Department
Pretoria
of
Minerals
and
Energy
New and Renewable Energy
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
Final Report
This Report contains restricted information and is for
official use only
August 08
Department of Minerals and Energy Pretoria
New and Renewable Energy
Report No. – DME/CE/002/200607
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 08
Report no.
DME/CE/002/200607 Rev. 29
Issue no.
001
Date of issue
13 August 2008
Checked
Mr. Silas Mulaudzi (Deputy Director: Grid-connected Renewable Energy)
Tel:
+27(0)12 317 8751
Approved
Ms Nomawethu Qase
Director: New and Renewable Energy
Prepared:
Tsebo Resources Management
Last Edited
13 August 2008
MinigridReplicationViabilityFinalReportJul08.doc
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
3
List of Tables
7
List of Figures
8
Abbreviations and Acronyms
10
Executive Summary
11
1.
2.
2.1.
3.
3.1.
Background
Introduction
The mini-grid pilot project
Technical evaluation
System Assessment
3.1.1.
3.1.2.
3.2.
3.2.1.
3.2.2.
3.2.3.
3.2.4.
3.2.5.
3.2.6.
3.2.7.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
3.5.1.
12
14
15
17
17
Hluleka Hybrid System
Lucingweni Hybrid Mini-grid System
17
20
Design Process
21
Generic design criteria
System Sizing
Overall Technical Design
System Assessment and Testing
Voltage Control
Energy Limiting
Costs
22
23
23
23
25
25
26
Local content in balance of system components
System availability measured against demand
Monitoring and Control Equipment
26
26
27
Demand Assessment
27
3.6.
3.7.
Vandalism and theft
Specific energy loads
4.
Socio-economic impact assessment and sustainability analysis
4.1.
Financial and economic viability of Mini-grid hybrid system
4.2.
Results
4.3.
Financial and economic viability of Lucingweni Mini-grid hybrid system
4.4.
Sustainability and replication opportunities
4.5.
Ownership, service delivery, maintenance and revenue collection
4.6.
Energy use and economic activity
4.7.
Risks and challenges to optimal operation
4.8.
Community satisfaction and appreciation
4.9.
Community participation
4.10.
Impact on communities and their expectations
5.
Recommendations
5.1.
Key elements arising
5.1.1.
5.1.2.
5.1.3.
5.1.4.
5.1.5.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
5.5.
5.5.1.
5.5.2.
5.5.3.
5.5.4.
5.5.5.
5.5.6.
5.5.7.
5.5.8.
5.5.9.
Clear recommendation on future design and installation improvement
Water purification plant and telecommunication systems performance
Appropriate funding
Issues of ownership, service delivery and revenue collection
Lessons for future implementation from an assessment of community participation
28
29
30
30
31
31
32
33
34
37
37
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
39
40
General findings from Hluleka
General findings from Lucingweni
Criteria for selection of mini-grid hybrids
Guidelines for success
40
41
41
42
Feasibility Study
Application process
Significant consultations
Project Development and Management
Participants and Responsibilities
Documentation
Training
Project management
Integrated Energy Supply
42
42
42
43
43
44
45
45
46
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 3 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
5.5.10.
5.6.
5.7.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Standards
46
Attracting Private Sector Investment
Integrated Planning Frameworks
46
46
Appendix A: Mini-grid hybrid system evaluation: Cost-benefit analysis
1.
2.
3.
4.
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.
4.5.
4.6.
4.7.
4.8.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Summary
The need for technology decisions, and broad approaches
Cost/benefit methodology
Information required to estimate costs of mini-grid supply
PV modules
Diesel Gensets
Fuel Cells
Wind turbines
Batteries
Control System costs
Installation and Control room costs
Reticulation costs
Lucingweni base case costing
Cost benefit of different electrification options
Cost Benefit Analysis detailed results
Discussion of results
References
Appendix B: Socio-economic evaluation
1.
2.
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
3.
3.1.
3.1.1.
3.3.
3.4.
5.
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
6.
7.
7.1.
7.2.
79
80
Households characteristics and socio-economic data
Energy Use Patterns and Needs Assessment
Perceptions about Non-grid Electrification (System Performance) and Level of Satisfaction
Willingness to Pay for Service
Ownership and Maintenance of the System
Revenue Collection Arrangements
Community satisfaction and appreciation
Community Participation and level of awareness
General comments and issues
Focus Group Meeting on the 15th June Meeting Notes:
Focus Group Meeting on the 16th June 2006
Focus Group Meeting on the 21st June 2006
In-depth interviews
3.4.1.
3.4.2.
3.4.3.
3.4.4.
3.4.5.
3.4.6.
3.4.7.
4.1.
Summary of Responses
Focus Group Discussions
3.3.1.
3.3.2.
3.3.3.
4.
76
77
77
77
78
78
79
79
Questionnaire
3.2.1.
3.2.2.
3.2.3.
3.2.4.
3.2.5.
3.2.6.
3.2.7.
3.2.8.
3.2.9.
80
82
85
85
86
87
87
88
88
89
89
90
91
92
The speaker at the Mayor’s office, Nyandeni Local Municipality
Local councillor: Lucingweni
Lucingweni Village Herdsman
Deputy Director, Operations and Maintenance, OR Tambo District Municipality
Lucingweni Ward Committee Member
Hluleka Nature Resort Caretaker
Village committee member and field worker
Description of Lucingweni
Summary of Issues:
Discussion
System performance and level of satisfaction
Ownership and maintenance of the system
Willingness to pay for energy Service provided by/derived from the system
Recommendations
Conclusion
Provision of a working, integrated system
‘People first’ governance approach
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
48
49
51
52
52
52
53
53
53
54
54
54
56
60
61
71
74
75
Introduction
The Research Methodology
Training of Fieldworkers
The Introductory field trip and meeting
Research implementation
Research Constraints
Results
Introductory consultative meeting
3.2.
47
Final Report
August 2008
93
93
94
94
94
95
95
96
96
98
98
98
98
99
100
100
100
Page 4 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
7.3.
Increased support and opportunities for entrepreneurship/income generating schemes
8.
References:
Appendices to Socio-economic evaluation
Interview with Cllr Mpongo – 22 June 2006
Interview transcript: Lucingweni Village Herdsman
Interview transcript: Operations and Maintenance Manager at the OR Tambo Municipality
Interview transcript: Speaker Nyadeni Local Municipality
Ward Concillors Report to DME on Lucingweni Mini-grid system
Socio-economic questionnaire
Agenda for focus group discussions
Appendix C: Technical evaluation
1.
2.
3.
3.1.
4.
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.
4.4.1.
4.6.
131
131
133
134
135
Generation equipment and Fuel Cost Assumption
135
138
Auxiliary Equipment Cost Assumption
Load Profile for Hluleka Game Reserve
Lucingweni Community designed Load
138
138
140
143
Wind Resources
Solar Resources
Solar Energy Technology
Balance of System
Load Management Assumptions
Grid Capital and Power Cost Assumptions
Financial and Operational Assumptions
143
148
149
150
155
156
156
Results
Hybrid System Choice
5.1.1.
5.1.2.
5.1.3.
5.2.
157
157
Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System
Lucingweni Community Hybrid System
Lucingweni Hybrid System Breakeven Grid Distance
157
157
159
Verification of Results
5.2.1.
5.2.2.
6.1.
127
128
128
Energy Supply
4.6.1.
4.6.2.
4.6.3.
4.6.4.
4.6.5.
4.6.6.
4.6.7.
6.
Load
Resources
System Components
Energy Demand
4.5.1.
4.5.2.
4.5.3.
5.1.
124
125
127
127
Hybrid System Case Study in Eastern Cape
Geography and Development
Energy Situation
Comparative Economic Analysis
Input Data
4.5.
5.
123
Introduction
Hybrid System Description
Description of HOMER Modelling Software
Physical Modelling
3.1.1.
3.1.2.
3.1.3.
160
Hluleka Hybrid System
Lucingweni Community Hybrid System
160
160
Analysis
Wind Turbines
6.1.1.
6.1.2.
6.2.
6.2.1.
6.2.2.
6.2.3.
6.3.
6.3.1.
6.3.2.
6.3.3.
6.3.4.
6.4.
6.4.1.
6.5.
6.5.1.
6.6.
6.6.1.
6.6.2.
6.6.3.
162
162
Maximum Turbine Output
Daily Variation in Output
162
163
Solar arrays
164
Average Monthly Variation
Daily Variation
Comments on the Daily Variation of the Solar Array Output
Batteries
164
165
167
168
Battery Bank Output Voltage
Comments on Battery Bank output Voltage
Battery Bank Output Power
Comments on Battery Bank Power Output
168
169
169
171
Inverter
172
Comments on the Inverter Output Power
173
Load
174
Comments on the System Demand
175
Resource utilisation split
176
Comments on the Energy Resource Split
Comments on the wind turbine output
Lucingweni Load Factor and Unserved Load
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
100
101
102
102
105
108
109
111
113
122
Final Report
178
179
180
August 2008
Page 5 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
7.
8.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Conclusion
References
181
182
Appendix D: Literature review
1.
2.
3.
3.1.
3.2.
Introduction
Background to mini-grid hybrid systesm
Hybrid systems – theoretical basis
Hansen and Bower
Technology Developments
3.2.1.
3.3.
4.
4.1.
5.
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
Control and Communication
187
187
HOMER
Hybrid2
188
188
Field Performance of Hybrid Power Systems
Lessons Learnt – Hybrid Systems Workshop
Funding hybrid systems utilising renewable energy sources
DBSA (1999). Renewable Energy Technologies in Southern Africa – A guide for investors.
An international perspective
Isla Tec Project
Gobabeb Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Project
Australian experience
5.3.1.
5.4.
5.5.
Australian National Programme
195
195
Namibia -
195
South African experience
6.1.
Legislative Framework
6.1.1. White Paper on Energy. 1998
6.1.2.
6.1.3.
6.1.4.
6.1.5.
6.2.
188
190
192
192
193
193
193
193
194
Chinese initiatives
Experience in Africa
5.5.1.
6.
184
185
186
186
186
Theoretical Modelling of Hybrid Systems
3.3.1.
3.3.2.
3.4.
3.5.
183
197
197
197
NERSA, Regulatory Framework for non-grid electrification in the Republic of South Africa, 2000
DME, INEP, Planning & Implementation Manual Version 0, 2002
Speech by the Minister of Minerals and Energy - 2002
Electricity Regulation Act - 2006
Feasibility Studies and Pilot Projects
197
197
198
199
199
6.2.1.
Kwa-Zulu Natal Feasibility Study
199
6.2.2.
Non-grid Electrification of Schools and Clinics - Strategy to Address Theft and Vandalism and Lack of
Maintenance”, DME Report 2002
200
6.2.3.
Renewable energy sources for rural electrification in South Africa
201
6.2.4.
7.
8.
8.1.
8.2.
Accelerating the Market Penetration of Renewable Energy Technologies in South Africa
201
Background to the Hluleka project
203
Background to the Lucingweni system
204
NER Progress reports on the Hluleka and Lucingweni implementation plan
204
Afrane-Okese, Y, June 2004. Hluleka/Lucingweni hybrid mini-grid pilot projects progress report.
205
8.2.1.
8.2.2.
Recent progress
Minor outstanding installation, construction and other issues at Lucingweni
206
206
8.3.
Shell Solar - Internal communication. Lucingweni: Present Situation and Issues. - 23 May 2006
206
9.
Rural energisation initiatives in South Africa
208
9.1.
Case study on Demonstration of Housing Energisation to reduce climate change
208
9.2.
Alleviation of Poverty through the provision of Local Energy Services
208
9.3.
SADC Training Manual in Data Survey Methods and Applications for Energy and
Environmental Management” MEETI
209
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 6 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
List of Tables
Table 1 Basic design criteria for mini-grid systems ......................................................................... 22
Table 2 Demand estimate per household - Lucingweni .................................................................. 28
Table 3 Primary load of the 12 chalets ............................................................................................ 30
Table 4 Primary Load 2 of the Staff Quarters, Reception Office ..................................................... 30
Table 5 Deferrable Load of water pumping System ........................................................................ 31
Table 6 Comparison of hybrid configurations for Hluleka (Wind speed 7.5 m.s-1)........................... 31
Table 7 Comparison of hybrid configurations for Hluleka (Wind speed 5.4 m.s-1)........................... 31
Table 8 Comparison of different options of rural electrification for Lucingweni Community ............ 32
Table 9 Lucingweni Community Load with Potential Productive uses Load ................................... 35
Table 10 Project participants and responsibilities .......................................................................... 43
Table 11 Proposed benefit points scale .......................................................................................... 51
Table 12 Key data for PV modules.................................................................................................. 52
Table 13 Genset Cost information................................................................................................... 52
Table 14 Simplified genset modelling paramters............................................................................. 53
Table 15 Control system costs ........................................................................................................ 54
Table 16 Overview of the Lucingweni Mini-grid, as per proposed installation................................. 57
Table 17 Lucingweni – Shell costs and loads: Tariff and benefits summary ................................... 58
Table 18 Lucingweni - Mini-grid base case ..................................................................................... 61
Table 19 Lucingweni - base case: Revenue and Benefit calculations............................................. 62
Table 20 Lucingweni: Mini-Grid plus SHS, Design and Costs......................................................... 63
Table 21 Lucingweni: Mini-grid plus SHS: Revenue and Benefit Results ....................................... 64
Table 22 Lucingweni: Micro-grid plus SHS for all households: Design and costs........................... 65
Table 23 Lucingweni: Micro-grid plust SHS for all households: Tariff and Benefit results .............. 66
Table 24 Design and Costing for Lucingweni, if only SHS used ..................................................... 67
Table 25 Tariff and Benefit calculations for SHS only solution........................................................ 68
Table 26 Mini-grid electrification of Lucingweni - using Diesel (or biodiesel) genset plus battery... 69
Table 27 Grid Connection - basic costing, tariff and benefits calculation ........................................ 70
Table 28 Scenarios for Lucingweni Electrification - key results....................................................... 71
Table 29 Eastern Cape trends in the number of dwellings per household ...................................... 80
Table 30 Level of education ............................................................................................................ 80
Table 31 Total monthly household income and frequency .............................................................. 81
Table 32 Sources and frequency of household income .................................................................. 81
Table 33 Cooking location and frequency ....................................................................................... 82
Table 34 Fuels used and their purpose ........................................................................................... 83
Table 35 Energy Costs per Fuel Type (per month) and (Frequency).............................................. 84
Table 36 Focus group meeting attendance ..................................................................................... 89
Table 37 Environmental costs of energy production in Swaziland ................................................ 134
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 7 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
List of Figures
Figure 1: Hluleka and Lucingweni Geographic Location and infrastructure proximity..................... 16
Figure 2: Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System............................................................................ 18
Figure 3: Hluleka Hybrid System Schematic ................................................................................... 19
Figure 4 : Lucingweni Community Hybrid system ........................................................................... 20
Figure 5: Lucingweni Hybrid System Schematic ............................................................................. 21
Figure 6: TN-C-S Earthing System.................................................................................................. 24
Figure 7: TN-S Earthing System...................................................................................................... 25
Figure 8: Monthly Wind Speed measured at the Port St. Johns weather station ............................ 27
Figure 9 Illustration of first pass regional approach to identifying stand-alone, mini-grid and grid
connected areas (Adapted from IREMP 2006)................................................................................ 50
Figure 10 Electrification options: Cost per benefit point (including Capex, and excluding Capex (x
10)) .................................................................................................................................................. 71
Figure 11 NPV of all costs per benefit point (including and excluding Capex) ................................ 72
Figure 12 Rural Women from Gathering Energy for Cooking.......................................................... 83
Figure 13 Electrical (and Thermal) Appliance Ownership ............................................................... 85
Figure 14 Depiction of willingness to pay for electrical needs ......................................................... 86
Figure 15 Depiction of willingness to pay for electrical and thermal needs ..................................... 86
Figure 16 Image from a focus group meeting at Lucingweni, on the 16th June, 2006.................... 89
Figure 17 Focus Group Meeting held at Lucingweni, June 2006 .................................................... 92
Figure 18 Coordinates of Lucingweni points of supply .................................................................... 96
Figure 19: A Model of Hybrid System............................................................................................ 125
Figure 20: Map of Hluleka and Lucingweni vicinity showing grid and road ................................... 132
Figure 21: Map of population density in Eastern Cape.................................................................. 132
Figure 22: Power Generation Equipment for the Hluleka Nature Reserve.................................... 135
Figure 23: Single line diagram of Hluleka Nature Reserve Hybrid System ................................... 136
Figure 24: A Single line Diagram of Lucingweni Community Hybrid System ................................ 137
Figure 25: Guest Accommodation Daily Load at Peak season ..................................................... 138
Figure 26: Primary Daily load profile of Guest Accommodation .................................................... 139
Figure 27: Staff accommodation and administration block and street lighting daily load .............. 139
Figure 28: Load profile of Staff Quarters and Administration Block and Street Lighting ............... 139
Figure 29: Hluleka Game Reserve water pumping as deferrable load.......................................... 140
Figure 30: Deferrable Load for Hluleka Game Reserve ................................................................ 140
Figure 31: Lucingweni Community System design load (Source Shell Solar, 2003)..................... 140
Figure 32: Design Load profile of Lucingweni Community System ............................................... 141
Figure 33: Lucingweni Community System possible load for productive uses.............................. 142
Figure 34 Load profile of possible productive uses; Carpentry and Metalwork Workshop............ 142
Figure 35: Lucingweni Community possible uses of excess electricity produced ......................... 142
Figure 36: A GIS Map of Calculated Wind Speed in Eastern Cape at an Anemometer Height of
60m(source Hassan and Partners, 1999)...................................................................................... 144
Figure 37: Modelled Eastern Cape Wind Resource ...................................................................... 144
Figure 38: Average monthly wind speed in Port St. John.............................................................. 145
Figure 39: Average Wind Distribution............................................................................................ 145
Figure 40: Monthly average wind speed at Latitude 31.817S and Longitude 29.3 from NASA..... 146
Figure 41: Power Curve of Proven WT6000 Wind Turbine ........................................................... 147
Figure 42: Kestrel 2500 Power Curve and Energy Production Curve( source www.aplogistic.co.za).
...................................................................................................................................................... 147
Figure 43pecifications of 2500 Kestrel Wind Turbine .................................................................... 147
Figure 44 Map of Solar Radiation in South Africa ......................................................................... 149
Figure 45: Average daily radiation at Hluleka and Lucingweni in Eastern Cape ........................... 149
Figure 46: Battery Bank of Lucingweni Community Hybrid System .............................................. 151
Figure 47: Specification of Windy Boy Inverter installed at Hluleka Hybrid System ...................... 152
Figure 48: Power curve of Windy Boy Inverter .............................................................................. 153
Figure 49: Maximum Current with DC Voltage characteristic of Sunny Boy 2500W Inverter........ 154
Figure 50: Output Power against voltage of Sunny Boy 2500W ................................................... 154
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 8 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 51: Specification of 20kW MLT Inverter (source www.mlt.co.za) ....................................... 155
Figure 52: Hluleka’s simulated hybrid system categorised according to their NPV....................... 157
Figure 53: Optimisation Choice of Hybrid System......................................................................... 158
Figure 54: Contributions of Solar and Wind in electricity production ............................................. 158
Figure 55: Lucingweni Hybrid system showing optimum system configuration with load ............ 159
Figure 56: Lucingweni Hybrid System Breakeven Grid Distance .................................................. 159
Figure 57: Correlation of Grid breakeven distance with wind speed at 220kWh/day .................... 160
Figure 58: Average Daily Wind turbine VA Output – Mar to May 05 ............................................. 162
Figure 59: Simulated Average daily Wind Turbine Mar to May .................................................... 162
Figure 60: Average Daily Wind turbine VA Output – Jun to Aug 05 .............................................. 163
Figure 61: Simulated output from the wind turbines between May to August. .............................. 163
Figure 62 Hourly output variation 1 August 2005 .......................................................................... 164
Figure 63: Simulated Wind Turbines and Solar Power Generation hourly output of the 1st August
...................................................................................................................................................... 164
Figure 64: Average Daily Solar array output Mar to May 05 (Watts)............................................. 165
Figure 65: Average Daily Solar array output Jun to Aug 05 (Watts).............................................. 165
Figure 66: Hourly output Variation 01 June 2005 (Watts) ............................................................. 166
Figure 67: Hourly PV Power Variation with Primary Load 1 June ................................................. 166
Figure 68: Hourly PV Power generation on 1st August .................................................................. 167
Figure 69: Hourly PV Power production on 1s October................................................................. 167
Figure 70: Battery Bank output voltage Mar to May 05 (V) ........................................................... 168
Figure 71: Battery Bank output voltage Jun to Aug 05 (V) ............................................................ 168
Figure 72: Battery Bank output voltage Sep to Dec 05 (V)............................................................ 169
Figure 73: Battery Bank Power Output – Mar to May 05 (W) ........................................................ 170
Figure 74: Simulated battery power output and primary load March to May ................................. 170
Figure 75: Battery Bank Power Output – Jun to Aug 05 (W)......................................................... 171
Figure 76: Battery Bank Power Output – Sep to Dec 05 (W) ........................................................ 171
Figure 77: Average Daily Inverter Power Output Mar to May 05 (VA)........................................... 172
Figure 78: Simulated inverter power output with primary load March to May 05........................... 172
Figure 79: Average Daily Inverter Power Output Jun to Aug 05 (VA) ........................................... 173
Figure 80: Average Daily Inverter Power Output Jul to Dec 05 (VA)............................................. 173
Figure 81: Average Daily Load on the Mini-grid Mar to May 05 (kVA) .......................................... 174
Figure 82: Average Daily Load on the Mini-grid Jun to Aug 05 (kVA) ........................................... 175
Figure 83: Average Daily Load on the Mini-grid Sep to Dec 05 (kVA) .......................................... 175
Figure 84: Renewable Energy Resource Utilisation Split Mar to May 05 ...................................... 176
Figure 85: Renewable Energy Resource Monthly Average Electric Production............................ 177
Figure 86: Renewable Energy Resource Utilisation Split Jun to Aug 05....................................... 177
Figure 87: Split between wind and solar contribution to the total power June to August .............. 177
Figure 88: Renewable Energy Resource Utilisation Split Sep to Dec 05 ...................................... 178
Figure 89: Contribution of Solar and Wind Resources in the Total Electricity Production between
Sep. and Dec................................................................................................................................. 178
Figure 90: Wind Turbine Power Output from May to September .................................................. 179
Figure 91: Simulated Daily Contribution of Wind Turbines to the Load in July.............................. 179
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 9 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Abbreviations and Acronyms
ANC
ARC
CoE
DBSA
DEAT
DME
DTI
EDC
ECB
FBE
IDP
ICT
IeC
IPP
kW
KW.h
LPG
LSM
LV
MV
NDA
NER
NERSA
NPV
ORT
RDP
RSA
SDF
SANERI
SHS
SSSA
African National Congress
Agricultural Research Council
Cost of Energy
Development Bank of Southern Africa
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Department of Minerals and Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
Economic Development Corporation
Electrical Contractor’s Board
Free Basic Electricity
Integrated Development Plan
Information and Communication Technology
Integrated Energy Centre
Independent Power Producer
Kilo Watt
Kilo Watt hour Liquified Petroleum Gas
Living Standards Measure
Low Voltage, referring to the electrical system operated at 230
volts single phase or 380 volts three phase
Medium Voltage, a term commonly referring to the electrical
network operated at voltages of 22, 11 or 6.6 kV.
National Department of Agriculture
National Electricity Regulator (Now the NERSA)
National Energy Regulator of South Africa
Net Present Value
Oliver Reginald Tambo District Municipality
Reconstruction and Development Programme
Republic of South Africa
Spatial Development Framework
South African National Energy Research Institute
Solar Home Systems
Shell Solar South Africa
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 10 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Executive Summary
This report documents an in-depth analysis of the technical and socio-economic viability and potential for
replication of the Hluleka and Lucingweni hybrid mini-grid pilot projects. The investigation was based on a
technical evaluation, a socio-economic study and a cost benefit analysis and culminated in motivations and
recommendations regarding the potential of mini-grid hybrids as a solution for energising sustainable rural
development.
The investigation was based on the integration of technical and socio-economic components to attempt a
measure of how viable and replicable mini-grids powered by hybrids, particularly renewable resources, really
are. A basic financial cost benefit analysis is not only difficult to do, even with suitable baseline data but
probably ineffective in measuring the true impacts and potential benefits of the introduction of electricity on
economic activity for example. The assessment team documented general findings from assessments of the
pilot projects, made recommendations regarding criteria for selection of mini-grid hybrids as a mode of
electrification and attempted to draw up guidelines for successful future mini-grid hybrid resource based
electrification. In considering criteria for inclusion of mini-grids in the options for electrification the following
were considered;
• those based on proximity of existing service delivery networks (including other energy carriers),
renewable resources and current and potential electrical load to one another and
• those considering the preponderance of the community to engage in economic activity using electricity
provided in sufficient quantities.
In particular, then, an attempt was made to determine the potential of this mode of electrification to stimulate
energy use for productive activities and therefore to energise sustainable rural development.
It was found, as outlined in Appendix C, that the pilot projects were generally sound from a technical
perspective albeit with inevitable hints of technological 'teething'. Institutionally there was uncertainty during
completion of the installation, commissioning and handover phases and therefore a lack of first-line
maintenance. There is still no certainty regarding transfer of ownership of the village system at the time of
writing and no clear strategy to put a sustainable financial model in place to ensure the continued operation
of the system.
It is not possible to remove all uncertainty from the process of selecting the mix of modes of electrification
(stand-alone, mini-grid and grid) in attaining electrification targets in a least cost way while simultaneously
optimising economic benefit from provision of that electricity. But it can be said that a cost per-connection
criteria alone is insufficient in motivating the role that mini-grids have to play. This is outlined in the cost
benefit analysis in Appendix A to the report.
The socio economic study (Appendix B) generally discovered that although electricity is not the primary need
from an energy perspective – needs being thermal in nature and best met using non-electrical carriers, there
is indication of a significant willingness to pay for electrical service provision given a suitable revenue
collection model.
Given the fact that the Lucingweni Hybrid Mini-grid System was in essence only in its final stages of
commissioning at the time of writing, the team recommends that, in order to capitalise on the sunken
investment in the pilots, that the current study, and socio-economic survey results in particular, form the
baseline for a continued, carefully monitored, productive energy use focussed, period of operation of the
village pilot overseen by the South African National Energy Research Institute. Upon evidence of a sound
business case for operation of the system, it could be a potential Energy Development Corporation project.
For the Lucingweni village system the conclusion therefore is that there is insufficient information to make a
decision on whether the model is either replicable or viable. Replication of the Lucingweni model in its
current form is not viable.
Although (community-based) eco-tourism presents one of the more viable options for realising the large
potential for renewable resource-based energy provision (for productive use) opportunities, the pilot as
implemented at Hluleka Hybrid System should not be replicated. In particular a dedicated, ongoing budget
for system maintenance must be put in place. Notably, business plans for commercially driven renewable
resource based energy provision must include and make provision for operating and maintenance costs.
Generally, ownership of and responsibility for operation, maintenance and revenue collection for services
provided must be clear at the outset.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 11 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
1. Background
This report is presented as the key outcome of an evaluation study commissioned by the
Department of Minerals and Energy. The Terms of Reference issued by the Department called for
a consulting organisation to:
Undertake an evaluation of the hybrid mini-grid pilot projects at the Hluleka Game
Reserve and neighbouring village of Lucingweni as to their viability and replicability in
energising sustainable rural development after a year of their operation.
Subsequent to the submission of proposals from various parties, the Department appointed Tsebo
Resources Management to undertake the study and make recommendations along the lines of the
Terms of Reference to the Department, on the viability and replication potential of the Hluleka and
Lucingweni Mini-grid hybrid systems.
Specifically the scope of work as outlined in the terms of reference was as follows;
Overall technical design
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assess the installation of the hybrid mini-grid systems in terms of their overall design,
construction, cost, operations and maintenance, efficiency and ease of replicability for the
energy component of the system. Make recommendations regarding future design and
installation improvements.
Assess the compatibility of the balance of systems components in relation to local and
imported materials.
Assess human resources and training required for operation and maintenance purposes.
Assess the systems operational working hours and resource availability in relation to
community energy needs at that particular period and back-up energy usage.
Assess monitoring and control equipment in terms of supplying reliable data for technical
evaluation, viability and replicability analysis of hybrid mini-grid systems.
Assess the extent, if any, of vandalism and theft of the system components from the
contractor on-site and community.
Review other components of the system such as water purification plant and
telecommunications for its performance.
Socio-economic impact assessment and sustainability analysis
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assess the economic & financial viability, by making use of a cost benefit analysis (or other
appropriate methodology), of the technology and make recommendations on appropriate
funding options.
Comment on the sustainability and replications opportunities for rural approach e.g.
energisations and community-enlistment.
Make recommendations on issues such as system ownership, service delivery, system
maintenance and revenue collection.
Collect data, using questionnaires, on current energy use patterns and socio-economic
activities to assess uses of the hybrid systems in terms of rendering them a service
compared to the period before the system installation.
Assess the impact of the hybrid mini-grid systems, by making use of a cost benefit analysis
(or other appropriate methodology), on stimulating economic activities or their potential to
do so.
Assess any potential risks or challenges facing the optimal operation of the mini-grid
systems. This should include any outstanding tasks which formed initial part of the pilot
projects.
Assess the level of community satisfaction and appreciation of the service.
Undertake a critical assessment of community participation and draw out lessons for future
implementation.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 12 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
Evaluate the impact on surrounding communities and the level of community expectation
created.
Recommendations
Based on all the above, make recommendations on
• the criteria for selecting hybrid mini-grid system as an option for electrification in South
Africa and
• guidelines for successful hybrid mini-grid implementation, including site specific criteria and
considerations.
This main summary report is accordingly structured in line with the above scope of work as follows;
Section 2
An introduction to electrification programmes in South Africa, focusing on rural electrification.
Section 3
An overview of the detailed technical evaluation of the two systems.
Section 4
Socio-economic aspects of the systems and communities.
Section 5
Recommendations for successful and sustainable replication of mini-grid hybrid systems in South
Africa.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 13 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
2. Introduction
One of the key mandates of the Government of the Republic of South Africa is the development of
rural communities, by amongst a number of interventions, the provision of affordable and
sustainable energy sources.
The South Africa’s White Paper on the Energy Policy (1998) and White Paper on Renewable
Energy (2003) underline the government’s obligation to provide universal access to energy. In line
with this Mandate, the Department of Minerals and Energy adopted the following vision statement 1:
Development Objective:
The vision of the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) is to promote access to adequate
and affordable energy services for disadvantaged households, small businesses, small farms
and community services. The purpose is to satisfy the basic needs of the developing sector, at
the same time to promote the effective utilisation of South Africa’s vast alternative energy
sources.
The vision of the role renewable energy in the energy economy of the country, as stated in the
White Paper on Renewable Energy (2003), is to establish an energy economy in which modern
renewable energy increases its share of energy consumed and provides affordable access to
energy throughout the country, thus contributing to sustainable development and environmental
conservation.
The desired objective is to reach the poorest of the poor and uplift them with the dedicated
personnel who have the desire to give everything they have towards this cause.
This will ensure that the poorest of the poor attain a sense of dignity which each and everyone of
us deserves.
Immediate Objectives :
The majority of the population in South Africa live in the rural areas. There are a number of
ways to supply energy to these areas. The DME has embarked on several programmes to
supply energy to these rural areas. Some of these programmes include:
• RDP Schools and Clinics Program
• Donor Funding, Solar Villages
• Solar Home Systems
• Hybrid Systems
• Micro Hydro Systems
• Wind Energy
• Solar Water Heating
• Solar Water Pumping
• Solar Thermal
• Thermal Efficiency Low Cost Housing
In order to achieve this government embarked on the National Electrification Strategy that provides
for the full integration of grid and non-grid technologies into a single electrification programme.
The experience of grid electrification in South Africa, which was embarked upon between 1994 and
1999 through the RDP Electrification Programme is varied and the following lessons were learned:
• The RDP Electrification Programme was not commercially viable, rather, it was part of a
long-term social investment programme expected to have indirect future returns;
• It has been recognised that financing such a programme from inside a utility would place an
undue burden on it and jeopardises its sustainability
1
DME website, www.dme.gov.za, accessed 01 August 2006
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 14 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
•
•
2.1.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Financing of electrification should be transparent and it should be co-ordinated with other
infrastructure investment programmes;
Rural areas are particularly costly and difficult to electrify;
It is imperative to consider a suite of capacity differentiated supply options commensurate
with load requirements in order to contain costs;
Substantial capital subsidies and soft loan funding are prerequisites to drive such a
programme. In addition, tariffs need to be restructured such that operating costs are
covered; and
A significant proportion of rural households will have to be electrified through non-grid
technologies if universal access to a basic electricity service is regarded as a necessary
developmental goal, as well as to ensure that capital costs are contained at a reasonable
level.
The mini-grid pilot project
According to the budget speech of then Minister of Minerals and Energy Hon. Phumzile MlamboNgcuka to Parliament in Cape Town, on the 7 May 2002 on the Integrated National Electrification
Programme, the Minister alluded to the high cost of electrifying rural areas due to large distances
from the national grid, low densities and small energy consumption. In her speech, she indicated
that the NER has been working on the regulations that will ensure that non-grid concessionaires
are to be regulated in such a way that they provide a comprehensive service, which is linked to the
local economic needs of the non-grid communities. Non-grid providers should not be satisfied with
only providing lights. Power for economic activities in the first instance is needed. As a result, a
mini-grid hybrid pilot project has been undertaken at the Hluleka Nature Reserve in the Eastern
Cape Province. An integrated approach resulted in the design consisting of an energy system, a
water purification system and a telecommunications system. The energy system will make use of
renewable energy solar, water heaters and liquid petroleum gas. This combination of energy
carriers will result in increased energy efficiency.
Two villages adjacent to Hluleka Nature Reserve Lucingweni 1 and Lucingweni 2 were also
identified as sites for pilot hybrid mini-grid systems. Emphasis has been placed on linking these
mini grids to new economic activities in collaboration with the Agricultural Research Council (ARC).
High value crops have been planted in a number of demonstration plants.
The NERSA, the then NER, was appointed as an implementing agent for the DME to oversee the
project execution process.
For these rural poor communities in general, the priority is the satisfaction of basic needs such as
food, health services, housing, clean water and sanitation. Energy plays an important role in
ensuring the delivery of these services 2.
The geographic location of the Hluleka nature reserve and Lucingweni village are shown in Figure
1 below.
2
World Energy Council and the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, 1999, “The Challenge of Rural
Energy Poverty in Developing Countries”, Available from the World Energy Council website www.wec.org
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 15 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 1: Hluleka and Lucingweni Geographic Location and infrastructure proximity
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 16 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3. Technical evaluation
3.1.
System Assessment
A technical evaluation of the system at Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni was carried out, to
assess the functionality of the systems against the design, to assess the availability of the resource
against the original data and assumptions and to assess the challenges during the various phases
of the system implementation, through the feasibility, design, construction to the operations phase.
This evaluation was undertaken through an inspection of the installed system at Hluleka and
Lucingweni, carried out from the 26 to the 29 July 2006, interviews with Shell Solar South Africa
personnel, through interviews with staff at Hluleka Game Reserve, local residents at Lucingweni
and other stakeholders and through an evaluation of various documents forwarded by SSSA to the
Consulting Team.
3.1.1. Hluleka Hybrid System
3.1.1.1.
Components 3
The energy system is based on a hybrid of 2 Proven 2.5kW wind generators, 3 PV Arrays of 56
Panels of 100 Watt Shell RSM Solar Panels wired in series and 5kVA Model KAMA KDE 5000
diesel generator. According SSSA report, this form of construction greatly reduces the wiring
losses and provides for higher efficiency string inverter and control equipment. A single 75 kVA
diesel generator set is retained to provide backup power in case of a catastrophic failure. The
energy system is located on a hill behind the top water reservoir. All control equipment and the
lead acid storage batteries are housed in a container mounted on a concrete plinth. The two wind
generators are supported on suitably designed 6.5m masts anchored on concrete bases. The solar
arrays are mounted on a steel frame as in Figure 2. The control container and 5kVA diesel
generator is installed underneath solar arrays, the arrays and control room are fenced off. A
suitable armoured, buried cable is installed between the control container and the bottom
distribution board (opposite Chalet 4) within the camp.
3
Shell Solar South Africa, “Progress report on Hluleka and Lucingweni Projects”, Presented to NERSA, December 2003
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 17 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 2: Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System
The power source has been designed to carry the household loads as well as satisfying the needs
to the water pumping and water purification system.
The reticulation is three-phase 400V AC make use of the existing distribution network. The 400V
supply from the hybrid system is connected into the existing system at the bottom distribution
board opposite chalet 4.
The battery bank is sized to provide 5 days reserve electricity and 5kVA diesel generator is
installed in the case of no wind and little sun.
The components of the wind turbine which include: the wind turbine, mounting mask, Windy Boy
and Sunny Boy inverters are imported from the UK and Germany. Figure 3 is a single line
schematic of Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid system.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 18 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 3: Hluleka Hybrid System Schematic
3.1.1.2.
Overall Technical Evaluation of Hluleka System
The system is adequate for the design load subject to wind speed. The system is too far from the
reserve, which pose security problem for the staff. Construction of the power system is sound.
However, the 75kW diesel generator is not automatically integrated within the system, because the
staff had to walk in the dark to switch on the generator during power failure. One of the wind
turbines is not working.
Solar water heaters for the chalets facing the ocean are too far from the chalets and the automatic
gas backup for hot water did not work as designed because every time you turn hot water tap the
gas would come on. On the question of operation and maintenance of the hybrid system, there
was no adequate first line maintenance in place, there was no budget for maintenance, no
dedicated staff trained to maintain the system. However, the installer of the system would maintain
the system from time to time, but not a model for sustainability.
The system was suppose to have been fitted with GSM monitoring system, so that data could be
downloaded remotely. However, it did not seem to be installed, because the evaluation team could
not have access to the data or access to the control to evaluate the system. The team was
informed that the keys for the control room were not available. Therefore our evaluation is
inconclusive, as to the efficiency, viability and ease replicability, except for visual inspection and
from interviews with the staff and team own experience from staying at the resort. The use of
imported balance of system components, such as Windy Boy and Sunny Boy inverters for the
Hluleka System proved to be a problem, because when one of the inverter broke down, a
technician had to be brought from Germany to come to repair it.
The panels of the of the Hluleka Hybrid System had been vandalised and some panels stolen as
can be seen in Figure 2, even though the system is fitted with alarm system. The staff informed the
evaluation team that when the alarm went off, they could not respond to alarm because of fear and
the remoteness of the system especially at night. The system could have been installed near the
resort, except for the wind turbines, which could have been installed at suitable place. The fencing
made much higher than it is the case here.
3.1.1.3.
Costs
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 19 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The cost of installing the Hluleka systems is R2 330 854.91, including gas stoves, solar water
heating, water purification system and telecommunication system 4. The system at a cost of
R 200 000/kW is very expensive.
3.1.2. Lucingweni Hybrid Mini-grid System
The Lucingweni Village Hybrid System consists of power generation, storage, control room,
reticulation on premises. The power generation consists of 6x6kW Proven Wind Turbine mounted
on 6m tall mast, all imported from UK, constructed on a concrete base, and 560x 100W Shell Solar
Panels mounted on steel structure. Storage consists of a battery bank with an effective capacity of
10 140 Ah (see appendix A for further detail), supplied by the First National Batteries of South
Africa. Twelve 2.5 kW Sunny Boy inverters are installed of which two are connected to each wind
turbine, two wind turbines are connected to each phase, feeding the grid directly and the batteries
through a bi-directional inverter. Four 15 kW MPPT SunDrive Solar Regulators also by MLT are
installed on the four arrays of solar panels to charge the batteries. A 3 phase-100 kW bi-directional
PowerDrive inverter by MLT from South Africa is installed charge the batteries with excess power
from wind turbines, also to feed power from batteries to the grid. The system is located at the
summit of the headland, and approximately down its length.
Figure 4 : Lucingweni Community Hybrid system
4
“In a joint strategy program, the National Electricity Regulator (NER), CSIR, Shell Solar, DME and the Eastern Cape
Provincial Government, developed a project implementation plan of a hybrid, stand-alone, mini-grid for the Hluleka
Nature Reserve. Hybrid mini-grid systems combine different generators, such as wind, sun and diesel, to produce the
most cost effective and efficient energy. At Hluleka an integrated design approach resulted in a joint energy system,
water purification system and telecommunication system. The energy system makes use of renewable energy, solar
water heaters and liquid petroleum gas. One diesel generator is being retained purely for back-up supply.” NERSA
December 2003. Progress report on hybrid mini-grid pilot projects at Hluleka and Lucingweni
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 20 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The reticulation to the households consists of ground mounted creosote poles carrying overhead
power lines to each individual dwelling. The main conductor is Aerial Bundled Conductor (ABC),
and the connection to the individual household consists of 8 mm “Airdac” conductor. SSSA state
that it is preferred method of reticulation in many rural and urban areas, which is certainly the
Eskom standard reticulation method for most rural areas.
Due to the density and distribution of the village, reticulation is distributed from the backbone
running below the summit of the headland, with spur take-offs to the village below. Street-lights are
installed at appropriate poles. At the customer’s premises, equipment component consists of an
external entry point at the roof level, and a ready board located within the home. Figure 5 provides
a schematic description of the Lucingweni renewable energy hybrid system.
Figure 5: Lucingweni Hybrid System Schematic
3.2.
Design Process
Numerous literature exists that can be used as a framework for the design of mini-grid systems,
such as the World Bank mini-grid design manual5. In summary the design process follows a fivestep process, viz
•
•
•
•
•
Identification of an appropriate site / location suitable for mini-grid system
Identify a suitable energy solution, either through a single energy source or hybrid system
Prepare load forecasts
System sizing, including energy storage requirements
Detailed design, including site works, access, controls, distribution network design
According to the study, by Hansen C.J & Bower J. 2003, the economic feasibility of hybrid system
is determined by local conditions and resource availability. Wind-diesel system economic depends
on six key variables:
• Availability wind resources;
• delivered price of diesel fuel;
5 ESMAP, Mini-grid design manual, September 2000
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 21 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
capital costs of the wind turbine, genset and auxiliary equipment;
life-cycle operating costs, including maintenance; value of secondary load; and
reliability of demand and revenue collection.
According to the same study, the experience in the Canary Island revealed several key
conclusions:
• first a rigorous study of the wind conditions, customers load profiles and maintenance cost
must be completed before construction can take place, because a small error can have farreaching consequences.
• Second the breakeven cost versus the old supply scheme should be obtained when the
price of diesel was high if the price go down;
• Thirdly administration problem that were encountered pointed to the need for extensive
training of local personnel in maintenance work, and clear authority to be given from the start
of project to those individual who will run equipment and collect payment.
3.2.1. Generic design criteria
Some basic design criteria for hybrid systems, and typical values are described in Table 1;
Table 1 Basic design criteria for mini-grid systems
Design Parameter
System Availability
Comment
This is a high reliability
which
carries
a
cost
penalty, particularly if there
is no diesel genset.
Typical Value
99 %
Or
expressed
as
system
unavailability of 1% of 8760 hours
per annum= 87.6 hours
= 3.65 days unavailability
There may be some critical
loads on a system that
should have high reliability,
but majority of rural minigrid customers do not need
such high availability. Far
better to prioritise loads that
need high reliability such as
telecommunications
and
health centre and to make
provision for them.
Voltage regulation
± 10 % of a nominal voltage of
231 Volts
OR
Minimum supply voltage at
furthest point of supply at full load
= 207.9 V
Maximum voltage at nearest
point of supply at no load = 254.9
V
Days autonomy for battery (usually
specify
either 4 days
storage
system availability OR days
battery autonomy – one is a
result of the other)
Daily Energy allowance
950 W.h per day
From documentation received from SSSA, the following criteria were used in the design of the
Lucingweni system;
1. Adequate settlement density to optimise system employment
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 22 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
2. Community profile, suitability and acceptance
3. Most efficient resources of natural resources available
4. Project sustainability: community participation, transfer of skills, employment creation
5. Economic stimulation, development of small commercial off-shoot industries
6. Risk evaluation
7. Environmental impact and ascetics
8. Technical, commercial and financial viability
Although criteria 1 of adequate settlement density to optimise system employment might apply to
the Lucingweni Village, it is not clear in the documents received from SSSA how the seven other
criteria were reached of the suitability of this particular community. The failure of the project point
to inadequate risk analyses; inadequate evaluation of available natural resources; inadequate
evaluation of project sustainability, community participation, transfer of skills; inadequate
evaluation of technical, commercial and financial viability and inadequate community profiling as to
their energy needs.
3.2.2. System Sizing
The modelling tool used by SSSA to size the above system is RETScreen by the Ministry of
Natural Resources in Canada. The model can be used to evaluate the energy production, life
cycle-cost, greenhouse gases emission reduction for central system, isolated-grid and off-grid
renewable projects. The model is limited to be used for pre-feasibility of energy projects and it is
‘static’ than ‘dynamic’ in that the user evaluate each of the technologies independent of one
another rather than in integrated fashion as in HOMER or Hybrid 2 modelling tools. It only
considers annual energy production, rather than time series analysis. The model cannot evaluate
smaller scale projects where energy storage is required. The wind speed data used for sizing the
system is that of Port Elizabeth which is very far from the project site.
3.2.3. Overall Technical Design
Although, the overall design is adequate for design load subject to wind speed, and load
management by consumers, the design load is not consistent, 220 households are supposed to
have been connected, but only 120 households are connected. Construction of the power system,
such as wind turbines is generally sound. However, PV arrays are too low to the ground with grass
growing underneath the arrays, which could pose a danger to the panels, if fire was to occur.
Reticulation is problematic at point of connection, main circuit breakers in the control room
connecting to reticulation are too small for the load. Phases of reticulation are not well balanced.
Energy limiting meter in the dwelling are not correctly installed, current and energy limiting are not
working. Generally, reticulation did not proceed according to standard grid-reticulation procedures
and standards as it will be shown below.
3.2.4. System Assessment and Testing
The functionality of the Earth Leakage Protection Unit (ELPU) was tested at four different
households, with a standard earth leakage tester. These households were selected on a purely
random basis. In all four instances, the ELPU did not function, and the testing instrument further
indicated that the earth conductor was not effectively connected to ground. This was investigated
further and the Consulting Team discovered that the system’s neutral conductor did not seem to be
earthed at any point, either at the source or intermediate points on the reticulation network, as
required by regulations such as SANS 10142 which is standard Eskom practice. The
recommended types of system earthing in South Africa according to SANS 10142, which is a
mandatory standard, are as follows:
TN-C-S
The neutral conductor is effectively earthed at the supply point, normally the distribution
transformer, and all exposed parts of the consumer’s installation are connected to this neutral
conductor via a separate earth terminal. This is illustrated in Figure 6.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 23 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 6: TN-C-S Earthing System
TN - S
The protective conductor (PE) is effectively earthed at the supply point, normally the distribution
transformer, and is a separate conductor, and all exposed parts of the consumer’s installation are
connected to this earthing conductor via a separate earth terminal. This is illustrated in Figure 7.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 24 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 7: TN-S Earthing System
These two systems are the preferred earthing methodologies in South Africa.
3.2.5. Voltage Control
The basic criterion for any electricity network is the voltage level, as this has a direct impact on the
performance of consumer’s electrical appliances, including light bulbs. The Lucingwini system was
tested for 10% minimum voltage variation from the nominal 230 Volt standard.
This test was carried out at one household furthest from the system control room, and a load
drawing approximately 15 Amps was connected to the distribution board. A voltage of 208 V was
measured at this point. It seems likely that the system would be able to maintain the voltage within
prescribed limits, if the energy control units function as specified.
3.2.6. Energy Limiting
Energy and current limiting device fitted in ready boards in some of the houses tested were not
working. To test the working of current and energy limiting device, a 1 kW element, and in some
cases a hot plate, were connected to a three pin plug of a ready board and left for an hour in some
cases to test if a system would trip but it did not trip, which is an indication that the devices was not
working, this was also confirmed by some of the residents that they could cook with the system.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 25 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3.2.7. Costs
The total cost of the Lucingweni system is R9 574 286.60, which includes the community hall and
community water supply. Using the above information, to calculate cost benefit analysis, we find
that the energy cost at R14.26/kWh (if capital cost is included) and R4.88/kWh to cover just the
operational cost is very high. The cost of R30 000 per connection if street lighting is included for
220 households are connected, instead of 120 households makes it one of the most expensive
electrification programme in the country. For more detail of CBA see Appendix A.
3.3.
Local content in balance of system components
For the Hluleka Game Reserve mini-grid hybrid system, most balance of system components, such
as inverters are imported from UK, except for batteries, backup diesel, solar array steel structure
and wire, which were source locally. The problem experienced with imported balance of system,
such as inverter, was that when inverters from SMA developed some fault, an engineer had to
flown in from Germany to fix the problem. This was the reason why locally source balance-ofsystem components were used for the Lucingweni Community mini-grid hybrid system. The
problem of compatibility between locally source inverters from MLT arose. The locally sourced
regulators and inverters could not communicate with imported German software in the regulators of
the wind turbines. This could explain insufficient output from the wind data obtained from the site.
