Practitioners Network “Thematic Group on Climate Change,

Energy Efficiency and Renewable

Energies” Carbon Footprint Methodologies for

Development Projects and Case Studies

March 2nd, 2009

O. Grandvoinet

C. Bernadac

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?

AFD case studies

Combined Heat and Power: Carbon Footprint tool

Urban transportation: ad-hoc method

Combined Heat and PowerDescription 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

Mitigation and Carbon Footprint Calculation method

2 2 2 21

33 3 3 3

years

tCO2

1. Construction emissions

2. Operation emissions

3. Reference scenario

4

4. Emission reductions per year

4 4 4 4

5. Averaging over project lifetime...

...

Combined Heat and PowerReference 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

Combined Heat and PowerProject emissions

Construction emissions: considered as negligible

Gas consumption per year: 300 000 000 m3

Figure used at AFD: including process (extraction, transport, refining)

Fuel Consumption tCO2eq tCO2eq

(litres) incl process excl process excl process incl process

Natural gas 300 000 000 000 0,00 0,00 600 820 678 079

Coal (HHV>23 865 kJ /kg) 0 0

Total 600 820 678 079

kg Ceq per litreFossil fuel consumption for operation

Combined Heat and PowerBaseline emissions

No construction emissions: current systems Current coal consumption per year: 300 000 t

Fuel Consumption tCO2eq tCO2eq

(tons) incl process excl process excl process incl process

Coal (HHV>23 865 kJ /kg) 300 000 728 674 741 000 800 280

Bitumen 963 875 0 0

741 000 800 280

Fossil fuel consumption for operationkg Ceq per ton

Combined Heat and PowerAvoided emissions

Project lifetime 20 yearsConstruction period 1 years

AFD's financing 40 million eurosProject total cost 106 million euros

Construction emissions 0 tCO2 eqFirst year of operation emissions 678 079 tCO2 eqAverage yearly evolution rate of emissions 0,00%

First year emissions 800 280 tCO2 eqAverage yearly evolution rate of emissions 0,00%

Hypotheses on project evolution

Baseline scenario emissions

Project emissions

Financial aspects

644 175 tCO2 eq156 105 tCO2 eq

0,24

33,95 €/tCO2 eq

Average annual emissions (project)Average emission reductions per yearRatio emission reductions / project emissionsCost of avoided ton of CO2 (cost of project / emission red.)

Combined Heat and PowerAvoided emissions (variation)

Project lifetime 20 yearsConstruction period 1 years

AFD's financing 40 million eurosProject total cost 106 million euros

Construction emissions 0 tCO2 eqFirst year of operation emissions 678 079 tCO2 eqAverage yearly evolution rate of emissions 1,00%

First year emissions 800 280 tCO2 eqAverage yearly evolution rate of emissions 0,50%

Hypotheses on project evolution

Baseline scenario emissions

Project emissions

Financial aspects

705 572 tCO2 eq133 887 tCO2 eq

0,19

39,59 €/tCO2 eq

Average annual emissions (project)Average emission reductions per yearRatio emission reductions / project emissionsCost of avoided ton of CO2 (cost of project / emission red.)

0,0

0,1

1,0

10,0

100,0

1000,0

10000,0

1,0 10,0 100,0 1000,0 10000,0

AgroecologyBiofuelWasteEE demand EE demand EE demandFuel switchWind pwrFuel switchGeothermal pwrHydroPV pwrReforestationRenewable biomassInterurban transportationUrban transportation

Cost of avoided tCO2éq

rati

o a

vo

ide

d e

mis

sio

ns

/pro

jec

t e

mis

sio

ns

AFD case studies

Combined Heat and Power: Carbon Footprint tool

Urban transportation: ad-hoc method

Urban transportationDescription 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

Urban transportationHypotheses

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.

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

-

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

700 000

800 000

900 000

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055

tCO2 évitées

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

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

0,0

0,1

1,0

10,0

100,0

1000,0

10000,0

1,0 10,0 100,0 1000,0 10000,0

AgroecologyBiofuelWasteEE demand EE demand EE demandFuel switchWind pwrFuel switchGeothermal pwrHydroPV pwrReforestationRenewable biomassInterurban transportationUrban transportation

Cost of avoided tCO2éq

rati

o a

vo

ide

d e

mis

sio

ns

/pro

jec

t e

mis

sio

ns

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

Carbon footprint follow-up

Direct & indirect project impacts

tCO2 avoidedtCO2 emitted

Cost/Budgetary costGDP

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

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 maximisingimpact probability

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

Additional comments

Objectives: Improve coordination on:

Method Tool Emission factors Perimeter

Further work on additional areas: Transport Carbon sequestration (forest, soil) Credit lines

How to « sell » an energy / climate approach?

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?

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