Proceedings of the Workshop on Mini-grids held in Bangalore India
62
OASYS SOUTH ASIA Workshop April 22, 2015 Proceedings Mini-grid Workshop Identifying the missing link: Enabling low-income markets through clean mini-grid solutions Venue: TERI Southern Regional Centre, Bangalore Organised by TERI, India
Transcript of Proceedings of the Workshop on Mini-grids held in Bangalore India
OASYS SOUTH ASIA Workshop
April 22, 2015
Proceedings
Mini-grid Workshop
Identifying the missing link: Enabling low-income markets through clean mini-grid solutions
Venue: TERI Southern Regional Centre, Bangalore
Organised by TERI, India
ii
Produced by:
The Energy and Resources Institute
New Delhi
30th April 2015
For further information, please contact Mr. Debajit Palit ([email protected]).
iii
Acknowledgement
The activities reported in this report are funded by an EPSRC/DfID research grant
(EP/G063826/2) from the RCUK Energy Programme. The Energy Programme is a RCUK
cross-council initiative led by EPSRC and contributed to by ESRC, NERC, BBSRC and STFC.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent
the views of the institutions they are affiliated to or the funding agencies.
iv
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 1
SUMMARY OF SESSIONS ......................................................................................................... 1
INAUGURAL SESSION .............................................................................................................. 2
SPECIAL PROJECT PRESENTATIONS .................................................................................. 3
BREAK-OUT SESSION 1: ROUND TABLE I DEVELOPMENT & INNOVATIONS IN
MINI-GRID DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 6
BREAK-OUT SESSION 2: ROUND TABLE II COMMERCIAL VIABILITY & SCALING
UP OF MINI-GRIDS .................................................................................................................... 9
CLOSING KEYNOTE ................................................................................................................. 11
ANNEXURE I: PROGRAM SCHEDULE ................................................................................ 13
ANNEXURE II: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS .......................................................................... 14
1
Background
Almost 1.3 billion people across the globe still do not have access to electricity and probably an equal number have access to unreliable and unaffordable supply of electricity which is
not sustainable. The International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook 2011 estimated
that over 40% of all installed capacity to achieve universal access to electricity by 2030 will be most economically delivered by mini-grids. A clean energy mini-grids High Impact
Opportunity (HIO) group has also been formed within the international framework of
sustainable energy for all to further enable, enhance, and promote existing and upcoming efforts in the sector, with a view to increasing rate of deployment and market transformation
impact. However, despite advances in technology and cost reductions, the pace at which
clean energy mini-grids are being developed and financed remains slow, due to various technical and financial barriers.
Against this background, TERI, MicroEnergy International and the United Nations Environment Programme held a mini-grid workshop on April 22, 2015 in Bengaluru with
the objective to identify and address challenges and issues related to the sustainable
implementation of clean energy mini-grids across Asia and Africa. Specifically, the objectives were to identify and address the missing link to the sustainable implementation of
clean energy mini-grids; bring together key stakeholders sharing the passion to successfully
push forward energy inclusion, aligned with the SE4All goals and establish a core group of institutions for a regular exchange and provide a platform for the establishment of future
partnerships for financing and implementation.
The workshop was organized under the aegis of the OASYS South Asia project, lasting from
October 2009 to April 2015, which is supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council, United Kingdom (UK) and Department for International Development (DFID). The OASYS project investigated a suite of alternative decentralized business
solutions and corresponding institutional frameworks for electricity and rural energy supply
with a specific focus on South Asia. The workshop attracted 70 delegates from the government agencies, private sector, project implementers, practitioners, academia, and
policy advocacy agencies from more than 10 countries including Bangladesh, India,
Germany, Kenya, France, Norway, Nepal, Singapore, Sri Lanka, the UK, and the USA.
During the workshop, a poster display session was also organised to showcase and share the
key findings from the research undertaken as part of the OASYS South Asia project.
Summary of Sessions
In addition to the Introductory session and the Concluding remarks, the workshop
comprised of three special project presentations which highlighted the lessons and experiences from Rural Electricity Access Programme of different organizations from the
field; and two dynamic break-out Round Tables, each comprising of three parallel sessions.
These two round table symposium held discussion on two subjects one on the development and innovations in mini-grid design and the other one on the commercial viability and
2
scaling up of mini-grids. Both the round table sessions were followed by the presentation
and discussion of the results.
Inaugural Session
The event started with the welcome by Ms. Liisa Andersson, MicroEnergy International wherein she welcomed all the participants and shared the objectives of the workshop. Mr P
R Dasgupta, Director, TERI Southern Regional Centre thereafter made the welcome address
on behalf of TERI. Mr Dasgupta in his address emphatically pointed out that this an apt time for this kind of workshop to discuss and deliberate upon the key issues around this theme,
when there is a global focus on energy access and sustainable development of energy
resources. In his speech, Mr Dasgupta highlighted the kind of work being undertaken by the Southern Regional Centre of TERI in this direction. He concluded his speech saying that he
is hopeful that the findings of the workshop will definitely bring out some new and
innovative ways of thinking leading to successful deployment of clean energy mini-grids in the future.
It was followed by video addresses in the “Saving CO2” session by Prof Daniel Kammen from UC Berkeley, California, USA and Mr Dean Cooper, Head of UNEP’s mini-grid
programme. Mr Cooper highlighted the importance of clean energy mini-grids is not only
meeting the persisting challenges of energy poverty being encountered in developing economies of the world, but also in playing a pivotal role in optimizing the available
resources in several developed countries of the world. He stressed that clean energy mini-
grids have been demonstrated as a viable solution in the current regime where grid based electrification is found to be inadequate and ill prepared to meet the growing energy
challenges. He also emphasized that we need to find new ways of translating the knowledge
gained through research in practical terms, so that the usefulness of the research is more.
The key note address of Dr Kammen, highlighted the need and urgency of promoting clean
energy strategy in an aggressive manner. He pointed out the importance of this kind of gathering which could lead to change in the mind sets of policy makers and planners in
promoting clean energy mini-grids, particularly in the South Asian region.
3
Special Project Presentations
Mr Debajit Palit, Associate Director, TERI presented the “OASYS South Asia Project: Experiences and Lessons” in the first technical session of the day. The presentation
highlighted various research and demonstration activities that have been undertaken as part
of the OASYS project, the lessons learned through different business models being implemented in different sites with different partners, and academic and other outputs from
the project. He highlighted the five major components of the project namely, identifying
research problems; the academic component of the research; action research component leading to demonstration projects; knowledge sharing and; policy research. He was of the
view that all these components are equivocally important for the project. He highlighted that
the project has achieved intended objectives to a large extent and has been able to 1) publish a large number of high quality research publications in academic journals and three books,
2) disseminate the research in a number of conferences/workshops; 3) develop international
research collaboration with a large number of institutions; 4) build capacity by training researchers, interns, practitioners and local project teams; and 5) established a strong
stakeholder engagement through organising workshops and events. He then elaborated on
the typology of delivery models tried out as part of the demonstration project component at three different states in India i.e. Odisha, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. Drawing from the
field experiences particularly from the community managed projects in Dhenkanal, Odisha,
he pointed out that a host of co-benefits were generated from the project. One such important co-benefit is the capacity building through different training programmes. For
example, local women were trained on how to run sewing machines. Similarly, because of
this project, the village itself got a renewed focus by the local administration i.e. by the Village Panchayat as well as by the District Administration. The accessibility to the village
has become much better now. This has led to better provisioning of social infrastructures
such as health facilities and schooling.
Mr Palit also highlighted a set of challenges encountered during the entire process of
deployment of demonstration projects of all types. The challenges, he highlighted, are of technical in nature as well as operational and often social. He pointed out that gaining
confidence among communities over the years was one of the important aspects of project
development. Similarly highlighting the micro-grids implemented by Mera Gao Power, which is a private developer and was supported with viability gap funding under OASYS
project, he pointed out that the key leveraging point of success is the collection efficiency
ensured through a weekly collection mechanism through the ‘Joint Liability Group’ mechanism. Dwelling on third demonstration project by another private developer, Mlinda
Foundation, supported under OASYS, he said that one of the major challenges faced in this
case was the mandatory provision of electrification through diesel run generation sets. He pointed that these models while present three different cases and approaches to deliver
electricity to rural people through clean energy mini-grids; they are unique in their own
ways and have potential to be scaled up.
The presentation was followed by some questions from audience. One of the questions was
related to grid ready infrastructure. Responding to the questions, Mr Palit elaborated on the complex issue of grid interconnection of clean energy mini-grids. He said that at the policy
level, even it seems there is still lack of clarity on ‘what do we mean by grid ready
4
infrastructure’. It seems implementing agencies are not clear whether the inverter should be
grid tied (bi-directional) or it should have the option of receiving electricity from the grid as well as solar when grid reaches the village. He then mentioned in case of the OASYS demo
project in Dhenkanal district, TERI has used both – the larger capacity power plant is
connected with the grid tied inverters while the other power plants are connected to grid interactive inverters. In case of grid extension in the village, the larger power plant can be
connected to feed electricity to the grid, while the other panels from the other plants can be
used as a backup to the grid during brown outs and black outs. This way the OASYS project has ensured that we do not spend extra fund for grid tied inverters and at the same time also
ensured that the infrastructure will not go waste in case grid reaches the villages. On a
follow up question about the grid interconnection guidelines in India, Mr Palit mentioned that Central Electricity Authority has released guidelines for the same. However, there still
exits some ambiguities about the finer points and rules for grid interconnection i.e. the step-
by step rules are not yet out. He also mentioned that there are some grey areas about licensing and regulation for off-grid sector with some arguing for regulations along with
tariff parity of grid and off-grid consumers, while others want the off-grid to develop in
market mode.
It was followed by a presentation on the Swarm Electrification concept by Mr Sebastian
Groh, Managing Director of ME SOLshare Ltd, Bangladesh, wherein he spoke about an innovative concept of interconnecting solar home systems to share the electricity generated
through Cash in as you go (CAYG) model by the consumers. Drawing from his experience,
he said that SHS instalment in Bangladesh appears to be not sustainable over long-run as the monthly instalment of SHS is too high. In addition, it is hard to predict demand growth.
More importantly, there is a massive growth of non-IDCOL market, which is hardly
regulated, resulting in poor quality deployment of SHS. However, one of the crucial and recent developments is related to the bottom up sharing pattern, which is a new
phenomenon. This has become a reality in the context of greater use of super efficiency
appliances. He opined that the model ‘share and cash in as you go (CAYG)’ could lead to optimal use of already deployed SHSs in Bangladesh. However, the main challenge is
related to flexibility in sharing the excess capacity. He then elaborated a construct which
would lead to transition from a single SHS to grid connection. He said that as the level of energy service provision increases, the level of complexity also increases. Other related
challenges are quality of services, the mechanism of revenue sharing and issues related to
efficiency.
The presentation was followed by comments by some of the available experts who are
working on similar concepts. Prof Peter Adelmann said that all seems to discuss too much
5
on how people in the end can get the grid. He opined that this should not necessarily be the
target, but rather the target should be access to energy to run all sorts of appliances. Mr Groh highlighted that the quality of the services, whether from grid or mini-grid, and
efficiency of appliances is important.
On another question about the cost of the Solshare charge controllers, he mentioned that
while price of a simple charge controller is US$ 3, the Solshare may be available at least 10
times of this price. He further said that while the price may be high, one need to be very careful in the mathematics of how much energy one is able to trade to make it viable. When
one looks at how the households are equipped, they often have multiple infrastructure (SHS,
kerosene lamps, diesel generator etc.) and spend much more when one do the overall calculation for the KWh consumed. He further raised the issue that the only reason people
want to be connected to the grid is because of the subsidized grid.
The session ended with Mr Abhimanyu Sahu, Director, Schneider Electric, sharing the
‘access to energy’ programme of the company with the audience. He highlighted how
Schneider is effectively engaged in provisioning of energy services by providing basic minimum access to energy. He highlighted how Schneider has been spending around 4-5 %
of the sales revenue in R & D. He pointed out the set of challenges related to access to
energy as lack of entrepreneurial skill, lack of business model, inadequate knowledge about the right technology, lack of access to finance and lack of adequate skills and trained people.
He then dwelt on the BIPBOP programme of Schneider initiated in 2008 which was
operationalized through a creation of social fund known as ‘Social Investment Fund’ that primarily invests in start-up companies. Lot of emphasis has also been laid on innovations to
address this issue. Under capacity building programme, 209 centres have been set up in
India which has led to giving training to about 35,000 persons. He then elaborated how Schneider has developed appropriate solution with complete range of products. Schneider
has been providing this solution in several countries such as Bangladesh, India, Indonesia
and Myanmar. He emphasized that the solution should be very much contextual and said that on technology DC micro-grid has again emerged as an efficient technology option for
the mini-grids.
Copies of all the three presentations are appended at the end of the Proceedings.
6
Break-out session 1: Round Table I
Development & innovations in mini-grid design
Chair: Dr Akanksha Chaurey, CEO, IT Power
For the first Breakout session, the participants were divided into three round table groups to discuss the various challenges and solutions for enhancing electricity access through clean
energy mini-grids. Three parallel discussions took place on the topics viz. bottom-up versus top-down design; AC versus DC mini-grids; and green versus brown field mini-grids.
The bottom up versus top down mini-grid design session was led by Mr Daniel Philipp from Micro Energy International. The group raised a guiding question that given the rapidly and
vastly changing use patterns, how mini-grids should be approached. One argument raised
during the discussion was that hardly any pilot projects are able to scale up though one view suggested that pilot projects do contribute a lot and they should be valued. The group felt
that bottom-up approach sounds ambitious and hence, it is required to bridge the gap
between the two. Though in bottom-up approach, beneficiaries have better understanding and can probably manage the system better. The group also felt that scale of a project may
determine the approach. The group was also of the view that while in top-down approach
the productive use of electricity is not always known and so sometimes the design may not match the demand, however, the knowledge transfer of modern technology through top-
down approach is easier than bottom-up.
The group then listed out various parameters such as flexibility/responsiveness to local
characteristics, technical design, social aspects, political framework, ownership, financial
viability, affordability, operation & maintenance, accessibility, productive uses and scalability and focused on whether a bottom up or a top down approach is appropriate for
the identified parameters. It was agreed, that some kind of reconciliation is required
between both the approaches. While attributes such as flexibility/responsiveness to local characteristics, social aspects, ownership, affordability, accessibility, development uses and
maintenance and operational capacity may be better dealt through a bottom-up approach,
attributes such as technical design, political framework conditions, controllability and scalability are better addressed through a top-down approach. The group concluded based
on the discussion that the design should be a mix of top-down and bottom-up approaches
and one can take the distinguishing elements and try to apply them to a specific case and come up with weightages for the same.
Next, the discussion on AC versus DC mini-grids revolved around several key aspects such as commercial viability, technical risks, standards/benchmarking and global experience in
both the options. Mr Shahriar Chowdhury of United International University, Bangladesh,
who was leading the group, shared the experience of IDCOL, Bangladesh which supported only AC mini-grids and refrained from supporting DC mini-grids in the absence of any
standards and benchmarks. The group discussion revolved around the cost feasibility,
efficiency, safety and pros and cons of AC and DC mini-grids. In terms of cost feasibility, the group felt that the DC not only have a positive restrictive effect because high power
7
appliances cannot be powered such as iron, geysers etc. but also have significantly lower
cost for service provision of basic household needs. It was mentioned that the DC can be a green-field solution that can be used as of now as the electricity loads in rural remote areas
are mostly lights, mobile charging and TV. They can be connected to the grid afterwards
through an inverter.
Regarding the efficiency, the group discussed that AC and DC holds a quotient of power versus dollar efficiency which influences the technical design of the system. As the power
electronics are still relatively expensive, therefore simple systems can reduce the costs. While
DC systems are easy to handle and can be managed by the locally trained technicians and also has low implementation costs, the cost increases manifold due to requirement of storage
and replacement of storage systems at regular intervals. The group mentioned that a
compromise can be made with a DC structure to supply electricity to households and a central AC anchor load which runs only during the day. Further, the group suggested use of
smart and innovative meters for effective revenue collection mechanism.
Also, when it comes to safety, DC systems are considered safe by practitioners and this is
one of the reasons that DC systems are widely used, particularly in IT based organizations.
With respect to health safety aspects, there seems to be no difference between DC and AC, however, voltage levels have a huge impact. The group felt that DC systems can be used at
the household level to use devices meant for entertainment, charging light and fans etc.
which can be powered on a safe extra low voltage level (SELV). However, more protection equipment will be required in case of transmission between different settlements, which
needs higher voltages. With regard to reaching scale, the group was of the view that the aid-
agencies are waiting for scalable DC mini-grids as the experience with DC is limited. The discussion brought out certain factors determining the scalability such as limited
redundancy in the central aspect of AC grids; already established market systems in the
areas and lack of DC standards.
The discussion on the Green versus Brown field mini-grids was led by Ms Chitra
Narayanswamy of IRENA. The discussion initiated with defining the scope and boundary of what constitutes ‘green field’ and what constitutes’ brown field’. On discussing, it was
agreed that the terms will be used in a broad sense. The question of market size also found a
place in the discussion. In addition, it was discussed that the key issues related to hybridization are; identifying the key drivers, spotting the operational challenges of such
hybridization, and more importantly understanding the social dynamics is important. The
8
management structure should consider building on the existing structure instead of creating
entirely a new structure. The group discussed about bringing the right kind of partners together to look into models which are working and a robust network of knowledge transfer
through policy makers to grassroots end-user and within the local village energy committee.
