Chasing the dots …

People, Politics, Policies and Power Play (2)
POLICY development is plotting direction and actions to provide guidance to all members of a grouping to achieve desired outcomes, in this case, Namibia; it is an Executive function and is based upon stated national intent, realities and interpretation of the future. It is about making things happen in an ever-changing world. It is about achieving those desirable outcomes that benefit, in this case, the Nation. Policy is not about being popular.

It is a function of independent and visionary thought and being able to support the results of that process; it is also about being nimble enough to make change when circumstances change due to uncontrollable factors. Our Energy Policy seems a good place to start, published in 1998 and despite some apparent ad hoc changes of position and a recent review under an IPPR paper that document remains Namibia’s Energy Bible. I suggest it so out of touch with reality as to be, in many respects, a dinosaur document; extinct. This needs updating now. What are the present and (maybe!) future circumstances around which the policy must operate – what has changed?The recent economic crisis and the rise of concerns about global warming, unsustainable use of global natural resources, shifts in the balance of power in both geo-political terms and the increasing power of global commercial interests to the detriment of government ability to influence are realities. The influence of money and wealth accumulation is distorting market mechanisms such that the old rules of supply and demand are being superseded by imperfections driven by global economics rather than those of sovereign states and regional groupings. These imbalances are producing a two (or three?) speed world, the super powerful, the wage slaves and a big group who don’t matter!The cost, sustainability, economic use and availability of energy underpin where nations will be positioned in the future. Why?A look at ‘national energy intensity’ provides a clue. In KWh per day per person for all major energy inputs the USA, Europe and Namibia consume 250, 125 and (about) 25 respectively; energy input is a good proxy of both national development and excess consumption but does not show much about the future; after all China is less that 10 but growing. Energy production is based upon converting both renewable and non-renewable inputs into usable forms. Here is the danger.Twenty years ago I submitted a report suggesting that oil prices would hit US$100 per barrel within 15 years! A lead balloon job, but I suggest now, that due to growth and political influence that Namibia should anticipate oil prices at a minimum of US$250 a barrel and be prepared if it goes higher. Coal and natural gas prices will follow; scarcity will eventually advantage those who can pay. This is a policy tank trap for Namibia to avoid.Namibians, because of the nature of our people, our vision of the future and geography are hooked on travelling. The car, taxi and bus are part of life’s rich fabric, an addiction unlikely to change. Equally our vision to be a trading nation requires an expansion of both truck and rail capacity and speed at competitive prices. Alternative motive power systems are needed to substitute for fossil inputs. (and please don’t suggest batteries and electric cars!)Our prime polices towards economic development and stability focus upon job creation, skills development and adding value to our raw products together with the growth of non-traditional products. However our current educational and skills levels mean that achieving these ideals mean that our labour force is only suitable for low level jobs; achieving improvement is likely to be dependant upon using external skills to grow the national talent base.Approximately 25% of Namibia’s energy input is electricity; half has been traditionally purchased from South Africa at rather nice rates and given us a soft ride but has been a disincentive new investment. Recent price hikes in South Africa will give a nasty jolt to our price structure even though NamPower’s rather nice agreement with Zimbabwe grants some respite (we hope). But both sources are fossil fuel based; the tank trap.Underinvestment has been a characteristic of all SAPP members and now there is a panic to install new capacity fuelled by the ‘ West’s’ need for business in its current recession. Deals are going to fall from heaven; in several years over capacity may be rife. We need to be smart.The trick is how to use excess power, including wind, CSP, nuclear, wave, to generate usable energy forms that both satisfy our energy needs as a Nation but also enables us to soak up cheap when available to reduce the greater risk? And can we do this in a way that lowers our environmental impact?Fifty per cent of Namibia’s current direct energy input is as liquid fossil fuel? Namibia, with its development plans will require a per capita, per day input of energy of at least 80 KWh/person/day. What to do? (TBC)csmith@mweb.com.na