15 Steadfast for East Africa: Powering Energy Dreams …
459
projects in the Rwandese pipeline include; Rusizi Hydro Power III where
147 MW will be shared between DRC, Burundi and Rwanda with the
latter taking a share of 49 MW. The Rusumo’s 80 MW will be shared
between Burundi, Tanzania and Rwanda with the latter taking a share of
27 MW. Hakan Peat to Power Project will give Rwanda 80 MW while
other 50 MW will come from Symbion Methane Gas Project. Moreover, another 40 MW is expected to be generated from other Micro or
Mini-Hydro projects which are at different development stages.
Rwanda is mostly countryside, there is no grid, and generators that
run on gasoline or diesel are becoming more expensive by the day to
operate (Disch and Bronckaers 2012). One may ask, how are the people
of Rwanda going to maintain vaccines, provide clean water, run fans
or operate a clinic to improve health care over the long run, or simply
adapt to climate change, without reliable energy—clean or dirty, cheap
or expensive?
We can conclude that in a bid to address this matter, the nations have
started to adopt the FIT structure. However, they are limited by the availability of large resources for utility-scale based plants that can provide
baseload. The wind resources in Rwanda and Burundi can play a major
role in meeting the energy demand in these countries. However, equally
impressive is that the neighbouring countries are well endowed, complimenting the lacking nations. A 2015 study undertaken by the World
Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) found
that according to initial renewable energy mapping studies, Tanzania
had solar resources equivalent to Spain’s, and potential for wind power
exceeding that of California. Developing all these resources would lead
to a supply glut and stranded resources, as the economy doesn’t have the
active demand to absorb power generation north of 4 GW at the current
economic development.
East African countries should, therefore, consider looking into an
East African Premium Tariff design for large scale utility projects that
will have a more than 50% export component of their total generation. This model would replicate the export processing zones, which
offer locators tax incentives and monetary incentives to produce goods
in the host country. However, most if not all these goods don’t actually
get to be consumed in the host market but are export-oriented. This
model of export processing zones has been very efficient in attracting
459
projects in the Rwandese pipeline include; Rusizi Hydro Power III where
147 MW will be shared between DRC, Burundi and Rwanda with the
latter taking a share of 49 MW. The Rusumo’s 80 MW will be shared
between Burundi, Tanzania and Rwanda with the latter taking a share of
27 MW. Hakan Peat to Power Project will give Rwanda 80 MW while
other 50 MW will come from Symbion Methane Gas Project. Moreover, another 40 MW is expected to be generated from other Micro or
Mini-Hydro projects which are at different development stages.
Rwanda is mostly countryside, there is no grid, and generators that
run on gasoline or diesel are becoming more expensive by the day to
operate (Disch and Bronckaers 2012). One may ask, how are the people
of Rwanda going to maintain vaccines, provide clean water, run fans
or operate a clinic to improve health care over the long run, or simply
adapt to climate change, without reliable energy—clean or dirty, cheap
or expensive?
We can conclude that in a bid to address this matter, the nations have
started to adopt the FIT structure. However, they are limited by the availability of large resources for utility-scale based plants that can provide
baseload. The wind resources in Rwanda and Burundi can play a major
role in meeting the energy demand in these countries. However, equally
impressive is that the neighbouring countries are well endowed, complimenting the lacking nations. A 2015 study undertaken by the World
Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) found
that according to initial renewable energy mapping studies, Tanzania
had solar resources equivalent to Spain’s, and potential for wind power
exceeding that of California. Developing all these resources would lead
to a supply glut and stranded resources, as the economy doesn’t have the
active demand to absorb power generation north of 4 GW at the current
economic development.
East African countries should, therefore, consider looking into an
East African Premium Tariff design for large scale utility projects that
will have a more than 50% export component of their total generation. This model would replicate the export processing zones, which
offer locators tax incentives and monetary incentives to produce goods
in the host country. However, most if not all these goods don’t actually
get to be consumed in the host market but are export-oriented. This
model of export processing zones has been very efficient in attracting