Barriers to Enhancing Energy Access for Households in
India and ChinaShonali Pachauri
May 26 2009
Presented at Cape Town
Outline of the Presentation• Background on poverty in India and China
• Overview of household energy use patterns and transitions in India and China
• Barriers to enhancing energy access for households – some general issues with examples from India and China
Poverty Still a Concern and Concentrated Mostly in Rural Areas
Data Source: Ravallion et al. (2007)
•60% of the world’s poor live in China and India
•Of the total 2.3 billion inhabitants, nearly 1.5 billion earn less than $2 per day
Mapping Energy PovertyTaxonomy based on final energy availability and share of non-commercial energy
Billions of people:Abject poverty: 1.3 Poor: 0.6 Less poor: 1.4Less poor: 1.4 Middle class: 1.4 Rich: 1.2
3.33.3
2.82.8Source: Gruebler et al, 2008
Pattern of Household Final Energy Use in 2005
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Rural Urban Rural Urban
India China
Solid Non-Solid
Data Source: Pachauri & Jiang 2008
Energy Transitions in Urban & Rural India and China
Urban China
0
20
40
60
80
100
1985 1990 1995 1999
Pe
rce
nta
ge
sh
are
in t
ota
l
Coal Electricity Gas , oil and others
Rural China
0
20
40
60
80
100
1985 1990 1995 1999Per
cen
tag
e sh
are
in t
ota
l
Coal Electricity Gas, oil and others Biomass
Urban India
0
20
40
60
80
100
1983 1989/90 1993/94 1999/00
Pe
rce
nta
ge
sh
are
in
to
tal
Coal Electricity Gas, oil and others Biom ass
Rural India
0
20
40
60
80
100
1983 1989/90 1993/94 1999/00
Pe
rce
nta
ge
sh
are
in
to
tal
Coal Electricity Gas, oil and others Biomass
Source: Pachauri & Jiang 2008
Energy Access Across Rural Household Quintiles
Data Source: Pachauri & Jiang 2008.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
q1 q2 q3 q4 q5
Quintiles
China Electricity
China LPG
China LPG
India Electricity
India LPG
Consumption of Modern Energy in Rural China & India
Rural
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800
Mean expenditure by deciles in 2000 PPP $ per capita
En
erg
y in
MJ
per
cap
ita
LPG in China Electricity in China LPG in India Electricity in India
Source: Pachauri & Jiang 2008
Energy Use Patterns - Urban Quintiles in India & China
Source: Pachauri & Jiang 2008
Fuel Choices by City in India and China
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
B iomass C oal/ C harcoalK erosene L P GO thers 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
S hanghai
B eijing
C hong qing
Tianjin
G uang zhou
S henyang
Wuhan
Xian
Haerbin
P ipedg asC oal
L P G
Source: Pachauri & Jiang 2009
Energy Distribution for Indian Households 1998-99
Source: Pachauri 2007
Changes in Energy Poverty in Indian Households
Source: Adapted from Pachauri et al 2004
BARRIERS TO ENHANCING ACCESS
Issues with Differences in Definitions of Access
• Physical access to energy • Economic access to energy –
– Affordability of the fuel or energy type– Affordability of a connection and equipment
• Unmetered access – – Illegal connections
• Connections through a central supply or grid or through distributed generation
• Access to high quality and reliable energy – quality of supply
Informational Barriers
• Definitions might differ and change– Village connections
or household connections
– Only central grid connections or decentralized distributed generation options
Source: Pachauri & Mueller 2009
Economic Barriers – Investments
Source: Ministry of Power
All figures in billion INR
5500
999
950
1260
Generation Transmission
Distribution Rural Electrification
Required investment in Indian Power Sector (Next 3 to 5 years)
Some Annual Cost Comparisons to 2015
1
80
215 225
50
500
0
100
200
300
400
500
Clean FuelsAccess
G8 ODACommitment
OECD ODA Energy PriceSubsidies
OECD FarmSupport
Global EnergyInvestment
$ Billion
Providing LPG Stoves and Canisters to 2.5 billion
Data Source: Various
Cost Comparisons Access to LPG
Economic Barriers – Pricing of Energy and Affordability
Category of Users Energy Expenditure (Rs. per year)
Energy expenditure as a percentage of total household expenditure (%)
Price per unit end-use energy (Rs. per Kwh)
Price per unit useful energy (Rs. per Kwh)
RURALBiomass 1227 10.1 0.09 0.46Biomass & Kerosene 1129 8.8 0.07 0.33Biomass & Electricity 1477 8.6 0.08 0.31Biomass, Kerosene & Electricity 1435 8.2 0.08 0.28Kerosene & Electricity 1388 7.5 0.38 0.70Kerosene & LPG 1670 6.1 0.19 0.37Kerosene, LPG & Electricity 2105 7.1 0.18 0.31Electricity & LPG 1896 6.4 0.20 0.33
URBANBiomass 1328 9.4 0.14 0.68Biomass & Kerosene 1185 8.8 0.08 0.37Biomass & Electricity 1261 8.4 0.09 0.34Biomass, Kerosene & Electricity 1595 8.7 0.09 0.33Kerosene & Electricity 1461 7.5 0.20 0.42Kerosene & LPG 2145 6.6 0.22 0.43Kerosene, LPG & Electricity 2427 7.5 0.18 0.32Electricity & LPG 2528 7.1 0.21 0.33
Pachauri & Spreng 2004
Economic Barriers – Access to Credit
• In addition to cost of fuels, upfront costs of connections and equipment are a significant share of the incomes of poor households
• Poor households are cash poor and do not receive a steady reliable income stream, so require access to ready and cheap credit
Institutional & Market Barriers
• Poor market development and lack of confidence for private sector investment– working in poor and low population density
areas makes it more difficult for private entrepreneurs to sustain a profitable operation.
– Often local public sector and entrepreneurs are not involved
• Many cases of successful pilot projects but poor replicability and scale-up
Political and Policy Barriers
• Political rhetoric resulting in setting unrealistic targets and in poor implementation of programs
• Low follow up and poor monitoring mechanisms
• Pricing of fuels often decided on considerations of winning the populist vote
• Subsidies often mistargeted and have other unintended consequences
Key Messages
• Integrating energy into overall Integrating energy into overall development and recognizing diversity of development and recognizing diversity of approaches in service deliveryapproaches in service delivery
• Demanding more institutional leadership Demanding more institutional leadership and critical roles for the public sector also and critical roles for the public sector also in public-private partnershipsin public-private partnerships
• Widening the policy “spectrum” and Widening the policy “spectrum” and putting more emphasis on learning-by-putting more emphasis on learning-by-doing capacity developmentdoing capacity development
Top Related