Your location: Home


ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY(AIJ)

List of Projects

Annex I

UNIFORM REPORTING FORMAT:

ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY UNDER THE PILOT PHASE

A. Description of project

1) Title of project:

New boiler plant in Ignalina, 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):

Name of organisation (English):

Joint Stock Company Vilniaus silumos tinklai,

Department:

Affiliate Ignalinos silumos tinklai

Acronym:

Acronym (English):

SPAB VST

Function within activity:

Borrower

Street:

Dariaus ir Gireno 65

Post code:

2038

City:

Vilnius

Country:

Lithuania

Telephone:

+370 2 63 25 20

Fax:

+370 2 26 44 61

E-mail:

WWW-URL:

Contact person (for this activity):

Surname:

BURBULIS

First name, middle name:

JONAS

Job title:

Deputy Director

Direct tel:

+370 2 63 25 20

Direct fax:

+370 2 26 44 61

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

Technical support

Street:

Breslaujos 3

Stensjögatan 3

Post code:

LT 3035

S-217 65

City:

Kaunas

MALMÖ

Country:

Lithuania

SWEDEN

Telephone:

+370-7- 75 34 95

+46-40-37 50 00

Fax:

+370-7- 35 12 71

+46-40-13 03 69

E-mail:

vilemas@isag.lei.lt

WWW-URL:

http://www.af.se

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:

Ignalina, located in the north east part of Lithuania it is a city with 7,500 inhabitants.

The idea is to concentrate the heat produc-tion to one new boiler house already built and to close two old boiler houses. A wood fired boiler is proposed to be installed.

The distribution networks need to be inter-connected and new substations must be installed The annual energy production is 36,000 MWh. Heating is produced by 40% light oil and 60 % heavy oil ( mazut ).

Type of project:a)

Renewable energy

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

state):

Ignalina Town

Utena Region

Lithuania

Activity starting date:

1998-01-21 (Letter of intent)

Expected activity ending date:

Loan expire date 2008-07

Stage of activity:b)

Ongoing

Lifetime of activity if different from ending date:c)

25 years

Technical data:d)

The new boiler will be designed for 5 -8 MW Mazout will still be used in the boiler house for peak load and as reserve capacity. It will include i.a. firing equipment,

a basic fuel storage on ground (asphalt), fuel conveyor, flue gas cleaner (cyclone), civil works, buildings, control equipment, commissioning, training etc. A new pre-insulated pipeline is going to be installed to connect the networks as well as 30 new substations in buildings and block central.

Annual heat after the new project is assumed to be provided with 25,000 MWh biofuels and 10,000 MWh mazout. 1,000 Mwh is assumed to be saved by the new substations. The emissions are calculated from the ultimate analysis of the assumed fuels.

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)/ 2,64 US$/ton defined as NPV of costs for NUTEK/SNEA
Emission Reduction comp. base-line per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
recipient's costs
NPV(recipient's net costs)/ -16,72 US$/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$/ton defined as NPV of costs for recipient country's action case - baseline case
Emission Reduction comp. base-line (NOTE! negative value is profit) per tonne of CO2 saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
total costs in recipient country
NPV(recipient country's total costs) / -16,72 US$/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)/ -14,08 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 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:

  • * Subsequent reports:

First report.

2) This report is a joint report:

  • Yes.

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

cf. Annex II, section B

  1. 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 quantitative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)

Item Please fill in

Describe environmental benefits in detail:

Annual emissions reduction

7,990 ton CO2

88 ton SO2

3.5 ton Nox

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?

No

Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:

More stable energy supply.

Improved working conditions, increased motivation.

The boiler plant can use the waste from sawmills in neighbourhood. Wood fuel production will start and give more people work locally.

Improved trade balance.

Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?

No

Describe economic benefits in detail:

Decreased fuel costs approx. 4 USD/MWh

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):

Two years the mixed fuel would have been used. After two years mazout would have been chosen as main fuel. Annual heat would have been provided with 22,000 MWh mazout and 14,000 MWh light oil.

The baseline emissions of CO2 during 15 years is calculated to 116820 tons.

2) Estimated emissions with the activity:

Annual heat after the new project is assumed to be provided with 25,000 MWh biofuels and 10,000 MWh mazout. 1,000 Mwh is assumed to be saved by the new substations. The emissions are calculated from the ultimate analysis of the assumed fuels.

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 reductions:

GHG

Year 0

=1997

Year 1

=1998*

Year 2

=1999

Year 3

=2000

Year 15

Planned energy production MWh/year

on biofuels

Mazout / light-oil

35000

12,500

5,000

25,000

10,000

25,000

10,000

25,000

10,000

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2

11285

11,285

11,357

11,357

11,357

CH4

N2O

other

B) Project activity scenarioa)

CO2

11285

7,288

3,293

3,293

3,293

CH4

N2O

other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2

0

-3,996

-7,992

-8064

8064

CH4

N2O

Other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2

0

-3,996

-11,988

-20.052

-116820

CH4

N2O

Other

  1. Includes indirect GHG leakages.

*The boiler is assumed to be in operation in autumn 1998. The first half of 1998 it is operated as baseline.

Summary table: Actual emission reductions:

GHG

Year 0

=1997

Year 1

= 1998

Year 2

= 1999

Year 3

=2000

Year 15

Factual energy production in MWh/year

on biofuels

Mazout

35000

A) Project baseline scenario

CO2

11285

CH4

N2O

other

B) Project activity scenarioa)

CO2

11285

CH4

N2O

other

C) Effect ( B-A )

CO2

0

CH4

N2O

Other

D) Cumulative effect

CO2

0

CH4

N2O

Other

a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.

*Calculated values since, the boiler is assumed to be in operation in autumn 1998. The first half of 1998 it is operated as baseline

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

1,600.000

Grant from NUTEK for technical assistans

100.000

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 will take place through

i) NUTEK’s technical specialist support to the local project leader and municipality.

iii) personal from boiler plant has been invited to different seminars and work-shops, documentation for training has been handed over.

Endogenous capacity supported or enhanced:

Endogenous capacity

(Name of organization1)

Development (DEV) /

enhancement (ENH)

Describe briefly

(DEV)

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:
  1. Technical difficulties:
  2. Effects encountered:

4) Impacts encountered:

5) Other obstacles encountered:

  1. Other: