Comparison of environmental aspects of geothermal and hydropower development based on case studies from Kenya and Iceland

Abstract

Geothermal power and hydropower are classified as renewable and clean sources of energy. However, only about one-fifth of the world’s electricity comes from such sources, while the greatest portion continues to come from fossil fuels which contribute greatly to pollutant gases. In Kenya and Iceland, the balance of energy sources is significantly different with hydro and geothermal supplying the greatest amount of energy for electricity generation. Both countries have regulations, similar yet different, requiring environmental accountability in project development. Though considered benign as energy sources, development of hydro and geothermal resources includes some environmental impacts. However, many of them can be mitigated. Sondu Miriu and Kárahnjúkar are hydropower projects under construction in Kenya and Iceland, respectively. Olkaria 1 and Nesjavellir are geothermal electric power projects in Kenya and Iceland, respectively. A comparison of impacts and management between the two sources of electricity in these two countries indicates both similarities and differences. While the impacts may be similar in nature, their magnitude is determined mainly by location, the technology adopted, size of development and the priority of the country. These factors, in turn, determine the management options adopted. Sometimes priorities and interests may clash, requiring application of special mechanisms and involvement of all stakeholders to reach a solution. Both Kenya and Iceland have great potential for both geothermal and hydro resources, but further development will depend on power plant location, priority by the governments, support of the communities affected, as well as the ability to mitigate environmental impacts.