During the discussion a case study was highlighted based on the study IRENA conducted in
partnership with UNEP and Siemens titled as "Renewable energy in hybrid mini - and
isolated grids: Economic benefits and business cases". This study was conducted on the diesel power plants in the 3 physical island sites of Bequia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines,
Nusa Penida, Indonesia; Busuanga, Philippines and four virtual island sites of Puerto
Leguizamo, Colombia; Las Terrenas, Dominican Republic; Hola, Kenya; Basse Santa Su, The Gambia case shows that based on private sector financing terms and the EIA mid-case
scenario for oil prices, Solar PV hybridization can reduce average generation costs at five of
seven sites (from 0.3 to 8 percent). If financed with public funds at a 5 percent real discount rate, assuming the same oil price scenario, hybrid mini-grids can achieve cost reductions at
all sites (12 to 16 percent). This is so even when PV generation at the sites would provide just
31 to 40 percent of total electricity needs. It goes to show that for one percentage incremental solar generation the fuel costs reduce by 0.5 percent.
The panellists discussed the example of brown field projects of 2 scenarios. One (such as in
India and Bangladesh) where renewable energy based mini-grids provided for basic domestic needs in regions that were grid connected but with unreliable supply, and those
un-electrified regions where it ran in parallel with an existing diesel network. Others (as in
Kenya), where renewable energy was integrated in existing diesel mini-grids, helping to minimize the use of diesel and provided for additional hours of supply. With regard to
scenario one, field experiences showed that the provision of reliable supply with much
lower tariffs by the renewable energy based mini-grid was able to phase out the existing diesel operators in the region. The lower tariffs for renewable energy project came from
subsidies both for capital costs as well as to partially meet the operational costs. Also,
renewable energy mini grid operator who served the anchor loads, such as telecom towers in a rural setting, worked with the network of diesel operators making them the tail end
distributors and providing them with the margins that are comparable to their sales from
diesel operations. In the other scenario, diesel operated mini-grids for off grid electrification in Kenya were operated by government agencies. The plants were limited to 4 hours of
operation and were being hybridized with PV to reduce diesel consumption (from 30
cents/kWh to 11 cents/kWh).
After the closure of all the three parallel session, there was a plenary discussion, which was
chaired by Dr Akanksha Chaurey. During the plenary, the leaders of the respective groups
presented the key points of the round table discussion.
Some of the key issues/questions that were brought out and debated in the plenary session
were the need to integrate with stand-alone systems and a need to deal with community
outliers; financial models that are appropriate for consumers and investors; the technical and cost feasibility of AC and DC micro-grids for different types of usages and the risks
involved; the question of converting from diesel to clean energy as a good investment
opportunity; and about investment environment for green field and brown field mini-grids.
With respect to designing of mini-grids, both aspects of bottom up and top-down approach
have different weightage and the design approach might depend on number of factors and
attributes and complimentary of designs may be required for better success. With regard to
9
AC and DC design, it was said that the DC might be feasible for lower capacity systems (say
up to 100 kW) mainly for providing lighting, mobile phone charging and TV/fan etc. AC system will be more viable if power is required for productive applications.
The session on brown field vs. green field concluded that that for the transition from diesel to renewable energy mini grids calls for subsidies and low cost financing to provide for
tariffs that were comparable or lower than those of diesel operators. In order to incentivize
such operators and help make the transition, the capacities had to be built and financing should be made available for the integration of renewable energy systems. Further, existing
diesel operator networks need to be tapped with tail end distribution to be channelized
through them and subsidies on kerosene can be rechanneled to provide for low interest loans for renewable energy mini-gird projects.
Break-out session 2: Round Table II
Commercial viability and scaling up of mini-
grids
Chair: Mr Harsha Wickramasinghe, Deputy Director General of the Sri Lanka
Sustainable Energy Authority, Sri Lanka
Post lunch, the second Breakout session was held on the commercial viability and scaling up of mini-grids discussing three topics in parallel sessions. Some of the key issues discussed
were key constraints to acceleration of small scale, village level micro-grids; policy and regulatory thrusts required at the sub-national/provincial levels; structural barriers limiting
the investment by the private sector; public–private cooperation for scaling up mini-grids;
need for super-efficient loads and quality measurement frameworks for ensuring viability of mini-grids. All these topics were intensely discussed by the respective groups and then the
key points were presented at the plenary session chaired by Mr Harsha Wickramasinghe.
The discussion on the “Enabling policy framework, partnerships, and institutional
requirements” was led by Mr S C Rajshekar of Symbiotic Research Associates, India. The
group stated that creating a level playing field with grid electrification is important and equity aspects should also be kept under consideration. Further, there was a discussion
10
about how to determine tariff, identify key actors and engage with those key actors. The
Group discussed that there are lack of actors in the mini-grid sector, which acts as a hindrance for the growth. While there are policies at the national level, they may not always
be enabling or sometimes may also be ambiguous. The Group concluded that while the
policy framework is important at the national level, it is also important that the sub-national and local level is aware of the policies so that it can ensure its proper and faster
implementation. Further, connections to productive loads and any implementation of such
loads can best be taken up in synergy with sub-national policies depending on the demand. The group also stressed on developing a mechanism for more active engagement with
different actors, developing a level playing field for mini-grid and off-grid with grid sector
in terms of support, financing and tariff design among others.
Next, discussion on “Attracting public and private capital and innovative financing” was led by Mr Mitra Ardron of Lumeter Networks and Technology, in which the group talked about
available financing mechanisms and main structural barriers, limiting the investment by the
private sector. The group identified some of the critical barriers to private finance in the sector as unclear risk mitigation options, bankable business models, no proper exit
opportunities and political framework conditions, unclear subsidy mechanisms, uncertain
demand in rural areas and difficulty in raising working capital. The group inferred that the biggest barrier to outside investment other than government is the lack of viable business
models. There are viable business models for phone charging and lighting but the pricing is
around INR 150/kWh. One of the reasons reflecting this high cost is due to use of efficient LEDs, which provides the equivalent light like a bulb but consumes one-tenth of the energy.
So it may also be necessary to determine the cost in terms of lumen-hour instead of kWh.
The group mentioned that business models do not appear to be viable when priced at close to grid. However, it is unclear whether anyone will pay a high amount; while high tariffs
may create viability but are threatened by grid extension based on subsidized tariffs.
Further, there was a discussion on the matter if there is any role for the private sector. In larger scale mini-grids, it does not seem to be the case, as the expected/enforced/reigning
low kWh tariffs for grid based electricity makes it challenging for mini-grid operators to charge a tariff based on economic cost for sustainable operation. There are very limited
examples or close to no knowledge of (viable) mini-grid business models that cover CAPEX
and OPEX. There is a lack of level playing field as central grid tariffs have huge historical subsidies as well as cross-subsidies to meet the operational cost. At the same time, the level
of subsidies needed to make mini-grids viable by far exceeds government budget leading to
unsustainable mini-grids. While the market seems to be huge, it is very fragmented. While
11
discussing the ABC (Anchor-Business-Consumer) model that is being implemented at some
places, the group could not develop a consensus on which consumer group is subsidizing whom. While the productive load may be important for generating additional revenues, the
introduction of productive load also adds to the cost and for the revenue may not always be
commensurate with the incremental cost, especially for PV mini-grids. The discussion brought out that there is not really any role for private investment in mini-grids unless
subsidies are removed for grid sector also and there is a level playing field. The dependence
on subsidies and grants means that one cannot expect them to scale to a significant portion of the 1.3 billion un-electrified people. The group also talked about public-private
cooperation and future movements towards self-sustaining business models. One way of
improving viability could be reduction of interest rate and flexible terms of financing.
The topic on “Resource matching” was led by Prof Peter Adelmann of Ulm University,
Germany, wherein the Group focussed on the availability of super efficient loads, import vs. local manufacturing, quality measurement frameworks and need and availability of local
data regarding clean energy sources. The group felt that storage is a key issue and even non-
electrical storage is quite important. The group also discussed that in order to predict demand fresh approaches are required as it plays a significant role.
Closing keynote
The workshop concluded with the closing keynote address by Prof Saifur Rahman of Virginia Tech University, USA. He started his speech by posing a question that why no one
talked of mini-grid 20 years ago. He then gave examples from USA electrification
programmes of fifties and the role played by cooperatives set up by the government, when private sector was not willing to electrify rural areas. He said that similar situation exists in
South Asia now and so the community have to be taken along for better results. He
stressed, citing the example of popularity of smart phones, that it is not always the cost but the versatility of the service provided by a gadget which is more important for success. He
then touched upon various issues of sustainable electricity supply and talked about a
pyramid framework where the technology is at the top; followed by human resources; regulation and finance in the middle; and at the base is customer acceptance. He stressed
that it is not the cost but the usefulness of the service which is more critical for success.
Concluding his speech he emphasized that customer acceptance is essential for the success of any business model.
12
In his concluding remarks, Mr Debajit Palit thanked all the speakers, panellists and
participants for attending the workshop and sharing their thoughts.
13
Annexure I: Program Schedule
10.00 – 10.10 Welcome - Liisa Andersson (MEI)
Welcome and Introductory remarks - Mr P R Dasgupta, IAS (Retd.), TERI SRC
10.10 – 10.30 Saving CO2-: Video Keynote Addresses
Dr Daniel M Kammen (UC Berkeley, California, USA)
• Micro-grids and Rural Electrification – A critical review
Dean Cooper (UNEP)
• UNEP’s Green Mini-grid program
10.30 – 11.20 Special project presentations
• OASYS South Asia Project – Debajit Palit (TERI, India)
• Swarm Electrification - Sebastian Groh (ME SOLshare Ltd, Bangladesh)
• BIP BOP project – Abhimanyu Sahu (Schneider Electric)
11.20 – 11.45 Tea/coffee Break
11.45 – 12.00 Introduction to the break-out sessions
12.00-12.05 Introduction to Round Table I: Development & innovations in mini-grid design
12.05 – 13.05 Parallel Sessions
Bottom-up vs. top-down (led by Daniel Philipp, MicroEnergy International, Germany)
AC vs. DC mini-grids (led by Shahriar A Chowdhury, UI University, Bangladesh)
Green vs. brown field mini-grids (led by Chitra Narayanswamy, IRENA)
13.05 – 13.30 Presentation and discussion of Round Table results (Chair: Dr Akanksha
Chaurey, CEO, IT Power)
• Presentation by Group head of breakaway sessions
• Discussion / Q & A
13.30 – 14.30 Lunch Break/ Networking
14.30 – 14.35 Introduction to Round Table II: Commercial viability and scaling up of mini-grids
14.35 - 15.40 Parallel session
Enabling policy framework, partnerships, institutional requirement (led by Mr S C
Rajshekar, Symbiotic Research Associates, India)
Attracting public and private capital and innovative financing /risk mitigation (led by Mitra
Ardron, Lumeter Networks)
Technology and resource matching (led by Prof. Peter Adelmann, Hochschule Ulm,
Germany)
15:40 - 16:10 Presentation and discussion of Round-table results (Chair: Mr Harsha Wickramasinghe,
Deputy Director General, Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority)
• Presentation by Group head of breakaway sessions
• Discussion/Q&A
16:10 - 16:30 Tea/coffee
16: 30 - 17:00 Closing Keynote - Prof. Dr. Saifur Rahman, Virginia Tech
17:00 - 17:15 Introduction to MES 2015 – Sebastian Groh, TU Berlin
17:15 - 17:30 Concluding Remarks - Debajit Palit, TERI
17:30 - 18:00 Screening of Solar Chronicle – An OASYS story on solar micro grids
14
Annexure II: List of Participants
S.No Salutation First Name Last Name Institution
1. Mr Mateen Abdul Emergence
Bioenergy Inc
2. Mr Peter Adelmann HS Ulm
3. Ms Anjana Agarwal World Resources
Institute
4. Mr Amiraly Akhil Ecole Polytechnique
5. Ms Liisa Andersson Micro Energy
International
6. Mr Siddhanth Awasthi Tata Solar Power
7. Mr Jonathan Bassett Selco Foundation
8. Mr Dhruv Bharadwaj Schneider Electric
9. Mr Rishab Bhargava Tata Solar Power
10. Mr Vijay Bhaskar Mlinda India
11. Mr Vijay Bhopal Scene Consulting,
UK
12. Ms Catherina Cader Reiner Lemoine
Institute
13. Ms Leena Chandran
Wadia
ORF Mumbai
14. Dr Akanksha Chaurey IT Power
15. Mr Alakesh Chetia Sun Edison
16. Mr Shahriar
Ahmed
Chowdhury United International
University
17. Mr Sreekanth C S E-Hands Energy
(India) Pvt. Ltd.
