Your location: Home

ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY (AIJ)
 
Annex I
UNIFORM REPORTING FORMAT:

ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY UNDER THE PILOT PHASE

List of Projects

A. Description of project

1) Title of project:

Orissaare District Heating

2) Participants/actors:

Please fill in one table for each participant/actor. For individuals fill in as from item Function within activity".

Item

Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization(a):

Närings- och Teknikutvecklingsverket

Name of organization (English):

Swedish National Board for Industrial and Technical Development

Department:

Environmental Energy System in the Baltic Region and Eastern Europe.

Acronym:

NUTEK

Acronym (English):

NUTEK

Function within activity:

Assigned by the Swedish Government for Implementation including financing arrangements.

Street:

Liljeholmsvägen 32

Post code:

S-117 86

City:

Stockholm

Country:

Sweden

Telephone:

+46-8-681 96 07

Fax:

+46-8-681 96 67

E-mail:

gudrun.knutsson@nutek.se

WWW-URL:

http://www.nutek.se

Contact person (for this activity):

-------------------------------------

Surname:

Liib

First name, middle name:

Aili

Job title:

Direct tel:

+46-8-681 96 72

Direct fax:

+46-8-681 96 67

Direct E-mail:

aili.liib@nutek.se

Item

Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization(a):

Estonian co-reporter

Name of organization (English):

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

(standard classifiers to be developed)

Street:

Post code:

City:

Country:

ESTONIA

Telephone:

Fax:

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

-------------------------------------

Surname:

First name, middle name:

Job title:

Direct tel:

Direct fax:

Direct E-mail:

a) Organization includes: institutions, ministries, companies, non-governmental organizations, etc. involved in the activity, i.e. research institutes associated with the project, auditors, government agency closely following the activity.

3) Activity:

Item

Please fill in if applicable

General description:

Orissare is a municipality situated in northeastern part of the island Saaremaa. There were three (two coalfired and one peat, light oil fired) boilerplants and three district heating networks in Orissare. The two coalfired boilers are shut down. One of the boilers has been earlier converted to biofuel firing by estonian suppliers. The network is interconnected and rebuilt to a 2-pipe system. Annual production is approx. 5000 MWh

Type of project:a)

energy saving in distribution and at end-users

Location (exact, e.g. city, region,

state):

Orissaare village

Orissaare County

Estonia

Activity starting date:

17. September 1996 (Loan agreement)

Expected activity ending date:

31. March 2006

Stage of activity:b)

completed

Lifetime of activity if different from ending date:c)

Technical data:d)

The new pipe-line has been laid for closing down two coalfired boilerplants. The existing 4-pipe system has been replaced with 2 pipes. Substations with heat exhangers have been installed

a) For example, using Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) classification: energy efficiency; renewable energy; fuel switching; forest preservation, restoration or reforestation; afforestation; fugitive gas capture; industrial processes; solvents; agriculture; waste disposal or bunker fuels.

b) Circle the appropriate option.

c) Methodological work will be required to define lifetime of activities.

d) Methodological work will be required to determine for each type of activity what the minimum data requirements are.

4) Cost (to the extent possible):

Item

Year 0

= 1996

Year 1

= 1997

Year

2 -9

Year 10

Cost of the project in US$:

140816

AIJ component in US$:

140816

6700

US$ per avoided ton of CO2 equivalent:

16,56

17,35

Describe briefly how costs are determined:

The investment proper is calculated to be 101.316 USD and technical support 39.500 USD.

The lifetime or the project is foreseen to be minimum 10 years (corresponding to the maturity period of the loan). The following definitions are used:

Cost for the project in year 0:

Costs for investment (= loan from NUTEK) and technical assistance (= grant from NUTEK) are summarized over the investment period (up to the time for commissioning) and stated for year 0, being the year of the date for commissioning.

Cost for the project in consequtive years:

Costs (i e possible costs for investment and costs of AIJ component character) are shown per calender year. Year 1 represents part of the calender year after the date of commissioning.

AIJ component in year 0:

The costs for technical assistance up to commissioning have a clear character of AIJ component. The costs for the investment can also be maintained to have the an AIJ character, as the loan is a cost for the host country, and as the loan represents a business risk for the financier, NUTEK.

AIJ component in consequtive years:

Consist a o of the following parts:

1. Costs for follow-up after the date of commissioning (information exchange to secure a high utilisation of the investment + costs for measuring and reporting to FCCC). The cost for follow-up for the years up to and including 1996 is calculated by dividing NUTEKs total costs for follow-up by the total years of operation of all NUTEK-financed projects.

2. Difference between a market interest rate and the favourable interest rate (STIBOR) which NUTEK applies. This can be settled between the co-reporting parties annually.

3. Business risk.

US $ per avoided ton of CO2 equivalent equals:

- at year 0 the cost of the project/AIJ component cost divided by the projected decrease in CO2 emission over the 10 year lifetime of the project

- for consequtive years the cost of the project/AIJ component divided by actual figure for decrease of CO2 emission for each of the years 1 - 10.

Note: Possible costs for organisations in the host country may be suggested by the co-reporter in the host country.

5) Mutually agreed assessment procedures:

Describe the procedures, including name of organizations involveda):

It is intended that upon agreement with a central Estonian authority on reporting of JI-projects, this authority will assign a local organisation, which will be involved in the evaluation of the climate effects of this project. After an initial work in cooperation with NUTEKís assigned consultant, this local organisation will take the main responsibility the continued measuring for JI-reporting.

a) Please ensure that detailed contact information for all organizations mentioned is reported under

section A.2 above.

B. Governmental acceptance, approval or endorsement

Bearing in mind that all activities implemented jointly under this pilot phase require prior acceptance, approval or endorsement by the Governments of the Parties participating in these activities, which shall be shown as follows:

(a) In the case of joint reporting, the report is submitted by the designated national authority of one participating Party with the concurrence of all other participating Parties as evidenced by attached letters issued by the relevant national authorities;

(b) In the case of separate reporting, the reports are submitted separately by the designated national authority of each and every participating Party. Information will only be compiled once reports have been received from all participating Parties.

1) For the activity:

* First report and joint reporting: Agreement with designated national authority is planned to be signed summer or autumn 1997.

* Subsequent reports:

Activity was: suspended

terminated earlier

Describe:

2) This report is a joint report:

Yes, Agreement with designated national authority is planned to be signed summer or autumn 1997.

No

3) General short comment by the government(s) if applicable:

Comment by the Swedish government

The Swedish Parliament decided already in 1993 to establish a program for what was later to be known as AIJ projects.

The decision stemmed from the perception that Swedish mitigation costs were relativeliy high when compared to most countries especially some of our neighbouring countries Acccordingly, Swedish policy against climate change should include promotion of activities in these countries.

The relatively high mitigation costs in Sweden are caused by a high share of non-fossil energy in the energy balance, efficient use of energy due to high carbon dioxide taxes and programmes for the introduction of renewables as well as for increased energy efficiency. (The background is more fully described in the Swedish national report to the FCCC)

In the bill leading to the establishment of the programme now reported the minister of energy in 1993 declared that Sweden immediatelly should take action to assist the Baltic countries to make their energy system more efficient. Such actions were seen to be in accordance with the notion of JI as conveyed in the FCCC. They should also contribute to the cost-effectiveness of Swedish measures against climate change . The minister also underlined in his message to the Parliament that Sweden should have a pragmatic approach in her climate change policy

That the criteria for JI were not yet determined when the programme was launched was not to be considered as any obstacle for the promotion and introduction of Swedish climate change policy initiatives in the Baltic countries, Poland and other East European countries. Such measures should be seen as an initial step towards an efficient, sustainable and equitable international climate strategy.

In the Swedish energy agreement of 1997 it was concluded that "Sweden shall, as a member of the European Union, work towards a common climate policy and should actively promote international cooperation in the climatic field. In particular, Sweden shall engage in the development of efficient policy means within the framework of the climate policy of EU and the Framework Convention on Climatic Change. Sweden should also cooperate with other countries in the way envisaged by the Climate Comvention, through so called joint implementation."

C. Compatibility with and supportiveness of national economic development and socio economic and environment priorities and strategies

Describe (to the extent possible) how the activity is compatible with and supportive of national economic development and socio economic and environment priorities and strategies

The project meets the following objectives in the Estonian Energy Law:

- efficient use of energy resources;

- creation and usage of energy efficient technologies, fuel/energy consuming and diagnostic equipment, construction and insulation materials; energy flow metering and control devices, automated energy consumption control systems;

D. Benefits derived from the activities implemented jointly project

Whenever possible, quantitative information should be provided. Failing that, a qualitative description should be given. If quantitative information becomes available, it could be submitted using the update(s). (If the amount of quantative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)

Item

Please fill in

Describe environmental benefits in detail:

Annual emissions reduction

850 ton CO2

2.8 ton SO2

1.3 ton NOx

Decrease of local pollution (two coalfired boiler plants have been closed down, the energy is supplied from a biofuel fired boilerplant)

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?

No

Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:

More stable heat supply to customers

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?

No

Describe economic benefits in detail:

Decreased energy consumption

Energy use can now be billed based upon measured figures

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of economic benefits?

No

E. Calculation of the contribution of activities implemented jointly projects that bring about real, measurable and long-term environmental benefits related to the mitigation of climate change that would not have occurred in the absence of such activities

1) Estimated emissions without the activity (project baseline):

Description of the baseline or reference scenario, including methodologies applied:

The reference scenario represents at status quo situation. The decrease in energy consumption that followed after 1990 is assumed to have reached full impact, meaning a stable heat consumption over the life-time of the project. Loan from NUTEK is so far one of the very few sources to finance this type of investments for municipalities in Estonia. As this would imply that an alternative investment would not have taken place, neither the consequence of another investment, nor the consequence of an alternative technical solutions are considered.

2) Estimated emissions with the activity:

Description of the scenario, including methodologies applied:

Cf. E.1. above.

Fill in the following tables as applicable:

Summary table: Projected emission reductions:

GHG

Year 1

Year 2

...

Year 10

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2

850

850

850

CH4

-

N2O

-

other

-

B) Project activity scenarioa)

CO2

0

0

0

CH4

-

N2O

-

other

-

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2

-850

-850

-850

CH4

-

N2O

-

Other

-

D) Cumulative effect

CO2

-850

-1700

-8500

CH4

-

N2O

-

Other

-

a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.

Summary table: Actual emission reductions:

GHG

Year 1

= 1997

Year 2

...

Year X

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2

CH4

N2O

other

B) Project activity scenarioa)

CO2

CH4

N2O

other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2

CH4

N2O

Other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2

CH4

N2O

Other

a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.

F. Additionality to financial obligations of Parties included in Annex II to the Convention within the framework of the financial mechanism as well as to current official development assistance flows

Please indicate all sources of project funding.

Category of funding

(For each source one line)

Amount

(US dollars)

Loan from NUTEK

101316 USD

Grant from NUTEK for technical assistans

39500 USD

1 USD = 7.50 SEK

G. Contribution to capacity building, transfer of environmentally sound technologies and know-how to other Parties, particularly developing country Parties, to enable them to implement the provisions of the Convention. In this process, the developed country Parties shall support the development and enhancement of endogenous capacities and technologies of developing country Parties

Transfer of environmentally sound technologies and know-how

Describe briefly

Schematically, the transfer of knowledge involves the following activities over time:

i) Technology transfer through NUTEKs technical specialist during the implementation of the project.

ii) Technology transfer through cooperation between foreign supplier and local partner

iii) Conferences, seminars, documentation and training.

iv) Stimulate înet-workingî for the exchange of experience between plant owners with similar problems, e g îbio-clubsî

technology transfer has taken place through

i) NUTEKs technical specialist support to the local project leader and municipality.

iii) personal from boilerplant has been invited to different seminars and work-shops, documentation for training has been handed ower

Endogenous capacity supported or enhanced:

Endogenous capacity

(Name of organization1)

Development (DEV) /

enhancement (ENH)

Describe briefly

(DEV or ENH)

1) Please ensure that detailed contact information for all organizations listed is reported under section A.2 above.

H. Additional comments, if any, including any practical experience gained or technical difficulties, effects, impacts or other obstacles encountered

Fill in as appropriate:

1) Any practical experience gained:

2) Technical difficulties:

3) Effects encountered:

4) Impacts encountered:

5) Other obstacles encountered:

6) Other:


Ready for some Climate Change News?

Visit the
NEWSROOM