The Quest for Resilient Sustainable Development and Low-Carbon Energy Transitions: Investigating the Challenges and Success Factors for Mini-Grids in Malawi

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript presents a study on the status of mini-grids installed in Malawi, focusing specifically on two hydroelectric mini-grids, Bondo and Chipopoma. Although the authors have done a lot of work, the study lacks a systematic analysis, which limits its scope. The authors suggest carrying out field visits and developing surveys with well-defined questions. However, the study lacks a comparative analysis of the responses collected. It only gives an opinion based on a detailed analysis of two out of the nineteen plants surveyed. The study could be improved by incorporating power plants that run on different primary energy sources, which were also surveyed. In my opinion, the results or opinions expressed in the study regarding the factors to be considered to improve resilience in the mini-grids installed in Malawi lack sufficient support.

Next, certain aspects that the authors may correct or clarify for paper improvement:

1- Line 57 – 58: there is an error in the writing.

2- Table 1: It would be relevant to incorporate the names of the mini-grids into the table.

 

3- Line 343: What would be the energy unit to which the presented rates apply?

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overview

I thank the authors for the sincerity with which they approached the explanation of the harsh conditions that exist to be able to electrify a country that has the majority of its population in conditions of poverty. This work seeks to carry out a diagnosis of the situations that affect the implementation of mini-grids in the country of Malawi, they addressed their research by conducting surveys, field visits, interviews with stakeholders and reviewing the literature. Taking two cities as case studies. I think it was a good approach but I also get the impression that they covered many topics and it would have been better to focus on a couple of them to be able to go deeper.

Abstract

Please rethink the definition of the problem, it is not clear. Also explain the concept in a better way, insert results and complete the significance so that the contribution is clarified.

Introduction

The introduction is too long, I consider that sections 1.2 and 1.3 could be summarized in an 8-line paragraph.

I would suggest seeing in the introduction more technical information from the literature such as the type of mini-grids used in houses, the volts they generate, examples of those that are powered by the sun, the wind, the costs of them and the rest of the infrastructure for proper installation and operation and maintenance, lifespan, jobs that would be needed and those that can be generated (social contribution), technology appropriation strategies. This is to serve as a basis to compare with the results obtained. For example, show the real costs for a house for 1 year, and then in the results show the comparison with numbers of what the energy production per house is really costing versus what it should cost, and thus there would be another way to convince the politicians, seeing how much money is wasted.

Implement a technical part with numbers.

Line 142. “Several studies in different countries including Rwanda, Bangladesh, South Africa and Cambodia”, this sentence is incomplete.

METHODOLOGY

The survey carried out failed to ask the population if they understand how to use and care for their mini-grid and if they understand the relevance of having electricity for their personal progress and as a community. This was relevant since in the results the authors mentioned on several occasions that the lack of knowledge and awareness of the population was decisive in why several projects were abandoned. I think it would be worth mentioning this finding in the conclusions about the importance of implementing a technology adoption strategy.

Something that I consider would have greatly enriched the research is to provide a calculation on the solar potential and the wind potential existing in the cities of Bondo and Chipopoma, or at least in one of them. Since in section 4 (lines 383 to 390) the authors mention it very briefly, but I consider that this is very important to have other energy sources that can be used for the development of mini-grids.

Table 1. The Appendix Table is better made and more complete than Table 1, I consider it better to place the Appendix Table instead of Table 1, no appendix is required.

Line 234. Check if the 94 % data is correct.

RESULTS

It would be worthwhile to compile the important characteristics of each case study in a table, such as: Capacity of each existing plant, number of houses, businesses, etc. that benefit from that electricity, geographical location in the country, peak hours. So as not to go into the article too much with its description and have that data first-hand.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems more like I'm reading a summary of the article. The conclusion should be based on the results obtained, please rewrite and make it not so long.

‘Malawi has made minimal progress on mini-grid installations, with some projects which were abandoned or delayed’, is merely informative, please conclude.

Lines 24 and 604, 605 to 607. In these lines the same thing as the abstract is repeated, paraphrasing or rewriting.

LInes 610 to 620. The authors give ideas to the government but are not in the form of conclusions.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

“The Quest for Resilient Sustainable Development and Low-Carbon Energy Transitions: Investigating the Challenges and Success Factors for Mini-Grids in Malawi” is a research/investigation article focusing on studying of the key factors and experiences in the deployment of mini electricity grids in Malawi. The choice of topic is interesting and has a practical humanitarian background. In general, the paper was found well written and coherent. There are, however, only a few factors needed to be improved:

 

1. In the introduction section, definitions of mini-grids, schematic diagrams, as well as examples should be illustrated for better understanding of this concept/solution.

2. The 19 mini-grids in Tab.1 should be correlated to the map in Fig.1. Recommend the author draw boundaries on the Fig.1 to show the area each mini-grid covers.

3. In the Sec. 3.1, please illustrate the financial challenges in bar graphs.

4. In the Sec. 3.2, for the technical challenges, please provide photos to further bolster your argument.

5. If possible, could the authors analyze the number of people each mini-grid benefits in comparison to the overall population’s average electricity availablity conditions.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

While I appreciate the authors' efforts to address the feedback and make revisions, I still have concerns about the adequacy of the new version of the manuscript. After reviewing the document, it's clear that there are shortcomings in the research design. The content presented in the manuscript's different sections does not align with the research title. It might be beneficial to reconsider the scope of the research, focusing specifically on surveying the status of mini-grids in Malawi and studying two specific cases of hydroelectric generation, while excluding other types of renewable generation sources currently in operation. This intention is not reflected in the authors' statements, or its formulation is not entirely clear.

Author Response

Thank you again for taking the time to review our revised paper and provide your feedback.  We do appreciate this as we know you are trying to help us. We have revised the aims and questions statements to improve the alignment of the article. We also given some reasoning why we selected the hydropower systems to do the in depth case studies.  

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It seems to me that they have improved the paper and I am satisfied with the changes made, just give a general revision to the English.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback, we are grateful for your time and expertise

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I'm OK with the revised version, the authors have answered all my questions. The paper can be accepted after minor fix to the writings, and figure presentation.

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback, we are grateful for your support.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been improved. I would recommend its publication.