In our last post we noted the apparent lack of a realistic plan for Africa’s transition to zero carbon—one that does not reflect the obvious bias of fossil fuel producing companies or governments or the impracticality of many environmental activists. The way forward should offer credible answers to several questions:
The starting point of course is to know how many gigawatts are required to bring electricity to 600 million Africans who currently do not have it.
What is the amount of renewable energy planned for Africa? How much has been installed? At the current rate of progress how long will it take to meet Africa’s energy requirements with renewable energy? What would be the likely cost given the increasing competitiveness of renewables? What will be the true unsubsidized cost of renewable power and fossil fuels?
What is the planned and installed capacity for fossil fuels? How soon and at what cost will these fuels meet Africa’s energy needs?
A realistic energy transition plan also recognizes that fossil fuel investments have a finite life, however unknown in length. That means some oil or coal specific assets will be stranded. It’s happened before when equipment and property reach obsolescence–like the ghost towns that pepper the western US. At least this time we can plan for it. How will companies minimize the amount of stranded assets as we move into a low carbon world? Will equipment makers design products for multiple uses?
An energy transition that tells Africa to continue without reliable electricity until renewables can provide 100% of the energy requirement is not acceptable. A business plan that assumes fossil fuel use indefinitely also will not work for countries that are most threatened by the effects of a warming planet. I expect to see more and more ideas on how to implement the energy transition in Africa. These questions and issues are how policy makers, and funders should evaluate transition plans.
emergingmktstories 