4

Speaking at an energy conference in Moscow, Russia's president Vladimir Putin was critical of renewable energy. He seems to claim that it is a choice between fossil fuel driven economic development or renewable energy.

People in Africa and in many Asian countries want to be as wealthy as people in Sweden. How can this be done? By making them use solar power, which is plentiful in Africa? Has anyone explained the cost of it? [...] But is it an accessible technology for developing economies and countries? Hardly accessible. But people there want to live like in Sweden and nothing can stop them. Go and explain to them that they must live in poverty for 20-30 more years, as well as their children. Explain it to them. Overall, of course, we cannot but support the ideas of developing renewable energy sources. We just need to be realistic.

I would like to know if this is correct: does Africa have to choose between renewable energy or economic development? And would choosing solar panels really stagnate living standards for twenty to thirty years?

Considering that Russia is a major oil and gas exporter, it does seem convenient that their president is critical of the effectiveness of renewables. But that doesn't mean his claim is necessarily wrong.

  • 4
    That is an extremely broad question and one that whole books have been written on on both sides of the argument. – Borgh Nov 04 '19 at 10:52
  • How much will economic growth be stunted if Africa goes the high pollution, low quality of life and poor health route? How much will mitigating climate change cost? – dont_shog_me_bro Nov 04 '19 at 11:46
  • 3
    Given Africa's geographical location with respect to the equator and its large tracts of desert it seems an almost ideal candidate for solar energy. As you pointed out, Putin has a vested interest in painting a different picture. – GordonM Nov 04 '19 at 12:09
  • 5
    Also, Africa is a big continent. That said some countries can take advantage of its hydrography and build a dam, others can be better using the sun and wind and finally, there are those that can take advantage of its own oil reserves, like Angola. This question begs to be broken to be answered in a country-by-country basis. – jean Nov 04 '19 at 12:45
  • I came here to comment the same as @jean. Solar power is quite popular here in South Africa, but other countries are different. I can't see how you can generalize the for the entire continent. – Jerome Viveiros Nov 04 '19 at 13:12
  • 1
    Please can you provide a specific quote with a specific claim, with sufficient context? Someone seeming to claim something isn't enough to go on. – 410 gone Nov 04 '19 at 13:43
  • @EnergyNumbers Done. –  Nov 04 '19 at 13:50
  • 7
    A complex question, with unclear premises, that can't be analysed for simple "truth" or 'falsehood", and would be better on Economics or Politics. – DJClayworth Nov 04 '19 at 14:30
  • @DJClayworth What's unclear about the premise? –  Nov 04 '19 at 14:41
  • 5
    This is not something that can be answered with empirical evidence. It is calling for opinion and speculation about a complex topic. – Oddthinking Nov 04 '19 at 16:41
  • @Oddthinking now that it's been edited to include a specific claim, I think that it can be answered with good evidence. There is a body of literature on the costs of solar in developing countries; on technological leapfrogging; and various case studies around the world. Given that, I'm voting to reopen. – 410 gone Nov 04 '19 at 17:25
  • @EnergyNumbers: I remain dubious that it will garner more than just competing opinions about economic models, but I am trying to keep an open mind. – Oddthinking Nov 05 '19 at 01:09
  • It doesn't seem to me that Putin is saying they have to *choose between* development and solar power. He seems to be saying that solar power would cost more than alternatives, even in Africa, in the next 20 years or so. Are you disputing that? – Fizz Nov 05 '19 at 03:00
  • Roughly 60% of Africa's public energy budget currently goes to fossil fuels https://www.dw.com/image/45302706_7.png – Fizz Nov 05 '19 at 03:05
  • 1
    If you live in a remote village in a sunny part of the continent, far away from the grid, then it's sort of irrelevant whether it would be cheaper if the government built a power line to the nearest fossil fuel plant... – gerrit Nov 05 '19 at 08:41
  • 1
    I'm still convinced that this is way too broad and impossible to answer. Any answer to this question will just be a guess, because if anyone knew the answer, why are we even discussing it instead of implementing it? – pipe Nov 05 '19 at 17:19
  • If you want to build new power generation capacity, building wind turbines is the cheapest way to go in various regions in the world. In some places solar can be the most cost effective, especially as it can most easily be done local without connecting to a far away power grid. On the other hand, if you already have a coal power plant build, it is much cheaper to keep it running versus shutting it down and building wind/ solar power instead. – quarague Nov 08 '19 at 08:46

1 Answers1

5

An answer to this question depends how one chooses to interpret that Putin said. I interpret it as him saying solar panels are more expensive than alternatives, perhaps for the next 20-30 years.

That depends on a few assumptions. A 2018 study on the feasibility of solar power (which is generally assumed is going to be largely decentralized in Africa) found that under the current cost structure solar power is not competitive (only in 0.2-0.3% of Africa it could beat current grid tariffs), but that it could become so in 28-35% of Africa under some assumptions of future cost decreases. They seem to rely on a 25% cost reduction by 2025 for this projection, derived from IRENA.

enter image description here

Fizz
  • 57,051
  • 18
  • 175
  • 291