Challenges for the practical implementation of the water-food-energy nexus

So far throughout the previous entries I have explained what the Water-Energy-Food Nexus consists of, how the uncertain future climate plays an important role in this nexus and looked at specific aspects of it such as the power sector and the improvement of water accessibility. This has all been done from a theoretical perspective and there is a reason for this. The WEF Nexus is a tool for policy makers to come up with sustainable policy decisions to promote sustainable development and poverty reduction (MED Spring, 2015) but it is still in development and more research is needed. 

Not everything is a straight path. There are numerous challenges and barriers that need to be discussed and overcome so that the Nexus approach does not end up seen as a utopia.

The Geography Compass Journal has published an article called “Tracing the Water-Energy-Food Nexus: Description, Theory and Practise” that exposes the underlying challenges and complexities of the practicality of the nexus approach that aims to raise awareness of the level of engagement needed from all the participants in order for this to be successful realistically.

• Resource insecurities and the drives are steep in uncertainty and resources interconnections    are highly complex. Uncertainties about social and economical futures worsens the situation
• Expertise and institutional capacity are not yet sufficient for supporting the nexus dialogue
• Often, when trying to implement the nexus approach we fall into encompassing only two sides of the three-way nexus such as energy for water.
• Resource allocation is often linked to political processes that are normally neglected and under presented in nexus modelling. If we want this approach to be a useful framework political economy must be more explicitly addressed.
• Normally the approach is seen as a top-down approach. Consequently, the household and village level (especially in rural contexts) is at risk of not being taken into consideration.
• There are historical vertically structured government departments and sector based structures of agencies that complicate the coordination for a cross-sectorial integration.
• Responsibilities for different elements of the nexus are situated within different government bodies and at different scales of decision-making and special scales.
• New institutional arrangements and administrative reforms may be necessary for advancing the nexus agenda but already established institutional arrangements can be highly resistant to change.

However, every cloud has at silver lining and the Global Green Growth Institute has published a paper called “Thinking to practise: Applying complexity. The Water-Food-Energy Nexus in Global Drylands” that looks into the case of Ethiopia and how the nexus approach can be used to help find a solution for the water, food and energy security.

This paper, apart from discussing the barriers of the nexus approach, it also bring some light into the discussion and gives some guide to how governments should behave towards such a complex issue.

1)    Perfect solutions are impossible to achieve when such complex and interconnected issues are discussed, therefore, stakeholders should focus on supporting and improving “good enough” decision making that can be put into action.  What this means is that what needs to be done is to develop objectives that are technically appropriate but also good enough to be tolerated by those who have the power to prevent the implementation.

2)     There should be a great focus on identifying and addressing bottlenecks to delivery. One question that could be asked could be “What are the root causes that hold back progress?

3)  The delivery system has to be more flexible to improve decision making by strengthening feedback loops on performance. This will create projects that are able to respond to local problems and be able to deviate from what was stipulated at first in order to adapt to the new circumstances.

Discussion

The outlook is very challenging but, in my opinion, throughout history every change is always seen impossible to achieve. Who was going to tell us that the world was going to be as connected as it is 50 years ago? No one. The nexus approach is a very innovative idea that needs patience and engagement from everyone in order to be successful. Maybe the institutions don't currently have the capabilities to adapt and to change but these capabilities can be learnt. Maybe what history shows us about governments seeking their own benefit its true, but we’ve come to a point where “their own benefits” need to be aligned with society benefits to guarantee resources security in the future. Lastly you maybe can allege I am being naïve but I believe that if we manage to make the nexus approach implementable, it would be an enormous step forward towards achieving sustainable development.

Is the expansion of renewable energy the key for securing water, food and energy in Sub-Saharan Africa?: The power sector (part 2)

In one of my previous entries “How can energy improve water access without worsening the situation?” I already discussed the use of renewable energy to improve access to water for both personal and agriculture use. In this entry I am going to dig into the effects of using renewable energy on the water intensity of the power sector.

The IRENA article, cited in the above entry, called "Renewable Energy in the Water, Energy and Food Nexus" says that “energy production globally accounts for about 15% of total freshwater withdrawals, second only to agriculture”. Leaving bioenergy on the side, renewable energy sources require a very small amount of fossil fuels for their development and therefore it can be negligible.

