Biomass (i.e. fuelwood, charcoal, agricultural residues, etc.) is without a doubt a major source of energy for the majority of Malawians. Over 80% of Malawi’s population lives in rural areas and a majority of them are subsistence farmers. The
26
electrification rate of Malawi is 9% (in urban areas 33% of households have electricity in their households, whilst in rural areas only 2% of households have electricity).
Consequently, 97% of all households use biomass for cooking (GoM, 2012a), and this has adverse consequences on the country’s forest resources. Despite Malawi having relevant legislation to ensure the protection of natural resources from over-exploitation (e.g. the Environmental Management Act of 1996, the Forestry Policy of 1996, etc.), the degradation of natural resources continues to be a major threat to the social and economic development of Malawi. Malawi’s high population density and the dependence of Malawians on agricultural production have led to alarming rates of environmental degradation leading to deforestation; decreasing soil fertility and increasing erosion; water depletion; loss of biodiversity; and increasing pollution (GoM, 2010a). These poor environmental conditions are also exacerbated by poverty (ibid). Subsequently, in order to subsist, a high proportion of the population relies on the exploitation of natural resources such as firewood, and the over-reliance on fuelwood for energy is another major cause of deforestation. There is therefore a strong likelihood that natural resources will continue to be a dominant energy source as well as a source of income for other households even with increasing electricity access rates hence various interventions need to be put in place to appropriately address this. Moreover, other energy experts have highlighted that households in some African countries do not switch completely from biomass to other energy sources such as Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) and electricity but rather increase the number of fuels used in their households as their total expenditures and incomes rise, even in urban areas (figure 2.4) (Brew-Hammond and Kemausuor, 2009). This therefore implies that increasing electricity generation capacity might not be a complete solution to decreasing biomass use and deforestation.
The relationship between energy use, high population growth and the low incomes of a majority of African/Malawian households also provides an avenue that needs further analysis. Population growth and persistent poverty will mean that the use of biomass energy will continue to rise (both in user numbers and quantity consumed) for the foreseeable future (Owen et al., 2013). It is estimated that even with Africa’s national targets to increase the contribution of electricity to national energy supply from 29% to 47% between 2008 and 2030, the number of people in SSA without electricity is expected to rise by 110 million during the same period (IEA, 2010). The rise in the number of people excluded from accessing electricity is arguably a
27
consequence of population growth and ineffective policies that do not promote investment in the energy sectors.
(A) (B)
Figure 2.4 Likely evolution of cooking fuel use in SSA households (A is the likely scenario before a rise in household income levels and B is the likely scenario after a rise in household income levels.)
Source: Brew-Hammond and Kemausuor, 2009
Most energy policies in SSA (Malawi included) portray biomass as a retrogressive source of energy that degrades the environment and engenders poverty. Such a misconception leads to missed opportunities since biomass has a significant potential to support urban-rural revenue flow, strengthen domestic energy security and drive green economic development (Owen et al., 2013) and its production and trading could contribute to the economy by providing incomes for rural areas, tax revenue and employment (Cuvilas et al., 2012). Recent studies also point out that the predicted household transitions from traditional biomass fuels to modern fuels (e.g.
electricity, kerosene, and LPG) as incomes and urbanisation increase will not be feasible in most African countries (figure 2.4). Apart from income other factors such as energy preferences, convenience and insurance against unreliable supply can prevent complete energy transitions and produce energy mixes instead as such the consumption of charcoal in Africa is projected to double and firewood to increase by 24% from 2000 to 2030 (Zulu, 2010). As it stands, whilst Malawi’s National Energy Policy (2003) envisages a fall in the contribution of biomass energy from 93% of total consumption in 2000 to 50% by 2020, more recent evaluations show that biomass
28
will still account for 82% of total energy consumption by that time if current trends continue, and demand for commercial wood fuels will have risen by 45% on 2008 levels (EUEI-PDF, 2009: pp. 12). This scenario therefore points out that Malawi needs to urgently review its energy policy and put in place frameworks to ensure that the energy policy is reviewed at least every five to ten year as a failure to do this delays the mobilisation of resources and technologies to rectify missed targets.
As stated earlier, even with increasing electrification rates in developing countries, charcoal and firewood will continue to be used for cooking and lighting at household level creating an energy mix of electricity, charcoal, firewood, gas and kerosene (Brew-Hammond and Kemausuor, 2009). In Malawi, it has been reported that even in cases where energy in the form of hydro or solar electricity is made available, its high cost is a deterrent to most households especially in rural areas and as such even though 21% of households have electricity within 100 meters from their dwellings, only 7% of those households use electricity (GoM, 2010b). This can therefore support the argument put forward by Zulu (2010) that more efforts and investments in Malawi should be put in making the biomass sector, especially charcoal production more efficient to reduce deforestation and also improve its supply chain to make it a viable source of income generating activity for rural households rather than maintaining the partial bans on the trade of charcoal which are unrealistic and untenable as there is an increasing demand and production of illegal charcoal.
2.2.5 Biomass, Renewable Energy and the Millennium Development Goals