Renewable energy is cheap, clean and in abundance, and should be pursued with great urgency, according to the Renewable Energy and Efficiency Institute. By Catherine Sasman WINDHOEK Namibia can save half of its electricity needs through energy sufficiency. And with abundant natural energy resources, the country should as a matter of urgency look at ways to harness these in a sustainable and affordable manner. This is the basic philosophy that underpins the work of the recently established Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Institute (REEEI), which is nestled on the campus of the Polytechnic of Namibia. “The age of traditional or conventional power generation is coming to an end,” said Harald SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt, who is attached to the institute as a consultant. “With renewable energy, Namibia can generate more than 50 percent of its power needs.” REEEI was formed in October last year, after consultations between the Polytechnic and the Ministry of Mines and Energy, to function as a hub of information to the government, private sector and academic institutions to increase awareness and knowledge on the usage of renewable energy and energy efficiency. It aims at identifying renewable energy resources in the country to be implemented in conjunction with energy efficiency technology, to contribute to the economic development in the country through more national independence in the provision of firm, affordable and sustainable energy. “Studies done on the future energy scenario in the country have prompted us to form the REEEI,” said the head of Polytechnic, Dr Tjama Tjivikua. “Namibia needs such an institution; somebody has to collect information in this regard.” “Our interest is to help people apply renewable energy and we do everything that is necessary for them,” added SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt. Namibia’s Energy Situation Currently Namibia is about 40 percent electrified. It consumes about 1.92 billion kilowatts per year and imports 50 percent of its electricity from South Africa. The country’s over-dependency on imports from Eskom and other sources, and its insufficient local generation capacity of conventional electricity, leaves it in a very vulnerable situation. The implications hereof are that the country is subject to an increased export of money, and a reduced quality and reliability of energy supply. There is also an increase of rolling blackouts. “This can negatively impact on foreign investment, health care and the development and operation of vital infrastructure,” commented Kudakwashe Ndhlukula, coordinator of REEEI. “It can have an adverse impact on the realization of Vision 2030.” Currently Ruacana Hydro provides about 240 megawatts (MW). It is currently operational, but its capacity is significantly reduced during winter months. The Van Eck Coal station produces about 120 MW, and operates at N$1 million per day. The Paratus is diesel operated and produces 24 MW. The much vaunted Kudu Gas project is anticipated to be completed by 2009 and will produce between 400 and 800 MW per year. It will cost the country N$5 billion, and will be operational for approximately 22 years. The Zambia Inter-connector, which has a capacity of 200 MW is under construction at a cost of N$1.2 billion. Another future project that will not come into operation before 2015, is the Grand Inga Hydro project in the Congo that is estimated to cost N$30 billion. The Hwange coal-fired power station, a project with Zimbabwe, might be operational by the end of the year, or early next year. This costs Namibia about N$300 million. The Epupa/Baines hydro project is currently being re-evaluated, as well as the LÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼deritz wind park. Other possible energy projects are the Lower Orange Hydro and Divundu Hydro schemes. With the growing world interest in nuclear energy and discussions about the development of nuclear power stations in the country – and a growing criticism against it – the REEEI staff also sound warning bells for a possible local insistence on the use of uranium as a source of power generation. The discussions have come up since the country is considering value addition to this natural resource, and for use at national level rather than the mere exportation thereof. Namibia is currently one of the biggest exporters in the world of “yellow cake”, the uranium oxide that forms the basis for fuel rods to be used in atomic power stations. “While value addition may in general terms be very intelligent, for this product it is a non-starter,” argued SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt against the establishment of nuclear stations in the country. “First, the minimum size nuclear power station available is 1000 MW – that is exclusive of the pebble-bed technology, which has proven dysfunctional and uneconomical in Europe. Namibia’s peak demand is a mere 500 MW,” he said. “Added to that, is that nuclear fuelled power stations must get rid of its electricity all the time. That is why nuclear power stations in industrialized countries have several back-up high voltage power lines connected to them. If this is not done, these stations carry the risk of becoming nuclear bombs because it is not possible to cool them down in a controlled way as quickly as needed in case the only power line fails.” Another criticism, added SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt, is that nuclear power stations need a lot of water for cooling. “That means that these stations can then only be set up along the coast, with Walvis Bay being the only logical position. Since there is not sufficient power lines, they would have to be constructed, which would increase the cost with no added economic benefit.” Another problem is that Namibia currently just simply does not have the expertise and experience to harvest this energy source. Nuclear power requires a solid basis in science and technology, which is sorely lacking in the country. He further expounded on political reasons why nuclear energy is not advisable. “Recent examples on world political level have shown that an attempt of a country to obtain independent access to nuclear power creates major political turmoil, even if that country has signed all international treaties that are relevant to confine the use of the material and equipment for civil purposes only. It can be assumed that those countries, which have the technology already, might even be prepared to wage a military intervention to prevent other countries from having independent access to the technology that is needed to run nuclear power stations on its own because this technology would also enable them to build a nuclear bomb. “It is beyond a doubt that nuclear power generation is utterly expensive and completely unnecessary to cover the energy needs of Namibia now and in future because the county is blessed like no other country with other renewable resources.” Alternative Sources the Only Way The future for our power needs, say experts, are in the sun and wind resources Namibia has in abundance. Robert Schultz, Senior Project Manager of the Energy Desk at the Desert Research Foundation of Namibia (DRFN) also makes a strong argument for the country to develop and use renewable resources. “Namibia has 3 300 sunshine hours per year, which can generate about six kilowatts per day,” he remarked. “With renewable energy we can cover all our power needs and even export some of it,” concurred SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt. “Namibia is the only country that can live 100 percent on renewable and sustainable energy.” Currently domestic electric water heaters form the largest consumption of electricity during peak hours at 49 percent. With the introduction of solar water heaters, this can be dramatically reduced. Solar water heaters save almost 100 percent of electricity for hot water. “Large-scale introduction of solar water heaters could created hundreds of jobs, provided that we start producing them here in the country,” remarked SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt. Another alternative, now becoming very popular, is the generation of wind power. Wind speeds along Namibia’s windy coastline are between three to 14 miles per second. A six- mile per second is considered economically viable. The 220 kilowatts turbine close to Walvis Bay produced sufficient electricity in December 2005 for 50 to 100 households. The use of biomass is also becoming more popular. About one to four bush-encroached hectares, according to Schultz, can provide the entire annual electricity needs of a typical household. Bush can be burned through various proven technologies to produce electricity for both grid and off-grid applications. “Approximately 1.5 million hectares harvested annually could provide for Namibia’s entire electricity consumption of about 3000 GW per annum,” he remarked. Furthermore, bush encroachment covers about 26 million hectares and are reported to cause losses to the national economy of more than N$700 million per year, according to 2004 figures. Returns of increased livestock production alone will usually not offset the costs of removing bush. But there are huge gains from increased rangeland. Another option is the use of biodiesel, which can be produced from all kinds of vegetable oils. In Europe, for example there are large plantations to grow plants for oil extraction. This, suggested SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt, is a possible new source of income for Namibian farmers. “Should Namibians base their national economic future on commercial farming of crops or livestock? Why not farm energy?” he challenged. Namibia’s numerous hot springs can also be used to generate geo-thermal power generation. Incandescent light bulbs and compact fluorescent lights (CFLs), recently popularized by NamPower to the public, are said to save up to 80 percent of electricity for lighting. “Renewable energy technology gets cheaper with time and the very source of power is available in abundance,” said SchÃÆ’Æ‘Æ‘ÃÆ”šÃ‚¼tt. “Why invest in fossil energy knowing that it will become increasingly expensive? If Namibia has the courage to go for new solutions now, we will be ahead of others and can later on not only sell the power but also the knowledge about how to generate, administer and distribute it.”