Solomon Islands Country Analysis
UNDP Asia-Pacific Regional Energy Program for Poverty Reduction (REP PoR)
Solomon Islands Country Assessment
DRAFT
Prepared by Mr. Herbert Wade and Mr. Kenneth Bulehite
for Winrock as part of the REP-PoR policy study on ‘Policy Study on
Regional Mapping of Options to Promote Private Investments
in Alternative Energy Sources for the Poor’
Forward
This report is provided in support of the Asia-Pacific Regional Energy Programme for Poverty Reduction (REP-PoR). It focuses on the Solomon Islands and is based on two weeks of field work and two weeks of surveys and case studies to provide a more detailed look at the links between energy and poverty in the Pacific Sub-Region. It builds on an earlier REP-PoR report relating to the Pacific Sub-Region, the REP PoR Pacific Rapid Assessment and Gap Analysis report that was presented in three parts:
• Section 1, an overview, which summarized key issues and findings and acted as an introduction to the Pacific Regional Synthesis;
• The Pacific Regional Synthesis, Section 2, was prepared in the form of a table in a format specified by the Lead Consultant of the REP-PoR Rapid Assessment and Gap Analysis; and
• The Pacific Island Country Summaries, Section 3, which provided country background information in the REP PoR-specified format and provided country-specific conclusions and recommendations for each of the fifteen PICs.
This report also builds on and supplements the Pacific Island Renewable Energy Project (PIREP) Solomon Islands Report through the surveys and case studies as well as providing additional information regarding the links between energy access and poverty in the Solomon Islands.
Acknowledgements
This effort could not have been concluded in the limited time available without the strong support of the Solomons Islands Department of Energy, UNDP Honiara and the unfailing cooperation of the people at the many government offices, NGOs and businesses that were consulted by the team in the course of preparing this report.
The consultancy team would like to especially thank the people in the villages of Iriri, Sukiki and Makaruka who so freely shared their experiences as well as their food and shelter.
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AAGR Average Annual Growth Rate
ACP African, Caribbean, Pacific countries
ADB Asian Development Bank
APACE Appropriate Technology for the Community and Environment
CBSI Central Bank of the Solomon Islands
CFL Compact Fluorescent Light
CPI Consumer Price Index
CROP Council of Regional Organisations of the Pacific
DME Direct Micro Expelling (coconut oil)
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
ESCAP Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN)
EU European Union
EWG Energy Working Group of CROP
FSP Foundation of the Peoples of the South Pacific
FY Fiscal Year
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GEF Global Environment Facility
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GNP Gross National Product
GREA Guadalcanal Rural Electrification Agency
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusamenarbeit (German Technical Cooperation)
HCJ Hocking Construction and Joinery Ltd
HF High Frequency
HF High Frequency (2-way radio)
Hp Horsepower
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
kV Kilo-Volts (thousands of volts)
kVA Kilo-Volt-Amperes (Thousands of Volt Amperes of power)
kW Kilo-Watt (Thousands of Watts of power)
kWh Kilo-Watt-Hour (Thousands of Watt Hours of energy)
kWp Kilo-Watts peak power (at standard conditions) from PV panels
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
LPPL Lever Pacific Plantations Ltd.
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MEF Malaita Eagle Force (paramilitary group)
MME Ministry of Mines and Energy
MNR Ministry of Natural Resources
NASA US National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NBSI National Bank of the Solomon Islands
NERRDP National Economic Recovery, Reform and Development Plan
NORAD Norwegian Agency for International Development
OPEC Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
OTEC Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion
PDF Project Development Facility (GEF)
PEDP Pacific Energy Development Programme (UN 1982-1993)
PFNET Peoples First Network
PIC Pacific Island Country
PICCAP Pacific Islands Climate Change Assistance Programme (GEF/UNDP)
PIEPSAP Pacific Islands Energy Policies and Strategic Action Planning
PIFS Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat
PIREP Pacific Island Renewable Energy Project (GEF/UNDP)
PMU Programme Management Unit, Ministry of National Planning
PPA Pacific Power Association
PREA Pacific Regional Energy Assessment (1992)
PV Photovoltaic
RAMSI Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands
RE Renewable Energy
RET Renewable Energy Technology
RIPEL Russell Islands Plantation Estates Limited
RTC Rural Training Centre
SEI Solar Energy International
SELF Solar Electric Light Fund
SHS Solar Home Systems
SICHE Solomon Islands College of Higher Education
SIDT Solomon Islands Development Trust
SIMA Solomon Islands Manufacturer’s Association
SIPL Solomon Islands Plantations Limited
SIREA Solomon Islands Rural Electrification National Agency
SIVEC Solomon Islands Village Electrification Council
SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
SPC Secretariat of the Pacific Community
SPREP Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme
STABEX EU fund for ACP countries to stabilise copra export prices
STPL Solomon Tropical Products Limited
SWH Solar water Heater
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats
TPA Townsville Peace Agreement
ULP Unleaded Petrol
UN United Nations
UNCBD United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity
UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organisation
US United States
USP University of the South Pacific
V Volts
VBMS Voice Belong Mere Solomons (Women's NGO)
VFEP Village First Electrification Programme
WB World Bank
WCO Western Coconut Oil Company
Wh Watt hours of energy
WPREP Western Province Regional Renewable Energy Programme
WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Country Overview 1
1.1 Country Background 1
1.1.1 Geography 1
1.1.2 Population 2
1.1.3 Environment 2
1.1.5 Political background 3
1.1.6 The ethnic tensions 3
1.1.7 Governance 4
1.2 Economy and national development objectives 5
1.2.1 Major rural development activities 7
1.3 Brief overview of the Energy Sector 8
1.3.1 Institutional Framework 8
1.3.2 Country Energy Sector Objectives 9
1.3.3 Primary Energy Sources/Energy Mix 9
1.3.4 Electricity Policy, Generation and Consumption 10
1.3.5 Energy Consumption/Demand Projections 10
1.3.6 Traditional and Fossil Fuel Usage and Projections for Future 11
1.3.7 Sectoral Issues (tariffs, subsidies, taxes, etc.) 12
1.3.8 Key Recent Developments or Dilemmas in Energy Policy or Legislation 13
2 Energy and Poverty Linkages 13
2.1 Nature and Extent of Poverty 13
2.1.1 Quality of rural life 15
2.2 Existing Energy Consumption Pattern and Categorization of Energy Needs of the Poor 15
2.3 Access to Electricity and Other Modern Fuels 16
2.4 Barriers to accessing modern energy services 16
2.5 Existing Opportunities to provide modern energy services to the poor 17
2.6 Priority Concerns for Energy and Poverty 18
3 Review of Renewable Energy Policies, Programs and Initiatives 18
3.1 Government Vision and Commitment 18
3.2 Relevant Policies, Laws and programs 18
3.3 Financing Sources and Mechanisms 19
3.4 Review of Market Experience, Private Investment and Financing 21
4 Public and private sector initiatives supporting renewable energy 22
4.1 Assessment of the Impacts of renewables on Rural Development and poverty, Role of Renewables in Meeting Energy Needs of the Poor, Categories of the Poor’s Needs (subsistence vs. productive) that renewables serve 22
4.1.1 Impact on livelihoods and income generation 24
4.1.2 Impact on workloads and living conditions of the poor 25
4.1.3 Financial leveraging 26
4.2 Donor-funded projects that have promoted renewable energy development for the rural Solomon Islands. 26
4.2.1 APACE activities 26
4.2.2 EU Activities under the Pacific Regional Energy Project (Lomé II) 27
4.2.3 SELF Activities 27
4.3 Donor funded renewable energy development for urban electrification 28
4.4 GEF Activities 28
4.5 Pipeline Projects 28
ANNEX A – Case Study, Iriri Village Hydro System 30
ANNEX B – Case Study: Guadalcanal Solar PV Village Electrification 47
ANNEX C – Persons Contacted 66
ANNEX D – References 70
ANNEX E – SWOT Analysis 72
SOLOMON ISLANDS
|Figure 1- Solomon Islands Map |
|[pic] |
|Source: AusAID |
1 Country Overview
1.1 Country Background
1.1.1 Geography
The Solomon Islands is located north east of Australia in the South Pacific between 5o 10' and 12o 45' South latitude and 155o 30' and 170o 30' East longitude. Six larger islands comprise nearly 80% of the 28,450 km2 of land area that includes nearly 1,000 islands in total of which about 350 have permanent residents. The largest island, Guadalcanal, includes the international airport, the international port-of-entry and the capital city of Honiara. The Islands are generally aligned in a chain from southwest to northeast covering some 800,000 km2 of tropical ocean within an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of 1.35 million km2. Although there are small atoll type islands within the Solomon Islands, over 99% of the land area is of volcanic origin and is hilly or mountainous.
1.1.2 Population
|Table 1- Census of 1999 – Provincial Population Data |
|Province |Urban |Rural |Total |
| Malaita |1,606 |212,014 |122,620 |
| Guadalcanal |3,013 |57,262 |60,275 |
| Honiara |49,107 |0 |49107 |
| Western |6,442 |56,277 |62,739 |
| Makira |979 |30,027 |31,006 |
| Central |1,333 |20,244 |21,577 |
| Isabel |451 |19,970 |20,421 |
| Choiseul |440 |19,568 |20,008 |
| Temotu |361 |18,551 |18,912 |
| Rennell-Belona |0 |2,377 |2,377 |
| Total |63,732 |345,310 |409,042 |
The last census was in 1999 and counted 409,042 persons. Of those, 94.2% were Melanesian, 4.0% Polynesian, 1.4% Micronesian, 0.4% European and 0.1% Asian. Males were 51.7% of the total. About 86% of the population (65,000 households) lived in rural villages and 14% were considered urban, quite low urbanization for the Pacific Region. Overall, there were 13 people per km2 and the average household size was 6.3 persons. Of the urban population, nearly 80% lived in Honiara which had approximately 50,000 inhabitants. The second largest urban area is Noro with 3,482 urban residents in 1999, less than one-tenth the size of Honiara. Melanesian Pijin is the lingua franca in much of the country although there are some 80 different language groups and these have dialects as well. 95% of the people are Christian with the principal religions being the Church of Melanesia (Anglican) about 35%; Roman Catholic 20%; South Seas Evangelical Church 15%; with the United Church (Methodist) and Seventh-day-Adventist having about 10% each.
