Uniform Reporting Format:
Activities Implemented Jointly Under the Pilot Phase
List of
Projects
A. Description of project
1) Title of project: Boiler Conversion in the Aardla boiler plant in Tartu, owned by AS Tamme Soojus
2) Participants/actors:
|
Item
|
Financier/Reporter
|
Estonian co-reporter
|
|
Name of organisation(a):
|
Statens energimyndighet
|
Eesti Vabariigi Keskkonnaministeerium
|
|
Name of organisation (English):
|
Swedish National Energy Administration(*
|
Ministry of the Environment of the Republic of Estonia
|
|
Department:
|
Secretariat for Climate Policy and International Co-operation
|
International Relations Department
|
|
Acronym:
|
STEM
|
EKM
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
STEM
|
MoE
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Assigned by the Swedish Government for implementation including financing arrangements.
|
Estonian Climate responsible Organisation
|
|
Street:
|
Kungsgatan 43
|
Toompuiestee 24
|
|
Post code:
|
BOX 310, S-631 04
|
10149
|
|
City:
|
Eskilstuna
|
Tallinn
|
|
Country:
|
Sweden
|
Estonia
|
|
Telephone:
|
+46 16 544 20 00
|
+372 62 62 800
|
|
Fax:
|
+46 16 544 22 64
|
+372 62 62 801
|
|
E-mail:
|
klas.tennberg@stem.se
|
min@ekm.envir.ee
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
http://www.stem.se
|
http://www.envir.ee
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Knutsson
|
Kratovits
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Gudrun
|
Andres
|
|
Job title:
|
Senior officer
|
Counsellor
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+46 16 544 20 72
|
+372 62 62 841
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+46 16 544 22 64
|
+372 62 62 845
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
gudrun.knutsson@stem.se
|
andres@ekm.envir.ee
|
(* From 1 January, 1998, the new Swedish National Energy Administration has taken over the
responsibility for the Programme for an Environmentally Adapted Energy System in the Baltic region and
Eastern Europe (EAES Programme) from NUTEK (Swedish National Board for Industrial and Technical
Development).
|
Borrower
|
|
Name of organisation(a):
|
AS Tamme Soojus
|
|
Name of organisation (English):
|
Ltd Tamme Soojus
|
|
Department:
|
Aardla Boilerplant
|
|
Acronym:
|
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Project owner
|
|
Street:
|
Tulbi 12
|
|
Post code:
|
50412
|
|
City:
|
Tartu
|
|
Country:
|
ESTONIA
|
|
Telephone:
|
+372 7 426 101
|
|
Fax:
|
+372 7 426 100
|
|
E-mail:
|
tamme@kodu.ee
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Pärnamäe
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Enn
|
|
Job title:
|
Manager
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+372 7 426 104
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+372 7 426 100
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
enn@kodu.ee
|
|
Item
|
Please fill in if applicable
|
Please fill in if applicable
|
|
Name of organization(a):
|
Sihtasutus Regionaalsed Energiakeskused
|
ÅF International
|
|
Name of organization (English):
|
Regional Energy Centres in Estonia
|
ÅF International
|
|
Department:
|
Võru office
|
AF - International
Malmö
|
|
Acronym:
|
SA REK
|
ÅFI
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
REC
|
AFI
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Local reporter
|
Technical support
|
|
Street:
|
Liiva 12C
|
Stensjögatan 3
|
|
Post code:
|
65602, Võru P.O., BOX 43
|
S-217 65
|
|
City:
|
Võru
|
MALMÖ
|
|
Country:
|
ESTONIA
|
SWEDEN
|
|
Telephone:
|
+372 78 282 30
|
+46-40-37 50 00
|
|
Fax:
|
+372 78 282 31
|
+46-40-13 03 69
|
|
E-mail:
|
|
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
http://www.af.se/ens/english/rec
|
http://www.af.se
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Potter
|
Lindgren
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Elmu
|
Ulf
|
|
Job title:
|
Consultant
|
project leader
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+372 78 282 30
|
+46-40-37 50 97
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+372 78 282 31
|
+46-40-13 03 69
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
elmu@regen.werro.ee
|
Ulf.lindgren@mlm.pdn.af.se
|
|
|
|
a) Organisation includes: institutions, ministries, companies, non-governmental organisations, 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:
|
Tartu is the second largest town in Estonia with 110000 inhabitants and there are several boiler
plants and district heating networks in Tartu. In Aardla boiler plant there were three oil-fired
DKVR 10-13 steam boilers. Two of which have been previously are converted to produce hot water. One
of these hot water boilers has been converted to biofuels. The converted boiler will be used as the
base load for this particular net.
|
|
Type of project:a)
|
Fuel switching to biofuels
|
|
Location (exact, e.g. city, region,
state):
|
Tartu town
Tartu county
Estonia
|
|
Activity starting date:
|
10. December 1993 (Letter of Intent)
|
|
In operation from:
|
August 1994
|
|
Expected activity ending date:
|
10. October 2004
|
|
Stage of activity:b)
|
completed
|
|
Lifetime of activity if different from ending date:c)
|
Expected technical lifetime is 15 years which means that the plant is expected to be in operation
till 2010.
|
|
Technical data:d)
|
Conversion of an oil-fired DKVR 10-13 boiler to biofuels through installation of an integrated
movable grate in the existing boiler. The new equipment consists of a pre-furnace with a moving
grate, a fuel silo, fuel handling equipment and flue gas cleaning equipment.
Boiler type: DKVR 10-13 (hot water)
Boiler output: 6 MW
Prefurnace: Integrated in the boiler
Flue gas cleaning: Multicyclone <300 mg/Nm3
Fuel type: Wood chips, sawdust, bark, 35-55%RH
Previous fuel : Mazut ( high-sulphur content heavy fuel oil)
Estimated heat production from the wood
fuel boiler: 30 000 MWh/jear
Total production of the boiler plant: 38 000 MWh/year
|
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.
The lifetime criteria has been arranged in different groups depending on type of implemented activities.
This classification assumes a level of operation and maintenance which is normal in western countries.
Lifetime of activity
Heat production plants (bio fuel)
|
25 years
|
New installation of all main equipment parts (fuel handling system, firing equipment and boiler)
and modernisation of secondary equipment.
|
|
15 years
|
Conversion of existing boiler but new installation fuel handling system and firing equipment.
Modernisation of secondary equipment.
|
|
10 years
|
Limited installation of new equipment (only one part of the three main parts, normally the firing
equipment). Modernisation of other equipment.
|
Heat distribution systems and sub-stations
|
25 years
|
Pre-fabricated pipes and installations using certified contractors and supervisor according to EN
norms and applicable district heating practise
|
|
15 years
|
Pre-fabricated pipes and installations without using certified contractors and supervisor
|
|
10 years
|
Modernisation of existing pipes.
|
Energy efficiency in buildings
|
25 years
|
Additional insulation roofs walls etc. with Scandinavian technology.
New installed heating systems.
|
|
15 years
|
Renovation and balancing of heating systems including thermostat valves.
|
|
10 years
|
Weather stripping windows, doors etc.
|
* if a combination of measures is done a reasonable lifetime for the project have to be calculated.
4) Cost (to the extent possible):
To the investment costs are referred the cost of the investment proper and the accumulated interest during
the grace period, generally 2 years.
The AIJ/JI cost items are the costs for:
- Technical assistance, a technical and administrative support from consultants, during the period from
definition of the project till commissioning. These costs are paid by STEM.
- Follow-up, an annual technical and economic follow-up by consultants, hired by STEM, of the operating
results of the plant with the objective to improve on its techno-economic sustainability and its climate
effect. The cost indicated is an average cost per project.
- Reporting costs – i e costs in connection with the annual reporting of the project’s
climate effects to UNFCCC. The cost indicated is an average cost per project.
- Administration –Costs for seminars, handbooks, education (capacity building) and average costs of
STEM staff per project.
- Difference in interest rates. STEM applies for its loans generally an interest rate corresponding to
6-month STIBOR (Stockholm InterBank Rate, in April 1999 3,0 %). Assuming a normal lending rate of 7 % means
that this loan is associated with a cost of 4 % in relation to normal lending rate.
Investment/instalment = the borrower’s possible own financing of the investment, followed by the
borrower’s repayment of the loan.
All costs in USD
|
Country
|
|
Tartu,Ardla,DH
|
1994
|
1995
|
1996
|
1997
|
1998
|
1999
|
|
|
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
Investment
|
1. Loan/debt to STEM
|
699476
|
621756
|
582896
|
595720
|
562543
|
468786
|
|
|
2. Added costs
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
12824
|
13702
|
0
|
|
|
3.Technical assistance
|
68750
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
AIJ/JI
|
4. Follow up
|
0
|
8750
|
10250
|
10625
|
2750
|
2834
|
|
A. Sweden
|
costs
|
5. Reporting costs
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1063
|
2500
|
930
|
|
|
6. Administration
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
7. Difference in interest
|
4%
|
24870
|
23316
|
23829
|
22502
|
18751
|
|
|
8.Accum. costs for AIJ/JI
|
68750
|
102370
|
135936
|
171452
|
199204
|
221719
|
|
|
9.Total costs
|
768226
|
724126
|
718832
|
767173
|
761747
|
690505
|
|
Investment
|
1. Investment/Instalment
|
0
|
77720
|
38860
|
0
|
46879
|
93757
|
|
2. Lithuania
|
AIJ/JI
|
2. Reporting costs
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
costs
|
3. Other costs
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
4. Accum. costs for AIJ/JI
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
5. Total costs
|
0
|
77720
|
116579
|
116579
|
163458
|
257215
|
|
1 USD =
|
8
|
SEK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5) Mutually agreed assessment procedures:
|
Describe the procedures, including name of organisations involveda):
|
|
Ministry of the Environment of Estonia is a central Estonian authority responsible on reporting of
JI projects. This authority assigns a local institution, which is involved in to the evaluation of
the climate effects of this project and takes the main responsibility to continue measuring,
results collecting for JI-reporting.
|
a) Please ensure that detailed contact information for all organisations 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:
Third report. First report was submitted 1997.
2) This report is a joint report:
- Yes, Agreement with designated national authority was signed 1997.
3) General short comment by the government(s) if applicable:
cf. Annex II, section B
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, Estonian National
Environmental Strategy, Estonian National Environmental Action Plan, Act on Sustainable Development
and the Long-term Development Plan for the Estonian Fuel and Energy Sector:
- efficient and sustainable use of energy resources;
- to increase the share of renewable energy sources in the primary energy demand from present 8% to
13% to the year 2010;
- to reduce the environmental damage arising from fuel and energy production, transport, conversion
and distribution;
- to create the reliable energy conservation system stimulating the implementation of energy
conservation measures by consumers;
- creation and usage of energy efficient technologies, fuel/energy consuming and diagnostic
equipment;
- stimulation of environmental awareness and environmentally friendly consumption patterns;
- to attract foreign investments for projects which ensure better use natural resources as well as
environmental improvement;
- to develop co-operation between Baltic, Nordic and Central European countries
|
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 quantitative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)
|
Item
|
Please fill in
|
|
Describe environmental benefits in detail:
|
Annual emissions reduction:
Projected: 1999
10190 ton CO2 10004 ton CO2
162,6 ton SO2 159,6 ton SO2
13,2 ton NOx 12,9 ton NOx
Lower pollution in town
Improved silviculture
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?
|
Yes. Some measurements have been has been carried out at 1994.
|
|
Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:
|
More stable energy supply
Improved working conditions, increased motivation
More employment (fuel companies)
Improved trade balance
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?
|
Yes. Some reports have been produced
SEI case study.
Involved into "Surrey -project" in 1997.
|
|
Describe economic benefits in detail:
|
Decreased fuel costs approx. 4 USD per MWh.
The boiler plant has the lowest productions costs (include capital costs) in town.
The boiler plant has started with loan amortisation prematurely.
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of economic benefits?
|
Yes. Some reports have been produced.
SEI case study.
Involved into "Surrey -project" in 1997.
|
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:
Present data reflect emission reductions using status quo (emissions in the period before the conversion to
renewable fuel) for the baseline case. Calculations, according to the top-down method, for emissions from
different types of projects in the baseline case are being made. The changed calculation method will result
in a change in emission reduction.
The new data will be introduced as soon as available.
After two years operation the mazout was be replaced by natural gas for the rest of the activity lifetime.
2) Estimated emissions with the activity:
Description of the scenario, including methodologies applied:
Emission reductions are calculated using the IPCC Guidelines, using the Carbon Emission Factor (CEF) for
different types of fuel, using actual system efficiency. For boiler conversion, the decrease in emissions
is calculated in relation to the amount of fossil fuel replaced (status quo).
For an energy efficiency project the decrease in emissions reflects the amount of fuel that is saved
through the project. In the case that the system uses renewable fuels, the reduction is calculated
comparing the amount of fossil fuels that was used before the conversion to renewable fuels.
Below comparison is based upon that the base-line scenario represents a status quo solution.
Fill in the following tables as applicable:
Summary table: Projected emission reductions:
|
GHG
|
Year 1
=1994
|
Year 2
=1995
|
Year 3
=1996
|
Year 4
=1997
|
Year 5
=1998
|
Year 6
=1999
|
...
|
Year 16
=2009
|
|
Planned energy production on biofuels MWh/year
|
|
13 500
|
30 000
|
30 000
|
30 000
|
30 000
|
30 000
|
|
30 000
|
|
A) Project baseline scenario
|
CO2
|
4585
|
10190
|
10190
|
10190
|
10190
|
10190
|
|
10190
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
B) Project activity scenarioa)
|
CO2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
C) Effect ( B-A )
|
CO2
|
-4585
|
-10190
|
-10190
|
-10190
|
-10190
|
-10190
|
|
-10190
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
D) Cumulative effect
|
CO2
|
-4585
|
-14775
|
-24965
|
-35155
|
-45344
|
-55534
|
|
-157432
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.
Summary table: Actual emission reductions:
|
GHG
|
Year 1
= 1994
|
Year 2
= 1995
|
Year 3
=1996
|
Year 4
=1997
|
Year 5
=1998
|
Year 6
=1999
|
...
|
Year 16
=2009
|
|
Factual energy production on biofuels
|
|
13074
|
26328
|
29372
|
36843
|
34372
|
29453
|
|
209453
|
|
A) Project baseline scenario
|
CO2
|
4441
|
8942
|
9976
|
12514
|
11675
|
10004
|
|
10004
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
B) Project activity scenarioa)
|
CO2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
C) Effect ( B-A )
|
CO2
|
-4441
|
-8942
|
-9976
|
-12514
|
-11675
|
-10004
|
|
-10004
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
D) Cumulative effect
|
CO2
|
-4441
|
-13383
|
-23360
|
-35874
|
-47548
|
-57553
|
|
-157593
|
|
CH4
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
a) Includes indirect GHG leakag
