Energy for Rural and Island Communities III: Proceedings of the Third International Conference Held at Inverness, Scotland, September 1983

Hexham.

Sponsors

The Sponsors, whilst supporting the aims of the Conference, did not necessarily endorse the views expressed by the contributors. The Conference was sponsored by:

UNESCO

UK Department of Energy

British Council

Scottish Development Agency

Highlands and Islands Development Board

Highland Regional Council

Grampian Regional Council

Strathclyde Regional Council

Western Isles Islands Council

Chivas Brothers Limited

James Howden & Company Limited

Occidental of Britain Inc

Bank of Scotland

Royal Bank of Scotland

Scottish Branch of the British Wind Energy Association

Scottish Solar Energy Group

Elmgrant Trust

University of Strathclyde

TOPIC A

ENERGY AND DEVELOPMENT

Energy for the Poor World

D. Pooley,     Director of Non-nuclear Energy Research, Harwell, Oxfordshire, OX11 0RA, UK

INTRODUCTION

Most of us attending this conference will take it for granted that it is necessary for the countries comprising what I have vaguely called the Poor World to achieve substantial economic growth if they are to alleviate the poverty which affects so many of their citizens. We realise how wealthy societies routinely use their wealth to buy not only health, longevity, education, etc for their people but also opportunities for information, travel and leisure. We know that virtually all measures of social well-being correlate strongly with measures of national wealth, crude those these undoubtedly are. The example I frequently use (eg Pooley, 1982) is infant death rate, widely recognised as a good indicator of the physical health and quality of health care in a community and for which an inverse correlation with GNP is quite clear. Literacy is another indicator that most of us here would accept as a measure of social well-being; Fig. 1 shows its link with GNP (World Bank, 1976 and Economist, 1978)

FIGURE 1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LITERACY AND NATIONAL WEALTH

It would probably also be accepted by participants of this conference that economic growth in the poor world must be accompanied by an increase in energy use. The increased human productivity required in the Third World to make those countries richer can only come by greater use of capital and energy. The classic example is agriculture. Energy inputs; steel for tractors and ploughs; water for irrigation; chemicals for fertilisers; can make enormous differences as a comparison between yields from similar land in the USA and Mexico shows, (Fig. 2). Indeed, Revelle has argued (Revelle, 1980) that, if India were to use expensive oil to achieve better cultivation, carry out more irrigation and make fertiliser, the value of increased food production would more than pay for the oil used. On the macro-scale, the correlation between economic activity and energy consumption of different countries (eg Economist, 1978) is just as clear cut. Moreover, within a large but generally poor country like India the large differences between the economic activity of different regions correlate with their energy consumption. Fig. 3 compares economic activity and electricity use for various Indian states, illustrating a further important point, that poor countries do not grow simply by using more fuel-wood or cow-dung; they move increasingly into commercial fuel as they develop economically (Desai, 1978).

FIGURE 2 YIELDS FROM SIMILAR FARM LANDS IN THE USA AND MEXICO

FIGURE 3 PER CAPITA ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION AND INCOME IN INDIA

Of the two related factors, energy use and increased economic activity, I do not know which is cause and which is effect; whether an increased supply of cheap energy will stimulate economic growth in the poor world, or whether the failure to provide that supply of reasonably cheap energy will stifle the economic growth which might otherwise occur. The conclusion is the same. If the economies of poor countries are to grow they will need to use increasing amounts of commercial energy and the cheaper this can be provided, the better. Let me emphasise again commercial energy. In my view it will not suffice simply to provide their energy needs for cooking, washing etc since this will only temporarily relieve the pressure of population on resources. Only commercial energy will catalyse a different life style and at least offer the prospect of breaking out of the present situation.

It therefore seems to me that the challenge and opportunity with respect to the Third World which faces those of us who work in energy science and engineering in the West, is an exciting and a considerable one. Energy for the poor world might be a way in which we can play a small part in tackling the world’s most important problem, the enormous disparity of wealth between the richer and poorer inhabitants of the planet. In this short paper I will try to outline the various ways in which I, personally, think we can contribute to this task. I am certain to leave out quite important issues and I will not be able to provide the details I would like and which the subject deserves.

Broadly, I think there are three groups of actions we need to consider:

1. Making changes in our own society’s energy system which will reduce our consumption of the fossil fuels the poor world most needs and can most easily use, in order to increase the availability and reduce the world price of those fuels. I have said fossil fuels but to all intents and purposes I mean oil; the task is to reduce oil-burn in rich countries.

2. Finding ways of transferring to the Third World those technologies of efficient energy supply and use which we have developed and have proven to be effective, which are also appropriate to Third World needs and which they can adopt more quickly with our help than on their own.

3. Trying to develop for our own rural and island communities, energy technologies which are suited to their circumstances and also suitable for use in some regions of the Third World.

The last is what this conference is mostly about. 1 therefore expect to be unpopular when I say that I believe activity 1. is by a long way the most Important of the three and that 2. is probably also more important than 3. Let me expand on each in turn.

REDUCING OIL CONSUMPTION

Oil is the world’s most important fuel. At present it is practially essential for transport energy and poor countries will have to use much more of it for this purpose if they are to obtain the benefits of specialisation in economic activity which trading allows. It is the easiest fuel by far to move around the world, to use efficiently on a small scale and in a variety of important applications other than its key use as a vehicle fuel; from lighting, through cooking and small-scale electricity generation to controlled heating for small industries. Because it is so easy to transport and to use economically it is the most sensible fuel for users who need only small amounts of energy and, perhaps most important of all, for users who are short of the capital needed to use coal, gas or nuclear energy. Coal requires more sophisticated and expensive plant if the inefficiencies in using it are not to more than offset its long term greater availability and lower price. Nuclear power is just out of the question for all but the larger and wealthier developing countries. The use of oil in the Third World has therefore grown substantially over the last few decades (UN, 1979) (Fig. 4) and it is my hope that this growth will continue in the future.

FIGURE 4 THE GROWTH OF OIL CONSUMPTION IN THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Oil consumption in the industrial West has fallen dramatically since 1979, in large measure as a consequence of the recession triggered off by the rise in oil prices following the revolution in Iran. Few of us would welcome this recession, which hits the Third World even harder than it does our own country, although we may be happy to see Western oil use fall as a result. However, not all the fall in oil consumption has come from recession. In the industrial economies we use oil for many purposes but three major ones illustrate how the extent of our use has been and can be reduced without the pains of recession and, I believe, with benefit for the Third World. The three uses I have in mind are transport, heating for industrial processes and electric power generation.

In Britain, as in most other countries, consumption of oil for transport has actually grown during the 1970’s, from 20.2 Mtonnes in 1971 to 24.3 Mtonnes in 1981 (D Energy, 1982), despite the increases in fuel price which occurred between these years. Fortunately, concern about fuel consumption in transport during this time has caused car manufacturers to improve aerodynamics, reduce vehicle weight, improve engine design and engine control and car buyers to show increased interest in smaller cars. As a result, fuel consumption per vehicle has not increased much since 1973; energy conservation has probably already begun to have an effect. There is still much left for scientists and engineers to do in improving vehicle technology, from helping to solve the problems of manufacturing lightweight, fibre-composite components to developing exhaust gas oxygen sensors for engine control.

A switch away from oil for process and space heating has also occurred, not to coal in Britain, where gas is available as a more attractive alternative, but away from oil. In Britain, industrial use of oil fell between 1971 and 1981 from 26.4 Mtonnes to 14.0 Mtonnes (D Energy, 1982), (corresponding to a fall of 5.2 Gtherms) and industrial gas consumption rose from 2.5 Gtherms to 5.7 Gtherms during the same period. Coal will also have to enter this industrial heat market eventually, either directly in the new generation of automated coal-burning equipment or indirectly, delivered to the users as substitute natural gas or electricity. Nevetheless, the replacement of oil by other fuels in industrial use has been quite large and has helped oil prices to be substantially contained.

The part uranium has to play on the energy scene is as a power station fuel. The reduction in use of oil in power stations in Britain during the 1970’s (from 24.5 Mtce in 1971 to 8.7 Mtce in 1981) was taken up mostly by coal, up from 72.4 Mtonnes to 87.3 Mtonnes, but also by nuclear energy, which rose from 8.2 Mtce to 12.2 Mtce (D Energy, 1982). The same cannot be said for France and Japan, where their great dependence on oil for power stations is being reduced dramatically by the use of nuclear power rather than by coal. In 1982 the nuclear contribution to electricity supply in France was 38.7% and in Japan was 20.3%, corresponding to 103 TWhr in each case or a saving of 34 Mtonnes oil. It is, of course, the CEGB’s and our Government’s stated intention that we in Britain should achieve a rough balance between coal and nuclear fuel for our power stations, with oil taking only a small share for peak load applications. You will not be surprised if I say that I think this is a wise policy for many reasons. The use of nuclear power, even in Britain, will have a very beneficial effect in keeping world energy prices down, by bringing into energy supply another fuel, Uranium 235, which is comparably abundant with oil and gas (Hedley, 1981) (Fig. 5), and comparably cost effective with coal for electricity generation (UNIPEDE, 1982).

FIGURE 5 WORLD ENERGY RESERVES 1979

These activities, conservation and the increased use of alternative fuels are occurring on a massive scale around the world and have already played a major part in reducing the West’s dependence on oil, to the point where the OPEC control of the market has been lessened and real prices have fallen for the fuel which the developing countries need most and have found most difficulty in buying during the 1970’s.

FORESTRY AND ENERGY CONSERVATION

There are some tasks on the energy scene which we do quite well in the industrial world, which the Third World needs also to do well but currently does badly. Probably the most urgent is good forest management. Most of you will know how dependent many poor people are on wood (Howe & Gulick, 1980) for cooking and water heating, and how the growth of population and lack of forest management in many poor countries are causing deforestation on an alarming scale (Eckholm, 1980). Growing trees on hillsides in Britain is not, of course, the same as growing trees in the desert margins of the Sahel or in the tropical rains of Surinam, but the principles are similar and foresters in other industrial countries have a broader range of experience, as have our own if their experience includes work in other parts of the Commonwealth. I find it rather ironic to contrast the fact that many of my very intelligent and energetic colleagues are thinking seriously about wood energy plantations for Britain, where labour costs are high, the market for unprocessed wood is very limited and the technology to convert wood to gas or liquid is difficult and not yet developed, with the real difficulties encountered in attempting to help Third World countries to learn to operate wood energy plantations in their situation, where labour costs are lower and there is a large, even desperate, market for unprocessed wood. Now that firewood is sold commercially in many parts of the Third World, the opportunity does exist for our forest technology to make a valuable contribution to Third World energy in many countries; yet my friends in Oxfam tell me that, in poor countries like Haiti, in much of Africa and India, forests are disappearing so quickly that catastrophic shortages of wood will occur in relatively few years and nothing of consequence is being done.

So far I have deliberately not limited myself to energy use in rural and island communities. My general thesis is that we can best help rural people in the Third World indirectly, both by measures we take in our own country and by measures which may help first the urban, industrial parts of their countries. The first reason is that technology transfer is difficult, from Harwell to industry, even from a company’s own R & D department to one of its operating divisions. An essential requirement is for the developer to be in close touch with and thoroughly to understand the ultimate user; his understanding must cover not just technical factors but also economics and finance, social and labour behaviour. This is difficult between a British university and an Indian villager, less so with an Indian company. The second reason is that help will be more productive if given to those nearer self sufficiency than the poorest rural people. I therefore believe that it could be quite valuable if some of our rapidly improving industrial conservation methods were transferred to Third World countries, since although we are only now adopting them ourselves, some are very simple and easy to use. Many examples of these energy efficiency measures are being demonstrated in Britain in our Energy Conservation Demonstration Projects Scheme, funded by the Department of Energy and managed by the Energy Technology Support Unit at Harwell. Some involve the simplest of heat recovery techniques, such as run-around heat recovery coils and could be adopted in the Third World without much difficulty.

