Annex I
UNIFORM REPORTING FORMAT:
ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY UNDER THE PILOT PHASE
List of
Projects
A. Description of project
1) Title of project:
Boiler Conversion at Birzai, Lithuania
2) Participants/actors:
|
Item
|
Financier/Reporter
|
Co-reporter
|
|
Name of organisation(a):
|
Statens Energimyndighet
|
Aplinkos Aosaugos Ministerija
|
|
Name of organisation (English):
|
Swedish National Energy Administration
|
Ministry of Environment
|
|
Department:
|
Division for Eastern Europe- EAES Programme
|
Dept. For Environmental Quality
|
|
Acronym:
|
SNEA
|
AAM
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
SNEA
|
EPM
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Assigned by the Swedish Government for Implementation including financing arrangements.
|
Assigned by the Lithuanian Government for activities implemented jointly
|
|
Street:
|
Liljeholmsvägen 32
|
A. Jaksto 4/9
|
|
Post code:
|
S-117 86
|
LT-2694
|
|
City:
|
Stockholm
|
Vilnius
|
|
Country:
|
Sweden
|
Lithuania
|
|
Telephone:
|
+46-8-681 96 07
|
+370-2 610 558
|
|
Fax:
|
+46-8-681 96 67
|
+370-2-220 847
|
|
E-mail:
|
gudrun.knutsson@stem.se
|
atm@nt.gamta.lt
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
http://www.stem.se
|
http://www.gamta.lt
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Westermark
|
Bilkis
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Sune
|
Mindaugas
|
|
Job title:
|
senior officer
|
Director of Environmental Quality Dept.
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+46-8-681 95 39
|
+370-2-61 90 49
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+46-8-681 96 67
|
+370-2-220 847
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
sune.westermark@stem.se
|
atm@nt.gamta.lt
|
|
Borrower
|
|
Name of organisation(a):
|
Bizai silimos tinklai
|
|
Name of organisation (English):
|
Birzai District Heating Company.
Birzai District Municipality Council
|
|
Department:
|
|
|
Acronym:
|
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
|
|
Function within activity:
|
borrower
|
|
Street:
|
Vytauto 38
|
|
Post code:
|
LT5280
|
|
City:
|
Birzai
|
|
Country:
|
Lithuania
|
|
Telephone:
|
+370 20 51 233
|
|
Fax:
|
+370 20 52 485
|
|
E-mail:
|
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
|
|
Surname:
|
Saltauskas
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Romas
|
|
Job title:
|
Administrator municipaity
|
|
Direct tel:
|
|
|
Direct fax:
|
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
|
|
Item
|
Please fill in if applicable
|
Please fill in if applicable
|
|
Name of organization(a):
|
|
ÅF Energikonsult Syd AB
|
|
Name of organization (English):
|
Lithuanian Energy Institute
|
|
|
Department:
|
|
|
|
Acronym:
|
|
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
|
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Project evaluator
|
|
|
Street:
|
Breslaujos 3
|
Technical support
|
|
Post code:
|
LT 3035
|
Stensjögatan 3
|
|
City:
|
Kaunas
|
S-217 65
|
|
Country:
|
Lithuania
|
MALMÖ
|
|
Telephone:
|
+370-7- 75 34 95
|
SWEDEN
|
|
Fax:
|
+370-7- 35 12 71
|
+46-40-37 50 00
|
|
E-mail:
|
vilemas@isag.lei.lt
|
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
|
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Pedisius
|
Mårtensson
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Antanas
|
Roland
|
|
Job title:
|
Professor
|
project leader
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+370-7- 75 34 95
|
+46-40-37 51 04
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+370-7- 35 12 71
|
+46-40-13 03 69
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
vilemas@isag.lei.lt
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
Birzai is a middle-size town close to border for Latvia. There are two boiler plants which are
connected to one network in Birzai. One of the boilerplants had two DE 16-14 oil-fired boilers. The
annual energy production from this boilerplant was about 50 000 MWh.
|
|
Type of project:a)
|
conversion to renewable fuelas
|
|
Location (exact, e.g. city, region,
state):
|
Birzai town
Birzai Region
LITHUANIA
|
|
Activity starting date:
|
13. August 1993 (Letter of Intent)
|
|
Expected activity ending date:
|
31. December 2003
|
|
Stage of activity:b)
|
Complete
|
|
Lifetime of activity if different from ending date:c)
|
Expected technical life time is 15 years,
the plant is expected to be in operation till 2007
|
|
Technical data:d)
|
Conversion of a DE 16-14 boiler to the use of wood fuels through installation of a pre-furnace.
Automatic fuel storage, wood chipper and flue gas cleaning are also included in the project. The
output power after the conversion is around 6 MW.
Estimated production from bio-fuel boiler 35000 MWh
|
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.
The life time 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.
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.
|
-
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)/
|
1,02
|
US$/ton
|
defined as NPV of costs for NUTEK/SNEA
|
|
Emission Reduction comp. base-line
|
|
per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic
life
|
|
recipient's costs
|
|
NPV(recipient's net costs)/
|
-7,63
|
US$/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$/ton
|
defined as NPV of costs for recipient country's action case - baseline case
|
|
Emission Reduction comp. base-line
|
(NOTE! negative value is profit)
|
per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic
life
|
|
total costs in recipient country
|
|
NPV(recipient country's total costs) /
|
-7,63
|
US$/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)/
|
-6,61
|
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 the Swedish side intended that upon agreement with a central Lithuanian 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
SNEA’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:
Second report . First report was submitted 1997.
2) This report is a joint report:
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 Lithuanian energy sector:
- to reduce the energy intensity;
- to create and improve energy infrastructure based on indigenous energy resources;
- to utilise the existing energy production capacity efficiently
to develop co-operation between Baltic, Nordic and other 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 quantative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)
|
Item
|
Please fill in
|
|
Describe environmental benefits in detail:
|
Annual emissions reduction
11400 ton CO2
174 ton SO2
8.1 ton N2O
Lower pollution.
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?
|
Yes
|
|
Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:
|
More stable energy supply.
Improved working conditions, increased motivation
Improved trade balance.
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?
|
Yes
|
|
Describe economic benefits in detail:
|
Decreased energy costs about 3 USD/MWh
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of economic benefits?
|
Yes
|
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 bsasline has been revised in relation to the feasibility study made 1993.
Heat is produced from mazut for four years, followed by a conversion to natural gas. This baseline reflects
ongoing conversion to natural gas in the Birzai district heating network.
The baseline emissions of CO2 during 15 years is calculated to 169500 tons.
2) Estimated emissions with the activity:
Description of the scenario, including methodologies applied:
The emissions are calculated from the ultimate analysis of the assumed fuel mentioned in above baseline.
Fill in the following tables as applicable:
Summary table: Projected emission reduction s:
|
GHG
|
Year 1
=1995
|
Year 2
=1996
|
Year 3
=1997
|
….
|
Year 15
|
|
Project baseline scenario.
Production MWh /year
|
|
50000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project activtiy senario
production by biofuels MWh/year
Saving from project
MWh / year
|
|
35000
|
35000
|
35000
|
|
35000
|
|
A) Project baseline scenario
|
CO2
|
16224
|
16224
|
16224
|
|
16224
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SO2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B) Project activity scenarioa)
|
CO2
|
4924
|
4924
|
4924
|
|
4924
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SO2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C) Effect ( B-A )
|
CO2
|
-11300
|
-11300
|
-11300
|
|
-11300
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SO2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D) Cumulative effect
|
CO2
|
-11300
|
-22600
|
-33900
|
|
-169500
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SO2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Includes indirect GHG leakages.
Summary table: Actual emission reductions :
|
GHG
|
Year 1
=1994
|
Year 2
= 1995
|
Year 3
= 1996
|
Year 4
=1997
|
Year 15
|
|
Project baseline scenario.
Production MWh /year
|
|
|
50000
|
|
|
|
|
Project activtiy senario
production by biofuels MWh/year
Saving from project
MWh / year
|
|
35000
|
24700
|
17600
|
23400
|
35000
|
|
A) Project baseline scenario
|
CO2
|
9170
|
6472
|
4611
|
6131
|
9170
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B) Project activity scenarioa)
|
CO2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C) Effect ( B-A )
|
CO2
|
-9170
|
-6472
|
-4611
|
-6131
|
-9170
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D) Cumulative effect
|
CO2
|
-9170
|
-15642
|
-20253
|
-26384
|
-127254
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Includes indirect GHG leakages.
- The converted boiler house have been concentrate on bio-fuel firing, remaining load have been produced
in central boilerhouse ( net are conected ). Therefore gas have been used to calculate reductions.
- On going work aim to increase the load on the converted boiler for that reason future production is
estimated to 35 000 MW/h, baseline figures used year 1 real not avalibal.
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
|
686.210 USD
|
|
Grant from NUTEK for technical assistans
|
138.003 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.
iii) personal from boilerplant has been invited to different seminars and work-shops, documentation
for training has been handed ower
iv) boilerplant staff has established exchange of experience with other boilerplants
|
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:
-
Any practical experience gained:
Knowledge about modern bio-fuel technique have made it possible to convert one smaller boiler house in
Radviliski to operate on bio fuel ( build 1997-98)
-
Technical difficulties:
To balance the net work so it will be possible to use the bio fuel boiler with maximum capacaty.
-
Effects encountered:
4) Impacts encountered:
5) Other obstacles encountered:
Reorganisation from Lithuanian State Energy System to a municipality company had effect on possibility to
decide about improvements in the system in this phase.
6) Other:
