UNEP GEF Project document: Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings, 7-2012

July 26, 2012 Dear Council Member: The UNEP as the Implementing Agency for the project entitled: Regional (Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Grenada, St. Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago): Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings, has submitted the attached proposed project document for CEO endorsement prior to final Agency approval of the project document in accordance with the UNEP procedures.

The Secretariat has reviewed the project document. It is consistent with the project concept approved by the Council in March 2010 and the proposed project remains consistent with the Instrument and GEF policies and procedures. The attached explanation prepared by the UNEP satisfactorily details how Council’s comments and those of the STAP have been addressed.

We have today posted the proposed project document on the GEF website at www.TheGEF.org for your information. We would welcome any comments you may wish to provide by August 23, 2012 before I endorse the project. You may send your comments to [email protected] .

If you do not have access to the Web, you may request the local field office of UNDP or the World Bank to download the document for you. Alternatively, you may request a copy of the document from the Secretariat. If you make such a request, please confirm for us your current mailing address.

Sincerely,

Attachment: Project Document cc: Country Operational Focal Point, GEF Agencies, STAP, Trustee

1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 USA Tel: 202.473.3202 Fax: 202.522.3240/3245

E-mail: [email protected]

MONIQUE BARBUT Chief Executive Officer and Chairperson

CEO Endorsement Template-December-08.doc 07/26/2012 2:28:10 PM

1

Submission Date: 23 July 2012

PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 4171 PROJECT DURATION: 48 months GEF AGENCY PROJECT ID: 00545 COUNTRIES: Antigua & Barbuda, Belize, Grenada, St. Lucia, Trinidad & Tobago PROJECT TITLE: Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings GEF AGENCY: UNEP EXECUTING PARTNERS: Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs); Ministry of Land Housing and Environment - Antigua & Barbuda; Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment - Belize; Windward Islands Research and Education Foundation - Grenada, Ministry of Physical Development, the Environment - St. Lucia; and Ministry of Housing and Environment - Trinidad & Tobago GEF FOCAL AREA: Climate Change GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM: CC-SP1-Buildings EE A. PROJECT FRAMEWORK

Project Objective: Build capacity to reduce GHG emissions in the commercial and residential buildings including appliances, demonstrate technologies to achieve reductions of 20% of GHG emissions and put in place policies or programs to roll out these technologies to the marketplace.

Project Components

Inv., TA or STA2

Expected Outcomes

Expected Outputs

GEF

Financing1

Co-

Financing1

Total ($)

c=a+ b ($) a % ($) b %

1. Establish an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Buildings

STA

Capacity for continual improvement: a. Baseline projection tion and monitoring system to be able to

track and feedback on progress b. Opportunities and target potentials for energy savings are identified

Building audit reports, statistics on potential savings in domestic, commercial and public sectors Identification of measures at the design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and deployment of renewable energy Identify efficient lighting and cooling equipment having significant potentials to reduce fossil fuel use Specific energy saving measures and policy options for various classes of buildings are identified

a. 535,550

b. 200,000 735,550

71

59

a.224,500

b.140,000 364,500

29

41

a. 760,050

b. 340,0001,100,050

REQUEST FOR CEO ENDORSEMENT/APPROVAL PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project

THE GEF TRUST FUND

Expected Calendar (mm/dd/yy)Milestones Dates

Work Program (for FSPs only) 02/01/2010

Agency Approval date 10/01/2012

Implementation Start 11/01/2012

Mid-term Evaluation (if planned) 10/01/2014Project Closing Date 10/31/2016


2

and developed 2. Enhanced national capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy development (each country takes technology task leadership coordinated by 5Cs & UNDESA)

TA Enhanced national capacity through a. Development of tools for energy efficient building design b. Identification of building materials and component efficiency labeling and standards. c. Support for use of trained personnel for sustainable energy through a listing service or registry d. Use of energy estimation tools for buildings

Development of training workshops, seminars on energy efficiency for building designers, contractors architects, renewable energy installers and maintenance personnel Publication of manual on best practices on energy efficiency for use in building sector Development of energy efficiency courses for national tertiary institutions

a. 205,000

b. 85,000

c. 85,000

d. 166,200 541,200

61

55

55

58

a. 140,000

b. 70,000

c. 70,000

d. 155,000 435,000

39

45

45

42

a. 345,000 b. 155,000 c. 155,000 d. 321,200 976,200

3. Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

TA

Higher borrowing ratio, lower rate, and extended term finance (green mortgages) linked to the code and building ratings.

Reduced operating costs and risk hedging against fuel price spikes are integrated into lending

200,000 100 0

0 200,000

Inv. Higher borrowing ratio, lower rate, and extended term finance (green mortgages) linked to the code and building ratings.

Fiscal incentives program to increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures

404,450 18 1,841,500

82 2,245,950

4. Demonstration program for sustainable energy

TA a. Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level. b. Initial market volume boosted for trades, materials and equipment

Government adopts a buildings and energy efficiency standard in their own buildings

a. 300,000

b. 200,000 500,000

100

100

0

0

0

0

a. 300,000

b. 200,000 500,000

Inv. Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level and initial market volume boosted for trades, materials and equipment

Challenge compe-tetion for private sector builders for construc-tion and retrofitting of buildings to make a very low purchased energy target of some few kWh/m2 .

975,750 21 3,688,750 79 4,664,500

5. Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings, equipment and

TA Energy performance standard for buildings design, construction and operation supported with ratings and minima

Development of guidelines and standards for energy efficient construction practices including

530,250 47 602,800 53 1,133,050


3

appliances for performance of equipment

renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.

6. Regional public awareness, knowledge management & sharing, replication strategy and regional reporting (5Cs & UNDESA/ SIDSnet)

TA Joint reporting for dissemination and cross-learning including regionally harmonized energy efficiency and renewable energy equipment and materials

Task reports produced on subtopics: Grenada: PV interconnection and monitoring buildings Antigua & Barbuda awareness and education program materials, schools, general public, St. Lucia: Lighting Belize: ESCO training and program Trinidad &Tobago Energy Efficiency Regulations

485,900 70 207,050 30 692,950

7. Project management National Regional

242,950 242,950 485,900

50 50 50

242,950 242,950 485,900

50 50 50

485,900485,900971,800

Total Project Costs 4,859,000 7,625,500 12,484,500 1 List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively of the total amount for the component excluding PPG and GEF fees.. 2 Inv. = Investment, TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & Technical Analysis.

.

A. SOURCES OF CONFIRMED CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT

Name of Co-financier (source)

Classification Type Project 1 %

Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs)

Exec. Agency (Lead)

Cash2 550,000 7.2

UNDESA Exec. Agency (Partner)

In-kind 150,000 2.0

Ministry of Land Housing and Environment AB

Nat'l Gov't Cash 550,000 7.2


Nat’l Gov’t In-kind 732,500 9.6

JICA3 in Belize Bilateral Cash 500,000 6.6

Development Finance Corporation Belize

Nat. Dev. Bank

Soft Loan 800,000 10.5

1 Excludes Project Preparation stage. 2 5Cs/SIDS Dock has now identified 2.5M$ for energy sector regulation in the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States. while additionally identifying 2.0 M$ to be blended with other finance through the Caribbean Development Bank for energy efficiency and renewables in the region. The amount shown here is likely to be exceeded once these projects are concluded. 3 Japan International Cooperation Agency


4

Central Buildings Authority Belize

Nat'l Gov't In-kind 45,000 0.6

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Belize


Grenada Development Bank

Nat. Dev. Bank

Soft Loan 1,200,000 15.7

WINDREF NGO In- kind 185,000 2.4

Saint Lucia Development Bank

Nat. Dev. Bank

Soft Loan 800,000 10.5

Sustainable Development & Environment Unit SL


Ministry of Housing and the Environment TT

Nat’l Gov’t Cash 1,716,500 22.5



Total Co-financing 7,625,500 100.0

C. FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY FOR THE PROJECT ($)

Project Preparation a

Project

b

Total

c = a + b Agency Fee

For comparison:

GEF and Co-financing at PIF

GEF Financing 125,000 4,859,000 4,984,000 498,400 4,859,000 Co-financing 177,000 7,625,500 7,802,500 6,355,000 Total 302,000 12,484,500 12,786,500 498,400 10,014,000

D. GEF RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY, FOCAL AREA AND COUNTRY1

GEF Agency Focal Area

Country Name/ Global

(in $)

Project (a) Agency Fee ( b)2 Total c=a+b

UNEP Climate Change Antigua & Barbuda 1,175,000 117,500 1,292,500 UNEP Climate Change Belize 1,175,000 117,500 1,292,500 UNEP Climate Change Grenada 1,175,000 117,500 1,292,500 UNEP Climate Change St. Lucia 450,000 45,000 495,000 UNEP Climate Change Trinidad & Tobago 884,000 88,400 972,500

Total GEF Resources 4,859,0003 485,900 5,344,900 1 No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.

2 Relates to the project and any previous project preparation funding that have been provided and for which no Agency fee has been requested from Trustee.

3 Approximately 15% of national allocations are programmed towards an overarching regional component to be led by 5Cs.


5

E. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENTS:

Component Estimated

person-weeks GEF amount

($) Co-financing

($) Project total

($) Local consultants* 613 919,500 568,200 1,487,700 Regional consultants 140 308,000 262,050 570,050 International/regional consultants*

15 75,000 45,000 120,000

Total 768 1,302,500 875,250 2,177,750 * Details with regard to GEF financing of the consultants are provided in Annex B.

F. PROJECT MANAGEMENT BUDGET/COST

Cost Items Total Estimated

person weeks/months

GEF amount

($)

Co-financing

($)

Project total

($) Regional Project Manager (5Cs)

168 163,050 242,950 406,000

A&B Project Manager 78 58,750 58,750 117,500 Belize Project Manager 78 58,750 58,750 117,500 Grenada Project Manager 78 58,750 58,750 117,500 St. Lucia Project Manager 30 22,500 22,500 45,000 T&T Project Manager 58 44,200 44,200 88,400 Administrative Support 97 74,000 0 74,000 Office facilities, equipment, and communications

5,900 0 5,900

Total 485,900 485,900 971,800

G. DOES THE PROJECT INCLUDE A “NON-GRANT” INSTRUMENT? yes no

H. DESCRIBE THE BUDGETED M &E PLAN:

1. The Project will build capacity to monitor the performance of the building stock using samples of buildings and equipment targeted in each country. Nationally this is budgeted under Activity 1. The monitoring will track the emissions intensity improvements. Project management and reporting under Activity 7 will provide the national reporting function while region wide aggregated technical reporting is under Activity 6. Independent evaluation is included in Activity Component 1. Project execution is monitored along with impact monitoring with activities rooted in the country institutions as much as possible. National Steering Committee Meetings and Annual Regional Steering Committee Meetings will provide opportunity for review of progress and opportunities to improve impact on a regular basis.

M&E Activities Responsible Parties Timeframe Budget (US$)

Progress and Financial Reports

- Execution: CariCom CC Centre

- Support: National PMUs

- Approval: UNEP

- Two reports for any given year (July 31 and January 31)

- Last Progress & Financial Reports (Final Reports) within 60 days of project closure

None

Inception Reports - Execution: CCCCC, PMUs

- Immediately following project start-up and national steering committee meetings

None

Progress Reports - Execution: CCCCC

- Support: PMUs

- Quarterly

None

Annual Project Reports (APR) - Execution: PMU - Yearly 25,000


6

- Support: National Steering Committees and PMUs

(GEF-financing) 20,000

(Co-financing)

Project Implementation Review (PIR)

- Execution: CCCCC

- Support: UNDESA

- Yearly 5,000 (Co-financing)

Regional Advisory Review (TPR)

- Execution: CCCCC

- Input: National Steering Committees, National Project Managers, UNDESA

- At least once every year upon receipt of the APR

50,000 (Co-financing)

Terminal Regional Advisory Review (TTR)

- Execution: CCCCC

- Input: National Steering Committees

- Support: UNDESA

- Approval: PSC

- Last month of project closure None

Project Terminal Report - Execution: CCCCC

- Support: PMUs - Last three months of project

implementation

None

Mid-term Independent Evaluation

- Execution: Independent Consultants

- Input: PMUs, Chair, National Steering Committees

- At the midpoint of project implementation

25,000 (GEF-financing)

Final External Evaluation



- Three months prior to the terminal TPR meeting


Total M&E Budget 75,000(GEF financing)


PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION:

STATE THE ISSUE, HOW THE PROJECT SEEKS TO ADDRESS IT, AND THE EXPECTED GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS TO BE DELIVERED:

2. Caribbean Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are heavily dependent on fossil fuels to meet their energy requirements. Most, except Trinidad & Tobago, import all the fuel oil that they require for transport, electricity generation, and domestic energy use. Belize has some oil production but imports refined products as well as part of its electricity requirements from Mexico. Although energy accords between the Caribbean countries and Trinidad & Tobago and Venezuela exist, the cost of fuel imports consumes a major portion of their foreign exchange resources. With growing incomes, the use of vehicles and electricity has been increasing. Although the Caribbean SIDS are in general not large emitters of greenhouse gasses (GHG), opportunities for GHG emission reductions are economically attractive given the high cost of energy services compared with other countries in the region; however, investments in appropriate equipment and building efficiency are not made. Vulnerability to oil price hikes is an ongoing economic development problem for the Caribbean SIDS. 3. As stated in the recommendations and conclusions of the Thirty-fifth Special Meeting of the Council for Trade and Economic Development on Energy, held in Georgetown, Guyana, on the 24th of March 2011 “the


7

energy situation in the Caribbean Community (CariCom) remained dire for net energy importers and had been intensified by the surges in oil prices resulting from the political unrest in the North African and Middle Eastern Region, making it an urgent and a priority matter for CariCom; if the current levels of high oil prices continue, this would represent a crisis for net oil importing CariCom Member States and would require urgent attention on their part.” 4. Energy policies and plans are at various stages of development and/or implementation in the region but all including that of Trinidad & Tobago, strive to reduce fossil fuel dependence. The domestic petroleum sector contributes 44.3% to the Trinidad & Tobago’s GDP and the petrochemical sector continues to grow in line with domestic natural gas production.4 Belize has recently begun production of oil but is a net importer and lacks any refining capacity. Caribbean SIDSs therefore have a common interest in improving energy efficiency and reducing the consumption of fossil fuels. 5. Also, the energy demand in buildings needs to be better classified in terms of the physical characteristics and patterns of use to develop specific solutions to improve energy efficiency and identify opportunities for renewable energy. Water heating, fans, refrigeration, and lighting are the major uses of energy in households while air conditioning is a major use of energy in hotels, offices, and commercial buildings. Many similar building designs, materials, and equipment exist across the region, which offers an opportunity to harmonize standards and specifications thus lowering the supply-side cost and increasing the availability of energy services. The buildings sector is generally under-investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy deployment due to diffused responsibility for energy consumption over the life time of any given building and limited and/or absence of either government or utility-led programs. A comprehensive set of standards, rating systems, and incentive tools for market suasion and innovation is required. Although until now a comprehensive study on the amount of electricity consumed in building across the region has not yet been done, based on the case studies and review of the impact of standards and labeling, there it is estimated that near term cost-effective savings of 20% are achievable as a direct result of the activities to be carried out under the Project and that buildings account for between 15 to 50% of GHG emissions in the Caribbean SIDS. 6. The Project will take a an integrated systematic approach to reducing energy consumption in the built environment based on near term incremental energy efficiency improvements, coupled with introduction of renewable energy including options such as the use of energy efficient lighting, elimination of standby transformer plug loads, electrical equipment upgrades as well as system level energy reduction through the use of solar water heating, sea water cooling, and energy storage where appropriate. However, in general the policy makers and general public in the Caribbean SIDS are still unaware of these potential benefits. For example, in Grenada, St. George's University and the Windward Islands Research and Education Foundation (WINDREF) will assist with indoor environment studies to demonstrate to authorities and the general public that increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy will not generate any negative health impacts. 7. With the exception of Belize and Trinidad & Tobago where the agricultural and industrial sectors are major consumers of electricity, the other Caribbean SIDS use more than 95% of their electricity in buildings. The activities under the Project will therefore mainly focus on (i) developing more energy efficient cooling, lighting, and refrigeration systems; (ii) introducing renewable energy such as photo-voltaic (PV) electricity and solar water heating; and (iii) improving the design and architecture of buildings so as to reduce their cooling and lighting requirements. It is estimated that existing energy consuming equipment in buildings has an average life span of 10 years and that therefore, where feasible, the Project can contribute to replace such equipment at a rate of 10% a year. 8. A likely increase in total size of the market for energy efficient products and equipment as well as renewable energy systems and equipment has not been taken into account. Therefore even if the actual

4 Experts have calculated the reserve-to-production ratio for oil at 10 to 20 years and for gas at 12 to 13 years (Ryder Scott Report 2001).


8

replacement rate of the existing energy consuming equipment in buildings would be somewhat lower, the Project could still achieve the envisaged GHG emission reductions as a result of an expanding market for the use of energy efficient products and equipment and the development of renewable energy projects in comparison with the business-as-usual scenario. It is expected that during the last three years of project implementation all equipment will achieve the projected market penetration rates as a result of measures and policies developed under the Project. First, Trinidad & Tobago will introduce a voluntary code for energy efficiency in buildings and minimum energy performance together with a standards and labeling program. A 30% penetration of the market is assumed during the voluntary introduction phase until mandatory status of the regulatory instruments achieved by the end of the Project or shortly thereafter. 9. The Government of Trinidad & Tobago recognizes that the market is under-investing in energy efficient equipment due to the low cost of energy in the country. In all other Caribbean SIDS under the Project higher energy prices and risks of further volatility in energy prices are expected to drive markets for energy efficient products and equipment much more effectively after it has been demonstrated that energy efficiency measures taken under the Project will result in energy savings and energy consumers have been informed about their potential benefits. The projected 20% energy efficiency improvement in the case of all the other Caribbean SIDS with high energy prices is conservative since new energy efficient products and equipment that have not been taken into account (such as brushless direct current motors and LED backlit televisions) with up to 40% improved energy efficiency are already available; however, these new appliances/equipment usually have higher purchase prices in comparison with the traditional appliances/equipment and innovative financing mechanism such as revolving funds schemes provided by local development banks and cooperative credit unions will be required to transform the market to benefit such more energy efficient products and equipment. Nevertheless, it is expected that the use of such new energy efficient products will also benefit from the Project. Assuming that new building codes and new standards for energy products and equipment will be developed and enforced and that appropriate financing mechanisms will de developed, the Project will be instrumental in avoiding GHG emissions of about 1 ton of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per US Dollar provided by GEF (see also paragraph 27). 10. Transforming the buildings sector in the SIDS under the project is addressed through the following components:

(i) Establish an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Buildings

- In each participating country the concerned national partner agency (executing partner) will establish a monitoring system that will track the performance of a sample of buildings that represents the national building stock. The indoor ambient environment, energy performance, and perceptions of the occupants will be part of the monitoring and provide feedback as to whether new energy systems, products, and measures are performing as intended and if not, opportunities for improvement will be identified and evaluated. St. George’s University and WINDREF in Grenada will establish a protocol for this purpose that will be shared with the other countries. Also, each country will allocate 5% of its contribution to the Project for testing and analysis, utilizing tools such as the common carbon metric tool developed by UNEP. The monitoring results will validate the impact of the Project as well as institutionalize a buildings energy policy support facility. Based on validated energy performance data and modeling, possible scenarios for reducing energy consumption by 50% will also be prepared with the aim to develop longer term goals for deeper emission cuts through innovative schemes such as sea water cooling.

(ii) Strengthening of National Capacity for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy - Commercial staff and professionals working in the buildings and construction sectors

will receive training in energy efficiency and renewable energy options, and rating systems; a

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben


9

dialogue will be conducted with regard to the most suitable options for increasing energy efficiency and renewable energy in the building sector in a particular country; and where applicable, mandatory energy performance levels introduced. Industry associations, architects, engineers, technical schools, utilities, and non-government organizations will be engaged.

(iii) Appropriate Financial and Market-based Mechanisms that Support Energy Efficiency

- In three SIDS under the Project, national development banks have been engaged to expand their loan portfolios to help achieve energy savings in the buildings and construction sectors. It is expected that as a result of the energy efficiency and other measures to be adopted under the Project, investment cost in renewable energy projects and energy efficiency products and equipment will be reduced, and that therefore loans will become more affordable for the potential borrowers. In general, it is not expected that additional government subsidies will be required but appropriate financing mechanisms will need to be developed, in particular for the installation of PV systems. In these three smaller SIDS economies, having a financial instrument to support the Energy Service Companies allows the project to expand impact to the retrofit market In the other two SIDS under the Project where a national development bank is not available, it is expected that commercial banks will assume the role of financier who, with the support of the Project, will develop appropriate financial support mechanisms for investment in renewable energy projects and energy efficiency products and equipment.

(iv) Demonstration Program for Sustainable Energy

- Demonstration projects such as retrofitting of existing building with more energy efficient equipment and utilization of proven energy efficient systems and deployment of renewable energy technologies will be designed, implemented, monitored, and evaluated. Subsequently, their performance and other findings will be disseminated to stakeholders including government agencies, industry, and the general public. This component acts as the first investment phase for activity 3 above, therefore the two should be considered together although the initial demonstrations will be scrutinized more carefully as the initial cases under the longer term portfolios of the financiers.

(v) Regulatory Framework to Promote Energy Efficient Buildings, Equipment, and Appliances - Following the implementation of the demonstration projects, mandatory minimum

energy performance levels and more appropriate regulatory frameworks to promote energy efficiency will be developed, adopted, and implemented. These will also include more appropriate pricing policies and regulations for energy consumption since current pricing of energy consumption in certain SIDS, in particular in Trinidad & Tobago, do not reflect their economic cost and therefore do not promote energy efficiency. The GEF project will support Grenada, St. Lucia and Antigua & Barbuda participation in the SIDS Dock funded energy regulations work on equipment and appliances. Through that process and parallel activity in Belize and Trinidad & Tobago, results of activity (i), (ii), and (iv) will be reported and provide the basis for governments to adopt the regulations.

(vi) Knowledge Management & Sharing, Replication Strategy, and Regional Reporting - The 5Cs, consistent with its mandate, will provide direct capacity building support to

the SIDS under the Project. UNDESA will support this technical advisory function. Both organizations will assist with the preparation of specific regional public awareness campaigns and establishment of a database for sharing relevant information among the SIDS involved in the Project. The results of the project will be shared with other CariCom countries through

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben


10

meetings and other activities as well as through the web site of 5Cs and the UN SIDS Web site, and UNEP publications.

11. Based on preliminary baselines and impact studies and available case studies of the impacts of energy efficiency standards and energy labels for energy consuming products and equipment in a variety of buildings the total estimated GHG emission reductions as a result of the Project are estimated at about 10.188 million tons of CO2 equivalent (see Table 1). For detailed information please refer to the Project Document, Section 2.6, Baseline Analysis and Impact Targets, Annex A on Blended Grant Loan Mechanism and Annex B on Baseline and Impact Case Studies. Within the above estimate since building integrated renewables will qualify under the building rating system and building codes, 250 solar water heating systems are expected to produce GHG emission reductions of 14,000 tons of CO2 equivalent over 10 years and the use of 100kW of PV is expected to produce GHG emission reductions of 6,300 tons of CO2 equivalent over 20 years. About 10% of the revolving funds would also involve renewables. Geothermal cooling sources are under consideration but not calculated separately. Table 1 – Estimated GHG Emission Reductions (tons of CO2 equivalent) Participating Country

Direct Direct Post

Direct Indirect5 Total

Antigua & Barbuda

160,000 200,000 360,000840,000 1,200,000

Belize 65,000 400,000 465,000 1,085,000 1,550,000

Grenada 100,000 400,000 500,000 1,167,000 1,667,000

St. Lucia 30,000 200,000 230,000 537,000 767,000

Trinidad & Tobago

880,000 880,000 4,791,000 5,671,000

1,235,000 1,200,000 2,435,000 8,419,000 10,854,000

A. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PRIORITIES/PLANS:

12. Launched in Copenhagen in December 2009 the SIDS Sustainable Energy Initiative called SIDS DOCK has a number of Caribbean countries signed on as members including four of the five countries that participate in the Project. SIDS DOCK is an institutional mechanism established to facilitate the development of sustainable energy sectors within SIDS. SIDS DOCK development is being jointly coordinated by the 5Cs and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), with oversight from a Steering Committee formed by Ambassadors to the United Nations in New York and technical experts. The ultimate goal of SIDS DOCK is to increase energy efficiency by 25 percent (in comparison with the 2005 baseline); generate a minimum of 50 percent of electricity from renewable sources; and decrease by 20-30 percent fuel use for conventional transportation by 2033.6 13. The CariCom’s plan for a Single Market and Economy (CSME) is intended to benefit the people of the region by providing more and better opportunities to produce and sell their goods and services and attract investments. Its aim is to create one large single market among the participating member states and one of its key elements is to enable the free movement of goods and services through measures such as eliminating all barriers to intra-regional movement and harmonizing standards to ensure acceptability of the traded goods and services. Building materials and equipment are important traded goods that are included in this agreement.

5 The indirect impact of the Project will include the full penetration of the market for energy efficient appliances, products, and systems with mandatory enforcement of MEPS. Subsequently, continuing for at least another 7 years (post project) until the standards may require major revision. This is equivalent to a 3.5 fold scale up factor on the Direct with 50% causality. 6 Some SIDS have announced even more ambitious goals.

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben


11

Also, energy efficiency and renewable energy performance standards can be promulgated under the CSME. The governments of the CariCom have designated 5Cs as the organization that is responsible for promoting sustainable energy in the region. 14. Antigua & Barbuda’s Initial National Communication on Climate Change of May 2001 states that climate change mitigation opportunities need to be pursued within the context of the country’s efforts to attain sustainable development. Within the Antigua & Barbuda context the policy options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are primarily related to potential reductions in the energy sector through improvements in energy efficiency and conservation. Climate change mitigation options for the energy sector should focus on attempts to promote more efficient production, distribution, and use of electricity through a range of measures including energy audits, demand side management measures, and public awareness raising activities. In SIDS under the Project there is considerable potential for solar and wind power utilization. However, given the costs of these technologies, the assessments of available resources, and the action plans that are needed to guide further action and development, considerable barriers still exist to such renewable energy resources. Nevertheless, taking into account the commercial availability of solar water heaters in many SIDS, consideration should be given to develop policies that would promote use of solar and wind power. 15. The Report for Formulation of a National Energy Plan for Belize of December 2003 recommends: Collection and analysis of energy data on a regular basis, the preparation of annual national energy balances, and the implementation of a demand-side management (DSM) study to assess whether additional power generation can be avoided; Implementation of a comprehensive energy-efficiency training program for relevant stakeholders. Review of the building codes in Belize to include potential energy saving design features. Training of appliance importers about the benefits of energy efficiency and encouraged to import energy efficient appliances. Design and commencement of a national energy efficiency education and awareness program. A study on energy end-use practices in all sectors (public, commercial, residential, etc.) of the economy in collaboration with Belize Electricity and Lighting and an organization that is experienced in conducting such surveys. Development and adoption of incentives such as reduction of import duties for energy efficient equipment (e.g., compact fluorescent lamps) to encourage their import and use. Support for the creation of ESCOs in Belize through workshops, dissemination of information, and the establishment of linkages to countries with ESCO experience. Creation of a National Solar Water Heating Initiative. 16. The National Stakeholders Consultation on the drafting of an Energy Policy for Grenada, including Carriacou and Petit Martinique, in its Aide Memoire of 2008 stresses the importance of moving toward energy independence. Grenada has piloted a feed-in agreement for construction and use of integrated PV power systems of up to 1% of peak electrical demand with meter reversal without penalty. The target for renewables is that it supplies 20% of grid capacity by 2020. Another major component is on energy efficiency. The strategies to achieve the objective of maximizing energy efficiency cut across all sectors and will require an integrated and comprehensive approach, including the following major steps: (a) Establishment of an Energy Efficiency Unit within the concerned Energy Division of the Government. (b) Development and deployment of a sustained energy efficiency public awareness program. (c) Development and deployment of a public sector energy conservation program (d) Enact and Energy Efficiency Act, which will, inter alia:

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben


12

(i) Create energy efficiency standards for mechanical ventilation, air-conditioning, lighting, appliances and hot water systems within institutional, commercial and industrial buildings. (ii) Mandate the use of energy efficient appliances and lighting. (iii) Mandate the labeling of appliances to provide information on the energy efficiency of

appliances (iv) Mandate a certain level of energy efficiency certification for all buildings.

(v) Mandate energy audits for to-be-determined large public and private consumers. (vi) Mandate the publishing of the results and actions taken as a result of the above mentioned audits. (vii) Require certain standards for energy audits and certification of the auditors themselves. (xii) Recommend economic incentives and penalties for specific sectors: tourism, industry and

agriculture. (xiii) Develop “tropicalised” standards for all of the standards used in the Act.

(e) Provide fiscal and other incentives for energy conservation. (f) Develop and monitor indicators of national energy consumption and efficiency (e.g. energy

intensity – amount of energy required to produce a unit of GDP).

17. Saint Lucia’s Sustainable Energy Plan lays out a strategy for the maintenance and growth of the energy sector in Saint Lucia through effective management. It seeks to attain a set of energy sector targets through the implementation of actions, which will create a policy and regulatory framework to encourage diversification of the local energy market and the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. Solar energy is perhaps the most widely distributed and used renewable energy source in Saint Lucia. Increased energy efficiency is also a major part of the energy plan. The plan aimed to achieve a 15% reduction in projected peak demand and installed capacity by 2020. Implementation of the plan is being awaited. Achieving this target requires public awareness/education campaigns aimed at changing attitudes and behavioral patterns with respect to energy usage. The first step will be to conduct an analysis of the existing conservation opportunities. This requires a detailed study of energy end use practices in all sectors of the economy. Capacity-building among the organizations and individuals participating in energy efficiency programs will also be developed. The establishment of Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) will also provide the avenue for consultancy for business enterprises. A national demand-side management initiative is also planned, initially targeting the residential sector. This will require a well-organized and innovative public awareness program that clearly communicates the need for and potential benefits of energy conservation in commercial and residential buildings. Government will take the lead role by establishing a set of energy efficiency standards for public buildings. A manual will be developed outlining energy efficiency standards and conservation measures for existing and new buildings. A solar heating initiative is planned to generate an increase in the use of solar water heaters. This will significantly reduce the high cost of water heating for both the residential and commercial sectors. Tax concessions have been introduced to combat the high initial costs of solar water heaters. Solar photovoltaic systems are also being promoted to provide back power during emergency situations and as demonstration units.

17. In Trinidad & Tobago the National Environmental Policy (NEP) commits the Government to reducing and offsetting CO2 production and to increase energy efficiency. The NEP also requires the country to develop national standards for energy efficiency. Consistent with the provisions of the NEP, the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (GoRTT) is currently pursuing initiatives aimed at developing a climate change policy, including mitigation and adaptation, across all sectors as well as updating its greenhouse gas inventory with a view to strategizing on GHG reductions based on this inventory. Accordingly, the current project will complement the other initiatives of the GoRTT in its efforts at reducing its GHG emissions. 18. The 5Cs coordinates the Caribbean region’s response to climate change. Officially established in August 2005 in Belize, the centre is the key node for information with regard to climate change issues as well as the region’s response to managing and adapting to climate change. It is the official repository and clearing house for regional climate change data and provides climate change-related policy advice and guidelines to the

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben

Detlef

Hervorheben


13

CariCom Member States through the CariCom Secretariat. In this role, the centre is recognized by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and other international agencies as the focal point for climate change issues in the Caribbean. It has also been recognized by the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) as a centre of excellence. The main goal of 5Cs is to improve the ability of Caribbean people living in communities at risk from climate change to adopt more sustainable lifestyles. It does this through the provision of services designed to improve knowledge of climate change and foster adaptation to the effects of climate change. These services include: Clearing House – The Clearing House is a proactive information exchange which engages stakeholders in accessing and sharing information. Joint Programs – Regional and international agencies, educational institutions, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and other civil organizations will find a ready and receptive partner for climate change projects at the Centre. Climate Change Curricula –The centre has access to the expertise to take curricula-related programs from concept to implementation. Training – The centre will develop appropriate courses for different organizations and levels of management in issues related to climate change. Consultancy Services – Using its network of expert consultants, the Centre can provide services for a wide range of situations and projects. It can conceptualize, plan, develop, implement, monitor, and evaluate projects and programs in areas related to climate change. Such areas range from maintaining biodiversity to production and use of alternative energy sources. With funding from DIFID (United Kingdom) 5Cs has developed a strategic plan for the Caribbean region to address the impacts of climate change, included in this plan is a strategic element that is focused on building capacity for sustainable energy. C. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH GEF STRATEGIES AND STRATEGIC PROGRAMS:

20. The Project has a high priority under the GEF-4 CC mitigation strategy. The demonstration aspects of the Project will focus on cost effective measures such as improvements in efficiency of standby transformer loads, energy efficient refrigeration equipment, high performance split air-conditioning equipment, efficient fans, closures for slatted windows, roof insulation, solar water heating, and building-integrated renewable energy including PV.

D. JUSTIFY THE TYPE OF FINANCING SUPPORT PROVIDED WITH THE GEF RESOURCES.

21. As the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC, GEF will assist Antigua & Barbuda, Belize, Grenada, Saint Lucia, and Trinidad & Tobago with the development of energy efficiency policy options and initiatives and a decrease of fossil fuel consumption by funding incremental costs of the more energy efficient equipment, appliances, and practices. Building the institutional capacity and the technical capacity in the countries and demonstrating the potential and developing mechanisms to roll-out the measures across the buildings sector are all interventions that remove barriers to a sustainable transformation of the market for the production and use of renewable energy and the sale and use of energy efficient products and equipment. GEF financing is well leveraged with substantial contributions from national governments, multilateral and bilateral sources, NGOs, and the private sector.

OUTLINE THE COORDINATION WITH OTHER RELATED INITIATIVES:

22. The Project has been designed to ensure strong country ownership experienced under by utilizing 85% of the GEF financing in-country and thus achieving strong buy-ins. This level of decentralization will require strong coordination since the various activities in the SIDS need to be well coordinated and common equipment standards and rating systems will be needed to be developed to achieve the envisaged increase in energy efficiency and are best adopted in a harmonized way. The 5Cs has the mandate to coordinate and implement region-wide agreements. UNEP will ensure linkage with the Global Solar Water Heating Market Strengthening


14

project, the Tunisia Solar Water Heating program7, and the Global Market Transformation for Efficient Lighting Project, which are implemented by UNEP. UNEP’s Sustainable Buildings and Construction Initiative (SBCI) will offer tools and information benefitting this project. The UN DESA Division for Sustainable Development and SIDS Unit will provide access to information on national sustainable development strategies development from its Regular Program for Technical Cooperation and the SIDS Unit’s ongoing projects. Information exchange will take place with the UNEP-GEF Energy Efficiency in Buildings project executed by the University of West Indies in Jamaica. 23. Activities of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States and the Caribbean Development Bank are coordinated with through both 5Cs and the national project partners. Most importantly for this project the SIDS Dock activities for the Caribbean – developed by 5Cs – involve support through the World Bank to establish an Eastern Caribbean Energy Regulatory Authority (ECERA) to regulate the sector including energy efficiency in appliances and equipment. This coordination is achieved by supporting member states in the Project to participate in the process and contribute their findings as well as justification for energy regulations that they will adopt in common with the other states. E. DISCUSS THE VALUE-ADDED OF GEF INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROJECT DEMONSTRATED THROUGH

INCREMENTAL REASONING :

24. Building on the current situation in the SIDS under the Project as described in section B above, the current business-as-usual approach would see continuing under-investment and poor levels of awareness of opportunities for energy efficiency improvement among consumers, industry professionals, and concerned governments. The added value of the Project will be to create the conditions for continual improvement of the building stock, demonstrate the effectiveness of using energy efficient products and equipment and producing and using renewable energy, and establish mechanisms that will transform the markets for energy efficient products and equipment and the use of renewable energy. Donor assistance has an important role to play in this context since the capacity in the SIDS under the Project is limited and inadequate to successfully develop and implement sustainable energy programs for buildings. Without GEF support, the markets, which are geographically fragmented and characterized by diffused responsibilities for making investments in energy products, equipment, and systems, would be unable to achieve a meaningful transformation. The Project, therefore, will provide the policy and technical framework for increasing energy efficiency and use of renewable energy, which would otherwise not be addressed through current national efforts. Important barriers for these processes include fragmentation of stakeholders, lack of awareness about options for increasing energy efficiency and increased use of energy efficiency, lack of means for key decision makers to participate in the global process to design a common benchmarking system, and lack of capacity to adequately analyze the needs for policy intervention at local levels. Further, there is need to strengthen the institutional capacity to collect local level data required for baselines and policy tools such as information about availability of materials, products, services, and the local level of technological development. Overcoming these barriers is expected to induce a shift towards more efficient use of fossil fuel based energy and that will be self-sustaining given the national economic benefits that it will bring.

F. INDICATE RISKS, INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS, THAT MIGHT PREVENT THE PROJECT

OBJECTIVE(S) FROM BEING ACHIEVED AND OUTLINE RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES:

25. The risk analysis reveals only low and medium possible risks for successfully achieving the intended project outputs and outcomes. They include (i) low commitment of the participating governments; (ii) lack of national level buy-in to participate in a regional project; (iii) national regulations for use of energy efficient products and equipment and use of renewable energy in buildings are not enforced; (iv) take-back or rebound effect is experienced as a result of new energy efficiency policies and measures and anticipated energy savings are not achieved; (v) development and availability of suitable financing mechanisms to procure and install energy efficient products and equipment in buildings is not forthcoming or delayed; (vi) mandatory minimum

7 The innovative financing model developed and used under this program will serve as a basis for developing a financing mechanism for

the purchase of SWHs by households.


15

energy efficiency standards lead to stagnation of the market for energy efficient products and equipment; and (vii) coordination of project activities is inadequate. However, appropriate mitigation measures and assurances have been incorporated in the project design and implementation arrangements (see Section 3.4 of the UNEP Project Document). 26. The Project is designed to provide 85% of the funding for activities in the participating SIDS themselves. This level of decentralization requires a strong coordination of the various country-based activities to ensure that common equipment standards and rating systems will be developed. 5Cs has the mandate to coordinate and implement region-wide trade related agreements. The successful implementation of energy efficiency programs, which under the Project mainly involve energy efficiency programs for buildings and appliances, requires political commitment and resources. The tendency in the building industry is to sell on first cost basis, esthetics and by location which is counterproductive for energy efficiency. If energy ratings and information are made available in the market, the energy efficiency characteristics of the appliances, equipment or buildings will become readily apparent and consumers will be in a position to make well-informed choices with regard to their purchase. Development of energy efficiency rating systems that are applicable in specific developing countries with appropriate benchmarks for comfort and other aspects will make the market more transparent. Normally responsibilities for investments in energy efficiency at the national level are diffuse and shared among various parties and existing mandatory minimum energy efficiency standards tend to stagnate, the Project will therefore explore rating systems as incentives to pursue the socioeconomic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency. G. EXPLAIN HOW COST-EFFECTIVENESS IS REFLECTED IN THE PROJECT DESIGN

27. The Project will result in direct GHG emission reduction of 1.235 million tons CO2 over the lifetime of the Project which will end by the second quarter of 2016 and 2.235 million tons CO2 including direct post project impact of revolving funds. This is equivalent to an approximate unit abatement cost of US$ 2 per ton of CO2 over the lifespan of the Project. The cost effectiveness of the GEF contribution to the proposed project is acceptable since it demonstrates that the GEF cost of the Project are competitive when compared to a CO2 abatement cost of at least US$ 5 per ton of CO2 for other GHG emissions reduction mechanisms. Further information is in the UNEP Project Document, Section 7.3.

28. The Project will also explore deployment cost effectiveness over time by laying out potentials, targets and roadmaps for longer term transformation. Energy efficiency when promulgated through standards has cost effective benefits in the creation of larger markets for materials and equipment as well as full market penetration. Rating and labeling systems along with mandatory codes will ensure an evolving and improvement seeking perspective on sustainable energy use. The SIDS will require deep energy efficiency gains and increased use of renewable energy. Grenada, in particular, has taken the innovative step of establishing a feed-in agreement for photovoltaic power to increase its share to 1 % of total power generation, which is to increase to 20% by 2020 with support from the Project.

29. Mandatory codes ensure full market penetration of minimum standards of energy efficiency. The Jamaican Building code is projected to reduce energy consumption by 40%. A similar or better code would likely be justified in these SIDS especially if oil price risk is factored into the code. The establishment of a rating system will encourage innovation and progressive competition. The rating system would also apply to existing buildings and could be tied to incentives.

PART III: INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION AND SUPPORT

A. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT:

30. UNEP will be the implementing agency and 5Cs will be the lead ‘umbrella’ Executing Agency. The UNDESA Regular Program for Technical Cooperation as well as the SIDS Unit of its Division for Sustainable Development will act as an Executing Partner Agency and provide technical assistance to 5Cs. UNDESA has

Detlef

Hervorheben


16

executed a variety of GEF projects; however, under the Project UNDESA will only provide advisory services that backstop 5Cs as the umbrella executing agency, which will be responsible for coordinating all national projects and overall execution of the Project.

31. The Project will use decentralized execution arrangements, which are appropriate in view of the diverse geographical locations of the partners. This approach is based on the recognition that a single project for each country at the funding level of the Project would result in, at most, a few viable projects, due to the high cost that would be associated with execution on a country-by-country approach. Combining the various countries under a single project with a central executing body -- a bundling of project development and execution arrangements – provides the best opportunity for development of viable projects in each country, thereby overcoming disadvantages of insufficient economies of scale.

32. The 5CS will execute the Project through national coordinators (NCs) who will serve as consultants. The work of these NC will be overseen by national steering committee (NSC), headed by a chair and supported by the NC, and the project technical coordinator (PTC) based at the 5Cs, as outlined in paragraphs 34and 35 below. The PTC will also be responsible for overall coordination of the activities of the Project and the PTC will be based at the 5Cs. A regional coordination committee (RCC) comprising primarily the NCs and representatives of UNEP, UNDESA, and 5Cs will be responsible for general project oversight. The RCC will be chaired by the PTC. In particular, the RCC will be to report on an ongoing basis with regard to:

(i) execution of the Project at the national level and the relationship with the concerned NSC; and

(ii) consulting activities that are provided to support project activities in other countries -- if relevant for the technical assistance provided to a particular country and the concerned NC.

33. NCs will be retained as consultants and paid based on their delivery of their envisaged outputs. The 5Cs through the PTC will be responsible for financial management and accounting. Funding will be provided by the 5Cs to national activities based on signed requests from the chair of the SC. Such requests will be disbursed upon completion of due diligence by the PTC. As required, the PTC will meet with respective NSCs to review the status of the proposed project(s) and possible challenges to their implementation and to ensure that proper documentation will be provided during the implementation phase. Quarterly reports are to be provided by all NSCs during the early stages of the execution of the Project.

B. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT:

34. Funding will be channeled to 5Cs, which will also be responsible for contracting project staff. National GEF Operational Focal Points are responsible for identifying potential members for the national steering committee (NSC) based upon agreed criteria prepared by the 5Cs in collaboration with the national coordinators. The 5Cs will support a regional oversight team comprising the 5Cs executive director and finance manager, and representatives from UNDESA, UNEP, and the GEF national focal points, and the national Project Management Units (PMUs) under the Project. The RCC will meet quarterly by teleconference or in person during the first year of project implementation. As 5Cs will coordinate technical and administrative matters with UNEP, they will share the administration and project coordination with national PMUs in each country. Since 85% of the resources will be executed nationally, the NSCs will provide the most important guiding function ensuring national buy-in and impact. The project management responsibilities are split evenly between national PMUs and 5Cs. PMUs are required to track their GEF and co-financing budgets while 5Cs will consolidate them for reporting to UNEP and provide general supervision. The regional role is critical to provision of backstopping and ensuring overall progress. UNDESA and 5Cs will serve as alternates for technical and coordination matters should demands require it.

35. The 5Cs will retain the services of an experienced professional selected in consultation with the participating countries to serve as the PTC. The 5Cs and national coordinators, the PTC, and the National GEF Operational Focal Points will be responsible for selecting the NSC in each of the participating countries. NSCs


17

will provide support and oversight for national implementation. NSCs shall meet as needed, supported by the NC. Terms of references for all positions are attached as Appendix 11 to the UNEP Project Document. Each country will take the lead with regard the development of technical specifications or materials for a specific topic. The 5Cs will also be responsible for collecting data and technical materials. It is anticipated that as a result of the distributed execution arrangement of the Project its impact on development of appropriate national policies will be maximized. Also, building on capacity at a regional intergovernmental agency, i.e., 5Cs, will be more sustainable than at smaller individual entities in the participating countries. The 5Cs through the PTC will provide technical assistance to the national projects as required to ensure successful outcomes. UNDESA will in collaboration with the 5Cs also provide technical assistance. Consultants will also provide technical assistance as needed and will be contracted through the 5Cs. More details about the project implementation arrangements are provided in section 4 of the UNEP Project Document. PART IV: EXPLAIN THE ALIGNMENT OF PROJECT DESIGN WITH THE ORIGINAL PIF: 36. Due to recent developments some modifications to the original project design were required to ensure that the objectives of the Project will be met. Country-wise priorities with regard to the possible project components have been adjusted and emphasis has placed on certain aspects. For instance, in Trinidad & Tobago, strengthening of energy regulation is favored since energy prices are expected to remain low for some time, which makes promoting energy efficiency more challenging. In the other countries where energy prices are high, market approaches such the development and involvement of ESCOs are prioritized. Thus the final design of the Project is tailored to national circumstances while sharing many common components. Also, the Project is more clearly focused on buildings than was described in the PIF. The project management arrangement have been streamlined with 5Cs co-managing the five national projects. The cash contribution has considerably increased in comparison with the cash co-financing that was envisaged at approval of the PIF. With regard to total GEF and co-financing allocations the following changes have been made:

Components 1 - Monitoring and Assessment, and Component 7 - Project Management, decreased by less than 15%.

Component 2 was reduced by 40% in favor of demonstration activities where learning by doing is targeted.

Component 3, Financial Mechanisms, was reduced by 8% but will now be executed in combination with

Component 4, Demonstrations, increased by 40%. GEF-financing of both components increased by 30% while co-financing increased by 50%, which is mostly cash now. During the PPG the project development team was successful in moving from grant-based demonstrations to blended grant/loan financing where the GEF funding is grant-based and the financing institutions provide loans thus with a leveraging ratio of 4 to 1. The initial project investments are the demonstrations, which require high due diligence and technical inputs while the mechanism is a loan that is returned to the revolving fund of Component 3. This component enables the project to enter the retrofit market thus broadening the potential impact of the Project.

Component 5, Regulatory Framework, is maintained 35%. Grenada, St. Lucia, and Antigua & Barbuda will have their regulatory activities taken up by the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States with World Bank establishing the Eastern Caribbean Energy Regulatory Authority; World Bank financial support of $5.6 million is envisaged to support this together with a grant of US$ 2 million from SIDS Dock (the latter is a conservative estimate as described in the 5Cs co-finance letter in the UNEP Project Document). Thus the GEF funds will now support the three eastern Caribbean countries with regard to their participation in the regional regulatory development activities instead of assisting them with developing energy regulations themselves as originally envisaged. The 5Cs is also represented at board of the SIDS Dock and will thus ensure proper coordination. Since the work of preparing the codes and setting up the regulatory agency is covered by associated co-finance, the results of components 1, 2, and 4 will be important in supporting the activities under component 5, Regulatory Framework.

Component 6, Regional Technical Activities, has been decreased 50% since 5Cs has increased its share of the project management component. Project Management cost remain the same.

Detlef

Hervorheben


18

PART V: AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION

This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF criteria for CEO Endorsement.

Agency Coordinator,

Agency name

Signature Date

(Month, day, year) Project Contact

Person

Telephone

Email Address Maryam Niamir-Fuller, Director, Director, GEF Coordination Office

07/23//2012 Edu Hassing,

Task Manager Climate Change, UNEP/DTIE

+ 33 (0)1 4437 1439

edu.hassing@ unep.org


19

ANNEX A: RESPONSES TO PROJECT REVIEWS (from GEF Secretariat and GEF Agencies, and Responses to Comments from Council at work program inclusion and the Convention Secretariat and STAP at PIF)

Review Criteria

Questions

Secretariat Comment At CEO Endorsement(FSP)/Approval

(MSP)

Response

Project Design

5. Will the project deliver tangible global environmental benefits?

8. Is the global environmental benefit measurable?

DER, February 17, 2012. a) The estimation of global environmental benefits is presented for each country separately. However, the estimates provided in each country do not match with the stated goals/objectives for each country, or cannot be understood due to lack of documentation. For example, Antigua and Barbuda: Table 1 presents 160,000 direct tCO2e reductions through demonstrations and public awareness on page 9 of the endorsement request; yet on 25 of the project document, 161,500 tCO2e reductions are available from a standards and labeling program. On page 15 of the endorsement request, Antigua and Barbuda are said to have dropped out of the regulatory component on appliances. b) It is necessary to more clearly present the planned accomplishments in each country; which components are being pursued; and provide clear descriptions of how the GHG benefits are estimated for each countries actions. Please explain if the examples of energy savings in the project document are illustrative only, or whether they are meant to be in line with project components of this project. c) Further, we cannot understand the reasoning in paragraph 87 of the project document on page 38, which implies that emissions benefits will result from "the projected 20% energy efficiency improvement." Yet in Table 10 on page 39, the GHG emissions reductions estimates are not linked with the 20% but based on country specific actions. Please clarify if the 20% is a visionary target for the region or is an outcome of the project, or if the actual emissions reductions are generated from direct and specific actions in each country per questions a) and b)

February 23, 2012 a) Detailed estimates may result in fine resolution figures while since uncertainties are relatively large, figures are rounded when brought up into the text. At time of submission, the situation in Antigua and Barbuda, Grenada and St. Lucia was uncertain as regards regulation, but the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States has been recently designated by SIDS Dock to benefit from a grant program administered for SIDS Dock by the World Bank on regulation. 5Cs as developer of SIDS Dock and continuing member of the board confirms this and the project proponents have now removed the uncertainty regarding regulation. Text on dropping regulation removed and budget restored. Impact estimates are not changed since the estimates were for suasion only with standards and labeling while now regulation will reinforce impact. CEO Req Project Framework components 2 and 5. Antigua & Barbuda’s revolving fund impact has been added in CEO Req Table 1 and ProDoc Table 10. b) As above all countries now anticipate standards and labeling with regulation of Minimum Energy Performance and market suasion. CEO Document, para. 10 Component (v) The smaller economies will also diversify into retrofitting and Energy Service Companies. c) 20% emissions intensity reduction is the target, top down estimates with market penetration and turn-over rates are estimated broad scale while bottom up specific building analysis and measures - where identified in sufficient detail - are added. The bottom up cases


20

above. validate which technologies and measures are needed to reach the 20% target. Text added to ProDoc, section 2.6, para. 36.

9. Is the project design sound, its framework consistent & sufficiently clear (in particular for the outputs)?

DER, February 17, 2012. There is a need to streamline the project components, ensure appropriate financing levels, and avoid duplication. Please address the following comments. a) On component 1, this is a very important component. b) On component 2, there appears to be overlap with the types of activities that will be needed for component 5. Please clarify if the technical materials developed for these components can be complementary and avoid duplication. c) On component 2d, development of a building rating system and label, please explain the potential duplication with component 5, energy performance standards for building design. These two efforts appear to conduct the same type of work and could be combined for lower cost. This duplication is apparent in the write-up on page 8, paragraph b) of the endorsement request. d) On component 3, there is a mention of PV systems. Because this is an energy efficiency project, a minimal amount of funding should be allocated to renewable energy systems. On page 12 there is mention of coordination with solar water heating initiatives. Please clarify if some portion of this project needs to be identified as meeting focal area objectives on renewable energy. e) On component 3, please articulate how the activities will be able to effect the outcomes as identified. The amounts of investment in the component ($2.245M total) do not seem adequate to have demonstrable impact on lower rates. The amount is lower than the PIF, with some resources moving to component 4. This change in financing appears to be going the wrong direction. Please justify. f) On component 4, the TA portion describes demonstrations and higher market volume. But the output describes government adopts buildings and efficiency standard. This is not clearly related. Would not the government adoption of policies fit better under another component, such as component 5? Please clarify. g) On component 5, as identified at the PIF stage, this is a very important

a) Component 1 is institutional capacity building and will produce the justification for program investments and regulation. b) Component 2 is industry capacity building and should prepare industry and vendors to deliver on component 3,4 and 5. c) We stand corrected, the rating system should be in component 5 whereas training on the use of energy estimation tools (also used for rating) belongs in Component 2. funding shifted from component 2 to 5 page 2 and 3. d) While for the buildings ratings system and standards we will take a holistic approach on energy including renewables, we do not anticipate a large uptake on PV due to cost effectiveness favoring the efficiency measures. This was requested in the PIF. A small fraction of impact is shown in the CC Tracking tool and a paragraph added para. 11 CEO Document and para. 88 ProDoc. e) The Component 3 and 4 are considered together in that they are both investments, the demonstrations having a high degree of quality control monitoring while the reflows to the financial mechanisms would follow. CEO Document para. 10 item component iv f) We agree, it is restated as a demonstration within their own government buildings. g) Component 5 is significantly strengthened given recent developments. The 5Cs as developer of the SIDS Dock and continuing member of the board of Directors informs that SIDS Dock will grant 2 million USD to the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States through the World Bank for energy sector regulation including energy efficiency in appliances and equipment. The co-finance and GEF funds have been shifted to component 5 based on 5Cs assertion at this time while full announcement of the OECS project would be available from World Bank as at project inception. The Project describes task areas that are lead by each country so as to avoid duplication while implementation of measures is more uniform with the exception that Trinidad


21

component of the program. This component should be strengthened, but instead the financing is lower than at the PIF. Also, please clarify if this component will be pursued in each country, or just Trinidad and Tobago. The description in paragraph e on page 15 implies that Grenada, St. Lucia, and Antigua Barbuda have "dropped this component." This weakens one of the major justifications for this regional coordination. This also contradicts the information presented on page 24 of the project document, which estimates the benefits to Antigua Barbuda for standards and labels. The statement "Trinidad Tobago and Belize will lead the regulatory work and it can be picked up by the others." is not encouraging. We understood the point of this project was that shared and coordinated efforts would lead to progress by all. Please clarify. h) On component 6, please ensure that results of component 5 in each country are documented and shared for accelerated replication across the region. The distribution of assignments (described in paragraph 32 on page 15) to different countries will create a complex web of interacting actors that will require careful coordination. Please explain in more detail how the 5Cs has the capacity to manage this complex task. i) From Table 1 on page 9 of the endorsement request, it appears that the components will be unevenly implemented in each of the five participating countries. For example, St. Lucia gets benefits from lighting and ESCOs, while Trinidad and Tobago gets benefits from EE Standards and Labeling, buildings. Please explain how each of the components will be applicable in each of the participating countries. j) In small and fragmented markets, one barrier to efficiency is lack of aggregation for efficient building materials and practices. Will this project include efforts to aggregate demand by aligning incentive programs and standards programs in multiple countries simultaneously? k) Based on the comments above, please provide a table which shows how much each financing and co-financing for each component will be implemented in each participating country. This could an expansion of Table 11 on page 40 of the project document, with additional

and Tobago relying heavily on regulation while the others pursue broader scope including ESCOs and financial mechanisms to encourage more aggressive energy savings. h) 5Cs directly contracts the national project management units and participates on the national steering committees. UNDESA will supplement this coordination task5Cs working with the GEF Focal Point will recruit and directly contract the National Consultant/Coordinator (NC). The 5Cs together with the GEF Focal point will identify and recruit members of the National Steering Committee (NSC). The GEF focal point, NC and members of the NSC will comprise the national project management units. Each NSC will have a chair selected by the 5Cs in consultation with the Focal Point. The 5Cs will contract a Technical Project Coordinator (TPC) who will be responsible for coordinating implementation in the countries. Coordination assistance will be provided by a regional steering committee (RSC) comprised primarily of the NCs, TPC, a representative of UNDESA will supplement this coordination task CEO Document p 16 Institutional Arrangement description expanded. i) St. Lucia is a smaller project, the technology areas delegated to them is lighting which is straightforward and they are interested in the topic. St. Lucia Development Bank funded ESCOs will cover a variety of technologies and generate the benefits. Trinidad will focus on the regulation with technical input from the others. Grenada task area includes work on a buildings evaluation protocol drawing on expertise from the Saint George’s University. Grenada will implement regulation, market suasion and ESCOs for the impact. Antigua and Barbuda retains project task area responsibility for suasion materials while implementing suasion, regulation and ESCos. Belize will focus on buildings codes and ESCOs as topic areas and adopt regulation, suasion and ESCOs for impact. The impact table and this text inserted as a summary. j) The ratings and labeling systems will be harmonized to the degree possible with all project countries as well as Dominica, St. Vincent & Grenadines, and St. Kitts and Nevis (OECS). The


22

columns for each participating country showing how much financing, co-financing, and whether the country will be committed to this component. Perhaps a qualitative scale under each country's column could be used, such as "Fully implemented; studied; not involved." We invite UNEP to propose an appropriate scale that conveys the meaning of how committed each country is to each component of the project. l) We find the project document sections to be quite choppy and inconsistent. Examples from one country are used in sections on Incremental cost reasoning, Replication, Public awareness...etc. We are not quite sure if the example in one country is representative of the planned efforts of all countries under the proposed project, or is some kind of incomplete baseline description. Please clarify.

OECS is most important to apply uniformity. The blended grant loan mechanism is the same across all countries considering that they are eligible under SIDS Dock and Caribbean Development Bank. The levels of mandatory energy performance will be different in TT versus the rest. k) Table 16 page 63 of the Project Document shows the GEF and cofinancing by component and by country. Given the above changes including a shift in GEF and cofinance the emphasis is quite uniform with the only difference being that Trinidad and Tobago is mainly standards and labeling and regulation with no ESCO fund. l) Trinidad and Tobago must always be described separately while the others are much more uniform. The text is revised to distinguish between TT and “other SIDS” where necessary for clarity.

10. Is the project consistent with the recipient country’s national priorities and policies?

DER, February 17, 2012. Yes.

11. Is the project consistent and properly coordinated with other related initiatives in the country or in the region?


12. Is the proposed project likely to be cost-effective?

13. Has the cost-effectiveness sufficiently been demonstrated in project design?

DER, February 17, 2012. a) We are confused on how to assess the cost-effectiveness of this regional program based on the information provided. First, it is difficult to understand which of the components is implemented in each country and how this leads to the estimated emissions benefits for each country. Second, we

a) The task areas for each country will contribute to the impact in the 5 countries as a whole therefore cost effectiveness is an aggregate. Antigua and Barbuda had proposed a revolving fund but there is not an appropriate national development bank to execute this component. Based on the discussions


23

don't really understand the level of co-financing provided by each country in relation to the estimated benefits in that country. Is it really intended that Antigua and Barbuda will provide similar levels of co-financing to Grenada but achieve only 1/3 the emissions benefits. Is UNEP proposed that the cost-effectiveness be considered for the project as a whole? Please explain. b) It appears that the most cost-effective options will not be equally pursued in all countries. Instead, some countries are pursuing options that are less cost-effective than other participants. Is this the intention of the project? We would like to see a justification, for example, on why more countries will not undertake the most cost-effective options such as the component 5 regulatory standards and labeling program in Trinidad and Tobago.

that included a revolving fund the pass the savings generated by the government buildings retrofits to a reinvestment fund, we have now included this component bringing A&B in line with the others however, the proponents feel that the Caribbean Development Bank financial instrument funded with 2.5 M$ SIDS Dock grant and CDB cofinance of ~7.5 M$ will make the overall target achievable at low risk with an A&B direct post project component added. The CDB will fund equivalent activities as associated cofinance. CDB involvement will be confirmed once their project arrangements with SIDS Dock and UNDP are completed later in 2012. The CEO Document. Project Framework contains a footnote and the Pro Doc Cofinance Letters section contains a listing of Associated Cofinance. P 152.

14. Is the project structure sufficiently close to what was presented at PIF?

DER, February 17, 2012. We are confused about the re-allocation of resources away from Component 5 which at the PIF stage was identified as the most important component. Please re-allocate funding to this component.

Funding has been reallocated to this component with the now much improved prospect for achievement with the SIDS Dock funding as above. Components 1,2,4, and 6 all contribute to 3 and 5 in important ways. Funding now reallocated in view of new prospects of adoption with Associated cofinance and an institutional arrangement in OECS being established. CEO Document Project Framework, p 9 Component (v)

15. Does the project take into account potential major risks, including the consequences of climate change and includes sufficient risk mitigation measures?

DER, February 17, 2012. The risks of the use of voluntary programs is not adequately addressed.

The risk of regulation stagnating the market is well recognized and explained in the text of the Project Document Risk Log page 46 . Regulation of the “laggards” in the market is now uniformly implemented across all countries to mitigate the risk that laggards will persist.

Justification for GEF Grant

16. Is the value-added of GEF involvement in the project clearly demonstrated through incremental reasoning?



24

17. Is the type of financing provided by GEF, as well as its level of concessionality, appropriate?


18. How would the proposed project outcomes and global environmental benefits be affected if GEF does not invest?

DER, February 17, 2012. Without the GEF investment, efforts across the region to promote energy efficiency will be uncoordinated and slower, reducing the benefits to be attained.

19. Is the GEF funding level of project management budget appropriate?


20. Is the GEF funding level of other cost items (consultants, travel, etc.) appropriate?


21. Is the indicative co-financing adequate for the project?

22. Are the confirmed co-financing amounts adequate for each project component?

DER, February 17, 2012. a) This is unclear at this point. As noted in box 9, please provide stronger justification for the amount of spending on each components and the potential duplication of effort between certain components. b) Regarding the co-financing levels, please validate the co-financing levels offered in letters match with those reported in the project document and endorsement requests. For example, the WINDREF co-financing letter lists $195,000 in-kind, but the tables in the document list $185,000. c) We are somewhat confused by the inclusion of co-financing letters that are not recorded in the endorsement request. For example, UNDESA confirms that

A table has been added at the beginning of the cofinance letters section ProDoc p 151.. Cofinance has been assessed by 5Cs, UNDESA and UNEP as responsible for tracking and validating the cofinance and is shown with differences explained including the Project Preparation cofinance already consumed and the cofinance reduction to only that which supports the objectives of ESD Caraibes in buildings. While the larger cofinance was offered in the letters in good faith, they are reduced where necessary to a level that can be reliably verified. In no case was cofinance exaggerated in the project document. The private sector cofinance was withdrawn completely but


25

$920,000 of BIPV systems were sold in Grenada. But this does not appear in the document anywhere, and is likely ineligible for co-financing. So why is the letter in the document package? Likewise, please explain the EC funding letter of 249,566.0 euro to Saint Lucia.

inadvertently remained pasted into the letters. It may be considered associated cofinance and in any case was not included in the tables or cofinance total.

23. Has the Tracking Tool8 been included with information for all relevant indicators?

DER, February 17, 2012. The tracking tool needs to be re-submitted. Do not use any of the cells under objective 1: Transfer of Innovative Technologies. The estimate of benefits should be recorded under Objective 2: Energy Efficiency and Objective 3: Renewable energy to the extent that any RE benefits are realized. Further, the cells in the tracking tool should be filled out with the targets for end of project, not the beginning of the project. For example, capacity building should not be 1 at the end of the project.

Corrected. The current estimate for renewables is included in the CC Tracking Tool and described in text associated with Table 1 CEO Document and Table 10 ProDoc.

Comments by Germany on Intersessional Work

Program March 2010 Response

21. Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD-Caraibes) Promotion: Regional (Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Grenada, St. Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago)

It remains unclear what the role of Jamaica will be within the project proposal. Jamaica is not mentioned but in the table on GHG emissions. Clarification would be helpful as the share of Jamaican GHG emissions reductions would make up more than one third of total project mitigation effects. The characteristics of the rating system and especially the label remain unclear (performance based?). As the introduction of building labels can be a highly complex procedure, more information on the planned activities would be helpful.

Jamaica has taken a national project independently. Information exchange is planned but no joint activities. An Annex on the baseline and impact of project measures is provided. The tools that are anticipated for use are the eQUEST software (free) using suitably adjusted defaults for new buildings and a process of matching to bills for existing buildings. Ratings will be kWh/m2 floor area. Ratings for equipment will be adopted/adjusted from USA, Canada and EU systems.


26

Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel The Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel, administered by UNEP, advises the Global Environment Facility

STAP Scientific and Technical screening of the Project Identification Form (PIF) Date of screening: 26th January 2010 Screener: Lev Neretin Panel member validation by: N.H. Ravindranath I. PIF Information GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 4171 REGION/COUNTRIES: CARIBBEAN: ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, BELIZE, GRENADA, ST. LUCIA, AND TRINIDAD AND

TOBAGO

PROJECT TITLE: ENERGY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CARIBBEAN (ESD-CARAIBES) GEF AGENCY: UNEP OTHER EXECUTING PARTNERS: MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA, MINISTRY OF NATURAL

RESOURCES AND THE ENVIRONMENT BELIZE, GRENADA ENERGY DIVISION, ST. GEORGE’S UNIVERSITY, ST. LUCIA

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND PLANNING DIVISION, TRINIDAD & TOBAGO, AND CARIBBEAN COMMUNITY CLIMATE

CHANGE CENTRE (5CS) GEF FOCAL AREA: CLIMATE CHANGE

GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM: CC-SP1 II. STAP Advisory Response (see table below for explanation) Based on this PIF screening, STAP’s advisory response to the GEF Secretariat and GEF Agency(ies): Minor revision required III. Further guidance from STAP 1. The project’s objective is to transfer and implement sustainable energy policies and instruments in the Caribbean SIDs through the promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energy use focusing on building sector. The project addresses a number of barriers including information, regulatory, capacity building and financial barriers. Some benefits can be accrued though the use of a regional approach, particularly those related to knowledge management and increased replication potential. STAP requests that the following issues be addressed before the CEO endorsement.

2. Baseline: STAP recommends presenting baseline situation for each of the targeted country in terms of energy efficiency and renewable energy market barriers and existing technologies in building sector and prioritize interventions accordingly to be supported at the national and regional levels. STAP wants to see more emphasis in the project on promoting system approach to energy conservation and efficiency because energy savings are higher through the use of better and alternative energy systems (heating, cooling, ventilation) compared to savings achieved by the use of energy-efficient equipment and appliances.

Buildings as systems is the fundamental approach with trade-offs to be considered using a compliance model and rating system. While there are differing opinions in the GEF community on the importance of minimum mandatory EE & RE codes versus voluntary rating systems and market suasion, the project proposes to use both.

3. Sustainable Energy: The phrase “sustainable energy” is not clearly explained. If the aim is to focus only on EE and RE in the building sector, why use the term “sustainable energy”?

EE & RE in Buildings is the main focus and this project should be considered the first in a series of three thrusts including RE in the energy grids, energy storage and de-carbonizing transport. The three together are SD for energy. The Title is now Energy for Sustainable Development in Buildings


27

4. EE or RE: The focus of the discussion is largely on EE in buildings. Solar energy is mentioned in between. PIF does not provide a clear distinction/strategy for the promotion of EE only or EE and RE. It is also not clear whether the project considers energy efficiency and renewables at the national level beyond the building sector?

The main focus is on end use purchased energy reductions through efficiency and renewable supply. This occurs mainly in buildings. For the smallest SIDS, any of the same technologies that can also benefit fisheries for example would be promoted there as well.

5. Sectors: There is a lack of clarity on which sectors are included in the project: a. whether the project aims at electricity use only for lighting, AC and other appliances in the building;b. whether construction materials are also included; covering steel, cement, aluminium, glass etc.;

In most of these SIDS, electricity is about 95% consumed in buildings in T&T and in Belize the project now clearly excludes agriculture and industry from the scope. Materials will be included, both in improved technologies for production in the larger countries and for more uniform markets for supply.

6. Financial Mechanism: What is the source of financing for EE activities? Why risk hedging against fuel price spikes? Which fiscal incentives are considered for financing renewable energy sources?

The project engages the National Development Banks within their existing mandates but with an expanded engagement in EE. As well the commercial banks (Royal Bank, Scotia Bank etc.) already financing buildings in the Caribbean may find lending to low energy consuming buildings to be lower risk. Borrowers that are exposed to high energy prices spikes are at risk of default.

7. Barrier Analysis: The barriers in promotion of EE and RE are likely to be different for different technologies and possibly different islands. The barriers to promotion of sustainable energy are not clear. STAP suggests conducting a systematic barrier analysis to identify, rank and prioritize barriers for different technologies in different islands to enable targeted approach to overcome the barriers.

The barriers in each country have been analyzed with the result that while many technologies and measures are shared across the region each country is differentiated in its delivery mechanisms.

8. Risk Assessment: The risk of incremental cost of incorporating EE and RE technologies into buildings is not adequately recognized. Resistance from builders and architects to components which may increase the cost of building should also be recognized and addressed by proposed interventions.

There are two separate groups, those that do not feel compelled to use a lot of energy due to cost and those that demand high standards of comfort. The project will appeal to the demand for higher comfort through promotion and demonstration while addressing minimum performance in mandatory codes. Not all countries will have the same emphasis but will share results and experience to stimulate broader application.


28

9. Climate resilience: STAP welcomes notion that the project should increase climate resilience of targeted SIDS through actions supporting energy efficiency and distributed renewable energy use in buildings. However, no specific information/analysis provided about “climate-proofing” of proposed technological interventions. This analysis is critical in the context of climate change impacts on SIDS. STAP recommends conducting more detailed analysis of climate risks of the proposed interventions at the project preparation stage and mainstream these risks in all project components. Sufficient resources should be allocated for such analysis.

The argument that RE and EE reduce vulnerability follows the general logic that energy is used to compensate for climate impacts. Cooling loads will be reduced by energy efficiency and hence provide more coping capacity. Water shortages in island states is normally addressed using reverse osmosis desalination. Again renewable energy and energy efficiency will bolster supply. Water saving measures in the building codes will reduce demand. UNDESA is conducting a parallel project on mainstreaming climate change adaptation in Grenada which will serve to inform this aspect.

STAP advisory response, Brief explanation of advisory response and action proposed Minor revision required.

STAP has identified specific scientific/technical suggestions or opportunities that should be discussed with the proponent as early as possible during development of the project brief. One or more options that remain open to STAP include: (i) Opening a dialogue between STAP and the proponent to clarify issues (ii) Setting a review point during early stage project development and agreeing terms of reference for an independent expert to be appointed to conduct this review The proponent should provide a report of the action agreed and taken, at the time of submission of the full project brief for CEO endorsement.


29

ANNEX B: CONSULTANTS TO BE HIRED FOR THE PROJECT USING GEF RESOURCES

$/ Estimated person weeks

Cost ($) Position Titles person

week Tasks to be performed

For Project Management

None

For Technical Assistance

Local Technical Coordinators and Consultants

1,500 613 919,500 Technical audits, training, project proposals for demonstrations, regulatory documents, technical materials, feasibility studies

International/ Regional

Regional 2,200 125 274,000 Technical advice and input on project activities, coordination of inputs from national projects to each other, technical reporting to UNEP

International 5,000 15 75,000 Technical backstopping and special studies including Sea Water Cooling

Travel 29,000

Total Person-weeks 743

Total Cost 1,297,500


30

ANNEX C: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND THE USE OF

FUNDS

A. EXPLAIN IF THE PPG OBJECTIVE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED THROUGH THE PPG ACTIVITIES

UNDERTAKEN. Baselines and potential impact on buildings energy consumption was achieved through a sample of buildings sufficient to understand which opportunities there are and that >20% will be possible. This process will be repeated and refined during the project. Stakeholder consultation was achieved mainly through individual interviews and support garnered for the project from those to be involved. The objective of defining the project in national context was achieved and the national project documents established and combined into a regional project. B. DESCRIBE FINDINGS THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE PROJECT DESIGN OR ANY CONCERNS ON

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION, IF ANY: NONE C. PROVIDE DETAILED FUNDING AMOUNT OF THE PPG ACTIVITIES AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION

STATUS IN THE TABLE BELOW:

Project Preparation Activities Approved

Implementation

Status

GEF Amount ($) Co-

financing ($)

Amount Approved

Amount Spent to

date

Amount Committed

Uncommitted

Amount*Local Consultants Completed 50,000 40,000 50,000 0 25,000International Consultants

Completed 40,000 35,586 40,000 0 20,000

Travel Completed 20,000 13,777 20,000 0 40,000Consultative Meetings (5)

Completed 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 50,000

Logistical Support Completed 0 0 0 0 30,000Reports & communications

Completed 5,000 1,299 5,000 0 10,000

Total 125,000 100,662 125,000 0 175,000* Any uncommitted amounts should be returned to the GEF Trust Fund. This is not a physical transfer of money, but achieved through reporting and netting out from disbursement request to Trustee. Please indicate expected date of refund transaction to Trustee.

ANNEX E: CALENDAR OF EXPECTED REFLOWS No reflows anticipated.

SECTION 1:

1.1 Pro

1.2 Pro

1.3 Pro

1.4 Tru

1.5 Stra

GEF

Stra

1.6 UN

1.7 Geo

1.8 Mo

1.9 Pro

1.10 Dur

1.11 Cos

Cost toCo-fina Cash Exec Natio Natio Bila

In-ki Nat Exe Nat

1.12 Pro

: PROJECT ID

oject title:

oject number

oject type:

ust Fund:

ategic object

F strategic long

ategic programm

NEP priority:

ographical sc

ode of executi

oject executin

ration of pro

st of project

o the GEF Trancing h cuting Agencyonal Executinonal Develop

ateral (Gover

ind tional Execuecuting Partnetional Executi

oject Summa

DENTIFICATIO

r:

tives:

g-term objectiv

me for GEF IV

cope:

ion:

ng organizati

oject:

rust Fund

y: 5Cs ng Partners ment Banks rnment of Ja

uting Partnerer: UNDESA ing Partner/N

ary

PROJECT

ON

EnCaribbean

G

PM

FS

G

ve: C

V: C

En

R

Ex

ion: C

48 C C

pan for Beli

s

NGO: WINDR

TotaTot

T DOCUMEN

nergy for Susn Buildings

GFL/

MS:

SP

GEF

C1 Energy

CC-SP1-Build

nergy Policy/

Regional

xternal

aribbean Com

8 months ommencemenompletion:

ze) Sub-to

REFSub-to

al Co-financial Project Co

NT

stainable Dev

y Efficiency

dings EE

/ Sustainable

mmunity Clim

nt: 11/01/201 10/31/20

U4,8

52,22,8

5otal 6,1

1,111

otal 1,5ing 7,6ost 12,4

Annex 1:

velopment in

consumption

mate Change C

12 016

US$859,000

550,000 266,500 800,000 500,000 116,500

174,000 150,000 185,000 509,000 625,500 484,500

: Project Docum

n and producti

Centre (5Cs)

% 38.9

4.4 18.2 22.4 4.0

9.4 1.2 1.5

100.0

ment

1

ion

Annex 1: Project Document

2

1. The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean project (the Project) was proposed by five member countries of the Caribbean Community (CariCom) comprising Antigua & Barbuda, Belize, Grenada, St. Lucia, and Trinidad & Tobago. GEF and UNEP support the Project, which aims to both reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and make the energy sector in the participating countries more efficient and increase their use of renewable energy. Increased access to affordable energy services is essential to drive economic development in the island states of the Caribbean. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the countries in the Caribbean are dependent on imported petroleum products for more than 90 % of commercial energy consumption. As a result of their small land areas and high levels of energy inefficiency the energy cost of countries in the Caribbean are among the highest in the world, which reduces their global competiveness. Paradoxically, the same countries have considerable potential for increased use of renewable energy. The countries recognize that to achieve their goals of sustainable economic development as set out in the Barbados Plan of Action and the Mauritius Strategy of Implementation1, they will need to increase the use of their renewable energy resources and significantly improve efficiency of their energy use. 2. The Project represents the first regional project that is piloting energy efficiency improvements in the economy in member states of CariCom while at the same time aiming to increase the use of renewable energy. Since buildings are major consumers of electricity across the region the Project focuses (in fact, in three of the five participating countries under the Project buildings are the major consumers) the Project focuses on the buildings sector for improving the efficiency of energy use. Over the last decade, the economic development of the island states and the low lying coastal states that comprise the Caribbean Community have experienced severe negative impacts due to changing climatic conditions. This has resulted in more frequent and damaging hydro-meteorological events as the changing weather conditions have had devastating effects on the infrastructure and on food production, in particular. In the small island developing states (SIDS) in the Caribbean that import an estimated 90 % of their food supplies, the impacts of climate change are even increasing this dependency when global food prices are high and continue to increase. With a similar level of dependence on imports of petroleum products that are required for economic development and meeting the energy needs of the population at also increasing prices, the impacts of climate change are bringing the economic vulnerability of these SIDS to new high levels. This increasing vulnerability has long been a major concern for the SIDS, in general, and they have been advocating strongly within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process for increased financial resources to be able to mitigate these impacts. 3. The overall objective of the Project is to bring about a 20 % reduction in GHG emissions from the building sector in the five participating countries though an integrated approach comprising (i) technical demonstration of energy efficient equipment, appliances, and best practices with regard to the design of more energy efficient buildings and retrofitting of buildings to make them more energy efficient; (ii) development and use of innovative financing mechanisms to address the higher upfront cost associated with the use of energy efficient products and equipment and the development of renewable energy sources; (iii) development of sustainable energy policies to support market transformation towards the use of more energy efficient products and equipment and the increased use of renewable energy; (iv) capacity building and institutional strengthening to implement sustainable energy policies and measures; and (v) public education to raise awareness among the general population of the benefits of sustainable development of the energy in comparison with a business-as- usual continuation of current practices of supplying and using energy. 4. Project implementation will comprise (i) as umbrella lead executing agency, the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs), that in 2002 was established by the CariCom governments to

1 Negotiated agreements under the Commission on Sustainable Development of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).


3

address the impacts of climate change, is based in Belize, and will be responsible for overall implementation, including the central coordination of the project activities; (ii) the National Steering Committees in the five participating countries that will be responsible for overseeing local project implementation; and (iii) regional and local energy experts who will be assisted by specialists from the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), which will act as executing partner agency and will provide the technical assistance. Annually, an official Project Steering Committee will be held comprising representatives from all participating countries, executing partner agencies, financiers, other stakeholders, and UNEP to review and discuss the overall status and progress of the Project. 5. It is expected that the policies, measures, and mechanism that will be developed and adopted under the Project will result in a reduction of 20 % in GHG emissions in the near-term and an even larger reduction of GHG emissions in the longer term. The lessons learned under the Project will also be disseminated across the Caribbean region so as to reduce its general dependence on imported petroleum products and help increase the level of available financial resources to mitigate the impacts of climate change and promote a sustainable development of the energy sector in the region. 6. The Project comprises six components, which provide the overarching structure for implementation of project activities in the five SIDS under the Project with a total cost of $12,484,500 of which the GEF will finance $4,859,000. The Project will be implemented over a period of four years and includes the following components.

(i) Establishment of an assessment and monitoring system for energy efficiency and renewable energy in buildings; (ii) Strengthening of national capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy to support long-term development of the five SIDS; (iii) Development and use of appropriate financial and market-based mechanisms that support sustainable energy use in buildings; (iv) Development and implementation of a demonstration program for sustainable energy use in buildings; (v) Development and adoption of a regulatory framework energy efficient buildings (building codes) and minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for appliances and equipment; and (vi) Increasing regional awareness and improving knowledge management, and sharing with regard to the benefits of energy efficiency and renewable energy and the development of a replication strategy.

7. As a result of the capacity building and awareness-raising activities under the Project it is expected that more engineers, technicians, architects, and relevant vendors will become qualified to deploy energy efficient technologies, products, and equipment in buildings thus accelerating the energy savings that can be achieved in buildings. Demonstration projects will be closely monitored and adjusted, if necessary, to make an effort that they exceed their energy savings targets. Feedback from the demonstration projects will be disseminated to the buildings sector and the general public. It is envisaged that the required financing for increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in buildings will be provided by national development banks, housing development corporations, and private sector banks in the form of loans for businesses, developers, construction companies, and individuals. The finance conditions and terms will be tailored to equalize the energy cost over the life of the loan as much as possible and help reduce the financial impact of any sharp energy price hikes in the future. In Trinidad & Tobago, where energy prices have remained relatively low as a result of its sizeable natural gas resources, regulatory measures will be pursued to counteract the under-investment in energy efficiency of buildings, most of which will last beyond its projected period for natural gas production.


4

8. It is projected that an emissions intensity reduction of 20 % of GHG emissions will be achieved in the buildings under the Project. Indirect impact following the project completion is expected to scale up to the entire buildings sector in due course in these countries as a result of the standards, codes, policy and legislature, and capacity built that will result from successful implementation. Rates of emissions reduction from buildings sector will vary by country and depend on the type of mechanism that will be applied to promote energy efficiency and use of renewable energy in buildings (for instance, regulation, persuasion, preferable finance or a combination). The Project is projected to achieve GHG emission reductions of 1.2 million tons (Mtons) of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) during the project implementation; 1.2 Mton of CO2e as direct post-project GHG emission reductions (as a result of the use of revolving funds), and a total of about 8 Mtons of CO2 equivalent as indirect GHG emission reductions (as a result of a longer term shift in energy equipment preferences and mandatory minimum energy performance requirements).


5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................................... 1 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... 6 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND AND SITUATION ANALYSIS (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION) ................ 8

2.1. Background and context .................................................................................................... 8 2.2. Global significance ............................................................................................................ 11 2.3. Threats, root causes and barrier analysis ....................................................................... 12 2.4. Institutional, sectoral and policy context ........................................................................ 14 2.5. Stakeholder mapping and analysis .................................................................................. 17 2.6. Baseline analysis and gaps ............................................................................................... 20 2.7. Linkages with other GEF and non-GEF interventions ................................................. 36

SECTION 3: INTERVENTION STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE) ................................................................. 38 3.1. Project rationale, policy conformity and expected global environmental benefits ..... 38 3.2. Project goal and objective ................................................................................................ 40 3.3. Project components and expected results ....................................................................... 40 3.4. Intervention logic and key assumptions .......................................................................... 42 3.5. Risk analysis and risk management measures ............................................................... 46 3.6. Consistency with national priorities or plans ................................................................. 48 3.7. Incremental cost reasoning .............................................................................................. 51 3.8. Sustainability ..................................................................................................................... 51 3.9. Replication ......................................................................................................................... 53 3.10. Public awareness, communications and mainstreaming strategy ................................ 53 3.11. Environmental and social safeguards ............................................................................. 55

SECTION 4: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS .................. 55 SECTION 5: STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION ..................................................................................... 57 SECTION 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN .......................................................................... 63 SECTION 7: PROJECT FINANCING AND BUDGET ............................................................................... 63

7.1. Overall project budget ...................................................................................................... 64 7.2. Project co-financing .......................................................................................................... 67 7.3. Project cost-effectiveness .................................................................................................. 68

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................ Appendix 1: Budget by project components and UNEP budget lines ................................... 69 Appendix 2: Co-financing by source and UNEP budget lines ............................................... 73 Appendix 3: Incremental cost analysis .................................................................................... 75 Appendix 4: Results framework ............................................................................................... 80 Appendix 5: Workplan and timetable ..................................................................................... 86 Appendix 6: Key deliverables and benchmarks ...................................................................... 91 Appendix 7: Budgeted M&E plan ............................................................................................ 94 Appendix 8: Summary of reporting requirements and responsibilities………………..…101

Appendix 9: Standard technical evaluation terms of reference…………………………...103 Appendix 10: Decision-making flowchart and organogram .................................................. 126 Appendix 11: Terms of reference of key project staff and main sub-contracts ................... 128 Appendix 12: Co-financing commitment letters from project partners ............................... 141 Appendix 13: Endorsement letters of GEF National Focal Points ........................................ 172 Appendix 14: Draft procurement plan .................................................................................... 182 Appendix 15: Tracking Tools ................................................................................................... 184

Annex A Blended Grant Loan Mechanism....................................................................................188 Annex B Baseline and Impact Analysis Case Studies……………………………………………190


6

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

5Cs Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre AC air-conditioningAPAB Association of Professional Architects of Belize APEB Association of Professional Engineers of Belize BECOL Belize Electric Company BEL Belize Electric Limited BELCOGEN Belize Co-Generation Energy Limited BAU business-as-usualCAIC Caribbean Association of Industry and CommerceCariCom Caribbean CommunityCC Climate Change5Cs Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre CDB Caribbean Development BankCDM Clean Development MechanismCFE Mexico’s Commission Federal de Electricidad CLASP Collaborative Labelling and Appliances Standards Program CO2 Carbon DioxideCREDP Caribbean Renewable Energy Development Programme CRS Carbon reduction strategyCSEP Caribbean Sustainable Energy Program CSIDS Caribbean Small Island Developing StatesCSME CariCom Single Market and Economy DFC Development Finance Cooperation DSM Demand Side ManagementEE Energy efficiencyE-IDCOT Eco-Industries Development Company of TobagoESCO Energy Service CompanyESD Caraibes Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean GDP gross domestic productGEF Global Environment FacilityGHG Greenhouse GasGTZ GWh HDC

Gesellschaft für Technische ZusammenarbeitGigawatt-hours Housing Development Corporation

HVAC IDB

Heating, Ventilation and Air-conditioningInter-American Development

IEA International Energy AgencyLAC Latin America and the CaribbeanLNG Liquefied Natural GaskWh kilowatt- hourm2 square meterm3 cubic meterMCD Ministry of Community DevelopmentMEA Multilateral Environment AgreementME Ministry of Energy MEP Minimum Energy PerformanceMHE Ministry of Housing and EnvironmentMLF Multilateral Fund


7

MOF Ministry of FinanceMW megawatt NREPS National Registry of Environmental ProfessionalsOAS Organization of American States ODS PMU

ozone depleting substanceproject management unit

RE renewable energy REC Renewable Energy CommitteeSGU St. George's UniversitySIDS Small Island Developing Statest ton(s) TCPD Town and Country Planning DivisionTOR terms of referencesTPMP Terminal Phase-out Management PlanT&TEC Trinidad & Tobago Electricity CorporationTTBS Trinidad & Tobago Bureau of StandardsTTGBC Trinidad & Tobago Green Buildings CouncilUN United NationsUNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USC University of the Southern CaribbeanUS$ United States DollarUWI University of the West IndiesWASA WINDREF

Water and Sewerage Authority Windward Islands Research and Education Foundation


8

SECTION 2: BACKGROUND AND SITUATION ANALYSIS (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION) 2.1. Background and context

1. The Caribbean Community consists of many small island developing states (SIDS) and low lying

coastal states, all of which exhibit unique characteristics, including varying topographies, limited natural resources, small populations and fragmented markets with different energy product specifications. Caribbean SIDS are heavily dependent on fossil fuel for energy services. Despite the existence of energy accords with Trinidad & Tobago and with Venezuela (PetroCaribe), the high degree of volatility of international fuel prices and high price combined remain a major source of difficulties for the region economies over the past years, particularly since the fuel price spike in 2008.

2. Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import

liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services despite abundant potential for the development of renewable energy resources. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90% of commercial energy consumption. All transportation fuels and an estimated 85% of all electric power in the Caribbean region are generated with liquid petroleum gas (LPG) fuel. Overall, across the region, approximately 85% of the population has access to electricity. On the supply side, recent data showed that in 2004, fuel consumption by electric utilities was more than 29.2 million barrels of petroleum. Total petroleum imports inclusive of electricity and gasoline was more than 163 million barrels during the same period – electricity consumption accounted for 18% of total consumption.

3. Renewable energy is estimated to contribute only about 3 % of the regional energy supply mix. For

CariCom member countries, the potential for development of renewable energy resources (such as biomass, solar, wind, ocean, hydro, geothermal, etc.) is large but unevenly distributed and the development of these resources may be stymied by the small size of the markets at the national level. For example, hydroelectric power potential in Guyana alone exceeds the existing electricity demand of all CariCom countries. Renewable energy sources constitute the major natural resource endowment for the majority of CariCom member countries. Another defining characteristic of the regional energy situation is the highly inefficient use of energy resources. It is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy generated by imported fuels, which results in very high energy consumption per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high %age of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices for vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies in the rest of the countries

4. The Caribbean region has the highest number of privately owned electricity utilities among all SIDS.

Privatization of regional electric utilities is motivated by budgetary pressure and a desire to attract private capital, and is promoted as a means to reduce government funding of the sector, to improve reliability and service and reduce inefficiencies the cost of electricity for consumers. Privately held power utilities exist in Barbados, St. Lucia, Dominica, Jamaica, and Grenada whereas public-owned power utilities exist in Antigua & Barbuda, Bahamas, Trinidad & Tobago, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, and Guyana. The institutional environment in the majority of countries across the region is characterized by a limited capacity for efficient and effective management of the energy sector only a few countries in the region give the operation and further development of their energy sector the required priority and attention.


9

5. Whilst the policy environment has improved over the last two years, when a number of countries received assistance to prepare national energy policies, there is still inadequate capacity for energy planning and policy making in the majority of countries. This poses a major institutional obstacle to bring about the required changes in the respective energy sectors to make them consistent with the national goals for sustainable development. In terms of income, all the countries of the Caribbean region, with the exception of Haiti and Guyana, are classified as low to lower-middle-income developing countries, with an average annual GDP per capita income of just under US$ 3,600. However, national per capita GDP incomes vary considerably across the region and ranges from US$ 22,100 in Trinidad & Tobago and US$ 21,700 in Barbados, to only US$ 576 in Haiti. Seven countries have a per capita GDP income at or below US$ 5,000, while four countries have a per capita GDP income above US$ 10,000. Approximately 38% of the population in the Caribbean region can be classified as poor, with the highest incidence of poverty in Haiti (80%), Guyana (35%) and Dominica (33%). The main drivers that have caused existing high poverty rates include low economic growth rates, poor agricultural productivity, limited and dwindling pool of experienced human capital, ineffective economic and social policies, and sometimes, the negative consequences of external factors, such as oil price hikes.

6. The Caribbean region’s real GDP is expected to have grown by about 4.2% in 2011, following a 3.4%

increase in 2010. It is also expected that on average consumer prices have increased by 7.2 % in 2011 for 2011 is projected together with a reduction of 4 percent in the region’s current account balance. In 2010, the Caribbean experienced an average increase in consumer prices of 7.1 % increase in consumer prices and a reduction of 3.9% in the current account deficit. Excluding the Dominican Republic and Haiti, GDP growth is projected to be 2.25% on average for 2012. However, high levels of public debt across all countries in the region will persist, which will imply that the economic outlook for these countries will be closely tied to external developments in the world economy. Currently, a large number of countries in the Caribbean region already need to service relatively large debts and debt service indicators and public debt ratios have increased still further due the recent simultaneous food-fuel-financial crises. In February 2011, 5 of the world’s 13 most indebted nations (as a share of GDP) included countries in the Caribbean.

7. The major determining factor for energy access in the majority of the CariCom countries is the

consumer’s ability to pay for the service of energy supply. Most people have access to electricity and in only three countries in the Caribbean region less than 90% of the population have access to electricity. However, there have been several instances during 2008/2009, when due to high fuel prices governments across the region had to subsidize electricity prices for many consumers as they were not able to pay the fuel surcharges and would have otherwise been disconnected. In the countries where than 90 % of the population have access to electricity, two countries - Suriname and Guyana - experience challenges of geography as a result of the remote interior location of significant parts of the inhabitants. The traditional grid-connected supply of electricity to such consumers in remote area is very costly given the small number of consumers and decentralized systems powered primarily by diesel generator sets are the principal means of electricity supply However, the diesel fuel required to produce electricity is relatively expensive and usually requires government subsidies to make the electricity affordable for consumers while at the same time renewable energy systems based on wind, solar, hydro, and bio-fuels are becoming less expensive and are proving to be more efficient in providing electricity to such consumers in isolated locations.

8. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supply is a major challenge for the future

economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of fuel imports, which increased from US$ 6.5 billion in 2004, to US$ 12 billion in 2007, which were equivalent to 16 and 21 % of the region’s combined GDP, respectively. Electricity generation prices in the region are high and among the highest in the world. This is primarily due to the very high cost of transportation in combination


10

with the relatively small quantities of fuel that are required for power generation and delivered to the various countries, the relatively high share of fuel use in the power generation matrix, and the low efficiency of the relatively small power transmission and distribution networks.

9. Trinidad & Tobago’s energy balance shows a complete dependence on crude oil and natural gas

whereas its use of renewable energy is insignificant. Domestically, natural gas is the primary source for electricity generation. As a result of the “relative cost-effectiveness” of electricity generation from natural gas, Trinidad &Tobago takes the enviable position of having the second lowest electricity rate (US 0.4 cents per kilowatt-hour [kWh]) in the Latin America and Caribbean region and by far, the lowest in the Caribbean region. This has, however, served as a barrier towards development of its renewable energy potential as there is a complacent over-dependence on the existing hydrocarbon-based economy with decreasing natural gas resources.

10. It is recognized that globally, buildings account for over a third of total energy use and associated

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; typically 10 to 20% (depending on building type) of the total life-cycle energy consumed is used for the manufacturing and assembly of building materials, construction, maintenance, refurbishment and demolition. Some 80 to 90% is used, over the life of the building, for heating, cooling, lighting and ventilation, house appliances, etc. The banking sector in the region has no incentives to provide financing at lower interest rates than their regular loans to support energy efficiency and energy conservation. Given interest rates in the majority of the project countries are as high as 15% this acts as a disincentive to investment in sustainable energy.

11. The Project focuses primarily on activities for sustainable energy use in buildings through more

efficient designs that make them more efficient with regard to providing cooling and lighting, as well as the utilization of technologies to reduce the amount of energy required for such cooling and lighting while maximizing the use renewable energy for this purpose. There are numerous opportunities within the Caribbean SIDS for reducing energy consumption and utilizing renewable energy in buildings; many of these have short payback periods as well as immediate environmental advantages. The economic benefits of energy efficiency investments in lighting products, appliances, and equipment in the Caribbean region are best realized at the macro-economic level. Calculations show that, especially for households, the low (subsidized) electricity rates result in relatively low economic savings on the level of the individual household though there are significant benefits when the aggregated economic savings are taken into account. Demand side management (DSM) programs will therefore have to be developed and be government-led as there will be significant economic benefits from more energy efficient energy use as result of the implementation of such programs in terms of: (i) delaying or avoiding new power generation infrastructure to match increasing demand for electricity; (ii) reduced fuel consumption by households; (iii) mitigation of the national fiscal burdens of providing electricity subsidies for the residential sector; (iv) enhanced energy security, and; (v) significant reduction of GHG emissions.

12. Under the Project, a mix of policy interventions, capacity building and demonstration activities will

aim to reduce electricity consumption by households and the public (government) and private sectors in the participating countries by 20 % in comparison with the business-as-usual scenario. It is intended that the project activities will serve as harbingers toward an “energy efficient regional economy” within the Caribbean region. There are also significant capacity building programs included in the Project to assist with developing capacity and skills in the areas of “green building design,” sustainable urban planning, and effective monitoring and verification of energy efficiency performance for building and construction material, as well as household appliances and equipment.

13. Project activities include (i) collection, review, and evaluation of additional data with the aim to

establish the baseline data set; (ii) needs assessment of increasing energy efficiency and use of


11

renewable energy in buildings in the five countries under the Project with the aim to set detailed targets for increasing energy efficiency and renewable energy use in buildings; (iii) consultations with governments, housing stakeholders, and other relevant parties to reinforce their buy-in of with regard to the Project; and (iv) development of detailed implementation arrangements including the design of a project work plan and terms of reference for consultants and the activities to be undertaken by 5Cs and the national executing partner agencies.

14. At present Trinidad & Tobago holds the Chair of the Council for Trade and Economic Development

(COTED) of the Energy Ministers in CariCom region. In this capacity, Trinidad & Tobago is expected to provide leadership with regard to the development of a sustainable energy path for Caribbean SIDS, most of which are net importers of energy. Trinidad & Tobago is a member of the Task Force for Development of a Regional Energy Policy for CariCom region that has been established to address such issues as security of energy supplies, energy pricing policy, and the impact on relative competitiveness in the envisaged CariCom single market and economy (CSME). This responsibility requires that Trinidad & Tobago will lead by example and will provide national “concept proofs” for a sustainable energy economy within the CariCom region. Within this context Trinidad & Tobago is keen to participate in the Project and avail of the technical assistance that it requires in this area.

2.2. Global significance

15. With the exception of Trinidad & Tobago, the contribution of the SIDS in the Caribbean region to

GHG emissions is negligible but they are disproportionately affected by climate change impacts. While adaptation is a priority for Caribbean SIDS they also recognize that all countries must take action to mitigate the negative impact of GHG emissions on the global environment and that increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy will reduce the vulnerability of SIDS to climate change. In the case of Trinidad & Tobago even significant emission reductions are possible.

16. Under the Project it is important to focus primarily on activities for sustainable energy use in buildings through more efficient designs that are more energy efficient and reduce GHG emissions with regard to the provision of cooling and lighting for buildings. There are numerous opportunities for reducing energy consumption in buildings. Under the Project the program for demonstrating and promoting technologies for reducing GHG emissions in buildings in Antigua & Barbuda is an innovative project in the Caribbean region, which will focus on the use of renewable and energy efficiency technologies to provide best practices for sustainable resource use in buildings. It is also envisaged that the results of this project will significantly improve public perception of GHG emissions reductions strategies and sustainable energy interventions in the five project countries. This is also expected to lead to an increased use of such technologies which have proven to be feasible and thus contribute to even larger reductions of GHG emissions in the long-term.

17. Under the Project there will be an “Integrated Approach” for reducing GHG emissions as a result of the generation and consumption of electricity in the participating countries. The approach will focus on increasing the use of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies; provision of best practices on sustainable energy use in buildings, and the development and adoption of appropriate policies and regulatory tools to scale-up the application and use of the same. It is also envisaged that the results of the Project will significantly improve public perception, as well as local investments in sustainable energy development activities in the Caribbean region. The Project is therefore of global significance as renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies that will be deployed under the Project will demonstrate that can make a difference, though small,


12

in terms of mitigating GHG emissions while generating local social and economic benefits – this is consistent with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs); the goals of the UNFCCC, in particular; and sustainable economic development principles, in general.

18. In the smaller island economies, Grenada for example, the buildings sector (commercial, domestic, and institutional) is the largest consumer of electricity and accounts for more than 90 % of total electricity consumption. It is therefore, the largest source of GHG emission after of the transportation sector. The Project aims to achieve a minimum reduction of 20 % in electricity use at the pilot activities that are to take place during 2012 – 2016. The Project plan to demonstrate the benefits of increased energy efficiency and use of renewable energy in buildings in a variety of ways. Demonstration projects may show that: a. Mandatory minimum energy efficiency standards for refrigeration, fans and motors,

lighting, and air conditioning units reduce national electricity consumption by 15 to 20 %; b. National adoption of a Building Code for Energy Conservation reduces energy

consumption by 10 to 20 % when passive energy designs are used; c. Rating-based incentive schemes and the provision of preferential finance result in

national energy savings of 20 %; and d. Use of rating system and demonstration of deeper savings coupled with preferential finance

plans can lead to a 50 % reduction in energy use by 2033.

19. The financing mechanisms that was to be developed under the Project (blended grant/loan mechanism) to promote the adoption of energy efficient technologies and the use of renewable energy in the buildings sector is being accepted as a model throughout the sub-region of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS); the CariCom region; and the region of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS). Also the energy efficiency standards to be developed under the Project will be harmonized, as much as possible, throughout the Caribbean region. The best practice principles, appropriate regulatory frameworks, and enhanced capacity to be developed under the Project will be used for developing national Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Roadmaps, which will outline measures for achieving a 50 % reduction in the use fossil fuel-based electricity in the CariCom region by 2033.

2.3. Threats, root causes and barrier analysis

20. There is continually increasing demand for electricity services as individuals, families, and

communities strive to improve their quality of life and come to rely on more electric appliances. The main barriers for the increased use of renewable energy and energy efficient and low-carbon technologies in the Caribbean are (i) the mistaken belief by the national governments that oil prices will decrease in the future, which in the past has stopped governments from making the sustainable development of the energy sector a national priority; (ii) the general unawareness by energy consumers of the benefits of increased energy efficiency and use of renewable energy; (iii) financial, institutional, policy, and other barriers. Also, previous energy saving programs (such Cuba’s give-away program of energy efficient lights) did not meet its objective, which has made countries reluctant to start new ones themselves. At present, the prices of petroleum products are expected to remain high and even continue their upward trend in the future. This has also become the general view of the national governments in the Caribbean region and the first barrier has therefore been reduced to some extent. However, other barriers remain.

21. Lack of awareness: To increase the present low awareness among consumers and policy makers of

the potential and corresponding financial and economic benefits of increasing the efficiency of energy consumption and the use of renewable energy national governments under the Project need to initiate long lasting awareness raising campaigns so as to create the enabling environment for the Project.


13

22. Financial barriers: Financial barriers have been identified as a key obstacle to large scale public and

private sector investments in low carbon technologies, such as renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. The ongoing economic difficulties resulting from the global recession has decreased the inflow of financial resources into the Caribbean economies thus further aggravating the situation. The main financial barriers are as follows:

• Lack of a dedicated equity funding sources, given that the capital requirements for significant GHG emissions reduction projects are relatively high and require significant private sector participation.

• Lack of financial resources and capacity to support renewable energy and energy efficiency projects and technologies or low carbon emissions strategies within the existing financial institutions in the SIDS under the Project.

• Local financial institutions (banks and credit unions) are relatively unfamiliar with the risks associated with lending capital for increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in the building sector with the exception that the installation of domestic solar water heaters (SWHs) has become an integral part of home construction and refurbishment loans in some SIDS under the Project .

23. Institutional and policy barriers: Institutional and policy barriers are of special significance as they limit the ability of clean energy technologies or best practices to attract investment funding. In fact, the absence of a “level playing field” in terms of policies and institutional mechanisms makes it difficult for clean energy technologies to compete with conventional fossil fuel-based technologies. Some of the key institutional and policy barriers identified during the project preparatory phase are:

• Insufficient coordination between government institutions with regard to the implementation of clean energy policies and programmes.

• Existing policies on renewable energy or energy efficiency and conservation – in many SIDS under the Project recently enacted energy policies which that focus on renewable energy, energy efficiency and conservation exist, however, significant work needs to be done to strengthen the institutional capacity that is required for effective implementation of the policies.

• In the majority of countries in the Caribbean region concrete and explicit regulations for the promotion of renewable energy use and energy efficiency applications within the building and construction sectors do not exist.

• Technical or regulatory documents that provide detailed minimum standards and procedures for (i) the design, calculation, and construction of energy efficient building envelopes; and (ii) the rating, labelling, and verification of energy efficiency performance of appliances and equipment. However, in general, governments are interested to develop these and the Project will serve to provide “best practice details” and develop such minimum standards.

24. Capacity barriers: There is a need to ensure the sustainability of clean energy technologies through development of the local capacity to identify, design, and/or build clean energy technologies, as well as to operate and maintain same. Plans for developing low GHG emission activities must become a part of strategic management and planning and therefore require significant knowledge on the available options for clean energy provision. Some of the key technical barriers identified are as follows:

• Insufficient technical capacity to support adaptation of urban planning and management to sustainable energy principles.

• Insufficient technical capacity to design and introduce master plans to assist clean energy project developers and investors.


14

• Lack of expertise in preparing bankable proposals and create awareness among bankers with regard to the benefits of developing energy projects that are based on the use of energy efficient technologies and renewable energy; this barrier needs to be addressed urgently so as to build a pipeline of projects that would make the local financial institutions more confident that a market does exist and, as a result, make them more motivated to provide the required financing.

• Lack of training opportunities and the absence of transfer of existing knowledge have stunted the growth of local entrepreneurship in the energy sector and, in particular, its capacity to design and operate energy efficient buildings.

25. Small market size, long distribution chains: Due to the relatively small population that characterizes SIDS, introduction of new products require a significant level of acceptance by the population to achieve minimum economies of scale that will generate adequate national economic benefits. This implies that if the SIDS were to depend on the conventional market mechanisms, such introduction will either be very slow or won’t materialize. Most potential market outlets for energy efficient and renewable energy technologies in the Caribbean region comprise relatively small private sector companies with very limited financial resources to demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of such technologies and publish and advertise the same for the general public. Overcoming such marketing challenges requires an active role by government agencies, possibly with assistance from NGOs. Due to the small size of the local markets the ‘critical mass’ required to drive the development of a significant number of energy service companies (ESCOs), which would have had an interest in promoting the use of energy efficient technologies, never materialized. In addition, the remoteness of the national markets and the relatively long supply and distribution chains pose logistical problems that are not conducive for the rapid deployment of such energy efficient and renewable energy technologies.

2.4. Institutional, sectoral, and policy context

26. The CSME is intended to benefit the people of the Caribbean region by providing more and better opportunities to produce and sell their goods and services and to attract investments. It is to create one large economic market among the participating member states with a free movement of goods and services following such measures as the elimination of all barriers to intra-regional movement and the harmonization of standards to ensure the acceptability of the goods and services traded. Building materials and equipment are important traded goods that are to be part of this market and energy efficiency and renewable energy performance standards are to be developed and promulgated under the CSME. The options for achieving market volume aggregation to promote the supply and use of more energy efficient equipment and materials are being explored by 5Cs in collaboration with the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB). The 5Cs was designated by the Heads of Government of the CariCom as the organization that is responsible for promoting the development and use sustainable energy in the region so as to build regional resilience to the impacts of a changing climate.

27. Antigua & Barbuda’s Initial National Communication on Climate Change of May 2001 states that

mitigation opportunities need to be pursued within the context of the country’s efforts to attain sustainable development. Within the Antigua & Barbuda context, the policy options for reducing GHG emissions relate primarily to reductions in the energy sector through improvements in energy efficiency and promoting energy conservation. Mitigation options for the energy sector should focus on attempts to promote improved efficiency in the production, transmission, distribution, and consumption of electricity. This should involve a range of measures such as (i) conducting energy audits; (ii) demand side management (DSM) activities; and (iii) public awareness campaigns. Considerable potential exists for development of solar and wind power projects. However, given the


15

costs of the required equipment, detailed resource and location assessments are required and action plans need to be developed to further guide policy makers and potential developers. With regard to the use of SWHs consideration should be given to measures for further stimulating demand.

28. The National Energy Plan for Belize of March 2011 recommends that:

• Energy data should be collected and analyzed on a regular basis, and a national energy balance produced annually. A DSM study should be conducted as part of the generation planning exercise, to assess whether development of additional power generation facilities can be avoided.

• A comprehensive energy-efficiency training program for relevant stakeholders should be implemented.

• The Belize Building Codes should be amended to include potential energy saving design features. The Central Building Authority and the professional associations are to lead the amendment and policing of the building codes.

• Importers and distributers of electrical appliances should receive training in energy efficiency and should be encouraged to import energy efficient appliances. The Department of Environment (DOE) and the Bureau of Standard of Belize (BSB) are to implement and standardize an energy efficiency labelling scheme for appliances to be imported and distributed in Belize.

• A national energy-efficiency education and awareness program designed and initiated by Antigua & Barbuda, is to be implemented in the other countries and Belize, through DOE, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) and BSB.

• A study of energy end use practices in all sectors (public, commercial, residential, etc.) of the economy should be conducted in collaboration with Belize Electric Limited (BEL) and an organization experienced in conducting surveys with the aim to recommend energy policies changes to promote increased energy efficiency.

• Incentives should be provided such as reduction in import duties for energy efficient equipment (e.g., compact fluorescent bulbs) to encourage their importation and use. DOE and MNR with the assistance from BEL are to develop and implement a corresponding incentive scheme.

• The creation of ESCOs in Belize should be supported through workshops, provision of information, and the establishment of linkages with countries with ESCO experience.

• A National Solar Water Heating Initiative is to be developed to promote use of SWHs, develop technical and minimum energy efficiency standards for SWHs, and regulate their imports.

29. The National Stakeholders Consultation for Preparing an Energy Policy for Grenada (including Carriacou and Petit Martinique) of 2008 has emphasized the importance of gradually becoming energy self-sufficient. Grenada is already implementing a feed-in agreement (including meter reversal without penalty) for buildings with integrated photo-voltaic (PV) power of up to a maximum of 1 % of total installed power generation capacity. The target for PV power is 20 % of total installed power generation capacity by 2020.

30. Various types of action have been identified to maximize energy efficiency including:

a. Development of an Energy Efficiency Unit within the Energy Division of the Government; b. Development and implementation a sustained public awareness program on energy efficiency; c. Development and implementation of a public sector energy conservation program; d. Enactment of an Energy Efficiency Act, which will, inter alia:

i. Create energy efficiency standards for mechanical ventilation, air-conditioning, lighting, appliances, and hot water systems within institutional, commercial and industrial buildings.


16

ii. Mandate the use of energy efficient appliances and lighting. iii. Mandate the labelling of appliances to provide information on the energy efficiency of a

particular appliance. iv. Mandate a certain level of energy efficiency certification for all buildings. v. Mandate energy audits for to-be-determined large public and private consumers.

vi. Mandate the publishing of the results and actions taken as a result of the above mentioned audits.

vii. Require certain standards for energy audits and certification of the auditors themselves. viii. Recommend economic incentives and penalties for specific sectors: tourism, industry and

agriculture. ix. Develop “tropicalized” standards for all of the standards used in the Energy Efficiency Act.

e. Provide fiscal and other incentives for energy conservation. f. Develop and monitor indicators of national energy consumption and efficiency (e.g., energy

intensity – amount of energy required to produce a unit of GDP).

31. St. Lucia’s Sustainable Energy Plan lays out a strategy for the maintenance and growth of the energy sector in St. Lucia through its effective management. It seeks to attain a set of energy sector targets through the implementation of actions, which will create a policy and regulatory framework to encourage diversification of the local energy market and the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. Achieving these targets requires the conducting of public awareness/ education campaigns aimed at changing attitudes and behavioural patterns with regard to energy consumption. The first step will be to conduct an analysis of the existing energy conservation opportunities, which will require a detailed study of energy end-use practices in all sectors of the economy. Capacity-building for organizations and individuals participating in energy efficiency programs will also be undertaken.

32. The establishment of ESCOs is to be promoted, which will also provide a channel for advising

business enterprises about the benefits of energy efficiency. A national DSM initiative is also planned, initially targeting the residential sector. This will require a well-organized and innovative public awareness program that clearly communicates the need for and potential benefits of energy conservation in the house. The Government will take the lead role by establishing a set of energy efficiency standards for public buildings. A manual will be developed outlining energy efficiency standards and conservation measures for existing and new buildings. A solar heating initiative is planned to generate an increase in the use of SWHs. This will significantly reduce the high cost of water heating for both the residential and commercial sectors. Tax concessions have been introduced to mitigate the high initial costs of SWHs. Solar PV systems are also being promoted to provide back-up power during emergency situations and as demonstration units for regular power supply.

33. In Trinidad & Tobago the National Environmental Policy (NEP) commits the Government to reduce

and off-set the country’s GHG production and to increase energy efficiency and develop corresponding national standards. Consistent with the provisions of the NEP, the Government is currently pursuing initiatives aimed at developing a climate change policy, including mitigation and adaptation, across all sectors as well as updating its GHG inventory with a view to be able to develop a strategy for reducing its GHG emissions. At the same time the Government is interested in diversifying its commercial energy supply mix, which at present is dominated by hydrocarbons while there is considerable potential for increased use of renewable energy.

34. The Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs) coordinates the Caribbean region’s

response to climate change. Officially established in August 2005, it is the key node for information with regard to climate change issues as well as the region’s response to managing and adapting to


17

climate change. In 2009 the governments of the CariCom gave it the responsibility for promoting sustainable energy. It is also the official repository and clearing house for regional climate change data, providing climate change-related policy advice and guidelines to the CariCom member countries through the CariCom Secretariat. UNFCCC; the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); and other international agencies also recognize 5Cs as the focal point for climate change issues in the Caribbean region and the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) has recognized it as a Centre of Excellence. The main goal of 5Cs is to improve the ability of Caribbean people who live in communities that at risk to be affected by the impacts of climate change to adopt more sustainable lifestyles. For this purpose, it provides services for improving the local knowledge of climate change and promoting adaptation to the effects of climate change. These services include: • Policy guidance – in its regional framework for development of resilience to climate change, 5Cs

outlines the strategic and programmatic goals the Caribbean region should be pursuing to address climate change mitigation and adaptation and an implementation plan for this strategy is currently being developed. It aims to include the following types of activities. - Providing fact-based advice by conducting vulnerability and impact assessments, while

simultaneously advising on the most cost-effective measures to be pursued to adapt to climate change.

- Pursuing pilot adaptation initiatives under its Special Pilot Adaptation to Climate Change (SPACC) project. This project is expected to demonstrate the resilience possibilities for adapting to climate change, which can be used throughout the CariCom region.

- Building awareness about climate change. In this context 5Cs has been working with the University of the West Indies (UWI) and other regional institutions and policymakers to build awareness about the threats and opportunities posed by climate change.

- Climate scenario modelling on which 5Cs has been working with the Institute of Meteorology of Cuba (INSMET) and UWI to downscale the climate models to a resolution more appropriate for the Caribbean region. These down-scaled models are to be used to estimate potential socio-economic and bio-physical impacts of climate change.

- Developing carbon neutral tourist destinations. Through collaborations with the Caribbean Tourism Association and the Caribbean Tourism and Hospitality Association, 5Cs is pursuing a pilot projects in four countries in the CariCom region to be able to designate the region a Carbon Neutral Tourist Destination in the future.

- Information Clearinghouse – The Information Clearinghouse is a proactive information exchange which engages stakeholders in accessing and sharing information.

• Joint Programs – Regional and international agencies; educational institutions; non-governmental organizations (NGOs); are being invited to develop and implement joint climate change projects.

• Climate change curricula – The 5Cs provides assistance to develop and implement curricula-related programmes on climate change.

• Training – The 5Cs helps develop appropriate courses for different organizations and levels of management on topics related to climate change.

• Consulting services – Using its network of expert consultants, 5Cs provides consulting services for a wide range of activities and projects in the area of climate change including biodiversity and renewable energy.

• Sustainable Energy Centre - The Board of the 5Cs has approved the establishment of such a centre and donor support is being sought to begin its development.

2.5. Stakeholder mapping and analysis

35. There are a number of key stakeholders including government agencies and regional institutions and

private sector entities that play a critical role in ensuring the success of the Project; they include:


18

• Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs): the 5Cs was designated by the governments of the CariCom to address the challenges of Climate change in the region (see paragraph 3.4 above). The 5Cs will also act as the umbrella lead Executing Agency for the Project.

• Ministries responsible for Housing and Environment: Ministries responsible for Housing and the Environment (MHEs) are to facilitate sustainable economic development through appropriate planning of adequate number of suitable housing units for low- and middle-income groups, as well as sound supervision and management of the environment. The mandate of these ministries may be defined within the context of the following parameters: (i) development of coordinated systems for environmental and physical planning; (ii) provision of information to develop policies that take into account social and environmental developments; (iii) facilitation of the development of sustainable communities that raise the standards of living at the national level and promote a culture of responsible citizenship through environmental stewardship; and (iv) development of policy directives that are to be coordinated with regional and international organizations and promote global partnerships to address environmental issues such as climate change. In some countries under the Project MHEs will have lead coordinating role.

• Ministry responsible for Energy: Ministries responsible for Energy (MEs) are involved in monitoring, controlling, and regulating the energy sector. However, depending on the country, the responsibility for the energy portfolio may also reside in other ministries such as Ministry of Finance (MOF), to Ministry of Works, or the Office of the Prime Minister. Among the participating countries the Ministry of Energy and Energy Matters (MEEA) in Trinidad & Tobago is the most developed and largest ME. The extensive hydrocarbon sector in Trinidad & Tobago, which produces approximately 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day and 123,000 barrels of oil per day, requires such an ME. However, MEEA also promotes energy efficiency and renewable energy projects. As there are clear synergies between the objectives of the MEEA and the Project, MEEA will be involved in certain activities under the Project, in particular, in the development of a “pilot” Zero Carbon Community Centres (ZCCC) project that will be developed in cooperation with the Ministry of Community Development (MCD) in Trinidad & Tobago.

• Bureaus of Standards: Bureaus of Standards (BSs) operate in a number of islands across the region. The primary responsibility for the BSs is usually vested with local the Ministry of Trade and Industry, which is responsible for ensuring the quality of goods and services, with the exception of food, drugs and cosmetics. The primary role of BSs is to develop, promote, and enforce standards to improve the quality and performance of goods produced or used in a particular country with the aim to: (i) ensure industrial efficiency and development; (ii) promote public and industrial welfare, health, and safety; and (iii) protect the environment. The BSs will have key roles to play in developing labelling protocols for household appliances, as well as the energy efficiency overlay, which to be included in the National Building Codes under the Project.

• Ministries of Finance: Ministries of Finance (MOFs) are the key decision makers with regard to the implementation of projects as they are the national body responsible for overall national development policy, approval of projects involving foreign exchange, and allocating the limited financial resources of the country. The involvement of MOFs is therefore critical for ensuring the success of the Project as they may be requested for in-kind contributions and support for the development of new policies and standards. Also, in Grenada, the local MOF is responsible for the energy portfolio.

• Ministries with responsibility for Climate Change: since climate change mitigation is at the justification for the Project; involvement of such ministries under the Project is crucial.


19

• National Building Authorities: National Building Authorities of some kind are the legal entity that is responsible for the approval and policing of construction practices, including the enforcement of Building Code in most Caribbean countries and their involvement will be a critical to ensure the envisaged outcomes of the Project.

• Major equipment suppliers: they are the key parties to ensure the supply and distribution of energy efficient products, appliances, and equipment as well as the supply of equipment and systems required for renewable energy production. The cost at which suppliers can provide such items will have a major influence on the transformation of the market for transformation of the market for the production and use of renewable energy and the sale and use of energy efficient products and equipment. The suppliers will also need to agree to supply higher cost items to the market with the expectation that there will be a gradual transition to a full markets for the same.

• Associations of Professional Engineers: taking into account their responsibilities for certification and classification of engineers and engineering schools in many countries they have to be involved as key stakeholders.

• Association of Professional Architects: taking into account their responsibilities for certification and classification of architects and their involvement in building codes, the development and application of building standards, their involvement as stakeholders will be critical to ensure the success of the Project.

• Educational institutions: educational institutions need to provide the required capacity building training that is required to demonstrate the technical feasibility and cost-effectiveness of using energy efficient and renewable energy technologies, including field-testing of the same. In Grenada, for example, the Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine of St. George’s University (SGU) and the Ministry of Education will cooperate to provide training to set up solar PV systems in two secondary schools, provide training at T.A. Marryshow Community College, and prepare on-line educational/public awareness raising materials.

• Electric utilities: electric utilities are the major energy parties of the energy sector as they are supplying most of the commercial energy used in buildings and households. Under the Project electric utilities will need to provide baseline and ex-post electrical energy consumption data, as well information with regard to the implementation of interconnection policies and issues related to stability of the electricity networks.

• Energy service companies (ESCOs): ESCOs are crucial for providing technical advice in the procurement process of energy efficient and renewable energy technologies (including those that are not yet widely deployed) and energy efficient products, appliances, and equipment. They also provide training in the operation and maintenance of such products, appliance, and equipment, which will be essential for the envisaged capacity building under the Project.

• National Development Banks: national development banks are state-owned financial institutions with a developmental mandate and are responsible for strategic lending for construction, buildings, business development, and education. Their involvement in the Project is crucial to source the required financing for the envisaged investments in energy efficient equipment and renewable energy development under the Project.

• Energy Regulatory Authority: an energy regulatory body is to act as an independent regulator of all parties that are involved in the energy sector so as to ensure that not one party will derive undue benefits from and that national interest in the operations of the energy sector are secured. In the majority of SIDS under the Project, energy regulatory authorities with responsibility for setting tariffs and policies on pricing of renewable energy do not yet exist. However, Grenada and St. Lucia are likely to launch such an authority under a World Bank funded project in the future and Grenada may even delegate rate-setting responsibilities for all


20

types of commercial energy to it. Energy regulatory authorities need to be involved in the Project since they can provide advice on possible feed-in-tariffs for electricity generated from renewable energy, developing policies that promote energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy such as renewable portfolio standards, as well as provide inputs for the ex-ante and ex-post assessments of renewable energy projects. Also, energy regulatory authorities are expected to benefit from the findings and recommendations for adoption of new policies to promote energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. The Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States has been designated for a grant from SIDS Dock to establish the Eastern Caribbean Electricity Regulatory Authority initially focussed on generation and transmission in St. Lucia and Grenada and now being considered by World Bank, 5Cs, UNDP to include regulation of equipment in the region following pilots in Grenada, Antigua Barbuda and St. Lucia.

2.6. Baseline analysis and impact targets

36. While sharing common technical solutions and approaches to increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy each country will take a somewhat different course of actions and therefore the impact analysis has been customized for each countries. All countries have as target a reduction of GHG emissions by 20% and the increased use of energy efficient and renewable energy technologies in buildings. The 20% GHG emissions intensity reduction is the target; top down estimates with market penetration and turn over rates are estimated broad scale while bottom up specific building analysis and measures - where identified in sufficient detail - are added. The bottom up cases validate which technologies and measures are needed to reach the 20% target. Grenada will take the lead in developing a monitoring mechanism to measure the uptake of such technologies in a representative sample of buildings and estimate their impact. Subsequently, assessments will be made of the potential penetration rates of these technologies and their potential impact following their scale up under the Project. At present, households in the Caribbean region mainly use electricity for refrigeration; lighting; appliances such as televisions, computers, and laundry machines; and sometimes for air-conditioning of usually the bedroom only. The priority for setting residential equipment standards will be given to products that are more or less continuously use such as refrigerators, lighting products and air-conditioning units. Priority will also be given to large central air-conditioning units in buildings, such as government offices, hotels, and commercial buildings. Many large buildings also have large chiller-type air-conditioning systems, which seldom operate at optimum efficiency due to the limited electricity supply capacity of the network and the requirement to maintain certain electricity load factors. Many of such large air-conditioning systems have therefore been shut down and replaced with smaller individual (split-type) air-conditioning units, which are often not energy efficient. The lighting products that are still most widely used are inefficient florescent lights (with magnetic ballast) and incandescent bulbs. Some energy efficient lamps such as compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) are sold and used; however, their quality is not assured in the absence of minimum technical standards for the CFLs. Efficiency improvements of the various technologies to be deployed are:

Magnetic ballast T12 to electronic T8 Lighting 35%

Incandesent to compact fluorescent 75%

Electric to Solar water heater 70%

EE Refrigerators 16 to 25%

Standard to LED displays 25%

EE Air conditioners 20%


21

Plug L

37. In certain circumstances across the Caribbean region, the tourism sector and office buildings would also rent refrigeration equipment (refrigerators, freezers, and coolers) from suppliers of ice, water, and other bottled drinks. In the majority of cases such rented equipment have proven to be inefficient users of electricity and unable to provide cooling at the desired temperature. Another example of inefficient equipment is extractor fans, which are used in commercial kitchens; most owners would purchase the cheaper model which is usually inefficient.

38. The economic benefits of energy efficiency investments in lighting and appliances for households are

best seen at the macro-economic level due to the subsidized electricity prices for households. In particular in Trinidad & Tobago, where as a result of the low electricity prices for households (less than 4 US cents per kWh), more energy efficient use of electricity would produce modest financial savings for individual household but would be significant economic benefits for the Government taking into account the corresponding reduction in required government subsidies. DSM programmes will therefore have to be introduced and implemented by the Government as they will significantly benefit from a reduced consumption of electricity which will: (i) delay or avoid the need for new power generation infrastructure to match rising demand; (ii) reduce fuel consumption by the residential sector; (iii) mitigate of the Government’s fiscal burden to provide electricity subsidies to the residential sector; (iv) enhance energy security (of supply); and (v) significantly reduce GHG emissions. In other countries in the Caribbean region where electricity prices for households are more than 10 times higher than Trinidad & Tobago, financial savings for households and national economic benefits would also be much greater, which makes a strong case for governments across the Caribbean region to begin developing and implementing DSM programs. To summarize activities versus scope of implementation, activities in St. Lucia are relatively modest; the technology area that was delegated to it is lighting, which is straightforward and of interest to it while the St. Lucia Development Bank is funding ESCOs that will cover a variety of technologies and generate the benefits. Trinidad & Tobago will focus on regulation with technical input from the others. Grenada task is to address developing a buildings evaluation protocol drawing on expertise from the St. George’s University. Grenada will implement regulation, market suasion and ESCOs for the impact. Antigua & Barbuda retains project task area responsibility for developing suasion materials while implementing suasion programs, regulations, and ESCO support. Belize will focus on buildings codes and ESCOs as topic areas and adopt regulation, suasion, and ESCOs for impact. Specific conditions and opportunities in the five SIDS under the Project are provided below.

Activities

Task Leading Country

Antigua & Barbuda Belize Grenada St. Lucia

Trinidad & Tobago

Suasion Materials Antigua & Barbuda

+++ ++ ++ ++ ++

Standards and Label Regulations

Trinidad & Tobago +++ ++ ++

+

(lighting) +++

Building Evaluation

Grenada ++ ++ +++ ++ ++

Building Codes Trinidad & Tobago

++ +++ ++ + +++

Demonstrations All ++ ++ ++ ++ ++

ESCOs Belize ++ +++ ++ ++ +

Lighting St. Lucia ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ + watching brief or partial deployment


22

++ active deployment and development +++ lead on task area Task Leading Countries are quite active in the tasks they have agreed to lead but do not exclusively implement, but rather execute activities to deliver support needed by all countries to implement. Due to the relatively small size of the project component for St. Lucia, it will not focus its activities on standard and label regulations (except for lighting) and development of building codes. Trinidad & Tobago will not focus its activities on the development of ESCOs since current energy pricing does not favor such development while taking into account the relatively small size of its project in comparison with its economy. Separate GEF projects could be considered and may be justified.

(a) Antigua & Barbuda

39. In Antigua & Barbuda the main outputs of the Project will be evidence and hard data that support and demonstrate that workable energy efficient and renewable energy technologies exist that can achieve significant and cost effective reductions of GHG emissions in the building sector. This will prove the feasibility of the various technologies to meet the stated national GHG emissions reduction target of 25% by 2020 and support recommendations for national GHG reduction strategies that are to be included in the NEP. The cumulative direct post-project GHG emissions reduction resulting from the demonstration, promotion, and adoption of the low GHG emission technologies and the adoption of associated recommendations for new policies under the Project are expected to produce energy savings of 55 gigawatt-hour (GWh) per year over a 10 year lifespan of the equipment with an GHG emissions factor of 0.987 tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per megawatt-hour (MWh) and reduction of 500,000 tons of CO2e by 2020. Assuming that there is a 10% replacement per year of the appliances (since the average lifetime of the appliances is assumed to be 10 years), the Project will result in a complete turnover of the entire stock of appliances in a 10 year period. It is therefore projected that during project implementation cumulative GHG emission reductions will reach 160,000 tons of CO2e by 2016. This will be monitored under the Project and the baseline and assumptions will again be reviewed during the inception phase of the Project.

40. The potential and options for reducing GHG emissions can be determined by examining of the GHG emission inventory of Barbuda & Antigua. The GHG emissions data for 2000 indicate that CO2 emissions dominated GHG emissions (383,000 tons of CO2e) with about 97 % of the CO2 emissions occurring in the energy sector2. In view of the dominance of GHG emissions from the energy sector the most effective climate change mitigation with a measurable impact on overall GHG emission would need to address present energy production and consumption practices.

41. Antigua & Barbuda lacks hydrocarbon and coal resources and imports all of its required petroleum products. Solar and wind energy resources have been estimated at 47 MW and 900 MW, respectively and the use of solar energy for water heating is still negligible. In 2000 the CO2 emissions from the energy sector indicate that CO2 emissions from electricity generation and transportation were about equal (at 47.7% and 49.1%, respectively) and accounted for just over 96% of the total CO2 emissions in the energy sector. In 2009 the largest single consumer of electricity in Antigua was the commercial sector, including tourism sector, with about 101,463 MWh. In the same year the domestic sector consumed about 86,502 MWh of electricity, followed by the governmental sector with about 20,860

2 Antigua and Barbuda Mitigation Assessment Report 2010


23

MWh and the industrial sector with about 6,104 MWh. In Barbuda the largest consumers of electricity in 2009 was the domestic sector with about 1,385 MWh. At the same time the commercial sector consumed 355 MWh and the governmental sector about 186 MWh. Increasing energy efficiency in buildings will have an impact of reducing electricity consumption in all sectors and thereby reduce GHG emissions whereas the electricity consumption in the industrial sector is too small to expect any significant impact from improving energy efficiency in buildings in the industrial sector.

42. Over the past five years the commercial sector has accounted for approximately 48% of the billed electricity consumption while the domestic sector accounted for 40% and the Government sector for 8%. These figures do not include public services such as public lighting and water supply services. Households use electricity primarily for refrigeration, lighting, and appliances such as televisions, computers, and laundry machines; some air-conditioning, usually for the bedroom; and miscellaneous equipment that is not used for a prolonged time. The development of residential equipment standards should therefore prioritize refrigerators, lighting products, appliances with standby plug loads, and air-conditioning units. Traditional Mayan/Caribbean design of buildings with flow of air through natural ventilation and shading is effective in providing cooling in buildings. To improve energy efficiency in large air-conditioned buildings including government offices, hotels and commercial buildings priority needs to be given to lighting products and equipment with standby plug loads to reduce indoor heating followed by air-conditioning methods and equipment.

- Case study (Environment Division Office of Antigua & Barbuda) –

43. The Environment Division is housed in a single storey wood and wall building that was initially constructed in the early 1980’s and subsequently, expanded in 2006. The building’s floor area is 150m2 and is occupied on average by 5-10 persons -5 days per week from 7:30 to 5:00 p.m. The occupants utilize 5 single room air-conditioning units, 2 standing fans, 1 refrigerator, 1 microwave, 1 high-speed digital printer, 2 printers, and 8 computers. The air-conditioning units are used intermittently and natural ventilation is frequently used. The building is wired for 220 V; however, most of the equipment in use require 110V, which has led to a significant usage of transformers. The data were run through eQUEST, which is a user-friendly interface for the US building simulation model and contains defaults for a variety of types of buildings. Weather files from the US Virgin Islands were used to simulate the options for achieving the 25% reductions. The electricity bills for the building amount to consumption patterns of 20,000 kWh a year, which is equal to 134 kWh per m2 a year. Potential energy savings measures include a 35% reduction in electricity consumption for lighting through the installation of T8 tubes with electronic ballasts, avoiding transformer use and the replacement of air-conditioning units with higher seasonal energy efficiency air-conditioners. (additional information is in Annex B Baseline and Impact Analysis.) Overall energy savings of 25% savings would be possible.

44. Residential buildings are usually open structures with direct inflows of outside air. The analysis of the types of buildings in the residential sector is less important. Instead, the focus will be on appliances that are operated for extended periods, such as refrigerators, lighting products, television sets, and transformers. In some retail outlets the energy (efficiency) labeling information is available; however, it has not been standardized and adapted to the local circumstances. For instance, some labels provide the expected savings in US dollars and at a consumer electricity price of 11 US cents per kWh whereas refrigerators in the Caribbean region usually operate in a warmer and more humid environment than the average indoor conditions in the United States. Based on power rating and hours of use televisions and refrigerators are roughly equal in consumption, air conditioners are highly


24

variable in use but also assumed to be the same as well as other equipment that will be pursued including transformers and ceiling fans. Table 1 presents the estimated impact of the implementation of an energy standards and labeling program in the country. Antigua & Barbuda is also planning to establish a revolving fund of US$ 200,000, which is to include four financing cycles and expected to result in 200,000 tons of CO2e as a direct impact after project completion. The effect of the ESCO revolving fund within the project period is within the market wide estimate as indicated below while the direct post project impact is estimated separately.

Table 1: Estimated Impact of Standards and Labeling Program in Antigua & Barbuda

TV sets Photo-Voltaic (PV)

Other AC units Refrigerators

Dwellings (number) 20,437 20,437 20,437 20,437 20,437 Penetration (%) 15 1 10 1 10 Consumption (kWh/year) 600 600 600 600 Savings (kWh) 150 2,000 120 120 150 Total (kWh/year) 459,832 408,740 245,244 245,244 306,555 Lifetime (years) 7 20 10 10 10 Years of program impact 4 4 4 4 4 kWh over lifetime 12,875,296 32,699,200 9,809,760 980,976 12,262,200 Emission factor (kg CO2/kWh)

0.987 0.987 0.987 0.987 0.987

Tons of CO2 12,708 32,274 9,682 968 12,102 Sub-total emissions reduction (tons of CO2)

Residential 67,735

Computers PV Other

AC units

Refrigerators

Units installed 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Penetration (%) 15 1 20 20 10 Consumption 600 600 600 600 Savings (kWh) 150 2,000 120 120 150 Total ( kWh/year) 450,000 400,000 480,000 480,000 300,000 Lifetime (years) 7 20 10 10 10

Years of program impact 4 4 4 4 4

kWh over lifetime 12,600,000 32,000,000 19,200,000 19,200,000 12,000,000

kg CO2/kWh 0.987 0.987 0.987 0.987 0.987

Tons of CO2 12,436 31,584 18,950 18,950 11,844

Sub-total emissions reduction (tons of CO2)

Commercial 93,765

Total tons of CO2 emissions reduction

Commercial and Residential (including initial ESCO projects as demonstrations)

161,500

Post Project Direct, tons of CO2 (revolving fund)

ESCOs 200,000

(b) Belize

45. Households use electricity primarily for refrigeration; lighting; and appliances such as televisions, computers, and laundry machines; some air-conditioning, usually for the bedroom; and miscellaneous


25

equipment that is not used for a prolonged time. The development of residential equipment standards should therefore prioritize refrigerators, lighting products, appliances with standby plug loads, and air-conditioning units. In large buildings including government offices, hotels, and commercial buildings priority should be given to improve the energy efficiency of their air-conditioning systems while some of the large chiller-type air-conditioning systems are not operating and have been replaced with split-level individual air-conditioning units or are operating inefficiently. They also use fluorescent lamps (with magnetic ballast), incandescent bulbs, and occasionally CFLs. Also in Belize the traditional Mayan/Caribbean traditional open concept for cooling of buildings with outside air is no longer being used due to the demand for in-door low comfortable temperatures and the increase in indoor heating that is generated by office equipment. Also lighting products in use are in general inefficient and include fluorescent lights (with magnetic ballast): incandescent bulbs; and some CFLs. However, technical standards for the CFLs are yet to be developed.

46. The tourism sector and many offices also rent refrigeration equipment (refrigerators, freezers, and coolers) from suppliers of ice, water, and other bottled drinks. In the majority of cases such rented equipment have proven to be inefficient users of electricity and unable to provide cooling at the desired temperature. Another example of inefficient equipment is extractor fans, which are used in commercial kitchens; most owners would purchase the cheaper model which is usually inefficient.

- Case studies and examples of potential energy savings -

a. Energy efficient measures in the building of Karl Husner Memorial(KHM) Hospital

47. To reduce the energy consumption of a building the potential for energy losses during its operation needs to be reduced. The case study found that KHM Hospital would need to address insulation of its roofs, walls, windows, and door, which would save electricity consumption by air-conditioning systems and other cooling equipment. In addition the following measures would need to taken.

- Installation of energy efficient lights and controls

48. One of the main energy cost at the hospital is the continuous usage of security lights as well as inefficient incandescent bulbs and other light fixtures whereas installation of photo cell light controls would reduce the usage of the lights to when they are required. The replacement of al inefficient l incandescent light bulbs and light fixtures would reduce electricity consumption by saving of up to 8 kWh a day.

- Air-conditioning efficiency

49. The air-conditioning system of the hospital comprises water chiller units with 3 to 105 tons in cooling capacity each, totaling 315 tons, and numerous split air-conditioning units at various locations. At present the actual total cooling capacity of the water chiller unit is only 125 tons. A pilot project is therefore to be implemented to expand the cooling capacity of the chiller system and integrate the split air-conditioning units with it, thereby consolidating the energy usage of the hospital and increasing overall cooling capacity by 80 tons.

- Pre-heating of water

50. Conventional water heating using electricity or diesel has been proven to be expensive while the capacity and intermittent high demand for hot water has raised some questions about continuous availability of water from a SWH. Two options for saving energy cost associated with water heating have been identified. The first option, the installation of a SWH, which will feed the hot water into an existing gas fired water heater thus requiring less energy. The second option, to recover the heat from


26

chiller-based air-conditioning system using a heat recovery water coil condenser and piping the heated water to the hospital’s boilers. 3

b. Energy service companies (ESCOs)

51. The Government of Belize lacks adequate funds for investing in energy efficiency upgrades of buildings and could therefore benefit from the involvement of ESCOs, which would determine the required energy efficiency upgrades and make the corresponding investments while the ESCOs would be repaid from (part of) the energy savings. Standard contracts need to be prepared together with the Development Finance Corporation of Belize to provide specific financial support and guarantees to ESCOs for this purpose. ESCO staff would need to be adequately trained and ESCOs would need to meet certain capacity criteria to qualify for such support. Projects in which ESCOs could become involved include lighting retrofits, upgrades of air-conditioning systems, overall energy efficiency upgrades of buildings, and development of renewable energy installations.

52. Energy efficiency labeling of appliances is does not yet exist in Belize. This has resulted in the importation and distribution of inefficient appliances, which are mostly purchased by the medium and lower income households and actually over their lifetime cost more than more energy efficient ones due the their higher energy consumption. Energy efficient building codes have not yet been adopted in Belize, but the process has commenced and the Project will assist in the completion of this process. It is estimated that any of the above actions, including energy efficiency improvements, labeling of appliances, engagement of ESCOs, and the development and implementation of building codes will increase the efficiency of energy use by more than 20%. Table 2 presents the estimated impact of the implementation of an energy standards and labeling program in the country.

Table 2: Estimated Impact of Standards and Labeling Program in Belize

TV sets Photo-Voltaic (PV)

Other plug loads

Refrigerators

Dwellings (number) 67,000 67,000 67,000 Penetration (%) 10 1 7 10 Consumption (kWh/year)

600 600 600 600

Savings (kWh) 150 2,000 120 150 kwh/y 100,5000 0 562,800 100,5000 lifetime Years 7 20 10 10 years of program impact 4 4 4 4 kWh lifetime 28,140,000 0 22,512,000 10,050,000 Emission factor (kg CO2/kWh

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Tons of CO2 14,070 0 11,256 5,025 Sub-total emissions reduction (tons of CO2)

Residential

30,351

Computers PV Other Refrigerators Units installed 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 Penetration (%) 10 0 7 10 Consumption 600 600 600 600 Savings ( kWh) 150 2000 120 150

3 The coefficient of performance (COP) of a heat-recovery chiller in heating mode is outstanding. For example, with

chilled-water temperatures of 54°–44°F (12°–7°C) and tower water of 85°–95°F (29–35°C), the cooling COP could be 6.3. With hot water from 95°–105°F (35°–41°C), the combined cooling and heating COP could be 11.4.


27

kWh/y 100,5000 134,000 562,800 1,005,000 Lifetime (years) 7 20 10 10

years of program impact 4 4 4 4

kWh lifetime 28140000 10720000 22512000 10,050,000

Emission factor (kg CO2/kWh

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Tons of CO2 14070 5360 11256 5,025

Sub-total emissions reduction (tons of CO2)

Commercial 35,711

Total direct tons of CO2 emissions reduction

Commercial and Residential (including initial ESCO projects as demonstrations)

66,062

Total direct tons of CO2 (post project)

ESCOs 200,000

Emission reductions as a result of the activities of ESCOs during the project period are included in the market assessment above so as not to double count the impact. Through the revolving fund additional GHG emission reductions of 200,000 tons of CO2 are expected (direct post impact), which can be attributed to the activities of ESCOs.

(c) Grenada

53. Households use electricity primarily for refrigeration; lighting; and appliances such as televisions, computers, and laundry machines; some air-conditioning, usually for the bedroom; and miscellaneous equipment that is not used for a prolonged time. Due to the island’s European colonial history, the domestic power supply is 220 volts. However, closer proximity to the USA has led to the use of a number of 110-volt appliances and devices in the household. Therefore, there are usually a few step-down transformers in each household. The development of residential equipment standards should therefore prioritize refrigerators, lighting products, appliances with standby plug loads, and air-conditioning units. Priority will also be given to make large air-conditioned buildings including government offices, hotels and commercial complexes more energy efficient.

- Case studies and examples of potential energy savings -

- Standby plug loads

54. A typical 500-watt transformer for a household draws approximately 10 watts when on standby. If it is assumed that a transformer is typically on standby for 20 hours/day and that there are three 500-watt transformers per household. This standby plug load thus equates to 18 kWh a month or 3% of the typical monthly usage of around 600 kWh for a middle-income householder in Grenada. It is anticipated that through this GEF project approximately 600 transformer standby eliminator devices will be distributed. This will result in a reduction in energy use by about 3 % by the participants under the Project, which will be equivalent to overall energy savings of 45 MWh a year. It is also anticipated that this initial market demonstration will result in wider scale deployment of these energy efficiency devices within the OECS and CariCom regions through private sector distributorships.

- Domestic and commercial solar PV systems


28

55. Grenada has already some experience with the installation and use of grid-connected and stand-alone PV systems on buildings, which can be used to project the economic and environmental impacts of activities under the Project. Since 2006, over 50 PV systems have been installed in homes and hotels in Grenada.

56. A typical middle-income household in Grenada will use about 600 kWh a month of electricity, which

is equal to an annual electricity consumption of about 7.2 MWh. As example, after a household had the installed two small grid-connected PV systems with a combined capacity of 3.99 kilowatt-peak (kWp), one was a pilot system with a capacity of 1.44 kWp and the second one had a capacity of 2.55 kWp, about 1.77 MWh a year per installed kWp was produced during 2007-2008, which was equivalent to a total electricity production of about 7 MWh a year. Since the average consumer price of electricity was US$ 0.30/kWh and consumers were subject to a 1:1 net metering policy, the household had to pay for only 200 kWh/year, which was equivalent to US$ 60 a year and save US$ 2,100 a year (in comparison with US$ 2,160 a year that it would have paid if it had purchased the electricity from the grid).

57. It is envisaged that under the Project a new net-billing system for electricity consumers will be

established whereby the national power company of Grenada, GRENLEC, will pay a fixed price for electricity that is purchased from households that generate PV-based electricity (who are also allowed to consume their self-produced electricity and sell any excess to the GRENLEC). This price takes into account the projected levelized cost of fuel over the next 10 – 15 years plus a fuel price risk factor and minus the cost of the spinning reserve and is estimated at US$ 0.20/kWh.

58. It is therefore estimated that a Grenadian household that would consume about 3.5 MWh of electricity a year and producing the equivalent amount from their own 2 kWp system (of which 50% would be sold to GRENLEC under the new interconnection policy proposed by GRENLEC), would achieve the following savings on their electricity bills (using 2009 prices):

1.75 MWh @ US$ 0.30/kWh = US$ 525/year plus 1.75 MWh @ US$ 0.20/kWh = US$ 350/year or approximately US$900/year.4

- True Blue Bay Resort

59. The True Blue Bay Resort is an example of a commercial tourism establishment that has carried out

energy efficiency and renewable energy activities during the last six years. The resort is located on the southwest peninsula of the island, has 49 rooms, and occupies an area of approximately 4 acres with a total building area of 2,000 m2. Since 2005 the owner of the resort has implemented the following activities:

- Installation of centralized air-conditioning system using variable speed compressors (which are not yet widely applied).

- Installation of double glazing. - Construction of new units with foam and fiber insulation.5 - Installation of room sensors that shut down the air-conditioning unit when the room is empty or the door is open. - Control of the room temperature from the Front Desk and preventing guests from setting the room thermostat at 16oC or lower. - Replacement of all lights with more energy efficient ones (significant savings).

4 To make it attractive for a household to purchase a PV system, a blended/loan would require a pay-back period of not less than 10 years and the cost of the PV system (inclusive of interest repayments) should not exceed about

US$ 4.50 per installed watt. 5 Giving an R Value of around R40, which is high as the insulation/fiber needs to be more than 10 inches thick.


29

- Monitoring of electricity consumption on a daily basis.

60. As a result electricity consumption at resort is well managed and although the cost of electricity has increased, due to the increase in oil prices and an increase in the number of rooms at the resort, energy consumption per room basis has decreased by a minimum of 20% reduction and in some rooms where additional insulation has been installed, a 40% decrease in energy consumption has been achieved. However, energy losses due to the use of continuous electricity drawing step down transformers has yet to be addressed.

- Demonstration Project of St. George’s University (SGU)

61. SGU consumes approximately 18 GWh of electricity a year, which is equivalent to about 10% of

nationally electricity consumption. Under the Project SGU will be involved in developing and implementing SGU demonstration projects for increasing energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy including such areas as provision of energy efficient lighting and more energy efficient air-conditioning. SGU is also a candidate for a pre-feasibility assessment on seawater cooling as a long-term strategy to achieve the 50% energy consumption reduction target. The pre-feasibility assessment will include:

• Bathymetric studies; • Temperature profiles; • Preliminary engineering assessment of pipeline routes, size of pipes, material of construction and

methods of installation; and • Demand analysis and potential commercial arrangements

62. Table 3 presents the estimated impact of the implementation of an energy standards and labeling program in the country. Grenada is also planning to establish a revolving fund of US$ 400,000, which is to include four financing cycles and expected to result in 400,000 tons of CO2 equivalent as a direct impact after project completion.

Table 3: Estimated Impact in Grenada

Item Electricity consumption Transformers 45 MWh/year Photo voltaic (PV) systems integrated in buildings

PV (each) 7 MWh/year Number of PV systems 20 Total PV systems 140 MWh/year Commercial consumption 99,060 MWh/year Domestic consumption 68,280 MWh/year Total 167,340 MWh/year Use of energy efficient appliances and equipment Penetration rate of energy efficient item

10% per year based on fixed market size

Electricity savings per item 20% per year Lifetime of item 10 years Effectiveness period within project

3 years


30

Total Savings 100,404 MWh (direct project benefits) Emission factor 0.987 tons of CO2/kWh (RETScreen) Total Direct GHG emissions reduction

99,099 tons of CO2

Post Project Direct ESCOs 400,000 tons of CO2

Emission reductions as a result of the activities of ESCOs during the project period are included in the market assessment above so as not to double count the impact. Through the revolving fund of the Grenada Development Bank additional GHG Emission reductions of 400,000 tons of CO2 are expected as direct post project impact, which can be attributed to the activities of ESCOs.

(d) St. Lucia

63. Ninety one % of the total electricity sold in St. Lucia is consumed in buildings and 33% of the total

commercial energy (electricity and petroleum products) used in St. Lucia is consumed in buildings. Electricity consumed in buildings represents 21% of the total national commercial energy consumption. If the consumption of commercial energy in buildings (including electricity and petroleum products) is not addressed, it will not be possible to implement any meaningful sustainable energy demand reduction program in St. Lucia.

64. Electricity sold to the traditional commercial sector (excluding hotels) accounts for about 110,000 MWh a year, which is equivalent to about 35% of total annual electricity sales. The public sector accounts for about 26% of the traditional commercial sales public sector and consumes about 28,500MWh of electricity a year. Public buildings account for about 9% of the electricity sold. If all public buildings were to implement strict DSM programs, electricity demand would be reduced by about 22%6 and annual savings include (i) a reduction of national demand for electricity by 2% (equivalent to about 7,000 MWh); (ii) government savings of about US$ 2.4 million equivalent; and (iii) GHG emission reductions of about 5,200 tons of CO2 a year with cumulative GHG emission reductions of 52,000 tons of CO2 (assuming a lifetime of 10 years of the new energy efficient equipment). For example, the replacement of incandescent light bulbs with CFLs would reduce electricity consumption for lighting by about 63% and electricity consumption in buildings by about 14%.

65. General recommendations for increasing energy efficiency in public and commercial office buildings in St Lucia include:

– Conducting mandatory energy audits for public and commercial office buildings to understand how the energy is used and which energy end-usage to address first.

– Increasing awareness: development of energy efficiency labels, distribution leaflets about the benefits of energy efficiency, encouraging people to sign up for energy efficiency programs to reduce energy us in buildings and in the use appliances.

6 At present electricity in public buildings is used for heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC)

applications: 48%; lighting: 22%; equipment: 13%; and other use: 17%.


31

– Labelling of air-conditioning units. The use of better energy efficiency ratings for air- conditioning units could save up to 30% of electricity required to cool a building. If such gains were to be achieved for all air-conditioning units in public office buildings on the island it would reduce (i) public sector electricity consumption by about 13.8% or 4,000 MWh, which would represent a decrease in national electricity demand of about 1.2%; and (ii) reduce annual CO2

emissions by 3,000 tons. 66. Currently, fluorescent lights with T12 magnetic ballasts are generally in use. This type of lighting is

no longer in use in North America and Europe as they are very inefficient. By applying stricter standards, this type of lighting could be prohibited in St. Lucia. By replacing the existing T12 magnetic ballasts with T8 energy efficient electronic ballasts, it would be possible to save up to 35% of the electricity required for lighting (for the same level of light), which would reduce electricity consumption of a building by about 7.7%. Such lighting systems would be easy to retrofit in existing buildings, and the payback period would be less than 10 years.

67. Changing all the lighting systems in all public buildings in St. Lucia, would save about 2,200 MWh of electricity annually, which would represent a reduction of about 0.7% of the national electricity consumption. Also, the electricity consumption in supermarkets on the island seems relatively high. In supermarkets, in general, 43% of the electricity is used to refrigerate food and it is estimated that an improvement of 20% of the efficiency of refrigeration would reduce electricity consumption by an average 8.6%. Similarly, 14% of the electricity is used for cooling of the air if the efficiency of the air-conditioning units would be improved by 25%, total electricity consumption would be reduced by 3.5%. Also, 13% of electricity is used for lighting and an improvement of 35% in lighting efficiency would reduce annual electricity consumption by 4.5. Added together, stricter energy efficiency standards for lighting, air-conditioning, and refrigeration appliances and equipment could reduce electricity consumption by about 16.7%. Table 4 presents the estimated impact of the ESCO projects expressed as post direct but anticipated to start within the project period country. St. Lucia has considerable experience in replacing incandescent lamps with CFLs. About 250,000 CFLs having been distributed by Cuba and some 10,000 by Energy Care of the United Kingdom. From a user preference study7 willingness to pay for CFLs is double for households that are aware of energy efficiency but at present only one third of the lamps are CFLs. It is assumed that the most frequently used bulbs have been replaced with CFLs. There are quality issues that need attention if the market is to sustain. The impact of this market segment is included in the below table.

Table 4: Estimated Direct Impact of Lighting Standards and ESCOs in St. Lucia

Residential Lighting Household units 2012 60,000 Light bulbs per house 9 total CFLs already 4.5 Regulation potential 4.5 Incandecent 60 watt CFL 15 watt Hours/year 1095.75 National savings 13313363 kWh/yr Years life 2.5 Yr minimum GHG emission 29,955 tons of CO2

7 Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for compact fluorescent lighting: Policy implications for energy efficiency promotion in St. Lucia, by Travis Reynolds, Jane Kolodinsky, Byron Murray, 2011


32

reduction @ 0.9 ton of CO2e/MWh ESCO Post Project direct

200,000 tons of CO2

68. Since the St. Lucia component of the Project is relatively small, it will primarily focus on improving the energy efficiency in public buildings8; however, the revolving fund that is to be established for St. Lucia as well, will also seek to finance other potential energy efficiency enhancement activities in retail and commercial buildings. During project implementation ESCOs are likely to spin off technologies and approaches for increasing energy efficiency that will be considered for application in the commercial sector of St. Lucia. St. Lucia is also planning to establish a revolving fund of US$ 200,000, which is to include four financing cycles and is expected to result in GHG emission reductions of 200,000 tons of CO2e as a direct impact after project completion. GHG emission reductions that result from activities of ESCOs during the project period are included the market assessment above so as not to double count the impact. The projected direct post project impact will be the result of activities of the ESCOs. Given the present limited scope of ESCOs in public buildings and regulation of lighting, St. Lucia intends on requesting another GEF project to broaden the scope to include all buildings, building codes and equipment generally.

(d) Trinidad & Tobago

69. The economic benefits of increasing energy efficiency in lighting and the use of household appliances

are more evident at the macro-economic level than in the households themselves. Due to a relatively low government-subsidized consumer price for electricity of less than 4 US cents per kWh, there is only a modest financial incentive for households to use electricity more efficiently. DSM programs will therefore need to be developed and be government-led as there will be significant economic benefits from more energy efficient energy use as result of the implementation of such programs in terms of: (i) delaying or avoiding new power generation infrastructure to match increasing demand for electricity; (ii) reduced fuel consumption by households; (iii) mitigation of the national fiscal burdens of providing electricity subsidies for the residential sector; (iv) enhanced energy security, and; (v) significant reduction of GHG emissions.

70. Estimated potential energy and GHG emissions savings in households where under DSM programs (pilot projects) electric water heaters would be replaced with SWHs are shown in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Estimated Energy and GHG Emissions Savings in SWH Pilot Projects

Total number of customers with single-element electric water heaters 26,538 Total electricity used per billing cycle (bi-monthly) by 26,538 customers (kWh) 95,058,431

Bi-monthly energy usage of a single-element electric water heater/ (kWh) 1,260 Bi-monthly energy usage of 26,538 single-element water heaters by customers (kWh)

33,437,880

Amount of energy to be replaced on a bi-monthly basis, by SWHs (kWh) 33,437,880 Reduction in energy usage by customers through the use of SWHs (%) 36.72

8 During the PPG phase the European Union co-financed the assessment of the potential for increasing energy efficiency in the buildings sector during the PIF/PPG period.


33

Annual potential reduction in CO2 emissions (tons) 148,266 Amount of energy to be substituted under a pilot project to replace 250 single-element water heaters (ca. 1 %) with SWHs on a bi-monthly basis (KWh)

315,000

Annual reduction in electricity use under SWH pilot project (KWh) 1,890,000 Reduction in energy usage by customers under SWH pilot project (%) 36.72 Annual reduction in CO2 emissions under SWH pilot project (tons) 1,400

71. Estimated potential energy and GHG emissions savings in households where under DSM programs (pilot projects) incandescent light bulbs heaters would be replaced with CFLs are shown in Table 6 below.

Table 6: Estimated Energy and GHG Emissions Savings in CFL Pilot Projects

Ten Incandescent Bulbs (60 W each)

Ten CFLs (15W each)

Savings

Bi-monthly electricity consumption per household (kWh)

360 90 270

Bi-monthly household electricity cost @ US 4 US cents per kWh (US$)

14.40 3.60 10.80

Annual electricity consumption for lighting per household (kWh)

2,160 540 1,620

Annual electricity cost for lighting per household @ US 4 cents per kWh (US$)

86.40 21.60 64.80

Annual per capita CO2 emissions in connection with the use of electricity for lighting in households (tons)

1.60 0.40 1.20

Total annual electricity consumption for lighting by 2,500 households under an energy efficient lighting pilot project (kWh)

5,400,000 1,350,000 4,050,000

Annual reduction of CO2 emissions by 2,500 households under and energy efficient lighting pilot project (tons)

4,000 1,000 3,000

72. Water supplied to households is normally not metered. However, under a DSM program for more efficient use of water by households (by installing low flush toilets, aerators, etc.) energy savings can also be expected. Table 7 presents an estimate of such savings.

Table 7: Estimated Energy and GHG Emissions Savings under DSM (Water Use) Program

Average daily household consumption of water ( m3) 2.175

Average annual household consumption of water ( m3) 794


34

Annual electricity required to supply one household with water (kWh) 403

Annual electricity required to supply 2,500 households with water under the pilot DSM project (kWh)

1,007,500

Annual CO2 emissions in connection with the supply of water to 2,500 house-holds under the DSM pilot project (tons)

750

Annual electricity required to supply 2,500 households with water after the implementation of the DSM project (kWh)

806,000

Annual reduction in electricity required to supply 2,500 households with water after the implementation of the DSM project (%)

20

Annual reduction in electricity required to supply 2,500 households with water after the implementation of the DSM project (kWh)

201,500

Annual reduction of CO2 emissions by 2,500 households after implementation of the DSM project (tons)

150

73. It is further envisaged that other programs/initiatives that will be implemented under the Project will

result in significant energy savings and environmental benefits in the future. If the feasibility and engineering study for solar air-conditioning at the Piarco and Crown Point International Airports leads to the actual development of such systems, total reduction in electricity use may be as high as 13,000 MWh (with 10,000 MWh saved at Piarco Airport), which would reduce GHG emissions by about 9,680 metric tons of CO2e a year. As much as 70 to 80 % of electricity consumption in large buildings with central cooling systems, such as airports, may be the result of their air-conditioning systems. In this regard, the implementation of the Project is timely since (i) the last expansion of Piarco Airport took place more than 12 years ago and the existing water chillers are close to the end of their operational lifetime and about 30 to 35 % of the electricity required for air-conditioning is used up by the chillers; and (2) Crown Point International Airport is slated for a program of expansions and renovations, which would begin in 2012. Its air-conditioning system can be further developed and expanded to optimize condensate capture that would lead to a reduction of water use at the airport. The climatic conditions in Trinidad & Tobago present an excellent opportunity with its relatively high temperatures and high levels of humidity of 85 to 95%.

74. The commercial buildings sector consumes about 9% of electricity. Use of T12 fluorescent lights with T12 ballasts is common and the lights and ballasts are locally manufactured. Upgrading to T8 fluorescent lights with T8 ballasts electronic ballast could save about 35% of electricity while introduction of LED-based computer screens, replacement of UPS power supplies, and upgrading of refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment could save about an additional 10% of commercial electricity consumption and would reduce GHG emissions by about 186,000 tons of CO2e over the lifetime of the new equipment and systems. Further, regulatory programs to increase energy efficiency such as ‘Appliance Standards and Labeling’ and ‘Green Building Codes’ would result in national energy savings of 15 to 20 % and 10 to 20 %, respectively. Such programs could be voluntary; however, previous experience shows that mandatory standards for minimum energy performance (MEP) and incentives for the use products with a high energy performance typically enhance the use of energy efficiency products and equipment. A combination of voluntary labeling with incentives for market leaders and mandatory MEPs for market laggards is to be developed under the Project.

75. The potential for annual electricity savings that may accrue as a result of the replacement of

“standard” appliances with energy efficient ones could be 335 GWh of electricity, which is equivalent to a reduction of 16 % of total current electricity consumption (see Table 8).


35

Table 8: Estimated Potential Energy and GHG Emission Savings through the Use of Energy Efficient Appliances Standard “Energy efficient” Savings Bi-monthly electricity usage, household appliances (kWh)

1,129.4 951.95 177.45

Bi-monthly bill, household appliances @ US 4 cents per KWh (US$)

45.18 38.08 7.10

Annual electricity usage for household appliances (kWh)

6,776.4 5,711.7 1,064.7

Annual bill, household appliances @ US 4 cents per kWh (US$0

271.08 228.48 42.60

Annual per capita CO2 emissions for household appliance use (tons)

5.01 4.22 0.79

Total annual electricity consumption for appliances by 314,480 households(GWh)

2,131 1,796 335

Total annual electricity consumption for appliances by 314,480 households (US$)

85,249,238 71,852,390 13,396,848

Total annual CO2 emissions due to use of appliances by households (tons)

1,575,545 1,327,106 248,439

Appliance replacement rate @ 10% a year (tons of CO2)

24,844

Over 10 years life of appliances (tons of CO2)

248,439

S&L/MEPS for appliances in effect for 3 years (tons of CO2)

745,317

76. The baseline for the household electricity DSM required estimation of the electricity consumption and concomitant carbon emissions for residential lighting and residential appliances. In the case of appliances, efficiency improvement afforded by each potential policy option is combined with local appliance use patterns to estimate average annual energy consumption for each appliance.

Table 9: Total Estimated Total Direct GHG Emissions Reductions (tons of CO2)

Demonstration projects Savings

SWH Pilot Projects 1,400

CFL Pilot Projects 3,000

DSM Water Program (2,500 households) 150 Piarco Airport Solar Air-conditioning System 9,680 WASA Office Demonstration Project 1,620 Zero Carbon Community Centre Demonstration 372 Sub-total 16,222 Replacement of Household Appliances

Total annual CO2 emissions due to use of appliances by households (tons)

248,439

MEPS for appliances in effect for 3 years 745,317 Commercial sector emission reductions 116,456 Total Direct Emissions Reductions 877,995


36

The impact of the demonstration projects has been added to the broader market impact estimates of standards and labelling since the levels of energy savings will be leading examples of greater energy savings than those expected from regulation itself. However, the demonstrations projects constitute a relatively small addition to the overall estimated impact.

Regional Energy Consumption, Public Health and Behavior Monitoring Protocol

77. This component of the Project will be carried out by WINDREF and is to evaluate and monitor the environmental and public health aspects of renewable energy use and energy efficiency interventions in all participating countries. Public health and environmental health indicators will be developed and exposure measurement data, as well as Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) survey data with regard to energy consumption behavior before and after certain interventions will be collected. In particular, the “take back” or “rebound” effects related to the availability of more energy efficient products, devices, and equipment will be quantified and the information disseminated through the public awareness program; it will also become one of the parameters that will be considered for the preparation of the building code. The epidemiological data will help understand the possible effects of increased energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy with regard to the general health and behavior of occupants of buildings. This will be done through the use of repeated cross sectional surveys that will evaluate the environmental and public health aspects of energy efficiency and renewable energy interventions before and six months after the activities.

78. The study consists of four phases, i.e., (i) selection of the group of persons who will be studied; (ii)

data collection; and (iii) data management and analysis. The group of persons will be randomly selected among occupants of buildings in the five SIDS under the Project where energy efficiency and renewable energy activities will take place. Locally data collectors who have been trained by SGU and WINDREF will be responsible for completing the questionnaires. The questionnaire will include sections on demographic background; socioeconomic indicators; quality of life; health information, and employee satisfaction (for office buildings) and include KAP survey for measuring energy consumption behavior using a validated standard list of questions.

79. The selected group will be interviewed at their homes or places of work. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of SGU will approve the exact procedures for collection of the data and the conducting of the interviews. Also industrial hygiene surveys will be conducted at each selected sites. Air sampling will be done to collect dust; volatile organic compounds (VOCs); and mould exposure. As required, humidity, temperature, light, and noise also will be measured. Subsequently, the collected data and other information will be analyzed using SPSS statistical software package version 11.01. Also other descriptive and analytical tools will be used, based on the type of data collected.

2.7. Linkages with other GEF and non-GEF interventions 80. UNEP is planning to implement a GEF-financed project on “Promoting Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy in Buildings in Jamaica” together with UWI. Arrangements will be made for exchange of information and joint meetings as well as exploring the need for harmonizing the building energy efficiency codes with that of both projects. The 5Cs has the mandate to coordinate and implement region-wide trade-related agreements. UNEP will ensure linkage with the Global Solar Water Heating Market Strengthening project, the Tunisia Solar Water Heating program9, and the Global Market Transformation for Efficient Lighting Project, which are implemented by UNEP. UNEP’s Sustainable Buildings and Construction Initiative (SBCI) will offer tools and information

9 The innovative financing model developed and used under this program will serve as a basis for developing a financing

mechanism for the purchase of SWHs by households.


37

benefitting this project. The UNDESA Division for Sustainable Development and SIDS Unit will provide access to information on national sustainable development strategies development from its Regular Program for Technical Cooperation and the SIDS Unit’s ongoing projects. Information exchange will take place with the UNEP-GEF Energy Efficiency in Buildings project executed by the University of West Indies in Jamaica. Activities of the Organization of American States, Organization of Eastern Caribbean States and the Caribbean Development Bank are coordinated with through both 5Cs and the national project partners.

81. The UNDESA Division for Sustainable Development and SIDS Unit will also provide access to information and national sustainable development strategies development support from its regular program for Technical Cooperation and the SIDS Unit’s on-going projects. UNDESA stresses the comprehensive integrated approach which is especially important in SIDS, where resources are constrained. Since 1997, UNEP has been addressing the issue of depletion of the ozone layer and in 1996, as part of it obligation under the Montreal Protocol, Trinidad & Tobago developed a Country Programme for the phase-out of ozone depleting substances (ODS). The country, with the support of the MLF and through the Terminal Phase out Management Plan (TPMP), continues to conduct activities for monitoring of ODS, development of regulations and standards for refrigerant use, capacity building for manufacturers and distributors of air conditioning systems and refrigerators, as well as increasing public awareness. Since many ODS are also GHGs, increasing energy efficiency of air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances and systems and refrigerators and may involve a change of the refrigerants used, which may pose a risk for depletion of the ozone layer although modern, energy efficient appliances and systems tend to use heat exchange systems that replace ODS with more benign substances. Increasing energy efficiency in air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances and systems (two of the most energy intensive applications in buildings) through the establishment mandatory standards for lower limits on energy efficiency for such appliances and systems will therefore be done in close coordination with the TPMP.

82. Recently, the European Union provided funding to a joint effort by the Caribbean Association of Industry and Commerce (CAIC) and the Private Sector Organization of Jamaica (PSOJ) for “Capacity Building of Caribbean Private Sector Environmental and Energy Management Capabilities”. This project aims to develop private sector capacity in environmental and energy management and to promote a successful regional and national collaborative approach to efficient energy consumption through studies in Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago. Data will be exchanged with this project so as to optimize the available knowledge about energy consumption developments and opportunities as well as existing capacity gaps in Trinidad & Tobago. The Project will also be linked directly to the “sub-regional” project that comprises all the countries in the Caribbean region and is preparing the “Energy Efficiency Overlay” for the National Building Code and the Protocols for Appliance Standards and Labelling, which will be made available to the other participating countries. Likewise, the Project will be linked with relevant activities and projects that are being undertaken in other countries in the Caribbean region such as: Public Awareness and Mass Communication Strategies to Promote Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Uptake – Antigua & Barbuda; Development of ESCO Financing Model – Belize; and Monitoring of Building Performance for Comfort, Health and Safety - Grenada.

83. Launched in Copenhagen, in December 2009, the SIDS Sustainable Energy Initiative called SIDS DOCK has a number of Caribbean countries signed on as members including four of the five countries that participate in the Project. SIDS DOCK is a SIDS to SIDS institutional mechanism established to facilitate the development of a sustainable energy sector within the small island developing states’ economy. SIDS DOCK development is being jointly coordinated by 5Cs and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), with oversight from a Steering Committee comprised primarily of AOSIS Ambassadors to the United Nations and technical experts. The ultimate goal of SIDS DOCK is to increase energy efficiency by 25 % (2005 baseline) and to


38

generate a minimum of 50 % of electric power from renewable energy sources and a 20-30 % decrease in conventional transportation fuel use by 2033; some SIDS have announced more ambitious goals. Representatives of 5Cs will sit on the Board of Directors of SIDS DOCK and therefore will be able to coordinate the pilot activities under the Project with the activities of the Eastern Caribbean Electricity Regulatory Authority. The World Bank will execute the regulatory work along side funding of their own. SIDS DOCK will also provide funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy through UNDP – available to all countries under the Project.

SECTION 3: INTERVENTION STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE) 3.1. Project rationale, policy conformity and expected global environmental benefits

84. The Project is aligned with UNEP’s priority to promote resource efficiency, i.e., sustainable consumption and production associated with buildings as well as its energy policy and climate change mitigation priorities. Efficient use of energy, materials, and water will be addressed under the Project. Increasing energy efficiency in buildings is a high priority of GEF’s climate change mitigation strategy. While the most cost effective measures to be investigated will focus on options for improving energy efficiency and developing required minimum performance ratings for appliances, equipment, and systems (such as television sets, refrigeration equipment, split air-conditioning equipment, lamps, and fans) and use of energy efficiency enhancing technologies and measures (such as replacement of slatted glass windows and installation of roof and wall insulation, SWHs, and PV systems) consideration will also be given to increase the use of renewable energy in the form of building-integrated, grid-connected renewable energy systems.

85. The Project takes a market transformation approach and comprises (i) capacity building; (ii) demonstration projects; (iii) development of financial support mechanisms; (iv) development of minimum performance standards and energy efficiency labelling of appliances, products, and systems; and (v) development of appropriate energy policies and regulations for the development of a sustainable market for energy efficient appliances, products, and systems. The Project aims to reduce the GHG emissions in connection with the generation of electricity that is required in residential and commercial buildings. In Belize and Trinidad & Tobago increasing energy efficiency in the agricultural and industrial sectors is not part of the Project while in the other three countries under the Project (Antigua & Barbuda, Grenada, and St. Lucia) more than 95% of the produced electricity is consumed in buildings, which is therefore almost equal to total electricity demand. The benefits of increased energy efficiency under the Project will be mainly the result of the use of more energy efficient equipment, products, and systems. It is assumed that all equipment, products, and systems have a lifetime of 10 years and that therefore the replacement rate (of the old stock with the new energy efficient appliances, products, and systems) will be 10% a year. However, the impact of the envisaged PV systems and building design measures will be longer. The estimated benefits are conservative as a likely increase of the markets for energy efficient products, appliances, and systems in the five individual countries has not been taken into account.

86. It is envisaged that within three years of project implementation all new policies and measures to promote increased energy efficiency will be in place. In Trinidad & Tobago a mandatory code for energy efficiency in buildings and mandatory minimum energy performance standards for appliances, products, and systems are to be adopted within the context of a standards and labeling program.


39

However, during project implementation the standards may still have a voluntary status and hence a 30% market penetration rate of the energy efficient appliances, products, and equipment has been assumed. This also reflects the low cost of electricity for consumers in Trinidad & Tobago and the recognition by Government that currently the market is under-investing in energy efficient appliances, products, and systems. In all other countries under the Project the projected high energy prices and risk of further oil price volatility are expected to transform the markets much more effectively after policies and measures to increase energy efficiency have been adopted and the general public has been properly informed.

87. The projected 20% energy efficiency improvement as a result of the expected continuation of high oil prices is conservative since equipment and appliances that would improve energy efficiency by 40% (e.g., brushless direct current motors and LED backlit televisions) are already available in the market. For those countries under the Project that together with a national development bank will set up revolving funds to help finance energy efficiency improvements in buildings, it is estimated that the GEF grant contribution in it will revolve at least 4 times. With eligibility criteria that require that on kWh/m2 basis an improvement in energy efficiency in buildings of 20% or more should be achieved, the GEF funds would result in a GHG mitigation cost of about US$ 4/ton of CO2e for each financing cycle. The use of US$ 1 of GEF funds in the revolving fund is therefore expected to reduce GHG emissions by 1 ton of CO2e.

88. The indirect impact of the Project will include the full penetration of the market for energy efficient appliances, products, and systems with mandatory enforcement of MEPS. Subsequently, continuing for at least another 7 years (post project) at which time the standards may require major revision. This is equivalent to a 3.5 fold scale up factor with 50% causality. A technical annex on Baselines and Impact Studies provides case studies of a variety of buildings and equipment standards & labeling impacts is attached (see Annex B). All countries will implement regulation while the smaller economies will broaden the scope to include ESCOs. All countries will use suasion although only those with high energy prices anticipate market appetite for high performance equipment and renewable energy. Table 10 presents the estimated GHG emissions reductions under the Project.

Table 10: Estimated GHG Emissions Reductions (tons of CO2 equivalent)

89. Included in the estimate above are integrated renewable energy systems that qualify under the building rating system and building codes, i.e.,250 solar water heating systems are expected to produce emission reductions of 14,000 tons of CO2 over 10 years and 100kW of PV is expected to produce emission reductions of 6,300 tons of CO2 over 20 years. About 10% of the revolving funds would also be used for developing renewable energy. Near surface geothermal cooling sources were considered but were not calculated separately.

Participating Country

Direct Direct Post

Direct Indirect Total

Antigua & Barbuda

160,000 200,000 360,000 840000 1,200,000

Belize 65,000 400,000 465,000 1,085,000 1,550,000 Grenada 100,000 400,000 500,000 1,167,000 1,667,000 St. Lucia 30,000 200,000 230,000 537,000 767,000 Trinidad & Tobago

880,000 880,000 4,791,000 5,671,000

1,235,000 1,200,000 2,435,000 8,419,000 10,854,000


40

3.2. Project goal and objective

90. The overarching goal of the Project is to develop and implement measures for promoting sustainable energy development within the buildings sector. The project objective is to reduce fossil fuel based electricity use in buildings by 20% and plan for 50% reduction in the longer term. The sustainable development goals are linked to environmental/climate change mitigation and knowledge transfer activities; the Project aims to reduce GHG emissions associated with the production of thermal electricity and the consumption of fossil fuels through the application and use of energy efficient technologies in buildings (including appliances, products, and services) as well the increased use of renewable energy sources in buildings (SWHs, PV systems, etc.).

91. The Project will also include pilot activities to implement and test specific best practices with regard to energy consumption and to promote the development of business opportunities for introducing and using energy efficient technologies that are essential for mitigating the risks associated with climate change. Governments will stimulate public participation in sustainable energy use in buildings through the development and implementation of relevant regulatory and incentive schemes for using energy efficient appliances, products, and systems; building codes including “green building” designs; financial support mechanisms; and increasing their awareness about the benefits of energy efficiency and the increased use of renewable energy.

92. The data and best practices learned under the Project will be used to develop further activities in the areas of energy efficiency and increased use of renewable energy possibly with support from donor agencies and local “green financing mechanisms” and to improve on the long-term goals of the Project. It is further envisaged that the Project will result in significant behavioural change towards energy use by the general public through the dissemination of information about preferred options, opportunities, and best practices, which will take into account the findings of the “targeted” KAP surveys. In quantitative terms the object of the Project is to reduce fossil fuel- based per capita electricity consumption in buildings in the five countries included in the Project by an average of 20% by 2020, and 50% by 2050. At the same time, reducing the use of water and materials with corresponding savings in required energy for their production and supply will also be addressed.

3.3. Project components and expected results

93. The expected outcomes and outputs of the Project are presented in Table 11 below.

Table 11: Project Outcomes and Outputs

Project Components Expected Outcomes Expected Outputs

1. Establish an assessment and monitoring system for energy efficiency and renewable energy s in buildings

• Capacity for continual improvement

• Opportunities and target potentials for energy savings are identified

• Baseline projection and monitoring system, which are able to track and provide feedback on progress

• Monitoring and quality assurance address on sustainable energy interventions in buildings

• Building energy audit reports • Data on potential savings in domestic

and public sectors • Design and terms for various pilot

demonstration interventions • Identification of measures at the

design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and increased use of renewable energy

• Identification of technology potentials to reduce fossil fuel use.


41

on a sub-regional project basis – to be led by Grenada – to determine indoor air quality, as well as knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) issue.

• Identification of the effect of energy efficiency intervention mechanisms on occupant comfort, health and safety, as well as the degree of the “rebound effect” that results from sustainable energy use interventions

2. Strengthening of national capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy

• Technical training programs on energy efficiency and renewable energy.

• Building materials and component efficiency: Guidelines and mechanisms for adaption into practice.

• Support programmes for policy and regulatory personnel required for building sustainable energy use.

• Development of design tools for building systems

• Development of training workshops and seminars on sustainable energy use for buildings to target regulators, project developers, designers, contractors, architects, as well as skilled labourers and maintenance personnel involved in energy efficiency and renewable energy interventions.

• Publication of manual on best practices for sustainable energy use in building sector.

• Development of tools for sustainable energy design in buildings

3. Development of appropriate financial and market- based mechanisms that support sustainable energy use in buildings

• Fiscal incentives program to increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures (such as income tax, environmental levy, etc.)

• CDM registered projects for household DSM and solar cooling for public buildings – to be developed from baseline data obtained during project implementation

• Blended grant/loan mechanism to be offered to ESCOs to facilitate their participation in building sustainable energy use activities

• Reduced operating costs are integrated into lending.

• Propose ESCO pre-qualification requirements, as well as TORs and minimum energy performance that qualify for programme support - to be executed on behalf of the Project by Belize

4. Demonstration of a program for sustainable energy

• Final designs and baseline data for pilot demonstrations.

• Verified data on project performance via monitoring and evaluation of demonstrations for energy efficiency and renewable energy interventions in buildings at the national level.

• Distinct market volume boost for building materials and equipment, which are relevant for implementation energy efficiency and renewable energy activities

• Selection and implementation of demonstration project through competitive bidding mechanism for construction and retrofitting of buildings to deliver specific target indicators to be developed as a part of the Terms of Reference for the projects.

• Government adopts a buildings and equipment energy efficiency standard.

5. Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings, appliances and equipment

• Adoption of minimum energy performance (MEP) standards for buildings design and construction and appliances, as well as introduction of rating protocol for performance

• Development of guidelines and standards for energy efficient construction practices including renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.


42

• Standards and labelling for television sets, refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment, “air circulation” fan motors, and exhaust fans and lighting products.

6. National project management

• Inception Meeting and Inception Report

• Periodic monitoring and implementation progress updates to National Steering Committee

• Midterm Meeting and Midterm Report

• Terminal Tripartite Review (TTR) and Terminal Project Report

• Outputs and reports, as per UNEP and GEF requirements.

7. Regional public awareness, knowledge management, and sharing, replication strategy and reporting

• Joint reporting for dissemination and cross learning.

• Results for analysis of the impact for different campaign strategies.

• Increased practice, knowledge and awareness – as measured via KAP surveys and analysis – for energy efficiency and renewable energy issues in Trinidad & Tobago and other countries under the Project.

• Attractive promotional materials and tools for renewable energy and energy efficiency.

• Sub-component reports for each activity led by the respective countries, inter alia: Trinidad &Tobago – protocols for energy efficient building codes, as well as appliance standards and labelling. Antigua & Barbuda – public awareness and mass communication strategy. Belize – ESCO model for financing energy efficiency and renewable energy projects Grenada – net metering (interconnection policy) and building monitoring and evaluation. St. Lucia- Energy efficient lighting

94. The Project will comprise the following specific activities under the various components: - Establish an assessment and monitoring system for energy efficiency and renewable energy in buildings

95. Within the lead agencies in each country, a monitoring system will be established that tracks the

performance of a sample of buildings representing the building stock. The indoor environment, energy performance, and occupants perceptions are part of the monitoring and generate feedback on whether measures are effective or not and what opportunities exist for improving energy efficiency. WINDREF and SGU will be taking the lead in establishing a protocol for establishing such an assessment and monitoring system while each country will allocate 5% of its resources towards the testing and analysis. The monitoring results will be used verify the impact of the Project as well as institutionalize a buildings energy policy support facility. Based on validated energy performance data and modeling, options for further reduction of energy consumption by 50% by 2050 will be made. This will include a review of new promising opportunities such as sea water cooling. - Strengthening of national capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy

96. Relevant personnel in the buildings and construction sectors will be trained and involved in selecting

energy efficiency and renewable energy options and the use of rating systems and where applicable,


43

mandatory energy performance levels will be introduced. Industry associations, architects, engineers, technical schools, utilities, and non-government organizations will also be engaged. - Development of appropriate financial and market-based mechanisms that support sustainable energy use in buildings

97. In three countries under the Project, the national development banks have been engaged in expanding their portfolios of buildings, construction and business development lending to pursue energy savings. Because the measures to be undertaken will be cost effective, the terms and conditions of the financial assistance to be provided by the national development banks will have a grant element that is financed under the project to make the loans more attractive for potential borrowers; however, government subsidies for the financing products are not envisaged. In the case of PV systems, sale of carbon credits or other financial support from the concerned government may be required to reduce their high upfront cost and make them attractive for potential buyers. In those countries where a national development bank is present, government agencies will assume the role of financier and develop financial and market-based support mechanisms.

- Demonstration program for sustainable energy

98. Demonstration projects will be designed and closely monitored in cooperation with the concerned industry. They will include the demonstration of (i) all types of energy efficiency appliances and equipment that are relevant for increasing energy efficiency in buildings in the Caribbean region such as energy efficient television sets, refrigeration equipment, (split) air-conditioning equipment, lamps, transformers, and fans; and (ii) techniques and technologies, such as the replacement of slatted glass windows and installation of roof and wall insulation and the use of SWHs and (integrated) PV systems.

- Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings, equipment and appliances

99. Consultants will assist the concerned governments with the preparation of draft policy initiatives and regulations to increase energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. Subsequently, these are to be discussed and finalized with concerned stakeholders in particular policymakers in national MOEs and MOFs. The regulations will focus on the development of MEPS for appliances, products and systems while the increased use of renewable energy would require the development of new policy initiatives, including energy pricing policies, to make use of renewable energy more financially attractive. Roadmaps will de developed for each country to guide the adoption and implementation of the new policies and regulations.

- Regional public awareness, knowledge management & sharing, replication strategy and regional reporting

100. The 5Cs will establish a database of all the reports and findings under the Project. Relevant reports will be prepared for target audiences and promotional tools and pamphlets for promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency across the region will be prepared. Findings and recommendations will also be shared with other relevant projects in the region and other regional and global projects supported by UNEP and GEF. They will also be discussed at regional meetings and workshops. Each country under the Project will also carry out public awareness campaigns to promote energy efficiency and use of renewable energy resources in the concerned country.

3.4. Intervention logic and key assumptions

101. The resbreezes night. Gmost ofhigh eff

102. “The refreezer savings standardwasherscurrent the dryeclothes.dishwasby Janufederal transformeetingproductcurrentlCLASPequipm

sidential buildand shading

Guidance on gf the potentialficiency refrig

F

S

ecommended energy use band 16% wa

ds, increasings, the savingsstandards. Cer test proced Room air co

shers will reauary 2013. M

tax credits irming marketg the new stants that just mely in the proc

P. Caribbean ent.

dings are mosverandas. Be

good practisel for energy sgerators, telev

Figure 1: The

Source: Collab

new standarby up to 30%

ater savings wg to 37% in tes are estimateClothes dryersdure will reduonditioners wlize a 14% in

Many of the nein the Unitedts towards hndards wouldeet the curreness of harmoncountries, esp

stly still depeedroom areas is needed an

savings are evvision sets, fan

e Impact of E

borative Labe

rds (MEPS)% by January

would occur inerms of energd at 43% for s will increasuce over-dryi

will have a 10 ncrease in eneew standards d States, illushigher efficiend cut their totant standards”(nizing minimpecially Beliz

endent on tra are more clo

nd there is mevident in equns and air-con

Energy-effici

elling and App

when implemy 2014. For tn 2015, in comgy and water energy and 5e in efficiencing, saving ato 15% incre

ergy efficiencare based on strating how ncy productsal electricity (USEPA appl

mum standardsze, will need

aditional openosed in and oerit to some i

uipment includnditioners.

iency Labels

pliances Stan

mented will top loading cmparison witsavings in 20

52% for watecy by 5% in 2additional eneease in energycy and a 23 %

levels of effithese tax cr

s. For a typiexpenses by

liance standars with the Un

d to block dum

Annex 1:

n design to taoccasionally ainsulation at lding SWHS,

on the Mark

ndards Program

reduce new clothes washth the continu018. For froner in 2015, in 2015. In addergy and extey efficiency b

% reduction inficiency that predits can coical householabout 6% in

rds announcenited States, wmping and re

: Project Docum

ake advantagair-conditioneleast of roofsPV systems,

ketplace

m (CLASP)

refrigerator hers, 26% eneued use of curnt loading clocomparison w

dition, changeending the lifby June 2014,n the use of wpreviously earontribute towld, products comparison wment). Mexic

with support fe-use of obso

ment

44

ge of ed at s but

and

and ergy rrent othes with es to fe of

and water rned

wards just

with co is from olete


45

103. Energy Star labelled appliances are more efficient yet, with refrigerators being at least 10% more efficient. Refrigerators that are 20% more efficient receive a tax incentive in the United States. The EU, United States, and Canadian labelling programs cover a range of appliance performance and are maintained by their standards organisations to remain current with technical advances and energy costs. By selecting a level such as the Energy Star and selecting an equivalent level in the EU system (G through to A++) countries will be availing themselves of products in mass production made in many countries including China and Mexico.

104. The Brazil refrigerator data for 2003 suggest that new Brazilian appliances were already within the efficiency range of the United States. The energy efficiency of older refrigerators can thus be assumed to lie between the new rated models and the Brazil 1995 or Mexico old refrigerators average points. Although the World Bank assumed a very poorly performing baseline for refrigerator consumption at 1,281 kWh/year (plus 10% transmission and distribution losses) a more conservative baseline, which would still allow the Project to achieve its energy efficiency improvement targets, is to assume that older appliances have an average electricity consumption of 600 kWh/year. The World Bank project was a scrapping program targeting old refrigerators assumed to have an additional five years of use. Unrated appliances coming into the Caribbean market have therefore been assumed to be performing according to this baseline for Caribbean refrigerators. Since Energy Star rated refrigerators are already being imported by countries under the Project, it is estimated that only about half of the refrigerators would have different standards if the Energy Star standard was adopted.

105. A 20% energy savings for refrigerators could reasonably be achieved through the adoption of Energy Star or equivalent EU standards labelling requirements and with a promotion program to encourage selection of the better fans and appliances among the rated appliances. This would represent minimal burden in terms of developing standards but may require focussed effort t manufacturers in Grenada and Trinidad & Tobago.

106. Annex B, Baselines and Impact Analysis for Buildings, presents a more detailed analysis of energy efficiency improvement on the electricity consumption in buildings. Table – explains the relationship between the various standards labelling programs, energy consumption and assumed baseline for Caribbean refrigerators.

Figure 2: Standards Labeling Programs and Baseline for Caribbean Refrigerators


46

Source: UNDESA

3.5. Risk analysis and risk management measures

107. The Project is designed to avoid problems experienced in other regional projects by utilizing 85% of the funding in-country. This level of decentralization calls for strong coordination since in the end common equipment standards and rating systems will be necessary. The 5Cs has a mandate to coordinate and implement region-wide climate and energy-related agreements. Adoption and support of energy efficiency programmes and in this case, buildings and appliances programs, requires political will and resources. The building industry usually sells a property first on the basis of cost considerations followed by appearance and location, which is counterproductive for promoting energy efficiency. By making energy efficiency ratings and information public, energy efficiency benefits will become more of a decisive criterion for potential buyers. Development of ratings systems that work in the developing countries with appropriate benchmarks for comfort and other aspects will help in this regard. Due to the diffused responsibilities for making investments in energy efficiency, and the tendency for mandatory minimums to stagnate, progressive options as incentives to pursue the socio-economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency will be explored.

108. Integrating the building and the appliances focus in a single initiative will provide a mechanism to account for and promote integrated solutions geared toward environmentally sound services provided by buildings, and within them. Building construction schemes whereby energy efficient appliances have already been installed when buildings are delivered would thus need to be promoted and incentives would need to be provided to integrate construction with procurement and installation of energy efficient standard appliances. Availability of energy efficient products in the local markets is as important as effective persuasion mechanisms to buy and use them. With regard to the most common features of buildings in the region, i.e., lighting and air-conditioning, the Project aims to demonstrate that integrating such features in a building from the start and include their installation

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Volume (ft3)

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n (

Kw

h/y

)

EnergyStar 2009

Brazil Procel 2003

Brazil 1995 and Mexico pre2000

Assumed Baseline for Caribbean refrigerators


47

during construction of the building will ensure the energy efficient use of such features at the lowest cost, their ease of use, and their proper blending with the architectural design of the building.

109. The take-back effect may degrade benefits of improved energy efficiency performance. These will be

assessed through testing and surveys and if required, mitigated by specific measures. Any impacts on the projected reduction of GHG emissions will be taken into account. Indoor air quality, combustion safety, and durability of structures can be affected by the introduction and use of energy efficient appliances, products, and equipment, which may result in the rejection of a particular energy efficient technology. Pilot programs, quality control measures and testing of a sample of buildings with improved energy efficiency (against a set of control buildings) will identify the need for adoption of measures to ensure adequate or improved building integrity. Consultation processes are crucial for developing policies and measures that are workable and effective. Table 12 presents the risk log. Table 12: Risk Log

RISK LOG

Risk Description Category ImpactSeverity

Likeli-hood

Risk Management Strategy & Safeguards

By When/ Whom?

1 Low commitment of the participating governments

Political Important Low to medium

In all but Trinidad and Tobago the cost of energy will provide incentive to policies that save energy while in Trinidad and Tobago raising prices of equipment and buildings will be more difficult

2014-2016 by government partners

2 Lack of national level buy-in to participate in a regional project

Organiza-tional

Medium Low Project is decentralized to national execution

5Cs, 2012-2016

3 National regulations for use of energy efficient products and equipment and use of renewable energy in buildings are not enforced (TT)

Political Important Medium Standards and labelling introduced as voluntary with market suasion and industry backing prior to mandatory status of minimum energy performance levels

PMU TT and 5Cs


48

RISK LOG

Risk Description Category ImpactSeverity

Likeli-hood

Risk Management Strategy & Safeguards

By When/ Whom?

4 Take-back or rebound effect is experienced such that savings are not achieved

Market Medium Low Detailed monitoring to quantify any effects and consumer awareness campaigns along with changes to technical specification will be carried out

2012-2016 WINDREF and

PMUs

5 Development and availability of suitable financing mechanisms to procure and install energy efficient products and equipment in buildings is not forthcoming or delayed

Market Important Low National Steering Committee and bank fiduciary standards

Biannual

PMUs and 5Cs

6 Mandatory minimums stagnate the market

Market Important Low Public awareness and a ratings scheme will be developed to encourage continuous improvement and competition

2012 -2016 5Cs, PMUs

7 Voluntary use of labels result in laggards continuing to use poor performing equipment

Market Important Low Minimum Energy Performance levels and building codes for energy conservation in buildings

2012-2016

5Cs, PMUs

8 Coordination of project activities is inadequate

Organisational

Important Low Nationally driven project activities will ensure coordination at the deployment level

PMUs and 5Cs

3.6. Consistency with national priorities or plans

110. The Project is entirely consistent with the participating countries national priority and plans, For example, Grenada, in its recent “Budget Statement” made in Parliament on January 14th, 2011, stated the following: “The Government, in association with the Windward Island Research Education Foundation of St. George’s University, as part of a joint-venture entitled the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (REEF) Initiative, is also in the final stages of submitting a proposal to the GEF (under the GEF 4) for US$1.1 million for energy interventions in the building sector. The buildings sector is responsible for over 90% of all of the electricity consumed in Grenada. Under this regional project, if approved by the GEF, energy efficiency standards (as promised in my 2010 budget) will be promulgated for refrigeration, lighting, air conditioning, standby plug loads and other major users of electrical energy within buildings. Part of the grant funds will also be used to create a soft loan mechanism, which will be administered by a local financial institution. Loans will be made available, under very concessionary terms, to householders and businesses wishing to purchase and install solar photovoltaic systems and energy efficiency devices. Through this innovative financial mechanism, our Administration hopes to increase market penetration of solar PV from the current 0.3% to 10% by 2020, in line with the targets set in the National Energy Policy. Government will formalize a long-term interconnection policy or what is referred to as a feed-in-tariff with the national electricity


49

generation and transmission company, GRENLEC, to provide confidence to purchasers of PV systems and other renewable energy technologies. Under the energy efficiency component of the proposed GEF 4 project, we also hope to conduct a pre-feasibility study on the use of cold seawater to air condition the True Blue Campus of SGU and perhaps the Maurice Bishop International Airport as well. This single project, if proven feasible, has the potential to reduce national energy consumption by 5%.”10

111. In the case of Trinidad & Tobago the National Environmental Policy (NEP) commits the Government to reducing and offsetting carbon dioxide production and to increase energy efficiency. The NEP also requires the country to develop national standards for energy efficiency. Consistent with the provisions of the NEP, the Government is currently pursuing initiatives aimed at developing a climate change policy, including mitigation and adaptation, across all sectors as well as updating its GHG inventory; this is with a view to develop strategies toward GHG reductions based on the said inventory. Accordingly, the Project will complement other initiatives of the Government towards reducing its GHG emissions.

112. The Report for Formulation of a National Energy Plan for Belize of December 2003 recommends • Collection and analysis of energy data on a regular basis, the preparation of annual national energy

balances, and the implementation of a demand-side management (DSM) study to assess whether additional power generation can be avoided;

• Implementation of a comprehensive energy-efficiency training program for relevant stakeholders. • Review of the building codes in Belize to include potential energy saving design features. • Training of appliance importers about the benefits of energy efficiency and encouraged to import

energy efficient appliances. • Design and commencement of a national energy efficiency education and awareness program. • A study on energy end-use practices in all sectors (public, commercial, residential, etc.) of the

economy in collaboration with Belize Electricity and Lighting and an organization that is experienced in conducting such surveys.

• Development and adoption of incentives such as reduction of import duties for energy efficient equipment (e.g., compact fluorescent lamps) to encourage their import and use.

• Support for the creation of ESCOs in Belize through workshops, dissemination of information, and the establishment of linkages to countries with ESCO experience.

• Creation of a National Solar Water Heating Initiative. UNDESA is currently supporting a review of the energy and transport sectors progress since Rio’92 with a view to identifying options for improved implementation following Rio+20.

113. In Antigua & Barbuda, the results of the Project will be used to help formulate a National Energy

Policy. A National Energy Task Force was established early in 2009 to gather data and consult with stakeholders to fulfil its mandate of producing a comprehensive and strategic National Energy Policy, which is ongoing.

114. For St. Lucia, the project is consistent with the Sustainable Energy Policy adopted in 2010. St. Lucia’s

Sustainable Energy Plan lays out a strategy for the maintenance and growth of the energy sector in St. Lucia through effective management. It seeks to attain a set of energy sector targets through the implementation of actions, which will create a policy and regulatory framework to encourage diversification of the local energy market and the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. Solar energy is perhaps the most widely distributed and used renewable energy source in St. Lucia. Increased energy efficiency is also a major part of the energy plan. The plan aimed to achieve a 15%

10 2011 Budgetary Statement presented by the Honourable V. Nazim Burke, Minister of Finance, Planning, Economy, Energy and Cooperatives to the House of Representatives on January 14th, 2011.


50

reduction in projected peak demand and installed capacity by 2020. Implementation of the plan is being awaited. Achieving this target requires public awareness/education campaigns aimed at changing attitudes and behavioral patterns with respect to energy usage. The first step will be to conduct an analysis of the existing conservation opportunities. This requires a detailed study of energy end use practices in all sectors of the economy. Capacity-building among the organizations and individuals participating in energy efficiency programs will also be developed. The establishment of Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) will also provide the avenue for consultancy for business enterprises. A national demand-side management initiative is also planned, initially targeting the residential sector. This will require a well-organized and innovative public awareness program that clearly communicates the need for and potential benefits of energy conservation in commercial and residential buildings. Government will take the lead role by establishing a set of energy efficiency standards for public buildings. A manual will be developed outlining energy efficiency standards and conservation measures for existing and new buildings. A solar heating initiative is planned to generate an increase in the use of solar water heaters. This will significantly reduce the high cost of water heating for both the residential and commercial sectors. Tax concessions have been introduced to combat the high initial costs of solar water heaters. Solar photovoltaic systems are also being promoted to provide back power during emergency situations and as demonstration units.

115. In this context, the Project would provide the policy and technical framework for a coordinated effort to increase energy efficiency in these sectors, which would otherwise have not been addressed by current national efforts. Important barriers to these processes include fragmentation of stakeholders, lack of awareness, lack of means for key decision makers to participate in the global process to design a common benchmarking system, lack of capacity to adequately analyze the needs for policy intervention at local levels, and inadequate capacity to build capacity to collect local level data required for baselines and policy tools, such as information about availability of materials, products, services and the local level of technological development. Overcoming the barriers is expected to expedite a shift toward energy efficiency that can be expected to continue in the future given the national economic benefits that it will generate.

3.7. Incremental cost reasoning

116. Under a BAU scenario, Trinidad & Tobago will continue its predominant dependence on fossil fuels for its electricity generation and supply; current building designs and use of appliances do not integrate sustainable energy issues and environmental protection in their development plan. The markets for renewable energy and energy efficiency are at their early stages of development and due to the country’s nearly complete dependence on fossil fuels for electricity generation, the share of renewable energy in the total mix of commercial energy supply is negligible. In addition, the market for electrical appliances, products, and equipment will continue to be dominated by low energy efficient types and models while, given the relatively low subsidized consumer prices of electricity, power consumption in the public, residential, and services sectors will continue to increase without relevant government interventions.

117. The Project will provide the data and specific recommendations to improve the enabling environment,

build institutional and human resource capacity, encourage adoption of suitable energy conservation/GHG mitigation technologies, and fill data gaps that will facilitate cost effective energy use and implementation of GHG mitigation measures in buildings. Currently, programs to collect and analyze data on the efficiency of buildings and appliances in the Caribbean region do not exist. Also, locally appropriate energy rating systems or standards are still lacking and individual countries are unable to make any decisions on policies to improve energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions from the building sector. The importation of appliances is not subject to any significant regulation in


51

the majority of countries across the region. Additionally, professionals who repair and maintain equipment are not aware of best practices that would improve or help maintain the energy efficiency of products. It is therefore expected that a continuing absence of data, training, demonstration and promotion of best practices will only serve to exacerbate the problem.

118. Although some governments have made significant investments in developing a national energy plans, such plans need to be supported by evidence that the policies and measures being suggested are socially acceptable and will result in cost savings to the public and generate national economic benefits. Without this support, the policy is not likely to be successful in the long term. In Grenada, while there are several existing national efforts to address energy efficiency there remains a significant gap with respect to the buildings and municipal lighting sectors. Specifically, there national coordinating efforts to address building and municipal lighting efficiency do not yet exist. To address such deficiencies the Project will support the development of a policy and technical framework for a coordinated effort to increase energy efficiency in these sectors, which would otherwise have be addressed by national efforts.

119. Overcoming the barriers is expected to produce a shift toward energy efficiency that can be expected to continue and accelerate in the future considering given the national economic benefits that it will produce. Under the BAU scenario, Grenada will continue to depend on fossil fuels only for its electricity generation; current building designs and appliance use will not integrate sustainable energy issues and environmental protection in their development plan. Like in Trinidad &Tobago the markets for energy efficiency and renewable energy are in their preliminary stages of development in Grenada with a negligible share of renewable energy in the total commercial energy supply mix with the notable exception of the use of SWHs for domestic water heating. It could even be argued that with a 0.3% penetration of SWHs and one well established energy service company, Grenada Solar Power Ltd. (GRENSOL) servicing the PV market, Grenada possesses an initial platform upon which to build an increase in the use of SWHs. However, the market for electrical appliances, products, and equipment will continue to be dominated by low energy efficient types and models and power consumption in the public, residential, and services sectors will continue to increase without relevant government interventions.

3.8. Sustainability

120. Sustainability of the outcomes of the Project will depend on several factors in each of the participating

countries. Institutional, technical, socio-economic and financial factors largely determine how these outcomes are perceived, replicated and accepted by the respective governments and all other stakeholders. Specific factors that will largely determine the sustainability of the outcomes of the Project include: - Institutional factors

121. The Project will build on existing institutions and agencies that have portfolio responsibilities with linkages to activities related to sustainable energy use in buildings. The Project will reinforce on-going activities and plans and bring together key agencies to strengthen the national renewable energy and energy efficiency framework, so as to establish a “semi-permanent” inter-ministerial body on climate change-related activities as well as cross-sectoral dialogues with stakeholders. For these activities to be sustainable the chain of supply and operation of equipment and technology must be institutionalized. For this to happen there must be a strong political commitment that drives the process to achieve mainstreaming of the policy. All stakeholders must buy-in to the strategies and be convinced of the benefits that will be derived from the sustained implementation of the policy.


52

- Technical factors

122. All technicians, tradesmen and professionals working in the building sector will need to be aware of the best practices necessary to improve the energy consumption patterns and reduce GHG emissions from buildings. Additionally, the traditional cultural practices, behaviours and other natural resource management considerations will need to be considered in the choice of technology and equipment, and renovation and retrofitting best practices. Factors such as the overriding need to incorporate adaptation measures and drought management strategies influence the appropriateness of the interventions chosen. In some cases, it will not be possible to simply adopt best practices from countries with a temperate climate. Innovative, nationally appropriate, culturally and socially acceptable solutions will have to be developed, tested, and promoted. The Project will have a major focus on capacity building initiatives. The training provided to various stakeholders will ensure that they have the relevant skills and knowledge base to formulate and maintain new goals for improving energy efficiency and increasing the use of renewable energy after completion of the Project. The Project will develop several technical standards and tools, including (i) Energy Efficiency Building Code; (ii) Standards and Labelling Protocols for Domestic Appliances, especially television sets, air-conditioning units, and refrigerators; and (iii) Guidelines and Technical Specifications for the use of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies in buildings. Best-practices “tool-kits” will also be made available and distributed.

- Socio-economic benefits

123. The demonstration of the cost savings realized and marketability of the equipment and technology

selected for demonstration and promotion will be critical to ensure the replication of the demonstration projects. Retailers will need to be assured that there will be a viable market for the appliances, products, and equipment being recommended and demonstrated before they will consider begin selling them. Consumers will need to be convinced that the cost of more energy efficient equipment, technologies to improve energy efficiency of existing equipment, and the retrofitting homes and offices will significantly reduce energy bills and result in substantial savings, which will justify their investment. It is recognized that a precondition for success of renewable energy and energy efficiency activities is the “coupling” of behavioural issues – knowledge, practice, and attitude – with technology and hardware features. It is envisaged that the Project will fast-track the development of balanced programs, both voluntary and regulatory, that remove cost-ineffective, energy-wasting products from the marketplace and stimulate the development of the use of cost-effective, energy-efficient products and technologies. The Project will stimulate market transformation by removing the energy inefficient products, with the aim of increasing the overall economic welfare of most consumers without seriously limiting their choice and reducing the affordability of products. For example, energy labels empower consumers to make informed choices about the products they buy and to manage their energy bills. - Financial viability

124. Demonstrating “bankable” practices during the demonstration of new energy efficient and renewable energy activities in connection with buildings will help to convince financial institutions that it could be financially viable to make investments in improving energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy and thereby reduce GHG emissions reductions through home loans and in micro financing for homeowners. Demonstrating the cost-saving benefits and demonstrating that energy efficiency and renewable energy activities in connection with buildings could be “bankable” is expected to reduce the “neutrality” of financing institutions towards energy efficiency investment loans and improve micro-financing opportunities. Awareness campaigns will be conducted on both the supply and demand side to catalyze the demand and achieve a significant and long-term market transformation


53

process, which will sustain the demand and supply dynamics of the energy efficient products and processes in the post-project period. At the macro-economic level, it is envisaged that based on the information and experiences generated under the Project significant investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy possibly in connection with the involvement of ESCOs will be mobilized.

3.9. Replication

125. The Government of Antigua & Barbuda is planning to construct green buildings during

implementation of the Project to house the offices of its Environment Division, which will incorporate the best available sustainable building practices. These will include low emissions and water conservation technology. The building will be ergonomically designed and have adaptation strategies to withstand, survive, and recover from natural disasters. This building will be a showcase of the options available to the public for energy and water conservation and disaster readiness. The building will demonstrate the efficiency of different types of technology and the cost effectiveness of said equipment. The Environment Division office will be a living laboratory for collecting and analysing data, and demonstrating to the public the technology and equipment available for GHG emissions reductions and efficient use of natural resources in buildings.

126. At the national level, the Government of Trinidad & Tobago is planning to construct energy efficient public and domestic buildings and it is envisaged that the Project will enable the replication and expansion of some pilot project activities, i.e., the Zero Carbon Community Centre design; the model for construction of community centres, and the DSM program for households in national housing projects. It is further envisaged that policy/regulatory activities for sustainable energy use in building designs and household appliances, as well as feasibility and engineering studies for PV-based air-conditioning systems will provide a template to facilitate national and regional uptake of energy efficient technologies. It is anticipated that the project activities in Trinidad & Tobago will provide examples of best practices, as well as baseline data, which will promote the development of similar projects throughout the Caribbean region.

127. The Government of Grenada through the REEF Initiative and other on-going programmes outlined in its National Energy Policy will use the data and momentum gained under the Project to develop and implement government-led activities throughout the buildings sector (domestic, commercial, and institutional) with the public sector taking the lead.

128. It is further anticipated that through sub-regional organisations such as the Eastern Caribbean Energy Regulatory Authority (ECERA), the Caribbean Electric Utilities Association (CARILEC), the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and CariCom, the project activities will be replicated in other Caribbean countries. Dissemination of the achievements of the Project and the lessons learned will be done through the 5Cs to other Caribbean regional countries and to all SIDS through UNDESA SIDSnet and the AOSIS website. Jamaica has already adopted a Code for Energy Conservation in Buildings, and it is hoped that the rest of CariCom member states will follow this example with the support from the Project.

3.10. Public awareness, communications, and mainstreaming strategy

129. There is a common misconception about energy efficiency and energy conservation. Energy

efficiency involves reducing the amount of energy required to provide products and services. It may require measures such as using energy efficient bulbs, or installing CFLs or larger window panes to accommodate more light. These measures reduce the amount of energy used and can positively impact upon the financial implications of energy usage. Energy conservation, on the other hand, refers to the attempts to reduce energy consumption such as turning off lights, and unplugging appliances. Both


54

energy efficiency and energy conservation can significantly reduce the cost of energy usage; and both will contribute to mitigate the impacts of climate change.

130. Based on the awareness increasing campaigns conducted by the Barbados Light and Power Company Limited with regard to the benefits of energy efficient lighting various activities would need to be considered in developing a public awareness strategy that focuses on several audiences and requires different means of reaching each of them. They include (i) public service announcements, (ii) cartoons, (iii) comic strips, and (iv) brochures. It is imperative that prior to the development of the strategy surveys must be conducted to determine the level of awareness. During the implementation of the awareness campaign the increase of the level of awareness should be measured while at its completion it should be measured how effective it has been in making life and behavioural changes in the target audiences. The initial survey will assist the implementing team in deciding on the information that needs to be included in the varying media. However, each media message should include the following: (a) a definition of energy efficiency and energy conservation, and; (b) the expected impact of energy efficiency and energy conservation on utility bills and/or the environment.

131. Mitigation options for the energy sector will focus on attempts to promote improved efficiency in electricity end-use, as well as the utilization of renewable energy technologies for the provision of energy in buildings. This will involve a range of measures to support DSM programs through increasing public awareness. An impact evaluation will estimate the program’s total impact on outcomes of interest and guide program implementation by scientifically testing alternative incentives and communication strategies against the adoption of energy efficient practices and technologies. Subsequently, the DSM program could be scaled up in line with the operational alternatives that are found to be most cost-effective. The impact evaluation is designed at an early stage, i.e., before the intervention takes place, and the effects are measured after the intervention takes place at different exposure horizons. The average treatment effects will be measured as ex post mean differences in outcomes between a “treatment” group (targeted by the intervention) and a “control group” (a similar, randomly selected comparison group).

132. It is recognized that a requisite condition for success of renewable energy and energy efficiency interventions is the “coupling” of behavioural issues – knowledge, practice and attitude – with technology and hardware features. A most important outcome from the Project is the design and testing of various renewable energy and energy efficiency promotional campaigns. Antigua & Barbuda will design “sub-regional” mass communication and public awareness activities for the project territories.

133. An inherent strength of the Project is the participatory approach used during its preparation. The Project will pursue the participatory approach based on regular communication with decision makers through the local National Steering Committees formed by each national government and concerned project partners. In line with its objective of national capacity building, the Project will develop and implement a communication and results dissemination strategy towards a number of target groups to ensure that details are gleaned on the project impacts and best practices. The concerned Project Management Unit (PMU) will be responsible for the development of the material for same and will provide periodic monitoring reports:

• The progress and results of the activities will be regularly available through hard copy and a project website, etc. Periodic monitoring reports will be used to prepare memos for decision makers and discussion during meetings of the National and Overall Steering Committees. Thematic reports will also be prepared and disseminated to reach out to scientific and professional audiences.

• A dedicated website will be launched and used as a communication tool with the public in general. The website will host publications and tools developed under the project. A


55

publication addressing the best practices and lessons learned will be produced, making sure that any experience gained can be applied.

3.11. Environmental and social safeguards

134. A facility for monitoring building performance is planned and will include aspects of health, well-being and environment. Many of the energy efficiency interventions within the ESD-Caraibes project will target lighting and air conditioning in buildings. To implement a Monitoring and Evaluation of building performance, not only are the energy use and carbon reduction essential but so too are the energy services provided by the building. In many buildings, air conditioning is a major ventilation pathway and consequently, is heavily influential towards indoor air quality (IAQ). There is a need for proper design of investigations so that any effect of energy efficiency interventions on indoor air quality parameters and related public health issues, such as dust, mould and luminosity, are clearly understood.

135. Numerous chemical and physical factors influence the indoor concentrations of contaminants. Source

characteristics, e.g., chemical and physical sinks, rates of air exchange, indoor air flow patterns and occupant activities, are some of the factors which need to be considered or measured when monitoring indoor air quality. The multiplicity of these factors makes the task of designing an investigation very complex. Determining the parameters to be measured as well as defining the extent of measurement are critical aspects of designing a study. The Windward Islands Research and Education Foundation (WINDREF) along with the Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine of SGU in Grenada will develop a study design and a protocol to conduct the monitoring and evaluation in buildings within the Project for which energy efficiency interventions have been made so as to determine parameters related to comfort, health, safety, and environment.

SECTION 4: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

136. UNEP will be the implementing agency (IA) and 5Cs will be the lead umbrella Executing Agency, which will execute the Project through national coordinators (NCs) who serve as consultants. The UNDESA Regular Program for Technical Cooperation as well as the SIDS Unit of its Division for Sustainable Development will act as an Executing Partner Agency and provide technical assistance to 5Cs. UNDESA has executed a variety of GEF projects; however, under the Project UNDESA will only provide advisory services that backstop 5Cs as the umbrella Executing Agency, which will be responsible for coordinating all national projects and overall execution of the Project.

137. UNEP, as the GEF IA and with assistance from UN-DESA, will responsible for overall project supervision to ensure consistency with GEF and UNEP policies and procedures and will provide guidance on linkages with related UNEP and GEF-financed activities. Funding will be channeled to 5Cs, which will also be responsible for contracting project staff and selecting members for the national steering committee. The 5Cs will put in place a regional oversight team comprising the 5Cs executive director and finance manager, and representatives from UNDESA, UNEP, and the GEF national focal points, and the national Project Management Units (PMUs) under the Project. The Oversight Group will meet quarterly over the first year.

138. As 5Cs will coordinate technical and administrative matters with UNEP, they will share the administration and project coordination with national PMUs in each country. Since 85% of the resources will be executed nationally, the national steering committees (NSCs) will provide the most important guiding function ensuring national buy-in and impact. The project management responsibilities are split evenly between national PMUs and 5Cs. PMUs are required to track their GEF and co-financing budgets while 5Cs will consolidate them for reporting to UNEP and provide


56

general supervision. The regional role is critical to provision of backstopping and ensuring overall progress. UNDESA and 5Cs will serve as alternates for technical and coordination matters should demands require it. Each year an overall Project Steering Committee will be held to review and discuss the overall progress of the Project and any issues that need to be addressed. It will include the members of the regional oversight team and representatives of relevant national ministries, government organizations; and private sector companies involved in the buildings sector of the participating countries. It will also invite other relevant regional organizations (such as the Caribbean Development Bank; the United Nations Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean [ROLAC]; and the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean [ECLAC]).

139. Project Management at the regional level will be provided by a Regional Coordinator/Programme

Manager, assisted by the regional coordination committee (RCC). The Project has regional and national scope and consequently the reporting features will facilitate integration among the project countries such that UNEP will receive reports via 5CS from the NSCs. The 5Cs has overall coordinating responsibility for the Project and will together with the national focal points, the PTC, and the National GEF Operational Focal Points be responsible for selecting the NSC in each of the participating countries.11 Further, each participating country will take the lead in one topic area. Grenada: Monitoring Health, Well-being – surveys, guidelines on improvements; Trinidad & Tobago, energy efficient equipment standards and building codes; Antigua & Barbuda: public relations; Belize: ESCO guidelines; and St. Lucia: energy efficient lighting. Oversight and guidance at the national level will come from the concerned NSCs (see terms of reference in Appendix 11).

140. In the case of Grenada, the NSC will include the GEF Focal Point for Grenada, and will have direct

oversight over the WINDREF Project Managers, the executing partner for the Grenada component of the Project. This NSC shall comprise technical advisors/representatives from the Ministries of Finance and Energy; Housing and Lands; Works and Public Utilities; Foreign Affairs and the Environment, as well as the Town and Country Planning Division and the Grenada Bureau of Standards.

141. In the case of Trinidad & Tobago, the NSC includes the GEF Operational Focal Point who will have

direct oversight over the Project Management Unit (PMU), the executing partner for the Project, Trinidad and Tobago Project; the NSC shall approve all reports prepared by the PMU prior to submission to the regional authority. The NSC shall comprise technical advisors/representatives from the Ministries of Community Development; Energy and Energy Affairs; Housing and Environment; Public Utilities; and Works and Transport, as well the Town and Country Planning Division; Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards; Trinidad and Tobago Green Building Council; and the Caribbean Association for Industry and Commerce. The NC will manage the PMU and will be directly responsible for project progress.

142. For Antigua & Barbuda, the Environment Division in the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Housing

and the Environment will be the National Executing Partner Agency. A Project Management Unit (PMU) will be established in the Environment Division. The PMU will be headed by an NC who will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the project, guide the implementation of activities and provide regular reports on the progress. The NC will be supported by a NSC, which will be comprised of the following stakeholders:

• Environment Division (including the GEF Operational Focal Point); • National Sustainable Energy Unit/the Energy Desk;

11 National GEF Operational Focal Points are responsible for identifying potential members for the NSC based upon agreed criteria prepared by 5Cs in collaboration with the NCs.


57

• Development Control Authority; • Statistical Division; • Department of Public Works; • Antigua Public Utilities Authority, Electricity Division; • Antigua State College, Engineering Department; • Electrical Contractors Association, and; • Antigua and Barbuda Investment Authority.

The committee will meet on a quarterly basis and provide technical support to the Project manager.

143. In Belize, the NSC will include the Ministry of Finance; the Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment; the Department of Environment; the Belize Bureau of Standards; major equipment suppliers; the Development Finance Cooperation; the Belize Tourism Board; the Ministry of Housing; and the Central Building Authority.

144. In St. Lucia the Environment and Sustainable Development unit will host the PMU, which will

coordinate national activities. The NSC will include the St. Lucia Development Bank; the Ministry of Finance; the Economic Affairs & National Development (including the GEF Operational Focal Point) , and the Ministry of the Public Service and Human Resource Development.

SECTION 5: STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

145. Many stakeholders were interviewed during project preparation, some individually, and others at national level meetings. This process will be formalized during the Inception Meeting of the Project when all stakeholders will be able to share and discuss their inputs and prospects for implementation of the Project. The primary stakeholders in this Project at the national level will be the various government agencies responsible for energy, economic development planning and the sustainable management of natural resources, building construction and housing development, and trade (importation of products). In addition, a number of professional organizations within the building sector will participate in project implementation. GHG emissions reductions will be largely determined by the ability of the Project’s effectiveness in changing the behaviour among all persons of the islands’ communities with regard to the use of energy to improve their well-being and therefore all residents of the five countries under the Project could be considered as direct stakeholders in the Project.

146. Because of its cross-sectoral features, the Project will involve multiple national stakeholders as well

as international partners. The Project seeks to build on the competencies of all stakeholders by creating a discussion platform to bring all views to the table and draw up the final orientation and guidance towards achieving project outcomes. At the implementation level, each involved stakeholder will play a central role based on its areas of expertise to ensure the delivery of outcomes and outputs. Table 13 present a breakdown and analysis of all the stakeholders involved in the Project.

Table 13: Stakeholder Breakdown and Analysis

Trinidad & Tobago

Stakeholders Role

Ministry of Community Development (MCD)

MCD is responsible for implementing government policies to identify and provide programmes and services to communities within Trinidad & Tobago. This Ministry be represented in the NSC, with further jointly responsible (along with the MEEA) for the Zero


58

Carbon Community Centre (ZCCC) pilot projects and some public awareness features therein.

Ministry of Energy and Energy Affairs (MEEA)

The MEEA is the agency of central government that is charged with responsibility for developing and managing the energy sector in Trinidad and Tobago. Though traditionally this function has been confined to the petroleum (oil and gas) industry, there is increasing focus on other energy services – including renewable energy and energy efficiency interventions. The MEEA will be represented in the NSC and jointly responsible for the ZCCC (with the MCD).

Ministry of Housing and Environment (MHE)

The MHE is the entity with portfolio responsibility for implementing government policies on environmental and climate change issues and is recognized as such under the FCCC. The Ministry will have a coordinating role under the Project and will preside over the NSC.

Ministry of Public Utilities (MPU)

The MPU is the arm of the Government of Trinidad & Tobago, mandated to ensure the effective delivery of affordable and quality public utilities (electricity, water, etc.) services to the citizenry of Trinidad & Tobago. The MPU will be represented in the NSC and will coordinate activities of the electricity and water provision utilities (T&TEC and WASA) under the Project, with particular attention to their role in the Household DSM activities and the WASA Head Office retrofit.

Ministry of Works and Transport (MOWT)

The MOWT is responsible for providing the infrastructure and transportation services necessary for the social and economic development of the country and has responsibility for the construction of public buildings, as well as oversight for the airport services. The MOWT will be represented in the NSC and will have oversight for the feasibility and engineering studies at the Piarco and Crown Point International Airports, as well as direct input towards the development of the Green Building Code.

Airports Authority of Trinidad and Tobago (AATT)

• Feasibility study and engineering design, Piarco and Crown Point International Airports

• Public awarenessEco-Industrial Development Company of Tobago (E-IDCOT)

• Green Building Code • Capacity Building

Green Fund Executing Unit (GFEU)

• Household Electricity DSM • Household Water DSM • ESCO Co-Financing Model

Housing Development Corporation (HDC)

• Household Electricity DSM • Household Water DSM • Public Awareness

Multilateral Environmental Agreements Unit (MEAU)

• Appliance Standards and Labelling • Capacity Building • Public Awareness

Regulated Industries Commission (RIC)

• Household Electricity DSM • Household Water DSM


59

• Public AwarenessTown and Country Planning Division (TCPD)

• Green Building Code • Capacity Building • Public Awareness

Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards (TTBS)

• Green Building Code • Appliance Standards and Labelling • Capacity Building • Public Awareness

Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission (T&TEC)

• Household Electricity DSM • Green Building Code • Appliance Standards and Labelling • Capacity Building • Public Awareness

Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA)

• Household Water DSM • Green Building Code (Plumbing Code) • Capacity Building • Public Awareness • Retrofitting, WASA Main Office

Caribbean Association of Industry and Commerce (CAIC)


Trinidad and Tobago Green Building Council (TTGBC)

• Green Building Code • Capacity Building • Public Awareness

Trinidad and Tobago Manufacturers’ Association (TTMA)


147. In Belize, stakeholders were interviewed during the project preparation; they include the following

and their role will be formalized at the national inception meeting (see Table 14)

Table 14: Breakdown and Analysis of Belize Stakeholders Belize Stakeholders Role Ministry of Finance (MOF)

MOF is responsible for the overall policy guidance and initial sign-off on project documents.

Ministry of Natural Resources & Environment (MONRE)

MONRE is responsible for implementing government policies to identify and provide programs services to and communities with the various entities in Belize. This will be achieved through the setting up of an Executing Unit within the Ministry.

Department of Environment (DOE)

Under the guidance of MONRE, DOE will lead with the implementation of the appliance labelling and set up guidelines for enforcement. They will engage the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in the appliance industry for the development of the


60

efficiency labelling policies.The Belize Bureau of Standard (BBS)

The BBS will support DOE in development of the efficiency labelling policies.

Major equipment suppliers

The major importers of appliances will be invited to awareness seminars in an effort to have them assist with monitoring the market for EE appliances.

Development Finance Cooperation (DFC)

The DFC will be the key banking agency to facilitate the rolling out of the ESCO projects. They will match, manage and report on the finances for the ESCO.

Belize Tourism Board (BTB)

The BTB will support the public awareness of EE intervention in the tourism sector via ESCOs.

Ministry of Housing (MOH)

The MOH shall participate in the ratification of the Building Codes.

Central Building Authority (CBA)

The CBA will lead the public awareness of the Building Codes with the support of the APEB, APAB and Local Building Authorities.

148. In St. Lucia, with its smaller project size, initially the activities will mainly focus on government buildings. Therefore the main stakeholders are the Ministry of Physical Development, and the Ministry of Environment as project leaders; the St. Lucia Development Bank, which will managing the ESCO lending component; and the Ministry of Finance that finances the energy cost of the various ministries. External parties such the Associations of Engineers and Architects as well as licensed contractors for the supply of energy efficient appliances and equipment under the Project will also be engaged and will benefit from capacity building activities.

149. In Grenada the following key stakeholders have been identified:

• Ministries of Finance, Planning, Economy, Energy and Cooperatives – overall policy guidance, in-kind contributions, partners under the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Initiative (REEF), which is a partnership comprising WINDREF that is based at SGU and the Government of Grenada.

• WINDREF - Project Management, in-kind contributions, REEF partner, national and regional monitoring and evaluation, including indoor air quality surveys.

• SGU’s Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine – logistical support to the REEF centre. In-kind/in-staff contribution

• Ministry of Education- liaison for the solar PV interventions in the two secondary schools, training at TAMCC, and on-line educational/public awareness material.

• TAMCC – educational institution – provision of training in RE technology and EE interventions, including field-testing.

• Ministry of Public Utilities – direct responsibility for GRENLEC • Ministry of Housing and Lands – planning permission for solar PV installation, maintenance of

public buildings, inspection by the Electrical Engineering Division • The national power company, GRENLEC, – private, monopolistic electric utility – provision of

baseline and ex-post electrical energy consumption data. GRENLEC is responsible for administration of interconnection policy and grid stability.

• ESCOs – technical assistance in the procurement of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies (including technology not yet widely deployed) and energy efficiency devices. Provision of training, operation and maintenance services.


61

• Grenada Development Bank - state owned financial institution with a developmental mandate – responsible for administering the blended grant/loan mechanism for building-integrated renewable energy and energy efficiency technology.

• 5CS – regional coordination of the Project • Eastern Caribbean Energy Regulatory Authority (ECERA). Grenada and St. Lucia are likely to

launch ECERA in 2011 under a World Bank funded project. Grenada may delegate rate-setting responsibility to ECERA when it becomes functional. ECERA will likely be used to provide advice and to regulate feed-in-tariffs for RE and set Renewable Portfolio Standards. ECERA is under consideration as having the expanded mandate to cover demand side electricity use as well.

• National project coordinators – coordination with the other participating countries will be required to allow for the ex-ante and ex-post assessments.

150. In Antigua & Barbuda:

• The Office of the Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs has portfolio responsibility for energy and the Antigua Public Utilities Authority.

• The Antigua Public Utilities Authority (APUA) is a statutory government agency, which has exclusive right for the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity and fuels and may subcontract such aspects as deemed necessary or appropriate. The Public Utilities Act (CAP 359) grants the Authority the exclusive right to generate, distribute, supply and sell electricity within Antigua and Barbuda. The Act goes on to stipulate that the Authority may give an individual the right to generate and supply electricity within Antigua and Barbuda. Any entity which generates electricity without obtaining prior, written permission from the Authority shall be guilty of an offence. In the face of this legislated monopoly, APUA has been very circumspect in the granting of the right to generate and supply electricity including to private individuals from renewable sources. The authorization has been essentially reserved for independent power producers (IPPs) with whom APUA has power purchase agreements (PPA) that are required to meet peak demands for electricity.

• The National Energy Task Force (NETF) is responsible for providing a comprehensive and

strategic National Sustainable Energy Policy. When this policy is completed the NETF will assist the government in implementing the Energy Policy. The National Energy Task Force will be responsible for examining current and anticipated energy consumption patterns in Antigua and Barbuda, technological advancements in the field of alternative energy, advancements in the field of energy conservation and other considerations, with the view towards advising the government on improvements to the National Energy Policy and the Sustainable Energy Plan.

• The National Energy Unit is a new entity that currently compiles energy information for use in

sectoral planning and evaluation activities, provides advice on energy related issues and activities and recommends various approaches and measures related to electricity sector generation. When the National Energy Policy is completed The National Energy Unit will provide advice on energy-related issues and activities by, inter alia, creating a discussion forum among governmental institutions, the private sector and public stakeholders in Antigua and Barbuda. It will have the primary responsibility for updating and improving the National Energy Policy and the Sustainable Energy Action Plan, so that the overall objectives of the energy sector reform are achieved in the shortest possible time. It will moreover function as an observer body at the national level, in order to assist the Ministry with responsibility for Public Utilities and other national authorities in the reasonable implementation and monitoring of energy related policies and laws.


62

• The Ministry of Works and Transport has portfolio responsibility for the Transport Board and

vehicular control as well as the Port Authority. Like in most countries in the Caribbean region transportation in Antigua & Barbuda accounts highest percentage of total GHG emissions and policies related to reducing GHG emissions in the transportation sector are important in reducing overall GHG emissions.

• The Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Housing, and Environment (MALHE) is increasing its

number of divisions and attached agencies. The divisions and agencies MALHE that are relevant for the Project include:

The Environment Division (ED), which is mandated to (i) identify and coordinate the implementation of national commitments to Multilateral Environmental Agreements, (ii) develop and implement a national environmental awareness program, (iii) establish projects related to the rehabilitation and protection of the environment, coordinate the development of environmental legislation; and (iv) coordinate the process of conducting EIAs for development projects. ED also serves as the Secretariat for Antigua & Barbuda's National Coordinating Mechanism for Environmental Conventions including the UNFCCC and is responsible for collecting data on GHG emissions for reporting while carbon credits would be registered through the Designated National Authority. The national GEF Operational Focal Point also works in ED.

SECTION 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN

151. The Project will follow UNEP standard monitoring, reporting, and evaluation processes and procedures. Substantive and financial project reporting requirements are summarized in Appendix 8. Reporting requirements and templates are an integral part of the UNEP legal instrument to be signed by the EA (5Cs) and UNEP. The project M&E plan is consistent with the GEF Monitoring and Evaluation policy. The Project Results Framework presented in Appendix 4 includes SMART indicators for each expected outcome as well as mid-term and end-of-project targets. These indicators along with the key deliverables and benchmarks included in Appendix 6 will be the main tools for assessing project implementation progress and whether project results are being achieved. The means of verification and the costs associated with obtaining the information to track the indicators are summarized in Appendix 7. Other M&E related costs are also presented in the Costed M&E Plan and are fully integrated in the overall project budget.

152. The M&E plan will be reviewed and revised as necessary during the project inception meeting/workshop to ensure project stakeholders understand their roles and responsibilities vis-à-vis project monitoring and evaluation. Indicators and their means of verification may also be fine-tuned at the inception workshop. Day-to-day project monitoring is the responsibility of the project management team but other project partners will have responsibilities to collect specific information to track the indicators. It is the responsibility of the Project Coordinator at 5Cs to inform UNEP of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely fashion.

153. The annual Project Steering Committee will receive periodic reports from the national Project Steering Committees with regard to the progress of the Project in each country and will make recommendations to UNEP concerning the need to revise any aspects of the Results Framework or the M&E plan. Project oversight to ensure that the project meets UNEP and GEF policies and procedures is the responsibility of the Task Manager in UNEP-GEF. The Task Manager will also review the quality of draft project outputs, provide feedback to the project partners, and establish peer review procedures to ensure adequate quality of scientific and technical outputs and publications. Baseline data gaps will be addressed during the first year of project implementation. A plan for collecting the


63

necessary baseline data will be prepared under Component 1. The main areas for which additional information are needed are energy consumption and physical characteristics of buildings.

154. Project supervision will take an adaptive management approach. The Task Manager will develop a project supervision plan at the inception of the project which will be communicated to the project partners during the inception workshop. The emphasis of the Task Manager supervision will be on outcome monitoring but without neglecting project financial management and implementation monitoring. Progress vis-à-vis delivering the agreed project global environmental benefits will be assessed with the Steering Committee at agreed intervals. Project risks and assumptions will be regularly monitored both by project partners and UNEP. Risk assessment and rating is an integral part of the Project Implementation Review (PIR). The quality of project monitoring and evaluation will also be reviewed and rated as part of the PIR. Key financial parameters will be monitored quarterly to ensure cost-effective use of financial resources.

155. A mid-term management review or evaluation will take place as indicated in the project milestones. The review will include all parameters recommended by the GEF Evaluation Office for terminal evaluations and will verify information gathered through the GEF tracking tools, as relevant. The review will be carried out using a participatory approach whereby parties that may benefit or be affected by the project will be consulted. Such parties were identified during the Stakeholder Analysis section of the project document. The annual Project Steering Committee will participate in the mid-term review and develop a management response to the evaluation recommendations along with an implementation plan. It is the responsibility of the UNEP Task Manager to monitor whether the agreed recommendations are being implemented.

156. An independent terminal evaluation will take place at the end of project implementation. The Evaluation Office (EO) of UNEP will manage the terminal evaluation process. A review of the quality of the evaluation report will be done by EO and submitted along with the report to the GEF Evaluation Office not later than 6 months after the completion of the evaluation. The standard terms of reference for the terminal evaluation are included in Appendix 9. These will be adjusted to the special needs of the project.

157. The GEF tracking tools are attached as Appendix 10. These will be updated at mid-term and at the end of the project and will be made available to the GEF Secretariat along with the project PIR report. As mentioned above, the mid-term and terminal evaluation will verify the information of the tracking tool.

SECTION 7: PROJECT FINANCING AND BUDGET 7.1. Overall project budget

158. The overall project budget is presented here while the UNEP budget format provides country-by-country activity budget and budget expenditure type. National Project Steering Committees will oversee the national projects and the administration of the project shared by a national project management unit and the 5Cs (see Table 15).


64

Table 15: Project Budget by Component

Project Components GEF Financing

Co-financing

Total ($)

($) % ($) %

1.Establish Assessment and Monitoring System including studies of long term potentials

735,550 67 364,500 33 1,100,050

2.Strengthening of National capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy

541,200 55 435,000 45 976,200

3.Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

604,450 25 1,841,500 75 2,445,950

4.Demonstration program 1,475,750 29 3,688,750 71 5,164,500

5.Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings

530,250 47 602,800 53 1,133,050

6. Regional Technical Advice 485,900 70 207,050 30 692,950

7a. National Project management 242,950 50 242,950 50 485,900

7b. Regional Project Management 242,950 50 242,950 50 485,900

Total 4,859,000 7,625,500 12,484,500

159. Project management cost mainly includes the cost of the 5Cs Project Coordinator and the national Project Managers. Co-financing of the project management cost will be provided by 5Cs, which will mainly be used for its own coordination activities and for the recruitment of consultants to assist it with this task (see Table 16 below).


65

Table 16 : Budget for Regional Coordination by Umbrella EA (5Cs) and National Project Managers (US$)

Project Components

GEF Financing

Co-financing

Total ($)Antigua &

Barbuda Belize Grenada St. Lucia Trinid

Tob

GEF Co-fin GEF Co-fin GEF Co-fin GEF Co-fin GE

1.Establish Assessment and Monitoring System including studies of long term potentials

735,550 364,500 1,100,050 145,050 130,000 145,000 33,250 288,550 101,250 77,000 50,000 79,

2.Strengthening of National capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy

541,200 435,000 976,200 199,950 215,000 190,000 100,000 56,500 50,000 54,000 5,000 40,

3.Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

604,450 1,841,500 2,445,950 45,000 45,000 45,000 100,000 403,450 950,000 100,000 400,000 11,

4.Demonstration program

1,475,750 3,688,750 5,164,500 400,000 673,750 400,000 1,100,000 100,000 200,000 109,000 400,000 466

5.Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings

530,250 602,800 1,133,050 150,000 160,000 160,000 45,000 89,500 25,000 20,000 5,000 110

6. Regional Technical Advice

485,900 207,050 692,950 117,500 117,500 117,500 45,000 88,4

7a. National Project management

242,950 242,950 485,900 58,750 58,750 58,750 58,750 58,750 58,750 22,500 22,500 44,

&b. Regional Project Management

242,950 242,950 485,900 58,750 58,750 58,750 22,500 44,

Total 4,859,000 7,625,500 12,484,500 1,175,000 1,282,500 1,175,000 1,437,000 1,173,000 1,385,000 450,000 882,500 886


66

7.2. Project co-financing

160. The co-financing sources as well as the contributed amounts are summarized in the following table. See Table 17 and Appendix 2 for detailed co-financing in UNEP budget line format. Also see with the letters the reconciliation excluding associated cofinance not associated with buildings and project preparation cofinance.


Classification Type Project %


Exec. Agency (Lead)

Cash 550,000 7.2

UNDESA Exec. Agency (Partner)

In-kind 150,000 2.0


Nat'l Gov't Cash 550,000 7.2



JICA12 in Belize Bilateral Cash 500,000 6.6


Nat. Dev. Bank

Soft Loan 800,000 10.5





Grenada Development Bank

Nat. Dev. Bank

Soft Loan 1,200,000 15.7

WINDREF NGO In- kind 185,000 2.4

St. Lucia Development Bank

Nat. Dev. Bank

Soft Loan 800,000 10.5

Sustainable Development & Environment Unit SL



Nat’l Gov’t Cash 1,716,500 22.5



Total Co-financing 7,625,500 100.0

12 Japan International Cooperation Agency


67

7.3. Project cost-effectiveness 161. Cost effectiveness in the project approach is improved through avoidance of repetition. In some

cases, deployment may take place without major GEF interventions. In most countries, due to the relatively high cost of electricity, the economics of effective building energy efficiency measures should be still sufficiently attractive to drive implementation without investment from GEF. However, it is evident that barriers exist due to the general lack of uptake of these energy efficiency measures, which are mainly due to lack of adequate energy policies and capacity to develop them, awareness of the benefits of energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy, and financial pricing system that would distribute the economic gains from more efficient and sustainable use of energy over the parties involved in the generation, transportation, and consumption of energy and thus provide adequate financial incentives for a transformation of the market for electricity-based products, appliances, and systems to a sustainable one.

162. The Project will support identification and development of policy packages that combine public-

private sector adoption and market suasion as well as support to mandatory codes for Energy Efficiency in Buildings and Appliance Standards and Labelling. The Project will also explore cost effectiveness over time by laying out potentials, targets and roadmaps for longer-term transformation. Energy efficiency, when promulgated through energy efficiency standards has cost-effective benefits in the creation of larger markets for materials and equipment as well as full market penetration. Rating and labelling systems along with mandatory codes will ensure a dynamic perspective toward enhancing sustainable energy use. Given the socio-cultural similarities of countries under the Project and the specificity of their energy situation, a “sub-regional” platform will be developed to enhance sustainability of the efforts, and to reduce the “per country” cost for same. The cost effectiveness of the blended grant-loan mechanism for ESCOs is proven by the commitment of national development banks to offer four times as much co-finance to the same investments. In addition, the requirement for equity or down payments by the ESCOs and/or the building owners will result in approximately 6 times more finance available compared to a grant funded demonstration.


68

Appendix 1: Budget by Project Components and UNEP Budget Lines

EXPENDITURE BY PROJECT COMPONENT/ACTIVITY ($)

Component 1:

Establish n Assessment

and Monitoring System for

Energy Effi-ciency and Renewable Energy in Buildings

Component 2: Streng-thening of National Ca-pacity for Energy Efficiency and Rene-wable Energy

Component 3: Appropriate Financial and Market-based Mechanisms that Support Energy Efficiency

Component 4: Demonstra-tion Pro-gram for Sustainable Energy

Component 5: Regulatory Framework to Promote Energy Efficient Buildings, Equipment, and Appliances

Component 6: Regional Public Aware-ness, Know-ledge Mana-gement and Sharing, Re-plication Stra-tegy, and Regional Re-porting

Component 7: Project Manage-ment

Total 2012 2013 2014 20155 Total

10 PERSONNEL COMPONENT

1100 Project personnel

1001 Project Coordinator (5Cs) 163,050 163,050 40,000 42,100 39,950 41,000 163,050

1002 Project Manager (AB) 58,750 58,750 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,750 58,750

1003 Project Manager (Bz) 58,750 58,750 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,750 58,750

1004 Project Manager (Gn) 58,750 58,750 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,750 58,750

1005 Project Manager (SL) 22,500 22,500 5,000 5,000 5,000 7,500 22,500

1106 Project Manager (TT) 44,200 44,200 10,000 10,000 10,000 14,200 44,200

1199 Sub-total 406,000 406,000 85,000 87,100 84,950 148,950 406,000

1200 Consultants

1201 5Cs 274,000 274,000 73,500 73,500 73,500 53,500 274,000

1202 AB 66,290 100,000 15,000 50,000 45,000 276,290 85,540 70,000 60,000 60.750 276,290

1203 Bz 66,240 130,000 15,000 10,000 35,000 226,240 25,540 70,000 25,000 105,700 226,240

1204 Gn 148,240

6,500 3,450 69,500 227,690 50,000 67,000 50,700 59,990 227,690

1205 Gn SWAC 50,000 50,000 40,000 10,000 50,000

1206 SL 17,000 9,000 5,000 5,000 8,000 44,000 14,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 44,000

1207 SL SWAC 17,040 17,040 17,040 17,040

1208 TT 14,740 10,000 1,000 45,750 40,750 112,240 30,000 30,000 25,000 27,240 112,240


69

1209 Int’l Technical Adviser 75,000 75,000 20,000 20,000 15,000 20,000 75,000

1299 Sub-total 381,850 285,500 39,450 110,750 198,250 349,000 1,302,500 355,620 323,500 258,500 364,880 1,302,500

1300 Administrative Support

1301 Assistant (5Cs) 74,000 74,000 28,000 14,000 15,000 17,000 74,000

1399 Sub-total 74,000 74,000 28,000 14,000 15,000 17,000 74,000

1600 Travel on official business

1601 Project staff travel 5Cs 35,200 35,200 7,000 10.000 9,000 9,200 35,200

1602 Project staff travel AB 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1603 Project staff travel Bz 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1604 Project staff travel Gn 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1605 Project staff travel SL 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1606 Project staff travel TT 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1606 In’tl Technical Adviser 29,000 29,000 6,000 9,000 9,000 5,000 29,000

1699 Sub-total 50,000 64,200 114,200 23,000 34,000 33,000 24,200 114,200

1999 Component total 429,550 285,500 39,450 110,750 198,250 440,900 480,000 1,896,700 491,620 458,600 391,450 555,030 1,896,700

20

SUB-CONTRACT COMPONENT

2100 Sub-contracts for Developing and Operation of Financial Support Mechanisms

2103 Bz: Development Finance Corp. 390,000 390,000 200,000 190,000 390,000

2104 Grenada Development Bank 400,000 100,000 500,000 200,000 300,000 500,000

2105 St. Lucia Development Bank 90,000 105,000 195,000 100,000 95,000 195,000

2199 Sub-total 490,000 595,000 1,085,000 500,000 585,000 1,085,000

2200 Sub-contracts for Monitoring Procure-ment and Demon-stration Contracts

2201 AB (procurement) 58,750 58,750 20,000 20,000 18,750 58,750


70

2102 AB (demo contracts) 350,000 350,000 150,000 200,000 350,000

2203 BZ (procurement) 58,750 58,750 20,000 20,000 18,750 58,750

2204 Gn (procurement) 100,000 100,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000

2205 SL (procurement) 22,000 22,000 10,000 2,000 10,000 22,000

2206 TT (procurement) 44,200 44,200 10,000 10,000 24,200 44,200

2207 TT (demo contracts) 420,000 420,000 200,000 220,000 420,000

2299 Sub-total 283,700 770,000 1,053,700 435,000 497,000 96,700 25,000 1,053,700

2999 Component total 283,700 490,000 1,365,000

2,138,700 935,000 1,082,000 96,700 25,000 2,138,700

30

TRAINING COMPONENT

3200 Group Training

3201 5Cs

20,000 20,000 20,000

20,000

3202 AB 99,950 30,000

105,000

234,950 70,000 50,000 50,000 64,950 234,950

3203 Bz 90,000 30,000

125,000

245,000 70,000 50,000 50,000 75,000 245,000

3204 Gn 50,000

20,000

70,000 25,000 20,000 10,000 15,000 70,000

3205 SL 45,000 5,000

12,000

62,000 25,000 20,000 6,000 11,000 62,000

3206 TT 30,750 10,000

70,000

110,750 50,000 30,000 10,000 20,750 110,750

3299 Sub-total 315,700 75,000

332,000 20,000 742,700 240,000 190,000 126,000 186,700 742,700

3999 Component total 315,700 75,000 102,000 332,000

742,700 240,000 190,000 126,000 186,700 742,700

40

EQUIPMENT AND PREMISES COMPONENT

4100 Expendable equipment

4101 Office supplies

3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

4199 Sub-total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

499 Component total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000


71

9

50

MISCELLANEOUS COMPONENT

5200 Reporting costs

5201 Public Awareness- Raising

Reports 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000

5299 Sub-total 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000

5300 Sundry

5301 Communications

900 900 100 300 300 200 900

5399 Sub-total

900 900 100 300 300 200 900

5500 Evaluation

5501 Monitoring & Evaluation (mid-

term and final) 22,300

52,700 75,000 30,000 45,000 75,000

5599 Sub-total 22,300

52,700 75,000 30,000 45,000 75,000

5999

Component total 22,300 52,700 2,900 77,900 100 31,300 300 46,200 77,900

99

GRAND TOTAL

735,550 541,200 604,450 1,475,750 530,250 485,900 485,900 4,859,000 1,669,720 1,761,900 614,450 812,930 4,859.000


72

Appendix 2: Reconciliation between GEF Budget and Co-finance Budget

5Cs UNDESA AB Ministry of

Land, Housing and, En-

vironment

AB Ministry of Land, Housing and, En- vironment

Bz JICA

Bz Develop- ment Fi- nancCor- poration

Bz Central

Buildings Authori- thy

Bz Ministry of

Natural Resources and En-

vironment

Gn Grenada Develop- ment Bank

Gn WINDREFF

SL St. Lucia Develop-ment Bank

SL Ministry of Physical Develop-ment and the Envi- ronmrntt

TT Ministry of Housing and the Environ-ment

TT Ministry of Housing and the Environ-ment

TOTAL

Cash In-kind Cash In-kind Cash Cash In-kind In-kind Cash In-kind Cash In-kind Cash In-kind Cash In-kind

UNEP Budget Line

10 PERSONNEL COMPONENT

1100 Project personnel

1101 5Cs Project Coordinator

242,950 75,000 242,950 75,000

1102 AB 58,750 0 58,750

1103 Bz 58,750 0 58,750

1104 Gn 58.750 0 58,750

1105 SL 22,500 0 22,500

1106 TT 44,200 0 44,200

1199 Sub-total 242,950 75,000 0 58,750 0 0 0 58,750 0 58,750 0 22,500 0 44,200 242,900 317,950

1200 Consultants

1201 5Cs 242,950 242,950 0

1202 AB 5,000 50,000 5,000 50,000

1203 Bz 300,000 18,000 300,000 18,000

1204 Gn 5,000 116,250 5,000 116,250

1205 Gn SWAC 10,000 0 10,000

1206 SL 4,100 30,000 4,100 30,000

1207 SL SWAC 10,000 0 10,000

1208 TT 5,000 33,500 5,000

33,500

1209 Int’l Technical Adviser (UNDESA)

45,000

1299 Sub-total 262,050 45,000 0 50,000 300,000 0 0 18,000 0 126,250 0 40,000 0 33,500 562,500 267,750

1301 Administrative Support 5Cs

0 0

1399 Sub-total 0 0

1600 Travel on official business

1601 Project staff 5Cs 0 0

1602 Project staff AB 0 0

1603 Project staff Bz 0 0


73

1604 Project staff Gn 0 0

1605 Project staff SL 0 0

1606 Project staff TT 0 0

1607 Int’l Technical Adviser (UNDESA)

30,000 0 30,000

1699 Sub-total 0 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000

1999 Component total

550,000 150,000 0 108,750 300,000 0 0 76,750 0 185,000 0 62,500 0 77,700 805,400 615,700

20 SUB-CONTRACT COMPONENT

2100 Sub-contracts for Developing and Operation of Financial Support Mechanisms

2101 Bz: Development Finance Corporation

800,000 800,000 0

2102 Grenada Development Bank

1,200,000 1,200,000 0

2103 St. Lucia Development Bank

800,000 800,000 0

2199 Sub-total 0 0 0 0 0 800,000 0 0 1,200,000 0 800,000 0 0 0 2,800,000 0

2200 Sub-contracts for Monitoring Procure-ment and Demon-stration Contracts

2201 AB (procurement) 30,000 0 30,000

2202 AB (demo contracts) 550,000 373,750 550,000 373,750

2203 Bz (procurement) 100,000 5,250 100,000 5,250

2204 Gn (procurement) 0 0 0

2205 SL (procurement) 20.000 0 20,000

2206 TT (procurement) 5,800 0 5,800

2207 TT (demo contracts) 1,716,500 1,716,500 0

2399 Sub-total 0 0 550,000 403,750 100,000 0 0 5,250 0 0 0 20,000 1,716,500 5,800 2,366,500 434,800


0 0 550,000 403,750 100,000 800,000 0 5,250 1,200,000 0 800,000 20,000 1,716,500 5,800 6,086,500 434,800

30 TRAINING COMPONENT

3200 Group training

3201 5Cs 0 0

3202 AB 220,000 0 220,000

3203 Bz 100,000 45,000 10,000 0 155,000

3204 Gn 0 0

3205 SL 0 0

3206 TT 138,500 0 138,500


74

3299 Sub-total 0 0 0 220,000 100,000 0 45,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 138,500 0 510,500


0 0 0 220,000 100,000 0 45,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 138,500 0 510,500

-

99 GRAND TOTAL

550,000 150,000 550,000 732,500 500,000 800,000 45,000 92,000 1,200,000 185,000 82,500 185,000 1,716,500 222,000 6,116,500 1,509,000


75

Appendix 3: Incremental reasoning

Building on the baseline situation, the current business as usual approach would see continuing under-investment and poor levels of awareness of opportunities for improvement among consumers, industry professionals and government. The added value of the project will be to build the capacity for continual improvement of the building stock in a way that stakeholders agree is effective that integrate with the market and will achieve sustainable improvements. In Trinidad and Tobago, while there are several existing national efforts to address energy efficiency within the transport sector for instance, there remains a significant gap with respect to the buildings and municipal lighting sectors. Specifically, there are no existing national coordinating efforts to address building and municipal lighting efficiency. In the eastern Caribbean and Belize the markets are very small and are at the end of a long supply chain for equipment presenting a situation where lock-in to certain equipment, especially low cost equipment is much firmer and specialized or high efficiency equipment is special order. Organising the suppliers to respond to an initial demand, demonstrating the energy efficiency, promoting the market for energy efficiency are all incremental to the business as usual case even though energy savings will justify the product upgrades. Energy standards and labelling in Europe and North America can be adapted to local climate conditions, energy prices and local currency in order to become effective marketing tools. Without their adaptation, they are not useful. Building designers are uncertain about what improvements to make, some over-insulating the envelope (beyond cost effectiveness) while others are succumbing to glass wall office building designs that are inappropriate in tropical climates and cause excessive air-conditioning loads. This project would provide the policy and technical framework for a coordinated effort to increase energy efficiency in these sectors, which would otherwise have not been addressed by current national efforts. Overcoming the barriers will trigger a shift toward energy efficiency that can be expected to continue given the national economic benefits.

Project Strategy Baseline Alternative Increment

Project Objective To reduce the GHG emissions intensity in buildings by 20%

Baseline older refrigerators and air-conditioners average 1,281 kwh/yr, newer 513 kwh/yr, with high variability. Good penetration of compact fluorescent lamps (rate unknown) but incandescent lamps still available. Magnetic ballast fluorescents still widely used in commercial buildings Very few (<0.1%) high performance buildings, most buildings use technologies

A reduction in GHG emissions intensity of 20% as a result of more efficient energy consumption and renewable energy use in buildings

The increment is moving from inaction and low level discussion to an organized push for EE and RE in buildings.


76

common during periods of low energy prices 1990’s. No mechanisms to encourage better performance

Outcome 1 Institutional capacity for management of sector, monitoring and assessment

General Statistics, weak knowledge of technical potentials, weak policy documents

Capacity to predict trends and assess impact of EE policies and programs, Long range planning for deep GhG emission cuts of 50%

EE and RE potentials and ability to track progress are institutionalized

Output 1.1 Building audit reports, statistics on potential savings in domestic, commercial and public sectors

Studies available for buildings were mostly walk-thought audits with no building envelope characterization .

Samples of commercial buildings, government buildings and hotels are established each at about 20 for statistical analysis.

Adequate information to allow alternative measures to be considered

Output 1.2 Identification of measures at the design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and renewables

There are a few reports looking at buildings in a rather general way

20 upgrade option reports on 1.1 studied buildings

Upgrades and cost effectiveness considered

Output 1.3 Identify equipment and lighting potentials to reduce fossil fuel use

Equipment ratings are available for some equipment and others not, Available ratings are for northern country conditions, electricity prices and foreign currencies

> 20% energy performance improvement

Improvements considered in a systematic way

Output 1.4 Specific energy saving measures and policy options for various classes of buildings are identified and developed

No bottom-up policy support documents for buildings sector

20% and 50% improvement options put forward for long term policy

Alternative is the increment, no significant action without the project

Outcome 2 Technical capacity and awareness for EE

Refrigeration and Air-conditioning equipment associations exist, Mechanical engineering, Civil Engineering associations exist but practice in the market is highly variable, low awareness and guidance available to many small builders, public consumers

Majority of vendors, practitioners and trades-persons are aware of EE techniques

Awareness and capacity to effect change improved

• Output 2.1 Development of training workshops, seminars on energy efficiency for building

No particular qualification available for ESCOs

30 trained ESCOs with at least 3 in each country

Qualified industry established


77

designers, contractors architects, renewable energy installers and maintenance personnel

• Output 2.2 Publication of manual on best practices on energy efficiency for use in building sector

Manuals available are for other climates and cultures

Manual covering building science in the tropical island context

Alternative is the increment

Output 2.3 Development of energy efficiency courses for national tertiary institutions

University of West Indies has some relevant capacity for training but the local poli-techniques need expansion of curricula

Improved material for training Improvement in training material

Outcome 3 Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

Normal finance is available for buildings, building renovation and to support business (including buildings materials and equipment suppliers) capitalization but no portfolio is established for energy service companies or renewable energy suppliers in particular

National development banks (NDB) accept grant capitalization to be used in a blended finance product for the demonstration investments and listed eligible loans subsequently. National housing authority agrees to adopt an EE guideline or draft national EE buildings code in their housing finance program.

EE in buildings finance becomes a finanace portfolio with added value over the traditional property value

Output 3.1 Reduced operating costs and risk hedging against fuel price spikes are integrated into lending

There are a few programs such as the Solar Water Heater loan Program by the Grenada Credit Union otherwise finance is generic and EE/RE not recognized

5 financing agencies engaged, others made aware of the options

Recognition of EE in the finance

Output 3.2 Fiscal incentives program to increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures

Tax and customs duty is exempted in several countries for items like Photovoltaic panels

Any expansion of tax relief possible will be pursued – likely are specialized components not manufactured in the CariCom region

New fiscal incentives

Outcome 4 Demonstration program for sustainable energy

Awareness and understanding of EE/RE benefits

Increased awareness

Output 4 .1 Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level.

Very few low energy buildings and none documented

Number of buildings Energy intensity kwh/m2, number of new buildings kwh/m2 20% improvement

Awareness and transparency of EE improved


78

Output 4.2 Challenge competition for private sector builders for construction and retrofitting of buildings to make a very low purchased energy target of some few kWh/m2 – Private sector competition for ESCOs.


~20 projects – at least 3 per country

Outcome 5 Regulatory instruments Trinidad and Tobago – Code compliance advice, mandatory equipment efficiency levels how-to establish

Refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment customs control is effective but no efficiency considered, low efficiency low cost equipment entering the market

Building guidelines or mandatory codes are provided or enforced along with building permitting Equipment standards and/or mandatory minimums are enforced

Possibility of Regulation exists

Output 5.1 Development of guidelines and standards for energy efficient construction practices including renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.

No energy code or equipment requirements or labeling exists

All countries adopt voluntary programs, some use suasion only while Trinidad and Tobago moves to mandatory

Standards and labeling inform the market

Outcome 6 Regional Dissemination

Ongoing mandate and activity advocating EE and RE

Enhance info and service offerings to member countries

Improved information availability

Output 6.1 Task reports produced on subtopics:

Weak regional coordination/ information exchange

Nationally lead task area reports produced with regional coordinator assistance

CAricCOm and SIDS community better informed


79

Appendix 4: Results Framework

Project Strategy

Objectively verifiable indicators Indicator Baseline Target Sources of

verification Risks and

Assumptions

Project Objective To reduce the GHG emissions intensity in buildings by 20%

Demonstration results and mechanisms to propagate savings at this level for 5 to 7 years

Baseline older refrigerators and air-conditioners average 1,281 kwh/yr, newer 513 kwh/yr, with high variability. Good penetration of compact fluorescent lamps (rate unknown) but incandescent lamps still available. Magnetic ballast fluorescents still widely used in commercial buildings Very few (<0.1%) high performance buildings, most buildings use technologies common during periods of low energy prices 1990’s. No mechanisms to encourage better performance

A reduction in GHG emissions intensity of 20% as a result of more efficient energy consumption and renewable energy use in buildings Country by Country targets are detailed in Section 2.6 on Baseline Analysis and Impact Targets.

Utility records for particular buildings and general demand vs GDP/capita published figures and project monitoring reports

Customs control of EE products may be difficult. In Trinidad and Tobago energy prices may remain too low and mandatory standards politically difficult

Outcome 1 Institutional capacity for management of sector, monitoring and assessment

a. Baseline projection and monitoring system to be able to track and feedback on progress b. Opportunities and target potentials for energy savings are identified

General Statistics, weak knowledge of technical potentials

Capacity to predict trends and assess impact of EE policies and programs, Long range planning for deep GhG emission cuts of 50%

Project reports Small administrations may restrict ability to carry specialized staff. Regional capacity can be maintained more easily.

Output 1.1 Building audit reports,

Grenada produces and transfers a monitoring

Studies available for buildings were mostly walk-

Samples of commercial buildings,

National and Regional Project


80

statistics on potential savings in domestic, commercial and public sectors

protocol and capacity building in appropriate national agencies

thought audits with no building envelope characterization .

government buildings and hotels are established each at about 20 for statistical analysis.

reports

Output 1.2 Identification of measures at the design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and renewables

Report on potentials and cost effectiveness

There are a few reports looking at buildings in a rather general way

20 upgrade option reports on 1.1 studied buildings

National and Regional Project reports

Output 1.3 Identify equipment and lighting potentials to reduce fossil fuel use

Report on actual performance and potentials to be achieved

Equipment ratings are available for some equipment and others not, Available ratings are for northern country conditions, electricity prices and foreign currencies

> 20% energy performance improvement


Output 1.4 Specific energy saving measures and policy options for various classes of buildings are identified and developed

Report on 1.2, 1.3 plus longer term potentials 5Cs/UNDESA provide preliminary feasibility study on Sea Water Cooling and long range buildings energy technologies

No bottom-up policy support documents for buildings sector

20% and 50% improvement options put forward for long term policy


Outcome 2 Technical capacity and awareness for EE Grenada – PV St. Lucia – Lighting Belize – ESCOs

Building service community is trained and aware Consuming public as informed and understands advantages of EE and RE Building and hotel managers are aware and

Refrigeration and Air-conditioning equipment associations exist, Mechanical engineering, Civil Engineering associations exist but practice in the market is highly variable, low awareness and guidance

Majority of vendors, practitioners and trades-persons are aware of EE techniques

Market surveys, industry association reports

Bypassing customs


81

able to monitor energy indicators (kwh/ m2, kwh/ guest-nite, kwh/ m3

refrigeration etc.)

available to many small builders, public consumers

• Output 2.1 Development of training workshops, seminars on energy efficiency for building designers, contractors architects, renewable energy installers and maintenance personnel

Trained personnel No particular qualification available for ESCOs

30 trained ESCOs with at least 3 in each country

Course records and listed trained personnel

• Output 2.2 Publication of manual on best practices on energy efficiency for use in building sector

Manual produced, feedback from Output 2.1 courses encorporated

Manuals available are for other climates and cultures

Manual covering building science in the tropical island context

Manual

Output 2.3 Development of energy efficiency courses for national tertiary institutions

Course material augmented and mainstreamed

University of West Indies has some relevant capacity for training but the local poli-techniques need expansion of curricula

School course material

Outcome 3 Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

Establishment of a fund, or a revolving mechanism to attract finance to demonstrations and subsequent investments or adoption in a housing finance program of an EE code

Normal finance is available for buildings, building renovation and to support business (including buildings materials and equipment suppliers) capitalization but no portfolio is established for energy service companies or renewable energy suppliers in particular

National development banks (NDB) accept grant capitalization to be used in a blended finance product for the demonstration investments and listed eligible loans subsequently. National housing authority agrees to adopt an EE guideline or draft national EE buildings code in their housing finance program.

National Development Bank Board decision, product offering Housing Authority program documents

Economic instability in general is a risk especially for tourism


82

Output 3.1 Reduced operating costs and risk hedging against fuel price spikes are integrated into lending

Availability of specialize finance or portfolio of banks lending that includes EE and RE features.

There are a few programs such as the Solar Water Heater loan Program by the Grenada Credit Union otherwise finance is generic and EE/RE not recognized

5 financing agencies engaged, others made aware of the options

Financial partner reporting to steering comittees

Output 3.2 Fiscal incentives

program to increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures

Expansion of Tax and Customs duty relief for EE and RE equipment

Tax and customs duty is exempted in several countries for items like Photovoltaic panels

Any expansion of tax relief possible will be pursued – likely are specialized components not manufactured in the CariCom region

Government customs regulations

Outcome 4 Demonstration program for sustainable energy

# and type of demonstration projects

Awareness and understanding of EE/RE benefits are recognised

Media reporting, surveys

Failing demonstrations need to be avoided as they are very powerful and can set back any progress.

Output 4 .1 Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level. Voluntary projects

Utility records (households, government and Commercial establishments)


Number of buildings Energy intensity kwh/m2, number of new buildings kwh/m2 20% improvement

Monitoring bills and occupants survey by national PMU

Take back effect, consumer preferences, risk of low oil price

Output 4.2 Challenge competition for private sector builders for construction and retrofitting of buildings to make a very low purchased energy target of some few kWh/m2 – Private sector competition for ESCOs.

# ESCO or new building projects proposed


~20 projects – at least 3 per country

Monitoring bills and occupants survey by national PMU

Outcome 5 Regulatory instruments Trinidad and Tobago – Code compliance advice,

Mandatory refrigeration, air-con, and lighting standards and labeling

Refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment customs control is effective but no efficiency

Building guidelines or mandatory codes are provided or enforced along with building

Customs reporting Political risk Compact fluorescent lights are not


83

mandatory equipment efficiency levels how-to establish

Phased in minimum performance levels Mandatory EE code for new buildings and phased in mandatory building ratings at time of sale (Mj purchased energy/m2)

considered, low efficiency low cost equipment entering the market

permitting Equipment standards and/or mandatory minimums are enforced

surviving anticipated life times, reducing reliability and payback as well as mercury contamination.

Output 5.1 Development of guidelines and standards for energy efficient construction practices including renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.

Status of development and adoption of labeling programs, efficiency standards and mandatory Energy Performance levels.

No energy code or equipment requirements or labeling exists

All countries adopt voluntary programs, all then adopt mandatory labeling, some use suasion only while Trinidad and Tobago moves to mandatory

Project report and draft regulations produced.

Outcome 6 Regional public awareness, knowledge management & sharing, replication strategy and regional reporting

Dissemination to region and SIDS

Ongoing mandate and activity advocating EE and RE

Enhance info and service offerings to member countries

Publications, Small Island Developing States net posted information, Presentations at regional for a

Output 6.1 Task reports produced on subtopics: • Grenada: PV interconnection and monitoring buildings • Antigua & Barbuda awareness and education program materials, schools, general public, • St. Lucia: Lighting • Belize: ESCO training and program • Trinidad & Tobago:

Regional coordination of the nationally lead task areas results in reports that are agreed to by the national PMUs/governments

No regional coordination/ information exchange

Nationally lead task area reports produced with regional coordinator assistance

Project reporting


84

Energy Efficiency Regulations


85

Appendix 5: Workplan and timetable

Regional Workplan

All the activities listed below are regional and link to the national budgets in Section 7.

Activities 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Outputs/Deliverables Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1.

Establish, and Operationalize Collaboration with Steering Committees x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x

National Steering Committee members

2. Selection of National Coordinators

x

Five National coordinators/consultants

3. Planning and Convening Inception Meeting

x x

Agreement of project administration, workplan, responsibilities and timetable for deliverables and the M and E

4. Design and Implement the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

x x x x

Monitoring and Evaluation plan developed and Implemented

5.

Design an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Interventions in Buildings

x x x

Assessment systems designed and tested

6.

Development of the Methodology and Instruments for Conducting the Assessment to Evaluate

x x

Methodology and instrument for conducting the capacity assessment


86

Activities 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016


the Capacity that Exist In country (government, and private sector) to implement energy efficiency to promote ESD

7. Conducting of national capacity assessment

x x x

Report on the Capacity needs of the five countries

8.

Design and delivery of training programme13

x x x x x x

Public and private sector professionals trained to be efficient managers of ESD implementers

Training workshop 1

x

Antigua focused on bank financing of efficient buildings CDM baseline Grenada

Training workshop 2

x

Training workshop 3

x

Building design and retrofit ting best practices training Belize, St. Lucia, TT, Grenada

9.

Establishment of MEP standards for energy efficiency in refrigeration and cooling devices (fans, AC units) and

x x x x

Standard, labeling and monitoring protocols for appliances, including AC units, fans and refrigerators

13 The focus of the training will be on the public sector to efficiently manage ESD and for the private sector to effectively implement ESD projects. Nature of the traning will be identified based on the assessment and national ESD priorities


87

Activities 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016


other common household appliances

10.

Standards developed for adaptation for ESD design, retrofitting and Monitoring Training workshop 1

x x

National standards for planning and implementing ESD

11. Conducting of national capacity assessment

x x x

Report on the ESD capacity in the participating countries and training needs

12. Developing guidelines for bioclimatic architectural designs

x x x

Guidelines for bioclimatic architectural designs

13. Development of Energy efficiency code for the design of buildings

x x x

EE code for design of buildings

14. Begin demonstration activities

x x x x x x x x x x

A number of projects that demonstrate successful practice in financing, regulation, capacity building, and market

15.

Design and Conduct assessment and gap analysis of existing financial and market mechanisms to support RE, EE and Energy conservation

x x x x

Guidelines on Financial and Marketing Mechanisms for Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings


88

Activities 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016


implementation

16. Inform public/private decision-makers about clean energy benefits

x x x x x x x

Public and private decision-makers informed about project results and clean energy benefits (public meeting and publications)

17.

Preparing Terms of References for Blended Grant-Loan Mechanism to promote ESCo development and operations

x x x

Terms of Reference on Blended Grant-Loan Mechanism for Supporting ESCo Activities Toward Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

18.

Development of specifications and Terms of Reference on Financial Mechanisms for Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

x x x

Specifications and Terms of Reference on Financial Mechanisms for Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

19. Planning and Convening of Mid-term Evaluation Review

x x x x

Mid-term Report

20.

Establishment of a functional Inter-Ministry Agency on Sustainable Energy

x x

Formal agreement at the national level for the agency to be established


89

Activities 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016


21. Dissemination of tools developed as part of this project

x x x

Publications and workshops, based on details provided by the Antigua & Barbuda project

22. Final Reporting

x

Final Evaluation Report


90

Appendix 6: Key Deliverables and Benchmarks

Goal: To utilize a mix of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies to reduce the electricity use in the project buildings by 20 % by 20-15 in five Caribbean Countries

Item Project Component Key Deliverables Dates Benchmarks

1.

Start-up, Regional Coordination, Evaluation and Reporting

1.Project Inception Report October 2012 Names, terms of reference and decisions of meetings

2.National Steering Committees December 2012 Names and terms of reference

3.National Consultants November 2012 Names and terms of reference

4.Regional Steering Committees January 2013 Names and terms of reference and decisions of meeting

5.Mid Term Evaluation Report July 2014 Evaluation report and report of the Evaluation meeting

Report on Consultation with Stakeholders

6.Final Evaluation October 2016 Final Report

2 Establish an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Buildings

1. National building performance tracking system

June 2012 Published document available on 5CS web site

2.Social safeguards monitoring plans published

June 2012 Published document available on 5CS web site

3.Training of of technical personnel November 2012 Report with name of participants and letters of nominations from National Steering Committee and letters certifying completion of training

3. Strengthening of national capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy to support long term development of ESD

Training of the following: 1.Construction sector professionals -trained and aware of sustainable energy practices for buildings

2. Technocrats with responsibility for approving and implementing

December 2012

Report from training activities and letters from National Steering Committee re completion of training.


91

building projects are trained to be aware and recognize the benefits of sustainable energy practices in buildings 3. End-users understand advantages of green buildings –targeting hoteliers, owners of commercial buildings, public sector managers

4. Demonstration programme for sustainable energy use in buildings

Project technical requirements and ToRs Utility records and trends

January 2015 Case study reports on the various demonstration projects.

5. Development of appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support sustainable energy use in buildings

Establishment of revolving finance mechanism to attract private activities to incorporate RE and EE in buildings

January 2014 Signed agreements between governments and financial institutions to establish revolving funds and other dedicated financing mechanism to support Energy efficiency and conservation technologies and renewable energy application in buildings.

Published Guidelines for establishment of Energy Service Companies

6. Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings (Building Codes), and Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) for appliances and equipment

1. Mandatory refrigeration, air-conditioning and lighting standards, with voluntary standards for other appliances and equipment

June 2015 Draft national legislation on agreed set of standard for energy equipment in the participating countries

2. Mandatory Energy Efficiency code for new buildings

June 2014 Draft national legislation on new code for new building construction


92

7 Regional public awareness, knowledge management, and sharing, replication strategy and reporting

Dissemination of information generated by the project

June 2015 Publications of training material, building code and design guide , Equipment and appliance standards and labelling, results of the demonstrations, and news paper and media coverage


93

Appendix 7: Budgeted M&E plan

The monitoring and evaluation funding is mostly allocated within the national and regional activities Components 1 and 7. Assessment of the buildings and equipment stock is considered an important ongoing task. The protocol established by WINDREF and proposed for execution in all countries will measure the energy performance as well as the ability of the buildings to deliver indoor environment and the response of occupants. In order to estimate the “take-back” effect , a small number of reference buildings will be tested to establish baseline data in each country. After implementation of the efficiency improvement measures these building will be monitored. The sample size across all 5 countries will be of more valid statistical size providing better characterization of trends in energy use, indoor environment, occupant satisfaction and health. About 5% of the project ($250,000) is allocated to the measurement and analysis within Project Component 1. Additional funding and co-financing in the Grenada budget Component 1 is for measurement protocol development. The results will be used in the public awareness campaign and therefore will be accompanied by surveys of occupant perceptions and satisfaction. They will also provide feedback to the buildings assessment protocol and building codes and standards. Greenhouse gas emissions reductions will be tracked here by tracking energy bills before and after. See the Annex Building Performance Assessment Protocol. Under the demonstrations and financing mechanisms Components 3 and 4, the volume of investment for low energy consuming buildings will be tracked by the co-financing partners themselves and reported through the national steering committees. There is no cost to the project. The project management functions will ensure that at the national level the project progress reports and funds management is accomplished. This work is spread across 5 administration units $242,950 (5%) all coordinated through the CariCom Climate Change Centre (5Cs) $242,950 (5%). Midterm evaluation will be primarily from a desk review $30,000 and participating in a regional meeting in one of the project countries. The Terminal Evaluation will be independent and cover all countries $45,000.


94

Monitoring Framework and Budget

Objective / Outcome

Outcome / objective level indicator

Baseline Conditions

Mid point Target (as relevant)

End of Project Target

Means of Verification

Monitoring / sampling (frequency / size)

Location / Group

Responsibility

Time frame

Budget(Object of expenditure & cost)

1.To reduce the GHG emissions intensity in buildings by

20%

GhG emissions intensity and market penetration

Equipment and buildings surveys building on the preliminary sample

By mid-term demonstrations and initial impact at 20 to 30% of end target = 0.24 million tCO2

1.2 million tCO2 and revolving mechanisms in place with prospect for 1 million tCO2 during foreseeable revolutions Indirect impact 6 million tCO2 projected

Component 1 provides and institutionalized assessment capacity

Frequency for energy monitoring is the billing period, size will be all demonstrations and 5% of project buildings plus cohorts

All countries and types of buildings will be covered, statistical samples achieved on a regional basis

National PMUs and counterpart governments, using 5Cs and WINDREF protocol

Annual reporting from 1st PIR date

5% of projects allocated under Component 1

2.Institutional capacity for management of sector, monitoring and assessment

Capacity to generate policy and assess impact

Weak Initial reports on assessment, policy options

1.Reports and policy options under consideration 2.- Two governments that have enacted policies to promote the use of higher efficient appliances and equipment – policies included reduced tariff on importation of EE and RE equipment and appliances and increased tariffs on low energy efficient equipment and appliances 3. Three governments that have introduced legislation to support market

Project reports and any policy progress at national level

Mid point and end

Project Management Units and national counterpart agencies

5Cs, WINDREF

Annual reporting from 1st PIR date

National project budget contracted services budgets allocated, ~ 50 buildingsd at 5,000 each plus market survey


95

transformation – 4. Two utilities companies that are promoting EE and RE in buildings

3.Technical capacity and awareness for EE

Building service community is trained and aware Consuming public as informed and understands advantages of EE and RE Building and hotel managers are aware and able to monitor energy indicators

Refrigeration and Air-conditioning equipment associations exist, Mechanical engineering, Civil Engineering associations exist but practice in the market is highly variable, low awareness and guidance available to many small builders, public consumers

First training session completed and initial progress engagement by industry

1.Ongoing engagement of industry associations 2. More than 50 % of professional that have received training are utilizing same . 3.One new ESCOS established and doing significant volume of business

Project reports, association publications

Mid-point and end of Project

National and or regional

National PMUs and 5Cs

ongoing Project management 20 person weeks

Financial Instruments

Availability of finance recognizing EE

No special finance instruments for EE buildings

Demonstration finance involves co-finance with revolving or ongoing nature

1.Three revolving funds and general willingness by banks to engage in EE incremental cost lending 2. A twenty percent increase in the number of financial institutions that are

Bank reports, loan agreements and banking surveys or association reports

Mid-point and end of project

All countries Emphasis on Grenada, Belize and St. Lucia

PMUs and 5Cs

Midterm review and final review

No additional cost to project


96

now providing financing to customers for procuring EE and RE equipment and appliances –versus at 3. Two of these institutions actively promoting the use of more EE appliances and equipment 4.One Commercial bank in two countries are offering better loan packages for the construction of more energy efficient buildings

4. Demonstrations

Awareness and acceptance of EE technologies

Isolated early adopters of EE technology exist

General support with some skeptics during demonstrations

1.Broad acceptance of EE in buildings 2. Two demonstration buildings in each country which have achieved greater than 20 percent reduction in energy use and better than 15 percent return on the investment

Press reports, government communications

Mid Point and end

All countries and regional Emphasis on A&B public awareness

PMUs and Cs

Mid Term review and Final reports

No additional cost

5. Regulatory instruments

Publication, use and mandatory implementation of equipment and buildings standards

No standards and labeling appropriate to Caribbean exist

Initial market penetration figures from component 1

1. Two governments have introduced legislation for standards, labeling , and introduced new building codes 2. Three governments that

Government an association reports

Mid Point and end

All countries and regional Emphasis on T&T

PMUS and 5Cs

Mid term and final reports

No additional cost over project management


97

and labeling have Standards and labeling programs in place, 3.One government with mandatory Energy Performance levels under consideration .

6. Regional Dissemination

Publications and references to project reports

Some isolated activities

Coordination results in reports shared across countries

Regional and global reference ot project outcomes

SIDSnet access figures, 5Cs

Mid point an end

All countries, regional

PMUs, 5Cs, UNDESA

Mid term and end reports

No Additional cost

2. Cost of acquisition of essential baseline data during first year of project14: Including the WinREF development and national deployment costs, about 150,000 is anticipated. Sample sizes will be adjusted as appropriate to stay within 5% budget over the full project period. 3. Cost of project inception workshop (please include proposed location, number of participants): Five inceptions workshops are anticipated with at least 30 participants in each country.

14 Refer to detailed M&E work plan for additional information on what data will be collected and what activities will be undertaken. The data to be collected needs to be consistent with the indicators included in the table above.


98

4. Cost of Mid-Term Review/Evaluation: $30,000 5. Cost of Terminal Evaluation: $45,000 6. Any additional M&E costs 15: The national development banks and housing finance corporations will be monitoring their investments and reporting to their respective boards, all provide annual reports which will cover these loans. Total costs: $75,000 specifically budgeted with $250,000 allocated to an assessment system that the project results monitoring will be based on and some portion of project management costs as well as $75,000 co-financing for the M&E effort.

M&E Activities (budgeted underUNEP budget line 5581, Monitoring & Evaluation)

Responsible Parties Timeframe Budget (US$)

Progress and Financial Reports

- Execution: CariCom CC Centre

- Support: National PMUs

- Approval: UNEP

- Two reports for any given year (July 31 and January 31)

- Last Progress & Financial Reports (Final Reports) within 60 days of project closure

None

Inception Reports - Execution: CCCCC, PMUs

- Immediately following project start-up and national steering committee meetings

None

Progress Reports - Execution: CCCCC

- Support: PMUs

- Quarterly

None

Annual Project Reports (APR) - Execution: PMU

- Support: National Steering Committees and PMUs

- Yearly 25,000 (GEF-financing)


15 Please describe the activity and included the expected cost. Additional M&E costs could be related to the following: (i) Additional reviews and evaluation processes for phased and tranched projects; (ii) application & validation of tracking tools.


99

Project Implementation Review (PIR)

- Execution: CCCCC

- Support: UNDESA

- Yearly 5,000 (Co-financing)

Regional Advisory Review (TPR)

- Execution: CCCCC

- Input: National Steering Committees, National Project Managers, UNDESA

- At least once every year upon receipt of the APR


Terminal Regional Advisory Review (TTR)

- Execution: CCCCC

- Input: National Steering Committees

- Support: UNDESA

- Approval: PSC

- Last month of project closure None

Project Terminal Report - Execution: CCCCC

- Support: PMUs - Last three months of project

implementation

None

Mid-term Independent Evaluation



- At the midpoint of project implementation


Final External Evaluation



- Three months prior to the terminal TPR meeting


Total M&E Budget 75,000(GEF financing)



100

Appendix 8: Summary of Reporting Requirements and Responsibilities Appendix 8 –

Reporting requirements

Due date Format appended to legal instrument as

Responsibility of

Procurement plan

(goods and services)

2 weeks before project inception meeting

No particular format

Regional Technical Coordinator

Inception Report 1 month after project inception meeting

No particular format

Regional Technical Coordinator

Expenditure report accompanied by explanatory notes

Quarterly on or before 30 April, 31 July, 31 October, 31 January Annex 11

CariComCCC (5Cs) administration unit with input from National PMUs

Cash Advance request and details of anticipated disbursements

Quarterly or when required

Annex 7B 5Cs’ administration unit with input from National PMUs

Progress report (non financial) Half-yearly on or before 31 January

Annex 8 Regional Technical Coordinator with input from National Coordinators

Audited report for expenditures for year ending 31 December

Yearly on or before 30 June

Stationary of firm 5Cs to contract accountant

Inventory of non-expendable equipment (applicable to office equipment or building monitoring equipment over 1500$ per item purchased with project funds)

Yearly on or before 31 January

Annex 6 5Cs with input from PMUs

Co-financing report Yearly on or before 31 July

Annex 12 National Technical coordinator with input from steering committee


101

Project implementation review (PIR) report Yearly on or before 31 August

Annex 9 5Cs technical coordinator, with input from national coordinators, UNEP Task Manager, UNEP Fund Management Officer

Minutes of steering committee meetings Yearly (or as relevant) Letterhead of Chairperson’s agency

Project Managers

Mission reports and “aide memoire” for executing agency

Within 2 weeks of return

UNEP format UNEP (TM, DGEF FMO)

Final report 2 months of project completion date

Annex 10 5Cs with input from PMUs

Final inventory of non-expendable equipment Annex 9 5Cs administrative unit

Equipment transfer letter Annex 10 Regional Technical Coordinator

Final expenditure statement 3 months of project completion date

Annex 11 5Cs administrative unit

Mid-term review or Mid-term evaluation Midway though project No particular format

UNEP TM or EOU

(as relevant)

Final audited report for expenditures of project

6 months of project completion date

Letterhead of firm

5Cs to contract firm

Independent terminal evaluation report 6 months of project completion date

Appendix 9 to Annex 1

EOU


102

Appendix 9 - Standard Terminal Evaluation Terms of Reference

Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP GEF project {Title} 1. Project Background and Overview Project rationale

The objective was stated as:

The indicators given in the project document for this stated objective were:

Relevance to GEF Programmes The project is in line with:.

Executing Arrangements The implementing agency(ies) for this project was (were) UNEP and { }; and the executing agencies were:

The lead national agencies in the focal countries were:

Project Activities The project comprised activities grouped in {number} components. Budget

At project inception the following budget prepared: GEF Co-funding Project preparation funds: GEF {Medium/Full} Size Grant TOTAL (including project preparation funds) Co-funding sources:


103

Anticipated: Terms of Reference for the Evaluation 1. Objective and Scope of the Evaluation The objective of this terminal evaluation is to examine the extent and magnitude of any project impacts to date and determine the likelihood of future impacts. The evaluation will also assess project performance and the implementation of planned project activities and planned outputs against actual results. The evaluation will focus on the following main questions:

1. Did the project help to { } among key target audiences (international conventions and initiatives, national level policy-makers, regional and local policy-makers, resource managers and practitioners).

2. Did the outputs of the project articulate options and recommendations for { }? Were these options and recommendations used? If so by whom?

3. To what extent did the project outputs produced have the weight of scientific authority and credibility necessary to influence policy makers and other key audiences?

Methods

This terminal evaluation will be conducted as an in-depth evaluation using a participatory approach whereby the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, key representatives of the executing agencies and other relevant staff are kept informed and consulted throughout the evaluation. The consultant will liaise with the UNEP/EOU and the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager on any logistic and/or methodological issues to properly conduct the review in as independent a way as possible, given the circumstances and resources offered. The draft report will be circulated to UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, key representatives of the executing agencies and the UNEP/EOU. Any comments or responses to the draft report will be sent to UNEP / EOU for collation and the consultant will be advised of any necessary or suggested revisions.

The findings of the evaluation will be based on the following:

1. A desk review of project documents including, but not limited to: (a) The project documents, outputs, monitoring reports (such as progress and

financial reports to UNEP and GEF annual Project Implementation Review reports) and relevant correspondence.

(b) Notes from the Steering Group meetings. (c) Other project-related material produced by the project staff or partners. (d) Relevant material published on the project web-site:{www.SIDSnet.org }.

2. Interviews with project management and technical support including

3. Interviews and Telephone interviews with intended users for the project outputs and

other stakeholders involved with this project, including in the participating countries and international bodies. The Consultant shall determine whether to seek additional


104

information and opinions from representatives of donor agencies and other organizations. As appropriate, these interviews could be combined with an email questionnaire.

4. Interviews with the UNEP/DGEF project task manager and Fund Management Officer,

and other relevant staff in UNEP dealing with {relevant GEF focal area(s)}-related activities as necessary. The Consultant shall also gain broader perspectives from discussions with relevant GEF Secretariat staff.

5. Field visits16 to project staff

Key Evaluation principles. In attempting to evaluate any outcomes and impacts that the project may have achieved, evaluators should remember that the project’s performance should be assessed by considering the difference between the answers to two simple questions “what happened?” and “what would have happened anyway?”. These questions imply that there should be consideration of the baseline conditions and trends in relation to the intended project outcomes and impacts. In addition it implies that there should be plausible evidence to attribute such outcomes and impacts to the actions of the project. Sometimes, adequate information on baseline conditions and trends is lacking. In such cases this should be clearly highlighted by the evaluator, along with any simplifying assumptions that were taken to enable the evaluator to make informed judgements about project performance. 2. Project Ratings The success of project implementation will be rated on a scale from ‘highly unsatisfactory’ to ‘highly satisfactory’. In particular the evaluation shall assess and rate the project with respect to the eleven categories defined below:17 A. Attainment of objectives and planned results:

The evaluation should assess the extent to which the project's major relevant objectives were effectively and efficiently achieved or are expected to be achieved and their relevance. • Effectiveness: Evaluate how, and to what extent, the stated project objectives have been

met, taking into account the “achievement indicators”. The analysis of outcomes achieved should include, inter alia, an assessment of the extent to which the project has directly or indirectly assisted policy and decision-makers to apply information supplied by biodiversity indicators in their national planning and decision-making. In particular:

− Evaluate the immediate impact of the project on {relevant focal area} monitoring and in national planning and decision-making and international understanding and use of biodiversity indicators.

− As far as possible, also assess the potential longer-term impacts considering that the evaluation is taking place upon completion of the project and that longer term impact is expected to be seen in a few years time. Frame recommendations

16 Evaluators should make a brief courtesy call to GEF Country Focal points during field visits if at all possible. 17 However, the views and comments expressed by the evaluator need not be restricted to these items.


105

to enhance future project impact in this context. Which will be the major ‘channels’ for longer term impact from the project at the national and international scales? • Relevance: In retrospect, were the project’s outcomes consistent with the

focal areas/operational program strategies? Ascertain the nature and significance of the contribution of the project outcomes to the {relevant Convention(s)} and the wider portfolio of the GEF.

• Efficiency: Was the project cost effective? Was the project the least cost option? Was the project implementation delayed and if it was, then did that affect cost-effectiveness? Assess the contribution of cash and in-kind co-financing to project implementation and to what extent the project leveraged additional resources. Did the project build on earlier initiatives, did it make effective use of available scientific and / or technical information. Wherever possible, the evaluator should also compare the cost-time vs. outcomes relationship of the project with that of other similar projects.

B. Sustainability: Sustainability is understood as the probability of continued long-term project-derived outcomes and impacts after the GEF project funding ends. The evaluation will identify and assess the key conditions or factors that are likely to contribute or undermine the persistence of benefits after the project ends. Some of these factors might be outcomes of the project, e.g. stronger institutional capacities or better informed decision-making. Other factors will include contextual circumstances or developments that are not outcomes of the project but that are relevant to the sustainability of outcomes. The evaluation should ascertain to what extent follow-up work has been initiated and how project outcomes will be sustained and enhanced over time. Five aspects of sustainability should be addressed: financial, socio-political, institutional frameworks and governance, environmental (if applicable). The following questions provide guidance on the assessment of these aspects:

• Financial resources. Are there any financial risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes? What is the likelihood that financial and economic resources will not be available once the GEF assistance ends (resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and trends that may indicate that it is likely that in future there will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)? To what extent are the outcomes of the project dependent on continued financial support?

• Socio-political: Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project?

• Institutional framework and governance. To what extent is the sustenance of the outcomes of the project dependent on issues relating to institutional frameworks and governance? What is the likelihood that institutional and technical achievements,


106

legal frameworks, policies and governance structures and processes will allow for, the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? While responding to these questions consider if the required systems for accountability and transparency and the required technical know-how are in place.

• Environmental. Are there any environmental risks that can undermine the future flow of project environmental benefits? The TE should assess whether certain activities in the project area will pose a threat to the sustainability of the project outcomes. For example; construction of dam in a protected area could inundate a sizable area and thereby neutralize the biodiversity-related gains made by the project; or, a newly established pulp mill might jeopardise the viability of nearby protected forest areas by increasing logging pressures; or a vector control intervention may be made less effective by changes in climate and consequent alterations to the incidence and distribution of malarial mosquitoes.

C. Achievement of outputs and activities: • Delivered outputs: Assessment of the project’s success in producing each of the

programmed outputs, both in quantity and quality as well as usefulness and timeliness.

• Assess the soundness and effectiveness of the methodologies used for developing the technical documents and related management options in the participating countries

• Assess to what extent the project outputs produced have the weight of scientific authority / credibility, necessary to influence policy and decision-makers, particularly at the national level.

D. Catalytic Role Replication and catalysis. What examples are there of replication and catalytic outcomes? Replication approach, in the context of GEF projects, is defined as lessons and experiences coming out of the project that are replicated or scaled up in the design and implementation of other projects. Replication can have two aspects, replication proper (lessons and experiences are replicated in different geographic area) or scaling up (lessons and experiences are replicated within the same geographic area but funded by other sources). Specifically:

• Do the recommendations for management of {project} coming from the country studies have the potential for application in other countries and locations?

If no effects are identified, the evaluation will describe the catalytic or replication actions that the project carried out.

E. Assessment monitoring and evaluation systems. The evaluation shall include an assessment of the quality, application and effectiveness of project monitoring and evaluation plans and tools, including an assessment of risk management based on the assumptions and risks identified in the project document. The Terminal Evaluation will assess whether the project met the minimum requirements for ‘project design of M&E’ and ‘the application of the Project M&E plan’ (see minimum requirements 1&2 in Annex 4 to this Appendix). GEF projects must budget adequately for execution of the M&E plan, and provide adequate resources during implementation of the


107

M&E plan. Project managers are also expected to use the information generated by the M&E system during project implementation to adapt and improve the project.

M&E during project implementation

• M&E design. Projects should have sound M&E plans to monitor results and track progress towards achieving project objectives. An M&E plan should include a baseline (including data, methodology, etc.), SMART indicators (see Annex 4) and data analysis systems, and evaluation studies at specific times to assess results. The time frame for various M&E activities and standards for outputs should have been specified.

• M&E plan implementation. A Terminal Evaluation should verify that: an M&E system was in place and facilitated timely tracking of results and progress towards projects objectives throughout the project implementation period (perhaps through use of a logframe or similar); annual project reports and Progress Implementation Review (PIR) reports were complete, accurate and with well justified ratings; that the information provided by the M&E system was used during the project to improve project performance and to adapt to changing needs; and that projects had an M&E system in place with proper training for parties responsible for M&E activities.

• Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities. The terminal evaluation should determine whether support for M&E was budgeted adequately and was funded in a timely fashion during implementation.

F. Preparation and Readiness Were the project’s objectives and components clear, practicable and feasible within its timeframe? Were the capacities of executing institution and counterparts properly considered when the project was designed? Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated in the project design? Were the partnership arrangements properly identified and the roles and responsibilities negotiated prior to project implementation? Were counterpart resources (funding, staff, and facilities), enabling legislation, and adequate project management arrangements in place?

G. Country ownership / driveness: This is the relevance of the project to national development and environmental agendas, recipient country commitment, and regional and international agreements. The evaluation will:

• Assess the level of country ownership. Specifically, the evaluator should assess whether the project was effective in providing and communicating biodiversity information that catalyzed action in participating countries to improve decisions relating to the conservation and management of the focal ecosystem in each country.

• Assess the level of country commitment to the generation and use of biodiversity indicators for decision-making during and after the project, including in regional and international fora.


108

H. Stakeholder participation / public awareness: This consists of three related and often overlapping processes: information dissemination, consultation, and “stakeholder” participation. Stakeholders are the individuals, groups, institutions, or other bodies that have an interest or stake in the outcome of the GEF- financed project. The term also applies to those potentially adversely affected by a project. The evaluation will specifically:

• Assess the mechanisms put in place by the project for identification and engagement of stakeholders in each participating country and establish, in consultation with the stakeholders, whether this mechanism was successful, and identify its strengths and weaknesses.

• Assess the degree and effectiveness of collaboration/interactions between the various project partners and institutions during the course of implementation of the project.

• Assess the degree and effectiveness of any various public awareness activities that were undertaken during the course of implementation of the project.

I. Financial Planning Evaluation of financial planning requires assessment of the quality and effectiveness of financial planning and control of financial resources throughout the project’s lifetime. Evaluation includes actual project costs by activities compared to budget (variances), financial management (including disbursement issues), and co- financing. The evaluation should:

• Assess the strength and utility of financial controls, including reporting, and planning to allow the project management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for a proper and timely flow of funds for the payment of satisfactory project deliverables.

• Present the major findings from the financial audit if one has been conducted. • Identify and verify the sources of co- financing as well as leveraged and associated

financing (in co-operation with the IA and EA). • Assess whether the project has applied appropriate standards of due diligence in the

management of funds and financial audits. • The evaluation should also include a breakdown of final actual costs and co-

financing for the project prepared in consultation with the relevant UNEP/DGEF Fund Management Officer of the project (table attached in Annex 1 to this Appendix Co-financing and leveraged resources).

J. Implementation approach: This includes an analysis of the project’s management framework, adaptation to changing conditions (adaptive management), partnerships in implementation arrangements, changes in project design, and overall project management. The evaluation will:

• Ascertain to what extent the project implementation mechanisms outlined in the project document have been closely followed. In particular, assess the role of the various committees established and whether the project document was clear and realistic to enable effective and efficient implementation, whether the project was executed according to the plan and how well the management was able to adapt to changes during the life of the project to enable the implementation of the project.


109

• Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency and adaptability of project management and the supervision of project activities / project execution arrangements at all levels (1) policy decisions: Steering Group; (2) day to day project management in each of the country executing agencies and {lead executing agency}.

K. UNEP Supervision and Backstopping • Assess the effectiveness of supervision and administrative and financial support

provided by UNEP/DGEF. • Identify administrative, operational and/or technical problems and constraints that

influenced the effective implementation of the project. The ratings will be presented in the form of a table. Each of the eleven categories should be rated separately with brief justifications based on the findings of the main analysis. An overall rating for the project should also be given. The following rating system is to be applied:

HS = Highly Satisfactory S = Satisfactory MS = Moderately Satisfactory MU = Moderately Unsatisfactory U = Unsatisfactory HU = Highly Unsatisfactory 3. Evaluation report format and review procedures The report should be brief, to the point and easy to understand. It must explain; the purpose of the evaluation, exactly what was evaluated and the methods used. The report must highlight any methodological limitations, identify key concerns and present evidence-based findings, consequent conclusions, recommendations and lessons. The report should be presented in a way that makes the information accessible and comprehensible and include an executive summary that encapsulates the essence of the information contained in the report to facilitate dissemination and distillation of lessons. The evaluation will rate the overall implementation success of the project and provide

individual ratings of the eleven implementation aspects as described in Section 1 of this

TOR. The ratings will be presented in the format of a table with brief justifications based on

the findings of the main analysis.

Evidence, findings, conclusions and recommendations should be presented in a complete and balanced manner. Any dissident views in response to evaluation findings will be appended in an annex. The evaluation report shall be written in English, be of no more than 50 pages (excluding annexes), use numbered paragraphs and include:

i) An executive summary (no more than 3 pages) providing a brief overview of the main conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation;


110

ii) Introduction and background giving a brief overview of the evaluated project, for example, the objective and status of activities; The GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy, 2006, requires that a TE report will provide summary information on when the evaluation took place; places visited; who was involved; the key questions; and, the methodology.

iii) Scope, objective and methods presenting the evaluation’s purpose, the evaluation criteria used and questions to be addressed;

iv) Project Performance and Impact providing factual evidence relevant to the questions asked by the evaluator and interpretations of such evidence. This is the main substantive section of the report. The evaluator should provide a commentary and analysis on all eleven evaluation aspects (A − K above).

v) Conclusions and rating of project implementation success giving the evaluator’s concluding assessments and ratings of the project against given evaluation criteria and standards of performance. The conclusions should provide answers to questions about whether the project is considered good or bad, and whether the results are considered positive or negative. The ratings should be provided with a brief narrative comment in a table (see Annex 1 to this Appendix);

vi) Lessons (to be) learned presenting general conclusions from the standpoint of the design and implementation of the project, based on good practices and successes or problems and mistakes. Lessons should have the potential for wider application and use. All lessons should ‘stand alone’ and should:

Briefly describe the context from which they are derived State or imply some prescriptive action; Specify the contexts in which they may be applied (if possible, who

when and where) vii) Recommendations suggesting actionable proposals for improvement of the

current project. In general, Terminal Evaluations are likely to have very few (perhaps two or three) actionable recommendations.

Prior to each recommendation, the issue(s) or problem(s) to be addressed by the recommendation should be clearly stated.

A high quality recommendation is an actionable proposal that is: 1. Feasible to implement within the timeframe and resources available 2. Commensurate with the available capacities of project team and partners 3. Specific in terms of who would do what and when 4. Contains results-based language (i.e. a measurable performance target) 5. Includes a trade-off analysis, when its implementation may require utilizing significant resources that would otherwise be used for other project purposes.

viii) Annexes may include additional material deemed relevant by the evaluator but must include:


111

1. The Evaluation Terms of Reference, 2. A list of interviewees, and evaluation timeline 3. A list of documents reviewed / consulted 4. Summary co-finance information and a statement of project expenditure by activity 5. The expertise of the evaluation team. (brief CV).

TE reports will also include any response / comments from the project management team and/or the country focal point regarding the evaluation findings or conclusions as an annex to the report, however, such will be appended to the report by UNEP EOU.

Examples of UNEP GEF Terminal Evaluation Reports are available at www.unep.org/eou Review of the Draft Evaluation Report Draft reports submitted to UNEP EOU are shared with the corresponding Programme or Project Officer and his or her supervisor for initial review and consultation. The DGEF staff and senior Executing Agency staff are allowed to comment on the draft evaluation report. They may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions. The consultation also seeks feedback on the proposed recommendations. UNEP EOU collates all review comments and provides them to the evaluators for their consideration in preparing the final version of the report. 4. Submission of Final Terminal Evaluation Reports. The final report shall be submitted in electronic form in MS Word format and should be sent to the following persons:

Segbedzi Norgbey, Chief, UNEP Evaluation and Oversight Unit P.O. Box 30552-00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel.: +(254-20)762-4181 Fax: +(254-20)762-3158 Email: [email protected]

With a copy to:

Maryam Niamir-Fuller, Director UNEP/Division of GEF Coordination P.O. Box 30552-00100 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +(254-20)762-4166 Fax: +(254-20)762-4041/2 Email: [email protected]

{Name} Task Manager


112

{Contact details} The Final evaluation will also be copied to the following GEF National Focal Points.

{Insert contact details here} The final evaluation report will be published on the Evaluation and Oversight Unit’s web-site www.unep.org/eou and may be printed in hard copy. Subsequently, the report will be sent to the GEF Office of Evaluation for their review, appraisal and inclusion on the GEF website. 5. Resources and schedule of the evaluation This final evaluation will be undertaken by an international evaluator contracted by the Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. The contract for the evaluator will begin on ddmmyyy and end on ddmmyyyy (# days) spread over # weeks (# days of travel, to {country(ies)}, and # days desk study). The evaluator will submit a draft report on ddmmyyyy to UNEP/EOU, the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, and key representatives of the executing agencies. Any comments or responses to the draft report will be sent to UNEP / EOU for collation and the consultant will be advised of any necessary revisions. Comments to the final draft report will be sent to the consultant by ddmmyyyy after which, the consultant will submit the final report no later than ddmmyyyy. The evaluator will after an initial telephone briefing with EOU and UNEP/GEF conduct initial desk review work and later travel to (country(ies)} and meet with project staff at the beginning of the evaluation. Furthermore, the evaluator is expected to travel to {country(ies)} and meet with representatives of the project executing agencies and the intended users of project’s outputs. In accordance with UNEP/GEF policy, all GEF projects are evaluated by independent evaluators contracted as consultants by the EOU. The evaluator should have the following qualifications: The evaluator should not have been associated with the design and implementation of the project in a paid capacity. The evaluator will work under the overall supervision of the Chief, Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. The evaluator should be an international expert in { } with a sound understanding of { } issues. The consultant should have the following minimum qualifications: (i) experience in {} issues; (ii) experience with management and implementation of { } projects and in particular with { } targeted at policy-influence and decision-making; (iii) experience with project evaluation. Knowledge of UNEP programmes and GEF activities is desirable. Knowledge of {specify language(s)} is an advantage. Fluency in oral and written English is a must. 6. Schedule Of Payment The consultant shall select one of the following two contract options: Lump-Sum Option


113

The evaluator will receive an initial payment of 30% of the total amount due upon signature of the contract. A further 30% will be paid upon submission of the draft report. A final payment of 40% will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. The fee is payable under the individual Special Service Agreement (SSA) of the evaluator and is inclusive of all expenses such as travel, accommodation and incidental expenses. Fee-only Option The evaluator will receive an initial payment of 40% of the total amount due upon signature of the contract. Final payment of 60% will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. The fee is payable under the individual SSAs of the evaluator and is NOT inclusive of all expenses such as travel, accommodation and incidental expenses. Ticket and DSA will be paid separately. In case, the evaluator cannot provide the products in accordance with the TORs, the timeframe agreed, or his products are substandard, the payment to the evaluator could be withheld, until such a time the products are modified to meet UNEP's standard. In case the evaluator fails to submit a satisfactory final product to UNEP, the product prepared by the evaluator may not constitute the evaluation report.


114

Annex 1 to Appendix 9: OVERALL RATINGS TABLE

Criterion Evaluator’s Summary Comments Evaluator’

s Rating

A. Attainment of project objectives and results (overall rating) Sub criteria (below)

A. 1. Effectiveness A. 2. Relevance A. 3. Efficiency

B. Sustainability of Project outcomes (overall rating) Sub criteria (below)

B. 1. Financial B. 2. Socio Political B. 3. Institutional framework and governance

B. 4. Ecological C. Achievement of outputs and activities

D. Monitoring and Evaluation (overall rating) Sub criteria (below)

D. 1. M&E Design D. 2. M&E Plan Implementation (use for adaptive management)

D. 3. Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities

E. Catalytic Role F. Preparation and readiness G. Country ownership / drivenness H. Stakeholders involvement I. Financial planning J. Implementation approach K. UNEP Supervision and backstopping

RATING OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND RESULTS

Highly Satisfactory (HS): The project had no shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Satisfactory (S): The project had minor shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Moderately Satisfactory (MS): The project had moderate shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): The project had significant shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Unsatisfactory (U) The project had major shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.


115

Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): The project had severe shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Please note: Relevance and effectiveness will be considered as critical criteria. The overall rating of the project for achievement of objectives and results may not be higher than the lowest rating on either of these two criteria. Thus, to have an overall satisfactory rating for outcomes a project must have at least satisfactory ratings on both relevance and effectiveness.

RATINGS ON SUSTAINABILITY A. Sustainability will be understood as the probability of continued long-term outcomes and

impacts after the GEF project funding ends. The Terminal evaluation will identify and assess the key conditions or factors that are likely to contribute or undermine the persistence of benefits after the project ends. Some of these factors might be outcomes of the project, i.e. stronger institutional capacities, legal frameworks, socio-economic incentives /or public awareness. Other factors will include contextual circumstances or developments that are not outcomes of the project but that are relevant to the sustainability of outcomes.

Rating system for sustainability sub-criteria On each of the dimensions of sustainability of the project outcomes will be rated as follows.

Likely (L): There are no risks affecting this dimension of sustainability.

Moderately Likely (ML). There are moderate risks that affect this dimension of sustainability.

Moderately Unlikely (MU): There are significant risks that affect this dimension of sustainability

Unlikely (U): There are severe risks that affect this dimension of sustainability.

According to the GEF Office of Evaluation, all the risk dimensions of sustainability are deemed critical. Therefore, overall rating for sustainability will not be higher than the rating of the dimension with lowest ratings. For example, if a project has an Unlikely rating in any of the dimensions then its overall rating cannot be higher than Unlikely, regardless of whether higher ratings in other dimensions of sustainability produce a higher average.

RATINGS OF PROJECT M&E Monitoring is a continuing function that uses systematic collection of data on specified indicators to provide management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing project with indications of the extent of progress and achievement of objectives and progress in the use of allocated funds. Evaluation is the systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, its design, implementation and results. Project evaluation may involve the definition of appropriate standards, the examination of performance against those standards, and an assessment of actual and expected results.

The Project monitoring and evaluation system will be rated on ‘M&E Design’, ‘M&E Plan Implementation’ and ‘Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities’ as follows:

Highly Satisfactory (HS): There were no shortcomings in the project M&E system. Satisfactory(S): There were minor shortcomings in the project M&E system.


116

Moderately Satisfactory (MS): There were moderate shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): There were significant shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Unsatisfactory (U): There were major shortcomings in the project M&E system.

Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): The Project had no M&E system.

“M&E plan implementation” will be considered a critical parameter for the overall assessment of the M&E system. The overall rating for the M&E systems will not be higher than the rating on “M&E plan implementation.”

All other ratings will be on the GEF six point scale.

GEF Performance Description Alternative description on the same scale

HS = Highly Satisfactory Excellent

S = Satisfactory Well above average

MS = Moderately Satisfactory Average

MU = Moderately Unsatisfactory Below Average

U = Unsatisfactory Poor

HU = Highly Unsatisfactory Very poor (Appalling)

117

Annex 2 to Appendix 9: Co-financing and Leveraged Resources

Co-financing (basic data to be supplied to the consultant for verification)

* Other is referred to contributions mobilized for the project from other multilateral agencies, bilateral development cooperation agencies, NGOs, the private sector and beneficiaries.

Co financing (Type/Source)

IA own Financing (mill US$)

Government

(mill US$)

Other*

(mill US$)

Total

(mill US$)

Total Disbursement

(mill US$) Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual

− Grants − Loans/Concessional

(compared to market rate)

− Credits − Equity investments − In-kind support − Other (*) - - - - -

Totals

118

Leveraged Resources Leveraged resources are additional resources—beyond those committed to the project itself at the time of approval—that are mobilized later as a direct result of the project. Leveraged resources can be financial or in-kind and they may be from other donors, NGO’s, foundations, governments, communities or the private sector. Please briefly describe the resources the project has leveraged since inception and indicate how these resources are contributing to the project’s ultimate objective. Table showing final actual project expenditure by activity to be supplied by the UNEP Fund management Officer. (insert here)

119

Annex 3 to Appendix 9

Review of the Draft Report Draft reports submitted to UNEP EOU are shared with the corresponding Programme or Project Officer and his or her supervisor for initial review and consultation. The DGEF staff and senior Executing Agency staff provide comments on the draft evaluation report. They may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions. The consultation also seeks agreement on the findings and recommendations. UNEP EOU collates the review comments and provides them to the evaluators for their consideration in preparing the final version of the report. General comments on the draft report with respect to compliance with these TOR are shared with the reviewer.

Quality Assessment of the Evaluation Report All UNEP GEF Mid Term Reports are subject to quality assessments by UNEP EOU. These apply GEF Office of Evaluation quality assessment and are used as a tool for providing structured feedback to the evaluator.

The quality of the draft evaluation report is assessed and rated against the following criteria: GEF Report Quality Criteria UNEP EOU

Assessment Rating

A. Did the report present an assessment of relevant outcomes and achievement of project objectives in the context of the focal area program indicators if applicable?

B. Was the report consistent and the evidence complete and convincing and were the ratings substantiated when used?

C. Did the report present a sound assessment of sustainability of outcomes? D. Were the lessons and recommendations supported by the evidence presented?

E. Did the report include the actual project costs (total and per activity) and actual co-financing used?

F. Did the report include an assessment of the quality of the project M&E system and its use for project management?

UNEP EOU additional Report Quality Criteria UNEP EOU Assessment

Rating

G. Quality of the lessons: Were lessons readily applicable in other contexts? Did they suggest prescriptive action?

H. Quality of the recommendations: Did recommendations specify the actions necessary to correct existing conditions or improve operations (‘who?’ ‘what?’ ‘where?’ ‘when?)’. Can they be implemented? Did the recommendations specify a goal and an associated performance indicator?

I. Was the report well written? (clear English language and grammar)

J. Did the report structure follow EOU guidelines, were all requested Annexes included?

K. Were all evaluation aspects specified in the TORs adequately addressed?

120

L. Was the report delivered in a timely manner

GEF Quality of the MTE report = 0.3*(A + B) + 0.1*(C+D+E+F) EOU assessment of MTE report = 0.3*(G + H) + 0.1*(I+J+K+L) Combined quality Rating = (2* ‘GEF EO’ rating + EOU rating)/3

The Totals are rounded and converted to the scale of HS to HU Rating system for quality of terminal evaluation reports

A number rating 1-6 is used for each criterion: Highly Satisfactory = 6, Satisfactory = 5, Moderately Satisfactory = 4, Moderately Unsatisfactory = 3, Unsatisfactory = 2, Highly Unsatisfactory = 1, and unable to assess = 0.

121


GEF Minimum requirements for M&E

Minimum Requirement 1: Project Design of M&E18 All projects must include a concrete and fully budgeted monitoring and evaluation plan by the time of Work Program entry (full-sized projects) or CEO approval (medium-sized projects). This plan must contain at a minimum:

SMART (see below) indicators for project implementation, or, if no indicators are identified, an alternative plan for monitoring that will deliver reliable and valid information to management

SMART indicators for results (outcomes and, if applicable, impacts), and, where appropriate, corporate-level indicators

A project baseline, with:

− a description of the problem to address

− indicator data

− or, if major baseline indicators are not identified, an alternative plan for addressing this within one year of implementation

An M&E Plan with identification of reviews and evaluations which will be undertaken, such as mid-term reviews or evaluations of activities

An organizational setup and budgets for monitoring and evaluation.

18 http://gefweb.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEPoliciesProcedures/MEPTools/meptstandards.html

122

Minimum Requirement 2: Application of Project M&E

Project monitoring and supervision will include implementation of the M&E plan, comprising:

Use of SMART indicators for implementation (or provision of a reasonable explanation if not used)

Use of SMART indicators for results (or provision of a reasonable explanation if not used)

Fully established baseline for the project and data compiled to review progress

Evaluations are undertaken as planned

Operational organizational setup for M&E and budgets spent as planned.

SMART INDICATORS GEF projects and programs should monitor using relevant performance indicators. The monitoring system should be “SMART”:

1. Specific: The system captures the essence of the desired result by clearly and directly relating to achieving an objective, and only that objective.

2. Measurable: The monitoring system and its indicators are unambiguously specified so that all parties agree on what the system covers and there are practical ways to measure the indicators and results.

3. Achievable and Attributable: The system identifies what changes are anticipated as a result of the intervention and whether the result(s) are realistic. Attribution requires that changes in the targeted developmental issue can be linked to the intervention.

4. Relevant and Realistic: The system establishes levels of performance that are likely to be achieved in a practical manner, and that reflect the expectations of stakeholders.

5. Time-bound, Timely, Trackable, and Targeted: The system allows progress to be tracked in a cost-effective

123

manner at desired frequency for a set period, with clear identification of the particular stakeholder group to be impacted by the project or program.

124


List of intended additional recipients for the Terminal Evaluation (to be completed by the IA Task Manager)

Name Affiliation Email Aaron Zazuetta GEF Evaluation Office [email protected]

Government Officials GEF Focal Point(s) Executing Agency Implementing Agency UNEP DGEF Quality

Assurance Officer

125

Appendix 10: Decision-making flowchart and organizational chart

1. UNEP/GEF UNEP, as the GEF Executing Agency and with direct technical assistance from UN-DESA, will be associated with the project supervision to ensure consistency with GEF and UNEP policies and procedures and will provide guidance on linkages with related UNEP and GEF-funded activities. The UNEP/UN-DESA Coordination will monitor implementation of the activities undertaken during the execution of the project and will be responsible for clearance and transmission of financial and progress reports to the Global Environment Facility. UNEP will retain the responsibility of reviewing and approving the substantive and technical reports produced in accordance with the schedule of work. 2. CARICOM CLIMATE CHANGE CENTRE The project has regional and national scope and consequently, the reporting features will facilitate integration among the project countries such that UNEP will receive reports via the CARICOM Climate Change Centre (5Cs) from the various national Project Management Units – 5Cs have Regional coordinating responsibility for the ESD-Caraibes Project. 3. REGIONAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE Project Management at the regional level will be provided by the CARICOM Climate Change Centre (5Cs) via a Project Technical Coordinator, assisted by the

CARICOM Climate Change Centre

UNEP/GEF

REGIONAL Steering Committee Regional Coordinator

UNDESA Technical Cooperation

NATIONAL Steering Committee • GEF Focal Point • Govt and NGO Representatives

Project Management Unit (MP U)

Project Technical Coordinator

National Coordinators

National Stakeholders • Local Partners • Green Fund • Co-financiers

Regional Stakeholders • SIDS Dock • CDB

126

Regional Coordinating Committee, that includes the UN-DESA Technical Representative and National Coordinators. 4. NATIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE The National Steering Committees include the GEF Focal Points, and will have direct oversight over the Project Management Unit (PMU), the executing organ for the ESD-Caraibes, the National Steering Committee shall approve all reports prepared by the PMU prior to submission to the UNEP-GEF. The Steering Committees shall comprise technical advisors/representatives from the ministries responsible for energy; housing, environment; utilities; and public works, as well as relevant bureaus of standards; green building councils; and business associations as appropriate. 5. PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT: The Project Management Unit (PMU) includes the Project Managers for the pilot demonstration projects of the ESD-Caraibes project, as well as the designated representative from the agencies with responsibility for the regulatory development issues – Energy Efficiency Building Code and Appliance Standards and Labelling. The National Coordinator will manage the PMU and will be directly responsible to the chairperson of the National Steering Committee and 5Cs.

127

Appendix 11 Key Project Staff and Main Sub-contracts

TERMS OF REFERENCE

PROJECT TECHNICAL COORDINATOR (MP)

Introduction The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is aimed at reducing the growth of energy demand in five Caribbean countries through increasing the efficiency of energy use in buildings, increased use of energy conservation and promoting the increased use of renewable energy resources. The overall regional project consists of five (5) national components whose outputs are expected to make a significant contribution to improved use of electrical energy in these countries and provide examples of best practices across the region. It consists of various interventions whose outputs will contribute to increasing the markets, addressing financing barriers, and increasing awareness and building capacity. The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS). The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is the first attempt to develop a regional project to address the inefficient use of energy in buildings in Caribbean Island Countries (CICs). Background Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90 per cent of commercial energy consumption. All

128

transportation fuels and an estimated 85 per cent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel19. The national energy situations across the region are characterized by national electric utilities that are either privately owned, publicly owned or at times, a mixture of both. Typically, these companies use either bunker or diesel fuel to produce power. As a consequence, the cost of electricity is, on average, among the highest in the world. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of regional fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 per cent and 21 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), respectively20. A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Duties & Responsibilities The PTC will report to the 5Cs Director or the designated representative. The PTC will liaise with the National Steering Committee and National Project Coordinators, Regional Steering Committee (RSC), as well as the UNEP Principal Project Representative (UNEP Paris) and Energy Advisor in UN-DESA, in coordinating the implementation of the annual work plan for the project. The workplan will provide guidance on the day-to-day implementation of the project activities and on the integration of parallel co-financing initiatives.

19 CARILEC. http://www.carilec.com/publications/Carilec%20Position%20Paper%20on%20Energy%20Policy%20-%20Final%20Document%20-%2011%20Jan%202008.pdf 20 UNDP Energy Paper

129

The PTC will be responsible for the day-to-day project implementation, which will be fully in line with UNEP execution procedures. The PTC will also be responsible for providing, to UNEP, all required reports, including the submission of work plans and financial reports. The 5Cs on the advice of the PTC shall recruit, as appropriate, experts to undertake activities at regional and national levels in cooperation with the participating CICs and the RSC. The PTC will work with an Administrative and Financial Officer (AFO) who will assist with the delivery of project activities. The PTC shall be responsible for all substantive, managerial and financial reports from the project. In particular the PTC will: Serve as the Head of the Project Management Office (MP O), housed in

5CS; Assume overall responsibility for the day-to-day management and

implementation of all project activities and ensure the realization of project objectives in accordance with the UNEP Project Document and UNEP’s Guide.

Assume responsibility for all the reporting obligations of the project to UNEP, including inception phase report, annual work plans and budgets, quarterly progress and financial reports, Annual Project Report(APR)/Project Implementation Review (PIR) reports, multi-partite review meeting papers and annual project audit reports, and all other reporting requirements as per standard UNEP/GEF procedures.

Ensure effective coordination of all ESD activities, both incremental and baseline (particularly co-financed) activities.

Coordinate and monitor the implementation of the activities described in the work plan.

Assume responsibility for all project consultation meetings, including meetings with the National Coordinators, National Steering Committee, donor meetings, multi-partite review meetings, an Inception Phase workshop and annual meetings of the RSC.

Coordinate in-country studies and activities with the ESD National Coordinators.

Coordinate and manage all procurement requirements for GEF-funded services and supplies (e.g., contracts and consultancies in the project, including reviewing consultancy reports).

Provide guidance to contractors and consultants engaged by the project. Facilitate liaison and networking between and among the 5 country

steering committees, regional organizations, key stakeholders, and other individuals involved in project implementation.

Foster and establish strong links with all project partners, particularly those who are implementing and/or funding co-financed activities and

130

other related programmes and projects in the CICs, including the CARICOM Energy Unit.

Ensure regular and timely receipt of progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project.

Assume overall responsibility for the widespread dissemination of ESD best practices and experiences as well as highlighting GEF’s and UNEP’s roles in the project.

Ensure the ESD is consistent with the Regional Strategy for Building a Climate Resilient Economy in the Caribbean, approved by the Caribbean Heads of Government, in July 2009.

Act as Secretary to the Regional Steering Committee. Deliverables The MP /Regional Coordinator is responsible for the submission of the following deliverables, among others: (a) Project Inception Report; (b) Project Progress and Financial Reports; (c) Steering Committee Report (d) Meeting and Training Workshop Reports; (e) Resource Assessment Reports; (f) Feasibility Study Reports; (g) Performance Reports on the hardware demonstration projects; (h) Mid-Term Evaluation Report; (i) Final Evaluation Report, and; (j) Reports on the Implementation of all project activities (incremental and baseline). Duration The duration of the project is over a 48-month period, with renewal at mid-term subject to successful evaluation. Qualifications & Experience The PTC shall have the following basic required qualifications and expertise: Advanced university degree (at least M.Sc. or equivalent) in engineering,

energy, environmental management or other field relevant to the project; Extensive knowledge and experience with the climate change and energy

issues of the CICs; Proven track record of project management experience with GEF- and

UNEP-funded projects or similar regional/multi-country projects in small island developing countries;

Demonstrated very good and adequate capacity for project leadership and management;

Ability to manage the work of consultants/sub-contractors; Proven ability to work as part of an interdisciplinary and/or multi-cultural

team;

131

Ability to meet project deadlines, and; an ability to live, travel and work within Caribbean island communities;

Practical experience with renewable energy projects/programmes, and; Excellent working knowledge of English.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

ADMINISTRATIVE / FINANCIAL OFFICER (AFO) Introduction The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is aimed at reducing the growth of energy demand in five Caribbean countries through increasing the efficiency of energy use in buildings, increased use of energy conservation and promoting the increased use of renewable energy resources. The overall regional project consists of five (5) national components whose outputs are expected to make a significant contribution to improved use of electrical energy in these countries and provide examples of best practices across the region. It consists of various interventions whose outputs will contribute to increasing the markets, addressing financing barriers, and increasing awareness and building capacity. The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS). The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is the first attempt to develop a regional project to address the inefficient use of energy in buildings in Caribbean Island Countries (CICs). Background Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum

132

products for more than 90 per cent of commercial energy consumption. All transportation fuels and an estimated 85 per cent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel21. The national energy situations across the region are characterized by national electric utilities that are either privately owned, publicly owned or at times, a mixture of both. Typically, these companies use either bunker or diesel fuel to produce power. As a consequence, the cost of electricity is, on average, among the highest in the world. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of regional fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 per cent and 21 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), respectively22. A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Duties & Responsibilities The AFO, working under the direct supervision of the Project Technical Coordinator (MP ), will be responsible for all the administrative, secretarial and financial matters of the ESD. The AFO will be responsible for the project’s record keeping systems, meetings and travel arrangements and the processing and reporting of all project incomes and expenditures. The AFO will work closely with the PTC , UNEP and the ESD National Coordinators. In particular the AFO will:


133

Conduct the secretarial activities of the project including correspondence, filing and drafting minutes of meetings.

Assist the PTC as the Secretary to the Regional Steering Committee. Responsible for arranging the travel and accommodation logistics for the

annual regional Steering Committee meetings and all other project-related meetings and associated travels.

Work together with the 5CS Project Accountant on the requests for the advance of project funds from UNEP to 5CS and any required payments from 5CS to project-implementing partners.

Work together with the ESD National Coordinators and project-implementing partners on the reporting of how funds advanced were spent and ensure timely financial reporting to the UNEP.

Assist the PTC in ensuring regular and timely receipt of progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project.

Liaise closely with the ESD National Coordinators on their work programmes and budgets and assist to make funds available on time.

Assist with the annual audit of the project. Provide technical assistance to CICs on how to effectively and efficiently

meet their ESD financial reporting requirements. Deliverables The AFO will assist the PTC in the facilitation, preparation, and submission of all the project deliverables. Duration The duration of the project is over a 48-month period; however, the AFO will be recruited on a two-year contract in the first instance, to be renewed for the remainder of the project based a mid-term review. Qualifications The AFO shall have the following basic required qualifications and expertise: University degree in accounting, business management or economics, and

some working experience in office and/or project management or secretarial responsibilities.

Previous experience in a management team for GEF- and UN-funded projects or similar regional/multi-country projects in small island developing countries;

Excellent working knowledge of English; Proven ability to work as part of an interdisciplinary and/or multi-cultural

team; Ability to meet project deadlines;

134

Ability to live, travel and work within the Caribbean Community; Some knowledge and experience with the climate change and energy

issues of the Region is an advantage.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

ESD NATIONAL CORDINATOR/CONSULTANT (NC) Introduction The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is aimed at reducing the growth of energy demand in five Caribbean countries through increasing the efficiency of energy use in buildings, increased use of energy conservation and promoting the increased use of renewable energy resources. The overall regional project consists of five (5) national components whose outputs are expected to make a significant contribution to improved use of electrical energy in these countries and provide examples of best practices across the region. It consists of various interventions whose outputs will contribute to increasing the markets, addressing financing barriers, and increasing awareness and building capacity. The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS). The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is the first attempt to develop a regional project to address the inefficient use of energy in buildings in Caribbean Island Countries (CICs). Background Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90 per cent of commercial energy consumption. All

135

transportation fuels and an estimated 85 per cent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel23. The national energy situations across the region are characterized by national electric utilities that are either privately owned, publicly owned or at times, a mixture of both. Typically, these companies use either bunker or diesel fuel to produce power. As a consequence, the cost of electricity is, on average, among the highest in the world. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of regional fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 per cent and 21 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), respectively24. A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Duties and Responsibilities The ESD National Coordinator/Consultant (NC) will be contracted by the 5CS and hosted in a designated agency as agreed to by National Steering Committee (NSC). This position will be funded by the ESD under the various activity lines that are to be implemented by the country. Under the direction of the National Steering Committee (NSC) and the Project Technical Coordinator (PTC), the NC shall carry out the following tasks that would be assigned:


136

Serve as the technical focal point for the national level activities of the ESD within the designated government agency;

Responsible for the day-to-day management and implementation of all national project activities;

Responsible for the formulation and preparation of annual and quarterly work plans and budgets;

Ensure the achievement of project objectives in accordance with the UNEP Project Document and the country-specific annual and quarterly work plans;

Assume overall responsibility for all the reporting obligations of the project to the designated host government agency, the NSC and PTC/5CS, including annual work plans and budgets, quarterly progress and financial reports.

Ensure an effective coordination of all ESD activities with all national project partners, particularly those who are implementing and/or funding co-financed activities in the country.

Coordinate and monitor the national activities described in the work plans.

Responsible for all project consultation meetings including a national Inception Phase Meeting and meetings of the country team.

Serve as the national representative to the annual meetings of the ESD Regional Coordination.

Manage all necessary nationally-managed contracts and consultancies in the project, including reviewing consultancy reports.

Ensure regular and timely receipt of progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project at the national level.

Coordinate in-country studies and activities. Provide guidance to contractors and consultants. Facilitate liaison and networking between and among the National

Steering Committee. Foster and establish strong links with all national co-financing activities. Assume responsibility for the widespread dissemination of ESD best

practices and experiences as well as highlighting GEF’s and UNEP’s roles in the project.

Ensure that the national level ESD activities are consistent with national policies and strategies.

Deliverables The NC is responsible for the submission of the following deliverables, among others: (a) Project Progress and where required, financial reports; (b) national meeting and training workshop reports; (c) reports on all nationally-managed project studies and consultancies, and; (d) progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project at the national level.

137

Qualifications & Experience The NC shall have the following basic required qualifications and expertise: An university degree or equivalent in energy, environment or a related

field; At least 5 years of project management/coordination experience; Proven track record of project management/coordination experience with

GEF- and UNEP-funded projects or similar national projects; Ability to coordinate the work of consultants/sub-contractors; Proven ability to work as part of an interdisciplinary team; Ability to meet project deadlines; Practical experience with renewable energy projects/programmes; Excellent interpersonal skills, and; Excellent working knowledge of English.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

NATIONAL PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEES (NSCs)

Introduction The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is aimed at reducing the growth of energy demand in five Caribbean countries through increasing the efficiency of energy use in buildings, increased use of energy conservation and promoting the increased use of renewable energy resources. The overall regional project consists of five (5) national components whose outputs are expected to make a significant contribution to improved use of electrical energy in these countries and provide examples of best practices across the region. It consists of various interventions whose outputs will contribute to increasing the markets, addressing financing barriers, and increasing awareness and building capacity. The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment

138

Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS). The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is the first attempt to develop a regional project to address the inefficient use of energy in buildings in Caribbean Island Countries (CICs). Background Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90 per cent of commercial energy consumption. All transportation fuels and an estimated 85 per cent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel25. The national energy situations across the region are characterized by national electric utilities that are either privately owned, publicly owned or at times, a mixture of both. Typically, these companies use either bunker or diesel fuel to produce power. As a consequence, the cost of electricity is, on average, among the highest in the world. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of regional fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 per cent and 21 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), respectively26. A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and


139

examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Purpose of the National Steering Committee (NSC) The National Steering Committee (NSC) will have overall responsibility for the management, coordination and implementation of the ESD in-country activities. The National Steering Committee shall be comprised of five persons, in addition to the national coordinator/consultant who will have the responsibility of providing coordination support to the NSC. Duties & Responsibilities Prepare a preliminary meeting schedule based on the implementation

plan/schedule of activities specified in the UNEP Project Document (ProDoc).

Based on the implementation plan/schedule of activities specified in the UNEP Project Document (ProDoc), and in consultation with the PTC /5CS, determine exactly which of the in-country activities that will be implemented by national professionals and other relevant national stakeholders from the private sector and civil society in the country.

Determine the responsibility of the exact work between the identified national stakeholders.

Prepare and transmit during the inception period, Memorandum of Agreements (MoA) containing comprehensive and confirmed implementation arrangements for the in-country activities to the PTC/5CS.

Be responsible for the ESD in-country activities that are to be implemented by national stakeholders (from government, private sector and civil society).

Implementation of specific national activities as agreed in the work plans. Through the PTC/5CS, request external expertise/technical assistance for

those specific in-country activities that are deemed not possible to implement by national stakeholders represented in the country team (e.g., due to lack of capacity, knowledge, availability, etc), if needed, and indicate the preferred source of expertise (regional organisations, national consultants, regional consultants and international consultants).

Cooperate and coordinate with external experts (regional organisations, national consultants, regional consultants and/or international consultants) and provide them with necessary input and assistance.

Review draft reports by consultants engaged by the NSC. Submit quarterly progress reports to the PTC/5CS. Inform, and justify to, the PTC/5CS about any possible delays during the

project. Inform ministries and other agencies of government

140

(professionals and politicians), NGOs and the private sector about the ESD project and its outcomes.

Membership The ESD National Steering Committee, at a minimum, will consist of senior representatives: National Executing Agency –who will chair the NSC GEF National Focal point From the Country’s Energy Unit/Office; From the power utility and/or private power generator; An environment / climate change officer; An executive from a financial

organization or from the government; of the business community / chamber of commerce.

Project Manager/Regional Coordinator The ESD National Coordinator/Consultant will provide the secretariat to the Country Team, and will chair the first meeting of the Country Team. The first meeting of the team will select the chairperson. The Steering Committee, when duly constituted, shall decide its schedule of meetings in keeping with the work plan.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

REGIONAL COORDINATION COMMITTEE (RCC)

Introduction The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is aimed at reducing the growth of energy demand in five Caribbean countries through increasing the efficiency of energy use in buildings, increased use of energy conservation and promoting the increased use of renewable energy resources. The overall regional project consists of five (5) national components whose outputs are expected to make a significant contribution to improved use of electrical energy in these countries and provide examples of best practices across the region. It consists of various interventions whose outputs will contribute to increasing the markets, addressing financing barriers, and increasing awareness and building capacity. The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy

141

projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs). The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is the first attempt to develop a regional project to address the inefficient use of energy in buildings in Caribbean Island Countries (CICs). Background Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90 per cent of commercial energy consumption. All transportation fuels and an estimated 85 per cent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel27. The national energy situations across the region are characterized by national electric utilities that are either privately owned, publicly owned or at times, a mixture of both. Typically, these companies use either bunker or diesel fuel to produce power. As a consequence, the cost of electricity is, on average, among the highest in the world. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of regional fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 per cent and 21 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), respectively28. A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater


142

widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Duties & Responsibilities The Regional Coordination Committee (RCC) shall be responsible for the following functions: • Providing policy guidance to the Implementing Partner in the

implementation of the project; • Facilitating the coordination and implementation of project activities

across institutions both at the regional and national levels; • Reviewing the project activities, and their adherence to the work plan set

forth in the project document and approve any modifications/revisions as may be necessary;

• Reviewing and approving the annual work plan and budget; • Approving major project deliverables; • Making decisions on the issues brought to its notice by UNEP and other

collaborating institutions, and advice regarding efficient and timely execution of the project;

• Reviewing issues raised and agreeing to action plans for their resolutions; • Appointing sub-committees, if necessary, to carry out specific tasks; • Initiating remedial action to remove impediments in the progress of the

project activities that were not earlier envisaged; • Approving requests for changes (e.g. scope changes, schedule alterations,

personnel); • Ensure that the ESD project activities are fully in line with existing

policies and climate change negotiation position of the region; and, • On request of the PTC/5CS, provide guidance on the execution of

national level activities under the ESD framework. Members The following will be the members of the RCC: • The National ESD Coordinator/Consultant of each participating country; • UNEP-GEF; • UNDESA; • 5CS Executive Director or representative; • PTC /5CS; • Representatives of collaborating organisations and co-financing partners.

143

The PTC will serve as the Chair of the Committee, and the Administrative and Financial Officer will assist the PTC . The secretariat services will be provided by the Implementing Partner (5CS). Meeting Frequency The RCC will meet annually, during the project period. Where appropriate, this will be done back-to-back with relevant regional meetings. The meeting will be the Project Inception workshop at the beginning of the project. The RCC will use e-mail distribution lists, phone, video and audio Conferencing, fax, etc., for communication in-between the meetings.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Project Inception Introduction The Inception Phase of the ESD provides an opportunity for the Project Management Office (MPO) to become acquainted with the Project, its agreed strategy, expected outputs and outcomes, the stakeholders, the risks etc. It is also an opportunity for the stakeholders and partners to provide input on the work plan and to confirm implementation arrangements both at the regional and national levels. It provides an opportunity to finalize any outstanding implementation details and present them to UNEP and 5CS for clearance. Inception Deliverables . The expected output of the Inception Phase is an Inception Report. The Report should address the following issues: 1. Review, agree on, and finalize project institutional arrangements,

including to: • Finalize level of representation and individual membership of the

RCC and NSC; receive confirmation of willingness to participate. • Develop rules of procedure for the RCC. • Clarify relationship between the RCC and NSC and National

Coordinators/Consultants. • Revise existing Terms of References in the Project Document if

necessary 2. Review, agree on, and finalize the role and responsibility of various

participants for achieving project outcomes:

144

• Identify links and coordination between participants and activities. • Link each participant to the work plan and delivery of project

outcomes. • Strengthen links to and between project stakeholders.

3. Review, agree on, and finalize the project management arrangements

(organizational chart) of the project, including reporting lines. This should include: • Location of the National Coordinators/Consultants (i.e., designated

host government agency). • Relationship of key project stakeholders (including name, title and

contact details of all government counterparts). 4. Review, agree on, and finalize the Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E)

framework for the implementation of the project, including: • Annual work plan/budget processes covering regional and in-country

activities, linked to the overall rolling work plans/budget. This will include the setting of yearly targets/milestones that are understood and agreed/endorsed by all stakeholders.

• Ongoing work plan/budget of monitoring and evaluation plans. • Links to project outcome indicators (impact indicators), progress

indicators. • Practical, activity-level links to national energy plans, where

available. • Monitoring of progress of parallel activities of co-financing

institutions, including the delivery of their committed co-financing. • Evaluation of the achievement of the target milestones/benchmarks,

which will be used as bases for the succeeding phase of the ESD. 5. Coordinate all co-financing sources with the project work plan. This

should include arrangements of government and private co-financing, and ways of monitoring, evaluation, and reporting for the co-financing.

6. With assistance from UNEP, review the capacity of the NCs and NSC in

providing and/or obtaining project execution services and day-to-day project management. Provide training on required UNEP reporting and project management requirements, as well as general GEF expectations.

7. Prepare, deliberate and agree with the participating countries on the

operational criteria for assistance, including allocation of funds to individual countries as part of the project.

8. Review, and where necessary identify additional Project Risks (possible

barriers to successful project implementation and identified externalities

145

that may reduce project effectiveness). Prepare a detailed risk management strategy for project implementation.

9. Prepare an overall work plan for the first year of implementation. Prepare

a project budget revision if necessary. Inception Process The PTC is expected to meet with all stakeholders during the Inception Phase. This will be a mix of individual appointments and also including the regional Inception Meeting to deliberate and agree to the modifications suggested by the PTC, as reflected in the final draft Inception Report (IR). Subsequent suggested modifications will have to be reflected in the Project Document agreed to by the 5Cs and UNEP. In the spirit of cooperation underpinning this project, all parties shall be invited to participate in and contribute to the Inception Phase. The Inception Phase shall include formal and informal training for the participants by 5CS and UNEP. This will cover an induction into the organization, its procedures and arrangements, as well as a sharing of project-specific knowledge from existing 5Cs and UNEP initiatives. The PMO will also receive training from UNEP. This will include an overview of UNEP rules and procedures from the UNEP-GEF, introduction to the office, as well as a briefing on GEF matters from the UNEP-GEF Technical Advisor. The TPC during the Inception Phase, shall bring to the attention of the meeting all previous project comments, including those of the STAP Roster Expert, GEF Secretariat, UNEP-GEF, and GEF Council members. 5CS and UNEP will provide copies of all relevant correspondence. The Inception Phase is expected to take approximately 12 weeks. However, flexibility exists to take account of the local situation and seasonal conditions. Monthly updates of the progress shall be provided to the UNEP-GEF. The preliminary draft Inception Report will be shared with the UNEP-GEF as soon as available and before a final draft Inception Report is to be prepared. This final draft version is to be circulated to all stakeholders for consideration during the regional Inception Meeting. The agreed final draft Inception Report will be sent to stakeholders no later than 2 weeks in advance of the regional Inception Meeting.

146

Appendix 12: Co-financing Commitment Letters Summary and Explanation notes (US$)


Project Preparation Cofinance (received)

Project Total Eligible

Commitment

accepted

Notes


550,000 550,000

UNDESA 25,000 150,000 175,000

Ministry of Land Housing and Environment A&B

550,000 550,000 Cash estimate based on project activities and establishment of a revolving fund

Ministry of Land Housing and Environment A&B

10,000 722,500 732,500 In Kind includes Government financing of upgraded public buildings

JICA29 in Belize 500,000 500,000 Although up to 10M$ is identified, the buildings integrated portion addressing project objectives during the project period is estimate conservatively at 0.5M$


800,000 800,000 Excludes normal management costs if their own finance and the equity required of borrowers


45,000 45,000


12,000 80,000 92,000

Grenada Development Bank 1,200,000 1,200,000 Excludes normal management costs if their own finance and the equity required of borrowers

WINDREF 10,000 175,000 185,000

St. Lucia Development Bank 800,000 800,000 Excludes normal management costs if their own finance and the equity required of borrowers

Sustainable Development & Environment Unit St. Lucia

110,000 82,500 192,500 EU funded activity related to buildings was instrumental in the project design

Ministry of Housing and the Environment T&T

1,716,500 1,716,500 Cash

Ministry of Housing and the Environment T&T

10,000 212,000 222,000

Total 177,000 7,625,500

29 Japan International Cooperation Agency

147

Associated Co-finance: SIDS Dock grant to Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States: US$ 2,000,000 SIDS Dock grant to UNDP including a concessional loan instrument, eligible countries including Trinidad & Tobago, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines, Dominica, Grenada, Belize, Antigua & Barbuda, St. Kitts and Nevis: US$ 2,000,000 plus Caribbean Development Bank own finance and equity of borrowers: more than US$ 6,000,000 World Bank support to Eastern Caribbean Energy Regulatory Authority: US$ 5,600,000 The Energy Efficiency Promotion Project is jointly funded by the European Union (EU)/ACP Energy Facility, German International Cooperation (GIZ) and OECS Secretariat, addresses the introduction of norms, standards and energy efficiency ratings and labels in the 6 independent OECS member countries, to improve Energy Efficiency (EE) at the consumer level, with priority attention to low income households. The proposal, covering Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis and St. Vincent and Grenadines, was approved by the EU for co-financing and a financing agreement negotiated and concluded between GIZ and the European Union. 5,2000,000 Euro

Appendix

x 13: Endorrsement letteers of GEF NNational Focaal Points

171

181

Appendix 14: Draft procurement plan

The procurement plan includes both goods (non-expendable equipment) and services (consultants and sub-contracts) that will be procured under the project. Items to be procured should be in accordance with the GEF-approved budget. Procurement will be undertaken only during the project implementation period. Externally executed project. Procurement of goods and services financed by GEF funds will be in accordance with the project executing agency’s applicable operational polices and procedures, but should meet internationally acceptable standards. The items of equipment and services required for executing the project should be detailed in the procurement plan, to be reviewed at the inception meeting and cleared by UNEP/GEF. The TM should ensure that the project workplan and timetable allow sufficient time to procure equipment and services, e.g. recruitment of project personnel and/or consultants, finalization of legal instruments for sub-contractors, and office set-up time. Procurement of additional items not included in the above-mentioned plan and costing above US$ 1,500 per item will be cleared by UNEP/GEF. The same principle of clearance will apply to any service contracts or agreements to be procured that are not in the original procurement plan and cost above US$ 5,000 per contract. Within two weeks, UNEP/GEF will review, provide guidance and/or give clearance. Terms of reference for consultants or sub-contractors should be finalized by the time the inception meeting is held. A forecast should be prepared of when consultancy agreements or sub-contracts are to be signed and the anticipated disbursement schedules, as this will affect the amount of the initial cash advance to be requested. Definitions of non-expendable and expendable equipment [ST/AI/2003/5] Non-expendable equipment. There are three categories of non-expendable equipment:

• Property or equipment valued at US$ 1,500 or more per unit at the time of purchase and having a shelf life of at least five years (e.g. generators, kitchen equipment, major equipment and vehicles);

• Special items, which are property items considered to be of an attractive nature and easily removable from the premises because of their size, costing US$ 500 or more per unit at the time of purchase and with a serviceable life of three years or more (e.g. computers, cameras, televisions, facsimile machines and tape recorders);

182

• Group inventory items (e.g. furniture and modular workstations) with a serviceable life of five years or more, irrespective of value.

Expendable equipment. Information on expendable equipment is not required to be maintained in the executing agency’s records. However, if equipment records are deemed necessary for the efficient management of the project activities (e.g. equipment spare parts, technical equipment and replacement items such as tires and maintenance tools), equipment records may be maintained at the discretion of the executing agency. There are two types of expendable equipment:

• Equipment valued at US$ 1,500 or less per unit at the time of purchase (e.g. toner cartridges and consumables);

• Equipment valued at US$ 1,500 or more but with a serviceable life of less than five years.

Consultants will be selected from a short list of at least three by 5Cs in consultation with a national government representative to the project and a UN adviser (UNEP or UNDESA). Non-profit Agencies will not be subject to competition. This includes the national development banks, housing development corporations, WINDREF, and non-government organizations. Successfully completed assignments can be extended without competition. Equipment purchased with total value greater than $1,500 US will be selected by competitive quotation. Tenders over $50,000 will be advertised. Value for money may be used to select the winning bid. Comparators can be from other countries than the one in which the tender is being let. The Caribbean Single Market Economy rules will be followed. General ethical standards will be upheld in the process. Purchasing and consultancies tendering plans will be reviewed by the national steering committee. Goods less than 1,500 $ may be purchased at any time from a petty cash

account for replenishment Major procurements schedule: Sept – Nov 2011 1 regional adviser, 5 national project managers Jan – June 2012 3 national development banks, 2 project deployment

contractors for the demos (first tranche Sept 2012 Sea water cooling prefeasibility study Oct 2012 – Jun 2013 3 national development banks, 2 project deployment

contractors for the remainder of demos and general EE/RE buildings finance

183

Appendix 15: Tracking Tools

See also separate file in MS Excel format At GEF CEO Endorsement

General Data Target Notes at CEO Endorsement

Project Title Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings GEF ID

Agency Project ID Country Antigua+Barbuda,Belize,Grenada,St.Lucia,Trinidad+Tobago Region LCR

GEF Agency UNEP Date of Council/CEO Approval Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 201

GEF Grant (US$) Date of submission of the tracking

tool Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 201

Is the project consistent with the priorities identified in National

Communications, Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC?

1

Yes = 1, No = 0 Is the project linked to carbon

finance? 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Cofinancing expected (US$)

Objective 1: Transfer of Innovative Technologies Please specify the type of enabling environment created for technology transfer through this project

National innovation and technology transfer policy

Yes = 1, No = 0

Innovation and technology centre and network Yes = 1, No = 0

Applied R&D support Yes = 1, No = 0 South-South technology cooperation 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 North-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0

Intellectual property rights (IPR) Yes = 1, No = 0 Information dissemination 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Institutional and technical capacity building 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Other (please specify)

Number of innovative technologies demonstrated or deployed 2

Please specify three key technologies for demonstration or deployment

184

Area of technology 1 Energy_Efficiency Type of technology 1 specify type of technology Area of technology 2 Renewable_Energy Type of technology 2 specify type of technology Area of technology 3 Type of technology 3 specify type of technology

Status of technology demonstration/deployment 1

0: no suitable technologies are in p1: technologies have been identified2: technologies have been demons3: technologies have been deploye4: technologies have been diffused5: technologies have reached mark

Lifetime direct GHG emissions

avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes aLifetime direct post-project GHG

emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes aLifetime indirect GHG emissions

avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes aLifetime indirect GHG emissions

avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Objective 2: Energy Efficiency Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas

Lighting 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Appliances (white goods) 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Equipment 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Cook stoves 0 Yes = 1, No = 0

Existing building 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 New building 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Industrial processes 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Synergy with phase-out of ozone

depleting substances 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)

Policy and regulatory framework 4

0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in pl2: policy/regulation/strategy discuss3: policy/regulation/strategy propose4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted5: policy/regulation/strategy enforce

Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees,

revolving funds) 4

0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed3: facilities proposed but not operati4: facilities operationalized/funded b5: facilities operationalized/funded a

185

Capacity building 4

0: not an objective/component1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awaren3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity stren5: institutional/human capacity utiliz

Lifetime energy saved

MJ (Million Joule, IEA unit converterFuel savings should be converted tocalorific value of the specific fuel. Ebe converted to energy savings by uspecific supply and distribution systethen totaled over the respective lifet

Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided 1,214,693 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided 1,080,000 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) 7,670,250 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) 7,577,500 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Objective 3: Renewable Energy Please specify if the project includes any of the following areas

Heat/thermal energy production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 On-grid electricity production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Off-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0

Policy and regulatory framework 1

0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in pl2: policy/regulation/strategy discuss3: policy/regulation/strategy propose4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted5: policy/regulation/strategy enforce

Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees,

revolving funds) 1

0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed3: facilities proposed but not operati4: facilities operationalized/funded b5: facilities operationalized/funded a

Capacity building 1

0: not an objective/component1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awaren3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity stren5: institutional/human capacity utiliz

186

Installed capacity per technology directly resulting from the project

Wind Biomass MW el (for electricity production) Biomass MW th (for thermal energy productio

Geothermal MW el (for electricity production) Geothermal MW th (for thermal energy productio

Hydro MW Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) 0.200 MW

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) 52,500.00 MW th (for thermal energy productio

Solar thermal power MW el (for electricity production) Marine power (wave, tidal, marine

current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MW

Lifetime energy production per technology directly resulting from the project (IEA unit converter: http://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp) Wind MWh

Biomass MWh el (for electricity production)Biomass MWh th (for thermal energy product

Geothermal MWh el (for electricity production)Geothermal MWh th (for thermal energy product

Hydro MWh Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) 7,008.000 MWh

Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) 18,900.00

MWh th (for thermal energy product

Solar thermal power MWh el (for electricity production)Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine

current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MWh

Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided 20,307 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided 120,000 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) 420,000 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) 841,944 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes a

187

Annex A - Blended Grant Loan Finance Mechanism

Grant funded demonstrations have a negative effect on the market place because the technology is often perceived then as not ready for normal business and there will be reluctance to further purchase the technology without the grant incentives. Since many energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies are cost effective, this sends an inappropriate signal to the market. The opposite tactic is to use the grant to capitalize a risk fund that is drawn down only in the event of a loss in one of the guaranteed investments. The guarantee process and fund management process however creates additional rules and procedures that cause overheads to rise and while a worthy mechanism for some larger international financial agencies and projects to consider, is inappropriate for smaller grants as are anticipated in the national subprojects of the ESD Caraibes Buildings project (100,000 – 400,000 range per country with individual grants of 1,000 to 100,000). An intermediate option is to take a normal finance offering for buildings and businesses and reinforce the finance in a way that does not cause significant market distortion over the medium term. It is preferable to extend this through national development banks that have a development mandate congruent with the GEF grant objectives. The national development banks could possibly syndicate with or be syndicated by private banks overseen by the central bank structure applying to their country or as required by their own board. By lending the grant funds at cost of operations (which may be 1 or 2%) excluding risk factor, inflation and profit as would normally be included in the interest rate charged; blended with a majority of the institutions own finance, the cost of finance for the new technology is reduced. For example, one part grant at 2% plus 3 parts loan at 11% reduces the blended interest rate to 8.75%. Cofinance to the GEF project is then at least 600,000 for a 200,000 grant contribution and would actually leverage much more if financing of energy conservation measures in buildings then becomes a standard product. If the size of individual building energy loans to listed eligible Energy Service Companies is 40,000 the above example would result in 20 demonstration projects. The institution gains experience and actuarial data on the risk associated with energy efficiency and renewable energy investments. Any incremental profit from better performance of the institutions own finance will justify the institutions own contribution to establishing the energy efficiency and renewable energy in buildings finance products. The grant funds, because they are heavily discounted will erode over time through normal write-offs and operational cost. During the project duration the financial institution must demonstrate the revolving nature of the grant by producing the loan documents and documenting the financial product they are offering. The initial investments will be identified by the project through feasibility studies and support to both recipient and finance agency deliberations. Subsequent use of the partial grant lending will be for listed eligible technologies, service providers and building energy rating levels specified by the project steering committee during the project and ready before the first revolution of the grant funds. Following the first revolution or reinvestment of any reflows to the financial

188

institution, grant funds will become their responsibility under their normal rules and procedures and board oversight. Rules and procedures will be reviewed prior to engagement with heavy reliance on the Caribbean Development Bank’s current status in relation to the national development banks, central bank status, and any other financing such as European Union’s Development Funds. Any additional advisory structure (including government ministries responsible for energy or environment) deemed appropriate and sustainable at the national level can also be considered so as to be able to evolve the rules for the grant based funds toward new technologies, better target them while they remain active, seek additional finance for the same mechanism, consider carbon finance pooling at national level, or oversee a wind up of the mechanism when the amount of funds becomes insufficient. Proposed development of the mechanism: UNEP, UNDESA, 5CS, national focal points agree to initial proposal for grant loan blending and propose to the National Development Banks (NDBs). NDBs provide letters of intent to avail finance for EE&RE in buildings, subject to their normal procedures for business and buildings finance. NDBs express interest in the mechanism proposed – to be negotiated further during the project – an estimate that their finance for EE& RE investments during the next 4 years could be [some volume of finance 3 to 5 times the grant they are proposed to receive] Project submitted to UNEP which submits to GEF Secretariat. GEF funds come to UNEP once approved. National agencies with 5CS/UNDESA assistance develop agreements with national banks while liaising with the CDB, and other possible providers of similar capital. Agreements and first tranche of funds approved by UNEP and transferred through the 5CS, through the national lead agency, or directly to the NDB depending on the agreements developed. National steering committees, with project consultant support provide feasibility of initial investments. NDBs process initial loans, and demonstrate revolving nature within their loans documents and procedures. Balance of grant loan finance funds transferred to 5CS (or as above) by UNEP and on to NDBs. Once all grant loans are placed, with revolving nature demonstrated in the loan documents and procedures of the NDB, financial reporting on the grant to UNEP-GEF is over. The national and regional project monitoring teams follow the performance during the project period and up to terminal project evaluation. NDBs and national advisory committees continue to monitor as appropriate.

Annex B Case studinterfaceand applimatched envelopeoperating Factory Energy cbuilding.

Ja O Space C 0Vent. Fan 0Misc. Eq 0Area Lig 0 Total 1 Typical bFactory

B - Baseline

dies were ma. Weather wiance loads wwithout sign

e characteristg schedules.

Road Antigconsumption

an Feb Oct Nov

ool 0.52 .95 0.85 ns 0.02 .02 0.02

quip. 0.61 .63 0.62

ghts 0.32 .35 0.34

1.47 .96 1.83

bills: kwh

and Impact

ade using thewas for Virgin

were adjustenificant adjutics, building

gua baseline and

Mar ApDec To0.55 0.70.75 0.60.02 0.00.02 0.00.58 0.60.61 0.60.32 0.30.34 0.31.47 1.81.72 1.6

kwh/day

t Opportuni

e DOE-2 pron Islands or

ed to reflect lustment. Theg orientation

d upgrade po

pr Maytal

76 0.7667 9.49 03 0.0302 0.28 67 0.6464 7.56 38 0.3735 4.18 84 1.8068 21.53

ities in Buil

ogram with tPuerto Ricolocal contextre are detail

n, equipment

otential for a

Jun Jul

0.80 0.94

0.02 0.03

0.62 0.64

0.34 0.37

1.78 1.98

ldings

the eQUESTo. Default ocxt and bills geed inputs fort specificatio

a small offic

Aug S

4 0.93 1

3 0.02 0

4 0.64 0

7 0.35 0

8 1.95 2

189

T cupancy enerally r ons and

ce

Sep

1.00

0.03

0.65

0.37

2.05

190

Rd Dec 6 2007 1647 54.9 1696 51.39 2007 66.9 1680 62.2 1895 55.74 1844 65.86

Feb-08 1385 44.68 1106 38.14 54.97625 20077.33

Upgrade

1. Baselin2. Equipmrated equ3. Lightinbest fluor4.& 5. Roreductiononly 10 ypeople in6. The aiconverted(average Energy SThis has

es to Factory

ne approximment Power uipment (Eneng is down trescent replaoof insulations but they wyears. Most onside the buir-conditioned to Energy of the unit n

Star - Seasonthe most dra

y Road, An

mately matchis 20% less

ergy Star) to T5 electroacement. on (R7) and wwill last the lof the heat islding not thr

ers were modEfficiency R

name plate dnal EER (SEEamatic effect

tigua Barbu

hes consumpplug loads,

onic ballast 4

windows (dolife of the bus coming frorough the endelled with tRatio (EER) data was 8.3 ER) rating ot on perform

uda

tion transformers

45% power s

ouble glazeduilding whereom the equipnvelope. the input and(Btuh/Kwh)EER while t

of 19 (top mmance.

s removed, b

saving, these

d) are relativeas equipme

pment, lights

d output kW ) in the basethis measure

models are 16

191

better

e are the

vely small ent is s and

line e used an 6 to 23).

GreahamLarger O

Ja

n Space Cool

36.4

Vent. Fans

6.9

Pumps & Aux.

0.6

Misc. Equip.

29.8

m Louisy CaOffice Buildin

Feb

Mar

36.6

47.3

6.9

8.4

0.6

0.8

28.5

33.2

astries ng eQuest ca

Apr

May

48.7

46.9

8.1 7.3

0.7 0.7

31.9

30.6

alculations o

Jun Jul

56.7

54.6

8.1 7.7

0.7 0.7

31.9

31.5

on baseline a

Aug

Sep O

58.6

56.4

55

8.1 7.7 7

0.7 0.7 0

32.4

31.1

36

and upgrades

Oct Nov

Dc

50.5

46.1

48

7.3 7.3 7

0.7 0.7 0

30.6

30.2

35

192

s

Dec

Total

43.8

582.7

7.7 91.6

0.7 8.2

31.5

373.3

Task Lights

4.4

Area Lights

17.2

Total

95.3

Actual co

4.1

4.7

17.0

20.5

93.8

115.0

nsumption 20

4.6 4.5

19.6

18.0

113.6

108.1

009 ~1300 M

4.6 4.6

19.6

18.8

121.7

117.9

Wh

4.7 4.5 4

19.7

18.8 0

124.1

119.2 .

4.5 4.4 4

18.0

18.0

18

111.7

106.7

1.

193

4.6 54.2

18.8

224.2

1071

1,334.1

Source: JYork pacbetween temperatuoutdoor csupply terelativelyocean wathereforeinvestiga(which w KHM HeQUEST

Johnson Conckaged units the Enteringure (72 F, 22conditions duemperature thy constant inater temperate projected. Fated along sidwould see the

osptial BelizT model runs

ntrols - Yorkare very com

g Cooling W2 C). Air coouring air conhrough unde

n temperatureture < 55 F, For Greahamde the downe complete re

ze City s to show im

k bulletin on mmon in the

Water Temperoled condennditioning loerground pipe and less th13 C. A 15 t

m Louisy thentown districemoval of th

mprovement p

part load pee region. Hearature and cosers experien

oads, while dping or grounhan (70 F 21 to 30% redu

e well or ocet Sea Water

he refrigerati

potential

erformance ad is the diffooling load nce >85 F (3domestic wand water wilC), deeper g

uction in kWan source wCooling con

ion units).

194

ference

30C) ater ll be ground or

W/TR is will be

ncept

Baseline keeping woutdoor Ydomesticlow at th The first variable option wbenefit. The lightballasts sbut not m

design uses with the appYork units hc hot water he time. Stand

upgrade is tspeed drivesill be useful

ting upgradesaving aboutmodelled is to

mostly defaproximate vinhad their comheat exchangdard efficien

to replace thes. If the air vwhereas if t

e moves fromt 35%. A furto go further

aults approprntage of KH

mpressors repgers were remncy fan moto

e fan motorsvolume can bthe cooling l

m T12 magnether option wto T5 saving

riate for oldeHMH. It was

placed at whmoved. Probors are assum

s with premiube reduced thload is const

etic ballast twhich is probg an addition

er constructinoted that th

hich time theably oil pric

med.

um grade mhe variable stant there wi

to T8 electrobably cost enal 10%.

195

ion in he e ce was

motors and speed ll be no

onic effective

196

The Chiller Plant Energy Efficiency Measure (EEM) is to switch to ground source condenser cooling water either by encasing the air-coil in a tank (fan replaced by a pump) or replacing it with a shell and tube heat exchanger (and pump). The assumed aquifer temperature is about 65 F or 18 C but the model does not explicitly model this system so the kWh/ton refrigeration is adjusted according the charts of entering condenser cooling water temperature charts versus coefficient of performance. The pumping energy increases appropriately however the model estimates the heat rejection as an energy consuming process served by remote evaporative cooling towers while the aquifer represents a cooling sink with no additional energy cost. Heat rejection energy should be manually subtracted from the total energy estimate for this run (not done). The Domestic Hot Water (DHW) EEM takes a small part of the heat rejected from the condenser and diverts it to preheat the domestic hot water supply to the boilers. This is accomplished by running split shell and tube heat exchangers – one part potable water, the other aquifer water. The model calculates water heating combustion systems as natural gas – the Btu consumption is converted to oil easily noting that a somewhat lower heater efficiency of 70% (assumed in a range of 60 to 80%) is appropriate for oil boilers. The boiler is currently unable to service the complete load hence an electric boiler is in the sterilization room [and electric hot water tanks are reheating water too?]. It should be possible to completely replace the oil fired boilers and the electric units but to be conservative only partial load replacement is estimated here. The annual electricity savings are estimated at 3,900 MWh or a ~20% reduction. Annual oil consumption would decrease 5,700 million Btu or about ~30%. Thus anticipating these measures as cost effective in most markets of the world where they are applicable, provided that tax and duty do not distort their use in a greater way than the high energy prices, we can assume that this impact of the project on this demonstration site will achieve or exceed the target of 20% overall.

197

Baseline (not calibrated to bills) Electric consumption kWh x000,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Space Cool 0.58 0.51 0.60 0.63 0.68 0.72 0.75 0.76 0.74 0.73 0.65 0.62 7.97 Vent. Fans 0.25 0.22 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.25 2.89 Pumps & Aux. 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.34 Misc. Equip. 0.41 0.37 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.39 0.41 4.78 Area Lights 0.36 0.33 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.35 0.36 4.25 Total 1.62 1.45 1.65 1.64 1.72 1.73 1.80 1.80 1.75 1.77 1.66 1.66 20.23 oil consumption Btu x000,000,000 Hot Water 1.11 1.01 1.11 1.07 1.10 1.05 1.07 1.06 1.02 1.07 1.04 1.09 12.79 All upgrades ( heat rejection subtracted) Oil consumption Btu x000,000,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Space Cool 0.40 0.35 0.41 0.43 0.47 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.51 0.50 0.45 0.42 5.48 Heat Reject. 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.54 Vent. Fans 0.21 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 2.53 Pumps & Aux. 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.73 Misc. Equip. 0.41 0.37 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.39 0.41 4.78 Area Lights 0.23 0.21 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 2.76 Total 1.31 1.18 1.33 1.32 1.38 1.38 1.44 1.44 1.40 1.41 1.34 1.34 16.27 oil consumption Btu x000,000,000 Hot Water 0.624 0.57 0.632 0.608 0.614 0.580 0.586 0.578 0.559 0.584 0.577 0.611 7.127

Savings: 3,900,000 kWh ~20% 5,700,000,000 Btu Oil ~30%

The EU fregion. Tillustrateintensity Performa

B

funded a stuThe work was the potentilabeling for

ance Assessm

Benchmark

dy by PPA cas done in paial in the Carr marketing pment Protoco

king and Bu

consultants tarallel with thribbean regiopurposes. Thol included i

uilding Perfo

that comparehe project pron as well ashe labeling win the ESD C

ormance La

ed building ereparation. Ts the possibi

would conforCaraibes doc

abeling

energy intenThe benchmaility to use brm to the Bucumentation.

198

nsity across tharking

building eneruilding .

8

he

rgy

199

9

200

Options for Standards and Labeling of Fans and Refrigerators

This is a review of the Energy Star labeled performance of fans. The data represents rated appliances, not the actual population of appliances (or fans) in the actual marketplace or in the homes in use today. While national consultants may be able to measure power draw of a few fans in their countries, a proper survey will be taken during project start-up. ENERGY STAR: “Qualified ceiling fan/light combination units: are over 50% more efficient than conventional fan/light units, which can save you more than $15 per year

on utility bills.

use improved motors and blade designs.”

For units that have no lights the savings will be less. A conservative estimate of the adoption impact is then 20%. Thus rated ceiling fans could on average save 25 kwH/yr. Promotion of the best technology at over 5 cfm/watt saves 75 kwh/yr per fan compared to conventional fans. Add up a few fans in a house and this equals a refrigerator.

Energy Star rated fans

Energy Star Rated Fans

Ceiling Fan efficiency

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00

Hunter Fan Company

Old Jacksonville

Fanimation

Hunter Fan Company

Hunter Fan Company

Craftmade International

Savoy House

Quorum

Monte Carlo Fans

Royal Pacific

cubic feet per minute/watt

Direct CurrentMotor

201

Exhaust Fan Efficacy

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00

Greenheck Fan Corporation

Carnes

Broan-NuTone LLC

Air-King, Ltd.

Ostberg Americas Inc.

Broan-NuTone LLC

Hangzhou AUPU Bathroom & Kitchen

Spruce Environmental Technologies, Inc.

FanAm, Inc.

Broan-NuTone LLC

Reversomatic Manufacturing Ltd.

Guangdong Genuin Electric Co., Ltd.

Panasonic

Soler & Palau

Aero Pure LLC

Hangzhou AUPU Bathroom & Kitchen

Stelpro Design Inc

Greenheck Fan Corporation

Fantech, Inc.

Panasonic

cfm/watt

Shaded Pole Motor

Capacitor Start Motor

Direct CurrentMotor

202

Energy Star Rated Refrigerators versus 840 kWh/yr for older refrigerators in Brazil and Mexico

Brazil Ratings Data averages 356 kwh/year in 2002/3

KWH/Yr

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Fisher & Paykel

Sanyo

Frigidaire

(Kenmore)

Liebherr

Viking

Amana

LG

Monogram

(Profile)

Crosley

Brazilian Refrigerators

0 100 200 300 400 500

CONTINENTAL

CONSUL

BOSCH

BRASTEMP

BLUE

GE

CONSUL

CONSUL

ESMALTEC

KwH/year

203

Compact refrigerators use more per unit volume.

Rated Refrigerators by Volume Antigua & Barbuda proposed the use of an Environmental levy to influence choice of appliances. The diagram shows the option of giving incentives to smaller and more efficient appliances less than 350 kwh/yr, and a levy on larger less efficient refrigerators over 350 kwh/year but excludes large commercial appliances based on their motivation being the cost savings and that very large refrigerators are more efficient per unit volume.

Adjusted Volume vs Consumption

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 50 100 150 200

Consumption (kWh/y/ft3)

Volu

me

(ft3

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Volume (ft3)

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n (

Kw

h/y

) Levy?

No Levy?

Incentive

204

The Brazil refrigerator data for 2003 suggests that new Brazilian appliances were already within the efficiency range of the USA. The older refrigerators can then be assumed to lie between the new rated models and the Brazil 1995 or Mexico old refrigerators average points. Although the World Bank assumed a very poorly performing baseline for refrigerator consumption at 1281 kwh/year (plus 10% transmission and distribution losses) a better baseline which allows the project to achieve realistic impacts is to assume that older appliances fall on the assumed average older refrigerators line or have an average consumption of 600 kwh/year. The World Bank project was a scrapping program targeting old refrigerators assumed to be used for an additional 5 years. Unrated appliances coming into the Caribbean market can be assumed to be performing on the Assumed Baseline for Caribbean Refrigerators. Since there are already Energy Star Rated refrigerators coming into the project countries, only about half of the refrigerators would be different if the Energy Star was adopted. A 20% energy savings for refrigerators could reasonably be achieved through the adoption of Energy Star or equivalent EU standard labeling requirements and with a promotion program to encourage selection of the better fans and appliances among the rated appliances. This would represent minimal burden in terms of developing standards but may require focused effort on the manufacturers in Grenada and Trinidad & Tobago.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Volume (ft3)

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n (

Kw

h/y

)

EnergyStar 2009

Brazil Procel 2003

Brazil 1995 and Mexico pre2000

Assumed Baseline for Caribbean refrigerators

UNEP GEF Project document: Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings, 7-2012

Documents

Transcript of UNEP GEF Project document: Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings, 7-2012