The role of geothermal and coal in Kenya's electricity sector

This research paper by the NewClimate Institute compares geothermal and coal power generation in Kenya, evaluating their impacts on costs, affordability, reliability, and sustainable development. The study finds that geothermal energy is significantly more cost-effective, creates more domestic employment, and has far lower environmental and health impacts than the proposed coal plants in Lamu and Kitui.

• Geothermal energy is significantly more cost-effective than coal in Kenya. For the 2017-2037 Least Cost Power Development Plan (LCPDP) period, the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for geothermal is approximately USD 10 cents/kWh, compared to USD 29.5 cents/kWh for coal, largely because coal is expected to operate at a very low capacity factor.
• The proposed 981 MW coal plant in Lamu poses risks to electricity affordability. Due to its large scale, it could increase electricity costs by up to 50% because of surplus capacity. Additionally, the take-or-pay purchase power agreement (PPA) requires Kenya Power to pay a capacity charge of USD 360 million per year (approximately KES 100 million per day) regardless of whether the power is used.
• Geothermal power generation provides greater domestic economic benefits than coal. It creates three times more domestic employment per MW of new capacity because Kenya has existing local expertise, whereas coal development would rely heavily on foreign labour for construction, operation, and maintenance.
• Coal-fired power plants would have severe negative impacts on human health and air quality in Kenya. Geothermal plants emit less than 1% of the air pollutants produced by coal plants of equal capacity. It is estimated that if both the Lamu and Kitui coal plants were built, roughly 1,620 Kenyans would die prematurely from air pollution by 2065.
• Replacing coal with low-carbon alternatives like geothermal could save almost 3 MtCO2 annually by 2037. This would help Kenya meet its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30% below business as usual by 2030. Using a shadow carbon price, these savings could equal USD 160-320 million per year by 2037.
• To ensure security of supply and reduce site dependency, Kenya should diversify its geothermal development beyond the Olkaria fields, where half of the capacity is expected to remain by 2035. The study suggests developing plants in other fields, including Baringo Silali, Akiira, Longonot, and Suswa.

APA

NewClimate Institute (2019). The role of geothermal and coal in Kenya's electricity sector. http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/the-role-of-geothermal-and-coal-in-kenyas-electricity-sector-and

Chicago

NewClimate Institute. The role of geothermal and coal in Kenya's electricity sector. 2019. http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/the-role-of-geothermal-and-coal-in-kenyas-electricity-sector-and.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=NewClimate Institute |title=The role of geothermal and coal in Kenya's electricity sector |date=12 November 2019 |url=http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/the-role-of-geothermal-and-coal-in-kenyas-electricity-sector-and |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{newclimateinstitute2019role, author = {{NewClimate Institute}}, title = {{The role of geothermal and coal in Kenya's electricity sector}}, institution = {NewClimate Institute}, year = {2019}, month = nov, url = {http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/the-role-of-geothermal-and-coal-in-kenyas-electricity-sector-and}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }