Uniform Reporting Format:
Activities Implemented Jointly Under the Pilot Phase
List of
Projects
A. Description of project
1) Title of project: Jelgava (II), Energy Efficiency in School building
2) Participants/actors:
|
Item
|
Financier/Reporter
|
Co-reporter
|
|
Name of organisation(a):
|
Statens Energimyndighet
|
Vides Aizsardzîbas un Regionâlâs Attîstîbas Ministrija
|
|
Name of organisation (English):
|
Swedish National Energy Administration
|
Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development of the Republic of Latvia
|
|
Department:
|
Secretariat for Climate Policy and International Co-operation
|
Environmental Protection Department
|
|
Acronym:
|
STEM
|
VARAM
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
STEM
|
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Assigned by the Swedish Government for Implementation including financing arrangements.
|
Assigned by the Latvian Government for activities implemented jointly
|
|
Street:
|
Kungsgatan 43
|
Peldu Str. 25
|
|
Post code:
|
S-117 86
|
LV 1494
|
|
City:
|
Eskilstuna
|
Riga
|
|
Country:
|
Sweden
|
Latvia
|
|
Telephone:
|
+46 16 544 20 00
|
+371-7 026 508
|
|
Fax:
|
+46 16 544 22 64
|
+371-7 820 442
|
|
E-mail:
|
klas.tennberg@stem.se
|
erna@varam.gov.lv
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
http://www.stem.se
|
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Knutsson
|
Apene
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Gudrun
|
Ingrid
|
|
Job title:
|
senior officer
|
senior official
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+46 16 544 20 72
|
+371-7 026 508
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+46 16 544 22 64
|
+371-7 820 442
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
gudrun.knutsson@stem.se
|
erna@varam.gov.lv
|
|
Borrower
|
|
Name of organisation(a):
|
Jelgavas Dome
|
|
Name of organisation (English):
|
Jelgava Town Council
|
|
Department:
|
|
|
Acronym:
|
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
|
|
Function within activity:
|
borrower
|
|
Street:
|
Liela Street 11
|
|
Post code:
|
LV-3000
|
|
City:
|
Jelgava
|
|
Country:
|
Latvia
|
|
Telephone:
|
+371-30 22338
|
|
Fax:
|
+371-30 29059
|
|
E-mail:
|
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
|
|
Surname:
|
Alberts
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Tocs
|
|
Job title:
|
Jelgava Town Council Technical department
|
|
Direct tel:
|
+371 30 055 24
|
|
Direct fax:
|
+371 30 29 059
|
|
Direct E-mail:
|
|
|
Item
|
Please fill in if applicable
|
Please fill in if applicable
|
|
Name of organization(a):
|
EKODOMA
|
ÅF International AB
|
|
Name of organization (English):
|
EKODOMA
|
AF International AB
|
|
Department:
|
|
|
|
Acronym:
|
|
ÅFE
|
|
Acronym (English):
|
|
AFE
|
|
Function within activity:
|
Local reporter
|
Technical support
|
|
Street:
|
Biskapa gate 6-1
|
Stensjögatan 3
|
|
Post code:
|
LV 1050
|
S-217 65
|
|
City:
|
Riga
|
MALMÖ
|
|
Country:
|
LATVIA
|
SWEDEN
|
|
Telephone:
|
+371-7 210 597
|
+46-40-37 50 00
|
|
Fax:
|
+371-7 210 597
|
+46 40 13 03 69
|
|
E-mail:
|
ekodoma@mail.bkc.lv
|
|
|
WWW-URL:
|
|
http://www.af.se
|
|
Contact person (for this activity):
|
-------------------------------------
|
-------------------------------------
|
|
Surname:
|
Kass
|
Mårtensson
|
|
First name, middle name:
|
Ilmars
|
Roland
|
|
Job title:
|
project manager
|
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:
|
ilmars-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:
|
The 4th High School in Jelgava, where the energy efficiency measures have been implemented, is
constructed of concrete pre-fabricated elements. The original flat roof was made of light weight
concrete covered with tar paper. The heating system was so inefficient that during cold winters
some classrooms had to be closed.
|
|
Type of project:a)
|
Energy efficiency
|
|
Location (exact, e.g. city, region,
state):
|
Jelgava town
Jelgava district
LATVIA
|
|
Activity starting date:
|
17. July 1995 (Letter of Intent)
|
|
In operation from:
|
December 1995
|
|
Expected activity ending date:
|
Loan expire date 31 March 2000
|
|
Stage of activity:b)
|
Completed
|
|
Lifetime of activity if different from ending date:c)
|
Expected technical lifetime is 25 years which means that the plant is expected to be in operation
till 2020.
|
|
Technical data:d)
|
Renovation and insulation of the roof, installation of a heat exchanger in a substation on the
incoming water pipes and regulators on subgroups in the 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.
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
|
|
Jelgava EE
|
1996
|
1997
|
1998
|
|
|
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
|
Investment
|
1. Loan/debt to STEM
|
109875
|
82375
|
54875
|
|
|
2. Added costs
|
6125
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
3.Technical assistance
|
36250
|
0
|
0
|
|
AIJ/JI
|
4. Follow up
|
0
|
10625
|
2750
|
|
A. Sweden
|
costs
|
5. Reporting costs
|
0
|
1063
|
0
|
|
|
6. Administration
|
50000
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
7. Difference in interest
|
4%
|
3295
|
2195
|
|
|
8.Accum. costs for AIJ/JI
|
86250
|
101233
|
106178
|
|
|
9.Total costs
|
202250
|
183608
|
161053
|
|
Investment
|
1. Investment/amortization
|
0
|
27500
|
27500
|
|
Latvia
|
AIJ/JI
|
2. Reporting costs
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
3. Other osts
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
costs
|
4. Accum. costs for AIJ/JI
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
5. Total costs
|
0
|
27500
|
55000
|
|
1 USD=
|
8
|
SEK
|
|
|
|
5) Mutually agreed assessment procedures:
|
Describe the procedures, including name of organizations involveda):
|
|
It is stated in agreement between STEM and Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional
Development of the Republic of Latvia that local organisation in Latvia, company EKODOMA is
assigned for the data collection and 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:
Second 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:
Yes, Agreement with Latvian Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development was signed on
March 1999. 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 Swedish side considers that the project meets the following objectives in 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;
Latvia became a Party of the United nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC) in
1992.
In accordance with Kyoto Protocol to the UN FCCC on 10 December 1997, Latvia individually or
jointly should ensure, that its aggregate anthropogenic CO2 equivalent emissions of
CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6 in 2008 - 2012 should
be 8% below the 1990 level.
|
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:
80 ton CO2
0.7 ton SO2
0.05 ton NOx
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of environmental benefits?
|
Yes.
Data collected by EKODOMA, 1999
|
|
Describe social/cultural benefits in detail:
|
More stable energy supply.
All classrooms can be used. Normal working conditions in all rooms. No water leakages.
The project is used as a demonstration object.
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of social benefits?
|
No.
|
|
Describe economic benefits in detail:
|
decreased energy bill about 55 %.
|
|
Do quantitative data exist for evaluation of economic benefits?
|
Yes.
Data collected by EKODOMA , 1999
|
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:
A reference scenario can be selected among an array of possible scenarios.
In the feasibility study and in this report has been chosen a reference scenario that represents at status
quo situation. The decrease in energy consumption that followed after 1990 is assumed to have reached full
impact, meaning a stable heat consumption over the life-time of the project. Loan from NUTEK/STEM is still
one of the few sources to finance this type of investments for municipalities in Latvia The Swedish EAES
Programme has thus helped to overcome a financial and also a technical barrier, as the technology was not
sufficiently known on the local scene.
In hind-sight it can be considered probable that natural gas would have been chosen some period after the
start-up time of the bio-fuelled boiler, had the bio.-fuelled boiler not been chosen.
2) Estimated emissions with the activity:
Description of the scenario, including methodologies applied:
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
=1996
|
Year 2
=1997
|
Year 3
=1998
|
...
|
Year 25
|
|
Energy savings at site based upon the baseline (MWh/year)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A) Project baseline scenario
|
CO2
|
80
|
80
|
80
|
|
80
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B) Project activity scenarioa)
|
CO2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C) Effect ( B-A )
|
CO2
|
-80
|
-80
|
-80
|
|
-80
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D) Cumulative effect
|
CO2
|
-80
|
-160
|
-240
|
|
-2000
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
a) Includes indirect GHG leakages.
Summary table: Actual emission reductions:
|
GHG
|
Year 1
= 1996
|
Year 2
= 1997
|
Year 3
=1998
|
...
|
Year 25
|
|
Factual energy production on biofuels/ saved energy (MWh/year)
|
|
100
|
110
|
100
|
|
|
|
A) Project baseline scenario
|
CO2
|
80
|
90
|
80
|
|
80
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B) Project activity scenarioa)
|
CO2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C) Effect ( B-A )
|
CO2
|
-80
|
-90
|
-80
|
|
-80
|
|
CH4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N2O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D) Cumulative effect
|
CO2
|
-80
|
-170
|
-250
|
|
-2010
|
|
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/STEM
|
110.666 USD
|
|
Grant from NUTEK/STEM for technical assistance
|
38.672 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 NUTEK/STEMs 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 institutions and
district heating companies with similar problems
|
i) technology transfer has taken place through
NUTEK/STEMs technical specialist support to the local project leader and municipality.
ii) local companies participated in project implementation phase
iii) Personal from different institutions has been invited to seminars and work-shops,
documentation for training has been handed over. The following seminars in Latvia have been
organized by support from NUTEK/STEM:
- "Environmentally Adapted Energy Systems in Baltic States and Eastern Europe", Cesis,
23 November, 1994;
- "Prospects for small boiler conversion to biofuel in Latvia", Rauna, March, 1996
- "Possibilities for wood fuel utilization in Latvia", Broceni, 17 April, 1997;
- "Waste wood for boiler houses", Liepa municipality, 5 June, 1998
- presentation of book translated from Swedish to Latvian "Environmentally adapted local
energy systems", author Niels Moe (STEM), seminars in Balvi, Jelgava, Saldus, 6-8 May, 1998
iv) Place is used as demonstration project
|
Endogenous capacity supported or enhanced:
|
Endogenous capacity
(Name of organization1)
|
Development (DEV) /
enhancement (ENH)
|
Describe briefly
|
|
Jelgava Municipality
S K-KATE
SIA Grein
SIA Rotors
LAFIPA
|
(ENH)
DEV
|
Several seminars have been organiz-ed to demonstrate the results achieved.
New type of project for local companies
|
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:
Instead of using proven but costly standard solutions, the project gives proof of the importance of finding
low-cost technical solutions adapted to prevailing conditions. Experience can be used as an example for
other municipalities when forming plans for the renovation of schools and similar buildings.
-
Technical difficulties: No
-
Effects encountered:
- much better comfort inside the buildings,
- reduced energy consumption, however it should be looked up together with outdoor temperatures for the
considered year.
- reduced energy costs,
- improved conditions for the school staff
4) Impacts encountered:
Due to the condition of building, structural improvements were also made that do not specifically relate to
energy conservation.
5) Other obstacles encountered:
6) Other:
