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