1. Gurudutt Shenoy Maitreya Foundation Saurabh Mehta Kyrion Technologies UNDERSTANDING ENERGY ACCESS & THE NEEDS OF THE BOP Voice of Disenfranchise

3. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION PROGRAMS IN INDIA YearProgram NameExplanation 1969REC (GOI)Incorporated under Power Ministry for rural electrification Till 1997 Village electrification – definitionA village is electrified if electricity is used for anything in the revenue area 1988-89Kutir Jyoti Program100% grant from government to install a single light to BPL HH. Later merged to RGGVY 1997-2005 Changed Village electrification – definition A village is electrified if electricity is used in the inhabited locality for any purpose. One bulb for a village was enough 2001Village Electrification Program (MNRE) Light up remote villages with stand-alone SPV systems 2001Minimum Needs ProgramStates with less than 65% electrification were provided with 100% loan facility to reach 100% electrification 2002Rural Electrification Supply Technology Electrify villages with local renewable resources, along with grid power, if feasible 2005National Electricity PolicyTargets set as : Complete electrification by 2009 and power to all by 2012 2005Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana New definition of village electrification: 1) Distribution Transformer and Distribution lines are provided. 2) Electricity is provided to public places 3) 10% HHs are electrified

4. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION SCENARIO IN INDIA Statistics on access to electricity services in India stand at around 90 % of villages, and 56% of the rural households. Despite of governments efforts in improving supply capacity and distribution infrastructure, the household electrification rate and power availability is still far below the desired level as well as the world average. The rural electrification schemes so far have focused mainly on the development and extension of the existing grid to rural areas to provide quality and reliable power. We haven’t seen much success in terms of Household electrification so far with these schemes. The current definition of “village electrification” under the current scheme RGGVY itself moves away from the core objective of the scheme.

7. UNDERSTANDING ENERGY ACCESS – FROM THE BOP’S STANDPOINT Though various agencies have developed their definition for electricity access, there is no universally agreed-upon definition of electricity access. Statistics are usually binary: households either have access or they don’t. This is unsatisfactory because many important aspects of electricity access, such as quality, quantity and affordability, are not considered. A survey was done for randomly selected 108 Household in 6 villages of across 3 states of India ( UP, Bihar & Odisha) all of which were incorporated in the RGGVY project. The field level survey aimed at understanding the needs of the under-electrified population, their awareness of schemes and market options for energy alternatives, and their willingness to pay for such services

8. KEY LEARNING Awareness on the scheme : less than 10% people knew about RGGVY even though their villages and households had been electrified. Legal connections & power theft : It was observed that even though all the 6 villages were electrified, less than 32% of these households had legal electrical connections. It was also observed that of the remaining 68% majority were using power illegally Quality of supply : 90% off the 32% HHs that had received metered connection under RGGVY reported that the electricity supply was erratic, unreliable and of low voltage, often available only after mid night when they have no use for it, which rendered the connection useless for them. This was also due to small capacity of distribution transformer, coupled with massive power theft. Power needs : 88 % of the respondents preferred electricity supply after sunset and 32% of the respondents demanded electricity for noon as well. People acknowledged and expressed its importance for better living conditions. They preferred electricity for multiple activities such as children's studies (86%), cooking (50%) and other household chores (6%).

9. KEY LEARNING Appliances – TV and/or fans were found at 64% HHs. These were the most used appliances after Lighting & mobile charging Consumptive Vs Productive : It was realized that 76% wanted power only for consumptive purpose and the remaining respondents wanted power for both consumptive and productive purpose. Awareness of alternatives : Considerable awareness about solar system alternatives was observed among the respondents, with a significant willingness to pay for it, especially in a case where monthly payment options existed Long lasting power cuts: Households with 18+ hours of electrifications (13) also asked for alternatives like solar lighting, 4 of them already had some alternative to avoid darkness during days of transformer failures, which will lead to a black out for several days, sometimes extending to a week. Basic needs : Every single respondent agreed to task lighting and mobile charging as their basic needed. They all agreed that 4 hours of these services with reliability is a must have for them, and anything beyond that is also beneficial.

10. AWARENESS ON ENERGY ACCESS ALTERNATIVES AlternativesRGGVYSolar lights Awareness about scheme/product 10%78% Own a connection/product 32%6% Want to own80%95% Even though people were electrified under RGGVY scheme, they were not aware about the scheme. Due to a few satisfied users in some villages and/or some relatives using a solar light, the awareness about solar lighting products was considerably high. Although grid connection can provide many more services compared to a solar light, people understood the huge quality and reliability issue of the grid connection and wanted to own a solar light as a reliable mean to lighten up their homes

11. COMPARISON OF POPULAR OPTIONS OptionsSolar Home System Solar Home System- EMI Solar Lantern - EMI Solar Micro Grid Cost 6,000- 50,000 300/month – 2000/ month 500 – 2500 100/ month 100/month- 150/ month Awareness14%0%78%5%0% Willingness to pay full cost 5%18%14%63%85% The 108 respondents from 6 villages were enquired about their awareness of a few solar based micro energy options If they were not aware, the products were shown to them and their willingness to pay for such a service/product was examined and was matched against the actual cost Upon seeing and understanding the choice between an energy product Vs an energy service, mostly people wished for service. Even with services, people preferred a solar micro grid model since it gave them the feel of a conventional electric system (grid like, with reliability and quality)

12. THE PEOPLE’S OUTLOOK Upon understanding the needs and demands of the end customers in the survey area we tried to develop a matrix. This matrix took into account their actual power requirement, hours of usage, total energy requirement. Based on these they were divided into 2 rural and 1 semi-rural categories. Matrix explains cost of the system that would be required to provide these houses with energy as per their needs and also the monthly revenue that should be collected to make the system economically sustainable. So the matrix was built on by adding 3 additional dimensions to it Capital expenditure required to provide the facility Minimum revenue required to provide such customers in a commercially viable model Typical appliances that can be powered at such level of access

13. Dimensions of electricity access UnitRural PoorRural Middle IncomeRural High Income & Small Town Power (up to)[W]150200 Usage[h/day]4612 Energy (less than)[Wh/day]43002400 Energy infra cost300015,00070,000 Minimum Revenue / month1204501600 Willing to Pay% respondents88%34%7% Energy ServicesTask lightXXX Phone ChargingXXX Home lightingXX FanXX TV/RadioX Productive ApplianceX It was realized that the willingness to pay by rural poor and middle income groups was at par with the minimum revenue that was required to make a solar micro grid model commercially viable for their village As per the requirements expressed by various potential end users of electricity, customized energy delivery models could and should be designed to create energy access to fulfil the basic energy needs of the under-electrified rural customers

14. Thank You