer to section A.3.
14. Technical Barriers: In contradiction to the statements in chapter 3.5.1 there are
already Codes of Practice and technical standards from South Africa available in
Namibia. Technical specifications, e. g. for PV systems in clinics and schools, were
elaborated by the RE programme in collaboration with the Ministry of Works,
Transport and Communication, Department of Works, and were used in public tenders
(Germany).
The absence of relevant codes of practice is seen by most suppliers and government
institutions, particularly the Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication and the
Ministry of Trade and Industry, as a main barrier that could be removed if pertinently
addressed, the technical barrier removal aspects within the proposed programme will
address this issue. Key to a successful set of codes and practices will be to assess what
has been undertaken in neighboring countries and decide their relevance to Namibia.
4
15. Technical Barriers: Independent test facilities should only be established in the
framework of the planned Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Institute and after
a comprehensive review of all existing facilities probably suitable for this task as
outlined in 2 studies of the RE programme (Germany).
The REEE Institute is one of the main targets to be promoted in the proposed barrier
removal programme. It seeks to be a “learning Institution“, that harnesses existing
capacities in Namibia and does not seek to duplicate. In its very inception the REEE
institute seeks to be sleek and engender efficiency. (see B7, F.1 and Annex G)
16. Technical Barriers: The statement that funds for development projects “are often
tied to specific non-Namibian suppliers” is incorrect. On the contrary, all tenders of
the RE Programme were elaborated, published and evaluated according to the rules of
the national tenderboard of Namibia and awarded exclusively to Namibian companies
(Germany).
While this procedure has been largely followed under the RE Programme, the same
cannot be said for the majority of other tenders in the solar energy field. It is the purpose
of the proposed programme to address this issue in more depth while encouraging
sustainability of the RE programme through the nurturing of local capacity.
17. Demonstration and Pilot Activities: Most demonstration and pilot activities listed
here are either in preparation (such as the comparison of advantages and shortfalls of
the various SET delivery and maintenance modalities) or already in progress (set-up of
outlets by private companies, government programmes to install SET’s at schools,
hospitals and communal water stations, design of solar-diesel hybrid electricity supply
system for Gobabeb) (Germany).
While some initial work has been done, the project intends to build on these in deepening
and extending the experience. Refer to section A.3 and E.4.
18. Risks and sustainability: The roles of important stakeholders in the crossinstitutional arrangement are not described (Germany).
The roles of the main stakeholders have been described in the institutional section, refer
to section B7 and Annex I.
19. Stakeholder Participation: The stakeholder participation and the institutional setup of the project remains vague. To leave the whole project implementation to a
steering committee, whose members are not even specified, gives no indication about
the ownership of the project (Germany).
The roles of the main stakeholders have been described in the institutional section, refer
to section B7 and Annex I.
United Nations Development Programme
Global Environment Facility
Namibia
Project Document
Project Title:
Project number:
Country:
Duration:
Estimated start date:
Estimated end date:
Implementing Agency:
Executing Agency:
Co-operating Agencies:
Barrier Removal to Namibian Renewable Energy Programme 1
NAM/01/G31/A/1G/99
Namibia
5 Years
January 2003
December 2007
UNDP
Namibian Government, Ministry of Mines and Energy (NEX)
Danida, R-3-E, NamPower, NGOs
Brief description: Namibia,
Budget Summary (US$)
with its supportive energy policy,
powerful solar regime and
UNDP:
Phase 1
Phase 2
Total
compact institutional environment
GEF (main)
2,600,000
2,712,300
5,312,300
has the possibility to provide a
GEF (PDF B)
103,000
small yet efficient market for solar
OTHER:
energy technologies. The GEF
DANIDA
2,120,000
2,120,000
project proposed here will help
Government
990,000
4,525,500
5,516,200
to reduce the barriers for the
NamPower
758,000
758,000
development of the demand
NGOs
552,000
552,000
for solar technologies and thus
TOTAL:
14,361,500
mitigate greenhouse gas
emissions by addressing
institutional, information, human capacity, financial, technical, awareness and other market barriers to
increased use of solar energy services by urban and rural households, government institutions (schools,
clinics, and police stations), NGO facilities, beverage retailers, communal and commercial farmers. The
project implemented in two phases will specifically assist local stakeholders in building local capacities to
promote, finance, install and maintain solar applications, help to develop and implement favourable
regulatory frameworks, and facilitate the establishment of viable financial mechanisms (micro lending and
mortgage additions). The latter will address up-front investment cost barriers and related risk perceptions.
The project will help to demonstrate viability of investments in solar energy and encourage widespread
replication. The first phase will concentrate upon the technical assistance required to remove/reduce
barriers while the second phase will accelerate the implementation of demonstration solar units. Expected
project outputs include an increase of solar technologies (SHS, PVPs, SWH, PV refrigeration and PV
institutional lighting) installations from about 7450 systems in 2000 to 41,950 systems by the year 2016.
This will result in a total abatement of about 692,054 tonnes of carbon dioxide over 15 years.
For the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP): ………………………………….
Date:………………………..
For the Government of Namibia:
………………………………….
Date:………………………..
1
Please note: The main difference in the total budget between project brief and project document stems from the fact that Danida
cannot make firm written co-financing commitments for phase 2 as was anticipated when the brief was approved. Smaller adjustments
had to be made to reflect currency fluctuation.
Content8
A. CONTEXT 9
A1.
Description of Sector......................................................................................... 9
A2.
Host Country Strategy .................................................................................... 11
A3.
Prior and ongoing assistance.......................................................................... 11
A4.
Institutional Framework ................................................................................ 13
B. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION14
B1.
Problem to be addressed and the present situation ..................................... 14
B1.1 Capacity Barriers ........................................................................................ 15
B1.2 Institutional barriers to increased market penetration of SESs in Namibia
................................................................................................................................... 16
B1.3 Public awareness and social acceptability .................................................... 17
B1.4 Financial Barriers .......................................................................................... 19
B1.5 Technical Barriers .......................................................................................... 20
B1.6. Demonstrations and pilots .............................Error! Bookmark not defined.
B2.
Expected end-of-project situation ................................................................. 21
B3.
Target beneficiaries ........................................................................................ 21
B4.
Project strategy and implementation arrangements ................................... 22
B4.1.
The project design strategy .................................................................... 23
B4.2.
The project implementation strategy .................................................... 24
B5.
Reasons for assistance from UNDP/GEF ...................................................... 26
B6.
Special Considerations.................................................................................... 26
B7.
Co-ordination arrangements.......................................................................... 27
B8.
Counterpart support capacity ....................................................................... 28
C. DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE 29
D. IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVES, OUTPUTS AND ACTIVITIES 29
D1.
Immediate objective ........................................................................................ 29
D1.1.
Component 1: Capacity building........................................................... 29
D1.2.
Component 2: Removal of institutional barriers ................................. 31
D1.3
Component 3: Public awareness and social acceptability ................... 32
D1.4.
Component 4: Financial barriers removed .......................................... 34
D1.5
Component 5: Technical barrier removal/reduction........................... 37
D1.6 Component 6: Demonstrations and pilots ................................................ 38
E. INPUTS 39
E1
The Ministry of Mines and Energy ............................................................... 39
E2
Other Ministries within GRN ........................................................................ 39
E3
The UNDP ........................................................................................................ 39
E4
GTZ .................................................................................................................. 39
E5
SADC TAU ...................................................................................................... 40
E6
NGOs ................................................................................................................ 40
E7
NamPower ....................................................................................................... 40
E8
DANIDA........................................................................................................... 40
E9
Public and Private housing developers ......................................................... 40
E10 Commercial and Development Banks/finance institutions ......................... 41
E11 Namibian Bottlers ........................................................................................... 41
7
E12 The Global Environment Facility .................................................................. 41
F. RISKS 41
G. PRIOR OBLIGATIONS AND PREREQUISITES 42
G1. Prior Obligations............................................................................................. 42
G2. Prerequisites .................................................................................................... 43
H. PROJECT REVIEW, REPORTING AND EVALUATION 43
I. LEGAL CONTEXT 44
J. BUDGET 45
7
8
ABBREVIATIONS
APR
CBO
CDM
CET
CTA
DANIDA
DEA
DWA
FINESSE
GEF
GTZ
MAWRD
MME
MET
MTI
NAPCOD
NDC
NPC
NOLIDEP
ODC
PAC
PTR
PMU
PM
PV
PVL
PVR
PVT
REINNAM
R-3-E
RET
SADC
SARDEP
SETs
SESs
SHS
SIDA
SMEs
SWH
TPR
TSG
UNAM
UNDP
UNISE
UNFCCC
UNOPS
Wp
Annual Project Review
Community based Organizations
Clean Development Mechanism
Conventional energy technologies
Chief Technical Advisor
Danish International Development Agency
Directorate Environmental Affairs
Directorate of Water Affairs
Financing Energy Services for Small-scale Energy Users
Global Environment Facility
German Agency for Technical Co-operation
Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development
Ministry of Mines and Energy
Ministry of Environment and Tourism
Ministry of Trade and Industry
Namibia’s Programme to Combat Desertification
Namibian Development Corporation
National Planning Commission
Northern Regions Livestock Development Project
Offshore Development Company
Project Advisory Committee
Project Termination Report
Project Management Unit
Project Manager
Photovoltaic
Photovoltaic Lighting
Photovoltaic Refrigeration
Photovoltaic Telecommunications
Renewable Energy Information Network of Namibia
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Bureau of Namibia
Renewable Energy Technologies
Southern Africa Development Community
Sustainable Animal and Range Development Programme
Solar Energy Technologies
Solar Energy Services
Solar Home Systems
Swedish International Development Agency
Small and Medium Enterprises
Solar Water Heaters
Tri-Partite Review
Technical Support Group
University of Namibia
United Nations Development Programme
United Nations Initiative on Sustainable Energy
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
United Nations Operations
Watt peak
8
9
A. CONTEXT
A1. Description of Sector
Namibia, with a territorial land area of 824,269 km², lies on the Atlantic coast of Africa
between latitudes 17° and 29° South of the Equator. Bisected by the Tropic of Capricorn,
the country is bordered in the west by a 1,500 km south Atlantic coastline, in the north by
Angola and Zambia, in the east by Botswana, and in the south-east and south by South
Africa.
Namibia’s youthful population was determined to be 1.4 million by the 1991 Population
and Housing Census and was projected to grow at an annual rate of 3.2 %. Currently, the
population is estimated at 1.7 million, with some 42 % of the total under the age of 15
years and only 4.8% over 65. Preliminary figures of the 2001 Census indicate that
Namibia’s population has grown to 1.826 million, i.e. at a rate of 2.6% since the 1991
Census. In spite of rapid urbanization, Namibia is still a rural society with fewer than 30
% of its population living in urban areas. The remaining 70% live in rural areas where
subsistence agriculture is the dominant economic activity. Regional population densities
vary enormously with almost two-thirds living in the northern regions while less than one
tenth live in the south.
With a per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of US$1.700, Namibia is defined as a
lower-middle income economy ranking 79 out of 174 countries according to the World
Bank which uses GDP as an income indicator. However, this indicator of national wellbeing masks a skewed income distribution, since in 1993 the richest 1% of households
consumed as much as the poorest 50%. The majority of the population, particularly those
in rural areas, live in conditions of relative poverty, have low literacy rates, and short life
expectancy. Using these and other factors, the UNDP Human Development Index which
uses income, education, life expectancy, access to clean water and modern energy
services as a composite indicator, ranks Namibia 116 out of 174 countries.
Namibia's strong semi-commercial water, electricity and telecommunications sectors
ensure that commerce and the major urban areas are adequately and reliably supplied
with these utilities. However, the majority of Namibia's population who live in rural areas
in relative poverty has yet to fully experience the convenience and utility of modern
energy services.
The state-owned national power utility, NamPower, is responsible for Namibia’s
electricity generation, imports and exports and the electricity grid. NamPower is the only
bulk electricity supplier in Namibia. A coal fired thermal power station near Windhoek
(120 MW), the hydro-electric plant at Ruacana (240 MW), the diesel-driven Walvis Bay
Paratus power station (24 MW) and a 200 MW grid connection to South Africa provide
the main sources of electric power. However, the majority of Namibia’s population has
yet to experience the conveniences of modern energy services, and it is estimated that
only about 16% of the total of 285,400 Namibian households have access to electricity.
9
10
With 93% of rural households relying on fuel-wood for cooking and heating, the
ecological pressures on the Namibian environment are evident. Paraffin is used by nearly
half of the rural households as lighting fuel, the other main light source being candles.
However, paraffin, candles and batteries deliver light of inferior quality at comparatively
high cost per unit light. This has the consequence of limiting evening activities to a
minimum and reducing opportunities for income generation or improvements in the
quality of education, health, and police service delivery (all of which are significantly
improved by a suitable supply of electricity).
A vigorous rural electrification programme has extended the electricity supply to rural
areas since independence. Low rural cash income is seen as a main obstacle for the rapid
electrification of households, which implies that fuel-wood, paraffin and candles will
remain the mainstay of rural energy provisions unless large-scale measures are
introduced to alter the current user patterns
Namibia’s high population growth has three main implications for the energy sector.
Firstly, not only does the backlog in energy services for households need to be corrected
but additional services also need to be provided for new households in both urban and
rural areas. Secondly, the Namibian economy in growing will require energy services to
facilitate this growth. The third important consideration relates to the impact of energy
usage and production on the environment. Much of the current conventional energy
consumption relies on non-renewable hydro-carbon fuels of finite quantity, which have to
be fully imported to Namibia.
Namibia is well endowed with largely underdeveloped renewable energy resources, such
as solar and wind energy, as well as hydro-power. Namibia has one of the best solar
regimes in the world with some 3,300 hours of sunshine per year, which gives it a
potential average annual global solar radiation value exceeding 6 kWh/m² per day. Along
some parts of the Namibian coast average wind speeds range between 6 and 8 m/s, and
the total hydro-power potential is estimated to exceed 750 MW capacity. Namibia’s
progressive constitution enshrines the protection of its environment and sustainable usage
of its natural resources. The White Paper on Energy Policy commits government to
promoting the introduction and usage of renewable energy resources.
The excellent solar regime makes the use of photo-voltaic (PV) systems for remote
schools and clinics, telecommunications, water pumping and home lighting potentially
feasible. However, the high initial capital outlay coupled with low incomes and lack of
access to credit are seen as significant barriers, with the result that solar home systems are
not yet as widespread as one would expect. Government has followed an active policy in
terms of PV, and the state-owned Telecom Namibia, the Ministry of Environment and
Tourism and the Ministry of Health and Social Services are examples where PV
technology is actively used. Solar water heating has been shown to be economically
attractive. Currently, the relatively low levels of Namibian electricity tariffs combined
with high prices of solar water heaters (SWH) and the non-existence of a SWH
manufacturing industry has led to a situation where SWH are expensive and little used. It
10
11
is believed that an active demonstration of technology and business opportunities needs
to be pursued to set a SWH development programme in motion.
Currently, UNDP, SADC and other donors, such as the GTZ, NORAD and DANIDA, are
actively promoting market development initiatives for renewable energy services in
Namibia. The present project builds on the Namibian Energy Policy (White Paper
promulgated in 1998), the work of GTZ (1993 to 1999), and the SADC FINESSE
activities undertaken in 1998 and 1999 have laid initial ground will collaborate closely in
the implementation of the business plans that can be seen as pilot programmes as regards
the commercially, institutionally and technically sustainable solar energy activities in
Namibia. The GEF activities will put in place conditions for replication of these pilot
activities by promoting a policy, regulatory and market context favourable for the
development of solar energy services (SES's).
Namibia is a net sink for Carbon Dioxide. In 1994, their inventory year, it emitted 1827
and removed 5716 Gigagrams to and from the atmosphere.
A2. Host Country Strategy
In 1993, the Ministry of Mines and Energy initiated the “Promotion of the Use of
Renewable Sources of Energy in Namibia” programme. The Ministry of Mines and
Energy established the Energy Policy Committee (EPC) to drive the policy making
process and the development of an Energy Policy White Paper in 1995. The EPC
completed the “White Paper on Energy Policy” in May 1998. As a framework for the
energy policies, the White Paper formulated the following energy policy goals: effective
governance, security of supply, social upliftment, investment and growth, economic
competitiveness and efficiency, and sustainability. The strategy for renewable energy of
the White Paper was summarized as follows: “Government will promote the use of
renewable energy through the establishment of an adequate institutional and planning
framework, the development of human resources and public awareness and suitable
financing systems. It also seeks to meet development challenges through improved access
to renewable energy sources, particularly in rural electrification, rural water supply and
solar housing and water heating.”
The project objectives coincide with national development objectives and Namibia’s
second National Development Plan (NDP 2) with specific reference to rural areas through
electrification, job creation, human resource development and small-scale industry
development (refer to chapter 21 in the NDP 2).
A3. Prior and ongoing assistance
Over the last 5.5 years the German Government through the Gesellschaft für Technische
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) has supported a Ministry of Mines and Energy programme on the
“Promotion of the Use of Renewable Sources of Energy in Namibia”, launched in 1993.
The aim of the programme was to “increase the use of cost effective and environmentally
11
12
sound RET’s by end users”. The MME/GTZ Renewable Energy Programme (RE
Programme) has also provided valuable inputs to the Energy White Paper.
Four training programmes for solar technicians, jointly organized by MME and GTZ,
were undertaken. Training manuals made available and initially some 100 technicians
trained, some of whom are still active in rural areas of the country. Also, a number of
government officials and staff members at MME and the Department of Water Affairs
(DWA) were trained on-the-job.
A revolving fund scheme was established, facilitating the financing of some 500 solar
home systems in rural Namibia. Mostly, the high up-front costs and strict policy of the
schemes administrator, i.e. the Namibia Development Corporation (NDC) has limited the
number of potential clients eligible for a loan from the revolving fund to those rural
families with regular income high enough to pay back the loan. This revolving fund is
now supplemented by a fee-for-service pilot scheme whereby 450 rural dwellers will be
given access to RET’s over the coming three years.
In a number of studies, jointly financed by MME and GTZ, the technical and economic
exploitability of wind and solar resources have been assessed, the economics of some
RET’s and the socio-economic impact of rural electrification were analyzed, and some
RET dissemination strategies developed. It should also be mentioned that there is a local
PV pump available in Namibia, being considerably cheaper than the imported models,
which was explicitly supported by the RE programme. According to the experience of the
RE programme, the in-depth knowledge about the electricity demand patterns of urban
households, the efficiency of solar and electrical water heaters, their economic
comparison and the macro-economic implications of their large scale dissemination is
indispensable to successfully promote the use of solar water heaters. For this purpose,
four studies were conducted, with the aim of designing a meaningful public awareness
campaign and to eventually propose price adjustments or subsidies based on macroeconomic considerations. Preliminary energy usage patterns and associated micro- and
macro-economic costs have been published. A preliminary assessment of the potential
market of photovoltaic pumps and solar water heaters was undertaken.
Some demonstration and pilot activities that the current programme will build upon have
been initiated under the GTZ/MME programme (set-up of outlets by private companies,
government programmes to install SET’s at schools, hospitals and communal water
stations, design of solar-diesel hybrid electricity supply system for Gobabeb), or are in
preparation (such as the comparison of advantages and shortfalls of the various SET
delivery and maintenance modalities). The barrier removal programme can build upon
these initial experiences and achievements in order to make best use of the expertise
already available, and to avoid a duplication of efforts.
Various other donor organisations and initiatives, such as NORAD, DANIDA, Ibis,
UNDP and SADC and others are actively promoting market development initiatives for
renewable energy services in Namibia. The envisaged GEF activities will put in place
conditions for replication of a variety of pilot activities, by promoting a policy, regulatory
12
13
and market context favorable for the continued development of solar energy services
(SES's).
A4. Institutional Framework
The Namibian National Energy Policy contains the elements of a Renewable Energy
Programme for Namibia that underpins the proposed project. The imminent rural
electrification plan and the newly created institutions involved in electricity (and energy
service) distribution will drive components of the project.
The Ministry of Mines and Energy
The Ministry of Mines and Energy, as the custodian of Namibia's rich endowment of
mineral and energy resources, facilitates and regulates the responsible development and
sustainable utilization of these resources. Within the Ministry the Energy Directorate is
responsible for renewable energy research and implementation of renewable energy
projects.
R-3-E
R-3-E is an independent organization created to perform certain functions of the Ministry
of Mines and Energy in the field of renewable energy. It aims to co-ordinate and advance
all renewable energy and energy efficiency related developments and to disseminate
reliable information to ensure the efficient and sustainable use of all energy resources for
the benefit of present and future generations in Namibia.
Other Ministries within GRN
The Ministries dealing with water supply, health, education, public works, police, and
agriculture, all have infrastructural development programmes that provide energy
services such as lighting, refrigeration, water-pumping, warm water which could be
undertaken using SETs. As such the involvement of the ministries is essential if the
project is to successfully integrate the use of solar energy technologies throughout the
public sector. The project also develops demonstration projects for facilities services by
these ministries and their agents and through small economies of scale subsidies will be
confirming interests in demonstration solar energy installations.
NGOs
Three NGOs in Namibia have agreed to be part of the project, they include the Desert
Research Foundation, Namibia Nature Foundation and Ibis. They will be installing
demonstration SESs in their facilities and availing their staff to learn about SES and
where to apply them, how to optimally operate and maintain them.
NamPower
NamPower (and their agents) are seen as key to a successful outcome of the project. They
will be the agency that will provide the sustainability to market transformation towards
solar energy technologies post-project. Their involvement in the provision of rural
electricity and the breadth of their extension of technical and administrative infrastructure
throughout Namibia.
13
14
Public and Private housing developers
The National Housing Enterprise (Public) and Hanover (Private) housing developers have
expressed interest in including solar water heating in the houses they develop.
Particularly the solar water heater component of the demonstration project will be
undertaken in collaboration with these developers and will require inputs from the
commercial and development banks to provide financial instruments as part of mortgages
or as dedicated loans.
Commercial and Development Banks/finance institutions
The Commercial and development banks are expected to constribute to the project by
designing and marketing financial instruments for the purchase of SESs. Purchase of the
SWHs results in some US$4.2 of new business for an estimated 4500 new systems
installed over the 5 years.
Namibian Bottlers
The Namibian Breweries has expressed interest in the project if it can be demonstrated
that the technologies work in cuka shops.
B. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
B1. Problem to be addressed and the present situation
Although Namibia has a strong commercial energy sector, which is capable of supporting
the country's commercial, industrial and service sectors, electricity is supplied to only
16% of the population, which is primarily based in urban areas. The growing need for
power for lighting, entertainment, refrigeration, and media is currently not being met
using grid electricity. Where this need is met, it is done through the use of relatively
expensive and fossil based CO2 emitting alternatives such as diesel, paraffin, candles,
coal and fuelwood. Low rural incomes, coupled with the rising cost of grid electrification
due to the decreasing value of the Namibian dollar and increasing pressure by the
international financing institutions on NamPower to provide a cost reflective tariff, has
two main implications. Firstly, massive investments are required for the grid to reach the
rural populations. Secondly, the likelihood of low electricity consumption levels will
jeopardise cost recovery on rural grid connections.
TABLE 1: Renewable energy technology assessment by sector and energy service
SECTOR
ENERGY
SERVICES
NEEDS
HOW NEEDS ARE
CURRENTLY MET
ALTERNATIVE CLEAN
ENERGY OPTIONS
Households
1. Lighting
2. Entertainment
3. Cooking
4. Refrigeration
5. Hot water
1. Candles, paraffin, biomass
2. Dry cell batteries, car
batteries
3. Firewood, animal dung,
paraffin
4. Paraffin and LPG
refrigerators
5. Biomass, grid power,
paraffin
1. PV lighting, biogas lighting
2. PV power
3. Solar cookers, biogas cookers
4. PV refrigerators
5. Solar water heaters
14
15
Commercial
Farmers
Beverage
Outlets
Schools
Clinics
Police Posts
and prisons
Pumping water for
irrigation, animal
and human use
1. Beverage cooling
2. Entertainment
3. Lighting
1. Lighting
2. Entertainment
3. Information
Technology
1. Lighting
2. Drug Cooling
3. Information
Technology
4.
Telecommunication
1.
Telecommunications
2. Lighting
3. Information
technology
Diesel, petrol, hybrid systems
1. Paraffin or LPG gas
refrigerators
2. Dry cell or car battery
powered radios
3. Paraffin, candles
1. Paraffin, candles
2. Dry cell, car battery
powered radios/TVs
3. Manual processing
1. Paraffin and candles
2. Paraffin and industrial LPG
refrigeration
3. Manual typewriters and
paper archiving/process
4. Batteries or none
1. Batteries or none
2. Paraffin and candles
3. Manual processing
1. PV pumps,
2. Wind pumps,
3. Hybrid pumping systems
1. PV refrigerators
2. PV powered TV and radios
3. PV lighting, biogas lighting
1. PV lighting, biogas lighting
2. PV powered TV and radios
3. PV powered computers &
typewriters
1. PV lighting and biogas lighting
2. PV refrigeration, biogas
refrigeration
3. PV powered computers
4. PV powered
telecommunication systems
1. PV powered telecom systems
2. PV lighting and biogas
lighting
3. PV powered computer
The extent the current and potential markets for SESs in view of the low grid
electrification penetration levels is summarised in Table 2 below.
TABLE 2:
Estimated current and potential market size for solar energy services
(SES) in Namibia in 2000
Solar Energy Technology
Photovoltaic Pumps (PVP)
Solar Home Systems (SHS)
Institutional Lighting(PVL)
Photovoltaic Refrigeration (PVR)
Solar Water Heaters (SWH)
Current
systems
700
2600
150
2000
2000
Potential
market
5000
9000
500
4000
15000
The estimate of market size was made by individuals with first hand knowledge aware of
the Namibian solar market.
The National Energy Policy for Namibia recognises that stand-alone and other solar
energy services could provide a least-cost solution to satisfy the basic energy needs in
Namibia. However, the widespread application of these technologies is currently being
hindered by different barriers.
B1.1
Capacity Barriers
15
16
The capacity barriers identified in this project are the availability of capacity to identify,
design and implement sustainable energy projects. These apply in the private, public and
NGO sectors.
B1.1.1 Private sector
i) Absence of SETs industry regulatory frameworks.
ii) Lack of comprehensive comparative SET data and information for planning and
investment.
iii) Limited number of skilled technicians to assess, install and maintain SET systems.
iv) Spatial concentration of SET industry in Windhoek far from demand centres (which
in itself contributes significantly to high installation costs).
B1.1.2 Government
i) Absence of SET policy implementation plans.
ii) Absence of SET policy implementation structures within government.
iii) Limited skills/knowledge to assess appropriate applications of SETs and assess
compliance with standards and codes of practice relevant to SETs technologies, their
installation, use and maintenance.
B1.1.3 NGOs
i) Lack of adequate information about SETs to enable NGOs to undertake meaningful
advocacy and public awareness work.
ii) Limited skilled human capacity within the NGO community to interpret energy policy
directives affecting SETs and design manage and evaluate SET projects.
B1.2 Institutional barriers to increased market penetration of SESs in Namibia
Institutions involved in activities related to the SET field often don’t achieve the
objectives they set themselves. They agree on objectives, share values, and intend to act
co-operatively to achieve joint goals. However, they sometimes fail to achieve the goals
despite the fact that they have the resources (capacity) to do this. This is often because of
what may be called institutional barriers. The meaning of institutional barriers, as the
term is used here, are those barriers associated with:
i) structure of institutions;
ii) clarity in the roles and responsibilities of institutions; and
iii) communication within and between institutions, including co-ordination of activities
and co-operation.
Optimizing the implementation of SESs will not rely on changing institutional structures,
but rather institutional barriers will be overcome by increasing the clarity of institutional
roles and responsibilities and/or by improving communication within and between
institutions, including co-ordination of activities and co-operation.
Despite existing institutional barriers, laudable initiatives to address specific sector (e.g.
technical or capacity related efforts), as well as cross-sectoral issues have been
undertaken in the past. The increased use of renewable energy through the establishment
16
17
of some institutional and planning framework, the development of human resources and
public awareness, and establishment of a SET-supporting financing system are already in
place. The envisaged GEF programme will continue to build on these initiatives and
interventions.
Measures addressing the lack of technical capacity located in institutions, resources
available to institutions or knowledge and awareness are not dealt with as institutional
barriers but included in Component 1: Capacity Barriers.
Institutional barriers include the following:
i) Budget procedures do not optimize government spending balance between capital and
recurrent budgets related to recurrent expenditure on non-renewable energy sources.
ii) Lack of institutional ownership of policies related to SESs in sectors that are affected
by existing cross-cutting policies related to SESs prevents implementation of these
polices.
iii) Policies that are formulated and framed in energy and economic terms are not
translated into policy measures that take institutional and administrative realities into
account.
iv) The capacity in MME linked to renewable energy areas is out of proportion with the
much larger capacity linked to other areas.
v) Lack of co-operation between private and public sector institutions especially, but not
limited to, their respective capabilities, responsibilities and roles.
vi) Incentives for electricity suppliers to increase electricity sales are sometimes contrary
to least cost energy service solutions for users and the Namibian economy.
B1.3 Public awareness and social acceptability barriers
There are various ways in which awareness of energy issues is raised in Namibia. For
example, the ‘Home Power!’ programme has used brochures, calendars, pamphlets, radio
and TV talks to reach potential users of solar home systems. However, since
commencement of the programme, only 220 systems have been installed. Lack of
awareness of the programme has been cited as one of the limiting factors to penetration
of solar home systems (SHS). However, this programme has, despite its potential, failed
to extend its scope of services into areas such as the provision of solar water heaters and
photovoltaic pumping.
MME has been raising awareness on energy efficiency particularly with respect to
transportation by placing adverts in newspapers and on bill-boards. While these adverts
have been running for more than a year, its effectiveness has yet to be evaluated.
NamPower and Northern Electricity inform consumers of issues mainly relating to
electricity shutdowns, via the radio and newspapers.
The Department of Water Affairs (DWA) has been informing communities about
changes relating to pumping and management of waterpoints through national
17
18
consultations culminating in workshops, and has developed manuals and courses for
water point management committees.
Agricultural extension workers are commonly the conduit for information from the
Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development (MAWRD) to the farmers. The
DWA and MAWRD are cited here since they are considered potential users of PV
technologies as well as conduits for information dissemination and awareness raising on
these technologies and their most appropriate applications.
B1.3.1 Awareness/social barriers to PVP utilisation
Communities and commercial farmers do not choose PVPs because they:
i) lack information on PVP life-cycle cost-benefit analysis using relevant discount rates
for poor communities and other end-users in comparison to other technologies.
ii) are misinformed about PVP and hence believe that PVP cannot meet their water needs
and will restrict their stock size.
iii) are unfamiliar with the performance and operation of PVP.
iv) are unaware of the environmental implications of using diesel and are not sensitised to
the important role they could play in contributing to a reduction in emissions and hence
saving the world and themselves.
Decision makers within the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development
(MAWRD) do not promote PVPs because they:
i) lack information on long term financial implications of investing in PVP rather than
diesel pumps;
ii) lack information needed to motivate creation of a position for an electrical engineer
within DWA who would promote and supervise PVP installation;
iii) lack capacity to address PVP issues; and
iv) are under pressure to provide for many communities and thus the available funding is
spread widely making it difficult to invest in costly technologies.
Management within agricultural programmes such as SARDEP, NOLIDEP and
NAPCOD do not promote PVP's because they:
i) are unaware of the role of stock sizes on the community’s decision in the type of pump
they prefer. The larger the stock size the higher the need for water. Communities tend to
believe that PV pumps can only be used where the stock is small.
ii) do not know the role they could play in promoting PVP.
B1.3.2 Awareness/social barriers to SWHs usage for private and commercial
usage
Architects and developers do not offer SWH as an option in the house quotations because
they:
i) are unaware or do not have accessible information on the life-cycle costs and benefits
of SWH vs. electric geysers and hence are confined to the up-front costs.
ii) do not realise the long term environmental implications of using electric heaters
instead of SWH.
18
19
iii) are unaware of reliability, product longevity, long-term performance, product quality,
and enforceable performance guarantees.
House owners do not demand SWH when building or buying a house or purchasing a
new water heater, because they:
i) are unaware of the life-cycle costs and benefits of SWH compared to electric heaters.
ii) apply for loans with loan providers who set their loan ceilings based on income of the
borrowers which are often to include additional costs such as the additional first cost of
SWHs.
iii) are unaware of reliability, product longevity, long-term performance, product quality,
and enforceable performance guarantees.
Financiers do not extend loans for SWHs because:
i) they are unaware that having a SWH effectively raises the loan applicants' income and
hence the ceiling which thus improves the ability to purchase SWHs.
ii) they do not value SWHs when a house is being valued in spite of the energy savings in
comparison with electric geysers.
iii) while the bank management has noted that they would be willing to provide the
additional funding needed to cover SWHs as part of the housing loan, this has yet to be
communicated to the bank staff handling these issues.
iv) government and industry providing attractive financing schemes to facilitate
acquisition of houses by their employees do not offer opportunities to acquire SWHs.
v) are unaware of reliability, product longevity, long-term performance, product quality,
and enforceable performance guarantees.
B1.3.3 Awareness/social barriers to SHS
i) potential end-users of SHS are unaware of the Home Power! financing scheme and
SHS in general since awareness campaigns are once-off and often not synchronised with
easy access to SHS.
ii) SHS are considered inferior to grid electricity and are considered as the electricity for
the poor.
iii) promoters of SHS are not informed of changes influencing consumer accessibility of
SHS.
B1.3.4 Awareness/social barriers to PV fridges
i) lack of awareness of the availability of such refrigerators and their performance
ii) lack of information on the long term cost-benefit analysis in comparison to other
refrigerators
B1.3.5 Across technologies-awareness/social barriers
Overall there is a general lack of awareness of SETs and RE among the stakeholders.
End-users are unaware of various characteristics of SETs e.g. performance. Potential
promoters and disseminators of these technologies are similarly uninformed.
B1.4 Financial Barriers
19
20
One of the main barriers to the use of solar energy technologies (SETs) is that they have
high first costs when compared to other business as usual technologies. The reasons for
this high comparative cost are multiple and include duties and tariffs, the low demand
and hence number of systems installed (limited economy of scale), dispersed applications
and, with respect to PVP, the lack of specialized technologies to deal with variations in
water quality and solar regimes.
The cost that users experience is not only related to the high first cost. The financing
possibilities are often not accessible because of lending policies or they are unaffordable
if the interest rate is too high, the duration of pay-back may be too long or too short, or
transaction costs too high.
These could all be considered as financial barriers to the market penetration of solar
technologies. Indeed, such barriers are further exacerbated by the quality and quantity of
information that end-users and financial institutions have access to.
B1.4.1 Financial barriers to increased market penetration of SETs in Namibia
i) High first cost of SETs;
ii) lack of well marketed, affordable and easily accessible financing for the purchase,
installation, and maintenance of SETs;
iii) lack of knowledge of current and potential financiers on how to appraise applications
for credit for SETs;
iv) lack of skills to develop business plans for the supply/manufacture and use of SETs;
v) local financiers’ limited knowledge of local, regional and international bulk lending
facilities/modalities/instruments/lines of credit dedicated to clean development/the supply
and efficient use of cleaner energy;
vi) lack of confidence in the returns on investment (for end-users) and loan performance
(for financiers);
vii) comparisons of costs between SETs and business as usual technologies for
equivalent energy services;
viii) the imposition of import/sales/installation duties/levies/taxes on SETs;
ix) uneven playing field between access to, and payment for, grid and off-grid electricity;
x) limited linkage to sustained dedicated financing to government policy commitment to
solar technologies (other than SHS);
xi) guarantee mechanisms are not adequate to enhance confidence in the purchase of
some of the SETs, and
xii) inadequate financial incentives for local renewable energy entrepreneurs to bulk
procure, sell, install and maintain SETs.
B1.5 Technical Barriers
This section deals with the technical capability of Namibia to use and promote SETs
sustainably and effectively. The technical capacity of Namibia has been assessed from
the perspective of the private sector, government, and NGOs.
20
21
B1.5.1 Technical barriers to market penetration of SETs in Namibia
i) non-existence of norms, standards and codes of practice for performance,
manufacturing, installation and maintenance of SETs;
ii) non-existence of an independent SETs testing facility;
iii) small and dispersed size of the Namibian SETs market does not facilitate benefits of
economies of scale;
iv) heavy reliance on imported SETs due to the limited local manufacturing capacity and
infrastructure;
v) manufacturers enjoy little support for local SETs development;
vi) conclusive techno-economic data comparing different energy technologies for
equivalent energy services has not been developed locally, and international experiences
are not widely known;
vii) little empirical knowledge of the costs and benefits of SETs is available, which often
leads to decisions being made in favor of conventional energy technologies and options;
viii) limited availability of adequately trained human resources within the engineering
consultancy, electricity utility fraternity, academia, government, financial institutions and
NGOs, to undertake and provide least cost energy planning in the provision of energy
services;
ix) energy usage patterns and associated micro- and macro-economic costs are little
known and understood;
x) a number of development projects in the SETs field are funded by donors, and funds
are often tied to specific non-Namibian suppliers, which erodes the local demand and
indigenous manufacturing capabilities; and
xi) due to the small market size, the industry experiences capacity and quality problems.
B2. Expected end-of-project situation
The win-win possibilities of this project include the benefits to Namibia, on the one hand,
and on the other, the potential to generate market development for solar energy
technologies leading to sustained reduction in carbon dioxide emissions globally. The
GEF resources will result in leveraging financial resources from the government, private
sector, bi-lateral donors and end-users predominantly for the demonstration/pilot
component of the project. Some of these resources (e.g. GRNs) have already been
programmed but the project streamlines their utilization through synthesizing their
application within this GEF project framework.
These results will have a sustained impact on the quality of life of the rural and urban
populations, improve energy service affordability for end-users, improve the energy
service quality in health care, police and educational facilities. The impacts of a
successful project on the global environment through a reduction in the emissions of
GHGs would continue well beyond the lifetime of the project.
The proposed project will contribute directly to the installation of solar technologies
(SHS, PVPs, SWH, PV refrigeration and PV institutional lighting) from about 7450
systems in 2000 to 41,950 systems by the year 2016. In addition to domestic development
21
22
benefits the project will result in a total abatement of about 692,054 tonnes of carbon
dioxide over 15 years. The following progress monitoring milestone is suggested: At
least 6823 systems will be installed by 2007 (project completion). As the project is
expected to have a sustained boosting impact on the Namibia RETs market, the total
reductions of GHG gases will be substantially greater.
Table 3: Number of solar energy systems installed over 5 year duration, as a direct
consequence of the GEF intervention
Solar Energy Technology
# of systems installed
over 5 years
211
1342
120
628
4522
Photovoltaic Pumps
Solar Home Systems
Institutional lighting
Photovoltaic Refrigeration
Solar Water Heaters
(see Annex D: Estimation of number of solar energy systems installed)
B3. Target beneficiaries
The major target beneficiaries of the project will be the Namibian people. The main
beneficiaries will be:







rural and urban households that do not have electricity but can afford to make use
of photovoltaic electricity for lighting (and radio);
shops and bottle store in areas away from the electricity grid that sell refrigerated
beverages;
suppliers of PV systems, and later when replication occurs, other renewable
energy technologies;
commercial and communal farmers that are required to pump water;
worker households on commercial farms;
health workers and patients in clinics, teachers and students attending educational
facilities, police station staff, staff of NGO facilities (research and conservancies),
and residents of conservancies beyond the reach of the electricity grid; and
urban and rural home owners in private and/or government supplied housing who
can afford a hot water service.
It is envisaged that beyond the project there will be further beneficiaries as the project
momentum extends to other technologies and end-use sectors.
To enhance the possibilities of success of the project, the active participation of end-users
is essential. This will be the challenge faced by the project as Namibia is a poor country.
The project is therefore designed around interventions that are most likely to succeed, and
while succeeding, provide an affirming demonstration to potential future SETs and other
RETs users.
22
23
The project should end up in a situation, where the environment and the general
conditions for a private enterprise interests in rural and remote electrification using PV
systems and water heating using solar water heaters are improved. For this to happen, the
participation of the private sector in the project is essential. This will be done through the
Project Management Unit (PMU) and Project Advisory Committee (PAC) of the project
(see co-ordination arrangements Section B7. below). However, this should not result in
conflicts of interest arising nor affect negatively the transparency and neutrality of the
project with respect to the bidding and other commercial relationships the project will
have with the private sector.
B4. Project strategy and implementation arrangements
The project will implement activities to enable the GRN to adequately transform the
energy market and thus allow greater use of renewable and sustainable energy services in
accordance simultaneously with the UNFCCC objectives.
B4.1.
Project design strategy
The approach to the project has been to consult broadly with stakeholders bilaterally in
meetings, multilaterally in workshops and clustered meetings and through written
comments/critiques. Based on the Namibian National Energy Policy and comments
drawn from these meetings, technologies that look promising from the perspective of
technical, financial and environmental criteria have been selected. Of these, solar standalone technologies have been targeted as this projects contribution to the Renewable
Energy Programme of Namibia implying a degree of fuel switching.
In developing the project some, 30 to 40 institutions were visited by a team of expert
consultants drawn from Namibia and other Southern African countries. The team was
divided into smaller groups to deal with the specific barriers, in most cases teaming a
Namibian with an expatriate consultant to harness in-country institutional memory. Each
bilateral meeting consisted of a briefing on the proposed barrier removal project.
Institutions were asked to contribute to its development by volunteering information on
the barriers to transforming the energy market in favor of renewable energy from their
perspective. Many of the same organizations were asked whether they were involved in
complimentary work and if their mutual interests would constitute grounds for cofinancing of the project.
Further development of the strategy involved two multilateral workshops with the main
stakeholders and a presentation of the project concept (at a PDF-B level of detail) to the
final FINESSE national workshop. These workshops provided an opportunity for detailed
criticism of the project as it was designed. The project was also subject to the normal
GEF project pipeline scrutiny.
In the development of this project, experiences have been drawn from Zimbabwe,
Malawi and South Africa. Particular attention in these regional examples of PV projects
is paid to critiques of: financial mechanisms (to end-users and the PV industry); project
23
24
institutional arrangements; institutional arrangements (external to the project) and
delivery modes; credit ratings of PV purchasers; project bulk purchasing and
warehousing; performance standards (and compliance protocols); codes of practice;
training and accreditation of technicians trainees. Lessons learned from these projects
will facilitate the Namibian project’s contribution to the momentum of PV electrification
in Africa. The Namibia project builds on the regional experience which includes:



B4.2.
The Zimbabwe GEF project where more than 9000 solar home and institutional
systems were installed making use of external soft financing using predominantly
commercial delivery modes.
In South Africa estimates suggest that the total installed PV capacity is
approximately 5MWp. Most of the systems have been entirely subsidised except
for the telecommunications systems and some of the PV pumping and the
majority of the solar homes systems. In South Africa, dedicated financing has
been organised by suppliers using their own limited resources, typically requiring
repayment over 6 months at high interest rates.
The Malawi UNDP-GEF project worth some US$10.5m which has commenced in
June 2002 aims to help mitigate greenhouse gas emissions by addressing
institutional, information, know-how, perceived risk and other investment barriers
to increased use of photovoltaic energy sources by households, institutions,
commercial entities and agro-industries. Specifically the project will: Assist local
stakeholders in building local capacities to promote, install and service PV
applications; help to develop and implement favorable regulatory frameworks,
facilitate the establishment of viable financial mechanisms (micro lending). The
latter will address up-front investment cost barriers and related risk perceptions.
The project will help to demonstrate viability of investments in photovoltaic
energy and encourage widespread replication. Expected project outputs: Increase
of off-GRID PV installations from about 5000 systems in 1998 to at least 30.000
systems by the year 2015. This will result in a total abatement of about 600,000
tonnes of carbon over the lifecycle of these systems. The following progress
monitoring milestones are suggested: At least 9.000 systems will be installed by
2006 (project completion), installation of 20,000 systems is foreseen by 2012.
Project implementation strategy
The prospects for the success of a Renewable Energy Programme on a large scale is
linked to the establishment of a flourishing market for manufacturing components,
financing, distributing, installing, and maintaining the technologies involved in providing
renewable energy services. However, the existence of market and non-market barriers
prevents the full potential of solar energy sourced services from being achieved. By
reducing or removing the identified barriers, this project will establish the necessary
conditions to integrate solar energy systems into the rural electrification plan and other
private and public sector strategies in a sustainable manner.
The project will explore energy problems of, and solar energy options for, poor urban and
rural households, facilitate income-generating activities, address renewable energy
24
25
opportunities amongst commercial and communal agricultural sub-sectors, cuka shop
owners remote from the grid, institutional facilities and the urban (water heating) and
rural homes (lighting, refrigeration, communications and entertainment, water heating) of
Namibians. Where possible, leverage will be applied to private sector beneficiaries of
project outputs (such as the commercial agricultural sector, current and prospective
private homeowners and cuka shop (small informal shop) outlets for cold beverages) to
provide additional services to employees or customers. For example, the cuka shops that
make use of PV powered lights, refrigerators and media services will be encouraged to
demonstrate the technology and become agents for PV and associated technology
suppliers. Commercial farmers will be encouraged to electrify their worker’s dwellings.
The project addresses awareness/social, capacity/information, institutional, technical and
financial barriers to the development of a market for SESs and proposes institutional and
financing mechanisms to integrate SESs into the household, agro-industrial and
commercial market niches of the Namibian economy. The project specifically considers
improving the skills and knowledge base of the main stakeholders, providing economy of
scale subsidies and credit facilities, establishing a regulatory framework, and monitoring
activities to build the market for SESs.
The proposed project therefore aims at removing these barriers to expand the use of
SES's in five principal markets, namely:
a)
SHS in households for lighting and radio/TV (rural);
b)
SWH for the provision of hot water, mainly in urban households;
c)
PVP in communal and commercial farming communities for water pumping;
d)
PV in the cold beverage industry for bottle cooling, lighting and radio/TV;
e)
PV in public institutions (e.g. schools, clinics, and police posts) for lighting,
radio/TV, refrigeration and telecommunications.
The final selection of technologies was made by the Namibian Government’s Ministry of
Mines and Energy. Excluded from the current list of RETs are a number of sustainable
energy technologies that could benefit from the replication of barrier removal activities or
from a newly liberated market such as wind energy technologies, solar cookers etc.
The proposed project would help the market develop and as a result would increase the
number of installed solar technologies by 41,950 in 2016. This will result in a reduction
of emissions in the order of 692 Gigagrams over 15 years. A summary of emissions
avoidance sources is provided in Annex A.
The project is to be implemented in two phases. The first is predominantly technical
assistance to barrier removal activities, and the second predominantly demonstration and
pilot project implementation. The first phase starts at the outset of the project for 2,5
years and the second phase (2,5 years) continues until the end of year 5. The first phase
will undertake the technical assistance to the barrier removal including considerable
capacity building in government, NGOs, finance, and other sectors, institutional
development, reduction of financial barriers, building public awareness, and
technological barrier reduction. These activities will lay the way for an accelerated
25
26
demonstration of the solar technologies in the second phase. At the end of Phase 1, once
most of the instruments addressing removal of the institutional barriers are in place,
Phase 2 will move to support an innovative loan/grant mechanism that will be extended
through the Namibian banking sector and parastatal housing delivery agents and the
Namibian Development Corporation. The demonstrations chosen for the Phase 2 exercise
will further make a showcase of how best to link with the NamPower over time to future
delivery of off-grid solar systems for grid connected power supply through their agents.
Equally important in this second phase will be to link government, NGO and private
sector (Breweries) to the successful (and lower incremental costs/less risky) first phase
demonstrations.
B5. Reasons for assistance from UNDP/GEF
UNDP's mandate is sustainable development with special focus in four key areas: i)
eradication poverty; ii) increasing women's role in development; iii) providing people
with income earning opportunities and livelihoods; and iv) protecting and regenerating
the environment. Energy production and consumption are closely linked to these issues as
stated by the UNDP Initiative on Sustainable Energy (UNISE) and in the recent UNDP
publication "Energy after Rio: Prospects and Challenges". UNDP is focusing on energy
as an essential instrument for socio-economic development. The document strongly
emphases the efficient use of energy, as well as the use of renewable sources of energy.
As a non-annex 1 country, party to the UNFCCC, Namibia has access to the GEF to
assist in undertaking projects that can show positive incremental costs in the reduction of
Greenhouse Gas emissions.
The project is consistent with the objectives of the GEF Operational Program 6:
Promoting the adoption of renewable energy by removing barriers and reducing
implementation costs. This project responds to these guidelines by describing activities
that remove barriers to the renewable energy programme in Namibia.
As an implementing agency for the GEF, UNDP has played an important role in the
development and management of capacity building and technical assistance projects
funded by the GEF. Through its global network of field offices, UNDP is in an excellent
position to assist countries in developing and implementing project activities of this type.
B6. Special Considerations
The environmental impacts of this project are positive. The substitution of solar systems
for fossil fuels reduces the emissions of CO2, CO, suspended particulates etc. Likewise, it
reduces the transport of fuel (kerosene, candles and diesel). A major risk of a negative
impact on the environment could be the increased use of batteries containing lead and
sulphuric acid and their improper displacement. To mitigate such an event, it will be
necessary to strengthen the existing systems of recycling or to create new ones.
Consideration will also be given to balancing battery cost with lifetime in order to reduce
disposal.
26
27
B7. Co-ordination arrangements
The project will be executed nationally under the National Execution Modality (NEX).
MME will be the executing agency. MME will delegate certain functions to the newly
created R-3-E institute on a contractual basis. The activities described in the project are to
be implemented by a PMU that will be put in place by MME for the 5-year duration of
the project in two phases of 2,5 and 2,5 years durations. Most likely the PMU will be
hosted by R-3-E.
The PMU will be advised by a Project Advisory Committee (PAC), composed of public
and private sector institutions (that are key receivers of policy insights). The PAC will
guide the implementation of the project to ensure that the results are disseminated to, and
evaluated by, relevant stakeholders and that they support the smooth transition from this
enabling activity to the further development and growth of the RET market in Namibia.
PAC specific functions are:





Advise the PMU on all aspects of the project
Review and comment on progress reports
Serve as a sounding board for the PMU
Disseminate project results and raise awareness of project activities and successes
Interpret the policy implications of the outputs of the project and devise ways in
which they can be incorporated into policy.
The existing R-3-E steering committee could act as the PAC. This committee is currently
comprised of the following organizations:









The Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME);
Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI);
Premier Electric (nominated by NamPower);
Polytechnic of Namibia
University of Namibia
Multidisciplinary Research and Consultancy Center (MRCC)
Group for Advancement of the Rational Use of Energy in Namibia (GARUEN)
Desert Research Foundation of Namibia (DRFN)
City of Windhoek
The committee should consider co-opting the following organizations
 Other electricity distributors
 Representatives of local government co-ordinating bodies
 NGOs (NNF, Ibis);
 Women action for development (WAD);
 Financiers (Commercial Banks, Parastatal Development Financing institutions
(eg. AgriBank, Namibia Development Corporation, Development Fund of
Namibia etc.);
 Namibian Breweries
27
28
In determining the final composition of the PAC, efforts will be made to ensure that the
key sectors are equally represented including key government ministries, financial
institutions, training institutions, NGOs, private industry, and potential users.
The following institutional arrangement is suggested for the project, as shown in Figure
1.
FIGURE 1: The institutional arrangements of the project
MME
PAC comprised of main
stakeholders. The already
established committee for
the R-3-E would be most
suitable.
The PMU
Others
sub-contract 3
sub-contract 2
sub-contract 1
Technical backstopping will be provided on an ad-hoc basis by in-country or
international consultants from the region. However, where skills are not available or
where specialist skills or experience cannot be located regionally, consultants from
beyond the region will be recruited.
B8. Counterpart support capacity
The Government of GRN participates in the project with an in-kind and counterpart
financing of US$5.516 million, which consists mainly of resources from the:
i) MME fiscal allocations to solar energy and RE related projects that fall under the
umbrella of the Renewable Energy Programme;
28
29
ii) Funds that are allocated in ministries for energy service infrastructure (water pumps
for communal agriculture, lighting for institutions, water heating for institutions,
lighting for staff of clinics and schools, and refrigeration for clinics and hostels.
iii) A direct allocation of Nam$1 million per annum from the MME budget to the R-3-E;
and
iv) In kind contributions in the oversight and implementation of the project.
For phase 1 the GRN supports the overall goal of this project with approximately
US$990,000 through funds allocated in the MME and other ministerial budgets. For
phase 2 support in the range of US$4,525,500 has been estimated. The phase 2 funds will
be allocated in budgets delineated in the second National Development Plan (NDP2).
C. DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE
The development objective of the project is “to increase affordable access to sustainable
energy services through the further development of a market for SET's in Namibia that
contribute to climate stabilization by reducing CO2 emissions through the removal of
technical, financial, social, institutional, capacity, public awareness and social
acceptability barriers.”
D. IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVES, OUTPUTS AND ACTIVITIES
D1. Immediate objective
The immediate objective is “to remove barriers to the delivery of commercially,
institutionally, and technically sustainable SES including electricity production (for offgrid lighting, radio, TV, water pumping, and refrigeration), and water heating to the
household, institutional, commercial, and agro-industrial sectors and to demonstrate the
enabled environment through affirming demonstrations of the applications of the
technologies.”
D1.1.
Component 1: Capacity building
The capacity building component of the project is targeted at four groups: the Private
Sector (PV industry); the Government; the PMU and NGOs. In the private sector, the
overriding objective is to build capacity of the Sustainable Energy sector to provide high
quality service to the markets. The main objective of the Government is to prepare a SET
implementation plan to guide SET development activities in collaboration with other
relevant government agencies.
As and extension at arms length of government, the project will build the capacity of a
project management unit to take on the day-to-day tasks of managing the project and
specified tasks. In the case of institutional capacity building in the PMU the following
objectives apply: i) to establish an excellent PMU that has the capacity to plan,
implement and review the project and contribute to the momentum for sustainability of
the RE sector post-project; ii) for the PMU to network with key local and international
29
30
role players that will focus interest and enthusiasm on the project and its outcome; and,
iii) to design and implement a RE (focusing on PV) resource centre that archives and
makes available information collected and generated over the duration of the project, and
co-ordinates and provides courses/training on RE.
For the NGOs the primary objective is to provide NGOs with adequate and relevant
information on SETs so as to enable them carry out advocacy and promotional work and
identify appropriate applications for the use of SETs.
Private sector
Output 1.1
Training programme for private sector technicians developed and
executed
Activity 1.1.1
Facilitate developing and undertaking training activities for
technicians and SET trainers
Output 1.2
Decentralised SET industries adequately equipped with skilled
personpower and resources to provide SET back-stopping activities,
including installation and maintenance
Activity 1.2.1
Promote the establishment of decentralised SET industries in
the regions. (Activity 2 needs to be implemented in parallel
with activity 6. See 3.1.3.3 below.)
Government
Output 1.3
Dedicated training programmes for SET staff in MME, MIT, DoW and
other Government agencies involved in SET delivery activities
developed and executed
Activity 1.3.1
Develop and undertake training for government officers
involved in SET activities
Output 1.4
A SET master plan is developed
Activity 1.4.1
Develop a SET implementation plan
PMU
Output 1.5
The project management unit is equipped to manage a five-year barrier
removal project
Activity 1.5.1
Establish the PMU
Activity 1.5.2
PMU staff participates alongside other key project players in
technical and management training courses and workshops
Activity 1.5.3
PMU staff participates with key project players in
international conferences, workshops, trade fairs/expos
Activity 1.5.4
The PMU will design and implement a RE/PV resource centre
30
31
NGO
Output 1.6
NGO training programmes developed and executed so that the NGO
community understand the implications of SETs and are able and
willing to advocate its use for certain energy services where appropriate
Activity 1.6.1
Undertake training of NGO analysts (and technicians where
appropriate)
D1.2.
Component 2: Removal of institutional barriers
The primary objective is to remove budgeting, subsidies, information and other
institutional barriers to the appropriate use of SESs in planning processes at inter-sectoral
levels.
Output 2.1
Consideration of the economic cost benefits of SESs is included in
development planning processes at inter-sectoral level
Activity 2.1.1
Build processes to assess economic costs and benefits (taking
into account the discount rates experienced by the various
market segments) of SESs into the development planning
processes at inter-sectoral level. Identify relevant inter-sectoral
development planning processes. Insert appropriate technical
assistance into the processes. Insert assessment that optimises
recurrent and capital expenditure over full life cycle costs
incorporating full consideration of SESs options into the above.
Output 2.2
Institutions optimize recurrent and capital expenditure over full lifecycle costs incorporating full consideration of SESs options
Activity 2.2.1
Support institutions in optimising recurrent and capital
expenditure over full life cycle costs, incorporating full
consideration of SESs options. Do this by providing an analysis
of their annual budgets that indicate savings that could be
realised by employing SESs.
Output 2.3
Institutions take ownership of and implement energy policies related to
SESs in the White Paper on Energy Policy.
Activity 2.3.1
Interpret the policies in the White Paper on Energy Policy
related to SESs and translate them into policy implementation
measures that can be effectively implemented in those
institutions that need to implement them. Ensure that the
formulation of the policy implementation measures is carried
out in a process that leads to ownership of the policy by the
institution that will carry out the measure.
Output 2.4:
A level playing field is established between SESs and grid electricity.
31
32
Activity 2.4.1
Support the incorporation of the goals of policies aimed at
achieving a level playing field between SESs and grid
electricity into the regulatory and institutional measures for the
electricity sub-sector. This will be done by supplying the
necessary technical support to the Electricity Control Board.
Output 2.5
Grid electricity suppliers are informed of project activities and support
the project implementation.
Activity 2.5.1
Ensure effective involvement of grid electricity suppliers in the
barrier removal project.
D1.3
Component 3: Public awareness and social acceptability
The overriding cross technology awareness building and social acceptability objective is
to create awareness throughout Namibia of SETs, addressing the particular needs of the
stakeholders.
PVP awareness/social barrier removal
Output 3.1
Increase in knowledge on PVP and decision making power among the
communities, commercial farmers and MAWRD decision makers.
Targeting communities
Activity 3.1.1
Development and dissemination of accessible educational
materials on PVPs through workshops, waterpoint committee
meetings, community meetings, church gatherings, radio,
video, and illustrative brochures.
Training of NGO’s, CBO’s, church leaders, community
leaders, waterpoint caretakers and agricultural extension
workers working in the targeted areas where PVP could be a
viable option. The individuals should be trained on PVP, to
become community advisors on water pumps by means of
short courses, workshops and demonstrations.
Targeting commercial farmers
Activity 3.1.3
Dissemination of information on lifecycle cost benefit analysis
and availability of concessionary credit to commercial farmers
via farmers associations, farmers union publications, banks,
radio and TV.
Activity 3.1.2
Targeting decision makers in government
Activity 3.1.4
An MME co-ordinated workshop aimed at sensitising
MAWRD decision makers on PVP.
32
33
Activity 3.1.5
Workshops and educational materials targeting MAWRD
programmes to inform them of PVP as well as their role as
potential promoters of PVP.
SWH Awareness/social barrier removal
Output 3.2
Increased knowledge of SWH and costs and benefits of SWH
compared to electric geysers.
Activity 3.2.1
Designing and disseminating educational materials on costs
and benefits using relevant social discount rates of SWH vs.
electric geysers through workshops and engineers/plumbers
association networks, newspaper adverts, calendars, brochures
and training courses. The dissemination would piggy-back on
existing information networks as much as possible. This
activity should be extended to include communal/commercial
farmers as well, and similarly to other technologies.
Activity 3.2.2
Seeking visible support from key political and social figures to
elevate the status of SWH through demonstration, workshops,
radio & TV talks where the key figure portrays support for
SWH.
Activity 3.2.3
Demonstrating the performance of SWH to relevant decisionmakers within the various institutions.
SHS Awareness/social barrier removal activities
Output 3.3
Increased knowledge of RE technologies among potential end-users.
Activity 3.3.1
Long-term awareness campaign via a mobile Renewable
Energy (RE) promotion programme, spearheaded by the R-3-E
Institute. This would demonstrate the technologies and also
provide opportunities for accessing these technologies. Some
of the activities would include use of audio-visual material to
educate end-users, targeted workshops, talks and lectures at
schools and other education institutions. This awareness
vehicle is to be used for all solar technologies promoted by the
full project.
Activity 3.3.2
Design and disseminate illustrative brochures communicating
reasons for using SHS instead of grid electricity and
information on SHS and how to access it.
Activity 3.3.3
Activity 3.3.4
Design training materials on SHS and other SETs applications.
Create an active network among the stakeholders, i.e. suppliers
of SHS, financiers and MME.
Output 3.4
Increased knowledge about how to access SHS.
33
34
Activity 3.4.1
Train advisors who would assist consumers in accessing SHS.
PV fridge barrier removal
Output 3.5
Increased awareness of the costs and benefits of PV refrigerators
compared to other refrigerators.
Activity 3.5.1
Develop and disseminate comparative information on cost and
benefits based on relevant social discount rates of DC
refrigerators to potential users - cuca shops, breweries and
other beverage companies as well as distributors and retailers
in remote areas. Compile and disseminate information on
sources of PV refrigerators. The dissemination would be via
radio, TV, farmers associations, MTI SMEs associations and
links.
Cross-sectoral workshops
Output 3.9
Increased knowledge of RE, and SETs in particular including
awareness of performance and sources of SETs and where to get
arrange finance for them and understanding of costs and benefits of
SETs.
Activity 3.9.1
A series of workshops are conducted across the regions
targeting end-users, distributors and promoters of the SETs
aimed at raising awareness of the energy service needs and
where these can optimally be met using SETs. The methods
used to raise awareness at these workshops include
demonstrations of the SETs by means of educational material
such as brochures and videos as well as discussions. The
workshops would be tailored to meet the needs of the targeted
groups. The workshops will be used to establish energy
advisory networks for policy research and advocacy.
D1.4.
Component 4: Financial barriers removed
The primary objective of this component is to reduce/overcome the financial barriers to
the supply, installation, purchase and maintenance of SETs including reduction of the
price and ready availability of finance for the purchase and maintenance of systems. This
component of the project details activities that could remove/reduce financial barriers to
SETs. The financial barriers that exist can be addressed using different project
instruments designed specifically to target each of a variety of solar technologies, their
users, suppliers and financiers. A desired outcome will be for potential users of these
SETs, whether government, community, wealthy or poor individuals, to see financial
benefits to the use of the technologies from day one.
The optimum outcome would be for end-users to access finance and be able to feel first
cost reduction benefits from day one of the installation of their solar system. Similarly
suppliers, financiers, maintainers, manufacturers/assemblers see improved sales and
34
35
increased financial benefits as a result of financial barriers being removed to their
enterprises.
Output 4.1
First cost of SETs is significantly reduced.
Activity 4.1.1
Develop a strategy to reduce the first cost of SETs exploring
the optimal application of economy-of-scale subsidies, bulk
procurement and warehousing and local manufacture/assembly
of SETs.
Output 4.2
Financiers make affordable loans to SETs users and SES providers.
Activity 4.2.1
The project will work with current and potential financing
institutions (Commercial Banks, Building Societies,
Agricultural Banks, Parastatal Development Banks and Funds,
Utilities and small lenders) to design the modalities for a low
interest,
low
deposit,
limited
collateral
financial
vehicle/mortgage supplement dedicated to SETs. The financial
vehicle/s will take into account the discount rates experienced
by the various market segments and devise differential pricing
to encourage access to the poor and contribute to rural
development.
Output 4.3:
Financiers are able to appraise loans for SETs users, suppliers,
entrepreneurs and manufacturers.
Activity 4.3.1
In collaboration with the range of financial institutions, the
project will compile, and develop training tools to deepen the
appreciation and implications of financing the purchase and
manufacture/assembly of SETs systems. Indicative training
tools could include written and audio-visual documentation,
exposure to projects in the SADC region and beyond, study
tours, workshops, staff exchanges, in-house short-term
specialist consultancies and so on.
Output 4.4
Financiers, suppliers and manufacturers of SETs are able to identify
opportunities and design business plans to take advantage of these.
Activity 4.4.1
Compile and develop training tools to identify, design and
market business plans for the supply and local
manufacture/assembly/warehousing of SETs in collaboration
with a range of financial institutions, suppliers of SETs and
potential bulk procurers of SETs (developers, Government
institutions and NGOs).
Output 4.5:
Financiers are able to locate and engage with international concession
finance companies dedicated to clean development and they are able to
develop protocols to cover exchange rate risks.
Activity 4.5.1
Build the knowledge of, and protocols for access to and use of
local,
regional
and
international
bulk
lending
35
36
facilities/modalities/instruments/lines of credit dedicated to
clean development/the supply and efficient use of cleaner
energy in collaboration with a range of financial institutions,
suppliers of SETs and potential bulk procurers of SETs
(developers, Government institutions and NGOs).
Output 4.6
Confidence in the financial benefits of SETs is enhanced.
Activity 4.6.1
Monitor and evaluate the progress in the installation and the
loan servicing of SETs loans to end-users and suppliers.
Publish and present the evaluated reports in local public media
and through REINNAM and regional newsletters/magazines/
journals.
Output 4.7
Comparative financial costs and benefits of using SETs compared to
other alternatives are established and disseminated.
Activity 4.7.1
Establish and compare the financial costs and benefits of using
SETs and alternatives for various energy services through
technical (under Namibian field conditions) and financial
testing and monitoring of SETs and equivalent alternative
energy services. This information will then be compiled in both
technical and publicly available media and updated as input
prices change.
Output 4.8
All direct and indirect taxes and levies are identified and
removed/reduced where appropriate.
Activity 4.8.1
Identify all direct and indirect taxes/duties/levies on the
import/sale/installation of SETs/SETs components and develop
mechanisms to reduce or remove these.
Output 4.9
The micro and macro economic costs and benefits of SETs are
publicised and workshopped with policy holders in a clear and
accessible way.
Activity 4.9.1
Identify all direct and indirect taxes and subsidies that are part
of the grid and off-grid electricity price build-up and use these
to argue for even-handedness in the development of policy and
policy instruments that support or hinder the implementation of
SETs.
Output 4.10
Instruments/measures are designed and used to level the financial
playing field between SETs, grid electricity and fossil fuels.
Activity 4.10.1 Identify all fiscal, donor and multi-lateral support for the use of
SETs that can be attributed to the Namibian Government's
energy and/or climate related policy. Use these levels of
support to argue for/sustain levels of Government financial
commitment to the implementation of policy.
36
37
Activity 4.10.2
Design and implement methods to broaden and deepen the
MME's revolving fund by means of more technologies and
more turnover.
Output 4.11
Financial guarantees linked to the introduction of new SETs are in
place.
Activity 4.11.1 Design financial guarantee mechanisms that oblige suppliers or
their agents to service/replace faulty or failed SETs systems.
Output 4.12
Entrepreneurs are making money from SETs.
Activity 4.12.1 Develop and implement sufficient financial incentives for local
renewable energy entrepreneurs to sell, and enhance the quality
of installations and maintenance of SETs.
Output 4.13
Strategies are in place whereby successful financial tactics can be
extended to other sustainable energy technologies and techniques.
Activity 4.13.1 Develop strategies to remove barriers to sustainable energy
solutions not included on the short-list of SETs contained in
this project. The rationale and lessons for replicability could be
based on the successful barrier removal activities for the shortlist of SETs contained in this project.
D1.5
Component 5: Technical barrier removal/reduction
The main objective of the reduction of technological barriers is to facilitate, support and
strengthen the introduction of the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (R-3-E)
Institute in Namibia, which will provide detailed technical information and develop and
apply appropriate norms, standards and codes of practice as required by the SET industry
and their market.
This section describes an effective technical capacity building activity that will enhance,
accelerate and sustain the removal of barriers constraining the effective use of SETs in
Namibia.
Output 5.1:
A well-functioning national information dissemination and technical
standards body such as the R-3-E Institute will ensure that RE
technologies of high standard reach the consumer (see Annex H). Also,
manufacturers and developers have the opportunity to have their
products tested and nationally certified, which will enhance their
product image and place it on a list of equipment eligible for public
tender. As Namibia’s economy is closely coupled to that of other
southern African countries, it is recommended that technical standards
should coincide with others in the SADC region, whereby country
offices should be responsible if expertise in a particular field exist.
Activity 5.1.1
Strengthen the technical, institutional and human capacity
aspects of the R-3-E Institute through training, study tours and
37
38
other exposures for the staff to other similar regional and
international institutions.
D1.6
Activity 5.1.2
Facilitate the operations of the R-3-E Institute, and to generate
and distribute information and data (including standards, norms
and codes of practice) on SETs their comparative costs and
most suitable applications.
Activity 5.1.3
Develop study materials, courses and laboratory classes at
tertiary institutions, the R-3-E Institute and the national
vocational training centres to educate learners about energy
usage patterns and their economic implications.
Component 6: Demonstrations and pilots
The objectives of the demonstration component of this project are two fold:
i) to test the transformed market for SESs and refine project activities to successfully
complete the market transformation; and
ii) to tangibly/visibly raise the profile SES technologies through affirming demonstrations
of their appropriate applications throughout Namibia.
This component of the project draws together the barrier removal activities and tests and
refines strategies to remove/reduce barriers in the SETs market, including information,
materials and financial modalities, as well as building awareness of solar energy services
in institutions and individuals.
Output 6.1:
Detailed design of the different delivery and maintenance modalities
i.e:
i) utility delivery and maintenance mode for households;
ii) commercial delivery and maintenance mode for households;
iii) industry delivery and maintenance mode for cold beverage outlets;
iv) government delivery and maintenance modes for clinics, schools,
police stations and prisons; and
v) NGO delivery and maintenance mode for conservancies, clinics,
schools, NGO training and research facilities.
Activity 6.1.1:
The detailed design of delivery and maintenance modalities
(see Annex F).
Output 6.2:
Maintenance is conducted within each delivery mode, and may also
make use of SETs installation and maintenance entrepreneurs.
Activity 6.2.1:
The implementation of affirming demonstrations in different
sectors.
Output 6.3:
Delivery of 6823 solar systems over a 5 year period commencing from
the beginning of the project.
38
39
Activity 6.3.1:
Design of demonstration indicators (including loan servicing,
income generation and social impacts), monitoring and analysis
of demonstration projects.
E. INPUTS
Resource inputs to the project are in-kind and in-cash. The in-kind contributions are from
government and other institutions volunteering their time on the PAC, providing offices
for the PMU and seconding a staff member to the PMU. The following inputs are
expected to be in-cash co-financing and contribution in-kind to the project:
E1
The Ministry of Mines and Energy
The Ministry of Mines and Energy will execute the project on behalf of the GRN. The
MME will channel the contributions of the GRN and GEF to the project management unit
for implementation of the project. The MME is expected to contribute some
US$2.43million to the project. This contribution consists of funds already allocated to RE
programmes and the R-3-E which complement the activities of this project. These funds
have been allocated in the ministry’s budget plan. In addition MME will second a staff
member to be part of the PMU and act as a day to day link between the PMU and MME.
Also, MME will provide appropriate office space for the PMU.
E2
Other Ministries within GRN
The Ministries dealing with water supply, health, education, public works, police, and
agriculture, all have infrastructural development programmes that provide energy
services such as lighting, refrigeration, water-pumping, warm water which could be
undertaken using SETs. As such the involvement of the ministries is essential if the
project is to successfully integrate the use of solar energy technologies throughout the
public sector. The project also develops demonstration projects for facilities services by
these ministries and their agents and through small economies of scale subsidies will be
confirming interests in demonstration solar energy installations. The ministries are
expected to contribute US$3.1million from their budgets over the 5 years of the project
for energy infrastructure. Again, all these funds have been allocated in the respective
ministerial budgets.
E3
UNDP
The UNDP is one of the agents for GEF and has been the implementing agent for both
the SADC Finesse programme, and the PDF-B which led to this project document. The
UNDP through its Namibian country office will implement the project. The UNDP
provides administrative support to the project as per NEX guidelines.
E4
GTZ
Over the last 5.5 years the German Government through the Gesellschaft für Technische
Zusammenarbeit has supported a Ministry of Mines and Energy programme on the
“Promotion of the Use of Renewable Sources of Energy in Namibia”, launched in 1993.
The aim of the programme was to “increase the use of cost effective and environmentally
sound RET’s by end users”. While GTZ is no longer assisting the MME directly, its
involvement with other sectors of the economy bodes well for the integration of
39
40
renewable energy. The GTZ involvement in renewable energy in Namibia has set the
stage for this project.
E5
SADC TAU
The SADC TAU hosted the UNDP Finesse programme in its application to 6 countries in
the region. The Finesse programme identified some of the barriers being addressed in this
project.
E6
NGOs
Three NGOs in Namibia have agreed to be part of the project. They include the Desert
Research Foundation, Namibia Nature Foundation and Ibis. They will be installing
demonstration SESs in their facilities and availing their staff to learn about SES and
where to apply them, how to optimally operate and maintain them. NGOs are expected to
contribute some US$ 552,000 to the project.
E7
NamPower
NamPower and their agents are seen as key to a successful outcome of the project. They
will be the agency that will provide the sustainability to market transformation towards
solar energy technologies post-project through their involvement in the provision of rural
electricity and by way of the breadth of their extension of technical and administrative
infrastructure throughout Namibia. NamPower and their agents are expected to contribute
US$758,000 to the project.
E8
DANIDA
Danida through the “Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Capacity Building in
Namibia” programme have developed project ideas that complement the GEF project.
Close collaboration between these two projects will be required to avoid duplication.
Danida is expected to allocate US$ 2.12 million to their intervention, which is scheduled
to run in parallel with the first phase of this project. Administration and management of
the Danida project will however be separate and independent from the UNDP-GEF
project. The UNDP/GEF project focuses on promotion of solar energy, while the Danida
project has a wider perspective on sustainable energy. But the project will to some extent
support and facilitate the UNDP/GEF project by strengthening the capacity of the newly
established network organisation, R-3-E Bureau, which is foreseen to also promote solar
energy issues. The main components of the Danida supported project are:
 R-3-E Bureau Capacity building
 Efficient Use of Energy in Low Cost Housing, planned, implemented and used (a
demonstration project)
 REEECAP, Capacity building initiative bringing REEE issues on the agenda of the
Integrated Development Plans of Village Development Committees and Constituency
Development Committees.
E9
Public and Private housing developers
The National Housing Enterprise (Public) and private housing developers have expressed
interest in including solar water heating in the houses they develop. Particularly the solar
water heater component of the demonstration project will be undertaken in collaboration
with these developers and will require inputs from the commercial and development
banks to provide financial instruments as part of mortgages or as dedicated loans.
40
41
E10 Commercial and Development Banks/finance institutions
The Commercial and development banks are expected to constribute to the project by
designing and marketing financial instruments for the purchase of SESs. Purchase of the
SWHs results in some US$4.2 of new business for an estimated 4500 new systems
installed over the 5 years.
E11 Namibian Breweries
The Namibian Breweries has expressed interest in the project if it can be demonstrated
that the technologies work in cuka shops. The breweries are therefore conditional cofinanciers expected to provide US$1.2 million which has not been included as cofinancing within the project boundary.
E12 The Global Environment Facility
The Global Environment Facility has agreed to finance the incremental cost of the
project. The Government of Namibia will complement the project with the baseline costs
in-cash and in-kind. The incremental cost matrix is presented in Annex A. The
contribution of GEF is US$ 5.31 million over the 5 years of the project. The GEF will
make US$2.6 million available in the first phase of the project.
F. Sustainability and Risks
Sustainability
The primary objective of this barrier removal project is to put mechanisms in place that
will create a favorable environment for private entrepreneurs to seize the opportunity of a
transformed market and take over the investment process for replication and
sustainability in the medium to long term. The implementation of this project will not
only improve the commercial attractiveness of solar energy technologies and services. It
will also transform the market through capacity building, institutional strengthening,
public awareness, the provision of financial incentives, technical standardization,
information dissemination and technology testing, and the implementation of
demonstration and pilot activities.
To enable sustainability of the project momentum, it is expected that upon completion of
the project, MME and R-3-E shall continue to play a key co-ordinating role in the
implementation of renewable energy activities in Namibia. Institutional mechanisms for
this continuity are provided through the steady flow of funds into capacity building,
awareness raising and other barrier removal activities that creates an enabling
environment in which the market for solar energy services can thrive. By attaching
middle level managers and technicians to the PMU and seconding MME staff to the PMU
the project shall have trained a pool of expertise whom the MME and the Private Sector
may redeploy for their own long term renewable energy activities.
There are various options for the continuation of the PMU at the end of this project: the
unit may cease to exit; it may be subsumed by a semi-autonomous body in the
government such as R-3-E, parastatal or commercial financier; or it may be taken over by
the industry association. An appropriate decision on this would be made before the end of
the project. The Project Manager will be tasked with exploring options for sustainability
41
42
of the momentum particularly amongst financiers, NGOs and dealers on completion of
the project.
Risks
The inherent risks of this barrier removal project include limited vision, lack of sector
commitment and consensus, and a lack of implementation initiatives. Through an
unfolding mechanism in the establishment of the project implementation modalities, it is
expected that the various sectoral interests are represented in the process. This will
provide the momentum to launch the project successfully, ensuring that the necessary
capacity and resources are employed thus minimizing the risks.
The establishment of the R-3-E Institute will further enhance continuity of the process
through its services to the industry. A significant portion of the pool of expertise that will
be created with the implementation of the project (Advisory Committee, Project
Management Unit and support services) is expected to remain actively involved in the
sector after project completion.
G. PRIOR OBLIGATIONS AND PREREQUISITES
Prior Obligations
Namibia signed the UNFCCC in June 1992. This was ratified on 2 April, 1995 and
entered into force. The ultimate objective of the Convention is “…the stabilization of
greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved
within the time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change,
to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to
proceed in a sustainable manner”. (UNEP/WMO, 1992)
At the Rio Conference, energy played a major role, because energy supply and use was
recognized as one of the major cause of environmental degradation both at the local level
as globally. Energy issues prior to Rio were concerned mainly with increasing energy
supply, energy consumption per capita being a key indicator of modernization and
progress. After Rio, attention of energy planners shifted to the amount of energy services
delivered not to the amount of energy used. The Rio Conference also recognized energy
as essential for development and Malawi along with 149 other countries committed
themselves to Sustainable Development and Protection of the Environment and this
resulted in the Rio declaration, Agenda 21, and in the UNFCCC. To this effect, Agenda
21, Chapter Nine makes the following important point: “Much of the world’s energy is
currently produced and consumed in ways that could not be sustained if technology were
to remain constant and if overall quantities were to increase substantially. The need to
control atmospheric emissions and other gases and substances will increasingly need to
be based on efficiency in energy production, transmission, distribution and consumption
and on growing reliance on environmentally sound energy systems, particularly new and
renewable energy sources of energy”.
42
43
As a signatory to the Convention, Namibia is fully committed to comply with the
provisions of UNFCCC, and Agenda 21 by promoting the production and use of
alternative energy technologies. As a first step to fulfilling its commitment, GRN has
produced an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and sinks for 1990 and with the
assistance of UNDP.
Prerequisites
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
GRN will support the project implementation process in-cash and in-kind as
explained above;
GRN will provide data to project staff and consultants as may be required for the
implementation of the project activities;
GRN will provide office space and second at least one staff to the PMU;
GRN agrees to remove import duties on technologies employed by the project;
Assistance for the project will be provided only if the pre-requisites stipulated above have
been fulfilled or are likely to be fulfilled. When anticipated fulfillment of one or more
prerequisites fails to materialize, UNDP-GEF may, at its discretion, either suspend or
terminate its assistance.
H. PROJECT REVIEW, REPORTING AND EVALUATION
As soon as the PMU is in place the PM will prepare an inception report including a
detailed work plan and monitoring plan. The purpose of the inception report shall be to
identify, at the very outset of the project, potential gaps, overlaps, and other risks to
successful implementation, potential partners and sources of information from which the
project stands to benefit. Particularly the coordination with the Danish funded projects
needs to be further clarified during the inception process.
UNDP shall be responsible for monitoring the project on a continuous basis. The PM and
his collaborating staff shall be responsible for co-ordinating and supporting the
monitoring process. Monitoring activities shall include regular visits of project sites,
regular meetings of project staff, and biannual meetings between project staff and PAC.
In order to facilitate the PAC meetings, the PM, with the assistance of his collaborating
staff, shall prepare and submit to PAC biannual reports on the progress of the project
including the sub-tasks.
In line with regular UNDP and GEF Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting procedures
the project shall be subject to the annual Tripartite Review (joint meeting of the
representatives of GRN and UNDP-Namibia) mechanisms, the Project Implementation
Review (PIR) and an independent evaluation at the end of the current phase I. The
evaluation at the end of phase I will be the most important input for deciding on
continuation with phase II. At the end of phase II another independent final evaluation
will be conducted. Prior to the TPR the Annual Performance Report (APR) will be
43
44
submitted to the TPR participants. The format for the APR is the same as the PIR format
and will be made available to the PM.
A Project Terminal Report (PTR) shall be prepared by the PM for consideration at the
terminal annual review. The PTR shall be prepared in draft in advance to allow its
preview and technical clearance before final tabling.
UNDP’s extensive experience in monitoring large projects will be drawn upon to ensure
that the project activities are monitored and properly documented. In this programme, the
repayment records of end-users, income generation and social impacts etc., is of
particular importance. This is essential for sustainability of the solar energy systems, and
for future expansion of the programme. The project-planning matrix with the monitoring
indicators is presented in Annex B.
The project will actively engage in cross project learning and sharing of knowledge and
lessons. This means the project will engage in an active dialogue with similar GEF and
non-GEF projects, particularly in Southern Africa to both share the Namibian experience
and learn from others.
I. LEGAL CONTEXT
This project document shall be the instrument referred to as such in Article 1 of the
Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA) between the GRN and the UNDP, signed
by the parties on July 15, 1977. The host-country implementing agency shall, for the
purpose of the SBAA, refer to the Government co-operating agency described in that
Agreement.
The following types of revisions may be made to this project document with the signature
of the UNDP Resident Representative only, provided he or she is assured that the other
signatories of the project document have no objections to the proposed changes.
Revisions in, or addition of, any of the annexes of the project document (with the
exception of the Standard Legal Text for non-SBAA countries which may not be altered
and the agreement to which is a pre-condition for UNDP assistance);
Revisions to the project will be permitted through agreement with the MME are allowed
which; i) do not involve significant changes in the immediate objectives, outputs or
activities of a project, but are caused by rearrangement of inputs agreed to or by cost
increases due to inflation; and, ii) mandatory annual revisions, which rephase the delivery
of agreed project inputs or increased expert or other costs due to inflation or which take
into account agency expenditure flexibility.
The Government will provide the Resident Representative with certified periodic
financial statements, and with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to the
status of UNDP (including GEF) funds according to the procedures set out in Section
30503 of the UNDP Policies and Procedures Manual (PPM) and Section 10404 of the
UNDP Finance Manual. The Audit will be conducted by the legally recognized auditor
of the Government, or by a commercial auditor engaged by the Government.
44
45
J. BUDGET
Table 4: Project Budget Phase I (UNDP format)
BL
Desription
10
PROJECT PERSONNEL
11
International expert and consultants
1101
International advisors
1197
1199
International expert and consultants
Line Total
13
Admin and Support Personnel
1301
Administration Secretary
1302
1303
1399
Driver
Account Clerk
Line Total
15
Duty Travel
1502
Monitoring and evaluation
1599
Line Total
16
Mission Cost
1601
Mission Cost
1699
Line Total
17
National Professionals
1701
Project Manager
1702
1703
Assistant project manager
Management consultants
Total
Net Amount
2003
2004
2005
375,000
150,000
150,000
75,000
W/M
30
12
12
6
Total
375,000
150,000
150,000
75,000
Net Amount
200,000
75,000
75,000
50,000
W/M
16
6
6
4
Total
200,000
75,000
75,000
50,000
Net Amount
575,000
225,000
225,000
125,000
W/M
46
18
18
10
Total
575,000
225,000
225,000
125,000
Net Amount
27,500
11,000
11,000
5,500
W/M
30
12
12
6
Total
27,500
11,000
11,000
5,500
Net Amount
27,500
11,000
11,000
5,500
W/M
30
12
12
6
Total
27,500
11,000
11,000
5,500
Net Amount
32,500
13,000
13,000
6,500
W/M
30
12
12
6
Total
32,500
13,000
13,000
6,500
Net Amount
87,500
35,000
35,000
17,500
W/M
90
36
36
18
Total
87,500
35,000
35,000
17,500
Net Amount
150,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
Total
150,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
Net Amount
150,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
Total
150,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
Net Amount
35,000
10,000
10,000
15,000
Total
35,000
10,000
10,000
15,000
Net Amount
35,000
10,000
10,000
15,000
Total
35,000
10,000
10,000
15,000
Net Amount
75,000
30,000
30,000
15,000
W/M
30
12
12
6
Total
75,000
30,000
30,000
15,000
Net Amount
60,000
24,000
24,000
12,000
W/M
30
12
12
6
Total
60,000
24,000
24,000
12,000
Net Amount
42,000
18,000
12,000
12,000
14
6
4
4
W/M
45
46
1704
1705
1706
1799
19
Economist consultants
Finance Specialist-Consultant
Legal Advisor
Line Total
PROJECT PERSONNEL TOTAL
20
SUBCONTRACTS
21
Subcontracts A
2101
Capacity building - local companies
2199
Line total
22
Subcontracts B
2201
Awareness workshops - local companies
2299
Line Total
Total
42,000
18,000
12,000
12,000
Net Amount
9,000
30,000
12,000
9,000
W/M
10
4
3
3
Total
30,000
12,000
9,000
9,000
Net Amount
30,000
6,000
6,000
18,000
W/M
10
2
2
6
Total
30,000
6,000
6,000
18,000
Net Amount
18,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
W/M
6
2
2
2
Total
18,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
255,000
96,000
87,000
72,000
Net Amount
W/M
100
38
35
27
Total
255,000
96,000
87,000
72,000
1,102,500
416,000
407,000
279,500
Net Amount
W/M
236
92
89
55
Total
1,102,500
416,000
407,000
279,500
Net Amount
162,500
50,000
90,000
22,500
Total
162,500
50,000
90,000
22,500
Net Amount
162,500
50,000
90,000
22,500
Total
162,500
50,000
90,000
22,500
Net Amount
93,000
20,000
40,000
33,000
Total
93,000
20,000
40,000
33,000
Net Amount
93,000
20,000
40,000
33,000
Total
93,000
20,000
40,000
33,000
23
Subcontracts C
2301
Institutional development - local companies Net Amount
2399
Line Total
24
Subcontract D
2401
Application of subsidy
2499
29
Line Total
SUBCONTRACT TOTAL
30
TRAINING
31
FELLOWSHIPS
3101
Short courses
3102
Scholarships
3109
Line Total
32
Group training
962,000
200,000
462,000
300,000
Total
962,000
200,000
462,000
300,000
Net Amount
962,000
200,000
462,000
300,000
Total
962,000
200,000
462,000
300,000
Net Amount
100,000
-
100,000
Total
100,000
-
-
100,000
Net Amount
100,000
-
-
100,000
Total
100,000
-
-
100,000
Net Amount
1,317,500
270,000
592,000
455,500
Total
1,317,500
270,000
592,000
455,500
Net Amount
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Total
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Net Amount
45,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
Total
45,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
Net Amount
75,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
Total
75,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
Net Amount
46
47
3201
Study tours
3299
Line Total
39
TRAINING TOTAL
50
MISCELLANEOUS
52
Reporting costs
5201
Communications
5299
Line Total
53
Sundries
5301
Sundries
5399
Line Total
59
99
MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL
BUDGET TOTAL
Net Amount
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Total
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Net Amount
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Total
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Net Amount
105,000
35,000
35,000
35,000
Total
105,000
35,000
35,000
35,000
Net Amount
45,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
Total
45,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
Net Amount
45,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
Total
45,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
Net Amount
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Total
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Net Amount
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Total
30,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
Net Amount
75,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
Total
75,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
2,600,000
746,000
1,059,000
795,000
W/M
236
92
89
55
Total
2,600,000
746,000
1,059,000
795,000
Net Amount
47
48
ANNEXES
Barrier Removal to Namibian Renewable Energy Programme
Annex A:
IncrementalCosts .......................................................................... p. 2
Annex B:
Project Planning Matrix ................................................................. p. 8
Annex C:
STAP Roster Technical Review and Response ............................ p. 12
Annex D:
SES Market Assessment Matrix ................................................... p. 17
Annex E:
Preliminary Project Schedule .............................................................p. 19
Annex F:
Delivery and Maintenance Modalities -------------------------------- p. 20
Annex G:
Brief overview of the Namibian R-3-E Institute .......................... p. 26
Annex H:
Terms of Reference: Project Manager/Co-ordinator .................. p. 28
Annex I:
Terms of Reference for Project Management Unit ..................... p. 30
Annex J:
Danida Co-financing letter ............................................................. p. 31
Annex K:
Government Endorsement letter ................................................... p. 32
48
49
Annex A: Incremental cost matrix
A.1 Broad Development Goal
The developmental goal being pursued through this project is the provision of energy to
the population of Namibia. This includes electricity production for off-grid lighting,
radio, TV, water pumping and refrigeration, and water heating to the household,
institutional and commercial sectors.
A.2 Baseline
Under baseline assumptions, Namibia would be expected to pursue these energy service
by way of the least-cost, conventional options, notably through grid-extension; the use of
small diesel gen-sets; or the use of kerosene and candles for lighting and refrigeration.
However, if Namibia had an efficient market for renewable energy, there would be
numerous potential win-win investment possibilities in solar and renewable energy
technologies that would be undertaken in the absence of this project. Different barriers
related to human resources, institutional capacity, available information, technical skills
and financing possibilities hinder the development of these opportunities.
Throughout peri-urban and rural Namibia, grid electrification is on the increase, however
there are numerous unelectrified households where lighting is primarily delivered using
kerosene and candles. This service is costly to households and could be delivered at
better quality to those who could afford it through the use of PV lighting systems. Under
the baseline, households and institutions (government and NGO) will continue to use
kerosene for lighting.
Under the baseline, beverage retailers use kerosene refrigerators and lighting in shops;
farms and institutions use diesel pumps on commercial farms and at communal water
points; and urban households use electric hot water storage geysers for water heating.
Estimates of the current levels of market penetration of the technologies are estimated at
2600 SHS; 700 PVPs; 2000 SWHs; 150 PV’s for institutional lighting and media; and
2000 PV fridges in shops, farms and clinics. The baseline includes the marketing and
processing of loans via the NDC’s HomePower! Programme.
A.3 Global Environmental Objectives
The global environmental objective is the development of the market for SES’s that
contributes to climate stabilisation by reducing CO2 emissions through the removal of
technical, financial, social, institutional and capacity barriers.
A.4 GEF project activities
Project activities aim at removing barriers to the implementation of solar technologies in
different applications in Namibia. The increase in the use of solar systems will reduce the
amount of CO2 emitted in providing lighting, water heating, and refrigeration. At the end
of the project, it is anticipated that there will be a vibrant and growing solar energy
service market in Namibia.
The barriers identified relate to limited institutional capacity, lack of public awareness of
both the potential and feasibility of PV’s in Namibia, lack of commercially-oriented or
49
50
institutional high-profile champions demonstrating successful usage of selected solar
applications, and financial barriers to the commercial financing of solar energy systems.
The first set of project activities is designed to strengthen Namibian capacity in private,
government and NGO sectors to be able to identify applications, manage and maintain,
use and oversee solar installations as well as the manage the project. The second set of
project activities aims at removing the institutional barriers to the increased use of solar
energy technologies. The third component aims at creating public awareness and social
acceptability of solar energy services amongst end-users, suppliers, policy makers and
other stakeholders. The fourth component considers the financial and the fifth technical
barriers to solar energy. The sixth and final component synthesises all of the components
by setting up affirming demonstrations applying a range of delivery, financing and
maintenance modalities linked to the programmes of the private sector, government and
NGO institutions and the parastatals, such as the electricity distribution utilities.
All GEF project activities are summarized in the Incremental Cost Matrix, Table AI.1.
A.5 System boundary
The system being considered in this project is the Namibian energy system. The principal
sub-markets for the range of solar technologies considered are:

unelectrified urban and rural households for PV light and refrigeration and SWHs;

unelectrified institutional use in schools, school hostels, police outposts, NGO
facilities and health clinics for PV lighting, PV refrigeration and SWHs;

PVPs for commercial farms and communal water points; and

PV refrigerators and lighting for beverage retailers.
The barriers removed by the project will also facilitate market creation for other possible
stand-alone and grid connected solar applications and extended use of renewable energy
services.
No changes in project design could be expected to occur with reasonable shifts in the
system boundary. The project exclusively deals with the operational emissions of the
baseline and alternative technologies.
The project boundary includes all 6 of the project components, in the sixth including
project contributions to the demonstrations, but excluding the contributions of cofinanciers/purchasers/users of the demonstrated SES’s.
A.6 Additional benefits
Additional benefits attributable to project activities can be expected to take several forms.
First, employment will be created amongst installers and maintainers of the solar systems.
Those consumers investing in PV systems for lighting will receive substantially higher
quality lighting at virtually the same cost as in the baseline, contributing to their standard
of living and education. In addition, local, particularly indoor air quality will improve due
to reduced CO and particle emissions from paraffin (kerosene) and diesel.
A.7 Project Costs
The entire project costs US$14.36 million of which GEF is being asked to grant US$5.3
million over 5 years for the barrier removal activities defined in the project. It is
50
51
anticipated that 10 years after the end of the project, the solar market in Namibia will
continue to grow at rates summarized elsewhere in the brief. In addition to the domestic
benefits, global benefits will include reduction of 692,054 tons of CO2 (or 188,742 tons
as C) by 2016 implying a unit abatement cost of US$28.1/ton of C over 15 years (using
the GEF contribution as the numerator).
51
52
Table A.1 Incremental Cost Matrix
Components
Cost category
1. Overcoming
capacity building
barriers in private,
government and
NGO sectors and
the PMU.
Baseline
2.Institutional
Strengthening
3. Overcoming
Social/awareness
barriers.
4. Overcoming
financial barriers
Costs (in US$
1000s )
0
Alternative
801.1
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
Baseline
801.1
Alternative
2850.1
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
2850.1
Baseline
0
0
Alternative
332.5
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
Baseline
332.5
Alternative
3070.3
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
1858.3
1,212
Domestic benefits
Global Environmental benefits
Capacity to develop, design and
monitor solar technologies not
available in Namibia, Renewable
Energy Institute substantially
strengthened with support from
UNDP
Solar industry, Government officials
and NGO/CBO workers appropriately
trained; PMU trained to undertake
project activities, Renewable Energy
Institute substantially strengthened
Increased human and institutional
capacity to sustain a solar programme
developed in Namibia
Institutional barriers to the application
of solar energy and implementation of
enabling solar energy policy continue
to exist within government and other
sectors.
Institutional barriers are reduced,
government decision makers plan in a
more integrated manner, grid versus
off-grid playing fields are leveled,
capital and operation budgets are
talking together and a Project
Management Unit is established to
manage this project.
Institutional barriers are reduced,
government decision makers plan in a
more integrated manner, grid versus
off-grid playing fields are leveled,
capital and operation budgets are
talking together and a Project
Management Unit is established to
manage this project.
With the exception of HomePower!
Marketing, public, private sector and
government unaware of solar costeffective applications, where to source
PV systems and how to finance them
Public aware of cost effective solar
applications, where to source PV
systems and how to finance them
Namibian public aware of PV
electrification, where to source and
how to finance them
First costs reduce market penetration
of solar technologies, financial
institutions unable to process loans for
solar systems. Funds available via
NDC through HomePower!
Fist costs of solar technologies are
lowered, and financial institutions
process loans for solar systems.
Revolving fund is extended and
financial guarantee is established.
First costs of solar systems are
lowered, financing marketed and
available for solar systems Revolving
fund is extended and financial
guarantee is established.
None
52
Solar technical capacity
increased
Solar technical capacity
increased
None
Institutional support is gained
for the application of solar
energy technologies.
Institutional support is gained
for the application of solar
energy technologies.
None
Increased awareness of the PV
applications
Increased awareness of the PV
applications
None
Market extended for credit sales
of solar technologies.
Solar market market expands,
demonstrable PV electrification
progress
53
5. Overcoming
technical barriers
6. SES
demonstration
projects
TOTAL
Baseline
0
Alternative
1,519.1
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
1,519.1
Baseline
0
Alternative
5,586
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
5,586
Baseline
1,212
No technical and financial costs
comparisons between solar and other
technologies exist, no standards or
codes of practice exist for solar
systems in the Namibian market.
Technical and costs comparisons
exist, standards and codes of practice
for installation and maintenance exist
for solar technologies. A Renewable
Energy Institute linking government,
users and suppliers disseminates
information and oversees the
transformation of the grid-electricity
energy market to a more balanced
renewable energy and conventional
electricity market.
Technical and costs comparisons
exist, standards and codes of practice
for installation and maintenance exist
for solar technologies. A Renewable
Energy institute linking government,
users and suppliers disseminates
information and oversees the
transformation of the energy market to
renewable energy.
Households predominantly use
kerosene and candles for lighting,
kerosene for refrigeration, diesel for
water pumping, electric hot water
storage geysers for water heating.
PV pumps are installed; Namibian
Breweries provides retailers with PV
refrigerators; households,
conservancies, educational and health
facilities are lit with PV systems; and
water heating is achieved using
SWHs.
GEF develops protocols for demos
and disseminates lessons about
experiences and learning
Better quality of light in PV-lit
buildings, PV refrigeration of
beverages and drugs, reduction of CO2
and particulate emissions, more cost
effective water heating using SWHs.
NDC continues financing PV lighting
systems using MME revolving fund,
and total SET market grows at a rate
of 2.5% pa.
53
None
Solar energy is championed and
becomes the cost effective and
reliable alternative to fossil and
biomass based energy services
Solar energy is championed and
becomes the cost effective and
reliable alternative to fossil and
biomass based energy services.
2,942 SHS, 792 PVP, 2,263
SWHs, 2,263 PV fridges, and
170 PV Institutional
installations, are installed by
government, NGOs and private
users over 5 years. 116,601 tons
of carbon as carbon dioxide
emissions (tc) over 5 years.
Between 2001 and 2006.
4,284 SHS, 1,003 PVP, 6,785
SWHs, 2,891 PV Fridges, 290
PV Institutional installations, are
installed by government, NGOs
and private users over 5 years.
217,475 tons of carbon as carbon
dioxide emissions (tc) over 5
years since the initiation of the
project.
1,342 SHS, 211 PVP, 4,522
SWHs, 628 PV Fridges, and 120
PV Institutional installations are
installed by government, NGOs
and private users over 5 years.
100,874 tons of carbon as
carbon dioxide emissions (tc)
over 5 years since the initiation
of the project
3,766 SHS, 1,014 PVP, 2,897
SWHs, 2,897 PV Fridges, 217
PV Institutional installations, are
installed by governrnent, NGOs
and private users over 15 years.
375,296 tons of carbon (as
carbon dioxide) emissions (tc)
over 15 years from 2001 to
2016.
54
Alternative
14,362
DANCED, GEF, UNDP, GRN, SIDA,
NamPower (Premier Electric)
Northern Electricity, NGOs, and
others join forces to address barrier
removal for solar technologies
Increment
(Alternative –
Baseline)
13,150
New and growing renewable energy
industry springs up; a precedent is
achieved for the widespread use of
other renewable energy technologies;
socio-economic improvements for
Namibian people and other countries
in the region.
54
11,600 SHS, 5,700 PVP, 17,000
SWHs, 7,000 PV Fridges, 650
PV Institutional installations, are
installed by government, NGOs
and private users over 15 years.
Systems avoid 1,067,348 tons of
carbon (as carbon dioxide)
emissions (tc) during the period
from 2001 to 2016.
Barriers to PV electric lighting,
PV powered refrigeration,
SWHs, and PV pumps are
removed. 31,159 additional
systems installed between 2001
and 2016 avoid an incremental
692,052 tons of carbon (as
carbon dioxide) or 188,742 tons
carbon (as carbon) emissions (tc)
during their lifetime at a cost of
US$5.3 million to GEF.
55
Annex A (continued): CO2 mitigation
Constants used:
12 kg C per 44 kg CO2
1.7 kg CO2 / kg wood
3.18 kg CO2 / ltr kerosene
0.081 ltr kero / hour burning lamps
2.96 kg CO2 / kg LP Gas
0.08 kg LPG / hour burning
SHS in 15 years: 3,076 tC
0.917 kg C / kg coal
0.519 kg coal / kWh for Eskom electricity
therefore 0.917 kg C/kg coal * 44/12kg CO2/kgC * 0.519 kg coal / kWh => 1.745 kg CO2 / kWh
SHS (50 W)
50 W => 0.05 kW => 109.6 kWh/a at 365.25 days with 6 hours / day sunshine
109.6 kWh/a => 109.6 * 1.745 kg CO2 / kWh = 191.3 kg CO2 / a => 2869 kg CO2 / 15 year
PVP
assume 660 Wp
0.66 kW => 1.446 MWh/a at 365.25 sunshine days at 6 hours per day
1 446.4 kWh/a => 2524 kg CO2 / a => 128.2 t CO2 / 15 years
SWH
assume: 3.0 kW element for 200 litre geyser
heating 200l/day by 40 deg C at 80% efficiency
assume: 15% technical losses in electrical transmission
13.4 kWh/d => 4897 kWh/a => 8.545t CO2/a => 128t CO2/15 years
200 l / day = 73000 l / a => 8.545 kg CO2 / a / 73000 l / a = 0.117 kg CO2 / ltr
PV Inst
assume average 330 W system, since 50*150 + 30*400 + 20*600 are installed
722.7 kWh/a at 365 days at 6 hours per day
Kerosene fridges
assume 1 ltr kerosene per day, in a typical 120 ltr fridge
3.18 kg CO2 / ltr * 365.25 = 1161 kg CO2 per annum per fridge
Paraffin Lamp
assume 2 candles per household per day = 2 parafin lamps per household per day for 4 hrs per day
0.081 ltr kero/hour * 4 hours / day = 0.324 ltr kero / day = 118.3 ltr kero / a
118.3 ltr kero => 118.3 * 3.18 kg CO2/ltr kero = 376 kg CO2 / household per year
Diesel Pumping
assume 5l diesel for 6.5 h at 2.1 m3/h => 0.75 l diesel for 2.1 m3 => 0.36 l diesel / m3
0.75 * 3.18 kg CO2 / ltr kero = 2.38 kg CO2 / 2.1 m3 => 1.13 kg CO2/ m3
Diesel Lighting
assume 5l diesel for 6.5 h driving a 3.5 kVA genset => 0.75 l/h for 3.5 kWh => 0.21 l / kWh
0.21 l/kWh * 3.18 kg CO2 / ltr kero = 0.68 kg CO2 / kWh
Replace paraffin fridge with PV fridge
save 1161 kg CO2 / fridge / a
Replace paraffin lamp with SHS
save 376 kg CO2 / household / a
Replacement off grid connection with SHS
save 52.17 kg CO2 / a
Replace Diesel Pump with PVP
save 1.13 kg CO2 / m3
Replace Diesel Lighting with PV institutional lighting
save 0.68 kg CO2 / kWh
Replace electric geyser with SWH
Technology Current
SHS
2,600
PVP
700
SWH
2,000
PV Inst
150
PV Fridges
2,000
Save t CO2 /a
978
1,444
17,082
74
2,322
21,899
save 0.117 kg CO2 / ltr hot water
Potential Save Pot t CO2 / a
9,000
3,384
5,000
10,311
15,000
128,115
500
246
5,000
5,805
147,861
Tons / Unit / a
0.38
2.06
8.54
0.49
1.16
55
56
ANNEX B: PROJECT PLANNING MATRIX
SUMMARY
OBJECTIVELY
VERIFIABLE
INDICATORS
MEANS OF
VERIFICATION
Widespread adoption of
SET's and quantified CO2
emission reduction.
National GHG Inventories
and Reports to UNFCCC.

Evaluation Reports.
CRITICAL
ASSUMPTIONS
AND RISKS
Global Objective:
To
increase
affordable access to
sustainable energy
services through the
further development
of a market for
SET's in Namibia
that contribute to
climate stabilization
by reducing CO2
emissions through
the removal of
technical, financial,
social, institutional,
capacity,
public
awareness
and
social acceptability
barriers
Consistency with GRN
development, energy and
environment policies.
Immediate Objective:
To remove barriers
to the delivery of
commercially,
institutionally, and
technically
sustainable
SES
including electricity
production (for offgrid lighting, radio,
TV, water pumping,
and refrigeration),
and water heating to
the
household,
institutional,
commercial,
and
agro-industrial
sectors
and
to
demonstrate
the
enabled
environment
through affirming

Identified barriers to
SES delivery removed;
and
Tax returns.
Turnover of private
sector institutions
dealing with solar
energy technologies
increases by an
average of 10% per
annum over the project
period.
56
Consistency with GRN
Energy Policy. GRN and
other stakeholder
participation.
57
demonstrations of
the applications of
the technologies.
Component 1:
Capacity in government,
SET Industry, NGOs,
Financing Agencies, and
PMU built




REINNAM
transformed into R-3E
Institute
and
industry association
within phase 1;
PMU staff engaged
and PMU offices
established
within
phase 1; and
50 technicians, project
developers,
and
analysts
from
government, private
and NGO sectors
trained in aspects of
solar energy by the
project in phase 1 the
same number again by
the end of phase 2.




Progress Reports from
PMU, R-3-E Institute
and other participating
agencies;
Minutes of meetings;
Independent
Mid
Term and Terminal
Reports;
Training courses and
workshop evaluation
reports by various
target trainee groups;
and
Technical reports on
SET
status
and
comparative techno
economic data




Component 2:

Institutional barriers
among government, SET
Industry, NGOs, Financing
Agencies and PMU
removed


Consideration of
economic cost and
benefits of SESs are
included in
development planning
processes at intersectoral level by the
end of phase 1;
Institutions
optimise
recurrent
and
capital
expenditure over
full life cycle
costs
incorporating full
consideration of
SESs options and
relevant discount
rates by the end
of phase 2; and

Progress Reports
from participating
agencies;

Minutes of
meetings;

Independent Mid
Term and Terminal
Reports;

A level playing
field is established
between SESs and grid
electricity by the end
57


GRN willing to
institute fiscal policy
reforms to level
playing field

Utilities will to
participate as delivery
mode
Annual budgets;

New SET
projects;

Grid electricity
companies
participation;

Legislation on
fiscal policy affecting
SETs;
GRN,
financing
agencies,
training
institutes,
industry,
and individuals wish
to collaborate, share
information and other
resources;
Infrastructure
and
human
resource
capacity exists or can
be built to establish a
decentralised
SET
institutional
mechanism
and
achieve
effective
training results;
Qualified personnel
are available to man
PMU
and
R-3-E
Institute and manage
project affairs; and
Qualified consultants
are
available
to
undertake
various
techno-economic
studies.
GRN, financing
agencies, training
institutes, industry, and
individuals wish to
collaborate, share
information and other
resources
58
of phase 2.

Component 3:
Public Awareness and
Social Acceptability of
SES's increased

Number of enquiries
made and SES
installations increases
at an average rate of
25% per annum over
the duration of the
project.


Component 4:
Financial
Removed

Barriers

Component 5:
Technical barriers removed
financiers make
affordable loans to
SETs users and solar
energy service (SES)
providers by the end of
phase 1;

instruments/measures
are designed and
untilised to level the
financial playing field
between SETs, grid
electricity and fossil
fuels by the end of
phase 2;

government votes for
increasing fiscal
allocations increasing
at 10% in real terms
per annum for the
implementation of the
SETs component of
energy policy; and

The number of
entrepreneurs making
money from SETs
increases by 10% per
annum over the
duration of the project.

R-3-E Institute
strengthened as
information and SET

Media messages
will have the intended
impact; and

Consumer public
willing to accept new
technologies.

Annual progress
reports, mid-term
reports, terminal
reports
Fiscal policy
Legislation on SETs
Annual Financial
Reports


all direct and indirect
taxes and levies on
SETs are identified and
removed/reduced by
the end of phase 2;
Content
and
delivery
evaluation
reports;
Consumer public
has access and uses
one or all of the media
applied;
Consumer public
is literate to
comprehend media
messages;






58
Annual progress
reports, mid term
reports and terminal

GRN, financing
agencies, training
institutes, industry,
and
Individuals wish
to collaborate, share
information and other
resources;
GRN willing to
institute fiscal policy
reforms in support of
SETs;
Financing
agencies willing to
provide loans under
dedicated SET
financing mechanisms
and users willing and
able to repay loans;
and
Market response
to SETs good.
SET industry willing to
participate in and
accept and abide by
59
dissemination,
standards and testing
facility by the end of
phase 1;




Component 6

SES Demonstration/Pilot
Projects Implemented


Authoritative SET
data sheets and
information services
developed by the end
of phase 1;
evaluation reports;

SET data sheets;

SET systems standards
Dossier;

Code of Practice
Dossier; and

Guidelines Documents
new standards and code
of practice; and

R-3-E Institute
functionally effective to
serve as an industry
association and agency
responsible for
establishing and
enforcement of codeof-practice.

Commitment to the
project by industry,
GRN, end-users,
financiers secured;
Guidelines
on
technical standards and
norms and compliance
regimes developed by
the end of phase 1;
Operational code of
practice among SES
operators instituted by
the end of phase 1;
Standards and
compliance regime
implemented by the
end of phase 2.
Criteria for SET
demo target areas
identified; demo areas
selected; demo
planning protocols
developed and
approved by MME and
demo implementation
plans outlined by the
end of phase 1;
Detailed design
of different
institutional delivery
and maintenance
modalities developed
and functional by the
end of phase 2;
Detailed design of
different financial
mechanisms developed
and functional; and
delivery of at least
6823 SETs over a 5
year period.
59

Progress Reports;

Site and systems
evaluation reports;

Inspection reports on
installed systems; and


Mid-Term and
Terminal Evaluation
Reports.
GRN enacts
appropriate legislation
supporting SETs

Key players satisfied
with project design

Whole and retail
financing is made
available

Demonstration results
and critical
success/failure factors
documented Critical
mass for SETs attained

with replication.
Annex C:
STAP Roster Technical Review and Response
STAP REVIEW OF UNDP/GEF PROPOSAL ENTITLED:
Barrier Removal on Namibian Renewable Energy Programme
Dr. Ashok Gadgil, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Overall Impression:
This is a thoughtfully written and strong proposal. It is especially well written in the societal and
institutional aspects of introducing solar energy technologies on a commercial scale in Namibia.
It is somewhat weaker in its engineering and technology-economics aspects. However, these
shortcomings can be easily corrected, and do not detract substantially from the overall strength
of the proposal.
Key Issues
1. Scientific and Technical Soundness
The basis for the project is the technical and scientific assumption that there is much renewable
energy to be cost-effectively tapped in Namibia, and of this solar energy forms a vital part. This
is a valid and sound assumption
The second assumption is that solar energy is not being tapped on a significant scale primarily
for weakness in the factors that this project will strengthen: providing analysis, training, and
awareness, removing institutional barriers, implementing demonstration projects, providing
publicity, and availability of financing. This assumption (although likely to be true) remains
untested, and is one of the necessary risks that the project must document and accept.
2. Identification of global environmental benefits and/or drawbacks of the project
The project aims to introduce renewable energy technologies by removing various institutional,
informational, policy, technical and financial barriers. The project will save about 200,000 tons
of C at a price of about US$30 per ton of carbon. This is somewhat expensive, however this is
not the only criterion by which the project should be judged. (Incidentally, the carbon savings
price given in Annexure A, paragraph A.7 is incorrect by a factor of 3).
There are no global environmental drawbacks of the proposal.
3. How the project fits within the context of goals of GEF, its operational strategies,
programme priorities, GEF Council guidance and relevant conventions.
The project fits well within the goals of GEF and its operational strategies and priorities. It aims
to create a viable and sustainable solar energy technologies market in Namibia, systematically
61
identifying and removing various barriers to the commercialization of solar technologies in
Namibia. The activities identified in the proposal fit GEF programme priorities and meet the
council guidance.
4. Regional Context
In the SADC region, Namibia is well integrated in the economic and commercial networks of the
region. Namibia receives plentiful sunshine, and could easily use several of the mature solar
energy technologies to reduce its CO2 emissions and gain some independence from imported
fossil fuels.
5. Replicability of the project
The proposal has a good social analysis of barriers to solar technologies in Namibia. Several of
the problems identified in Namibia in this section are also seen on other developing countries.
The sections of the project dealing with removal of these barriers are replicable in other
countries.
6. Sustainability of the project
Project is designed to be sustainable beyond the horizon of GEF support.
Secondary Issues
The proposal has no significant linkages to other focal areas (e.g., biodiversity protection or
coastal waters). It does not have linkages to other programmes or action plans at the regional
level.
Other (non-stated) beneficial or damaging environmental effects are negligible.
The degree of involvement of stakeholders in the project is planned to be adequate.
The project will build significant capacity in Namibia in the private, NGO and government
sectors for solar energy system commercialization
The project is innovative in terms of comprehensively addressing removal of barriers at the
technical, institutional and financial level, and also in terms of private sector, NGO and
government institutions.
Additional Comments
1. In Background and Context section 2 “Summary”, the last sentence is confusing since the
previous statement says that there will be 7450 systems in 2000, and the last sentence says
that there will be at least 6823 systems installed by 2006. Perhaps the authors mean
“additional systems”?
2. Background and Context Section 9. The annual solar radiation surely exceeds 6 kWh/sq.m.
by a huge margin. Please correct the error.
61
62
3. Background and Context Section 10. Here we discuss making PV systems for home lighting
and water pumping financially feasible. However, nowhere in the proposal there is any
discussion of costs per system, and how does each compare to the income at the top of the
income distribution (at the top of the income distribution are the potential customers).
4. Background and Context Section 10 also suggests that electricity is competing with solar hot
water. What is the hot water use pattern in Namibia (temperature, amount, time of day)?
How much do Namibian households spend on hot water as a function of their incomes? If
these data are unavailable, who will collect them? Without these data, we can’t say that solar
hot water will successfully replace electricity.
5. Rationale, Objectives and Strategy Table 1 (Renewable energy technology assessment)
needs to incorporate quantitative data. If these data are unavailable, the project must make
explicit provision to gather these data at project startup. Later on, in section 38, we talk of
doing cost-effectiveness calculations. Where are (or who will collect) the data for these
calculations?
6. Project Activities Section 3.1.3.3 talks of training NGO technicians. This is puzzling, as they
are not needed anywhere in the project activities. What the NGO do need are analysts. And
these analysts need training, which is missing.
7. Project Activities section 3.2.1, part (vi). We need to bear in mind that sometimes the social
objective of making electricity affordable (and thus available) to every segment of society
over-rides the narrower economic objective of recovering full costs of electricity. In such
cases, lifeline rates for small users and higher rates for large users may be a better solution.
8. Project Activities section 3.3.1, paragraph 51. Section (I). Lifecycle cost-benefit analysis
requires a discount rate for future expenses or future savings. It is well known that even in
rich industrial countries, consumers exhibit discount rates for future savings from 30 to 50%
per annum. For poor consumers in poor countries, the discount rates are much higher. So,
sometimes, it is not lack of analysis, but desperation about putting bread on the table this
evening, Project Activities that causes minimizing of first costs, rather than of life-cycle
costs.
9. Project Activities sections 54, 55 and 56. Need to add issues of reliability, product longevity,
long-term performance, product quality, and enforceable performance guarantees. Again, for
section 55 (I), please bear in mind the above caveat about life-cycle costs.
10. Project Activities Section 66 and 74. Again whose discount rates will you use in determining
costs and benefits? From whose perspective?
11. Project Activities section 82. “too long” is what would make sense, where you say “too
short”. If the pay back is too short, everyone is happy!
12. Project Activities section 101. The first sentence needs to be reworded. Reads awkward,
about “feeling” first cost benefits from day one. What is that?
62
63
13. Project Activities section 110. The last sentence of section (I) needs to be rewritten.
set of technical standards should coincide…” What about other set?
“..one
14. Project Activities section 122. Table 3. Suggest re-title table to replace the word “currently”
with the words “over 5 years project duration”.
63
64
RESPONSE TO STAP REVIEW
Comment 1: On the second assumption, this is based on the experience of local authors who
have through the years witnessed how incremental changes in "providing analysis, training, and
awareness et cetera" have positively stimulated the Namibian solar market, and changed
attitudes. It will be of interest to the reviewer to note that Namibia is the first country in Africa
that has developed an electrification master plan in which off-grid electrification (mainly via
solar and hybrid generation) is treated on the same footing than grid electrification. Also, we
have initiated both fee-for-service and ownership-based solar electricity provision, ideas that
would not have been possible to initiate and implement if the above assumption had been
completely baseless. it is an assumption, but it is based on Namibian realities, which limits the
risk to the project considerably.
Comment 2. It is assumed that the GEF contribution of US$ 5.3 *10^6 is used as the numerator
in this calculation (as explicitly mentioned in brackets at the end of the section A.7): this implies
that 188,742 t of C saved at a GEF cost of 5.3 m US$ is equal to US$ 28.1/ton C. The carbon
savings price as calculated above is correct if the assumptions that are explicitly stated leading
to this number are properly taken into account.
.Comment 3. No response necessary.
Comment 4. No response necessary.
Comment 5. No response necessary.
Comment 6. No response necessary.
Secondary Issues
This is not quite correct. There is mention of the large complementary programme of
DANCED. See section 130.
Additional Comments
1 Corrected.
2 This has been corrected, the sentence should read"...average global solar radiation value
exceeding 6 kWh/m^2/day".
3
In fact, PV systems for home lighting and water pumping are primarily for people in the
rural areas with little disposable income and far away from the electricity grid, while those
customers "at the top of the income distribution" are usually found near to the national
electricity grid. In the absence of solid statistics we can say that the cost of a SHS
constitutes between 120% to 180% of an "average rural person" (here I assume an income
per month between N$ 300 and N$ 450 with the SHS costing some N$ 6,500, while the
numbers are of course much worse for PVP)
64
65
4 Some of this work has been done as part of solar energy programme of the Ministry of Mines
and Energy. An indication of consumption patterns is included below. Should there be gaps
these could be undertaken under the Institutional (see para 39) and technical barrier
components (see para 109). A Namibian middle class urban family has a per person
consumption of 22.7 +- 6.9 litres/day of hot (55 - 65 deg C) water per day for the entire year.
There are two dominant hot water usage peaks, namely in the morning from 5h30 to 8h30,
and in the afternoon from 16h30 peaking at 19h00 and dropping below the daily average at
21h00. The peaks are similar for low (high) income groups with a daily average consumption
of 21.8 +-5.3 l/day (37.9 +- 7.8 l/day). People spend some 2.6% (high), 4.4 % (middle) and
up to 10% (low urban income, but still with grid electricity) of their monthly gross salary on
hot water, but many of the poor (urban, peri-urban and definitely rural) do not spend money
on hot water as it is considered unaffordable. Some field-data has been collected and
analysed (DW von Oertzen et al) but a comprehensive data collection effort should be one of
the first tasks of the R-3-E Institute (See technical barriers section: section 10), this Institute
being one of the measures proposed in the Project Brief to collect and analyse data of this
nature. BUT, from the experiences of owners of solar water heaters one can conclude that
they have the definite potential to replace electrical geysers. The government initiated studies
on this matter conducted by the Namibian lead author of this Project Brief clearly indicate
the micro- and macro-economic advantages of a rapid introduction and retro-fitting of SWH
in urban areas.
5 Quantitative data are currently not available in a concise format. Again, the very first
actions of the proposed R-3-E Institute will have to be designed to compile and collect data,
and bring them into a unified user-friendly format. As said in the Additional Comment 4, "...a
comprehensive data collection effort should be one of the first tasks of the R-3-E Institute
6 The point is taken and changes are included in the text.
7 This is indeed correct and is currently investigated in detail by the Namibian Electricity
Control Board, ie the National Electricity Regulator.
8 This is included in 3.3.1
9 These issues are included in awareness barriers to SWHs in paragraph # 55, 56, and 57.
10 Now included in paragraphs 67 and 75.
11 Corrected.
12 The sentenced has been rephrased .
13 The activity has been rewritten to exclude expectations of a second set of standards.
14 Corrected.
65
66
Annex D:
SES Market Assessment Matrix
Appendix D: Scenario Development of Projected Outputs of GEF intervention
Year(s)
Baseline: no project intervention
Number of Estimated Number of
current
potential systems in
market
systems in market
market
size
A
SHS
PVP
SWH
PV Fridges
PV Institutional
2000
SHS
GEF
PVP
Intervention
SWH
2001
PV Fridges
2006
PV Institutional
2006
2011
-
2011
2016
-
NOTE:
SHS
PVP
SWH
PV Fridges
PV Institutional
SHS
PVP
SWH
PV Fridges
PV Institutional
2,600
700
2,000
2,000
150
7,450
9,000
5,000
15,000
5,000
500
sub-total for year 2000
2,942
792
2,263
2,263
170
sub-total for last 5 years
cumulative total saved
3,328
896
2,560
2,560
192
sub-total for last 5 years
cumulative total saved
3,766
1,014
2,897
2,897
217
sub-total for last 5 years
cumulative total saved
Full Project with GEF intervention project
t CO2
Number of
Number of
t CO2
Number of
saved by t CO2 saved
systems
systems:
saved by
t CO2 saved systems in t CO2 saved
GEF pilot & by market
due to pure pure GEF GEF pilot &
total
in given time
in 5 year
demo
stimulation
GEF
demo
intervention
market
interval
interval
contribution in 5 year
intervention in 5 year contribution
in 5 year
interval
A+B+C
interval
B+C
B
interval
988
1,442
17,080
2,320
51
21,881
5,265
5,600
7,790
2,658
2,525
1342
1,275
5,265
7,684
2,367
15,793
1,575
8,110
211
1,087
7,684
91,011
7,000
192,150
4,737
101,139
4522
96,545
91,011
12,362
3,667
16,433
1,404
4,071
628
1,821
12,362
279
317
459
147
180
120
147
279
116,601
232,626
116,025
100,874
116,601
116,601
232,626
116,025
100,874
116,601
5,632
8,600
10,640
5,272
5,008
5,632
8,220
4,033
24,377
3,137
16,157
8,220
97,360
12,000
298,900
9,440
201,540
97,360
13,224
5,333
21,267
2,773
8,042
13,224
306
483
663
291
357
306
124,742
355,847
231,105
124,742
241,343
588,473
347,130
241,343
6,047
11,600
13,490
7,834
7,443
6,047
8,826
5,700
32,960
4,686
24,134
8,826
104,542
17,000
405,650
14,103
301,108
104,542
14,200
7,000
26,100
4,103
11,900
14,200
337
650
676
433
338
337
133,953
41,950
478,876
344,922
133,953
375,296
1,067,348
692,052
375,296
1) Assume baseline growth of 2.5 % per annum
2) Assume that GEF intervention opens and develops market to 33% of its year 2000 estimated potential every 5 years
3) Assume that non-operational systems are replaced
4) Assume that equipment implementation program evenly spread over 5 year period
66
67
67
68
Annex E: Project Schedule
68
69
Annex F: DELIVERY AND MAINTENANCE MODALITIES
TARGET SECTOR
HOUSEHOLD
Non-Electrified
Households
SOLAR ENERGY SOLAR ENERGY DELIVERY
TECHNOLOGY
SERVICE
MODALITY
Solar
Home Light & Radio/TV
Systems
Water Heating
Solar
Water Cooking
Heaters
Solar Cookers
INSTITUTIONAL
1.
Non-Electrified
Schools
2.
Non-Electrified
Clinics
Solar
Home
Systems
Solar
Home
Systems
PV-Refrigerators
Solar
Water
3.
Non-Electrified Heaters
Prisons
Solar
Home
Systems
4.
Non-Electrified PVPolice Posts
Communication
Solar
Home
Systems
PVCommunication
AGRICULTURAL
1. Diesel Commercial PV Pumps
Farmers
PV Pumps
2.
Diesel
Village
Communities
COMMERCIAL
Non-Electrified
PV-Refrigeration
Beverage Outlets
Lighting, Radio/TV
Lighting, Radio/TV
Drug Refrigeration
Water Heating
Lighting, Radio/TV
Telecommunication
Lighting, Radio/TV
Telecommunication
Commercial
(PV
Industry,
Utility,
NGO)
Commercial
(PV
Industry,
Utility,
NGO)
Commercial
(PV
Industry,
Utility,
NGO)
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Government-PV
Industry
Water Pumping for Commercial
(PV
Cattle
Pump Industry)
Water Pumping for Government (Water
Cattle
Department )
Cooling,
Lighting, Namibia Bottlers
Radio/TV
Annex G: Institutional delivery and maintenance modalities
Annex D presents SES market segments targeted by the present project, SESs to be offered to
each market segment and institutional modalities to be applied in the delivery of these
services. Figures G.1 to G.5 are schematic illustrations of how project Funds, SESs and
Maintenance Support Services are going to flow within the framework of each institutional
modality. Notes on how each of these institutional delivery modalities is designed to operate
are provided below.
Throughout the descriptions of the delivery modalities, grant funds are referred to. The
average level of grant funding or subsidy is described in Annex D.
69
70
In all of the modality diagrams
refer to flows of finance, technical assistance,
SETs and information respectively.
F.1 Utility Delivery Mode for Households
NamPower is about to publish its rural electrification master plan (off-grid planning forms
part of master plan), which promises electrification of rural areas. Realities on the ground
however, are such that large sections of the rural population will not be connected to the grid
in the foreseeable future because of the ever-increasing costs and the practicalities of grid
extension to spatially dispersed population settlements. The utility modality is driven by
policy commitments of the national utility for rural electrification coupled with the
limitations imposed by the ground realities of delivering on this promise.
The key players in the Utility Mode are:
i)
Members of the PV Industry in Namibia who source and supply the required SETs;
ii)
Two utilities, namely: Northern Electricity and Premier Electric (a distribution
subsidiary of Nampower), which will procure in bulk and warehouse SHS for
installation in the homes of new applicants deemed uneconomic for grid connection
in the short to medium term. The utilities have the choice of using their own
engineers (who would have been specifically trained under the project to handle
SETs) to carry out the installations and maintenance or out-source any of these
services to the PV Industry operators. The utility would own the PV system and be
responsible for its maintenance.
iii)
Un-electrified end-users would be required to pay a one-time connection fee, the
amount of which would be equal to the tariff paid by domestic pre-paid consumers of
the grid (currently set at N$120). They would also be required to pay a flat monthly
charge as contribution towards the repayment of the PV system, spread over its lifespan of 15 years. The PV will operate on the pre-paid metering system where, in the
event of a default, the system would stop working. The monthly repayments would
include a small levy (to be determined) which would go into an existing fund
purposely set to enable the utility to recover its subsidy to PV clients on connections.
iv)
Government to enter into agreement with the utilities on the operation of this
modality, provide loan guarantees and import incentives on equipment (e.g. reduced
import duties and surtaxes) as is the case with CET equipment.
v)
Throughout PV is used as an example of the SETs, though the utilities may extend
their services.
70
71
vi)
FIGURE F.1. Utility Delivery Mode for Households
DONOR
PMU
FUND
MANAGER
PV
SUPPLIER
UTILITY
UN-ELECTRIFIED RURAL AND PERI-URBAN HOUSEHOLDS
F.2 Commercial Delivery Mode for Households and Commercial Farmers:
Players in this modality are:
i)
The PMU that identifies projects and advises utility, PV suppliers and Fund
manger. Arranges for technical assistance where required.
ii)
Project Donors who provide grant funds;
iii)
Special Purpose Vehicle Fund Manager (SPV-FM) who manages grant funds and
makes available own funds on credit to end-users and PV suppliers;
iv)
PV-suppliers who source systems, as well as install and maintain them under
contract; and
v)
End-users who in this case are non-electrified rural and urban households.
The players of this modality require that grant funds lined up under the project be
deposited with a Fund Manager identified under the SPV. PV Suppliers shall identify
clients to participate in the Project.
Once interest from clients is secured, a PV Supplier will prepare a Business Plan (BP) on
behalf of the client for submission to the SPV-FM for funding consideration. The SPVFM will appraise the BP for its creditworthiness while PMU will appraise it for its
technical merits and advise the SPV-FM accordingly. The approved BP will be passed on
to the PV Supplier (by the household) to undertake, under contract, PV installations at the
household in question. Payment to the PV Supplier will be made by the SPV-FM after
certification of installation by PMU Inspectors. The utility will act as the wholesale and
retail financier and could act as the supplier as well. Critical to this modality is the
avoidance of passing on cash to clients. Instead, paid up equipment shall be delivered on
a turn-key basis. Clients will repay loans to the SPV-FM via the utility at agreed terms
(on interest rates and grace periods).
71
72
FIGURE F.2 Commercial Delivery Mode for Households and Commercial Farmers
PMU
PV-SUPPLIERS
DONOR S AND
FINANCIERS
FUND
MANAGER
RURAL AND URBAN HOUSEHOLDS
and
COMMERCIAL FARMERS
F.3 Industry Delivery Mode for Cold Beverage Outlets
The main players in this delivery mode are:
i) Project Donors and Financiers;
ii) Project Management Unit
iii) SPV-FM;
iv) Namibia Breweries and Namibia Beverages (beverage wholesalers);
v) PV Refrigerator Suppliers; and
vi) Un-electrified Beverage Outlets in rural and peri-urban areas (beverage retailers).
Project donors make available grant funding. This grant is deposited with the SPV-FM.
The beverage wholesalers raise the remaining from either their own internal resources (as
is currently done with Paraffin Fridges if at all) or from a combination of own internal
resources and SPV-FM bulk-funding, or wholly from SPV-FM bulk-financing. Once the
beverage wholesalers have affirmed the availability of their contribution, the SPV-FM
releases the project’s grant contribution for the purchase of PV Refrigeration equipment
from a SETs supplier who in turn enters into an installation/maintenance contract with
beverage wholesalers. The beverage wholesalers will then identify the outlets where the
equipment is to be installed. The contribution of the bottling companies can be passed on
to the beverage retailers as outright grants or as loans (as practised with high turn-overoutlets), or better still, in combination of grant and loan. PMU identifies projects,
provides technical backstopping for installation and maintenance inspections as per
established standards and codes.
The beverage retailers will, where interest exists, be trained to work on commission as
PV supply industry agents. This training can be seen as part of the Component 1 Capacity
Building and Institutional Strengthening within the PV Industry. Typically the retailers
could target beverage clientele with PV system sales.
72
73
FIGURE F.3: Industry Delivery Mode for Cold Beverage Outlets
PROJECT DONORS
PMU
PV FUND
MANAGER
BEVERAGE
COMPANIES
PV SUPPLY
INDUSTRY
NON-ELECTRIFIED BEVERAGE RETAIL OUTLETS
F.4 Government Delivery Mode for Clinics, Schools, Police and Prisons and
Farming Communities
As part of its social responsibility policy, GRN is in the process of developing a rural
infrastructure to improve the efficiency of social service delivery in its network of
schools, clinics, police posts and prisons in remote areas. These facilities either use CO2
emitting energy (e.g. paraffin for lighting), or do not have modern energy services. This
project will target these facilities. Under this arrangement, project donors for the Barrier
Removal Project will make a grant contribution to the cost of PV systems. The PMU
shall work in collaboration with the respective ministries/departments to identify schools,
clinics, police posts and prisons requiring support. The SPV-FM shall pass on project
funds to the PV suppliers to install systems at identified sites. In addition to project
identification, the PMU shall provide technical backstopping by way of inspecting
installations and arranging for maintenance contracts with local PV.
73
74
FIGURE F.4: Government Delivery Mode for Police and Prisons, Schools, Clinics
and Communal/Commercial Farmers
PMU
PROJECT
FINANCIERS
GOVERNMENT
AGENCY
FUND
MANAGER
PV-SUPPLIER
UNELECTRIFIED SCHOOLS, CLINICS, POLICE
POSTS, PRISONS AND FARMING COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
F.5 NGO Delivery Mode for Conservancies, Training/Research Facilities, Schools;
Clinics and Farming Communities
The NGO modality is a variant of the Government Delivery Modality applied to public
institutions using grant funds. While both rely on PV-suppliers to install and PV
entrepreneurs to maintain PV-systems, the NGO modality, unlike the Government mode,
relies on an existing network of NGOs as a conduit for passing on grant funds, as well as
serving as agents for technology dissemination, advocacy and capacitating local
communities. The possibility of the NGO Delivery Mode piggybacking on the Awareness
component of the project will be explored early in the project. During the demonstration
component of the project, the NGO modality will be applied to the conservancies, houses,
and other facilities of the NGOs.
FIGURE F.5: The NGO Delivery Mode for Conservancy, Schools, Clinics, Research
and Training Institutions, and Farming Community
PROJECT DONORS
/FINANCIERS
PMU
FUND
MANAGER
DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEES
NGO/CBO
UNELECTRIFIED SCHOOLS, CLINICS, POLICE POSTS,
PRISONS, FARMING COMMUNITY
74
PV
SUPPLIER
75
Annex G: The Namibian Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency Institute (R-3-E)
A Brief Overview
The Namibian Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME) commissioned a project in late
1999 to formulate the organisational and operational guidelines for a Namibian
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (R-3-E) Institute, and set into motion the
founding and operation of such an Institute. The primary functions of the R-3-E Institute
are envisaged to be in the field of information dissemination, setting of performance and
quality standards, testing of equipment and labelling thereof, and R-3-E related
consulting and planning.
It has become evident that a number of test facilities exist in Namibia operating in
complete isolation from each other. This automatically leads to the multiplication of
equipment purchases, staffing and test venues. However, the scarcity of finances,
knowledge and experience in Namibia dictates that duplication efforts must be avoided,
which requires that existing resources are pooled or shared. This realisation demands a
small, market and service oriented R-3-E Institute, which develops smart partnerships
between government, the private sector and other participants, co-ordinating and
regulating all Namibian R-3-E activities.
Currently it is envisaged that the R-3-E Institute will evolve in three phases:
Phase I: from year 0 for about 2 years, i.e. from 2000 to 2001
The R-3-E Institute will deliver some core services, while the Namibian market and
industry commitment is established and deepened. In this phase the core activities will be
 promotion of R-3-E technologies,
 building a sustainable information dissemination strategy,
 co-ordinating local R-3-E efforts and co-operating with local partners,
 the co-ordination of basic equipment testing,
 facilitation in R-3-E related consulting and planning activities.
Phase II: from year 3 for about 2 years, i.e. from 2002 to 2003
Here the R-3-E Institute will actively co-operate with regional and international partners
to
 broaden its information dissemination efforts,
 expand and deepen its promotion of R-3-E technologies campaigns,
 facilitate local and regional partners in equipment testing and labelling activities
Phase III: year 5 of operation and beyond, i.e. beyond 2003
This phase will be characterized by a mature operation of the R-3-E Institute, i.e. funding
mechanisms have been established, a sustainable operation modus has been formulated,
and credible partners have been found who form part of the supportive backbone of the
Institute.
75
76
At the time of writing this overview, the following developments have already taken
place with regard to the R-3-E Institute development:
 a group of base stakeholders of the R-3-E Institute has been identified from
amongst representatives of government ministries, the private sector, parastatals
and tertiary institutions,
 a mission statement, short term goals and a business definition have been defined,
 a preliminary organisational structure of the R-3-E Institute has been agreed on,
 a short and medium term operational strategy has been developed, taking
cognisance of the limited financial resources and the Namibian economic
conditions,
 resource and test centres that will be collaborative partners of the R-3-E Institute
have been identified,
 an analysis of the various independent Namibian test facilities has been
undertaken and an integrative procedure how future duplication of services and
equipment purchases can be avoided is currently being developed,
 international and regional collaborating partners have been identified.
The R-3-E Institute will initially require support for its operation: the technical,
institutional and human capacity aspects will have to be strengthened. Effective
information dissemination strategies will have to be developed, supported by locally
produced information and data on SET’s, and their comparative costs and benefits. Also,
study materials, courses and laboratory classes at tertiary institutions and vocational
training centres will have to be developed. From the above it is evident that the envisaged
technical barrier removal activities are well suited to facilitate, support and strengthen the
R-3-E Institute.
The R-3-E Institute is relying solely on finance secured from private sector, government
department and NGO membership to the Institute, as well as a fee-for-service structure
that is currently under development. Its institutional structure makes it independent of
direct government intervention, yet relying on close linkages to government ministries
departments, such as the Ministry of Mines and Energy, the Ministry of Works, Transport
and Communications and the Directorate of Rural Water Supply and others. This will
free the Institute from government bureaucratic procedures and enable a dynamic and
market driven organization.
76
77
ANNEX H: Terms of Reference: Project Manager/Co-ordinator
JOB DESCRIPTION
TITLE
ORGANISATION
: Project Manager
: Project Management Unit
CONTRACTING PARTY : Namibian Government
REPORTS TO
DURATION
: PS of Mines and Energy
: Five Years (renewable)
DUTY STATION
: Windhoek Namibia
REMUNERATION
: Commensurate with qualifications, skills and experience
REQUIREMENTS
: Applicants must have post-graduate training in any one of
the following fields of study:

development economics with a strong energy systems planning and management
component; and/or

engineering with energy systems planning bias and/or economics background.
In either case, candidates must also fulfil a combination of at least the following
conditions:

Work experience with alternative energy technologies, mainly renewable energy
systems;

At least five years experience in the energy field at the household, small-scale
commercial, agro-industrial and/or institutional level in public or private sector;

At least five years work experience at senior management level with demonstrable
project level management skills and ability to coordinate activities involving a large
contingent of professional consultants drawn around the country and/or
internationally;

Working knowledge of the Namibian energy sector.
RESPONSIBILITIES
Directing activities of the PMU covering:

day-to-day management and co-ordination;

budgeting;

forward planning;

advice on policy direction;

liaising with project participants and stakeholders;
77
78

preparation and presentation of project status reports to the steering committee;

preparing subcontractors terms of reference and contracts;

supervision of contracts;

technical assistance; and

project execution of all tasks identified under the project specified in this Project
Document.
DUTIES

Lead, manage and coordinate the day to day management of the PMU to be
established in Windhoek including administration, accounting, technical expertise,
and actual project implementation and reporting;

Lead the development of detailed project design including preparation of
subcontractors terms of reference, identification and selection of national, regional
and international subcontractors, cost estimation, time scheduling, contracting, and
reporting on forward planning of project activities and budget (list of subcontractors
is provided below);

Coordinate activities of consultants including contract management, direction and
supervision of
field operations, logistical support, review of technical
outputs/reports, measurement /assessment of project achievements and cost control;

Supervise the selection of demonstration sites and actual installation and follow-up
evaluation of demonstration facilities identified in this project Document;

Assist in the design, supervision and where possible delivery of the training and
outreach activities of the project;

Provide technical assistance in renewable energy policy discussions and
development;

Plan and coordinate various workshops identified in this Project Document;

Assist in developing institutional delivery modes for renewable energy services for
different end use sectors in Namibia;

Assist in developing a special purpose financing vehicle for renewable energy
industry and end users;

Assist the Secretary to the PAC and maintain records/minutes of proceedings of this
Committee;

Take responsibility for the quality and timing of project outputs;

Assist in overall project monitoring and evaluation; and

Undertake other management duties that contribute to the effective functioning of the
project.
78
79
Subcontractors will be contracted to undertake specific project tasks according to the
final project schedule. Subcontractors may be individuals and/or organizations,
whichever is appropriate for a given task. When subcontractors are in the employment of
the project, they form part of the PMU and benefit from the support of the PMU support
staff.
79
80
ANNEX I: Terms of Reference: Project Management Unit
See section B7. In the text of the Prodoc text.
The PMU’s function is to manage the project on a day-to-day basis in a flexible manner.
The main output of the PMU is to assist the sub-contractors in executing projects and
recording the methodology, successes and failures of these components of the overall
project.
The chief executive officer of the PMU, the Project Manager (PM), provides strategic
direction to the PMU and takes ultimate responsibility for the scheduling and quality of
all project outputs. The PM has final responsibility for advising the PAC on the members
of the PMU. The job description/TOR of the PM is a component of the project document
(See Annex H).
The PMU has access to core professional staff when required that may include:









a project manager;
an assistant project manager;
an international technical advisor;
policy researcher and advocate (part time);
an energy planner (part time);
an economist (part time);
a legal expert (part time);
a management consultant (part time); and
other contracted specialists (institutional development, capacity building, workshop
designers and facilitators etc.).
The PMU will also include a member of the MME who is seconded and whose salary
will be augmented as the budget allows. The MME staff member will be seconded to the
project to work alongside the policy research and advocacy PMU member. This person
will be seen as a link between the PMU and MME whose TOR will be negotiated
between the PM and the MME prior to selection and secondment.
In addition to the staff who embody the professional skills associated with the outputs of
the project, core administrative staff will be required with skills that are:




a middle management, personal assistant and understudy to the PM;
secretarial;
accounting; and
support staff with skills in language and information interpretation and draft editing.
The PMU is comprised as far as possible of Namibian private/non-governmental experts/
consultants. Attached to each of the core functionaries are young professionals whose
capacity will be built through on-the-job training. The trainees can be drawn from
government, non-government, tertiary education and/or private sectors. The professional
staff of the PMU should apply gender sensitivity in selection.
80
81
Annex J: Danida Co-financing Letter
81
82
Annex K: Government Endorsement Letter
82