The average annual growth rate (AAGR) from 1986 to 1999 was 2.8%, one of the highest in the region, and the population is quite young with the median age in 2005 estimated to be under 19 years. The urban component of the population had an AAGR of 3.8% for the same period with almost all that growth occurring in and around Honiara though there is evidence that the growth rate of Honiara is slowing. Honiara’s growth from 1970-1986 was a remarkable 6% which slowed to less than 4% over the next 13 years and indications are that the rate of growth since 1999 has been much less, probably to a great extent due to the 1999-2002 ethnic unrest.
1.1.3 Environment
The Solomon Islands is party to various treaties and conventions related to environmental protection, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), Law of the Sea, and the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD). An initial national communication to the UNFCCC, indicating greenhouse gas emissions, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change was prepared and submitted in 2003.
The climate is of the tropical monsoon type with a wet season from December to March. Temperatures change little over the year with daily averages from around 25° to 30° C. Rainfall varies considerably from place to place due to the effects of mountains. Typically 3000 to 3500 mm falls each year. Tropical cyclones pass through the island chain from time to time depositing heavy rain and causing wind and flood damage. The last cyclone causing heavy damage in populated areas was Namu in 1986. Besides floods and wind from cyclones, natural hazards include earthquakes, volcanism and land slides.
A long standing environmental issue in the Solomon Islands has been the unsustainability of the rate of logging that has taken place. Logging has been a major source of export revenue, and was the only significant export earner in 1999 through 2003, the time of ethnic tension. The annual log cuts since 1994 have averaged 645,000 m3 with the sustainable rate around 398,000 m3/year. At this rate the virgin forest will be gone by 2015. Attempts have been made at control but there are strong forces, both internal and external to the Solomons that have made it difficult. Economic tree plantations of mostly teak and mahogany, which include many small village scale plantings, are in place and production may reach as much as 200,000 m3/year by 2020 but clearly logging at the present rate cannot very long continue to be the strong export earner of the past years.
1.1.5 Political background
1.1.5.1 Pre-Independence
In prehistoric times to the time of the first European visit in 1568, the Solomon Islands were settled by diverse peoples including Melanesian groups from the north and west and Polynesian groups, notably Tongan and Tokelauan, from the East and south. Don Alvaro de Mendaña sailing from Peru was the first European known to sight the Solomon Islands, giving names to several of the islands that are still used as well as naming the group after King Solomon of biblical fame. Mendaña returned in 1595 and attempted to set up a colony on Santa Cruz but Mendaña died of malaria there and the colony did not survive. From that time until 1767 there were no recorded visits by Europeans. From 1767 on, however, many British, American and French ships called in the Solomons and made a very bad impression on the islanders, so bad that the Solomon Islands soon became known within European circles as the least welcoming of the Pacific Islands. The British gained control of the Solomon Islands in the 1890s and a Resident Commissioner for the British Protectorate of the Solomon Islands took office in 1896.
The Japanese began their invasion of the Solomon Islands in 1942, shortly after the start of the Pacific component of World War II. Guadalcanal and the nearby waters were the sites of major land, air and sea battles with the allied occupation of Guadalcanal soon extending to the rest of the group. Following the allied victory over Japan in 1945, local government was introduced followed by regional assemblies and, in 1970, an elected governing council.
1.1.5.2 Post-Independence
The former British Solomon Islands Protectorate achieved independence from Britain on 7 July 1978 and became the Independent State of Solomon Islands. The structure is a Westminster-style Parliamentary democracy. The Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II, represented by a Governor General. The elected Parliament includes a Speaker, and 50 members representing 50 constituencies. The Head of Government is a Prime Minister, who is usually the leader of the majority party or majority coalition is elected by Parliament. A 20 member Cabinet and the Deputy Prime Minister is appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister from among members of Parliament. Elections are normally held every four years, the most recent was in April 2006.
1.1.6 The ethnic tensions
Since 1999, the Solomon Islands has experienced considerable social unrest and economic disruption, the roots of which extend back to colonial days. Serious civil unrest began on the biggest island of Guadalcanal, which in the late 90s had accumulated a large migrant labor population from the most populated but poorly developed neighboring island of Malaita. In May 1999 a group of Guadalcanal youth calling themselves the Guadalcanal Revolutionary Army (GRA) , violently evicted Malaitan settlers from their homes on Guadalcanal. The youth claimed that repeated government failures regarding addressing grievances of Guadalcanal people relating to land compensation and other ethnic issues was the reason. The violence may have occurred for those reasons but the situation that led to the continuation and expansion of the problem was more deep seated. By 2000, organized militia from both Malaita (Malaita Eagle Force or MEF) and Guadalcanal (Isatabu Freedom Movement or IFM the successor to the GRA) were armed and in the fight. Elements of the Police Field Force (mostly from Malaita) joined the MEF, then calling themselves the MEF Joint Operations and helping arm the militants. In June 2000 the MEF Joint Operations staged a coup d'é·tat and forced the Prime Minister to resign causing the fall of his government. A new Prime Minister was elected from Choiseul. More than 100 persons were killed, an estimated 32,000 persons displaced, mostly laborers from Malaita, and there was substantial property damage.
The Townsville Peace Agreement was signed in October 2001 but serious tensions remained. In June 2003, the Prime Minister sought the intervention of Australia to aid in restoring order and parliament approved the request for intervention. On 24 July, 2003, over 2000 troops from Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, and Tonga arrived as the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands (RAMSI). By 2004, RAMSI had been scaled back to 302 police officers and 120 military in addition to civilian technical advisors.
In April 2006, following national elections, mobs of people unhappy with the results of the election of the Prime Minister rioted in Honiara. The result was the burning of shops in Chinatown and mobs engaging in street violence. Reinforcements for the police were flown in from Australia but there was no further violence reported on the days following the riot. The losses reportedly run into the millions of Solomon Islands Dollars, primarily losses to the important Chinese business community, but whether this represents a one time or long term problem is too early to tell. Certainly the riots will cause second thoughts on the part of investors, both foreign and domestic.
1.1.7 Governance
As noted in the UN Common Country Assessment (UNCCA) of 2002:
“The Solomon Islands has failed to achieve a level of political maturity sufficient to permit the formation of stable governments. There has been a high turnover of governments – ten in twenty-three years – and seven prime ministers. Despite this instability it is reassuring that, except for the change of government brought about by a coup in June 2000, all other changes have been constitutional…. Its component provinces resent the rule of its centralist government. The economy, weakened through a decade of poor economic management and poor governance, has been pushed to the brink of collapse by a civil uprising between militia of two of the country's main islands. Post-Independence gains in health, education and infrastructure are being eroded. The commercial timbers of the nation's natural forest resources are almost spent.”
The CCA further notes that:
“There has been increasingly poor performance of successive governments since the 1980s. The Government of 1992-94 bravely tried to correct the logging industry's erosion of natural capital and use of bribery but was forced out by a campaign funded by those whose interests were threatened. The past twenty years of Central Government expansion has been accompanied by a decline in standards and efficiency. Revenue leakage through duty remissions and through failure to support the monitoring of log exports has caused massive losses. Provincial governments, too, are not strangers to inefficiency but they have the excuse that the Central Government has kept them under-resourced. Allegations of corruption and the misuse of public office are widespread – yet investigations are rarely conducted. Some recent political performances suggest a need for a fresh attempt in political education. Yet the need for better understanding of political processes and their application for good governance is not confined to politicians. If accountability is to be improved, then the public needs improved awareness so that, through their emerging CSOs, they can better participate in promoting good governance.”
In response to the governance issues and in the hope of relieving the source of the tensions that led to violence in 1999-2000, there is talk of shifting to a federal system whereby much greater political independence would accrue to the provinces. While that has some advantages, it is not necessarily a cure for the problem, a shift to a federal state could simply mean a shift of corruption and poor governance from the national to the provincial level.
1.2 Economy and national development objectives
|Figure 2 - Palm oil plantation |
|[pic][pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
The bulk of the population is only marginally in the money economy. The relatively small monetized economy is dominated by large scale commercial enterprises in agriculture, fishing, mining and logging. Most manufactured goods and petroleum products must be imported though there is a small garment industry, mostly for the local sale of school uniforms. The islands are rich in undeveloped mineral resources such as lead, zinc, nickel, and gold. The export economy has been historically led by fisheries, logging, and commercial agriculture that consists mostly of palm oil, coconut products and cocoa. There is substantial potential for mining development but presently there are no mines operating largely due to land issues.
The civil unrest that began in 1999 seriously impacted all export industries as well as disrupting education and health care services; full recovery is yet to be achieved. During the period of unrest, only logging continued as a large export earner. Civil unrest on Guadalcanal led to the closure of Solomon Islands Plantations Limited (SIPL) in mid-1999 (the only palm oil producer in the country and also a producer of cocoa for export), the closure of the Gold Ridge gold mine in mid-2000 (the only mining operation and a major provider of export revenue), and the cessation of timber log production and sawmilling on Guadalcanal
Production of copra and cocoa on Guadalcanal by other commercial enterprises and by smallholders also ceased in 1999. The civil unrest also adversely affected the operations of manufacturing and service industries in Honiara. The export production base has been badly damaged and the economy shrank for several years following the period of unrest. Though Gold Ridge and SIPL remain essentially closed, there has been a recovery of fisheries exports and agricultural exports are growing again. Figure 1, as adapted from the Central Bank of the Solomon Islands Economic Overview of 2004, clearly shows the major economic impact of the 1999-2003 ethnic tensions. Even before the ethnic tensions, the economic situation was difficult with a large foreign debt, continuing devaluation of the currency and shrinking foreign reserves. The ethnic tensions and sudden economic downturn of 1999-2002 made the situation substantially worse effectively halting plans for investment and shutting down most of the major export earning enterprises in the country. The Department of National Reform and Planning estimates that real GDP per capita declined steadily from 1996 (aboutUS$250) to 2002 (about US$90) with the largest drop in
|Figure 3 - Change in Monetary GDP (1988-2004) CBSI 2004 Annual |
|Report |
|[pic] |
| |
2000 due to the ethnic tensions. While RAMSI has provided for stability and guarded optimism, economic recovery remains slow and major export industries are still not back in operation. The riots and violence in Honiara following the April 2006 election undoubtedly will have a further impact on the urban economy though it is too soon to judge the extent.
