Title of paper

4.2 Namibia’s project activities in a global context

In total, 27 categories for classification of small scale projects are recognized within the CDM project framework. For a better overview, these 27 classifications are categorized in eight groups: afforestation & reforestation, renewables, methane avoidance, landfill gas, fuel switch, supply-side EE, demand-side EE, HFC & N2O reduction. From 261 projects taking place in Africa, 52% are registered as renewables. Landfill gas and methane avoidance represent only 4% respectively 5% of all projects. With regard to the volumes of CERs accumulated by each project type until 2012, renewable energy projects account for 34%, while methane avoidance projects account for 36%. Landfill gas accumulates only 1% of all CERs issued in Africa until 2012 (Fenhann, 2013: Regions, Charts 13, 14).


Figure 3: Percentage of CDM projects in each category in Africa (Source: Fen-hann, 2013: Regions, Chart 13)


Figure 4: Volume of CERs until 2012 in Africa by type (Source: Fenhann, 2013, Regions: Chart 14)

Comparing methane avoidance with other continents and countries, methane avoidance plays a relatively big role in Africa. In Latin America, it only represents 1.2% of all projects and accounts for 0.8% of CERs volume accumulated until 2012. Landfill projects, however, are more dominant in Latin America with 19.1% of projects representing a CERs volume of 12.7%. Such as in Africa, renewables is the most successful classification in Latin America accounting for 70% of all projects and a volume of CERs of 58% (Fenhann, 2013: Regions, Charts 13, 14).

Figure 6: Volume of CERs until 2012 in Latin America by type (Source: Fenhann, 2013, Regions: Chart 4)


Figure 5: Percentage of projects in Latin America by type (Source: Fenhann, 201: Regions, Chart 3)

In Asia, methane avoidance plays a marginal role as well, representing 2% of all projects and generating 6% of the CERs. Landfill only generates 2.1% of the CERs representing 7% of all projects. Renewable energy projects cover 77% with a CERs volume of 39.8%.

Figure 7: Percentage of projects in Asia by type (Source: Fenhann, 2013: Regions, Chart 8)


Figure 8: Percentage of projects in Asia by type (Source: Fenhann, 2013: Regions, Char 8)

Lastly, looking at the global picture, methane avoidance represents 8% of all projects worldwide with a CERs generation of only 3%. Landfill gas destruction accounts for 5% of all projects worldwide, with a CERs accumulation of 8%.

Figure 9: Percentage of CDM projects in each category worldwide (Source: Fenhann, 2013: Analysis, Chart 3)

Figure 10: Volume of CERs until 2012 worldwide by type (Source: Fenhann, 2013: Analysis, Chart 4)

Summing up, Namibia’s projects are part of a category that on a global level does not accumulate a high volume of CERs and at the same time is relatively seldom compared to other project types.

4.3 Challenges

Namibia has great potential for renewable energies. At the southern coast with its strong winds wind power is an option to produce a significant amount of electricity. Invader bush in the north presents a biomass with great potential, suitable to fuel bush-to-energy power plants. By harvesting the bush, which causes harm to the soil and biodiversity, Namibia can not only generate a lot of electricity but could also supply Namibians with employment opportunities. Lastly, Namibia has the biggest sun radiation in the world, providing great opportunities for solar farms, water heaters and solar home-systems (von Oertzen, 2012: 3).

However, Namibia seems to have problems to make use of these recourses on a grand scale. Complicating things, CDM does not seem to be of any help in this regard. Only two out of four projects applying for CDM status were successful. In addition, the Kupferberg Landfill as well as the Gammams Water Care Works are classified as methane avoidance projects with only a small renewable energy component. Critics argue that transforming one gas into a less harmful one might be a way of generating CERs effectively. However, it has a considerably small development effect on the energy sector. Furthermore, gas flaring cannot be regarded as a measure of making use of Namibia’s vast renewable energy potential. Some even discuss, whether simple gas flaring should be accepted for CDM use, since it is doubtful whether the reductions in “emissions are additional to any that would occur in the absence of the certified project activity” (Renkhoff, 2013: 232).

In 2011, the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) published a study analyzing ‘CDM Implementation Barriers’. The study extracts criteria that hinder the realization of CDM projects in African countries (Burian, 2011). Three of these criteria give hints on why Namibia could not yet make use of the CDM support to take advantage of its immense renewable energy potential.

4.4 Using the BMU criteria on Namibia

4.4.1 Investment needed per CER

The first criteria is called investment needed per CER. Since investments are led by a market mechanism, investors find it most attractive to invest in projects allowing the most cost efficient accumulation of CERs. Thus, projects that modify already existing facilities are most attractive for investors, because cost intensive ‘switching costs’ can be avoided (Burian, 2011: 34). Such projects are called end-of-pipe projects, because they often consist of installing a filter or a gas burning flame in ‘the end of the pipe’. Not only methane avoidance, such as in Namibia, are criticized as end-of-pipe projects but also and more prominent HFCs, PFCs, SF& N2O reduction projects. The latter represent only 2% of all projects worldwide but account for 31% of the total volume of CERs. This shows how effective such projects are in generating CERs (Fenhann, 2013: Analysis, Charts 3 and 6). This technology creates the potential for several conflicts. It can barely be considered a technology that sustainably develops the energy sector. Luhmann and Sterk criticize that they even hinder more promising renewable energy projects from being realized since resources and efforts become absorbed by the simple introduction of filter-systems (Luhmann/Sterk, 2008: 107-125). Since the change of energy sources and plants is always related to switching costs, existing industries have an advantage of attracting investors. In addition, a second negative effect of such trends is that countries with small industries such as Namibia have few facilities that would serve for end-of-pipe implementations.

4.4.2 Investment climate

The investment climate is another important factor when it comes to attracting CDM investors. In Namibia, the investment climate is negatively influenced by a low density of population, a low spending potential and high HIV/AIDS rates. These restraints are accompanied by a lack of infrastructure, inefficiency and corruption (Burian, 2011: 40).

4.4.3 Technical feasibility

Thirdly, also the technical implementation is important for CDM investors. “The electricity transmission and distribution infrastructure may be a significant bottleneck for CDM implementation” says the BMU report (Burian, 2011: 35). However, restrictions in the transmission and distribution of electricity are a big problem in Namibia at the moment. The distribution of electricity does not reach the majority of the Namibian population. According to Namibia’s Statistics Agency, only 42% of all households use electricity for lightning, some 78% in urban and 14% in rural areas (Namibia Statistics Agency, 2010: 77). A poor electricity distribution infrastructure that makes it difficult to feed renewable energy into the grid which is a significant constraint for CDM investors (Burian, 2011: 40).