1
UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR AFRICA
(ECA)
Revised Final Draft
Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework in Africa:
Toward Energy Security and Sustainable Livelihoods
Prepared for the
FOOD SECURITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION (FSSDD)
Mersie Ejigu
Executive Director
Partnership for African Environmental
Sustainability (PAES)
January 2012
2
Table of Contents
Acronyms…….. .................................................................................................................... 4
Definitions of Key Terms ...................................................................................................... 7
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 11
Background, Purpose and Study Methodology .................................................................... 20
Introduction…… ................................................................................................................. 23
Chapter I. Africa’s Energy Landscape and Trends ............................................................... 26
I-1. The Economic, Social, Environmental and Political Significance of Energy in
Africa ... ………………………………………………………………………………….26
I-2 Energy Structure, Production and Consumption ......................................................... 29
I-3 Harnessing Renewable Energy Resources .................................................................. 34
I-4 Energy Efficiency and Conservation........................................................................... 39
Chapter II Bioenergy: Potential, Drivers, Benefits and Risks ............................................. 40
II-1 Bioenergy: Evolution and Future ............................................................................... 41
II-2 The Drivers ................................................................................................................ 43
II-3 Benefits of Bioenergy ................................................................................................. 44
II. 4 Bioenergy Risks ......................................................................................................... 49
II-5 Bioenergy Challenges................................................................................................. 52
II-6 Global Bioenergy Trends ............................................................................................... 57
II-7 Bioenergy Potential and Sustainability of Major Feedstocks .......................................... 57
II-9 Second Generation: Cellulosic Biofuels and Algae ........................................................ 73
II-10 Peace and Security Aspects of Bioenergy Development ............................................. 74
Chapter III. Bioenergy Policies and Strategies Development in Africa: Lessons Learned……..76
III-1. Survey of Sub-regional Strategic Policy Frameworks ................................................. 76
III-2. Review of National Bioenergy Policies in Africa ......................................................... 77
III-3 Key Lessons Learned ................................................................................................. 79
Chapter IV. The African Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework .................................... 81
IV-2 The Political and Socioeconomic Context of the Policy ............................................... 85
IV-3 Key Issues and Policy Options ...................................................................................... 86
IV-4 Process of Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Development ................................................. 96
IV-5 Policy Implementation Mechanisms ........................................................................... 100
IV-6 Monitoring and Follow-Up of the Implementation of the Policy ................................ 102
Chapter V. The Way Forward ........................................................................................... 104
Conclusion……................................................................................................................. 108
Annex I: Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Development Check List ...................................... 110
Annex II. Sub-regional Aspects of Energy Trends ............................................................ 113
References…… ................................................................................................................. 120
3
List of Tables
Page
Table 1. Africa Energy Demand, 1990 –2015 31
Table 2. Power Generation in Africa, 1990-2015 31
Table 3. Total Final Consumption of Energy in Africa, 1990-2015 32
Table 4.Transport energy by source in Africa, 1990-2015 32
Table 5: Energy consumption in Africa by fuel source, 2007-2035 32
Table 6. Africa: Electricity Access, 2009 34
Table 7. Africa: Key Oil-Producing Countries and Proven Reserves 34
Table 8: Ongoing and Planned Projects in African Countries with Major
Wind Energy Use 39
Table 9. West Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators 43
Table 10. Central Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators 44
Table 11. Eastern Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators 45
Table 12. Southern Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators 46
Table 13: North Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators 47
Table 14. Land acquired for biofuels production in selected African countries 61
Table 15. Bioenergy land acquisition and feedstock in some African countries 62
Table 16. Prices per megajoule (MJ) of Ethanol and Household Fuels 64
Table 17. World Ethanol Fuel Production (million liters) 65
Table 18. Comparative Analysis of Crop Productivity in Three
Climatic Conditions 66
Table 19. Africa Land Use 66
Table 20. Regional Distribution of Cultivable Land 67
Table 21. Crop Residues: Residue Ratios, Energy Produced, Current Uses 69
Table 22. Comparative Analysis of Performance of Biofuels Feedstocks 71
Table 23. Production of Sugar and Sugar Cane and Potential for Cogeneration 74
List of Maps
Map 1. Electricity Access Map: Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Asia 33
Map 2. Crop Suitability for Rainfed Sugarcane, High Input Level 73
Map3. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed Maize, Low Input Level 75
Map 4. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed Sweet Sorghum: Intermediate Input 75
Map 5. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed Oil Palm, High Input Level 76
Map 6. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed Soybean, Intermediate Input Level 77
List of Charts
Chart 1. Hydropower Potential and Percent Utilized 37
Chart 2. Comparison of Energy Yields of Major Biofuels Feedstocks 72
4
Acronyms
AEEP Africa-EU Energy Partnership
AfDB African Development Bank
AMCEN African Ministerial Conference on Environment
AMU Arab Maghreb Union
AU African Union
AUC African Union Commission
AUC/DREA AUC Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture
AWEA Africa Wind Energy Association
CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CDM Clean Development Mechanism
CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa
CSD Commission on Sustainable Development
DAC Development Assistance Committee
DLUC Direct Land Use Change
EAC East African Community
ECA Economic Commission for Africa
ECCAS Economic Community of Central African States
ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States
EIA Energy Information Administration
EGS Environmental Goods and Services
EU European Union
EUEI PDF European Union Energy Initiative Partnership Dialogue Facility
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa
FDI Foreign Direct Investment
FEMA Forum for Energy Ministers of Africa
GBEP Global Bioenergy Partnership
GDP Gross domestic product
GEF Global Environment Facility
GHG Green House Gases
GJ Gig joules
GNP Gross National Product
GSP Generalized System of Preferences
GEF Global Environment Facility
GFSE Global Forum for Sustainable Energy
GVEP Global Village Energy Partnership
GWh Gigawatt hour
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
HDI Human Development Index
HDR Human Development Report
5
ICT Information and communications technology
IDA International development assistance
IEA International Energy Agency
IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute
IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
ILUC Indirect Land Use Change
IMF International Monetary Fund
INFORSE International Network for Sustainable Energy-Africa
IRENA International Renewable Energy Agency
JPOI Johannesburg Plan of Implementation
KWh Kilo Watt Hours
LCA Life Cycle Assessment
LGP Length of Growing Period
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
LUC Land Use Change
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MTOE Million Ton Oil Equivalent
NBI Nile Basin Initiative
NEPAD New Partnership for African Development
NPCA NEPAD Planning and Coordination Agency
NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
PAES Partnership for African Environmental Sustainability
PPP Purchasing Power Parity
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Plan
REC Regional Economic Communities
RECP Renewable Energy Cooperation Programme
REEEP Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership
REIL Renewable Energy and International Law
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
R&D Research and Development
RITD Regional Integration and Trade Division (UNECA)
SADC Southern African Development Community
SEI Stockholm Environment Institute
TPES Total Primary Energy Supply
UEMOA West African Economic and Monetary Union
UN United Nations
UNCCD UN Convention to Combat Desertification
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNFCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization
6
WHO World Health Organization
WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development
WTE Waste to Energy
WTO World Trade Organization
WWI World Watch Institute
7
Definitions of Key Terms
Anhydrous ethanol – pure ethanol from which almost all the water has been removed so
that it can be blended with gasoline (Kojima, 2005 - The World Bank).
Bagasse – the cane residue remaining after sugarcane stalks are crushed to extract the
juice. Bagasse generally accounts for about 30 percent of the total crushing and can be
used to generate power and heat.
Bioenergy – renewable energy derived from biomass (biological materials) in solid,
liquid and gas forms as well as the social, economic, scientific and technical fields
associated with using biological sources for energy (modified definition by author from
various sources including One Biosphere). Bioenergy, throughout the document, refers to
modern bioenergy.
Bioenergy technologies – technologies that employ renewable biomass resources to
produce wide-ranging energy-related products, including electricity, liquid, solid, and
gaseous fuels, heat, chemicals, and other materials.
Biodiesel – plant and/ or animal oil based liquid fuel (diesel) produced through
transesterification of vegetable oil, residual oil and fats used to run diesel engines and
generators. Transesterification involves mixing vegetable oil and animal fat with methanol
along with a liquid catalyst to produce methyl esters (biodiesel) and glycerin (Abdeshahian,
et al. 2010).
Bioethers - (also referred to as fuel ethers or oxygenated fuels) are compounds that act as
octane rating enhancers and added to petrol as blending components to make it burn
cleanly and completely (UNECA, 2011 Biofuels Development in Africa: Technology
Options and Related Policy and Regulatory Issues, Draft Report).
Biofuels – ethanol and biodiesel derived from plants, including agricultural crops that can
be used for cooking, transportation, and lighting. As used here, it includes (i) Agrofuels-
“biofuels obtained as a product of energy crops and/or agricultural (including animal) and
agro-industrial by-products” ((FAO 2004) and “biofuels from municipal waste -
municipal solid waste incinerated to produce heat and/or power, and biogas from the
anaerobic fermentation of both solid and liquid municipal wastes” (FAO 2004).
Biohydrogen - hydrogen produced biologically (bacterial process and algae) from both
cultivation and waste organic materials. It is mostly used in refineries and large producers
and also fuel car engines to replace hydrogen produced from fossil fuels.
Biomass - any organic material which has stored sunlight in the form of chemical energy
that includes wood, wood waste, straw, manure, sugarcane, aquatic plants, animal wastes,
microbial cells, municipal wastes and many other byproducts from a variety of
agricultural processes. FAO’s definition of biomass is “material of biological origin
excluding material embedded in geological formations and transformed to fossil” (FAO
2004).
Biopower (biomass power) – the use of biomass to generate electricity through burning
biomass feedstocks directly to produce steam that drives a turbine, which turns a generator
8
that converts the power into electricity. Biopower system technologies include direct-firing,
co-firing (mixing biomass with fossil fuels), gasification, pyrolysis, and anaerobic
digestion used in conventional power plants.
((NRELhttp://www.nrel.gov/learning/re_biopower.html).
Charcoal – “solid residue derived from carbonization distillation, pyrolysis and
torrefaction of fuel wood” (FAO 2004).
Conventional biodiesel – oil extracted from plants and animals through a process that
involves, in the case of plant based biodiesel, first crushing seeds to extract the oil and then
converting this vegetable oil or fat into fatty acids, which are subsequently converted to
methyl or ethyl esters directly using an acid or base to catalyze the reaction (Kojima 2005-
The World Bank).
Direct LUC (DLUC) – land use change that “occurs in situ resulting from a commercial
decision as part of a specific supply chain for a specific product e.g. if a field is changed
from growing wheat to oil seed rape.” (Hart Energy, Land Use Change: Science and Policy
Review, 2010)
Energy security - a condition in which a nation or region ensures adequate, reliable,
continuous, affordable, easily accessible, equitable and environmentally sustainable supply
of energy goods and services for a healthy and productive life for all people.
Energy insecurity – the actual and potential threats to livelihoods, social wellbeing, and
human freedom at the individual, community, and national levels arising from the lack of
access to an affordable, adequate, and uninterrupted supply of clean energy.
Energy security assessment – examines potential and actual threats to national stability,
livelihoods, wellbeing at the individual and community level arising from the lack of, or
unequal access to energy goods and services.
Environment - the totality of all physical resources including land, water, atmosphere,
climate; biological resources including fauna, flora, and genes; ecosystem services and
functions including carbon sinks; as well as the cultural, social, and economic aspects of
human activity and environmental change.
Environmental degradation – the reduction and deterioration in stock and quality of
agricultural land, soil fertility, vegetation cover and fresh water resources. It relates to
processes of chemical degradation (loss of essential or limiting nutrients), physical
degradation (surface sealing, crusting) and biological degradation (decline in flora and
fauna, deterioration of soil nutrients, pollution and degradation of marine resources) and
consequent decline in quantity and quality of land resources (soil, water and vegetation)
resulting in scarcity.
Environmental sustainability – management of natural resources and the environment
that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.
9
First-generation technology – technology for producing ethanol from sugar crops, such as
sugarcane or sweet sorghum, and from starchy crops, such as cassava and wheat, and
producing biodiesel from animal fats or vegetable oils.
Human security – “Human security means protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions
in the patterns of daily life – whether in homes, in jobs or in communities” (UNDP, 1994).
Hydrous ethanol – ethanol that contains some water and, thus, is not suitable for blending
with gasoline. It can be used for cooking, lighting, and transport in specially designed
vehicles. It is cheaper than anhydrous ethanol ((Kojima, 2005- The World Bank).
Indirect LUC (ILUC) - changes in the use of land as a consequence of the direct change.
For example, if less wheat is grown, other lands may be pressed into service to supply the
shortfall. This could include LUC in another country or continent. (Hart Energy, Land Use
Change: Science and Policy Review, 2010)
Land - “the terrestrial bio-productive system that comprises soil, vegetation, other biota,
and the ecological and hydrological processes that operate within the system” (UN
General Assembly, UNCCD, 1994).
Ligno-cellulosic ethanol – ethanol extracted from the lingo-cellulosic material (plant
matter) found in plant stalks, cedar pine, agricultural residue including waste seed husk,
timber waste, and specialty crops including fast-growing grasses or trees through
biological enzymatic process (IEA, 2006).
Primary energy consumption – the direct use at the source, or supply to users without
transformation, of crude energy, that is, energy that has not been subjected to any
conversion or transformation process (OECD 2001).
Producer gas – “solid biofuel gasified/manufactured in a gasifier” (FAO, 2004).
Second-generation technology – refers to the technology used to produce lingo-
cellulosic ethanol.
Social sustainability – refers to the continuous betterment of human well-being and
welfare through access to health, nutrition, education, shelter, and gainful employment, as
well as through maintenance of effective participation in decision-making within and
across generations. (Adapted from Maler and Munasinghe, 1996).
Sustainable bioenergy – is energy derived from biomass that is affordable, easily
accessible to all, burns cleanly, enhances the material and social wellbeing of all people
and maintains ecosystem integrity and diversity across generations and geographic space.
Sustainable development – Development that "meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland
Commission, 1987).
Value addition – the processing of raw materials and agricultural products for exports
and domestic consumption that result in additional value for the commodity over what
10
has been required to produce it from the previous stage of production (UNECA FSSDD,
Draft Sustainable Development Indicators Framework for Africa (SDIFA), 2011).
Woodfuel – commonly referred to as traditional (biomass) energy and includes “all types
of biofuels originating directly or indirectly from trees, bushes and shrubs (i.e. woody
biomass) grown on forest and non-forest lands” (FAO, 2004).
11
Executive Summary
1. This study on the Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework in Africa: Toward Energy
Security and Sustainable Livelihoods is a collaborative initiative of the African Union
Commission (AUC) and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa
(UNECA). The Constitutive Act of the African Union values the sovereignty and the
sovereign equality of member states and their inalienable right to decide on their
policies. This framework is, thus, designed to serve as a technical tool for promoting
the sustainable development of bioenergy within the framework of NEPAD as well as
global conventions that Africa is party to.
2. The Framework is a logical continuation of the various AU initiatives launched to
support the sustainable development of bioenergy in Africa, including: (i) the Addis
Ababa Declaration and Action Plan on Sustainable Bio-fuels Development in Africa
adopted at the first High-level Bio-fuels Seminar in Africa, August 2007; (ii) Dakar
Renewable Energy Development Plan of Action adopted at the International
Conference on Renewable energy in Africa, April 2008. Recently, the development of
a bioenergy framework has been a priority area of work for AU/NPCA, particularly
with the approval of the 2nd
Action Plan of Africa-EU Energy Partnership (AEEP) and
the Renewable Energy Cooperation Programme (RECP) by the African Energy
Ministers meeting held in Maputo, Mozambique, November 2010, which aimed at
tripling bioenergy production in Africa by 2020.
3. Recognizing the uniqueness of “energy” and its economic, social, political and
cultural features, the Framework is based on the principle that energy and
development are inseparable. Meeting the necessities of life (e.g., food, clothing,
shelter, and transport) depends on access to energy services. The lack of access to
modern energy services represents a state of economic and social deprivation.
The Setting
4. Africa’s energy profile underpins a complex, nonlinear development process. It is
characterized by low level energy consumption, a rural sector that is dependent on
traditional biomass energy and a modern sector that is dependent on fossil fuels midst
huge wealth of underexploited renewable energy resources, and against the backdrop
of high petroleum prices, pervasive poverty, and environmental degradation. Energy
and development are inextricably linked; under development, and low energy
production and consumption reinforce each other.
5. Endowed with abundant energy resources, Africa can take pride in its wide ranging
sources: solar and wind resources; over 1.1 million GWh of exploitable hydro
capacity; over 9,000 MW of geothermal potential; 59 billion barrels of petroleum; 8
billion cubic meters of natural gas reserves and, over 60 billion tons of coal (FAO
2008). Africa’s bioenergy potential is immense given the rapid advances in research
12
and development that have brought new energy feedstock into production and second-
generation lingo-cellulosic technologies to come into full commercial production
before the end of this decade.
6. The levels of production and access to energy in the majority of African countries are
inadequate, seriously constraining the economic development. Access to affordable,
reliable, clean and renewable energy, as well as related technologies is critically
important in enhancing productive capacity. In addition, the efficient use and
distribution of energy can play a critical role to enhance energy availability.
7. Almost six out of ten Africans have no access to electricity and three-fourths of the
energy used in domestic settings comes from dwindling supplies of traditional fuels.
Africa has the lowest energy consumption level in the world, a reflection of its low
level of economic and social development, accounting for only 3.5 per cent of global
consumption in 2009. Of the total energy Africa consumes, traditional biomass (solid
wood, twigs, and cow dung) accounts for 58 per cent, electricity 9 per cent, petroleum
25 per cent, and coal and gas each 4 per cent (IEA, 2009). About 65% of the African
population rely on traditional biomass for cooking, most of them in rural areas (IEA,
2010). This heavy reliance on traditional biomass has exacerbated deforestation and
land degradation. Indoor combustion has contributed to widespread respiratory
diseases.
8. End-use energy efficiency is also low with Africa losing ten to forty percent of its
primary energy input. According to the World Bank (2009), the continent’s deficient
power infrastructure is associated with a loss of about 0.1 per cent in per capita
income growth equivalent to a loss of 1.9 per cent GDP growth (UNECA, 2011).
Further, a number of countries have introduced containerized mobile diesel units for
emergency power generation to cope with power outages at a cost of about
US$0.35/KWh, with lease payment absorbing more than 1 per cent of GDP in many
cases (UNECA, Economic Report on Africa 2011).
9. According to the same Report, Africa registered an economic growth rate (measured
in GDP) of 4.7 per cent in 2010 despite the continued global economic and financial
crisis. Although this relatively high economic growth came from oil and non-oil
producing countries, the performance of non-oil producing countries was much lower
as they find it difficult to cope with high oil prices. The growing concerns for energy
security and global climate change coupled with the desire of countries to produce
their own energy and reduce dependence on imported oil, and advances in bioenergy
technologies, galvanized interest in modern bioenergy, most notably, biofuels, as an
important solution to Africa’s energy debacle.
10. There is no single solution to a country’s energy problems. Africa should harness its
wealth of renewable (solar, hydropower, geothermal, and wind) and non-renewable
(oil, gas, coal, etc.) energy resources. Each country should strive to meet its energy
13
needs from multiple sources to the extent that these resources are economically
feasible, environmentally sustainable, and socially responsible. In the pursuit of this
goal, modern bioenergy offers unique opportunities to meet energy and sustainable
development objectives.
Bioenergy Benefits, Costs and Risks
11. Bioenergy is energy derived from any biological material. According to FAO (2004),
there are three types of bioenergy: woodfuels, agrofuels and biofuels from municipal
wastes. Bioenergy, as used here, includes agro-fuels and biofuels from municipal
waste and which are used as solid fuels (chips, pellets, briquettes, logs), liquid fuels
(methanol, ethanol, butanol, biodiesel), gaseous fuels (synthesis gas, biogas,
hydrogen), electricity and heat agro-industrial production, transportation, heating,
cooking, and lighting. Liquid bioenergy (biofuels) is becoming the most common
form of bioenergy and is largely used, either mixed with oil-based fuel or
directly/solely, in the transport sector.
12. Bioenergy has many benefits as well as costs and risks. On the benefit side, bioenergy
offers huge potential to provide cheaper, more accessible, environmentally sound
alternative energy both at the household and commercial levels. For example, home-
use fuel, such as paraffin, wood and coal, could be replaced by ethanol gel, made by
mixing ethanol with a thickening agent and water. The gel fuel burns without smoke,
and thus eliminates respiratory health risks associated with current fuels used in the
home.
13. Sustainable bioenergy has the potential to significantly contribute to enabling each
country to be own energy producer and help achieve a number of the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), namely to “eradicate extreme poverty and hunger,”
“ensure environmental sustainability,” and “promote gender equality and empower
women1.” Bioenergy also emits less carbon, thereby helping to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. The carbon dioxide is absorbed by the new plants and recycled, rather
than being released into the atmosphere. In contrast, carbon from fossil-fuel
combustion is fully released into the atmosphere. Bioenergy resources provide cleaner
burning with negligible emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrate and particulates, which are
urban pollutants. Modern bioenergy enables African
countries to produce a high-value crop
(biofuel/biodiesel) that has high domestic and export
market opportunities.
14. If not managed cautiously and prudently, costs and
risks can not only easily erode the benefits but also
result in social problems and carbon debt. For example,
1 See item (d) below on social benefits of biofuels
Bioenergy helps meet three vital
Millennium Development Goals:
Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme
Hunger and Poverty
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality
and Empower Women
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental
Sustainability
14
recent media reports label biofuels as the “false promise” and driver of large land
acquisitions that displaced rural people and threatened Africa’s remaining small
tropical rain forests. Thus, how the bioenergy is produced, the feedstock used where it
is produced, who produced it and how it is produced and marketed matter significantly
in realizing the full economic, social and environmental benefits that accrue to
bioenergy. The paramount risks include:
a. Food or Fuel (Consumption or Combustion). Most bioenergy feedstock crops (e.g.,
sweet sorghum, corn, and rapeseeds), used today, are staple food for the majority of
the African population. Any use of these crops to produce biofuels may reduce food
production and raise prices. In countries where these crops
are used either directly or indirectly as animal feed, the
livestock sector would be adversely affected too. Given the
current low level of agricultural technologies, land tenure
and poor agricultural management practices; it may also be
difficult for farmers to produce both food and fuel
simultaneously.
b. Land requirement. In many African countries, population growth and slow
technological progress have forced people to rely on extensive agricultural practices
that exhausted fertile land and become increasingly dependent on degraded and
marginal land. Recent large land acquisitions for the production of biofuels
feedstock in several African countries have attracted global media attention because
of risks that may include crowding out of small producers and degradation of
ecosystems, in addition to competition with food production.
c. Deforestation and ecosystem destruction. The production of today’s
biofuels/biodiesel from feedstock crops, sugarcane and oil palm in particular, takes
place in high rainfall and warm areas, which house Africa’s remaining tropical forests
and natural heritage. The conversion of natural habitats and ecosystems such as peat
lands, forests, grasslands, fallow lands, and marginal crop lands results in land use
changes (direct and indirect) that not only erode climate benefits that accrue to
bioenergy, through reduced GHG emissions and pollutants, but result in net GHG
emissions many times more than conventional fuel, depending on the type of land
used. While a better understanding of GHG emissions life cycle is in order, a
sustainable bioenergy policy should factor in all carbon credits and debits in guiding
the choice of feedstocks and maximize economic, social and environmental benefits.
15. There are ample opportunities to minimize the above risks, although these opportunities
need to be seen in the context of various challenges. One of the challenges is access to
and efficiency of bioenergy technology as much of the available knowledge on biofuels
technology is based on large-scale farming of two feedstocks: sugar cane and corn.
Newer technologies that are used for a wide variety of feedstocks and operate at
different capacities, particularly on a small- and medium-scale, need to be widely
available and easily accessible. Further, for all production schemes, all feedstocks must
“Depending on the type
of land used, biofuels
could ultimately emit 10
times more carbon
dioxide than conventional
fuel” MIT Study
www.energyboom.com
15
have a positive energy balance (yield more energy than the energy required for growing
and processing) as a minimum, the matter that has been difficult to achieve so far for
some starch-based feedstocks.
Toward a Pan-African Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework
16. Several African countries have developed national bioenergy policies and set blending
targets. A survey of ten African countries (UNECA, Biofuels Technology Options
2011) shows that policy development experience several gaps, although national
policies have been formulated concomitant regulatory frameworks are lacking, and
capacities for land suitability analysis and feedstocks processing are inadequate.
17. Further, the vital importance of a continental approach and policy framework has
been underlined by various African Union initiatives launched in support of the
sustainable development of bioenergy in Africa, including: (i) Addis Ababa
Declaration and Action Plan on Sustainable Bio-fuels Development in Africa, which
was adopted at the first High-level Bio-fuels Seminar in Africa, August 2007; (ii)
Dakar Renewable Energy Development Plan of Action, adopted by the International
Conference on Renewable energy in Africa organized by the AUC jointly with a
number of concerned organizations, Dakar, April 2008; and (iii) The 2nd
Action Plan
of Africa-EU Energy Partnership (AEEP) and the Renewable Energy Cooperation
Programme (RECP), approved by the African Energy Ministers, Maputo,
Mozambique, November 2010, which is aimed at tripling bioenergy production in
Africa by 2020.
18. A Pan-African sustainable bioenergy policy framework and guidelines is needed to
offer an over-due continental vision and guidance for promoting energy and income
security. New market opportunities for biofuels arising from blending targets set by
European Union, high demand in the United States, and possibilities that bioenergy
offers each country to be own energy producer and replace fossil fuels by cheaper,
socially and environmentally friendly alternative, have made bioenergy development
an economic and political imperative that requires continental vision and guidance.
19. The development of a pan-African sustainable bioenergy policy framework will, thus,
strengthen efforts, built upon lessons learned, and promote the sustainable pursuit of
bioenergy development through enhanced socially and environmentally responsible
investment in the production, processing, marketing and use of bioenergy. The policy
framework also offers opportunities to harmonize national and sub-regional bioenergy
policies and strategies to enhance regional cooperation and trade as well as to ensure
that one environmental or social problem is not substituted by another through
improperly designed bioenergy policies.
20. The primary goal of the Pan-African Policy Framework is to enable the bioenergy
sector to contribute significantly and effectively to the reduction of poverty,
16
improvement of social and environmental well-being of rural people, and enhancing
energy access and security. The developed Policy Framework would vocally
strengthen efforts made to achieve build energy and livelihoods secured and climate
resilient Africa, and minimize the potential risks of bioenergy.
21. The Policy Framework promotes a holistic approach to energy development, a broad
development agenda that takes bioenergy beyond the transport sector aiming at
mproving access to energy at the household level (rural and urban) for cooking and
lighting, as well as at the commercial or industrial levels; focusing on non-food
feedstocks; the importance of evaluating each bioenergy feedstock for its economic,
social and environmental benefits and costs prior to issuing investment contracts.
22. The policy Framework promotes and advocates for the consideration of small
producers and low income groups (which constitute a large segment of the
population) central (both as producers and consumers) to the transition towards rural
transformation and development in African countries. National bioenergy policies
should comprehensively target and address the three levels of bioenergy operation,
local, medium and large scales.
23. The process of policy development is as important as the policy itself. Assessing the
global and regional dynamics and opportunities, identifying the needs and societal
concerns, putting in place the necessary legal and institutional frameworks for
coordinating and integrating economic, social and environmental objectives,
mobilizing and building capacities (human and institutional), consulting and engaging
stakeholders, and setting up monitoring mechanisms are all critical to the success of a
sustainable bioenergy policy. Indeed, developing a policy is empowering as it helps
countries to address inter-related social environmental and economic issues on
proactive basis.
24. Bioenergy to be designated as sustainable should embrace the following ten
principles:
• Food security: enhance access to and availability of food.
• Poverty reduction and rural development: improvement of livelihoods
including employment and income generation, education and health
services as well as enhancement of linkages between the rural and urban
economies. Small-scale land holders are central to bioenergy development
and planning.
• Economic transformation: integrated feedstock production and
processing as well as export of processed goods through the use of
technology, inputs and management of waste.
17
• Respect for and maintenance of different cultures, diversity and social
fabric through implementing a participatory policy development.
• Conservation of forest resources and wetland ecosystems thereby
enhancing the integrity and diversity of the bio-physical systems.
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: contribute to climate change mitigation by
significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions.
• Soil: implement practices that reduce soil degradation and/or maintain soil
health.
• Water: maintain or enhance the quality and quantity of surface and ground
water resources, and respect prior formal or customary water rights.
• Land Rights: respect for land rights and land use rights, both formal and
informal.
• Human and Labour Rights: promote descent work and wellbeing as well
as full respect of human and labor rights as well as women and child
rights.
25. The formulation of sound, realistic and politically supported policy is not a guarantee
for its effective implementation. Institutional, financial, legal and regulatory as well as
monitoring and follow-up mechanisms, among others, need to be put into place to
ensure the realization of the policy. Often an implementation strategy is formulated
following the adoption of the policy encompassing: raising awareness, promoting
dialogue, sharing experiences; developing human and institutional capacity; putting in
place the necessary laws, regulatory frameworks and institutions, mobilizing
investment resources and funds, specially microfinance schemes for small holder
producers; and effective integration of the policy into national development strategies
and plans; and enhancing coordination and cooperation across Africa.
26. Effective monitoring and follow-up of the implementation of the policy is a vital
aspect of the policy framework and includes, among others, the importance of
continuity, and building and institutionalizing monitoring and evaluation, i.e., doing,
improving, learning and relearning, and development of indicators.
The Way Forward
27. In formulating this policy, it is important to draw lessons from policy and strategy
development experiences of the post Rio Earth Summit years, when policy responses
to sustainable development challenges have not been effective. Each African country
needs to assess its own and other relevant countries' experiences, drawing lessons
(successes and failures) to formulate its national sustainable bioenergy policy. It will
18
also be useful to consider the findings of global and regional assessments, including
the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the Global Energy Assessment (ongoing),
and other assessments by UN organizations. Accordingly, critical issues that need to
be considered include: (i) country ownership and internally driven processes - the
driving force behind any energy policy needs to be a country's own energy demand
and factor endowments; (ii) long-term view and political commitment; (iii) strong
institutional leadership and follow up. (iv) integration of sustainable bioenergy policy
in national development and poverty-reduction strategies; and (v) public participation
in the formulation of national bioenergy strategies.
28. Investing in energy efficiency and saving. Often overlooked, though is as important as
new investment. Indeed, the availability of energy is only half a step toward ensuring
access to energy. Programs for promoting efficient energy use would include:
expanding energy saving technologies, notably improved stoves, at the household
level; reducing energy wastage at the industrial level; and, improving managerial and
operational efficiencies of the power sector.
29. Increasing Investment in Biomass. There will be 627 million people in Sub-Saharan
Africa (52 million more people in 2015 than in 2004) who will depend on traditional
biomass as their primary energy source against the backdrop of severe environmental
degradation and deforestation. The ecological and socioeconomic impacts of such
continued dependence on traditional biomass are grave. As part of a national
sustainable energy policy, increasing the quantity and quality of biomass density must
be accorded the highest priority. Indeed, investment in tree plantations at the
household, community, and state levels is cheap, as it can be done easily and
routinely. Yet, it offers quick and high investment returns, and helps curtail
environmental degradation. Greater biomass density lays the foundation for the
success of bioenergy programs including second generation biofuels and also trade
growth in bioenergy.
30. Develop new and innovative funding mechanisms. In addition to
accessing funding opportunities from traditional multilateral and
bilateral sources, there is a need for bold new measures to generate
funding, which may include: targeted micro-credit programs; an
infrastructure to reach widely dispersed smallholder farms; public-
private partnerships; concessionary loans; subsidies; cross-industry
partnerships that tie the provision of one sector’s services with funding to support
bioenergy initiatives; and, technical capacity to access global funds (e.g., CDM and
GEF facilities). As substantial upfront investments is probably required for bioenergy
development, African governments need to implement policy measures to motivate the
private sector to invest in the value chain ranging from producers to consumers of
bioenergy (farmers, processors, traders and consumers). These policy measures may
include fuel tax exemption, and government support to R&D.
Investing in energy
efficiency and
saving energy, often
overlooked, is as
important as new
investment.
19
31. Involve Sub-regional organizations. Africa has well-functioning sub-regional
organizations that command the political support and respect of their respective
member states. These sub-regional organizations represent powerful means to
promote the bioenergy agenda, harmonize energy policies, and expand the sub-
regional energy market. Expanding the sub-regional market, in turn, helps to achieve
economies of scale as most African countries have a
small energy sector; reduce interstate tensions and
conflict contributing to building peace; and promote
sustainable development. Bioenergy trade is perhaps one
of the fastest growing sectors worldwide and the
creation of sub-regional markets is an important
dimension of the sustainable bioenergy development
agenda. In this context, countries in each region can
mutually benefit from the emerging bioenergy markets
by pooling their resources and jointly utilizing their
comparative advantages in bioenergy production and processing.
32. A key component of the bioenergy agenda is the need for extensive research and
development on reducing cost of producing bioenergy feedstock; expanding the range
of bioenergy feedstock toward nonfood crops; raising the energy yield of crops;
moving from annual to perennial crops and from soil depletion to soil enrichment
with the view to ensuring environmental sustainability; developing varieties that are
drought resistant and grow well under semi-arid and arid conditions; and assessing
technology options and determining suitability to local conditions.
Conclusion
33. The sustainable development of bioenergy has the potential to contribute substantially
to improving access to affordable and clean energy, raising living standards, reducing
poverty and respiratory diseases, halting environmental degradation, improving
infrastructure, transforming rural economies, and empowering countries to produce
own energy. Nevertheless, improperly designed policies do not only erode these
benefits but also turn bioenergy into huge social and environmental liability that
destroys Africa’s social fabric and integrity of ecosystems. Thus, how bioenergy
development is designed, the kind of feedstock used, and how it is produced and
where it is processed are vital aspects of a successful bioenergy development.
Expanding the bioenergy sub-
regional market, in turn, helps to
achieve economies of scale as
most African countries have a
small energy sector and
contributes to building enduring
peace and promoting sustainable
development.
20
Background, Purpose and Study Methodology
This study on the Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework in Africa: Toward Energy
Security and Sustainable Livelihoods is a collaborative initiative of the African Union
Commission (AUC) and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA). The Constitutive
Act of the African Union values the sovereignty and the sovereign equality of member
states and their inalienable right to decide on their policies. The purpose of this
Framework is, thus, to serve as a technical framework and tool that highlights issues that
can be considered in the development of national bioenergy policies.
As can be recalled, the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) identified
five critical areas for achieving the goal of energy for sustainable development:(i)
increasing access to energy services, particularly for the poor; (ii) improving energy
efficiency; (iii) increasing the proportion of energy obtained from renewable energy
sources; (iv) advanced energy technologies; and (v) reducing the environmental impact of
transport (UN Energy, 2007).
NEPAD highlights the critical role energy plays as an engine of development which
impacts the performance other sectors and the competitiveness of enterprises. It calls for a
fundamental improvement in the African population access to reliable and affordable
energy supply. More specifically, it calls for the development of new and renewable
energy resources to “increase Africans’ access to reliable and affordable commercial
energy supply from 10 to 35 per cent or more within 20 years; improve the reliability and
lower the cost of energy supply to productive activities in order to enable economic
growth of 6 per cent per annum; and reverse environmental degradation that is associated
with the use of traditional fuels in rural areas” (OAU/AU 2001). It calls as well for
rationalizing the territorial distribution of existing and unevenly allocated energy
resources and to strive to develop the abundant solar resources.
Within the WSSD and NEPAD framework, the AUC has launched a number of initiatives
to promote the sustainable development of bioenergy in Africa that include: (i) Addis
Ababa Declaration and Action Plan on Sustainable Bio-fuels Development in Africa,
which was adopted at the first High-level Bio-fuels Seminar in Africa, August 2007; and
(ii) Dakar Renewable Energy Development Plan of Action, adopted by the International
Conference on Renewable energy in Africa organized by the AUC jointly with a number
of concerned organizations, Dakar, April 2008. Among the specific measures proposed
were: developing enabling policy and regulatory frameworks for biofuels development;
harmonizing national biofuels policies, strategies and standards through regional
economic communities; and establishing a regional market for biofuels. At its meeting in
Maputo, November 2010, the African Energy Ministries approved the 2nd
Action Plan of
Africa-EU Energy Partnership (AEEP) and the Renewable Energy Cooperation
Programme (RECP) which aimed at, among others, tripling bioenergy production in
Africa by 2020.
21
In 2005, the Forum of Energy Ministers of Africa (FEMA) was established to “provide
political leadership, policy direction and advocacy on energy issues, to increase access,
better utilization and management of energy resources for a sustainable social and
economic development of Africa and develop a coherent energy strategy”2
Recently AU, AfDB and UNECA developed the Framework and Guidelines on Land
Policy in Africa, which among other things, promotes the sustainable management of land
resources and the conservation of Africa’s ecosystem integrity and diversity, which offers
a valuable framework for this work. Further, the UNECA recently completed a study
titled: Biofuels Development in Africa: Technology Options and Related Policy and
Regulatory Issues, 2011, which has served as a launching pad and building block for the
development of this study. As the bioenergy policy and regulatory institutions in most
African countries are not yet adequately and properly developed, there is a need for a
continental framework that guides the development of sustainable bioenergy in Africa,
nationally and regionally, and harmonizing national bioenergy policies, strategies and
standards through regional economic communities to ensure economies of scale and
access to international markets.
The primary objective of this assignment is to provide a comprehensives basis to develop
Africa Bioenergy Policy Framework and Guidelines that will help raise awareness
among African leaders and the general public about the need for environmentally and
socially friendly bioenergy development policies, the rationale for it, the issues
(economic, social and environmental) to be addressed in a changing international
economic and political order, and highlight opportunities and risks including the
interaction between food, fuel and feed, and the capacity deficits. .
As a basis for developing the Framework, this study seeks to:
review recent developments, future growth and risks in the global and continental
energy market, and outlook
assess the drivers, benefits as well as the trade-offs of/between increased
bioenergy production and the provision of food, local food prices, forest sector,
water consumption, climate change, and equity,
document the development policy landscape and capacity needed, as well policy
options for the promotion of sustainable bioenergy development in Africa; and
propose a process for policy development as well as mechanisms for monitoring
and follow up of implementation of the Framework.
Study Methodology
The development of this sustainable bioenergy policy framework and guidelines is based
on literature review, workshop based consultation, and interviews with key stakeholders.
2 IISD, http://africasd.iisd.org/institutions/forum-of-energy-ministers-in-africa-fema/
22
The work builds upon the massive work done by the Africa Union Commission, United
Nations organizations, other multilateral and bilateral organizations, regional economic
communities, academic and research institutions, NGOs and the private sector.
The desk review encompasses reviewing and analyzing published and unpublished
studies and reports, academic research, and other written sources of information on
bioenergy at global, regional, sub-regional, national and sub-national levels. This include
policies, strategies, plans of action, reports, speeches, survey reports, reviews, especially
the ECA commissioned study on biofuels technical feasibility in Africa, policy
documents and briefs, decisions, resolutions and directives.
During the course of preparation, under the supervision of ECA/FSSDD, close
collaboration was maintained with and AUC/DIE-DREA and the RITD division of ECA.
Close consultation with various relevant stakeholders were made as appropriate.
The background analysis was presented to an Expert Group Meeting (EGM) held on
November, 2011. The EGM brought together key experts from bioenergy related line
ministries of AU Member States as well representatives and experts from Africa-based
organizations and communities, UN agencies, and AfDB. The meeting reviewed for
validation this document. The key outcome of the meeting is a refined draft of the
Africa’s bioenergy policy framework. The draft policy framework will then be sent to the
ministerial meeting responsible for energy for consideration and possible adoption. Once
the draft framework is adopted this will launch the Framework and Guidelines onto the
formal policy-making processes of the AU Summit for consideration and adoption.
23
Introduction
Energy is critical to the survival of human society. It is an economic, social, political and
cultural good. The food we eat, the clothes we wear, our mobility from one place to the
other, in a word our livelihood, depends on energy. The organization of society including
the division of labor between men and women revolves around the type of energy used
and how it is accessed and processed. The lack of access to energy means the lack of
access to food and shelter. It also means the lack of access to health and education
services, and inability to move from place to place. Thus, the lack of access to energy can
be equated to a state of economic and social deprivation.
Energy and development are inseparable. Higher level of electrification, for example, has
always been a vital indicator of industrial development. But energy is not only a means of
development but also an end result of development or an end in itself. Access to energy is
a fundamental human right. Access to energy and access to light is, indeed, a basic human
necessity and a right every citizen should enjoy.
Africa accounts for 3.5 per cent of global energy consumption, the lowest level in the
world (IEA 2009, EIA 2010). End-use energy efficiency is a major drawback with Africa
losing an estimated ten to forty per cent of its primary energy input. Of the total energy
Africa consumes, traditional biomass (solid wood, twigs, and cow dung) accounts for 58
per cent, electricity 9 per cent, petroleum 25 per cent, and coal and gas each 4 per cent.
About 608 million people depended on traditional biomass (wood, charcoal, cow dung,
etc.,) and lack access to electricity or to any kind of modern energy services in 2008 (IEA
2009). This number is expected to grow to 765 million by 2030 and 30 percent of the
population depending on biomass will live in Africa (IEA 2009). Traditional biomass
energy involves generating energy from wood, straw, other plant materials, charcoal, and
animal dung through direct burning. Rural communities use mostly wood, as it is easier
and cheaper to obtain, while urban areas use mostly charcoal. Introduced around the first
half of the ninetieth century, charcoal, improves the carbon content and energy density
and has proved superior to wood because it burns more efficiently and cleaner. Still, both
wood and charcoal represent the most inefficient use of plant energy resulting in
considerable energy wastage at the production and consumption processes. Additionally,
indoor burning of traditional biomass contributes to widespread respiratory diseases,
which resulted in about million deaths each year. With rising deforestation and
consequent shortage of wood against the backdrop of high population growth, the pattern
of biomass energy is changing too. Today, biomass energy includes twigs, leaf litter, and
agricultural residues with adverse effects on forest resources, soil structure, fertility and
social health.
While the continent’s population grew by 2.5 per cent per annum, the world’s highest,
Africa’s consumption of traditional biomass energy rose by 42 per cent between 1990 and
2004 (IEA 2006). The rising trend will continue with an estimated 54 million more
24
Africans to be dependent on traditional biomass by 2015 (IEA 2006). This means
increased environmental degradation, deepening poverty, limited capacity to adapt to
climate change, and unbearable social conditions, particularly for women and children.
Sustainable bioenergy has the potential to significantly contribute to ameliorating the
situation.
The high oil prices affect the rich and poor differently. Developed countries have the
capacity to cope with the high energy prices. On the other hand, non-oil developing
countries, especially those in Africa, have limited or no such capacity and have to face the
huge impact across sectors and social groups. For example, Africa accounts for 3% of the
world’s energy consumption, the lowest per capita modern energy consumption in the
world, however, the heavier burden of high energy costs falls on it. In many African
countries, high energy costs breed social grievances, increase political tensions, hamper
efforts to reduce poverty, widen income disparity, halt the transition from subsistence to
commercial economy, and force women to spend more time gathering wood and less time
participating in social programs and being economically productive. Many African
countries will be far from achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) owing,
to, among other factors, high energy costs. Oil prices, which averaged USD23 per barrel
in 2001, hit a record high of USD145.28 per barrel in July 2008. Although dropped to
below USD50 briefly in early 2009 rose again to 113.93 in April 2011 and dropped to
USD85.41 on 12 October, 2011. Global primary oil demand is expected to rise to 105.2
mb/d from its level of 84.7 mb/d in 2008 (IEA 2009).
“The energy sector is responsible for two-thirds of GHG emissions, and the costs of
climate change in terms of adaptation are estimated to reach USD50-170 billion by 2030,
half of which could be borne by developing countries” (UNEP 2011). Countries face
three challenges: reduce dependence on expensive imported oil, improve the
socioeconomic wellbeing of citizens, and make a transition to modern energy sources that
are environmentally friendly and low carbon.
Undoubtedly, the phenomenal fluctuation and increase of oil prices have brought the
issue of energy security and the quest for renewable and environmentally friendly
alternative sources of energy to the forefront of the global development and political
agenda. The quest for a cheaper and environmentally friendly substitute for oil and the
urgent need to reduce dependence on a single energy source became an investment
priority and a research and policy agenda that both the rich and low income countries
shared. Bioenergy, dominated by biofuels (bioethanol and biodiesel) used mostly for
transport, emerged as a natural solution to the energy problem.
Modern bioenergy is produced in solid, gas, and liquid forms. It represents the sustainable
and more efficient production of energy derived from plants and agricultural crops. While
developed countries, for example, are interested in replacing petroleum in the transport
sector, Africa’s interest is much broader and includes reduction of poverty, curtailing
deforestation, and improving access to affordable and cleaner energy at the household
25
level. The extent to which bioenergy generates these benefits depends on the resolution of
environmental and social concerns, food security, vulnerable communities, water
resources, and deforestation concerns arising from liquid bioenergy.
There is no, and cannot be, a single solution to the energy problem. Each African country
should explore all potential sources of energy, based on the respective factor
endowments, and use these resources in a manner that is economically, socially, and
environmentally sustainable. Bioenergy, hydropower, solar, and wind energy fall in the
category of renewables. Depending upon economic, social and environmental costs and
benefits, a country can develop all or some of them. These energy sources complement
one another; it is not an either / or approach. For example, hydropower once thought to
be the most dependable and least cost renewable energy option is no longer reliable or
holds because of recurrent drought and consequent decline of water volumes, in addition
to environmental degradation that may result in, specifically with mega-hydro projects.
This has required the promotion and development of cogeneration technologies, and
bioenergy is a major contributor.
With the setting of blending targets by the European Union and other big consumers,
biofuels production showed phenomenal rise to 0.8 million barrels (mb) per day in 2008
(with 37 per cent between 2006 and 2007); forecasted to rise to 4.4 mb/d in 2035 (IEA
2009). “The potential to produce biomass for energy in a sustainable way is sufficient to
meet global demand” argues the World Bioenergy Association.
Bioenergy technologies use agricultural crops and other plants (which are already there or
can grow easily) to produce various energy products including electricity; liquid, solid,
and gaseous fuels; heat; and, chemicals. However, concerns about the effects on food
prices, carbon recycle, land grabs and displacement of small farmers induced by biofuels
investments, monocultures of big producers, clearing forests for biofuel plantations,
policies that tend to favor producers in developed countries and do not create processing
capacity in-country, poorly negotiated investment deals in terms of economic, social and
environmental sustainability, and the doubts that clouded climate benefits of biofuels
have attracted huge media attention and will, undoubtedly, shape the future of bioenergy.
Indeed, the economic, social and climate benefits of bioenergy depend on how it is
produced, where it is processed and how it is managed. There is clearly a strong case for
directing expenditures on biofuels more towards research and development, especially on
second-generation technologies, which, if well designed and implemented, could hold
more promise in terms of alleviation of socioeconomic conflicts, and reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions with less pressure on the natural resource base.
This study is organized in two major sections: the first part covering chapters (I-III)
seeks to provide background analysis (including production, trade, and consumption
trends, benefits, costs and risks) and identify issues critical to the development of an
African sustainable bioenergy policy framework and guidelines. The second part covering
26
chapters (IV-V) serves to provide a comprehensives basis for the formulation of Africa
Bioenergy Policy Framework.
Chapter I. Africa’s Energy Landscape and Trends
1.1 introduction
Energy is a unique commodity as it is: an economic good – it is income-generating,
tradable, and also a source of livelihood; a social good – for example, access to light is a
basic human right; a political good – it is a factor for political stability; and, a cultural
good – the nature of energy and its source determine the division of labor in society, for
example, between men and women.
Africa is endowed with huge natural resource However, it, specifcally Sub Sahara Africa,
continues to face multiple challenges: food insecurity (a region with abundant resources
but cannot feed itself); health hazards (arising from malaria and HIV/AIDS epidemics);
water scarcity; vulnerability to climate change risks; governance (fragile democracy and
lack of political stability); and environmental degradation (deforestation and massive
biodiversity loss). The low level of energy consumption, a rural sector that is dependent
on traditional biomass energy and a modern sector that is mainly dependent on fossil oils
against the backdrop of high petroleum prices is an addition to the litany of woes Africa
endures. “The prices of fuel in sub-Saharan African countries are about double those in
the most competitive markets, and landlocked countries face even higher prices”
(Mitchell 2011).
I-1. The Economic, Social, Environmental and Political Significance of Energy in
Africa
Africa’s energy profile underpins a complex, nonlinear development process. Heavy
reliance on traditional biomass energy, pervasive poverty,
environmental degradation, and underdevelopment
reinforce each other. Energy and development are
inextricably linked. The development of the energy sector
paves the ground for industrialization and expansion of
transport and communication. The level of energy
consumption is a key indicator of economic growth;
developed countries have higher levels of energy
consumption than less developed countries. Energy
impacts the development and functioning of all sectors at
all societal levels.
Energy impacts the socio-economic wellbeing and performance of African societies in a
variety of ways. For example, oil-price increases affect oil-producing and non-oil-
producing African countries in opposite ways, but both pose challenges. Oil-producing
“Togo is among the hardest hit
economies in the world, with a
projected balance of payments
impact of the oil price shock of 6
per cent of GDP in 2008. This
reflects Togo’s heavy reliance on
oil imports (18 per cent of GDP
in 2007) resulting from its role
as a regional transport hub and
extensive diesel-based electricity
generation” IMF 2008
27
African countries have enormously benefited from the price increases. Yet, these
countries are as dependent on biomass energy and have high levels of poverty similar to
many non-oil producing African countries. If not productively used, it is highly possible
for oil revenue to contribute to deepening poverty and environmental degradation.
Undoubtedly, non-oil-producing African countries, on the other hand, have been hard hit
by high oil prices. Due to the low level of GDP and their narrow production bases, these
countries have limited capacity to cope with high oil prices. The loss in terms of
aggregate output as a result of oil price increases is also highest in these countries.
According to an IEA study, for every $10 oil-price increase, Asia loses on the average 0.8
per cent of GDP, highly indebted countries lose 1.6 percent, and sub-Saharan African
countries lose more than 3 per cent (IEA 2006). The same study also shows that
developed countries would suffer the least, with the GDP of the United States falling by
only 0.3 per cent the first year, and Japan’s GDP by 0.4 percent (IEA 2006)
Further, energy costs account for a large percentage of household and national budgets in
many African countries. The cost of fuel imports relative to GDP is particularly high
given low levels of income. For example, in 2004, Sierra Leone and Zambia spent about
40 and 50 per cent, respectively, of their foreign exchange on fuel imports. Developments
in the renewable energy sector have not been significant since then to change the situation
in a fundamental way. Undoubtedly, the impact of high oil prices particularly on the
urban poor has been severe and widespread. As a result of higher energy costs, the
number of people below the poverty line in developing countries has increased by four to
six percent since 2002 (IEA 2006).
Development strategies and programs are sensitive to energy prices. In many countries,
high oil prices distort development priorities by altering budgetary resource mobilization
and allocation. On the revenue side, there will be less tax collection as the profitability of
oil-consuming companies diminishes and unemployment surges as a result of oil-price
increases. Further, to avoid socio-political discontent, governments may be tempted to
mitigate the effect of oil-price increases by shifting budgetary resources from the
education and health sectors.
Social impacts of high energy costs can also be huge. For example, in Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Guinea, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Niger,
and Tanzania, high oil prices have had a severe social impact (IEA 2006), including:
Increased marginalization of the poor and widening of income inequality. The
poorer sections of society are hit hardest because the poor have limited or no
means of hedging oil-price increases. They depend on kerosene for cooking and
lighting, which eventually becomes unaffordable, leading them to shift to charcoal
for their energy needs. Higher oil prices also mean higher transportation costs,
which increase the urban poor’s commuting costs. In rural areas, the cost of
getting crops to markets raises disincentives to increasing (increase) productivity.
28
Reduced spending on education and health. When budgets are squeezed, most
governments tend to cut spending on education and health services to finance
higher energy costs for defense and other sectors. This, in turn, results in fewer
children going to school and greater numbers of people who have no access to
health care.
Increased burdens on rural women. In many African rural societies, women are
responsible for gathering wood fuel for household chores. With increased
deforestation against the backdrop of high population growth and steadily increase
in kerosene prices, fuel-wood collection has become increasingly taxing on
women. Scarcity of wood fuel forces women to spend more time gathering wood
and less time earning a livelihood.
Not less important are the environment impacts of high oil prices, which manifest in at
least three ways:
Households switch to charcoal and wood fuel to cope with sharp rises in kerosene
prices, thereby escalating forest and environmental degradation. In many African
countries, forests and bushes are cleared first, then the twigs, leaves, and grasses.
Doing so often degrades the lands so that it is no longer agriculturally productive
any vegetation.
The intensive use of dung and twigs deprives the soil of nutrient-replenishing
materials causing land degradation.
Several African countries have launched oil and gas exploration at a wide scale,
particularly in areas where drilling was not commercially feasible or wildlife
sanctuaries and biodiversity treasures exist.
The period since the first oil shock of the 1970s has seen significant impacts of energy on
political stability. Recent oil price hikes have been attributed to the popular uprisings in
North Africa and the Middle East. In oil importing countries, high oil prices have
triggered anti-government protests and wide-ranging grievances throughout the world,
including Africa forcing governments to resort to price freezes, tax cuts, and other
measures to soothe voter resentment. For example, in Nigeria, “furious demonstrations
shut down whole sections of major cities around the country” that prompted the
Government to freeze fuel prices (Washington Post 2005). There have been several
instances when high oil price – triggered protests in the past few years and also resulted in
military coups and deep-rooted political instability, for example, Liberia in 1979 and
Ethiopia in 1974. Today, grievances arising from the high oil prices are widespread. Still,
the potential for these grievances to fuel social unrest and provide fertile ground for
antigovernment elements to exploit the situation remains high.
29
In sum, the economic, political, social, and environmental effects of high oil prices are
broader and deeper than often understood. In many non-oil producing African countries,
high energy costs breed social grievances, increase political tensions, and create
conditions for political instability. Such escalating costs hamper efforts to reduce poverty,
widen income disparity, and halt the transition from subsistence to commercial
agriculture. High energy costs also accelerate the pace of forest/environmental
degradation, and force women to spend more time gathering wood and less time pursuing
livelihood earning and social activities. Poorer non-oil African countries are hardest hit
because they do not have the economic strength − either as a nation, or as individuals − to
cope with the implications of oil price increase.
I-2 Energy Structure, Production and Consumption
Africa’s energy profile features a continent with extremely low energy production and
consumption and high dependence on traditional biomass. The continent’s share in world
energy consumption, an indicator of economic growth, which was 3.8% in 1980 increased
to 5% in 2000, 5.2% in 2007 and is projected to increase to only 5.3% in 2015
representing the lowest energy share in the world and the lowest per capita use of modern
energy (IEA 2009). Compared with other regions of the world, per capita consumption of
modem energy in Africa was estimated at almost half that of South-America and one third
of that of Middles East and North Africa in 2008 (World Development Indicators, World
Bank, 2011). Of the total energy consumed, biomass accounts for 59 per cent, electricity
8 percent, petroleum 25 percent, and coal and gas each 4 percent (OECD 2004).
Traditional biomass energy is projected to remain dominant in Africa in 2030. Per capita
primary energy use is estimated at 0.38 Mtoe in 2030, down from 0.37 in 2007, and yet
one quarter of that of Latin America (IEA 2009).
Africa is, however, a net exporter of energy (IEA 2009) primarily because of the large
crude oil production in a limited number of countries, which is mostly exported. For
example, in 2005, Nigeria exported close to 89 percent of its oil (2.3 million bbl/day of a
total oil production of 2.6 million bbl/day) while Angola exported about 86 percent of its
oil (1.8 million bb/day of exports from a total production of 2.1 million bb/day)3 (EIA
2006). Projection data shows that Nigeria will account for 8.97% of African regional oil
demand by 2015, while providing 22.76% of supply. Therefore, Africa’s designation as a
net energy exporter would be misleading unless placed in the context of the degree of
industrialization. Even some of the African net oil exporter countries are counting heavily
on traditional biomass for domestic energy supply and enjoying meager per capita
consumption of energy. For example, in the above two mentioned countries the
contribution of traditional biomass to total energy consumption has been over 80 per cent
while oil accounted for only 10.1 per cent of total energy consumption in Nigeria in 2008
(EIA 2010). This certainly raises concerns on the efficient and equitable use of resources,
and policy priorities.
3http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables1_2.html
30
During 1990 – 2007, Africa’s consumption of traditional biomass increased by 54 per
cent while its consumption of oil rose by 60 per cent (IEA 2009). This should be
compared with developing Asia, where traditional biomass consumption increased by 12
per cent and oil consumption by more than 167 per cent. Asia’s far higher rate
industrialization and faster economic growth explains to a large extent the huge difference
in oil consumption of the two regions.
Table 1. Africa Energy Demand, 1990 – 2015, in Mtoe
1990 2007 2015 Share (%) 2007
Biomass and waste 190 295 331 47
Hydro 5 8 11 1
Other renewables 0 1 3 0
Oil 87 132 136 21
Gas 30 85 120 13
Coal 74 106 110 15
Nuclear 2 3 3 0
Total primary energy demand4 388 630 714 100
Source: IEA 2009
Africa’s total power generation, which is expected to increase to 166 GW through 2015
(IEA 2009). Of this, hydropower accounts for only 6 per cent. Due to the inclusion of
South Africa, which is the largest producer and consumer in Africa, 47 per cent of the
power generated comes from coal while oil accounts for only 14 per cent (Table 2) .
Table 2. Power Generation in Africa, 1990-2015, in GW
1990 2007 2015 Share (%)
2007
Biomass and waste 0 1 6 0
Hydro 5 8 11 6
Other renewables 0 1 3 1
Oil 11 18 13 14
Gas 11 38 62 29
Coal 39 62 68 47
Nuclear 2 3 3 2
Total power 69 131 166 100
Other energy sector 57 90 103 100
Of which electricity 6 10 12 11
Source: IEA 2009
Table 3 below shows Africa’s 2007 total final energy consumption with 56 per cent
generated from biomass and waste and 24 per cent from electricity while electricity
accounts for only 9 per cent.
4Total Primary Energy Demand: Indigenous production + imports - exports - international marine
bunkers ± stock changes (IEA 2006)
31
Table 3. Total Final Consumption of Energy in Africa, 1990-2015, in Mtoe
1990 2007 2015 Share (%)
2007
Biomass and waste 169 261 287 56
Electricity 21 43 57 9
Other renewables 0 0 0 0
Oil 70 112 122 24
Gas 9 29 34 6
Coal 19 17 16 4
Heat 0 0 0 0
Total final
consumption
289 463 516 100
Source: IEA 2009
A breakdown of the transport energy by source shows the dominance of oil as the main
source of transport energy, 97 per cent, in 2007 (Table 4).
Table 4.Transport energy by source in Africa, 1990-2015, in Mtoe
Transport 1990 2007 2015 Share (%)
Oil 36 66 72 97
Biofuels 0 0 1 0
Other fuels 1 2 2 3
Source: IEA, 2009 World Energy Outlook
Based on the current energy consumption growth rates, Africa’s total energy consumption
is projected to increase by around 69 per cent through 2030 (Table 5) with serious
implications on energy security. It is noteworthy to note that this projection does not take
into account the development needs for Africa to enhance energy security where 70 per
cent of rural Africa does not have access to clean energy. Furthermore, energy security
will be more costly in the years to come against the steadily growing demand for energy,
especially by emerging economies.
Table 5: Delivered energy consumption in Africa by fuel, 2007-2035, in Quadrillion Btu
Fuel 2007 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 percentage change (%),
2007-2035
Liquids 6.4 7.2 7.4 8 8.7 9.4 46.88
Natural gas 3.3 5.1 6.1 6.9 7.1 7.4 124.24
Coal 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.7 5.3 6.2 47.62
Nuclear 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 200.00
Renewable 3.7 4.2 4.5 4.9 5.3 5.8 56.76
Total 17.8 20.8 22.5 24.6 26.5 29 62.92
Source: International Energy Outlook 2010, IEA
32
Africa’s biomass consumption is expected to increase from 261 million tons oil
equivalent (Mtoe) in 2007 to 287 Mtoe in 2015, and to 319 Mtoe in 2030 (IEA 2009).
About 608 million people depended on traditional biomass (wood, charcoal, cow dung,
etc.,) and lack access to electricity or to any kind of modern energy services in 2008 (IEA
2009). This number is expected to grow to 765 million by 2030 with 30 per cent of
Africa’s population to depend on biomass (IEA 2009). This heavy dependence on
traditional biomass in the new era of expensive oil means:
• slow and/or stagnating economic growth and Africa further lagging behind the
rest of the world
• greater deforestation and environmental degradation
• worsening of poverty
• failure to meet MDG goals
• severe livelihood and energy insecurity
• slow transition to modern economy and hinder efforts in the move towards green
economy.
(i) Access to Electricity
Most of Africa’s population lacks access to electricity. In 2005, Sub-Saharan Africa’s
electrification rate was 25.9 percent (8 per cent for the rural sector), compared with 95.5
percent for North Africa, 78.1 percent for the Middle East, 72.8 percent for Developing
Asia, and 90 percent for Latin America (IEA 2006). Within Sub-Saharan Africa, rates
vary widely among countries. In Uganda, for example, less than four percent of the
population has access to electricity, while in South Africa, 66 percent do, and in
Mauritius, the entire population does (UNECA 2005).
Map 1. Electricity Access Map: Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Asia
Source: http://internationalrivers.org/en/node/3325
33
Today, there are 587 million Africans without access to electricity (IEA 2009). Most of
these people are in rural areas, where pervasive poverty and environmental degradation
have worsened their plight. The table below shows the urban-rural divide in electricity
access, with 58.3 percent electrification rate for the urban sector compared with 8 percent
for the rural population. North Africa enjoys a high electrification rate: 98.7 per cent and
91 percent electrification rates for the urban and rural sectors, respectively.
Table 6. Africa: Electricity Access, 2009
Region Population
without electricity
(million)
Electrification
rate (%)
Urban
electrification
rate (%)
Rural
electrification
rate
North Africa 2 99 99.6 98.4
Sub-Saharan Africa 585 39.5 58.3 14.3
Total Africa 587 41.9 68.9 25.0
Source: International Energy Agency, 2010 World Energy Outlook
(ii) Oil Production and Consumption
Africa has estimated petroleum reserves of 125.6 billion barrels5 and is emerging as a key
player in world crude petroleum production. The region’s share of world crude oil
production rose from 10.0 percent in 1973 to 12.2 per cent in 2005, while natural gas
production rose from 0.8 percent in 1973 to 6.2 per cent in 2005. As for hard coal
production, Africa’s share in world production grew from 3.1 per cent in 1973 to 4.9
percent in 2005 (IEA 2006).
Nigeria dominates Africa’s oil production in Africa with about 2.6 million bb per day,
and is ranked eleventh worldwide (out of 213 countries). Angola is the second largest
producer of oil with 1.6-million barrels per day and is ranked nineteenth (CIA 2006).
With 216,700 barrels per day, South Africa is forty-third, while the Democratic Republic
of the Congo, producing 22,000 barrels daily, ranks seventy-first. South Africa consumes
68 per cent of the region’s oil (CIA 2006).
Table 7. Africa: Key Oil-Producing Countries and Proven Reserves
Country Crude oil production
(‘000 barrels per day)
Proven reserve
(million barrels)
Biomass (% of
total energy)
HDI
Ranking
Nigeria 2,200 35, 900 81.0 154
Algeria 2,100 11,400 0.0 102
Libya 1,800 39, 100 1.0 64
Angola 1,400 72.0 161
Egypt 579 3.0 111
Sudan 382 563 87 141
Equatorial Guinea 330 120
Congo Brazzaville 244 79.0 140
Gabon 237 56.0 124
South Africa 217 56.0 121
Source: EIA 2010 and 2010 Human Development Report
5 http://middleeastoil.net
34
Ironically, Africa’s big oil-producing countries are hugely dependent on traditional
biomass as an energy source (Table 6 above). For example, Nigeria, Africa’s largest oil
producer and exporter, derives 83 percent of its energy from biomass, while the
corresponding figure for Cameroon is 80 percent, Sudan 87 percent, and the Congo
(Brazzaville) 79 percent.
The performance of oil-producing countries in the area of human development has also
been weak. With HDI rankings of 161 for Angola and 159 for Nigeria, it is clear that the
continent’s biggest oil-producing countries are among the world’s poorest countries.
(iii) Coal Production and Consumption
Total production and consumption of coal in Africa is low. South Africa is the single
largest producer of coal, accounting for 11 percent of the world’s reserves and producing
almost all of Africa’s coal output. About 77 per cent of South Africa's primary energy
needs are provided by coal. Other African countries that have coal-mining activities are:
Zimbabwe, Zambia, Niger, Malawi, Swaziland (400,000 tons annually), and Malawi
(about 50 000 tons per year). Botswana, Nigeria, Morocco, and Egypt are believed to
have significant regional potential for coal production.6
Although production costs are low, the region has a limited coal reserve. The negative
impact on the environment is a key factor that should be taken into account when
considering potential investment in coal mining.
c. Natural Gas.
Africa’s natural gas resources are concentrated in a few countries: where Algeria, Egypt
and Nigeria account for 80 percent of proven reserve (IEA 2009) and the continent’s
consumption has more than tripled in the period 1990-2007 (IEA 2009). The incremental
growth in Africa’s natural gas demand occurs mostly in the industrial and electric power
sectors. Like oil, natural gas exploration is moving rapidly in many African countries.
I-3 Harnessing Renewable Energy Resources
Renewable energy refers to energy that can be replenished at the same rate that it is being
used. Such resources are derived from plants, residues of plants and animals, solar
radiation, wind, water (hydropower), and the earth’s heat (geothermal). Indeed, Africa is
endowed with abundant energy resources including solar, wind, hydro and geothermal, as
well as petroleum and natural gas. Africa’s bioenergy potential is immense too,
particularly given rapid advances in research that have brought new energy crops into
production and second-generation lingo-cellulosic technologies within reach in less than a
decade.
a. Solid Biomass
6Africa: Mining - Coal Mining, http://www.mbendi.co.za/indy/ming/coal/af/p0005.htm
35
Traditional biomass is the primary source of energy for most Africans and will continue
to dominate energy production and consumption in the decades ahead (IEA 2009). It is
generated from wood, straw, other plant materials, charcoal, and animal dung through
direct burning. Rural communities use mostly wood, as it is easier and cheaper to obtain,
while urban areas use mostly charcoal. Charcoal contains concentrated energy (the energy
per mass of charcoal is about twice that of wood) that is cleaner and easier to transport
than wood. The notion of “clean burning” in the case of charcoal does not necessarily
mean low levels of emissions or inefficient energy production. This is because the total
emissions produced by charcoal through the manufacturing process could exceed total
emissions from wood burning. With urbanization continuing rapidly, charcoal is bound to
comprise an increasing share of Africa’s biomass energy use.
The continued reliance on woody biomass against the backdrop of high population
growth and heavy deforestation means that Africa is moving towards a wood fuel crisis.
For more than the past decade, the pattern of biomass has gone beyond woody biomass.
Traditional biomass energy usage today includes twigs, leaf litter, agricultural residues,
and dung. All of these are collected and used, but with adverse effects on forest resources,
soil structure, fertility, and human health. There is also considerable energy wasted in the
production and use of biomass energy. Although the problem’s severity and the
magnitude of the crisis vary among countries and rural communities, continued reliance
on traditional biomass energy is not an option.
With rising oil prices and government support, the International Energy Agency (IEA)
forecasts an increase in global biofuels use from about 1 mb/d in 2010 to 4.4 mb/d in
2035. Advanced biofuels, including those from ligno-cellulosic, are expected to enter the
market by around 2020, according to IEA, though the United States, Brazil and the
European Union are expected to remain the world’s largest producers and consumers of
biofuels.
b. Hydropower
At the global level, hydropower stands second to fossil fuels contributing about 20% to
the global electricity supply (Ministerial Conference, Sirte 2008). It is considered as
among the cleanest and most reliable sources of energy. In recent days, small hydro
power energy has increasingly become popular because of its low investment cost and
short gestation period.
Africa’s hydropower and geothermal power remains almost untapped with a mere 7 per
cent of the hydropower and 0.6 percent of the geothermal energy potential currently being
exploited. Africa has the world’s lowest hydropower utilization rate. The total installed
capacity is 21,000MW, 90% of which are concentrated in eight countries (D.R Congo,
Egypt, Gabon, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Zambia, Madagascar, and Mozambique) (Ministerial
Conference, Sirte 2008).
36
Chart 1. Hydropower Potential and Percent Utilized
Hydropower potential tapped
51%
22%
8%
80%
23%
34%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Europe
Asia
Africa
North America
Latin America
Oceania
Hydropower potential tapped
Source: African Development Bank, presentation by R.M. Gaillard, Hydro 2006,
September 2006
Estimated at 2,000 Twh/a, Africa’s hydropower potential is huge. This potential,
however, must be seen in terms of Africa’s water situation, which has four important
features:
Low level of precipitation. Rainfall in Africa is about 670 mm per annum (mm/a),
with the highest rainfall occurring in the Island countries (1,700 mm/a), the
Central African countries (1,430 mm), and the Gulf of Guinea (1,407 mm/a). The
lowest precipitation occurs in northern Africa, with an average rainfall of only
71.4 mm/a (The Africa Water Vision for 2025).
Uneven distribution of water resources. In terms of water availability, Africa is a
region of huge contrasts. Some regions have abundant water resources, such as
Central Africa and parts of West Africa; many other regions are dry and part of
either the Sahara or the Kalahari deserts. Africa is often referred to as the driest
continent.
Recurring drought and flooding. Eastern and Southern Africa experience long
periods of recurring drought, which is followed intermittently by severe flooding.
Countries in the Horn of Africa, in particular, have suffered from severe, recurrent
droughts that have reached apocalyptic proportions in some years. Frequent
flooding compounds the problem, destroying agricultural production.
Most of Africa’s large rivers are trans-boundary. Africa has one-third of the
world’s major international water basins. In almost all cases, however, water
originates outside the borders of the primary users of the water and crosses one or
more countries. For example, in Egypt, the entire flow of the Nile water
originates outside the country (86 per cent from Ethiopia). In Botswana, which
gets its waters from the Zambezi River, 94 per cent of its water originates outside
37
its borders. In Mauritania, 95 per cent of its water (the Senegal River), and, in
Gambia, 86 per cent of its water (the Gambia River) come from other countries
(Ruphael, 2004). In fact, Africa is endowed with a large volume of trans-
boundary rivers flow. Examples include: the Nile River, which has 10 riparian
countries; the Congo River, which holds nearly 30 pe rcent of Africa's freshwater
resources, has nine riparian countries; the Niger River with nine riparian
countries; the Zambezi River with eight riparian countries; the Volta River with
six riparian countries; and Lake Chad with five riparian countries. The large
number of international water basins in Africa, while posing Herculean
management challenges, offers huge opportunities for multi-country power
generation and the creation of regional energy markets.
Overall, the population’s highly limited access to electricity and the huge hydropower
potential mean considerable opportunities for hydropower development. Indeed, Africa’s
transformation from subsistence to an industrial economy requires that electricity
development precede other sectors. On the other hand, the sector faces several
constraints, including: (i) recurrent drought and climatic variation; (ii) high up-front
investment requirements; and, (iii) high risks (technical, economic, commercial,
environmental and social) arising from the investment and management of large
hydropower investments, in particular, including population displacement, biodiversity
loss, ecosystem disturbance). These constraints highlight the need for a carefully
articulated, economically feasible, environmentally and socially sustainable multi-country
hydropower development schemes. It also underscores the need to work out the optimum
energy mix on short-, medium-, and long-term basis. Thus, while Africa has a huge
hydropower potential, the heavy financial investment required along with the social and
environmental risks may adversely impact its development, hence diminishing its role in
the realization of Africa’s transition to modern energy.
c. Solar Energy
Africa has the world’s highest average amount of solar radiation each year because of its
proximity to the Equator. During winter, 95 per cent of the daily global sunshine, above
6.5 kwh/m2, falls on Africa. Solar power provides clean energy, which can be produced
anywhere the sun shines with competitive power production costs of around 0.04 –
0.06US$/kWh in the Sahara and Namibia deserts (UNECA, Biofuels Technology Options
2011).
Since the late 1970s, various efforts have advanced the solar agenda in Africa and, lately,
have accelerated in response to higher oil prices. However, solar energy use in Africa is
mostly at the household level and small scale applications. For example, Ethiopia with
Solar Power (Israel) is installing a total of more than 80KWp of photovoltaic systems in
rural locations where there is no grid access7. In Zambia with Apex-BP Solar (France),
7 See African Solar News at: http://www.solarbuzz.com/News/NewsAfrica.htm
38
121 community-based organizations and nine schools in rural areas will have access to
electricity for lighting, radio, television, and refrigeration8. In Tunisia, Apex-BP Solar
(France) is building “four telecommunication repeater stations powered solely by
photovoltaic solar power in the open desert.”9
Nevertheless, high initial investment costs and the lack
of capacity to maintain solar panels at the village level
have impeded wider adoption. Although investment
costs have been reduced considerably over the years,
solar panel technology still remains beyond most
Africans’ reach. Nevertheless, solar offers huge
potential as an alternative if solar panels can be made
more affordable and the necessary capacity for maintenance is developed. IEA 2009
d. Wind Energy
Despite Africa’s enormous unexploited wind energy resources, particularly along some
coastal and specific inland areas, and potential to supplement other renewable energy
sources, wind energy is not widely used. Africa’s total wind turbines installed capacity
stood at 906 MW in 2010 (0.5% of the worldwide capacity) (UNECA Biofuels
Technology Options 2011). Of this total, 169 MW were added in the year 2009), in three
countries, Egypt, Morocco and South Africa with Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia accounting
for 890 MW out of Africa’s total of 906 MW (WWEA 2011). The following distribution
of ongoing wind projects sheds some light on the geography of wind energy in Africa:
Table 8: Ongoing and Planned Projects in African Countries with Major Wind Energy Use
Country Wind energy projects expected
output
South Africa 8.65 MW
Morocco 253.9 MW
Namibia 220 KW
Egypt 123 MW
Eritrea 250 KW
Libya 20 MW
Tunisia 22 KW Source: Africa Wind Energy Association, 2006. http://www.afriwea.org/en/projects.htm
e. Geothermal Power
Another key renewable energy source in Africa is geothermal power, estimated at 14,000
MW, but only 0.6% of this potential has been commercially used with Kenya’s (127
MW) and Ethiopia (7 MW) (UNIDO 2009). The entire rift valley, stretching from
8 See the above source
9 See African Solar News at: http://www.solarbuzz.com/News/NewsAfrica.htm
“Solar is a long established
technology but in the past it has
been constrained by technical
difficulties in producing power
on a sufficiently large scale for a
given area of land at sufficiently
low cost” (IEA 2009)
39
northeastern Ethiopia to Mozambique, shows strong indications of geothermal potential.
East Africa alone has the potential to generate 2,500 MW of geothermal power10
.
Ethiopia and Kenya have already integrated into their national grids most of the power
they generated from geothermal power. High initial investment cost is a major constraint.
In sum, African countries have enormous possibilities and a diverse resource base to
resolve their multiple problems: low energy production and consumption; indoor
pollution; energy wastage; environmental degradation; poverty; and, social deprivation.
However, policies to date have focused on petroleum exploration and hydropower-based
electricity, with minimal attention accorded to development of bioenergy resources.
I-4 Energy Efficiency and Conservation
There is considerable energy wasted in the use of traditional biomass and electricity.
Woody biomass burning, widely practiced in Africa, is perhaps the most inefficient way
of using plant energy. Energy loss occurs at every stage of the production process, from
collection to charcoal making to final use in traditional stoves.
Of the total Africa’s primary energy input, 10 to 40 per cent is wasted with distribution
and end-use losses as high as 23 per cent and 40 percent, respectively (Kirai 2006). Any
leakage or losses result in increased GHG emissions per unit of useful consumer energy
delivered as well as lost revenue (Sims, et al. 2007). Electricity generation and
transmission in Africa is characterized by overloads, frequent outages, old and inefficient
thermal power plants and poor maintenance of power plants, which increase energy
losses.
According to the World Bank (2009), the continent’s deficient power infrastructure is
associated with a loss of about 0.1 percent in per capita income growth equivalent to a
loss of 1.9 per cent GDP growth (UNECA 2011). Further, a number of countries have
introduced containerized mobile diesel units for emergency power generation to cope
with power outages at a cost of about US$0.35/KWh, with lease payment absorbing more
than 1 percent of GDP in many cases (UNECA Biofuels Technology Options 2011).
Energy production does not necessarily ensure energy availability. Improving energy
efficiency through better management and new equipment could substantially reduce
energy consumption. For some countries, energy efficiency improvements could be a
cheaper, quicker way to increase energy supply.
Many analyses point to the huge potential of investment in energy efficiency. Such
measures include more efficient appliances and equipment, better insulation of buildings,
more fuel efficient vehicles, better insulation, replacing the old inefficient thermal power
plants by new ones, with the latest technologies and higher efficiencies, or simply by
10 See http://www.esi-africa.com/last/esi_2_2003/032_38.htm
40
rehabilitation and retrofitting of some old power plants, better load factor management,
and improving maintenance of power plants on a regular basis. Already practiced in
several countries, the promotion of high efficiency cooking stoves to replace inefficient
biomass traditional stoves and/or promoting fuel substitution of traditional biomass use,
supplying industries with energy-efficient technologies, including motors, lighting,
cooling and ventilation and increased use of compact fluorescent lamps, for example, help
save considerable energy and reduce the overall supply needed.
Chapter II Bioenergy: Potential, Drivers, Benefits and Risks
Sustainable bioenergy, the focus of this report, is energy derived from biomass that is
affordable, easily accessible to all, burns clean, enhanced the material and social
wellbeing of all people and maintains ecosystem integrity and diversity across
generations and geographic space. Africa’s sustainable bioenergy potential is rather
unlimited. UNIDO (2009) estimates the sustainable biofuels production (i.e., preserves
biodiversity, rainforests and water resources and does not endanger food security) in Sub-
Saharan Africa that ranges from 41 to 410 exajoules by 2050. In 2008, Africa consumed a
total amount of about 19 exajoules, which is less than the lower range of the potential
(UNIDO 2009).
Alcohol making and oil extraction from plants and crops have been integral parts of
Africa’s history and culture. Given advances in technology nowadays, the range of
bioenergy feedstocks that can be used for bioethanol and biodiesel is broad and the
possibilities for avoiding the fuel, food and feed competition are significant. With
Africa’s tropical climate suitable for fast plant growth, second-generation technologies
will stretch this potential further and make it, technically, unlimited. However, behind
each potential benefit lie risks and challenges that unless managed cautiously and
prudently will not only erode benefits but also frustrate a country’s efforts to achieve
descent improvements in living standards, meet MDGs and move toward sustainable
development.
Biomass Resources
.
• Agriculture- energy
and short rotation
crops, crop residues
and animal wastes
• Forestry - forest
harvesting and supply
chain, forest and agro-
forest residues
• Waste - landfill gas.
other biogas, MSW
incineration and other
thermal processes
• Industry- food, fiber
and wood processing
residues
• Solid fuels (chips,
pellets, briquettes,
logs)
• Liquid fuels
(methanol, ethanol,
butanol, biodiesel),
• Gaseous fuels
(synthesis gas, biogas,
hydrogen),
• Traditional biomass –
fuel-wood, charcoal
and animal dung from
agricultural production
• Carbon capture and
storage linked with
biomass
• Centralized electricity
• and/or heat generation
• Liquid and gaseous
biofuels for transport
• Heating/electricity and
cooking fuels used on
side
• Bio-refining,
biomaterials, bio-
chemicals, charcoal
Energy Supply Forms Bioenergy Utilization
41
II-1 Bioenergy: Evolution and Future
In natural resource dependent economics like Africa, bioenergy (traditional and modern)
will continue to be a dominant feature of the energy mix. Currently, the global bioenergy
discourse is dominated by biofuels, which converting the sugary and starchy part of the
plant (ethanol) and the oil in fruits (biodiesel) into liquid, represents a technologically
advanced, widely used (both developing and developed countries), more efficient use of
biomass energy,
In most African households, alcohol production for human consumption has been in place
for centuries, although there is no evidence of alcohol’s use for lighting or burning.
Biofuels could be seen as extensions of existing alcohol-distillation processes, converting
plant material into fuel for vehicles and households to provide lighting and cooking.
Indeed, biofuels can be produced from plants that grow in the backyard using simple
equipment that a village blacksmith can make and maintain.
The main categories of bioenergy are:
a Solid fuels– These include chips, pellets, briquettes, logs used for household uses
including cooking, heating, lighting as well as for industrial or manufacturing
processes.
b Ethanol gel –This is used for cooking in traditional African cooking stoves and is
good substitute for fuel wood. Ethanol gel burns clean and easily ignites with reduced
CO2 emissions compared to fossil fuels.
c Conventional ethanol. Conventional ethanol results from the conversion of starchy
and sugar crops (sugarcane, wheat, cassava, sorghum, maize, etc.) into alcohol.
Biomass is converted into fermentable sugars, which eventually converts to ethanol
through a distillation process that separates the water from ethanol. Plant materials
can be converted into biofuels through several processes. The most common method
is to ferment glucose to become ethanol. This conversion is energy intensive because
energy is needed to boil ethanol away from water after fermentation is completed.
d Conventional biodiesel. Biodiesel is produced from widely available oilseeds that
include: rapeseed, oil palm, soybean, sunflower seed, coconut, linseed, cotton seed,
ground nuts, castor, sesame seed, corn, jatropha as well as animal fats: beef tallow,
pig lard, poultry fats, used cooking oils and oil extracted from algae. When Dr. Rudolf
Diesel built the first diesel engine in 1885, his intention was to run it on vegetable oil,
although he was also able to use hydrocarbon fuel. Convenience and economics
paved the shift to the hydrocarbon-based fuel in subsequent years. Recent high oil
prices have helped to resurrect the interest in biofuels. As is the case for ethanol, the
cost of producing biodiesel depends on the type of feedstock used, the conversion
technology, yield per hectare, land, labor, and other input costs. Current production
42
of biodiesel based on rapeseed in Europe and soybean in the U.S. costs between $0.50
and $0.60 per litre of diesel equivalent respectively (IEA 2006). Both these crops are
high-value food crops in many African countries.
e Biogas. Widely used at the household or community level, this involves converting
biomass (plants, wood including waste) into biogas through anaerobic digestion.
Biogas provide a variety of energy services that include electricity for lighting,
pumping, milling, cooking, and heating. Biogas burns cleaner and efficiently than the
biomass it is produced from and the residual matter from anaerobic digestion is rich in
nitrogen and is used as organic fertilizer. Biogas can be produced from any kind of
biomass feedstocks that are suitable for anaerobic digestion. It is much simpler and
less expensive than, for example, ethanol technology that requires feedstocks with
high fermentable carbohydrate levels (e.g. corn and sugarcane) and biodiesel that
requires feedstocks with high oil content (e.g. waste vegetable oils or vegetable oil
from oil seed crops). Both ethanol and biodiesel technologies require extensive pre-
processing of feedstocks and at the same time use only the portion of the crop or
plant. Biogas uses the entire plant material and can even be made from left over
organic material from both ethanol and biodiesel production.
d. Producer gas. This is the gas generated when wood, charcoal or coal is gasified with
a limited supply of air. If produced with gasifier technologies that can produce high
proportion of combustible gas and minimize impurities, producer gas can be used to
run transport engines.
e. Bio-hydrogen. While hydrogen is a common element found in all fossil fuels and all
organic matter, this refers to the hydrogen (H2) obtained from biomass (plants and
organic waste) through biological process, for example, bacteria. Hydrogen (H2) is
gas that is odorless and colorless and can be transported via pipeline or shipped in
containers for use by industries (many refineries, coal gasification industries, diesel
desulfurization) with huge potential to run transport engines. When burned, hydrogen
produces water vapor and zero emissions as it is carbon free. Today almost all
hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels through thermochemical processing.
f. Ligno-cellulosic ethanol production. This involves extracting fermentable sugar,
which can then be converted into alcohol from the lingo-cellulosic material found in
plant stalks and waste seed husks through biological enzymatic process (IEA 2006).
Although still in research, this offers fuel-conversion opportunities from almost any
type of biomass (the plant’s dry-matter) instead of the highly restrictive conventional
grain ethanol processes. The cost savings and environmental benefits are expected to
be huge. With Africa’s tropical climate, which enables plants to grow much faster
compared to temperate countries, lingo-cellulosic-based energy process offers
tremendous opportunities to produce cheaper energy. Other benefits that accrue to
second generation technology include: higher per hectare productivity, improved
energy balances, greater reductions in GHGs, reduced land-use requirements, and less
43
competition for food and fiber (Mitchell 2011). However, in order to make this
technology competitive with fossil fuels, “significant cost reductions and
technological developments are needed while the sustainability of the overall process
has to be ensured” on which current research focuses on (http://www.biolyfe.eu/).
g. Algal biodiesel and ethanol– often referred to as the third generation biofuel, algal
oils (algae derived biodiesel and ethanol) have been a focus of recent research. The
process involves strain selection, biological optimization of the culture media, algae
cultivation and harvesting. Algae and aquatic biomass have, indeed, the potential to
provide a new range of third generation biofuels, including jet fuels. Their high oil
and biomass yields, widespread availability, absence or very reduced competition
with agricultural land, high quality and versatility of the by-products, their efficient
use as a mean to capture CO2 and their suitability for wastewater treatments and other
industrial plants make algae and aquatic biomass one of the most promising and
attractive renewable sources for a fully sustainable and low-carbon economy
portfolio.
While the current global production of bioethanol and biodiesel is dominated by Brazil
(sugar cane feedstock) and the United States (corn feedstock), which produce on large
scale plantations, Africa’s resource endowments (limited rainfall in many countries and
technology) would require the promotion of bioenergy at the smallholder level. Further,
given its climatic conditions (tropical climate) suitable for fast plant growth, Africa is
believed to have huge potential in second-generation cellulosic biofuels, although the
technology may take up to ten years to be available in the market.
II-2 The Drivers
Despite differences in the level of income and natural resource endowments in African
countries, there are common driving forces behind the promotion and development of
bioenergy. The main ones are:
(a) Energy security. At the age of highly volatile and expensive oil prices, many countries
are increasingly concerned about their energy security. In Africa, almost all the ten
countries surveyed have energy security as a top priority issue (UNECA 2011).
Although there is no agreed definition of energy security, as used here, Energy
security - a condition in which a nation or region ensures adequate, reliable,
continuous, affordable, easily accessible, equitable and environmentally sustainable
supply of energy goods and services for a healthy and productive life for all people.
The attainment of energy security is, thus, clearly a long term goal that requires
holistic efforts and development of all sectors at all societal levels. The sustainable
development of bioenergy will, undoubtedly, make significant contribution to these
efforts.
44
(b) Reducing dependence on expensive oil. Oil is a major drain on export earnings of
many non-oil producing African countries. Biofuels creates possibilities for reducing
dependence on oil through blending, in particular, which many countries are currently
practicing.
(c) Producing own energy–for non-oil producing countries, the capacity to produce own
energy is seen as an economic growth and energy security imperative. Because
bioenergy is derived from plants and crops that almost all countries can easily grow, it
empowers countries to produce own energy and instills strong sense of hope.
(d) Promoting economic and social development –Energy is a major constraint to
development. Easy access to affordable energy is a key agenda for many African
countries, whose rural sector is burdened by subsistence agriculture, pervasive
poverty, underemployment and low productivity, huge dependence on biomass energy
at the backdrop of severe deforestation and land degradation. The possibilities that
bioenergy offers to improve access to energy, move towards modern energy sources,
generate new sources of income, transform the rural sector through enabling access to
new technology, enhances food production and generates livelihood opportunities are
clearly among the driving forces.
(e) Reversing environmental degradation. After several decades of neglect, many
countries have felt the impact of environmental degradation and deforestation, largely
caused by extensive agricultural practices and traditional biomass energy. Reversing
environmental degradation is one of the driving forces in the promotion of bioenergy
(UNECA, Biofuels Technology Options 2011).
(f) The setting of mandatory blending targets by the European Union and the natural
choice of Africa to produce the feedstock. Natural because of Africa’s geographic
proximity to Europe and its tropical climate and huge cultivable land.
II-3 Benefits of Bioenergy
The economic, social, and environmental benefits of bioenergy depend on the type of
feedstock used, how and where the bioenergy is produced. While much of the bioenergy
science and technology is very much work in progress, there is wide range of plants and
crops that can be used as feedstocks, With Africa’s potential to grow almost all of them
and technological advances in second and third generation bioenergy, which may be
accessed in the medium to long term, the extensive development of bioenergy and the
wide use of biofuels, in particular, for cooking, heating, lighting and transport are
inevitable.
As biofuels concerns, much of today’s knowledge, opportunities and challenges are
based on the experiences of mainly two countries, Brazil (sugar cane ethanol) and the
U.S. (corn ethanol). Europe, China and India are producing biofuels commercially,
45
although at a smaller level compared to Brazil and the U.S. In Brazil, the production of
sugarcane ethanol started in the 1920s. Interest in it fluctuated in response to oil price
changes. In 1975, immediately after the first oil crisis, the Brazilian Government’s launch
of a policy and subsidies to support ethanol production led to a jump in output and growth
in commercial usages. Availability of surplus cane production gave impetus to ethanol
research, development, and production. Similarly, for the U.S., as the world’s largest
producer of high quality corn, an ethanol program flourished in response to excess
production of sugar cane and corn.
Intra-African experience in the production, processing and use of bioenergy, in particular
biofuels, as well as experience in policy development remain limited. There are, however,
many valuable lessons that can be learned from the experiences of Brazil, the U.S.,
Europe, China, and India, the world’s top producers of biofuels. Obviously, Africa’s
interests and priorities in biofuels are different. For example, in Africa, while replacing
fossil fuels is important, the production and use of biofuels must be seen in terms of its
potential in meeting energy demands for cooking and heating, alleviating poverty through
raising incomes and transforming rural economies from raw material to processed
commodities producers, generating employment opportunities, rehabilitating ecosystems,
adapting to and mitigating climate change.
Sustainable bioenergy production based on widely available crops and plants, opens up
new domestic markets, produces exports, reduces poverty, and enhances rural economic
transformation. Bioenergy benefits can accrue to a large segment of the farming
population, creating broad-based development that could form the basis for sustained
economic growth and social wellbeing. Among the specific benefits:
a. Improved household and commercial access to cleaner fuel. Modern bioenergy, in all
its forms (solid, gaseous and liquid), which each country can easily produce in a
sustainable way, can improve access to cleaner and affordable fuel.
b. Enhancing the development of the agriculture sector by offering opportunities for
investment and infrastructure development. A distinguishing feature of the
agricultural sector in most Sub-Saharan countries is the dominance of subsistence
farming characterized by, among others, very low yields, technological input, and
investment levels. Efforts to increase agricultural productivity and the transition from
subsistence to modern economy have been constrained, among others, by the poor
rural infrastructure and limited capacity (financial and knowhow) to improve use of
agricultural inputs and farm management practices. Heavy reliance on traditional
biomass energy, in particular, the use of cow dung and agricultural waste as fuel, has
deprived the cultivable land of natural fertilizers. In spite of abundant energy
resources, available estimates of Africa's energy use indicate limited use of modem
energy especially in the agricultural sector which accounts for a large proportion of
the region's GDP leading to the long standing observation of the underperforming
agricultural sector in Africa. Added to this is the health impacts to women and
46
children arising from the use traditional firewood in traditional stoves, which curtails
the deployment of additional labor force into farming activity. Bioenergy can
contribute to modernizing the agricultural sector through provision of locally
produced biofuels for powering motorized agricultural equipment (e.g., water pumps,
tractors, cultivators, processors, grain grinders, etc.). In addition to contributing to
agricultural mechanization, bioenergy will help make cooking cleaner, saves women’s
energy and time to take care of children. The development of modern bioenergy
systems offers opportunities for investment and infrastructure improvements in
agriculture with the promise to diversify agricultural production and thus to stimulate
socio-economic development. Further, Africa's rural sector is burdened by huge
underemployment and low productivity. Bioenergy has the potential to provide new
sources of income, broadens access to new technology, enhances food production and
generates livelihood opportunities.
c. Strong backward, forward, and lateral linkages. Among the benefits of bioenergy are
its strong backward, forward, and lateral linkages with development. The strong
backward linkage arises from the production of feedstock, which can easily be grown
at the household and commercial levels. The possibility of using wide ranging plants
and crops produced at the small holder level for energy creates new markets and
encourages greater production of these crops, which help improve livelihoods. The
forward linkage refers to the processing of biofuels, the employment generated, and
the potential to transform rather easily rural economies from raw material to
processed (final products) producers and suppliers with significant value added. The
lateral linkage refers to the potential of modern bioenergy to contribute to increased
production of food by improving incomes, hence access to better agricultural
technologies.
d. Diversification of renewable energy sources. Bioenergy offer huge potential to
provide cheaper, more accessible, environmentally sound alternative fuels both at the
household and commercial levels. For example, rural households can use ethanol gel,
made by mixing ethanol with a thickening agent and water. The gel fuel burns without
smoke, thus not causing respiratory problems associated with current fuels used in
the home.
e. Income growth and poverty reduction. It is widely reported
that Africa is the poorest region of the world with almost 40
percent of the population living below the poverty line and
one-third of Africa's population undernourished. Africa
faces also “lack of export diversification, supply side
constraints, low levels of sub-regional and continental trade
integration, and mounting food shortages” (UNECA and
AU 2009). It is against this background that NEPAD aims
“to eradicate poverty in Africa and to place African countries, both individually and
collectively, on a path of sustainable growth and development and thus halt the
Bioenergy helps meet three vital
Millennium Development Goals:
Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger
and Poverty
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality
and Empower Women
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental
Sustainability
47
marginalization of Africa in the globalization process” (OAU/AU 2001). In Africa,
however, much of the poverty is rural and with a majority of the population earning
less than a dollar a day (income poverty) but also lacking access to education, health
services, clean water coupled with weak capacity to cope with climate induced risks
(severe drought, flooding, etc.). Because production of bioenergy can be based on
widely grown crops and plants with strong involvement of small producers, bioenergy
has the potential to open up new domestic markets and export opportunities thus
creating a new source of income that has the potential to continuously grow.
f. Broad-based development and greater multiplier effects. Because bioenergy creates
the possibility to engage a large segment of the farming population in feedstock
production, it has the potential to create broad-based development that could lay the
foundation for accelerated technological transformation and economic prosperity.
This is in contrast with the development experience of African countries with oil and
mineral wealth, which has been generally disappointing. Apart from a few countries,
for example, Botswana (in the case of diamonds), the evidence suggests that countries
dependent on natural resources (particularly minerals and timber) tend to experience
slow growth, unusually high corruption rates, abnormally low rates of
democratization, and an exceptionally high risk of civil war (Ross 2003). Further, in
such countries, wealth tends to be concentrated in the hands of the ruling elite or
dominant class, with a large majority of the population marginalized. The economic
management process centers around controlling the wealth and centrally allocating it
to favored sectors rather than engaging the population, thereby creating a broader
foundation for development. The development experience of countries endowed with
abundant natural resources varies greatly, however. Countries that benefit from sound
governance structures and policies, including Norway (oil) and Botswana (diamonds)
have used proceeds from their natural resource wealth to promote far-reaching social
development and economic growth. That is not the most common experience,
however.
g. Employment generation. One of the important benefits of bioenergy is the income and
employment opportunities at the local level. In South Africa, for example, a 2%
ethanol blending based on locally produced and processed feedstock is associated
with the creation of 25 000 new jobs; reduction of unemployment by 0,6% (mainly in
rural areas); enhancement of economic growth by 0.05%; “attainment of a balance of
payments saving of R1.7 billion; and a greenhouse gas emissions’ saving of R 100
million per annum” (Department of Minerals and Energy of South Africa, 2007). In
addition to direct and indirect employment generation, bioenergy contributes to
income distribution and market creation. While oil wealth tends to be concentrated in
the hands of a few privileged people, the benefits derived from broad based
bioenergy/biofuels production and processing accrue to a larger section of society,
including those people living in isolated rural areas, because bioenergy crops, with
second generation technologies in sight, can be cultivated in most areas where there is
some kind of vegetation.
48
h. Low transport and distribution costs. Ethanol gel for cooking can be stored and
transported easily, while biofuels (bioethanol and biodiesel) can be stored and
distributed through existing petroleum distribution infrastructure, and thus do not
require significant new investment in storage, transport, and distribution facilities.
i. Clean and efficient transport fuel. . The biofuels are used as fuel enhancers
(blending) and fossil fuel substitutes. As fuel enhancers, biofuels have several
beneficial properties including “they have a higher-octane content (ethanol) than
gasoline and greater lubricity (biodiesel) than diesel thus reducing fuel system wear
that gives them value for blending with fossil fuels.
(http://www.berkeleybiodiesel.org).
j. Diversification of energy sources. By one forecast, fossil fuels are expected to last no
more than half century, oil: 46 years (depleted in 2055) natural gas: 63 years (depleted
in 2072) coal: 119 years (depleted in 2128).11
These fossil fuels, which took millions
of years to form, account for more than three-quarters of the world’s fuel
consumption. Excessive dependence on fossil fuels has had serious consequences for
the planet’s economic and social environments, biodiversity, and climate conditions.
Biofuels represent highly promising alternatives to fossil fuels with huge potential to
provide cheaper, more accessible, and environment friendly fuels. Indeed, bioenergy
helps to broaden the diversity of fuel supply, thereby helping to avoid price shocks
due to conventional fuel shortages and any subsequent social impacts.
k. Social benefits. If small-scale and farmer-based technologies are adopted, bioenergy
can reduce poverty and narrow income inequality. It will also help insulate people
from the vicissitudes of global oil market forces. Bioenergy also has the potential to
or holds the promise to reduce the burden on women by relieving them from wood-
fuel collection responsibilities and reducing health hazards from indoor air pollution.
l. Halting environmental degradation. One of the most critical problems Africa faces
today is environmental degradation. For example, West Africa has lost more than 90
percent of its original forest, while the Congo Basin loses about 1.1-million hectares
of forest each year.12
For every 28 trees cut down, Africa replants only one tree.13
The only green area that catches the eye on an African physical map is the block of
natural forest in Central Africa, particularly in the Democratic Republic of Congo,
Gabon, and the Congo. For Africa, the conservation and sustainable use of
environmental resources is of paramount importance. Bioenergy has the potential to
enhance the wise, sustainable use of biological resources, ultimately helping the
11 http://www.science20.com 12
http://afrol.com/features/10278 13
http://www.afrol.com/
49
maintenance of ecosystem diversity and integrity as well as functions and services
provided.
m. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Bioenergy has “60 percent less emissions of
carbon dioxide − a greenhouse gas − than crude oil, and five times less than oil
produced from coal.”14
In general, plants take up carbon dioxide, which is released
upon burning and then absorbed by the new plants. The carbon dioxide is, thus
recycled without any new carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere. Carbon
released from fossil fuel combustion is fully released into the atmosphere. Bioenergy
resources are clean burning with little emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrate,
common urban pollutants. Nevertheless, the achievement of full carbon benefits
depends on the type of feedstock and where and how it is produced. Among other
things, the production of the feedstock should not involve clearing of forests and also
avoid loss of wetlands, which are known for their high carbon storage.
n. Easily transferable technology. Biofuel crops are easily converted through locally
available technologies to generate relatively cost-effective fuels. In the case of
imported technologies, one key challenge of technology transfer is adaptability and
maintenance. For example, in some African villages, the services of water pumps and
solar panels have been discontinued due to poor maintenance. Bioenergy technologies
might not be simpler than water pumps, but they are generally easily transferable,
adaptable, and can be maintained through a brief training of farmers or by local
blacksmiths.
o. Improved access to energy and help achieve energy security. By enhancing access to
cleaner energy, reducing dependence on imported oil, diversifying energy sources,
and creating possibilities to empower small producers to produce their own energy
resources, thereby reduce dependence on kerosene, bioenergy can make significant
contribution to the attainment of energy security.
II. 4 Bioenergy Risks
There are several economic, social, and environmental costs associated with the
production, processing, marketing, and use of bioenergy. The major ones are:
a) Food or Fuel (Consumption or Combustion). Most bioenergy feedstock crops (e.g.,
sweet sorghum, corn, and rapeseeds), used today, are staple food for a majority of the
African population. Any use of these crops to produce biofuels may reduce food
availability production and raise prices. In countries where these crops are used either
directly or indirectly as animal feed, the livestock sector would be adversely affected
too. Given the current low level of agricultural technologies, land tenure problems and
poor agricultural management practices; it may also be hard for farmers to produce
14
SouthAfrica.info reporter
50
food and fuel simultaneously. Although there is hardly any guarantee that food
production will increase if the use of these crops for bioenergy is avoided, the large
price differential between energy and food crops is bound to influence the decision of
producers in favor of bioenergy, as widely reported in the aftermath of the 2007 global
food crisis. A sustainable bioenergy policy avoids forcing households to make hard
choices between fuel and food. Rather, it encourages the production of bioenergy from
non-food crops and perennials in a manner that the material, social and ecological
wellbeing of citizens is maximized over generations.
b) Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The production of today’s biofuels/biodiesel feedstocks,
sugarcane and oil palm15
, in particular, is grown in high rainfall and warm areas - the
same areas which host Africa’s remaining tropical forests. The conversion of natural
habitats and ecosystems such as peat lands, forests, grasslands, fallow lands, and
marginal crop lands results in land use changes (direct and indirect) that not only erode
climate benefits that accrue to bioenergy but result in net emissions “as much as 10 times
more carbon dioxide than conventional fuel, depending on the type of land used. For
example, palm oil produced on converted rainforest land produces 55 times more carbon
emissions than palm oil produced on previously cleared land" a recent MIT study
shows.16
While a better understanding of GHG emissions life cycle is in order, a
sustainable bioenergy policy will factor in all carbon credits and debits in guiding the
choice of feedstocks and maximize economic, social and environmental benefits.
Biofuels are a potential low-carbon energy source, but whether biofuels offer carbon
savings depends on how they are produced. Converting rainforests, peat lands,
savannas, or grasslands to produce food crop–based biofuels in Brazil, Southeast
Asia, and the United States creates a “biofuels carbon debt” by releasing 17 to 420
times more GHG than the annual GHG reductions that these biofuels would provide
by displacing fossil fuels. In contrast, biofuels made from waste biomass or from
biomass grown on degraded and abandoned agricultural lands planted with perennials
incur little or no carbon debt and can offer immediate and sustained GHG
advantages” (Fargione, et al. 2008).
c) Adverse environmental impacts of monocultures. Supplying feedstocks to bioenergy
plants requires growing the same crop year after year. Sugarcane, corn, sweet
sorghum, and oil palm, currently the most known feedstocks deplete soil nutrients.
Continuous cultivation of these crops can turn arable land barren. Although fertilizers
help to replenish soil nutrients, their continuous, massive use is environmentally
detrimental and could diminish the potential contribution of reductions in greenhouse
gas emissions.
d) Increased rainforest clearance and ecosystem destruction as investors hunt for good
soils and rainfall. Sugarcane and palm have their best growth and productivity in high
15
Oil palm, here, refers to the tree (plant stalk) 16 http://www.energyboom.com/biofuels
51
rainfall and humid areas, which are rainforest zones. If sugarcane and palm plantations
are expanded to these areas, which is a highly likely scenario, environmental damage
would be enormous. In many Africa countries, parts of the forest reserve, of the
continent’s richest concentrations of biodiversity, have been developed/ or under
development for a sugar/palm oil plantation. . This signals serious environmental
threats. Investment firms likely insist on grabbing the best and most fertile land,
causing even more destruction of the rainforests, even though they could still make a
reasonable profit by growing bioenergy crops in other areas.
e) Undesirable impacts on food production and prices. Under ideal circumstances, when
demand for corn, rapeseeds, soybean, and other biofuel crops rises, prices for these
agricultural commodities will also increase, thereby encouraging farmers to bring
more land under cultivation. Hence, such price increases benefit producers. But in
Africa, the prevailing subsistence agricultural technology, poor market infrastructure,
and low investment capacity may not permit quick responses to expand production.
The likely scenario would be for farmers to devote more of their land to cultivating
biofuels feedstock and less to food and animal feed crops. Therefore, there is likely to
be an across-the-board increase in crop prices and animal feed prices of animal feed,
although residue from biofuels can still be used as animal feed. For example, the
international price of rapeseed oil, which was USD850.70 per metric ton in 2006 rose
to USD 1,736.46 in July 2008, an increase of over 100 percent.17
Although the price
fell to USD 1310.84 in September 2011 -a 54 percent increase-18
following the fall in
the price of crude oil, the demand for rapeseed oil within the EU, the largest consumer
of rapeseed oil, is expected to increase significantly. Some reports show exorbitant
food price hikes. For example, the price of corn which was around USD 200 in 2006
rose to about USD 300 in 2008 with a further hike to around USD 325 in September
201119
while the price of wheat is reported to have increased from USD 195.98 to
439.72 in March 2008, an increase of 125 percent, although down to 315.92 in
September 2011.20
While fluctuations of prices of wheat and corn may be due to a
number of factors, the contribution of the biofuels industry to these price hikes is
believed to be significant.21
f) Crowding out of farmers to give space to big business. Most bioenergy crops are
produced in large commercial farms. In many African countries, however, due to the
high rate of population growth and the slow growth of agricultural technologies, most
people have remained on small farms. Promotion of large-scale commercial farming
might require forcing peasants out of their farms to create economically viable
17 http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=rapeseed-oil&months=60 18 http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=rapeseed-oil&months=60 19
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/chart-maize.html 20
http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=wheat 21 http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/92544/icode/
52
entities.22
This will, however, have socially and economically undesirable effects in
the medium- to long-term.
g) Increased use of genetically modified crops. With rapid advances in agricultural and
industrial biotechnology occurring against a backdrop of high costs for biofuel
feedstocks, there will be increased use or pressure to use genetically modified
organisms (GMOs) to boost productivity of food and biofuels crops, and thereby
lower production costs. However, using GMOs for bioenergy is highly contentious.
GMOs can reduce sharply the potency of bioenergy in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions because of their
high chemical content.
Bioenergy also faces enormous challenges that have the
potential to erode some or all of these benefits unless
development is strategically planned and executed. The
next section discusses the bioenergy challenges,
geography of bioenergy resources, development
possibilities, and constraints.
II-5 Bioenergy Challenges
There are several challenges that hinder the development of sustainable bioenergy in
Africa. The major ones are:
a) Land requirement. Bioethanol and biodiesel feedstock crops need to be grown by any
of the following: (i) bringing new land into production, i.e., land that is not currently
under use for agricultural production; (ii) replacing existing food, oil and fiber crops
with biofuels feedstock crops; (iii) converting degraded, abandoned land or land that is
considered marginal to productive use; (iv) agricultural intensification, i.e., intensifying
land use without reducing crop production, including improving yields, technologies
and integrating agriculture and livestock production.
Under existing feedstock plants and crops and also technological conditions, the
production of biofuels would require considerable land. According to FAO, of the total
Sub-Saharan Africa land surface of 2287 million hectares, 45 percent is suitable for
agriculture.23
Of this total area suitable for agriculture, FAO’s 2000 World Soil
Resources Report shows only about 15 percent under cultivation.24
Although latest
figures are lacking, the notion of huge uncultivated land resonates in many political
circles with many people espousing a rather risky argument that the development of
bioenergy offers opportunities to convert the uncultivated area into energy wealth.
Nevertheless, current “estimates greatly exaggerate the land available, by over-
22
http://www.grain.org/article/entries/606-the-new-scramble-for-africa 23
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4252e/y4252e06.htm 24 ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs/wsr.pdf
“The [global] demand for land has
been enormous” … and “more than
70 percent of such demand has been in Africa; countries such as
Ethiopia, Mozambique, and Sudan
have transferred millions of
hectares to investors in recent
years.” (Deininger 2011, The
World Bank)
53
estimating cultivable land, under-estimating present cultivation, and failing to take
sufficient account of other essential uses for land” (Young 1999). The notion of
cultivable land includes mountains, forests, bushes, lakes, wetlands, gorges, national
parks and protected areas. Thus, the actual cultivable area is much smaller than the
figures suggest. Further, “in Africa 16 percent of all soils are classified as having low
nutrient reserves while in Asia the equivalent figure is only 4 percent.”25
To a majority of Africans, land is the primary source of livelihoods, a measure of social
class and economic well-being. In many African countries, population growth and slow
technological progress have forced people to rely on extensive agricultural practices
that exhausted fertile land and become increasingly dependent on degraded and
marginal land. Recent large land acquisitions for the production of biofuels feedstock in
several African countries have attracted global media attention because of risks that
may include crowding out of small producers and degradation of ecosystems. A
sustainable bioenergy policy helps to minimize and even eliminate these risks through
promoting effective small scale production and agricultural intensification that releases
new land; maintenance of ecosystem services and functions through expanding research
and encouraging shifts to newly developed feedstock that do not threaten forest,
wetlands and other ecosystems. Thus, the question of land availability for bioenergy
depends on the type of feedstock and how and where it is produced and processed.
The economic, social and environmental implications of land use for bioenergy are
significant and any investment in the production of feedstock without determination
of the feasibility and sustainability of specific bioenergy projects will be detrimental.
The social and environmental benefits needs to be carefully evaluated taking into
account local environmental and social conditions.
Table 14. Land acquired for biofuels production in selected African countries
Country Projects Area (‘000) hectare
Median size (hectare)
Domestic share
Ethiopia 406 1,190 700 49
Liberia 17 1,602 59,324 7
Mozambique 405 2,670 2,225 53
Nigeria 115 793 1,500 97
Sudan 132 3,965 7,980 78
Source: Deininger, Klaus and Byerlee, Derek with Jonathan Lindsay, Andrew Norton,
Harris Selod, and Mercedes Stickler, World Bank 2011
As the above Table shows, Sudan has given out the largest land area of close to four
million hectares. A recent publication, shows that Ethiopia has placed 3,589,678 hectares
for lease under the Federal Land Bank in five regions of the country: Amhara 420,000 (not
yet confirmed); Afar 409,678; BeniShangul (691,984); Gambella (829,199); Oromia
(1,057,866) and SNNP (180,625) (Dessalegn 2011). The same publication shows that the
25 http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y6831e/y6831e-03.htm
54
land is being leased out at “ridiculously” low rent that ranges between 14.1 birr (less than
one US dollar) and 135 birr (about USD 8) (Dessalegn 2011).
Information is lacking to analyze the social and environmental implications of these
investments. Table 14 above shows that Sudan has leased out the largest tract of land,
among the countries the World Bank study covered. Seventy eight percent of this land is
he investment is locally owned (domestic share) compared to Liberia’s 7 percent.
However, there is neither empirical evidence nor is there any guarantee suggesting that
local investors will be more socially and environmentally responsible than foreign
investors.
Table 15. Sites of bioenergy land acquisition and feedstock in some African countries.
Country Investor Land acquired
in hectares Investment in USD
Feedstock / Product
Cameroon SOCAPALM and
Socfinal (Belgium)
30,000
Oil palm
Cote D’Ivoire 21st Century Energy (USA)
130 million Sugar cane, maize and sweet sorghum, and later to
manufacture biodiesel from
cottonseed and cashew nut
Ethiopia
• Benishangul-
Gumuz
• SNNP
• Tigray
• Amhara
• AmaroKelo
• East Hararghe
Oromiya
Sun BioFuel, UK
Becco Biofuels US
Hovev Agriculture
Ltd Israel
Flora Ecopower
(Germany)
The National
Biodiesel Corp.
(NBC)Germany, US
LHB Israel
80,000
5,000 200,000
40,000
35,000
40,000
expanding to 400,000
13,700
Expanding to
200,000
90,000
100,000
Kenya Bioenergy
International (Switzerland)
93,000 Jatropha plantation with a
biodiesel refinery and an electrification plant in Kenya
Nigeria
Ebonyi State
Viscount Energy
(China)
US$80-ml.
(ethanol factory)
Cassava and sugar cane.
Tanzania Sun Biofuels (UK) 18,000(top
quality land)
Jatropha
Source: http://www.grain.org/article/entries/606-the-new-scramble-for-africa
b) Policy and institutional weaknesses. Because bioenergy is a multisectoral
undertaking, its promotion, sustainable production, and marketing require strong
policy and institutional support. Among the critical capacity gaps and institutional
55
weakness are: “a lack of documented rights claimed by local people and weak
consultation processes that have led to uncompensated loss of land rights, especially
by vulnerable groups; a limited capacity to assess a proposed project’s technical and
economic viability; and a limited capacity to assess or enforce environmental and
social safeguards” (Deininger 2011). While it is possible to argue that this is not a new
issue for Africa, what perhaps makes the bioenergy sector different is the magnitude
and urgency of the energy problem, the huge demand for biofuels feedstock in
European countries, China and India; and the national, regional, and global processes
that are promoting renewable energy development, in general, and bioenergy, in
particular for the attainment of energy security. Clearly, the lack of a sound policy
framework, inadequate incentives, limited knowledge of the bioenergy sector, and
weak state capacity are constraints to modern bioenergy development.
c) Access to and efficiency of bioenergy technology. Much of the available knowledge
on biofuels technology is based on large-scale farming of two feedstocks: sugar cane
and corn. Newer technologies that use a wide variety of feedstocks and operate at
different capacities, particularly on a small- and medium-scale, need to be widely
available and easily accessible. Further, for all production schemes, all feedstocks
must have a positive energy balance (yield more energy than the energy required for
processing), as a minimum, which has been difficult to achieve for some starch-based
feedstocks
d) Increasing water shortage and insecurity. Africa’s water resources are becoming
scarce and increasingly the reasons for political tension. Water’s scarcity results from
recurrent drought and increased demand from a fast-growing population. Political
tensions have emerged because Africa’s large rivers are mostly transboundary ones
that are shared by multiple countries. Sugarcane, oil palm, and corn − widely
considered to be high in energy yields − are soil depleting and require large amounts
of both soil moisture and fertilizers. Bioenergy development, thus, has the potential
to increase competition for scarce water resources, although sustainably developed
bioenergy (in a manner that will maximize environmental benefits) helps to reduce
water scarcity and eventually improve availability.
e) Lack of continental bioenergy experience from which lessons can be drawn. Efforts
to promote bioenergy remain weak, scattered, and ad hoc. South Africa, Mauritius,
and Zimbabwe - Africa’s largest ethanol producers - are based on large-scale
commercial farming. Thus, Africa needs to draw its lessons on smallholder bioenergy
production from countries outside the region.
f) Making bioenergy costs competitive with oil. Current production of biofuels is
dominated by sugarcane/corn ethanol and biodiesel from rapeseeds, corn, and oil
palm. The production costs of biofuels from these feedstocks is generally high −
without taking into account environment and social benefits. Heavy government
subsidies are also involved. The experience of Brazil, the U.S., and Europe suggests
56
that the cost of raw material accounts for 60 to 70 percent26 of total bioenergy
production costs. Typically, feedstocks cost US$0.38/litre of corn bioethanol in the
USA, US$0.31/litre of sugarcane bioethanol in Brazil, an estimated US$0.35/litre in
Tanzania, US$0.69/litre of soy biodiesel in the USA, US$0.53/litre of palm biodiesel
in Malaysia, and US$0.49/litre of Jatropha biodiesel in Malaysia (UNECA 2011).
This is clearly on the high side by any industrial manufacturing standard, but it does
suggest that the success of the modern bioenergy sector lies in its capacity to reduce
feedstock costs. Indeed, the economic viability of modern bioenergy rests on such
costs. Although distribution and marketing costs are important, as explained earlier,
biofuels do not have any special requirement for marketing and distribution as
existing infrastructure built for fossil fuels can be fully utilized.
Brazil’s ethanol industry breaks even at $35 per barrel oil equivalent27
. But Brazil
produces almost all its sugarcane from rain-fed agricultural practices and is believed
to be the world’s most efficient and least-cost producer of sugarcane (Kajammi 2006).
Indeed, rain-fed production of sugarcane and other crops in tropical and subtropical
areas of Africa, where plants usually grow more rapidly, enhances the economic
viability of sugarcane ethanol. Undoubtedly, higher crop yields through the use of
improved seeds, fertilizers, and sustainable agricultural management means lower
production costs. For example, “grain-based ethanol costs on average around
$0.30/litre ($0.45/litre of gasoline equivalent) in the U.S., after production subsidies,
so that it is competitive with gasoline at an average crude oil price of between $65 and
$70 per barrel” (IEA 2006). In Europe, ethanol production costs, including all
subsidies, are about $0.55/litre (0.80/litre of gasoline equivalent)” (IEA 2009).
Although current high oil prices of more than $110 per barrel make the production of
ethanol lucrative, generating biofuels at a much lower costs and make it affordable to
the poor remains a huge challenge.
At the household level, the following Table on experiences of UEMOA countries
offers perceptive on the current situation and policy options for governments.
26Presentation during the author’s visit of the Vienna, Austria biodiesel plant. 27
Presentation of the Brazilian delegation to the IEA organized conference on biofuels option attended by
the author.
57
Table 16. Prices per megajoule (MJ) of Ethanol and Household Fuels
Country Raw
material
Ethanol
(FCFA/MJ)
Real price
of butane
(FCFA/MJ)
(%) more
expensive/
cheap
Non-subsidized
price of butane
(FCFA/MJ)
(%)more
expensive
/cheap
Benin Cassava 17.8 8.7 103% 130 37%
Burkina
Faso
Sugarcane 17.7 6.3 183% 127 39%
Côte d’Ivoire
Molasses 9.1 55 67% 130 -30%
Guinea
Bissau
Cashew
tree,
apples
25.2 117 117% 117 117%
Mali Molasses 14.4 70 106% 120 20%
Senegal Molasses 11.7 60 94% 126 -7%
Source: UEMOA 2008.
II-6 Global Bioenergy Trends
Today, Brazil (sugar cane based), USA (corn based) and European Union (biodiesel
based on rape seeds and other oil crops) dominate the biofuels market. According to IEA,
the global consumption of biofuels is forecasted to increase from about 1 mb/d in 2009 to
4.4 mb/d in 2035 (IEA 2009). The production and consumption of biofuels will continue
to be dominated by the United States, Brazil and the European Union (IEA 2009).
Further, the IEA forecasts that although “advanced biofuels, including those from ligno-
cellulosic feedstocks, are assumed to enter the market by around 2020,” the support
needed from governments to make biofuels competitive with oil increases from “$45
billion per year between 2010 and 2020, and $65 billion per year between 2021 and
2035” (IEA 2009).
The Global Renewable Fuels Alliance (GRFA), in cooperation with F.O. Licht, estimate
ethanol production to reach 88.7 billion liters in 2011, of this, Africa accounts for only
170 million liters or far less than one percent (UNECA 2011), which offers a some basis
for assessing Africa’s potential in the production and consumption of bioenergy.
Table 17. World Ethanol Fuel Production (million liters)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Europe 1,627 1,882 2,814 3,683 4,615 5,467
Africa 0 49 72 108 165 170
Americas 35,625 45,467 60,393 66,368 77,800 79,005
Asia/Pacific 1,940 2,142 2,743 2,888 3,183 4,077
World 39,192 49,540 66,022 73,047 85,763 88,719
Source: Adapted from UNECA, Biotechnology Technology Options 2011.
II-7 Bioenergy Potential and Sustainability of Major Feedstocks
58
Africa accounts for about one-fifth of the world's land surface and extends 4,800 miles
north to south and 4,500 miles east to west28
. It is larger than the U.S., Europe, India,
China, Argentina, and New Zealand combined. Centered on the Equator, Africa is
endowed with diverse vegetation and enormous eco-systems, making it possible to grow
almost all types of plants and crops that used as biofuel feedstocks. Because of the
tropical and subtropical climate, crop productivity is potentially the highest in Africa.
Table 18. Comparative Analysis of Crop Productivity in Three Climatic Conditions
Crop High input yields (t/ha) Intermediate Input Yields (t/ha)
Tropics Sub-tropics Temperate Tropics Sub-tropics Temperate
Wheat 5.3 – 11.1 5.4 – 9.9 5.4 – 9.9 3.3 – 7.4 3.4 – 6.9 3.3 – 5.7
Maize (grain) 6.0 – 15.6 8.5 – 17.1 8.5 – 17.1 3.5 – 10.5 5.3 – 12.2 4.9 – 11.3
Maize (silage) n.a. 17.0 – 26.0 17.0 – 26.0 n.a. 13.0 – 20.9 12.1 – 19.2
Barley 4.7 – 9.9 5.2 – 9.2 5.2 – 9.2 2.9 – 6.7 2.9 – 6.4 2.8 – 5.1
Sorghum 3.4 – 12.1 7.8 – 13.0 7.8 – 13.0 2.2 – 7.5 4.6 – 8.1 3.4 – 6.4
Sweet Potato 7.5 – 15.4 7.5 – 15.9 7.5 – 15.9 5.0 – 10.6 5.0 – 10.9 n.a.
Cassava 16.6 n.a n.a 11.0 n.a. n.a.
Soybean 3.1 – 4.8 4.6 – 5.5 4.6 – 5.5 2.0 – 3.2 3.0 – 3.6 2.8 – 3.4
Rape 4.5 – 5.6 4.5 – 6.0 4.5 – 6.0 2.6 – 3.5 2.9 – 3.8 2.8 – 3.6
Groundnut 3.1 – 4.7 3.2 – 4.9 3.2 – 4.9 2.0 – 3.1 2.0 – 3.3 2.0 – 3.0
Sunflower 5.6 – 6.7 4.9 – 6.1 4.9 – 6.1 3.9 – 4.8 3.4 – 4.4 3.3 – 4.1
Oil palm 8.7 6.4 6.4 6.0 4.4 n.a.
O)live n.a. 6.7 6.7 n.a. 4.1 3.3
Source: FAO, http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/GAEZ/index.htm?sb=6
a. Overall Land Use
Large swaths of desert and barren land are Africa’s distinguishing feature. Table 17
below shows that more than 78 percent of North Africa, 46 percent of West Africa, and
34 percent of Southern Africa are covered by desert and barren land.
Table 19. Africa Land Use
Region Grassland Woodland Forest Mosaics
including
cropland
Crop-
land
Irrigated
cropland
Wetland Desert &
barren
land
Water
(coastal
fringes)
Urban
Eastern
Africa
25.8 23.5 5.1 10.5 15.4 0.0 0.0 15.9 3.7 0.0
Central
Africa
15.5 31.7 29.3 4.8 5.2 0.0 0.1 11.6 1.9 0.0
Northern Africa
9.7 8.3 0.6 1.4 0.9 0.2 0.3 78.1 0.4 0.0
Southern 38.4 0.6 1.6 17.8 7.2 0.0 0.1 33.9 0.3 0.1
28http://www.harpercollege.edu/mhealy/g101ilec/ssa/afd/afphys/afphysfr.htm
59
Africa
Western
Africa
25.4 16.3 2.1 6.1 2.3 0.1 0.5 46.0 1.2 0.0
Source: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/GAEZ/index.htm?sb=6
Further, Africa’s forest cover is very small. Central Africa, where one of the world’s
richest areas of diversity and ecosystems exists, has only 29.3-percent forest coverage.
West Africa’s forest cover is only 2.1 percent. Although countries such as Liberia, Sierra
Leone, and Cote D’Ivoire have large tropical forest areas, countries with bigger
geographic areas (such as Mali, Niger, and Chad) form part of the Sahara desert, thus
bringing the average rate of forest coverage to a low level.
The other distinguishing feature of Africa’s landscape is the relatively large grassland.
Southern Africa has more than 38 percent of its land classified as grassland. This means
that close to 75 percent of Southern Africa is claimed by deserts and grasslands.
More than a quarter of Eastern Africa is grasslands, with another quarter devoted to
woodlands.
b. Cultivable Land
Africa’s total cultivable land is estimated at 840-million hectares, which compares to 890-
million hectares for Latin America and 70-million hectares for Southwest Asia. Of this
land, only 27 percent is used (cultivated), compared to 87 percent for Asia and 97 percent
for Southwest Asia Table 18 below).
Table 20. Regional Distribution of Cultivable Land
(million ha,
1983)
Currently
cultivated
Potentially
cultivable
Percentage of cultivable land
already in use
Southwest Asia 68 70 97
Africa 225 840 27
Latin America 195 890 22
Asia 280 343 82
TOTAL 768 2143 36
Source: FAO, available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/T8300E/t8300e0e.htm
However, these “estimates greatly exaggerate the land available, by over-estimating
cultivable land, under-estimating present cultivation, and failing to take sufficient account
of other essential uses for land” (Young 1999). The notion of cultivable land includes
mountains, forests, bushes, lakes, wetlands, gorges, national parks and protected areas.
Thus, the actual cultivable area is much smaller than the figures suggest. Further, the
quality of land and soil conditions vary by locality; and detailed studies are required to
determine the kind of bioenergy feedstock to produce.
60
c. Rainfall
The availability of adequate moisture is an important factor for plant growth. The amount
of rainfall in Africa varies considerably from zero millimeters of annual rainfall in the
Sahara and Kalahari deserts to 4,500 mm in Central Africa. In general, Africa’s rainfall is
characterized by the following:
• Uneven moisture distribution. Central Africa gets most of Africa’s rainfall. The
concentration of precipitation in a rather small part of the continent means less
potential for large, rain-fed commercial farms. Further, Central Africa includes
what remains of Africa’s tropical rainforest, which must be conserved to maintain
the ecosystem integrity of the entire continent.
• Rainfall variability within the same region. In addition to the rainfall variability
between, for example, Southern Africa and Central Africa, or between the Sahel
countries (Mali, Niger, etc.) and the Gulf of Guinea (Liberia, Sierra Leone, etc.),
there is a marked difference in the amount of rainfall within the same region.
Extreme variability of the local rainfall would require adoption of wide-ranging
varieties of bioenergy crops, which could limit the size of commercial farming.
• Recurrent drought and flooding. Since the 1970s, the Horn of Africa, the Sahel
countries, and Southern Africa have experienced recurrent drought much more
frequently than previously observed. The Horn of Africa in particular has been hit
hard with a resulting famine of apocalyptic proportions. In Ethiopia and Somalia,
the severe drought in 2006 was followed by flooding.
• Erratic rainfall. Several African countries receive their annual rainfall during
certain months of the year, with some months being completely dry. This rainfall
pattern reduces the potential for growing crops with a long growing season.
d. Growing Period / Agro-ecological Zone
For plant growth, particularly crops like sugarcane that have a long growing period, it is
not the amount of rain but its distribution that is more important. Map 4 below shows the
agro-ecological classification of Africa based on the length of the available growing
period (LGP), as prepared by FAO. LPG is defined as “the period (in days) during the
year when rainfed available soil moisture supply is greater than half potential
evapotranspiration (PET)” (FAO 2006). Accordingly, FAO puts LPG into four
categories:
• Arid: LGP less than 75 days
• Semi-arid: LGP in the range 75 - 180 days – agriculture areas compete with
livestock
• Sub-humid: LGP in the range 180 - 270 days
• Humid: LGP greater than 270 days
61
Any area that has a growing period of less than 75 days is considered unreliable and
unsuitable for rain-fed agriculture. However, in the southern part of the Sahara desert, the
eastern part of the Horn of Africa, and southwest Africa, there could be livestock and
limited farming activity through the use of boreholes and artificial dams. Here again,
Central Africa and the surrounding countries have a longer growing period consistent
with the amount of rainfall they receive.
e. Major Bioenergy Feedstock
As explained earlier, the range of plants and crops that can be used as bioenergy
feedstocks is wide. The following section discusses some well-known bioenergy
resources and maps out their potential.
e.1. Plant Residues
Plant residues are important sources of energy, which unfortunately have not yet been
efficiently harnessed. The UNDP-sponsored study by Sivan Kartha and Eric D. Larson
offers insight into the range of plants and the usages for their residues:
62
Table 21. Crop Residues: Residue Ratios, Energy Produced, Current Uses
Crop Residue Residue
ratio°
Residue energy
(Mi/dry kg)b
Typical current residue
uses'
Barley's Straw 2.3 17.0
Coconut Shell 0.1kg/nu
t 20.56 household fuel
Coconut Fibre 0.2kg/nu
t 19.24 mattress making,
carpets, etc.
Coconut Pith 0.2kg/nu
t
Cotton Stalks 3.0 18.26 household fuel
Mustard
Cotton
gin
waste
0.1 16.42 fuel in small industry
Groundnut Shells 0.3 fuel in industry
Groundnut Haulms 2.0 household fuel
Maize Cobs 0.3 18.77 cattle feed
Maize Stalks 1.5 17.65 cattle feed, household
fuel Millet Straw 1.2 household fuel
Pulses Straws 1.3 household fuel
Rapeseed Stalks 1.8 household fuel
Rice Straw 1.5 16.28 cattle feed, roof
thatching, field burned Rice Husk 0 .25 16.14
fuel in small industry,
ash used for cement
production Soybeans Stalks 1.5 15.91
Sugarcane Bagasse 0 .15 17.33 fuel at sugar factories, feedstock for paper
production
Sugarcane
tops/lea
ves 0 .15 cattle feed, field burned
Tobacco Stalks 5 .0
heat supply for tobacco
processing, household
fuel
Tuberse Straw 0.5 14.24
Wheat Straw 1.5 17.51 cattle feed
Wood
products
waste
wood 0.5 20 .0
( a) Unless otherwise noted, the residue ra tio is expressed as kilograms of dry residue per kg of crop produced, where the crop production is given in conventional units, e.g. kg of r ice grain
or kg of clean fresh sugarcane stalks. The ratios given here are illustrative only: for a given
residue, the residue ratio will vary with the agr icultural practice (species selected, cult iva tion practices, etc.). Unless otherwise noted, the ratios given here are from Biomass Power Division (1998).
(b) Unless otherwise noted, these are higher heating values as rep orted by Jenkins (1989). The lower
heating values are about 5 percent lower. The higher and lower heating values differ by the
latent heat of evaporation of water formed during complete combustion of the residue. (c ) The use to which residues are put var ies gr eatly from one region of a country to another and
from country to country. The uses listed here are illustrative only. They are typical uses in parts of India.
(d) Source: Taylor, Taylor, and Weis (1982). (e) Estimate for China as given by Li, Bai, and Overend (1998). Tubers includes crops such as cassava, yams, and
potatoes.
( f ) Wood products refers to lumber or finished wood products such as furniture. The residue ratio
is given as a broad average by Hall et al. (1993). The ratio will vary considerably depending on the specific product.
Source, UNDP, Sivan Kartha and Eric D. Larson, authors, Bioenergy Primer: Modernized Biomass Energy for Sustainable Development, 2000. The above explanatory notes are from the
same source
63
e.2 Major Biofuels Feedstock
The range of plants and crops used as biofuels feedstocks is rather limited. Sugarcane,
palm oil, sweet sorghum maize, jatropha, and soybean are the major ones. There is little
data on energy yields for other crops. Given that, as Table 19 below shows, sugarcane is
the most efficient crop for the production of bio-ethanol and the highest energy-yielding
crop. Sweet sorghum is second, but provides only 56 percent of the ethanol that
sugarcane produces. The biofuel yield of maize is far lower than sweet sorghum.
On the biodiesel side, palm oil is the best performer in terms of biofuel and energy yield.
Jatropha, with a biofuel yield of 700 litres per hectare is rather low, although it stands as
having the second best potential after palm oil. See the analysis of each crop below based
on current technoloies.
Table 22. Comparative Analysis of Performance of Biofuels Feedstocks
1 gigajoule (GJ) = 278 KWh Crop Seed yield
(tons/ha)
Crop yield
(tons/ha)
Biofuel
yield
(litre/ha)
Energy
yield
(GJ/ha)
Annual rainfall
range in mm
Altitude / temperature
range for optimum
growth
Sugarcane
(juice)
100 7500 157.5 1,400-1,800 0-1000m/22-38 C
Palm oil 9800 70 3000 105.0 >2000 <400m/22-32 C
Sweet sorghum 60 4200 88.2 500-800 – has no
flooding tolerance
Variable, but does not
handle cold well.
Maize 7 2500 52.5 500-800 Above 15 C
Jatropha 740 2-12.5,
depending
on rainfall
700 24.5 300-1000 0-500m/
above 20 C
Soybean 480 990 kg/hec 500 17.5 450-700 10-30 C, depending on
stage of germination,
ideal is between 21-27 C
Cassava 1537 61
Sugar beets 450-960 20-35 C
Sunflower seed 600-1000
Algae 30,000
Rapeseed 544 -6-4 C
Castor beans 1600 54.3
Source: (first 6 rows) Francis X. Johnson, Stockholm Environment Institute, 2006. Palm oil: http://www.newcrops.uq.edu.au/newslett/ncn10214.htm Sweet sorghum: http://www.tropicalforages.info/key/Forages/Media/Html/Sorghum_(annual).htm Rainfall for maize, soybean, wheat: http://www.fao.org/docrep/U3160E/u3160e04.htm#2.1%20water%20requirements%20of%20crops Temperature for Maize: http://www.fao.org/ag/AGL/AGLW/cropwater/maize.stm Jatropha: http://www.jatrophaworld.org/9.html; Soybean: http://www.cgiar.org/impact/research/soybean.html, http://www.nsrl.uiuc.edu/news/nsrl_pubs/insectbooks/guidelines/introduction.pdf Sugar Beets: http://www.tnau.ac.in/tech/swc/sugarbeet.pdf; http://www.agr.hr/jcea/issues/jcea4-2/pdf/jcea42-3.pdf; http://www.wg-crop.icidonline.org/37doc.pdf; http://www.biodieseltechnologiesindia.com/biodieselsources.html Castor beans: http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Ricinus_communis.html Cassava: http://www.mekarn.org/msc2003-05/theses05/phallaabs.pdf;
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/2/7/12145/81957
64
Chart 2. Comparison of Energy Yields of Major Biofuels Feedstocks
Energy yield GJ/ha
0 50 100 150 200
Castor
Cassava
Soybean
Jatropha
Maize
Sweet sorghum
Palm oil
Sugarcane (juice)
Energy yield GJ/ha
Source: Derived from Table 20
Data on energy yields of feedstocks has been obtained from different sources and there is
considerable variation among sources.
f. Land Suitability Analysis of Major Biofuel Feedstocks
f.1. Sugarcane
Sugarcane is a tropical plant that requires adequate moisture (1,400–1,800 mm) and warm
temperature (22-38oC). The plant performs well under a long growing season (15-16
months) on soils with pH in the range of 5 to 8.5. Today, much of Africa’s sugar is
produced under irrigation.
Typically, sugarcane productivity is highly
influenced by climatic conditions and ranges
from 50 t/ha to 100 t/ha (weight of wet stem)
with productivity in some African countries,
particularly Zambia and Zimbabwe, reaching
140t/ha in place (UNECA 2011). At the
industrial level, ”one ton of sugarcane used
exclusively for sugar production generates
around 100 kg of sugar as well as over 20 litres
of bioethanol using molasses, or one ton of
sugarcane may produce 86 litres of hydrated
bioethanol in bioethanol-only production”
(UNECA 2011).
For rainfed sugarcane production, which is
most desirable for bioenergy, availability of
adequate and well-distributed moisture
throughout the growing period is important for
obtaining maximum yields. The minimum temperature for active growth is
approximately 20°C.
Sugar Corporation, Ethiopia’s state-owned
producer, intends to build 10 new factories and
is inviting private investment. The project,
which has raised concern among environmental
activists, involves constructing plants and
establishing farms at a cost of about 80 billion
birr ($4.6 billion) in four regions. The
government is undertaking the work because
Ethiopian private firms are “not financially and
technically ready to do such huge enterprises.”
“The government has given focus to sugar
development and hopes to become one of the
top 10 exporters in the coming 15 years.”
www.bloomberg.com printed in Precise Consult
Ethiopian Investor News (September 2011)
65
Map 2. Crop Suitability for Rainfed
Sugarcane, High Input Level
As shown on Map 5, the most suitable region for rain-
fed sugarcane is Central Africa. There are also areas in
West Africa, Southern Africa (Madagascar,
Mozambique), and some parts of Eastern Africa
(Uganda, Tanzania) that are marginally to moderately
suitable. Since the 1970s, Southern Africa, in particular,
has been a major producer of sugarcane and a key global
player.
Source FAO.
Africa’s sugarcane production is dominated by Southern Africa. Within Southern Africa,
South Africa has a lion’s share with a production of more 25-million tons in 2002.
Mauritius, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, and
Malawi are that region’s other large
producers. Elsewhere, Egypt, Sudan,
Kenya, Ethiopia, and Uganda are relatively
large producers.
Data on bio-ethanol production from
sugarcane was only available for South
Africa (110-million gallons), Mauritius,
and Zimbabwe (each produce six-million
gallons yearly). Thus, apart from South
Africa, other countries are not significant producers of sugarcane ethanol, although there
appears to be good potential to increase ethanol production by expanding existing
plantations.
Sugarcane costs account for 58 to 65 percent of the total cost of ethanol production
(Nastari 2005 a). This means that improving sugarcane productivity, while reducing
production costs per unit of output, are vital factors in lowering ethanol production costs.
Sugarcane products and byproducts include food (e.g. juice, alcohol, sugar, sweetener,
syrup and candy), fuel/energy (bioethanol from juice and molasses, electricity and heat
from bagasse, ethanol gel from gelatinized ethanol), medicine (e.g. traditional medicine,
Ayurveda medicine, folk medicine, wound healing, cosmetics and skin healing), fertilizer
(from molasses), animal feed (from molasses), other uses (e.g. paper from bagasse, and
polishes and wax paper from filter-cake or press mud) (UNECA 2011).
One important byproduct of sugarcane is bagasse, the residue after the juice is extracted
from sugarcane. Some studies show that a sugar factory produces as much as 30 percent29
of bagasse out of its total crushing. This bagasse is used to generate power and heat.
29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagasse
CARENSA Initiative
CARENSA is an initiative which has been
supported by the European Commission and whose
main aim is to evaluate the “potential for the
southern African sugar industry to become a
significant supplier of low carbon bioenergy within
the SADC region.” According to a brief prepared on
the request of the CARENSA initiative, the sugar
industry will still be able to produce ethanol after
having provided for the demand of crystalline sugar
(Woods et al.,).
66
Many sugar industries in Eastern and Southern Africa have currently installed co-
generation facilities, which export substantial amounts of energy to the grid. (See Table
21 below.)
Table 23. Production of Sugar and Sugar Cane and Potential for Cogeneration in Africa, 2002
African Countries
Sugar (x
103t)
Sugarcane(a) (x 103t)
@31 bars(b)
Cogeneration Potential (GWh)
@ 44
bars(c)
@ 82 bars (d)
Angola
Benin
Burkina Faso Burundi
Cameroun
Chad
Congo Côte d’Ivoire
Egypt
Ethiopia Gabon
Guinea
Kenya
Madagascar Malawi
Mali
Mauritius Morocco
31
5
40 21
113
33
55 158
1,397
294 18
26
423
32 257
34
552 156
282
45
364 191
1,027
300
500 1,436
12,700
2,672 164
236
3,845
291 2,336
309
5,018 1,418
14
2
18 10
50
15
25 71
635
131 8
12
192
15 117
15
250 71
20
3
25 13
72
21
35 101
889
187 11
17
269
20 164
22
351 99
31
5
40 21
113
33
55 158
1,397
294 18
26
423
32 257
34
552 156
Mozambique
Nigeria Réunion
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia South Africa
Sudan
Swaziland Tanzania
Togo
Uganda
Zaire Zambia
Zimbabwe
242
20 210
93
6
21 2,755
792
520 190
3
244
75 231
565
2,200
182 1,909
845
55
191 25,045
7,200
4,727 1,727
27
2,218
682 2,100
5,136
110
9 95
42
3
10 1252
360
236 86
1
111
34 105
257
154
13 134
59
4
13 1,753
504
331 121
2
155
48 147
360
242
20 210
93
6
21 2,755
792
520 190
3
244
75 231
565
Total 9,612 87,378 4362 6,117 9,612
Source: Stephen Karekezi, Presentation at the Nairobi, UNEP Workshop on Biomass Energy and Poverty Reduction in Africa, 9-11 2006.
As shown above, South Africa is the largest cogeneration facility with production of
2,755 GWh, followed by Egypt (1,397 GWh), Sudan (792 GWh), and Mauritius (552
GWh), all under 82 pressure bars.
67
f.2. Maize / Corn
Maize is widely grown in Africa under rain-fed conditions. It is a staple food crop in
many countries and a backyard crop. It is used also for making alcoholic beverages. As
Map 6 below shows, parts of Eastern, Western, Central, and Southern Africa are suitable
for growing maize, even under low input conditions.
Maize produces bio-ethanol (from stalks) and
biodiesel (from seeds). At a biofuels yield of 2,500
litres per hectare, it is one of most important biofuels
feedstocks. However, because of its starchy nature, the cost
of producing ethanol from maize is high.
The U.S., the world’s largest and most efficient producer of
corn, subsidizes “ethanol production at 51 cents per gallon
and production of other so-called biofuels at up to $1 per
gallon”30
to encourage the use of alternative fuels. Such a
highly subsidized production scheme is neither desirable
nor feasible in Africa. Further, maize is a soil-
depleting plant that is highly input intensive. Yet,
there is huge potential to increase maize production
for food and fuel crops, if based on small-holder agricultural practices.
f.3. Sweet Sorghum
Sorghum is believed to have originated from Eastern
Africa and “African slaves introduced sorghum into the
U.S. in the early 17th century.”31
It is widely grown in
other parts of Africa and is known for its resistance to
drought and tolerance for heat. It is a staple food crop
for many Africans and is also used to produce
alcoholic beverages.
As can be observed from the map above, sweet
sorghum grows widely in Africa under rain-fed
conditions. Like maize, it is a soil-depleting crop and
its repeated cultivation in the same area undermines
soil and fertility conditions. These risks are highly
reduced under a smallholder production scheme.
While potential for biofuel production exists, higher
30
See Harder, Ben article, “Demand for Ethanol May Drive Up Food Prices,” Science News
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060722/food.asp
31 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorghum
Map 4. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed Sweet
Sorghum: Intermediate Input. Source: FAO
Map3. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed Maize,
Low Input Level. Source: FAO
68
priority needs to be given to increasing food production and smallholder agricultural
production schemes.
f.4. Palm Oil
Palm is an important energy crop, the most efficient among the biodiesel crops. Map 8
below shows that the Central Africa region, which is also
a tropical rainforest area, is most suitable for rain-fed oil
palm. Indeed, large-scale oil palm plantations are almost
all established in large forest areas and involved forest clearance.
Oil palm monocultures are also associated with soil-nutrient
depletion and erosion. Oil palm production, unlike other crops, is
un-amenable for smallholder agricultural scheme. Therefore, with
the high priority given to the conservation of tropical forests, large-
scale production of rain-fed oil palm appears limited.
f.5. Jatropha
Jatropha is widely grown in the region as a hedge crop and as, in the case of Uganda, a
support to vanilla plants. It is believed to have originated in the “Caribbean and was
spread as a valuable hedge plant to Africa by Portuguese traders”32
There are many
varieties of jatropha; jatrophacurcas is the one most widely used as a biodiesel crop.
Some estimates indicate that 31 percent to 37 percent of oil is extracted from the jatropha
seed.33
As shown on Table 19 above, jatropha grows well in low-altitude areas with annual
rainfall between 300 and 1,000 mm per year. This makes many parts of Africa suitable
for jatropha production. Jatropha allows intercropping with yams, pulses, grain or
legumes, while the oil cake is used as an organic fertilizer. It, thus, contributes to
increasing food production while reducing soil nutrient loss. Moreover, jatropha can be
harvested three times a year. It can also do without much irrigation and does not require
much pesticides or fertilizers. According to the UK-based company D1-Oils, 200,000
hectares are currently under the cultivation in Zambia and 15,000 in Malawi.34
So far, the
jatropha plantations in Southern Africa are small-scale and knowledge about the plant is
generally limited.
Jatropha gives about one-fourth of the biofuel yield of palm oil, but the climate benefits
could outweigh energy benefits. A land suitability map for jatropha is unavailable from
FAO.
32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jatropha 33
http://www.biodieseltoday.com/ 34 Presentation during CSD 14 at the UN Foundation hosted luncheon in New York, May 10, 2006.
Map 5. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed
Oil Palm, High Input Level
69
f.6 Soybean
Soybean is one of the most promising food and energy crop. It is a soil-enriching crop
that performs well with annual rainfall between
450-700 mm (check figures). Although its biofuel
yield is about 500 litres per hectare, it requires far less
fertilizer and pesticides compared to maize. Indeed, soybean’s
contribution to greenhouse gas reduction is more substantial
compared to maize. As Map 9 shows, soybean grows well in many
parts of Africa.
f.7. Castor Oil
Castor grows throughout Africa, but generally as a wild plant. India, China, and Brazil
cultivate the plant for commercial purposes. Castor is believed to have enormous
potential for biodiesel production and appears to be superior given its economic and
ecological benefits, which include:
• non-edible − there’s no competition with the food sector;
• belongs to the bean family − soil-enriching not depleting like maize and palm;
• castor biodiesel is “the only one that is soluble in alcohol”35
and has less heat
requirements for subsequent energy processes;
• castor oil maintains its fluidity at extremely high and low temperatures; and,
variety of medicinal and other values too.
Some studies estimate the oil content of castor bean to be from 24 to 48 percent,
compared with 17-percent oil content for soybeans.36
Same sources indicate that
breeding has made it possible to produce dwarf varieties of the castor-oil plant, which
grow only 1.7-meters height, much lower than the three-meter height of the traditional
plant. This eases castor cultivation. Further, perhaps more importantly, the castor-oil
plant is easy to grow and drought resistant, which makes it an ideal crop for the semi-arid
and arid regions of Africa.
35
http://www.biodieseltechnologiesindia.com/biodieselsources.html 36http://www.biodieseltechnologiesindia.com/biodieselsources.html
Source: FAO, Land Suitability Maps www.fao.org
Map 6. Crop Suitability for Rain-fed
Soybean, Intermediate Input Level
70
f. 8. Cassava
Cassava is common in many African countries and is a staple food crop. It grows under a
variety of moisture and soil conditions. Cassava is produced manually at the small scale
or household level. Cassava has “one of the highest
rates of CO2 fixation and sucrose synthesis for any C3
plant.”
As the Map above shows, cassava performs well in pockets
of tropical, high rainfall, and humid areas of Africa, where
expansion will be constrained because of the high
priority given to conservation of tropical forests.
The above analysis, however brief it may be, shows that
African has limited potential in first generation biofuels
feedstock, not only because of competition with food, but also because of limited
availability of suitable land given its fast growing population.
II-8 Processing and Value Addition
The notion of bioenergy processing involves a variety of technologies, ways, systems and
activities, which UNECA (2011) calls downstream processing that involve: refining,
gasification, fractionation, oleochemical, esterification, refined product storage, with
products that include biodiesel, palm oil, fatty acid distillate, plamolein, palm stearin,
fatty acids, alcohols, amides, amines, glycerin, methyl esters, cooking oil, frying fats,
margarine, ice cream, candles soap, emulsifiers, bakery fats, energy generation, animal
feed, organic fertilizers, The primary ones are:
(a) Transforming woody biomass into energy. Since creation human beings have used
wood to produce energy through “direct combustion” (burning the wood), i.e.,
breaking down the wood cellulose to release the energy it contains. This is the
simplest method to obtain energy and can easily be done by everybody, anywhere in
the world and at all social and industrial organizational levels. While charcoal making
constituted the simplest form of obtaining cleaner and easier use of woody biomass,
over the years, a variety of technologies have been developed to convert wood into
energy for cleaner, easier and more efficient residential, commercial, and industrial
uses. Burning of wood can generate steam, which can be used to turn turbines that
generate electricity for use to power machines or put into the power grid.
Biomass can also be converted into a synthesis gas (syngas) through the process of
gasification (exposing wood to extremely high temperatures (900-1,200°C) and
pressure in a low oxygen environment), which can be used as a fuel source. Parallel
Map 10. Agro-climatic suitability
for rain fed cassava: low input.
71
to this is the biogas production, which involves anaerobic digestion (exposing wood
to certain bacteria in the absence of oxygen and under other controlled conditions)
and can be produced from any kind of biomass not only from wood. Both processes
involve the breaking down of the wood cellulose to produce gas (syngas and biogas),
which can be used like natural gas for cooking, heating water or buildings, or
producing electricity and can be transported easily than wood.
Biomass can also be converted into liquid oil through a process called fast pyrolysis.
The oil can then be burned in boilers for direct heating or for generating electricity.
Since the bio-oil contains a much higher amount of energy per unit volume than
wood, it is easier and cheaper to transport than wood. Ethanol, methanol, or biodiesel
can also be produced from woody biomass to be used for transportation fuel (for
blending). As in ordinary alcohol making, ethanol is produced through a fermentation
process by exposing the wood to microorganisms. As these microorganisms
decompose the wood, enzymes are produced, which break down the sugars in the
wood to produce ethanol. Methanol can also be produced from the gasification of the
woody biomass and converting it into liquid, which can be used to fuel vehicles or to
produce other chemical products.
In many African countries, much of the woody biomass is used in its simplest form,
which represents the most inefficient use the resource with resulting health and
environmental damages. While investment to increase biomass density and reverse
environmental degradation remains crucial to make access to feedstock cheaper and
easier, the promotion of sustainable bioenergy paves the ground for transition from
traditional biomass use to modern cleaner and environment friendly energy. Several
factors like stage of technological development of the country, level of income and
affordability will influence this transition, however.
(b) Biomass densification or briquetting. This involves producing a higher quality fuel
through compacting biomass feedstocks like stalks, husks, bark, straw, shells, pits,
seeds, sawdust into a uniform dense form, Briquettes can be easily produced with
village level technologies, provide more efficient and cleaner burning than wood, and
can also be easily transported.
(c) Converting cane into energy. This involves the production of ethanol from the
glucose in the sugar cane and starch in corn. Sugarcane feedstock is easier and
cheaper to convert because of the high sugar content (six carbon glucose). Today,
sugar crops (for example, sugar beet, sugarcane, and molasses) provide about 61
percent of world ethanol production (Kojima and Johnson 2005). Maize contains
starch (long chain of glucose molecules), which requires more burning. With fast-
changing technology, starchy feedstocks (such as maize, wheat, potato, sweet potato,
and cassava) could be feasible in the foreseeable future, particularly if there is a leap
forward to cellulosic feedstock (see discussion below).
72
Ethanol can be used to make “gel fuel” although most of the production is used for
transport by blending it with gasoline. Five- to ten-percent ethanol blended with
gasoline can be used in any car. But only ethanol that is free from water (anhydrous
ethanol) can be blended with gasoline. If engines are designed to use ethanol, hydrous
ethanol (ethanol with water) can be used, which is cheaper than anhydrous ethanol
because of shorter distillation. The ethanol is denatured to make it unsuitable for
human consumption.
Today, the two largest producers of ethanol and biodiesel are Brazil (from sugar cane)
and the United States (from maize). Between 1975 and 2004, Brazil produced 230-
billion liters, which was blended with ethanol and used for transport (Kojima and
Johnson 2005).
(d) Converting oil bearing seeds to energy. In seed bearing plants and crops, the
production of biodiesel involves first crushing seeds to extract the oil and then
converting this vegetable oil or fat into fatty acids. The fatty acids are subsequently
converted to methyl or ethyl esters directly using an acid or base to catalyze the
reaction. Biodiesel can, thus, be used directly as boiler fuels, processed into biodiesel
(fatty acid methyl esters), or processed into “bio-distillates” via refinery technology.
The “cake” that is left over after the oil has been pressed out of the seeds or nuts is
usually used as animal feed while the stalks can be left on the field, where they serve
as a fertilizer for the next crop or be used to electricity and gas, the same way as
described for woody biomass above.
(e) Converting straw to energy. In the African setting, straw is used as animal feed and
the rest left on the ground as fertilizer to boost the next crop. However, the straw can
be converted to electricity using gasification technology for heating, cooking, power
generators and machines. The process is technically similar as that described for
woody biomass.
(f) Converting animal fat into energy. This involves the production of biodiesel from
animal fats: tallow, lard, animal fat from meat processing industry in the same
manner as vegetable oil, described above, is produced. Compared to that from crops,
e.g, rape seed, flax, soybean, etc., animal fat based biodiesel is considered inferior
and usually used for heating and cooking not for to run transport engines, which
require higher quality biodiesel. This lower quality characteristic is related to its
reaction to temperature change as animal fat turns cloudy at a higher temperature and
could also thicken up when it gets to a temperature lower than about 40 degrees
Fahrenheit.37
(g) Waste to Energy (WTE). This involves the conversion of waste, generally,
municipal solid waste (MSW) or household and municipal garbage into steam or
steam-generated electricity. The notion of waste actually includes wastes such as
37
. http://e85.whipnet.net/alt.fuel/animal.fat.html
73
wood, wood waste, peat, wood sludge, agricultural waste, straw, tires, landfill gases,
fish oils, paper industry liquors, railroad ties, and utility poles. WTE, in addition to
economic and health benefits, has considerable environmental benefits that include
the release of greenhouse gases, and reduce the volume of waste considerably for
landfills.
(h) Converting algae to energy. The conversion of algae to energy along with the
lingo-cellulosic are emerging as most promising on social and environment grounds,
although questions of technology availability and access to it remain critical issues
for Africa (see the section II-9 below).
The above analysis, albeit brief, illustrates the variety of ways and systems for
converting biomass energy. Each system differs in economic, social, and environmental
benefits and costs. Although the social and environmental benefits, often, do not show
significant differences the economics of each system, access to the technology and scale
of production varies considerably. It is also worth noting that several African countries
by exporting oil seeds (rape seeds, flax, soybean, etc.,), non-edibles like jatropha seeds
as well as wood to supply the raw material for refineries in developed and fast
industrializing countries are foregoing considerable revenue as well as the backward,
forward and lateral linkages that in-country processing offers. The bi-products produced
during the conversion of biomass to energy are many as explained above and include:
plastics (poly lactic acid, etc.), solvents, and low calorie sweeteners, etc. that hard earned
foreign exchange is being spent on. In particular, the export of food crops (raw
feedstock) to other countries will have both direct and indirect negative consequences,
including losses in food production and employment generation capacity; postponement
of Africa’s transition to modern energy; and the continued trapping of Africa in poverty
and low industrialization vicious cycle. Losses in value addition would also frustrate
Africa’s desire to uplift the infant biofuels sector and postpone Africa’s emergence as
globally recognized biofuels producer until the time cellulosic ethanol and algae oil for
biodiesel are available.
II-9 Second Generation: Cellulosic Biofuels and Algae
As described earlier, ligno-cellulosic ethanol production involves extracting fermentable
sugar, which can then be converted into alcohol from the lingo-cellulosic material found
in plant stalks and waste seed husks through biological enzymatic process (IEA 2006).
Expected to be fully available by 2020 (IEA 2009), these technologies offer fuel-
conversion opportunities from almost any type of biomass (the plant’s dry-matter) instead
of the highly restrictive conventional grain ethanol processes. “Conversion efficiencies of
60 to 70 percent may ultimately be possible, yielding greenhouse-gas emission reductions
of 90 percent if lingo-cellulosic materials are used for the extraction process” (Hamelink,
et al. 2004). Lignin-cellulosic feedstocks must undergo further processing as they need to
be first processed to sugars, either by heating with acid or converted using cellulose
enzymes extracted from fungi (Hart 2010). Given Africa’s tropical climate that enables
74
plants to grow much faster compared to temperate countries, lingo-cellulosic-based
energy process is considered Africa’s hope with huge cost savings and environmental
benefits.
The process of extracting biodiesel and ethanol from algae (algal ethanol and oils) is often
referred to as the third generation biofuels. The process involves strain selection,
biological optimization of the culture media, algae cultivation and harvesting and
technology integration. Algae and aquatic biomass have high oil and biomass yields, can
grow widely with no competition with food crops in wastewater treatments and other
industrial plants with capacity to capture CO2. ((Hart 2010). However, the cost of
processing algae for both energy and valuable co-products supply is still very high (Hart
2010) and more research needs to be under taken.
Although Africa’s greater potential is generally believed to be in second generation
technologies, first technology biofuels offer considerable benefits that cannot be forgone.
First, first generation technologies are available today and with sound policies and
management practices, there are ample opportunities to produce economically, socially
and environmental sustainable bioenergy/biofuels.
II-10 Peace and Security Aspects of Bioenergy Development
Bioenergy development if not managed cautiously and in a sustainable manner is likely to
trigger and amplify land related conflicts. It is now widely recognized that in natural
resource dependent economies, like Africa, political instability and armed conflicts, in the
majority of cases, are related to severe competition over access to natural resources,
notably land, pasture, and water as well as to the mismanagement, misuse and transfer of
these resources. In countries with abundant natural resources, e.g., Democratic Republic
of the Congo, Liberia, and Cote D’Ivoire, misuse and mismanagement of these resources
have opened pathways of vulnerability to poverty, famine, infectious diseases, forced
migration, and armed conflict. In turn, armed conflicts played havoc to livelihoods, social
and environmental wellbeing by creating a large influx of war refugees that cause
mounting pressure on environmental resources, including land and water, as well
devastation of natural heritage sites and national parks. Recently, various reports show the
strong link between climate change and security, and highlight the potential of climate
change to redefine the security agenda through worsening food and energy insecurity,
aggravating border disputes, migration, resource shortages, and social stress.
In particular, access to land (farm land and grazing area) has been an important cause and
trigger of armed conflict n Burundi, Zimbabwe, Sudan, northern and southern Ethiopia
and Karamoja in Uganda’s cattle region. In the Upper Guinean forest belt and Central
African countries, access to forests/timber continues to be a major cause and trigger of
war. A survey of households in four areas of Uganda and Ethiopia’s South Welo region,
conducted in 2002, showed all disputes in settled agricultural and pastoralist areas to be
were over natural resources (notably land and water). In Uganda, close to 90 per cent of
75
disputes were over land and the remaining 10 per cent over water, while in Ethiopia over
73 percent were over cropland, while disputes over pasture accounted for the remaining
27 percent.
The production of bioenergy requires new land (already cultivated for food crops, land
under forest, rural settlement, etc.) to be brought under cultivation. For example,
jatropha curcas is reported to grow under wide ecological conditions and does well in
marginal and moisture stressed areas. However, it is not yet ascertained whether it would
still be commercially feasible if it grows in marginal and moisture stressed areas. Further,
many African countries have not yet mapped their natural resource base and developed
sustainable land use plans that will enable them guide bioenergy investment decisions.
The notion of marginal land (often referred to as “waste land”) is troubling as there is no
globally agreed definition of marginal land (Young 1999). What is generally considered
“waste land” may not be a waste land for the environment, when ecosystem services and
functions are taken into account. It is also highly possible that investors will hunt for
good soils and rainfall in order to maximize their profit, if the host government is
perceived to be weak and also lacks the capacity to monitor land acquisition. Further,
industrial biofuels production results in environmental degradation arising from impacts
of monoculture practices and continuous and over use of fertilizers thus diminishing
arable land.
“Biofuels land grab in Kenya's Tana Delta fuels talk of war” “villagers vow to resist as
wildlife vanishes and they are driven from their land to make way for water-thirsty crops”
was the heading of an article of the Guardian July 2, 2011. The article charges that “the
eviction of the villagers to make way for a sugar cane plantation is part of a wider land
grab going on in Kenya's Tana Delta that is not only pushing people off plots they have
farmed for generations, but also leads to loss of livelihoods and destruction of the
ecosystem. If these charges are confirmed, the likelihood of investment in biofuels,
thought to be positive, is likely to lead to social tensions, heighten livelihoods insecurity,
displacement of people, and ultimately result in either state – community or community –
community conflicts. Further, the competition for land for energy and staple food crops
is likely to push up food prices; and low income groups are always the most vulnerable
causing social stress and political instability.
The pursuit of sustainable development of bioenergy should necessarily consider issues
such as socioeconomic deprivation (poverty) and environmental scarcity (landlessness,
poor soil fertility, etc) to pave the ground for building enduring peace and stability at the
country and regional levels.
In conclusion, bioenergy while offering many benefits (more from second and third
generation technologies), poses many challenges and risks that need to be carefully
strategized and managed with a view to minimizing risks of negative impacts and
maximizing benefits in the short, medium and long term. Energy security, the possibilities
of producing own energy and replacing expensive petroleum by environment friendly
76
product, supporting the rural and the urban poor sectors’ transition to modern energy
sources are among the primary policy drivers for bioenergy promotion. The benefits of
bioenergy to stimulate and transform agricultural and rural development from subsistence
to technology intensive practices, possibilities to restore degraded lands and reduce rural
covert unemployment have been widely recognized. In recent years, many countries are
also looking to bioenergy development as a vehicle for climate change mitigation because
its highly reduced greenhouse gases emissions. Sound policy, legal, regulatory and
institutional frameworks are sine qua non for ensuring that socio-economic and
environmental sustainability considerations are taken into account in the production,
promotion and use of bioenergy. In developing such policy, the first task is to distill
lessons from African experiences, both at the country and regional levels, which the next
chapter addresses.
Chapter III. Bioenergy Policies and Strategies Development in Africa: Lessons
Learned
In Africa, the development of sound and sustainable bioenergy policy is at an early stage.
Although several African countries have developed national bioenergy policies and set
blending targets, a comprehensive review of policy status, goals and priorities is lacking.
Recent wide media reports on African biofuels investment deals that involved huge land
acquisitions, marginalization and displacement of local farmers, investors rush to pristine
and tropical forest areas as part of the search for fertile soils and good rainfall, payment of
below normal wages for labor, feedstock production to supply refineries in developed and
other countries instead of creating in-country refining capacity have multiplied challenges
faced by the bioenergy sector heightening the urgency of sound bioenergy policy
development, which the following sections provide a review of.
III-1. Survey of Sub-regional Strategic Policy Frameworks
The review of the existing sub-regional-based bioenergy policy initiatives reveals that
bioenergy is not placed high in the agenda of RECs whereby only two RECs, out of five
have developed and, in some cases, adopted some sort of bioenergy regional frameworks
either in the form of common policy or a development strategy. A pioneer in the
development of a regional bioenergy policy development is ECOWAS, which issued, in
2005“White Paper for A Regional Policy: Geared Towards Increasing Access to Energy
Services for Rural and Peri-urban Populations in Order to Achieve the MDGs.” The
White Paper promotes, among others, the development of “harmonized political and
institutional frameworks (e.g. PRSP, MDGs monitoring frameworks, etc.) to expand
access to energy services, being centered on poverty reduction in rural and peri-urban
areas and the achievement of MDGs.” The key targets of the White Paper are, among
others, providing access to improved domestic cooking services to all people (100% of
the population) by 2015; and motivating power to 60 percent of the rural population and
electricity to 66 percent of the population. Some of the most important features of the
77
White Paper are the emphasis it placed on the rural sector and the link it developed
between poverty reduction and provision of energy services. Although almost six years
since it was issued, reports on its implementation are lacking. In the absence of such
reports, it is difficult to know to what extent the White Paper has been internalized and
consequently to what extent it has influenced the development of national level bioenergy
policies and strategies.
In 2008, Hub for Rural Development in West and Central Africa (Senegal) issued a report
titled: “Sustainable Bioenergy Development in UEMOA Member Countries” covering
Bénin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinée Bissau, Mali, Niger, Sénégal, and Togo,
which are all members of ECOWAS as well. A key objective of the strategy paper is to
develop a sustainable agricultural and energy policy framework that would enable
countries” to develop bioenergy policies and institutional frameworks. Three years since
it was issued, reports on its adoption by governments of UEMOA countries and also on
its implementation are lacking.
SADC and GTZ produced a report entitled : “SADC Bioenergy Policy Development” in
August 2010. The paper proposes a six -step technical process for the development of
bioenergy policy and strategy: (i) set the context; (ii) land use assessment and resource
mapping; (iii) set objectives and sustainability criteria for the bioenergy policy/strategy;
(iv) develop and assess implementation options; (v) land use planning; and(vi) develop
bioenergy policy and or strategy (GTZ 2010). The paper underlines stakeholder
engagement as critical to the success of a bioenergy policy, and offers useful analytical
and process framework for consideration in the development of a bioenergy policy. The
influence this paper will have at the country level policy development will depend on the
political process put in place for its adoption and wider use, on which reports were not
found.
III-2. Review of National Bioenergy Policies in Africa
An online survey of selected African countries reported (UNECA 2011), , offers some
idea on the status of biofuels policies and understanding of concerns and priorities of the
countries.
78
Table 22. African Countries with Bioenergy/Biofuel Policy and Blending Targets
Country Policy Date of
Issue
Primary Feedstock Blending
Target
Angola Biofuels Policy 24/3/10
Botswana Energy Policy 2009
Ethiopia E10
Ghana Bioenergy Policy (Draft) 2010
Kenya National Biofuels Policy(Draft) E10
Malawi E10
Mali Agricultural Legislation 2006 Jatropha
Mauritius Energy Policy 2005-2009 Sugar Cane
Mozambique National Biofuel Policy and
Strategy
E10 B5
(2015)
Nigeria Biofuels Policy and Incentives No. 72 Vol. 94
Rwanda National Energy Policy
&Strategy
Senegal National Bioenergy Strategy 2006 Jatropha for biodiesel / Sugar
Cane for ethanol
South Africa Biofuels Industrial Strategy 2007 2% (2013)
Zambia National Energy Policy May 2008 E10 B5 (2015)
Source: UNECA (2011) and UEMOA (2008)
This UNECA study revealed that all the countries had energy security and diversification
as a leading objective followed by capacity building for biofuels development (including
research), job creation and poverty alleviation (. This study also shows environmental
and cogeneration being among the top issues addressed by the countries’ bioenergy
policies, while food security concerns were way down the ladder (UNECA 2011). The
study concluded that policy development shows several gaps, although national policies
have been formulated concomitant regulatory frameworks are lacking, and capacities for
land suitability analysis and processing (biodiesel and bioethanol) are woefully
inadequate. Even in some countries, as the above table shows, where biofuels blending
targets/mandates have been developed and adopted, there is no indication that biofuel
policy and regulatory frameworks have been developed.
At the global level, “by end of 2010, approximately 39 countries have already
implemented or are preparing to implement mandatory biofuels programs and most do not
address biofuels Land Use Change (LUC) (Hart 2010). Although “several governments
have attempted to address LUC concerns in their biofuels programs,” it is unclear to what
extent the issue has been seriously considered in Africa.
79
III-3 Key Lessons Learned
Africa can draw lessons from existing examples. From experiences of the past few years,
there are several lessons drawn from the management of bioenergy as well as from the
policy formulation and implementation experiences.
Tendency to overlook potential negative impacts of biofuels. There is a rush
toward concluding investment deals without carefully examining the
environmental and social impacts of the investment. Despite the existence of
widely available reports on uncertainties clouding the economic viability of
biofuels in some developed economies and also reports on adverse social and
environmental impact of biofuels, there has been tendency to shun these reports as
same old stories. Often, there has been "a lack of documented rights claimed by
local people and weak consultation processes that have led to uncompensated loss
of land rights, especially by vulnerable groups” (Deininger 2011).
Treating biofuels policy as a standalone policy without integration into the overall
socioeconomic development and natural resource management policy and
strategy. The development of the bioenergy impacts and is also impacted by
policies and developments in the agriculture, land, natural resources, industry,
water resources, among others, as well as by macroeconomic policies and national
development strategies and priorities, including national poverty strategies. For
example, in addition to the impact of biofuels investment on food production,
biodiversity and human settlements mentioned earlier, biofuels crops which
require irrigation (e.g. sugarcane) exert pressure on local water resources. In
addition, water quality can be affected by soil erosion and runoff containing
fertilizers and pesticides. The growing of feedstock in large scale impacts
biodiversity negatively with habitat loss and conversion of the natural landscape
into energy-crop plantation. The positive contribution of bioenergy in restoring
degraded areas, reducing poverty, and hastening the transition to modern energy
are all important benefits that need to be considered side by side with risks and
costs. Thus, integration of bioenergy policies into sectoral and national
development and natural resources management policies is sine quo non for the
full realization of bioenergy benefits and minimization of risks posed.
Promoting foreign investment without ensuring strong backward, forward and
lateral linkages to the economy. Several bioenergy investments are to produce the
biofuels feedstock to supply raw material to industries in Europe and as well as
newly emerging industrialized countries such as China and India. This approach
foregoes economic benefits that accrue at the processing stage as well as many by
products that countries producing the raw material end up importing and draining
their hard earned foreign exchange.
No designated in-charge institution. In several cases, there is no clearly
designated institution “in charge” of bioenergy energy development (UEMOA
80
2008). In countries, where there is no designated institution, the capacity to
coordinate in an effective manner the formulation and implementation of
bioenergy policies is lacking.
Limited consideration of the entire life cycle of bioenergy production and process.
The overall performance of different biofuels in reducing fossil energy use and
GHG emissions varies widely when considering the entire life cycle from
production through transport to use. The net balance depends on the type of
feedstock, land use pattern and the production process. For example, if the
cultivation of the bioenergy feedstock involves clearing forests and bush, GHG
emissions will be so considerable that dwarf any economic and social benefit.
Measures to ensure environmental sustainability and climate benefits at the local,
national and regional levels are lacking. Environment including climate change do
not have political or administrative boundaries. The granting of huge tracts of land
for biofuels investment will have impact on the environment beyond a country’s
political boundaries. These are often ignored and there is clearly need to take
measures to ensure sustainability of all crops and plants used as biofuels
feedstocks.
Mandatory blending targets and subsidies determined in isolation. As the
experience of several countries suggest, poorly applied blending targets and
subsidies have the potential to create artificially rapid growth in biofuels
production, exacerbating some negative impacts. Although they may provide
employment and develop rural infrastructure, they may have a limited effect in
achieving energy security and climate change mitigation. Further, national
policies need to recognize the regional and global consequences of biofuels
development and evaluate and weigh net positive results nationally and regionally.
“Current policies tend to favour producers in some developed countries over
producers in most developing countries. The challenge is to reduce or manage the
risks while sharing the opportunities more widely.” (Jacque Diouf, FAO Ex-
Director General, 2008),
Low priority accorded to building critical mass of expertise and institutions.
Weak capacity to assess a proposed project’s technical and economic viability as
well as enforce environmental and social safeguards has been one of the problems
faced by many African countries (Deininger 2011).
Lack of consistent policy and regulatory frameworks. Although bioenergy policy
priorities are usually different among countries, reflective of each country’s
unique conditions, social and environmental requirements and trade standards are
often expected to be the same, which is not the case now.
81
Limited investment in building public private partnership. In many African
countries, the public and private sectors hardly communicate on a common and
mutually beneficial agenda. The tendency, more often than not, is to see each
other with suspicion.
In conclusion, because of Africa’s limited experience, the range of lessons to be learned
on the wide ranging bioenergy issues is limited, which calls for assessing lessons learned
from other developing countries in Asia and South America. For example, in developing
the bioenergy system, there are two key lessons learned from the Brazilian experience:
the need for, first, a long-term view and, second, strong government support and political
commitment. The other key learned lesson is that putting in place an appropriate policy
and institutional framework that promotes close working relationships between
government and the private sector, civil society and academic/research institutions is
crucial for ensuring enduring socio-economic and environmental sustainability.
Chapter IV. The African Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework
The importance of a continental approach and policy framework has been underlined by
various African Union initiatives launched in support of the sustainable development of
biofuels, in Africa that include, among others: (i) Addis Ababa Declaration and Action
Plan on Sustainable Bio-fuels Development in Africa, which was adopted at the first
High-level Bio-fuels Seminar in Africa, August 2007; (ii) Dakar Renewable Energy
Development Plan of Action, adopted by the International Conference on Renewable
energy in Africa organized by the AUC jointly with a number of concerned organizations,
Dakar, April 2008. Key resolutions of these two initiatives, in particular, “encourage
regional, sub-regional, national and sub-national institutions to focus on renewable energy
resources/technologies with a clear comparative advantage and develop an Africa
regional energy policy” of the Dakar Declaration are geared towards promoting bioenergy
in a broad development context. Further, the 2nd
Action Plan of Africa-EU Energy
Partnership (AEEP) and the Renewable Energy Cooperation Programme (RECP),
approved by the African Energy Ministers meeting in Maputo, Mozambique, November
2010 have advocated for tripling of bioenergy production in Africa by 2020.
A key objective of NEPAD is “placing Africa on a path of sustainable growth and
development” through eradicating poverty, building peace, and conserving the integrity
and diversity of its ecosystems, most notably its forest resources. Centred on “African
ownership and management,” NEPAD calls for a new partnership between Africa and the
international community and the enhancement of the continent’s integration in the global
economy and trade based on “transformation from a raw materials supplier to one that
processes its natural resource.” Accordingly, any bioenergy development should
integrate both production and processing at all levels.
82
It is also important to note that recent African experiences in biofuels investment deals
indicate huge land acquisitions, marginalization and displacement of farmers, investors
rush to pristine and tropical forest areas as part of the search for fertile soils and good
rainfall, below normal wages for labor, feedstock production to supply refineries in
developed and other countries instead of creating the refining capacity in-country, these
all have made bioenergy a liability rather than asset. This Policy Framework seeks to
minimize the negative features of bioenergy development and build the positive ones
through identifying issues (economic, social and environmental) to be considered in the
development of national bioenergy policies and strategies. It also provides guidance on
capacity development measures for policy formulation, and implementation, investment
planning and negotiations as well as research in non-food feedstock to effectively manage
such issues like food, fuel and feed competition, huge land acquisitions and GHG
emissions around which, bioenergy, biofuels in particular, received negative publicity.
While recognizing the uniqueness of “energy” and its economic, social, political and
cultural features, the Framework is based on the principle that energy and development
are inseparable. Meeting the necessities of life (e.g., food, clothing, shelter, and transport)
depends on access to energy services. The lack of access to modern energy services
represents a state of economic and social deprivation. The sustainable development of
bioenergy can make significant contribution to alleviating poverty, meeting energy needs
and reducing health hazard of/to the rural population, which is heavily dependent on
traditional biomass energy, transforming raw material-based economies into processed
goods producers, reversing environmental degradation and ultimately, the attainment of
energy and livelihood security. Clearly, the successful production, processing, marketing,
and use of bioenergy face several challenges and pose risks. However, there are ample
possibilities to transform these challenges and risks into economic transformation and
development opportunities. The formulation of a sustainable bioenergy policy framework
is a first step; elements of which are presented below.
IV-1. The Need for a Pan African Policy Framework
A Pan-African sustainable bioenergy policy framework and guidelines is needed for
several reasons:
a. The need for continental vision and guidance for promoting energy and income
security has been underlined in several past NEPAD policies and strategies. The
impact of high energy prices of the past decade have had serious economic, social and
environmental implications that resulted, among others, with the ascendancy of
energy security as a key concern. New market opportunities for biofuels arising from
blending targets set by European Union; the opportunity that bioenergy offers each
country to be own energy producer and replace fossil fuels by cheaper, socially and
83
environmentally friendly alternative, have made bioenergy development an economic
and political imperative that requires continental vision and guidance.
b. With the negative publicity on biofuels and the continued food-versus-fuel debate,
Africa's capacity to harness its bioenergy resources, in a manner that is socially and
environmentally sustainable will be hindered. There is, thus, a need to develop
Africa’s bioenergy potential and strengthen collective efforts to make Africa a strong
participant in the global biofuels race and contributor to alternative fuels through
enhanced socially and environmentally responsible investment in the production,
processing, marketing and efficient use of bioenergy.
c. There is also need to encourage the development of national sustainable bioenergy
policies and strategies as well as regulatory frameworks based on Africa’s collective
vision and consistent with NEPAD, the MDGs, and global conventions that Africa is
part to as well as Africa’s common position on climate change.
d. Changing Africa’s image in the management of biofuels investment in particular, is
long overdue. The failure of African countries to enforce social and environmental
accountability that resulted in the marginalization and displacement of farmers,
environmental degradation, payment of below human survival wages, and talks of
pending social upheavals and conflicts are bound to scare away the genuine and
strong investors who like to come for the long haul in favor of opportunistic and short
term gains oriented investors, that matter that African countries cannot afford to stand
by and watch. There is need to ensure that one environmental or social problem is not
substituted by another through wrongly designed bioenergy policies.
e. While well designed bioenergy policies support the potential of the green economy to
achieve sustainable development and poverty eradication, badly designed bioenergy
policies and investments can easily frustrate these goals, and in fact worsen
environmental degradation and social grievances. It is, therefore, necessary to
provide an African reference framework that helps address bioenergy issues: benefits,
costs, risks and opportunities in an integrated and transparent manner in order to
ensure that benefits are maximized while costs (social and environmental) are
minimized and trade enhanced.
f. Because climate change impacts do not have political boundaries, there is need to
harmonize national policies and strategies to eliminate climate change adverse
impacts.
g. Small economics of scale and dominance of fragile markets in Africa necessitate the
need for a continental framework that enhances regional cooperation and trade.
The primary goal of the Pan-African Policy Framework is to enable the bioenergy sector
contribute significantly and effectively to the eradication of poverty, improvement of
84
social and environmental well-being of the people, transition to modern sources of energy
and efforts made to achieve build energy and livelihoods secured and climate resilient
Africa. The specific objectives are:
i. Promote the sustainable development of bioenergy through, inter alia,
bringing the generation, distribution and consumption of bioenergy to the
forefront of the development policy and management agenda within the
framework of NEPAD and global conventions that Africa is party to;
ii. Identify issues (economic, social and environmental) for sustainable and
equitable (across gender, income groups and generation) to be considered in
the development of national bioenergy policies and strategies;
iii. Enhance cross-sectoral understanding and raising awareness among African
leaders, the general public and media about modern bioenergy policies and
practices and their benefits, costs, tradeoffs, opportunities and risks;
iv. Guide capacity development measures for policy formulation and
implementation, investment planning and contract negotiations as well as
research in non-food feedstock to effectively manage such issues like food,
fuel and feed competition, land acquisition and GHG emissions around which,
biofuels in particular, received negative publicity;
v. Facilitate harmonization of national policies to maximize value addition and
carbon credits while minimizing climate change impacts;
vi. Strengthen bioenergy/biofuels governance and minimize the social and
environmental costs of bioenergy investment; and
vii. Strengthen regional cooperation and trade in bioenergy as a means to promote
the sustainable development of bioenergy in the continent.
It is important to elaborate each objective and develop a set of activities that enable to
achieve these objectives. In the case of strengthening bioenergy governance, for
example, among the key activities would be: (a) development of institutions and human
capacities to process and manage large-scale investments, including inclusive and
participatory consultations that result in clear and enforceable agreements; (b) provision
of clear guidelines to investors on technical, social and environmental requirements and
social and environmental responsibilities, including the need for well elaborated,
economically viable, technically consistent with local visions and national plans for
development; and (c) enhance economic and social inclusiveness, thereby minimize
economic and social grievances and conflicts arising from bioenergy development.
85
IV-2 The Political and Socioeconomic Context of the Policy
This Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Framework and Guidelines is a collaborative initiative
of the African Union Commission (AUC) and the Economic Commission for Africa
(ECA). The Constitutive Act of the African Union values the sovereignty and the
sovereign equality of member states and their inalienable right to decide on their policies.
The purpose of this Framework is, thus, to serve as a technical framework and tool that
highlights issues that can be considered in the development of national bioenergy
policies.
Tthe World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) identified five critical areas
for achieving the goal of energy for sustainable development:(i) increasing access to
energy services, particularly for the poor; (ii) improving energy efficiency; (iii) increasing
the proportion of energy obtained from renewable energy sources; (iv) advanced energy
technologies; and (v) reducing the environmental impact of transport. Certainly, well
designed, socially oriented and environementally freindly bioenergy policies can
contribute significantly to increasing energy access particularyly for the poor rural,
increasing share of renewable energies, and reducing the envirnemnetal impact of
transport.
The Year 2012 has been declared by the UN as the year of global energy access
enhancement where concerted efforts of development partners around the globe are made
intensively to improve energy access in energy deprieved regions like Africa, which has
the lowest total primary energy consumption in the world and a majority of households
lacking access to clean and reliable energy.
Within the WSSD and NEPAD framework, the AUC has launched a number of initiatives
to promote the sustainable development of bioenergy in Africa. NEPAD highlights the
critical role energy plays as an engine of development which impacts the performance of
sectors and the competitiveness of enterprises. It calls for a fundamental improvement in
the African population access to reliable and affordable energy supply. More specifically,
it calls for the development of new and renewable energy resources to “increase Africans’
access to reliable and affordable commercial energy supply from 10 to 35 per cent or
more within 20 years; improve the reliability and lower the cost of energy supply to
productive activities in order to enable an economic growth of 6 per cent per annum; and
reverse environmental degradation that is associated with the use of traditional fuels in
rural areas” (OAU/AU 2001). It calls as well for rationalizing the territorial distribution of
existing and unevenly allocated energy resources and to strive to develop the abundant
solar resources.
Over the past few years, AUC initiatives include: (i) Addis Ababa Declaration and
Action Plan on Sustainable Bio-fuels Development in Africa, which was adopted at the
first High-level Bio-fuels Seminar in Africa, August 2007; and (ii) Dakar Renewable
Energy Development Plan of Action, adopted by the International Conference on
86
Renewable energy in Africa organized by the AUC jointly with a number of concerned
organizations, Dakar, April 2008. Among the specific measures proposed were:
developing enabling policy and regulatory frameworks for biofuels development;
harmonizing national biofuels policies, strategies and standards through regional
economic communities; and establishing a regional market for biofuels. At its meeting in
Maputo, November 2010, the African Energy Ministries approved the 2nd Action Plan of
Africa-EU Energy Partnership (AEEP) and the Renewable Energy Cooperation
Programme (RECP) which aimed at, among others, tripling bioenergy production in
Africa by 2020.
In 2005, the Forum of Energy Ministers of Africa (FEMA) was established to “provide
political leadership, policy direction and advocacy on energy issues, to increase access,
better utilization and management of energy resources for a sustainable social and
economic development of Africa and develop a coherent energy strategy” (FEMA 2011).
Recently AU, AfDB and UNECA published the Framework and Guidelines on Land
Policy in Africa, which among other things, promotes the sustainable management of land
resources and the conservation of Africa’s ecosystem integrity and diversity, which offers
a valuable framework for this work. Further, the UNECA recently completed a study
titled: Biofuels Development in Africa Technology Options and Related Policy and
Regulatory Issues, which has served as a launching pad and building block for the
development of this Framework and Guidelines. Because the bioenergy policy and
regulatory institutions in most African countries are not yet adequately and properly
developed, there is need for a continental framework that guide the development of
sustainable bioenergy in Africa, nationally and regionally, harmonizing national
bioenergy policies, strategies and standards through regional economic communities to
ensure economies of scale and access to international markets.
IV-3 Key Issues and Policy Options
The formulation of a sustainable bioenergy policy requires the consideration of a number
of issues, including among others, economic, social, environmental, political and cultural
dynamics; social organization; institutional coordination; sub-regional and global
cooperation, trade and investment relations; development financing, stakeholders
participation as well as technical issues such as developing sound methodology and
availability of reliable data. The process of ensuring that there is a strong political
commitment and capacity to enforce regulatory measures is also important. Some of the
specific issues that merit consideration are the following:
a. A holistic approach. Africa’s energy profile underpins a complex, nonlinear
development equation. Heavy reliance on traditional biomass energy, pervasive
poverty, environmental degradation, and underdevelopment reinforce each other.
Energy and development are inextricably linked. The development of the energy
87
sector paves the ground for industrialization and expansion of transport and
communication. A holistic approach to the energy (renewables and non-renewables)
and development (macro and sectoral) issues is the conditio sine quo non for
advancing the bioenergy agenda. The national bioenergy policy cannot and should
not be a stand-alone policy but an integral part of a national energy, and agro-
industrial development and transport sector strategy, which in turn is part of the
national development strategy (macroeconomic and sectoral). A well-articulated
bioenergy policy has huge multiplier effects and cross-sectoral impacts that positively
influence agricultural, industrial, and trade development.
b. Enhancing access to energy. Energy is a means of development. Meeting the basic
necessities of life (e.g., food, clothing, shelter, and transport) depends on access to
energy services. Thus, access to energy or access to light is a fundamental human
right that every citizen should enjoy regardless of income class, gender, culture,
religion, or age groups. Sustainable bioenergy represents a broad development agenda
that takes bioenergy beyond the transport sector aims at improving access to energy at
the household level (rural and urban) for cooking and lighting.
c. Feedstock supply and use. Technically, the range of biofuel feedstocks is wide.
Possibilities of cellulosic ethanol and algae oil for biodiesel have stretched the range
considerably. However, the range of feedstocks known today is rather limited:
sugarcane, oil palm, maize, sorghum, and jatropha, which attract/involve highly
diverse input requirements, alternative uses and climatic requirements, and are grown
in many different contexts globally. The type of feedstock used, how and where it is
produced determine the extent of economic, social and environmental benefits of
bioenergy. The life cycle assessment (LCA) of different biofuel crops reveals large
differences in yields, climatic requirements, energy balances, and water and carbon
footprints. Under existing production patterns and technological conditions, the use of
staple food crops for bioenergy should be avoided. The opening up of a new window
of consumption, i.e., energy for these crops, will drive food prices up, which will
make food expensive and inaccessible. Even if the government introduces food
subsidies, which actually is unwarranted and imposes financial implications beyond
the capacity of most African countries to bear, the higher prices could trigger land use
changes as investors acquire large tracts of for feedstock production. The supply of
the displaced food and feed commodities subsequently decline, leading to higher
prices for those commodities. The land use conversion may result in undesirable
social and environmental changes that need to be factored in. Further, because the
energy derived from most food crops (corn, wheat, etc.) is starch based, it requires
considerable energy input to obtain the ethanol, thus have low energy balance. Even
in some feedstocks, energy consumed is greater than energy produced. African
countries should refrain from basing their biofuel expansion on such crops. In the
past, many producers have brought non-food crops that grow on marginal lands, for
example, jatropha as a low-cost and high environment benefit option to biofuels
production. However, studies are lacking that prove the commercial success of
88
jatropha when cultivated in low rainfall and poor soil conditions. Thus, each
bioenergy feedstock needs to be evaluated and weighed in terms of its economic,
social and environmental benefits and costs prior to issuing investment contracts. In
fact, countries need to undertake rigorous baseline assessment of biofuels perspective
including identifying best feedstocks and practices.
d. Scale of operations. The scale of operations, i.e., small producers, medium and/or
large scale plantations matters in the choice of feedstocks. Most feedstock crops can
be economically viable and more so environmentally sustainable in small-scale and
community based production and processing schemes. Large, medium and small-scale
production and processing can be complementary and have different impacts on
development. There are areas where large-scale production of bioenergy could have
high returns and advantages of economic scale, while small and medium scale
enterprises have greater potential to create backward, forward and lateral linkages to
the economy. Further, large scale and small producers can target different markets.
For example, while large scale producers aim at producing, say high quality
bioethanol for the transport sector, small and medium scale producers can cater for
household uses, i.e., heating, cooking, and lighting. A sustainable bioenergy policy
should be designed in a manner that will make small producers and low income
groups (which constitute a large segment of the population) central (both as producers
and consumers) to transition towards higher agricultural income growth and agro-
industrial processing.
e Subsidies and government support. One of the distinguishing features of the energy
sector is subsidies to both non-renewable and renewable energy production and
consumption. IEA estimates subsidies at the global level at 37 billion for electricity
and 20 billion for biofuels in 2009 (IEA 2009). Indeed, the bioenergy development in
the now successful countries (e.g. Brazil, U.S., Europe, China, and India is
characterized by heavy government subsidy. For example, EU subsidizes farmers at
the rate of Euro 45 per hectare38
while the U.S. subsidizes ethanol production by 51
cents per gallon (Harder, Science News 2006). Current policies designed to promote
bioenergy development include production subsidies and incentives for local
processing subsidies as well as tariff and non-tariff barriers with the view to
encouraging individual and corporate investors to move into production with minimal
risks and also give them time to establish the industries. While such policies could be
justified on economic, social and environmental, and even in some cases, national
security grounds, they have the potential to distort national, and even in some cases
global, markets. However, the pace and viability of the bioenergy sector will continue
to be determined by dynamics in the petroleum industry, which is also a highly
subsidized sector (IEA 2009). Thus, a well strategized government support is critical
to bioenergy development and inevitably. While government subsidy is unlikely in the
African context, subsidies given to biofuels producers in countries outside Africa is
38 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/business/worldbusiness/22biofuels.html?pagewanted=all
89
bound to put heavy pressure on production and processing of feedstock in Africa,
which African countries have to respond to make their biofuels competitive in the
global market.
f Production and processing. With its largely tropical climate suitable for fast growth
and diverse ecological conditions, Africa has the potential to grow almost all types of
feedstock in a cost effective manner. However, Africa has little to gain as a raw
material producer. Much of the value addition and backward and forward linkages to
the rest of the economy are realized at the processing stage. As feedstock suppliers,
countries will forego considerable economic benefits (higher prices per unit of output,
markets created for inputs at the processing stage, transfer of skills, etc.); social
benefits (employment opportunities both at the installation and operational stages) and
even environmental benefits (use of the waste products as fertilizers). Further,
meeting the energy requirements of the local population and supplying fuel to local
markets including meeting blending targets presents huge investment opportunity.
Thus, there is need to shift the bioenergy decision-making process from a supply push
(an effort to accommodate investors) to a demand-driven program that aims to meet a
country’s energy demand based on own feedstock and in-country processing
(refining) capacity. A sustainable bioenergy policy requires bioenergy investments to
combine feedstock production and processing (refineries) and guarantees local
markets.
g Bioenergy production costs: Bioenergy costs and benefits are always expressed in
relation to petroleum prices. When petroleum prices rise, bioenergy investments
become lucrative. But when petroleum prices fall, bioenergy becomes a losing
undertaking. The breakeven price for biofuels, today, is believed to be between $35
and $60 per barrel of oil equivalent, with Brazil's ethanol estimated to break even at
$35 compared to around $45 - 55 in US and EU,39
which reflects the high costs of
biofuels production. Undeniably, technological advances are helping to lower
production costs and broaden the range of biofuels feedstock. Second-generation
biofuels are expected to further lower production costs, thus increasing the chances of
biofuels to be competitive with petroleum. Still, biofuels will continue to be
expensive, hence the need for subsidies in the short to the medium term, which will be
a heavy burden to governments, particularly in the African setting. To enhance the
competitiveness of bioenergy, bioenergy development should be grounded on a large
production base that embraces small holder production and processing scheme,
environmental and social benefits, in addition to the backward, vertical, and lateral
linkages to the wider economy. This will certainly help lay the foundation for rural
transformation and a country’s industrialization.
h Managing the Food, Fuel, and Feed Competition. The biofuel feedstocks currently
commonly used (e.g., corn, rapeseeds, lentils, etc.) are staple food/feed crops to most
39 http://climateavenue.com/en.bioethanol.Brazil.htm
90
Africans. While it is possible for technological changes in fuel-crop production to
give impetus to food production growth with the net result being higher food supply;
social, political and environmental factors, even economics, are dictating the shift
from food crops to non-food crops and from large scale plantations to greater
involvement of small scale producers. Even here, although the decision of how much
to produce for fuel or food is likely to be based on the household’s economic and
social needs, higher prices of feedstock are bound to heavily influence these decisions
in their favor. However, there is wide range of crops and plants that can be used for
bioenergy; and with technological advances that made it possible to grow energy
crops in areas deemed unsafe for consumable crops, such as beside roads, next to
polluting industry or on contaminated land, or being irrigated by treated waste water,
or even on marginal lands assuming economics hold, it is possible to produce enough
food while increasing the bioenergy supply. A sustainable bioenergy policy is founded
on an integrated and balanced pursuit of economic, social, and environmental
objectives and avoiding the food, feed and fuel competition.
i Land tenure policy and property rights: Land tenure policy and arrangements greatly
vary among African countries. In many countries, customary holding, which is
communally owned and administered by tribal chiefs, is prevalent. Private and lease
holdings as well as government land exist side-by-side with customary holdings. In
countries such as Ethiopia, land is state owned. Farmers have only use rights. Local
authorities administer the size of a farmer’s holding. In some African countries,
tenure insecurity has become a constraint to increasing agricultural production,
conserving soil and water resources, and planting trees. Investment in energy crops
also requires long-term commitment and secured land holdings. The Framework and
Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa (AU, UNECA and ADfB 2010), while calling for
clarification of property rights in agriculture and sustainable land management,
highlights “serious concerns about land needs” for energy development and questions
“the capacity of many countries to meet their internal agricultural requirements as
land is taken out and the ecological trade-offs involved in the scramble by foreign
investors for land” to grow biofuels feedstock. While some countries have already
established programs and policies to improve land tenure, other countries that have
not done so need to critically consider land tenure and property rights issues
improvements in their bioenergy policy formulation process.
j Bioenergy use and efficiency: Producing energy is important, but equally important is
ensuring that the energy is produced and used efficiently by producers and consumers.
There is considerable energy wasted during the production and consumption of
biomass energy and electric energy due to faulty technologies or mismanagement.
Therefore, bioenergy policies should consider production and consumption of energy
in an integrated manner. Investing in energy efficiency improvements could entail
less cost than new investment and yet yield higher energy output.
91
k Bioenergy and natural resource management. Halting environmental/land
degradation while expanding bioenergy production is a critical element of a
sustainable bioenergy policy. Very few African countries can take pride in their
environmental policies of the past decade. Deforestation and land degradation have
continued unabated. The rate of replanting has been woefully inadequate to offset the
effects of deforestation. As current biofuels feedstocks, sugarcane, palm oil, corn, etc.
are high moisture requiring and soil fertility depleting, sustainable management of
natural resources under fast growing bioenergy production is a daunting task.
Moreover and much seriously, planting some of the highly productive biofuels
feedstocks, such as palm oil, required clearing tropical forest opening wide the scope
for a large-scale, massive deforestation. One source of hope is the collective position
taken and political commitment made to fighting climate change through effective
climate adaptation and mitigation. Through strategic choices of biofuel feedstocks,
gradually developing those that enrich soils and do not require much water to grow
and further moving to lingo-cellulosic and algae based biofuels, a sustainable
bioenergy policy ensures the protection of the environment including Africa’s fast
dwindling forest resources as well as and the maintenance of ecosystem integrity and
diversity.
l Bioenergy, poverty eradication and rural transformation. Sustainable bioenergy has
the potential to improve livelihoods through involving small farmers as direct
producers or out-growers in the, profitable, production of biofuels feedstock enabling
them to generate new income, opening up employment opportunities, and thereby
alleviating poverty and boosting rural incomes. Properly designed, socially inclusive
and environmentally responsible large scale plantations that involve small producers
can contribute to poverty alleviation. To realize this, however, there is need for strong
government negotiation and policy enforcement capacity, which has to be
development in many countries. However, bioenergy technologies are highly divisible
and the deliberated move toward the establishment of small scale processing
(refining) units will enable low income groups to generate additional income and help
transform the rural sector from subsistence production to agro-processing. Indeed, all
the economic, social and environmental benefits of bioenergy can best be realized at
the small holder level and with social inclusiveness and the avoidance of forest
clearance, extensive use of fertilizers, and ecosystem disturbance. However,
government support for improved infrastructure, institutions and services remains
essential.
m Gender dimensions of bioenergy: Women are traditionally responsible for firewood
collection and expend considerable time and physical effort to supply fuel for their
household and productive needs. With continued environmental pervasive
deforestation, the distance women walk to fetch fuel wood and time it requires have
got longer. This limits the time available to mothers to take care of their children and
girls for education and income-generating activities. The heavy reliance on traditional
energy sources also has negative health impacts, most victims being women. Burning
92
of solid biomass in inefficient stoves and/or in unventilated spaces (as is the case for
most households in African countries) produces pollutants, such as particulates,
carbon monoxide and formaldehyde, resulting in indoor pollution. Exposure to these
pollutants is a major cause of acute respiratory infections, low birth weight and
chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, and it increases the risk of premature death
by a factor between two and five (World Bank 2008). Thus, women will be the
primary beneficiaries of a sustainable bioenergy development as it opens up
possibilities to shift from solid wood to ethanol and gel for cooking, which burns
cleaner and quicker.
.
n Bioenergy markets and trade. The issue of bioenergy trade at the local, national,
regional, and global levels should be an important element of a sustainable bioenergy
agenda. Bioenergy trade is an issue of global interest and perhaps one of the fastest
growing sectors worldwide. Regardless of the volume of trade, bioenergy trade is an
issue that no African country can afford to ignore. Plant and forest products,
agricultural residues, once thought to have no economic value, have now become not
only sources of energy but also tradable in world markets. It is important for countries
to take full cognizance of these developments and strive towards the creation of local
and regional markets. Once a commodity is determined “tradable”, the possibility of it
trickling into the international market must be recognized. Today, there are many
foreign investors interested in the production and processing of certain bioenergy
products with the view to supplying a foreign market. Issues of economic, social, and
environmental sustainability, subsidies, tariff and non-tariff barriers, fair-trade
practices, and certification are key agenda items of an ongoing debate. A sustainable
bioenergy policy encourages each country to take immediate steps to develop the
necessary skill and capacity or establishing a sound trade basis/ground and for
negotiating investment and trade with knowledge and clear vision.
o Bioenergy governance: Governance, here, refers to institutions, policies, customs,
relational networks, laws and regulations, property rights, stakeholders’ participation
in policy development, access to knowledge, finance, information and education that
foster the sustainable development of bioenergy. Indeed, bioenergy development is a
multisectoral and multilevel undertaking that requires the active engagement of the
government, the private sector, civil society, and institutions of higher learning.
(i) Government. Governments, both at the national and local levels, must play a
leadership role in initiating and formulating policy and legislation, and the
promotion of production, investment, and trade. The key functions of government
are:
Policy making – developing a sustainable bioenergy policy as an integral
part of the national development strategy with adequate legal provisions
for the production, distribution, use, and trade in bioenergy.
93
Regulatory – governments have a responsibility for setting, for example,
environmental standards, creating an attractive investment climate, and
providing supportive monetary, fiscal, and pricing policies. They must also
ensure that environmental and social objectives are fully met during the
bioenergy program’s implementation.
Developing capacity and convening – Since bioenergy is a new
undertaking, there is a government responsibility to build the necessary
capacity for investment planning, negotiation, choice of feedstock and
technology, and concluding economically, socially and environmentally
acceptable deals. Governments have also the responsibility to create
forums and mobilize various government departments, the private sector,
civil society, and the academic community to rally behind the bioenergy
agenda.
Inter-ministerial coordination –The sustainable bioenergy agenda requires,
technically, the involvement of all ministries, although the key ones are the
ministries of energy, agriculture, natural resources/environment, finance,
planning, investment, lands, trade, and industry. These institutions’
involvement in the promotion, production, and trade of bioenergy needs to
be well coordinated and guided with the view to strengthening
complementarities and avoiding institutional rivalries.
(ii) The private sector. The private sector is ultimately the engine of bioenergy
development. In some countries, the private sector, both large scale and SMEs
have moved quickly in developing bioenergy. SMEs have special role in the
development of sustainable bioenergy given their less capital intensive
technologies employed and greater capacity to embrace local communities.
Indeed, industries such as sugar, cement, and bricks, can start generating their own
biofuels and substitute expensive diesel/natural gas without waiting for
government action.
(iii) Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). CSOs play two key roles: first, serving
as a watchdog for government and business actions; and, second, an advocacy role
– promoting bioenergy at the national and community levels. The active
involvement of civil society leaders and members in the promotion and capacity-
building of bioenergy is certainly crucial to promote sustainable development of
bioenergy.
(iv) Community Based Organizations (CBOs). Although non-profit organizations
as CSOs, CBOs operate in one locality; owned and operated by that locality. This
creates an enabling environment for nurturing a sense of ownership and ensures
sustainability to any bioenergy initiative.
94
p Foreign Direct Investment: Land Acquisition and Rights. The production and
processing of bioenergy, in particular bioethanol and biodiesel require the
involvement of foreign direct investment (FDI), where much of the technology and
finance resides. Driven by mandatory ethanol blending targets put by the European
Union and other developed countries coupled with the high oil prices, the past decade
saw a rush towards biofuels production among foreign investors. While this has
opened up opportunities for Africa, which receives negligible FDI outside the mining
sector and which has vast unused land and a tropical climate, it created serious
problems for governments to coordinate and guide such investments. In many
countries, bioenergy policies and guidelines do not exist. Nor do well trained and
bioenergy technology literate human resource exist to manage the multifaceted
economic, social and environmental implications of bioenergy investment that
resulted in some governments concluding poor deals. The long held perception that
Africa has been used to generate raw materials, products and services for others and
seen as a safety valve for the production of alternative energy for rich countries and
media reports that confirm these fears, have complicated issues for countries.
Naturally, any foreign direct investment is attracted by the rate of profit, climatic
conditions, available land, skilled labor and infrastructure, stable political and
macroeconomic climate, working conditions and possibilities of producing the
feedstock at the lowest possible cost. To achieve the maximum possible profit and
take full advantage of economies of scale, these foreign investments often come in a
big scale, which in turn requires vast tracts of land (conjoined) in order to generate
volumes of energy for export. In the case of the production of bioethanol from sugar
cane, investors will insist on access to well watered fertile land. There are also doubts
about the commercial feasibility of biodiesel from e.g. jatropha, perceived to be the
miracle crop, if grown in low fertility and moisture stressed area. However, most of
the land that is suitable for biofuel production is either currently cultivated or densely
populated by small and subsistence producers, or under forest and wetlands, the
matter which necessitates effective coordinating and guiding of biofuels-oriented FDI.
The sustainable bioenergy policy framework advocates a rational approach, which
ensures sustained economic gains (short, medium and long term) based on production
and in-country processing of feedstocks, while guaranteeing the social, environmental
and cultural wellbeing of the people. This may require renegotiation of investment
contract, if there is a window of opportunity to do so, which many reasonable
investors will understand too. But what is crucial is the development of effective
human and institutional capacity for investment planning, identification of
technology, negotiation of international contracts, setting social and environmental
standards and monitoring performances within the necessary legal and regulatory
framework.
95
q Bioenergy and green economy. Sustainable bioenergy is an integral part and, indeed
the corner stone of the green economy. First, all bioenergy feedstocks are plants and
crops that are renewables; and the energy produced burns clean without or with
negligible greenhouse gas emissions and residues are all biodegradable. Second,
bioenergy has the potential to reduce oil utilization in the transport sector, which is
responsible for much of the pollution; and already many African countries are
implementing blending targets they set. Third, bioenergy is amenable to small scale
production and processing opening up opportunities for rural income growth, poverty
reduction, and economic transformation from raw material production to processed
goods. However, achieving these goals, as explained above, requires sustainable
bioenergy policies with the necessary regulatory enforcement mechanisms, building
the necessary human resources and institutions including capacity for investment
planning, technology selection, trading and contract negotiation.
r Research and Development. Bioenergy development at an infant stage. For example,
while energy can be produced from many plants and crops, today’s biofuels feedstock
is mainly limited to sugar cane, corn, oil palm, and jatropha. There is thus a need for
investment in research in plant breeding, agronomy, and biochemistry to expand the
feedstock choice, shift from food crops to non-food plants, raise the energy yield of
crops, move from annual to perennial crops and from soil depleting to soil enriching,
and find the most energy-efficient and least costly bioenergy feedstocks under
different local environmental conditions. There is need as well to invest in research
aimed at promoting small-scale production and processing adapted to African context
particularly with majority of bioenergy technologies available currently are large-
scale oriented and based ones.
Further, biotechnology offers new and unprecedented opportunities in the production
of bioenergy including: (i) improved conversion process helps to facilitate conversion
processes; (ii) production of more drought, water logging, and disease resistant
varieties that help minimize the high costs of agrochemicals, pesticides, and water;
(iii) application of tissue culture; (iv) adoption of zero tillage practices, and (v)
improved pest management - widely recognized in Africa, would go a long way in
increasing the availability of tree and crops for bioenergy production while reducing
land required for bioenergy. However, there are wide-ranging issues and applications,
which need to be seen in the context of their effective contribution to increased energy
and food production and environmental protection. For example, more research needs
to be done to determine the extent of environmental benefits, including
biodegradability, and emission reductions. It is also important to ensure that
biotechnology is built into Africa’s indigenous genotypes of flora and fauna, which it
must, For example, “Growing organic rice can, for example, be four times more
energy-efficient than the conventional method” (UNEP 2011 quoted from(Mendoza
2002)
96
Clearly, there is massive ongoing research worldwide both in first- and second-
generation bioenergy technologies, it is important to actively involve and fully engage
Africa’s research and academic community. This would entail: first, revisiting
national science and technology policies; and, second, establishing a national network
of multidisciplinary researchers involving plant breeding, agronomy, farm
management, and agricultural extension, biochemistry, and chemical engineering
fields.
As a part of the global bioenergy drive, access of African universities to bioenergy
research and technology in developed and developing countries must be facilitated,
possibly through joint research programs. In addition, the link between research and
policy must be strengthened through creating mechanisms that would bring together
ministries dealing with bioenergy and research centers and institutions of higher
learning.
IV-4 Process of Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Development
The process of policy development is as important as the policy itself. Assessing the
global and regional dynamics and opportunities, identifying needs and societal concerns,
putting in place the necessary legal and institutional frameworks for coordinating and
integrating economic, social and environmental objectives, mobilizing and building
capacities (human and institutional), consulting and engaging stakeholders, and setting up
follow up and monitoring mechanisms are all critical to the success of a sustainable
bioenergy policy. Indeed, developing a policy is empowering as it helps countries to
address inter-related social environmental and economic issues on proactive basis. The
key aspects of the sustainable bioenergy policy development process are:
a. Assessing Needs, Possibilities and Implementation Capacities: In formulating a
sustainable bioenergy policy, each country needs to assess its own situation, why a
sustainable bioenergy policy is needed, and what its priorities should be. It is also
important to review experiences of countries at similar stages of development and
draw lessons (successes and failures). The findings of global and regional
assessments, including the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the Global Energy
Assessment (ongoing), and other assessments by multilateral and bilateral
organizations is a vital source of knowledge.
b. Formulating the Policy. In the formulation of the sustainable bioenergy policy, the
key issues to consider are:
Country ownership and internally driven processes. While it is important to
take into consideration the global dynamics in bioenergy development, the
driving force behind any energy policy needs to be a country’s own energy
demand and factor endowments.
97
Long-term view and political commitment. There are no quick fixes in any
bioenergy undertaking. Continuous and long-term commitment that
transcends political party rivalries and squabbles is necessary for success.
Strong institutional leadership and follow up. Whether it is the Ministry of
Energy or Agriculture, a government agency, or the Prime Minister’s office, it
is important to ensure that there is technical and administrative capacity for
coordination and leadership.
Setting bioenergy targets. One distinguishing feature of a national bioenergy
policy is that it is accompanied by a medium- to a long-term target. Many
countries have already set blending targets. But targets for replacing
household energy and others can also be set. Target setting helps governments
and other institutions to view their activities in terms of quantified goals. It
also helps them to mobilize resources from local and external sources for
investment and capacity building.
c. Knowledge, Technology and Markets. The status and efficiency of different energy
technologies, existing and new technologies are key factors in determining the
demand, use, GHG emissions,, and investment choices. For example, while there are
examples of small scale and rural bioenergy production technologies operating
throughout the world, in most cases these technologies produce low quality bioethanol
and biodiesel that cannot be used in the transport sector. This means that their
products will be geared toward meeting household cooking and lighting needs, which
is a big market in the African setting.
Any production of bioenergy resources in Africa needs to be geared towards meeting
domestic household and commercial demands. This would enable a country to take
full advantage of the benefits that accrue to bioenergy resources. However, much of
the technology and finance in the bioenergy sector comes to meet the
needs/requirements of the export market. In Europe, for example, biodiesel plants
rely on imported raw material (feedstocks), which will not enable African countries to
realize the full benefits of bioenergy production, processing, distribution, and
consumption. It is thus important that Africa countries consider designing policies that
aim at promoting holistic, value-add based bioenergy development that places
emphasis on processing biofuels feedstocks. Such policies would, for example, ensure
processing is placed close to the raw material base and that Africa exports the
processed final product (i.e., biofuels, not the feedstocks such as rapeseeds, flax,
castor beans, and jatropha nuts).
d. Building on Existing Capacities and Practices. A sustainable bioenergy policy should
not be seen as a completely new undertaking plan, but an integral part of a country’s
energy and development policy and planning processes. In many cases, in-country
98
capacities exist for the formulation and implementation of the policy. In areas, where
there are gaps, training and skill upgrading schemes need to be designed prior to
resorting to expatriate staff. Thus, countries need to undertake bioenergy-related gap
analysis to identify where gaps exist and how best to work out these gaps. A
sustainable bioenergy policy is, thus, built on existing capacities, institutions and
processes. It entails effectively mobilizing the capacities that exist and building on
them where necessary is critical.
e. Engaging Stakeholders: Currently, there are many cases in Africa, where energy
policies have been prepared as stand-alone strategies, often sidelining sectors that are
critical to energy development including agriculture, forest, and industry. With energy
security emerging as a leading concern for governments, national energy policies are
seldom publicized too. Sustainable bioenergy policy making and formulation are the
responsibility of governments. Within this framework, it is important to ensure that
key stakeholders (ministries and public agencies, civil society, funding agencies,
industry, producers, research and higher institutions of learning and community
elders) are consulted. Such consultation and early involvement of stakeholders will
help generate broad support and buy-in for the policy and subsequent bioenergy
decisions and also facilitate participation in the implementation process. It would also
a long way in helping to avoid the potentially significant adverse social and
environmental impacts of biofuel expansion, while benefits are maximized through
ensuring that biofuel developments support rather than undermine existing growth and
development initiatives and priorities.
f. Harmonization with Other Sectoral Policies and Global Processes. This involves a
two-stage harmonization (integration) process: intra and inter-sectoral. First, fully
integrating the development of the bioenergy sector into strategies and programs
designed to develop other renewables (hydropower, solar energy, wind, geothermal,
etc.) and also with fossil fuel energy with the view to fully harnessing
complementarities and avoiding redundancies. In areas, where solar, wind, and other
energy sources are costs effective, they need to be encouraged and used. Secondly,
almost all African countries have formulated national poverty-reduction strategies,
which are supported by the international development community and multilateral
financial institutions. However, the energy and environment, more specifically the
bioenergy content of these poverty reduction strategies is weak. There is a need to
strengthen and expand these strategies by bringing on board bioenergy production and
marketing issues. Policies and strategies in agriculture, industry, and transport sector
impact, and are impacted by, the development of the bioenergy sector; the policy
integration should include these key sectors. Specifically important is streamlining
bioenergy development into food security policies/strategies to ensure avoiding the
food-fuel dilemma. Beyond national boundaries, harmonizing national
bioenergy/biofuels policies, strategies and standards through regional economic
communities; and establishing a regional market for biofuels are vital for the success
of the bioenergy sector.
99
g. Measuring and Monitoring Economic, Social, and Environmental Sustainability.
Sustainable bioenergy, here, is defined as energy derived from biomass that is
affordable, easily accessible to all, burns clean, enhances the material and social
wellbeing of all people and maintains ecosystem integrity and diversity across
generations and geographic space. Several initiatives have been launched to develop
measurable indicators for sustainable bioenergy and mechanisms for monitoring it,
among which is the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels (RSB), which aims to
achieve global consensus around a set of principles and criteria for sustainable liquid
biofuel feedstock production, processing and transportation/distribution. The
Governments of United Kingdom, Netherlands and Sweden, among others, have
established principles and criteria that need to be met.
In the African context, sustainable development is conceptualized as the integrated
and balanced pursuit of economic growth, social wellbeing, protection of the
environment and sound and participatory governance (UNECA FSSDD 2011).
Accordingly, bioenergy to be designated as sustainable should embrace the following
ten principles:
Food security: enhance access to and availability of food.
Poverty reduction and rural development: improvement of livelihoods
including employment and income generation, education and health services
as well as linkages to the rural economy.
Economic growth and transformation through the use of technology, inputs
and management of waste: integrated feedstock production and processing,
export of processed goods rather than raw materials, maximize efficiency and
social and environmental performance, and minimize the risk of damage to the
environment and people.
Improvement of social wellbeing and maintenance of different cultures and
diversity.
Conservation of biodiversity, notably forest, wetland and mountain
ecosystems, genetic resources, national parks and protected areas and thereby
enhancing the integrity and diversity of the bio-physical systems.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: contribute to climate change mitigation by
significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions.
Soil: implement practices that reverse soil degradation and/or maintain soil
health
100
Water: maintain or enhance the quality and quantity of surface and ground
water resources, and respect prior formal or customary water rights.
Land Rights: respect for land rights and land use rights, both formal and
informal.
Human and Labor Rights:; Biofuel operations shall not violate human rights or labor
rights, and shall promote decent work and the well-being
h. Assessing the Outcomes of the Implementation of the Bioenergy Policy. Effective
implementation of sustainable bioenergy development requires the follow up and
monitoring of what is happening, an understanding of what works and what does not.
Documenting changes and accordingly adjusting policies and priorities is an
important aspect of monitoring, evaluation and learning process. Establishing
practical and relevant monitoring and evaluation strategies can help to track progress
toward goals and objectives. Through monitoring and evaluation, an organization can
learn, capture and share lessons that improve programme development, demonstrate
accomplishments and benefit others working to improve the sector’s development.
IV-5 Policy Implementation Mechanisms
The formulation of sound, realistic and politically supported policy is not a guarantee for
its effective implementation. Institutional, financial, legal and regulatory as well as
monitoring and follow-up mechanisms, among others, need to be put into place to ensure
the realization of the policy. Often an implementation strategy is formulated following the
adoption of the policy. The key policy implementation mechanisms are:
a. Raising Awareness, Promote Dialogue, and Share Experiences. Changing people's
perceptions and attitudes towards bioenergy must be an important element of
bioenergy development. Awareness raising will go a long way in expediting the
formulation of policies and enactment of legislation. Some of the means for achieving
this include using cross-sectoral mechanisms for information dissemination (e.g.,
agricultural, medical) associations, setting up an Africa-specific bioenergy network,
which some countries have already done so, organizing town hall meetings, and
effectively using the media. Incorporating modern bioenergy in educational curricula
at high schools and universities should also be considered. National and local media
play vital roles in the policy implementation process in keeping stakeholders informed
of progress made, generating wider understanding of sustainable development, and
encouraging participation. The media also plays an important role in promoting
governments' awareness of the importance of information, communication and
education to enable the effective involvement of citizens in bioenergy development.
b. Developing Human Resources Capacity. The formulation and successful
implementation of a sustainable bioenergy policy require strong human capability,
101
among others. But first, it is important to make sure that the development of the
policy is internalized and built on existing knowledge and expertise; local skills and
capacity both within and outside government are optimally harnessed; and
mechanisms are put in place maintain and retain capacity. Second, where gaps exist,
efforts should be made to develop the necessary capacity as part of the
implementation process. The human capacity required includes technical skills and
abilities for planning, choosing appropriate technology, project and program
formulation, investment negotiation, conflict resolution and consensus building,
capability to internalize diverse experiences and perspectives to enable the sustainable
development of bioenergy. In order to ensure effective integration of the bioenergy
policy in other sectoral policies and strategies, training of personnel working in
finance, national development planning, agriculture, natural resources, industry and
transport must be an integral part of the human resource capacity development effort.
c. Strengthening and Building Institutions. This will involve: (i) in countries which
have not done so, the establishment of a lead governmental unit in each country to
coordinate bioenergy activities across the interested ministries (e.g., agriculture,
energy, rural development, finance, commerce/trade, and environment. (ii) For
already established ones, assessing their capacities, identify gaps, strengthening them.
(iii) Institutions operate on the basis of legally defined mandates, which may not
permit the implementation of cross cutting issues. It is thus vital to clarify the
respective roles and responsibilities of implementing institutions and fully engage
them in the process.
d. Laws, Regulatory Frameworks and Institutions. Implementing the policy may require
developing legal and regulatory instruments including ensuring complementarity with
other policies –economic, investment, population, use of natural resources, trade,
education, or strengthening new ones. Government departments should thus be
mandated to look into the policy and legal implications of implementing the strategy,
and workplan and priorities of legislative bodies should be reflective of the
sustainable bioenergy development strategy objectives.
e. Mobilizing Investment Resources. Adequate, predictable and regular financial
resources are required to implement sustainable bioenergy development. In addition
to accessing funding opportunities from traditional multilateral and bilateral sources,
there is a need for bold new measures to generate funding, which may include:
targeted micro-credit programs; an infrastructure to reach widely dispersed
smallholder farms; public-private partnerships; concessionary loans; subsidies; cross-
industry partnerships that tie the provision of one sector's services with funding to
support bioenergy initiatives; and, technical capacity to access global funds (e.g.,
CDM and GEF facilities).
f. Effective integration of elements of the policy with broader as well as key sectoral
development policies, strategies and plans. In order to ensure that the objectives of
102
the policy are fully realized, the key elements of the sustainable bioenergy policy need
to be fully integrated into the country’s short, medium and long term sectoral and
national development strategies and plans. Among the key strategies and plans are:
the national energy plan for both renewable and non-renewable, the national poverty
reduction strategy (NPRS), agricultural and industrial development, water resources
development, natural resource conservation and sustainable use, rural development
and gender equity.
g. Enhance Coordination and Cooperation across Africa. At the regional level, the
sustainable bioenergy policy needs to be coordinated with the various implementation
mechanisms of EPAD, most notably the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural
Development Programme (CAADP), which is now fully accepted and has progressed
well.
h. Set goals for energy access and blending…..realistic but flexible targets. Target
setting helps individuals and organizations to define the quantity and quality of
expected outputs and services. "Targets" accompanied by incentives can, indeed,
motivate both management and workers to work hard and apply their utmost
creativity and energies. Although targets need to be challenging, they ought to be
achievable and realistic in relation to actual and perceived constraints and be set at the
organizational or firm level.
i. Regional Cooperation and Trade in Bioenergy: Africa's sub-regional organizations
(for example, IGAD, ECOWAS, SADC, COMESA) are powerful means to promote
the bioenergy agenda and guide its development. They are also vital forces to
harmonize energy policies and expand the sub-regional energy market. Formulating a
regional bioenergy guideline would facilitate promotion, production, and consumption
of bioenergy. In the medium- to the long-term, expanding the sub-regional market
helps to achieve economies of scale since most African countries have a small energy
sector. Doing so also prevents interstate tensions and conflict, contributes to building
peace, and promotes sustainable development.
IV-6 Monitoring and Follow-Up of the Implementation of the Policy
Monitoring the implementation of the policy, evaluating performances and learning from
experiences need to be an integral part of the strategy process. Monitoring and evaluation
needs, in turn, to be based on clear indicators and built into strategies to steer processes,
track progress, distil and capture lessons, and signal where a change of direction is
necessary. The policy process should enhance institutional arrangements, sharpen
concepts and tools, foster professional skills and competence, and improve public
awareness. As policy responses and technological capability change over time, the M&E
process would permit regular update and continuous renewal of the strategy. It would also
103
enable public institutions to produce regular national reports so that stakeholders can see
progress (and the Government) be held accountable. Among the key mechanisms are:
a. Developing a transparent and evaluative culture. Monitoring and evaluation
should not be an on and off undertaking but an integral part of the development of
an evaluative culture too, i.e., doing, improving, learning and relearning.
b. Development of Indicators. An important element of the M&E process is the
development of indicators -benchmarks or thresholds. These indicators could be
both qualitative and quantitative, and should reflect the status and trends of a
particular process element or product. Based on these indicators annual reports
should be prepared to enable stakeholders see progress made.
c. Participatory Monitoring and Follow Up: A participatory approach needs to be
adopted where appropriate to involve various program stakeholders (staff,
funders, clients, partners, etc.) in designing and conducting the evaluation to
ensure that the needs, ideas and concerns all players are included in the process.
This often involves developing mechanisms organizing discussion forums,
participant interviews and focus group discussions. Internally many organizations
are recognizing the importance of improved management techniques, institutional
reflection and learning. M&E can also be done using external evaluator, which is
a requirement of many funding organizations and is done to obtain unbiased
assessment of work done.
d. Feedback Loops and Improving the Policy Framework. Monitoring and
evaluation should also be a continuous process of learning and improving the
impact, priorities and content of the policy at the national, sub regional and
regional levels; distilling lessons learned; and based on these lessons learned,
improving and refining regularly the sustainability of bioenergy development.
104
Chapter V. The Way Forward
In developing the bioenergy system, there are two key lessons learned from the Brazilian
experience: the need for, first, a long-term view and, second, strong government support
and political commitment. Putting in place an appropriate policy and institutional
framework is conditio sine quo non for sustainable approaches to bioenergy development
as well as for mobilizing political commitment and cross-sectoral support. Indeed,
harnessing the opportunities bioenergy provides and addressing the challenges requires a
holistic approach across sectors and hierarchical levels. Among other things, such an
approach calls for a close working relationships between government and the private
sector, government and civil society, and rural communities and academic/research
institutions. Toward implementing this Policy Framework and notwithstanding
differences among African countries, there are five key measures that should be
considered:
Setting up the Institutional Framework for Promoting the Production, Trade, and
Use of Bioenergy. Bioenergy development is a multisectoral and multilevel
undertaking that requires the active engagement of the government, the private
sector, civil society, and institutions of higher learning. Among these institutions,
governments must play a leadership role in initiating and formulating policy and
legislation, and the promotion of production, investment, and trade. The private
sector is ultimately the engine of bioenergy development. In some countries, the
private sector has moved quickly in developing bioenergy. Indeed, industries
such as sugar, cement, and bricks, can start generating their own biofuels and
substitute expensive diesel without waiting for government action. Civil Society
Organizations (CSOs) play two key roles: first, serving as a watchdog for
government and business actions; and, second, an advocacy role – promoting
bioenergy at the national and community levels. Lastly, bioenergy development is
in its infancy stage and hence requires investment in research in plant breeding,
agronomy, and biochemistry to find the most energy-efficient and least costly
biofuel feedstocks, which will require the active involvement and engagement of
universities and research institutions.
Developing a Comprehensive Strategy and Policy for a Transition to Sustainable
Energy System. Once the institutional framework is in place, the second vital task
to consider is the development of a national comprehensive sustainable energy
policy. In formulating this policy, it is important to draw lessons from policy and
strategy development experiences of the post-Rio Earth Summit years. There
have been impressive responses in the form of national strategies and policies to
the global conventions, but the implementation of these policies has been
extremely poor. Each African country needs to assess its own and other relevant
countries’ experiences, drawing lessons (successes and failures) to formulate its
national bioenergy policy. It will also be useful to consider the findings of global
and regional assessments, including the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the
105
Global Energy Assessment (ongoing), and other assessments by UN
organizations. Accordingly, in formulating a national sustainable energy policy,
which will include bioenergy, some of the issues to consider, though familiar but
seldom implemented, include: (i) country ownership and internally driven
processes - the driving force behind any energy policy needs to be a country’s
own energy demand and factor endowments; (ii) Long-term view and political
commitment- there are no quick fixes in any bioenergy undertaking. Continuous
and long-term commitment that transcends political party rivalries and squabbles
is necessary for success; (iii) strong institutional leadership and follow up.
Whether it is the Ministry of Energy or Agriculture, a government agency, or the
Prime Minister’s office, it is important to ensure that there is technical and
administrative capacity for coordination and leadership; (iv) integrating
sustainable energy in national development and poverty reduction strategies.
There is a need to strengthen and expand these strategies by bringing on board
bioenergy production and marketing issues; (v) public participation in the
formulation of national energy strategies. National energy policies are seldom
publicized on grounds that energy is a national security issue that needs to be
restricted to the government sector. Such practices have stifled the development
of the energy sector by depriving it of essential public support.
Increasing Investment in Biomass. As explained earlier, there will be 627-million
people in Sub-Saharan Africa (52-million more people in 2015 than in 2004), who
will depend on traditional biomass energy as their primary source. The ecological
and socioeconomic impact of such continued dependence on traditional biomass is
grave. Unfortunately, investment in biomass is often ignored due to the mistaken
belief that it is abundant and nature given; therefore, it can take care of itself. As
part of a national sustainable energy policy, increasing the quantity and quality of
biomass density must be accorded the highest priority. Indeed, investment in tree
plantations at the household, community, and state levels is cheap, as it can be
done easily and routinely. Yet, it offers quick and high investment returns, and
helps curtail environmental degradation. Greater biomass density lays the
foundation for trade growth in bioenergy. Further, investment in biomass helps
meet four MDGs: poverty reduction, health improvement, environment
regeneration, and gender equality as it reduces the plight of women. Promotion of
investment in biomass has two dimensions: first, increased tree planting and,
second, re-forestation. Such investment should place appropriate emphasis on
expanding renewable and nonrenewable biomass. At the same time, it is important
to integrated sustainable bioenergy into natural resource development and
management policies and strategies at the regional, national and subnational
levels.
Setting the Broad Bioenergy Agenda. Previous sections identified several
opportunities and challenges, which must be addressed through short-, medium-
and long-term action plans. Questions about a starting point and implementation
106
are difficult to answer. One possibility may be a review of a country’s current
biofuel feedstocks − notably, sugarcane, sweet sorghum, jatropha – to identify
areas where quick starts could be made. For example, in the case of sugarcane
ethanol, the best starting point may be existing sugar industries. These industries
could explore ethanol production possibilities and establish cogeneration facilities.
Several European firms are already interested in investing in jatropha and other
feedstocks. This could also be another starting point. To broaden the bioenergy
agenda, countries could also consider organizing consultations with stakeholders
to try to reach wider sections of society, including producers and consumers.
The speed at which bioenergy is extensively developed and embraced depends on
the extent to which the policy issues mentioned in the previous chapter are
addressed. One critical issue is the need to consider a wide range of bioenergy
crops and to minimize the use of those crops as food staples. Corn and sweet
sorghum, for example, are not only in high demand by the food sector, but are also
soil-depleting plants. While the medium- to long-term strategy would be to base
biofuels technology on soil-enriching and more environment friendly plants, there
should not be an “either or” approach to the challenge. The way forward would
be to study the technical, social, and environmental feasibility of each crop at the
smallholder farmer and commercial farming levels.
Investing in Energy Efficiency. Energy is an extremely scarce commodity.
Whether it is fossil fuels, hydropower, solar power, or bioenergy, it must be
efficiently used. Energy waste needs to be minimized and, if possible, avoided in
all production and consumption processes. Investing in technologies that can save
energy or enhance its efficient utilization is as worthwhile as new investment.
Indeed, the availability of energy is only half a step toward ensuring access to
energy. Programs for promoting efficient energy use would include: expanding
energy saving technologies, notably improved stoves, at the household level;
reducing energy wastage at the industrial level; and, improving managerial and
operational efficiencies of the power sector.
Elaborate Regional Perspective to Energy Development. Africa has well-
functioning sub-regional organizations that command the political support and
respect of their respective member states. The Intergovernmental Authority on
Development (IGAD), Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and
the Economic Cooperation of West African States (ECOWAS), for example, have
restructured to their respective organizations to meet the growing challenges of
economic development and conflict resolution. Further, as mentioned in the
previous chapter, ECOWAS has already prepared a white paper on energy
development in West Africa, which is an important step forward. The bottom line
is that these sub-regional organizations represent powerful means to promote the
107
bioenergy agenda, harmonize energy policies, and expand the sub-regional energy
market. Expanding the sub-regional market helps to achieve economies of scale
as most African countries have a small energy sector; prevents interstate tensions
and conflict; and, contributes to building peace and promoting sustainable
development.
Develop new and innovative funding mechanisms. In addition to accessing
funding opportunities from traditional multilateral and bilateral sources, there is a
need for bold new measures to generate funding, which may include: targeted
micro-credit programs; an infrastructure to reach widely dispersed smallholder
farms; public-private partnerships; concessionary loans; subsidies; cross-industry
partnerships that tie the provision of one sector’s services with funding to support
bioenergy initiatives; and, technical capacity to access global funds (e.g., CDM
and GEF facilities).
Developing a Bioenergy Trade Policy. The issue of bioenergy trade at the local,
national, regional, and global levels should be an important element of a national
sustainable energy agenda. Bioenergy trade is perhaps one of the fastest growing
sectors worldwide. Regardless of the volume of trade, bioenergy trade is an issue
that no African country can afford to ignore. Plants and residues, once thought to
have no economic value, are not only sources of energy but are also tradable in
world markets. With the increased production of bioenergy, local, regional, and
global markets must be created. Once a commodity is determined to be tradable,
the possibility of it trickling into international market must be considered. As
explained in the previous chapter, there could be foreign investors interested in the
production and processing of certain bioenergy products with the view to
supplying a foreign market. Therefore, it is important for each country to take
immediate steps to become skilled in negotiating investment and trade with
knowledge and clear vision.
Awareness Raising Focused Capacity Development. There is generally a lack of
awareness regarding bioenergy in governments and the public. Indeed, any
meaningful program to promote bioenergy must start by raising awareness,
particularly because of the delicate issues involved. These include the trade-offs
between food and fuel, which could be a rallying point for some advocacy
organizations and obstruct progress towards realizing Africa’s bioenergy
potential. Awareness building may include: posters, banners, TV, radio,
brochures, newspapers, street pole advertisements, facilitating information
exchange among institutions, and, organizing study tours to countries within
Africa, Asia, and Latin America where biofuels production is well advanced.
Investing in Research and Development. Another key component of the
bioenergy agenda is the need for extensive research about: reducing cost of
108
producing bioenergy feedstock; expanding the range of bioenergy feedstock
toward nonfood crops; raising the energy yield of crops; moving from annual to
perennial crops and from soil depletion to soil enrichment with the view to
ensuring environmental sustainability; developing varieties that are drought
resistant and grow well under semi-arid and arid conditions; and, assessing
biotechnologies and determining suitability to local conditions
While there is ongoing research worldwide both in first- and second-generation
bioenergy technologies, it is important to actively involve and fully engage
Africa’s research and academic community. This would entail: first, revisiting
national science and technology policies; and, second, establishing a national
network of multidisciplinary researchers involving plant breeding, agronomy,
farm management, agricultural extension, biochemistry, and chemical engineering
fields.
As a part of the global bioenergy drive, access of African universities to bioenergy
research and technology in developed and developing countries must be
facilitated, possibly through joint research programs. In addition, the link between
research and policy must be strengthened through creating mechanisms that would
bring together ministries dealing with bioenergy and research centers and
institutions of higher learning.
Conclusion
Africa has the world’s lowest production and consumption of energy against a backdrop
of pervasive poverty and food insecurity, and severe environmental degradation. All
indicators suggest a continent that is energy and livelihood insecure. Maintaining the
status quo is not an option. But the solutions sought need to contribute to reducing
poverty and halting environmental degradation.
The sustainable development of bioenergy has the potential to contribute substantially to
improving access to affordable and clean energy, raising living standards, reducing
poverty and respiratory diseases, halting environmental degradation, improving
infrastructure, transforming rural economies toward higher value added and technological
intensity production, and empowering countries to produce own energy. Undoubtedly,
bioenergy could be a vital means for achieving energy and livelihood security.
Nevertheless, wrongly designed policies do not only erode these benefits but also turn
bioenergy into huge social and environmental liability that destroys Africa’s social fabric
and integrity of ecosystems. Thus, how bioenergy development is designed, the kind of
feedstock used, and how it is produced and where it is processed are critical elements of a
sustainable bioenergy program.
109
In formulating the policy and implementation mechanisms, it is, thus, important to ensure
that: (i) Bioenergy is not all about biofuels, but biomass based energy in all its aspects:
solid, liquid and gas made available through first, second and third generation
technologies;
(ii) There is a holistic approach to energy development and a broad development agenda
that takes bioenergy beyond the transport sector. While replacing oil by biofuels is
important, Africa’s bioenergy scheme aims at enabling Africa’s transition from traditional
biomass energy to modern energy while improving access to energy at the household
level (rural and urban) for cooking, lighting as well as at the commercial or industrial
levels; reducing poverty through generating off-farm employment opportunities; and
transforming the rural sector through technical change and improved infrastructure;
(iii) In-country capacity for bioenergy feedstock is built and that all benefits that accrue to
bioenergy is fully captured. Despite the relatively high proportion of feedstock cost,
processing of feedstock has significant valued added with strong backward, forward and
lateral linkages in the economy it creates;
(iv) Economic and social empowerment of the rural and farming population, Africa’s
majority, is engaged both as producer and ultimate beneficiary; and
(v) Policies and regulatory frameworks are harmonized across countries to facilitate
access to microfinance, regional cooperation, trade and maximum realization of carbon
credits.
110
Annex I: Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Development Check List
Issues Activities Issues and instruments Status
Preparing the
ground for policy
formulation
Assessment of economic, social
and environmental conditions to
set the context right
• Policy and institutional context
• Energy needs analysis; existing policies and regulations
• Food needs analysis
• Status of water availability, quantity and quality
• State of environment including climate change and impacts
• Land use assessment, physical resources and land suitability
Sound methodology and process
for formulation • Country ownership and internally driven processes.
• Long-term view and political commitment.
• Strong institutional leadership
Developing the bioenergy policy
and or strategy
Set goals and objectives • Socioeconomic development and poverty reduction
• Improved access to affordable energy and transition from traditional to
modern sources of energy;
• Agricultural development and transformation of the rural sector
• Energy security, climate adaptation and mitigation
• Economic, social and environmental sustainability
• Equity across generations, social groups and gender
• Capacity development for policy implementation, investment planning
and contract negotiations as well as research
• Bioenergy/biofuels governance and
• Regional cooperation and trade in bioenergy
Set clear priorities • Energy security
• Access to energy at the household level, particularly rural)
• Rural sector transformation
• Reducing dependence on fossil fuels
Set specific targets that help mobilize resources
• number of jobs to be created in rural poor areas through the development of the bioenergy scheme
• blending target
• substitution of fossil fuel by the bioenergy in percent and specific time period
111
Implementation
strategy and options
Advocacy and cross sectoral
awareness raising Awareness among political leaders, parliament, and the general public and
media about modern bioenergy policies and practices, benefits, costs,
tradeoffs, opportunities and risks
Bioenergy governance Clear institutional roles and responsibilities
• Institution that house and implement the policy
• Adequacy of legal and institutional mandate
• Existing capacity and additional capacity needed to monitor the implementation
of the policy, for example, biofuels experts, extension officers
Regulatory frameworks
• Instruments used to regulate including licensing and certification
• Infrastructure, market and fiscal support needed to reach goals
Stakeholder engagement
Ensuring that stakeholder engagement processes are done in the right way and
that decisions are taken in line with Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
Economic empowerment Engaging farmers both as producers and beneficiaries
• Small holder bioenergy production and processing
• Out grower schemes
Apply sustainability principles • Food security: enhance access to and availability of food.
• Poverty reduction and rural development: improvement of livelihoods
including employment and income generation
• Economic transformation through the use of technology, inputs and
management of waste
• Integrated feedstock production and processing,
• Maintenance of different cultures, diversity and social wellbeing.
112
• Conservation of forest resources and wetland ecosystems thereby
enhancing the integrity and diversity of the bio-physical systems.
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: contribution to climate change mitigation
• Soil: implement practices that reverse soil degradation and/or maintain soil
health
• Water: maintain or enhance the quality and quantity of surface and ground
water resources, and respect prior formal or customary water rights. Choosing
land that is not in water stressed basins
• Land Rights: allocating sufficient arable land for food production now and into
the future respect for land rights and land use rights, both formal and informal.
• Biodiversity: increasing biomass density, conserving biodiversity; adequate
land and provision for national parks, protected areas
• Human and labor rights: promote decent work and the well-being
Processing and value addition • Integrated feedstock production and processing
• Technology efficiency
• Water saving technologies
• Environment and social friendliness
Feedstock analysis • Moisture requirements – rain fed and irrigation thresholds
• Region of origin of the feedstock, history and current status
• Soil depth - water extraction
• Soil quality, type, fertility required
• Threshold for crop yield ((kg/ha)
• Biofuel yield (litres/ha)
• Oil content
• Invasiveness - not yet listed
• Cropping systems - rotation cropping with legumes
113
Annex II. Sub-regional Aspects of Energy Trends
The production and consumption of energy vary considerably within Africa and its sub-
regions, as do the magnitude and depth of energy and livelihood insecurity. Although the
natural resource endowment generally determines the type of energy produced in a
country or region, it has limited impact on energy consumption patterns and behavior.
Oil, for example, is a global commodity that is exported and traded in the international
market. More industrialized countries use a larger portion of the oil they produce, while
less industrialized countries tend to export almost all of their oil.
Africa’s energy map shows three distinct regions: North Africa, which relies heavily on
oil and gas; South Africa, which depends on coal; and, sub-Saharan Africa, which is
dependent on traditional biomass. The following sections highlight some of the regions’
specific situation, challenges and opportunities and the importance of bioenergy.
a. West Africa
Despite their differences in factor endowments, West African countries represent similar
household-level energy production and consumption patterns. Liberia, Sierra Leone,
Guinea, and Cote D’Ivoire house a significant portion of Africa’s tropical rainforest,
while Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger form part of the Sahara desert. Although Nigeria is
one of the world’s largest oil-producing countries, it derives about 83 percent of its
household energy from biomass, almost the same as Burkina Faso (87.1 percent), Mali
(88.1 percent), and Niger (88.6 percent). With 92 percent of its household energy
originating from biomass, Sierra Leone has the region’s highest level of biomass
dependency.
The rate of wood-fuel consumptions has changed dramatically. For example, during the
period between 1980 and 2000, Liberia’s wood-fuel consumption increased by more than
two-fold: from 2,451 thousand cubic meters in 1980 to 5,173 thousand cubic meters in
2000 (FAO 2003). Generally, countries that endure protracted political instability and
conflict often experience unusually high increases in wood-fuel consumption and
deforestation. Surprisingly, however, Ghana and Niger, which were relatively peaceful
during the same period, have more than doubled their wood-fuel consumption (Ghana by
218 percent, Niger by 209 percent), which could be attributed to policy and institutional
weaknesses (FAO 2003).
As Table 7 below shows, countries that are heavily dependent on biomass energy tend to
fall in the lower ranks of the Human Development Index (HDI), a measure of overall
socioeconomic wellbeing. Sierra Leone, Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso, with HDI ratings
of 174 and above, belong to the group of the world’s poorest countries. The number of
people having access to electricity is also low with Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Burkina
Faso having only five-percent electrification rates. The dependence on imported oil is
114
also high. In Sierra Leone, fuel imports accounted for close to 40 percent of total
imports in 2002. Burkina Faso and Togo spent close to one-fourth of their hard currency
earnings on petroleum imports.
In sum, despite its natural resources endowment, West Africa is a region that is energy
and livelihood insecure. It is characterized by heavy dependence on biomass, low levels
of electrification, total dependence of the transport sector on imported oil (except
Nigeria), and high fuel-import bills against the backdrop of pervasive poverty and heavy
deforestation. The formulation of a regional energy policy by ECOWAS titled: “White
Paper for Regional Policy: Gearing Towards Increasing Access to Energy Services” in
2005 illustrates the crucial importance of a common understanding and unified effort to
address energy and livelihoods issues of the region. Among the goals set by the White
Paper are: (i) access to improved domestic cooking services for 100% of total population
by 2015, i.e., 325 million people or 54 million households over a 10 year period” and “at
least 60% of the rural areas population will live in localities and will have access to
motive power, with the objective to increase productivity of economic activities, and will
have access to common modern services” (ECOWAS 2005).
The Economic and Monetary Union of West Africa (UEMOA), established by the eight
French-speaking UEMOA members: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea Bissau,
Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo, has also developed what is called “Sustainable
Bioenergy Development in UEMOA Member Countries” which among other issues,
defines “strategies for sustainable agricultural and energy policies that would enable
countries to improve their current/planned bioenergy policies (national, regional, local)
and integrate them into broader development programs, with a focus on the rural
economy (UEMOA 2008).
115
Table 9. West Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators
Coumtries Population
(2005) millions
Energy
production
(Mtoe)
Energy
consumption
2003 (Mtoe)
Fuel
import (%
of total import)
Biomass (% of total
energy consumption)
Access to electricity
(%)
Population below the
poverty line (%)
HDI
ranki
ng
Benin 7.64 1.62 2.39 17.4
(2002) 77.00 22 29 163
Burkina Faso 13.49 24.4
(2004) 87.1 5 46 174 Chad 9.65 171
Cote d'Ivoire 17.29 7.22 6.67 17.1
(2003) 68.00 39 164
Gambia 1.59 10.6 (2003) 81.0 155
Ghana 22.02 6.23 8.85 18.6
(2003) 73.00 35 40 136
Guinea 9.45 21.7 (2002) 74.2 5 160
Guinée-
Bissau 1.41 66.7 5 173 Liberia 2.90
Mali 11.37 21.9 (2001) 88.9 8 175
Mauritanie 3.08 46 153
Niger 12.16 16.9
(2003) 88.6 8 177 Nigeria 128.76 229.44 97.83 16 (2003) 83.00 46 159
Senegal 11.86 1.11 2.59 18.3
(2004) 56.5 33 156
Sierra Leone 5.86 39.7 (2002) 92.0 5 70 176
Togo 5.4 1.91 2.60 23 (2004) 74 17 147 Source: IEA, 2006, ECOWAS, White Paper for Regional Policy: Gearing Towards Increasing
Access to Energy Services, 2005, UNDP Human Development Report, 2006.
N.B. Figures are hardly consistent among different sources.
b. Central Africa
Two factors have considerably influenced the energy profile of Central Africa: factor
endowments and war. The region is well known for its abundant oil and biomass
resources. On the other hand, Burundi, Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo
have gone through many years of civil war and political instability, resulting in massive
displacement of their people. Population displacement and migration on such a massive
scale has resulted in greater than usual reliance on traditional biomass energy and,
consequently, extensive deforestation.
Cameroon, Congo, and Gabon - and more recently Equatorial Guinea - are among the
region’s largest oil producers. The non-oil producing countries − notably, the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Rwanda, and Burundi − represent the
116
worst cases of pervasive poverty, malnutrition, low energy consumption, and
environmental degradation.
Table 10. Central Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators
Central Africa
Population
(2005)
million
Energy
production
(Mtoe)
Energy
consumption
2003 (Mtoe)
Fuel import
(% of total
import)
Biomass (%
of total
energy
consumption)
Access to
electricity
(%)
Populati
on below
poverty
line (%)
HDI
ranking
Burundi 7.79 16.5 (2004) 169
Cameroon 17.26 12.48 6.84 17.8 (2004) 80.00 47 40 144
Central African
Republic 4.23 11 (2003) 172
Congo 3.60 12.59 1.03 79.00 19.5 140
Dem. Rep. of
Congo 60.76 17.00 16.06 91.00 5.8 167
Equatorial
Guinea 0.53 120
Gabon 1.39 12.11 1.67 3.2 (2004) 56.00 47.9 124
Rwanda 9.38 15.6 (2003) 60 158
Source: IEA 2006, UNDP HDR 2006
In Central Africa, energy and livelihood insecurity are manifested in several ways (see
Table 8 above):
• Heavy dependence on traditional biomass energy. Both oil- and non-oil-
producing countries depend heavily on traditional biomass energy. DRC derives
about 91 percent of its household energy from this source. The Congo
(Brazzaville) and Cameroon, the region’s two largest oil producers, also obtain
about 80 percent of their domestic energy needs from biomass.
• Low electrification rate. Here, DRC has the lowest electrification rate of 5.8
percent. In Congo, less than 20 percent of its population has access to electricity.
• Pervasive poverty. Although complete data on poverty in each country is lacking,
the HDI ranking, which includes poverty, suggests low levels of socioeconomic
wellbeing.
• Total dependence on imported oil by the transport sector. Since there is no
(documented) commercial production of biofuels in Africa, the transport sector
relies solely on oil.
c. Eastern Africa
Eastern Africa comprises a diverse group of countries with unequally distributed energy
resources. Sudan is the only oil-producing country. Ethiopia and Uganda are widely
acknowledged for their huge hydropower potential, while Kenya and Ethiopia produce
geothermal power. Tanzania has started pumping natural gas from Songo Songo, an island 232
kilometers from mainland Tanzania (East African 2004).
117
Table 11. Eastern Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators
Eastern Africa Population
(2005) million
Energy production
(Mtoe)
Energy consumption 2003 (Mtoe)
Fuel import (% of total imports)
Biomass (% of total energy
consumption
Access to electricity
(%)
Population below the poverty line (%)
HDI ranking
Djibouti 0.476 148 Eritrea 4.67 0.48 0.81 69 20.2 157 Ethiopia 73.00 19.37 20.51 12 (2003) 93 15 44 170
Kenya 34.9 13.68 15.75 24.3
(2004) 78 14 152 Somalia 8.59
Sudan 40.18 16.59 2.1
(2003) 87 30 141 Tanzania,
United Rep. 36.76 17.53 17.16 16.5
(2004) 94 11 36 162 Uganda 28.2 10 (2004) 93 8.9 38 145 Source: IEA, 2006 World Energy Outlook
Notwithstanding recent high economic growth rates the sub-region has achieved,
generally, Eastern Africa manifests severe cases of energy and livelihood insecurity:
• Heavy dependence on traditional biomass energy. There is excessive dependence
on this energy source, with Uganda, Tanzania, and Ethiopia obtaining more than
93 percent of their energy from traditional biomass.
• Recurrent drought and occasional flooding. Recurrent drought followed by
famine is one of the region’s distinguishing features. The Horn of Africa,
particularly Ethiopia and Somalia, has experienced severe drought followed by
flooding.
• Accelerating deforestation and land degradation. This was driven by high
population growth and growing demand for food and energy services against the
backdrop of unsustainable agricultural practices.
• Pervasive poverty. The region’s countries fall on the tail end of the HDI ranking.
• Recurrent conflict. The region, particularly the Horn of Africa, has experienced
protracted internal and border conflicts for many years, including the current war
in Somalia and political tensions between Ethiopia and Eritrea.
• Total dependence of the transport sector on imported oil. There is no commercial
production of biofuels.
a Southern Africa
The production and consumption of energy in Southern Africa is dominated by South
Africa, which accounts for 83 percent of the region’s energy consumption, 69.8 percent of
118
its energy production, and 88.8 percent of its GHG emissions (EIA 2006). When South
Africa is excluded, the region shows signs of energy and livelihood insecurity
characterized by:
• low levels of per-capita energy consumption
• high dependency on traditional biomass
• pervasive poverty and environmental degradation
• low levels of electrification and inadequate electricity generation capacity
• total dependence of the transport sector on imported oil; and,
• oil imports constituting a major drain on scarce foreign currency
Table 12. Southern Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators
Southern Africa
Population (2005) million
Energy production
(Mtoe)
Energy consumption 2003 (Mtoe)
Fuel
import (% of total
imports)
Biomass (% of total energy
consumption)
Access to electricity
(%)
Population below the poverty
(%)
HDI ranking
Angola 11.70 57.36 9.12 72.00 15 161
Botswana 1.64 1.01 1.86 6.5
(2001) 38.5 131 Lesotho 2.03 11 149
Madagascar 18.31 23.3
(2004) 15 71 143
Malawi 12.98 2.7
(2004) 7 65 166
Mozambique 20.15 8.24 8.30 11.7
(2002) 93.00 6.3 168
Namibia 2.03 0.32 1.27 10.4
(2003) 15.00 34 125
South Africa 44.34 156 121.84 14.5
(2004) 11 70 121
Zambia 11.11 6.36 6.78 11.2
(2004) 81 19 73 165
Zimbabwe 12.16 8.6 9.57 13.7
(2004) 54 34 151 Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2006, World Bank, World Economic Outlook 2006
One feature that distinguishes this region from the rest of Africa is its relatively large
ethanol production capacity. With ethanol production of 110-million gallons in 2004,
South Africa is the world’s seventh largest ethanol-producing country after Brazil, USA,
China, India, France, and Russia.
Recently issued “SADC Bioenergy Policy Development - GTZ/Programme for Basic
Energy Conservation” 30th August 2010 sets lofty objectives that include: improving
energy security and balance of payments; creating local jobs, rural up-liftment, and lower
greenhouse gas emissions, which constitute the key objectives of this Pan-African
sustainable bioenergy policy framework and guidelines.
119
e. North Africa
Relatively higher energy consumption, low levels of fuel imports, low dependence on biomass
energy, and a very high electrification rate characterize North African energy production and
consumption patterns. Indeed, North Africa stands at a high level of energy and livelihood
security (see Table 11 below), although there appears to be no production of traditional biomass
energy.
Table 13: North Africa: Selected Energy and Livelihood Indicators
North
Africa
Population
(2005) million
Energy production
(Mtoe)
Energy consumption
2003 (Mtoe)
Fuel import (% of total imports in
2004)
Biomass (% of total energy
consumption)
Access to electricity
(%)
Population below the poverty line (%)
HDI ranking
Algeria 32.53 165.73 33.07 0.9 0.00 98.1 102 Egypt 77.50 64.66 54.26 8.3 3.00 98 16.7 111 Libya 5.76 85.38 18.031 0.7 1 97 64 Morocco 32.72 0.66 10.92 16.7 4.00 85.1 19 123 Tunisia 10.00 6.80 8.24 10.3 16.00 98.9 87
Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2006, World Bank, World Economic Outlook 2006
In sum, despite differences in energy resource endowments, Sub-Saharan Africa shows
considerable similarity in the structure and consumption of energy across Africa marked
by high dependence on biomass energy and low electricity access. North Africa, on the
other hand, has high electricity access level and very low or zero biomass energy
dependence.
120
References
Abdeshahian, P., Dashti, M.G., Kalil, M.S., and Yusoff, W.M.W., 2010. Production of
Biofuel using Biomass as a Sustainable Biological Resource, Research Article, 9: 274-
282. Science Alert.
African Union, UN Economic Commission for Africa and African Development Bank,
2010. Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa. Land Policy in Africa: A
Framework to Strengthen Land Rights, Enhance Productivity and Secure Livelihoods.
Africa Wind Energy Association, available at: http://www.afriwea.org/en/projects.htm
All Africa September 15, 2006, South Africa: Ethanol – Boom or Bust?
http://allafrica.com/stories/200609150592.html
Baue, Bill, 2006. Biofuels May Not Be Sustainability Panacea, According to the Bank
Sarasin Report. August 2, 2006. http://www.socialfunds.com/news/article.cgi/2073.html
BEFSCI, FAO, 2010. Testing Framework for Sustainable Biomass ("Cramer Criteria") -
The Netherlands
Biopact, 2006. “Indian Ocean island states form biofuel alliance with China and
Malaysia”. http://biopact.com/2006/08/indian-ocean-island-states-form.html
Biopact.“Nigeria, China sign agreement on ethanol production.” August 14, 2006.
http://biopact.com/2006/08/nigeria-china-sign-agreement-on.html
Biopact, 2006. “Good news for vehicle owners in Kenya – biofuels are on their way”
http://biopact.com/2006/06/good-news-for-vehicle-owners-in-kenya_12.html
Brundtland Commission, 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press.
Business Ezinemark, Top and Emerging Bio-Fuel Markets by Technology, Feedstocks,
Regulations, Pricing & Commercialization Trends & Forecasts (2011 – 2016).
http://business.ezinemark.com/top-and-emerging-bio-fuel-markets-by-technology-
feedstocks-regulations-3224ae2373f.html
Christensen, John, 2007. Options and strategies for an environmentally sustainable
biofuels production and trade, Side event organized by ICTSD & SEI, Bali, 4 December
2007, UNEP Riso Center.
COMPETE, 2009. International Conference.Bioenergy Policy Implementation in Africa’
26-28 May 2009, Lusaka, Zambia, Conference Summary.
121
Cotula, Lorenzo, Dyer, Nat & Vermeulen, Sonja. 2008. Fuelling exclusion?The biofuels
boom and poorpeople’s access to land, IIED and FAO.
__________________, 2008. International Workshop, ‘Bioenergy Policies for
Sustainable Development in Africa’ 25-27 November 2008, Bamako, Mali, Workshop
Programme – Draft Workshop Report.In collaboration with the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), and the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels (RSB).
Deininger, Klaus and Byerlee, Derekwith Jonathan Lindsay, Andrew Norton, Harris
Selod, and Mercedes Stickler, 2011. Rising Global Interestin Farmland: Can it Yield
Sustainable and Equitable Benefits?, The World Bank, Washington, DC
Dessalegn Rahmato, 2011. Land to Investors: Large-Scale Land Transfers in Ethiopia.
Forum for Social Studies, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Earth Policy Institute. 2004. World Ethanol Production Available at: http://www.earth-
policy.org/Updates/2005/Update49_data.htm
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), 2005. White Paper for a
Regional Policy: Geared Towards Access to Energy for Rural and Peri-urban Populations
in order to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals.
Ejigu, Mersie. 2005. A Report of the UNCTAD Exploratory Mission to East Africa: The
Way Forward. For the UNCTAD Biofuels Global Initiative.
Ejigu, Mersie. 2006. “Sustainable Energy Equals Freedoms + Choice: Bioenergy and
Biofuels as Energy Solutions.” Presentation at the Bonn International Conference,
"Sustainable Bioenergy - Challenges and Opportunities" October 12-13, 2006.
Ejigu, Mersie, 2005. “Rethinking the Energy Paradigm – an African Perspective.” Paper
presented at the WTO 10th Anniversary Symposium, High Level Panel, Geneva 20-22
April 2005.
Ejigu, Mersie. 2005. “Grasping the Nettle.” Our Planet, UNEP, Vol. 16, No. 3.
Ejigu, Mersie, 2008. Toward energy and livelihoods security in Africa: Smallholder
production and processing of bioenergy as a strategy, Natural Resources Forum: A
United Nations Sustainable Development Journal, Vol. 32 No. 2 (2008) 152–162
Energy Information Administration, 2006.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/SADC/Full.html
122
European Union Energy Initiative Partnership Dialogue Facility (EUEI PDF), 2006.
http://www.malifolkecenter.org/repertoire/repertoire_web.pdf#search=%22Hamata%20A
g%20HANTAFAYE%22
FAO Sustainable Development Division, 1999. The challenge of rural energy poverty in
developing countries, World Energy Council/Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations.
FAO, Forestry Department, 2004. UBET, Unified Bioenergy Terminology.
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/007/j4504E/j4504e00.htm
Fargione, Joseph, Hill, Jason, Tilman, David, Polasky, Stephen, and Hawthorne, Peter,
2008. Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt. Science 29 February 2008: 1235-
1238. Online 7 February 2008
Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP), 4 Sustainability Indicators for Bioenergy, FAO
http://www.globalbioenergy.org/programmeofwork/sustainability/gbep-24-sustainability-
indicators/en/
Goldemberg, José, 2004. “The Case for Renewable Energies.”International Conference
for Renewable Energies, Bonn.
Goldemberg, Jose and Sauni T. Coelho,2005. “Why Alcohol fuel?The Brazilian
Experience.” CTI Industry Joint Seminar on Technology Diffusion of Energy Efficiency
in Asian Countries, Beijing, February 2005.
GTZ/Programme for Basic Energy Conservation, 2010. SADC Bioenergy Policy
Development.
Hart Energy Consulting, CABI, 2010. Biofuels andLand Use Change: Science and Policy
Review, October 2010. Online: www.hartenergyconsulting.com
IEA. 2010. World Energy Outlook 2010. Available at:
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/weo2010sum.pdf
International Energy Agency (IEA), 2004. “Analysis of the Impact of High Oil Prices on
the Global Economy.” Available at:
http://www.iea.org/textbase/papers/2004/high_oil_prices.pdf
International Energy Agency, 2006. World Energy Outlook 2006. OECD/IEA.
International Energy Agency, 2010, World Energy Outlook 2009. OECD/IEA
IEA, Energy Balances for Africa, 2003.
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/stats/balancetable.asp
123
International Monetary Fund, Africa Department, 2008. The Balance of Payments Impact
of the Food and Fuel Price Shocks on Low-Income African Countries: A Country-by-
Country Assessment, Prepared by the IMF African Department, June 30, 2008.
www.imf.org
IISD, http://africasd.iisd.org/institutions/forum-of-energy-ministers-in-africa-fema/
Iiyama, Miyuki Temu, August, Munster, Cristel, Jamnadass, Ramni, 2010. Sustainable
Bioenergy Development Opportunities and Challenges in Research & Policy for Africa.
World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Nairobi, Kenya, African Bioenergy Convention,
Stellenbosch, March 17th – 19th, 2010.
Johnson, Francis X. and Emmanuel Matsika, 2006. “Bio-energy trade and regional
development: the case of bio-ethanol in southern Africa.” Energy for Sustainable
Development 10 no. 1 (2006).
Kampman, B.E., den Boer, L.C., Croezen, H.J., 2005. Biofuels under Development: An
analysis of currently available and future biofuels, and a comparison with biomass
application in other sectors. Delft,, May. Available at:
http://www.ce.nl/eng/redirect/werk_mat_index.html
Kgathi, D.L. Hall, D.O., Hategeka, A. and Sekhwela, M.B.M, eds., 1997. Biomass
Energy Policy in Africa: Selected Case Studies ZED Books Ltd., London, UK.
Kirai, Paul, 2006. “Energizing Africa Through Energy Efficiency,” presentation at the
6th Global Forum For Sustainable Energy, 29 November – 1st December 2006, Vienna,
Austria. GEF-KAM ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT
Kojima, Masami and Johnson, Todd, 2005. Potential for Biofuels for Transport in
Developing Countries, Energy Sector Management Program, Report 312/05, The World
Bank.
Levine, Joel, ed., 1996. Biomass Burning and Global Change. Cambridge,
Massachussetts: MIT Press.
Maler, K. and M. Munasinghe (1996). “Macroeconomic policies, second-best theory and
the environment”, Environment and Development Economics 1 (1996): 149-163.
Marrison, Chris and Eric Larson. “A Preliminary Analysis of the Biomass Energy
Production Potential in Africa in 2025 Considering Projected Land Needs for Food
Production.” Biomass and Bioenergy 10 no. 5 and 6 (1996): 337-351.
Mbendi, 2011. Biofuels Manufacturing in Africa.
http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/biof/af/index.htm
124
Millington, Andrew C. et al., 1994. “Estimating woody biomass in Sub-Saharan Africa.”
Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Mitchell, Donald, 2011. Biofuels in Africa: Opportunities, Prospects, and Challenges.
The World Bank, Washington, DC.
OECD, 2001. Glossary of Statistical Terms.
http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=2112,
OECD, 2004, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/49/32342675.pdf
One Biosphere, “Bioenergy, Biofuels and Their Impacts on Biodiversity,”
http://www.onebiosphere.com/bioenergy_biofuels_and_biodiversity.html
Otto, Martina, 2009. Bioenergy Risks and Opportunities, RSB, Outreach East Africa,
United Nations Environment Programme.
Plesch, Dan, Greg Austin, Fiona Grant and Stephen Sullivan, 2006. “Bio-Energy and
CAP Reform: The Gains to Europe and Africa.” London: The Foreign Policy Centre.
Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2011-2020,
Fourth United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, Istanbul, 2011
Rainer, Janssen, Rutz, Dominik , Helm, Peter, Woods, Jeremy, Rocio-Diaz-Chavez,
2009. Bioenergy for Sustainable Development in Africa: Environmental and Social
Aspects, COMPETE (Competence Platform on Energy Crop and Agroforestry Systems -
Africa)
Ravindranath, N.H., et al. R. Manuvie, Joe Fargione, Pep Canadell, GoranBerndes,
Jeremy Woods, Helen Watson, and Jayant Sathaye, 2010. GHG Implications of Land
Use and Land Conversion to Biofuel Crops, SCOPE Biofuel Report, Chapter 4.
Ross, Andrea &Lambrou,Yianna, 2009. Making Sustainable Biofuels Work for
Smallholder Farmers and Rural Households: Issues and Perspectives, FAO, Rome.
Ruphael Y. (2004). Energy Bulletin: Water Crisis Looms in Africa, 17 September 2004.
Available at http://www.energybulletin.net/2177.html.
Sinkala, Thomson Prof. 2007. The role of Jatropha curcasin small scale production in
the framework of a decentralized electrification strategy for rural areas, Eastern and
Southern Africa Regional Workshop on Biofuels28-29 June 2007, UNEP. Nairobi
125
Schneider, Uwe A. and Bruce A. McCarl. “Economic Potential of Biomass Based Fuels
for Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 24
(2003): 291-312.
Science News. 2006. “Demand for Ethanol May Drive Up Food Prices” by Ben Harder.
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060722/food.asp
Sims, R.E.H., R.N. Schock, A. Adegbululgbe, J. Fenhann, I. Konstantinaviciute, W.
Moomaw, H.B. Nimir, B. Schlamadinger,J. Torres-Martínez, C. Turner, Y. Uchiyama,
S.J.V. Vuori, N. Wamukonya, X. Zhang, 2007: Energy supply. In Climate Change 2007:
Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R.
Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and
New York,NY, USA.
Smeets, Edward, André Faaij and Iris Lewandowski, 2004. “A quick scan of global bio-
energy potentials to 2050.”
http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/smeetsglobalquickscan2050.pdf
South Africa Department of Minerals and Energy, 2006. Draft Biofuels Industrial
Strategy of the Republic of South Africa.
Stokes, Harry, 2004. Commercializing of a New Stove and Fuel System for Household
Energy in Ethiopia Using Ethanol from Sugar Cane Residues and Methanol from Natural
Gas. October 30.
http://www.crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/Stokes/Ethopia%20Ethanol%20a
nd%20Methanol.pdf#search=%22stokes%20ethiopia%20stove%22
The Guardian, Biofuels land grab in Kenya's Tana Delta fuels talk of war: Villagers vow
to resist as wildlife vanishes and they are driven from their land to make way for water-
thirsty crops. Tracy McVeigh in the Tana Delta, Kenya, Saturday 2 July 2011 19.02
BSThttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/02/biofuels-land-grab-kenya-delta
The Wall Street Journal online, 2007. “Corn's Rally Sends Ripples,” by LaurenEtter,
Ilan Brat, and Steven Gray. http://online.wsj.com
UEMOA, 2008. Sustainable Bioenergy Development in UEMOA Member Countries,
October, 2008
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), 2002.
“Guidance in Preparing a National Sustainable Development Strategy: Managing
Sustainable Development in the New Millennium,” Background Paper No. 13,
DESA/DSD/PC2/BP 13 submitted to the Commission on Sustainable Development
Second preparatory session 28 FJanuary-8 February 2002.
126
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2005. “Energy Services for the
Millennium Development Goals” http://www.energyandenvironment.undp.org/
UNDP, 1994. Human Development Report: New Dimensions of Human Security, 1994.
UNDP, 2010. Human Development Report: The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to
Human Development, 2010.
UNECA, 2006. Harnessing Energy for Development. http://www.uneca.org/
UNECA, 2011. Biofuels Development in Africa: Technology Options and Related Policy
and Regulatory Issues, Draft Report.
UNECA and UNEP, 2007. Making Africa’s Power Sector Sustainable: An Analysis of
Power Sector Reforms in Africa.A Joint UNECA and UNEP Report Published within the
Framework of UN-Energy/Africa
UNECA, 2011. Economic Report on Africa 2011: Governing development in Africa -
the role of the state in economic transformation. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
UNECA, 2011. Draft Sustainable Development Indicators Framework for Africa and
Initial Compendium of Indicators, ongoing work.
UN Energy, 2007. Sustainable Bioenergy: A Framework for Decision Makers -
Widening Access (Environmental Sustainability and Food Security) and Overcoming
Challenges (Rural Development)
UNEP, BIOENERGY: Managing risks and opportunities: An Overview of Key Issues
under discussion and of UNEP’s Bioenergy Programme, An Overview of Key Issues
under discussion and of UNEP’s Bioenergy Programme,
http://www.unep.fr/energy/bioenergy/issues/pdf/Couv%20Bioenergy%20HD%20Fin%20
4%20pages.pdf
UNEP, 2011.Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and
Poverty Eradication - A Synthesis for Policy Makers, www.unep.org/greeneconomy
UNEP, 2009.A Growing Debate: Bioenergy in the 21st Century,
http://www.unep.fr/energy/bioenergy/documents/pdf/IssuePaper.pdf
UN General Assembly, 1994. UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).
UNESCO, SCOPE and UNEP, Policy Brief, No. 9, June 2009. Biofuels and
Environmental Impacts Scientific Analysis and Implications for Sustainability
127
UNIDO. 2009. “Scaling up Renewable Energy in Africa.”
http://www.uncclearn.org/sites/www.uncclearn.org/files/unido11.pdf.
UNIDO (n.d). Cassava Value Chain.
http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/UNIDO_Worldwide/LAC_Programme/3RG
E/Cassava%20Value%20Chain.pdf
von Braun, Joachim and Packauri, R.K. 2006. “Essay: The Promises and Challenges of
Biofuels for the Poor in Developing Countries,” International Food Research Institute
(IFPRI).
Washington Post, January 24, 2007. Blindness on Biofuels by Robert J.
Samuelson.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2007/01/23/AR2007012301562.html
Woods, Jeremy, Gareth Brown and Lindsay Jolly. “Producing Ethanol, Electricity and
Heat from Sugar Crops in Southern Africa – Policies Status and Prospects in a Rapidly
Changing Global Environment.”
http://www.carensa.net/PDF/CarensaScenarios%20WBC%20Poster%5B2%5D.pdf
World Resources Institute.
http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/data_tables/ene2_2005.pdf
Wright, Lynn. “Worldwide commercial development of bioenergy with a focus on energy
crop-based projects.” Biomass and Bioenergy 30 (2006): 706-714
Wynn, Gerard, 2006. “Biofuel rush risks gasoline hike, forest damage.” August 25,
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L23121854.htm
Yamamoto, Hiromi, Junichi Fujino and Kenji Yamaji. “ Evaluation of bioenergy potential
with a multi-regional global-land-use-and-energy-model.” Biomass and Bioenergy 21 no.
3 (2001): 185-203.
Additional web sources:
www.energyboom.com
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables1_2.html
http://www.berkeleybiodiesel.org).
http://www.science20.com
http://afrol.com/features/10278
http://www.afrol.com/
http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=rapeseed-oil&months=60
http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=rapeseed-oil&months=60
http://www.mongabay.com/images/commodities/charts/chart-maize.html
http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=wheat
128
http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/92544/icode/
http://www.grain.org/article/entries/606-the-new-scramble-for-africa
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060722/food.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorghum
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/business/worldbusiness/22biofuels.html
http://climateavenue.com/en.bioethanol.Brazil.htm
http://e85.whipnet.net/alt.fuel/animal.fat.html