Forest management and industrial energy conservation are activities which we do or are beginning to do well, and which poor countries need. Let us see if they can be handed over successfully.

NEW ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES FOR REMOTE COMMUNITIES

Because many of the talks at this conference are centred on this last of my three themes, I will say very little about it. There are, of course, many vitally important tasks to tackle. In conservation, it is ironic that the average British household uses only 7 GJ each year for cooking (Schipper & Ketoff, 1983) whereas the average Third World family of 6 uses 6 − 8 tonnes of wood (Openshaw, 1980) with an energy content in the range 50-100 GJ. The latter is mostly for cooking, admittedly for an on-average larger family but for much more basic cooking and in a much more energy hungry environment. It would be excellent if the improved technology for wood-burning cooking stoves which many groups in the rich world have sought to develop were successful in meeting all the requirements of first cost, materials supply, maintenance, social custom, etc which are required if it is to be used widely.

However, I think we here are more likely to be successful in tackling those new energy technologies which can also be used in our own rural and island communities. Of these the front runner seems to be wind power. Wind power is in most respects the most attractive of the electricity generating renewables for Britain (ETSU, 1982) and our UK development programme is centred on its use on our northern and western islands. Many companies are independently developing smaller machines which are more suitable for smaller communities than the 100 kW to few MW aerogenerators currently being built on Orkney and at Carmarthen Bay. The opportunities are there for sizeable markets in the Third World (ERA, 1981) but I want to urge caution and emphasise the role of initial development for rural and island communities here.

The reason lies in the important factors which determine the cost of energy from an aerogenerator (Fig. 6) and the great uncertainties which still exist in what is achievable in terms of load factor, operation and maintenance cost and lifetime in particular. Earlier this year I was privileged to visit wind generators in the Irish Republic, the USA and Canada and to discuss their performance with both developers and operators. In the USA I visited the Californian wind farms where hundreds of 50 kW size machines have been built as well as some of the multi-Mwatt giants. The Irish programme has, I think, been an extremely valuable and interesting one, in that the Irish have bought a large number of commercial machines for a variety of applications and have sought to evaluate rather than to develop. All the experience I have heard about of load factor, 0 & M cost and lifetime is rather dismal. At the wind farms it was clear that average availability was nowhere near the 80-90% sought, that the mean time between failures (the determinant of availability and 0 & M cost) was still only hundreds of hours and that machine lifetimes were most unlikely to be more than a few years. If you will look again at Fig. 6 you will see that load factor and 0 & M cost operate together in a particularly severe nut-cracker mode. If the machines are unreliable then the load factor will fall and the 0 & M cost will rise causing the cost of energy to rise very quickly. The Irish electricity generating machines have had similarly disappointing experiences and the very large US wind turbines are even worse.

FIGURE 6 FACTORS AFFECTING THE COST OF WIND ENERGY

The point I am trying to make is that no community-sized electricity-generating wind turbine which I am aware of is sufficiently reliable for Third World operation, quite apart from the problems of high first cost, lifetime, of integrating them with small deisels as may often be necessary if electricity is to be provided in periods of calm or low winds. There will inevitably be some problems in using even proven wind turbines in the Third World but let us not make them much worse by hurrying into that market with technology which we know to be inadequate because of some superficial argument that the technology seemed appropriate to their needs.

I have no time to discuss solar photovoltaics or wave energy devices or small scale hydro, but you will gather that I am generally in favour of concentrating on those technologies which we ourselves can use first, primarily to ensure that we have cost effective, reliable equipment to offer the poor world. They cannot afford to pay high prices for their energy as can the experimental middle classes here and in the US, nor for expensive and protracted development carried out over long distances.

CONCLUSIONS

Energy for the Third World is somewhat analogous to food for the Third World; the problem is not that the world cannot provide enough food or energy but that both are in surplus where they are not greatly needed (food in North America; oil in the Middle East) and that poor countries often cannot afford to buy from these surplus areas. In doing as much as we sensibly can to reduce oil burn in the West, we have helped both ourselves and the poor world in large measure. Indeed it is primarily because we can help both ourselves and the poor world in this way that I see the first of my possibilities as the quickest, easiest and most powerful way of our helping with their energy supply. Next, let us try to help them with those things we know we can do well and which are appropriate for them. Forestry and industrial energy conservation are my suggestions but I am sure they do not exhaust the possibilities. Finally, by all means let us try to develop new energy technologies which may ultimately be better suited to their use than are those on which we rely, but let us keep at the fore-front of our minds cost, reliability, operation and maintenance requirements; which still rule them out for us and will make the cost of energy in the Third World prohibitive unless we scientists and engineers can do something to make improvements.

REFERENCES

Energy, D‘United Kingdom Energy Statistics’. London: HMSO, 1982.

Desai, Ashok V. ‘Energy Policy’. 1978; Vol 6(No 3):217–230.

Eckholm, Eric P, ‘The Other Energy Crisis; Firewood’ in ‘Energy in the Developing World’, p63–71, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Economist, 1978; ‘The World in Figures’, Economist Newspapers, London.

ERA, 1981; ‘Study of World Market for Medium Sized Wind Turbine Generators’ by UK Electrical Research Association, Crown Agents, London.

ETSU, 1982; ‘Strategic Review of the Renewable Energy Technologies’; Energy Technology Support Unit of UK, D Energy, ETSU R13, HMSO, London.

Hedley, Don‘World Energy; The Facts and the Future’. London: Euromonitor Publications Ltd, 1981.

Howe, James W, Gulich, Frances A‘Fuelwood and other Renewable Energies in Africa’. Washington DC: The Overseas Development Council, 1980.

Openshaw, Keith, ‘Woodfuel, a time for reassessment’; in Energy in the Developing World, p72–86, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Pachauri, Rajendra K. ‘Energy Policy’. 1982; Vol 10(No 3):189–202

Pooley, Derek. ‘High Temperature–High Pressures’; Vol 14. Pion Publications, UK, 1982:367–376.

Revelle, Roger. ‘Energy Use in Rural India’. In: ‘Energy in the Developing World’. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1980:194–207.

Schipper, Ketoff. ‘Energy Policy’. 1983; Vol 11(No 2):131–147.

UN, 1979; ‘1979 Yearbook of World Energy Statistics’, United Nations, New York, 1981.

UNIPEDE, 1982; ‘Generating Costs–Assessment made in 1981 for plant to be commissioned in 1990’ Moynet, G; International Union of Producers and Distributors of Electrical Energy.

World Bank, 1976; ‘World tables 1976’, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Experience in New Zealand with Small Scale Energy Systems Applicable to Rural and Island Communities

G. Baird* and E.D. Mowbray**,     *School of Architecture, Victoria University, Private Bag, Wellington, New Zealand; **Association of Consulting Engineers New Zealand, P.O. Box 12055, Wellington, New Zealand

ABSTRACT

After a brief outline of the country’s renewable and non-renewable energy resource base, the authors present an overview of research into, and practical experience of, small scale energy systems which have been applied in remote locations within New Zealand. The utilisation of solar, hydro, biomass (vegetable oils, ethanol, biogas and woodburning) and wind energy, is discussed in detail with respect to the agricultural sector. The utilisation of small scale energy systems in the transportation, fishing and domestic sectors is briefly described. The paper ends with an outline of the barriers to the application of small scale energy systems in New Zealand. An extensive list of references is presented.

KEYWORDS

Small scale energy systems

rural and island communities

New Zealand

solar

hydro

biomass

wind

agriculture

transport

fishing

domestic

INTRODUCTION

New Zealand is an island country, situated between latitudes 34°S and 47°S in the South Pacific, with a land area of 25.7 million hectares and a population of just over three million people. Although most people live in towns and cities, the economy of the country is heavily dependent on agricultural products. Thus, the energy requirements of the rural community are of vital importance.

NEW ZEALAND’S ENERGY RESOURCE BASE

At the time of the 1973 oil shock, almost all of New Zealand’s transportation needs and around half of its industry depended on imported oil. Efforts are being made to reduce this dependence and these have led to a reassessment of indigenous renewable and non-renewable energy resources. The country has significant reserves of natural gas and coal which are being developed, and lignite which promises to be a major future source of energy. About a third of New Zealand’s current primary energy is supplied from renewable sources -large scale hydroelectric schemes (see Table 1–Ministry of Energy, 1982).

TABLE 1

Primary Energy Use in New Zealand (1980)

The geographical location, climate, topography and geology of New Zealand serve to enhance the potential for the use of renewable energy resources of the type appropriate for small scale utilisation in rural and island communities. Most parts of the country enjoy at least 2000hrs of bright sunshine, well distributed throughout the year and averaging 37-52% of that possible. Coupled with the relatively warm temperatures, the potential for solar water and space heating would seem high. New Zealand’s annual rainfall averages over 2000mm and is fairly uniformly distributed throughout the year in many parts of the country.

Given the size of the agricultural sector and the climatic advantages discussed, it will come as no surprise that attention has been given to the potential of agricultural products and by-products as energy ‘feedstocks’. New Zealand can produce a diversity of biomass feedstocks (Palmer, 1983). The country’s wind power potential is one of the highest in the world. According to Cherry (1976), most areas have moderate to very high mean wind energy fluxes. There are a few sites where geothermal steam is used for heating (at a variety of industrial and domestic scales) and for the production of electricity (currently around 5% of the country’s electricity supply). This source is fairly localised and its ‘renewability’ (or at least its prospect as a long-term source of energy) is difficult to assess.

With the availability of these promising renewable energy resources, it was inevitable that small scale and alternative energy technologies would receive increased attention in the decade since 1973. In the sections that follow we shall outline some examples of New Zealand experience with the use of small scale technologies in the agricultural, transportation, fishing and domestic sectors. Clearly, an exhaustive review cannot be presented within the confines of this paper–rather, it is a very selective set of snapshots together with a detailed reference list. For an indication of the range of commercially available systems see Isaacs and Mowbray, 1981.

THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR

Farms use energy in various forms: diesel for on-farm vehicles and machinery, hot water for cleaning dairy sheds, electricity for pumps, electric fences and other equipment. In the past ten years, increased attention has been given to the energy consumption of the agricultural sector (Sims, 1983). Many farmers are taking advantage of the alternative energy sources available to them.

General Conservation

There are agricultural techniques being studied in New Zealand which have conservation of diesel as a prime aim. Of particular note are minimal tillage techniques developed at Massey University. Another technique is whole crop harvesting which can replace combine harvesting (Straight Furrow, 1982). Surplus straw is also collected which can be used for energy production.

Direct Solar Utilisation

Dairy farms have a well specified (in time, location, quantity and temperature) demand for hot water which can be met by solar water heaters. In one test, using 18 solar panels of 0.75m² as preheaters for an electric heating system, 30% of the heat requirement was obtained from the sun (Raine and Isaacs, 1981). Electric fences have been powered by the sun using photo-electric cells (Sangster, 1981a). This makes electric fencing far more portable than before. Commercial solar energisers are used and have proved reliable, but under load they do not develop the same voltage as mains-powered fences.

Utilisation of hydro-electricity

Large scale hydro projects provide 30% of New Zealand’s primary energy. However, micro-hydroelectric systems (under 250 kW) are used on some of the many small streams, often in remote locations. They are usually economically attractive only where national grid electricity is unavailable. Thus, remote hill country farms and islands are often prime spots. Over 50 such schemes are presently operating in the country (Blakely and O’Connor,