For more details of technical evaluation see Appendix D.
There is also no reliable output from solar arrays that could indicate a problem of compatibility
between imported and locally source balance of system. When modelling the above system, using
Homer software developed by the NREL indicates a much higher output than the one obtained
from the data.
3.4.
System availability measured against demand
Lack of reliable data for Lucingweni Community mini-grid hybrid systems and the fact that the
system was not operational during the evaluation, made it difficult to assess the system operational
working hours and resource availability in relation to the community energy needs.
However, modelling the system using Homer software, indicated that the system is more than
adequate to supply the load, assuming that the wind speed at Lucingweni is the same as at Port
St. John, about 15 km away as the crow flies. Port St John is much closer than Port Elizabeth data
that was used by SSSA in sizing the system. It is also assumed that load is high in the evening and
1/4 of the total load during the day. From the data received, the outputs of both wind turbine and
solar arrays is very small which probably indicate that either the system was not operating as
designed or data capturing equipment was faulty. For more details on the technical evaluation see
Appendix B:
The data available at Port St Johns was used for this exercise and the results are depicted
graphically in Figure 8
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 26 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 8: Monthly Wind Speed measured at the Port St. Johns weather station
3.5.
Monitoring and Control Equipment
The monitoring of both Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni Community hybrid system was not
up to scratch for pilot systems that they were suppose to be. For the Hluleka Hybrid system, the
evaluation team could not have access to the control room or have access to the data that was
supposed to have been captured remotely using GSM system. The evaluation team was informed
that, the contractor who happen to be at the site during our visit had left the keys in East London
and management at the reserve told us they did not have the keys. Therefore it is difficult to
assess viability and replicability of the system. However, from the interviews we had with staff and
management and our own experience staying at reserve was that the system was not working as
designed, even with only 2 chalets and staff quarters being used.
The data that was retrieved from the monitoring equipment installed at the Lucingweni Community
System either indicate that the system was not working as designed, because there was very low
outputs from both wind turbines and solar arrays, or data capturing equipment was faulty. The fact
that the system was not operational during our visit made it difficult to take measurements.
However, the general feeling among the community is that of dissatisfaction with the system.
3.5.1. Demand Assessment
A study undertaken by Hassen and Partner and CSIR (2001) shows the demand for electricity in
the Eastern Cape Province in the household sector ranges from 50kWh to 150kWh per month. In
most cases consumption increases rapidly the first three to four months, after which the demand
growth slow. During the first year of electrification, the average annual growth is 10kWh per
customer, equivalent to 14% per annum. Initial electricity consumption per household in the former
Transkei is estimated by Eskom to be some 50kWh per month. Consumption is expected to grow
gradually until it reaches in 20 years peak of approximately 220kWh per household.
The development of the Lucingweni hybrid system entailed an assessment of the potential
demand, as the key input for the system sizing process. Table 2 presents this assessment of the
demand per household.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 27 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 2 Demand estimate per household - Lucingweni
De scription
Lights
TV
Small Fridge
Cell Charger
Unit Loa d (W ) Qty
15
100
100
10
TOTAL
4
1
1
1
Tota l Loa d (W )
60
100
100
10
270
Agriculture
According to the study by Hassan and Partners (2001), although agriculture is declining in the
Eastern Cape it remains a backbone of rural economy. Primary activity in the agricultural sector is
highly diversified correlating with diverse natural resources bases and the variance in the climate.
It varies from field crop production (e.g. maize, sorghum and beans) and horticulture crops
(vegetables, citrus and subtropical fruits, tea) to animal products (e.g. fresh milk, eggs, cattle,
sheep, goats). The main sources of income are mostly from vegetables production (29%),
slaughtering of cattle and calves (20%), maize (13%) and fresh milk (11%).
The main energy requirements in the agricultural sector are:
• Draft energy for ploughing and electricity for water pumping, food processing, especially
milling
• Electricity for refrigeration to store veterinary material and perishable products
• Electricity for water pumping to irrigate crop field and supply water for livestock
• Electricity for processing of agricultural products such as threshing and milling.
Manufacturing
In the manufacturing sector, the main activities in this sector are mostly small scale commercial
enterprises such as carpentry, bakeries, brick making and clothing. The main manufacturing
products are food and beverage products (bread, meat, maize and beer), textile products (clothing
and leather shoes), building material ( e.g. cement and cement products), furniture making (e.g.
schools and office), chemical products and metal products (welding, iron sheeting). Electricity is
needed in these areas.
Commercial Sector
The main activities in the commercial sector comprise tourism and retail activities such as shops,
general retailers, bottle store and transport sector activities such car repair and hair salon. The
tourism sub-sector is expected to develop rapidly in medium and long-term. Development is mostly
along the cost (the Wild Coast) where the most attractive tourism is to be found. However, despite
their high potential its not being developed because of inaccessibility of the areas, lack of
infrastructure services, the restriction of existing land tenure and the lack of capital.
New Economic Activities
The above study identified a number of potential economic activities in terms of available natural
resources, which are hampered by unavailability of electricity. Four sectors were identified as
having a good potential for development: agriculture, forestry, mining and tourism.
One immediate observation on the Shell Solar design parameters is that, there was no formal
assessment of the potential loading due to productive usage of the energy, which was a key
criteria for the hybrid systems development, as per the Minister’s mandate to the DME.
3.6.
Vandalism and theft
The study carried out by Minerals and Energy Policy Centre in 2002 on “Strategies to address
Theft and Vandalism and Lack of Maintenance” for Non-grid Electrification of Schools and Clinics
found that the major causes of theft and vandalism are the following:
•
•
Lack of ownership of system by the community
Poor security of the system
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 28 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
Lack of involvement of the community in the planning and implementation of the projects
Non-functioning of the system due to either poor installation or lack of maintenance
Lack of awareness on the use of the system
Poor management by those responsible.
From the initial visit to the Hluleka Game Reserve where theft of solar panels has occurred,
demonstrates poor security for the system. The Hybrid system installed at the reserve is far from
the main camp, in a remote location. The system cannot be seen from the reserve, because of the
surrounding natural forest in this area. Although the system is fitted with alarm system it is not clear
if the alarm went off during the theft. There have also unfortunately been a number of false alarms,
which means that reserve staff do not always respond, even if the alarm does go off. The fencing
should have been topped with a razor wire which we feel would have helped to deter potential
thieves from stealing the system. The panels should been secured with unti-theft screws. The
solar panel stolen at the main gate entering the reserve, was mounted on wooden pole which
made it easy to cut the pole and steel the panel. A steel pole filled with concrete could have been
the most appropriate to add more to the security of the system.
Theft and vandalism of the panels at Hluleka is continuing.
At the time of writing the community hybrid system at Lucingweni village is still intact, no theft or
vandalism has occurred. The reason could be community involvement in the planning stage and
consultation with the community or that community derived some benefit from the system when it
was working or that permanent security personnel were in attendance 6.
3.7.
Specific energy loads
At Lucingweni village water pumping is not installed, because, according to the SSSA Report,
2004, a suitable water boreholes could not be found. As for the telecommunication, we were
informed by SSSA that negotiation with service providers such as Vodacom and MTN failed.
Therefore the project team could not review other components of the system. However, as for the
Hluleka Game Reserve water purification system was not working, because water was still muddy
and we were advised by the management not to drink the water, which might indicate the purifying
system is not working properly. A sample was taken from Hluleka for analysis, the result indicates
that the water was not fit for human consumption.
Studies have shown that energy for lighting is at the lower end of priority needs of rural people
potable water supply and food are on their first priority list. The fact that Lucingweni hybrid system
was declared completed without water supply would indicate poor planning on the part of project
implementers. According to the SSSA Report of 17 November 2005, indicating the completion of
the project without completion of potable water supply indicate a flaw in drawing up of the contract
for the implementation of the hybrid system, especially keeping in mind the amount of money
invested in the project. The supply of potable water should have been made part of the package of
hybrid system not an optional requirement.
6
At the time of writing version 22Aug07 of this report it was reported that the remaining 80 PV panels at Lucingweni had
been removed to a place of storage (Afrane-Okese, Personal Communication). This has not be evaluated in this report
as is post dates the evaluation by several months.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 29 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4. Socio-economic impact assessment and sustainability analysis
4.1.
Financial and economic viability of Mini-grid hybrid system
To assess financial and economic viability of the Hluleka Mini-grid hybrid system, HOMER
software is used. HOMER has been widely used all over the world to design hybrid system such as
in Hinchinbrook Islands (Dalton and Lockington, 2006), in India (Hansen and Bower, 2003), Chiloe
Islands in Chile (E7 Fund, CNE and UNDP, 2004). For more details about HOMER see attached
Technical report Appendix C. The HOMER Micropower Optimisation Model is a computer model to
assist in the design of micropower system and facilitate the comparison of power generation
technologies across wide-range of application. HOMER is capable of simulation, optimisation and
sensitivity analysis. In the simulation process, HOMER models the performance of a particular
micropower configuration each hour of the year to determine technical feasibility and life cycle cost.
In the optimisations process, HOMER simulates many different configurations in search of the one
that satisfies technical constraints at the lowest cost. In the sensitive analysis process, HOMER
simulates many of optimisations in the range of input assumptions to determine the effect of
uncertainty in the model input (Lambert et al, 2006)
The simulation is performed assuming the following:
• wind speed at Hluleka is the same as that of Port St. John for which data is available as in
Figure 8. Port St. John is about 15 km from Hluleka as the crow flies; and average wind
speed of 5.36m/s given for Hluleka Game Reserve in Hassan and Partner Report
• the load for the 12 chalets, street lighting, administration block, staff quarters and water
pumping are as shown in Table 3, 4 and 5 below;
• maximum load occurs in the evening;
• real interest rate is 8%
• project lifetime is 20 years
Table 3 Primary load of the 12 chalets
Equipment
Wattage
(W)
Freezer 120-L
60
Fridge
100
Lights CFL (8)
18
Outside light (1)
9
Fluorescent lights 18
Ceiling fans
75
Hard-wired
hair 1000
drier
Total
Qty
12
12
130
12
12
12
12
Total
Power
0.72
1.20
2.340
0.108
0.216
0.900
12.00
Hrs
usage
10
10
6
6
6
6
1
Power
Factor
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
17.48
Total (kWh)
10.286
17.143
20.057
0.926
1.851
7.714
17.143
75.120
Table 4 Primary Load 2 of the Staff Quarters, Reception Office
Equipment
Wattage
Qty
2
10
9
4
Total
Power
0.200
0.090
0.162
0.04
Hrs
Usage
10
6
7
2
Power
Factor
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Freezer 120-L
Lights
Street lights
Cell
phone
charging
Computer
&
Monitor
Printer
Total
100
9
18
10
2.857
0.771
1.62
0.114
150
3
0.450
8
0.7
5.143
50
1
0.050
0.992
2
0.7
0.143
10.648
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Total (kWh)
Page 30 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 5 Deferrable Load of water pumping System
Equipment
Wattage
Water pumping
3000
Water
filtration 1000
plant
Total
4.2.
Qty
2
1
Total
Power
6.00
1.00
Hr usage
5
5
Power
Factor
0.7
0.7
Total (kWh)
42.86
7.142
7.00
50.000
Results
The results obtained are very dependent on the wind speed, if the wind speed is the same as that
of Port St. John, at an average of 7.54 m/s the combination of wind/battery/ alone is the optimum
system, as shown in the Table 6 below.
Table 6 Comparison of hybrid configurations for Hluleka (Wind speed 7.5 m.s-1)
PV
WT
GEN
BATT
CAP
NPC
COE
5.6
2
2
5
30
60
815 444
1 148 847
1 013 117
1 645 812
3.81
5.35
CAP
Shortage
20%
0%
Diesel
Annual
962
At the cost of R5.35/kWh, the Hluleka Mini-grid Hybrid System is expensive, it can only compete, if
grid is at a distance of 15.5km away. As for the optimum system of wind/battery the system
competes with grid at distance of 9.06 km.
The present system has total annualised cost of R172 690 including capital cost, replacement,
O&M and fuel cost.
However, if the wind speed is as stated in the Renewable Energy Potential in Eastern Cape Report
by Hassan and Partners (1999) at an average of 5.4m/s at 25m height, the optimum system is 4
Wind Turbine and 120 batteries of 1160Ah, 2V each. Although the initial cost is much higher at R1
145 802 than the currently installed system at R1 148 847, the Net Present Cost is much higher at
R2 190 536 than R1 457 610 and the energy cost of R5.12/kWh compared to currently installed
system of R7.13/kWh. When the optimum system is compared with grid, the system becomes
competitive at distance of 13.6km from the grid, as compared to currently installed system which
becomes competitive to grid at a distance of 21.1km.
Table 7 Comparison of hybrid configurations for Hluleka (Wind speed 5.4 m.s-1)
PV
(kW)
5.6
5.6
4.3.
WT
4
2
2
2
GEN
(kW)
5
5
5
BATT
60
30
30
60
CAP
(Rand)
1 145 802
835 884
1 071 357
1 148 847
NPC (Rand )
1 457 610
1 762 236
2 049 782
2 190 538
COE
(Rand)
5.12
5.72
6.66
7.13
CAP
Shortage
10%
0%
0%
0%
Diesel (l)
5 136
4 947
4 050
Financial and economic viability of Lucingweni Mini-grid hybrid system
According to cost-benefits analysis (Appendix A), the Lucingweni Mini-Grid Hybrid System at the
cost of R29 100/connection to supply 220 households, including street lighting and capital cost
makes it, one of the most expensive electrification programmes in the country – if indeed it is
considered solely an electrification project. The consumers will have to be charge the amount of
approximately R14.26/kWh to recover the capital operational cost and R4.88/kWh to recover
operational costs only, both of which are significantly above the current willingness to pay, even
with a R40/month FBE allocation. It will be very difficult to recover capital cost, which anyway is not
normally done even for grid. As stated, when capital cost is excluded and the tariffs that would be
necessary to cover operational and maintenance cost is R4.88/kWh, which is still high for the
majority of rural households with a high level of unemployment.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 31 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
When this hybrid mini-grid system is compared to other electrification options, as shown in Table 8
below, this system is much more costly when compared to other systems such as mini-grid plus
solar home system (DD); mini-grid for social services and for productive uses, with SHS for
households (EE); the use of solar home system only no mini-grid (FF); the use of diesel or
biodiesel plus batteries (HH); and grid. Although capital cost for grid is the most expensive, its
operational cost is much lower as compared to other modes of electrification. The cost of energy
(CoE) per kWh if the capital cost is to be recovered is R11.03, as compared the present system at
R8.93/kWh, excluding capital cost the CoE is R0.59 for the former and R3.23/kWh for the latter.
Grid electricity has the highest benefit points followed by mini-grid and diesel. It also has the
highest capital cost per benefit points at R42 183, as compared to mini-grid base at R15 229.
Table 8 Comparison of different options of rural electrification for Lucingweni Community
Mini-grid for
SS and PU
only, SHS for
rest (EE)
SHS only (no
PU/SS power
supply)
(FF)
Diesel/Biodiesel
plus battery
5.45
314 459
3.16
218 944
2.511
189 986
1.30
110 557
1.57
336 731
16.03
92 580
(8.54)
(5.31)
(4.38)
(2.38)
(5.10)
(16.94)
(3.09)
(2.15)
(1.86)
(1.09)
(3.46)
(0.91)
266.9
162.5
133.9
72
266.9
428.4
8.93
9.12
9.12
9.25
5.10
11.03
3.23
3.69
3.88
4.21
3.46
0.59
358
335
317
175
358
380
15 229
9 435
7 927
7 437
4 398
42 183
878
653
599
632
940
243.63
(23 853)
(15 844)
(13 811)
(13 647)
(13 633)
(44 576)
(8 624)
(6 409)
(5 884)
(6 210)
(9 235)
(2,392)
(AA)
Capex (Rm)
Opex (R)
NPV incl Capex
(Rm)
NPV excl Capex
(Rm)
Energy Supplied to
all loads
CoE incl Capex
(R/kWh)
CoE excl Capex
(R/kWh)
Benefit Points
Capex per Benefit
Point
Opex per benefit
point
NPV incl Capex/
benfit point (R)
NPV excl Capex/
benefit point (R)
Grid
Mini-grid
plus
some
SHS
(DD)
Mini-Grid
base
(HH)
In conclusion, a combination of hybrid mini-grid for social services and productive uses and SHS
for household provide the most economic options for development notes far removed from grid
than hybrid alone or SHS alone.
4.4.
Sustainability and replication opportunities
The capital cost per connection is very high and energy cost per kWh is beyond majority of rural
households willingness to pay, therefore, the system is not sustainable in a long run, unless the
presence of electricity create other economic activities within the community. The above cost
benefit analysis shows that a combination of solar home system for household electrification and
mini-grid hybrid system for economic activities, which requires much higher power, might be more
cost effective than mini-grid hybrid system alone. The capital cost of such a method of
electrification requires R2.5 million as compared to R5.45 million for mini-grid hybrid system. The
cost of energy is R3.88/kWh excluding capital cost and it is much higher than R3.23/kWh for minigrid hybrid system. However, operational cost per benefit point at R599 is second to grid electricity
at R243.63. Studies have shown that most rural households do not use grid electricity for cooking
and space heating (JM Green and Zwede D, 2005), because of high cost of using grid. They would
rather use firewood, paraffin etc. The use of a combination of mini-grid hybrid system for social
services and productive uses and SHS for households with provision for access to other energy
sources such as LPG, paraffin, wood might be the most economic method of non-grid rural
electrification.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 32 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
According to the DME Guidelines to the National Electrification Planning, in a situation that nongrid will be considered and the basic needs of households cannot be satisfied by non-grid alone,
complimentary energy source should be made available to fill the gap. Lucingweni is accessible by
road, therefore provision of other energy sources such as LPG and paraffin should not be a
problem.
4.5.
Ownership, service delivery, maintenance and revenue collection
Since the community did not contribute financial or otherwise to have the system in their village,
many people did not perceive themselves or the community as currently owning the system. They
thought it belonged to Shell Solar, the Contractor, the DME; the local chief/village herdsman or the
local municipality Nyandeni; while other did not know or even think about it. When asked ‘Who
should own the system, amazingly over 95% thought it should belong to the community. “the
system is here is our village, therefore it belongs to us..”; “the local municipality and/or the local
councillor should own and maintain the system”, on behalf of the community.
Local ownership from the conceptualisation through implementation of a project is of utmost
importance, as it is directly related to caring, looking after and maintaining the system. From the
socio-economic survey it is clear that the level of ownership that was instilled within the community
at the project inception was not enough for the people to value and own the system. The fact that
people did not contribute financial or otherwise for the installation of the system, therefore did not
feel any sense of ownership which could reduce vandalism and theft of the system components; as
the very community becomes each others keepers.
To ensure local ownership, consultation by project implementers and contribution either financially
or otherwise by all members of the community should have been incorporated at the initial stages
of conceptualisation and implementation of the project. During the survey, some people suggested
that youth and women should be trained to operate and maintain the system and the local
municipality, through their local councillor, should undertake the overall management of the
system. The high level of sophistication of the system requires a high level of skill which does not
exist in this rural community, because people with that level of skills go to bigger towns and cities
where the pay is better.
However, it boils down to the question of capacity within the responsible municipality to undertake
the overall management of the system. Although the local municipality of Nyandeni is mandated by
the Local Municipality Infrastructure Act to provide basic services such as roads, sanitation, energy
and water and willingness to undertake responsibility, on the part of the local municipality and also
OR Tambo District Municipality they are hampered by lack of capacity. (Refer to Mr Sidelos report,
and Eric Mzayiya’s Interview).
Lack of capacity within the responsible municipality provides a challenge on the question of
ownership, maintenance and revenue collection. There are currently two models of ownership
being used in rural areas; Local municipality and private-public partnership through non-grid
electrification concession. According to the reports by Shell Solar (2003), Nygeleni municipality has
shown unwillingness to take ownership of the hybrid system ceding their lack of capacity, even
though during our interviews of local councillors have expressed willingness to undertake
ownership. The other proposal is that Oiver Regina Tambo District Municiplaity to take over the
ownership and enter into contract agreement with SSSA to provide ongoing maintenance of the
system. The revenue collection will be undertaken by Oliver Regina Tambo District Municipality
and the system to be treated just like Solar Home System where government give subsidy of R40
and the customer pay R18.00 per month. The amount of R40 will go toward offsetting the charges
levied by SSSA. It has been shown in the CBA that this tariffs might not be enough to cover
operation and maintenance cost
The other model that is proposed by SSSA is for Oliver Regina Tambo District Municipality takes
the responsibility of the system and enters into service agreement with SSSA to maintain the
system including replacement cost of capital equipment. For revenue collection and tariff, the
system be treated the same way as SHS and that a subsidised tariff be implemented meaning that
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 33 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
the customers pays R18.00 per month and that ORT subsidise at R40.00 per month for each
customer served by making use of the FBE grant. The amount of R40.00 will go towards the
maintenance and upkeep of the total mini-grid used to offset the charges to be levied by contractor
under the proposed service agreement.
The other model is allocating the area as concession area and the system become under
concessionnaire. This will address lack of capacity, which is preventing Nygeleni Local Municipality
from taking ownership of the system. The concessionaire operates like a utility in the area of their
jurisdiction; they install non-grid electricity; maintain and collect monthly payment for the service
provided. Therefore they will have maintenance personnel residing in the area of their operation. In
the case Solar Home System, a concessionaire receive standard subsidy of R3 500 for the
installation of Solar Home System, which consist of 50Wp panel, battery, 4 lights and an outlet for
radio and a black and white television. They also charge R100 for installation and monthly fee of
R58 for operation and maintenance. These concessionaires operate fee-for-service through
prepayment system for collection of monthly fees. As a result of operating in this area of
concession, energy providers have established infrastructure in the rural area to do installation,
maintenance and collect payment that they are better qualified to do maintenance.
However, the model of charging people a flat rate is found not to be acceptable for most people. A
study undertaken at OR Tambo municipality to assess acceptance and appropriateness of
supplying current limit of 2.5A and payment of flat rate found that people were very negative to
such as system. The overwhelming majority of people preferred pre-payment meters. No person
interviewed was happy with paying flat rate tariff. An important reason why people preferred 20A
supply to the 2.5A, 5A supply was that they could control their monthly expenditure on electricity. It
was shown together with the size of household income, other factors influence whether were able
to pay monthly flat rate. The flat rate was found to be inflexible requiring consistent payments at
the same time each month.
The socio-economic survey carried out in Lucingweni as part of this assessment also supports the
above finding. The majority of people interviewed showed preference of pre-payment metering, on
the similar line as cell phone prepayment model. When designing model of revenue collection, this
will have to be borne in mind.
The allocation of this area as a concession area seem to provide the best option, the
concessionaire operating in the area collect revenue through fee for service in the same way as for
prepayment metering and fee for service model. The concessionaire could also provide SHS
system for the neighbouring villages.
4.6.
Energy use and economic activity
Although access to affordable, modern energy services is increasingly seen as a pre-requisite for
sustainable development and poverty alleviation, its performance in this respect will depend on
many factors which includes:
• attitudes and behaviours;
• information and technologies;
• the availability of finance and supporting institutions; and
• in particular, policies and policy frameworks that encourage change in the desired direction
(IT Power India, 2004)
As previously pointed out above that the hybrid system is capable of supporting economic
activities. However, enabling environment has to be created such as:
• innovative credit mechanism,
• project linked to income generation,
• community skill development by training and capacity building; a
• availability of group grants for micro-level activities in the community.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 34 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
In order for the rural population to take a full advantage of availability of electricity provided by
hybrid system, empowering of population should be undertaken through skills training in such area
as sewing, carpentry, welding, handicraft, entrepreneurship etc. Access to micro-finance should
be made available for those who would like to start business and stimulate local economy.
Lucingweni area is characterised by poverty and high unemployment the majority of people
depend on government social grants and are headed by women. Employment in this remote area
is limited. However, with this area proximity to Hluleka Game Reserve and the sea, there could be
a number of income generating opportunities, which need to be investigated such as ice making to
preserve fish and crayfish, battery charging, craft making, agro-tourism and commercial farming.
At the time of evaluation, the hybrid system was not working therefore difficult to assess economic
activities that took place when it was working. We had to rely on the information obtained from the
people from their memory, which might not be very accurate. However, from the information
obtained from Mr. Sidelo, former councillor of Lucingweni, the system never worked long enough to
really make some impact to the people. According to him, the system only worked for a total of 3
months, including the period when they switch the system illegally, because of the pressure from
the community just before Local Government Election of March 2006.
Mr Sidelo indicated a number of economic activities were envisaged with power from the hybrid
system, such as eco-tourism, agriculture and forestry. He indicated Agricultural Research Council
together with Eastern Cape Provincial Government initiated a number of project such as fruit and
herbs growing in the area where the power could be used for irrigation and fruit drying. Other plans
were to establish a development centre with computers and access to the Internet for the
community.
Cell phone charging is another business opportunity, cell phones are widely used in this rural area
of Eastern Cape including Lucingweni. People take their cell to nearby town for charging at cost
R5.00 per charge. Rural people also use car batteries to power their TV set for those with a good
TV signal, also to power their hi-fi music system. It has been shown that the high use of car
batteries correspond to the ownership of TV, having a TV repeater station at the Lucingweni will
encourage people to own TVs. The batteries have to be taken to major towns by public transport
for charging. One of the economic activity going on in this area is fishing, and grayfish harvesting,
lack of reliable cold storage reduce the amount they could charge for their catch.
The amount of energy required for ice-making, carpentry workshop; battery and cell phone
charging and irrigation for high-priced commercial vegetable and fruits, is shown in the table below
and this power could be either primary load or deferred load depending on the priority which in
should be income generating opportunity, because through economic activities that the people can
be able to afford energy services in their home.
Table 9 Lucingweni Community Load with Potential Productive uses Load
Equipment
Wattage
(W)
Dwelling lights
Dwelling Radio
Dwelling TV
Dwelling decoder
Dwelling Cell Chrg
Street lights
Comm lights
Comm Plugs
Comm Telecom
System Data
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
15
10
70
40
10
26
15
200
40
20
Qty
Total kW Hr
Usage
880
220
220
220
220
70
10
10
3
1
Final Report
13.2
2.2
15.4
8.8
2.2
1.82
0.15
2
0.12
0.02
Cos phi
4
10
5
5
2
7
8
8
5
1
August 2008
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Total (kWh)
75.429
31.429
110.000
62.857
6.286
18.200
1.714
22.857
0.857
0.029
Page 35 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
Equipment
Wattage
(W)
System Telecom
System lights
System Security
Shops Refrigerator
Shops Lights
Comm. Centre
Total
DME New and Renewable Energy
Qty
Total kW Hr
Usage
Cos phi
Total (kWh)
10
45
10
100
15
100
1
3
1
4
8
1
0.01
0.135
0.01
0.4
0.12
0.1
46.685
1
1
24
8
10
10
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.014
0.193
0.343
4.571
1.714
1.429
337.921
1500
800
1500
800
2
2
1
2
3
1.6
1.5
1.6
6
6
8
4
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
25.714
13.714
17.143
9.143
Electric Saw
Planner
Lathe
Security Light
Total
3000
3000
1500
18
1
1
1
2
3
3
1.5
0.036
15.2
6
6
5
0.7
0.7
0.7
25.714
25.714
10.714
Ice Making
Battery Charging
Water pumping
Total
200
1500
3000
0.2
1.5
6
7.7
8
10
5
Metal Workshop
Welding set
Grinder set
Compressor
Drilling machine
Carpentry Workshop
1
1
2
127.857
0.7
0.7
0.7
2.286
21.429
42.857
66.571
When simulating the above load with Homer, assuming that only half of the load is on every hour
from 8:00 am to 5:00pm everyday; and wind speed data is the same as that of Port St. John, a
total of 184 828 kWh/year is produced of which 50% is from Wind and the other 50% is from solar
arrays. The load served is 120 345kWh with excess electricity still left of 46 977kWh or 25%.
From the socio-economic survey, the system itself has barely stimulated/upgraded the standard of
living of people, which is a primary indicator before economic activities. There exist few individuals
already within the communities that are involved with sewing; and doing handcraft such as mats
and baskets. They could be properly coordinated, supported to increase their production.
Integrating provision of non-grid electricity with other complementary thermal energy sources such
as LP Gas, gel fuel, paraffin and other appropriate sources would boost the potential for economic
activity in some way. For example, women would form cooperatives to buy and sell these fuels.
The system is big enough to support other economic activities in the village. However, the inverter
will have to be substantial increased, because the existing inverter is not big enough to handle the
increased load for other economic activities.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 36 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
4.7.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Risks and challenges to optimal operation
As this project is a pilot project the risks are high, the hybrid system technology is new to South
Africa and the risks can stem from:
1. Using an unusual approach
2. Attempting to further technology
3. Training for new task or applying new skills
4. Developing and testing of new equipment, systems, or procedures
Therefore it is necessary to study and understand the risk before deciding to approve a project and
commit funds to it. The sources of risks could either be Internal or External. Internal risks include
market risks, of not fulfilling, either market needs or particular market; technical risks of not meeting
time, cost, or performance requirements due to technical problems with the end-item or project
activities; maturity of technology being tried. How ready is the end-item or process for production
and use: complexity. How many steps, elements, or components are in the products and process,
and what are their relationships: quality. How producible, reliable, and testable is the end-item or
process.
External risks includes only risks that stem from sources outside the project of which project
manager or stakeholders have little or no control over. These risks could be to market condition,
competitors actions, government regulation, decisions made by senior management or client
regarding project priorities, staffing, or budget, customers needs and behaviour, supplier relation,
adverse weather, material or labour resources (Nicholas JM, 2001).
In the two cases of Hluleka and Lucingweni Hybrid System, undertaking pilot projects of these
nature, a careful analysis of the risks was not undertaken as suggested. This is demonstrated by
the problems that were encountered in the implementation of both projects, as indicated in the
SSSA reports and from interviews with the users:
Market risk;
• Community is not satisfied with the level of service provided
• The system has never worked to the people satisfaction, therefore they are disillusioned
with hybrid system
• Ownership and maintenance of the system was not thought out at the inception of the
project
• Payment and revenue collection was not put in place at the inception of the project
Technical risks
• The project took longer than original planned, because some equipment were misdirected
to West Africa instead to South Africa
• The Inverters imported from UK broke down under overuse and a technician had to be
brought from overseas to repair the system
• Software communication problem between locally source balance of system with imported
equipment
• Maintenance and operation of the system was not put in place, no budget allocated and no
local personnel trained to operate and maintain the system
• The use of wind speed data of Port Elizabeth was very risky
A thorough risk analysis should have been undertaken before committing funds to the project, a
thorough feasibility study should have been undertaken to determine the load and assess available
renewable resources. The use of REETScreen alone to size the system was risky, the software is
intended for rough sizing in the pre-feasibility phase.
4.8.
Community satisfaction and appreciation
The community of Lucingweni and neighbouring villages perceived the non-grid mini-hybrid system
as ‘weak’, ‘inferior’ unreliable, and used all negative words to show their disappointment with the
performance of the system, given the history of the village’s energy provision through this
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 37 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
technology. During the ‘black-out’, the community did not know what was wrong with the system
and everyone had their own explanation of why the system was not working. Amongst the
explanations given were the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The system is not working because the contractor has not been fully paid for the
installation,
The key for the main distribution house is lost or stolen,
The key is kept by the young men that were trained by the contractor and they switch the
system on and off as they please,
The system is not working because it has been vandalised by the village young men,
The system failed because people started using heavy appliances such as stoves and irons
when they were not supposed to, and
The system was vandalised because people want grid electricity in the village.
The above statements from the community summarise people frustrations with the system, which
could have been avoided in the first. The system was installed free of charge, the people did not
have to pay for the service which led to abuse of the system such as trying to cook with the
system. Studies have shown that even people with grid electricity do not use it for cooking because
of its perceived high cost.
4.9.
Community participation
From the survey, it is clear that the communities were consulted at the inception of the project,
through their leadership structures: the local government and the traditional leadership; and directly
through community meetings. However, when the project was implemented, the participation of
the above community structure faded away, with involvement of external contractors and
employment of few local people.
There was a project steering committee put in place, at the beginning of the project whose
participation faded away also as the project was implemented, as well as the rest of the local
government leadership structures.
4.10.
Impact on communities and their expectations
•
•
•
•
•
Households have been highly disappointed by the performance of non-grid
electrification although there is some willingness to continue using the supply if they can
be assured that its performance will be improved
Households expected to be able to cook with an introduction of electricity and went out
of their way to buy appliances which they were informed they could use without
providing alternative was disappointment to the community. Households aspire to use
‘ESKOM’ electricity to meet all their needs; and for them any electricity that cannot cook
defeats the purpose of electrification. However, it should be borne in mind that the
community was not paying for the service with which they were provided, therefore the
high expectation for the system to meet all their energy needs.
Space heating is also equally important especially in winter, another reason to ensure
that there are reliable sources of energy for thermal use.
Poverty in the area leads to people looking up to the government for free services, the
culture of non-payment of municipality services is posing a big problem for the
government with limited resources.
The neighbouring villages which were not connected during the pilot phase of the
project that were supposed to have been connected within a 6 month period, were still
waiting eagerly to be connected. However, it does not seem likely at this stage. The
presence of this pilot installation had raised high hopes for the rural people and to be
dashed in the way it has been done has left a bitter taste, which has done more harms
to renewable energy technologies, which will take a long time to erase.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 38 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5. Recommendations
5.1.
Key elements arising
5.1.1. Clear recommendation on future design and installation improvement
The design was generally good. With hindsight, better resource information for example could
have improved cost optimisation.
Installation of power systems such as solar panels, batteries, backup generator, should be situated
at a secure place with easy access by operational staff.
The use of proper modelling tool, specifically designed for hybrid systems, for sizing of the system
such as Homer or Hybrid 2 should be used.
Assessment of all existing renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, ocean and wave power,
etc. should be thoroughly investigated before implementing a project.
SABS standards and regulations or International Electricity Standard, if SABS standard and
regulations do not exist, for installation of electrical systems, such as SANS 1102 should be
followed
An integrated energy approach in the design of rural energy supply should be followed and best
solution to satisfy the energy need
Timely assessment of the community needs must be made
5.1.2. Water purification plant and telecommunication systems performance
Essential services such as water, communication should be given a priority in the design of the
system.
This element is well covered in the Nov 03/04 NERSA report. The problems were not with energy
supply for these needs but rather with putting the peripheral systems/loads themselves in place.
5.1.3. Appropriate funding
Commercial viability is difficult to prove or attain for mini-grid only village electrification so a mix of
public (or grant) and private financing is required. Public finance options include capital subsidies
and ongoing support such as through a basic service monthly facility.
Revenues for grid connected mini-grids producing renewable power should be considered. These
include emissions reduction and renewable energy certificate revenues.
The collection of revenues relies on a suitable system owner to carry out collection of such.
5.1.4. Issues of ownership, service delivery and revenue collection
Ownership is critical and should be established, at different levels from the planning stages of the
project, throughout. The level of participation by all stakeholders ‘speaks' directly to the question of
ownership by all stakeholders at different levels. Local ownership, in particular, is ensured by ongoing information, consultation and participation by the local communities and their leadership.
(See page 98 of main report for recommendations)
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 39 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
On the issue of revenue collection - there could be two models - the flat rate and pre-paid
(standard pay per unit consumption) systems. From the finding of this study, these people
preferred the pre-paid system especially because they are already used to the pre-paid established
systems such as the Telkom, ESKOM and cell-phone pre-paid/card systems, all of which gives the
household to purchase as much as they can afford and enjoy the purchased service at leisure.
There is a strong willingness to pay for the service obtained, but the service has to be reliable and
meet the needs of the people, starting with the most basic needs according to survival priorities cooking, water heating, lighting and communication. Revenue collected monthly, potentially by the
IeC once established, can then be used and managed to maintain the system to continue
supplying the service.
5.1.5. Lessons for future implementation from an assessment of community participation
As evidenced in the discussions with the community in general and the leaders in particular, the
community participation was not enough, especially during the implementation of the project and
afterwards. There was a lot of expectation created and NOT MET with regard the provision of
/coupling with LP Gas and IEC for access to thermal energy to meet the most pressing thermal
needs.
The presence of, or the very lack of community participation can speak positively or negatively to
the issue of ownership. As already mentioned, this has to be done from project planning
throughout the lifetime of the project.
Overall, this seems to be repetition as its already covered in the report, under recommendations.
There is no "one-size-fits-all" kind of solution, whether pertaining to tariff structures, revenue
collection, ownership and community participation.
Get agreements and establish systems pertaining to tariffs, ownership and expectation of
community, government, contractor and all stakeholders
Setting-up of robust monitoring of the project through existing government structures such as, but
not limited to the local municipality
Commissioning of a system and guarantee should also be put in place in the early planning stages
prior to implementation.
5.2.
General findings from Hluleka
There appears to be a lack of clarity around actual infrastructure ownership and maintenance
arrangements. This uncertainty needs to be avoided from the outset if the lack of first-line
maintenance issue, and therefore any chance of sustainability, is to be addressed.
Installation of power systems such as solar panels, batteries, backup generator, should be situated
at a secure place with easy access by operational staff.
The backup generators should be connected in such a way that it kicks in automatically once more
power is needed.
The use of proper modelling tool, specifically designed for hybrid systems, for sizing of the system
such as Homer or Hybrid 2 should be used.
Essential services such as water, communication should be given a priority in the design of the
system
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 40 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Assessment of all existing renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, ocean and wave power,
etc. should be thoroughly investigated before implementing a project.
SABS standards and regulations or International Electricity Standard, if SABS standard and
regulations do not exist, for installation of electrical systems, such as SANS 1102 should be
followed
An integrated energy approach in the design of rural energy supply should be followed and best
solution to satisfy the energy need
5.3.
General findings from Lucingweni
The system is in some ways still being installed and commissioned, thus making a thorough
investigation of how replicable and viable the system is uncertain at this stage. This might
suggests that once the system is indeed commissioned and negotiations regarding ownership,
revenue and maintenance regimes have been completed, would require revisiting some of the
issues initially intended to be investigated through this pilot project. A suitable institutional home
would have to be found and mandated to undertake such a task. It would mean that the socioeconomic data collected through this project could be used as a baseline and the study repeated a
year or two after handover. Not continuing with further investigation would mean that resources
employed in determining the full potential of mini-grid to ‘energise sustainable rural development’ to
date would have been wasted. The productive use benefits of the system, those beyond the
services supplied by for example solar home system based electrification alone, have not yet been
tested to the degree to which they would need to be in documenting the benefits of such a system
in this regard.
This would mean the following:
• Getting agreement before implementation regarding ownership, tariffs, expectations of
community, government, contractor etc. The fact that people were not required to contribute
financially or otherwise gave people false hope that you can get something for nothing.
Since no tariffs structure were put in place at inception raised people expectation of getting
free electricity. The technology procurement process could have been more thorough.
• Setting up robust monitoring of the project through existing governance structure such as
local municipality
• Priority might have been given to provision of social services such as water, communication
and the community hall rather than to household energy needs, as is the case in this
project.
• Commissioning of the system and guarantee should have been put in place.
5.4.
Criteria for selection of mini-grid hybrids
The electrical grid is currently 11 km from Lucingweni and ±25 km from Hluleka. The nearest
established potential industrial customer is approximately 15 km away. In 2000, when the planning
began, the distance was probably twice as this when compared to 2002. At appointment of a
contractor to build the system, the grid was 17Km away. The reasons for choice of the nature
reserve site are unclear from the existing documentation but presumably based on the perceived
potential of sustainably energised eco-tourism. The village of Lucingweni (A or B) is considered to
have been somewhat lacking in an underpinning methodology for site selection. Site selection was
based on a place to pilot mini-grid systems rather than in keeping with the question above,
formulated more recently, of how a suitable option for electrification be chosen. In answering the
question as to selection of an appropriate method of electrification, the questions may have
revolved around issues such as willingness and ability of electrical consumers, be they
households, community service providers or potential businesses, to pay for the service and of the
likelihood of a large positive local economic development impact. The latter will also be a factor of
the availability of complementary networks for service provision.
• Distance from the grid, and the Distributor’s plans for expansion
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 41 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
5.5.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Settlement density
Availability of the energy resources (wind, solar)
Buy-in and support from the local community, based on a clear and unbiased presentation
of the costs, benefits and possible service levels. Several commentators emphasise that
this buy-in has to be ascertained both at the leadership and general household level, and
that leadership endorsement will not guarantee household participation.
Related to the above, the community’s expectations regarding grid electricity service
provision need to be understood if the benefits of the mini-grid are to be realised.
Current patterns of energy expenditure in terms of equivalent service requirements must
be compatible with proposed service charge regimes.
Levels of income and employment need to be understood in order to inform the design
process, output and service charge regimes.
Existing or good potential for income-generating activities.
Concerns regarding the current institutional model mean that stand alone mini-grid
installations are not viable. The need to be part of a more coherent, cluster of systems that
can share management resources is clear.
In undertaking the site selection process, it is important to identify the objective of the
process, specifically whether the objective is to find a site with good specific renewable
energy resources, or whether the objective is rural energy delivery, in which case a
technical solution is crafted for a site with specific needs, spatial layouts and energy
availability.
Investigate the possibility of combining different approaches – for example, using a smaller
sized mini-grid system for households located closer to the hybrid system, and high
demand commercial and industrial loads, and SHS for households located further away
from the hybrid system.
Check municipal capacity, infrastructure and plans regarding electrifying the households.
Guidelines for success
Based on the analysis and finding in the previous sections, the following are considered as critical
factors for successful replication of mini-grid hybrid systems in South Africa:
5.5.1. Feasibility Study
In implementing a mini-grid system, a thorough feasibility study should be undertaken to determine
energy resources available, because a small error in the assessment of energy resources,
especially of wind energy, can have a significant impact on the design of the system, which can be
costly. A thorough load audit and future demand should be determined to properly size the system.
5.5.2. Application process
It is strongly recommended that the households within the community go through an application
process for a connection, even if the intention is to electrify the entire community. A detailed
database must be setup, capturing all information related to each connection, including a formal
sign off for application (with acknowledgement of certain conditions such as using energy wisely).
This database can later be used to record payments, and of course tampering, complaints etc.
5.5.3. Significant consultations
In the SSSA reports is that Lucingweni was selected based on the criteria mentioned in Section
3.2.1. However, there is no record to indicate if the assessment was done, except, that some
socio-economic studies were done by other projects which we could not get hold of. The
consultative meetings that took place should have been minuted as records that can be referenced
in the future by interested parties.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 42 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5.5.4. Project Development and Management
IEC 62257-3 presents a comprehensive framework for the development and management of the
implementation of hybrid systems, summaries as follows:
5.5.5. Participants and Responsibilities
The implementation of hybrid system projects can be generalised as involving the following
participants;
• Regulatory Authority (Licensor)
• Project Developer
• Engineering Consultant
• Project Implementer or Contractor
• Sub-contractor(s)
• System Operator
• Maintenance Contractor
• Training Provider
• User (Consumer)
Depending on the circumstances and size of the system, a single party can address more than one
of the listed responsibilities above. The specific responsibilities of each participant are listed on
Table 10.
Table 10 Project participants and responsibilities
Participant
Regulatory Authority
Responsibility
Publish the regulatory framework, in line with the legislative
environment and Government policies and strategies
Licensing of system operators
Project Developer
Obtain resources for financing of the project
Define general specifications
Define environmental constraints
Appoint Engineering Consultant
Appoint Contractor
Decide if a quality assurance plan is necessary, and to launch it
Prepare a warranty plan
Engineering
Consultant
Translate user requirements into technical specifications
Prepare a warranty plan
Prepare Call for Tenders
Assess submitted tenders and make recommendations to the project
developer
Monitor construction activities and progress
Monitor expenditure against budgets and cash flow projections
Manage scope changes during construction
Check compliance of the system with the specifications
Project Implementer Perform the sizing of the system to comply with general specifications
(Contractor)
Construct the project on behalf of the project developer
Implement the quality assurance plan
Be responsible to the project developer for the conformity of the
installation with the following parts of the specification;
Locally available materials and skills
Local laws and regulations
Time schedule
System level specifications
Warranty
Commissioning plan
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 43 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Participant
Responsibility
Training of initial operators
Education of initial users
Submission of documentation as described in the quality
assurance plan
Other information
Management of sub-contractor(s)
Sub-Contractor(s)
Responsible to the project implementer for the satisfactory execution
of the selected part of the works as agreed with the project
implementer, or satisfactory supply of the equipment under the
Contractor’s supervision
Operator
Compliance with the quality assurance plan
Operation of the system in accordance with all safety regulations
Provision of the quality of service as contractually agreed by the
Regulatory Authority or in compliance with License conditions
Manage the maintenance and repairs pursuant to the contract with
the operator including the supply of spare parts
Maintenance
Contractor
Training Provider
Organise and implement the training supports and courses for
operating and maintenance agents and users
User
To use the installation according to the contract with the operator
5.5.6. Documentation
5.5.6.1.
Site log book
During construction, the Contractor should be required to maintain a site log book, with
specifications as to what should be recorded.
On completion of the project, the following documentation should be submitted to the project
developer or owner.
5.5.6.2.
Project implementation documentation
• Procurement documents
• Technical specifications of all components
• Commissioning report, including signed original certificates of all commissioning tests,
including a record of the prevailing conditions at the time of testing
• Training Manuals
• Safety Manuals
• Warranty documents
• Legal documents
5.5.6.3.
Operational Documentation
• System installation manual, incorporating the following aspects
o Safety manuals and safe operating procedures
o System layout drawings
o System single line diagrams
o Component installation directions and schematics
o Details of civil works, including foundations for support structures
o Listing of special tools required
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 44 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
o
DME New and Renewable Energy
System control specifications, describing all possible settings of control and
protection equipment
5.5.6.4.
Basic System Operations Manual
This document augments the detailed operational documentation above, and is meant to be used
for first line maintenance and repairs. It should be written from the perspective of someone with
basic skills in electrification, using simple language and simplified diagrams and figures to illustrate
points or service issues. This document should enable the local system technician to provide
sufficient information when reporting faults that require higher levels of intervention.
5.5.6.5.
Maintenance Manual
The maintenance manual should provide all information required regarding regularly scheduled
service and maintenance of specific components. This is intended for technicians and engineers
with higher levels of skills and knowledge of the system.
5.5.6.6.
Training Documentation
This document should capture all relevant information with regard to training, including the details
of all personnel who received training, the details of the training, the instructor, copies of
certificates where applicable, and signed test results for all trainees.
5.5.7. Training
Serious consideration should be taken of the need for independent user training, as contractors are
not specialist trainers, it is sometimes better to get qualified trainers directly involved. (South
African Clinic electrification experience)
5.5.8. Project management
Clear, continuous, robust project management is a standard requirement of a project of this scale.
Recommended that there should be:
•
•
Agreed installation specifications (e.g. see comments above re module mounting) – signed
off by client representative
Agreed commissioning test to be done at installation (at which time a part payment can be
made)
These commissioning tests need to be documented, and verified to the satisfaction of the client.
Normally they would be done by the contractor, but in the presence of either a client engineer, or
an engineering consultant (project manager).
Then, at end of warranty period, there must be another verified check of entire system, to confirm
that all equipment is functioning as per spec (while still in warranty). Normally a retention payment
is held back until this time.
The independent party checking on commissioning also checks that users have been adequately
trained, if not, commissioning test fails, training contractor has to retrain.
For a successful replication of hybrid mini-grid systems in South Africa, the following aspects would
have to be adequately addressed and be in-place.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 45 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5.5.9. Integrated Energy Supply
When deciding on model for non-grid rural electrification an integrated energy supply approach, as
stated in the DME to the Guidelines National Electrification Planning (2001). The document states
that in the situation where non-grid solution is considered and the basic energy needs of household
cannot be satisfied by the solution on its own, complimentary energy sources should be available
to fill the gap. We recommend that Integrated Energy Centre be established to cater for community
thermal needs such as cooking and space heating.
5.5.10. Standards
In the event that future hybrids are developed by private sector developers, standards for all
components and the systems themselves will have to be in place, to ensure uniformity, safety and
reliability of the components. Furthermore, these standards will ensure a fair and equitable
adjudication of proposals and offers from developers, and streamline the decision process.
The development must also be fully compliant with all existing standards and regulations, and
specific processes should be in place to ensure this compliance.
5.6.
Attracting Private Sector Investment
Given that these systems yield returns that are not necessarily attractive for private sector funding
institutions, the Government of South Africa would have to create special financial instruments,
administered by an institution such as the DBSA. This fund would possibly take up equity in a
proposed development, so as to improve the achievable returns for the balance of the funding
requirements, and reduce the risk to private sector institutions.
Furthermore, the only way that a hydro, geothermal, biomass, wind or solar private-sector power
developer can make money - pay its debts and earn a profit - from developing a renewable
resource, is to convert that resource to electricity. Therefore, in order for an entrepreneur to
finance a renewable energy project, it must first secure the legal right to enter the land, the right to
explore for, extract, or use its renewable resource, and the right to convert that resource to
electricity and sell electricity to a customer. Furthermore, these legal rights must be firmly in place
before a developer can obtain financing.
5.7.
Integrated Planning Frameworks
The need to plan the implementation of mini-grid hybrid systems in close consultation with other
service delivery agencies cannot be over-emphasised. It is critical for example to understand the
Integrated Development Plan (IDP) of the area, together with its associated Spatial Development
Strategy.
The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects
Final Report
August 2008
Page 46 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Appendix A: Mini-grid hybrid system evaluation: Cost-benefit analysis
Appendix A (Interim report A) Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
June 2007
Table of Contents
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 47 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
1. Summary
A cost benefit analysis of various options for the electrification of Lucingweni is presented. This
utilizes information from the project installation, coupled with information gleaned from suppliers
and other sources to prepare basic system designs for:
• Mini-grid electrification (using pilot project costs, as well as probable new installation costs)
• Mini-grid plus Solar Home System electrification
• Solar Home System only
• Mini-grid using diesel (or biodiesel ) as the source
• Grid electrification
These designs are all costed, from both a capital and operational point of view, and the cost of
energy (with and without capital repayment) determined. From this one can estimate possible tariff
scenarios. Furthermore, a benefit points concept is introduced, to allow for a broader quasi socioeconomic comparison of the different solutions.
Based on the findings of this study, a combination of a micro-grid serving the higher load
requirements of water pumping, social services and productive use would yield the highest benefit
per unit cost. The study also highlights the differences in results when considering capital plus
operational costs, or only focussing on the operational costs.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 48 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
2. The need for technology decisions, and broad approaches
Data gathered from the Lucingweni mini-grid site provides a unique opportunity to inform debate
and planning perspectives regarding the more general area of rural energy service delivery, and in
particular, electricity service delivery.
Government (at various levels), private sector energy suppliers, communities, and the National
Utility (or future Regional electricity Distributors) all need to make informed decisions about when
to install a mini-grid, rather wait for the grid, use solar home systems (SHS) or other options. There
are a range of issues that affect such decisions, including:
• proximity to the national grid (cost of extending grid lines)
• availability of energy on these lines (many rural grid lines are already at their load limit)
• knowledge of existing or proposed grid electrification plans in the region (a grid line might
be about to come nearby)
• local density of the loads that need energy (cost of local reticulation)
• resource levels at the site (wind, biomass, solar, micro-hydro) – affects the cost of
delivering energy from renewable resources
• current household and social infrastructure energy and more specifically electricity demand
(water supply, health centres, schools) (different energy supply options may service these
needs in different ways)
• income levels, willingness and ability to pay
• current economic activity, and potential for future economic activity (productive use of
energy) – critical in assessing the likely benefit of different electrification options
• capacity in the demand area to undertake the necessary support
• capacity in the region (institutional private sector or other) to provide ongoing support,
management and second level maintenance
In the South African context, it must be emphasized that grid planning uncertainty remains one of
the key factors in decisions. This author has been involved in a number of investigations around
isolated mini-grid project development, where a major activity has been to identify sites where
there is relative security that the main National grid will not arrive. By their very nature, good minigrid sites (which have high local density of loads, and good economic potential) are also good sites
to grid connect. Furthermore, the cost of grid connections to a particular settlement is highly
dependent on what other grid electrification is planned or taking place in adjacent
regions/settlements. Given the ongoing pace/scale of rural grid electrification, it is often difficult to
do this. For this reason, we feel that significant effort needs to be spent on regional grid planning
process. There are examples of how these planning processes have been modified to include
grid/mini-grid and stand-alone (SHS) as options.
• IREMP (2006) The Integrated Rural Electrification Masterplan process that is nearing
completion in Uganda, illustrates possible methodologies.
• Banks et al (2000) presents an electrification modelling tool that can help at a strategic level
(this tool has subsequently been developed further with funding from Eskom and DME).
• We also understand that Eskom is currently undertaking a ‘universal’ access planning
exercise – which we trust will help to clarify regional electrification plans
Figure 9 illustrates a possible regional level approach, and is adapted from IREMP (2006). Banks
et al (2000) also presents possible strategies for this regional level planning.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 49 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
Process
First pass decisions
Using available data (typically on GIS),
allocate settlements in region to:
•
Definitely grid
•
Definitely mini-grid
•
Definitely stand-alone
•
uncertain
DME New and Renewable Energy
Criteria
Estimate cost of electrification below norms (on per connection
basis): larger communities, households close together,
settlements near existing or planned grid infrastructure
Estimate cost of local reticulation low. Reasonable size
communities, households close together, settlements remote
from existing grid infrastructure, close to energy source, key
anchor loads present
Estimate cost of grid electrification well above (on per
connection basis): small communities, households widely
dispersed, settlement remote for current or planned grid
infrastructure and from other settlements.
All settlements, areas where the technology decisions is not
clear or controversial
Network
Development
Planning
For ‘definitely grid’ and ‘uncertain’ areas
develop grid network development plan
with sufficient detail to estimate costs
and interdependencies
Preliminary
review
Review plan to identify and remove from
grid plan areas which are too expensive
Prioritisation
Rank all remaining electrification projects
in order of priority for electrification
First pass – ‘rough’ grid planning tools and methods
Consider using GIS model tool (see Banks 2000)
Cost per connection very high
Consider using cost per ‘benefit point’ as criteria.
Figure 9 Illustration of first pass regional approach to identifying stand-alone, mini-grid and grid
connected areas (Adapted from IREMP 2006)
The strategies documented above, do not however cater well for a mixed mini-grid/SHS approach
(where large loads in productive use area might be connected to a mini-grid, and smaller
household loads – particularly on the periphery, are fitted with SHS). This concept is described in
some detail in Banks & Aitken (2004, pp83 ff)
Ultimately, energy service planners will need to develop tools and methodologies to decide in
advance, which electrification route to follow. Lucingweni (and Hluleka) provide a good opportunity
to gather baseline data that can provide indicative costs as inputs to such regional tools (e.g. the
electrification model). To this end, the section 4 and 5 discusses in more detail the costs and
benefits of Lucingweni as a case study. Section 6 presents first pass costing of a number of
alternative strategies for providing electricity to Luncigweni, and compares the costs and benefits
of these different strategies.
Section 8 draws conclusions and recommendations from a Cost/benefit perspective. These of
course need to be combined with other perspectives in reaching final decisions, using a multicriteria approach.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 50 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3. Cost/benefit methodology
Energy service delivery can be costed in purely financial terms (cost per household connection, or
the cost per kWh). However, this does not adequately express the differences in actual service
delivery. For example, a solar home system may deliver power at R12/kWh, which is 24 times
more expensive the retail price of grid electricity. However, in terms of cost per hour of lighting, it
may only be 4 times more expensive, simply because the solar system uses the electricity far more
efficiently. A detailed economic analysis tries to capture the value of particular benefits to society at
large, using shadow costing, marginal costs, and modifies benefit valuation using concepts such as
the ‘consumer surplus’ (Davis and Horvei, 1995).
Our analysis is constrained by time, and utilizes a financial costs approach. However, in order to
allow for a reasonable comparison between technologies that offer broadly similar services, yet
significantly different quantities of energy (in kWh), we have introduced the ‘benefit point’ concept
(similar to that used in the Electrification model (Banks 2000))
The value of a benefit point given to a particular category of service provision can of course be
debated. However, once agreed, this provides a very rapid and easy to use methodology for
comparing the cost/benefit ratio of different energy (or more specifically) electrification solutions.
Banks 2000b provides further detail on the benefit points methodology and suggested values.
For present purposes we propose the following scale of benefit points:
Table 11 Proposed benefit points scale
Load Category
Benefit points per
load unit served
Grid connected (no load limit,
1
power available at Eskom tariff)
Min-grid households
.9
Schools
15
Clinics
15
Street lights
0.5
Water pump
20
Community Centre
10
Spaza Shops
1
Refrigerators
2
System Loads
0
Community plugs, lights etc
4
Other loads
6
SHS connected household (50
0.75
Wp)
SHS connected household (100
0.82
Wp, with Inverter)
If this method is to be used more extensively, we recommend that particular consideration be given
to the appropriate weighting of benefit points for social services and for power supply that can
enable income generation (Other loads, community plugs, Spaza shops and other productive uses)
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 51 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4. Information required to estimate costs of mini-grid supply
The Supplier provided some information on costs of Lucingweni. However, these are once off costs
and reflect the fact that this was a pilot installation, and not subject to competitive bidding. In order
to provide a revised cost benefit analysis, applicable to ‘non-pilot’ type projects, we have used the
cost assumptions provided in Banks & AItken 2004 (Chapter 2), updated where possible by
inflation, or as indicated through consultations with suppliers.
4.1.
PV modules
Module prices have increased during the last few years, as there has been a shortage of solar
grade silicon, due to the very rapid international expansion of the market. There are however
strong indications that the price of the technology will reduce in the next few years, as new
technologies (some South African) are being brought to the market. The prices indicated below
assume large orders.
Table 12 Key data for PV modules
Technology type
R/Wp
Installed Capex required to gain 1
(R7.5/USD) cost/Wp kWh/day at average radiation
of 5 KWh/day, 35o tilt angle)
(R/kWh)
4.2
R 31.50
R 38.50
R 7,700.00
3.5
R 26.25
R 33.25
R 6,650.00
Cost
(USD)
per Wp
Poly or mono-crystalline
Amorphous
cell
technology
New technology (e.g.
2.52
thin film)
(Updated from Banks & Aitken, p57)
R 18.90
R 25.90
R
5,180.00
For the purposes of this study, we have used an installed cost of R36/Wp. Note that the Shell/NER
contract price for modules is R52/Wp.
For the Lucingweni area, we have assumed a design radiation level of 4.5 kWh/m2. In other words,
an array of size 1 kWp, orientated correctly (about 40o to the horizontal, facing due north) will
produce 4.5 kWh of electricity per day. In summer production will be higher. This would need to be
verified for different parts of the country. There is also considerable attention to improve yields if
seasonal, partial or full tracking is implemented – which could be justified on large installations.
4.2.
Diesel Gensets
Banks & Aitken (??) provide an overview of diesel (or biodiesel) genset application for mini-grids.
The costs of energy delivered by a diesel (or biodiesel) genset of course depend significantly on
how it is used, as the efficiency (kWh electricity produced per litre diesel) and the maintenance
costs vary significantly, depending on the load. However, for current purposes, we have used
Banks & Aitken costs, with the following changes:
• We have updated their capital and non fuel operating costs by a factor of 10% for inflation
• Fuel cost adjusted from R4/litre to R6.70/litre
Table 13 Genset Cost information
in Cost per kWh
Power rating of Cost
of Consumption
at
R6.7/litre,
genset
installed unit in l/kWh at 75% load
with maint and
genset
room
rebuild
with
control
panel
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Cost per kWh
assuming only
runs at 75%
load
Page 52 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
12.5 kW
20 kW
53 kW
83710
87780
138380
DME New and Renewable Energy
0.35 R 3.64 to R R 2.8 to R 3.2
4.32
0.35 R
3.64
R
2.86
0.33 R
2.92
R
2.41
For the CBA model (results presented in section 6 it was necessary to separate fuel and other
operational costs, and have used the following simplified table.
Table 14 Simplified genset modelling paramters
Service
Cost of installed unit in Consumption
of genset room with control in l/kWh at cost
R2000 + 5%
75% load
panel
of Capex
12.5 kW
R 83 710
0.35
R
4,093
20 kW
R 87 780
0.35
R
4,195
53 kW
R 138 380
0.33
R
5,460
Power
rating
genset
4.3.
Rebuild
Capex
*30%
R 25,113
R 26,334
R 41,514
Fuel Cells
Fuel cells are starting to be considered as a future technology for distributed generation, and are
discussed in the context of mini-grid briefly by Banks & Aitken (2004, p 58). However, they are not
considered as a commercially viable option yet.
4.4.
Wind turbines
Several wind turbines are available. Banks & Aitken (2004, p 59) indicate that costs range from
R20/W for 6 kW machines, up to R52/rated watt for smaller machines. There is a considerable
price range, with some local manufacturers at the time indicating costs of R13/installed W.
Turbines obviously need to be placed on masts and foundations, which can add a further R4 to
R10 per Watt installed. From the Lucingweni NER/Shell proposal prices, the 6 x 6 kW Proven
turbines had a cost of R30/Wp. Recent prices from Proven indicate R42 /installed Watt (including
the tower). For the purposes of this study we assume a cost of R30/rated watt (turbine and mast).
For Luncigweni, we have assumed a good capacity factor of 25%. That is, a turbine rated at 1 kW
will produce: 25% x 1 kW x 24 h = 6 kWh on average per day. See section ?? of main report for
further information on the wind resource.
4.5.
Batteries
Battery’s for mini-grid type applications are typically sold as 2 V cells. Those at Lucingweni are
labelled to have a nominal capacity of 3000 Ah (on the glass cases), and given that there are two
parallel strings of 110 cells each, the total nominal energy storage capacity is:
(2V x 3000 Ah) X 110 Cells x 2 Strings = 1.32 MWh
Discussion with the contractor indicated that they are in fact rated at 5070 Ah. This gives a total
storage capacity of:
(2V x 5070 Ah) X 110 Cells x 2 Strings = 2.23 MWh
However, in order to prolong life, batteries should only be discharged to about 80% of the capacity
(and this only occasionally), with daily depth of discharge (DOD) being of the order of 30% or less.
This reduces their effective energy storage capacity. For a system with only renewable energy
generation, it is necessary to rely on the battery to get past periods of no wind/sun. As a rule of
thumb, many systems are designed with battery autonomy of 4 days (i.e. enough energy in the
battery to supply all loads for 4 days, with no energy input). However, if a diesel genset is
included, then this genset can be configured to autostart when the batteries approach maximum
allowed DOD, and a far smaller battery bank can be used. For the comparative designs we have
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 53 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
assumed up to 10% of the energy will be provided by a diesel genset, and have reduced the days
battery autonomy to 3 days. (It could even be reduced further, although one has to take care that
the batteries can still absorb all the energy from the renewable energy sources.
The cost of the batteries is not separately listed in the project documentation. However, based on
indicative prices from manufacturers, we have assumed a delivered price of R2.41 per Ah for a 2 V
cell (based on indicative prices for large batteries provided by a manufacturer). This gives an
estimated price of R 2. 29 million for the as built batteries (and appropriately scaled prices for the
other system sizes modelled). Note there is significant variation in battery price, depending on the
specific technology used.
4.6.
Control System costs
There are two main classes of control equipment required in hybrid mini-grid systems:
• Generator controllers (e.g. to control input of wind turbines, PV modules or even a diesel
genset in to the system)
• Load inverters/controllers – which manage the flow of power from the DC sources out to an
AC load
In some case these are combined, and a bi-directional inverter can accommodate energy flows in
both directions. Given the variability of configurations, and the fact that for Lucingweni, no
component specific costing is provided, we have utilized the following approximations.
Table 15 Control system costs
Price range (From prices Used for this report. First
gathered by Restio Energy figure is for as built cost
estimate, second is for
in 2004)
CBA
assuming
larger
volumes (see note below)
Wind – grid connected R 4 to R7 /Watt
R 6 /W and R2/W
inverters
Solar
–
MPPT
grid R 1.6 to R4
R4/W and R1.5/W
connect inverter
Load inverter
R 3.5 to R20
R 4/W and R2/W
Item
Note: 2006 indicative prices obtained from a South African manufacturer indicate significant
potential for cost reductions (with prices in the range of R0.75 to R 2.6/W for different types of
medium scale power converters). Hence the somewhat lower figures used for the CBA in
section 6.
Estimated product lifetimes are indicated on the CBA summary sheets. As with many electronic
products, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the life of these devices. These devices may
also be vulnerable to lightning. This is one of the significant risk areas for a small scale mini-grid
operator or community, and one of the motivations for spreading risk across more than one
installation.
4.7.
Installation and Control room costs
Installation and control room costs are assumed to be 20% of the capital cost of the generation
equipment (excluding reticulation). This should include connectors, cables, and dataloggers,
secure building, as well as labour and transport.
4.8.
Reticulation costs
One of the most important factors when considering mini-grid implementation, is the local
reticulation cost. Indeed, if one takes the budget figure given by Shell, and divides this by the 220
households, the local reticulation was more than R5000/household. This is more than enough to
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 54 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
equip each house with a complete SHS. If only 120 connections were made (as per review team
physical check), then the cost is closer to R10 000, just for the wires from the power system to the
house and the ready boards/meters. (There are a number of informal connections, which help to
improve the cost per connection figures).
Local reticulation costs are strongly dependent on settlement topography, settlement layout, and
the approximate local density of households. Indeed, based on prior work done by Restio Energy
(looking for mini-grid sites) in the Eastern Cape and northern KwaZulu Natal, there are relatively
few remote (from grid), un-electrified settlements that have households close enough together to
reduce local reticulation costs to less than R3000/household.
Note: for the tables below, we have counted all connections (including streetlights, community
plugs, etc.) – and have used the original Shell estimate of 220 households. This gives a total of
275 connections, and for the budget figure of R1.153 million, this gives an average cost of R3
744/connection.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 55 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5. Lucingweni base case costing
Table 16 provides a summary of the main assumptions used to estimate salient capital and
operational costs for the Lucingweni system, using the Shell Solar design loads, and the costing
information provided by Shell. Note that we have used information provided above to estimate the
costs of certain components (as the Shell budget did not list all the independent components of the
system).
From this summary, it will be noted that the cost of energy provided by the sytem is rather high:
R14.26 per kWh (if capital costs (generation and reticulation) are included, discount rate of 8%),
R4.88/kWh just to recover the operational costs.
The Net Present Value (NPV) numbers provided do not include allowance for revenue, as this is
discussed separately below – the project thus has a negative NPV (effectively the cost of delivering
the service).
Of more concern is rather high cost per connection – at a capital cost of R30 000, this isone of the
most expensive electrification projects to date in South Africa. Note that we have counted street
lights, etc. as a full connection to get this average. If these are excluded the cost is of the order of
R37 500. Note too that for the purposes of this exercise we have assumed there are 220
connections (as per budget). Site investigates indicate only 120 formal connections, although
there are several ‘informal’ connections (some estimates indicate as many as 400!)
Given the above costs, what tariffs would need to be charged?
Table 17 shows two possible tariff options that would recover adequate revenue to cover the
operational costs only. (It would be very difficult to recover capital costs, and even in the case of
grid electrification this is not normally done for rural areas7). Note, these revenue collection models
all assume that all consumers use their full allocated allowance, and that payment rates are 100%.
Obviously, it would be necessary to charge even higher tariffs, to allow for lower than anticipated
demand, and a small measure of non-payment. Banks & Aitken (2004, pp91 ff) explore scenarios
using different tariffs for mini-grid systems.
7 In the off-grid concession programme, a portion of the capital costs is recovered through the tariff.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 56 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 16 Overview of the Lucingweni Mini-grid, as per proposed installation
Scenario Description
Lucingweni Mini-Grid - as specified
Last updated
This scenario used the Shell Solar load estimates, and budget costs
Demand information
Mini Grid
Number of:
Unit load (kWh/day)
Design load
Mini GG hhSchools
Clinics
220
0
0.91
4.89
313.58 kWh/day
0
0
02-Oct-06
CC
Street lightsWater pum Other (see
70
3
15
0.182
10 Peak load (Design)
49.43
Total
308 connections
266.545 kWh/day
kVA
Through put/day
kWh
0
157
Capex
Power System equipment
Type and description
Installed capacity
Diesel genset:
PV modules
MPPT charge controller
Wind turbines
Wind turbine controllers
Bi-directional inverter
Battery: Tubular
Installation and sundries
0
53.6
56.0
36.0
30.0
100
2230.80
-
kVa
kWp
kW
kW
kW
KVa
kWh
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
2,787,508
224,000
1,085,175
180,000
400,000
2,693,691
438,574
R
7,808,948
R
1,153,417
Per connection (incl SH R
29,099
157
-
Total cost of Generation and power management technology
Capex/kWh of des load (M-G)
R 24,902 Capex per kWh/SHS
Reticulation (Mini-Grid only)
No connections to the mini-grid (all types)
Total Capex
R
308 R/Conn
8,962,365
Operational Costs (excluding planned replacements)
Diesel genset:
Fuel cost
R 6.7 /l
Routine maintenance
Battery maintenance
PV module cleaning and array maintenance
Controllers and inverters
Wind turbine maintenance
Site operator and revenue collection
System Manager
N/A
3744.86
Operational costs are per year
0.00 l fuel day
Total annual operation costs
Costs of replacing/overhauling items
Diesel generator
Battery bank
Power electronics
Wind turbines
Life (years)
3
8
10
10
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
26,937
5,575
8,040
21,704
21,600
32,000
R
115,855
Cost per replacement
R
R
2,693,691
R
804,000
R
1,085,175
Discount rate
8%
Total annual operatonal cost (including replacements) if discounted and amortised
Expressed in R/connection point served/year
R
R
474,574
1,541
Energy supplied M-G
20 year NPV (with capex)
20 year NPV (no capex)
R
R
(44,227)
(15,128)
R
R
14.26
4.88
266.5 SHS
R
R
0 Total
(13,621,803.07)
(4,659,438.47)
266.5 kWh/day
Per connection
Per connection
Cost of Energy (if capex must be recovered) (R/kWh)
Cost of Energy (if capex supplied by external funder) (R/kWh)
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 57 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 17 Lucingweni – Shell costs and loads: Tariff and benefits summary
Scenario Description
Lucingweni Mini-Grid - as specified
Last updated
02-Oct-06
CC
This scenario used the Shell Solar load estimates, and budget costs
Mini-grid System
Solar Home Systems
Total
Energy Supplied (kWh/day)
266.5 Energy Supplied
0.0
266.5
Capex incl retic
R
8,962,365
Capex
R
R
8,962,365
Capex per kWh
R
33,624
R
R
33,624
20 year NPV (with cap R
20 year NPV (no capex R
Opex (incl replc), discounted and amortize R
CoE, including Capex (R/kWh)
R
CoE excluding Capex (R/kWh)
R
(13,621,803)
(4,659,438)
474,574
14.26
4.88
Revenue option One (Standard pay per unit consumption - if all use their design consumption)
Load Category
Tariff
Unit Cons (Wh/day) (R/kWh)
No of
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total consu
266.5 kWh/day
220
0
0
70
3
1
8
4
1
1
0
0
0
910
4890
0
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
17800
0
0
0
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
R 4.88 R 135.02
R 4.88 R 725.54
R 4.88 R
R 4.88 R
27.00
R 4.88 R 1,483.72
R 4.88 R 148.37
R 4.88 R
22.26
R 4.88 R 118.70
R 4.88 R
60.09
R 4.88 R 2,641.02
R 4.88 R
R 4.88 R
R 4.88 R
Total revenue
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
29,704.09
1,890.26
4,451.16
148.37
178.05
474.79
60.09
2,641.02
39,547.84
Revenue option two (flat rate plus for mini-grid, fixed fee for SHS)
Base charge
R
62.50 Threshold
20 kWh/month Tariff
Load
Category
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
No of
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
Unit Cons (Wh/day)
220
0
0
70
3
1
8
4
1
1
0
0
0
910
4890
0
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
17800
0
0
0
R 116.25
R 963.66
R
62.50
R
62.50
R 2,051.67
R 135.42
R
62.50
R
92.83
R
62.50
R 3,712.42
R
62.50
R
60.00
R 100.00
Total Revenue
Valueing the Benefits - using Benefit points
Load Category
No of
Benefit points per Benefits
Min-grid households
220
0.9
198
Schools
0
15
0
Clinics
0
15
0
Street lights
70
0.5
35
Water pump
3
20
60
Community Centre
1
10
10
Spaza Shops
8
1
8
Refrigerators
4
2
8
System Loads
1
0
0
1
4
4
Community plugs, light
Other loads
0
6
0
SHS (50 Wp)
0
0.75
0
0
0.82
0
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total number of benefit points for this implementation
323
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Revenue/year
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
356,449.14
22,683.13
53,413.96
1,780.47
2,136.56
5,697.49
721.09
31,692.28
474,574.10
R
7.00
Revenue/year
25,575.92
4,375.00
6,155.00
135.42
500.00
371.33
62.50
3,712.42
40,887.58
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Total Benefit Points
Capex per benefit point
Opex per benefit point
NPV incl Capex/benefit point
NPV excl Capex/benefit point
R
R
R
R
306,911.00
52,500.00
73,860.00
1,625.00
6,000.00
4,456.00
750.00
44,549.00
490,651.00
323
27,747.26
1,469.27
(42,173)
(14,426)
The above results demonstrate that:
• Electrification using mini-grid is very expensive on a per connection basis (even if all loads
such as street lights are counted as ‘connections’)
• That the cost of energy delivered is of the order of R14/kWh (if capital costs included).
• If one assumes that capital costs are fully subsidized (as is the effective case for rural grid
electrification), then the cost of energy is more reasonable, but still relatively high at about
R4.88/kWh.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 58 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
The tariffs that it would be necessary to charge (assuming capital fully subsidized) are
typically above current willingness to pay levels, even with a R40/month FBE allocation –
they would not be affordable by the majority of households in the community (R 130 less
R40 =R95/month). (Some would be able to afford them). Note that municipalities elsewhere
in south Africa have allocated part of the FBE to thermal fuels, it is unlikely that a full
R40/month could be available to subsidies mini-grid electrification.
The above analysis of course assumes that there is significant productive use (from some
of the water pumps, the refrigerators and the ‘community plugs’). To date this has not been
demonstrated on site, but it is hoped that this could develop.
Note that there is significant extra capacity in the system (using our sizing options - see
below where the same load is met, but with a smaller system design). Once adequate
monitoring of the system has demonstrated that this is actually the case, it would be
possible to try and stimulate even further productive use capacity, which could significantly
improve the cost/benefit ratio for the project.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 59 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6. Cost benefit of different electrification options
In the following section we seek to compare the costs and benefits of electrifying Lucingweni using
a number of different options:
• A Mini-grid base case (scenario AA). This uses the same load estimates as the Shell
design – although use of the power is slightly modified (less street lights, inclusion of a
school and other productive use activities). The scenario uses the same design approach
and costings as used for the other scenarios (this gives lower capital costs, and a diesel
genset as part of design).
• Mini-grid for main loads, some of the households, and SHS for the remainder of the
households. (With two different classes of SHS being used) (Scenario DD).
• Mini-grid for the main loads, excluding all households. The latter are all electrified using
SHS (again with two different classes of SHS being allowed) (Scenario EE).
• SHS only for households- no productive use or provision of electricity for social services
(Scenario FF)
• Mini-grid, using diesel genset plus battery (no solar or wind). This design allows 24
availability of power, without needing the genset to run all the time. Furthermore, when the
genset does start up, it can run at near full load (its most efficient mode) – charging the
battery at the same time as delivering power to the consumers. This option is similar to a
biodiesel option. (Scenario HH).
• Grid electrification is modelled – using a generic method. (Scenario GG).
A word of caution. While we regard these costing results to be valid for the purposes of broadly
comparing different technical solutions, there are two important limitations:
a) It is been difficult to obtain reliable information on costs for the different renewable energy
components. The scenarios presented use the above defined sizing scale factors.
However, experience in the renewable energy industry indicates that there can be
considerable cost variation for different products.
b) The above designs have been done using a spreadsheet mini-grid costing tool developed
by Restio Energy. This is not a detailed hybrid design tool such as Homer or HYBRID II.
However, given that all scenarios use similar costing approaches, we regard the approach as
being applicable for the purposes of this study.
The design summary sheets for each scenario are presented in Table 18 to Table 27. Table 28
provides a summary of the key results.
In an effort to provide a more comprehensive comparison of the cost/benefit ratio for the different
options, benefit points have been assigned to each type of load. It will be noted for example that a
main ‘national’ grid connected household is allocated 1 point, a mini-grid household load is
allocated 0.9 point, while a large SHS is allocated 0.82 benefit points, and a smaller SHS is
allocated 0.75 points. Social services such as schools, water supply and clinics are allocated a
high number of benefit points. Productive use applications are allocated even more. This benefits
point methodology allows one to normalize the costs of a project against perceived benefits.
Obviously, this depends on what weighting factors are given to each measured benefit. This
concept is discussed in some detail in Banks (2000).
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 60 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
7. Cost Benefit Analysis detailed results
Table 18 Lucingweni - Mini-grid base case
Scenario Description
Lucingweni - mini-grid base case
Last updated
Load and energy supply costs calculated using generic assumptiosn
Demand information
Mini Grid
Number of:
Unit load (kWh/day)
Design load
Mini GG hhSchools
Clinics
220
1
0.91
4.89
296.59 kWh/day
1
2
02-Oct-06
AA
Street lightsWater pum Other (see
20
2
31
0.182
10 Peak load (Design)
51.12
Total
275 connections
266.935 kWh/day
kVA
Through put/day
kWh
30
133
Capex
Power System equipment
Type and description
Installed capacity
Diesel genset:
PV modules
MPPT charge controller
Wind turbines
Wind turbine controllers
Bi-directional inverter
Battery: Tubular
Installation and sundries
53
32.6
35.0
24.0
24.0
69
1170.77
-
kVa
kWp
kW
kW
kW
KVa
kWh
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
138,380
1,174,514
52,500
720,000
48,000
138,000
1,413,702
737,019
R
4,422,115
R
1,029,837
Per connection (incl SH R
19,825
133
-
Total cost of Generation and power management technology
Capex/kWh of des load (M-G)
R 14,910 Capex per kWh/SHS
Reticulation (Mini-Grid only)
No connections to the mini-grid (all types)
Total Capex
R
275 R/Conn
5,451,952
Operational Costs (excluding planned replacements)
Diesel genset:
Fuel cost
R 6.7 /l
Routine maintenance
Battery maintenance
PV module cleaning and array maintenance
Controllers and inverters
Wind turbine maintenance
Site operator and revenue collection
System Manager
N/A
3744.86
Operational costs are per year
9.79 l fuel day
Total annual operation costs
Costs of replacing/overhauling items
Diesel generator
Battery bank
Power electronics
Wind turbines
Life (years)
3
8
10
10
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
23,936
5,460
14,137
2,349
2,385
14,400
21,600
32,000
R
116,267
Cost per replacement
R
41,514
R
1,413,702
R
238,500
R
720,000
Discount rate
8%
Total annual operatonal cost (including replacements) if discounted and amortised
Expressed in R/connection point served/year
R
R
314,459
1,143
Energy supplied M-G
20 year NPV (with capex)
20 year NPV (no capex)
R
R
(31,052)
(11,227)
266.9 SHS
R
R
0 Total
(8,539,360.32)
(3,087,408.74)
266.9 kWh/day
Per connection
Per connection
Cost of Energy (if capex must be recovered) (R/kWh)
Cost of Energy (if capex supplied by external funder) (R/kWh)
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
R
R
Jun 2007
8.93
3.23
Page 61 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 19 Lucingweni - base case: Revenue and Benefit calculations
Scenario Description
Lucingweni - mini-grid base case
Last updated
02-Oct-06
AA
Load and energy supply costs calculated using generic assumptiosn
Mini-grid System
Solar Home Systems
Total
Energy Supplied (kWh/day)
266.9 Energy Supplied
0.0
266.9
Capex incl retic
R
5,451,952
Capex
R
R
5,451,952
Capex per kWh
R
20,424
R
R
20,424
20 year NPV (with cap R
20 year NPV (no capex R
Opex (incl replc), discounted and amortize R
CoE, including Capex (R/kWh)
R
CoE excluding Capex (R/kWh)
R
(8,539,360)
(3,087,409)
314,459
8.93
3.23
Revenue option One (Standard pay per unit consumption - if all use their design consumption)
Load Category
Tariff
Unit Cons (Wh/day) (R/kWh)
No of
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total consu
266.9 kWh/day
220
1
1
20
2
1
8
12
1
8
1
0
0
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
0
0
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
R 3.23 R
Total revenue
89.33
480.05
196.34
17.87
981.70
98.17
14.73
78.54
39.76
196.34
785.36
-
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
19,653.59
480.05
196.34
357.34
1,963.40
98.17
117.80
942.43
39.76
1,570.72
785.36
26,204.95
Revenue option two (flat rate plus for mini-grid, fixed fee for SHS)
Base charge
R
52.50 Threshold
20 kWh/month Tariff
Load
Category
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
No of
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
Unit Cons (Wh/day)
220
1
1
20
2
1
8
12
1
8
1
0
0
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
0
0
R
83.22
R 567.45
R 215.83
R
52.50
R 1,189.17
R
94.17
R
52.50
R
69.83
R
52.50
R 215.83
R 945.83
R
60.00
R 100.00
Total Revenue
Valueing the Benefits - using Benefit points
Load Category
No of
Benefit points per Benefits
Min-grid households
220
0.9
198
Schools
1
15
15
Clinics
1
15
15
Street lights
20
0.5
10
Water pump
2
20
40
Community Centre
1
10
10
Spaza Shops
8
1
8
Refrigerators
12
2
24
System Loads
1
0
0
8
4
32
Community plugs, light
Other loads
1
6
6
SHS (50 Wp)
0
0.75
0
0
0.82
0
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total number of benefit points for this implementation
358
Appendix A Version 3.2
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
235,843.08
5,760.60
2,356.07
4,288.06
23,560.75
1,178.04
1,413.64
11,309.16
477.11
18,848.60
9,424.30
314,459.40
R
4.00
Revenue/year
18,307.67
567.45
215.83
1,050.00
2,378.33
94.17
420.00
838.00
52.50
1,726.67
945.83
26,596.45
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Total Benefit Points
Capex per benefit point
Opex per benefit point
NPV incl Capex/benefit point
NPV excl Capex/benefit point
R
R
R
R
Cost-benefit analysis
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Revenue/year
219,692.00
6,809.40
2,590.00
12,600.00
28,540.00
1,130.00
5,040.00
10,056.00
630.00
20,720.00
11,350.00
319,157.40
Jun 2007
358
15,228.92
878.38
(23,853)
(8,624)
Page 62 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 20 Lucingweni: Mini-Grid plus SHS, Design and Costs
Scenario Description
Lucingweni: Mini-grid & SHS combination
Last updated
Main loads and some hh connected to mini-grid, rest with SHS
Demand information
Mini Grid
Number of:
Unit load (kWh/day)
Design load
Mini GG hhSchools
Clinics
40
1
0.91
4.89
113.93 kWh/day
Medium SHS (50Wp)
60
1
2
02-Oct-06
DD
Street lightsWater pum Other (see
20
2
27
0.182
10 Peak load (Design)
23.60
Total
91 connections
102.535 kWh/day
kVA
120
Large SHS (100 Wp, AC)
Power System equipment
Type and description
Installed capacity
Through put/day
kWh
11
51
Capex
Diesel genset:
53 kVa
PV modules
12.5 kWp
MPPT charge controller
14.0 kW
Wind turbines
9.0 kW
51
Wind turbine controllers
9.0 kW
Bi-directional inverter
34 KVa
Battery: Tubular
449.71 kWh
Installation and sundries
SHS capex and installations
Total cost of Generation and power management technology
Capex/kWh of des load (M-G)
R 15,900 Capex per kWh/SHS
Reticulation (Mini-Grid only)
No connections to the mini-grid (all types)
Total Capex
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
138,380
451,154
21,000
270,000
18,000
68,000
543,031
301,913
1,080,000
2,891,478
R
273,000
Per connection (incl SH R
11,677
91 R/Conn
3,164,478
Operational Costs (excluding planned replacements)
Diesel genset:
Fuel cost
R 6.7 /l
Routine maintenance
Battery maintenance
PV module cleaning and array maintenance
Controllers and inverters
Wind turbine maintenance
Site operator and revenue collection
System Manager
SHS maintenance excluding battery replacements
Total annual operation costs
R 18,000
3000
Operational costs are per year
3.76 l fuel day
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
150 per hh
Costs of replacing/overhauling items
Life (years)
Diesel generator
3
Battery bank
8
Power electronics
10
Wind turbines
10
SHS Batteries
4
Discount rate
8%
Total annual operatonal cost (including replacements) if discounted and amortised
Expressed in R/connection point served/year
Energy supplied M-G
20 year NPV (with capex)
20 year NPV (no capex)
102.5 SHS
R
R
60 Total
(5,314,098.68)
(2,149,620.97)
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost per replacement
R
41,514
R
543,031
R
107,000
R
270,000
R
120,000
162.5 kWh/day
Per connection
Per connection
Cost of Energy (if capex must be recovered) (R/kWh)
Cost of Energy (if capex supplied by external funder) (R/kWh)
Cost-benefit analysis
9,194
5,460
5,430
902
1,070
5,400
21,600
32,000
27,000
108,057
R
R
218,944
808
R
R
(19,609)
(7,932)
R
R
Jun 2007
9.12
3.69
Page 63 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 21 Lucingweni: Mini-grid plus SHS: Revenue and Benefit Results
Scenario Description
Lucingweni: Mini-grid & SHS combination
Last updated
02-Oct-06
DD
Main loads and some hh connected to mini-grid, rest with SHS
Mini-grid System
Solar Home Systems
Total
Energy Supplied (kWh/day)
102.5 Energy Supplied
60.0
162.5
Capex incl retic
R
2,084,478
Capex
R 1,080,000.00 R
3,164,478
Capex per kWh
R
20,329
R
18,000.00 R
19,470
20 year NPV (with cap R
20 year NPV (no capex R
Opex (incl replc), discounted and amortize R
CoE, including Capex (R/kWh)
R
CoE excluding Capex (R/kWh)
R
(5,314,099)
(2,149,621)
218,944
9.12
3.69
Revenue option One (Standard pay per unit consumption - if all use their design consumption)
Load Category
Tariff
Unit Cons (Wh/day) (R/kWh)
No of
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total consu
162.5 kWh/day
40
1
1
20
2
1
4
12
1
8
1
60
120
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
200
400
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
R 3.69 R 102.15
R 3.69 R 548.93
R 3.69 R 224.51
R 3.69 R
20.43
R 3.69 R 1,122.55
R 3.69 R 112.25
R 3.69 R
16.84
R 3.69 R
89.80
R 3.69 R
45.46
R 3.69 R 224.51
R 3.69 R 898.04
R 3.69 R
22.45
R 3.69 R
44.90
Total revenue
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
4,086.07
548.93
224.51
408.61
2,245.09
112.25
67.35
1,077.64
45.46
1,796.07
898.04
1,347.06
5,388.22
18,245.30
Revenue option two (flat rate plus for mini-grid, fixed fee for SHS)
Base charge
R
25.00 Threshold
20 kWh/month Tariff
Load
Category
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
No of
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
Unit Cons (Wh/day)
40
1
1
20
2
1
4
12
1
8
1
60
120
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
200
400
R
53.41
R 501.33
R 176.08
R
25.00
R 1,076.42
R
63.54
R
25.00
R
41.03
R
25.00
R 176.08
R 851.33
R
60.00
R 100.00
Total Revenue
Valueing the Benefits - using Benefit points
Load Category
No of
Benefit points per Benefits
Min-grid households
40
0.9
36
Schools
1
15
15
Clinics
1
15
15
Street lights
20
0.5
10
Water pump
2
20
40
Community Centre
1
10
10
Spaza Shops
4
1
4
Refrigerators
12
2
24
System Loads
1
0
0
8
4
32
Community plugs, light
Other loads
1
6
6
SHS (50 Wp)
60
0.75
45
120
0.82
98.4
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total number of benefit points for this implementation
335
Appendix A Version 3.2
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
49,032.82
6,587.10
2,694.11
4,903.28
26,941.11
1,347.06
808.23
12,931.73
545.56
21,552.89
10,776.44
16,164.66
64,658.66
218,943.64
R
3.70
Revenue/year
2,136.52
501.33
176.08
500.00
2,152.83
63.54
100.00
492.40
25.00
1,408.67
851.33
3,600.00
12,000.00
24,007.70
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Total Benefit Points
Capex per benefit point
Opex per benefit point
NPV incl Capex/benefit point
NPV excl Capex/benefit point
R
R
R
R
Cost-benefit analysis
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Revenue/year
25,638.20
6,015.95
2,113.00
6,000.00
25,834.00
762.50
1,200.00
5,908.80
300.00
16,904.00
10,216.00
43,200.00
144,000.00
288,092.45
Jun 2007
335
9,434.94
652.78
(15,844)
(6,409)
Page 64 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 22 Lucingweni: Micro-grid plus SHS for all households: Design and costs
Scenario Description
Lucingweni: Mini-grid & SHS combination
Last updated
Key loads only connected to mini-grid, households all with SHS
Demand information
Mini Grid
Number of:
Unit load (kWh/day)
Design load
Mini GG hhSchools
Clinics
0
1
0.91
4.89
68.77 kWh/day
Medium SHS (50Wp)
80
1
2
02-Oct-06
EE
Street lightsWater pum Other (see
0
2
23
0.182
10 Peak load (Design)
16.94
Total
27 connections
61.895 kWh/day
kVA
140
Large SHS (100 Wp, AC)
Power System equipment
Type and description
Installed capacity
Through put/day
kWh
7
31
Capex
Diesel genset:
20 kVa
PV modules
7.6 kWp
MPPT charge controller
8.0 kW
Wind turbines
6.0 kW
31
Wind turbine controllers
6.0 kW
Bi-directional inverter
25 KVa
Battery: Tubular
271.47 kWh
Installation and sundries
SHS capex and installations
Total cost of Generation and power management technology
Capex/kWh of des load (M-G)
R 16,435 Capex per kWh/SHS
Reticulation (Mini-Grid only)
No connections to the mini-grid (all types)
Total Capex
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
87,780
272,338
12,000
180,000
12,000
50,000
327,799
188,383
1,300,000
2,430,301
R
81,000
Per connection (incl SH R
10,167
27 R/Conn
2,511,301
Operational Costs (excluding planned replacements)
Diesel genset:
Fuel cost
R 6.7 /l
Routine maintenance
Battery maintenance
PV module cleaning and array maintenance
Controllers and inverters
Wind turbine maintenance
Site operator and revenue collection
System Manager
SHS maintenance excluding battery replacements
Total annual operation costs
R 18,056
3000
Operational costs are per year
2.41 l fuel day
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
150 per hh
Costs of replacing/overhauling items
Life (years)
Diesel generator
3
Battery bank
8
Power electronics
10
Wind turbines
10
SHS Batteries
4
Discount rate
8%
Total annual operatonal cost (including replacements) if discounted and amortised
Expressed in R/connection point served/year
Energy supplied M-G
20 year NPV (with capex)
20 year NPV (no capex)
61.9 SHS
R
R
72 Total
(4,375,379.55)
(1,864,078.94)
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost per replacement
R
26,334
R
327,799
R
74,000
R
180,000
R
144,000
133.9 kWh/day
Per connection
Per connection
Cost of Energy (if capex must be recovered) (R/kWh)
Cost of Energy (if capex supplied by external funder) (R/kWh)
Cost-benefit analysis
5,886
4,195
3,278
545
740
3,600
21,600
32,000
33,000
104,844
R
R
189,861
769
R
R
(17,714)
(7,547)
R
R
Jun 2007
9.12
3.88
Page 65 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 23 Lucingweni: Micro-grid plust SHS for all households: Tariff and Benefit results
Scenario Description
Lucingweni: Mini-grid & SHS combination
Last updated
02-Oct-06
EE
Key loads only connected to mini-grid, households all with SHS
Mini-grid System
Solar Home Systems
Total
Energy Supplied (kWh/day)
61.9 Energy Supplied
72.0
133.9
Capex incl retic
R
1,211,301
Capex
R 1,300,000.00 R
2,511,301
Capex per kWh
R
19,570
R
18,055.56 R
18,756
20 year NPV (with cap R
20 year NPV (no capex R
Opex (incl replc), discounted and amortize R
CoE, including Capex (R/kWh)
R
CoE excluding Capex (R/kWh)
R
(4,375,380)
(1,864,079)
189,861
9.12
3.88
Revenue option One (Standard pay per unit consumption - if all use their design consumption)
Load Category
Tariff
Unit Cons (Wh/day) (R/kWh)
No of
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total consu
133.9 kWh/day
0
1
1
0
2
1
0
12
1
8
1
80
140
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
200
400
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
R 3.88 R 107.53
R 3.88 R 577.83
R 3.88 R 236.33
R 3.88 R
21.51
R 3.88 R 1,181.65
R 3.88 R 118.17
R 3.88 R
17.72
R 3.88 R
94.53
R 3.88 R
47.86
R 3.88 R 236.33
R 3.88 R 945.32
R 3.88 R
23.63
R 3.88 R
47.27
Total revenue
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
577.83
236.33
2,363.30
118.17
1,134.38
47.86
1,890.64
945.32
1,890.64
6,617.24
15,821.71
Revenue option two (flat rate plus for mini-grid, fixed fee for SHS)
Base charge
R
25.00 Threshold
20 kWh/month Tariff
Load
Category
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
No of
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
Unit Cons (Wh/day)
0
1
1
0
2
1
0
12
1
8
1
80
140
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
200
400
R
54.95
R 527.08
R 184.25
R
25.00
R 1,133.25
R
65.63
R
25.00
R
41.90
R
25.00
R 184.25
R 896.00
R
60.00
R 100.00
Total Revenue
Valueing the Benefits - using Benefit points
Load Category
No of
Benefit points per Benefits
Min-grid households
0
0.9
0
Schools
1
15
15
Clinics
1
15
15
Street lights
0
0.5
0
Water pump
2
20
40
Community Centre
1
10
10
Spaza Shops
0
1
0
Refrigerators
12
2
24
System Loads
1
0
0
8
4
32
Community plugs, light
Other loads
1
6
6
SHS (50 Wp)
80
0.75
60
140
0.82
114.8
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total number of benefit points for this implementation
317
Appendix A Version 3.2
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
6,933.93
2,835.96
28,359.62
1,417.98
13,612.62
574.28
22,687.69
11,343.85
22,687.69
79,406.93
189,860.56
R
3.90
Revenue/year
527.08
184.25
2,266.50
65.63
502.80
25.00
1,474.00
896.00
4,800.00
14,000.00
24,741.25
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Total Benefit Points
Capex per benefit point
Opex per benefit point
NPV incl Capex/benefit point
NPV excl Capex/benefit point
R
R
R
R
Cost-benefit analysis
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Revenue/year
6,324.92
2,211.00
27,198.00
787.50
6,033.60
300.00
17,688.00
10,752.00
57,600.00
168,000.00
296,895.02
Jun 2007
317
7,927.09
599.31
(13,811)
(5,884)
Page 66 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 24 Design and Costing for Lucingweni, if only SHS used
Scenario Description
SHS only
Only households serviced with SHS
Demand information
Mini Grid
Number of:
Unit load (kWh/day)
Design load
Last updated
Mini GG hhSchools
Clinics
0
0
0.91
4.89
0.00 kWh/day
Medium SHS (50Wp)
80
0
2
02-Oct-06
FF
Street lightsWater pum Other (see
0
0
0
0.182
10 Peak load (Design)
0.00
Total
0 connections
0 kWh/day
kVA
140
Large SHS (100 Wp, AC)
Power System equipment
Type and description
Installed capacity
Through put/day
kWh
0
0
Capex
Diesel genset:
0 kVa
PV modules
0.0 kWp
MPPT charge controller
0.0 kW
Wind turbines
0.0 kW
0
Wind turbine controllers
0.0 kW
Bi-directional inverter
0 KVa
Battery: Tubular
0.00 kWh
Installation and sundries
SHS capex and installations
Total cost of Generation and power management technology
Capex/kWh of des load (M-G)
Capex per kWh/SHS
Reticulation (Mini-Grid only)
No connections to the mini-grid (all types)
Total Capex
R
0 R/Conn
3000
R
0.0 SHS
R
R
0.00 l fuel day
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
150 per hh
72 Total
(2,385,460.95)
(1,085,460.95)
5,909
Cost-benefit analysis
21,600
24,000
33,000
78,600
Cost per replacement
R
R
R
R
R
144,000
72.0 kWh/day
Per connection
Per connection
Cost of Energy (if capex must be recovered) (R/kWh)
Cost of Energy (if capex supplied by external funder) (R/kWh)
Appendix A Version 3.2
-
Operational costs are per year
Costs of replacing/overhauling items
Life (years)
Diesel generator
3
Battery bank
8
Power electronics
10
Wind turbines
10
SHS Batteries
4
Discount rate
8%
Total annual operatonal cost (including replacements) if discounted and amortised
Expressed in R/connection point served/year
Energy supplied M-G
20 year NPV (with capex)
20 year NPV (no capex)
1,300,000
1,300,000
R 18,056
Per connection (incl SH R
1,300,000
Operational Costs (excluding planned replacements)
Diesel genset:
Fuel cost
R 6.7 /l
Routine maintenance
Battery maintenance
PV module cleaning and array maintenance
Controllers and inverters
Wind turbine maintenance
Site operator and revenue collection
System Manager
SHS maintenance excluding battery replacements
Total annual operation costs
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
110,557
503
R
R
(10,843)
(4,934)
R
R
Jun 2007
9.25
4.21
Page 67 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 25 Tariff and Benefit calculations for SHS only solution
Scenario Description
SHS only
Only households serviced with SHS
Mini-grid System
Energy Supplied (kWh/day)
Capex incl retic
Capex per kWh
20 year NPV (with cap R
20 year NPV (no capex R
Last updated
R
R
02-Oct-06
FF
Solar Home Systems
Total
0.0 Energy Supplied
72.0
72.0
Capex
R 1,300,000.00 R
1,300,000
R
18,055.56 R
18,056
Opex (incl replc), discounted and amortize R
CoE, including Capex (R/kWh)
R
CoE excluding Capex (R/kWh)
R
(2,385,461)
(1,085,461)
110,557
9.25
4.21
Revenue option One (Standard pay per unit consumption - if all use their design consumption)
Load Category
Tariff
Unit Cons (Wh/day) (R/kWh)
No of
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total consu
72.0 kWh/day
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80
140
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
200
400
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
R 4.21 R 116.44
R 4.21 R 625.72
R 4.21 R 255.92
R 4.21 R
23.29
R 4.21 R 1,279.59
R 4.21 R 127.96
R 4.21 R
19.19
R 4.21 R 102.37
R 4.21 R
51.82
R 4.21 R 255.92
R 4.21 R 1,023.67
R 4.21 R
25.59
R 4.21 R
51.18
Total revenue
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
2,047.34
7,165.71
9,213.05
Revenue option two (flat rate plus for mini-grid, fixed fee for SHS)
Base charge
R
60.00 Threshold
20 kWh/month Tariff
Load
Category
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
No of
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
Unit Cons (Wh/day)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80
140
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
200
400
R
98.40
R 703.69
R 264.17
R
60.00
R 1,480.83
R 112.08
R
60.00
R
81.67
R
60.00
R 264.17
R 1,176.67
R
60.00
R 100.00
Total Revenue
Valueing the Benefits - using Benefit points
Load Category
No of
Benefit points per Benefits
Min-grid households
0
0.9
0
Schools
0
15
0
Clinics
0
15
0
Street lights
0
0.5
0
Water pump
0
20
0
Community Centre
0
10
0
Spaza Shops
0
1
0
Refrigerators
0
2
0
System Loads
0
0
0
0
4
0
Community plugs, light
Other loads
0
6
0
SHS (50 Wp)
80
0.75
60
140
0.82
114.8
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total number of benefit points for this implementation
175
Appendix A Version 3.2
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
24,568.13
85,988.46
110,556.60
R
5.00
Revenue/year
4,800.00
14,000.00
18,800.00
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Total Benefit Points
Capex per benefit point
Opex per benefit point
NPV incl Capex/benefit point
NPV excl Capex/benefit point
R
R
R
R
Cost-benefit analysis
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Revenue/year
57,600.00
168,000.00
225,600.00
Jun 2007
175
7,437.07
632.47
(13,647)
(6,210)
Page 68 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 26 Mini-grid electrification of Lucingweni - using Diesel (or biodiesel) genset plus battery
Scenario Description
Lucingweni - mini-grid, Diesel plus battery
Last updated
02-Oct-06
HH
Load and energy supply costs calculated using generic assumptiosn
Mini-grid System
Solar Home Systems
Total
Energy Supplied (kWh/day)
266.9 Energy Supplied
0.0
266.9
Capex incl retic
R
1,574,633
Capex
R
R
1,574,633
Capex per kWh
R
5,899
R
R
5,899
20 year NPV (with cap R
20 year NPV (no capex R
Opex (incl replc), discounted and amortize R
CoE, including Capex (R/kWh)
R
CoE excluding Capex (R/kWh)
R
(4,880,712)
(3,306,079)
336,731
5.10
3.46
Revenue option One (Standard pay per unit consumption - if all use their design consumption)
Load Category
Tariff
Unit Cons (Wh/day) (R/kWh)
No of
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total consu
266.9 kWh/day
220
1
1
20
2
1
8
12
1
8
1
0
0
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
0
0
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
R 3.46 R
95.66
R 3.46 R 514.05
R 3.46 R 210.25
R 3.46 R
19.13
R 3.46 R 1,051.23
R 3.46 R 105.12
R 3.46 R
15.77
R 3.46 R
84.10
R 3.46 R
42.57
R 3.46 R 210.25
R 3.46 R 840.98
R 3.46 R
R 3.46 R
Total revenue
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
21,045.58
514.05
210.25
382.65
2,102.46
105.12
126.15
1,009.18
42.57
1,681.96
840.98
28,060.95
Revenue option two (flat rate plus for mini-grid, fixed fee for SHS)
Base charge
R
60.00 Threshold
20 kWh/month Tariff
Load
Category
Min-grid households
Schools
Clinics
Street lights
Water pump
Community Centre
Spaza Shops
Refrigerators
System Loads
Community plugs, light
Other loads
SHS (50 Wp)
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
No of
Revenue/cons
umer/month Revenue/ Month
Unit Cons (Wh/day)
220
1
1
20
2
1
8
12
1
8
1
0
0
910
4890
2000
182
10000
1000
150
800
405
2000
8000
0
0
R
90.72
R 574.95
R 223.33
R
60.00
R 1,196.67
R 101.67
R
60.00
R
77.33
R
60.00
R 223.33
R 953.33
R
60.00
R 100.00
Total Revenue
Valueing the Benefits - using Benefit points
Load Category
No of
Benefit points per Benefits
Min-grid households
220
0.9
198
Schools
1
15
15
Clinics
1
15
15
Street lights
20
0.5
10
Water pump
2
20
40
Community Centre
1
10
10
Spaza Shops
8
1
8
Refrigerators
12
2
24
System Loads
1
0
0
8
4
32
Community plugs, light
Other loads
1
6
6
SHS (50 Wp)
0
0.75
0
0
0.82
0
SHS (100 Wp, with Inv
Total number of benefit points for this implementation
358
Appendix A Version 3.2
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
252,546.98
6,168.61
2,522.95
4,591.76
25,229.47
1,261.47
1,513.77
12,110.15
510.90
20,183.58
10,091.79
336,731.41
R
4.00
Revenue/year
19,957.67
574.95
223.33
1,200.00
2,393.33
101.67
480.00
928.00
60.00
1,786.67
953.33
28,658.95
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Total Benefit Points
Capex per benefit point
Opex per benefit point
NPV incl Capex/benefit point
NPV excl Capex/benefit point
R
R
R
R
Cost-benefit analysis
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Revenue/year
239,492.00
6,899.40
2,680.00
14,400.00
28,720.00
1,220.00
5,760.00
11,136.00
720.00
21,440.00
11,440.00
343,907.40
Jun 2007
358
4,398.42
940.59
(13,633)
(9,235)
Page 69 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Table 27 Grid Connection - basic costing, tariff and benefits calculation
Scenario Description
Grid Only
All loads supplied with Grid
Demand information
Mini Grid
Number of:
Unit load (kWh/day)
Design load
Last updated
Mini GG hhSchools
Clinics
220
1
1.643836
4.89
428.38 kWh/day
Medium SHS (50Wp)
0
1
2
02-Oct-06
GG
Street lightsWater pum Other (see
20
2
31
0.182
10 Peak load (Design)
118.89
Total
275 connections
428.378835616438 kWh
kVA
0
Large SHS (100 Wp, AC)
Power System equipment
Type and description
Installed capacity
Through put/day
kWh
428
Capex
Diesel genset:
0 kVa
Line Extension Cost
MPPT charge controller
0.0 kW
Wind turbines
0.0 kW
0
Wind turbine controllers
0.0 kW
Bi-directional inverter
170 KVa
Battery: Tubular
0.00 kWh
Installation and sundries
SHS capex and installations
Total cost of Generation and power management technology
Capex/kWh of des load (M-G)
R 35,016 Capex per kWh/SHS
Reticulation (Mini-Grid only)
No connections to the mini-grid (all types)
Total Capex
R
275 R/Conn
16,029,837
Operational Costs (excluding planned replacements)
Grid electricity supply costs
Cost of Energy at LRM
Routine maintenance
Battery maintenance
Line Maintenance
Controllers and inverters
Wind turbine maintenance
Site operator and revenue collection
System Manager
SHS maintenance excluding battery replacements
Total annual operation costs
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
15,000,000
15,000,000
R
1,029,837
Per connection (incl SH R
58,290
N/A
3744.86
Operational costs are per year
0.28
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
150 per hh
Costs of replacing/overhauling items
Life (years)
Diesel generator
3
Battery bank
8
Power electronics
10
Wind turbines
10
SHS Batteries
4
Discount rate
8%
Total annual operatonal cost (including replacements) if discounted and amortised
Expressed in R/connection point served/year
Energy supplied M-G
20 year NPV (with capex)
20 year NPV (no capex)
428.4 SHS
R
R
0 Total
(16,938,803.81)
(908,967.20)
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost per replacement
R
R
R
R
R
-
428.4 kWh/day
Per connection
Per connection
Cost of Energy (if capex must be recovered) (R/kWh)
Cost of Energy (if capex supplied by external funder) (R/kWh)
Cost-benefit analysis
43,780
30,000
10,800
8,000
92,580
R
R
92,580
337
R
R
(61,596)
(3,305)
R
R
11.03
0.59
Jun 2007
Page 70 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
8. Discussion of results
Table 28 provides a summary of the key financial and benefit points results from the above
exercise. Note that the NPV values exclude any revenue, and are negative. Also note that the
Capex costs include reticulation infrastructure. The costs found are on the ‘conservative’ (high) end
for mini-grid. This in part reflects allowance for 8 year battery life, provision for revenue
collection/system engineer, and provision for replacement of control equipment after 10 years.
Table 28 Scenarios for Lucingweni Electrification - key results
Mini-Grid base
(AA)
Capex (Rm)
5.45
Opex (R)
314 459
NPV incl Capex (Rm)
Opex per benefit point
(8.54)
(3.09)
266.9
8.93
3.23
358
15 229
878
NPV incl Capex/ benfit point
(R)
(23 853)
NPV excl Capex/ benefit point
(R)
(8 624)
NPV excl Capex (Rm)
Energy Supplied to all loads
CoE incl Capex (R/kWh)
CoE excl Capex (R/kWh)
Benefit Points
Capex per Benefit Point
Grid
Mini-grid
plus
some
SHS
(DD)
Mini-grid for
SS and PU
only, SHS for
rest (EE)
SHS only
(no PU/SS
power
supply)
(FF)
Diesel/Biodiesel
plus battery
3.16
218
944
(5.31)
(2.15)
162.5
9.12
3.69
335
9 435
653
(15
844)
(6 409)
2.511
1.30
1.57
16.03
189 986
110 557
336 731
92 580
(4.38)
(1.86)
133.9
9.12
3.88
317
7 927
599
(2.38)
(1.09)
72
9.25
4.21
175
7 437
632
(5.10)
(3.46)
266.9
5.10
3.46
358
4 398
940
(13 811)
(13 647)
(13 633)
(5 884)
(6 210)
(9 235)
(16.94)
(0.91)
428.4
11.03
0.59
380
42 183
243.63
(44
576)
(2,392)
(HH)
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Mini- Mini + SMG
Grid SHS DD +SHS
only AA
Capex/bp (R)
SHS
Diesel
Grid
Opex/bp x 10 (R)
Figure 10 Electrification options: Cost per benefit point (including Capex, and excluding Capex (x
10))
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 71 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Mini- Mini + SMG SHS Diesel Grid
Grid SHS +SHS
only DD
AA
NPV incl Capex (-R)
NPV exc Capex (-R)
Figure 11 NPV of all costs per benefit point (including and excluding Capex)
Figure 10 and Figure 11 show in graphical format the way that calculations such as those shown
above could help to identify the optimum implementation methodologies that have the lowest ratio
of NPV per benefit point (or putting it another way, the highest number of benefit points per unit
capex or overall expenditure incurred).
The grid connection scenario is highly dependent on distance from the grid, and related grid
extension activities. If the cost of grid extension could be reduced by a few million Rand only, then
it would become the most cost effective solution - even including Capex (and deliver the highest
number of benefit points). It is clearly the most cost effective solution taking only operational costs
into account.
For the off-grid options, it will be seen that (for the assumptions used):
• A diesel or biodiesel installation would have the lowest capital cost per benefit point. It has
a higher , and (apart from grid), it also has the lowest discounted cost of energy (capital
repayments included). Note, this conclusion changes if the discount rate is increased from
8% to 15% - then the renewable energy mini-grid base case has a lower cost of energy.
There are of course significant concerns regarding assured supply of diesel to a rural
project like this. Furthermore, a diesel unit has the highest annual operational costs (at
R336 000/year).
• From an operational cost perspective, the mini-grid only (using renewable energy system)
has the lowest cost of energy (excl capex). Indeed, we suspect that some authors might
even suggest lower costs, as our provisions for battery and electrical component cost
replacement are on the high side.
• Capital costs can be significantly reduced if SHS are used for some (or all households).
There are two main reasons for this:
o Reticulation costs are saved
o The amount of electricity delivered is lower (reduced investments in PV or wind
generation plant and battery size)
• The cost per unit of energy delivered increases marginally for the Mini-grid plus SHS
options, as the SHS have a higher cost per unit energy then the mini-grid (depending on
the scale of the mini-grid)
• However, it should be noted that the actual service delivered by even the ‘medium’ SHS
used is similar to that currently being enjoyed by most Lucingweni residents. (A medium
SHS, if installed according to current norms used in the concession process has four or
more lights installed in the home, and a plug point for cell phone charger, a 9 V output for a
radio, and a 12 V output for a B&W or low power colour TV). Current Lucingweni mini-grid
installations only have one light installed, and although plugs are provided, they are being
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 72 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
used for little else than entertainment devices and cell phone charging (if the load limits are
adhered to!) Most people surveyed are not using the systems for TV and there seems to be
little ‘in-home’ productive use of energy, so the actual benefit being accrued is only some
lights and in 24 cases cell phone charging 8.
It will be noted that the SHS plus mini-grid options have the lowest NPV of operational costs per
benefit point. Furthermore, they have total NPV per benefit points that are amongst the lowest (and
comparable to the diesel option) yet with far lower annual operational costs.
The above set of alternative designs for electricity service delivery to Lucingweni highlights several
important issues:
• There is room for cost reduction (compared to original project budget) – if system design
can be optimised
• Connecting all households to the mini-grid does not seem to be the most cost effective way
to do off-grid electrification – depending of course on the local density of households (and
hence the reticulation cost).
• Even if mini-grid is not utilized for the whole settlement, there is still potential to use hybrid
power supply systems to provide higher levels of power for key loads and productive use
activities.
The optimum solution from a variety of perspectives seems to be a combination of SHS and mini or
micro-grid power supply for Productive use/social services.
There are a variety of ways in which energy services can be delivered to rural communities- using
a range of electricity generation technologies, as well as using different methods to distribute the
electricity. At present there are few ‘rules of thumb’ available to allow designers to quickly identify
what would be most appropriate. There is a need to develop better tools allow for:
• Optimum design of mini-grid generation plant (international tools are available, main gap is
in cost updates for South African conditions)
• Proper investigation of the optimum mix (given varying community layouts) for grid connect
vs. stand alone system supply. Ultimately this may require development of village level
tools that have similar principals to the electrification modelling tool developed for
Eskom/DBSA and DME (or to the NREL VIPOR tool). This does of course require access to
settlement layout information.
Furthermore, it is recommended that more detailed analysis of the type presented here (but using
more rigorous design analysis) be used to develop simpler tools that could be more readily used
by electrification planners and service providers.
8
Some households are using the systems for cooking, but this is considered ‘abuse’ of the system, and should not be
possible if the energy limiting devices are working properly.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 73 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
9. References
Banks D (2000), Electrification modelling for South Africa: Discussion of the methodology employed. Rural
Area Power Solutions, prepared for DME, Eskom and DBSA Pretoria, January 2000
Banks D, Aitken R (2000), KwaZulu-Natal Mini-grid Feasibility Study, for National Electricity Regulator, RAPS
Consulting, June 2004.
Banks DI, Mocke F, Jonck EC, Labuschagne E, Eberhard R (2000), Electrification planning decision support
tool. In Proc. Domestic Use of Energy Conference, Cape Town April 2000, pp 85-92.
Davis M, Horvei T (1995). Handbook for the economic analysis of energy projects, Development Bank of
Southern Africa
IREMP (2006) Integrated Rural Electrification Master Plans (annex 3), ITPower, Africaon, prepared for the
Government of Uganda.
Appendix A Version 3.2
Cost-benefit analysis
Jun 2007
Page 74 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Appendix B: Socio-economic evaluation
Appendix B Version 6
Socio-economic evaluation
June 2006
Table of Contents
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 75 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
1. Introduction
The former DME Honourable Minister, currently Deputy President of the State, Ms Phumzile
Mlambo-Ngcuka visited Australia in 2001, she saw the hybrid mini-grid system and she was very
interested in the system. She subsequently commissioned NERSA (Formerly known as NER) to
identify the suitable site in RSA and implement the project as a pilot. NERSA sub-contracted Shell
Solar as relevant experts to put on the system in EC, Lucingweni, 100 km East of Mthatha
town.The Hluleka/Lucingweni project was started in 2001 by the DME as one of the projects of its
kind in South Africa. The main aim was to provide electrical power to communities that were too far
from the Eskom grid and as the Eskom electrification programme, these communities were left
behind. In the inception phase, this project was seen as a pilot project that would lay a foundation
for a few like it to follow in other rural areas of South Africa depending on how well it worked.
The system provides limited supply of power to a few households (just under 200) in the
Lucingweni village and can be used for one light inside the house, there are also plug points
installed in the homes with icons showing what can be plugged on. At the beginning of the project
during the installation phase of the system, the residents of Lucingweni were told that they could
only use it for lighting, black and white TV as well as charging cell phones; as it did not have
enough power and at a later stage, the power output would be improved to enable them to use
other appliances such as small cooking stoves, irons and kettles. For a village that never had
electrical power before, this was a good opportunity for people to try the level of electrical power
that was provided to them and many went out to purchase appliances such as stoves and irons as
they suspected that they could use them.
Due to a number of problems experienced in the village with the system, the implementation of
such a project did not take off as expected. In 2006 the system is not working and no one seems to
have taken responsibility for it. The local municipality had no idea whether they were responsible
for it as they had never received a clear mandate from the DME nor the NER to take over the
system. Moreover there is lack of capacity within the municipality and in the village for people to be
able to take care of the system as no one with appropriate qualifications has been identified, and
trained for this need.
A developmental project of this nature, however technically inclined, requires very strong socioeconomic focus and integration, to be able to achieve the utmost objective of service delivery and
people’s satisfaction. The conducting of the socio-economic analysis/evaluation within the overall
project was a tricky exercise in that there were many non-technical (‘soft’) issues that had been
lingering over the project for a very long time.
In the midst of all positive and negative perceptions and feelings about non-grid electricity; the
purpose of the socio-economic study was to evaluate people’s feelings, knowledge and
perceptions and to evaluate social impacts on the sustainability and potential to replicate mini-grid
hybrid systems. It was also meant to focus more on the end-users/beneficiaries/recipients of the
service; alongside needs analysis of the people to finally arrive at the issue of local ownership,
maintenance of the system, willingness to pay for service supplied, and the many pertinent issues
that will ensure the sustainability and successful replication of such projects.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 76 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
2. The Research Methodology
The research deployed a five-fold participatory approach:•
•
•
•
•
An introductory meeting with the community to establish consultative mechanisms and
research. [A full report of this meeting is attached].
A questionnaire capturing both quantitative and qualitative socio-economic information
Focus group meetings
In-depth interviews with key people within the community and leadership as well as informal
interviews and conversations with the local people, especially the fieldworkers; and
A run-down of Lucingweni village to verify the total number of households connected; and
those not connected to the system but are in the neighbourhood within the Lucingweni
village
Sampling of households for the field questionnaire respondents were random and on the ground;
having tried coding of households on aerial photograph of the location. Combinations of sampling
methods were used. These included the Rapid Rural Appraisal, simple random and focus group
discussions. When dealing with rural community, Rapid rural Appraisal was the most preferred
because of its approach. Its main characteristics are that it is affordable, takes a very short time to
complete and can make use of more informal data collection. It is used mostly in rural development
projects for example on nutrition, health and sociological approaches it therefore suited the kind of
research we were undertaking The village was divided into small areas and the research team
having paired in two would assign themselves an area and then cover the entire household within
the chosen area.
Five field workers, previously trained to carry-out research under different programmes and
selected by community leadership structures and processes; were used as field workers for this
research. The fieldworkers were involved in an information and communication research that was
undertaken by Energy and Development Resource Centre (EDRC). The field workers were
primarily equipped with interviewing skills. The information and communication research was to be
integrated into the delivery of computers at the already existing non-grid energy service. Their
English language proficiency was not good, hence the three socio-economic researchers had to
adapt an innovative approach to collect the information from both the questionnaire respondents
and focus group meetings. This meant that the researchers had to carry out all the interviews; and
the field workers facilitated communication, sampling and coordination of the research processes.
2.1.
Training of Fieldworkers
Though the said fieldworkers had been previously trained and engaged in a research programme
in the area, their proficiency and understanding of this research was somewhat poor in the sense
that they had never done an energy research before and for this reason could not relate to this
particular study without any training.. The Team therefore engaged the local councillor, Mr.
Mpongo, to facilitate and assist in the training of the Fieldworkers. This exercise proved to be
highly effective as it brought all the parties (the researchers and the fieldworkers) at par with
understanding the purpose of the research, the methods and the expected outcomes of the
fieldwork.
2.2.
The Introductory field trip and meeting
The consulting team, in consultation with and company of the DME, NER, Shell Solar and the
Local Government Leadership (Nyandeni local municipality and OR Tambo district municipality) in
Umtata Eastern Cape, planned and carried out the site visits to the Eastern Cape, on the 27th –
30th May, 2006.
The Objectives of the visit were:
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 77 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
•
•
2.3.
DME New and Renewable Energy
For the Consulting Team to visit the area and establish the geographical, technical and
socio-economic details of the two project areas.
For the Consulting Team to establish the consultation and research mechanisms; and to
contact face-to face with all local authorities, such as the local municipality; the councilors;
the traditional leadership, ward committee members, field workers, and Hluleka Resort
personnel.
Plan and prepare for the follow-up visit and research; as well as overall consultation and
assessment of the two mini-grid hybrid projects.
For the DME to formally introduce the Consultant to the Leadership structures and local
communities; and furthermore to elaborate on the specific terms of reference of the project
and the DME expectation out of the research/assessment process.
For NER to portray continuity and support to the project; to further facilitate the carrying-out
of the assessment and work;
Research implementation
Every morning the research team met the fieldworkers to brief them about the day’s planned
activities. The teams (researcher and fieldworker) then arranged themselves in pairs, and went to
households that were randomly selected to conduct the research in the mornings. At the same
time there would be two fieldworkers that walked around the village to make a list of all households
that had electricity connections whilst letting the households know that they would be interviewed
about the hybrid system and their general energy use. The village was divided into small areas and
the research team having paired in two would assign themselves an area and then cover the entire
household within the chosen area. This also enabled the teams conducting interviews to locate the
households and respondents hence making the interview process quicker. At the households
where the fieldworkers found nobody to answer the questionnaires, an invitation would then be left
for an eligible person to attend a focus group meeting which was usually held later in the day.
Focus group meetings were held meetings were held at central places within the village in the
afternoons, and were well attended by the community members with a balance of men and women
of ages between 18 and over 60 years old. We held three well attended focus groups where all the
previously prepared questions were asked to each group. Each focus group meeting had more
than 30 people attending; and registers with both names and contact numbers were recorded.
2.4.
Research Constraints
The primary constraints encountered in conducting the socio-economic research for assessing the
potential to replicate mini-grid hybrid-based electricity provision systems based on the Lucingweni
pilot site were:
• A lack of baseline socio-economic data prior to the implementation of the pilot
• The coincidence of the evaluation with the endeavour to correct the situation in the village
and effort needed to avoid confusing these
• Reluctance of respondents to participate based on despondency regarding energy service
delivery and expectations of same through the mini-grid hybrid system. People were often
not sufficiently aware or informed of the status of the process.
The researchers retained a positive attitude and integration of participatory approaches and
methods worked to the benefit of the research and project.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 78 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3. Results
3.1.
Introductory consultative meeting
Below is the summary of issues from community meeting during the introductory visit by the project
team to the project areas
•
•
•
•
•
•
The community felt very strongly disappointed by the non-performance; and the ‘weakness’
of the non-grid electricity. Below are some points as quoted and/or phrased by the
communities
This was initially a pilot implementation, intended for trial for 6-month but has taken 4 years;
and it is at the worst place than when it started (not working) and has disappointed the
community.
People wanted to be re-assured that they would still be considered for grid-electrification
plans, and not to say they are already catered for, by this ‘useless’ form of energy.
Peoples overall expectation and needs, particularly for cooking and water heating are not
provided for, or met. This is a major course for concern as at the beginning of the project,
they were promised the provision of LP Gas for meeting thermal needs. In actual fact, the
people were promised an Integrated Energy Centre (IEC) providing a whole range of
energy products and services. The other expectation (and somewhat concern) is for the
government subsidy in ensuring adequate access to basic services for the low income
communities.
The people, however, raised a very strong, positive point about the system – in that in
addition, the non-grid mini hybrid system also provided for street-lighting, which really upgraded the ‘look’ of the village and its status, as well as upgraded the standard of living in
the village.
They expressed major concerns with regards the power output or ‘strength’ of the non-grid
electricity – in that when one plugs even the weakest appliances such as a cell-phone
charger, hair tong, the whole system power drips!
The positive outcomes from the community interactions are that:• There is still hope (and acceptance) of the system, provided it could be made to work and
its meant for the interim (while awaiting grid electrification); and
• The people who are not connected currently were asking as to when this power is going to
be extended to their locations (neighbouring villages around Lucingweni); is it going to take
another 4 years before they could expect this kind of service? Then one could see that
they have not totally rejected the non-grid electricity as a ‘working’ option to meet their
basic lighting/TV needs.
• The community was wondering if at some point they would be expected to pay for the
energy service that they derive (supposedly) from the system; and also if it was weak (on
and off) because it was free?
• Some felt very strongly against the whole concept of non-grid, mainly due to the system
failure to meet expectation. (One could also allude to ‘mob-psychology’ here).
• Some members of the community expressed concern on the construction material, size and
nature of the community hall.
3.1.1. Summary of Responses
In responding to the issues as raised by the community, Mr. Andre Otto, Deputy Director for
Renewable Energy at the Department of Minerals and Energy, emphasized that people would not
be expected to pay for something that is not providing any value or service. Hence the reason why
the DME wants to resuscitate the system and once it is operating; people would have to pay for the
service so that the project may be replicated in other areas. He insisted on the community/local
ownership and protection of the system; as well as openness and collaboration throughout the
research and afterwards.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 79 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Yaw Afrane-Okese, of NER re-iterated the functionality of non-grid systems as a viable options for
remote areas; the NER commitment in supporting the implementation and sustainability of this
project; and re-assuring the communities that the presence of this system will not inhibit the
ESKOM grid electrification to the areas, as and when it id due. He alluded to the South African
commitment of electrification for all by 2012.
3.2.
Questionnaire
Forty-six (46) of the 228 households, constituting a sample size of 40% of the Lucingweni village,
were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire (see attached) to establish their energy
use patterns, energy needs, knowledge and perceptions on the mini-grid electricity system in the
village. Of the forty-six households interviewed, thirty (30) households were connected to the minigrid system, whilst sixteen (16) were not connected.
3.2.1. Households characteristics and socio-economic data
3.2.1.1.
Household size
Many households in the rural areas in the Eastern Cape Province are comprised of two or more
rondavels, in some cases often coupled with a big house with a number of rooms. Household size
therefore, varies from one to more than ten occupants, with the average household size being
approximately 6.
Table 29 indicates the trend of multiple dwellings per household in the Eastern Cape. This trend is
also witnessed in Lucingweni. Local materials (mud bricks locally made) and thatch are normal
building materials.
Table 29 Eastern Cape trends in the number of dwellings per household
Dwellings
Shared dwelling
One dwelling
Two dwellings
Three dwellings
Four dwellings
More than four dwelling
Total
Number of households
4 860
147 051
216 878
186 683
96 315
59 895
711 682
Percentage
0.7%
20.7%
30.5%
26.2%
13.5%
8.4%
100%
3.2.1.2.
Level of Education
The survey considered the level of education of the entire household. There is minimal tertiary
education, suitable for operation and maintenance of a technically sophisticated electricity
provision system and only approximately 30% secondary education levels in evidence. Table 30
indicated the education levels found through the survey. Generally there is no schooling and only
primary school for older generation; and partial primary and high school for children and youth.
Table 30 Level of education
Level of Education
Frequency
Perce
ntage
No schooling
26
14.1%
Primary School
97
52.7%
High School
58
32.5%
Training after High School
Certificate
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
1
June 2007
0.5%
Page 80 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Level of Education
Frequency
Perce
ntage
College, technikon, university
Diploma
1
0.5%
Specify:___________________
____________
Degree
1
0.5%
Post graduate
nil
Total
184
100%
Banks (1997) reports that data from the rural survey of 1996 indicates that 21.6% of the adult
population in the Eastern Cape has no formal Education; while just over 50% have grade 7 or
higher; and only 2.3% have either a certificate, diploma or degree. This finding correlates well with
the study findings here regarding the level of education within rural households of the Eastern
Cape.
3.2.1.3.
Households Income and sources
In excess of 80% of the households in the Lucingweni village depend on government social grants,
quite often between R500 and R1, 500 and sources being old age grant, child grants and in few
cases part-time work which is often not guaranteed. These rural areas are characterized by low
levels of education (mostly no schooling and lower primary education levels); unemployment and
general poverty.
Table 31 Total monthly household income and frequency
Total Monthly Income
Number of Percentage
people
R0 – R500
10
22%
R501 – R1 500
28
61%
R1 501 – R2 500
7
15%
R2 500 – R3 500
1
2%
R3 501 – R4 500
nil
0%
R4 501 – R5 500
nil
0%
R5 501 and up
nil
0%
Table 31 shows that around 83% (61% plus 22%) of households interviewed has income ranging
between R0 and R1, 500. This is due to the high dependence on pensions and other
governmental social grants such as the child support grant and disability grant. Remittances are
also important (Banks, D, 2001)
Many households are headed by women, while most of them are either in their early thirty’s or in
the late sixty’s; the younger women having their husbands away to work; while they stay behind to
look after the households and children. These women have (and look after) many children and
child grant seems to be the motivator to have more children, mainly due to poverty and lack of
productive roles.
Table 32 Sources and frequency of household income
Source
#
of Percentage
people
Unemployed
10
22%
Pension
6
13%
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 81 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Source
#
of Percentage
people
Remittances (cash contribution by employed family members 7
outside the household)
15%
Formal employment
9
20%
Part-time work
6
13%
a) Child grants
37
80%
b) Disability grant
9
20%
c) Old age pension
13
28%
Selling (products)
1
2%
Farming
1
2%
Other (Please specify)
1
2%
Welfare allowances (child grants, disability grant)
3.2.2. Energy Use Patterns and Needs Assessment
Table 33 indicates that more than 90% of respondents report that cooking both outside and inside
homes (mostly rondavels). Cooking inside a dwelling takes place irrespective of the presence of a
separate kitchen. Wood and paraffin are the main sources of energy for cooking, ironing, water
and to a limited extend, space heating. Lighting is provided for by candles and paraffin. Radios
are run by dry dell batteries and a few households with black and white TVs use car batteries
which are sometimes charged using solar panels 9 owned by a few households in the village,
though very seldom. Cell-phone usage is very high in the area. More than 90% of households
own at least one cellular phone, with some households having more than one cellular phone.
These are charged at R5 per week (four times a month), either in town or at a shop with car battery
charging or at a households with a solar panel.
Table 33 Cooking location and frequency
Cooking
Kitchen
No Kitchen
inside house
outside house
42 (91%)
46 (100%)
30 (65%)
--
16 (35%)
--
Cooking frequency
Once a day (0%)
Twice a day (30%)
Three times a day
(70%)
9
To find out where these solar panels were acquired, informal questions asked of the fieldworkers. They all said that
they did not know where people bought these from. The solar panels are often placed outside the home on the ground
during the day for charging purposes.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 82 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 12 Rural Women from Gathering Energy for Cooking
Wood, being the most used source of energy for thermal needs is often gathered by women and
girl children. Most households find it difficult to cost (and/or quantify) the amount of wood they use
per month, and it is ‘perceived’ to be free like in many rural areas. Paraffin is bought in quantities
of 1 litre, 2 litres and 5 litres from local retail shops. The cost of Paraffin is R5 per litre; and
households use between 2 litres to 25 litres per month; hence is perceived to be expensive by the
majority of households. . Paraffin is mostly used for cooking and lighting (Table 34). Dry cell
batteries are often used by the households who own a radio (PM10 preferred, with costs at around
R48 per month).
Table 34 Fuels used and their purpose
Type of
Fuel
Uses per fuel type
Cooking
Lighting
Heating
home
Water
Heating
Ironing
Fridge
Solar
Energy
n/a
nil
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Paraffin
40 (91%)
30 (65%)
nil
30 (65%)
26
(57%)
nil
Wood
46
(100%)
16 (35%)
46 (100%)
46 (100%)
40
(87%)
n/a
Gas
2(4.3%)
nil
nil
2(4.3)
nil
2 (4.3%)
Coal
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
n/a
Candles
n/a
45 (98%)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Dry
Cell n/a
Batteries
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Car
batteries
2 (4.3%)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Appendix B
n/a
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 83 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Type of
Fuel
Uses per fuel type
Other
(specify)
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
Table 35 Energy Costs per Fuel Type (per month) and (Frequency)
Fuel type
Costs per in Rands and Specific uses
frequency
Solar Energy
No costs involved
Charging
cell-phones
and playing radio
Paraffin
R25 – R50
15
R51 – R100
12
R101– R150
4
Lighting, water heating,
and cooking (tea making
high- used for boiling of
water for tea)
No cost
2
R50
3
R51 – R100
7
R101– R150
3
R150– R200
1
R185
1
Fridge
R170
1
Fridge
R90
1
Stove
R70
1
Stove
Wood (most did not attach
financial value. Of those
who did; these were the
figures (wood is mostly
collected and in few cases
bought at (R10 per load)
Gas
Coal
none
Candles
R7 – R21
15
R22 – R36
26
R37 – R51
1
>R 51
3
R20
1
R40
1
R50
1
Car Batteries
Dry cell batteries (PM9 and R15 – R30
PM10 only)
R31 – R50
Cell phone charging
Cooking,
water
and
space heating, ironing
and lighting ( in few
cases)
Not applicable
8
Lighting
Playing radio
Radio only; no torches
7
> R51
3
R12
1
R20
18
R30
4
Charged at people’s
houses; shops (mainly
with car batteries or Solar
PV; and in town (Umtata)
Please intreprete
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 84 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
to
ta
l
st
ov
Fr
e
id
ge
(g
as
)
Ke
ttl
e
Iro
n
at
e
2pl
ys
te
m
an
d
W
hi
te
TV
C
ol
ou
r
ac
k
is
Ra
di
o
TV
Bl
Ce
l
Hi
-F
ar
ph
on
e
50
40
30
20
10
0
lu
l
Number of Households
Electrical and Thermal Appliance Ownership
Appliances
Figure 13 Electrical (and Thermal) Appliance Ownership
The figure above illustrates the number of households that owns particular electrical and thermal
appliances. As per the above bar chart, cellphone seems to be the most popular appliance while
Hi Fi and TV sets seem to be the least owned appliances.
3.2.3. Perceptions about Non-grid Electrification (System Performance) and Level of
Satisfaction
The community of Lucingweni and neighbouring villages perceived the non-grid mini-hybrid system
as ‘weak’, ‘inferior’, ‘unreliable’ and used all negative words to show their disappointment with the
performance of the system. Given the history of the village’s energy provision through this mini-grid
hybrid system, these perceptions were bound to be voiced out. During the ‘black-out’, the
community did not know what was wrong with the system and everyone had his/her own
explanation of why the system was not working the way it was supposed to.
Amongst the explanations given were the following:
• The system is not working because the contractor has not been fully paid for the
installation,
• The key for the main distribution house is lost or stolen,
• The key is kept by the young men that were trained by the contractor and they switch the
system on and off as they please,
• The system is not working because it has been vandalized by the village young men,
• The system failed because people started using heavy appliances such as stoves and irons
when they were not supposed to, and
• The system was vandalized because people want grid electricity in the village.
3.2.4. Willingness to Pay for Service
There is very high level of willingness to pay for a functioning system. Some people felt that the
system was ‘weak’ and hence under-performing because it was free; and pleaded their willingness
to pay to make it work. Over 95% of the respondents expressed their willingness to pay for the
energy services derived from the system. However, people suggested figures ranging from R40 –
R200 10 to pay for energy services. There was no separation of electrical from thermal needs in the
10
The level of awareness of the services which the system will and will not be able to deliver is unclear from the survey
analysis.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 85 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
question pertaining to willingness to pay. People were also cautious to put a high figure lest they
commit themselves to this energy service which may not meet their needs.
Figure 14 Depiction of willingness to pay for electrical needs
Willingness to pay for Electrical and
Therm al Needs
6%
26%
R100
6%
10%
R120
R150
R200
10%
39%
3%
R300
As t old
No idea
Figure 15 Depiction of willingness to pay for electrical and thermal needs
There was a strong point that came out of this research, in that people said they would pay
whatever amount that is fixed (just like cellular phone airtime or ESKOM prepaid vouchers); and
they recommended the pre-paid system with a number of denominations and options for
payments.
There was a strong feeling that came out though, that even though there is high level of willingness
to pay for the system; that an option for people to pay must be looked at; and they are given a
service as part of the local economic development and free basic needs allocation; or even
Corporate Social Investment, whatever the case may be.
3.2.5. Ownership and Maintenance of the System
There are currently two models of ownership being used in rural areas; municipality or privatepublic partnership through non-grid electrification concession. According to the reports by Shell
Solar (2003), Nyandeni municipality has shown a lack of willingness to take ownership of the
hybrid system citing their lack of capacity. However, this is contradictory to the survey findings.
(see Mr Sidelo’s interview and report ). The other option could be for the OR Tambo District
Municipality to take over the ownership and enter into contract an agreement with a suitable
service provider to provide ongoing maintenance of the system.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 86 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
It has been suggested that the revenue collection for electricity provided from the system could be
undertaken by ORT district and to be treated just like Solar Home System where government give
subsidy of R40 and the customer pay R18.00 per month. The amount of R40 will go toward
offsetting the charges levied by the system operator. The latter model is that of private-publicpartnership through a concession model. This model will address lack of capacity, which is
preventing Nyandeni Local Government from taking ownership of the system. The off-grid
concessionaires are awarded concession areas through tendering process. This concessionaire
operates like a utility in the area of their jurisdiction; they install non-grid electricity; maintain and
collect monthly payment for the service provided. Therefore they will have maintenance personnel
residing in the area of their operation. In the case Solar Home System, a concessionaire receive
standard subsidy of R3 500 for the installation of Solar Home System, which consist of 50Wp
panel, battery, 4 lights and an outlet for radio and Black &White TV. They also charge R100 for
installation and monthly fee of R58 for operation and maintenance. These concessionaires operate
fee-for-service through prepayment system for collection of monthly fees. As a result of operating
in this area of concession, energy providers have established infrastructure in the rural area to do
install, maintain and collect payment that they are better qualified to do maintenance.
Some of the community members felt the system belonged to the community; while some believed
it belonged to the contractor, Shell Solar, and some to the chief and local municipality, Nyandeni.
When asked on who should own the hybrid system, people felt the community, the local
municipality and/or the local councilor should own and maintain the system, on behalf of the
community. The community then entrusts their local municipality; through their local councilor, Cllr
Mpongo to inform the community on maintenance and payment issues.
3.2.6. Revenue Collection Arrangements
All (100%) the respondents who were willing to pay for the system were suggesting pre-paid
vouchers (different denominations) and people buying coupons proportional to their needs and
usage of power. It became evident how they understood the cellular phone recharge vouchers and
procedures; and were also aware of ESKOM’s pre-paid systems.
Few people though suggested that the municipality should pay for their energy usage.
The model of charging a flat rate was found not to be acceptable for most people. A study
undertaken at OR Tambo municipality to assess acceptance and appropriateness of supplying
current limit of 2.5A and payment of flat rate found that people were very negative to such as
system. The overwhelming majority of people preferred pre-payment meters. No person
interviewed was happy with paying flat rate tariff. An important reason why people preferred 20A
supply over the 2.5A, 5A supply was that they could control their monthly expenditure on electricity.
It was shown together with the size of household income, other factors influence whether people
were able to pay monthly flat rate. The flat rate was found to be inflexible requiring consistent
payments at the same time each month.
Our own survey in the Lucingweni area also supports the above finding. The majority of people
interviewed showed preference of pre-payment metering, on the similar line as cell phone
prepayment model. When designing model of revenue collection, this will have to borne in mind.
3.2.7. Community satisfaction and appreciation
Community satisfaction and appreciation is greatly influenced by the perception and expectation of
the quality of service. Customer expectations are pre-trial beliefs a customer has about the
performance of service that are used as a standard or reference against which the service
performance is judged. While, customer perception can be defined as the process by which
individual select, organise and interpret stimuli into meaningful and coherent picture of the world.
Customers use the following dimensions to evaluate the quality of service, tangibility- (appearance
of physical installation and equipment used) reliability (the ability to deliver the promised service
dependably and accurately), responsiveness (willingness to help customers and provide prompt
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 87 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
service), assurance (ability of the service provider to convey trust and confidence) and empathy
(caring, and providing individualized customer’s attention). The first step towards achieving high
quality service levels is the identification of the attributes of the service that are expected by the
customers. The identification of the customer’s service expectations and requirements combined
with the consistent delivery on these requirements.
The instrument used to measure service quality and customers’ satisfaction is the SERVQUAL
Gaps model, which compares the service expectations and actual performance (perceptions). The
central idea of the SERVQUAL instrument is that service quality is a function of the different gap
scores between expectations and perceptions. The gap scores are calculated by subtracting the
expectation score from perception score based on the five dimensions stated above Perception –
Expectation = Gap. If the Perception is greater than Expectation indicates Excellent Service. If
Perception is equal to Expectation indicates Technical Satisfaction. If ‘Perceptions’ are less than’
Expectations’; the situation indicates a ‘Service Problem’.
The results from the SERVQUAL Gaps Model’ analysis depicts that:•
•
•
•
•
On the question of - the way the wiring and general installation is done in the houses,
people are generally not satisfied.
On the question of reliability in meeting people need, the general response is that of
dissatisfaction, which is understandable because the system has not worked consistently
since it was installed. This is despite the fact that the system design and ultimate
installation was not the same – in that the system was designed for 1A per household;
though ultimately installed at 20A per household.
On the question of responsiveness - such as getting help when needed and spare parts,
the result indicates a poor response from the service provider and lack of coordination and
information on who to consult of where to purchase those spare parts).
On the question of assurance, there is a general mistrust and confidence of the service
provider (mainly unavailability of such a contractor, being an outsider to the community).
On the question of empathy - such as training on the operation of the system, consultation
of people about their needs, the general response indicates lack of accommodating people
needs and expectations.
3.2.8. Community Participation and level of awareness
Often than not community participation is used as a smoke screen in doing what was originally
planned not as genuine process of accommodating people needs and expectation. People in
general, and men and women in particular have different energy needs. From this survey, it is
clear that people do not want “one-size-fits-all” of tariff structure of current limiting and flat fee rate
tariff but this is a structure that is used by the service provider.
3.2.9. General comments and issues
There were high aspirations of using grid electricity (often referred to as ESKOM electricity) which
people perceived as the most efficient, prestigious, powerful and reliable source of energy that
would satisfy all of their needs. There is an awareness of the cost and time factors for such
electricity to reach the area, and hence the appreciation of the current system if it could be
functional.
There was consistent plea by the community to assure them that the prioritization (and
acceptance) of this electricity and project will not hamper the delivery (speedy) of the ‘ESKOM
electricity’.
Given their experiences, many households, especially the men felt this electricity was ‘weak’ and if
it were to continue supplying them with service, it needs to be ‘beefed-up’, or strengthened.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 88 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
There are other needs such as schools, clinic and skills development programmes within the
locality to cater for the many villages that falls under the jurisdiction of Lucingweni, the Village
Herdsman and Cllr Mpongo.
3.3.
Focus Group Discussions
Three focus group meetings were held during the conducting of this research, on the 15th, 16th and
21st June 2006.
Figure 16 Image from a focus group meeting at Lucingweni, on the 16th June, 2006
Attendance at the focus group meetings was as in Table 36.
Table 36 Focus group meeting attendance
Date
Number of participants
15 Jun 2006
36
16 Jun 2006
31
21 Jun 2006
37
The meetings were attended mostly by women, with participation by a few men and youth (mostly
boys). The venues for the focus group meetings were central and within reach. The notes from
these meetings are attached as appendices with summaries provided below.
3.3.1. Focus Group Meeting on the 15th June Meeting Notes:
People expressed their poverty levels as extreme within the areas, with no jobs; no income except
from social grants; and them having to raise and educate the children. They all cook with wood
and paraffin, with very few cases of cooking with gas; and use candles (and paraffin) to light the
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 89 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
houses. Candles cost R2,50 each and R7.50 for a packet of six. Wood is also used for ironing
and warming the house.
Many people have cell-phones, and they charge them with car batteries and pay R5 per charge. A
few have radios and even fewer had TVs, though they were mostly not in use.
People aspire to meeting all their energy needs with electricity. They would be willing to pay as
long as the electricity is ‘strong’ and ‘working’. They considered themselves lucky to be part of the
pilot; as in the meantime while they were waiting for ‘normal’ ESKOM electricity, they can have this
supply. At first people were not being open, but as the meeting opened up, people were freer and
started appreciating facts such as:•
•
•
The ESKOM electricity will take some time to get to Lucingweni;
That they should take responsibility of this system and its components; and
That this will not hamper/stand in the way for the delivery of the ESKOM electricity; and
when that time comes, they will not have to pay for two kinds of electricity (services).
Ideas for economic activities from this meeting were narrowed to having fridges to be able to store
and sell milk, meat and cold drinks. People felt that any kind of business needs electricity to run.
Generally people were not involved during and after the implementation of the project. They did
not know who owned the system; and did not deal with Barry directly. They knew Barry to be
working closely with Shawn who supposedly had the keys to the control room of the system. One
young man within the community, Siyabulela did mention that he was working with Barry and he
was trained. The only predicament was that he does not have access to the system, otherwise he
would be able to operate the system.
People really wanted electricity (and light!); and they were desperate for the key to be available to
operate the system.
Noise from the wind turbines was investigated as it appeared to be a problem for those households
near the system, particularly at night – “it would felt as if the flaps are going to dislocate and fall
apart”.
They wanted any form of energy for cooking as well; and they would be willing to pay for it. The
people admitted that they have taken part in making the system failing (by cooking); so they recommitted not to cook and to look after the system if power is restored. They will charge and light
only. The openness and truthfulness about this meeting was encouraged and acknowledged by
the researchers in the midst.
3.3.2. Focus Group Meeting on the 16th June 2006
Thirty-one people attended this meeting. Most of them were neighbours (and family to Mr Sidelo);
hence the tone was very positive and in support of this project. After prayer, greetings,
introductions and background to this research; there were comments from the communities:
‘‘…I love this electricity. I wish I could have it in my house. I live here in Lucingweni village but I am not
connected. I was told there are not enough poles to connect us…’
Community member, Lucingweni, June 2006
The same socio-economic data, as well energy use patterns such as cooking using wood, outside,
dependence on social grants; mostly candles and les paraffin for lighting homes; was mentioned
by the group. The group mentioned that within their villages and household, the women cook the
usual kinds of food which takes long time to cook such as rice, samp, potatoes, tea, cabbage,
steamed-bread and many others.
All aspire to meet all energy needs with electricity.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 90 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Perceptions and knowledge about non-grid electricity – the community was told not to cook, iron,
or heat the house with this electricity; and that they could only light, play radio and/or TV; and
charge cellular phones. One lady from the community mentioned that they made the electricity fail
– to the contrary they cooked and ironed with it. They also bought fans. They had stopped buying
candles and paraffin; and stopped going to the fields to collect wood. Now they are very sorry
because they killed it, they are not going to cook and iron again if it was to be resuscitated and to
be in a working condition again. They are battling now, and would really plead with the
government and all stakeholders to bring the power back somehow.
The ladies mentioned that their village looked so beautiful at night; and appreciated the streetlighting component of he system. They could walk at night without much problem. This was a
more versatile group – they wanted gas to cook with; and would pay for it.
In terms of ownership of system, they all agreed that it belonged to the community; though one
woman thought that it belonged to the government. Then the local councilor should maintain it for
the community; and government/local municipality should pay for its maintenance.
Meeting emphasized the need for training and proposed that a ‘woman’ should look after the
system. One Mr. Simon proposed that when this electricity is working, there needs to be
someone looking after the system; and having timed operation: i.e. switch on at 08h00 and off
at 21h00. There should also be guards to watch over the system. The payment should be
card system, so that those who use more could have to pay more.
There was plea for government support as the poverty levels in the villages are high.
The meeting mentioned that three the trained men/boys would take any offenses onto the system,
thereby making the whole community to suffer. That is when the suggestion to have women
operating the system came strongly, due to women being warm-hearted; and would not switch off
the entire community due to misunderstanding or quarrels.
There was evident and urgent plea for water – claims that people died because of cholera in the
area. Also other needs included a clinic, since people died on the way to the clinic which is far.
There is also a need for schools in the area.
The community hall – the Village Herdsman ‘controls’ the community hall. People have to rent it to
be able to utilize it; and worse of all, it is built very badly.
3.3.3. Focus Group Meeting on the 21st June 2006
The focus group was opened with a prayer, introductions and background to the project and
research. Discussions started around what people knew or were told about non-grid electricity –
that it was for pilot purposes and not to cook with it.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 91 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 17 Focus Group Meeting held at Lucingweni, June 2006
One man stood up, and said all negative things that this electricity is weak, it is preventing
ESKOM’s electricity to come to the area; and that he does not like this electricity – stood up and
left immediately.
Sibongile mentioned that this electricity really helped the community – the street were better lit; the
only challenge is that it would switch on and off, without warning. The pole thought the batteries
were flat, for the system to shut down. There should be time for operation (switching on and off of
the system).
People emphasized on the need fro ‘strong’ electricity. People were told that this electricity was for
the meantime while waiting for ESKOM’s power. People had already started buying electrical
equipments, and was suggested that they be collected and be given to the village chief, to be
handed back to the owners once ESKOM’s electricity has been extended to the area.
People expressed willingness to pay as long as they are provided with energy solutions that meet
their demands/needs. Only seven people out of the thirty six that attended the meeting were
connected.
In terms of socio economic data, people depended on government grants, sowing with grass
(making baskets and mats) and cash remittances from Husbands working in Umtata,
Johannesburg and other towns and cities. They spent around R100 on paraffin and R25 on
Candles.
Their knowledge of the non-grid was not much except that it switches on and off. The fact that
they really liked about this system is that it provided street lighting, which was nice though inside
their houses was very dark. This was referred to as ‘planning, people first’. People that came from
surrounding areas were safer passing through the village; and people had lights at the main church
which was very exciting.
3.4.
In-depth interviews
Seven (7) in-depth interviews were conducted with key people in the community. The following
were part of this methodology and presented issues as follows:
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 92 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3.4.1. The speaker at the Mayor’s office, Nyandeni Local Municipality
The speaker at the Mayor’s office, and the then local councilor of Lucingweni (until May 2006), Mr
Sidelo, feels very strong about the failure of this project; and its dynamics, within the whole
government leadership structures, as, according to him, it reflects badly on the then Minister of
Minerals and Energy, Her Excellency Mrs Pumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka the initiator and inceptor the
project; the ANC government as a whole; the local leadership of Nyandeni and Lucingweni village;
Mr Sidelo himself as a person and a resident in the area, as well as the (his) community at large.
He also blamed the contractor, who ‘took the community for granted…’ and about the project lag of
four years without commissioning. He informed the researchers that the Nyandeni municipality has
always, and is still willing to take over the system, manage and maintain it on behalf of the
community.
Mr Sidelo had just written a report (for the DME), in his capacity as the councilor and as the one
who continues to be involved in everything that happens in the Lucingweni village, and also the
one who facilitated the introduction of the mini-grid hybrid project in the area; to the effect of this
project which he made available to this research (attached as appendix)
3.4.2. Local councillor: Lucingweni
Councilor Mpongo - The current local councilor of Lucingweni assumed office within the election of
new local government in May 2006. He did not have proper hand-over from the then councillor, Mr
Sidelo on this project, but works well with both Mr Sidelo and the local village herdsman –
relationships that are sensitive and need proper management.
When asked about his perceptions on the mini-grid system and how the project has turned out for
the Lucingweni community and its impact on the Nyandeni municipality he responded by saying
that his perceptions were based on limited information which he got from the meeting when the
research project was introduced. He also knew that it is a pilot project and that the energy provided
is limited and that it will be supplemented by other means of energy to enable people to cook and
meet other thermal needs. The councilor mentioned that there is a gap in informing people on what
they should expect from the project and there is a need to establish a dialogue to find out what the
energy needs of the people are and look at their awareness of the avenues of getting energy. He
also mentioned that there is a need to look at the policy issues from government in regulating nongrid electricity especially for those people that it is provided for and those that do not have access
to energy.
The councilor suggested that the way forward for the project should be determined by a survey that
would look at the energy needs of the area and to what extent these are a necessity. In order for
the project to be sustainable, the councilor suggested that local people should be trained in
accredited learnerships at recognized institutions so that they are able to deal with maintenance
issues when they arise. For him, there was also a need to make energy sources available at an
affordable price for local people.
When asked about what he foresaw the role of the local and district municipalities as being, he
responded by saying that the DME should explain what their vision is regarding the project and
relay that message to the district and local municipalities so that they will know what their role is. If
there are subsidies such as Free Basic Electricity (FBE) to be put in place, this should be made
clear to these municipalities so that they can fulfill their roles. With non grid electrification, it still has
to be considered how the indigent policy or FBE will be administered. This could be done by giving
people an amount of energy supply for free or cutting the supply once the people have exceeded
what they are supposed to use per month.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 93 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3.4.3. Lucingweni Village Herdsman
Chief Dalindyebo - The Lucingweni Village Herdsman resides at Lucingweni and has been chief in
the area for a number of years. His house is one those electrified in the village. He was
interviewed to get his views on the electrification situation at the village and what the future
prospects of the project according to him are.
According to him after the wiring had been done and the installation of the system completed in
many of the households people were able to use it for lighting. He confirmed that some
households were using it for cooking but there were problems as it kept on switching off. He
confirmed what was said in the focus groups regarding the ‘boys’ that had been working on the
installations and said that they were controlling the supply in the village. They had taken it upon
themselves to control how and when people should use this electricity.
The chief said that there is no one taking responsibility for this supply and the ‘boys’ did as they
pleased.
The chief said that he would like to have Eskom electricity in this village because he knows that it
works well and people can have small businesses if they want to. A concerning issue was that he
is convinced that the village has not received Eskom electricity because ‘we were given the nongrid supply first’ and according to him, this is what has delayed the process of grid electrification in
the village. He was also sure that people would be able to afford grid electricity if it was supplied to
them. The Chief also expressed that it would be hard to ‘trust’ non-grid electricity even if the
system is fixed because there is no guarantee that these boys will not temper with it again.
The Chief also mentioned the visit of former Minister’s (Honorable Mlambo-Ngcuka) which took
place in (2001?) where she made it clear to the people there that they should not cook with this
supply but light only, people still cooked with it nevertheless.
Full interview transcript attached below.
3.4.4. Deputy Director, Operations and Maintenance, OR Tambo District Municipality
Mr Mzayiya - The Deputy Director, Operations and Maintenance, OR Tambo District Municipality
outlined that the OR Tambo district municipality’s specific role to the communities is the provision
of water services; and supports the local municipalities in other areas such as infrastructure
development, health, environment, local economic development, in cases where the said local
municipalities lack the necessary resources (human and financial).
Mr Mzayiya was asked about the OR Tambo Municipality and its involvement in the Lucingweni
energy and water supply programme. In his response, he mentioned that the OR Tambo
municipality was more interested in the water supply and the ownership issue of the system
including servicing can be done by the municipality. Mr Mzayiya said that there are plans by OR
Tambo to test the water at Lucingweni in less than four weeks from the interview date. He also
mentioned that the DME had requested the OR Tambo to take over the non-grid system at Hluleka
and Lucingweni which is a matter that was to be further discussed with the Nyandeni Municipality
and all stakeholders involved in the matter.
The OR Tambo together with Nyandeni municipalities would need facilitation by consultants to take
over the negotiations and lead the process so that both municipalities can agree on their
responsibilities.
3.4.5. Lucingweni Ward Committee Member
Mr Ncgala The Lucingweni Ward Committee Member, gave background of the project having all
started at Nyandeni, through the local councilor, Mr Sidelo. He further suggested that the other
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 94 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
two ward councilors, Mr Mbiko and Mr Qaqa (responsible for local economic development at
Nyandeni) are aware of the project as they were briefed by Mr Sidelo.
He emphasized the issues of training of youth to guard and manage the system for the community;
while the ownership of the system is handed over to the local municipality, Nyandeni. He stressed
that the contractor, Shell Solar to transfer skills to their people for future work and development in
the area.
He presented hope that people from the neighbouring villages will have interest in mini-grids when
they see it working and benefiting the people in Lucingweni.
He made a strong pledge to the government for the provision of thermal energy service,
particularly LP Gas and the whole initial IEC concept’s implementation; and to really consider
subsidising poor people with energy even when there is willingness to pay for services derived.
3.4.6. Hluleka Nature Resort Caretaker
Mr. Phumezile Bennie Gaxela, assistant to Hluleka resort manager, Mr Yazini, had been with Hluleka
since the inception of mini-grid hybrid at the resort. His perceptions are that it is weak, unreliable
and too much trouble in terms of operation even with diesel generator back-up.
There was appreciation of the benefits of the system by Benny, and the staff of the resort as they
were able to safe on the diesel quantities; and would have some light, though unreliable. If only
they were kept abreast of development and were trained to do basic trouble shooting with the
system, they would derive even more benefit.
The resort was under new management and reconstruction, making it a prime opportunity for the
DME and NER to present the system and its benefits to the new management, the Eastern Cape
Parks Board; and to b integrated within the new plans to re-commission the resort.
3.4.7. Village committee member and field worker
Ms Nontobeko Landule, a village committee member and field worker lives in Lucingweni village
(within the totally un-electrified area), and sits on almost all committees in the village. Though she
lives in Lucingweni, she is one of those households that are not connected to the grid (not far from
the community centre). However, being the community leader and representative, she was
positive and steadfast in her quest to want this electricity to work for the benefit of all her village
communities and people.
She related the consultation processes and delivery procedures, which the communities were part
of, until there was salient division within the communities, spearheaded by the contractor and the
village herdsman, due to lack of transparency and power dynamics. Being a woman who believed
in true representation of people and standing by the truth; she was not in very good books with the
village herdsman, who was now sidelining the community’s representatives and committees to
achieve the last requirements/deliverables of the project, towards final payment.
However, despite all that has happened, the people were still hopeful towards the functioning of
the system; the provision of clean water; the Integrated Energy Centre (IEC) and the delivery of
thermal energy options for improvement of quality of life.
The full write-ups of the interviews are presented separately as attachments in the appendices of
this report.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 95 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4. Description of Lucingweni
The researchers, together with the fieldworkers did the ‘run-down’ of the Lucingweni village to
establish the total number of households in the village, number of those connected and those not
connected. 120 of the 228 households in the village are connected to the mini-grid system.
These numbers were verified by the technical team on their visit to the area and the geographic
coordinates of each connection captured as in Figure 18.
Figure 18 Coordinates of Lucingweni points of supply
4.1.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Summary of Issues:
Many households comprise of a number of independent houses i.e. more than three rondavels
in one yard
Majority of households depend on government social grants i.e. child grants, disability grants
and old age pension grants. Women may even go to an extent of having many children
because this is one of the main sources of income
Households have been highly disappointed by the performance of non-grid electrification
although there is some willingness to continue using the supply if they can be assured that its
performance will be improved
Households cook at least three times a day. Food cooked takes a long time to prepare and this
shows that there is a need for efficient thermal energy sources provided for these households.
Households aspire to use ‘ESKOM’ electricity to meet all their energy (electrical and thermal)
needs; and for them any electricity that cannot cook defeats the purpose of electrification.
Hence they aspire to cook (and meet every need – cooking, water heating, ironing, electrical
and otherwise) with electricity.
Space heating is also equally important especially in winter, another reason to ensure that
there are reliable sources of energy for thermal use.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 96 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
To implement any kind of projects in the Eastern Cape province, one has to go through
stringent protocol at all levels to consult, inform and execute such endeavors. This calls for a
more transparent approach and integration within local leadership and community structures,
so as to avoid conflicts and disputes within the community. Local protocol has to be followed as
well.
Local government structures take the lead in implementing development projects but they are
supported by (and have to liaise and consult with) the traditional leadership.
Poverty in the area leads to people looking up to the government to ensure that the supply is
maintained at all times although there is willingness to pay for the services provided.
Cell phone ownership is high but there is a great need for communication services such as
public telephones as people do not usually have airtime.
The women were able to cook with the system. They went to buy electric two-plate stoves and
would cook with them (curiosity minds)
A total of 228 households in the whole of Lucingweni village; of which only 120 are connected
to the system.
A few households (within the village that are not connected) had boxes within their households
but were never connected. Some mentioned that they were requested to pay (R50) for them to
be connected.
The rest of the un-connected households (within the village and those villages neighbouring
Lucingweni) were waiting eagerly for the duration of the pilot (initially 6 month) to be connected
later. The reason provided for being left out/not connected was that they were not part of the
pilot.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 97 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5. Discussion
5.1.
System performance and level of satisfaction
This is one critical area since people were informed (given information and consulted) about the
nature of the non-grid system, its application and its limitations. They accepted it based on the
information that they were given, specifically that:
•
•
•
•
It is being piloted for 6 months and will be extended/replicated in other surrounding villages
and households
Its provision will be coupled with the Integrated Energy Centre (IEC) to meet and
supplement the thermal needs of the people such as cooking, ironing, water and space
heating; and to some extend, the usage of fridges for business purposes. To this effect, the
provision of LP Gas as the source to meet these needs was mentioned to the communities.
The main driver for this pilot is rural development and upgrading the standard of living of
the people; such that they would even able to run small entrepreneurial activities.
There was a promise to integrate this project into other existing and potential projects which
included provision of safe drinking water, improvement of telecommunications, and to
avail a community centre where economic activities could happen, within the village.
Most of these promises and even others were not achieved by the project, within the timeframes
and beyond. The project has in turn taken more that four years (from the initial plan of 6-month
pilot) and most of all has been a source of frustration and non-performance for the better part of its
lifespan. As a result, many people were really frustrated, as they still had hope for functionality and
delivery of the service by the system, the service provider and the government.
Having said these, there was an amazing hope and willingness for the system to be re-looked at,
serviced and/or maintained such that it can continue to function and offer energy services. The
community took responsibility to the malfunctioning of the system as they cooked and tampered
with the system while they were informed clearly on the capacity and limitations of the system.
They also alluded to power/system failure to their fellow community members who had the
knowledge and hence authority to switch the system on and off.
5.2.
Ownership and maintenance of the system
Ownership is another critical area that needs to be established and engraved in people’s minds
that they take ownership and responsibility of the system; and that they had something to
contribute to start with, and to benefit from it. Sufficient information and communication (two-way
process, allowing feedback and reflection); participation by the community and transparent
participatory implementation instills the levels of ownership, and hence caring for the system.
Local ownership is ensured by on-going information, consultation and participation by the local
communities. Once ownership is instilled in communities’ minds, they can together guard and look
after their communal assets, and be each other’s keepers.
5.3.
Willingness to pay for energy Service provided by/derived from the system
There is a strong point which came from the Ward Committee member Mr Ncgala, in that people
should not be made to pay for the system even if they are willing to pay. Their willingness to pay
may be an indication of the value derived from the service, though this type of energy might not be
necessarily one of the ‘basic’ and critical needs.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 98 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6. Recommendations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Naturally people have curious minds – if you tell them not to do something, they would
want to experiment and see exactly why they should not do a particular thing. It is
therefore advisable to design and supply limited power supply within a households,
ensure that the supply installed does only what it is advocated it does as opposed to
installing supply that can handle further activies such as cooking and in the same breadth
tell people not to cook. However, this recommendation is more technical than socioeconomic. and continuous awareness and education of the people remains pivotal
Many good things that came out of this research, and these include; peoples perceptions,
knowledge, experiences and inputs into the future of this project. It is therefore advisable
for the DME to resuscitate the information and communication structures with the
community at large, to instill value and consultation of every individual, and this would work
for the benefit of all.
Community ownership of the system should be key in future in the delivery of the services.
Community ownership may be instilled in many ways possible, and at different levels.
Once the community own the assets; and the local municipality manages and takes care of
the maintenance of the system, the system’s (components) vulnerability to theft and
vandalism will be lessened, with people being each other’s keepers.
Provision of energy should be coupled with other basic needs such as ICTs, water and
roads and other infrastructure.
The project of this magnitude should be monitored very closely; and deliverables clearly
tabulated to warrant accountability.
Specific attention has to be paid to issues of capacity building, skills development,
information and knowledge transfer; and local ownership of the system
The sustainability of any project starts at project conceptualization and implementation.
People should be consulted and involved in whichever way possible throughout the entire
project cycle.
The project has to meet the critical (or basic) energy needs of the people: energy for
meeting thermal needs (such as cooking and water heating) primarily; as well as electrical
needs secondarily. In the case of non-grid electrification, the delivery of electrical energy
service (lighting, TVs, cell-phone charging etc) should be coupled with the delivery of
cleaner, safer, affordable and available alternative sources of energy to meet the thermal
needs, which are detrimental to households’ survival; and tend to take more than 80%
(Banks, 2001) of the energy usage in the homes.
Over and above the system maintenance and the delivery of energy services, the people
should also be taken care of in terms of informing them on what is happening; and keep
the communication lines open to air their views on services provided; future plans and
trouble shooting. This comprise a practical example to implementing the ‘Batho Pele’
principles and concepts.
The option of free basic energy provision for the poor should be geared towards meeting
the thermal energy needs; while the delivery (and maintenance thereof) of this source
(non-grid) should be at the government/municipal expense through subsidy (people’s
needs versus piloting)
Power should also be supplied in sufficient quantity to support some economic activities for
the community to generate income from the very same system
Provision of Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs) to the community should be integrated
within a project of this type, to instill energy efficiency principles and practices.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 99 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
7. Conclusion
To reflect back to the essence of this project and hence this study: ’Assessment of the viability and
potential to replicate mini-grid hybrid systems’ from the socio-economic perspective; the four major
conclusions are:
7.1.
Provision of a working, integrated system
The provision of an integrated, functional system and solution is critical to success of the project:
supply/solution meeting people’s needs; as well as provision of a whole package solution/supply –
electrical and thermal energy provision. The provision of this electrical system should be coupled
with the delivery of complementing energy sources to meet the thermal needs of the people;
particularly cooking, water heating and ironing;
7.2.
‘People first’ governance approach
– taking everybody alongside processes
The leadership (and communities’) information, consultation, training and skills’ transfer becomes
of core importance to instill ownership of the system and the overall project at large. System or
assets’ ownership by local communities decreases/mitigates vandalism and theft. When such
ownership is instilled, the issues of maintenance and payments towards service derived/delivered
easily falls into place.
•
Extra budget needed urgently to meet the thermal needs
Whilst there is a parallel process by the DME to make the system work; there should be parallel
commissioning (and funding) of supply of LPG in particular, to meet the thermal needs; and free
basic energy allocation can go towards the thermal energy whilst the maintenance of the mini-grid
can be taken up within municipality budgets. (people can derive more value and benefit to
appropriate, modern, affordable and available (acceptability is not the main issue, they were
informed about plans to deliver LPG and had waited, in acceptance and anticipation) energy that
meets their thermal needs (basic, or rather priority need for cooking, and water heating); to balance
the upgrade in the general standard of living. People lighting with electricity but still collecting and
cooking outside with wood and traditional biomass fuels - law of diminishing returns!
7.3.
Increased support and opportunities for entrepreneurship/income generating
schemes
Resources (financial and human) have to be mobilized to accelerate the creation of skills and
business opportunities. A scheme for initializing; and supporting the establishment of business
ventures can be supported/instigated, with set timeframes and deliverables; sustainability and
management inbuilt from conception of such schemes. Integrated Energy Centre and the use of
community centre for ICTs and other economic activities should be looked at, for a start. The
many interviews presented in this report have pointed to other ideas for economic activities, such
as support to sewing groups, welding, etc.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 100 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
8. References:
Banks, Douglas. Market potential and relevant socio-economic data. Update report from the Decentralized
Rural Electrification. Rural Area Power Solutions (Pty) Ltd. 2001.
Aitken, Robert. Eastern Cape Province Socio-economic Resource Survey; RAPS (Pty) Ltd for SAD-ELEC.
2005
Mohlakoana, Nthabiseng. Rural Electrification through Solar Home Systems in the Eastern Cape: Policy
Implications. Energy in Africa magazine, Goldcity Communications, Johannesburg.
Makhabane, Matshepiso. Socio-economic Impact Assessment of Thermal Provision versus electrification in
the Western Cape Province: The case of LP Gas Demand –Side Management. report fro the LPGSASA,
August 2006
Makhabane, Matshepiso. promoting the uptake of LP Gas as a Fuel of choice to Meeting theTthermal Needs
of the Low Income Households in South Africa. A study done for IIEC funded by USAID, 2005.
Househam,Ian. Personal conversations: August 2,3 17,18, and 28; 2006.
Aitken, Robert. Personal conversation, July 2006
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 101 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Appendices to Socio-economic evaluation
Interview with Cllr Mpongo – 22 June 2006
Interviewed by N Mohlakoana for Dikepolana Resources
Councilor Mpongo is from Nkanunu a village outside Lucingweni.
Perceptions of non-grid electrification
• Councilor Mpongo’s perceptions are based on limited information which he got from a meting
when the research project was introduced
• He knows that it is a pilot project and that the energy provided is limited and that it will be
supplemented by other means of energy to enable people to cook and meet other thermal
needs
• He believes there has been, and still exists a gap in informing people on what they should
expect from the project
• He said there is a need to establish a dialogue to find out what the energy needs of the people
are and look at their awareness of the avenues of getting energy
• Councilor Mpongo recons that the policy issues from government in regulating non-grid
electricity especially for those people that it is provided for and those that do not have access
to energy should be looked at.
• Councilor Mpongo does not view the Lucingweni system in isolation, but also considers the
Hluleka Nature Reserve and the limitations of the system installed especially when there are
tourists around, having limited access to energy such as lights
• There is no element of willingness administratively from the service providers of the system. It
is a stage where we should look at the exit strategy so that the efforts are sustainable. There is
no indication that there were plans to sustain the system as there is no training of the local
people even if people were working on voluntary basis.
• He maintains that many local stakeholders, including himself do not have knowledge of what
the service provider should have done in terms of completing the project.
• There are still questions with regards to the households that are not connected, what plans are
made for them.
• There is no formal document that the local councilor, Mr Mpongo has received in terms of what
the plans are; and what the energy output of the system are. He has gathered that the system
was supposed to cater for the water needs of the people.
• There is vandalism by the local people who feel that the system has failed them and they are
not getting what they were promised.
• It is clear that people are prepared to be technologically advanced as there is a lot of use of cell
phones and people acquiring TVs and other appliances that are technologically related. This
change of mind set was brought about the introduction of the non-grid system in the area.
What was your introduction to the project?
• There was no formal introduction; I only got what I know from informal sources and the meeting
I had with Mr. Sidelo.
Lucingweni energy needs
• The best plan would be to ensure that the scheme is sustained people should be trained and
information should be shared with regards to the areas where such a system is working and
where there are success stories of IECs
• There is a need to supplement available energy sources with LPG
What is the way forward – how do we make the system work
• A survey is needed in terms of looking at the energy needs of the area and to what extent
these are a necessity
• Have proof at to how sustainable the system is
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 102 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
•
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
There is a need to train the local people in accredited learnerships
Make energy sources available at an affordable price for local people
It must be noted that people will not take up the use of electrification immediately; this will take
time as people are used to using wood, paraffin and other sources of energy other than
electricity.
People need to be exposed and given time to adopt to such a life style
The basic electricity needs are that people must not suffer when they need to light in their
homes or use TV and radio
There is a need to get a person that will understand the dynamics of the area and not someone
that has business interests only, this has left a crack and blockage in the development of the
area
The role of the municipality
•
•
•
•
•
•
The DME should explain what their vision is about the project and relay that message to the
district and local municipalities so that they will know what their role is. They should make it
clear what the subsidies will be.
We have had a meeting about indigent subsidies and have found that within the Nyandeni
municipality, there are less than 3000 households that have access to indigent funds.
There was a study of income levels of households so that the municipality could find out the
number of households that needed indigent assistance and there are funds available for more
households to access these funds.
There are plans to ensure that access to energy is made affordable through the indigent funds
With non grid electrification, it still has to be considered how the indigent policy or FBE will be
administered. This could be done by giving people an amount of energy supply for free or
cutting the supply once the people have exceeded what they are supposed to use per month.
The IDP of Nyandeni should speak to OR Tambo IDP so that there is no duplication of
services.
Water
•
•
•
At present we are busy reviewing the water situation, there is count made of the rivers in the
village and look at the critical areas
there are options to revive the scheme at Hluleka or using a diesel engine for stand pipes in the
village
OR Tambo is in the process of seconding people to work in the existing water projects. There
are also political challenges to be considered
Ownership and maintenance
•
The local municipality should have no option but to own and maintain the system but the DME
should ensure that the hand over is done properly
Other benefits
•
•
Having non-grid electrification could also benefit other sectors in the community by introducing
a multi-purpose centre where ICTs are availability for the use of the community.
This could also be introduced to assist schools’ programmes where pupils can be taught how
to use computers and can also assist in science projects
Small business development
•
•
There are opportunities at Hluleka Nature reserve where the local community can benefit by
marketing their local hand work productions through the ICTs and to attract tourism in the area.
There could be links with other sectors such as the pension pay out points that could use nongrid electricity
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 103 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
Sales of appliances could be made locally, repairs and sell cards for electricity credits
Recommendations
•
•
•
There is a need for DME to consider the other energy services for the area such as LPG and
consider affordability issues on such services.
There is a need that when sub-contactors working on this project do not have business
interests only but also consider the needs of the community that they will take to heart.
DME, district and local municipalities should facilitate the process of ensuring that the system is
revived.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 104 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Interview transcript: Lucingweni Village Herdsman
Interview with Chief Dalindyebo of Lucingweni Village near Hluleka – 21 June 2006
Interviewed by N Mohlakoana and S Ntinezo for Dikepolana Resources
Other people present: Nontobeko Landule, Nozamile Nkosini and Sylvia Skwati
Chief Dalindyebo resides at Lucingweni and has been chief in the area for a number of years. His
house is one those electrified in the village. He was interviewed to get his views on the
electrification situation at the village and what the future prospects of the project according to him
are.
Perceptions on non-grid electrification and what he knows about non-grid electricity
•
It was the first time I had ever seen this type of electricity and we were told that it was being
tested or piloted for six months.
Installation and use in the village
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
After it had been installed committees were formed and people were very agitated about the
issue at hand but I stopped them because we wanted the project to be successful
After the wiring had been done in many of the households we were able to use it for lighting. I
heard that some households were using it for cooking but there were problems as it kept on
switching off
I became aware that this is not real electricity as it was not reliable. It would switch off at any
time
The other problem is that the boys that have been working on the installations are controlling
the supply in the village. They have taken it upon themselves to control how and when people
should use this electricity. If one person has a fight with one of the boys, they switch of the
electricity supply to your house whilst the other houses are lighting
We realised that one of the keys for the system was kept at the Nature reserve and these boys
stole the key and made a copy
There is no one taking responsibility for this supply, these boys do as they please and there is
no one stopping them.
Last year a white man from Australia came to the village to assess the cholera problem and
check up on houses with water tanks. He said that this electricity is not suitable for this area but
more suitable for Australia where the weather is hot always.
Grid electricity
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I would like to have Eskom electricity in this village because I know that it works well and
people can have small businesses if they want to
The problem with the village not having Eskom electricity is that we were given the non-grid
supply first; this is what has delayed the process for the village to received grid electricity.
We have been waiting for Eskom electricity but because of the non-grid system, there seem to
be little hope.
The wind turbines are noisy and the cause a lot of wind within their installed area, it is very
unpleasant to have them so near especially because it does not help with anything
There will be no problem to pay for grid electricity because a lot of people in the village earn an
income in the form of pensions especially child grants. They can take at least R60 from that to
pay for their Eskom supply on monthly basis and they will be able to cook.
The nice thing about Eskom is that there are no boys that will be controlling the supply, if there
is a problem with the supply, Eskom will send its own people to deal with the problem not the
young boys in the village that have taken over the non-grid system.
In the Giqi village not far from here, they have Eskom electricity and they have had it for a long
time (5 months) and they are using it for lighting and everything else. Eskom is busy extending
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 105 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
the grid to the other villages and I know that Lucingweni will be receiving this supply very soon.
At this point the Chief stood up to show us the villages where Eskom is busy extending the
grid.
If we can get grid electricity in this village, our children will be able to start small businesses
where they can do welding projects as they do have the qualifications from technical colleges.
We were never able to iron and cook with this electricity. The Chief also showed us his ready
board to show the type and load of supply.
What were you told with regards to an event where the non-grid system is giving you
problems? Who is the contact person, is it the DME, NER, the municipality?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
From the beginning we have been going to the councilor (Sidelo) because he is the one that
came with this project. He brought the white people with him (Barry and others from Pretoria)
and they introduced this project to the village.
We are now going to direct all these problems to the new councilor which we will be having a
meeting with next Wednesday (28 June 06).
If the supply is corrected and people are able to use electricity the way they want to it would
still be difficult to trust non-grid electricity because there is no guarantee that these boys will not
temper with it again.
These boys were spoilt from the beginning by these white men that worked with them when
they were doing installations. They think that they have the right to do whatever they want with
the supply hence switching it on and off whenever they feel like it.
I feel that we were fooled by being given this electricity.
These boys even vandalize the system at night when people are sleeping. Some of the boxes
from the system are missing.
At the moment it is difficult to approach anyone because no one wants to take responsibility for
this electricity, even the people that brought it here are no where to be seen and we cannot talk
to these boys.
The Minister’s visit
•
•
•
•
When the Minister (Mlambo-Ngcuka) first came to the village to introduce the project she had a
good plan and spoke very well. She said that people should not cook with this supply but light
only. She also said that if people felt that they were ready to cook with it they should say so
that the supply could be upgraded.
People bought stoves and pots and they started cooking when they were not supposed to.
Barry also said that this supply will not e able to cook and they said that they would come back
to correct it.
People could not rely on it especially when they were having functions at their homes and
needed to work at night, it would just switch off.
The most important thing is that we have a reliable source of supply so that we can cook and have
small businesses. We will be able to pay for the supply as people will pay for what they are using. I
know this as I have a house in Dayveton (Gauteng) and buy electricity on monthly basis.
The light from the non-grid supply was also not as bright as compared to that of grid electricity,
especially outside. It would also switch off when the weather was bad, during rainy and windy
days.
Community Hall, Training and Energy Centre
•
•
This hall was built by the white man (Barry) but this is not the structure that was agreed upon
With regards to the training and energy centre, I allocated some land for this purpose and they
built a temporary structure which did not last. People had some activities there for a short while
but after some time the structure collapsed and that was the end.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 106 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
What we have been told is that there will be a permanent brick structure that will be built.
Everyone that wants to participate in a small business development will be housed there; the
sewing groups, welders and an energy centre will also be located there.
This new centre will be done by different people from those that brought the non-grid system
and they have spoken to people such as the sewing groups and other interested people.
Water
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
There is a man that was called Peter, he came to the village in the mid 80s and he wanted to
check the rivers in the village. The aim was to see whether there are rivers that can be able to
provide water to the village by use of stand pipes.
He checked most of the rivers and by using some device that showed if the water was suitable
for human consumption. Some of the rivers were not suitable.
At some point they decided to have a bore hole that used solar energy to pump water and they
had tanks that were filed with water from these bore holes.
One night the system was vandalized and the solar panels were stolen. We knew who did it
and they were punished.
Another contractor came to install pipes for the water to flow from the water reserve to the
tanks. We realized that these contractors had incorrectly fitted the pipes and that was the end
of the water project. I believe that the municipality should take it upon themselves to provide
water in the village and not subcontract anyone as the contractors do not care; they just leave
the situation as it is without solving the problem.
We cannot use water from these tanks and we are told that it is unhealthy to drink this water.
At the moment the village households use river water as they do not have any other choice.
I am worried that there will be a cholera outbreak soon. Sometimes there is a need to have a
temporary hospital in a tent which is usually set up near my house and no one cares about
these people. At one point these tents were blown by the wind and two people passed away
whilst my wife and I had to help the survivors.
What is the way forward?
•
•
We want to have grid electricity and I hope that the people that brought the non-grid system
here will come and remove it when ESKOM comes here.
We also work well with the Nyandeni and OR Tambo municipalities through our councilor and
we believe that this will bring development in the area.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 107 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Interview transcript: Operations and Maintenance Manager at the OR Tambo Municipality
Mr Eric Mzayiya – 19 June 2006
Interviewed by N Mohlakoana and S Ntinezo for Dikepolana Resources
Background
Mr Mzayiya is the Operations and Maintenance Manager at the OR Tambo Municipality
Perceptions on non-grid electrification and water supply
Mr Mzayiya was asked about the OR Tambo Municipality and its involvement in the Lucingweni
energy and water supply programme.
•
•
•
•
•
He said that the OR Tambo municipality was more interested in the water supply and the
ownership issue of the system including servicing can be done by them but the person with
most information would be Cllr Tobo who is heading the Local Economic Development and
Tourism portfolio.
He said that he DME had requested the OR Tambo to take over the non-grid system at Hluleka
and Lucingweni.
The OR Tambo together with Nyandeni would need facilitation by consultants such as
Dikepolana Resources to take over the negotiations and lead the process so that both
municipalities can agree on their respective roles and responsibilities.
The other people to talk to at the OR Tambo are Mr Mbiko – Cllr for the Insfrastructure portfolio
and Mr Hlazo – the Municipal Manager.
Mr Mzayiya said that there are plans by OR Tambo to test the water at Lucingweni in less than
four weeks from the interview date.
He also confirmed that people will not pay for water services and there are plans to install stand
pipes that will be places 200m apart from each other to enable access to water for the Lucingweni
residents.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 108 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Interview transcript: Speaker Nyadeni Local Municipality
Mr Sidelo, Speaker, Nyandeni Local Municipality - 21st June 2006
By Ms M. Makhabane for Dikepolana Resources
Introduction
The project stared in the year 2002, and then there were Madiba from Shell Solar; and Ms
Noluthando Poswa from the DME. I cannot remember then who was a representative of the NER.
It all started through the Nyandeni local municipality within which I was the local then for five years.
Information (and handover) to appropriate colleagues/councilors at Nyandeni
Mr Sidelo had informed the two ward councilors in the Nyandeni local municipality: Cllr Mbiko and
Cllr Qaqa (responsible for local economic development); and they were aware of the project.
The Nyandeni municipality is therefore willing to take-over the project, and had since been waiting
for the commissioning and hand-over of the project to the local municipality. To this effect local
municipalities are given budget allocations to subsidize poor people with energy by the DME,
under the free basic energy subsidy; and this could be harnessed to deliver basic energy services
to the people.
Training and consultation of people
This was a critical area according to Mr Sidelo. In his views, proper consultation was not done
from planning and inception of the project; people were consulted and involved thoroughly within
the implementation phase of the project only when Yaw Afrane-Okese, from NER came into the
picture.
There was no proper and coordinated training, technology, skills and knowledge transfer to the
local communities, to be able to maintain and operate the system; as well as do productive
activities within the community. The peoples’ consultation and involvement ceased more during
the final delivery of the project (i.e. upon constructing the community centre). The local
municipality and all stakeholders are urging for the speedy hand-over of the system, with trained
people and skills to service and manage the system.
Mr Sidelo mentioned that he had championed a formation of the community development trust,
comprising of five administration areas in order fro the trust to access funding as a credible
registered entity. This trust/initiative were hijacked by Barry and Shawn, by dividing the community
and using the same trustees in the construction of the community development centre. Ms Bongile
Nompe is the chairperson of the community and as mentioned earlier, the said committee was
elected by the community.
Other Developmental Projects in the Area
Mr Sidelo mentioned that there are other developmental project such as the Fruit tree production
and herbs, that was piloted by the Agricultural Research Centre (ARC) was is progressing well. He
mentioned an opportunity for electricity to dry and preserve these fruits; the Nature Reserve revival
project which is just starting for the duration of a year though it is stalling a bit; the BEE keeping
project within the nature reserve; the Mtakaye River project that is overlooked by Shawn – the
latter three being championed by the national office of Department of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism (DEAT).
He also mentioned that the Lucingweni area comprise four other villages around Lucingweni, which
are Mdzwine, Kangeni, Pungula and Xhuthu Dwele.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 109 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Way forward
Mr Sidelo pleaded with the authorities (the DME and the NER) to make sure that the project is
winded up and handed over to the municipality; ‘as the current situation is destroying the image of
‘our’ government with a scar that can never be erased’.
Attached to appendix D2 is the actual report that had been prepared by Mr Sidelo.
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 110 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Ward Concillors Report to DME on Lucingweni Mini-grid system
BY MJ SIDELO, (Ward Councilor – 082 856 3820)
15 May 2006
Context:
This report was prepared by Mr Sidelo, when he was still the local councilor for Lucingweni and
surrounding areas, just in time for the evaluation project.
Background
This project was a pilot project by the Department of Mineral and Energy under the Minister
Mlambo-Ngcuka who came to launch the project. The main objective of the report was to play a
role in the national war against poverty among the poor communities like Hluleka.
Electricity would be used by communities in different projects.
A beautiful development centre was to be built where community would do developmental
programmes to uplift themselves.
The old water scheme would be revived.
The whole project was supposed to be finished at least by 2003.
Till now 2006, the project is still not complete.
CHALLENGES
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Objectives of the project have not been achieved till now in 2006
Many houses are not electrified which are next to the pilot area.
Ever since the project started to give light in 2004, it never operated to the satisfaction of
the community.
It operated few weeks and went off; and was on and off right through.
There was no light from January 2005 till Dec 2005.
There was light in Dec 2005 only for three weeks.
It is in May 2006 now, we last saw the light in February.
No body can proudly say in the community we have an electricity project here.
It could not be handed to the municipality because it was unfinished work.
The project implementer seems not willing to handover the project as he never trained in
people in the community to be able to operate the project.
We believe somebody is manipulating or community as we heard that there is a letter
written behind the knowledge of the project steering committee representing the community
saying that all is well in the project.
This project is a disappointment to the community and the government especially the DME
in particular the Deputy President who was the minister then.
The project is only in one village out of four surrounding villages, something which
threatens the life of the project in terms of vandalism.
The community if patiently waiting for spread of the project and he day it will actually be
effective and running.
The worse disappointment is the development centre which is a temporal structure with no
explanation made for that reason either to the Ward Councilor of that time or the
community.
This was quickly built behind the back of the steering committee and the Ward Councilor of
the time, Cllr Mr Sidelo.
The reason best known by the implementing company, Shell Solar represented by Mr Barry
Fontini whom I worked with smoothly for sometime here whilst implementing electrification.
Things changed when he wanted to cheat my community by building a temporal structure
without agreeing or consulting them through their reps which has been the project steering
committee with the Ward Councilor all along. I started to be in the bad books of Mr Barry
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 111 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Fontini when I confronted him about this and he told me that he did not see a need to
consult me though he had been working with me all along.
Water has not been drank because the bore hole made does not have sufficient water.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Appendix B
The DME must intervene immediately.
Shell Solar must finish up the electrification.
The project must be tested at least three months, people getting light to see if it is
working.
Local people must be trained to control and manage the project.
The project must be handed over to the local municipality.
The development centre must be properly built to be a permanent structure and be
electrified.
Additional boreholes must be looked for to get water for the community.
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 112 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Socio-economic questionnaire
HLULEKA/LUCINGWENI MINI-GRID HYBRID PILOT PROJECT
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY: LUCINGWENI - JUNE, 2006
Date:________________________________
Interviewer: ________________________
Respondent Name and Surname: __________________________________________ Age:
__________________________________________________________________________
Gender of Respondent: Male_______________ Female:_____________
SECTION 1: GENERAL CONTACT INFORMATION, HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS AND
SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA
1.1 Contact Details:
Address: __________________________________________________________________
Cell :________________________________
{NO}
Connected to the mini-grid system:
{YES}
1.2 Type of house/building structure.
( ) Mud House(Plata)
rooms)
( ) Roundavel (write number – (
1.3 Number of rooms for the household: _____
)
(
)Big house (2+
Number of people: _______
Number of Adults_____ Children: ______
1.4 Total monthly household income (tick appropriate box)
R0 – R500
R501 – R1 500
R1 501 – R2 500
R2 500 – R3 500
R3 501 – R4 500
R4 501 – R5 500
R5 501 and up
1.5 Sources of household income
Unemployed
Pension
Remittances (cash contribution by employed family members outside the
HH)
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 113 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Formal employment
Part-time work
Welfare allowances (child grants, disability grant)
a) Child grants
b) Disability grant
c) Old age pension
Selling (products)
Farming
Other (Please specify)
1.6 Levels of Education – state highest grade completed (all/older family members)
Level of Education
Tick appropriate box
No schooling
Primary School
High School
Training after High School
Certificate
College, technikon, university
Diploma
Specify:_______________________________ Degree
Post graduate
SECTION 2: ENERGY USE PATTERNS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT
2.1 Where does cooking happen? ( ) inside house
2.2 Is there a separate kitchen?
(
) Kitchen
( ) outside house
(
) no kitchen but cooking area
2.3 Please indicate what fuels are used for specified end-uses?
Type of Fuel
Cooking Lighting Heating
home
Water Heating
Ironing Fridge
Solar
Energy
Paraffin
Wood
Gas
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 114 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Coal
Candles
Dry Cell
Batteries
Car
batteries
Other (specify)
2.4 What electrical appliances do you have:
Cellphone
Radio
Hi-Fi system
TV Black and White
TV Colour
Other (Specify)
Note: A few households use solar panels (stand alone) that do not have any connection to
the house. They use these to charge car and cell phone batteries. This also brings some
revenue for these households as they are able to make money by charging cell phone
batteries for other households.
2.5 Where do you charge your cell-phone? _____________________________________
2.6 How much money do you spend per month per fuel type?
Costs per month (ask per Specific uses
week where applicable and
calculate)
Fuel type
Solar Energy
Paraffin
Wood
Gas
Coal
Candles
Car Batteries
Dry cell batteries
Other (specify)
2.7 How many times in a day does cooking happen? (How many meals per day do you
cook?)
( ) Once
Appendix B
( ) two times a day
Version 6
(
Socio-Economic study
) Three times a day
June 2007
Page 115 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
How long does cooking take?_________________________________________________
What sort of meals do you cook? (mention by name and frequency)
_______________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
2.8 What are your energy related specific needs within your household?
NEEDS
How do you currently
fulfil these needs
Future aspirations (if you
had options, how would
you fulfil these needs?
Lighting
Cooking
Space Heating
Water Heating
Radio
TV (Black/White; Colour)
SECTION 3: PERCEPTIONS ABOUT NON-GRID ELECTIFICATION (SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
AND LEVEL OF SATISFACTION)
3.1 What do you think or know about non-grid electriciation? _____________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
In what ways does the non-grid electrification meet your expectations? _____________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
In what ways has it failed to meet your expectations?_____________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
3.2 What information did you receive on non-grid electrification? __________________
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 116 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
3.2
(
Do you have any particular needs with regards non-grid electricity?
) Yes
(
)No
3.4 If Yes, what was your expectation on the provision of such power to meet your needs?
_______________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
3.5 If no, state the reason.____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 4: WILLINGNESS TO PAY
4.1 When the system was operational, would you be willing to pay for the energy services
derived from the system? {YES} {NO}
4.2 How much would you be willing to pay per month on provision to meet the following:Options
Rands /month
2 Lights + radio
2 Lights +TV Black and White
2 lights + Colour TV
4 lights + Radio + Colour TV
4.3 If no, why not? __________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
SCETION 5: OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 117 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5.1 In your opinion, who owns the system? _____________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
5.2 Who do you think should own the system? __________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
5.3 Who maintains the system? _______________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
5.4 Who should maintain the system? __________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
5.5 Who pays for the maintenance of the system? _______________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
5.6 Who should pay for maintenance of the system? _____________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 6: REVENUE COLLECTION ARRANGEMENTS
6.1 Do you have any suggestions regarding the revenue collection for the energy service
derived from the system?
Method
Tick
appropriate
box
Pre-paid metering
Monthly Instalments
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 118 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Quarterly Instalments
Other (specify)
SECTION 7: LEVEL OF SATISFACTION MATRIX AND GENERAL ISSUES
7.1 The SERVQUAL GAPS MODEL
PERCEPTION
Ideal system
Lucingweni System
EXCELLENT
VERY POOR
NOT
IMPORTANT
AT ALL
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE
1
2
3
4
5
How important is the way wiring looks in 1
your house?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Are you satisfied with the way it was done 1
in your house?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
How important is the type of lights used in 1
your house?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
How important is the system to work your 1
expectation?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Do you know where do go when you need 1
help?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
How reliable is the system to meet your 1
energy need?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
When the system was working where did 1
you get replacement for lights?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
How important it is that the system should 1
give warning before it goes off?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Did you get help when you needed about 1
the system?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Have you ever been told about the 1
limitation of the system?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Are satisfied with the training you received 1
about the operation of the system?
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Were you consultant before the installation 1
of the system at your house
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Are you satisfied with the amount of 1
consultation
2
3
4
5
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 119 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
7.2 Any comments relating to training, information, communication and support to this project?
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 120 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
DME New and Renewable Energy
June 2007
Page 121 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Agenda for focus group discussions
LUCINGWENI, JUNE 2006
Date:________________________________
Facilitators: ________________________
Venue:
Present:
Consultants:
Field Workers
Members of the Community
1. Baseline Information before project (very brief)
2. General Geographical characteristics and Socio-economic data
3. Community information, consultation, training and support
4. Overall System performance and energy services deliveries
5. Energy Use patterns; Needs Assessment, Expectations and ability to meet the needs
of the people
6. Perceptions about non-grid electrification
7. Problems and solution analysis (scenario development – process)
8. Willingness (and ability) to pay for Service
9. Ownership and maintenance
10. revenue Collection Arrangement/ideas/ …
Type in additional points as per hard copy
Appendix B
Version 6
Socio-Economic study
June 2007
Page 122 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Appendix C: Technical evaluation
Appendix C Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Table of Contents
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 123 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
1. Introduction
The Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni mini-grid hybrid systems were installed as pilot
projects to investigate viability of this technology under South African conditions. The Hluleka
Game Reserve mini-grid hybrid System consists of 2x25KW Proven WT2500 Wind Turbine
imported from Proven Energy in UK; 56x100W Shell RSM 100S solar panels; 2.5kW Windy Boy
inverters by SMA in Germany to connect the wind turbines to the grid; 2x2.5kW Sunny Boy
inverters to connect solar generation system to the grid, with 3 x3 kW Sunny Island Inverters to
take energy to and from the batteries; and 60V 10RSO1160Ah 2V batteries Raylite Batteries by
First National Batteries in South Africa; 5kW backup diesel generator Model KAMA KDE 5000 with
rated 230V 18.3A. The system is connected to a mini-grid reticulations which supply power to 12
guest chalets; staff quarters, reception office and street lighting; and to water pumping and water
purification system.
Lucingweni System consists of 6x6kW Proven WT6000 Wind Turbine plus mask from Proven
Energy in UK; 560x100W Shell Solar Panels; 12x2.5kW Windy Boy by SMA that connect the wind
turbines to the grid, two inverters per turbines, 100kW Bi-directional inverter by MLT, which
connect the batteries and the grid; 4x15kW MPPT Solar regulators, which connect four strings
arrays to the batteries; 2x110 2V cells 5070Ah Raylite Batteries by First National Batteries. The
system designed to supply power to the mini-grid reticulation to 220 households, street lighting,
water pumping and telecommunication.
This technical report assess overall design, efficiency and easy of replicability for the energy
components of the system. It also evaluates the performance of the systems from measurements
carried out and available data.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 124 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
2. Hybrid System Description
A hybrid energy system is defined as an installation that uses two or more generation
technologies in concert (Drouilhet, 2001).You could define hybrid as a combination of two or more
renewable energy sources such as PV, wind, hydro etc, storage battery and fuel powered gen-sets
to provide a reliable off-grid supply. The goal of using multiple technologies is to take advantage of
the best operational characteristics of each system and create synergy in their combination. For
example, the costs associated with the diesel gensets are dominated by the costs of fuel delivery
and the on-going maintenance. This contrasts with the wind turbines where costs are dominated by
the upfront capital investment, but have low maintenance requirements. Further, a diesel genset
provides good reliability and when combined with wind or PV, the renewable energy reduces fuel
consumption and emissions from the diesel (Drouilhet, 2001).
Hybrid systems for rural electrification can be configured in three different ways: grid connected,
off-grid with distribution system, and off-grid for direct supply. Grid-connected configuration has the
advantage of being able to rely on the grid if the hybrid system has problems. Likewise, the grid is
strengthened by the power supply near the end of its reach, thus boosting voltage and reducing
power cuts. For off-grid configurations, the hybrid can either be connected to many load centres,
200 households in a group of villages for example, or can act as a source of supply for one or two
loads, thus obviating the need for a distribution system. A non-connected off-grid system is usually
used to charge batteries or supply power to a small rural industry, such as a grain milling
operation.
