Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Practitioners Network “Thematic Group on Climate Change, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energies” Carbon Footprint Methodologies for Development Projects.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Practitioners Network “Thematic Group on Climate Change, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energies” Carbon Footprint Methodologies for Development Projects."— Presentation transcript:

1 Practitioners Network “Thematic Group on Climate Change, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energies” Carbon Footprint Methodologies for Development Projects and Case Studies March 2 nd, 2009 O. Grandvoinet C. Bernadac

2 Which methodologies, emission factors and tools do we use? Interactive presentation of the key calculations and assumptions How do we use the results? Which resources does our monitoring approach require? What were and are our most important challenges? Which type of coordinated action is most needed?

3 AFD case studies Combined Heat and Power: Carbon Footprint tool Urban transportation: ad-hoc method

4 Combined Heat and Power Description of project CHP in China  202 MW of electricity 2 x 76 MW gas turbines 50 MW steam turbine  120 t/h steam production Electricity production with combined cycle replaces coal consumption (~200.000 t p.a.) Heat production replaces old coal boilers (~100.000 t p.a.) Project cost: 106 M€  AFD’s financing: 40 M€ Project lifetime: 20 years

5 Mitigation and Carbon Footprint Calculation method 22 2 2 1 3 33 3 3 years tCO 2 1. Construction emissions 2. Operation emissions 3. Reference scenario 4 4. Emission reductions per year 4444 5. Averaging over project lifetime...

6 Combined Heat and Power Reference scenario Here: quite straightforward  Coal consumption in current systems  Assumption: no increase in coal consumption More difficult cases (example of natural gas terminal)  Theoretical fuel switch (non existing clients)  Unmet demand  Generally conservative approach to avoided emissions

7 Combined Heat and Power Project emissions Construction emissions: considered as negligible Gas consumption per year: 300 000 000 m 3 Figure used at AFD: including process (extraction, transport, refining)

8 Combined Heat and Power Baseline emissions No construction emissions: current systems Current coal consumption per year: 300 000 t

9 Combined Heat and Power Avoided emissions

10 Combined Heat and Power Avoided emissions (variation)

11

12 AFD case studies Combined Heat and Power: Carbon Footprint tool Urban transportation: ad-hoc method

13 Urban transportation Description of project Subway in Cairo: 4 phases, from 2007 (construction of phase 1) to 2022 (operation of phase 4) Modal shift from road to subway Lifetime of project: 30 years (based on lifetime of equipment) Total cost: ~2 280 M€ Carbon footprint method not usable for this type of project Ad-hoc method: high number of hypotheses, numerous data needed

14 Urban transportation Hypotheses Construction emissions taken into account Energy consumption of subway constant over time (when finished) Energy savings due to modal shift constant over time Rebound effect of 1% per year: induced demand of 1% per year due to decongestion of roads.

15 Urban transportation Project emissions Construction emissions:  263 000 t of steel  1 000 000 t of cement  51 700 t gasoline  4 000 t oil Operation emissions:  180 000 MWh per year 2.1 M tCO2 75 000 tCO2

16 Urban transportation Modal shift In 2022, modal shift lowers petrol consumption by 235 000 toe per year (traffic studies)  822 000 tCO2 avoided per year Decrease by 1% per year due to rebound effect Before 2022: avoided emissions proportional to length of subway

17 Urban transportation Avoided emissions Average emissions: 141 000 tCO2/year Average avoided emissions due to modal shift: 597 000 tCO2/year Avoided emissions: 455 000 tCO2/year Ratio avoided emissions/project emissions ~3 Cost: ~125 €/tCO2 avoided

18

19 Carbon foot print lessons  Methodology more useful than result  Help decision making at the project design level … but co-benefits and induced / unquantifiable impacts  Value of intra-sector benchmark … with both energy (kWh) and carbon (CO2) footprint  Difficult inter-sector comparison /selection

20 Carbon footprint follow-up Direct & indirect project impacts tCO 2 avoided tCO 2 emitted Cost/Budgetary cost GDP Induced & leveraged impacts Pilot/replicable projects Public policies Induced & leveraged impacts Structural & long term effects  Building reference data by sector  Measurement of induced & leverage impacts CARBON FINANCE

21 Screening of climate change mitigation interventions Sector’s inertia and weight in terms of CO2 emissions Determinants of energetic change Leverage: promoters/investors, structural effects Maturity: public policies, existing projects, market Relevance of devlt. partner instruments Energy diagnostic: savings and substitution potential Intervention strategy maximising impact probability

22 Strategic planning tackling climate change  Integrate energy/carbon footprint criteria in urban and urban transport planning  Reinforce links between urban planning and development of integrated transport systems  Reduce demand for mobility / Less travel means less carbon, not less access  Leverage co-benefits (local environment, optimal dimensioning of investments, efficiency & attractiveness of city, social – access to transport solutions) AFD interventions  Soft components focused on climate change and at city policy design level  Holistic vs. urban transport project approach  Financing of priority investments as defined by strategic environmental planning  More to come : Curitiba, Brasilia, Rabat, Tshwane (Pretoria), Mumbai ? … Leveraging impact by thinking global and long term  Urban mobility Hanoi Guiyang

23 Additional comments Objectives: Improve coordination on:  Method  Tool  Emission factors  Perimeter Further work on additional areas:  Transport  Carbon sequestration (forest, soil)  Credit lines

24 How to « sell » an energy / climate approach?

25 Different logical framework  How to mobilize the local level for a global and long term issue? Linking global problematic and local concerns  Maximising co-benefits (climate / livelihoods / welfare) Linking long term and short term  Resilience to external shocks Examples Air pollution due to urban transport and emitting industry Natural resources management contributing to carbon sequestration and eco-services protection Electric sector : technical losses, demand side management => investment planning, auto-financing, tariff optimisation incl. social Getting prepared to a costly and scarce energy How to « sell » an energy / climate approach?

26

27

28

29

30 http://climcity.cap-sciences.net/#h


Download ppt "Practitioners Network “Thematic Group on Climate Change, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energies” Carbon Footprint Methodologies for Development Projects."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google