ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACE Access to Clean Energy APR Annual Project Review AWP Annual Work Plan C-WET Centre for Wind Energy Technology CO Country Office CP Country Programme CPAP Country Programme Action Plan EOI Expression of Interest EOP End of Project FSP Full Scale Proposal FYP Five Year Plan GEF Global Environment Facility GHG Green House Gas GOI Government of India IREDA Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency JNNSM Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission kgoe Kg of Oil equivalent kWth Kilo Watt Thermal LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MNRE Ministry of New & Renewable Energy MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forests Mt Million Tonnes MTE Mid-Term Evaluation Mtoe Million ton of oil equivalent MW Megawatt NABARD National Bank for Agriculture and Development NAPCC National Action Plan on Climate Change NISE National Institute of Solar Energy NPC National Project Coordinator NPD National Project Director OECD Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development PAC Project Advisory Committee PIF Project Identification Form PIR Project Implementation Reports PMU Project Management unit PPG Project Preparatory Grant PPP Purchasing Power Parity PPR Project Progress Reports PSC Project Steering Committee RE Renewable Energy RGGVY Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana 3 RPO Renewable Purchase Obligation RTA Regional Technical Advisor (UNDP) SSS NIRE Sardar Swaran Singh National Institute of Renewable Energy SERC State Electricity Regulatory Commission SNA State Nodal Agency tCO2 Ton of carbon dioxide
3 RGGVY is the Government of India’s programme for rural electrification. India GEF ACE Project Design Page 3 UAC Unit Abatement Cost UNDAF United Nations Development Action Framework UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change USAID US Agency for International Development USD or US$ US Dollar
India GEF ACE Project Design Page 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ...... 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 5
LIST OF TABLES ...... 6
PART A. SITUATION ANALYSIS ...... 7
1 Project context – rural livelihoods and energy in India ...... 7 2 Baseline analysis – energy access and rural livelihoods in the targeted states...... 15 3 Barrier analysis ...... 36 4 Key stakeholders ...... 40
PART B. PROJECT STRATEGY ...... 47
5 Project rationale, design principles and strategic considerations...... 47 6 Policy conformity and country ownership ...... 50 7 Project objectives, outcomes and outputs ...... 51 8 Key indicators, risks and assumptions ...... 66 9 Cost-effectiveness; GEF incremental reasoning ...... 69 10 Sustainability and replicability...... 69 11 Project results framework ...... 71 12 Total budget and work- plan ...... 76 13 Management arrangements...... 82 14 Monitoring framework and evaluation...... 86 15 Legal context...... 91
PART C. ANNEXES ...... 92
Annexure – A: Risk Analysis ...... 92 Annexure – B: Agreements...... 96 Annexure – C: Terms of References ...... 102 Annexure – D: Emission Reductions Calculation...... 108 Annexure – E: Renewable Energy Technology Compendium...... 111 Annexure – F: Summary information on identified clusters for demonstration projects ...... 112 Annexure – G: Summary Report on Stakeholders Consultations...... 119 Annexure – H: Country Office Support Service (COSS) Agreement...... 122 Annexure – I: Project Annual Targets ...... 125
India GEF ACE Project Design Page 5 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Cumulative installed capacity of RE as on January 1, 2014...... 9 Table 2: Status of three states on key development parameters ...... 18 Table 3: Share of the states in national output in various sectors ...... 19 Table 4: Details of solar lighting solution for back-yard poultry farm ...... 25 Table 5: Details of biogas plant for layer poultry farms...... 25 Table 6: Details on briquetting of biomass waste from poultry farms ...... 26 Table 7: Details of solar power pack for milk collection centres ...... 26 Table 8: Details of milk chiller for milk collection centres...... 27 Table 9: Details of biogas plant for dairy farms...... 27 Table 10: Details of solar pumps ...... 28 Table 11: Details of farm level solar cold rooms...... 28 Table 12: Details of solar dryers for horticulture sector ...... 28 Table 13: Details on solar aeration ...... 29 Table 14: Details on solar fish dryer ...... 29 Table 15: Details of solar lighting solution for artisan's houses ...... 30 Table 16: Details of solar power pack for common facility centers...... 30 Table 17: Details of gasification system for power generation ...... 30 Table 18: Details of Solar Charkha ...... 31 Table 19: Details of Solar Powered Loom ...... 31 Table 20: Details of biomass cook-stoves ...... 32 Table 21: List of potential clusters for demonstration phase ...... 33 Table 22: Barrier Analysis ...... 37 Table 23: Key stakeholders involved in the project ...... 40 Table 24: Project Components and Outcomes...... 52 Table 25: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 1...... 53 Table 26: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 2...... 57 Table 27: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.1...... 59 Table 28: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.2...... 60 Table 29: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.3...... 61 Table 30: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.1...... 63 Table 31: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.2...... 63 Table 32: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.3...... 65 Table 33 Project Planning Matrix ...... 71 Table 34: Outcome wise detailed budget...... 76 Table 35: Allocation of MNRE's co-financing contribution ...... 80 Table 36: Summary of Funds:...... 81 Table 37: Estimate of direct project services (DPS) (US$)...... 85 Table 38: M & E work-plan and budget...... 90 Table 39: Emission reduction from demonstration projects...... 109 Table 40: Year wise and cumulative emission reduction...... 110 Table 41: Summary details of stakeholders' workshops...... 119 Table 42: Project Annual Targets ...... 125
India GEF ACE Project Design Page 6 PART A. SITUATION ANALYSIS
1 PROJECT CONTEXT – RURAL LIVELIHOODS AND ENERGY IN INDIA
1. India has emerged recently as the third largest economy in the world in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms. However, in terms of per capita GDP, in PPP terms, India ranks very low at 127 in the 199- country ranking. After robust economic growth by around 9% annually, the country is now dealing with slowing economic growth rates at just around 5%.
2. Of the 1.21 billion people in India, 833 million (68.8%) live in rural areas. The rural population of India lives in 640,867 villages, as identified by the 2011 Census. The number of rural households is estimated to be 138 million. According to the Economic Survey of India 2013-144, the poverty ratio in the country has declined from 37.2% in 2004-05 to 21.9% in 2011-12 and the latest poverty ratio estimates are 25.7% and 13.7%, for rural and urban areas respectively. However, going beyond defined poverty lines to the larger context of livelihoods deprivation, it can be said that nearly half of India’s rural households are poor in terms of insecure livelihoods options and high levels of vulnerability to risk factors5, with limited coping ability. The issue of rural livelihoods in India needs to be understood in this context.
3. Though a majority of rural households depend on farm income, low land holding and low agricultural productivity make it necessary for farmers to look for additional sources of income. Animal husbandry, dairy farming and fisheries help supplement family incomes. A number of small enterprises based on local handicrafts and other activities such as tea stalls and hotels are also important sources of income for some rural families. Recognising the need to improve livelihoods security in India’s villages, the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India launched Aajeevika - National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) in June 2011. The Mission aims at “creating efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor enabling them to increase household income through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial services”. NRLM proposes to reach out to rural poor households through “self-managed Self Help Groups (SHGs) and federated institutions and support them for livelihoods collectives”. In addition, the poor would be facilitated to achieve increased access to their rights, entitlements and public services, diversified risk and better social indicators of empowerment. NRLM believes in harnessing the innate capabilities of the poor and complements them with capacities (information, knowledge, skills, tools, finance and collectivization) to participate in the growing economy of the country”6.
4. India is the fifth largest energy consumer in the world, accounting for nearly 5% of the world’s total energy consumption. However, India’s per capita energy use at around 614 kgoe7/year is just a third of the world average and one-eighth of the average per capita energy consumption in OECD countries. The Twelfth Five-Year Plan (2012-2017) document predicts an average annual growth rate in energy consumption of 5.7 percent per year in the Plan period, pointing out that this is in part a reflection of the need to satisfy unmet energy demands. The Plan document predicts that domestic energy supply
4 The Planning Commission has updated the poverty lines and poverty ratios for 2011-12 based on the recommendations of the Tendulkar Committee using Household Consumer Expenditure Survey 2011-12 data of the National Sample Survey (NSS) 68th round Accordingly, with the poverty line at all India level at monthly per capita expenditure (MPCE) of 816 for rural areas and 1000 for urban areas in 2011-12. The Planning Commission constituted an Expert Group under the Chairmanship of Dr. C. Rangarajan in June 2012 to ‘Review the Methodology for Measurement of Poverty’. The term of the Expert Group has been extended up to 30 June 2014 5 Risk factors include delayed or weak monsoon, inadequate rains, inadequate river flows, dropping water table levels, increased oil prices, communal tensions and violence, disease or pest outbreaks, inability to more produce to markets, high interest rates, high inflation rates, a family member becoming sick and needing expensive hospital treatment, inability to repay high interest loans from moneylenders, rural policy changes, corruption, and so forth. 6 http://aajeevika.gov.in/ 7 Kilogram of oil equivalent (WDI, 2014)
7 of about 670 Mtoe8 will be supplemented by energy imports of 937 Mtoe by 2017. Thus the Indian energy sector is expected to witness an expansion of energy demand, with a persistently high dependence on imported fossil fuels. In addition, energy access issues are a persistent concern, as outlined below.
1.1 Energy scenario in India: energy access, energy imports and fossil fuel dependence are important concerns
5. India’s energy consumption is marked by large inequities, most starkly between rural and urban areas. Energy access is a major concern in India as depicted by the figures of a generally low dependence of households on “modern” fuels such as electricity and LPG - for lighting and cooking respectively.
6. In rural India, over 85% of households in rural India continue to depend on “traditional” cooking fuels (firewood and wood chips and other biomass, dung cake and coal/ charcoal) for cooking, with only 11% using LPG. About 66% of households in rural India used electricity for lighting while about 33% used kerosene.9 Even among those households having access to electricity in rural India, electricity demand is generally very low, with only 11% of those connected to the grid using over 100 kWh per month10.
7. Though fossil fuel subsidies such as on LPG and kerosene were intended to help alleviate energy poverty in India, this has not actually occurred on account of leakages and mis-targeting of subsidies. Also, analysis of past trends in household energy consumption shows that besides fuel prices, factors such as fuel availability, culture, geography, the extent of urbanization, and the design of state policies also influences fuel choices.
8. As mentioned above, another major concern in India is its high level of fossil fuel energy import dependence, primarily comprising oil and coal. Domestic production of crude oil in India has remained essentially constant during the last two decades - at 32.2 Million tonnes (Mt) in 1990-91 and 37.8 Mt in 2012-1311. The combination of rising oil consumption and relatively flat production has left India increasingly dependent on imports to meet its petroleum needs. In 2009, India was the sixth largest net importer of crude oil in the world, importing about 70 percent of its needs. India is expected to become the fourth largest net importer of oil in the world by 2025, behind the United States, China, and Japan.
9. Over the years, India’s energy import bill has also grown on account of a rising reliance on imported coal as local production has failed to match increasing coal demand. Importing about 150 million tonnes of coal a year, India is the world’s third-largest importer of coal even though it has the world’s fifth- largest coal reserves. Rising oil and coal imports raise serious concerns about India’s energy security, in particular its ability to physically source the necessary oil requirements or to cope with the negative economic impacts of any constrained global oil supply, or major oil price rises.
10. Although, on a per capita basis, India is among the lowest GHG emitters, India is the fourth largest global emitter of GHG on the basis of total annual emissions. Given that India emits more than 5% of global CO2 emissions and that India’s GHG emissions are showing a rapidly increasing trend (with emissions nearly trebling in the last two decades), India’s growing fossil fuel consumption – with fossil fuel demand being the largest source of CO2 emissions globally – is a cause for concern.
8 Million tonnes of oil equivalent 9 Energy sources of Indian households for cooking and lighting, Ministry of statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, September 2012 10 An overview of Indian energy trends: Low carbon growth and development challenges. Prayas Energy Group, September 2009 11 http://petroleum.nic.in/pngstat.pdf
8 1.2 Renewable energy potential and initiatives
11. The per capita electricity consumption in India is approximately 778 kilowatt-hours (kWh)12 (as of March 2012), which is just 30 percent of the global per capita average of 2,600 kWh. The impetus to provide improved and eventually universal energy access, reduce dependence on both energy imports and fossil fuels, are the key drivers for India to turn to renewable energy options.
12. India is endowed with large renewable energy resources. According to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), among the various renewable energy resources, solar energy potential is the highest in the country. In most parts of India, clear sunny weather is experienced 250 to 300 days a year. The annual radiation varies from 1,600 to 2,200 kWh/m2, which is comparable with radiation received in the tropical and sub-tropical regions. The equivalent energy potential is about 6,000 million GWh of energy per year13. The Potential for wind power generation for grid interaction has been estimated at about 48,500 MW taking sites having wind power density greater than 200 W/m2 at 50 m hub-height with 1% land availability in potential areas for setting up wind farms @12 ha/MW14. It is also estimated that on average, India has 300 sunny days per year and receives an average hourly radiation of 200 MW/km2. It is estimated that 12.5% of India’s land mass, or 413,000 km2, is potentially available for harnessing solar energy. The estimated potential for small hydro in India is 20,000 MW over 6,474 prospective sites15. MNRE estimates India’s biomass-based electricity potential at 18 GW from around 120-150 million tonnes per year of available biomass resources. This estimate is in addition to about 5 GW of power generation that is possible from bagasse-based cogeneration in sugar mills16.
13. The Government of India recognizes that ongoing aggressive development of its renewable energy resources is critical to ensure that it is able to meet both its economic and environmental objectives. Consequently, renewable energy development is promoted through a range of policies and actions.
14. MNRE is the nodal Ministry of the Government of India for all matters related to new and renewable energy. MNRE has evolved through several steps from the Commission of Additional Sources of Energy that was established in 1991. The Ministry works in close collaboration with state level renewable energy development agencies (State Nodal Agencies - SNAs). The Ministry has been instrumental in setting up and supporting a wide range of institutions to develop and promote renewable energy technologies and applications in India. These include public financial institutions such as the Indian Renewable Agency Development Agency (IREDA) and research institutes such as the National Institute of Solar Energy (NISE), Centre for Wind Energy Technology (C-WET), Alternate Hydro Energy Centre (AHEC), Sardar Swaran Singh National Institute of Renewable Energy (SSS NIRE), and the more recent addition - the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI).
15. The Government of India’s MNRE reports that India has over 30 GW of installed renewable electricity generation capacity, which is approximately 15% of India’s total installed grid electricity generation capacity. However, generation of electricity from renewable energy sources is estimated at just over 5% of total grid electricity generation.
Table 1: Cumulative installed capacity of RE as on January 1, 2014
Grid Interactive Power (capacities in MW) Wind Power 20,299 Small Hydro Power 3,774 Biomass Power & Gasification 1,286
12 http://mospi.nic.in/mospi_new/upload/Energy_Statistics_2013.pdf 13 http://mnre.gov.in/information/solar-rpo/ 14 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/grid-connected/solar-thermal-2/ 15 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/grid-connected/small-hydro/ 16 http://www.mnre.gov.in/related-links/grid-connected/biomass-powercogen/
9 Bagasse Cogeneration 2,513 Waste-to-Energy 99 Solar Power 2,208 Total 30,178 Off-grid or Captive Power (capacities in MW) Waste to Energy 120 Biomass (non-bagasse) Cogeneration 517 Biomass Gasifiers Rural 18 Industrial 146 Aero-Generators/Hybrid systems 2 Solar PV Systems 160 Water mills/micro hydel 10 (2,547) Biogas based energy systems - Total 973 Other renewable energy systems Family Biogas Plants 4.7 million Solar Water Heaters 7.5 million m2 Source: MNRE website accessed in April 2014
16. A wide range of Government of India (GoI) policies and schemes17 have sought to support the expansion of renewable energy, as follows:
Electricity Act 2003: Mandates that each State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC) must establish minimum renewable power purchases; allows for the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) to set a preferential tariff for electricity generated from renewable energy technologies; and provides open access of the electricity transmission and distribution system to licensed renewable power generators. National Electricity Policy 2005: Allows SERCs to establish preferential tariffs for electricity generated from renewable sources. National Tariff Policy 2006: Mandates that each SERC must specify a renewable purchase obligation (RPO) with distribution companies in a time-bound manner with purchases to be made through a competitive bidding process. Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) 2005: Supports extension of electricity to all rural and below poverty line (BPL) households through a 90% subsidy of capital equipment costs for renewable and non-renewable energy systems. Eleventh Plan 2007–2012: Established a target that 10% of power generating capacity should be based on renewable sources by 2012 (a goal that has already been reached); it also supported the phasing out of investment-related subsidies in favour of performance-oriented incentives.
17. In June 2008, India’s first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) was released. It outlined existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation and adaptation. The plan identified eight core “National Missions” running through 2017.
17 Indian Renewable Energy Status Report. Background paper for DIREC 2010. NREL/TP-6A20-48948 October 2010
10 18. The Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) is part of the NAPCC. JNNSM has a target for the deployment of 20,000 MW of solar power, 20 million m2 of solar thermal collector area and 20 million solar lighting systems by 2022. The objective of JNNSM is to create a policy and regulatory environment that provides a predictable and effective incentive structure that enables rapid and large-scale capital investment in solar energy applications and encourages strong technical innovation and the lowering of costs. The Mission adopted a 3-phased approach, spanning the remaining period of the 11th Plan and first year of the 12th Plan (up to 2012-13) as Phase 1, the remaining 4 years of the 12th Plan (2013- 17) as Phase 2 and the 13th Plan (2017-22) as Phase 3. At the end of each plan, and mid-term during the 12th and 13th Plans, there will be an evaluation of progress and a review of capacity and targets for subsequent phases – to be based on emerging cost and technology trends, both domestic and global.
19. Many states have introduced state-level renewable energy policies with their own schemes and tax incentives for renewable energy. Various states have implemented provisional measures such as concessional open access charges for captive renewable energy projects and waivers on cross-subsidy surcharges. These measures are meant to reduce the burden resulting from the generally lower plant load factors of renewable energy projects.
20. SERCs also set state-specific targets for distribution companies to purchase a certain percentage of their total power requirement from renewable energy sources through targets set in the form of Renewable Purchase Obligations (RPOs). As part of its policy to promote renewable energy, India launched the Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) Mechanism in 2010. Under this scheme, generators of renewable energy are granted an REC per unit of green energy that they contribute to the grid. RECs have begun to be traded on the power exchanges, with the RECs being purchased by states / agencies that are otherwise unable to meet their RPOs.
21. The National Clean Energy Fund was created in 2011 as a funding mechanism for research and development in the field of clean energy technologies. The fund is created by levying a nominal cost on coal. Though the fund is large (expected to grow to INR 100 billion) the guidelines for utilisation of this Fund have been found to be very broad-based with the result that the Fund is now being used for routine energy projects including those in the new and renewable energy sector.
1.3 Rural livelihoods in India
22. Over 85% of rural incomes in India are generated from agriculture, although the sector’s contribution to the Gross National Product (GNP) is just around 35%. More than 12-15% of rural families are landless. About 90% of rural families own less than 51% of the land available, with an average per capita holding of only 0.19 ha. Out of the 147 million ha of agricultural lands, about 60 million ha are located in arid zones, which are mostly owned by poor families. That rural agricultural workers spend about 75% - 80% of their earnings on food is an indicator of their low level of income and their limited spending capacity. As the chances of crop failure on these arid lands is very high, the farmers generally do not invest in external inputs like improved seeds, fertilisers and plant protection measures and end up with poor crop yields, even during normal rainfall years.
23. Agricultural production in India is largely based on rain-fed irrigation where rainfall is the main source of water. However, in the absence of adequate soil and water conservation practices, it is estimated that over 65% of rainwater runs off, leading to high levels of flooding when it rains. About 28% of the total cropping area in the country is under irrigation. As a result of poor soil and water conservation measures, the average yield of food crops in India is only 1.9 tonnes/ha as compared to 4.0 tonnes/ha in China. Due to excessive use of water for irrigation, over 9 million ha of formerly fertile lands have turned into wastelands, thereby posing a serious threat not only to food security and employment generation but also to community health, biodiversity and the environment.
24. Livestock is an important source of supplementary income. India has over 500 million head of livestock, which include cattle, buffaloes, sheep and goats. Among them, cattle and buffaloes are popular for milk production. Over the last three decades (1982 to 2012), average productivity of Indian cows has grown from 1.9 to 3.9 kg of milk per day. This is still significantly lower than global standards — UK, USA, and
11 Israel are at 25.6, 32.8 and 38.6 kg per day, respectively18. The poor and landless prefer to maintain sheep or goats and let them loose for grazing on community pastures.
25. Poor productivity of the land and livestock and the inefficient use of forests are the causes of seasonal employment in villages. Small farmers have work only for 100-120 days for growing one crop in a year, which is not adequate to sustain their livelihoods. Hence, they have to struggle to earn additional wages by working in irrigated areas or they migrate to urban areas. The migration pattern varies with the region, opportunities and socio-economic status of the families. The poorest families, particularly the landless and marginal holders owning poor quality land tend to migrate with the entire family. Many tribal families migrate to cities as construction workers and return at the onset of the rains. Such migrations severely affect the quality of life, due to poor health, lack of education and social pressures leading to the erosion of moral values.
26. Forests have been providing many direct and indirect benefits to rural communities. As against the recommended 33% of the total geographical area to be placed under forest cover; only 24% land is under forest cover, according to the India State of Forest Report 2013. An estimated 275-400 million people depend on forests for a variety of goods and services. These includes collection of edible fruits, flowers, tubers, roots and leaves for food and medicines; firewood for cooking (some also sale in the market); materials for agricultural implements, house construction and fencing; fodder (grass and leaves) for livestock and grazing of livestock in forest; and collection of a range of marketable non- timber forest products.19
1.4 Livelihoods Interventions in India
27. In agriculture, until the 1960s the predominant livelihood interventions covered irrigation through large dams and canal systems, followed by the introduction of the high yielding crop varieties during the Green Revolution, influencing the livelihoods of over 40 million farmers and a similar number of landless labourers. India has added over 40 million hectares of irrigation since independence in 1947; the largest increase in irrigated land in human history. This has generated or stabilized the livelihoods of millions of people.
28. Originally called the National Rural Employment Program (NREP), and later the Sampoorna Gram Samriddhi Yojana (SGSY), wage-employment was generated in the lean season through public works such as road building. In 2006, this approach was substantially revised with the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which guaranteed 100 days of employment to any citizen wanting to work. The resulting Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme has generated over 16 billion days of work and generated rural incomes to the range of INR 2.48 trillion since its inception.
29. In the field of self-employment, the interventions from Government started with the Integrated Rural Development Programme in 1980, later re-fashioned into the Swarna Jayanti Grameen Swarozgar Yojana (SJGSY), to promote self-employment among the poor through acquisition of an income- generating asset with the help of a bank loan and a government subsidy. The National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) was launched in 2012; taking the SGSY idea forward by creating institutions of the poor that would anchor rural livelihoods development in a sustainable manner.
30. In addition, there are a number of programmes run by sectoral institutions such as the National Dairy Development Board, the Central Silk Board, the Coir Board, the National Horticultural Board, the National Fisheries Development Board, the Khadi and Village Industries Commission and the Development Commissioners for Handloom and Handicrafts, focusing on specific sectors of the economy.
31. Also noteworthy are programmes run by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), for promoting livelihoods in different regions and sectors. NGOs such as SEWA, BAIF, MYRADA, AKRSP, PRADAN,
18 http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/indian-cow-may-your-yield-increase/article5835726.ece 19 http://envfor.nic.in/sites/default/files/redd-bk3_0.pdf
12 RGVN and BASIX have been active in this field. The Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) works with over 750,000 self-employed women of low-income households, while the Bharatiya Agro- Industries Foundation’s (BAIF) programmes support one million livelihoods, comprising cattle cross- breeding, pasture development, horticulture, etc. Yet another intervention has been that of Venkateswara Hatcheries to develop the poultry sector, culminating in the National Egg Coordination Council, which serves over 200,000 poultry producers. Various micro-finance interventions by banks and NGOs have influenced the livelihoods of more than twelve million people.
1.5 Energy and Rural Livelihoods Linkage
32. Of the livelihoods sectors that are the most significant and critical for rural India i.e. farming, horticulture, dairy, poultry, fisheries, handicrafts such as bamboo, cane and weaving and a range of other cottage / village industries – several suffer from low productivity and income insecurity, as described above. Higher and stable productivity is associated with higher energy intensity. As a result, access to reliable energy is an imperative. Energy requirements are typically for electric, mechanical and / or thermal applications.
33. Recognition of the need for energy in livelihoods activities is most evident in pump-sets for irrigation. Indian pump-sets have largely been running on diesel, or grid electricity when it is available. It is estimated that India has over 21 million pump-sets, of which nearly 9 million run on diesel, while the rest are electric and depend on the electricity grid20. Nearly 20-25% of India’s electricity consumption is accounted for by irrigation, and this figure is likely to increase given that less than 40% of India’s cultivated land is irrigated (the rest being rain-fed). It is to be noted that the use of diesel pumps result in huge subsidies. According to the CEA, despite many upward revisions, electricity tariffs for agriculture (pumping) remain low and cover just 30 percent of the average cost.21 In addition, not just are diesel costs rising, but the use of diesel for water pumping also has implications for high diesel subsidies and high foreign exchange outgoings. Thus, there is a strong motivation to find alternatives to the use electric and diesel pump sets. As an early RE intervention in this area, MNRE announced in March 2014 a programme to launch 17,500 solar PV based pumping systems in a number of states22.
34. Other specific energy-requiring applications have also been emphasised for some of the key livelihoods sectors. In particular, it is estimated that about 25% of India’s horticultural produce is wasted due to lack of facilities for post-harvest processing (including cold storage, drying, pulp making etc.) for horticultural perishable output. A National Centre for Cold Chain Development (NCCD) has been established to work in close collaboration with industry and other stakeholders to promote and develop an integrated cold chain in India for perishable agricultural commodities to reduce wastage and to substantially improve both farmers’ incomes and reduce prices for consumers. Similarly, fish storage and drying facilities are expected to considerably reduce wastage and increase income of fisher-folk. Schemes for solar fish drying (with LPG back-up) indicate recognition of this opportunity. However, access to the necessary adequate “modern” energy (24/7 reliable grid electricity supply and/or reliable LPG supplies) for major rural livelihoods activities is currently low in rural India.
1.6 India and Climate Change
35. India is undertaking a wide range of initiatives to address the threat of climate change on issues ranging across forestry, glaciology, energy efficiency and climate change mitigation technology. India is an active participant in international negotiations on climate change under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) is the UNFCCC focal
20http://www.cstep.in/sites/default/files/CSTEP_%20Harnessing%20Solar%20Energy%20Options%20for%20India_S hubha%20Raghavan%20et%20al_Solar%20Studies.pdf 21 http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/monthly/executive_rep/jun14.pdf 22 http://www.ctara.iitb.ac.in/tdsl/pastreports/autumn2012/solarpvpumpingsurvey.pdf
13 point as well as the operational focal point of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), while the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) of the Ministry of Finance is the GEF political focal point.
36. The eight missions under India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) are the: National Solar Mission; National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency; National Mission on Sustainable Habitat; National Water Mission; National Mission for Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystems; National Mission for a Green India; National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture; and National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change. The NAPCC’s relevance relating to this project includes:
Achieving national economic growth objectives through a qualitative change in direction that enhances ecological sustainability, leading to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions; Devising efficient and cost-effective strategies for end-use demand-side management; Developing new and innovative forms of market, regulatory and voluntary mechanisms to promote sustainable development.
1.7 Assistance by UNDP in the Area of Environment and Energy
37. The India UN Development Action23 Framework (UNDAF) provides the objectives of the wider UN system’s assistance to India for the period 2013 – 2017, and is harmonised with the Twelfth Five Year Plan of the GoI (Government of India).
38. The India UNDAF “is a strategic framework document that sets out six outcomes which focus on achieving inclusive growth, improving food and nutrition security, promoting gender equality, ensuring access to quality basic services, strengthening decentralization and delivering sustainable development. All these outcomes are in line with the fundamental principles contained in the Approach Paper to the Twelfth Five Year Plan.” The UNDAF 2013 – 2017 also states “The critical requirement for inclusive growth is to generate sustainable livelihoods, which in turn requires synergistic action - building skills with accessible financial services including partnering with private sector initiatives.” The UNDAF 2013 – 2017 has two outcomes (out of six) that are highly relevant to this GEF-ACE project, namely inclusive growth and sustainable development. The Inclusive Growth Outcome includes “sustainable livelihoods” and “environmental sustainability”, and the Sustainable Development Outcome includes “clean energy for productive use”.
39. UNDP was an active partner in the development of the UNDAF and is also a lead agency for many of the thematic areas of interventions by the UN system in India under the UNDAF. The UNDAF states that the UN proposes to work in nine (9) States of India with the highest proportion of people living in poverty - Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. Among these, Odisha, Assam and Madhya Pradesh are targeted states in this project.
40. UNDP operations in India fall under the “Country Programme Action Plan” (CPAP) 2013 – 2017 agreed between the GOI and UNDP. Under the Sustainable Development Outcome of the CPAC 2013 - 2017, “UNDP’s objective in this area is to expand access to clean energy and help build the capacity of communities to manage natural resources and withstand climate change and disasters. Specifically, at the request of the Government and in consultation with partners, UNDP will intensify its support for initiatives that increase access to clean energy for productive uses in off-grid, underserved rural regions. UNDP will support decentralized electricity generation through renewables, particularly in off- grid areas. Under the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, UNDP will also support formulation of
23 “The ‘A’ in the acronym UNDAF now stands for “action” rather than “assistance” as in the past. This is a subtle, but important change, which reflects an evolving partnership between the UN and the Government of India. This emphasis on action is reflected in the commitment of the UN to joint work which will bring greater coherence and synergy to its work in India” – Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission of India, the UN nodal partner from the Government of India (GoI).
14 policy frameworks and help to address barriers to expanding and scaling up energy access in rural areas to strengthen livelihoods. Support will be provided to set up pilot demonstration projects that promote entrepreneur-based business and delivery models that can be further scaled up. UNDP will help to strengthen the capacities of local communities to deploy new technologies and of market-based service providers to adapt and maintain technologies.”
41. The Government of India, through its designated nodal department, the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) in the Ministry of Finance, has exercised the necessary national ownership and direction of UNDP program activities by approving and signing the Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) 2013- 2017 with UNDP. Specific mention is made in the CPAC 2013 – 2017 that nearly 40% of the estimated $260 million resource requirement is expected to be mobilized from UN Trust Funds, including the GEF.
2 BASELINE ANALYSIS – ENERGY ACCESS AND RURAL LIVELIHOODS IN THE TARGETED STATES
42. The proposed project targets three states: Odisha, Assam and Madhya Pradesh24. The state of Odisha is in eastern India, Assam is one of the north-eastern states, and Madhya Pradesh is a central state. Though situated in three different regions of India, and with varying geographic and socio-cultural profiles, the three states have a lot in common. On the Human Development Index and total poverty fronts, all three States belong to the bottom eight in India and are way below the national averages. Brief geographic and socio-economic profiles of the three states are provided below.
2.1 Geographic and socio-economic profile
2.1.1 Assam
43. Assam is spread over a geographical area of 78,438 square km accounting for 2.4 percent of India's total land area. Of this area, about 25 percent is classified as forest area and about 4 percent is under tea estates. Assam is also known for its abundant natural resources, perennial rivers, fertile lands and its long history. Assam has a significant oil and gas industry and the Brahmaputra valley is thought to still hold a large quantity of ‘yet-to-find’ oil25. Assam also has large quantities of low ash coal resources, limestone and dolomite deposits. Petroleum (crude oil) is the principal mineral produced in Assam. In spite of being resource-rich, Assam has remained one of the poorest states in India.
44. Most of the Assam’s population lives in the lush and verdant valleys of its two major river systems, with twenty-four districts in the Brahmaputra Valley and the three districts of the Barak Valley. Less densely populated are the two hill districts of Karbi-Anglong and the North Cachar Hills, set in the low-lying hills that separate the two river valleys.
45. With 32.91 million people, Assam accounts for 2.58% of the total population of India. Assam has 85.90% of its total population living in rural areas, which is higher than the national average of 68.90% as per the 2011 Census. The combined population of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the state is nearly 19.26 percent.
46. Assam is among top five states with the highest percentage of its population living below the poverty line. According to the Tendulkar Committee Report, the Poverty Headcount Ratio in Assam is 34.4%. The rural poverty rate is 36.4% and urban poverty rate is 21.8%. Assam’s economy continues to be
24 With scope for the project to potentially be extended to Jharkhand and Meghalaya 25 Directorate General of Hydrocarbons, under Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Govt. of India, see http://www.dghindia.org/3.aspx
15 predominantly an agrarian economy with more than 52% of the total labour force engaged in agriculture and allied activities.
Figure 1: District map of Assam
2.1.2 Odisha
47. Odisha has a land area of 155,707 square km (4.74 percent of India’s landmass) and a population of 36.8 million people (3.47% of India’s population). Administratively the state is divided into 30 districts. The extensive ranges of hilly forests, several lofty peaks, rolling highlands, a long stretch of coastline, an extensive riverine system, brackish waters, coastal mangroves, and coastal plains together have endowed the state with a wide range of ecological habitats for a diverse and broad spectrum of flora and fauna.
48. About 23 percent of Odisha’s population comprises the indigenous tribal population, mostly concentrated in the north-western and south-western districts of the state with traditional means of livelihoods. The tribal population has a heavy dependence on forests for their livelihood. The north- western districts (Sundargarh, Keonjhar, and Mayurbhanj) account for 35.3 percent of Odisha’s tribal population and the south-western districts (Koraput, Kalahandi, Malkangiri, Nawrangpur, Nuapada, Rayagada, Kandhamal, Boudh, Balangir and Saharanpur) account for another 39.1 percent. The forces of modernization have largely bypassed them and marginalized them in economic terms, threatening their livelihoods security. The population belonging to Scheduled Castes constitutes a little more than 16 percent of the state’s population. Unlike the tribal population, they are mostly concentrated in the coastal districts, namely Balasore, Bhadrak, Cuttack, Jajpur, Jagatsinghpur, Kendrapara, Khurda, Ganjam, Nayagarh and Puri, which together account for 52.8 percent of the state’s Scheduled Caste (SC) population.
16 49. On the basis of physical features and agro-climatic conditions, it is possible to divide Odisha into four zones:(i) Northern Plateau; (ii) Central Table Land (iii) Eastern Ghats and (iv) Coastal Plains. Odisha receives about 1500 mm (60 inches) of rainfall normally, with a variability of 25–30 percent. About 77 percent of the rainfall comes from the southwest monsoon (June to September). However, the south western districts of Kalahandi, Balangir, and Koraput fall in the rain shadow zone of the southwest monsoon and hence receive highly erratic rainfall.
Figure 2: District Map of Odisha
2.1.3 Madhya Pradesh
50. Madhya Pradesh (MP), commonly known as the Heart of India has its capital in Bhopal. In the year 2000, the eastern part of Madhya Pradesh was formed into the separate state of Chhattisgarh. Madhya Pradesh with a geographical spread of 308,140 square km is the second largest state in the country by area and constitutes more than 9% of the total geographical area of India. The forest cover of Madhya Pradesh constitutes 30.73% of its geographical area. Madhya Pradesh has 50 districts consisting of 313 blocks and 55,393 villages. Madhya Pradesh is one of the foremost Indian States to implement the three tiers Panchayat Raj System in the country and has 50 Zila (District) Panchayats, 313 Janpad (Blocks) Panchayats and 23,040 village panchayats having their own elected representatives with a 50% reservation for women.
51. The total population of Madhya Pradesh is 72.59 million, of which 52.5 million live in rural areas. Madhya Pradesh also has one of the largest tribal populations with 18 districts being predominantly tribal districts. The share of scheduled tribes (ST) and the scheduled castes (SC) is 20.27% and 15.17% respectively.
52. The BPL (Below Poverty Line) survey of 2002-03 with updated figures to October 2010 highlight that 4.65 million (47.4 percent) households in rural Madhya Pradesh are living below the poverty line. Madhya Pradesh accounts for nearly 11 percent of the total rural population of India. Tribal households are the poorest among the most deprived social groups in India.
17 Figure 3: District Map of Madhya Pradesh
Error! Reference source not found. below outlines the similarities and differences among the three states on various basic geographic and socio-economic aspects as relevant to energy access and rural livelihoods activities.
Table 2: Status of three states on key development parameters
Madhya Parameter National Assam Odisha Pradesh Basic indicators – geographic and demographic Population (in millions) 1,210 31.16 72.59 41.94 Population Rank (29 States)26 14 6 11 Population density (persons per square km) 382 397 235 269 Number of districts 672 27 51 30 Number of inhabited villages 593,731 26,395 52,117 47,529 Geographical area (square km) 3,287,590 78,438 308,252 155,707 Socio-economic indicators Income per capita (INR per capita real Net State 35,993 21,406 22,264 23,875 Domestic Product at 2004-05 prices) Human Development Index (HDI) 0.467 0.444 0.375 0.362 HDI rank in India (of 23 recorded States) 16 20 22 Poverty (% below poverty line) 21.92 31.98 31.65 32.59 Poverty rank (of 29 States) 22 21 23
26 Ranking of states before the division of Andhra Pradesh
18 Madhya Parameter National Assam Odisha Pradesh Rural Unemployment rate (Nos. Per 1000 16 39 7 30 population) % rural population below the poverty line 26% 34% 36% 36% Share of agriculture in state economy 28% 25% 18% % of villages electrified 94.4% 96.1% 97.8 % 81.9 % % of rural households with electricity used as the 28% 35% 58% primary source of lighting energy % of rural households with modern fuels (LPG / PNG/biogas / solar) as the primary source of 12% 2% 4% 2% cooking energy
53. The three States also have middling to low shares in the value of output in the primary sector. The Error! Reference source not found. below gives a comparative picture of the value of output.
Table 3: Share of the states in national output in various sectors27
As % of total value for India Assam Madhya Pradesh Odisha Value of total agricultural output 2.35% 5.50% 2.95% Value of total forestry output 1.53% 5.58% 3.85% Value of total livestock output 1.01% 4.59% 2.24% Vale of total egg output 1.19% 1.20% 4.36% Value of total milk output 0.91% 5.30% 1.21% Value of total fish output 4.09% 0.87% 4.12% Value of total inland fish output 6.94% 1.50% 4.52%
2.2 Livelihood activities in the three states
2.2.1 Assam
Primary Sector livelihoods – agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries
54. Agriculture and its allied activities play an important role in the socio-economic development of Assam, as this sector is the major contributor to Assam‘s economy, as well as providing livelihoods for a significant proportion of the population of the State. However, about 23% of the net sown area is either flood or drought prone and more than 83 percent of the farmer families are small and marginal farmers.
55. Animal Husbandry sector has a significant impact on employment generation in Assam and plays a vital role in income generation of both the rural and semi-urban economy. The fisheries sector has a higher growth rate than other agriculture and allied sectors. Besides swamps and low lying areas, the two major rivers and their tributaries have a high growth potential for scientific fish farming/ fishing and could play a pivotal role in the socio-economic development and employment generation in Assam. There are about 3,910 sq. km of water area in Assam in the form of rivers, ponds and tanks.
27 Compiled from data provided by Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India
19 56. Fish farming in Assam to date in natural water bodies has been mostly traditional capture fishery only. The scientific fish farming is practiced generally in individual and community tanks. Recently, emphasis has been given for scientific fish farming in ponds and community tank through awareness, training, Government support and subsequent bank linkages. But Assam is yet to reach self-sufficiency in fish production in respect of economic as well as minimum nutritional requirement of 11 kg/person/year, considering that 90% of Assam’s population eat fish. The gap is partially maintained by imported fish from other States.
Production Sector livelihoods – handloom and silk
57. Handloom Weaving is a way of life and intensely linked with Assamese culture and heritage. The Handloom Industry of Assam is known for its rich tradition of making handloom and handicraft products. It also plays a very important role in the socio-economic development of Assam. Assam has more than 1.3 million looms out of the total 2.8 million looms in the country. In spite of being intensely connected with the culture of the State, the Handloom Industry has not flourished in the commercial sphere. At present, about 280,000 looms are being utilized for commercial weaving in the true sense. About 570,000 looms run semi-commercially and provide subsidiary income. The rest are domestic looms and are run to meet domestic requirements.
58. Traditionally, sericulture is a major cottage industry in the State. Non-mulberry silk in general and muga silk in particular has been closely associated with the rituals and traditions of Assam and thus, silk production and its uses has been an important household activity in Assam over the years. Rearing of eri, muga and mulberry silk worms plays an important role in the economic development of a large section of the rural population of Assam. Sericulture is practiced in more than 10,532 villages and provides employment to 260,000 families. Assam accounts for the highest production of muga and eri silk in India. Further Assam has the near monopoly in the world in the production of muga, the “golden silk” as about 99% of the muga silk is produced in Assam. Assam has also achieved Geographical Indication for muga Thread. It is also noteworthy that more than 65% of the people obtaining their livelihood from sericulture in Assam are women.
Livelihoods support initiatives in Assam
59. The Assam State Rural Livelihoods Mission (ASRLM) will anchor the planning and implementation of rural livelihoods activities in the State. Under the broad framework of the National Rural Livelihoods Mission, the ASRLM will promote self-help groups (SHGs) of women and their federations. This community institutional structure will anchor the livelihoods promotion activities in Assam.
60. Non-governmental organizations such as Action North East Network (ANT), Rural Volunteers Centre, Rashtriya Gramin Vikas Nidhi and a number of organizations supported by the Khadi and Village Industries Commission are also active in the livelihoods development sphere in rural Assam.
61. As per the figures for year 2012 from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), there are 276,565 self-help groups in Assam. These groups are reported to have collective savings of close to INR 950 million. Of these, 28,000 SHGs are reported to have obtained bank loans through the NABARD supported SHG-Bank linkage programme, to the tune of INR 1.87 billion.
Challenges
62. The promotion of rural livelihoods in Assam faces significant challenges on two counts. First, the topography of Assam is such that, large tracts of land are prone to annual flooding, leading to disruptions in normal occupation cycles. Several parts of Assam are also prone to violence, led by separatist or sub-national identity demands for independence/autonomy.
2.2.2 Madhya Pradesh
Primary sector Livelihoods: agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, and bamboo
20 63. Madhya Pradesh presents the co-existence of a large subsistence agriculture sector along with a small but modern industrial sector. The agriculture sector contributes 33 percent of the Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP). In Madhya Pradesh 71% of the population in rural areas is employed in agriculture. Interestingly, 20.3 percent of the urban population is also engaged in agriculture and related activities. The share of marginal and small farmers in the total landholding area and the number of holdings in Madhya Pradesh increased from 9.6% in 1970-71 to 21.5% in 1995-96, an increase of 75% in terms of land under small and marginal farmers.
64. Fisheries resources in MP include the following: (i) total inland water bodies spanning 287,000 hectare (ha); (ii) Rivers and canals extending over 17,088 km; (iii) 227,000 ha of reservoirs and (iv) Tanks and ponds comprising over 60,000 ha. Madhya Pradesh has a total of 38 Fish Farmer Development Agencies, covering a fish production area of 92,000 ha of water bodies. More than 112,000 fish farmers are attached to these agencies. Average productivity reported is about 1,300 kg of fish per hectare per year. The reported total production of fish in 2012-13 was 8.5 million tonnes.
65. Madhya Pradesh accounts for 1.20% of the total value of egg production in India. Its estimated poultry population, at 7.3 million birds, accounts for 1.14% of the total poultry population in India.
66. Madhya Pradesh has 20.3% of the area and 12% of the growing stock of bamboo in India. The production of bamboo in Madhya Pradesh is close to 400,000 tonne/year.
Other livelihoods
67. It is estimated that only 6% of the population of Madhya Pradesh are engaged in the organized sector. The majority of workers (94%), including agricultural labour, construction labour and workers in traditional industries like leather-tanning, forestry, fishing, beedi-rolling, household workers and village artisans are in the unorganised sector.
68. About 400,000 families are dependent on handlooms production. 18 clusters of handloom weavers spread over 13 districts of Madhya Pradesh account for the production. Under the Ambedkar Hastashilp Vikas Yojana of the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, 67 clusters of handicrafts production have been identified and supported.
Livelihoods support initiatives in Madhya Pradesh
69. The Madhya Pradesh Rural Livelihoods Project was an externally aided livelihoods project that ran from 2004 to 2012 in selected parts of Madhya Pradesh. In several other districts, the District Poverty Initiative Programme (DPIP), also an externally aided project, was implemented. DPIP has been implemented since 2001 in 53 blocks of 15 districts.
70. The Madhya Pradesh Rajya Aajeevika Forum (MPRAF) implements the National Rural Livelihoods Mission activities in the State. MPRAF and DPIP together will cover 99 blocks in 25 districts in an intensive manner, while the remaining 214 blocks in 25 districts will be taken up in a non-intensive manner.
71. As per the figures for year 2012 from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), there are 1.6 million self-help groups in Madhya Pradesh. These groups are reported to have collective savings of close to INR 1.12 billion. Of these, 8,000 SHGs are reported to have obtained bank loans through the NABARD supported SHG-Bank linkage programme, to the tune of INR 950 million.
Challenges
72. Eight of the 50 districts in Madhya Pradesh are considered to be left-wing extremism affected, leading to issues of law and order and internal security. These are among the most backward districts in Madhya Pradesh, and generally comprise those districts with a substantial forest cover. While the reported rate of rural unemployment is very low for Madhya Pradesh, in actual terms productive
21 engagement of the population is a serious challenge, with very high rates of under-employment, especially in the primary sector.
2.2.3 Odisha
73. The specific agro-ecological conditions of Odisha define the broad contours of livelihoods options for its people. These conditions, however, are not static and are liable to change according to the patterns of human intervention and the modes of utilization of natural resources. As a result, the natural conditions of production and livelihoods security are coming under increasing threat due to deforestation and soil erosion, floods, water logging and soil salinity, as well as vulnerability to cyclonic storms.
74. The coastal region of Odisha presents a virtual mono-cultural landscape and the predominant crop, paddy (rice), is grown in two-crop combinations with pulses, oilseeds, or jute. Paddy is also the most important crop in highland Odisha and is widely cultivated in river valleys. A large number of miscellaneous crops such as coarse millets, pulses, oilseeds, jute, and sugarcane are also grown.
Primary sector livelihoods
75. The agriculture sector contributes only about 26 percent of the GSDP, with more than 70% population dependence resulting in low per capita income in the farm sector. The average size of agriculture holdings in Odisha is 1.25 ha. Small and marginal farmers constitute about 83% of the farming community. Agriculture in Odisha is characterized by low productivity on account of various factors. These factors include problematic soil (acidic, saline and waterlogged), lack of assured irrigation, low seed replacement rate, low level of fertilizer use, low level of mechanization etc. The serious gaps in yield potential and the technology transfer provide an opportunity to Odisha to substantially increase its production and productivity.
Livestock
76. 80% of the rural households own livestock of one species or the other and this livestock earns supplementary income for the family. The livestock sector contributes 7.27% of Odisha’s net domestic product. The predominant farming system in Odisha is the mixed crop-livestock farming system and over 90 percent of farms of all categories conform to this farming system. During 2008-09, Odisha’s annual milk production was 1.6 million tonnes, and egg production was 1.44 billion. The annual production of chicken meat is about 70,000 tonnes and the per capita availability is 1.8 kg. As per the Livestock Census 2003, Odisha had 14.3 million cattle and 1.4 million buffaloes. The State also has sizeable number of small animals i.e., 5.97 million goats, 1.75 million sheep, and 0.6 million pigs.
Fisheries
77. Odisha has both marine and inland fisheries, providing livelihoods to a substantial number of households. Some key fisheries related data for Odisha are as follows:
o Length of coastline – 480 km o Number of fishing villages – 813 o Families dependent of marine fishing – 114,238 o Total inland water bodies – 980,000 ha o Rivers and canals – 4500 km o Reservoirs – 256,000 ha o Tanks and ponds – 114,000 ha o Flood plain lakes – 180,000 ha
22 o Brackish water – 430,000 ha
78. During 2008-09, the total annual fish production of the State was 374,822 tonnes (131,000 tonnes marine and 244,000 tonnes inland). There are around 1 million fishermen in Odisha, of whom 450,000 are marine fishermen and the rest are inland fishermen.
Forestry
79. The Forest Survey of India assessment reveals that the actual forest cover in Odisha (very dense forest, moderately dense forest, open forest, and mangrove forest) is 48,366 sq. km, which is 31.06% of the total land area in Odisha. The actual tree cover is 6381 sq. km, which is 4.10% of the total land area in Odisha. Odisha is among the first States in India to ensure a policy on Non-Timber Forest Produce (NTFP) collection and marketing, recognizing the livelihoods implication on NTFP collectors. The most important forest products are kendu leaves, bamboo and sal seeds. About 22% of Odisha's population belongs to Scheduled Tribes, more than two-thirds of whom are dependent on forests for their livelihoods.
Other livelihoods
80. The share of the informal sector in total non-agricultural employment is estimated to be around 71%. Odisha has a dominance of artisan-based enterprises in the industrial sector. The handloom industry provides livelihoods to about 200,000 households. Handicrafts and sericulture are two other major activities in the non-farm sector.
Livelihoods support initiatives in Odisha
81. For improving livelihoods of tribal and other vulnerable communities, several schemes are being implemented in Odisha with the active support from a number of external donors. These schemes include the Odisha Tribal Empowerment and Livelihood Programme (OTELP), Western Orissa Rural Livelihood Programme (WORLP), Jeevika and Orissa Fund for Development Initiative (OFFDI). Other initiatives include, Targeted Rural Initiative for Poverty Termination and Infrastructure (TRIPTI), improvement of traditional water bodies and tanks through community participation, and improving rural growth and productivity opportunities for the poor in Odisha. The Odisha Livelihoods Mission implements the National Rural Livelihoods Mission in the State.
82. As per the figures for year 2012 from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), there are 540,000 self-help groups (SHGs) in Odisha. These groups are reported to have collective savings of close to INR 3.3 billion. Of these, 49,000 SHGs are reported to have obtained bank loans through the NABARD supported SHG-Bank linkage programme, to the tune of INR 5 billon.
Challenges
83. Fifteen out of the thirty districts in Odisha are identified as left-wing extremism affected. The high proportion of Scheduled Tribe population, along with the high dependence on forest resources poses a significant challenge to livelihoods development interventions in Odisha.
2.2.4 Energy access context in the three states
84. Concerns regarding access to energy across all the three states are evident through the indicators in Error! Reference source not found. above which show a low percentage of households using “modern” fuels such as electricity and LPG - for lighting and cooking respectively. As in the case of the national level figures, village electrification has gathered considerable momentum, yet progress is very slow in terms of the actual electrification of individual rural households. It should be noted that a village is considered to be electrified if 10% of all households of the village have an electricity connection and if electricity is provided to public places like schools, panchayat offices, community centres, health
23 centres and dispensaries. Therefore, an “electrified” village can still have 90% of households not connected to the electricity supply.
85. In addition, even when electricity connections are available and taken up, discussions during the project formulation field visits reveal that electricity supply is generally unreliable with power being available for just 4-8 hours a day, and voltage fluctuations are also large and frequent.
86. It is also important to note that un-electrified villages tend to be located in clusters around remote, hilly or forested areas. For instance, in Assam there are around 2,200 un-electrified villages categorised as remote villages of which 818 are in Karbi-Anglong district, 311 in Dhemaji and 237 in NC Hills. These are also typically areas with low level of human development, and a high prevalence of tribal populations.
87. Electricity tariffs are typically low and BPL (Below Poverty Line) families do not need to pay connection charges. For households with metered connections, the tariffs per kWh are around INR28 1.40 in Odisha, INR 2.35 in Assam and INR 3 in Madhya Pradesh. Such electricity tariffs are well below real electricity supply (generation, transmission and distribution) costs. The low tariffs that are set below cost are a major reason for the unreliable and poor voltage of most rural electricity supply in India.
88. RGGVY is a national program where Rural Electrification Corporation (REC) is a nodal agency. RGGVY focuses of establishing infrastructure and improving access to electricity in rural and remote locations. RGGVY is being implemented in all the three states. An evaluation of the RGGVY implementation conducted in 2012 in Assam29 and 2013 in Madhya Pradesh30 low hours of electricity availability (8-14 hours of electricity per day, availability during peak hours is just 2- 4 hours); low benefits reported on income and employment as compared to education, security and overall comfort. In case of Madhya Pradesh, overloading resulting in burning of transformers points to poor user-orientation in assessment of actual and potential demand. In Odisha, tardy progress of the RGGVY is traced to the use of small contractors by the central public sector organisations responsible for RGGVY implementation in the state.
89. National Biogas and Manure Management Programme (NBMMP) programme targets implementation of family type biogas plants and supports (a) biogas based distributed/grid power generation; (b) demonstration of integrated technology-package in entrepreneurial mode for medium size (200 to 100 m3 per day) biogas plants for generation, purification/enrichment, bottling and piped distribution of biogas; and (c) setting up plants having capacity of 1,000 m3. Its major activities are specifically on the diversification of energy access to clean and improved technologies in thermal applications (such as cooking as well as mechanical energy and power applications) through the use of biogas. For 2013- 14, the NBMMP has set a target of 106,000 biogas plants across the country with target figures of 6,000, 10,000 and 6,500 for Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha respectively31.
2.3 Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods (RETPRLs)
90. Through various stakeholder consultations (workshops, one to one meetings and field visits), the most promising rural livelihoods sectors that emerged for this India GEF ACE project were poultry, dairy, horticulture, fisheries and khadi and village industries. The renewable energy technology packages that are most relevant for these sectors are briefly described in the following sections. A detailed description of the technology packages is provided in Annexure E.
28 60 INR = 1 USD at 24 June 2014 29 http://www.recindia.nic.in/download/IRADe_Assam.pdf 30 http://www.rggvy.gov.in/rggvy/rggvyportal/evaluation/Tetratech_MP.pdf 31 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=103386
24 2.3.1 Poultry
91. Poultry is one of the fastest growing segments of the agricultural sector in India. Increasing at a rate of 8-12% annually. India is the 3rd largest global producer of eggs and the 4th largest global producer of broiler chickens. Poultry provides a source of livelihood to more than 3 million families, among which there is a high concentration of landless, marginal and small farmers. The number of families engaged in poultry is expected to reach 5 million by 202532.
92. In the market oriented small poultry farm model, there are centralised large layer farms and hatcheries, which supply day old chicks to families for rearing in the backyard farms. Each family usually has 300- 800 birds, which they rear for 35-40 days and then sell to the market. The families (300-500 in numbers) are organized in the form of cooperatives or producer companies.
93. The most promising renewable energy interventions for the poultry sector are:
i. Solar PV based lighting and ventilation of back-yard poultry farms:
The feeding habits of birds are sensitive to light and sufficient light is required for proper feeding and growth of the birds. Also the birds became restless when the surrounding temperature goes above 35-38°C. In that case ventilation is required. Two applications based on solar PV can be possible – solar lanterns for lighting and solar power packs for lighting and ventilation. The cost and specification of these systems are provided in Table 4:
Table 4: Details of solar lighting solution for back-yard poultry farm
Solar lantern Solar power pack Capacity range (Wp) 5 – 10 12 – 24 Details LED or CFL light, small battery 2 - 4 LED lights and/or 1 DC fan, Cost per system (INR) 2,200 – 2,700 5,400 – 10,800
ii. Biogas plant based on poultry litter for captive use in layer farms and hatcheries33:
Poultry litter can be utilised in a biogas plant for generating electricity for captive use in the farm. The specification and cost details for an appropriate biogas plant for a 10,000 bird layer farm are provided in Table 5.
Table 5: Details of biogas plant for layer poultry farms
Number of birds 10,000 Poultry litter produced (kg/day) 1,000 Cost of constructing a 200 m3 digester (INR) 3,400,000 Cost of a 30 kVA engine (INR) 370,000 Biogas yield (m3/kg of litter) 0.1 to 0.15 m3/kg of litter Total cost of biogas plant with engine (INR) 3,770,000 Electricity that can be produced (kWh/day) 300 – 350
32 Presentation by Anish Kumar, Poultry, Available online at: http://sapplpp.org/files-repository/information- hub/presentations/rural-backyard-poultry-development, Last accessed on 14th may 2014 33 Layer farms are where chickens are used to produce eggs, while hatcheries are where fertilized eggs are hatched and the subsequent day old chicks are then sold to either broiler or layer farms.
25 iii. Energy generation from biomass waste from backyard poultry farms:
Sawdust or rice husks are used as a bedding layer in the backyard broiler farms, which are replaced with a fresh bedding layer every rearing cycle (40-45 day cycle). The used sawdust or rice husk is currently either dumped or burnt. This biomass, which is being wasted, can instead be collected from these farms and converted into briquettes, which can then be used or sold as a thermal fuel. The details related to the quantity of biomass waste, capacity of briquetting machine and its cost are provided in Table 6.
Table 6: Details on briquetting of biomass waste from poultry farms
Average quantity of biomass used per rearing cycle per farm (kg) 400 No of rearing cycles in a year 5 No of backyard farms in a cluster 300 – 500 Approximate collection of biomass waste (ton/year) 600 – 800 Capacity of the briquetting machine required (kg/h) 400 – 600 (Assuming 5-6 hours of operation per day for 250 days/year) Cost of briquetting machine (INR) 100,000 – 120,000 Selling price of briquettes (INR/kg) 4 – 6
2.3.2 Dairy
94. The dairy sector contributes about 5.3% of India’s agricultural GDP. India is the world's largest milk producer with an annual output of 121.8 million tonnes in 2011-12 - about 13% of the world’s total milk production. As per the estimates in 2004, the dairy sector is the major source of income for an estimated 27.6 million people. Among these, 65 to 70 percent are small, marginal farmers and land-less labourers. The dairy sector also supports around 10 million members / farmers through 100,000 cooperative societies in India. The cooperative dairy model is the prevalent dairy model used in India. The milk produced by individual farmers is collected at village-level milk collection centres, twice a day. Milk collected from several milk collection centres is transported to a milk chilling centre and the chilled milk is then transported to the central milk processing unit.
95. The most promising renewable energy interventions for the dairy sector are:
i. Solar PV power pack for lighting and powering small equipment at milk collection centres:
Lighting is required during the collection, weighing and testing of milk at the milk collection centres, which occurs during morning and evening hours. Also, at some of these collection centres, electronic weighing and testing equipment are being used which require power. Solar PV power packs can be used for lighting and powering such equipment or for lighting only where manual equipment is being used. Details regarding the specification of a solar power pack and its cost are provided in Table 7.
Table 7: Details of solar power pack for milk collection centres
Solar power pack only for Solar power pack for lighting and lighting powering equipment Capacity (Wp) 12 – 24 100 2 - 4 LED lights, powering testing and/or Details 2 - 4 LED lights weighing machines Cost (INR) 5,400 – 10,800 22,000 – 28,000
26 ii. Solar PV power for milk chilling at milk collection centre:
Milk from all the collection centres has to be transported to the chilling centres twice daily. A thermal battery concept based chiller has been developed and is now being used at a few collection centres. This thermal battery enables the cool storage of the milk for 1-2 days at the collection centres itself and thus reduces transportation costs and expands the reach of the milk collection centres. The charging of the thermal batteries requires electricity and renewable energy based chillers have not yet been tested. However, it is planned to run such chillers with solar PV, and most likely in the next few months there would be some useful operational experience on this. The cost and specification details of these milk chilling systems are given in Table 8.
Table 8: Details of milk chiller for milk collection centres
Chilling capacity (litres per day) 1,000 Electricity consumption per day (kWh) 12 Cost in INR (chiller including thermal battery) 580,000 Cost in INR (Solar PV panels of 3 kWe capacity) 300,000
iii. Biogas plant based on cattle dung for captive use in dairy farms:
In small dairy farms having 50-200 cattle, dung can be utilised in a biogas plant for generating electricity for captive uses. The specification and cost details for an appropriate biogas plant for a 100 cattle farm is provided in Table 9.
Table 9: Details of biogas plant for dairy farms
Number of cattle 100 Cattle dung produced (kg/day) 1,500 Cost of constructing a 85 m3 digester (INR) 1,450,000 Cost of a 30 kVA engine (INR) 370,000 Biogas yield (m3/kg of dung) 0.05 m3/kg of dung Total cost of biogas plant with engine (INR) 1,820,000 Electricity that can be produced (kWh/day) 150 2.3.3 Horticulture
96. Horticulture accounts for about 30% of India’s agricultural GDP from 13.08% of cropped area. I Horticulture also provide about 37% of India’s total exports of agricultural commodities. Presently, India is the 2nd largest producer of fruits and vegetables in the world. India produces nearly 11% of all the world’s vegetables and 15% of all fruits. Annual average growth rate of Indian Horticulture was about 5% in the 11th five-year plan period (2007-12). In recent years, horticulture producer companies are being promoted which are collectives of horticulture farmers and provide technical services and inputs to farmers or pooling produce for collective marketing.
97. The most promising renewable energy interventions for the horticulture sector are:
i. Solar Pumps
Irrigation is a critical requirement for horticulture and due to poor access to electricity, or the poor reliability of electricity if it is available, the farmers have to depend on diesel pumps. Experience with solar pumps has been quite successful in India. A wide range of solar pumps is available ranging from micro pumps of few hundred Watts capacity to relatively larger pumps of a few kW capacities. The cost and specification of such solar pumps are provided in Table 10, as below:
27 Table 10: Details of solar pumps
Micro solar pumps Larger solar pumps Capacity 100 W 3 hp Capacity of solar PV module (Wp) 200 2,700 – 3,000 60,000 - 150,000 Discharge (litre per day) 2,500 (head: 20 - 50 m) Cost (INR) 50,000 510,000 - 570,000
ii. Solar PV based small cold rooms
In recent years, small farm level cold rooms have been developed which can store local agricultural produce for 6 - 14 days. These small cold rooms are helping the farmers in aggregating their produce and selling it based on the optimum price trend in the market over a 6 -14 day period. Trials on integrating these cold rooms with solar PV are being undertaken, and this possibility can be explored more comprehensively and systematically during implementation of this India GEF ACE project. The technical features and cost of the local cold rooms are provided in Table 11, as below:
Table 11: Details of farm level solar cold rooms
Model – I Model – II Model – III Capacity (tonnes of produce) 2 5 10 Refrigeration capacity of Air-conditioner 2 3 4 (tonnes of refrigeration) Rating of diesel generator (in kVA) 2.8 5 5 Electricity consumption (running: 15 - 16 16 - 17 50 80 h/day) (in kWh/day) Total costs (INR)* 250,000 790,000 1,170,000 *The cost also includes the cost of diesel generators (that are provided for backup), insurance and civil construction costs.
iii. Solar dryers for drying spices, vegetables and fruits
Solar drying is a promising option for drying and preserving spices, vegetables and fruits to increase their storage life. The dried produce can also fetch better returns from the market. Details on some of the commonly used solar dryers are provided in Table 12, as below:
Table 12: Details of solar dryers for horticulture sector Natural convection Solar air heaters with Dryer Type Green house dryer based solar conduction drying chambers dryer Capacity (kg) 300, 600 and 1000 70 to 1000 10 to 100 700,000 500,000 25,000 Cost (in INR) (for 300 kg dryer) (for 100 kg dryer) (for 10 kg dryer)
2.3.4 Fisheries
98. India is the third largest producer of fish in the world and second in inland fish production. Constituting about 4.4% of the global fish production, the sector contributes to 4.7% of the agricultural GDP. The
28 total fish production of 6.57 million metric tonnes presently has a nearly 55% contribution from the inland fisheries sector.
99. The most promising renewable energy technology applications for the fisheries sector are:
i. Solar aeration
Aeration is required to maintain a high enough dissolved oxygen level, which is critical for fish productivity in the lake/pond. Various types of aerators such as paddle type surface aerators or diffuser type sub-surface aerators are being used. There are some successful examples of operating these aerators on solar power. The key features of a paddle type aerator developed by the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati that has been demonstrated in Assam, are provided in Table 13, as below:
Table 13: Details on solar aeration
Power rating of the motor (hp) 1 Hours of operation (hour per day) 4 - 5 Cost of aerator (INR) 60,000 – 65,000 Capacity of SPV module required 1 – 1.2 kWp
ii. Solar fish dryers
Fish drying is done to preserve fish for later use. It is mostly done for marine fishes. Solar dryers have been tried for fish drying at several locations across the country. However, different varieties of fish have different drying requirements viz. drying time, drying rate, etc. and there is a varying mix of different fish species in the catch caught daily by fishermen. Designing an appropriate solar dryer with this flexibility remains a challenge. Details of existing solar fish dryers are provided in Table 14, as below:
Table 14: Details on solar fish dryer
Dryer type Solar air heaters with drying chamber Capacity range (kg) 70 – 1,000 Cost (INR) 500,000 (for a 100 kg dryer)
2.3.5 Khadi and village industries (KVIC)
100. The term Khadi is used for hand-spun and hand-woven fabric. A significant part of the rural population in the three focus states is dependent on garment making and other small village industries such as processing of minor forest produce, oil mills, spice processing, etc. Potential renewable energy technology applications for this sector can be:
i. Solar lights for lighting of artisan’s houses
The artisan’s family at their house usually does the artisanal work. Insufficient lighting due to poor access to electricity during morning and evening hours is affecting their work. Providing them with solar lanterns or solar home lights will help in increasing their productivity.
29 The cost and specification of these systems are provided in Table 15, as below:
Table 15: Details of solar lighting solution for artisan's houses
Solar lantern Solar home light system Capacity range (Wp) 5 – 10 12 – 24 Details LED or CFL light, small battery 2 - 4 LED lights and/or 1 DC fan Cost per system (INR) 2,200 – 2,700 5,400 – 10,800
ii. Solar PV based power for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers
One of the models being implemented by Khadi and Village Industry Commission (KVIC), are the common facility centres developed in the artisan clusters to provide them with a common work shed and equipment for mechanised and specialised work. Poor access to power is affecting the usability of these centres. Based on the requirement of typical common facility centres, the capacity and cost for 3 suitable solar PV systems are provided in Table 16 below:
Table 16: Details of solar power pack for common facility centers
Capacity of solar PV (kWp) 2 3 5 (With battery bank) Cost (INR) (as per MNRE 380,000 570,000 950,000 benchmark cost)
iii. Biomass gasifiers based on bamboo waste for power generation for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers of bamboo clusters
Bamboo and cane are used for manufacturing furniture and various decorative and utility items. Large amounts of bamboo waste are generated in the process, which can be utilised for power generation and powering the common facility centre. The technical details and cost of a typical gasification system are provided in Table 17, as below:
Table 17: Details of gasification system for power generation
Capacity of the gasifier (kWe)34 10 Raw material (bamboo waste) input (kg/hour) 16 - 18
34 A large number of small sized biomass gasifiers of 10-20 kWe capacity installed in remote rural areas have faced sustainability challenges primarily due to non-availability of skilled manpower for operation and maintenance, problems in ensuring year-long availability of processed dry biomass and problems in the timely collection of revenue. Despite these past experiences, small power biomass gasifiers are being proposed for bamboo clusters as the availability of processed biomass (in this case bamboo waste from bamboo processing) is assured and the systems are to be used for the electrification of common facility centres, which are expected to have some technical staff for the operation and maintenance of the processing machines. The same technical personnel can potentially be utilized for the operation and maintenance of the biomass power gasifiers. However, as the situation may differ from one cluster to another, feasibility of small power biomass gasifiers for each cluster needs to be ascertained before implementation.
30 Cost of the gasification system (INR) 1,000,000
iv. Solar charkha,35 based on solar PV, for artisans or the common facility centre
The traditional charkha is manually operated. Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization (MGIRIR) has converted manually operated charkha into solar operated charkha by incorporating a specially designed 12 volt PMDC (permanent magnet direct current) motor and pulleys which can be directly mounted on the charkha. The specifications and costs of solar charkha is given in Table 18.
Table 18: Details of Solar Charkha
Solar PV Motor Drive Battery Production Cost (INR) capacity 8 Spindle 60 Wp 12 V DC, 30 W 12 V, 26 A-h 1 kg/day 30,000 charkha 24 Spindle 200 Wp NA NA 3 kg/day 60,000 charkha
v. Solar powered loom based on solar PV, for artisans and common facility centre
A loom is a device used to weave cloth. Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization (MGIRIR) has developed a solar powered loom. The specifications and costs of solar powered loom is given in Table 19.
Table 19: Details of Solar Powered Loom
Solar PV Production capacity Cost Solar powered 160 Wp 15 meter fabric/day INR 150,000 loom
2.3.6 Biomass fuel based informal industries/ small business
101. There are a range of unorganised small industries/businesses operating in rural areas with thermal energy demands, including commercial cooking, arecanut (betel nut) boiling and drying, jaggery36 and khova37 production, rubber-band vulcanizing, ayurvedic medicine production, silk reeling, textile bleaching and drying, cashew processing and the making of snacks. Most of these units burn biomass for their thermal energy requirement. Biomass cook-stoves, which burn biomass fuel more efficiently and with reduced emissions, can be applied in several of these units. The details of some of the commonly used cook-stoves are provided in Table 20 as below:
35 Charkha or spinning wheel is a device for spinning thread or yarn from natural or synthetic fibres 36 Jaggery (also transliterated as jaggeree) is a traditional uncentrifuged sugar consumed in Asia and Africa. It is a concentrated product of date, cane juice, or palm sap (see palm sugar) without separation of the molasses and crystals, and can vary from golden brown to dark brown in colour 37 Dried whole milk or milk thickened by heating
31 Table 20: Details of biomass cook-stoves
Cost of Fuel Type of Other the Fuel consumption stove specifications stove (kg/h) (INR) (1m length and Tava Firewood 4 – 5 24,500 0.7m diameter) Firewood 2.5 9,000 Multiuse Stove diameter Briquette 1 – 1.5 11,000 Stove of 0.3m Charcoal 0.7 10,250 Cashew shells, wood Loose Stove diameter shavings, tamarind bio-fuel 4 – 5 18,000 of 0.7m shells, coconut stove shells, etc.
32 2.4 Promising clusters for pilot / demonstration projects
102. During the course of project design, some key livelihood sector clusters were identified that could be taken up for the implementation of RETPRLs during the demonstration phase of the project. These clusters have been identified in consultations with the relevant government agencies and NGOs, and most of these clusters have also been visited to assess their requirements and identify appropriate RE technology solutions. The list of identified clusters along with some of their key salient details is provided in Table 21 as below:
Table 21: List of potential clusters for demonstration phase
# Location Livelihood Key details of the cluster Possible RETPRLs District Block (s) Sector Assam 1 Barpeta Chakchaka KVIC -3,000 artisan families (5 -Solar lighting (bamboo) villages within 5 km radius) systems for artisans -Artisanal work being done houses at individual houses -Biomass gasifier -One common facility center power system to (CFC) for generate electricity mechanized/specialized from bamboo waste work to power the CFC -Main products – furniture, decorative and utility items 2 Nalbari Mukalmua KVIC -2,000 artisan families -Solar lighting and and (khadi and -Spinning being done at systems for artisans Kamrup Dhamdhama silk) individual houses houses Rural (Nalbari); Common facility centers for -Solar PV based Rangia - weaving and stitching micro-grid for the (Kamrup CFC Rural) -Solar charkha and looms 3 Darrang Pachim Horticulture -15,000 families spread over -Solar pumps for Mangaldai 30 villages irrigation (specially -Main produce: tomato, for winter crops) pumpkin, papaya, assamese lemon -Presently using diesel pumps for drawing water from bore-wells for irrigation 4 Udalguri Biomass -50-60 dhabas (road side -Improved biomass fuel based small restaurants) and tea cook-stoves small shops along major roads businesses around tea gardens -Presently using firewood from nearby forests for cooking in a very inefficient way
33 # Location Livelihood Key details of the cluster Possible RETPRLs District Block (s) Sector 5 Goalpara Agia Fisheries -100 families spread across -Solar powered 20-30 villages are involved aerators for fish in fisheries ponds -Large number of ponds, wet lands and rain fed tanks -Typical pond size: 0.1 – 3 ha per family -Typical fish production: 50,000 kg per ha per year Madhya Pradesh 6 Hoshang Kesla Poultry -1000 families having -Solar systems for abad backyard poultry farms with lighting and 300-800 birds in each farm. ventilation of -These families are backyard farms associated in the form of a -Poultry litter based cooperative society biogas plant for -The cooperative has a captive use in layer centralised layer farm with farms hatchery and feed -Briquetting unit for preparation units palletisation of waste biomass from backyard farms 7 Betul and Shahpur Horticulture -800 families spread across -Small solar Hoshang (Betul) and 40-45 villages around conduction dryers abad Kesla border of two districts at household level (Hohangaba -Main produce: tomato, okra, for mushroom d) cauliflower and oyster drying mushroom -Solar pumps for -Presently drying of irrigation mushroom in open sun -Solar based small -Irrigation mainly through cold rooms for diesel pumps vegetables -No facility for cold storage of vegetable produce 8 Raisen Bareli Dairy -Around 50 milk collection -Solar lighting centres, each managed by systems for milk a village level cooperative, collection centers collecting milk from 1500 -Solar powered milk members. chillers based on -Every member usually owns thermal battery 2-4 cattle and sells the concept for milk surplus milk to cooperative. collection centers -Milk testing and weighing is usually done manually -Milk to be transported to chilling centres twice daily
34 # Location Livelihood Key details of the cluster Possible RETPRLs District Block (s) Sector 9 Balaghat Waraseoni KVIC -600 artisan families -Solar lighting (bamboo) -Artisanal work being done systems for artisans at individual houses -Biomass gasifier -One common facility center power system to (CFC) for generate electricity mechanized/specialized from bamboo waste work to power the CFC -Main products – furniture, decorative and utility items 10 Dhindori Mehadwani Horticulture -1,000 farmer families -Solar pumps for -Organised as common irrigation water user groups for irrigation -Main produce: wheat, maize, mustard, flaxseed, soya bean, pulses, etc. Odisha 11 Koraput Jeypore Horticulture -450-500 families spread -Solar pumps for across 30 villages are irrigation dependent on horticulture. -Solar powered -Main produce: vegetables, small farm level spices, mustard, paddy and cold rooms maize -Small solar dryers -Irrigation mainly through for spice drying diesel pumps 12 Puri Nimapara Fisheries -The coast area near -Solar fish dryers (Chandrabha Chandrabhaga has been ga) leased to a cooperative society -This society is working for developing the livelihoods around fish drying and its marketing along with the business of fresh fish. 13 Kalahand Kokasara Dairy -4 milk collection societies -Solar PV systems i each having 30-50 for lighting and members powering -100-200 litres of milk equipment at milk collected daily at each collection centers society -Solar powered milk -Electronic milk testing and chillers based on weighing machines are thermal battery being used concept for milk collection centers
35 # Location Livelihood Key details of the cluster Possible RETPRLs District Block (s) Sector 14 Keonjhar Poultry -200 families having 600 -Solar systems for birds each in their backyard lighting and poultry farms. ventilation of -These families are backyard farms associated in the form of a -Poultry litter based cooperative society biogas plant for -Only around half of these captive use in layer families have access to farm electricity; others use LPG -Briquetting unit for lights. palletisation of -The cooperative has a waste biomass from centralised layer farm with a backyard farms hatchery and feed preparation units 15 Khurda Bolagarh KVIC -600 artisan families spread -Solar lighting (Arikama) (bamboo) across 23 villages within 30 systems for artisans km radius -Biomass gasifier -Artisanal work being done power system to at individual houses generate electricity -One common facility center from bamboo waste (CFC) for to power the CFC mechanized/specialized work -Main products – decorative and utility items
3 BARRIER ANALYSIS
103. MNRE (the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy) is the nodal Ministry of the Government of India for all matters relating to new and renewable energy. MNRE provides considerable funding and other support for all forms of new and renewable energy in India. MNRE funding and support programmes are generally delivered through related state nodal agencies, who also often add further state-level support and funding mechanisms of their own to the MNRE funding and support programmes. MNRE currently operates “Grid Connected Power”, “Decentralised Systems” and “Off- Grid Power” programmes. MNRE currently has no programme focused on areas that are in villages which are nominally connected to the electricity grid, but which in practice have many unserved or underserved existing and potential new rural household livelihood enterprises.
104. In India, as in many other developing countries, the primary energy focus has been, and continues to be, on achieving universal “village-level” electrification, whilst also providing low-cost and sometimes even free electricity access to the rural poor, farmers and other groups. The result is that many parts of the electricity supply system operate at substantially below the real cost of supply, making it uneconomic to establish, maintain or strengthen distribution and transmission networks. As a result, electricity is generally unreliable and is usually supplied for only a few hours per day in the most remote areas. The interconnection of decentralised renewable electricity supplies to the grid is hampered by unclear or unhelpful technical and financial grid interconnection rules and tariffs. So adding local renewable energy based capacity to the grid is very problematic. Therefore, for the many unserved or underserved areas in rural India, the default reliable electricity supply option is captive diesel generators.
36 105. For thermal energy supply, agricultural wastes are increasingly now commercial products that need to be purchased, and diesel and fuel oil are now expensive as they are steadily approaching price levels set by international markets. LPG is still highly subsidized. Oil companies bear a large proportion of the burden of LPG subsidies, and are therefore not motivated to expand LPG supply particularly to locations that are remote or have low population density or have low LPG demand. As a result, LPG supply is frequently restricted and unreliable in rural areas.
106. On the rural livelihoods side of the ledger in India, there is a growing realisation that supporting rural livelihoods is a critical element of poverty reduction efforts.
107. The National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) of the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, is focused on promoting self-employment and organization of rural poor, and NRLM now leads this rural livelihoods support activity. The basic concept of NRLM is to organize the rural poor into SHG (Self Help Groups) and make them capable of self-employment. NRLM is based on the positive results in India of the Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes. The World Bank is supporting the NRLM programme with credit of about $1 billion, in continuation of its long-term engagement in the sector38. At this stage, NRLM does not have any explicit acknowledgement or support activity for the unserved or underserved grid electricity supply situation in the many rural livelihoods applications in India. In fact, the NRLM does not explicitly recognize the critical role of energy access in securing and strengthening many livelihoods activities.
108. The key RE and rural livelihoods barriers that this India ACE GEF project will address are presented in Table 22, as below.
Table 22: Barrier Analysis
(1) RE – rural livelihoods package barriers
Key RE and rural livelihoods The use of RE in rural livelihoods applications is not being applications are poorly developed in a systematic way. For some of the RE rural understood, lack suitable livelihoods applications e.g. solar PV pumps for horticulture technical specifications and lack applications, a few states in the past had announced state level compliance mechanisms for programmes with additional subsidies. Several hundreds of meeting specifications systems had been installed under these programmes, but as this was done in an ad-hoc fashion it has not led to systematic learning or the development of the market for the RE technologies. Technical specifications are poorly defined and there is no proper mechanism in place for ensuring that RE for rural livelihoods systems actually meet any of the technical specifications that are set. In the absence of standardised performance specifications and compliance testing protocols and methods, it is very difficult to properly measure the performance of RE for rural applications systems. Therefore poor performance, low quality and unreliable systems continue to be favoured by the existing ad-hoc RE for rural livelihoods subsidy schemes, notwithstanding the large funds that are allocated to such schemes.
Key RE – rural livelihoods Many of the key RE in rural livelihoods applications have already packages have not been been piloted through very generous subsidy schemes in one or systematically demonstrated, more of the states of India, but this has not been done in a
38 See http://www.moneylife.in/article/national-rural-livelihood-mission-understanding-the-vulnerability-of-low-income- groups/19452.html
37 replicated, scaled up or systematic way. Standardised RE technology in rural applications documented packages are lacking, and pilot and demonstration focused initial uptake schemes are not undertaken in an integrated way, so the knowledge gained and the potential to utilise economies of scale achieved are not able to be harnessed through subsequent well managed replications and mass scale up approaches.
The uptake of key RE – rural RE and rural livelihoods are supported in a disjointed fashion by livelihoods packages is not MNRE and NRLM and key likelihoods related ministries at the effectively supported in an central level, and also similarly treated in a disjointed fashion at the integrated fashion at the central, state and district levels. So RE subsidies focus primarily on RE state and district levels uptake, and rural livelihoods support activities ignore the role of the reliable energy supply that is required for the rural livelihoods to actually be realised and be sustained. In unserved and underserved electricity and LPG rural supply locations, the rural livelihoods are either not implemented, or are less profitable, or need to rely on diesel generators or expensive fossil fuels for thermal applications to get the necessary reliable energy supply needed to be viable.
There is a lack of awareness and India is a vast country and with 29 states there is a tendency for institutional capacity for key RE – user awareness to be focussed on just a particular state, so a key rural livelihoods packages RE – rural livelihoods package can be reasonably well understood with reasonable potential user awareness in one state but poorly understood in another state. In addition, institutional capacity also varies from state to state and between the states and the central government level,
RE technology and service A large number of constantly changing subsidy and other support providers do not always know funding schemes are made available at the central and state levels how to effectively pool the many for RE for rural livelihoods technology and service providers. central and state level funding Opportunities for the effective pooling of RE and rural livelihood and other supports available funding and other support schemes are not taken up, and the available funding is therefore not fully utilised.
(2) Supply chain barriers
There is a lack of suitable and The unpredictable, ad-hoc and subsidy driven primary drivers of active RE – rural livelihoods RE for rural livelihoods makes it very difficult for suitable RE technology and service providers technology and service providers to identify suitable market niches, to establish appropriate business plans, to access the necessary business finance, to effectively market their sales and service models, to grow their businesses, and to expand their technology sales and after sales service provision businesses.
(3) Policy and regulatory barriers
National and State level rural NRLM and key livelihoods related ministries at the central level, livelihood mission statements and and also SLRMs and livelihoods related departments at the state documents do not emphasise the level, do not recognise the key role of a reliable energy supply, and critical role of RE in meeting hence do not emphasise an important role for RE in rural
38 unserved and underserved rural livelihoods in unserved and underserved energy related livelihoods energy needs geographical areas. The recognition of the key role of RE in rural livelihoods is not recognised in relevant mission statements, policies, guidelines, and circulars that do not explicitly mention RE as a critical success factor.
There is no formal and focussed MNRE runs a wide range of RE subsidy and support programmes, MNRE funding and support but does not have a specific programme aimed at supporting the programme specifically focussed use of RE to support rural livelihoods. The MNRE support for RE on RE in rural livelihoods used in rural livelihoods is therefore unfocussed, and does not match the importance of enhancing rural livelihoods given by governments across India at the central and state levels.
Decentralised RE applications Decentralised RE in India often faces significant barriers from focused on rural livelihoods face regulators and customers in charging a suitable tariff when significant problems in setting supplying electricity to stand alone customers. RE is competing suitable cost recovery tariffs in with a prevailing mind-set that electricity should somehow be stand-alone applications, and in supplied at a low tariff in rural areas. In most states there is an grid interconnection applications ongoing political decision for grid electricity for water pumping to the financial and technical be free (a zero tariff). For grid-interconnected RE for rural interconnection issues are applications, suitably remunerative feed-in-tariffs (FITs) are generally unclear and generally difficult to access in practice, and technical grid problematic for RE entrepreneurs interconnection issues are often unclear and/or make it difficult or to access impossible to access the grid in practice.
(4) Financial barriers
Subsidies and other financial The subsidies and supports for RE for rural livelihoods applications supports for RE in rural livelihood are generally a mix of MNRE and state level RE supports, as well applications are often complex, as sometimes rural livelihoods supports at the central and state are often very difficult to access, level. The RE applications for rural livelihoods are competing with often favour the RE systems with subsidised electricity grid extensions and subsidised grid electricity the lowest initial cost and not the supply, to the extent that such grid electricity supply is actually RE systems that meet the best available. LPG for rural livelihood thermal applications is also technical specifications, and highly subsidised, and hence LPG supply is frequently restricted in investment risks are generally rural areas. So the RE for rural livelihoods subsidies and supports overestimated. are to some extent just levelling the playing field with subsidised grid electricity and LPG. The central and state level RE for rural livelihoods subsidies and supports are often ad-hoc and are available for only limited periods or for limited total funding. Hence the financial support schemes are often poorly understood, unevenly accessed, and inadequately pooled by RE technology and service providers. The central and state level RE for rural livelihoods subsidies and supports are often poorly specified in terms of the RE systems to be subsidised and supported, and technical specifications are poorly checked and inadequately tested for compliance. Investment risks for decentralised RE for rural livelihoods are poorly understood by financial debt providers, and hence high collateral is generally required to cover the funds that need to be borrowed for the RE systems for rural livelihood
39 applications. Investment risk mitigation and risk sharing mechanisms (such as partial risk guarantees) are poorly developed and are not widely available.
4 KEY STAKEHOLDERS
109. The strong participation of a large number of stakeholders from central government, state governments, NGOs, financial institutions, industry, and academic institutions, international organizations and financial institutions is required for the project’s interventions in the RE and rural livelihoods application area in India to be successful. A brief description and proposed role of the project’s key stakeholders is presented in Table 23 as below.
Table 23: Key stakeholders involved in the project
Stakeholder Role39
Government – Central Level
Ministry of New and MNRE is responsible for framing policy and implementing programmes for the Renewable Energy development and promotion of new and renewable energy technologies in India. (MNRE) MNRE serves as the main client (Implementing Partner) in this project. MNRE will provide the strategic steering for the project, oversee the accomplishment of project objectives and tasks, lead co-funding requirements, initiate policy actions on its own and through other departments, and facilitate coordination with other key stakeholders including the Ministry of Rural Development (for NRLM), Ministry of Agriculture (for relevant agricultural sector Missions), Ministry of Power (for decentralised RE tariffs and grid interconnection), etc.
Ministry of MoEF is the GEF focal point for GEF projects in India and thus will liaise with Environment and GEF and provide overall coordination of the project. Forests (MoEF) Ministry of MoA is the administrative ministry for several govt. agencies/missions including: Agriculture (MoA) Department of Agriculture and Cooperation; Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries; National Horticulture Mission; etc. which cover a wide spectrum of agriculture, horticulture, dairy, fisheries and animal husbandry livelihoods. These subordinate departments/missions have the mandate for formulation and implementation of policies/schemes for their corresponding livelihoods sectors. MoA will be a member of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and in particular will be responsible for facilitating and maintaining coordination linkages with its relevant programmes and support schemes. Ministry of Rural MoRD is involved in improving the socio-economic status of rural areas through Development various development and welfare activities. It will be a member of the PSC and (MoRD) will support the project through facilitating coordination with relevant rural development schemes/agencies. National Rural NRLM, a mission launched by MoRD, aims at creating efficient and effective Livelihood Mission institutional platforms of the rural poor enabling them to increase their household (NRLM) incomes through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial services. NRLM will be a member of the Project Executive Committee
39 This column describes the role of the stakeholder in implementation of this proposed project.
40 Stakeholder Role39 (PEC) and will provide crucial linkages with the relevant livelihoods sectors and local communities. Khadi and Village KVIC is a statutory government body under the Ministry of Micro, Small and Industry Commission Medium Enterprises. It has the mandate for planning and implementing (KVIC) programmes for the development of khadi (homespun garments) and other village industries in rural areas. KVIC will be a project co-financing partner and will be a member of the PSC. Rural Electrification REC has a mandate for the promotion and financing of the electrification of rural Corporation (REC) areas. It is also a nodal agency designated by the Ministry of Power for the Limited implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY), a scheme to electrify all un-electrified villages / habitations and to provide access to electricity to all rural households in un-electrified and electrified villages in India. REC will be consulted on project issues related to rural electrification aspects. Ministry of Power MOP closely works with REC in meeting its targets under the RGGVY. MOP will (MoP) be a member of the PSC and will be responsible to facilitate close coordination and to avoid duplication of efforts when it comes to rural electrification. Government – State Level
State Nodal The SNA’s are the state level agencies for the promotion of renewable energy Agencies (SNAs) for and will have a role in the MNRE subsidy disbursement component for the renewable energy various renewable energy technologies. State Departments The State Departments for Rural Development are the key state level rural for Rural livelihoods agencies, which are also involved in the implementation of the central Development government schemes/programmes related to rural development in their state. They also formulate and implement state specific schemes on rural development. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the renewable energy interventions for rural livelihoods applications in the three states. State Rural The State Rural Livelihood Missions are the implementing arms of NRLM in the Livelihood Missions respective states. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the renewable energy interventions for productive applications in the three states. State Departments These state level Departments have the mandate for the implementation of for Agriculture/ central government schemes and programmes in the respective sectors of their Horticulture/ Animal states. These Departments also formulate and implement independent state Husbandry/ Dairy/ level programmes. They will be approached for the integration of renewable Fisheries energy in their on-going programmes and in accessing additional subsidies/assistance available under their programmes. State Electricity The SERCs have the responsibility for determining electricity tariffs and for Regulatory regulating power purchase and procurement processes within their state. SERCs Commissions will be key project partners as it is expected that tariff structures for off-grid (SERCs) electricity generation would ideally be updated through project activities. The SERCs are responsible for the guidelines for off-grid as well as small-scale on- grid solutions. Financial Institutions
41 Stakeholder Role39 Indian Renewable IREDA is a Government Public Limited Company established in 1987 that Energy Development operates under the administrative control of MNRE. IREDA’s role is to promote, Agency (IREDA) develop and extend financial assistance for renewable energy and energy efficiency/conservation projects in India. IREDA will be a member of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and is expected to play an important role in making finance available for the scaling-up of project interventions. National Bank for NABARD is an apex development bank in India. The mission of NABARD is to Agriculture and promote sustainable and equitable agriculture and rural prosperity through Development effective credit support, related services, institutional development and other (NABARD) innovative initiatives. NABARD is expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the renewable energy enterprises.
YES Bank YES Bank is a private sector commercial bank in India, which is also involved in providing credit for livelihood activities. YES Bank can play an important role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the renewable energy enterprises. Grameen/Regional Grameen/Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and micro finance institutions are Rural Banks (RRBs) expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the beneficiaries and micro finance and renewable energy enterprises. institutions Corporate Organisations for CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility)
National Thermal NTPC is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Madhya Power Corporation Pradesh and Odisha. It will be approached to provide support in the (NTPC) implementation of the pilot projects and for scaling-up activities, by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise.
National Aluminium NALCO is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Odisha. Company Ltd. NALCO will be approached to assist in the implementation of the pilot projects (NALCO) and in the scaling-up phase by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise. Oil and Natural Gas ONGC is a public sector enterprise that has significant operations in Assam. It Corporation Ltd. can be involved in implementation of the pilot projects and scaling-up by (ONGC) contributing CSR funds and technical expertise. Private sector enterprises involved in developing / delivering specific renewable energy solutions
Bayer Material Bayer Material Science, under its Social Business Initiative is involved in the Science promotion of cold rooms and solar dryers, which are key project rural livelihood application areas. These technologies are proposed as part of the technology packages to be implemented in the project. Promethean Power Promethean Power Systems designs and manufactures rural refrigeration Systems systems for commercial cold-storage applications in both non-electrified and in partially electrified areas. The technology (based on a thermal battery concept) is enabling milk producers to reliably store and preserve milk. This concept can also be used for the cool storage of fruits and vegetables. The thermal battery concept is part of the technology packages proposed in the project. Science for Society Science for Society (S4S) is a research and innovation based enterprise, which (S4S) has developed a low cost solar conduction dryer for individual use for the drying
42 Stakeholder Role39 of agro products. The S4S dryers could be part of the technology packages to be implemented in the project. Claro Energy Pvt Ltd Claro Energy is a small energy service provider company formed in 2011 that offers solar powered water pumping solutions to meet the irrigation water needs of rural farmers in powerdeficit regions in India. Claro’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India. Jain Irrigation Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd (JISL) is a multinational organisation based in Systems Ltd Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India with over 9,000 employees and 28 manufacturing plants. JISL manufactures a number of products, including drip and sprinkler irrigation systems and components, integrated irrigation automation systems, PVC and PE piping systems, plastic sheets, greenhouses, bio-fertilizers, solar water-heating systems, biogas plant on turnkey basis, wind hybrid energy and photovoltaic system. JISL’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India.
Shakti Pumps Shakti Pumps is a leading pump manufacturer in India and is also a manufacturer of Solar PV pumps. Solar PV pumps from Shakti Pumps could be part of the technology package. Perfect Gas Perfect Gas Generators Pvt Ltd is a specialist manufacturer of biogas engines Generators Pvt Ltd and also undertakes turnkey installation of biogas power generation systems in poultry farms and dairies. They could be one of the biogas systems technology providers. Jay Khodiyar Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting Machine Tools machines in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the briquetting systems. Infinite Energy Pvt Infinite Energy Pvt Ltd is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting Ltd machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems.
Radhe Engineering The two companies belonging to the same group are manufacturers of biomass Company & Radhe briquetting machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the Renewable Energy technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems. Development Pvt Ltd SELCO Solar Pvt. SELCO Solar Pvt. Ltd, a social enterprise that provides sustainable energy Ltd solutions and services to under-served households and businesses. They could be one of the technology providers for solar PV solutions in the project. Cold Chain Solutions Cold Chain Solutions are involved in setting-up of cold rooms for post-harvest management in Odisha. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar based cold room applications.
Planters Energy Planters Energy Network (PEN) provides solar-based dryers for processing of Network (PEN) fruits, fish, vegetables, spices, etc. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar drying solutions.
NRG Technologies NRG provides solar drying and solar hot air generation systems for drying of Pvt Ltd fruits & vegetables, fish, mushrooms, spirulena, etc. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar drying solutions.
43 Stakeholder Role39 Sustaintech India Sustaintech India Private Limited is a social enterprise, which manufactures and Private Limited sells sustainable energy products, primarily fuel-efficient commercial cook stoves. They could be one of the solution providers for the commercial biomass cooking stove solutions. Ecozen Solutions Ecozen Solutions has developed an innovative micro-cold storage product that is powered by solar energy. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar based cold room solutions.
Ankur Scientific Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt Ltd are one of the leading Energy Technologies manufacturers of biomass gasifier systems in India. They could be one of the Pvt Ltd technology providers for biomass gasifier systems Fosera Solar Fosera Solar systems GmbH & Co is a manufacturer of pico solar lighting systems solutions. They could be one of the technology providers for solar lighting GmbH & Co. solutions.
Supernova Supernova Technologies Pvt Ltd has developed mobile solar energy based Technologies Pvt Ltd aeration system as well as wind-solar aeration system to be used for the aeration of fisheries ponds. They could be one of the solution providers for the renewable energy based aeration systems for fisheries.
Sun Edison They are a large manufacturing firm in solar solutions. They were the first company to install the 1 MW canal top solar power plant in Mehsana, Gujarat. They not only sell products, but are involved providing financing to dealers. Hence, they may be useful partners in piloting innovative markets with solar solutions. Academic/Research Institutions:
IIT Guwahati, Assam The Department of Design and Rural Technology Action Group at IIT Guwahati have been working on research and development of innovative technological solutions and the improvement of existing technologies for rural livelihoods. They are also providing training support to the rural enterprises. In the proposed project, IIT Guwahati could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. Tezpur University, The Department of Energy at Tezpur University is involved in research and Assam technology development and training work on various renewable energy technologies. In the proposed project, Tezpur University could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. National Institute of NIST is an academic institute and some of its faculty members are involved in Science and the development and implementation of innovative renewable energy solutions Technology (NIST), and business models for rural enterprises. In the proposed project, NIST could Berhampur, Odisha assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. The Energy and TERI is a not for profit research institute. The institute is involved in development Resources Institute of renewable energy based technological solutions for decentralised (TERI) applications. In the proposed project, TERI could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs.
44 Stakeholder Role39 Entrepreneurship The Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDI), an autonomous body Development and not-for-profit institution. EDI runs regular academic programmes and a Institute of India variety of training programmes aimed at developing entrepreneurship. In the (EDI) proposed project, EDI could assist in Component 2 - i.e. in the development of the supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers. Mahatma Gandhi MGIRI is an institute promoted by the Ministry of Micro Small and Medium Institute for Rural Enterprises (MSME). MGIRI is involved in developing new technologies for rural Industrialization entrepreneurs, enterprises and industries related to their products. In the (MGIRI) proposed project, MGIRI could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs Civil Society Organisations/NGOs
Action for Food AFPRO strives for the enhancement of livelihoods and the quality of life of the Production (AFPRO) rural poor and marginalized communities through the management of natural resources (land, water and forests); with the main supported economic activities revolving around agriculture, livestock, fishery and forestry. AFPRO is active in Assam, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. AFPRO could be a potential CLIA in the project Rashtriya Gramin RGVN is a national level multi-state development and support organization Vikas Nidhi (RGVN) working in the states of Assam, Jharkhand, Meghalaya and Odisha. RGVN aims for the development of sustainable livelihoods of the rural poor with a priority for women in the agri and allied sectors through financial, institution building and capacity building support activities. RGVN could be a potential CLIA in the project Ajagar Social Circle Ajagar Social Circle is an initiative to bring about a change in the socio-economic condition of the people of India’s north eastern region through increasing livelihood opportunities and through providing social and economic security. The organization, at present, is engaged in a number of farming, allied and non- farming activities with communities living in the Assam-Meghalaya belt. Ajagar Social Circle could be a potential CLIA in the project Green Valley Forest GVFWPS is primarily working with the communities in and around wildlife rich and Wildlife areas of Assam. The majority of these communities are dependent on forest- Protection Society based livelihoods such as firewood and timber businesses. GVFWPS aims at (GVFWPS) reducing human-animal conflict, saving flora and fauna and conserving natural resources by providing alternative livelihoods and encouraging efficient use of natural resources. GVFWPS could be a potential CLIA in the project Bethany Society Bethany Society is a NGO based in the state of Meghalaya. The key areas of their work include capacity building and livelihood enhancement, institution building (development of SHGs) and improving access to finance with a special focus on the disabled. Bethany Society could be a potential CLIA in the project NB Institute for Rural NBIRT works for the development of rural communities through development, Technology (NBIRT) promotion and implementation of innovative renewable energy technologies for rural applications, training and development of human resources and creating green jobs. NBIRT is based in Guwahati in Assam. NBIRT could be a potential CLIA in the project PRADAN PRADAN has significant and wide-ranging experience in promoting improved livelihoods with the rural poor. The key areas of PRADAN’s work are forest-based livelihoods, natural resource (land and water) management, livestock
45 Stakeholder Role39 development, promotion of SHGs and micro enterprises. PRADAN has an active presence in Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. PRADAN could be a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training activities. Action for Social ASA is working for the livelihood improvement of the rural poor mainly in the Advancement (ASA) agriculture and allied sector in the state of Madhya Pradesh. The main areas of ASA’s work are land and water resource management, enhancement of agriculture productivity, agribusiness promotion for small holders, and micro credits for agriculture and research and training. ASA could be a potential CLIA in the project. Samaj Pragati SPS, a NGO based in Madhya Pradesh, is working towards the improvement of Sahayog (SPS) the socio-economic conditions of the tribal and marginalized rural poor through technical and financial support to the communities and policy advocacy. The main sectors of their work are water resource management, agriculture, livestock development and handicrafts. SPS could be a potential CLIA in the project. Mahila Chetna MCM is an NGO with a focus towards the empowerment of women so as to Manch (MCM) enable them to take a lead role in the social, economic and political spheres. MCM is providing support to women and communities in establishing suitable institutions (SHGs, cooperatives, producer companies, etc.), improved institutional management, the development of livelihoods (in particular agriculture, horticulture and dairy) and establishing forward and backward linkages. MCM is based in Madhya Pradesh. MCM could be a potential CLIA in the project Centre for Advanced CARD has been established to promote action research and to apply its findings Research and for the protection and development of society and the environment. The focus Development areas of their work are research studies, monitoring and evaluation of (CARD) development programmes, capacity building and policy advocacy. CARD could be a potential CLIA in the project ACCESS ADS is a national level livelihoods promotion organization with a focus on Development incubating innovations and sustainable models for the livelihoods promotion of Services (ADS) the poor. It offers specialised technical assistance in the microfinance and livelihoods areas. ADS have a significant presence in Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. ADS could be a potential CLIA in the project Rural Development RUDSETI has been established to train, support and promote self-employment and Self entrepreneurial ventures in the field of rural development. RUDSETI offers Employment several entrepreneurship development programmes of 1-4 weeks duration in Training Institute agriculture, and in allied and non-farm based livelihood sectors. RUDSETI could (RUDSETI) be a potential CLIA in the project Agragamee Agragamee is working with the marginalized and underprivileged communities in the tribal districts of Odisha. Agragamee are focusing on policy advocacy and formulation of people centred development programmes, food security, water resource management, and the development of women’s organization and training programmes. Agragamee could be a potential CLIA in the project Samvedna Samvedna, an NGO based in Odisha, is working for the fishing communities and marginalised farmers. Samvedna are involved in the implementation of various government programmes/schemes and in strengthening livelihoods through providing technical support and access to finance. Samvedna could be a potential CLIA in the project
46 Stakeholder Role39 Development Development Alternatives (DA) is both a research and an action-oriented Alternatives organisation, involved in designing and delivering eco-solutions for the poor and the marginalised. Development Alternatives could be a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training activities.
PART B. PROJECT STRATEGY
5 PROJECT RATIONALE, DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Project Rationale and Design Principles
110. This UNDP-MNRE-GEF India Access to Clean Energy project (the India GEF ACE project) has been designed as a project in three selected Indian states, with a potential scope to extend its activities to other states if there is a strong interest – in particular to the neighbouring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya.
111. This project will involve working with a carefully chosen limited set of RE - Rural Livelihoods application packages for an initial group of rural districts with a strong unserved and underserved energy supply situation for key rural livelihoods. The selected RE – Rural Livelihoods applications will be developed into carefully integrated packages and then demonstrated, replicated and scaled up in the India GEF ACE project. Further extensive scale-up actions will continue after the project’s end with the help of a new MNRE programme (to be established by the project) that will be specifically focused on the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods applications in India.
112. The India GEF ACE project will make an early implementation start (even before GEF approval) with the India UNDP-MNRE ACE $2.4 million project, where $0.8 million will be provided from UNDP core funding sources, and no GEF funds will be utilised. The India MNRE-UNDP ACE project will establish: the PSC (Project Steering Committee); the PEC (Project Executive Committee) and UNDP- MNRE implementation arrangements; the project’s PMU (Project Management Unit); suitable CLIA’s (Cluster Level Implementing Agencies); and will enable early development of some of the RE – Rural Livelihoods applications. The India UNDP-MNRE ACE project will integrate with the India GEF ACE project at its time of inception, and the UNDP-MNRE ACE project implementation arrangements will then transition into the GEF ACE project.
113. The India GEF ACE project is closely aligned with the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) global initiative led by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon to achieve universal energy access, double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency, and double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix by 2030. This initiative was launched in September 2011 and United Nations General Assembly unanimously declared the decade 2014‑2024 as the Decade of Sustainable Energy for All.
