Process and impact evaluation of PFE Process and impact evaluation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
process and impact evaluation of pfe process and impact
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Process and impact evaluation of PFE Process and impact evaluation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 16, 2024 111 likes •382 views

Process and impact evaluation of PFE Process and impact evaluation of PFE a Swedish tax rebate program for industrial energy efficiency Presentation at eceee 2009 Summer Study, June 2 2009 Christian Stenqvist and Lars J. Nilsson

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Process and impact evaluation of PFE – Process and impact evaluation of PFE a Swedish tax rebate program for industrial energy efficiency

Presentation at eceee 2009 Summer Study, June 2 2009

Christian Stenqvist and Lars J. Nilsson Environmental and Energy Systems Studies, Lund University, Sweden

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Background Background

  • PFE = Programme for improving energy efficiency in energy-intensive industries
  • Between 1998 and 2003 there was a policy planning process for a Swedish long

term agreement targeting energy efficiency in energy intensive industry term agreement targeting energy efficiency in energy intensive industry.

  • In 2004 the Energy Taxation Directive (2003/96/EC) enacts a minimum tax of 0.5

Euro/MWh on electricity used by businesses. An exception is made in consideration 29 stating that:

“Businesses entering into agreements to significantly enhance environmental protection and energy efficiency deserve attention; among these businesses energy intensive ones merit energy efficiency deserve attention; among these businesses, energy intensive ones merit specific treatment.”

”P f I i E Effi i A t” (SFS 2004 1196) d d

  • ”Programme for Improving Energy Efficiency Act” (SFS 2004:1196) was passed and

PFE started in January 2005.

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-3
SLIDE 3

The PFE outline The PFE outline

2nd PFE period 2005

  • Energy audit & analysis
  • Implement and certify

Energy Management System

  • Continuously improve EMS
  • Realize reported actions

Energy Management System

  • Identify electricity saving

actions Implement routines for

  • Apply routines
  • Estimate the result of the

routines

  • Implement routines for

procurement and planning

”The reported electricity savings actions should be expected to lead to savings that broadly speaking would have been achieved if the minimum tax had been applied during the same period.”

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

Source: STEM 2007

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Participation depend on electricity consumption

Participation categorised by electricity consumption

p p y p

1059 1000 1200

nies

Eligible companies Actual participants

400 600 800

er of compan

6 8 32 26 20 20 43 16 117 17 3 200 400

Numbe

>1000 200-1000 100-200 40-100 10-40 <10

GWh per year

The ~1250 eligible companies consumes ~35 TWh/year. The ~100 participating companies consumes ~30 TWh/year.

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Expected Impact

1000

Reported sa ings actions (first

600 700 800 900 1000

Reported savings actions (first year savings) a) Annual and cumulative savings (8 year lifetime)

200 300 400 500 600 GWh

b) Annual and cumulative savings (no restriction in lifetime) c) Annual and cumulative savings ( t i ti i lif ti t

100 200 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 4 2 1 5 2 1 6 2 1 7 2 1 8

(no restriction in lifetime + extra savings from EMS and routines)

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 year

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-6
SLIDE 6

About additionality issues About additionality issues

  • Free-rider coefficient [0,1]
  • Double-counting factor [0,1]
  • Multiplier effect ≥ 0

Net annual savings = Gross annual savings * (1 - free- rider coefficient + multiplier coefficient) * double-counting factor

  • Multiplier effect ≥ 0

We believe that the 1 TWh per year would have been saved also without PFE and the tax rebate. We believe that the 1 TWh per year of saved electricity became an reality thanks to PFE and the tax rebate.

Photo: Jenny Persson, SEA

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

y ,

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Cost-effectiveness of reported savings Cost effectiveness of reported savings

Annual net Annualised Cost effectiveness Annual net electricity savings Annualised expenditures Cost-effectiveness [Euro per kWh] Government 363 – 726 GWh 10.7 million Euro 0.015 - 0.029 End-users (companies) 363 – 726 GWh 7.6 million Euro 0.011 - 0.021 Society 363 - 726 GWh 17.5 million Euro 0.024 - 0.048

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Final conclusions

Success: Success:

  • Comprise almost 90 percent of eligible electricity use
  • Participating companies are positive about the program
  • Potentially there will be large savings (>3 % electricity savings)

Potentially there will be large savings (>3 % electricity savings)

  • PFE has brought structure and organisation into energy management activities.
  • Clear structure for reporting and documentation of actions. Reporting

procedures are regulated by the PFE Act. procedures are regulated by the PFE Act. Less successful:

  • Not attractive to 90 percent of eligible companies to join.

p g p j

  • Makes no demand on other energy carriers than electricity.
  • Higher demands on actions could give higher energy cost savings.
  • PFE lacks quantitative targets difficult to evaluate effectiveness

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Thank you for listening!

christian.stenqvist@miljo.lth.se q @ j

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-10
SLIDE 10

2 questions for discussion

Is there, in other Member States, an equivalent example of an policy program that make use of the minimum tax on electricity (0.5 Euro/MWh), in operation or under consideration? in operation or under consideration? How much effort should be put into determining correction factors (free How much effort should be put into determining correction-factors (free riders, multiplier, double-counting etc.)? How may that effort (time and resources) lead us forward in the task of improving energy efficiency?

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Snabb genomgång av PFE (1)

2000 påbörjas processen att formulera ett styrmedel i form av ett 2000 påbörjas processen att formulera ett styrmedel i form av ett långsiktigt avtal för ökad energieffektivisering och minskad klimatpåverkan, inom energiintensiv industri (Ds 2001:65). Energiskattedirektivet 2003/96/EC kräver minimiskatt på el 0,5 Euro/MWH, men tillåter undantag: , g “Businesses entering into agreements to significantly enhance environmental protection and energy efficiency deserve attention; among these businesses energy intensive ones merit specific treatment ” these businesses, energy intensive ones merit specific treatment. Ds 2003:51 Prop 2003/04:170 SFS 2004:1196 Lag om Program för Ds 2003:51 Prop. 2003/04:170 SFS 2004:1196 Lag om Program för Energieffektivisering

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Snabbgenomgång av PFE (2)

ä S 200 Källa: STEM 2007

Definition av måluppfyllelse (SFS 2004:1196, 11 § andra stycket 3): De eleffektiviserande åtgärderna ska förväntas medföra att en ökad el- effektivitet i slutet av programperioden som i stort sett motsvarar vad som skulle ha uppnåtts om en energiskatt i nivå med 0,5 euro per MWh hade

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

tillämpats under hela programperioden.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Syfte och målgrupper

Syfte: Utvärdering av PFE: dess process och de förväntade resultaten Målgrupper: E i di h t h d di h t l

  • Energimyndighetens och andra myndigheters personal
  • Företag som är med i, eller står utanför, PFE
  • Utredare och beslusfattare, I Sverige och internationellt som vill lära av

g erfarenheter från PFE.

  • Forskningsfältet inom styrmedelsanalys och energieffektivisering,

representerat både vid universitet och privata institut. p p

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Deltagare per bransch per elanvänd etc Deltagare per bransch, per elanvänd etc.

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Metod

Theory-Based-Evaluation (Weiss C. H., Blumstein C., Rossi P., et al.)

Program theory = “the set of beliefs and assumptions that undergird program activities” (Weiss, 1997 p. 503)

  • 1. Make an initial characterization of the policy instrument
  • 2. Draw up a policy theory

3 T l t th li th t t i di t d

( , p )

  • 3. Translate the policy theory to concrete indicators and

identify success and failure factors

  • 4. Draw up a flow-chart of the policy theory

5 Collect information to verify and adjust the policy theory

  • 5. Collect information to verify and adjust the policy theory
  • 6. Collect additional information and analyze all aspects of

the policy theory (including target achievement, net impact and cost effectiveness)

Källa: Khan J. et al. 2006

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Programteorin

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Måluppfyllelse enligt 2-års redovisning

Fråga om måluppfyllelse: ”Kan de el-effektiviserande åtgärderna, sammantagna, förväntas medföra en ökad effektivitet i slutet av programperioden som minst motsvarar vad som skulle ha uppnåtts om en energiskatt i nivå med 0,5 Euro/MWh (=0,5 öre/kWh) hade tillämpats under hela programperioden?”

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Tolkningar av måluppfyllelse

1 Åtgärdernas elkostnadsbesparing ≥ Skattebefrielsen

  • 1. Åtgärdernas elkostnadsbesparing ≥ Skattebefrielsen

Exempel: Ett företag har en årlig elanvändning på 145 GWh. Inom PFE rapporteras och genomförs åtgärder som tillsammans minskar elanvändningen 6 64 GWh jämfört med

  • 1. Åtgärdernas elkostnadsbesparing ≥ (0,5 * skattebefrielsen)

genomförs åtgärder som tillsammans minskar elanvändningen 6,64 GWh jämfört med situationen före PFE. Företaget har ett avtalat elpris om 0,40 SEK/kWh. 6 640 000 [kWh] * 0,4 [SEK/kWh] = 2 656 000 SEK per år i elkostnadsbesparing Exempel: Ett företag har en årlig elanvändning på 145 GWh. Inom PFE rapporteras och genomförs åtgärder som tillsammans minskar elanvändningen 6,64 GWh jämfört med situationen före PFE Företaget har ett avtalat elpris om 0 40 SEK/kWh Elasticiteten på 145 000 000 [kWh] * 0,005 [SEK/kWh] = 725 000 SEK per år i skattebefrielse 2 656 000 > 725 000 och målet är uppfyllt. Företaget tjänar nästan 4 gånger mer på elkostnadsbesparingen jämfört med skattebefrielsen situationen före PFE. Företaget har ett avtalat elpris om 0,40 SEK/kWh. Elasticiteten på efterfrågan av el antas vara - 0,5. 6 640 000 [kWh] * 0,4 [SEK/kWh] = 2 656 000 SEK per år i elkostnadsbesparing 145 000 000 [kWh] * 0 005 [SEK/kWh] 725 000 SEK å i k b f i l på elkostnadsbesparingen jämfört med skattebefrielsen. 145 000 000 [kWh] * 0,005 [SEK/kWh] = 725 000 SEK per år i skattebefrielse 2 656 000 > 362 500 och målet är uppfyllt.

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Rapporterade åtgärder och förväntade pp g resultat

800 500 600 700

Realised EEI

300 400

measures Annual cumulative

100 200

cumulative savings

2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 4 2 1 5 2 1 6 2 1 7 2 1 8

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Energtjänstdirekti et 2006/32/EC och EMEEES Energtjänstdirektivet 2006/32/EC och EMEEES

Di 2006/32/EC i bö d

  • Dir. 2006/32/EC innebörd:

– Vägledande mål om 9% nationell energibesparing till 2016 (jmf med 2001-2005). Besparing ska uppnås genom energitjänster och andra i ff kti i i åt ä d energieffektiviseingsåtgärder. – Mätning och kontroll skall ske med top-down- och bottom-up- beräkningsmetoder. – Offentlig sektor skall ha en ledande roll – Krav på energidistributörer m fl med olika alternativ kring energitjänster, energibesiktningar, fonder och finansiering, och g j , g g , g, frivilliga avtal – Medlemsländer ska utforma nationell handlingsplan

  • Slutbetänkande utredning ”Vägen till ett energieffektivare Sverige” SOU
  • Slutbetänkande utredning Vägen till ett energieffektivare Sverige SOU

2008:110 kom förra veckan.

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-21
SLIDE 21

EMEEES

  • Det saknas harmoniserade metoder (top-down/bottom-up) och definitioner.

EMEEES har jobbat med att ta fram sådana.

  • Hantering av dubbelräkning, multiplikatoreffekter, free-riders, och

rebound?

  • Vad är baseline och därmed additionella besparingar?

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Korrektionsfaktorer

Total net annual electricity savings = Total gross annual electricity savings * (1 - Free-rider coefficient + Multiplier coefficient) * Double-counting factor Multiplier coefficient) Double-counting factor Free-rider “Skattebefrielsen är förstås en morot för oss, men den stora potentialen är den besparing vi gör totalt genom att sänka vår elenergiförbrukning. Som energiintensiv industri hade vi vidtagit åtgärder i vilket fall men PFE hade Free rider energiintensiv industri hade vi vidtagit åtgärder i vilket fall, men PFE hade stor betydelse för att vi startade ett mer systematiskt arbete” Multiplier-coefficient p Double-counting factor

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Några slutsatser

  • PFE är styrmedelspaket anpassat till de stora elförbrukarna.
  • Andra incitament krävs för att attrahera mindre elförbrukare.
  • PFE saknar kvantitativa mål svårt att säga om PFE är effektivt
  • Höjda krav på åtgärder bör betala sig i än större kostnadsbesparingar

på energi p g

  • Många är nöjda med PFE

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-24
SLIDE 24

EE – Less specific energy use

Specific energy use in Swedish industry (SNI 10-37)

200 250 300 100 total energy use 50 100 150 index 1 energy intensity production value 1 9 7 1 9 7 3 1 9 7 6 1 9 7 9 1 9 8 2 1 9 8 5 1 9 8 8 1 9 9 1 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 7 2 2 3 2 6 year

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Specific electricity use has also decreased

Specific electricity use in Swedish industry (SNI 10-37) 300 150 200 250 300 x 100

electricity use

50 100 150 Index

production value electricity intensity

1 9 7 1 9 7 3 1 9 7 6 1 9 7 9 1 9 8 2 1 9 8 5 1 9 8 8 1 9 9 1 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 7 2 2 3 2 6 year

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Electricity use and economic growth

Electricity use within Swedish industry SNI 10-37 (mining and Electricity use within Swedish industry SNI 10 37 (mining and manufacturing)

58000 60000 50000 52000 54000 56000 GWh 44000 46000 48000 50000 G 42000 1 9 8 6 1 9 8 7 1 9 8 8 1 9 8 9 1 9 9 1 9 9 1 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 3 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 7 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 Year

Lund University/Faculty of Engineering/Technology and Society/Environmental and Energy System Studies/eceee Summer Study 2009/June 2, 2009