The components of the hybrid system modelled in this report include wind turbines, PV modules,
diesel gensets, inverters, power control equipment (e.g. rectifiers, inverters, switches), batteries
and a dump load. Figure 1-1 displays all the modelled components and how they are connected in
schematic graphical form.
Inverters
Diesel
Genset(s)
AC
Bus
Solar Cells
DC
Bus
Rectifier
Wind
Turbine(s)
Primary
Load 1
Water
Pumping
Battery
Bank
Primary
Load 1
losses
Figure 19: A Model of Hybrid System
The diesel gensets feed power into the AC system, which is connected to the consumer load. If the
power supplied is above the load demand at any given time, it is sent through the rectifier and
changed to DC for storage in the battery bank. Alternatively, the excess power can be sent to the
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 125 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
water pumping as a dump load. When the wind speed or sun intensity is low, the battery bank
sends stored power through the inverter to the AC side, and on to the consumers. Each trip from
AC to DC incurs losses, as does the battery storage process; industrial batteries typically have a
round trip efficiency of 80%, or 20% losses (Hansen CJ and J Bower, 2003)
To maximise the use of the renewable energy (RE) devices and serve the load most efficiently,
three different dispatch strategies can be employed. The first is a ‘series’ hybrid system in which
the diesel and RE source run to charge the battery and all power for the load is drawn from the
battery bank. The second type of hybrid system is the ‘switched’ configuration, where the diesel
and RE sources are fed directly to the load and excess power is funnelled to the batteries allowing
the diesel to be shut off during low load periods. System integrated batteries are also used to
supply power for short duration to compensate for the power output fluctuations of the wind
turbine(s) and to avoid brief starts of the diesel generator(s). If the batteries run low, the diesel
generator starts up to feed the load and recharges the batteries. One aim of this ‘load-following’
control strategy is to operate the diesel generator primarily when a high fraction of its rated
capacity is needed, as this is the most fuel-efficient, and therefore cost-efficient, mode of operation
(Ackermann, 2002).
The third type of system configuration is run without diesel genset and uses the RE source for
power whenever it is available and relies on the batteries to make up the difference. Which of
these strategies proves to be the most effective depends on the local conditions and demand
profile, and all three are tested in the model, presented in Section 2.
The economic feasibility of a hybrid system is determined by local conditions and resource
availability. Wind-PV-diesel hybrid system economics depend on seven key variables:
i.
Available wind resources;
ii.
Available solar resources
iii.
Delivered price of diesel fuel;
iv.
Capital costs of the wind turbine, solar modules, genset and auxiliary equipment;
v.
Life-cycle operating costs, including maintenance;
vi.
Value of secondary load; and
vii.
Reliability of demand and revenue collection.
Each of these variables will be examined and tested for sensitivity in Section 4. Two initial
condition factors that bode well for hybrid systems in Eastern Cape are that a dealer/service
network for diesel generators already exists, and this infrastructure could be leveraged to provide
service for hybrid systems.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 126 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3. Description of HOMER Modelling Software
The analysis in this paper uses the Hybrid Optimisation Model for Electric Renewable (HOMER)
model to compare a range of hybrid and centralised options. HOMER has been widely used all
over the world to design hybrid system such as in Hinchinbrook Islands (Dalton and Lockington,
2006), in India (Hansen and Bower, 2003), Chiloe Islands in Chile (E7 Fund, CNE and UNDP,
2004). The HOMER Micropower Optimisation Model is a computer model developed by the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in the US to assist in the design of micropower
systems and facilitate the comparison of power generation technologies across wide-range of
application. HOMER is capable of simulation, optimisation and sensitivity analysis. In the
simulation process, HOMER models the performance of a particular micropower configuration
each hour of the year to determine technical feasibility and life-cycle cost. In the optimisations
process, HOMER simulates many different configurations in search of the one that satisfies
technical constraints at the lowest cost. In the sensitive analysis process, HOMER simulates many
of optimisations in the range of input assumptions to determine the effect of uncertainty in the
model input (Lambert et al, 2006)
HOMER models a power system physical behaviours and its life-cycle cost, which is a total cost of
installing and operating a system over its life span. HOMER identifies the least-cost system for
supplying electricity to remote loads by performing hourly simulations of thousands of potential
power systems and rank and ordering them by life-cycle costs. It also performs sensitivity analyses
to evaluate the impact of a change in any of the input parameters and provides both annual and
hourly outputs (Lambert, et al, 2003). Hybrid system design is made difficult by the intermittence of
renewable resources; the need to match electrical supply and demand; and the large number of
potential component size combinations. The hourly simulation performed by HOMER can handle
the constantly changing conditions. The model allows for rapid calculation of thousands of different
alternative systems’ net present value (NPV) and the derivative of NPV, cost of energy (COE).
NPV is the best indicator of a project’s economic value, as it properly accounts for the opportunity
costs of capital (Brealey and Myers, 2000). By comparing the NPV and the COE, a ranked order of
projects can be obtained and alternatives can be compared on a like basis, the return on capital,
which is the main limiting factor for electricity projects in South Africa.
3.1.
Physical Modelling
In this section, we describe HOMER physical operation. In HOMER, a micropower system must
comprise at least one source of electrical power or thermal energy (diesel genset, solar panel, wind
turbine etc..) and at least one destination for that electrical power or thermal energy. It may also
comprise of conversion devices such as AC-DC Converter, and storage devices such as batteries
or hydrogen storage tank.
3.1.1. Load
In HOMER, the term load refers to demand for electricity or thermal energy. The existence of
micropower system is to serve a load. HOMER can model three types of Loads. Primary Load,
Deferrable Load and Thermal Load:
Primary Load is electric load that a system must serve according to specific schedule, such as
demand associated with lighting, radio, TV, household’s appliances, industrial processes. Primary
load has to be met immediately, if not, HOMER records it as an unserved load. HOMER, enable
the modeller, to specify a 24 hours load profile, which can be synthesised over a year period.
Among the three types of load modelled in HOMER, primary load receives a special treatment in
that it requires a user-specified amount of operating reserve. Operating reserve is a surplus
electrical generating capacity that is operating and can respond instantly to a sudden increase to
the load or sudden decrease to the renewable power output.
Deferrable Load on the other hand is electric demand that can be served within a certain time
interval such as water pumping, ice making, battery charging, because of storage capacity inherent
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 127 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
in those loads. These loads give a flexibility of when the system can serve them. The ability to
defer serving a load is often advantageous for system comprising intermittent renewable power
source, because it reduces the need for precise control of the timing of power production. If the
renewable power supply ever exceed the primary load, the surplus can serve the deferrable load
rather than going to waste.
Thermal Load: HOMER models thermal load in the same way that it models primary electric load,
except that the concept of operating reserve does not apply to the thermal load. The user specifies
the amount of thermal load for each hour of the year, either by importing a file containing hourly
data or by allowing HOMER to synthesise hourly data from 24-hour load profiles.
3.1.2. Resources
Resources in HOMER, applies to anything coming outside of the system that it is used by the
system to generate electricity or thermal energy. HOMER is able to model four types of renewable
resources (solar, wind, hydro and biomass) as well as any fuel used by the components.
Renewable resources vary according to time, location, climate, topology, season and local
productivity level. The nature of available renewable energy resources affects behaviour and
economic of renewable power production.
Solar Energy: HOMER is able to model a system containing solar PV array from the data provided
by the user for the location of interest. Solar resources indicate the amount of global radiation
(direct and diffuse radiation) that strikes the earth surface in a typical year measured in kWh/m2.
The data can be one of three forms hourly, daily or monthly on a horizontal surface, or monthly
average clearness index, which is a ratio of radiation striking the Earth’s surface to the solar
radiation striking the top of the atmosphere.
Wind Energy: To model a system containing one or more wind turbine, HOMER requires data of
wind speed that a turbine can experience in typical year. The user can provide hourly measured
wind speed or HOMER can generate synthetic hourly data from 12 monthly average data and
other additional statistical parameters such as:
• Weibull shape factor, which is a distribution of wind speed over the year;
• Autocorrelation factor, which is a measure of how strongly the wind speed in one hour tends to
depend on the previous hour;
• the diurnal pattern strength and hour of peak wind speed, which indicate the magnitude of the
phase of the average daily pattern in the wind speed.
HOMER provides default values for these parameters. HOMER provides for both anemometer and
wind turbine height. If the turbine height is different from anemometer height, HOMER adjusts the
wind speed using logarithmic law or power law. The user also indicates the height of the site above
sea level.
3.1.3. System Components
HOMER can model 10 types of components.
• The first three are power generation components (solar, wind, hydro).
• The second three are dispatchable energy sources, meaning they can be controlled as needed
(generator, grid and boiler).
• The third two types of components are converter and electrolyser, which convert electrical
energy to another form.
• The last two components are storage devices such as batteries and hydrogen storage tank.
Solar Arrays: HOMER model solar array as a device that convert solar radiation to DC electricity
independent of the temperature of the arrays and the voltage at which it is exposed. However, the
assumption might not be necessarily true, because the output of solar arrays depends on the
temperature of array and voltage to a certain extends.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 128 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
Ppv = fpvYpv
Where:
DME New and Renewable Energy
It
Is
fpv = PV derating factor
Ypv = PV rated capacity
It = Global solar radiation including diffuse radiation
Is = Standard amount to rate the capacity of array 1 kWh/m2 irradiance at 25o
The derating factor is scaling factor that suppose to account for the effect of dust, wiring losses,
elevated temperature and anything else that could cause the PV array not to perform from the
ideal.
Wind Turbine: HOMER models wind turbine as a device that converts the kinetic energy of the
wind into ac or dc according to a particular power curve. Power curve is a graph of power output
versus wind speed at hub height (see figures 15 and 16). HOMER assumes that the power curve
applies at standard air density of 1.225kg/m3, which corresponds to standard temperature and
pressure conditions.
HOMER calculates the power output of a turbine in four steps: first, it determines the average wind
speed for the hour at the anemometer height by referring to the wind resource data. Secondly, it
calculates the corresponding wind speed at the turbine’s hub height using either the logarithmic or
power law. Thirdly, it refers to the turbine’s power curve to calculate its power output at that wind
speed assuming standard air density. Fourthly, it multiplies that power output value by the air
density ratio, which is the ratio of actual air density to the standard air density.
Generators: HOMER models generators based on its fuel consumption, output power, expected
life-time of operation, the type of fuel consumed. HOMER, assumes a linear curve with a yintercept using the following equation for the generator fuel consumption:
F = FoYgen + F1Pgen
Fo = the fuel curve intercept
Where
Ygen = the rated capacity of generator in kW
F1 = the fuel curve slope
Pgen = the electrical output of the generator
Battery Bank: HOMER models battery as a single or a number of devices capable of storing dc
electricity at fixed round trip energy efficiency, with limits to how quickly it can be charged and
discharged. How deeply it can be discharged without damaging the battery and how much energy
can cycle through it before it needs replacement. HOMER assumes that the properties of the
batteries remain constant throughout its lifetime.
The main physical properties of battery are the nominal voltage, capacity curve, lifetime curve,
minimum state of charge and round-trip efficiency. HOMER calculates the life of battery in years
using the following formula:
Rbatt = min(
NbattQlifetime
, Rbatt , ∫ )
Qthrpt
Where Nbatt is the number of batteries in a bank, Qlifetime is lifetime throughput of a single battery,
Qthrpt the annual throughput (total amount of energy that cycles through the battery bank per year),
Rbath, the float life of the battery.
Converter: is a device that converts DC to AC in the process called inversion or AC to DC in a
process called rectification. HOMER can model the two common types of converters: solid state
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 129 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
and rotary. The size of the converter refers to the maximum amount of ac power that the device
can produce by inverting DC power. Physical properties of converter are its inversion and
rectification efficiencies, which are assumed to be constant.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 130 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4. Hybrid System Case Study in Eastern Cape
4.1.
Geography and Development
Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni Village are situated in the former Transkei area, to the
east of Mthatha towards the Wild Coast. The Hluleka Game Reserve is situated on the coast while
Lucingweni Village is situated inland about 5km from Hluleka (see figure 3-1 below). Figure 3-2
shows the level of settlement in this area. The map shows that the major part of Trankei is densely
populated at between 90 to 100 people per square meter, as a result of resettlement policy of
Apartheid Government in the past.
The coastal region of Eastern Cape is a summer-rainfall region with high rainfall figures along the
coast, but becoming drier as you go inland.
According to the Socio-economic Survey carried out in Lucingweni, the majority of the people have
only primary education, and unemployment is very high, majority of people live on old age pension
and child grant.
According to Shell Solar South Africa report 2005, the selection of Lucingweni village for pilot
project was based on the following criteria:
1. Adequate density to optimise system employment
2. Community profile, suitability and acceptance
3. Most efficient use of natural resources available
4. Project sustainability: community participation, transfer of skills, employment
creation , economic stimulation, development of small commercial off-shoot
industries
5. Risk evaluation
6. Environmental impact and ascetics
7. Technical, commercial and financial viability
Several villages and settlements in the area were surveyed and communities consulted. The
process resulted in the identification of two villages, namely Lucingweni (220 family units) and
Lucingweni 2 (120 family units), as the sites most suited to the application of Hybrid Mini-grid
electrification systems.
The suitability of Lucingweni village in terms of the above criteria, is characterised by the following:
1. The village, consisting of 220 dwelling, is situated on the slopes of a headland,
approximately 2 km long and 0.7 km wide, and characterised by natural undulation. The
dwelling is concentrated on the higher ground between the undulations.
2. The community is well structured, organised, and represented by an executive committee,
which consists of a cross section of the inhabitants. The committee has consulted with the
villagers and with the surrounding settlements concerning the proposed pilot project and
has established consensus and a keen understanding of the requirements, dynamics and
responsibilities associated with it. The committee and surrounding communities are aware
that they are unlikely candidates for future grid electrification and that their acceptance of a
mini-grid system will not jeopardise their chances of being grid electrification targets
3. The location of the village provides for efficient use of both solar and winds generation
technologies. The summit of the headland on which the village is built is ideal in terms of
access, security, and orientation to prevailing wind, orientation for photovoltaic arrays and
proximity to consumers. Possibilities for both biomass and micro-hydro do not exist in the
area. However, our socio-economic survey found that firewood is the main source of
energy for thermal application, such as space heating and cooking.
4. The committee has emphasised the community understanding of the benefits potential of
such a project. Aside from the short-term project implementation, employment creation
possibilities and transfer of skills, they are fully aware and encouraged by the future
commercial possibilities. In addition existing but incomplete community water supply
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 131 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
system existing in the village and was revived with the introduction of mini-grid. During both
socio-economic survey and technical evaluation, it was found that there was no potable
water supply reticulation in the village. We were informed that the borehole that was drilled
not far from the system was found not to have water.
Figure 20: Map of Hluleka and Lucingweni vicinity showing grid and road
Figure 21: Map of population density in Eastern Cape
(Source Hassan and Partners, 1999)
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 132 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
4.2.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Energy Situation
Lucingweni village is about 15 km from the national grid. However, new construction of 11kV line
was observed from the main road on the way to Lucingweni and Hluleka, which indicates that it will
not be long before grid electricity reach the village. Figure 3-3 shows extend of electrification in the
former Trankei area. According to the socio-economic survey carried out in Lucingweni village, the
majority of households currently use candles and paraffin for lighting and dry batteries and car
batteries to power radios and black and white TV. The car batteries are charged using solar panels
and some are taken to the neighbouring towns for charging. The majority of people have cell
phones approximately 90% of households have at least one cell phone. The cell phones are
charged at the neighbouring towns at cost of R5 per charge once a week, which indicate huge
business opportunity for cell phone charging in the area. As for thermal needs, majority of
households uses wood and paraffin for cooking and space heating. Wood is gathered freely from
the surrounding natural forest, while paraffin is bought in 1, 2 and 5 litre quantities at the cost of R5
per litre. Households use about 2 to 25 litres per month depending on their income.
According to the “Renewable Energy for Rural Electrification in South Africa” 1999 study by Garrad
Hassan and Partners, the history of electrification is such that higher income communities receive
electrical connections earlier. Studies have shown that it is difficult to separate out the effects of
access to electricity from those related to income. In fact, it appears as though many of the effects
of electrification are themselves related to income levels, with many effects found to be present or
stronger in higher income groups. Low-income electrified households appear to have fuel choice
patterns similar to those of unelectrified households and electricity appears to be an additional fuel
for these households. Fuel switching towards electricity is generally only evident in any substantial
way in wealthier households (Garrad Hassan and Partners, 199)
Electrified households tend to spend more on energy than unelectrified households, and this
relationship holds for all regions and all income groups. However, the difference is small (R25 to
R30 per month) in comparison with the spread in energy expenditure figures. Electrified
households tend to rely less on candles, paraffin and batteries and this is most evident in the
highest income group. This result is supported by data on fuel expenditure (by all income groups)
as well as by a comparison between the prevalence of paraffin, candles and batteries in electrified
and unelectrified households (Garrad Hassan and Partners, 1999).
.
According to the above study, in 1995, Eskom piloted the current limiting supply of 2.5A, 5 and 20A
in the OR Tambo District Municipality in an attempt to get electricity to as a many people as
possible. The payment method was a “flat rate”, the user pays a fixed monthly amount irrespective
of the number of units (kWh) consumed. It was found that the negative experience and perception
of the flat rate tariff overshadowed all discussions on the electricity supply. With the high rate of
disconnection in the village it was not surprising that the feeling towards the 2.5A supply was
extremely negative. The desire for pre-payment meters was overwhelming. Not one person
interviewed was happy with paying a flat rate tariff. An important reason why households selected
the 20A supply over the 5A supply was that they could control their monthly expenditure on
electricity. It was shown that, together with the size of household income, other factors influenced
whether households were able to pay the monthly flat rate.
The reason for rejection of flat rate is that it is inflexible, requiring consistent payments at the same
time of each month. Such a tariff does not take account of the shifting circumstances and priorities
in rural households, where the ability of households to absorb crises or unusual demands on their
financial resources is limited.
A number of households opted for the 20A-supply option so that they could use electricity for
cooking. These households did not necessarily fall into the high-income group. In fact,
households reliant on one pension or less per month also prioritised expenditure on
hotplates/stoves so that electricity could be used for cooking. Hotplates were prioritised above
kettles and irons.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 133 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
During our own socio-economic survey, the same results were found; most of the people
interviewed preferred pre-paid metering than paying the flat rate.
In 2003 through the Electricity Basic Services Support Tariff (Free Basic Electricity) Policy for
Republic of South Africa, the Government removed Value Added Tax on paraffin to enable poor
households to afford readily available fuel for their energy requirements. Secondly, the government
introduced free 50 kWh of grid electricity per month to all households with concomitant blocked or
stepped tariffs for electricity consumption beyond 50kWh to mitigate the cost implication of free
basic electricity provided. Thirdly, the government introduce a free non-grid electricity to all nongrid electrified households (connected through the National Electrification Programme) funded from
the energy component of the equitable share to the maximum of R48.00 per households per
month.
4.3.
Comparative Economic Analysis
The choice between competing technologies for rural energy services can be informed by a
financial comparison between the different options. The difficulty in properly costing the
environmental and social benefits of different types of power projects limits the scope of this paper
to quantitative results of financial indicators.
According to the report by Hassan and Partner, 1999, a study undertaken by ECN staff, two of
whom were involved in the Eastern Cape study, in nearby Swaziland distinguished the following
externalities where electricity substitutes wood or paraffin:
•
Reduction in health and fire hazards. This is related to indoor cooking with wood, especially for
the widely used three-stone open fires.
•
Benefits in terms of less deforestation
•
Reduction of inconvenience related to the collection (high labour input requirements) and use
of fuelwood and other biomass based fuels, especially for the women concerned.
These externalities have been quantified, based on a report by van Horen and Davis Raising
Electricity Service levels in the National Infrastructure Plan: Financial and Economic Implication
(1996) as follows:
Table 37 Environmental costs of energy production in Swaziland
In-house air pollution by wood
External costs
(R/household/year)
944
Paraffin poisoning
90
Fires and burns
491
Externality
Fuelwood collection
291
(Source Hassan and Partners,1999)
Relating externalities 1, 3 and 4 to fuelwood use, the external costs thereof would be R1, 726 per
household per year. If these costs also apply to the average Transkei rural household, and
electrification by means of RAPS or grid extension reduces wood consumption by about 25% 11, the
total external benefits of avoided fuelwood consumption would be R431 per household per year, or
R36 per household per month. On the basis of monthly electricity consumption of 200 kWh this
positive environmental impact (an important component of the social value) of domestic
electrification would be worth some R18c/kWh (€0.028/kWh)(Hassan and Partners, 1999).
However, the 200 kWh consumption is much higher than the designed load of Lucingweni
Community system of 28 kWh/month.
11
based on surveys on energy consumption patterns before and after electrification
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 134 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
In addition to the above aspects, which to a certain extent, can be quantified, the provision of
electricity to rural households will also improve the quality of life in general through access to
communication media such as radio and television. The availability of lighting could enable further
education in rural communities. However, the value of these aspects is more difficult to quantify.
4.4.
Input Data
The input data used for simulation is obtained from both Cost and Benefit Analysis in Appendix A
and costs provided by Shell Solar of South Africa. The power generation systems (diesel genset,
wind turbines, and solar arrays) include capital costs and installation cost.
4.4.1. Generation equipment and Fuel Cost Assumption
Power generation cost are displayed in Table 3-2 taken from Cost Benefit Analysis in the Appendix
A and Shell Solar Cost. According to the National Electricity Regulator Hybrid Mini-Grid: Progress
Report of Dec 2003, two 75kW diesel generators generated all the energy needs for the Hluleka
Nature reserve. These generators were on for 10 hours per day. The generators used around 90
000 litres of diesel per year. The location of the diesel generators created a pollution problem in the
Hluleka River, caused by diesel fuel seepage and irresponsible battery and battery acid disposal.
Figure 22: Power Generation Equipment for the Hluleka Nature Reserve
Generator
Rated
Capital
Cons.
R/kW
Replace
O&M
type
Capacity
Cost
l/kWh at
Cost
Cost
(kW)
75%
Genset
12.5 kW.
R83 710
0.35
2.80
R25 113
Wind Turbine
2.5 kW
R126 433
R126 433
12 643
6 kW
R120 000
R120 000
R12 000
PV Modules
5.6 kW
R215 586
R215 586
R12 600
56 kW
R2 156 000
R2 156 000 R126
000
Batteries
139.2 kWh
R733 050
R733 050
R73 350
2.23MWh
R2 29 mill
R2.29mill
R268
950
Windy
Boy 3.3kW
R333 506
R286 060
R990
Inverters
MLT Inverter
120kW
R480 000
R480 000
R45 000
MLT Regulator 15kW
R197 662
R197 662
R5 625
According to the Renewable Energy Sources for Rural Electrification in South Africa Report, (1999)
estimated that Hluleka Nature Reserve can be able to accommodate 2x50kW wind turbine more
than currently installed of 2x2.5kW.
Two type of wind turbine are modelled, which are actually installed in the Hluleka Nature Reserve
and Lucingweni Village Hybrid System, the 2xProven 2500 and 6xProven 6000 respectively. The
prices used are actual prices provided by Shell Solar South Africa.
The Hluleka Game Reserve hybrid System solar electricity generation consists of 56 100W Shell
Solar PV module arrays wired in series which makes a total of 5.6kW. According to Shell Solar of
South Africa this form of construction greatly reduces the wiring losses and provides the higher
efficiency string inverter and control equipment (see figure 5)
Figures 3-4 and 3-5 show, single line diagrams of Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni
Community Hybrid Systems respectively. The Hluleka Game Reserve system: the generation part
consists of 2x2.5kW Proven2500 Wind Turbine, connected to the mini-grid by 2 x 2.5 kW Windy
Boy Inverters; solar arrays of 56x100W Shell Solar Panels connected in two strings to the mini-grid
by 2x2.5kW Sunny Boy inverters. There is three 3kW bi-directional Sunny Island Inverter to charge
and discharge the batteries and 5kW diesel generator to complement the batteries during periods
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 135 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
of low wind and low solar. Sixty 10RS1160A 2V batteries have been installed for energy storage.
The systems supply 12 guests chalets and staff quarters and offices. A 75kW generator has been
kept for emergencies.
As for the Lucingweni Community Hybrid System, the generation part consists of 6x6kW Proven
WT6000 wind turbines connected to the mini-grid by Sunny Boy Inverters and 56kW of 4 strings
solar arrays connected to the batteries by 4x15kW MPPT solar regulators by MLT. The battery
storage consists of two strings of 110 x 2V RSO 5070A by First National Batteries. The batteries
are connected to the grid through 100kW bi-directional inverters also by MLT. The reticulation
supplies power to 120 households. However, it is designed to connect 220 households.
Figure 23: Single line diagram of Hluleka Nature Reserve Hybrid System
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 136 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 24: A Single line Diagram of Lucingweni Community Hybrid System
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 137 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
4.5.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Energy Demand
4.5.1. Auxiliary Equipment Cost Assumption
The energy storage, control and electrical equipment needed for a hybrid system can be extensive,
depending on the system’s configuration (Hansen and Bower, 2004). To allow for systems with
power storage to be modelled; a set of cost assumption is developed for auxiliary components,
such as, inverters, batteries, synchronising electronic, based on the cost given by SSSA. The
Sunny Boy and Windy Boy Inverters cost $750/kW and $8/kW-yr for O&M. Batteries cost $100/kW
of capacity and $5/yr for O&M.
4.5.2. Load Profile for Hluleka Game Reserve
The load has been divided into three components according to their importance:
• Primary Load 1 is the guests’ chalet, which is the priority load.
• Primary Load 2 is the staff quarter, reception and street lighting which can be shed if there
power shortage.
• Water pumping and water filtering is deferrable load, which can be deferred to the time when
there is excess power.
The primary loads are added together to obtain the aggregate demand and the dump load is
treated as deferrable.
4.5.2.1.
Hluleka Game Reserve System Load
The Primary load1 is the guest accommodation, which is of the highest priority and consists of 12
chalets. Primary Load 2 is the administration block and staff quarters and street lighting. The
deferrable or dump load consists of water pumping system.
The load in each of the chalets is shown on the Table 3-3 below, and the load profile is as shown
in the figure 3-6. It is assumed that the load is highest in the evening when most guests are
indoors. There is also moderately high-energy consumption in the morning. The evening load is
assumed to consist of mostly lighting from 17:00 to about 22:00.
4.5.2.2.
Primary Load 1: Guest Accommodation
Figure 25: Guest Accommodation Daily Load at Peak season
Equipment
Wattage
(W)
Freezer 120-L
60
Fridge
100
Lights CFL (8)
18
Outside light (1)
9
Fluorescent lights 18
Ceiling fans
75
Hard-wired
hair 1000
drier
Total
Appendix C
Version 4
Qty
12
12
130
12
12
12
12
Total
Power
0.72
1.20
2.340
0.108
0.216
0.900
12.00
Hrs
usage
10
10
6
6
6
6
1
Power
Factor
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
17.484
Technical evaluation
Total
(kWh)
10.286
17.143
20.057
0.926
1.851
7.714
17.143
75.120
May 2007
Page 138 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 26: Primary Daily load profile of Guest Accommodation
4.5.2.3.
Primary Load 2: Staff Quarters and Administration block
The primary load 2 is as shown Table 3-4. Load profile is shown in figure 3-7 below. It is assumed
the load is high during the day when most of the staff are at work with computers printing and
photocopying contributing to the high energy consumption in addition to the freezers. In the
evening, streets lights, staff quarter lights and 2 freezers are the main loads.
Figure 27: Staff accommodation and administration block and street lighting daily load
Equipment
Wattage
Qty
2
10
9
4
Total
Power
0.200
0.090
0.162
0.04
Hrs
Usage
10
6
7
2
Power
Factor
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
Total
(kWh)
2.857
0.771
1.62
0.114
Freezer 120-L
Lights
Street lights
Cell
phone
charging
Computer
&
Monitor
Printer
Total
100
9
18
10
150
3
0.450
8
0.7
5.143
50
1
0.050
0.992
2
0.7
0.143
10.648
Figure 28: Load profile of Staff Quarters and Administration Block and Street Lighting
4.5.2.4.
Dump Load or Deferrable Load
Provision of potable water for the reserve is considered deferrable load, which is served when
there is enough electricity. The water is pumped from the nearby river into the main reservoir which
has capacity to hold 10 000 litres. According to the NER Progress Report 2003, the 3 kW pump
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 139 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
was replaced with 2 (one on stand by) high efficiency single phase submersed pump. Each pump
has capacity to deliver 10 000 litres a day. A Micro-filter water purification system that ensures that
water is both potable and free of discoloration was installed at the second reservoir. The second
reservoir was used as a buffer storage point prior to the delivery of the water to the site. The
membrane filtration equipment is installed to purify the water. The equipment was supplied by
Vulamanz. The system is designed by the University of Stellenbosch and the ML Sulton
Technikon. The system has the capacity to handle between 10 000 and 30 000 litres per day.
The energy system has been designed to have capacity to pump the water to the existing reservoir
when the batteries are fully charged so as to reduce the size of the storage batteries.
It is assumed that it would take 5 hours to fill the reservoir. The amount of energy required to fill the
reservoir is 42.86 kWh.
Figure 29: Hluleka Game Reserve water pumping as deferrable load
Equipment
Wattage
Water pumping 3000
Water filtration 1000
plant
Total
Qty
2
1
Total
Power
6.00
1.00
Hr usage
5
5
Power
Factor
0.7
0.7
7.00
Total
(kWh)
42.86
7.142
50.000
Figure 30: Deferrable Load for Hluleka Game Reserve
4.5.3. Lucingweni Community designed Load
The total load or power demand on the hybrid system has been split into three parts for modelling
purposes:
i.
ii.
iii.
Primary Load 1: Domestic;
Primary Load 2: Productive Uses light industrial (carpentry and metal work workshop);
and
Dump load: (water pumping for domestic use, ice making and refrigeration).
4.5.3.1.
Primary Load 1: Domestic (based on the designed Load)
The primary load 1 used in this modelling is based on the designed load as given in the contract
between NER and Shell Solar of SA of July 23. 2002. It is as shown in the Table 3-6 below and
daily load profile is shown in Figure 3-8. The profile shows high demand in the evening when most
households are at home with lights, radio, TV and street lighting are switched on.
Figure 31: Lucingweni Community System design load (Source Shell Solar, 2003)
Equipment
Wattage (W) Qty
Total kW Hr
Usage
Cos phi Total (kWh)
Dwelling lights
Dwelling Radio
15
10
13.2
2.2
0.7
0.7
Appendix C
Version 4
880
220
4
10
Technical evaluation
May 2007
75.429
31.429
Page 140 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Dwelling TV
Dwelling decoder
Dwelling Cell Chrg
Street lights
Comm lights
Comm Plugs
Comm Telecom
Water Pumping
70
40
10
26
15
200
40
2000
220
220
220
70
10
10
3
3
15.4
8.8
2.2
1.82
0.15
2
0.12
6
5
5
2
7
8
8
5
5
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
110.000
62.857
6.286
18.200
1.714
22.857
0.857
42.857
System Data
System Telecom
System lights
System Security
Shops Refrigerator
Shops Lights
Comm Centre
Total
20
10
45
10
100
15
100
1
1
3
1
4
8
1
0.02
0.01
0.135
0.01
0.4
0.12
0.1
52.685
1
1
1
24
8
10
10
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.029
0.014
0.193
0.343
4.571
1.714
1.429
380.779
Load Profile
40
Demand (kW)
30
20
10
0
0
6
12
18
24
Hour
Figure 32: Design Load profile of Lucingweni Community System
4.5.3.2.
Primary Load 2: Light industrial Load (Carpentry and Metalwork
Workshop).
According to the World Bank Report (2001), the presence of electricity will not necessarily initiate
development, it can only stimulate development already taking place. Communities that are very
poor, with very little economic activities, are unlikely to derive much economic benefits from
electricity supply, although they derive social benefits from better lighting and communication. In
order to derive economic benefit from grid extension, the community should have the following:
‰ Some existing infrastructure investment (water, roads)
‰ Access to markets
‰ Growth in agricultural output
‰ Growing number of productive uses
‰ Improving living standard and income
‰ Existing development activities in the area.
According to our socio-economic survey, Lucingweni Community does not satisfy some of the
above criteria such as existence of water, growing number of agricultural output, or growing
number of productive uses. However, As Aitken, 2004, pointed out that lack of business skills; lack
of access to finance and market awareness are responsible for the kind of micro-enterprise that
exist in the rural areas, which are largely of survivalist in nature with no prospect for growth.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 141 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Although there is no industry going on at this stage, the original intention of installing hybrid
system, instead of solar home system is the capacity to be used for productive uses. With
institutional reforms such as business skill training, access to finance and awareness of the
market, there might be productive uses for the hybrid system. To find out if the system could
handle the load for productive uses. The system is modelled with the productive load as shown in
the Table 7 below and the load profile shown in Figure 10. The high load from 7:00 am in the
morning and 18:00 in the evening is when the community workshop is opened and is being used.
The profile is based on the Gujarat NGO (named SAATH) in Khadir in India to manufacture
prefabricated pieces from concrete (Hansen and Bower, 2003. p.31)
Figure 33: Lucingweni Community System possible load for productive uses
Equipment
Metal Workshop
Welding set
Grinder set
Compressor
Drilling machine
Wattage
(W)
Qty
Total
Power
Hr
Usage
Power
Factor
Total (kWh)
1500
800
1500
800
2
2
1
2
3
1.6
1.5
1.6
6
6
8
4
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
25.714
13.714
17.143
9.143
3000
3000
1500
1
1
1
3
3
1.5
15.2
6
6
5
0.7
0.7
0.7
25.714
25.714
10.714
Carpentry Workshop
Electric Saw
Planner
Lathe
Total
Load Profile
12
Demand (kW)
127.857
9
6
3
0
0
6
12
Hour
18
24
Figure 34 Load profile of possible productive uses; Carpentry and Metalwork Workshop
4.5.3.3.
Deferrable Load : Ice Making, battery charging and water pumping.
Ice making, battery charging for the nearby communities and water pumping is considered when
there is an excess energy and it is shown in Table 3.8 below.
Figure 35: Lucingweni Community possible uses of excess electricity produced
Total
Power
Equipment
Wattage (W) Qty
Power
Hr Usage Factor
Total (kWh)
Ice Making
200
1
Battery Charging
1500
1
Water pumping
3000
2
Appendix C
Version 4
0.2
1.5
6
8
0.7
10
0.7
5
0.7
Technical evaluation
May 2007
2.286
21.429
42.857
Page 142 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
Equipment
Total
Wattage (W) Qty
DME New and Renewable Energy
Total
Power
7.7
Power
Hr Usage Factor
Total (kWh)
66.571
4.5.3.4.
Lucingweni Community Actual Load
When the survey of houses actually connected was taken, it was found that only approximately
120 households were connected to the mini-grid, no water pumping system was in place, no
telecommunication system was installed, majority of the household did not have television.
However, some households were found to possess hotplates and they admitted using them during
our survey, unfortunately proper survey was not taken to actually quantify the number of
households. To determine the accuracy of our simulation, the actual load was simulated in order
to compare with data actually obtained from Lucingweni Community hybrid system. Although, our
sample might not be statistically significant, it was discovered that the current limiting device in the
ready board was not working, one could draw as much power, without the current limiting device
went off. The number of houses visited was four and in all of them, the current limiting device was
not working.
The actual load is presented as accurately as possible. The majority of households visited had only
2 lights instead of 4 lights as per the design load. It is assumed the households have to make
addition themselves, probably it was not the responsibility of the contractor to provide addition
lighting for all the rooms, as this could have made the project more expensive.
For the simulation, it was assumed that actual size of the load could be calculated using a ratio of
120/220 of the total daily load. The range of primary load is simulated to determine the
performance of the system.
4.6.
Energy Supply
4.6.1. Wind Resources
Wind energy projects are generally more financially viable in “windy” areas. This is due to the fact
that the power potential in the wind is related to the cube of the wind speed. However, the power
production performance of a practical wind turbine is typically more proportional to the square of
the average wind speed. The aerodynamic, mechanical and electrical conversion characteristics
and efficiencies of the wind turbines account for the difference. This means that the energy that
may be produced by a wind turbine will increase by about 20% for each 10% increase in wind
speed. Wind energy project sitting is critical to a financially viable venture. It is important to note
that since the human sensory perception of the wind is usually based on short-term observations of
climatic extremes such as wind storms and wind chill impressions, either of these “wind speeds”
might be wrongly interpreted as representative of a windy site. Proper wind resource assessment
is a standard and important component for most wind energy project developments
(www.retscreen.net)
The wind resources assessment study carried out in ECP by Hassan and Partner, 1999 is as
shown in Figure 3-10 and Figure 3-11 at about 60m and 25 m respectively above ground level. The
wind speed was estimated for 1 km2 spatial resolution using a combination of WASP and modified
NOABL wind flow modelling technique. According to the study the coastal areas of Eastern Cape
Province show a good wind speed of 6 to 7 m/s , with the area around Cape Recife (Port
Elizabeth) west to Cape St. Francis as being particularly windy. The high wind speeds over the
coastal mountain range around Patensie and Uitenhage are also well represented, showing wind
speeds in the range of 7 to 9 m/s. The high wind speeds on the coast are reduced farther inland,
with the coastal plain experiencing relatively low wind speeds of 5 to 6 m/s. The low wind speeds
of the coastal plain exist as far as the Great Escarpment.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 143 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The wind speeds in the majority of the former Transkei region are among the lowest in the whole of
ECP, though the coastal zone has areas of reasonable wind speeds in the range 6.0 to 7.5 m/s,
particularly in the north-east corner where the Wild Coast is located.
Figure 36: A GIS Map of Calculated Wind Speed in Eastern Cape at an Anemometer Height of
60m(source Hassan and Partners, 1999)
Figure 37: Modelled Eastern Cape Wind Resource
(Source Hassan and Partners, 1999)
The data used for the modelling in this study is based on the Port St Johns data, which is the
nearest that could be obtained. Port St John is about 15 km as a crow fly from the project area.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 144 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The figures 3-12 below show monthly average wind speed at different time of the day. The wind
speed is the highest in afternoon at about 14:00 and at night at about 20:00. In the morning, the
wind speed average 6.2m/s. Wind speed is the highest in October. Figure 3-13 depicts wind speed
distribution at Port St John, from the graph it can be seen that the average annual wind speed is
about 7 m/s.
12.0
10.0
Monthly Average at
08:00
8.0
Monthly Average at
14:00
6.0
Monthly Average at
20:00
4.0
Average
2.0
AY
JU
N
JU
L
AU
G
SE
P
O
C
T
N
O
V
D
EC
M
AP
R
AR
B
M
FE
JA
N
0.0
Figure 38: Average monthly wind speed in Port St. John
Wind Speed PDF
12
Frequency (%)
9
6
3
0
0
5
10
Wind speed data
15
20
25
Value (m/s)
Best-fit Weibull (k=2.03, c=8.25 m/s)
30
35
Figure 39: Average Wind Distribution
Simulation is also performed with wind speed obtained from NASA website
http://eaosweb.larc.nasa.gov for Latitude 31.817S and Longitude 29.3E, which are co-ordinates of
Hluleka , and is shown in Figure 3-14.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 145 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 40: Monthly average wind speed at Latitude 31.817S and Longitude 29.3 from NASA
4.6.1.1.
Matching of Wind Turbine Characteristic to Site
The power output from the rotor is strongly depended on the wind speed as indicated earlier in
conjunction with the tip-speed ratio (tsr). The demand from the load is possibly related to rotational
speed. Therefore the overall performance is strongly dependent on the wind regime. In a strong
wind area one should fit a larger load to a turbine than one would in a more moderate wind regime.
A supplier of wind turbine would take that into account when recommending a wind turbine. This is
often partly represented by the use of a design wind speed, this is usually a speed where the
system reached its optimum overall efficiency. Figure 3-14 shows output curve of Proven Wind
Turbine used at Lucingweni Community Hybrid System. From the graph, the turbine starts
producing electricity at 2.5 m/s and reach it’s optimum output at a wind speed of 12 m/s. Both
Proven 2500 and 6000 used at Hluleka and Lucingweni are brushless, direct drive, permanent
magnet DC generator. They are available in the following sizes 0.6, 2.5, 6 and 15 kW. They can be
used for battery charging at 24 and 48V or they can be grid connected when used with Windy Boy
Inverters.
The ratio of the design wind speed to the mean site speed affects both annual output and the
periods when some output is provided. A relatively low design speed wind turbine will produce an
output in lower wind conditions, but less output at the high wind speed as compared to a turbine
with a high design speed. The rated wind speed is the speed at which the turbine provides
maximum power.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 146 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 41: Power Curve of Proven WT6000 Wind Turbine
For comparison, a 2.5 kW Kestrel wind turbines by A & P Logistics of South Africa is also
modelled. The turbine is a direct drive DC generator. It has cut-in speed of 2.5 m/s and is rated at
14 m/s. It can provide DC voltage at 48, 96, 110 and 120V. Figures 3-15 shows both a power curve
and monthly energy production curve of the above wind turbine. Table 3-9 shows the turbine
specifications.
Figure 42: Kestrel 2500 Power Curve and Energy Production Curve( source www.aplogistic.co.za).
Figure 43pecifications of 2500 Kestrel Wind Turbine
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 147 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4.6.2. Solar Resources
South Africa has very good solar resources about 4.5 kWh/m2/day on the average. However, the
coastal region has one of the lowest in the country as shown in radiation map in Figure 3-16 below,
especially the Eastern Cape Coast.
When designing and sizing a solar energy system, reliable solar data is required. The most
relevant figure is the average daily global radiation (i.e. the total solar energy per day per square
metre) on a horizontal surface. The global or total radiation is the sum of two components:
‰
‰
Direct radiation. This component propagates in a straight line from the sun and casts
shadows. It heavily depends on the cloud cover and contributes 0 to 90% of the total
radiation
Diffuse radiation (light scattered by clouds and dusts particles in the atmosphere)
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 148 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 44 Map of Solar Radiation in South Africa
The distinction is very important, since some solar energy systems make use of all incoming light
(e.g. PV panels), while others only use direct radiation (e.g. a solar water heater with parabolic
dish). Apart from climate and the cloud cover, important factor determining global radiation is the
latitude of the site, the time of the year and time of day.
The solar radiation data used for modelling in this project was downloaded from NASA website
http://eaosweb.larc.nasa.gov by giving the latitude and longitude of the place of interest. The
Figure 3-17 below shows monthly radiation at Latitude 31’ 49” and Longitude 29’ 18” for Hluleka
Game Reserve and Latitude 31’ 49” S and Longitude 29’ 15”E for Lucingweni Community system
measured from GPS system.
Figure 45: Average daily radiation at Hluleka and Lucingweni in Eastern Cape
4.6.3. Solar Energy Technology
The modules used at both Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni Community Hybrid System are
100W modules by Shell Solar. However, these modules are no more available they have been
discontinued, 160 Wp and 80 Wp Shell SQ80, have replaced them.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 149 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4.6.4. Balance of System
4.6.4.1.
Battery
The type of batteries used for Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni Community systems are
Raylite 10RSO1160 2V and RSO5030 2V by First National Battery in South Africa. The batteries
have capacities of 1160Ah and 5070Ah respectively.
As for the Lucingweni system, the batteries are housed in the control room and the layout is shown
in Figure 46 below:
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 150 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 46: Battery Bank of Lucingweni Community Hybrid System
4.6.4.2.
Appendix C
Inverters and Regulators
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 151 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The inverters and regulators used at Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System are Windy Boy and
Sunny Boy manufactured by SMA supplied to the project together with Proven Wind Turbine by
Proven Energy in UK. However we did not have access to the control room to establish the
accuracy of the information obtained. Barry Fontini, project manager of Shell Solar South Africa,
informed us that the system packed up, because of overloading and a technician had to brought
from overseas to repair the inverter. It was also indicated in the report that traces of rust were
noticed because of the proximity of the system to the sea. The Windy Boy and Sunny Boy are
supposed to be some of the most reliable in the market, according to the manufacturer.
According to the manufacturer manual, the Windy Boy is a single conversion, DC to AC inverter,
which is similar in operation to Sunny Boy grid tied PV inverter. Mechanical power from the turbine
is delivered to the inverter as DC voltage (speed) and current (torque). Most small turbine uses an
AC alternator and diode rectifier bridge to convert variable frequency from alternator to dc power.
The inverter uses programmed power versus voltage curve to command current from the turbine.
Each alternator design has an optimum point of power curve of speed (voltage) versus torque
(current). The Windy Boy incorporates a linear power curve that may be programmed by the user
to match the characteristics of the specific wind turbine alternators. Table 3-10 shows the
specifications of 2500Wac Inverter that is used for the Hluleka Game Reserve System
(www.provenenergy.co.uk)
Figure 47: Specification of Windy Boy Inverter installed at Hluleka Hybrid System
(Sourcewww.provenenergy.co.uk)
The Windy Boy controls power to the grid based upon the input DC voltage from the wind turbine.
This is based upon a linear curve with a start voltage and a maximum operating voltage. These
parameters may be adjusted and optimised for the specific turbine connected to the Windy Boy.
When the DC input voltage reaches the start voltage setting, the inverter will begin a countdown to
start delivering power to the grid. This length of time is dependent upon the start timer setting. If
the DC input voltage remains above the start voltage setting for the prescribed length of time, the
inverter will synchronise with the grid and begin delivering power. As the DC input voltage rises the
power delivered to the grid will increase, as shown in the Figure 3-19 below:
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 152 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 48: Power curve of Windy Boy Inverter
(source wwwprovenenergy.co.uk)
As mentioned above, the Sunny Boy is similar in operation to Windy Boy in that it is a string
inverter. String technology means that a small number of modules are connected together in series
to a ‘string’, each string is then connected to a separate inverter, which feeds the electricity of one
string to the grid. Large PV-systems consist of a large number of single strings. The energy
produced is connected directly on the AC side, which results in the fact that the system design gets
very simple and no extraordinary DC cabling is necessary anymore. String Technology allows MPP
tracking for each small module group, thus improving system efficiency by 1 - 3 %. The inverter is
design for a string of 18 to 24 standard modules connected in series.
The inverter has islanding protection using the method of active grid impedance measurement. In
the event of utility outage, the active measurement results in over/under frequency condition and
Sunny Boy disconnect from the grid.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 153 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 49: Maximum Current with DC Voltage characteristic of Sunny Boy 2500W Inverter
Figure 50: Output Power against voltage of Sunny Boy 2500W
(Sourcewww.provenenergy.co.uk)
As for the Lucingweni Community Hybrid System, the system uses four 15 kW SunDrive Solar
Regulators designed, manufactured and supplied by MLT in Cape Town. They regulate the
charging of the battery bank. The system is wired in such a way that the power from the solar
panels is fed only to the batteries. During the period of low sun and no wind, the batteries are used
to supply AC power to the load through a bi-directional 100kW PowerDrive Inverter also designed
and manufactured by MLT in Cape Town. The inverter can feed power to the batteries or feed
power from batteries to the AC load of the mini-grid.
According to the manufacturer’s manual of MLT Regulator, it is fitted with Maximum Power Point
Tracking (MPPT), which is an electronic system that will keep the highest wattage flowing from
your solar panels at all times. It uses switch-mode technology to keep the multiple of amperage
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 154 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
and voltage at a level where the highest possible wattage is delivered from the panels. This system
of regulation maximises the potential of the solar panels (www.mlt.co.za). However, the
specification of the 15 kW MLT Regulator is not available on their website. Our guess is that it was
custom made for the project.
The 120 KVA PowerDrive Inverter is not available either on the MLT web side, it was specially
ordered for Lucingweni Community Project. It is a pure sinewave inverter. The specifications of the
biggest inverter that could be obtained from MLT web-site is 7.5kVA 36V MAXI Inverter shown in
Table 3-11 below.
Figure 51: Specification of 20kW MLT Inverter (source www.mlt.co.za)
SPECIFICATIONS
INPUT VOLTAGE RANGE
BATTERY LOW CUT OUT VOLTAGE
33 – 48VDC
33V
BATTERY LOW RETURN VOLTAGE
NO LOAD CURRENT (Inverter on)
38V
2.4A
STANDBY CURRENT
55mA
OUTPUT VOLTAGE
OUTPUT VOLTAGE REGULATION
MAXIMUM CONTINOUOS POWER OUTPUT
230VAC
+/- 3%
7500VA
MAXIMUM SHORT TERM POWER OUTPUT (3 sec)
MINIMUM LOAD SENSE (Resistive)
20000VA
15W
FREQUENCY
50Hz
TOTAL HARMONIC DISTORTION
5%
EFFICIENCY
87% At full
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE RANGE
load
DIMENSIONS
490mm x 450mm (L H D)
0 – 50°C
790mm x
SHIPPING WEIGHT
105Kg
4.6.5. Load Management Assumptions
The management of the load of hybrid system is crucial to the cost of the system to be installed.
HOMER offers a number of load management strategies that can be useful in the design of the
system. One of the baseline assumptions for the modelled system is unserved load capacity that
means that at peak times when the energy resources are low, the system cuts off supply to a
certain percentage of the load. This allows the system to be undersize. In the simulation of both
Hluleka and Lucingweni Hybrid system, the Primary Load was divided into Primary Load 1 and
Primary Load 2. This meant that Primary Load 2 of Hluleka System and Primary Load 1 of
Lucingweni are of less priority during time of low energy resources. These loads have been
estimated at 20% of unserved load. We have also included deferred load during the time of excess
electricity to pump water and for ice making.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 155 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4.6.6. Grid Capital and Power Cost Assumptions
Although the cost of centralised grid electricity is relatively low in South Africa, the cost of
externalities for the generation of electricity using coal has not been fully factored in the cost of
electricity.
According Hansen and Bower, 2003, to better quantify the cost of delivering power over long
distance, a model developed by Antares Group is used:
Cost of Delivered Power = (Busbar COE) + [(BLT + TL + TH)*(Busbar COE)]
Where:
BLT = Baseline Transmission Cost (Cost of Capital Investment and O&M for lines)
TL = Transmission line loss
TH = Theft Loss
COE = Cost of Energy
However, for this study the cost of R70 000 per km is used, based on the information obtained
from Dr. B. Baholo of Africon who has done extensive work on rural electrification for Eskom.
4.6.7. Financial and Operational Assumptions
Financial and operational assumptions are as given by Banks, 2006 in the Cost and Benefit
Analysis report attached as Appendix A (for Lucingweni). Although the equipment was bought in
2002-2004, the discount rate used for the purpose of simulation is that used in the CBA report of
8%. The cost of equipment used in this report is the prices given by NER in the NER Progress
Report of 2003.
The cost of Photovoltaic generator for Hluleka Game Reserve System, including supply and
installation is R235 474. The cost of wind generator system, including supply and installation is
R252 867.71. Control container including installation is R48 873. Control equipment R266 801.
Battery Bank is R155 031 (NER Progress Report, 2003)
As for the Lucingweni Solar Wind Hybrid System, the cost of Photovoltaic generator system is R2
787, 507.60. Wind Generator system R1 085 175.00, control structure and equipment R3 423 546
(NER Progress Report, 2003). It was difficult to separate the costs of control equipment, balance of
system and structure containing the control equipment, because there is no breakdown of cost. It is
assumed that the control equipment, also include the building.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 156 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5. Results
The results obtained when simulating the loads and generation systems indicate that the Hluleka
Game Reserve Hybrid system is not adequate to supply grid quality electricity. The 2x2.5kW
Proven Wind Turbine are too small for the load at least two wind generators of the same size as
Lucingweni Community’s system should have been installed. The Lucingweni Community’s system
is adequate for the load. However, indications are that the system was not performing as designed.
It was also the most expensive way of supplying electricity to this community. From evaluation
team survey, there was a general dissatisfaction with quality of service by the users offered by the
system.
5.1.
Hybrid System Choice
5.1.1. Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System
For Hluleka Hybrid System, the system is simulated before the installation of renewable energy
technologies, when the electricity supply consisted of 2x75kW diesel gensets. The amount of
diesel consumed is found to be 101 000 litres of diesel annually, if it is operated 24hours, which is
about 12% above the stated value of 90 000 litres per annum when operated 10 hours a day given
in the SSSA reports.
When simulation is performed for the Hluleka hybrid system with the following assumptions:
• Wind speed of both Port St John with the average of 7.4 m/s and that given on NASA website
for 5.34 for latitude 31.817S and 29.3E
• Solar radiation as given above
• Exchange rate is US$1 = ZAR7.00
• Discount rate of 8%
• Price of diesel is R6.50/l
• Capacity shortage of 20%
It is found that the system is too small for the load. The system is undersized, which explain the
problems, they have been having with the system. The 2 wind turbines of 2.5kW, solar array of
5.6kW with backup of 5kW-diesel genset are too small for the Load. The optimum system is found
to be 8x2.5kW or 4x5kW Proven Wind Turbines and 90 batteries of 1160Ah 2V, 6kW converter and
5kW diesel genset, at cost of R1 729 028 and cost of energy (COE) R7.91/kW (see Table 4-1
below). The combination of 6x2.5kW wind turbine, 5kW diesel genset and 30 batteries of 1160Ah
2V is much cheaper when compared to optimum system. However, its NPC is much higher than
the optimum system.
PV
(kW)
5.6
Figure 52: Hluleka’s simulated hybrid system categorised according to their NPV
WT
GEN BATT
CAP
NPC (Rand )
COE
CAP
Diesel (l)
(kW)
(Rand)
(Rand)
Shortage
8
90
1 729 028
2 223 263
7.91
19%
6
5
30
1 341 620
2 348 276
7.27
0%
5 136
8
60
1 887 011
2 412 375
8.61
19%
The advantage of hybrid system is reflected in the amount of diesel saved. Before the installation
of hybrid system, diesel consumption by the 2x75kW was 90 000 (SSSA Report, 2002), the
simulated diesel is 101 837, which is within margin of error 12% of stated value of 90 000 litres.
5.1.2. Lucingweni Community Hybrid System
The Lucingweni Community hybrid system, as previously stated, consists of 6x6kW Proven wind
turbines, 56kW Shell Solar PV panels, with energy storage capacity of 1.8MWh. The system is
connected to a mini-grid reticulation that supply power to the designed capacity of 220 households
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 157 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
to provide lighting, entertainment etc as it was shown in Table 3-8 above. The following
assumptions are made:
• wind speed is that given in the NASA website http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/sse/ at an average
of 5.4m/s and that of Port St John.
• solar insolation is that given in the above website, at an average 4.39kWh/m2/day
• discount rate is 8%
• exchange rate is US$1 = ZAR7
• capital cost of equipment are those given in SSSA reports
• maintenance cost are 5% of capital cost
Table 4-2 shows the optimum configurations of hybrid system. A configuration of 15x6kW or larger
wind turbines could have been the best solution or reducing the number of solar panels and
increasing the number of wind turbines could have been a cheaper option. The reduction in cost if
the first options if taken is R1 159 781 and reduction in energy cost is R0.93. The optimum
configuration system breakeven distance with grid is 52.4km, while the current configuration is
70.5km. Grid is currently about 15km away, which makes the current system very expensive when
compared to grid.
PV
(kW)
28
56
WT60
Batt
15
9
6
110
110
110
Figure 53: Optimisation Choice of Hybrid System
Conv Disp
Initial
Total NPC COE
Renewable
(kW)
Str.
Cap (R )
(R )
(R )
Fraction
100
CC
3 000 095 6 172 103
4.74
1.0
100
CC
3 308 697 6 498 996
4.86
1.0
100
CC
4 159 876 7 899 570
5.67
1.0
Cap
shortage
14%
12%
5%
Figure 4-1 shows the contribution of solar and wind in the total power generation. The graph
indicate that solar contribute 56% and wind contribute 44%. The total annual energy produced is
158 291 kWh and the total load served is 108 928kWh with excess electricity 17%. Solar
penetration is 80.8% with capacity factor of 18.2%, average output from solar is 245kWh/day. Wind
penetration is 62.2% with capacity factor 20%, average daily output of 7.86kW.
Figure 54: Contributions of Solar and Wind in electricity production
The viability of hybrid system where wind power generation is one of the components is the wind
speed. In sensitivity analysis in below shows that as the load increases from a low wind speed of
3.54m/s used by SSSA for the sizing of the system, the hybrid of Wind/PV/Batteries becomes more
optimum that PV/Battery alone. However as the wind speed increase, configuration of
Wind/Battery, when a load is below 220 kWh/day, is optimum. Above this load a combination of
Wind/PV/Battery becomes optimum. This indicates that knowing wind resources is very critical in
the design of hybrid system. The current configuration becomes viable if the average annual wind
speed is above 5.4 m/s and the load is less than 220kWh/day below this wind speed a bigger solar
power generation is needed
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 158 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 55: Lucingweni Hybrid system showing optimum system configuration with load
5.1.3. Lucingweni Hybrid System Breakeven Grid Distance
The Lucingweni’s comprises of renewable energy technologies only, therefore the load served, the
cost of power generation, discount rate and the wind speed, determines the breakeven point with
grid. Figure 4-3 shows a breakeven point between grid distance and the designed load of
320kWh/day, at a distance is 72.9 km. This system is only justified if grid is at the distance of 72.9
km, which is not the case, because grid is less than 20km away.
Figure 56: Lucingweni Hybrid System Breakeven Grid Distance
The sensitivity analysis of breakeven grid distance with wind speed in Figure 4-4 below indicates
that there is change in breakeven distance with wind speed. As the wind speed increase the
distance from grid decrease that indicates the importance of knowing the wind speed before the
system is installed.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 159 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 57: Correlation of Grid breakeven distance with wind speed at 220kWh/day
5.2.
Verification of Results
It is very difficult to verify our result because we could not have access to either the data or control
room of Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System. Secondly the data that we managed to obtain from
Lucingweni Community Hybrid System proved to be either unreliable or the system was performing
as designed, as would be shown in Section 5.2 below.
5.2.1. Hluleka Hybrid System
In order to verify the accuracy of our result, a simulation of Hluleka Game Reserve system before
installation of renewable energy technologies is done. It is found that the amount of diesel
consumed 101 827 litres per year is within the error of margin of 12% from the given figure of
90 000 litres per given in the NER Progress Report, 2003.
5.2.2. Lucingweni Community Hybrid System
In order to verify our simulation results data captured at Lucingweni Community is used for
analysis. The data capturing system consists of the various current transformers, voltage
transducers, data logger and a PC installed in the control room. The system was setup to capture
the following system parameters at 5-minute intervals;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Appendix C
Wind turbines voltage (Turbine 1 – 6)
Wind Turbine current output (Turbine 1 – 6)
Solar panel array output voltage (Array 1 – 4)
Solar panel array output current (Array 1 – 4)
Inverter output voltage (Red, White and Blue phases)
Inverter output (or input) current (Red, white and Blue phases)
Battery charge regulator output voltage (Regulator 1-4)
Battery charge regulator output current (Regulator 1 – 4)
Battery bank output voltage
Battery bank output current
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 160 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The data that was available spanned the timeframe from the 08 March 2005 to the 27 December
2005 in one-day intervals, and the 01 June 2005 to the 30 November 2005 in 5-minute intervals.
However, from discussion of Doug Banks with of MLT in Cape Town, which installed the data
logging system, admitted that the data is unreliable because the logging system was never
calibrated, therefore there is not much information that could be derived.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 161 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6. Analysis
6.1.
Wind Turbines
6.1.1. Maximum Turbine Output
The recorded wind turbine performance and simulated performance are depicted in Figure 6-1 and
6-2. When the system started operating, at the beginning of March, an output of between 1.0kVA
to 1.4 kVA is observed from the five turbines and zero output from one of the turbines. This
indicates that one of the turbines was not working from the start. After 19 March there was no
output from the all the turbines. The simulated power output shown in Figure 6-2 from the six
turbines during the same period indicates an average output of 7.5 kW, with estimated production
factor of 20% from the wind turbines. However, the wind turbines are not able satisfy the load on
their own.
WIND GENERATOR POWER OUTPUT
Mar to May 05
1600
1400
1200
Gen 1
Gen 2
Gen 3
Gen 4
Gen 5
Gen 6
VA
1000
800
600
400
200
7-Jun-05
28-May-05
8-May-05
18-May-05
Date
28-Apr-05
18-Apr-05
8-Apr-05
29-Mar-05
19-Mar-05
9-Mar-05
27-Feb-05
0
Figure 58: Average Daily Wind turbine VA Output – Mar to May 05
Figure 59: Simulated Average daily Wind Turbine Mar to May
The wind turbine output from June to August as shown in the graph of Figure 6-3 below, is too low,
even though the output shows variation of typical behaviour of wind turbine. The low output is not
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 162 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
supported by the simulated output in Figure 6-4. The output is also not supported by output
observed when system was first switched on. The conclusion that can be drawn is that the system
is not performing as designed.
WIND GENERATOR POWER OUTPUT
Jun to Aug 05
350
300
Gen 1
Gen 2
Gen 3
Gen 4
Gen 5
Gen 6
VA
250
200
150
100
50
Date
5-Sep-05
16-Aug-05
27-Jul-05
7-Jul-05
17-Jun-05
28-May-05
8-May-05
0
Figure 60: Average Daily Wind turbine VA Output – Jun to Aug 05
Figure 61: Simulated output from the wind turbines between May to August.
6.1.2. Daily Variation in Output
A key requirement for hybrid systems is the complementarity of the different resources. In the case
of Lucingweni, the wind and solar energies complement each other as shown in the simulated
output of Figure 6-6, when solar output is low wind output is high and vice-versa..
From Figure 6-5 of the recorded wind turbine output variation on the 1st August, indicates that wind
turbines power production happened in the late afternoon until early morning, which coincide with
the load. This is not confirmed by the simulated wind turbine hourly output of Figure 6-6, which
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 163 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
shows that the maximum output happens in the early afternoon at around 14:00 which is supported
by the Port St. John which indicates the highest wind speed happen in the early afternoon. For the
best performance of the simulation software actual hourly data is needed which could have useful
if wind speed was monitored at the site.
Wind Turbine Daily Output Variation
01 August 2005
1800
1600
1400
Wind Turbine 1
1200
VA
Wind Turbine 2
1000
Wind Turbine 3
Wind Turbine 4
800
Wind Turbine 5
600
Wind Turbine 6
400
200
10:30:00
11:20:00
6:20:00
7:10:00
8:00:00
8:50:00
9:40:00
3:00:00
3:50:00
4:40:00
5:30:00
23:40:00
0:30:00
1:20:00
2:10:00
20:20:00
21:10:00
22:00:00
22:50:00
16:10:00
17:00:00
17:50:00
18:40:00
19:30:00
12:00:00
12:50:00
13:40:00
14:30:00
15:20:00
0
Time
Figure 62 Hourly output variation 1 August 2005
Figure 63: Simulated Wind Turbines and Solar Power Generation hourly output of the 1st August
6.2.
Solar arrays
6.2.1. Average Monthly Variation
For the period March to May 2005, the solar array 4 indicates a high output of over 12kW while the
other three indicates lower outputs (see Figure 6-7). This could either indicate malfunction of the
system or data capturing equipment, because the arrays are supposed to give the outputs. After
March 15 there was an average output of 2kW from all the arrays.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 164 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
SOLAR ARRAY POWER OUTPUT
Mar to May 05
12000
Watts
10000
Array 1
Array 2
Array 3
Array 4
8000
6000
4000
2000
31-May-05
24-May-05
17-May-05
3-May-05
10-May-05
Date
26-Apr-05
19-Apr-05
12-Apr-05
5-Apr-05
29-Mar-05
22-Mar-05
15-Mar-05
8-Mar-05
0
Figure 64: Average Daily Solar array output Mar to May 05 (Watts)
The data from June to August is much more realistic because the daily variation of solar array
output as depicted in Figure 6-8 is noticed. However, there are no outputs from other arrays,
except for array 1, which could either confirm the malfunctioning of system or data capturing;
therefore not much conclusion can be drawn from the data.
SOLAR ARRAY POWER OUTPUT
Jun to Aug 05
3000
2500
Array 1
Array 2
Array 3
Array 4
Watts
2000
1500
1000
500
8/31/05
8/24/05
8/17/05
8/10/05
8/3/05
7/27/05
7/20/05
7/13/05
7/6/05
6/29/05
6/22/05
6/15/05
6/8/05
6/1/05
0
Date
Figure 65: Average Daily Solar array output Jun to Aug 05 (Watts)
6.2.2. Daily Variation
The hourly variation in the output of the solar arrays was plotted for the 01 of June, August and
October 2005, as shown in Figure 6-9, 6-11 and 6-12 . The hourly-simulated outputs for the same
days are shown in Figures 6-10. The measured hourly outputs show that there is no output from
the solar arrays from 6:30 until 17:30 as expected because there is no sun. All the four arrays
show some power outputs of more than 5kVA. However, there is no output from the other arrays
on the 1st August and 1st of October, except for array 1. This is confirmed by the hourly-simulated
power outputs from the solar arrays at 6.30 until 17:30 for June in Figure 6-10. The solar power
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 165 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
production shows mismatched with the load the AC load is high during the night when there is no
sun, which indicates the importance of storage devices.
Solar Array Daily Output Variation
01 June 2005
12000
10000
8000
VA
Solar Array 1
Solar Array 2
6000
Solar Array 3
Solar Array 4
4000
2000
5:30:00
6:20:00
7:10:00
8:00:00
8:50:00
9:40:00
10:30:00
11:20:00
22:50:00
23:40:00
0:30:00
1:20:00
2:10:00
3:00:00
3:50:00
4:40:00
16:10:00
17:00:00
17:50:00
18:40:00
19:30:00
20:20:00
21:10:00
22:00:00
13:40:00
14:30:00
15:20:00
12:00:00
12:50:00
0
Time
Figure 66: Hourly output Variation 01 June 2005 (Watts)
80
A C Primary Load
PV Pow er
Pow er (kW)
60
40
20
0
0
6
12
Ju n e 1
18
24
Figure 67: Hourly PV Power Variation with Primary Load 1 June
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 166 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Solar Array Daily Output Variation
01 August 2005
9000
8000
7000
6000
VA
Solar Array 1
5000
Solar Array 2
Solar Array 3
4000
Solar Array 4
3000
2000
1000
9:40:00
10:30:00
11:20:00
7:10:00
8:00:00
8:50:00
6:20:00
4:40:00
5:30:00
2:10:00
3:00:00
3:50:00
0:30:00
1:20:00
23:40:00
21:10:00
22:00:00
22:50:00
18:40:00
19:30:00
20:20:00
17:50:00
16:10:00
17:00:00
13:40:00
14:30:00
15:20:00
12:00:00
12:50:00
0
Time
Figure 68: Hourly PV Power generation on 1st August
Solar Array Daily Output Variation
01 October 2005
2500
2000
Solar Array 1
1500
VA
Solar Array 2
Solar Array 3
1000
Solar Array 4
500
9:40:00
10:30:00
11:20:00
8:00:00
8:50:00
7:10:00
6:20:00
4:40:00
5:30:00
2:10:00
3:00:00
3:50:00
0:30:00
1:20:00
23:40:00
21:10:00
22:00:00
22:50:00
19:30:00
20:20:00
18:40:00
17:50:00
16:10:00
17:00:00
13:40:00
14:30:00
15:20:00
12:00:00
12:50:00
0
Time
Figure 69: Hourly PV Power production on 1s October
6.2.3. Comments on the Daily Variation of the Solar Array Output
The general pattern is as expected, with the output peaking at approximately 12:00 during June,
August and October. Solar start producing power 6:30 to 16:30 in winter and 5:30 to 17:30 in
summer.
The significant difference between the output for array 1 and arrays 2 to 4 can possibly be
explained by either faulty equipment in the latter three arrays or faulty data capturing equipment..
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 167 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
6.3.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Batteries
6.3.1. Battery Bank Output Voltage
The battery bank output voltage between March and May in Figure 6-11 indicates variation of
between 210V and 225V, this could be the period when the system was operational. After June the
battery voltage stabilised at between 235V and 245V as shown in Figure 6-12 and Figure 6-13.
This could indicate that the system was not operational during these periods, because when the
community illegally switched on the system, a steady drop in voltage is observed from 14
December in Figure 6-13. However, there is no recharging of the batteries from the power
generation components.
BATTERY BANK VOLTAGE OUTPUT
255
250
245
240
235
230
225
220
215
210
205
7-Jun-05
28-May-05
8-May-05
18-May-05
Date
28-Apr-05
18-Apr-05
8-Apr-05
29-Mar-05
19-Mar-05
9-Mar-05
Battery
Bank
27-Feb-05
Volts
Mar to May 05
Figure 70: Battery Bank output voltage Mar to May 05 (V)
BATTERY BANK VOLTAGE OUTPUT
255
250
245
240
235
230
225
220
215
210
205
5-Sep-05
16-Aug -05
Date
27-Jul-05
7-Jul-05
17-Jun-05
28-May-05
Battery
Bank
8-May-05
Volts
Jun to Aug 05
Figure 71: Battery Bank output voltage Jun to Aug 05 (V)
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 168 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
BATTERY BANK VOLTAGE OUTPUT
255
250
245
240
235
230
225
220
215
210
205
3-Jan-06
14-Dec-05
Date
24-Nov-05
4-Nov-05
15-Oct-05
25-Sep-05
5-Sep-05
Battery
Bank
16-Aug-05
Volts
Sep to Dec 05
Figure 72: Battery Bank output voltage Sep to Dec 05 (V)
6.3.2. Comments on Battery Bank output Voltage
The battery bank voltage outputs show the period when the system was operational and not
operational. From March until end of May the system was operational and from June until
December the system was shut off.
6.3.3. Battery Bank Output Power
According to Figure 73 below, the battery bank power output corresponds to the high power output
from the wind turbines when the system was switched on for the first time. The initial high battery
output could indicate when the battery banks were being charged from the 9th March until around
the 20th March. From the 22 March until 17 April there was no power being drawn from the
batteries. From the 25 April power was being drawn from the batteries. From June in Figure 75 only
1kW was being drawn from the battery, which is enough to power auxiliary equipment within
control room but not enough to power the load. This is a further indication that the system was not
working during this period. The simulated battery banks power output in Figure 74 over the same
period, indicates that the battery output is not enough to meet the load. According to the
configuration of the system, the wind turbine directly feed the load through Windy Boy Inverters
and excess power is fed to the battery while solar array charge the battery directly and battery
bank feed the load through the PowerDrive Inverter. The lower simulated battery power outputs of
Figure 6-14, 6-16 and 17 could indicate that the battery bank could be providing a fraction of power
to the load while the wind turbines are providing the rest.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 169 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
BATTERY BANK POWER OUTPUT
Mar to May 05
30000
25000
20000
Watts
15000
10000
Battery
Bank
5000
0
-5000
31-May-05
24-May-05
17-May-05
10-May-05
3-May-05
26-Apr-05
19-Apr-05
12-Apr-05
5-Apr-05
29-Mar-05
22-Mar-05
15-Mar-05
8-Mar-05
-10000
Date
Figure 73: Battery Bank Power Output – Mar to May 05 (W)
30
A C Pr ima r y L o a d
B a tte r y Po w e r
20
Pow er (kW)
10
0
-10
-20
-30
Ma r c h
A p r il
Ma y
Figure 74: Simulated battery power output and primary load March to May
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 170 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
BATTERY BANK POWER OUTPUT
Jun to Aug 05
8000
7000
6000
Watts
5000
4000
Battery
Bank
3000
2000
1000
0
31-Aug-05
24-Aug-05
17-Aug-05
10-Aug-05
3-Aug-05
27-Jul-05
20-Jul-05
13-Jul-05
6-Jul-05
29-Jun-05
22-Jun-05
15-Jun-05
8-Jun-05
1-Jun-05
-1000
Date
Figure 75: Battery Bank Power Output – Jun to Aug 05 (W)
BATTERY BANK POWER OUTPUT
Sep to Dec 05
2000
0
Watts
-2000
-4000
Battery
Bank
-6000
-8000
-10000
15-Dec-05
22-Dec-05
8-Dec-05
1-Dec-05
17-Nov-05
24-Nov-05
10-Nov-05
3-Nov-05
27-Oct-05
13-Oct-05
20-Oct-05
6-Oct-05
29-Sep-05
22-Sep-05
8-Sep-05
15-Sep-05
1-Sep-05
-12000
Date
Figure 76: Battery Bank Power Output – Sep to Dec 05 (W)
6.3.4. Comments on Battery Bank Power Output
The period from March to May 2005 in Figure 6-15 seems to indicate normal functioning of the
battery bank, with roughly equal charge and discharge energy cycles.
The June to November period shows very little energy being released from the batteries nor been
fed to the battery bank for re-charging. Since the battery voltage was constant during this period, it
would suggest that the battery bank had not suffered any damage, but that there was no energy
being drawn from the system.
This period corresponds to the timeframe reported by the community when the system was
apparently not operational (± 7 months).
The deep charging cycle in late December would suggest that this was when the community
illegally switched on the system and the batteries charging.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 171 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
6.4.
DME New and Renewable Energy
Inverter
The negative Inverter Power Output shown in Figure 6-30 indicates that the batteries were
charging from 8 March to 15 March. From March 15, the inverter was supplying the load as shown
in positive inverter output. However, the inverter power output is not balanced, there is more power
being drawn from the red phase than the blue and yellow phases. According to the simulation in
Figure 6-31, the inverter output should mimic the load, supplying power to the load from the
batteries when the power from wind turbine is low and vice verse when power output from wind
turbines is high. The system experienced its highest load of around 22.5 kW between 19 April to17
May. It could have been caused by the fact that the entire load was completed and switched on.
From the 20 May there is no output from inverter, which could be the period when the system was
switched off.
INVERTER POWER OUTPUT
Mar to May 05
20000
15000
10000
VA
Red
Phase
White
Phase
Blue
Phase
5000
0
31-May-05
24-May-05
17-May-05
10-May-05
3-May-05
26-Apr-05
19-Apr-05
12-Apr-05
5-Apr-05
29-Mar-05
22-Mar-05
15-Mar-05
8-Mar-05
-5000
Date
Figure 77: Average Daily Inverter Power Output Mar to May 05 (VA)
35
A C P r im a r y L o a d
In v e r t e r P o w e r
30
Pow er (kW)
25
20
15
10
5
M arc h
A p r il
May
Figure 78: Simulated inverter power output with primary load March to May 05
From June to August only the red phase was operational as indicated in Figure 6-22 providing
enough power for auxiliary equipment in the control room. However, the inverter output was very
low which could indicate that the system was not supplying the load because the inverter output
fluctuated between 1.7 kVA and 1 kVA not enough to supply the load.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 172 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
INVERTER POWER OUTPUT
Jun to Aug 05
1800
1600
1400
VA
1200
Red
Phase
White
Phase
Blue
Phase
1000
800
600
400
200
31-Aug-05
24-Aug-0 5
17-Aug-05
10-Aug-05
3-Aug-05
27-Jul-05
20-Jul-05
13-Jul-05
6-Jul-05
29-Jun-05
22-Jun-05
15-Jun-05
8-Jun-05
1-Jun-05
0
Date
Figure 79: Average Daily Inverter Power Output Jun to Aug 05 (VA)
From July to December, the system was not supplying the load as indicated by the low inverter
power output of less than 2 kW Figure 6-24 below just enough power for auxiliary equipment in the
control and probably security lights only. After the 22 December, there was increase in output from
the inverter shown in Figure 6-24, which correspond to the period when the community decided to
switch on the system illegally. As indicated previously that the three phases are not balanced,
there is more power being drawn from the red phase than from the other phases. It could indicate
that the system was not complete because the system was designed to provide power to 220
households only 120 households were connected; power for the community centre; power for
water pumping and telecommunication, which was not done.
INVERTER POWER OUTPUT
Jul to Dec 05
16000
14000
12000
VA
10000
Red
Phase
White
Phase
Blue
Phase
8000
6000
4000
2000
15-Dec-05
22-Dec-05
8-Dec-05
1-Dec-05
24-Nov-05
10-Nov-0 5
17-Nov-05
3-Nov-05
27-Oct-05
13-Oct-05
20-Oct-05
6-Oct-05
29-Sep-05
15-Sep-05
22-Sep-05
8-Sep-05
1-Sep-05
0
Date
Figure 80: Average Daily Inverter Power Output Jul to Dec 05 (VA)
6.4.1. Comments on the Inverter Output Power
The output power of the inverter also clearly suggests that the system was not supplying the load
between roughly the end of May 2005 to mid-December 2005, a period spanning 6.5 months.
According to simulation of inverter, the inverter should mimic the load, supply power to the load
from either the wind turbine or from battery depending on the power output of the turbines.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 173 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The load supplied by the red phase of the inverter, approximately 1.6 kW during this period was
most likely enough to supply power for auxiliary equipment such as data logging system in the
control room, including the internal and external security lights.
6.5.
Load
One of the serious drawbacks of the Lucingweni system data logger is that there is no explicit
measurement of the load taken up by the grid. Thus to determine the load, and thus the energy
drawn on the mini-grid, these value must be calculated from the captured parameters as thus;
From a consideration of the system diagram, the relationship between the various currents flowing
into and out of the common busbar is as follows:
I Load + I Inverter + I Wind_turbine = 0
Thus the load current is:
I Load = -( I Inverter + I Wind_turbine )
The three assumptions made in this calculation are:
1. The busbar voltage is always equal to the Inverter output voltage.
2. A negative Inverter current implies the inverter is taking in power to charge the batteries
3. A positive Inverter current implies the inverter is supplying current to the load.
Assumption one can be confirmed by the fact that the wind turbine voltage regulator, (Windy Boy)
always synchronises itself to an existing busbar voltage. Should the “Windy Boy” not be able to
regulate its output voltage to within 5% of the busbar voltage, then it disconnects the supply i.e. the
Wind turbine power output.
Based on the above assumptions, the daily average load supplied across the three phases was
calculated and is presented in Figure 81 to Figure 83 below.
DAILY SYSTEM MAXIMUM DEMAND
Mar to May 05
30.00
25.00
kVA
20.00
Demand
15.00
10.00
5.00
31-May-05
24-May-05
17-May-05
10-May-05
3-May-05
26-Apr-05
19-Apr-05
12-Apr-05
5-Apr-05
29-Mar-05
22-Mar-05
15-Mar-05
8-Mar-05
0.00
Date
Figure 81: Average Daily Load on the Mini-grid Mar to May 05 (kVA)
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 174 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
DAILY SYSTEM MAXIMUM DEMAND
Jun to Aug 05
3.00
2.50
kVA
2.00
Demand
1.50
1.00
0.50
5-Sep-05
26-Aug-05
16-Aug-05
6-Aug-05
27-Jul-05
17-Jul-05
7-Jul-05
27-Jun-05
17-Jun-05
7-Jun-05
28-May-05
0.00
Date
Figure 82: Average Daily Load on the Mini-grid Jun to Aug 05 (kVA)
DAILY SYSTEM MAXIMUM DEMAND
Sep to Dec 05
30.00
25.00
kVA
20.00
Demand
15.00
10.00
5.00
28-Dec-05
8-Dec-05
18-Nov-05
29-Oct-05
9-Oct-05
19-Sep-05
30-Aug-05
0.00
Date
Figure 83: Average Daily Load on the Mini-grid Sep to Dec 05 (kVA)
6.5.1. Comments on the System Demand
The load curves presented in Figures 6-29 to 6-33 corroborate with the previous indications that
the system was not operational during the period from the end of May 2005 to Mid December
2005. During the period from March to May 05, the system peaked at 25 kVA.
From the measured peak demand and the known number of connected households (±100), these
values suggest an initial After Diversity Maximum Demand (ADMD) as follows:
No of Households =
Peak Demand
ADMD
Or;
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 175 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Peak Demand
No.of Households
= 0.25 kVA
ADMD =
The above figure would naturally be expected to rise as the level of awareness rises and the
general community starts to utilise more electrical appliances.
According to the simulation of the inverter power output, the inverter output should mimic the load
therefore the inverter power output is an indication of the load connected to the system.
6.6.
Resource utilisation split
Another fundamental design parameter for hybrid systems is the split between the various energy
resources. In the case of the Lucingweni system, the system was sized to achieve a 50 % split
between the wind turbines and the solar energy. Due to the fact that the solar arrays do not supply
the busbar directly, the split was determined by consideration of the total load and the load
supplied by the wind turbines.
Figure 6-29 to Figure 34 depict the utilisation of the resources and the variation of this split over
time. From the simulated split between wind and solar in Figure 6-30 wind turbines contribute
about 44% of the total power produced and solar 66%.
DAILY SYSTEM SUPPLY SPLIT
Mar to May 05
120%
% of Total Demand
100%
80%
Wind Energy
60%
Inverter (Battery)
40%
20%
31-May-05
29-May-05
27-May-05
23-May-05
25-May-05
21-May-05
19-May-05
15-May-05
17-May-05
11-May-05
13-May-05
5-May-05
7-May-05
9-May-05
1-May-05
3-May-05
29-Apr-05
25-Apr-05
27-Apr-05
21-Apr-05
23-Apr-05
17-Apr-05
19-Apr-05
13-Apr-05
15-Apr-05
9-Apr-05
11-Apr-05
5-Apr-05
7-Apr-05
1-Apr-05
3-Apr-05
30-Mar-05
28-Mar-05
24-Mar-05
26-Mar-05
22-Mar-05
20-Mar-05
18-Mar-05
16-Mar-05
14-Mar-05
12-Mar-05
8-Mar-05
10-Mar-05
0%
Date
Figure 84: Renewable Energy Resource Utilisation Split Mar to May 05
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 176 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Figure 85: Renewable Energy Resource Monthly Average Electric Production
According to the simulation of solar and wind between June to August in Figure 6-32, the two
resources complements each other, when solar is low wind in high and vice versa, which shows
the advantage of using a hybrid system.
DAILY SYSTEM SUPPLY SPLIT
Jun to Aug 05
120%
% of Total Demand
100%
80%
60%
Wind
Energy
Inverter
(Battery)
40%
20%
4-Aug-05
6-Aug-05
8-Aug-05
10-Aug-05
12-Aug-05
14-Aug-05
16-Aug-05
18-Aug-05
20-Aug-05
22-Aug-05
24-Aug-05
26-Aug-05
28-Aug-05
30-Aug-05
29-Jun-05
1-Jul-05
3-Jul-05
5-Jul-05
7-Jul-05
9-Jul-05
11-Jul-05
13-Jul-05
15-Jul-05
17-Jul-05
19-Jul-05
21-Jul-05
23-Jul-05
25-Jul-05
27-Jul-05
29-Jul-05
31-Jul-05
2-Aug-05
11-Jun-05
13-Jun-05
15-Jun-05
17-Jun-05
19-Jun-05
21-Jun-05
23-Jun-05
25-Jun-05
27-Jun-05
1-Jun-05
3-Jun-05
5-Jun-05
7-Jun-05
9-Jun-05
0%
Date
Figure 86: Renewable Energy Resource Utilisation Split Jun to Aug 05
Figure 87: Split between wind and solar contribution to the total power June to August
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 177 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
DAILY SYSTEM SUPPLY SPLIT
Sep to Dec 05
100%
90%
% of Total Demand
80%
70%
60%
50%
Wind
Energy
40%
Inverter
(Battery)
30%
20%
10%
22-Dec-05
15-Dec-05
8-Dec-05
1-Dec-05
24-Nov-05
17-Nov-05
10-Nov-05
3-Nov-05
27-Oct-05
20-Oct-05
13-Oct-05
6-Oct-05
29-Sep-05
22-Sep-05
15-Sep-05
8-Sep-05
1-Sep-05
0%
Date
Figure 88: Renewable Energy Resource Utilisation Split Sep to Dec 05
40
PV Po w e r
Pr o v e n W T 6 0 0 0
Pow er (kW)
30
20
10
0
S e p te m b e r
O c to b e r
No v e mb e r
De c e mb e r
Figure 89: Contribution of Solar and Wind Resources in the Total Electricity Production between Sep.
and Dec.
6.6.1. Comments on the Energy Resource Split
Figures 6-35 and 6-36 indicate that the design split was not achieved, as the wind resource
generally contributes significantly less than the total demand. The period between the end of May
2005 and Mid December 05 should be ignored, as the system was not taking any loading from the
mini-grid.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 178 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
WIND GENERATOR POWER OUTPUT
Jun to Aug 05
350
300
VA
250
Gen 1
Gen 2
Gen 3
Gen 4
Gen 5
Gen 6
200
150
100
50
0
Date
Figure 90: Wind Turbine Power Output from May to September
Figure 91: Simulated Daily Contribution of Wind Turbines to the Load in July
6.6.2. Comments on the wind turbine output
According to the recorded wind turbines outputs in Figure 6-35 above, contribution from wind
turbines to the total energy produced is very low, contrary to the simulated wind turbine output of
an average of 15kW in Figure 6-36. The low contribution from wind turbines could indicate four
factors as compared to simulated output:
1) The site where the wind turbines are installed might not have sufficient wind speed
2) The system is not performing as designed
3) Data capturing equipment is faulty.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 179 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
If 1) wind electricity generation system could be a “white elephant”, the output of the wind turbines
system does not justify the cost incurred in installing and maintaining it, if 6x6 kW wind turbines
can only deliver, 350VA each, a total 2.1 kVA could have been a waste of resources. It would also
indicate the high risk of installing wind power generation system without proper wind speed
measurements, as stated previously.
If 2), it would mean that combining local made components, with imported components might not
work so well. The wind power generation system consists of imported Proven 6000 wind turbines
connected to Sunny Boy inverters and 100kW PowerDrive Inverter for charging the batteries.
However, the result are inconclusive, lack of reliable data made this exercise very difficult, the
problem is compounded by the fact that the system was not being used during the period of
investigation.
6.6.3. Lucingweni Load Factor and Unserved Load
As indicated above that the Hluleka Hybrid system is too small for the load. The village load factor,
which is the energy consumed relative to maximum energy that could have consumed if the
maximum (kW) demand had been maintained throughout the billing period
LoadFactor (%) =
kWhused int heperiod
x100%
PeakkWx24hrxno.ofday sin period
Load Factor = 341kWh/(5kWx24hr) = 73%
The load factor for Hluleka Game reserve on in the morning ranges 73%.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 180 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
7. Conclusion
The task of evaluating viability and potential to replicate hybrid systems in the South Africa context
is made difficult by the lack of reliable data from both Hluleka Game Reserve and Lucingweni
Community hybrid systems. The fact that evaluation team did not have either access to the control
room of Hluleka Game Reserve or data, which was supposed to have been collected, made our
task difficult. However, superficial observation as users of the system, during our brief stay at the
resort, indicated that the system could not meet the load, even when only one chalet and staff
quarter was being used. The simulation of the Hluleka Game Reserve hybrid system indicates that
the system is too small for the load, more wind turbines or bigger turbines could have been
installed instead of 2x2.5 kW wind turbine. This could be the reason why the system was given so
many problems. When the simulation of the two diesel genset before the renewable energy
systems were installed, is done, the amount of diesel consumed annually of 101, 000 litres agree
with reported figure of 90 000.
The simulated power output from the Lucingweni Community Hybrid System is enough to meet the
designed load of 220 households and is big enough to provide power for productive uses, such as
metal work and carpentry. It can also serve a deferrable load of water pumping, battery charging
and ice making. Some members of the community told us that they could cook with the electricity
produced when the system was operational which confirmed the capacity of the system. However,
when comparing the simulated performance with actual performance during the brief periods of
operation, we observe some discrepancies, the maximum actual power output of the wind turbine
and solar arrays which could indicate that combining imported and locally source balance-ofsystem created a problem which was not entirely solved. The use of RETScreen software by SSSA
for the design of the two system, could have created a problem in that the above software is
intended as rough estimation in pre-feasibility not in feasibility or implementation phase. It can not
also be used for small system with storage capacity. While HOMER software has been used for
both pre-feasibility and feasibility design phase in number of countries and it is considered reliable,
such as in Chile ( E7, CNE and UNDP, 2004), India( Hansen and Bower, 2003). This might
indicate that taking measurements of wind speed and thorough assessment of the load need to be
completed before implementation could take place.
According inverter output, which suppose to mimic the load, the three phases of system are not
balanced with the red phase supplying most of the power to the load
The two systems were intended as pilot installation, therefore monitoring of the performance of the
two systems should have been of highest priority. However, the absence of reliable data after two
years of operation, it is felt that it should not have happen, because the same mistakes will be
repeated. Future pilot installation should be monitored careful in order to be able to draw proper
conclusions.
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 181 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
8. References
A.A Sitiawan and C.V. Nayar, 2006. Design of Hybrid Power System for a Remote Island in Maldives” Curtin
University of Technology, Perth, 2006.
P. Lilienthal, P. Gilman, and T. Lambert, 2005. “HOMER the Micropower Optimisation Model” National
Renewable Energy Laboratory.
T. Lambert, P. Gilman, and P. Lilienthal 2006 Micropower System Modeling with HOMER an Integration of
Alternative Sources of Energy, F.A. Farret and M.G. Simoes, eds: John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
T. Givler and P. Lilienthal, 2005. “Using HOMER Software, NREL’s Micropower Optimisation Model, to
Explore the Role of Gen-sets in Small Solar Power System”. National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
May 2005.
S.W. Hadley, J.W. Van Dyke, W.P. Poore, and T.K. Stovall, 2003. “Quantitative Assessment of Distributed
Energy Resource Benefits, Oak Ridge National Labaoratory.
Garran Hassan and Partners, 1999. “Renewable Energy Resources for Rural Electrification in South Africa,
Final Report:
N. Ketjoy, 2005. “Photovoltaic Hybrid Systems for Rural Electrification in the Mekong Countries”, PhD
Thesis, Faculty of Electrical Engineering/Information Technology, University of Kassel.
E. Martinot and K. Reiche, 2000. Regulatory Approaches to Rural Electrification and Renewable Energy:
Case Studies from Six Developing Countries”. World Bank Report, Washington, DC.
DME, 2003. “Electricity Basic Services Support Tariffs (Free Basic Electricity) Policy for Republic of South
Africa” Department of Minerals and Energy 2003.
N.E. Steven, 2001. Isla Tac Power System, First Year Status Report: October 2000 through October 2001”.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
DME, 2004. “Energy Regulatory Bill”. Department of Minerals and Energy, 2004.
DME, 2006. “Electricity Regulation Act, 2006.
DME, 1998. “White Paper on the Energy Policy of the Republic of South Africa”, DME
E7, 2004. “Chiloe Project Pre-feasibility Report”. E7 Fund, CNE and UNDP, Dec. 2004
C.J. Hansen and J. Bower, 2003. “An Economic Evaluation of Small-Scale Distributed Electricity Generation
Technologies”. Oxford Institute of Energy Studies, October 2003.
RETScreen International, 2001. “Wind Energy Projects Analysis” (www.retscreen.net)
E7, 2001. “Project E7-1: Indonesia Renewable Energy Supply System, Final Report”. The E7, Network of
Expertise for Global Environment.
Garrad Hassan and Partners, 1999. “Renewable Energy Sources for Rural Electrification in South Africa
Final Report”.
J.C.Jansen, J.W.J. van der Linden, D.Vos “Rural Electrification in Swaziland Phase II: cost-benefit analysis”
ECN Report no. ECN-C-97-041 (1997)
van Horen and Davis: ‘Raising Electricity Service levels in the National Infrastructure Plan: Financial and
Economic implications’; Energy for Development Research Centre (EDRC), University of Cape Town
(October 1996)
Appendix C
Version 4
Technical evaluation
May 2007
Page 182 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Appendix D: Literature review
Appendix D Version 3
Literature review
March 2006
Table of Contents
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 183 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
1. Introduction
This literature report was prepared for the DME as the first deliverable on the project titled “Minigrid hybrid viability and replication potential: The Hluleka and Lucingweni pilot projects “.
This literature review provides an overview of the pertinent issues arising out of an appraisal of
various reports, papers and references conducted as part of the inception to the mini-grid hybrid
viability and replicability study project. The terms of reference of this project outlines the process
of compilation of data and information relating to the two hybrid mini-grid system pilot projects and
the analysis with recommendations regarding their viability and replicability in energising
sustainable rural development.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 184 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
2. Background to mini-grid hybrid systesm
Mini-grid hybrid systems are viewed as a potentially viable and sustainable solution to rural
electricity provision. They also present the opportunity to incorporate renewable energy resources
and technologies for their conversion to electricity, thus also contributing to the broader objective of
the reduction of greenhouse gases.
The difficulty of providing electricity to rural areas via the main grid is related to the typically long
distances from the main grid network, and also the sparse density of the settlements within these
rural areas. Thus the financial viability of providing rural areas with grid electricity is compromised
by two factors, of a technical and financial nature. The long distances that the main HV or MV lines
have to be extended typically renders the electrification projects prohibitively expensive when one
includes the feeder line costs in benchmarking the actual cost per connection against set targets.
The long lengths of the feeder lines also lead to voltage control problems.
Furthermore, because of the typically low consumption rates in the early years of the electrification
projects, financial justification for these projects becomes difficult.
The solution to achieving rural energisation can be approached by the usage of RAPS (Remote
Area Power Systems). These are typically solar power systems, installed on an individual
household level, typically consisting of a PV panel, inverter and battery. A potential shortcoming of
stand-alone PV systems is the provision of sufficient power to conduct productive activities, such
as processing of agricultural products, small-scale industrial activities and a host of other income
generation activities.
Hybrid systems thus offer the potential to provide sufficient power for both residential usage and
also for productive uses. These system harness different combinations of energy sources for the
production of electrical power.
These hybrid systems have been implemented in various parts of the globe, with differing results
and successes.
The technical design of the system in terms of fuel supply and load matching is often considered
to be the critical issue. However, a successful technical design and even flawless installation and
commissioning together are necessary but probably not sufficient conditions for sustainability. To
a major extent the successful provision of sustainable energy in rural areas is a critical function of
the communities buy-in to the proposed service delivery mechanism. To partially fulfil this
condition, the involvement of the technical service provider must be clarified from the onset.
Thus to carry out a comprehensive assessment of the replicability and viability of mini-grid hybrids
for sustainable rural electrification and economic development in rural areas of South Africa, a full
economic analysis including social and environmental variables in the determination of viability and
therefore also long-term sustainability must also be carried out.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 185 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
3. Hybrid systems – theoretical basis
3.1.
Hansen and Bower
12
According to the study, the economic feasibility of hybrid systems is determined by local conditions
and resources availability. Wind-diesel system economic feasibility depends on six key variables:
Availability of wind resources; delivered price of diesel fuel; capital costs of the wind turbine,
genset and auxiliary equipment; life-cycle operating costs, including maintenance; value of
secondary load; and reliability of demand and revenue collection.
According to the same study, the experience in the Canary Island revealed several key
conclusions: first a rigorous study of the wind conditions, customers load profiles and maintenance
cost must be completed before construction can take place, as a small error can have far-reaching
consequences. Second the breakeven cost versus the old supply scheme should be obtained
considering the worst case scenario of the price of diesel; Thirdly administration problems that
were encountered pointed to the need for extensive training of local personnel in maintenance
work, and clear authority to be given from the start of project to those individuals who will run the
equipment and collect payment.
The study concludes that competitive small-scale systems may provide an opportunity to open up
the electricity market to competition from the bottom up and provide job opportunities and
economic growth for remote areas. They may also bring additional benefits to the operation of
electricity systems such as: First transmission constraints reduction and postponed energy
investment: Second small wind turbine technology and local manufacturing; Thirdly, local control
and incentives: Fourthly, carbon emission reduction.
The study identifies various barriers to the implementation of hybrid systems as follows;
1. Low subsided tariffs have reduced the incentives to look for alternatives in rural areas
2. No local capacity exists for maintenance or finance of small-scale power systems
Hybrid projects suffer from a lack from economy of scale, due to the high set-up cost and the need
for specialised engineering skills to build these hybrid systems.
3.2.
Technology Developments
This publication, “Renewable Energies – Innovation for the Future” 13, examines the development of
renewable energy systems, ranging from simple small scale solar or wind turbine systems, through
to larger scale hybrid systems. In particular, with reference to hybrid systems, the following is
stated on page 89 of the publication;
“Stand-alone systems, starting from the straightforward decentralised diesel systems,
have since progressed up to complex hybrid systems on the basis of renewable
energy. In many miniature applications, e.g. solar-operated clocks, the practical
benefits or the image given to the user predominates.
When supplying larger systems in remote regions, however, a renewable energy
system must primarily be able to compete with conventional techniques in terms of cost
effectiveness. Despite the relatively high costs in the range between about 0.3 and 1
Euro/kWh (Author’s Note: 1 Euro = ZAR 7.93 on the 31 May 2004 14) for producing
electricity in today’s stand-alone systems, they are sometimes worthwhile if the
procurement of fuel is difficult or is not dependable.
12
C.J & Bower J, ”An Economic Evaluation of Small-scale Distributed Electricity Generation”, Oxford Institute of Energy
Studies, 2003
13
German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU), “Renewable Energies,
Innovation for the Future”, May 2004
14
www.fxtop.com
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 186 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
Not to be underestimated are, additionally, the positive effects of avoiding fire and
health hazards associated with the combustion of kerosene, diesel and paraffin in
developing countries. A holistic assessment of renewable energy stand-alone systems
compared with conventional techniques or grid connection must therefore include
ecological and socio-economical criteria along with purely economic aspects.”
Some key factors identified in the publication for the successful implementation of stand-alone
hybrid systems are;
“For the long-term success in developing countries,
• an infrastructure has to be set-up for repairs,
• training of craftsmen and spare parts logistics.
• Many projects from the past have shown that for successful implementation, it is
absolutely necessary to consider the individual socio-economic conditions at the
location.
• Financing models also play a large role, because the people are generally not in
a position to finance in advance projects.”
3.2.1. Control and Communication
The publication further emphasises the need for control and communication mechanisms thus;
“The needs for control and communication increase with the increasing complexity of a
stand-alone system. Communication between the individual system components is
necessary o keep the system stable to minimise operating costs and to assure supply
reliability. Feedback from the consumer to the higher-level control system (load
management system) must be possible. E.g. to block or shed load of individual
consumers. However, none of the systems on the market at the present time has
become the established standard.”
Although this statement is partially true, the increasing utilisation of various geyser control system
in South Africa offers possibilities of these systems being modified to suit the needs of s
sophisticated control algorithm for hybrid systems.
Potential candidates for this type of application include ripple control systems, where a tone is
injected in to the mains reticulation system, and decoded at the consumer’s premises by a special
receiver that filters out the 50 hz mains voltage and extracts the injected signal. A potential
shortcoming of these type of systems is the high cost of the injection equipment at the main
substation or, in the case of a hybrid system, at the centralised control room. Typical figures
published by Eskom DSM show that for say 300 households, such systems could cost in the region
of R 5, 000 to R8000 per household.
Another good candidate technology is based on radio receivers, where the control signal is
broadcast wirelessly to individual receivers at each household or consumer premises. These types
of systems can cost between R2000 to R3000 per household to implement. The drawback to these
radio based systems could be that some rural areas could be potentially hilly, making it difficult to
achieve the necessary radio coverage for the transmitter, necessitating additional infrastructure to
overcome this natural challenge.
3.3.
Theoretical Modelling of Hybrid Systems
Inn order to accurately cost the implementation of hybrid systems, it is important to model the
theoretical behaviour of the system, and thus be able to optimise the different components in terms
of size and rating of the individual components, based on the availability of each renewable energy
resource. Various tools are available widely to create such models, the most predominantly utilised
globally being the following:
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 187 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
•
•
•
DME New and Renewable Energy
HOMER
Village Power
HYBRID2
3.3.1. HOMER 15
This section describes the application of Homer for modelling hybrid stand-alone systems.
The Homer Micropower Optimisation Model is a computer model developed by the US National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to assist in the design of micropower systems to facilitate
the comparison of power generation technologies across a wide range of applications. Homer
models a power system's physical behaviour and its life-cycle cost, which is the total cost of
installing and operating the system over its lifetime. Homer can model grid-connected and off-grid
micropower systems serving thermal loads, and comprising any combination of photovoltaic (PV)
modules, wind turbines, small hydro, biomass power, diesel generators, micro turbines, fuel cells,
batteries, and hydrogen storage. The software performs three principal tasks: simulation,
optimisation, and sensitivity analysis. In the simulation process, the software models the
performance of a particular configuration of micropower system each hour of the year to determine
its technical feasibility and life-cycle cost. In the optimisation process, the software simulates many
different system configurations in search of the one that satisfies the technical constraints at the
lowest life-cycle cost. In the sensitivity analysis process, the software performs multiple
optimisations under a range of input assumptions to determine the effects on uncertainty of
changes in the model inputs.
Homer's simulation model is less detailed when compared to the Hybrid 2. This is to limit input
complexity and permit fast enough computation to make optimisation and sensitivity analysis
practical.
3.3.2. Hybrid2 16
This section describes the application of the Hybrid2 software package in the simulation of standalone hybrid systems.
For system sizing, including energy storage requirements a number of software packages could be
used such as Hybrid 2 and Homer. The Hybrid2 simulation software helps with a long-term
prediction of hybrid power system performance. The Hybrid2 simulation model is based on
"logistic" model. It is used primarily for long-term performance predictions and for providing input to
economic analysis. It uses statistical analysis to more accurately model what occurs during a given
time step. The Hybrid 2 code can model system with time series input data of any length but a time
series of 5min to 2 hours are recommended. Hybrid 2 is a combined probalistic/time series model
designed to study a wide variety of hybrid power system. Hybrid 2 can model different types of
systems including one or more diesel generators of different type (up to 7), up to 1000 wind turbine
of 10 different types, storage batteries, four types of power conversion, dump load, photovoltaic,
and three types of consumers loads on each bus."
3.4.
Field Performance of Hybrid Power Systems 17
This paper, by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, was prepared in response to a
realisation that there is lack of high-quality, well documented information allowing a clear
understanding of the true performance and costs of hybrid renewable energy systems.
Furthermore, the abstract highlights the discrepancy that generally occurs between the theoretical
15
NREL. Online. Available from http://www.rsvp.nrel.gov/pdfs/Briefs_2000/homer.pdf. - Access - May 2006
National
Renewable
Energy
Laboratory.,”Hybrid2
software
Manual”
Available
from
http://www.ceere.org/rerl/Projects/software/hybrid2/Hy2_users-manual.pdfs
17
Baring-Gould E.I, Nwecomb C., Corbus D., Kalidas R., “Field Performance of Hybrid Power Systems”, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory
16
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 188 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
power production of wind turbine systems and the actual achieved values, which canbe a little as
25% of the expected output.
Although the paper is developed based on the performance of DC-based systems, i.e power
sources feeding onto a common DC bus, the same issues are applicable to AC bus systems.
Data was collected from 18 hybrid systems, over geographically dispersed areas, ranging from
Mexico, Chile, Russia, Brazil, Ghana and the United States of America.
On page three of the document, a basic hynrid system conssting of a wind turbine, solar PV array
and fossil-fuel generator set is presented, as depicted below.
The data acquisition systems at each site capture the following parameters;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Wind Speed and direction
Current drawn from wind turbines
Current to the battery bank
Current to the Inverter
DC Bus Voltage
AC Bus voltage
AC Active and reactive power
The paper highlights two energy concepts, with regard to hybrid systems namely;
Spilled energy
This is condition that occurs when the battery storage is full, and the load is less than the power
output of the system.
“renewable / battery capacity ratio”
This describes the renewable energy production capacity of the system as a ratio of battery
storage capacity. The importance of this parameter is explained thus;
“The value is also important as it indicates the amount of time that it will take to charge
the battery bank using renewable resources”.
One example cited has a battery capacity of 50.4 kWh and a wind turbine rated at 7 kW, thus the
ratio is 13.89%. Thus it would take 3.6 hours to charge the battery bank from a 50% discharge
state, which would be a typical setpoint for the battery charge regulator.
System Control
One principle highlighted in the paper is the recommended algorithm for system control that
prioritises the usage of the renewable energy whenever these are available. It highlights the
potential for high system losses that are caused by poor control and dispatch algorithms.
Possible Solutions
The authors propose the following as possible solutions to optimise hybrid systems in general;
“Improved use of discretionary loads so that any excess energy can be utilised instead
of spilled. Examples would be water pumping, water purification, heating, ice making
and battery charging.
“Carefully considered renewable production/battery capacity ratios to ensure that
system designs fit more closely with projected weather patterns for the area”.
Improved battery selection, to ensure that batteries used and their capacities are
capable of providing the required voltage regulation. For example, batteries with high
internal resistances will have higher voltage variations when undergoing charge and
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 189 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
thus will result in higher losses and more time spent at or above the wind turbine
regulation voltage.
Improved system control through better automation, supervisory control and operator
education to reduce the losses associated with poor control of the diesel generator.”
3.5.
Lessons Learnt – Hybrid Systems Workshop 18
This workshop, held in September 2001 in Montral, Canada, was organised with the intention of
sharing information on experiences and R&D trends and needs from over 70 experts around the
world.
One concept introduced in the workshop is that of a RESCO, or Renewable Energy Services
Company. The importance of these RESCOs is emphasised as a means of leveraging the private
sector in the development of isolated renewable energy systems. In South Africa, this development
is only commencing at present with a rapidly developing Energy Services Company (ESCO)
industry, with organisations focusing broadly in energy efficiency and Demand-Side Management
(DSM) initiatives.
Some key issues arising out of the various sessions that are possibly applicable to the Lucingweni
and Hluleka developments are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lack of reliability is very expensive (repairs, visits to sites).
Components are usually reliable; however their integration is a frequent source of failure.
Overestimation of expected energy output in the past has often resulted in lack of credibility
for hybrid systems.
Inhabitants of powered communities will always find new ways to consume power. Systems
must be planned in order to restrain the load increase or to allow easy and sustainable
expansion.
Agreement must be reached in advance in order that the users are aware of the energy
limitations and of the need for efficient appliances.
Local management (co-op or RESCO) and operator is one of the keys to success.
In order for the benefits of a centralised hybrid system to be realised, without the possible
problems of abuse of energy load and inefficient appliances, it is important to have an
adequate energy distribution and energy management scheme is place. This can be
achieved through the agreed participation of users and a technical compoinent in the form
of an “energy dispenser/meter” that facilitates and controls the load behaviour of users.
Users ‘contract’ for a certain amount of power and energy per month and the system is
designed and operated around the community profile. Proper training and communication
of system capacities and limitations become a key component of project planning and
system management.
The shift from pilot to commercial system is not easy.
Technology is less of a problem than the ‘human’ factors’ of management, financing,
training etc.
RESCOs may be a key instrument to implement RE hybrid systems.
Robustness is often better than high efficiency.
Standards
The need for standards was highlighted, particularly to provide confidence to users that the
covered products have been tested and they are expected to perform according to specifications.
One may add to the above statement that in order to also increase investor confidence, it would be
important to have these standards in place, to enable a detailed yet accurate risk assessment for
investors. In the event that investors cannot undertake these risk analyses, it is highly unlikely that
18
Turcotte D, Sheriff F, Pneumaticos S, “PV Horizon – Workshop on Photovoltaic Hybrid System – Summary and
Conclusions of the Workshop”, CANMET 2001
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 190 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
they would be willing to invest in renewable hybrid projects, or that the risk premium would become
prohibitively high.
The participants agreed that priority should be given to component standards since systems can
benefit more from a performance assessment guideline.
There was also agreement for the need for performance standards and guidelines on how to
maintain and operate batteries.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 191 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
4. Funding hybrid systems utilising renewable energy sources
4.1.
DBSA (1999). Renewable Energy Technologies in Southern Africa – A guide for
investors.
This report, prepared by the DBSA, was the outcome of a project titled “Assessing the integrated regional
market potential for the widespread introduction and application of appropriate renewable energy
technologies within SADC”. The objective of the report is to enable investors to make informed decisions
about the renewable energy market in Southern Africa.
It highlights the fact that in developed countries, the key driver behind the penetration of renewable energy
technologies is the mitigation of environmental impacts, whereas in developing communities the drivers are
the provision of basic services, including health, water, education, and to stimulate economic growth within
these typically rural settings.
The report indicates that South Africa has a strong potential for market growth in solar electrical generation,
solar water heating and cooking, small hydro, biomass generation, and to a lesser extent small wind and grid
connected wind generation.
The identified barriers to the development of the renewable energy markets are;
•
•
•
•
•
•
Slow pace of power sector liberalisation and privatisation
Lack of regional standards
Low levels of industrial development
Donor influenced market
No renewable energy technology investment framework
The general utility view of renewable technologies as second rate and pre-electrification
applications
Other perceived barriers, such as the absence of generous tax incentives
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 192 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
5. An international perspective
5.1.
Isla Tec Project
The evaluation of a wind diesel hybrid system in Isla Tac Island in Chile after a year of operation
produced interesting results. The system was initiated under a cooperative agreement between the
US Department of Energy and the Chilean National Energy Commission (CNE) under overall
direction of the Chilean Rural Electrification Programme, as a pilot project to evaluate operational
performance and social benefits of a prototype wind diesel hybrid power system in Chile’s Region
de Los Lagos. When the operational performance of the system was compared to original
computer model simulation, using Homer and Hybrid2 software models, the amount of energy
generated was 54kWh/day compared to a simulated value of 47kWh/day: apparent power was
89.4kVA/day compared to 55.4 kVA/day which shows a low power factor. Yearly energy generation
was 19 710 kWh compared to a simulated value of 17 000kWh; diesel fuel consumption was 5 300
litres compared to simulated value of 3 128 litres; diesel generator operating hours was 2820 hours
compared to simulated hours of 818; maximum demand was 7.4 kW compared to simulated peak
demand of 7.5kW; the actual end-users were 82 compared to a simulated value of 59. In general it
is thought the system has operated well, but due to distribution losses and low power factor
conditions, the users had received less power and the hybrid system has consumed more diesel
and hours than originally simulated.
However, a number of issues were identified for the project or any future remote power supply
implementation such as meeting extra/deferrable productive loads with extra power especially from
wind turbines. Examples of these loads are water pumping, ice making and communal refrigeration
systems. A proper tariff structure should be utilised so that incremental production capacity could
be added to meet rising energy demand. With regard to cost information, it is important to
understand the cost associated with the installation, operation and maintenance of these systems
so that an accurate assessment can be made of these systems in comparison to other alternatives.
5.2.
Gobabeb Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Project 19
This web site provides detailed information on the Gobabeb hybrid mini-grid power supply system.
The site integrates a number of different energy sources to achieve energy supply for lighting,
cooling, cooking, computers and information technology, water heating. The system uses PV
panels, diesel gensets, as well as passive cooling, LPG (for cooking) and solar water heating.
Particular emphasis is placed on energy efficiency, energy management, energy awareness and
revenue collection. The project has a dual tariff system, with specific categories of users benefiting
from the initial grant funding of the capital costs (residents and SADC researchers), while
researchers and private company visitors pay a tariff that also would help cover the initial capital
investment. The emphasis placed on user awareness, as well as up front establishment of an
ongoing financial management system for the project is particularly relevant for the Lucingweni and
Hluleka projects.
5.3.
Australian experience
Australia has a well-developed stand-alone, renewable energy system industry, driven by the vast
areas, relatively sparse population and remoteness from the main grid of settlements.
According to one publication, the state of the Aistralian RAPS industry is described thus 20:
“In Australia stand-alone and hybrid power systems are used widely in remote areas to
provide power for following situations: Small holiday homes and shacks, Boats and
recreational vehicles, small rural farms (single homes), large station homesteads (with
19
20
Source: http://www.drfn.org.na/degreee/
www.rise.org, “Stand-Alone Power Supply Systems”, accessed 20 September 2006
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 193 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
multiple residences), remote aboriginal communities, small mining operations, and
various telecommunications applications. The total number of systems in Australia is
not accurately known but it has been estimated as being in excess of 10,000 systems”.
The information portal amongst a number of issues raised, indicated the standards available in
Australia and also the accreditation of installers as follows:
“In Australia, accredited suppliers and installers use Australian Standards for design
and installation of systems. This accreditation of installers is performed by the
Australian Business Council for Sustainable Energy. They provide an updated list of
installers on their website. The design and installation of all SPS systems in Australia
should always be performed in accordance with the Australian Standards:
• AS 4509
Stand-alone Power Systems Parts 1, 2 and 3.
• AS 4086.2
Secondary batteries for use with SPS - installation and
maintenance.
• AS 5033
Installation of photovoltaic (PV) arrays.
• AS 2676
Guide to installation, maintenance … of secondary batteries in
buildings.
• AS 3011
Electrical installations - Secondary batteries installed in
buildings (LV batteries).
• AS 3010
Electrical installations – Supply by generating set.”
Some prgrammes that have been initiated by the Australian Government in support of renewable
systems are cited thus 21;
5.3.1. Australian National Programme
“The Australian Government has initiated a number of measures over recent years to
support renewable energy in general and, in some cases, PV in particular. These
include:
•
•
Mandatory renewable energy target - this target seeks to increase the
contribution of renewable energy sources in Australia's electricity mix by 9 500
GWh per year by 2010, with that target continuing until 2020. Since 1 April
2001, electricity retailers and large energy users (known as liable parties) must
purchase increasing amounts of electricity from renewable sources. A trade in
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and financial penalties for noncompliance are features of this scheme.
Renewable Opportunities- A Review of the Operation of the Renewable Energy
(Electricity) Act 2000 - was published in January 2004. With respect to PV, the
recommendations of the review that have been supported by the Government
during 2004 include: extending the deeming provisions for small PV systems
from 5 to 15 years and increasing the deeming threshold from 10 to 100 kW.
These changed provisions are expected to pass through Parliament in early
2005. This could equate to an effective 5-10% reduction in the system price
based on current RECs value, since deemed systems can claim their RECs
when installed, rather than on the basis of actual annual output.”
“Supporting the use of renewable energy for remote power generation (RRPGP) - this
programme commenced in 2000 and is expected to make available around 200 million
Australian dollars over nine years for the conversion of remote area power supplies
(including public generators and mini-grids) from diesel to renewable energy sources,
and for new renewable installations that would otherwise have been fueled by diesel.
The RRPGP provides up to 50 % of the capital value of the replacement or new
21
www.oja-services.nl, Watt, M, “Australia - Photovoltaic technology status and prospects”, Centre for PV
engineering, University of New South Wales, 2005
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 194 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
renewable generation for off-grid users of diesel-based power systems. Recent
changes to the terms of the grants mean that from 2005 fringe-of-grid will also fall
under RRPGP, grants will now be available for other fossil-fuel replacement (not just
diesel), and that energy efficiency and solar water heaters will also qualify. The
programme is administered by and is different in each State and Territory: Western
Australia's Remote Area Power Supply (RAPS) sub-programme, targeting indigenous
communities, isolated households and commercial operations such as pastoral
properties and tourist and mining operations; Western Australia's Renewable Energy
Water Pumping (REWP) sub-programme; Northern Territory's Renewable Energy
Rebate Programme (RERP), targeting small and large communities, households,
commercial and industrial operations; Queensland's Working Property Rebate Scheme
(WPRS) targeting family owned working properties; Queensland's Renewable Energy
Diesel Replacement Scheme (REDRS) targeting indigenous communities, households
and businesses; Tasmania's Residential Remote Area Power Supply Sub-programme
and RRPGP subprogrammes in NSW and South Australia. Bushlight (Indigenous
Renewable Energy Services Project) is a national sub-programme which aims to both
increase industry capacity to service indigenous communities and to build greater
understanding of renewable energy issues within communities, and RESLab is a
renewable energy systems test centre, also supported under industry support
components of the RRPGP.”
“Commercialization of renewable energy technologies - 100 million Australian dollars
have been allocated over seven years to promote strategic development of renewable
energy technologies, systems and processes that have commercial potential. A further
20 million Australian dollars will be provided to support development of advanced
electricity storage technologies, including batteries, electro-mechanical and chemical
storage”.
The are other numerous initiatives cited in the publication, however the above are the
most relevant in the Hluleka and Lucingweni context.
5.4.
Chinese initiatives 22
According to this study the experience in the Peoples Republic of China indicates that the villagesize wind/diesel, wind/PV off-grid hybrid generation systems require a large initial investment,
which results in the high cost of energy. It showed that households with an annual income of $2
500.00 are able to afford such systems. The paper further argues that, although generous
Government subsidies are helpful to promote the dissemination of systems, there is still a need to
demonstrate to the industry and the public of the potential viability, profitability and sustainability of
the hybrid technology market. To explore the full potential of hybrid systems, the technology needs
to be demonstrated as a commercially viable, low risk technology, and made acceptable to the
public. The paper argues for more pilot projects that will play an increasingly important role in the
successful development, the diffusion of information and acceptance of the systems.
5.5.
Experience in Africa
5.5.1. Namibia A report produced by Roerden 23 for the German international technical assistance organisation,
GTZ, provides an overview of key technology issues for mini-grids. It reports in some detail on
mini-grid implementations in Senegal, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Spain and Germany – and draws
important lessons from these. The report then goes on to discuss new advances in technology (as
at 2000), and then considers key criteria for mini-grid implementation in Namibia. Given the many
22
Wenqiang L., Shuhua G. and Daxiong Q., “Techno-Economic Assessment for Off-grid Hybrid Generation System and
the Application Prospects in China”. www.worldenergycouncil.org
23
Roerden, C (2000), Off-Grid Electrification for Namibian Villages: Photovoltaic Hybrid Systems to supply Mini Grids”,
Prepared for GTZ
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 195 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
similarities between mini-grid implementation in South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Senegal,
several of the key findings are directly relevant. In particular:
• Costs – investors found the costs high, although users were generally satisfied (but did not
necessarily have to pay investment costs)
• For long term sustainability, the suggestion is to avoid diesel if possible (maintenance)
• Energy demand informs mini-grid/vs stand alone SHS choice (if less than 0.5 kWh/day use
SHS instead of mini-grid) (Note from reviewer- this is a rule of thumb only, and will depend
on circumstances)
• Village structure- not too dispersed for mini-grid.
• Local opinion: need to know how much people are willing to pay.
• Roerden suggests for proper sense of ‘local ownership tariffs should cover operational
costs plus at least 20% of capital over time
“The most important factor for successful implementation is a supportive, positive attitude by the rural
electrification officials. Convinced champions, who are in a position of authority keep up the momentum
during the extended process of resource assessment, site selection, project design, implementation,
evaluation and replication.”
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 196 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6. South African experience
6.1.
Legislative Framework
6.1.1. White Paper on Energy. 1998
In the South African white paper on energy of 1998, the following excepts give clear guidance and
direction on the usage of alternative means of achieving the energisation of rural communities. In
particular, the vision of the South African Government in the White Paper on Renewable Energy,
November 2003, is to have "an energy economy in which modern renewable energy increase its
share of energy consumed and provides affordable access to energy throughout South Africa, thus
contributing to sustainable development and environmental conservation.” According to the White
Paper, the government has set the target of 10 000 GWh (0.8 Mtoe) of renewable contribution to
final energy consumption by 2013, to be produced mainly from biomass, wind, solar and smallscale hydro. The renewable energy is to be utilized for power generation and non-electric
technologies such as solar water heating and bio-fuels. This is approximately 4% (1667 Mw) of
estimated electricity demand (41539 MW) by 2013.
6.1.2. NERSA, Regulatory Framework for non-grid electrification in the Republic of South
Africa, 2000
The framework was developed in response to the mandate by the Minister of Minerals and Energy,
for the regulation of the implementation of non-grid electrification.
The framework envisages a subsidy regime that would cover 80% of the capital costs of the nongrid systems, with the balance recovered through some form of payback mechanism, including
appropriate tariffs.
The framework envisages that the implementation will be via the granting of concessions to the
private sector for the provision of the energy services.
One of the identified key success factors of the non-grid energisation is economic development of
the target areas, and thus the achievement of financial independence and social equity gained by
these rural communities.
6.1.3. DME, INEP, Planning & Implementation Manual Version 0, 2002
In the Integrated National Electrification Programme, the National Government electrification
strategy is..."to provide for the full integration of the grid and non-grid technologies into a single
electrification programme, as complementary supply options to reach universal access to basic
households electricity services. "The government recognizes that a pure approach to electrification
targets falls short of socio-economic development dimensions of the target communities. The
integrated approach is aimed at the promotion of socio-economic development of previously
disadvantaged communities through household and institutional electrification and electrification of
associated community value-added facilities, as well as Black Economic Empowerment at all levels
of the electrification industry. On the non-grid electrification, the INEP states "in the remote areas,
where the lowest capacity grid system cannot be supplied within the capital expenditure limit, this
system will provide a natural opportunity for Remote Area Power Supply (RAPS) to be supplied".
Thus Annual connection targets, and related subsidies, will be allocated for non-grid electrification
in accordance with the National Electrification Strategy".
The role of the National Government in accordance with the White Paper for Energy, is to assume
political and financial responsibility for the New National Electrification Programme stated thus:
“Government will co-ordinate the electrification programme, including the setting of
realistic electrification, ensuring allocation and management of funds financing and
subsidization of electrification projects and determination of appropriate mix between
grid and off-grid technologies”.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 197 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6.1.4. Speech by the Minister of Minerals and Energy - 2002
In the year 2002, the then Minister of Minerals and Energy, the Honourable Phumzile Mlambo
Nqcuka, in her speech to parliament, stated the following;
The Integrated National Electrification Programme (INEP)
“This programme remains the flagship of the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) as it
constitutes our main vehicle for the delivery of better life to all. Accordingly, the total number of
connections for 2001 were 336 858, of which 141 707 were installed in rural areas, and 195 191 in
urban areas.
The electrification Programme has been delivering above target. In 2001/2002, there were 336,858
connections as against the 300,000 target. Real costs per connection are also coming down at a
rate of about two and a half percent per annum. Many thanks to Eskom, our Implementing Agency.
During 2002/2003, a further 300 000 households, 700 schools, and 100 clinics will be electrified.
This will be done at a cost of R950 million during 2002/2003 financial year with more emphasis
placed on integration with other infrastructure and service providers.”
Rural Electrification and Non-Grid Electrification
“The Integrated National Electrification Programme is inclusive of Grid and Non-Grid energy. This
ensures that Non-Grid customers, who are generally poor and rural, are secured and catered for. A
total of 34 per cent remains un-energized in the whole of South Africa.
Rural areas are particularly costly and difficult to electrify due to large distances from the national
grid, low densities and small settlements. We will need, Honourable members, to take a keen
interest to ensure public co-operation and understanding.
The NER has been working on regulations that will ensure that non-grid concessionaires are to be
regulated in such a way that they provide a comprehensive service, which is linked to the local
economic needs of the non-grid communities. Non-grid providers cannot be satisfied with only
providing lights and cooking. We need to power economic infrastructure in the first instance.”
Mini Grid Hybrid Systems
“During 2001 we did a pilot for the Hluleka Nature Reserve in the Eastern Cape Province. An
integrated approach resulted in the design consisting of an energy system, a water purification
system and a telecommunications system. The energy system will make use of renewable energy
solar, water heaters and liquid petroleum gas. This combination of energy carriers will result in
increased energy efficiency.
Two villages adjacent to Hluleka Nature Reserve have been identified as sites for pilot hybrid minigrid systems. Emphasis has been placed on linking these mini grids to new economic activities in
collaboration with the Agricultural Research Council (ARC). High value crops have been planted in
a number of demonstration plants.
This is what we expect from our non-grid operators in the whole country overtime.
Theft and crime threaten electrification and safety.
Rural electrification efforts are undermined by vandalism and theft especially that of solar panels.
Parents and Community policing forums, especially in the rural areas, must look to their
responsibilities and deal firmly with these mindless vandals. MPs also please stimulate efforts in
your constituencies. Such actions are making the cost of Solar Home Systems prohibitively
expensive as theft proof gadgets have to be added. We also need your help to ensure that such
vandals will face the full might of the law.”
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 198 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6.1.5. Electricity Regulation Act - 2006
The Bill, as introduced in 2005 and subsequently enacted as an Act of Parliament (Electricity Regulation Act
4 of 2006) states that the Minister may, in consultation with the National Energy Regulator, determine the
types of energy sources from which electricity must be generated, and the percentages of electricity that
must be generated from such sources (s 46(1)(b)), determine that electricity thus produced may only be sold
to the persons or in the manner set out in such notice (s 46(1)(c)), and determine that electricity thus
produced must be purchased by the persons set out in such notice (s 46(1)(d)). The Regulator, in issuing a
generation licence, is bound by any such ministerial determination (s 46(3)(a)), and may facilitate the
conclusion of an agreement to buy and sell power between the generator and the purchaser of that electricity
(s 46(3)(b)). The Act also states that the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, make regulations regarding
the types of energy sources from which electricity must be generated (s 47(4)(n)), and the percentages of
electricity that must be generated from different energy sources (s 47(4)(o)).
6.2.
Feasibility Studies and Pilot Projects
6.2.1. Kwa-Zulu Natal Feasibility Study
The Nuon-RAPS Utility undertook a feasibility study, funded by the National Electricity Regulator,
for the implementation of a mini-grid within their northern KwaZulu-Natal ‘concession’. The report
documents these findings including preliminary activities such as site identification through to the
technology selection, design and costing. Various operational scenarios are presented, including
full household reticulation as well as a more simple spinal installation servicing commercial and
institutional users with the mini-grid, households to be served by ‘Solar Home Systems’. While a
range of technologies and energy sources were reviewed, photovoltaic and diesel generators
proved the most technologically appropriate and cost effective. The feasibility study shows that
decisions around service levels and technology selections are particularly important in the overall
conceptualisation and design of a mini-grid. While the rationale behind the project was to
determine the feasibility of a mini-grid within northern KwaZulu-Natal, the overarching goal was to
contribute towards the piloting of the concept within the national framework for providing improved
energy services to remote rural communities within South Africa.
The settlement of Mduda was identified as potential site for a mini-grid installation in Northern
KwaZulu Natal. The community is reasonably far from existing grid lines and there are no plans
that NuRa was able to obtain indicating that it is scheduled for grid electrification. There are three
main settlement areas, with about 200 households, two schools, water pumps and 13 identified
businesses. Two of the communities are close enough to connect to a single mini-grid, are
adjacent to the institutions and include most of the businesses. Design attention was focussed on
these 120 households, as being the most feasible. A socio-economic survey indicated significant
reliance on fuel wood for thermal energy. Candles, paraffin and dry cell batteries are widely used
for lighting. Lead-acid batteries are used by 31% of the community. The current expenditure on
energy that could be displaced through the provision of an electricity service (such as mini-grid) is
of the order of R50 / month.
A review of tariff options, and consideration of displaceable income, suggest that sufficient revenue
can be earned from the consumer base to cover operational costs, but not capital expenditure.
Several ownership models were reviewed, and workable options have been found. It was
recommended that the system be owned, managed, and that revenue collection be undertaken by
a utility (such as Nuon RAPS). Alternative ownership structures were also reviewed, and, subject
to the clients’ wishes, and successful negotiation with the parties, these could be used. Several
risks to project viability have been identified. These were listed and mitigation strategies offered.
Viability of the project, and the development impact are dependent in part on two important
adjuncts to the mini-grid electrification project. Firstly, the water reticulation system in the
community should be improved, and the mini-grid used to power the water pumps. Preliminary
costing indicated that this could be achieved at a cost of R850 000. Secondly, income generation
opportunities in the community need to be created, through the productive use of energy. Business
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 199 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
concepts have been developed, and preliminary costs for a comprehensive productive use support
programme were of the order of R300 000.
The concept of ‘micro-grids’ was also explored during this project. Although several potential sites
were identified that already have micro-grids (powered by diesel or petrol generators), these were
found to be primarily ‘single client’ situations. The site with the most potential for an upgrade is
kwaDapha Community Campsite. Conceptual work was undertaken regarding the micro-site
concept, but the development of a full feasibility study was not undertaken, given concerns
regarding low probability of implementation, and the fact that it would not electrify a significant
number of households.
The feasibility study found that implementation of a mini-grid at Mduda is possible, although
relatively expensive (on a per household basis). The authors recommend that the detailed findings
of this study be carefully reviewed by the NER and the Department of Minerals and Energy (the
prime funder of the programme). Key decisions required were identified, and recommendations
listed. These include: Technology choice, scope of mini-grid reticulation, ownership, hosting of
revenue collection and maintenance management functions, management of maintenance fund.
The final section of the report presents more generic ‘lessons learned’ that will assist future minigrid project development. Perhaps the most important general finding is that in the South African
context – where there is a strong, widely dispersed grid, it is very difficult to find ‘good’ sites for
mini-grid implementation. Most villages that are large enough, and have households located close
enough together to make a mini-grid worthwhile (compared to stand-alone off-grid electrification
options) are very likely to be connected to the national grid in the near future.
6.2.2. Non-grid Electrification of Schools and Clinics - Strategy to Address Theft and
Vandalism and Lack of Maintenance”, DME Report 2002
This report investigates major causes of vandalism, theft and lack of maintenance on non-grid
electrification of schools and clinics and the findings of the investigation indicated the following;
• Lack of ownership of the system by the community
• Poor security at schools
• No identifiable marking on the system
• Non involvement of the community in the planning and implementation
• Non-functioning of the system “white elephants” due to poor installation or lack of
maintenance
• Lack of awareness on the use of the system
• Poor management of schools
The study highlighted internationally accepted best practices by which to benchmark the local
systems as follows;
Financial indicators
• Beneficiaries pay for the operation, maintenance, and management costs associated with
the services
• Socio-economic Indicators
• Involvement of the community goes beyond few meetings and workshops
• Guidance and training is essential during the empowerment process
• Address both community wide as well as household needs security
• Security is a social issue. there is greater respect for private rather than community access
• Culture of community action on reporting
• Better police and community relationship
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 200 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
6.2.3. Renewable energy sources for rural electrification in South Africa
The objectives of this study are presented thus;
24
“The emphasis is on the identification of commercially exploitable opportunities in areas
with no prospect of grid electrification in the next five or more years. Electrification is
not viewed as an end in itself, but as a means to local economic development through
the establishment of new businesses and enterprises. The scale of generation and
demand envisaged ranges from about 10 kW to 10 MW, and local distribution networks
will be required in all cases modelled. Domestic electrification, though not the highest
priority of this project, would be a welcome spin-off from new local economic activity.”
The study boundaries were limited to the Eastern Cape Province, based on the fact that it had the
highest proportion of un-electrified households compared to other provinces.
From an initial screening of the potential areas within the Province itself, based on the criteria that
the area was presently un-electrified, was over 10 km away from the grid, and there were no plans
to electrify within a 5 to 10 year timeframe, it became apparent that the only eligible areas for
consideration were in the previous “Transkei” boundaries.
The estimated electricity consumption per household in these areas is estimated to be 50 kWh per
month, increasing at an annual rate of 14% to an ultimate 20 year peak figure of 220 kWh per
month.
The study further identifies various economic activities which could potentially be stimulated by the
availability of electrical power as being the following;
• Agriculture
• Forestry
• Tourism
“The above economic activities have a high potential in terms of available natural
resources but this potential has not yet been realised because of unavailability of
electricity (and probably poor infrastructure in general)”.
Thus the availability of power is identified as a necessary, but not in itself a sufficient condition to
stimulate the growth of these industries.
The Ngqeleni magisterial district, within which the village of Lucingweni and the Hluleka nature
resort are located, is identified as having the second largest potential for energy consumption
within the agricultural sector, second only to the Lusikisiki magisterial district.
This would seem to suggest that any planning of the implementation of energy systems must at the
onset incorporate agricultural activities as part of the demand forecast, in order to improve the
ultimate financial viability of the development.
6.2.4. Accelerating the Market Penetration of Renewable Energy Technologies in South
Africa 25
This study, conducted under the auspices of the European Commission Synergy Programme
project titled “Strategy to accelerate the market penetration of Renewable technologies in South
Africa, was undertaken between December 1999 and March 2001.
The objective of the study, as stated in the report, is:
24
Garrad Hassan and Partners Limited, “Renewable energy sources for rural electrification in South Africa”, 1999
25
Martins, De Lange, Cloin, Szewczuk, Morris, Zak “Accelerating the Market Penetration of Renewable Energy
Technologies in South Afric, 2001
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 201 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
“to develop a strategy to accelerate the market penetration of renewable energy
technologies in South Africa, taking into account the lessons learnt by EU Member
States”.
Specifically, the report was commissioned to develop strategies aimed at overcoming the barriers
to the widespread implementation of renewable energy systems in South Africa, identified in the
Garrad Hanson report, summarise in section Appendix D.
The study recommends the following actions towards the achievement of accelerating renewable
energy technologies thus;
• Development of a 200 MW set-aside programme
• Develop and implement power purchase regulation
• Capacity Building
Other policy related actions
• Disseminate successes and failures
• Integrated resource planning
• Improve tariff structure
• Apply innovative financing
• Use green power marketing
Actions to enhance the policy framework for off-grid renewable energy
• Government stakeholders should convey the same message
• Raising awareness of end-users on electrification planning, the non-grid rural electrification
programme and renewable energy technologies
• Make electrification planning more transparent
• Integrate energy planning into Integrated Development Planning Process
• Capacity Building to support the implementation of the non-grid electrification programme,
focusing on: improved evaluation and monitoring capacity at DME and NER and technical
and financial assistance for concessionaires
Other relevant actions by stakeholders include;
• Conduct research on the optimal rural energy service structure
• Concessionaires should be responsible for all non-grid energy services in their concession
area
• Special risk mitigation measures for economic activities
• Launch integrated PV follow-up programme
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 202 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
7. Background to the Hluleka project
The first fully functional hybrid mini-grid system in South Africa, was implemented as a pilot project,
in the Eastern Cape, to provide power for the Hluleka Nature Reserve. According to a report
presented by the NER, this system is described thus;
“The Hluleka game reserve power system originally consisted of two 75 kW diesel
generators operating for 10 hours to power lights, stoves, water heaters, refrigerators,
kettles and toasters. The generators consumed 90 000 litres of diesel per year. Water
supply for the camp was pumped directly from the river into the reservoir without any
purification. The reserve has to cope with 90 guests at one time. The NER, CSIR,
DME, Shell Solar and Eastern Cape Provincial Government developed an
implementation plan of a hybrid, stand alone, mini-grid system. The hybrid system
combines different energy resource technologies, such as wind, solar and diesel
generator to produce the most cost effective and efficient system. The integrated
approach resulted in the joint energy system, water purification and telecommunication
system.
The implemented hybrid system consists of 2x2,5 kW Proven wind turbines and 3 Shell
Solar PV module arrays fitted with 56x100W modules wired in series. A single diesel
genset was retained as a back-up for emergency. Lead acid batteries are used for
energy storage. The power is distributed via a three phase 400 / 230V reticulation
system so as to make use of the existing distribution equipment. The system is
designed to carry the camp load as well as the pumping and purification plant. A GSM
monitoring system has been installed to provide data and current status of the plant.
Within the guests’ accommodation chalets, various demand reduction measures were
implemented, including the replacement of the electric geysers with 200L Solarbeam
solar water heaters, backed up by Junkers W125-31 instantaneous gas water heaters.
The refrigerators were replaced with 120L high efficiency chest refrigerator/ freezers,
the bath with fitted with showers, the electric stoves were replaced with gas stoves and
tungsten filament lamps replaced with 9W compact fluorescent lamps. The linear
fluorescent tube fittings were also fitted with electronic ballasts to improve their
efficiency.
During the on-going monitoring of the project, it was realised that more guests than the
90 capacity of the resort were being allowed into the camp at one time, and furthermore
to enter the camp with portable swimming pools, large freezers, fridges etc. This led to
a system failure due to the complete draining of batteries and over-current on the
inverters. Total failure of the 3 inverters occurred and these had to be replaced in
December 2003.”
Cost
The total cost to implement the Hluleka project was ZAR 2 330 854.91
A more detailed analysis of the Hluleka system is undertaken as part of this project, and forms a
central point form which various lessons and recommendations for future systems are derived.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 203 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
8. Background to the Lucingweni system
Subsequent to the implementation of the Hluleka system, Shell Solar South Africa were given a
further mandate to identify potential sites in the Mdikane / Hluleka area, to implement pilot projects
to test the potential for mini-grid community power supply, as a means of energising rural
communities. The foreseen process after completion of the installation was to hand over the
system to the Client, the NER. They in turn would then hand the system over to the OR Tambo
district municipality, who would then operate and maintain the system.
Previous energy supply
It is not explicit what the community’s previous energy sources were, however from a site visit
conducted at Lucingweni, it was indicated that this was primarily wood and paraffin.
Hybrid System
The system installed consists of the following components;
•
•
6 x 6 kW Proven wind turbines
Solar panel array, grouped as follows;
Number
102
136
136
136
Wp / panel
105
105
105
105
TOTAL
kWp / group
10.71
14.28
14.28
14.28
53.55
The generated DC power is converted into AC via a 100 kW inverter, which then feeds into a 3phase reticulation network, in parallel with the wind turbines. This is further detailed in the main
body of this report.
A more detailed analysis of the Lucingweni system is undertaken as part of this project, including
the analysis of the data collected by the monitoring system and forms a central point form which
various lessons and recommendations for future systems are derived.
Date of commissioning
September 2004
Cost
Total installed cost R9.75 million.
8.1.
NER Progress reports on the Hluleka and Lucingweni implementation plan
This report by the NER project team presents the findings of a visit to the two systems in August
2004. The purpose of the visit was to meet with communities’ governance structures and assess
the work in progress. The findings of the visit were the following:
For the Hluleka Game Reserve Hybrid System, there had been lack of first line and scheduled
maintenance of both the energy system and water purification plant; one solar panel was stolen.
With regard to the Lucingweni system, the community was disappointed about limitations of the
system’s output.
Discussion with Nyandeni Municipality about the payment for the services and Free Basic
Electricity Tariffs subsidy of R40/month was initiated. However, no conclusion was reached.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 204 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
During a brainstorming discussion between SSSA and the project team, the possibility of installing
a communal TV at the community hall with a large screen and video was considered, provided
funds were available. The possibility of communal refrigeration was also discussed. To date none
of these initiatives has been implemented.
With regard to the ownership, service delivery, maintenance and revenue collection arrangements, the
Nyandeni Municipality has not been committal about taking ownership of the system.
8.2.
Afrane-Okese, Y, June 2004. Hluleka/Lucingweni hybrid mini-grid pilot projects
progress report.
This report outlines a field trip to the pilot project sites during June 2004 by the then National
Electricity Regulator, the project manager for the pilot projects. It outlines a meeting with a newly
appointed Hluleka Manager.
Energy service output
The community expressed their disappointment at the energy provision limitation and the need for
integration of thermal energy provision and sufficient energy for productive uses noted.
Service payment
This considers the suggested tariff level of R40/month per household for a limited 950Wh
(approximately 5 times the supply from a SHS). The sufficiency of this tariff for sustainable
operation and maintenance of the system and the willingness and ability of the community to pay
for this service or the municipality to provide it need to be determined.
Time frame and delays
Most of the reasons for the delays are due to the pilot nature of the projects. Others challenges
included, difficulty in sourcing turbines, retention of flexibility in the system monitoring options, a
cholera outbreak, accommodation constraints and finally incompatibilities in terms of software
communication between the local inverters and the software running the imported turbine
regulators.
Ownership, service delivery, maintenance and revenue collection arrangements
To ensure sustainability of the Lucingweni community system after it has been commissioned,
appropriate ownership, service delivery, maintenance and revenue collection arrangements would
have to be put in place. The representatives of the Nyandeni Municipality who attended the
Lucingweni community meeting were non-committal to take up this challenge when they were
asked at the meeting. The reason behind this was probably that of 1) the technical nature of the
system, 2) lack of capacity to deal with the many urban issues they face and also 3) the problem of
accessibility since they are based far away near Umtata with bad road access. It was, however,
impressed upon them that basic services like electricity and water are their responsibility. They
therefore accepted the overall local responsibility of ensuring that these services are delivered but
the actual service delivery, maintenance and revenue collection would have to be outsourced.
The Project Team and Shell Solar subsequently held a meeting with a prominent local
entrepreneur at nearby Mtakakyi who runs many of the local shops in the surrounding community.
This entrepreneur provides pension collection services to the community and therefore the
possibility of this business taking on revenue collection and service delivery was explored. During a
brainstorming session between Shell Solar and the Project Team, it was thought that a few
community members should be trained for first line maintenance but the periodic main
maintenance should be scheduled with a qualified outsourced entity.
To ensure that the Nyandeni Municipality is responsible for service delivery by whoever is
outsourced these tasks, they would have to be offered a basic training on the system maintenance
and operation. Thus, it was recommended and agreed with them that Shell Solar invites them to
the installation of the rest of the equipment and also include them in any training being offered.
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 205 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
These ideas would have to be followed up further and firm agreements would have to be signed
with responsible parties in the end.
For Hluleka, a contract will have to be signed with the management on energy efficiency
management, first line maintenance, periodic major technical maintenance and system
performance monitoring and reporting in exchange for system ownership.
8.2.1. Recent progress
This chapter notes the absence of vandalism and theft in the community system unlike the Hluleka
system which had started to experience theft and vandalism of the solar panels. This suggests
continued community support for the project.
8.2.2. Minor outstanding installation, construction and other issues at Lucingweni
Thermal energy and economic activities
A discussion was held with a prominent community entrepreneur at nearby Mtakakyi to explore
potential economic activities and thermal energy options that could be linked to the projects to
enhance their sustainability.
Concept of communal TV and Refrigeration raised
Technical evaluation and socio-economic impact assessment requirements outlined
Minor concerns emerging out of the field trip were also documented
8.3.
Shell Solar - Internal communication. Lucingweni: Present Situation and Issues. - 23
May 2006
This internal communication, submitted to the Consulting Team, by Shell Solar South Africa
(SSSA), highlights the challenges faced by SSSA during the implementation of the Lucingweni
hybrid mini-grid system.
Shell Solar Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd – (SSSA), under contractual agreement with the
National Electricity Regulator (NER), undertook the installation of a Solar/Wind Hybrid
Mini-Grid at Lucingweni Village, Nqeleni District (D155), Eastern Cape. The NER acted
for the Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs, who were identified as the client, in
the execution of this project.
Construction of the installation was completed in August 2004, with the site being finally
commissioned on 30 September 2004.
In terms of Invoicing and payments, a final payment of R 2,7M was outstanding, which
was due after notification of completion. However this final invoice had already been
issued in February 2004, at the request of the NER. Submission of the invoice was
requested by NER for financial year end purposes.
Payment of the final amount was requested by SSSA following completion. A request
by NER for a new invoice to be submitted was complied with by SSSA and was
supplied to NER, along with a statement of completion.
To date the payment is still outstanding, and all requests for payment to be made, have
been ignored.
Issues
Issues which may be contested include:
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 206 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
The fact that community water provision has not been realised.
SSSA undertook to attempt to re-vitalise an existing inoperative water system. The
system is now operational, however the borehole supply point cannot deliver the
required volume.
Payment for Service tariffs has not been determined.
The NER is yet to determine a tariff for the service supplied.
Local ownership of the completed system has not been finalised.
This points to sustainability and maintenance issues.
Training has not been finalised.
Difficult without clear ownership and tariff decisions.”
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 207 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
9. Rural energisation initiatives in South Africa
A key aspect emanating from the international experience is the issue that the ultimate success of
rural energisation schemes depend equally on sound technical design methodology as it does on a
thorough understanding of the underlying social dynamics.
Various projects have been implemented in South Africa in an attempt to clearly bring out the key
success factors for rural energisation projects. Amongst others, the Parallax and APPLES projects.
9.1.
Case study on Demonstration of Housing Energisation to reduce climate change
This project was undertaken by Parallax Sustainable Development Solutions (Pty) Ltd 26, to pilot an
ownership approach for the supply of Solar Home Systems and Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG).
Although the project is not directly related to hybrid systems, it brings out a key element in the
success of all such endeavors – How to simultaneously address the rural communities’ thermal
and electrical energy needs.
This project was funded by USAID and the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, with
the primary objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions as a demonstration for the World
Summit on Sustainable Development. This project took place in a remote valley in southern
KwaZulu Natal in the uBuhlebezwe Municipality and consisted of 90 SHS installations of the same
type and capacity (55 Wp) as used in the concessions programme together with a LPG package of
a two plate stove and a 6 kg gas bottle. The homeowner pays the full cost of the SHS system over
36 months and receives one refill of the gas bottle per month for a monthly charge of R150. It was
established that there is a reasonable market for such a system and that the target market was
satisfied with the service that was given. Four systems were removed because of non-payment
during the 18-month project period and another four were stolen early in the project. Three
members from the community that have been trained to handle the local component of the project.
Other than the supply activities (installation of SHS, supply of LPG) and the collection of the
monthly charge, they service the systems on a six monthly cycle. Parallax estimates that a
business case exists with such a team serving 200-250 customers from one centre.
9.2.
Alleviation of Poverty through the provision of Local Energy Services
27
The Alleviation of Poverty through the provision of Local Energy Services, or APPLES project, was funded by
the European union under the “Intelligent energy - Europe programme, the Government of South Africa, the
Government of the Netherlands and the Government of Denmark.
The overall goal of APPLES is to contribute to poverty reduction and alleviation in South Africa by developing
implementation strategies to enhance access to affordable energy services for poor communities.
The key barriers that inhibit access to energy services for the poor in South Africa are:
•
•
•
•
lack of knowledge on energy needs of the poor
lack of knowledge on energy supply options among the poor
weak infrastructure for delivering energy services
lack of integration of energy interventions.
APPLES addresses these barriers by researching the energy needs of poor communities, undertaking
capacity building activities and identifying best-practices that can be adapted to the South African context.
Furthermore, APPLES supports the South African Government’s efforts to improve the infrastructure to
deliver energy services to the poor, in particular the implementation of Integrated energy Centres (IECs).
26
27
Parallax (Pty) Ltd, Case study on Demonstration of Housing Energisation to reduce climate change, January 2004.
Source: www.applesonline.com
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 208 of 209
Mini-grid hybrid viability and replication potential
DME New and Renewable Energy
9.3.
SADC Training Manual in Data Survey Methods and Applications for Energy and
Environmental Management” MEETI
The methodology to be utilised in the socio-economic assessment is the participatory rapid rural
appraisal. This method combines the advantages of participatory rural appraisal and rapid rural
appraisal. The participatory rural appraisal as the term implies, is meant to promote local abilities to
collect and analyse their own information, plan with it and act upon it. Participatory research aims
at intensive involvement by the outside researcher in the local community. The method involves
empowering the community or individual. Rapid Rural Appraisal involves finding a balance
between getting survey results reasonable quickly, but also getting them reasonably accurately.
RRA is grounded in using a number of tools to elicit local knowledge as well as an emphasis on
cross-checking all information received, whatever the source. RRA approach is much more
adaptive and open, than traditional survey methods which usually work to a blueprint.
The P - RRA surveying can be made using a range of fairly rapid, semi-participatory process focus
methods
• Informal survey is usually a starting point that involves wide-ranging perusal of previous
studies and literature, informed observation, general and directed discussion with selected
informants, but limited participation in activities.
• Discussions involves free-ranging and open-ended, but structured by a checklist or
guidelines
• Individual or group interviews which involves structured interviews with a checklist and the
use of selected informants.
• Questionnaires –to individual, households, business
Appendix D
Version 3
Literature Review
March 2006
Page 209 of 209