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:

Mustamäe, energy efficiency of 4 cooperative houses

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:

Division for Eastern Europe- EAES Programme

International Relation development

Acronym:

STEM

Acronym (English):

STEM

Function within activity:

Assigned by the Swedish Government for Implementation including financing arrangements.

Estonian Climate responsible Organisation

Street:

Liljeholmsvägen 32

Toompuiestee 24

Post code:

S-117 86

EE 0100

City:

Stockholm

Tallinn

Country:

Sweden

ESTONIA

Telephone:

+46-8-681 96 07

Fax:

+46-8-681 96 67

E-mail:

gudrun.knutsson@stem.se

WWW-URL:

http://www.stem.se

Contact person (for this activity):

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

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

Surname:

Westermark

Kratovits

First name, middle name:

Sune

Andres

Job title:

senior officer

councellor

Direct tel:

+46-8-681 95 39

+372-62 62 841

Direct fax:

+46-8-681 96 67

+372-62 62 845

Direct E-mail:

sune.westermark@stem.se

andres@ekm.envir.ee

Borrower

Name of organisation(a):

Name of organisation (English):

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Street:

Post code:

City:

Country:

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:

Item Please fill in if applicable Please fill in if applicable

Name of organization(a):

Projektsamordning AB

Name of organization (English):

Institute of Energy Research

Department:

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

Function within activity:

Project evaluator

Street:

Paldiski Road 1

Technical support

Post code:

EE 0001

City:

Tallinn

S-217 65

Country:

ESTONIA

Vätra Frölunda

Telephone:

+372-2-45 03 03

SWEDEN

Fax:

+372-2-45 24 35

+46-31-49 03 61

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

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

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

Surname:

Vares

Pahapill

First name, middle name:

Villu

Taavi

Job title:

Professor

project leader

Direct tel:

+372-2-45 03 03

+46-31- 49 03 61

Direct fax:

+372-2-45 24 35

+46-31-

Direct E-mail:

villuv@online.ee

taavi.pahapill@projektsamordning.muth.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:

Mustamäe District of Tallinn was built in the 1960`s and 1970`s.There live about 80 000 persons in 20 000 flats.The actual buildings are built in 1964-65. The framework is precast concrete elements and walls are of plastered light weight concrete. The roof is flat and had many leaks causing considerable energy losses. The buildings have open and one-pipe heating systems (Ehitajate tee partly 2-pipe system) connected with district heating.No regulation possibilities were available for incoming heating water or for local needs inside the buildings. Ventilation consist of natural draught. This project consist of four units, totaly seven buildings, 424 flats and owned by four cooperatives. (legal private status also during the Soviet era)

Type of project:a)

energy efficiency

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

state):

Mustamäe district

Tallinn town

ESTONIA

Activity starting date:

08. June 1995 (Letter of Intent)

Expected activity ending date:

Loan expire date 31. March 2005

Stage of activity:b)

compleated

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)

Renovation and insulation of the roof, wheather-stripping of windows, renovation of wall element joints, insulation of gable sections (Sütiste tee) new entrances new substation including heat exchangers, domestic hotwater circulation, expansion tanks,main pipe control valves and balancing the heating system, radiator reduction valves in rooms next to insulated parts, termostatic radiator valves installed in 2-pipe system (Ehitajate tee) exchanging old and leaking pipes including new insulation, finally chemical cleaning the house heating system.

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.

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

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 including western installation supervision

15 years

Pre-fabricated pipes including local installation supervision

10 years

Modernisation of existing pipes.

  1. Cost (to the extent possible):

The cost analysis is based on a model developed within the framework of an expert group set up by the Nordic Council of Ministers and presented in the report TemaNord:564. The calculations include:

1. How would the CO2 emissions have developed without the investment from the investor country, i.e. determination of a reference alternative.

2. The investment cost of the project.

3. Differences in operation costs before and after the investment.

4. Changes in other economic conditions, e-g- reduction of other environmentally damaging emissions.

5. The time before the project would have been implemented anyhow, or the economic lifetime of the project if it is reasonable to expect that the project alternatively would not have been implemented within the period in question.

The more detailed calculations are found in the table enclosed as the last page to this project report.

Swedish National Energy Administration's costs
NPV(Swedish net costs)/ 14,49 US$/ton defined as NPV of costs for NUTEK/SNEA
Emission Reduction comp. base-line per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
recipient's costs

NPV(recipient's net costs)/

7,51

US$/ton

defined as NPV of costs for recipient's action - baseline case

Emission Reduction comp. base-line

(NOTE! negative value is profit)

per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
recipient country's economic costs
NPV(recipient country's economic costs) / 0,00 US$/ton defined as NPV of costs for recipient country's action case - baseline case
Emission Reduction comp. base-line (NOTE! negative value is profit) per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
total costs in recipient country
NPV(recipient country's total costs) / 7,51 US$/ton defined as NPV of costs for recipient's and recipient country's action case - baseline
Emission Reduction comp. base-line (NOTE! negative value is profit) per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
Overall costs
NPV(all costs)/ 22,00 US$/ton defined as NPV of all costs for SNEA, recipient, and recipient country's action case - baseline case
Emission Reduction comp. base-line (NOTE! negative value is profit) per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life

5) Mutually agreed assessment procedures:

Describe the procedures, including name of organizations involveda):

It is from teh Swedish side 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 STEM’s assigned consultant, this local organisation would 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:

  • * Subsequent reports:

Second report . First report was submitted 1997.

2) This report is a joint report:

  • Yes.

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 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

370 ton CO2

3.3 ton SO2

0.24 ton NOx

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?

No.

Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:

The inhabitants have become much more aware of environmental aspects. Inhabitants and neighbors find that they can see "the light in the tunnel" - they have common positive issues to discuss. This creates of course unity and identity.The process give also as result a form of self-identity and proudness to take part in the evolution. Looking at the actors in the process from local manager to architects,ingeneers, suppliers they receive an example how to act commercially and at the same time keep the ethic in business.

Much better comfort thanks to a 2-30C higher inside temperature.

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?

Yes, some studies has been curried out

Describe economic benefits in detail:

Decreased energy consumption between 8-30 %. The experiences from this project encouraged the actors to go further with new projects. For example the whole Mustamäe District will have new substations in the end of the year 1997.

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of economic benefits?

Yes, some studies has been curried out

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):

The bsasline has been revised in relation to the feasibility study made 1995.

Annual heat supply would continue to have been provided with district heating based on mazout. For the comparison of emission reduction, only the saved energy is used as the source of emissions for the baseline calculation. It is assumed that the inhabitants in the co-operatives would have done energy savings measures by themselves. The annual savings would be 3 % for three years starting 2 years from the start of this project. The energy reduction made would thus be 10 %. Emissions are calculated from elementary analysis of the assumed fuels.

The amount of CO2 emitted without the project during the technical lifespan is 8,570 ton.

2) Estimated emissions with the activity:

Description of the scenario, including methodologies applied:

Annual heat is provided with district heating based on mazout. The annual energy savings is estimated to 55 kWh/m2 and 40,000 m2, giving 2,400 MWh in savings. The emissions are calculated from the elementary analysis of the assumed fuels.

Fill in the following tables as applicable:

Summary table: Projected emission reductions:

GHG

Year 1

=1996

Year 2

=1997

Year 3

=1998

Year 4

=1999

Year 15

Planned energy saving MWh/year

1.600

1.600

2.400

2.400

2.400

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2

442

430

630

605

605

CH4

N2O

other

B) Project activity scenarioa)

CO2

0

0

0

0

0

CH4

N2O

other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2

-442

-430

-630

-605

-605

CH4

N2O

Other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2

-442

-872

-1502

-2107

-2712

CH4

N2O

Other

a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.

Summary table: Actual emission reductions:

GHG

Year 1

= 1996

Year 2

= 1997

...

Year 15

Factual energy saving MWh per year

1600

1600

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2

442

430

CH4

N2O

other

B) Project activity scenarioa)

CO2

0

0

CH4

N2O

other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2

-442

-430

CH4

N2O

Other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2

-442

-872

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

580.859 USD

Grant from NUTEK for technical assistans

94.854 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 "net-working" for the exchange of experience between plant owners with similar problems, e g "bio-clubs"

technology transfer has taken place through

i) NUTEKs technical specialist support to the local project leader and municipality. ii) technology transfer through cooperation between foreign consultants, supplier and local consultant and building constructor.

  • iii) informations and meetings with personal involved in the project and the tenants
  1. stimulate cooperation with local experts,consultants to achieve two-way communication and to find respect for chosen solutions from both sides.
  2. Involve professional groups besides energy experts i e architects, construction engineers, firesecurity experts and so on to achieve optimal solutions and to secure other aspects such as estetical view.

Endogenous capacity supported or enhanced:

Endogenous capacity

(Name of organization1)

Development (DEV) /

enhancement (ENH)

Describe briefly

Mustamäe District Administra-

tion of City Tallinn

(DEV)

The local project leader has been an important person who continues the energyefficiency projects in larger scale and informs other interested.The representatives for the cooperatives have become important references for others.

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: