Graduation and expansion of positive list of small scale projects

Transcription

1 , Annex 6 to the report of the 49 th meeting of the SSC WG Graduation and expansion of positive list of small scale projects CDM EB 87 Paris, France, 23 to 27 November 2015 UNFCCC Secretariat SDM programme

2 Procedural background EB 63 and EB 67 approved positive list of technologies in the SSC additionality tool. EB 81 approved criteria for reassessment of positive lists a) Reassessment every 3 years b) First reassessment due in

3 Purpose To present the recommendation of the SSC WG on the positive list based on the reassessment carried out 3

4 Current positive list in SSC additionality Grid connected renewable energy technologies (<=15 MW) a. Solar PV and Solar-thermal electricity generation; b. Off-shore wind; c. Marine technologies (e.g. wave and tidal); d. Building integrated wind turbines or household roof top wind turbines (unit size =< 100 kw) e. RE technologies implemented in countries with = <20 per cent rural electrification rates Off-grid renewable energy technologies (<=15 MW) a. Micro/pico-hydro (unit size =< 100 kw); b. Micro/pico-wind turbine (unit size =< 100 kw ); c. PV-wind hybrid (unit size =< 100 kw); d. Geothermal (unit size =< 200 kw); e. Biomass gasification/biogas (unit size =<100 kw) Distributed technologies for households/communities/smes unit size =< 5 per cent of SSC thresholds (=<750kW, =< 3 GWh/y or =<3 ktco 2 e/y)

5 Key issues and proposed solutions Grid connected RE technologies (<=15 MW) a. Solar PV and Solar-thermal electricity generation; b. Off-shore wind; c. Marine technologies (e.g. wave and tidal); Criteria: Retain if levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) of specific RETs is 50% or higher than fossil fuel(ff) electricity and its penetration rate is less than 3% Analysis: Information from IPCC (2014), IEA (2015), IRENA(2015), and REN21 (2015) assessed Global average LCOEs of Solar, Ocean, Off-shore Wind in all cases at least 2 X average LCOE of FF technologies Penetration rate well below 3% in Non-Annex I countries Proposal: To retain the current positive list of grid connected RE technologies

6 Key issues and proposed solutions Source: IEA (2015), REN 21(2015), IRENA (2015), IPCC (2014)

7 Key issues and proposed solutions Off-grid renewable energy technologies (=<15 MW) a. Micro/pico-hydro (unit size =< 100 kw); b. Micro/pico-wind turbine (unit size =< 100 kw ); c. PV-wind hybrid (unit size =< 100 kw); d. Geothermal (unit size =< 200 kw); e. Biomass gasification/biogas (unit size =<100 kw) Criteria: Retain if capital cost is at least three times higher than that of a diesel generator of comparable size Analysis: Information from REN 21 (2015), FF School-UNEP (2015), IRENA (2015), IEA (2014), UNDP (2014) Capital costs of off-grid positive list technologies remains at least 3 times higher that of its DG counterpart of comparable size. Proposal: To retain the current positive list of off-grid RE technologies

8 Key issues and proposed solutions Comparison of capital cost (Off-grid RE vs DG) Renewable-Energy Technology Installed Capacity Geothermal* kw 6410 Capital cost in 2015 (USD/kW) Micro hydro kw (Avg: 4175) Wind turbine (on shore) < 100 kw (Avg: 3885) Wind turbine (household system) Solar PV roof top (residential) Solar PV roof top (commercial) kw (Avg: 5500) 3 5 kw (Avg: 4600) kw (Avg: 6700) Diesel generator MW (Avg: 478) Source: REN21 (2015) and Frankfurt School/ UNEP Collaborating Centre /IRENA (2015)

9 Key issues and proposed solutions Distributed technologies for households/communities/smes unit size =< 5 per cent of SSC thresholds (=< 750 kw, =< 3 GWh/y or 3 ktco 2 e/y) Criteria: Retain technologies with 3 X capital cost as compared to baseline technology, penetration rate <3% Analysis: Includes technologies for households/communities i.e. efficient cook stoves, efficient lighting, water purification; solar water heater and micro irrigation (PoAs and CDM projects) 2.7 billion rely on traditional biomass for cooking. cost of efficient cooking technologies is substantially higher (more than 3 times) than the cost of traditional cook stoves Proposal: To retain the current positive list but carry out further work as per the new mandate to assess alternatives to size criteria and consolidation of all positive lists

10 Key issues and proposed solutions Investment cost of Cook stoves Type of cookstoves Traditional cookstoves Source: IEA (2014) Investment Cost ($) Efficiency (%) Charcoal Fuelwood, straw Alternative cookstoves Kerosene LPG Electricity Biogas digesters Improved cookstoves Charcoal Fuelwood 15 25

11 Impacts The positive lists greatly reduce costs for projects and PoAs. 11

12 Recommendations to the Board The SSC WG recommends the Board to retain the positive list of technologies as contained in the methodological tool Demonstration of additionality of small-scale projects. 12

13 Subsequent work and timelines Further work related to streamlining positive lists in tools for Demonstration of additionality of small-scale projects and Demonstration of additionality of micro-scale projects. To make recommendations to the Board in areas where the positive list could be expanded while responding to mandate mentioned above. 13