Solar energy : lessons from the Pacific Island experience

TLDR: The successful experience of the Pacific islands in using and maintaining solar photovoltaic systems (PV) indicates that such systems could come to play a substantial role in the electrification of rural areas in many developing countries as mentioned in this paper.

Abstract: The successful experience of the Pacific islands in using and maintaining solar photovoltaic systems (PV) indicates that such systems could come to play a substantial role in the electrification of rural areas in many developing countries In particular, the Pacific island experience suggests that present-technology household-sized PV systems can provide reliable power at costs less than those of the more commonly used diesel systems in small, remote villages for consumers with a limited number of appliances It also suggests that the long-term success of solar PV programs will depend on the establishment of effective institutional approaches for maintaining the systems, and it indicates that ownership and maintenance of the systems by utilities appears to be the soundest option In the Pacific islands, solar PV programs encountered a variety of difficulties in their early phases Most of the early systems suffered from technical deficiencies - stemming primarily from unreliable controllers, batteries, and appliances rather than the PV panels themselves The lesson drawn is that systems must be appropriately designed, use reliable even if initially high-cost components, and be properly installed and adequately maintained Tuvalu provides a case study illustrating the potential effectiveness of solar PV systems in remote areas for rural electrification under appropriate institutional arrangements A comparison of solar PV and diesel systems on the basis of life-cycle costs of providing the final services that the customer desires for a number of years shows that the life-cycle costs of solar PV systems are marginally lower than those of diesel systems for households in remote rural areas The difference in overall costs is about 1 to 14 percent, with the higher savings applicable to households with low energy consumption and lower savings applicable to households with higher energy consumption