| Main knowledge bank page |
Recent additions |
Recent changes |
What links here |
Categories |
Category cloud How-to guides | Organisation profiles | Project profiles | |
Folovhodwe Solar Village Project - South Africa
[top] [end]Project Type/NameSolar Village Project - Solar Home Systems, School Power Systems and upgrading of Clinic Solar System[top] [end]Project Summary[top] [end]LocationThe Folovhodwe Solar Village Project is in the Northern Province, beyond the Soutpansberg mountain range. This is a fairly arid region and experiences only seasonal thundershowers.The village consisting of approximately 600 households is at least ten kilometres from the nearest existing power line. The closest shopping centres are Thohoyandou or Messina, both being approximately 80 kilometres from the village. Folovhodwe village is the first South African demonstration site for the solar electrification of a complete rural community. All 582 households in the village received Solar Home Systems (SHS). Through the Folovhodwe project it is hoped to demonstrate that solar photovoltaics provide a viable alternative for areas too far from the grid. [top] [end]Key StatisticsLocation: Folovhodwe, Limpopo Province (Latitude22° 35' Longitude 30° 22')Scale: Large scale pilot project Budget: R2.5 million Number of Households 582 Number of installations 582 kWp installed 31,9 [top] [end]Contact DetailsMr Marius Willemse, Director, Noun RAPS UtilityE-mail: Marius@... Telephone: +27 12 998 3375 [top] [end]Replication PotentialThe project has been adapted and replicated in a different form based on the lessons learned on its implementation. A fee-for-service approach has been adopted in other solar electrification projects in order to guarantee maintenance and ensure sustainability of the projects. At the same time, Folovhodwe is likely to be grid electrified in the near future, possibly by 2005 (Personal communication with Ms Molatelo Montwedi, Deputy Director, Electrification Planning at DME, June 2003). Effectively, this means that the investment in the project will be wasted. As far as the community of Folovhodwe is concerned, it is unclear how they will be able to appreciate 'the fee-for-service' approach which is inherent in grid electrification. However, their problems with regards to maintenance and service points will be addressed since grid infrastructure includes access to pay points, and maintenance service from the service provider.[top] [end]FundingThe following are the project sponsors and their roles;
The Folovhodwe Solar Village Project received the infrastructure as a grant from the Bavarian government and the South African Department of Minerals and Energy. The community through the Project Steering Committee is responsible for the maintenance of the SHSs and Solar School Systems. [top] [end]BackgroundThe Bavarian Government approached the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) with a proposal to establish a Solar Village. The Bavarian Government would provide grant funding for the project in the form of products from Bavaria based manufacturers of photovoltaic modules, charge controllers, DC-DC converters, and DC energy efficient lamps.DME were expected to cover the cost of the balance of system equipment and the cost of Solar Home Systems (SHSs) installation. The village of Folovhodwe was selected, as it was one of a few communities for which information was available, due to a study done by the Energy Development and Research Centre (EDRC) in 1996. Between 1997 and 1998 several national government officials from Bavaria and South Africa, local government officials, manufacturers' representatives and other role-players visited the community. Meetings (information sessions) were held with the community's representatives (Civic, Project Steering Committee, Headman) as well as the broader community. Unfortunately this process was not well planned. The focus of these meetings was on the donation, the benefits thereof and the generosity thereof. The over eagerness of some of the government officials and manufacturers' representatives in getting the project established, lead to unrealistic presentations and promises. The presentations did not cover or stress the necessity of paying a service fee, the maintenance of the donation's value, product guarantees and what a guarantee really means. The roles, functions and responsibilities of the different stakeholders were also not clarified and defined. The installation process was completed in February 1999 and the official opening of the project took place in middle March 1999. No connection fee was received from any household prior to installation and no service fees were collected until November 1999 when a second project got underway to sort out the problems experienced by the project. [top] [end]Project DescriptionThe Solar Home System consists of the following;
[top] [end]Cost Of ServiceA connection Fee of R100 fee was initially intended but installation took place before collection was made. The idea of the collection of a connection fee was subsequently dropped.A monthly service fee of R35 per month was requested to make the project sustainable. The community however decided only to pay a R20 per month service fee. The monthly service fee may be increased with inflation if the community sees a need for increasing their monthly contributions. The service fees collected are used to cover administration costs, the maintenance of systems and the purchase of replacement parts. [top] [end]MaintenanceThe service fee covers all system components, which include items such as the solar module, battery, lights, charge controller and radio adapter. The service fee also includes the labour cost of employing two technicians and an office administrator as well as the office such as transport, stationary, telephone and others.The service fees paid by the community are paid into a project trust account from which future maintenance and product replacement would be financed. Any excess funds were to be used for project extension or other Folovhodwe community development projects. By April 2000 the low service fee of R20, currently collected, and the large number of accounts in arrears seriously endangered the sustainability of the project. Community managed maintenance and development funds have a limited potential for success in South Africa due to the political nature of stakeholders, which causes polarisation and mistrust (Willemse, 2000). [top] [end]Delivery StructureSHS ownership was transferred from the DME to the Transitional Local Council (TLC) for the region.The Folovhodwe community appointed a project steering committee to manage the project and all project funds. Funds generated from the service-fees to be used for system maintenance. The plan was to use any surplus funds generated from the project to upgrade or extend the solar project as well as to support other community development projects. A payment office was established and staffed by one office administrator and one technician (a second technician would then be employed if the community fund could afford it). As part of the project, six villagers received training in SHS installation and maintenance procedures. The office administrator and two technicians were to be selected from this group of trainees. The office administrator is responsible for administration of the end user service-fee accounts, routine maintenance and repair requests. Money collected by the Solar Service Office is deposited by a member of the project steering committee into the project bank account on a weekly basis. Each end-user were expected to sign a Service Contract, committing himself/herself to timely service fee payment and proper care of the system. It was agreed that in the event of Folovhodwe village receiving grid electrification the SHSs would be moved to another needy village. [top] [end]Other Service Infrastructure And NeedsWater Supply: There are 2 boreholes (wells) in the village that are equipped with diesel pumps. Water is pumped to storage tanks once a day and from these tanks water is then transported through street standpipes across the village. It is suspected that either too little water is pumped daily or the storage capacity of the tanks is too low because water is only available for an hour or two per day.One of the boreholes is an artesian well. When not pumped, the water flows freely from the borehole. Approximately 15 households use this water for small vegetable gardens. Telecommunication: A fixed line telephone network passes the village but only Venmag Mine is connected to it. In April 2000 Vodacom, a cellular network company erected a signal tower in the area to provide network for the use of cellular phones. Clinic electrification: The clinic was solar electrified in 1992 under the Independent Development Trust's clinic electrification programme. The PV system was upgraded and repaired in February 1999. Schools electrification: All three community schools, the primary, middle and secondary school were solar electrified as part of the project. Unfortunately, by April 2000 no arrangements had been made for the maintenance of the systems beyond the one year installation guarantee which expired in September 1999. In addition, the single solar module, a battery and the inverter at the primary school were stolen. [top] [end]Implementation And Management[top] [end]Service ProvidersSun Electricity -Installed the 3 schools PV systems and 582 households SHS.RAPS (Pty) Ltd -Provided SHS technical training for six villagers from which the office administrator and two technicians were selected. -Launched a rescue attempt (see details below), which entailed the enactment of project terms to ensure the sustainability of the project. This included pushing the payment of monthly service fees, the establishment of a community office for project revenue collection and maintenance administration. Northern Gauteng Provided 22 student engineers who assisted in installation of Technikon the SHSs as part of their practical training. [top] [end]Local Project PersonnelA total of six people from the local community received technical training. A technician and an office administrator are currently employed by the project, and both have received the technical training. In order to be fair to all, the Project Steering Committee appointed the two by drawing their names from a hat.[top] [end]Project Management TeamMs Kosi Lisa - Director: Renewable Energy, Department of Minerals and Energy A C Mphaphuli - Administrator, Mutale/Masisi/Vhutswema Transitional Local Council K P Nenzhelele - Chairman, Folovhodwe Solar Village Project Steering Committee Mr Marius Willemse - .Managing Director, Nuon RAPS (Pty) Ltd[top] [end]Project ContentInstallation of the solar power systems in the three schools took place in October 1998. The 582 households in the community each received their SHS during February 1999.No maintenance or service-fee collection took place until November 1999. As suggested above, the community only decided to start paying the R20 monthly service fee at a community meeting held in December, 5 1999. The payments were to include the month of December. The DME decided to cancel the collection of the intended R100 connection fee. The project is not expected to grow much beyond the 582 households serviced as all the formal inhabited houses in the community were covered. The current slow payment and non-payment crisis negatively impacts on project administration and maintenance. If these are resolved, there is a possibility that other solar development, such as solar water pumping, might be implemented. RAPS Pty Ltd was appointed by the DME too launch a rescue attempt on the Folovhodwe Solar Village Project. Apart from establishing project terms that are acceptable to all stakeholders to ensure the sustainability of the project, RAPS also had to put the necessary project revenue and maintenance administration systems in place to facilitate community management of the project. It should be noted that RAPS's role was at the advisory level, making recommendations to the community and project representatives. As it happens, many of the recommendations were not implemented. An amount of R10 000 was earmarked by DME for the purchase of construction material for a payment collection and administration office. The local council agreed to oversee the construction and to provide the labour for the construction of the office as well as the required office furniture. Foundations for the office were dug in February 1999 but by the end of April 2000 there was no evidence of building construction. [top] [end]Lessons Learnt[top] [end]SocialEnd-user acceptability of project process. There was unhappiness with the project process. The project steering committee felt that they were disempowered by numerous changes and new additions to negotiated project terms. This has improved since they are in control of the administration of the project.End-user perception of service. Generally households are happy with their SHSs and the additional benefits that this service has brought. The benefits are largely restricted to proper lighting and radio use as only a limited number of households own television sets. Politics. A breakdown in community liaison and facilitation, lack of planning and political jostling and pressure were the main causes for the long period during which there was no payment for the SHS services. Connection fee. Installation of the solar systems should not have proceeded without a connection fee being collected from each household. This is the only way of ensuring project "buy-in" from the community. Theft. An estimated 15 to 20 solar modules were stolen from households. Residents blamed the short mounting poles and Zimbabweans frequenting this area 30 kilometres from the border, for theft. Actions taken by households include the lengthening of mounting poles, installation of the module on the roof of the house, chaining module to the mounting pole, welding all bolts and nuts, or storing the module in the home at night or when people are away. [top] [end]EconomicAffordability. The majority of households in Folovhodwe can afford a R35 per month service fee. There is however a group, estimated to be between 25% and 35% of the community, that are very poor and unable to afford the monthly R35 service fee. The intention of the Local Council is to determine the welfare needs of the individual poor households and to subsidise their service fee payment accordingly (this action was still outstanding as at April 2000).Payment history. Only about 3% of households paid R35 towards the requested R100 connection fee in January and February 1999. Households were not willing to pay the connection fee mainly because of a belief that the project is a donation and the fact that the connection fee was not part of the initial project negotiations. At a community meeting in May 1999, the community decided that they will contribute R20 per month towards the service fee and reaffirmed this decision at another community meeting on the 5th December 1999. However, no attempts at service fee collection were made up to the end of October 1999. Since the 1st of November 1999 RAPS has established a service and revenue collection office. As at 29 April 2000, some service payment was received from 82% of households. A total of 14% of households were up to date with their payments (March 2000), 38% were one month in arrears (February 2000), 19% were two months in arrears (January 2000) while 11% paid only their December 1999 service fee. A total of 9 households had their solar modules removed during April 2000 due to non-payment. Two of the transgressors made full payment on their arrears and subsequently had their solar modules reinstalled. This action will be continued for the time being as a "terms of contact enforcement" measure. [top] [end]TechnicalSolar Module. A number of Webasto fibreglass modules were included in the Bavarian supplied PV product. These modules do not have a protective aluminium frame making their installation difficult. In the absence of maintenance technicians, "repairs" are made to some of the modules for all the systems that fail. Either, diodes are removed or cells soldered together. Such repairs are not optimum particularly because the reason for system failure is typically a blown fuse on the charge controller.Lights. A number of 11W compact energy efficient fluorescent lamps were damaged in transit or as they were removed from the protective packaging and installed in bulkhead fittings. Approximately 3% of lamps did not work at installation even though there was no visible damage to the lamp. Module mounting pole. Three-meter long 75mm diameter electroplated pipe profiles were used to mount the modules. After installation, only 2.5m of the pole would remain above ground. This type of mounting put the modules within reach of people, hence it became easier for some of the modules to be stolen. In addition, the height of the module mount increased the incidence of shading by structures or small trees during the day. [top] [end]Ecological/Environmental LessonsNone. The project only focused on lighting and media activities, as such other environmentally polluting fuels continued to be used in the households where SHS were installed. It is not clear what has been done with the equipment that is dysfunctional in the area since none of the people who were involved in the project have any recent news on it. Lead acid batteries which are used in PV electrification are environmentally hazardous, as such they require a proper disposal or recycling strategy which was non-existent in this project.[top] [end]Implementation LessonsThe speed with which the project was implemented created many problems, which jeopardized the project's sustainability.Since the community was informed that the project is a donation, they took it for granted that there is no need to pay. When the issue of payment was raised halfway through the project, the majority of the beneficiaries refused to pay the connection fee, and 18% failed to pay monthly fees. These problems emerged as a result of poor planning. In order to ensure community buy-in and the sustainability of the project, this and other issues should have been clarified at the outset. Relations between project implementers and the project's beneficiaries can determine the success of development initiatives. The Folovhodwe project provides a case in point, indicating how a breakdown in these relations has the potential to jeopardise an entire project. The lesson here is that sustainable development is not simply about resources but includes the management of relations between people and resources. The lack of additional infrastructure, such as maintenance service points, outlets for spare parts such as light bulbs further crippled the project. Though efforts were made to bring in external project managers to resuscitate the project, the efforts were not effective. | |
 Page created:
05 April 2004; Last edited:
16 April 2004; Version: 1 | |
Pagename: FolovhodweSolarVillageProjectSouthAfrica @HEDON: XYAA | |