Source: IRENA, 2015

As the graph shows, the amount of water withdrawal for bioenergy is substantially higher than for conventional fossil fuels (coal, gas and oil). This is due to the great volume of water needed for feedstock production, processing and transportation (IRENA, 2015). Developing conventional fuels require water input for mining and drilling (extraction). Once the fuel is transported, the next stage, energy generation, is also very water-intensive requiring energy mostly for cooling (IRENA, 2015).

The question about whether renewable energy technologies can reduce the water footprint is answered with studies form different institutions or organisations. The International Energy Agency has modelled three energy sector world scenarios where it shows that an expansion of the role of renewables will decrease water withdrawals while water consumption will still increase (IEA, 2012). Moreover, the European Wind Energy Association estimated that “wind energy avoided the use of 387 billion litres of water in 2012” (IRENA, 2015).

The following step is to analyse the energy sector in Africa and see the impact that a shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy would have in the water withdrawals. The article Prospects for the African Power Sector also by IRENA (IRENA, 2012) gives a scenario for 2030 that models the situation if renewable energy policies were implemented given the current situation.

Power generation in Africa is dominated by fossil fuels (81%) with coal being the main source (40%) followed by natural gas (29%) and oil products (12%). Hydropower corresponds to a 16% of the total power generation and lastly nuclear power account for 2% and other renewables for 1% (IAE database).

The model compares two scenarios. The first one is a continuation of existing economic, demographic and energy trends (business as usual) and the second one is a renewable scenario where a transition to a renewable-based energy system achieves electricity access for all by 2030 (IRENA, 2012).

Source: IRENA, 2012

The graph bellow shows the differences between the two future scenarios modelled. Whereas in 2015 the picture is still very similar, solar and wind energy production starts to substitute the use of fossil fuels. In 2030 the picture would look very different. In the business as usual scenario, most of the electricity would be generated with the use of fossil fuels whereas in the renewable scenario, fossil fuels would generate less than half of the electricity with solar and wind expanding and producing most of the other 50%. For the 2050 renewable scenario, the use of fossil fuels would not increase, and the increasing energy demand would be met by the rapid expansion of solar and wind energy, hydro and biomass.

In terms of regions, the renewable scenario also models the electricity generations by regions. The south and west would still use fossil fuels to generate most of its electricity. In the south the dominant source would be coal and in the south it would be oil. Central Africa’s electricity production would be dominated by hydropower (corresponding to two thirds of the total generation). The East would be dominated by wind and the north by solar and wind mostly (IRENA, 2012).

For the scenario explained above it is assumed that the policies promoting the transition would be fully implemented and would perfectly work. It is important to recognise and we aware of the limits and challenges that this transition comprises in order to understand the difficult situation that Africa is currently living and why the process, that has already started, is being very slow. The article Renewable Energy in Africa: Prospects and Limits by the United Nations (UN, 2003) explains this limits.

The three major barriers:

- Policy and legal barriers: Since the end of the oil crisis of the 1970s, African governments have failed to promote the use the RETs (Renewable Energy Technologies). This is demonstrated by the low budget allocation to renewables in most countries (UN, 2003).

“In Ethiopia investments in petroleum quadrupled from 1990-2000… In contrast, expenditure on traditional and alternative energy (which includes RETs) has steadily decreased from about 1% of total expenditure in 1990, to 0.1% of total expenditure in the year 2000”. (UN, 2003)

- Technical barriers: The is a continuing shortage of qualified personal for installing and maintaining renewable energy technologies, which make them unsustainable. Projects rely on the expertise of a expatriate or urban personnel, therefore, on their departure, the technologies become far to complex for the community and production stops (UN, 2003).

- Financial barriers: The initial capital costs for renewable technologies are very high and therefore, due to the lack of government funding and the low income level of the majority of the population, the RETs become unaffordable. Moreover, due to a lack of awareness, banks are normally reluctant to provide loans for RETs projects (UN, 2003).

Opinion: The three barriers are involved in a vicious cycle that I believe can be broken by a change of mentality. The most important factor in this circle is the government. If the government start seeing the expenditure in the renewable sector as an investment, it will make it easier for the population to afford RETs and it will also attract the private sector and therefore the banks as well. In terms of building local capability, the increase in both, public and private investment, will increase the training programmes that must be designed for local communities. This will not only make the use of RETs sustainable but also create employment for the local communities. At last, these barriers must be overcome so the renewable sector can expand and therefore, decrease the water withdrawal for the power sector and the pressure on achieving water security in general terms.