Falchetta, G.

Semeria, F.

Tuninetti, M.

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

Quantifying the economic feasibility of solar irrigation in sub-Saharan AfricaGiacomo Falchetta1,2,, Francesco Semeria3 and Marta Tuninetti31. IIASA - International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria2. Ca’ Foscari University of Venice / RFF- CMCC EIEE, Venice, Italy3. Polytechnical University of Turin, Turin, Italy23th May 2022EGU 2022Session HS5.1Background (i)Figures: Falchetta (2021)Data: World Bank, FAOSelected indicators for sub-Saharan Africa900+ million by 2050, UN 2019 prospectsUnder baseline trends, most development gaps still open (or even larger) by 2030Background (ii)• Spatially overlapping irrigation wateraccess and energy access gaps in largeparts of sub-Saharan Africa• Potential for leveraging synergies? Butcomplex underlying dynamics• Need for an integrated frameworkto assess if and where solar irrigationis economically feasible and can havea positive development impact.MethodsSpatio-temporal profile of irrigation water needs, given local supply constraints(Tuninetti et al. 2015)Spatio-temporal profile of pumping energy needs and PV+battery sizingLocal to national insights: where is the largest impact potential for solar irrigation?Spatio-temporal distribution of system costs (PV, pump, transport to market) and benefits (revenues, food, exces power output)Main input data• Agricultural land and yield:MapSPAM 2017 SSA (19 main crops)• Climate:CRU TS v4, 1981 – 2020 LTA• Surface water and aquifers:HydroSheds; MacDonald et al. 2012• PV generation potential:SOLARGIS• PV investment cost:Xie et al. 2021• Prices:FAOSTATSpatially-explicit analysis, 0.25 arc-degrees resolutionWaterCrop evapotranspiration modelResults (i)• Local to (sub)regional irrigation water needs to close the irrigation gap• Related energy needs to pump water onto the fields• Required number of small-scale (1-25 m3/h) water pumps• Corresponding standalone PV capacity needed to power pumpsResults (ii)• Total costs, revenues and profits• Dependent on local cropping patter, water needs, water accessibility, costs, crop prices, remoteness...• Groundwater pumping seem to have predominant potential• Total system payback time: in many sites, below 10 years• NB: discount rate at 15%Results (iii)• Pump and PV costs: similarshare of total costs• Transport costs: negligible• Yearly total costs: less than half of yearly total revenues• Potentially significant macroeconomic impact of solar irrigationResults (iv)• Food security co-benefits• Calories, proteins and fats generated thanks to increased production due to irrigation gap closure...• ...compared to current food gap• In some large countries, e.g. Tanzania and DR Congo, food gap nearly closed!Conclusions• Solar irrigation not only shows large technical feasibility inSSA, but also has economic potential to be installed andbring positive development impacts• Nigeria + West Africa, and southern DRC (300+ million people)are areas of strong potential• Important food security co-benefits → yield growth can haveimportant impact on food insecurity!• Future steps: run different scenarios (costs, prices, climate...)Thank you!falchetta@iiasa.ac.atContributions, support, and comments from Vittorio Giordano, Edward Byers, Shonali Pachauri, Francesco Laio, and the whole IIASA ECE program

Quantifying the economic feasibility of solar irrigation in sub-Saharan Africa

https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/18009/1/Presentation_EGU_22_solar_irrigation.pdf

Quantifying the economic feasibility of solar irrigation in sub-Saharan Africa

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)