18. Mr Pronab Dasgupta TERI
19. Mr Hari Dilip Kumar Micro Energy
International
15
S.No Salutation First Name Last Name Institution
20. Ms Roshini D'souza Schneider Electric
21. Mr Dominic Fernando Schneider Electric
22. Mr Pardeep Garg Indian Institute of
Science
23. Mr Arvind Garimella TERI
24. Mr Ratan Kumar Ghosh GIZ Bangladesh
25. Mr Henry Gichungi Kenya Power
26. Mr Sebastian Groh ME Solshare
27. Dr Jelte Harnmeijer Scene Consulting,
UK
28. Ms Nadhiya Hemanath Schneider Electric
29. Dr Mitavachan Hiremath FluxGen Engineering
Technologies
30. Mr John Holmes Smart Villages
Initiative
31. Ms Asma Huque PSL
32. Mr Ajay Karkhanis NVI India
33. Ms Deepali Khanna Rockefeller
Foundation
34. Mr Hannes Kischoff Micro Energy International
35. Mr Bhaskaran K Krishnamurth
y
SELCLO Foundation
36. Ms Shweta Kulkarni Prayas, Energy
Group
37. Ms Purnima Kumar Barefoot Power India
38. Mr Sathish Kumar Schneider Electric
39. Ms Aruna KumaranKan
dath
Centre for Science
and Environment
16
S.No Salutation First Name Last Name Institution
40. Mr Raju Laudari Alternative Energy
Promotion Centre
(AEPC)
41. Mr Rajesh Manapat Sun Edison Energy
India Pvt. Ltd
42. Mr Roshan Mascarenhas Selco Foundation
43. Mr Evan Mertens Rural Spark
44. Mr Adron Mitra Lumeter Network
45. Dr Parimita Mohanty The Climate Group
46. Mr Charles Muchunku Kenya Renewable
Energy Association
(KEREA)
47. Dr Janakaraj Murali TERI
48. Mr Arunkumar Nagpal Mrida Renergy &
Development Pvt.
Ltd
49. Ms Chitra Narayanswa
my
IRENA
50. Ms Akila Navin Sun Edison
51. Mr Debajit Palit TERI
52. Mr Ketan Parab E-Hands Energy
(India) Pvt. Ltd.
53. Mr Setu Pelz RVE.SOL
54. Mr Daniel Philipp Micro Energy
International
55. Mr Saifur Rahman Akash Solar
Engineering Ltd.
56. Dr S C Rajshekar Symbiotec Research
Associates
57. Ms Vaishali Rao SELCO Foundation
58. Mr Abhimanyu Sahu Schneider Electric
17
S.No Salutation First Name Last Name Institution
59. Dr Gopal K Sarangi TERI University
60. Ms Shruti Sharma International
Institute for
Sustainable
Development (IISD)
61. Mr Tarun Sharma Indian Institute of
Science Bangalore
62. Mr K Rahul Sharma Centre for Policy
Studies
63. Ms Shruti Srivastava Acumen Fund
64. Ms Kirsten Ulsrud University of Oslo
65. Mr Terry Van Gevelt Smart Villages
Initiative
66. Mr Timothy Walsh National University
of Singapore, Solar
Energy Research
Institute of
Singapore
67. Mr Harsha Wickramasin
ghe
Sri Lanka
Sustainable Energy
Authority
68. Mr Prashanta
Kumar
Swain TERI
19
Presentations
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
OASYS South Asia project
The Off-grid Access Systems for South Asia (or OASYS South Asia) is a research project funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council of UK and the
Department for International Development, UK. This research is investigating off-grid
electrification in South Asia from a multi-dimensional perspective, considering techno-economic, governance, socio-political and environmental dimensions. A consortium of
universities and research institutes led by De Montfort University (originally by University
of Dundee until end of August 2012) is carrying out this research. The partner teams include Edinburgh Napier University, University of Manchester, the Energy and Resources Institute
(TERI) and TERI University (India).
The project has carried out a detailed review of status of off-grid electrification in the region and around the world. It has also considered the financial challenges, participatory models
and governance issues. Based on these, an edited book titled “Rural Electrification through
Decentralised Off-grid Systems in Developing Countries” was published in 2013 (Springer-Verlag, UK). As opposed to individual systems for off-grid electrification, such as solar
home systems, the research under this project is focusing on enabling income generating
activities through electrification and accordingly, investing decentralised mini-grids as a solution. Various local level solutions for the region have been looked into, including husk-
based power, micro-hydro, solar PV-based mini-grids and hybrid systems. The project is
also carrying out demonstration projects using alternative business models (community-based, private led and local government led) and technologies to develop a better
understanding of the challenges. It is also looking at replication and scale-up challenges and
options and will provide policy recommendations based on the research.
More details about the project and its outputs can be obtained by contacting the principal
investigator Prof. Subhes Bhattacharyya ([email protected]).
OASYS South Asia Project
Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development,
De Montfort University,
The Gateway, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK
Tel: 44(0) 116 257 7975