Although the economy was in trouble before 1999, the ethnic tensions caused its collapse with GDP shrinking an estimated 24% between 1998 and 2002. According to the Economic Analytic Unit of the Australian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade[1]
“in 2002 alone, the stock of formal government debt increased by over 40 percent as government lost control of finances, increasing government debt servicing costs, uncontrolled expenditures by government ministries and extortion by militants and police led to fiscal deficits which the government was not able to finance. The government defaulted on loan interest payments in 2002 and high levels of government debt increased the vulnerability of financial institutions. High interest rates and limited opportunities for new and viable investments in the domestic market restricted private sector involvement……Coupled with falling commodity prices the value of merchandise exports fell by an average of 19 percent per year between 1999 to 2002.”
In response, the government developed a National Economic Recovery, Reform and Development Plan (NERRDP), 2003-2006, which identifies and focuses on five key strategic areas:
• Normalizing the law and order and security situation;
• Strengthening democracy, human rights and good governance;
• Restoring fiscal and financial stability and reforming the public sector;
• Revitalizing the productive sectors and rebuilding supporting infrastructure;
• Restoring basic social services and fostering social development.
There has indeed been improvement in these areas over the past few years though whether the NERRDP or RAMSI should receive the main credit is not clear.
What is often lost sight of by external observers is that the problems of 1999-2003 largely affected only government and the small percentage of Solomon Islanders fully in the money economy. The decline in Real GDP per capita was due to problems in Honiara and had little effect on those considered as living in poverty. Most of the rural residents of the country saw little change in their subsistence lifestyle and in some cases even benefited because many people fled Honiara and Guadalcanal and returned to their home villages on other islands, bringing with them money and skills that were in short supply in those rural areas. Those rural households that depended on the sale of export agricultural products to buyers in Guadalcanal, notably cocoa and copra, did have a decrease in their incomes.
1.2.1 Major rural development activities
Given the problems with external debt, Government emphasis for economic development has been largely focused on exports and “quick fixes”. Trying to get Gold Ridge and SIPL back into production has been the focus of much effort since the turmoil of 1999-2003. The NERRDP has components for rural development but until the government becomes fiscally sound it is not likely to receive much attention. Such rural development as is being carried out is very limited in scope and is largely in the hands of NGOs and private business. Almost none of the rural development effort is specifically
The Rural Development Volunteer Association has funding from a number of donor sources. It is one of the NGOs working mainly for rural development. An important component of the Association is the People’s First Network (PFNET). PFNET activities include the provision of locally based email services from 25 rural locations and distance education and Internet service provision at nine rural sites. To provide email service, a two-way short wave (HF) transceiver, low speed modem and laptop computer are used, all powered by a battery charged from a solar panel. The fees vary somewhat from place to place but typically for a fee of SBD2 (about US$0.28) a resident writes down the communication to send, the operator types it onto the laptop and software converts it into a form that can be reliably sent over the HF radio to be received elsewhere and printed out for delivery. The system has been operating for several years and has filled the gap between very expensive telephone calls and the very slow postal service.
For the new distance learning program, a 1.2kWp solar system powers six laptop computers each with access to a printer and scanner. The communications are through satellite and provide for a relatively high speed Internet connection. The nine distance learning sites are associated with existing secondary schools and can be used for the provision of distance education from Government sources as well as the University of the South Pacific (USP) extension services and private training providers.
Another area of private development that serves rural areas are the “express boat” services that include several passenger vessels (ranging from less than 40 to around 400 person capacity) that connect outer island ports with each other and Honiara. Cargo shipping is also largely privately owned though the Provincial Governments often own small ships for cargo transfer. The express boat services have significantly increased inter-island passenger transport though at a somewhat higher cost than the subsidized government vessels.
Churches have been involved in rural development since before independence. There are many church operated schools, health facilities and missions. Most have diesel generators and a few have used small hydro for power. The electricity is intended for mission facilities though nearby houses can be connected. Some shipping is church owned and at one point even a small air service was owned by a church. Twenty-five Rural Training Centers (RTC) have been developed by the various churches. These rural educational centers provide training in home skills, carpentry, mechanics and other skills useful in rural areas. From time to time, they also sponsor short courses in various skills including solar technology. Since 2001, the EU has helped support the RTCs with such things as training materials, curriculum development, teacher’s training and teacher’s salaries. In 2006 a new phase of EU assistance will focus on development of facilities with some new buildings, improved physical plant and other development. All the centers have electricity though the size of the installation varies as does the size of the school. The smallest center has around 40 students while the largest around 400. The electricity supply likewise varies from 5kVA to 50kVA or more. The RTCs are often near to coconut plantations and consideration is being given to biofuel preparation for the diesel engines that provide electrical generation and using that experience to teach the skills necessary to produce biofuel from coconuts in the village context.
Rural development by the National Government has been mainly focused on health and education. This has included the construction and manning of over 250 rural health clinics and school construction and the training and provision of teachers for government and community schools. Rural energy development has not been a priority by the national government and to date no rural electrification programs have been funded beyond short power line extensions from SIEA generation centers.
1.3 Brief overview of the Energy Sector
1.3.1 Institutional Framework
The three main organizations involved in energy are the oil companies, the Solomon Islands Electricity Authority (SIEA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) within the Ministry of Mineral Resources.
In theory, the DOE is the oversight agency for all energy, including petroleum and electricity. In reality its role is largely peripheral as regards conventional energy with mainly an advisory capacity while the real decisions are made by Cabinet. Neither the petroleum companies nor the SIEA presently have shown particular interest in either renewable energy or rural energy development except possibly biofuels. Essentially by default, the DOE has become the primary agency for policy and implementation in those areas.
Since 2000, oil has been imported by two companies, Shell and Markwarth, a locally owned petroleum company. Markwarth purchases from Mobil. Shell has given notice that deliveries to the Solomon Islands will cease in mid-2007 as is the case in the rest of the South Pacific. The main oil storage facilities are near the Honiara wharf and are both too small and located too near a major population area. There have been several proposals to move the facility to a less developed area and for the Government to own the storage thereby providing some leverage with oil importers (as has been done in Samoa). Presently, there is still no decision to move the storage though the growth of petroleum imports will probably make that necessary in the not too distant future.
The DOE and the Price Control Unit in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry theoretically have some control over wholesale oil prices and electricity tariffs but they are regulators without any capacity for enforcement and the prices seem to be mostly determined by oil companies and the SIEA through their direct connection to higher levels of Government.
DOE presently has six full time persons with four more positions established but not presently filled. The present positions include Director, Deputy Director, Principal Renewable Energy Officer, General Energy Officer, Project Officer, Principal Energy Officer for Petroleum (recently vacant). Additional positions yet unfilled include Principal Energy Officer Economics, Principal Energy Officer Conservation, Senior Energy Officer Civil Engineering (hydro) and Senior Energy Officer Mechanical Engineering (biofuels).
1.3.2 Country Energy Sector Objectives
Each of the three major entities involved in the energy sector have proposed plans for development. The three are competing for limited funds and it will be up to the new government to allocate the finance among them.
The petroleum sector is facing the loss of Shell as a supplier in 2007 as the company withdraws from the Pacific Islands. A restructuring of the oil import system is proposed that includes major investment in the construction of a new fuel storage facility away from the wharf area. Although relocating the storage has been a proposal for more than a decade, the withdrawal of Shell as a supplier has caused increased attention on the problems of the existing oil supply arrangements.
The near term objective in the utility sector is to improve the quality of service in Honiara by upgrading facilities and improving management. Several international organizations are presently working with the SIEA to help them improve their performance. The poor quality of power in Honiara is considered to be limiting economic recovery and lowering general productivity. Even if immediately addressed aggressively, it is unlikely that problem can be solved in less than four or five years since finance will have to be located, personnel hired, equipment or repair parts purchased and installations completed.
The DOE has proposed an aggressive plan for rapidly increasing rural electrification using a combination of energy sources, including hydro, solar and biofuels. Carrying out the plan is contingent on the availability of funding, however, and that has not been allocated. The DOE proposes a small levy on fossil fuel sales as the source of income to a rural electrification fund, much like the very successful Energy Conservation Fund in Thailand, but given the already high price for fuel, adding even a small levy will be a difficult decision for Government.
1.3.3 Primary Energy Sources/Energy Mix
The two major sources of energy are biomass and petroleum products. The exact percentage of national energy that comes from each is not known since biomass use is poorly documented but indications are that biomass use is slightly larger with petroleum use gradually increasing relative to biomass.
1.3.4 Electricity Policy, Generation and Consumption
Under the outdated Electricity Act of 1969, the generation of electricity is the monopoly right of the SIEA within the geographic areas it chooses to service. Private generation is strongly discouraged within the SIEA service areas by requiring private companies who generate electricity to pay SIEA a kWh fee for all generation that occurs while SIEA has power available to that location. The use of private generators for emergency supply when SIEA cannot provide power is not charged, however. Since outages of several hours a day are common in Honiara, back up generators are required if a reliable supply of power is desired.
The SIEA essentially operates only in urban areas with the only significant load center being Honiara. Table 2 shows the pattern of demand for the SIEA load centers in 2004.
|Table 2 – SIEA Consumption by Consumers, 2004 (MWh) |
|Category |
|[pic] |
|Source: Kenneth Bulehite 2006 |
The January 2006 update of the CIA World Fact Book indicates that there are only 34 km of paved roads in the country with most of those in and around Honiara. The 1999 estimate of unpaved roads was a total of 1,326 km with many of those reportedly in quite poor condition.
The ADB report on progress toward Millennium Development Goals in the Pacific was not optimistic for the Solomon Islands. Though the MDG goals are national in scope, the very low urbanization of the Solomons means that the goals are effectively ones that have to be reached in rural areas. Though there has been some improvement in child mortality rates, a reduction in malaria infection rates and slight increases in water and sanitation access, other indicators, particularly as regards education and health, remain very low. The Solomon Islands has the lowest primary school enrollment rate in the Pacific Region, maternal mortality rates remain high and there is a large difference between urban and rural areas in all MDG indicators. With almost overwhelming economic problems, recent ethnic tensions erupting in violence and the need for major investments in education and health services to serve a rapidly increasing population, the priority for investing in general energy access development appears quite low as is illustrated by the total absence of government investment or Cabinet accepted plans for promoting rural energy development.
2.2 Existing Energy Consumption Pattern and Categorization of Energy Needs of the Poor
Except for the small sample survey taken in association with the case studies by the team in March 2006, there has been no survey effort to specifically determine energy consumption patterns in the rural Solomon Islands. The 1999 Census and the soon to be released 2005 National Household Income and Expenditure (HIES) survey both include questions that relate to energy and help give some indication of energy use patterns, notably the type of energy used for cooking, ownership of electrical appliances and ownership of fuel using devices such as outboard motors, generators and vehicles. Unfortunately the census did not give any information regarding the use patterns for the owned equipment or of the different forms of energy that are used. Until the HIES data is published, probably late in 2006, there are no recent statistically significant data regarding rural energy use.
What is known is that the great majority of households are unelectrified and rural energy use is limited almost entirely to biomass for cooking, kerosene for lighting and dry batteries for radios and other small appliances. Interviews carried out during the case studies indicated that the recent price increases have caused families to cut back on the already modest use of kerosene for lighting.
Though not common in rural areas, a few families have outboard motors and/or household generators that use petrol or diesel fuel. Again, the sharp rise in fuel price in recent months has caused some of these families to cut back on their use of motorized equipment and has increased their interest in the use of traditional sailing canoes for sea transport and fishing, They typically have reduced the time for electricity to be supplied by their home generators.
Given the relatively low population density in the rural Solomon Islands and the lush vegetation found in most areas, access to biomass for cooking has not been a significant problem except in the area around Honiara where demand does exceed the nearby supply. For Honiara, bundles of firewood are available in the market, where a large bundle (450 x 325 mm bundle weighing about 40kg) is typically priced at SBD20 (about US$2.75). A bundle lasts anywhere from a few days to more than a week according to the size of the family, the type of food being cooked and the attention paid by the cook to efficient fuel use. In rural areas, the kitchen is typically a small open sided room with good ventilation so exposure to smoke from the cooking fire is not the health problem that is found in some countries.
2.3 Access to Electricity and Other Modern Fuels
Electricity access is very low even by developing country standards. The 1999 census indicates that around 84% of the population is without access to any form of electricity other than dry batteries and nearly half of the electrified population lives in Honiara. Those figures remain valid since there has been no new rural electrification activity since the census. The rest of the electrified households are almost all in electrified provincial centers or are supplied with electricity from a church mission, commercial organization, NGO or government facility that has its own power supply. According to census data, in 1999 69% of electrified households were connected to SIEA services. About 28% of electrified households (4.5% of all households) produced the electricity themselves and the remaining electrified households obtained it from other sources, such as employers, church facilities, schools, etc.
Nearly every household has access to kerosene and dry batteries through retailers associated with markets and through villagers who purchase in bulk from a market and then sell the fuel or batteries from their home. The price of kerosene and dry batteries varies widely from place to place and high price is often a significant barrier to their extensive use. During visits to rural areas it was noted that the quality of the batteries being sold is typically quite low. As is often the case, the poorest people seem to be getting the least value for their money.
2.4 Barriers to accessing modern energy services
There are two primary barriers to accessing modern energy services, the first of course is money. Access to cash equates to access to modern energy. With over 80% of the population minimally participating in the money economy, access to cash is limited. Although exact numbers are not available, the small energy surveys carried out in relation to project case studies (please refer to annex A and B) indicates that e.g. in Iriri, the average annual income was around US$1500 of which around 5%, on average, is spent on energy mostly for kerosene and dry batteries. The use of cash for energy services is in competition with school fees, clothing, tobacco, transport, etc. and energy is generally low in priority to the otheose uses for cash.
The second factor is physical access. The dispersed, low density population makes it costly and difficult to provide modern energy access, even for easily transportable energy such as kerosene. To some extent, this barrier is intertwined with the cash barrier since a substantial component of the cost of fuel in rural areas is the cost of transport and of the several layers of trading that has to take place between the importer and the ultimate user of energy.
Obviously grid extensions cannot be even considered for most households either because there is no grid on their island at all or because of the very high cost of extending the grid over rough terrain and the even greater cost of keeping the fast growing jungle from damaging the power lines that would have to be built through the tropical forest. Village scale generation by diesel engine is technically reasonable since Solomon Island villages are generally compact and interconnection of households not difficult. The use of locally produced coconut oil is an attractive possibility for many villages. But the capital cost of the equipment and the ongoing cost of fuel and maintenance are a major barrier to a village proceeding with installing a diesel mini-grid. A further problem is the lack of technical skills in rural areas that are required for power system maintenance. Even in Fiji where there is a generally much higher level of technical skills availability, most of the hundreds of village diesel power systems that have been installed are poorly maintained and engine life is estimated to be about half of what should be the case with proper maintenance.
Under present conditions, any electricity supply that costs significantly more than the expenditures now being made for kerosene and dry batteries is unlikely to be accessed on any scale.
2.5 Existing Opportunities to provide modern energy services to the poor
If electricity needs to be provided at a cost that is about equal to the expenditures now being made for kerosene and dry batteries, only small solar installations have the immediate promise of meeting that requirement. With the capital cost spread over five years or more and with designs that make effective use of lower cost lead-acid batteries, the cost of basic lighting and radio operation from solar energy can be no more than the present cost of kerosene and dry battery use. In some villages, pico-hydro also shows some promise though reliable units are not available in the Solomons nor is the technical expertise locally available for their installation and maintenance. For villages that are relatively large yet compact in area and have good access to technical support, the biofuel/diesel power approach may be economically reasonable.
There are no significant rural business development programs in the Solomon Islands nor are there significant formal micro-credit programs available to rural households. There are many small loans to rural dwellers but they are from family and friends or a village money lender, not commercial entities or government. A GEF/World Bank program is expected to begin to address this lack within the year with part of the program focusing on credit for rural energy (mainly for solar home systems) but as the project has yet to be approved by the GEF and formally implemented, it is not yet clear just what the actual mechanism will be. The micro-finance program is likely to be practical only for salaried workers and rural businesses which will pretty much limit the loans to government employees, shop keepers and workers on commercial plantations, a small percentage of the rural population.
With UNDP support, the ANZ Bank has trials underway in some rural areas of Guadalcanal using a mobile banking facility that is mainly intended to encourage rural savings deposits with those deposits presently used to support urban loans. For the future the bank indicates that a small rural loan program may be developed for those rural households that regularly utilize the savings facility. Presently the service uses a special vehicle that has been fitted for that purpose. During the trial period it is used only to visit villages that have road access from Honiara. Reportedly, there are more than 2000 rural customers now using the service and ANZ has indicated that a similar mobile banking service is being considered on ships that connects outer island ports and Honiara.
2.6 Priority Concerns for Energy and Poverty
Nationally, the priority concern for energy is to restore reliable power in Honiara. The rolling blackouts and frequent outages due to the inability of the SIEA to maintain enough operational generating capacity are considered to be limiting productivity and slowing the macroeconomic growth needed to overcome the government’s financial problems. Increasing access to rural energy is not seen as a priority of government and even if it were, the enormous investment needed would provide little increased government revenue for many years to come and cannot be sustained under the present economic conditions. Given the economic situation in the Solomon Islands, the government cannot be looked to for significant rural energy investment in the foreseeable future unless fully financed by grant aid earmarked for that purpose or by a revenue source not presently tapped by government. In 2006, there are no proposed major grant-aid projects for rural energy. The only significant externally funded intervention focusing on rural energy access is the planned GEF /World Bank project. That is a credit based private sector development project that is not expected to directly impact on more than the small percentage of rural households that have a salaried income or a consistent business income, e.g. teachers, health workers and shop keepers.
A PIEPSAP study to review the current Electricity Act of the Solomon Islands will take place beginning in mid-2006. A major objective of the review will be to identify the barriers and constraints to the provision of electricity into the rural areas. Based on the findings, there will be recommendations as to how the Electricity Act can be improved/strengthened to establish an enabling framework for expanding the provision of electricity to rural areas of the whole Solomon Islands group.
3 Review of Renewable Energy Policies, Programs and Initiatives
3.1 Government Vision and Commitment
Historically, the rural energy sector has received virtually no attention from Government. There are some signs that this may be changing as there recently has been the authorizing of an increase in staffing for the DOE and a proposal to Cabinet for setting rural electrification goals and processes, but thus far the primary indicator of government commitment, i.e. funding for implementation, has been absent.
3.2 Relevant Policies, Laws and programs
Although over the past 20 years there have been several attempts at defining a national energy policy, none have been put into use. PIEPSAP consultants have been working with the DOE on a national energy policy though when it is complete it remains to be seen is Government will accept it and use it to formulate action in the energy sector.
Laws relating to energy are seriously outdated. The SIEA operates under the Electricity Act of 1969, legislation that strongly inhibits the development of independent power producers (IPPs) or private electricity generation. Given the inability of the SIEA to provide the generation capacity needed, inhibiting the free development of IPPs and private generation is directly hurting both SIEA and national economic development.
The regulations that govern petroleum storage were put into place in 1939. Fortunately the fuel storage has long been managed by international oil companies that have required that modern safety and access procedures be followed. However, should the storage be privatized, legislation mandating the use of the international petroleum industry practices will be needed.
The Environmental Act of 1998 is part of law but the resources to enforce it are limited. It clearly could affect hydroelectric, geothermal and ocean energy development (should such development become commercially available), and probably the development of biofuel plantations but how it will be enforced is not yet clear.
3.3 Financing Sources and Mechanisms
Except for a few hundred privately purchased solar home systems bought for cash, to date all renewable energy development investment has either been using grants from overseas agencies or as part of some foreign developed agro-industrial facility.
At the rural village level, the Australian NGO Appropriate Technology for the Community and Environment (APACE), later spinning off the Village First Electrification Programme and the Solomon Islands Village Electrification Council (SIVEC), has received donations from public and private sources, including the Republic of China, United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), to fund the installation of seven village scale (5kW to 50kW each) hydro systems. Five have been completed with at least two, Manawai Harbour (installed in 1997) and Bulelavata (installed in 1999), still said to be functioning.
Investments for power development by SIEA have been entirely for urban power delivery and have had almost no impact in rural poverty areas. Likewise investments by agro-industries have generally provided power only for the processing sites though some homes associated with such facilities were also electrified.
Solar based village electrification was financed by the international NGO, the Solar Electric Light Fund (SELF), with money collected from public and private sources. SELF funded the installation of solar home systems in the adjacent villages of Sukiki (46 homes in 1998) and Makaruka (65 homes in 1999). An NGO, the Guadalcanal Rural Electrification Agency (GREA) was established to manage the project. The villagers initially agreed to pay an installation fee equivalent to US$50 and then SBD50 per month for a period of four years after which the 50 Wp systems would be owned by the households. The collected money was intended to be used to purchase new solar home systems through the revolving fund concept. As is typically the case with that project structure, people paid reliably for a while but payment collections soon began to fall behind. The process was interrupted in 1999 when the villages were raided by ethnic militants and much of the equipment moved, destroyed or stolen. The building that included the office of GREA was burned and at least 80% of the project investment lost. Even if everyone had paid the full amount on time, there would have been a major shortfall in the revolving fund because the Solomon Island Dollar lost about one third its value against the US Dollar between 1998 and 2002 and replacements would have had to be purchased in hard currency.
The loss of value of local currency against the hard currencies that set solar system prices is a major problem for the long term finance of solar PV in developing countries and is a significant barrier for the private sector to engage in credit sales extending more than a year or so. It is for this reason that several private finance arrangements for solar systems in South East Asia have payment requirements in US Dollars rather than local currency. This has worked in Cambodia and Laos largely because the US Dollar is already a common medium of exchange and is legal. In many developing countries, requiring payment in foreign currency is not only uncommon it is often illegal. In theory, an annual exchange rate modification in the user payment could be applied but it is unlikely that such a scheme would be widely accepted in the market place. The only real solutions to the foreign exchange problem are either for the foreign exchange risk to be accepted by the financing institution or for the equipment be manufactured locally where all costs are in local currency. Unfortunately for solar equipment, local manufacture is only practical where there is a market several orders of magnitude larger than the size of that found in the Solomon Islands.
Currently under development is a renewable energy finance support project by GEF through the World Bank. Expanding on its earlier experience in Papua New Guinea (PNG), one component of the proposed project is intended to help the private sector to reach rural salary earners with credit to purchase renewable energy systems, notably solar home systems. The project is expected to include awareness, training, business development and market development initiatives as well as its core component of renewable energy finance development. This project could have future benefits for lower income people through the development of solar maintenance and installation support mechanisms in rural areas but the program itself is not expected to have direct impact on the great majority of rural households.
Also as a part of the GEF/World Bank proposal is a loan fund for rural private enterprises that would be managed through the ANZ bank. A local proposal has been prepared for biofuel development that combines rural enterprises – who would locally product coconut oil – and rural electrification. The process would be spearheaded by a local coconut oil producer, Solomon Tropic Products (STP) acting in joint venture with the Australian Biofuels Group (ABG). The joint venture would guarantee the market for rural oil production, convert it into bio-diesel through esterification of the coconut oil and market the bio-diesel locally. The joint venture would maintain its own shipping and copra collection system and each month would visit the oil producing sites and collect the oil, check the technical systems for both oil production and rural electrification, and perform other functions necessary to support the overall operation of the oil production system. For each dollar of rural investment, around ten dollars is likely to be invested by the joint venture to provide the infrastructure to get the copra from villages to the rural oil mills, to transport the product to Honiara for conversion to bio-diesel, for the conversion process and for the storage and marketing of the bio-diesel. Of the existing proposals for rural energy development, this appears to have the greatest potential with a possible financial leverage of the GEF funds of as much as 10 to 1.
3.4 Review of Market Experience, Private Investment and Financing
By far, the largest active market for renewable energy is presently that for fuel wood in Honiara. Bundles of split fuel wood can be purchased at the central market, along roads and in many private shops. The volume of sales is not known and there is a clear shift to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) that is cutting into the market, but with about 25% of Honiara homes still using fuel wood, it is a significant market since a SBD20 bundle typically lasts most households around a week if only wood is used for cooking in the household. According to local sources, most of the wood comes from waste generated by logging on Guadalcanal and does not represent the cutting of trees solely for firewood. The income from the firewood sales is mostly retained by the Honiara entrepreneurs with rural areas receiving little monetary benefit.
|Figure 6 - Village scale oil mill at STP |
|[pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
|Figure 5 - Willies Electric and Solar |
|Power Demonstration & Sales Centre |
|[pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
The only private business in the Solomon Islands specializing in other forms of renewable energy is Willies Electric and Solar Power operated by David Iro. The company began business in July 1998 and has delivered several hundred solar PV systems to churches, health centers, schools, resort operators, government, and private citizens. To date, most of the sales have been paid directly or indirectly by donor agencies though there are signs that more private sales can be expected in the future. Willies Electric stocks a full range of PV components, including a variety of panels, controllers and batteries. The company operates a training facility for solar technicians and users and training is routinely a part of any sale of solar components. A register of trained personnel is kept and requests for technical support are referred to those trainees who are residing in the general area of the needed support. Sales are not yet great enough to allow for the establishment of permanent rural service facilities though that is a long term goal.
Besides Willies Electric, several general merchandise shops handle rechargeable batteries and 12VDC lights. Some also have available for sale small solar panels and charge controllers though sales of those more expensive components to private individuals is reportedly at best only one or two a month.
Several hundred solar water heaters have been installed in the Honiara area, mostly on commercial buildings though a few homes include them. There is no specialist shop selling solar water heaters, they are essentially imported on demand – often directly by the purchaser. Most if not all the units installed are of Australian manufacture. Aid projects have funded solar water heating for health facilities though the number of installations is small.
Biofuels holds great potential for rural energy development. Though there has been no significant commercial development so far, several local companies have demonstrated interest in biofuel production. STP in Honiara is producing coconut oil and blending 80% oil with 20% kerosene and selling the product on a small scale at a price slightly lower than diesel fuel. The company has also entered into a joint venture with ABG to shift to making transesterified coconut oil (i.e. biodiesel) for local sale and possible export. Plans are in place for a large scale copra collecting system servicing a number of small oil mills in rural villages. The oil would be collected monthly in special bunker ships and transported to Honiara for conversion to biodiesel. One village already has formed a registered business and has collected nearly SBD100,000 for investment in the necessary oil production facility and associated village electrification and other villages are following their lead.
4 Public and private sector initiatives supporting renewable energy
4.1 Assessment of the Impacts of renewables on Rural Development and poverty, Role of Renewables in Meeting Energy Needs of the Poor, Categories of the Poor’s Needs (subsistence vs. productive) that renewables serve
The use of biomass as the main fuel for cooking is reported by 94% of rural households who responded to the 1999 census. Even in Honiara around one-fourth of the households considered wood as their main cooking fuel in 1999. Nationally, households reported an average daily use of wood for cooking as around 15kg per day which translates into over 300,000 metric tons per year. According to the PIREP Solomon Islands country assessment report, annual petroleum imports were around 70,000 metric tons of oil equivalent (ToE) while biomass just for cooking was estimated at around 110,000 ToE annual use. Since biomass is also used in significant quantity for copra drying and other purposes, perhaps as much as two-thirds of the energy used in the Solomons comes from biomass. Thus by any form of measurement, biomass use is an enormously greater producer of energy in the Solomons than other renewable energy sources.
|Figure 7 - Honaria market - firewood |
|[pic] |
|Source: HerbWade 2006 |
Without ready access to this important renewable energy resource, the level of poverty/hardship would increase as the greater time needed to locate, collect and transport cooking fuel reduced the time available for other productive activity. Fortunately only in a few localized areas of the Solomon Islands are there reports of cooking energy access problems and in those cases the problem appears to be more a decline in availability of the preferred fuel, often mangrove wood, rather than the availability of biomass fuel in general. However, rapid population growth has raised concerns regarding reduced wood fuel availability in the future for the more highly populated rural areas as well as the problem of affordable cooking fuel for Honiara households. It is likely that the cooking fuel market in Honiara will follow the path seen in Asian cities, i.e. as traditional wood fuels rise in price due to the increasing cost of collection and transport, the use of such substitute fuels as charcoal and fuels made from sawdust and other biomass processing wastes will become widespread in urban areas. Also expected is an increase in the replacement of biomass fuels by LPG fuel in affluent households, a trend seen throughout the PICs. In 1999, about two-thirds of Honiara households used LPG as their primary cooking fuel and the percentage was growing so in 2006 the numbers are likely to be substantially higher.
Although several private companies have indicated an interest in the use of sawmill and joinery waste as a raw material for manufactured fuel, such as briquettes and pellets, thus far no biomass products are available in Honiara markets as a substitute for traditional wood fuel.
The use of hydro power for rural economic development is second in terms of energy production when considering the existing application of renewable energy in rural areas but its energy production is many orders of magnitude smaller than that of biomass with much less than 1% of rural households having access to electricity from hydro resources. Overall the experience with village hydro has not been good as it has included long power outages and a high maintenance cost. No village that has had a hydro electric installation has thus far documented a reduction in poverty that clearly justifies the monetary and human resource cost of the facility. The primary problem appears to be the lack of an adequate system for design, maintenance and repair combined with the more basic problem of lack of the necessary business skills and market access structures needed to put the available energy to long term productive use.
In terms of energy generated, solar PV appears to be ranked third when based on the capacity of installed equipment but it may well be producing more total electrical energy than the village hydro systems due to the much higher reliability experienced with the solar power. The majority of the electricity from solar is used for powering communications equipment and most of that is used by Solomon Telekom Co., Ltd. (Telekom) though there is substantial investment in PV for powering other communications equipment, mostly by logging companies and for government installations. Solar for lighting and household use is estimated to be available in less than 1% of homes in rural areas and thus far has had almost no impact on rural poverty.
The widespread use of solar power for rural communications systems is probably the most successful use of renewable energy for poverty reduction in the Solomon Islands though its overall effect on poverty appears quite small, partly because it is an indirect effect and partly because the service coverage is still limited. Though there are no statistics to show its poverty reducing benefits, it is likely that it has reduced rural poverty in the communications service areas somewhat through (i) increased access to educational opportunity in the form of remote education through satellite based Internet access and extension courses from several sources; (ii) market information provided through rural email and radio services; (iii) health service improvement through the ability to do HF radio or telephone consultations and to mobilize emergency services; (iv) government service improvement through faster access and the ability to interact with officials directly; (v) improved economic networking to facilitate producer/buyer interaction; and (vi) improved integration of rural dwellers into the broader social and political activities of the country. It must be emphasized that these effects are still quite modest and the fact that this is probably the most successful use of renewable energy for poverty reduction illustrates the very small impact renewable energy (other than traditional biomass use) has had thus far on rural low income households in the Solomons.
4.1.1 Impact on livelihoods and income generation
Since the quality of life in a subsistence economy depends largely on the availability of time for activities that are not required for subsistence, the impact of access to renewable energy on livelihoods has been great. The ease of access to biomass for cooking means little time is needed for wood gathering and thus there is more time for non-subsistence activities, including income generation, than is the case in the many developing countries where many hours are spent just in gathering firewood for the daily meals.
Other forms of renewable energy have considerable potential for income generation, though through the sale, operation and maintenance of renewable energy products, not so much through their use. The sale of wood and, perhaps in the future manufactured cooking fuels based on biomass, for use in urban households provides some income generation opportunity for rural dwellers. Even more potential for income generation is the production of agricultural products that can be converted into biofuels for engine operation such as coconut oil. Copra production remains a staple income source for over half of the Solomon Islands rural households but the copra market has been weak for many years and the income from copra has fallen since its peak over a decade ago. Dramatically increased demand for coconut oil as a replacement for diesel fuel could reverse that trend. The particularly attractive aspect of coconut oil use for biofuels is the fact that the coconut resource does not have to be developed, it is already available with all the land tenure issues solved and a system is already in place to get the product from the production areas to market. While some replacement of senile trees would be needed to achieve maximum production, major rural economic benefit would be possible without allocating new land to coconut plantations. The current production of copra is just about sufficient to provide all the fuel for power generation by SIEA and double that production could be achieved with only modest investment in rehabilitating plantations. Rather than clearing new land for production, inter-cropping of other oil producing plants, such as Jatropha, within existing coconut plantations could provide for more efficient use of land already allocated.
The strong international demand for biofuels that may occur, should fossil fuel prices continue to rise, could lead to the development of “fuel plantations” on a large scale. That would likely be detrimental to the rural environment and could leave many rural households as nothing more than a ready source of unskilled labor for multi-national companies through development along the lines of the palm oil plantation already in place. But the window is now open for the creation of a network of local producers that could provide the necessary raw materials for large scale biofuel production while not requiring either massive land use restructuring or the shifting of huge blocks of labor from villages to commercial plantations. Since one of the main causes of the 1999 ethnic tensions was the importing of large numbers of cheap Malaitan laborers to work on the palm oil plantations of Guadalcanal, the use of local producers avoids that potentially serious problem.
4.1.2 Impact on workloads and living conditions of the poor
The experience with renewable energy projects and projects intended to increase energy access in rural areas is very limited. The project with the longest experience is that of the Iriri micro-hydro project (covered in detail separately in a case study, Annex A). In general the Iriri project dramatically increased maintenance workloads while improving living conditions only marginally. One village leader estimated that in the early years when the hydro was working well, the entire male workforce of the village would spend up to one fourth of their annual available work time engaged in maintaining the hydro facility. That was due largely to the APACE design using local materials that survived only a short time in the forest environment. As a result gardens suffered and income generating activities were reduced.
Other village scale hydro systems that have been in place more than ten years have also been frustrating to the recipients with long periods without power and maintenance requirements that go beyond the capability of the villages to handle. All the APACE sourced hydro projects were installed specifically with income generating components but they appear to have had little effect in Iriri, with the wood shop and bakery having failed as businesses within a few years of the hydro installation. No first hand information is available from the other hydro sites but discussions with persons from the project areas indicates similar experiences in most. An interview with a SIVEC officer indicates that the most recent APACE funded hydro projects have been more robust in design and have resulted in more reliable power and longer term income generation for villagers though that could not be verified nor the extent of that income generation determined.
The two villages Sukiki and Makaruka that have been electrified by solar photovoltaics reported improved living conditions, mainly good lighting, for the short period that the systems were in use but major damage to houses and property during the ethnic tensions that occurred soon after the projects were installed left the project in disarray and few installations remain even partially functional (see case studies in Annex B for more detailed information).
Although hydro energy remains a major resource, the decades of frustrated attempts to develop it have left government, the SIEA and industry with lowered expectations of its future as an energy source. The main thrust for renewable energy development today is for the manufacture of biofuels using coconut oil as the raw material. Assuming the price of diesel fuel remains at its present level or increases, the prospects are good for biofuels to increase rural development. The manner that the biofuel industry develops will have a major impact on how much benefit is actually received in rural areas. If it is developed as a dispersed industry with a number of relatively small centers producing the product with the coconuts coming from village scale plantations, then biofuels could be a major boost to the rural economy. If the industry is concentrated into one industrial facility, requiring copra to be shipped from rural areas to a central oil mill and then shipping the finished product back to the rural areas for use as fuel, there will be much less of an economic boost for the rural areas and the situation will be much the same as in the 70’s and 80’s during the peak years of copra production. The only difference would be that then the oil was exported, today it would be converted to fuel for urban power generation or transport. The worst scenario would be for the government to allow the development of huge coconut or palm oil plantations and concentrate not only the processing but also the production. In that case the result would be mostly beneficial to investors. For the lower income groups the benefits would be large numbers of low paying jobs that require separation of workers from their families and traditional social groups plus the potential for serious problems due to the rural land acquisition processes that would be required.
4.1.3 Financial leveraging
As noted above, the proposed GEF/World Bank project for the provision of finance for micro credit and the development of a fund that would be available for rural energy development has the potential for major leverage of funds, particularly as regards biofuel development since there are private funds likely to be available for large scale investment in that sector. The donor inputs to the PFNET and the Rural Training Centers are expected to leverage funds from the government and local residents though the linkages of that activity and energy access are tenuous.
Presently there are no projects in the pipeline that have a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) component though there is local awareness of the possibility of benefits through the CDM for projects that support greenhouse gas reduction. Though the CDM is viewed as a positive aspect for renewable energy development, at present it is not considered a sufficient incentive to overcome the other barriers to renewable energy development that are present in the Solomon Islands.
4.2 Donor-funded projects that have promoted renewable energy development for the rural Solomon Islands.
There have been many donor funded studies and policy reviews that have been carried out in the Solomon Islands relating to renewable energy for rural energy access (including the one generating this report) and considerable donor money has gone into urban power development, but very little direct implementation of renewable energy based rural energy systems by donors agencies has taken place.
Documentation was found for only a few donor funded projects that have provided increased access to energy for rural areas that were based on renewable energy sources (excluding Telekom PV installations which probably included funds that were sourced from donors but could not be directly identified as donor projects). Only three of those actually directly impacted low income rural households.
4.2.1 APACE activities
The most effective activity for increasing rural household electricity access appears to be that of APACE, an Australian NGO that has received money from a number of donor sources including the Australian public, AusAID and the Republic of China (Taiwan). Between 1983 and the present, the donor money has been used in part to install village scale hydro systems at seven villages in the Solomon Islands. The installations have been poorly documented and the relative benefits are unknown except for that of the Iriri installation where there was a follow up investigation by the UN Pacific Energy Development Programme in 1986 and the 2006 village survey and case study prepared for this report. As noted earlier, the available data can be construed to mean that the Iriri project has been as much a burden to the village as a benefit. Whether this is the case with other of the APACE installations is not clear though a similar pattern of maintenance problems seems to have ocurred with all the APACE installations that have been in place for five years or more. The local NGO that is handling these projects is confident that the latest installations have a technical design that will greatly reduce the maintenance requirements and that the current institutional approach is also less failure prone than earlier management schemes.
4.2.2 EU Activities under the Pacific Regional Energy Project (Lomé II)
The EU Lomé II project of 1982-1995 provided technical demonstrations of renewable energy throughout the Pacific region. For the Solomons, the project provided technical support and several hardware demonstrations of renewable energy technology in the that were focused on rural areas. These included:
• Hydrological measuring equipment to support designs for hydro development
• Solar water heating for Auki, Buala, Kira Kira, Lata and Gizo provincial hospitals
• Electrolux PV refrigeration systems for six provincial health clinics (four were actually installed)
• Installation of 28 large, efficient wood stoves for institutional cooking in schools to replace open fire cooking
• A 15kW biomass gasifier using charcoal fuel and intended for power generation was tested at the Batuna sawmill on Vangunu Island in the Western Province
The results of the EU Lomé II project demonstrations were mixed. The solar water heaters and institutional stove installations worked well. The hydrological measuring equipment did not function properly and was soon lost due to floods following cyclone Namu in 1986. The solar refrigerators were not successful with two of them never being installed. The gasifier also did not work well and operation was not continued beyond the basic trial period supported by the project.
4.2.3 SELF Activities
In 1997 the Solar Electric Light Fund (SELF) , an USA NGO, established the first solar-electrified village in the Solomon Islands. Initially the village of Sukiki, a small village located on the weather (SW) coast of Guadalcanal, received forty-six solar systems for homes and a school plus four systems were installed at health clinics in rural areas elsewhere in Guadalcanal. The project was undertaken in partnership with the Guadalcanal Rural Electrification Agency (GREA), a non-governmental organization based in Honiara, which was specifically established as the local partner for the project. SELF obtained the funding from various donor agencies and private donations.
