CC:INFO/AIJ: Boiler Conversion at Daugavgriva, Latvia

Annex I

UNIFORM REPORTING FORMAT:

ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED JOINTLY UNDER THE PILOT PHASE

A. Description of project

1) Title of project:

Boiler Conversion at Daugavgriva, Latvia

2) Participants/actors:

Item	Financier/Reporter	Latvian co-reporter
Name of organisation(a):	Statens Energimyndighet
Name of organisation (English):	Swedish National Energy Administration	Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development of the Republic of Latvia
Department:	Division for Eastern Europe- EAES Programme	environmental protection Department
Acronym:	SNEA
Acronym (English):	SNEA
Function within activity:	Assigned by the Swedish Government for Implementation including financing arrangements.	Latvian Climate Responsible Organisation
Street:	Liljeholmsvägen 32	Peldu Str. 25
Post code:	S-117 86	LV 1494
City:	Stockholm	Riga
Country:	Sweden	Latvia
Telephone:	+46-8-681 96 07	+371-7 026 508
Fax:	+46-8-681 96 67	+371-7 820 442
E-mail:	Gudrun.knutsson@stem.se	erna@varam.gov.lv
WWW-URL:	http://www.stem.se
Contact person (for this activity):	-------------------------------------	-------------------------------------
Surname:	Westermark	Apene
First name, middle name:	Sune	Ingrid
Job title:	senior officer	senior official
Direct tel:	+46-8-681 95 39
Direct fax:	+46-8-681 96 67
Direct E-mail:	sune.westermark@stem.se

	Borrower
Name of organisation(a):
Name of organisation (English):	JSC Riga Siltums
Department:
Acronym:
Acronym (English):
Function within activity:	Borrower
Street:	Kr.Valdemara Street 3
Post code:	LV-1539
City:	Riga
Country:	Latvia
Telephone:	+371 7320 680
Fax:	+371 7220 785
E-mail:
WWW-URL:
Contact person (for this activity):
Surname:	Krilovs
First name, middle name:	Nikolajs
Job title:	Boiler House Manager
Direct tel:	+371 2 43 23 97
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):	Riga Technical University
Department:
Acronym:
Acronym (English):
Function within activity:	Project evaluator
Street:	Kronovalda Boulv. 1	Technical support
Post code:	LV 4100	Stensjögatan 3
City:	Riga	S-217 65
Country:	LATVIA	MALMÖ
Telephone:	+371-7 089 923	SWEDEN
Fax:	+371-7 089 923	+46-40-37 50 00
E-mail:
WWW-URL:
Contact person (for this activity):	-------------------------------------	-------------------------------------
Surname:	Blumberga	Mårtensson
First name, middle name:	Dagnija	Roland
Job title:	Professor	project leader
Direct tel:	+371 7 210 597	+46-40-37 51 04
Direct fax:	+372-7 210 597	+46-40-13 03 69
Direct E-mail:	eko@mail.bkc.lv	rmn@ens.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:	Daugavgriva, a part of Riga town, is situated west of the river Daugava and close to the Gulf of Riga. The boiler house supplies inhabitants of Daugagriva region with heat but was earlier also energy centre for the Russian submarine base. The plant consists of four identical oil fired steam boilers DKVR-10/13 and two oil fired hot water boilers KGVM10. The annual heat production is about 80,000 MWh.
Type of project:a)	Conversion to renewable energy
Location (exact, e.g. city, region, state):	Daugagrieva Riga Region LATVIA
Activity starting date:	2. June 1995 (Letter of Intent)
Expected activity ending date:	Loan expire date 31. March 2006
Stage of activity:b)	Complete
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)	One of the DKVR 10-13 boilers has been converted to biofuels, through the installation of a moving inclined grate in a separate pre-furnace. The project also comprises automatic fuel storage, flue-gas cleaning and a wood chipper. After conversion the output power of the boiler is estimated to 6 MW, with an estimated annual heat production based on bio-fuel of 40,000 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.

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)/	1,42	US$/ton	defined as NPV of costs for NUTEK/SNEA
Emission Reduction comp. base-line			per tonne of CO₂ saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
recipient's costs
NPV(recipient's net costs)/	-7,19	US$/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$/ton	defined as NPV of costs for recipient country's action case - baseline case
Emission Reduction comp. base-line	(NOTE! negative value is profit)		per tonne of CO₂ saved compared to baseline scenario during the project's economic life
total costs in recipient country
NPV(recipient country's total costs) /	-7,19	US$/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)/	-5,77	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 Latvian 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 co-operation 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 Latvian 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 quantitative information is too large, the source could be indicated.)

Item	Please fill in
Describe environmental benefits in detail:	Annual emission reductions calculated on the baseline scenario with an estimated heat production of 40,000 MWh based on biofuel. 13,000 ton CO2 210 ton SO2 22 ton NOx Wood waste from board factory can be used
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?	Yes.
Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:	More stable energy supply. Improved working conditions and increased motivation. Improved trade balance.
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?	No.
Describe economic benefits in detail:	Decreased fuel costs approx. 6 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

Estimated emissions without the activity (project baseline):

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

In hind-sight it can be considered probable that mazout would continued to be the main fuel. The annual heat production would continue to be around 60,000 MWh. For the comparison of emission reduction, only the 40,000 MWh produced with biofuels is used as the source of emissions for the baseline calculation. The total CO2 emission during the plant’s lifetime would have been 195,000 ton. Emissions are calculated from elementary analysis of the assumed fuels.

2) Estimated emissions with the activity:

40,000 MWh of heat produced in a boiler with the annual average efficiency of 80 %. For the actual emissions the baseline emission calculation is done, assuming the heat production was made on mazout instead of bio-fuels. Emissions are calculated from elementary analysis of the assumed fuels.

Fill in the following tables as applicable:

Summary table: Projected emission reduction s:

	GHG	Year 1 =1996	Year 2 =1997	...	Year 15 =2010
Estimated energy production at plant based upon the baseline (MWh/year)		40,000	40,000		40,000
A) Project baseline scenario	CO2	13,000	13,000		13,000
	CH4
	N2O
	other
B) Project activity scenarioa)	CO2	0	0		0
	CH4
	N2O
	other
C) Effect ( B-A )	CO2	-13,000	-13,000		-13,000
	CH4
	N2O
	Other
D) Cumulative effect	CO2	-13,000	-26,000		-195,000
	CH4
	N2O
	Other

a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.

Summary table: Actual emission reductions :

	GHG	Year 1 = 1996	Year 2 = 1997	Year 3 =1998	...	Year 15 =2010
Factual energy production on biofuels/ (MWh/year)		27,260	32,220
A) Project baseline scenario	CO2	9,400	11,110
	CH4
	N2O
	other
B) Project activity scenarioa)	CO2	0	0
	CH4
	N2O
	other
C) Effect ( B-A )	CO2	-9,400	-11,110
	CH4
	N2O
	Other
D) Cumulative effect	CO2	-9,400	-20,510
	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	778.731 USD
Grant from NUTEK for technical assistance	92.781 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 co-operation 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, knowledge has been transferred in procurement, project management, operation and maintenance.

iii) Personal from boiler plant has been invited to different seminars and workshops, documentation for training has been handed owner.

iv) Specialists of other boiler plants have visited the boiler plant, the staff has an exchange of experience with other boiler plants and is active in "bio-club".

Endogenous capacity supported or enhanced:

Endogenous capacity (Name of organization1)	Development (DEV) / enhancement (ENH)	Describe briefly
Daugavgriva	DEV	A feasibility study is made for cogeneration based on biofuels. It is probable that the co-generation will be implemented with assistance from STEM.

1) Please ensure that detailed contact information for all organizations listed are 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:

The boiler house manager has become very skilled with biofuelled plants and is often hired by other plant owner to give advice about, adjust and optimise their equipment.

2) Technical difficulties:

3) Effects encountered:

4) Impacts encountered:

5) Other obstacles encountered:

At the end of the project the ownership of the plant was transferred to Riga Siltums. They were not interested in the converted boiler and did not want to take over the loan. The commission of the boiler was delayed for 6 months, before the problem was solved.

6) Other:

NEGOTIATIONS

FOCUS

PROCESS

KEY STEPS