This study examines the least-cost technology option for increasing electricity access in Taraba state which has the lowest electricity access rate in Nigeria within a 15-year investment period. We employ the Network Planner Tool – a web-based decision support program which integrates geospatial information with demographic and energy demand information, and compare three electrification options: grid-extension, mini-grid diesel-based system, and stand-alone option which uses solar PV home systems supplemented by small diesel system for productive use. The results show that grid-extension is the least-cost option for 98.1% of the demand centres; the mini-grid option is the least-cost cost option for the remaining demand nodes; while the stand-alone option is not least-cost in any demand node. The total cost of achieving 50% electricity access rate in Taraba State is US$1.70 billion, where grid-extension and mini-grid options account for 96.9% and 3.1% respectively. Sensitivity analysis indicates that the mini-grid becomes least-cost for more demand nodes with lower cost of energy storage.

1. Technology Options & Cost of Increasing
Access to Electricity in Taraba State,
Nigeria
Uduak Akpan+, Salisu Isihak, and Sanusi Ohiare
u.akpan@spidersolutionsnigeria.com
8th NAEE/IAEE International conference,
27th – 28th April, 2015,
University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria

2. TABLE OF CONTENT
 Background
 Network Planner Tool
Data requirement
Modeling procedure
 Results
 Sensitivity Analysis
 Discussions
 Conclusion & recommendations

3. BACKGROUND
 Access to electricity promotes rural development –
education, health, microenterprise development, etc
 1.3 billion persons lacked access to electricity in 2012
 over 600 million in sub-Saharan Africa
 76 million lacks electricity access in Nigeria with
electricity access rate being 56%; 84% in urban areas and
34% in rural areas
 The electricity access rates in the various states vary
significantly, from 10.9% in Taraba State to 99.3% in
Lagos State

4.  Why
electricity
access rate
vary
 Population
density
 Location of
generating
facilities
 Coverage of
the
transmission
lines
Electricity access rate by
state

5. Population density by state

6. Coverage of the electricity grid in
Nigeria

7. Rural electrification planning
 Grid-extension is often used for rural electrification
 However, grid-extension may not be cost-effective in
certain situations e.g. in rural areas far from the grid, with
low electricity demand and sparse population
 Grid-extension with lead to low capacity utilization
 Off-grid (decentralized mini-grid, stand-alone) may be cost-
effective
 Planners need to evaluate the technology options to identify
the least-cost option
 To identify the least cost options, Network Planner Tool
could be employed.

8. NETWORK PLANNER TOOL
 Free, web-based application
 Developed by Modi Research Group, Earth Institute,
Columbia University, USA.
 integrates geospatial with demographic and energy
demand information to identify the least-cost
technology option among three possible electrification
options: grid-extension, mini-grid, and stand-alone
 Can be applied at a very disaggregated level depending
on data availability for demand centres
 Has been used in Ghana and Myanmar

9. DATA REQUIREMENT
 Geospatial
 Spatial location
(longitude and
Latitude of
demand nodes
 GIS shapefile
showing the
coverage of the
MV lines
Demographic
 Population of
demand nodes
 Population
growth rate
 Population
threshold
 Household size
 Average inter-
household
distance
 Economic
 Economic
growth rate
(national)
 Investment
horizon
 Lending rate
 Income
elasticity of
electricity
demand

10. DATA REQUIREMENT contd.
 Electricity demand
 Household Domestic
 Number of appliances, wattage,
duration of use (hours/day,
days/week)
 Household productive
 Social Institutions (health,
education, etc)
 Commercial
 Public lighting
Cost
 Grid Extension
 Internal Cost (LV lines)
 External Cost
(Transformer, MV lines)
 Additional generating
capacity
 Mini-grid
 Internal Cost + generating
facility
 Standalone
 Solar PV system
 Mini diesel generator

11. Modeling procedure
 Upload geospatial information (spatial location of
demand nodes and GIS Shapefile)
NPT maps shapefile of MV lines with
spatial information of demand nodes on
Google Earth
NPT maps spatial information of
demand nodes on Google Earth

12. Modeling procedure contd.
 Input demographic and socio-economic data (population
threshold, household size, population growth rate)
 NPT projects population of demand nodes to the end of
investment period
 Input electricity demand information and specify the
demand scaling factors for each category of electricity
demand
 NPT uses demographic and electricity demand information to
project the electricity demand of each demand node till the
end of the investment period
 Input cost information
 NPT estimates the cost of meeting the demand using the three
options and identifies the least-cost option
 NPT also obtains an important decision metric MVmax

13. START
Is the
cost of the lower-cost
decentralized option
<
internal cost of grid-
extension
Compare the costs of the
decentralized options
Select the decentralized
option with the lower
discounted cost
Compare the cost of the lower-cost
decentralized option with the total
(internal + external) cost of grid-
extension
Choose the lower-cost decentralized option
as the least cost electrification option
YesNo
STOP
Compare the cost of the lower-cost
decentralized option with internal cost of
grid-extension.
Is the
cost of the lower-cost
decentralized option <
total cost of grid-
extension
Choose the lower-cost decentralized option
as the least cost electrification option
Yes
No
Select grid-extension as the
least-cost technology option
Compute MV max, and the length of
grid (MV) to be extended
Selecting the least-cost option

14. RESULTS
Base-case result showing the least-cost
technology option for each demand node

15. RESULTS contd
Cost of attaining 50% electricity access rate (i.e 266,571 household)s in
Taraba State (assuming no initial access level)
Number of demand nodes 157
Number of target households (50% of Total number of households) 266571
Stand-alone 0 [0%]
Mini-grid 3 [1.9%]
Grid-extension 154 [98.1%]
Total cost (million US$)
Stand-alone 7,424.36
Mini-grid 1,756.25
Grid-extension 1,648.73
Cost per household (US$)
Stand-alone 27,851.34
Mini-grid 6,588.32
Grid-extension 6,184.96
Technology option for demand nodes (number of demand nodes [%])
Investment cost (initial + recurrent over investment period)

16. RESULTS contd
Cost of schedule for electrifying the demand nodes in the state
using the least cost technological option for each demand node
Number of demand nodes 157
Mini-grid nodes 3
Mini-grid initial cost $3,379,096
Mini-grid recurring cost $25,480,684
Mini-grid cost $28,859,780
Mini-grid cost levelized $0.17 / kWh
Mini-grid energy storage cost $23,988,419
Grid nodes 154
Grid initial cost $502,661,598
Grid recurring cost $1,140,723,225
Grid cost $1,643,384,822
Grid cost levelized $0.16 / kWh
Grid length existing 11,128,147 m
Grid length proposed 1,409,839 m

17. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
20% increase in household
electricity demand level
20% decrease in household
electricity demand level
 Change in household electricity demand level
(Base case = 2424.24kWh/year)

18. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS contd
 Change in household electricity demand
level
-
1,000.00
2,000.00
3,000.00
4,000.00
5,000.00
6,000.00
7,000.00
8,000.00
9,000.00
S-A M-G G-E
Change in household electricity
demand level (total investment cost,
million US$)
20% decrease Base case 20% increase
-
5,000.00
10,000.00
15,000.00
20,000.00
25,000.00
30,000.00
35,000.00
S-A M-G G-E
Change in household electricity
demand level (cost per household,
US$)
20% decrease Base case 20% increase
S-A: Stand-alone; M-G: mini-grid; G-E: grid-extension

19. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS contd
Mini-grid energy storage cost =
US$0.10/kWh
Mini-grid energy storage cost =
US$0.15/kWh
 Change in mini cost of energy storage

20. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS contd
 Change in mini cost of energy storage
1,463.20
1,756.25
2,049.31
-
500.00
1,000.00
1,500.00
2,000.00
2,500.00
US$0.1/kWh Base case US$0.15/kWh
Change in mini-grid energy storage
level (total investment cost, million
US$)
5,488.96
6,588.32
7,687.67
-
1,000.00
2,000.00
3,000.00
4,000.00
5,000.00
6,000.00
7,000.00
8,000.00
9,000.00
US$0.1/kWh Base case US$0.15/kWh
Change in mini-grid energy storage
level (cost per household, US$)

21. DISCUSSIONS
 Even though grid-extension is the least-cost option for most
demand nodes, the cost per household is still high
 With the present electricity sector structure, discos may be
unwilling to take the risk
 Rural electrification agency needs to be strengthened to
deliver its mandate
 Grid-extension will add additional stress to the low national
generation capacity
 Mini-grid uses diesel which has high fuel cost
 Taraba has high small hydro power potential which may be
used for mini-grids since mini-grid may be cost-effective in
some demand nodes

22. CONCLUSION
 There is need to re-conduct the study using data at a more
disaggregated level (e.g. village level)
 REA needs to compile a comprehensive list of unelectrified
villages in Nigeria, including spatial information of such
villages
 REA should develop policies that encourage community-
level small hydro power schemes in Taraba
 The scope of the work may be extended to cover all
unelectrified villages in Nigeria

23. THANK YOU
 www.spidersolutionsnigeria.com
 info@spidersolutionsnigeria.com