In 1998, a second solar electrification project was implemented by SELF and GREA in the neighbouring coastal village of Makaruka. Sixty-five homes, a school and several churches were electrified by solar PV. Solar systems were also installed using SELF support at rural houses in Gatokiae (Western Province, 7 systems) and at rural health clinics on the island of Santa Isabel (4 systems) where the equipment installation and training was carried out by SIEA staff who had been training during the Sukiki installation.
Based on its experience in Sukiki and Makaruka, GREA planned to develop a larger-scale SHS programme, with or without SELF, and established an office at the Guadalcanal Provincial Government headquarters. The plans could not be carried out due to the ethnic tensions that commenced in 1999. The provincial government building in which the GREA office was housed was burned and GREA equipment and records lost. Many of the solar-electrified houses in Sukiki and Makaruka were destroyed, stolen or damaged by militants.
After law and order was restored, the promoters of GREA re-organized the NGO to form the Solomon Islands Rural Electrification Agency, SIREA, an NGO that has the same function as GREA but is national in scope. To date SIREA has not been able to raise the funding and support needed for additional village electrification but continues to be enthusiastic and optimistic about the future.
4.3 Donor funded renewable energy development for urban electrification
That there is significant hydro potential in the Solomon Islands is well known. A government survey identified more than 100 sites that had promise and a JICA consultancy (Master Plan Study for Power Development in Solomon Islands, 2002) estimated that at least 330 MW of hydro resources is available in the Solomons.
A number of studies have been carried out since the 1960’s for SIEA and industrial hydro development. Two installations were carried out, one 32kW unit on the Malu’u river in Malaita funded by New Zealand aid (1986) and the other in 1996, a 185 kW unit funded by GTZ (Germany). Both installations remain in service but the real need is for Honiara. A number of hydro sites to serve Honiara have been considered, one project even going so far as to commence construction for access roads and worker housing. These have included sites on the Lunnga, Matiniko, Choroa, Itina and the Komarindi rivers but thus far the projected cost has been too high or there have been technical problems with the site. Land issues are also considered a significant problem for development of larger scale hydro power with SIEA reportedly having had land owner problems with even its small Malu’u River installation.
4.4 GEF Activities
The Solomon Islands (together with the 14 other PICs) participated in the GEF/UNDP/SPREP/ Pacific Islands Renewable Energy Project (PIREP). PIREP had as its primary purpose the development of a GEF funded Full Size Project (FSP), the Pacific Islands Greenhouse Gas Abatement through Renewable Energy Project (PIGGAREP), aimed at reducing the growth rate of GHG emissions from fossil fuel use in the PICs through the widespread and cost effective use of their RE resources. As part of its project development effort, barriers to the development of renewable energy to mitigate climate change were identifies and capacity development needs for lowering those barriers were assessed.
4.5 Pipeline Projects
Presently there is at least one donor project in the pipeline specifically focused on renewable energy. The Solomon Islands together with 9 other PICs are expected to participate in the GEF/UNDP/SPREP regional Pacific Islands Greenhouse Gas Abatement through Renewable Energy Project (PIGGAREP). The Project Brief has been approved in principle by the GEF Council and as of April 2006 awaits GEF endorsement. If endorsed, the Full Size Project (FSP) with a US$5.225 million contribution from GEF will aim at reducing the growth rate of GHG emissions from fossil fuel use in the PICs through the widespread and cost effective use of their renewable energy resources. It consists of various activities whose outputs are intended to contribute to the removal of the major barriers to the widespread utilization of renewable energy technologies. No direct implementation of hardware is included in the project; outputs are focused on policy development, capacity building and conceptualization of those overarching interventions that may be implemented to actualize barrier reduction and the determination of their appropriate modality of conjugation.
The GEF/World Bank small loan support project and finance facility outlined earlier appears likely to proceed though as of March 2006 it had not been approved by the GEF. A significant increase in rural energy access through private sector investment is anticipated by the program developers though it is not exclusively focused on renewable energy development.
A proposal for private development of biofuels that includes a rural electrification component is stalled because SIEA has not agreed to allow the trial of biofuel based generation of electricity by the developers without incurring the kWh fee charged by SIEA for private generation. The trials are needed to test the use of biofuels in stationary diesel engines of the type proposed for rural electricity generation. A MOU has been drafted by the Department of Energy and approved by the Minister for a three year trial on engines owned by the biofuel developers but as the test installations are within an SIEA service area, SIEA permission is required under the existing electricity law.
Indirect support in the area of renewable energy development is expected to be provided through the PIEPSAP project. Starting in the second quarter of 2006, PIEPSAP assistance to the Solomon Islands will include: the support of national policy development workshops and a draft set of policy statements on twelve strategic areas will be developed; there will be a review of the utility restructuring plan presented by the World Bank (reviewed upon request of the Government of the Solomon Islands); a comprehensive review of the Solomon Islands Electricity Act; and development of a regulatory framework for rural electrification. The first mission is expected to start around May 2006.
ANNEX A – Case Study, Iriri Village Hydro System
1. Background
The Sydney based non-profit NGO, Appropriate Technology for the Community and Environment (APACE) began operations in the Solomon Islands in the late 1970s. APACE was formed in 1976 with the intention of providing services in the Asia-Pacific region for energy, community development and project design. Funding for APACE was sought from private donations and from donor agencies.
In 1983, after several years of preparation, APACE installed the first hydro based village electrification scheme in the Solomons at the village of Iriri, a community located about 45 minutes by power boat from Gizo, the provincial center of the Western Province. The funding for the installation came from several public and private donors but UNIDO is generally considered the primary source.
The design premise used by APACE for the Iriri and later village hydro installations in the Solomons was that simple designs using local materials should be used as much as possible with community committees established for the operation and maintenance of the hydro systems. Additionally, the project specifically included components intended for income generation to improve the economic conditions of the target village.
2. Original Design
The primary reference document that has survived form the 1980s is a report by the UN Pacific Energy Development Programme (PEDP) that reviewed the installation in 1986 at the request of the Solomons Island Government with the intent of determining whether or not the Iriri installation should be replicated. There is no information available regarding the details of pre-installation surveys or stream gauging though at the time of the PEDP visit, the stream flow was estimated at 35 liters per second. The visit in March 2006 was during the driest part of the year and the flow appeared to be substantially less than that though no actual measurements were taken.
|Figure 8 - Iriri Dam Site |
|[pic][pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
To ensure a clear intake for the penstock, a weir, approximately two meters high, was constructed out of hewn logs to block the small stream thereby creating an intake pond. Approximately 10 meters upstream from the weir, a cable and small logs were stretched across the stream surface to help catch trash that floated down the stream. No intake structure was built, the plastic penstock pipe (~150 mm in diameter) penetrated the dam and opened directly into the pond about a meter above the stream bed. No means was provided to filter the intake or to break up intake vortices. The penstock was approximately 800 meters long constructed entirely of plastic pipe, all mounted above ground. About 650 meters of the penstock was supported on crossed sticks stuck in the ground, at some points supporting the penstock as high as 3 meters above ground. This included approximately 80 meters of penstock that followed the stream bank before starting across land to the power station.
|Figure 9 - Iriri Pestock near turbine |
|[pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
The 600 mm diameter Pelton type turbine was installed about 42 meters below the head pond surface. It was sheltered by a metal roof on poles but was not enclosed. Flow control was provided by a deflector vane that could be manually actuated or would fall into place automatically to prevent overspeed conditions should the generator load be lost. The turbine speed of about 750 RPM was doubled to 1500 rpm for the alternator using a pulley and a dual “V” belt drive connecting the turbine to the alternator.
The alternator is a 12 kVA brushless type unit providing 240VAC at 50 Hz when turned at 1500 RPM. Controls consisted of an overspeed/underspeed sensor and a double pole switch and circuit breaker. The power was delivered to the village through 1.3 km of copper cable run through buried plastic conduit. At the village was an electronic load controller intended to closely control the turbine speed by automatically switching in additional load if the speed increased beyond a set limit or reducing load if the speed fell below a set limit. Thus the electronic load controller was intended to automatically maintain a constant load on the alternator so a constant turbine speed – and operating frequency – would be maintained. Power distribution to the village houses was also underground. No transformers were needed since the distribution voltage was already at 240V.
3. Income producing components
A small sawmill and furniture making shop was already present in the village at the time of electrification. The electrification project provided electric tools for the furniture shop and also supported the development of a bakery business. The sawmill power requirements were too high for the system, however, and it remained on diesel power. Assistance was provided to the furniture making shop operator to obtain a contract for the manufacture of student furniture for a nearby school. One person was selected as the operator and maintenance technician and was trained by APACE.
4. Institutional System
Management has been entirely within the village using the existing traditional leadership system. Neither APACE nor the government participated in operation or maintenance of the installation though APACE was available in the early years of the project for advice and to assist in locating repair parts. Initially a fee of SBD10 per month was charged to houses for electrical services but collections were irregular and ultimately stopped.
5. Operational history
|Figure 10 - Iriri power “house” |
|[pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
Although the Iriri installation has probably had more external attention than any other of the village hydro projects in the Solomons, no maintenance or operational log was kept. Based on interviews with villagers, an overall power availability of around 50% appears to have been the case with a number of relatively long outage periods occurring in the ‘90s. Problems with the electrical system caused some lengthy system failures. Failed diodes in the alternator caused at least two long outages and the load controller also failed. Most of the outages were due to dam or penstock failures but those were usually reparable by the village within a week or two after system failure. Running the penstock above ground through the dense jungle resulted in breaks due to falling limbs or trees. Floods washed away the wooden penstock mounts located in the stream valley near the dam and also caused penstock failures. The crossed stick penstock supports rotted quickly and had to be replaced about every three months. Repairs to the wooden “stockade” dam had to be made several times. Given the small size of the village, this represented a substantial labor commitment.
A flood in about 2000 again washed out the penstock downstream from the dam and also broke the wire from the power house to the village where it crossed the stream. As all the spare penstock sections had been used and no money was available to purchase more penstock or wire, no repairs have been made and the system is essentially abandoned. At the time of the field trip visit the dam was found to be still in place, though obviously in need of repair, but the penstock was broken or missing in several places. The wires to the village also were broken in several places. The turbine appeared to be in reasonably good condition and probably could be returned to service with minor repairs. The alternator and associated electrical controls were in poor condition since most of the shelter was gone and they had been exposed to the elements for several years. The path to the site was overgrown and the system appeared to be abandoned.
6. Survey results
6.1 Methodology
A number of similar rural household energy surveys have been carried out in the Pacific Islands and the questionnaire prepared by the international consultant was based on the experience gained in the delivery and analysis of those earlier surveys. While two household survey teams spent approximately half an hour at each of the 30 households completing the survey questionnaire, the local consultant interviewed village leaders regarding their view of the electrification, the hydro project and the effect of the project on the community. The survey was carried out over a period of two days. Since many of the principal household
|Figure 11 - Surveyor and villager in Iriri |
|[pic] |
|Source: Kenneth Bulehite 2006 |
members were not present during the day, with work in gardens or elsewhere requiring their absence, much of the information was obtained in the evening thereby helping ensure that responses were truly representative of the consensus within each household.
Unfortunately the results of the Solomon Islands Household Income and Expenditure Survey carried out in 2005 will not be published until late 2006 or early 2007 so the information from the case study household survey cannot be compared with that from nearby villages to help determine if the installation of the hydro electric facility has had a significant development impact. Also no pre-installation survey was carried out by APACE, or at lease no record of it is available, so there is no way to compare what changes have occurred in the village from 1983 to the present.
6.2 General village conditions
Most of the homes included multiple rooms and most were constructed of sawn lumber with a metal roof. Some homes of traditional construction are present. There were an average of 5.8 persons per household with the largest age group (31%) in the 19-35 range. The second largest age group (23%) was children under 10 years of age. Only 6.4% of the community were people over 50. Thus the total population of 174 persons was quite young with 74% under 35 years old.
|Figure 12 - Iriri House |
|[pic] |
|Source: Herb Wade 2006 |
Of the 30 homes in the community, 17 of them are sometimes not occupied with an average vacancy of around a month.
About 80% of the households depend mainly on surface water for their water supply and 70% use the beach or forest as their toilet.
Access to the village is either by foot along jungle trails or by boat. There are no roads or land vehicles.
All households stated that they considered having electricity very important and 80% responded that having 24 hour electricity was also very important. About half the households stated that what they liked the most about electricity was that it was cheaper than kerosene and batteries.
About half the households said that solar is either as good as or better than hydro for electricity. About 37% said hydro was better than solar and 13% didn't know how the two technologies compared. 70% of the households believed that hydro requires more maintenance than solar.
The two households with solar systems (one 10 years old and the other only 3 months) both reported high satisfaction with the solar and said the power from solar was very reliable. The cost of maintenance was also reported as quite low with one battery replacement and two light replacements the only cost for repairs or maintenance.
6.3 Income and expenditures
Remittances from relatives living elsewhere were reported by 63% of the households indicating a number of villagers are working in urban areas. Since Gizo is a nearby urban area (around 4,000 population) with frequent air and sea contact with Honiara, migration has not been difficult. In terms of the largest contribution to village income, the role of casual worker, largely work in Gizo, provides about 34% of village income. The most people engaged in income generation grow and sell produce though in total that only contributes 13% of the reported village income. The average annual household income was reported to be SBD10,870 (US$1,510) with the lowest being SBD1,200 (US$167). The highest single household income was reported to be SBD44,400 (US$6,167) with over half of that income provided by a skilled craftsman and the rest form several sources. About half the households had an income between SBD5000 and SBD10,000 per year. 83% of the households reported widely varying income from month to month with a lot of the variation attributable to the variability of garden production.
Food, school fees, clothing, energy (kerosene and batteries), church/community and transport were listed as the largest expenditures with most households reporting less than SBD50 per month expended in each category.
6.4 Energy Expenditures
Of the 30 houses, 2 have solar lighting systems (both provided by family members working in urban areas) and 3 have rechargeable batteries that are used exclusively for lights. The rest rely on kerosene and dry batteries for energy services. The rechargeable batteries reported are typically small sealed lead-acid batteries manufactured for use in computer uninterruptible power supply (UPS) units. They are typically charged weekly at no cost by friends.
The average monthly cost of kerosene was reported as SBD28 (US$3.90) and the average monthly cost for dry batteries was reported as SBD32 (US$4.50). Battery use was mainly for portable lights and radios. Note that 7 households reported using kerosene sometimes for cooking though no houses listed kerosene as the main cooking fuel. Of the 30 households, 29 reported wood as their most used cooking fuel and one house reported LPG as their main cooking fuel. Four other households use LPG sometimes but not as their primary cooking fuel.
The average amount households said they were willing to pay for electricity to operate lights and radio was about US$4 per month even though they are now paying around double that for kerosene and batteries. 83% did state that they would be willing to pay more for electricity if more appliances could be used. The top appliances desired were lights (80% said lights were the most important appliance), radios were second and videos and irons a tie for third most important appliance.
When responding to the question “was the village better off before or after the hydro”, 53% said the village was better after the hydro was installed because it was more modern. 30% said it was better with the hydro because they made more money after the hydro was installed. Income generation was reported from bakery, showing videos, using lights to prepare for market and sewing with bakery operation the most reported income source that used electricity.
When the hydro was working, lights were left on several times longer than is the case now when kerosene or a rechargeable battery is used for lighting. Most houses reported leaving a light on all night when the hydro was working but less than half leave a kerosene light burning all night today.
The reason cited as the main problem with the hydro system was a lack of sufficient money in the village to keep it running.
6.5 Results and Conclusions
The conclusion of the UNPEDP review of the project in 1987 was that the Iriri project should not be replicated. However, APACE proceeded with micro-hydro electrification in the nearby Vavanga (1994) and Ghatere (1997) communities on Kolombangara in 1994 and 1997 respectively. Both were built using a design similar to that in Iriri with a wooden dam, an exposed plastic penstock and turbines of 10-12 kW capacity. Both have had a history of technical problems and unreliable operation quite similar to Iriri’s experience.
Though the Iriri (and other APACE installations in Vavanga and Ghatere) saved on cost through the use of locally available materials for the dam and for the penstock supports and also through eliminating some design components such as a trash filter and intake structure, those savings have combined to lower system reliability and increase maintenance requirements. As noted in the 1987 PEDP report, even with the simplified design and local materials, the cost of the hydro installations by APACE have been substantially greater (on a per house basis) than household solar. The household survey showed that when the hydro power was functioning, almost all the power use was for lighting and radio or cassette player operation, a usage level that is easily achieved with solar power at lower cost and with higher reliability. The justification for the high investment in the hydro installation over lower cost solar was the availability of more power to allow the use of larger appliances and for powering tools and income generating projects. The reality has been that over the 20 years following the hydro installation, there has been almost no investment by the community in either larger appliances or in income generating activities that depend on electricity. The reason for this lack of development appears to be due to factors other than energy access including, but probably not limited to, market access problems, unreliability of the power supply, lack of business skills and lack of access to finance for income activity development. Some village leaders even feel that the hydro has helped stifle development of the community due to the labor commitment that has had to be made for maintenance, the expense of repair of the electrical components and the general frustrations that have occurred at each system failure. While the hydro technician and some village leaders still hope to renovate the hydro system, at this point it appears that there will need to be a complete replacement of all components, except possibly the turbine, and finding the necessary finance will be difficult.
Although some households reported using electricity for income production when the hydro worked, there is no evidence that the overall economic development of the village has benefited from the hydro installation over the 23 years since its installation. Indeed some village elders consider the village to be worse off today than before the hydro installation. From a poverty alleviation standpoint, there also is no evidence that the hydro installation has made any difference one way or the other. Today most households have no access to clean water or proper sanitation and the general condition of the village and of the villager’s lives is said by the villagers themselves to have changed little. Merely having access to energy has not been a significant stimulus to either economic or social improvement for households in Iriri though the perception of the villagers is that some benefits have accrued, if nothing else there seems to be at least a perception of progress that was not present before the hydro installation.
IRIRI HOUSEHOLD SURVEY MARCH 2006 – 30 Households
House characteristics
|1. Construction |Wooden |Thatched |Iron |Concrete |
|Roof materials | |13 (43%) |17 (57%) |0 |
|Wall materials |24 (80%) |5 (17%) | |0 |
|2. Number of rooms |1 |2 |3 |
|(excluding bathing and toilet) | | | |
| |15 (50%) |13 (43%) |2 (7%) |
|4. Number of structures (excluding toilet or |1 |2 |3 |4 |NR |
|external bath) | | | | | |
| |11 (37%) |8 (27%) |8 (27%) |1 (3%) |2 |
|5. Maximum distance between buildings of the |0-3 |4-6 |7-9 |
|household | | | |
| |26 (87%) |2 (7%) |2 (7%) |
Access to market
|8. Means of transport to market |On foot |By boat |
| |6 (20%) |24 (80%) |
|9. Time needed to get to market in|.5 |.75 |1 |1.25 |1.5 |1.75 |
|hours | | | | | | |
|1 |10 |8 |5 |6 |3 |2 |
|4 |1 |0 |1 |1 |0 |0 |
|5 |1 |1 |2 |0 |0 |0 |
|Total age-group persons |40 (23%) |35 (20%) |
| |13 |17 |
|13. If not occupied all the time how many weeks vacant |1 Week |2 |
| |19 |11 |
|15. If relatives send money how does it relate |Most of the income |Around half |Less than half but significant |Small percentage |
|to total income | | | | |
| |1 |1 |1 |20 |
|16. Income statistics |
|Average household income |10,870 (US$1510) |
|Maximum household income |44400 (US$6,167 |
|Minimum household income |1200 (US$167) |
|Income range |0-2500 |2501-5000 |5001-10000 |
| |5 (17%) |12(40%) |13 (43%) |
|18. If variable income, why? |Depends on market price |Depends on weather |Depends on available work |Depends on produce |
| | | | |availability |
| |1 (3%) |8 (27%) |0 (0%) |21 (70%) |
Household Expenditures per month
|21. |None | ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- japanese invade philippine islands wwii
- the british channel islands ww2
- the channel islands during wwii
- channel islands occupation ww2
- islands off maine coast map
- inhabited islands of maine
- islands of maine coast
- islands off coast of maine
- how many islands in maine
- maine islands drive to
- remote islands off maine coast
- islands of maine map