114. The India GEF ACE project will not explicitly deal with domestic uses of RE as there are fundamental differences between the domestic uses of energy and the productive uses of energy in
47 India as follows: (1) even when villages in India are “electrified”40, many productive uses will not be connected as they are located away from the village electrified area; (2) households in unconnected villages or households that are not connected in an “electrified” village just generally do without an electricity supply rather than make use of captive diesel generator sets as is the case for many productive uses where an available and reliable electricity supply is a prerequisite of the livelihoods activity being viable at all; (3) households have an expectation of low cost (actually below full supply cost) electricity and would rather do without an available or reliable supply rather than pay the full cost of electricity supply, whereas productive uses are often prepared to pay the high cost of diesel generator sets if the alternative is no electricity supply at all. So adding domestic uses of energy, as an explicit focus of the project, would result in a project that tried to address two fundamentally different energy supply markets. Finally, even just focusing on productive uses in three states in the project is already very ambitious with only a GEF $ 4,006,849 budget.
115. The India GEF ACE project will work through local CLIAs with an initial group of rural livelihood applications that already have well-established market linkages. The India GEF ACE project will utilise a mix of RE technologies that range from well-established technologies with large scale up potentials (e.g. solar water pumping) to RE applications that are less well developed but where the potential development impact is very large and where the RE application could be of significant future strategic importance (e.g. RE for local crop cold storage and RE for fish pond aeration).
116. The India GEF ACE project will be a key RE enabling activity as India continues to develop and roll out its National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) - but where unserved and underserved energy supplies would otherwise be a major constraint to the desired development of rural livelihoods into the future in rural India – and where diesel generators are the default electricity supply option in the unserved and underserved areas being targeted.
117. This proposed India GEF-supported ACE project will: help develop suitable RE – Rural Livelihoods technology applications packages; identify and implement new risk-sharing financial mechanisms (including but not limited to partial risk guarantees); mobilise and pool existing RE and rural livelihood subsidies and support mechanisms at the central and state levels; identify and implement improved pilot RE tariff and grid interconnection mechanisms; and remove the key barriers to enable RE applications to be strategically deployed in rural livelihoods in India. The overarching rationale for the India GEF ACE project is to position RE for further ongoing sustained growth in the Indian rural livelihoods sector after the formal end of the GEF project. More specifically, the proposed project will:-
(i) Address RE- rural livelihood technology barriers by: Supporting the development and deployment of ten (10) key cost-effective RE – rural livelihoods application packages for deployment in selected specific rural livelihoods sectors; demonstrate and document the RE – rural livelihood application packages in fifteen (15) clusters covering approximately 30 villages and benefitting 1,500 household enterprises; run training programmes and training of trainers activities for the replication and scale up of seven (7) sectoral master training packages; replicate and document the replication of the RE – rural livelihoods application packages to 28,500 household enterprises; and develop scale-up plans for each sector/technology application in each applicable state.
40 In India a village is considered to be “electrified” when the government buildings (school, health clinic etc.) are electrified and 10% of the houses are connected. However electricity supply can be as little as four to six hours per day (say 2 hours in the afternoon and two to four hours in the early morning when everyone is asleep, and voltage regulation can fluctuate widely.
48 (ii) Address the supply chain barriers to the RE technology supply and service providers providing an increased uptake of RE in rural livelihoods in India by: Supporting the business development of 100 RE technology and service providers for rural livelihoods applications; identifying suitable RE technology supply and service providers; developing business plans for these providers; facilitating access to suitable business finance; providing site visits, study tours and training to enhance replication and scale up phase marketing, sales and after sales service provision. This will then ensure the wider ongoing post project-end replication of RE in rural livelihoods applications in India. (iii) Deliver policy and regulatory support to RE utilisation in rural livelihoods applications by: Ensuring that national and state level rural livelihood mission statements emphasise the use of RE as a critical success factor by: developing suitable RE guidelines / statements and circulars as required; documenting and publicising these new RE elements of rural livelihoods mission statements through the project website; and participating in suitable regional and international fora that focus on the interface between RE and rural livelihoods for knowledge transfer from the India GEF ACE project to other relevant regional and international initiatives. Working with MNRE to develop a specific new RE in rural livelihoods programme, and support this new MNRE programme with suitable training workshops. Improving the tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised RE41 through: developing a roadmap for supporting improved tariff structures for small scale captive and off grid RE; and improving the regulatory, technical and tariff guidelines for decentralised RE systems’ grid interconnection. (iv) Identify and remove financial barriers to the support of decentralised RE – rural livelihoods applications by: Identifying, developing and promoting improvements to existing decentralised RE subsidy schemes and supports; developing and providing support under new financial support models for RE technology and service providers that meet updated technical specifications and (quality et al) compliance testing guidelines; identify, develop and promote mechanisms and guidelines for the pooling of existing financial resources for RE – rural livelihoods applications; and assess, design and undertake training, and provide implementation support for improved risk mitigation (including but not limited to partial risk guarantees) for RE – rural livelihoods providers and end users.
5.2 Strategic Considerations and Consistency with UNDP Programme
118. The overall strategy for the project is to create an enabling environment for the wider market development of the use of RE for rural livelihoods applications in India. The project activities will greatly assist the Government of India in the implementation of the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM), and in the enhanced uptake of RE as led by MNRE.
119. As mentioned earlier, UNDP operations in India fall under the “Country Programme Action Plan” (CPAP) 2013 – 2017 agreed between the GOI and UNDP. Under the Sustainable Development Outcome of the CPAC 2013 - 2017, UNDP’s objective in this area is to expand access to clean energy and help build the capacity of communities to manage natural resources and withstand climate change
41 Decentralised RE includes both fully captive applications and also grid connected applications where the grid connection sales are not the primary purpose of the RE installation
49 and disasters. With MNRE, UNDP will also support formulation of policy frameworks and help to address barriers to expanding and scaling up energy access in rural areas to strengthen livelihoods. Support will be provided to set up pilot demonstration projects that promote entrepreneur-based business and delivery models that can be further scaled up. UNDP will help to strengthen the capacities of local communities to deploy new technologies and of market-based service providers to adapt and maintain technologies.
120. The India GEF ACE project is fully aligned with the India UN Development Action Framework (UNDAF) 2013-2017, which defines its sixth (Sustainable Development) outcome as “Government, industry and other relevant stakeholders actively promote more environmentally sustainable development….” and “It will also focus on clean energy for productive uses”.
121. The UNDP-MNRE-GEF ACE project is closely linked to the UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-17 with its emphasis on fostering supporting Sustainable Development Pathways as one of its three key focus areas. The UNDP focus on sustainable development pathways includes boosting the prospects of the poor for employment and livelihoods. Energy, and in this case RE, is clearly then linked to UNDP’s core mandate for 2014-17. UNDP has a specific focus on policy, legal and regulatory frameworks as well as institutional capacities that can lower investment risks, broaden and deepen markets, and strengthen private- and public-sector capacities to expand investment and increase access to sustainable energy at the national and sub-national levels to create better conditions to find and scale-up inclusive market- based solutions to achieving clean energy access, especially to off-grid sources of renewable energy.
6 POLICY CONFORMITY AND COUNTRY OWNERSHIP
6.1 Policy Conformity
122. The India GEF ACE project fully conforms to the GEF-5 climate change mitigation focal area strategic objective CCM-3 to “Promote investment in renewable energy technologies.”
6.2 Country Eligibility
123. India ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 01 November 1993. India has submitted its Second National Communications Report to UNFCCC on 04 May 2012 (see http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/indnc2.pdf).
6.3 Country Drivenness
124. India has an excellent potential to accelerate the use of its considerable renewable resources to power its growing economy with more secure and affordable renewable energy supplies in underserved and unserved areas and specifically to support the ongoing development of rural livelihoods. The Government of India recognizes that the enhanced utilisation of local renewable energy resources is critical to ensure that it is able to meet both its economic and environmental objectives, and it has promoted this development through appropriate policies and actions. MNRE is the nodal ministry of the Government of India for all matters related to renewable energy.
125. India has a strong focus on expanding renewable energy supplies. India’s electricity supply from renewables is expected to increase rapidly from 24,503 MW by the end of the Eleventh Five-Year Plan (2011) to 54,503 MW by the end of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan (2017).
50 126. The Government of India has enacted a wide range of policies to support the expansion of renewable energy. There has also been a strong policy emphasis on achieving universal electrification, in particular through the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) scheme that supports the extension of electricity supply to all households in India. Under RGGVY, the Ministry of Power has sanctioned 921 projects to electrify 124,139 villages and to provide free electricity connections to 40.73 million below poverty line (BPL) rural households. As on 31st March 2014, electrification work in 108,280 villages have been completed and 21.68 million free electricity connections have been released to BPL households42. By the end of the Eleventh Plan (2011), out of the total of 593,732 villages in India (Census 2001), 556,633 villages (93.8 percent) had been electrified43. However, ongoing constraints with the supply of electricity still leaves many unserved and underserved villages and household enterprises without the necessary reliable electricity needed for their household enterprises. So there will remain a role for decentralised RE to provide reliable electricity supply for rural enterprises for many years yet in India. However, tariff setting and grid interconnection issues will mean that decentralised RE will still face many challenges into the future.
127. For the thermal energy needs of rural livelihoods enterprises, agricultural wastes are increasingly now commercial products that need to be purchased, and diesel and fuel oil are steadily approaching price levels set by international markets. LPG is still highly subsidised, however the subsidy available is not sufficient to cover all the actual LPG demand, so LPG supply is frequently restricted in rural areas. Renewable energy for rural livelihoods thermal needs is therefore in demand, and hence is also a focus of the India GEF ACE project.
7 PROJECT OBJECTIVES, OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS
7.1 Project Goal and Objective
128. The India ACE project goal is the reduction of GHG emissions, which is achieved through the objective of enhancing reliable and affordable clean energy access for rural livelihoods in un-served44 and underserved45 areas. This will be achieved by the integrated removal of the key barriers that prevent the wider adoption of RE – rural livelihood technology and services packages in India. The project’s emission reduction estimates are quantified in Annexure D.
129. The project focus is on access to clean energy for rural livelihoods. The project is based on the premise that lack of access to affordable and reliable energy hinders the growth of various critical rural livelihoods activities such as agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, and village industries. It is expected that decentralised renewable energy for electrical, thermal and mechanical applications will catalyse rural livelihoods activities to reduce poverty and improve the rural quality of life. While project benefits are likely to be in the tangible form of reduction in GHG emissions where fossil fuels are replaced partly or completely by efficient and clean renewables, more significant albeit gradual and less tangible co-benefits will flow in terms of improved incomes and quality of life especially for marginalised rural communities.
42 http://powermin.nic.in/bharatnirman/bharatnirman.asp, accessed on 05 July 2014 43 However, the limitations of RGGVY include that some of the villages which have been “electrified”, that is formally connected to the grid, have not yet been energised, and in many “electrified” villages a large proportion of houses are still not connected to grid electricity supply, and that many villages do not receive more than a few hours a day of electricity supply 44 Un-served: Scattered inhabited areas, hamlets or clustered villages without any grid electricity supply are defined as “un-served” areas. 45 Under-served: Areas that are connected to a grid electricity supply but do not get continuous or adequate supply, or where not all livelihoods applications have practical access to grid electricity supply - e.g. water pumping in remote fields
51 7.2 Project components, outcomes, outputs and activities
130. The major project component outcomes and activities are summarised in Table 24 as below:
Table 24: Project Components and Outcomes
Project components Outcomes 1. Development and deployment of 1. Deployment of RE-rural livelihood application packages key RE - rural livelihood application packages 2. Supply chain for RE technology 2. Increased supply of RE technology and service providers supply and service providers for for rural livelihood applications enhancing rural livelihoods 3. Policy and regulatory support for 3.1 Inclusion of RE applications in national and state level RE - rural livelihoods applications rural livelihoods policies for key livelihood sectors in rural areas 3.2 Future MNRE programs also cater to actions towards enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods 3.3 Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised46 RE 4. Financial support for 4.1. Improved decentralised RE subsidies and support for decentralised RE - rural livelihoods rural livelihoods applications 4.2. Enhanced provision of financial support for decentralised RE in rural livelihoods applications 4.3 Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralised RE in rural livelihoods applications
The outcomes, outputs and activities are described as below:
7.2.1 Component 1: Development and deployment of key RE - rural livelihood application packages
Outcome 1: Deployment of RE – rural livelihood application packages
This outcome addresses the need to develop and deploy RE technology packages to suit specific applications in rural livelihoods sectors that contribute significantly to employment and income generation and that are important for the welfare of marginalised rural communities. The first step involves the identification of specific energy uses (existing or potential) in the applicable livelihoods sector where energy needs can be met reliably through decentralised renewable energy technologies. At least ten such RETPRLs (Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods) were identified. The suitability of these RE technologies, their demand for and scale of deployment, and likely
46 Decentralised RE includes both fully captive applications and also grid connected applications where the grid connection sales are not the primary purpose of the RE installation
52 costs were estimated. A brief description of identified RETPRLs is available in Section 2.3 with detailed assessments available in Annexure E.
Table 25: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 1
Outputs Activities 1.1. At least ten (10) cost- 1.1.1 Assess performance (cost - benefit and technical performance) effective RE technology of existing RETPRL packages (Year 1 & 2) packages developed for rural 1.1.2 Assess the market for existing RETPRL packages (Year 2) livelihood (RETPRL) 1.1.3 Update technical specifications and compliance testing applications and established guidelines to improve RETPRL packages’ performance (Year 2) technical specifications 1.1.4 Formalise technical quality specifications and compliance testing mechanisms for RETPRL packages (Year 2) 1.1.5 Conduct training program for MNRE, technology providers and users on the new testing and compliance mechanisms (Year 3) 1.2 Demonstrated and 1.2.1 Review suitability of clusters identified during the project design documented RE – rural phase (Year 1) livelihood application 1.2.2 Finalise the 15 clusters (Year 1) packages in 15 clusters47 and 1.2.3 Identify and contract suitable CLIAs48 and state coordinators benefitting 1,500 household (Year 1) enterprises 1.2.4 Prepare CLIA cluster level RETPRL package implementation plans (Year 1) 1.2.5 Implement cluster level RETPRL package implementation plans (Year 1, 2 & 3) 1.2.6 Assess demonstrated RETPRL packages and implementation mechanisms for replication and scale up (Year 2 & 3) 1.2.7 Document implementation activities (results, uptake and impacts) throughout the project (Year 2 & 3) 1.3 Completed training 1.3.1 Develop seven (7) sectoral50 master training packages51 (Year programmes and training of 2) 49 trainers activities for 1.3.2 Conduct master training packages for potential CLIAs, replication and scale up of RE government agencies, sector experts, federations, etc. (Year 3 and – rural livelihood application 5) packages 1.3.3 Identify potential replication and scale up locations in the targeted states (Year 3) 1.4 Completed promotion of 1.4.1 Develop district wise state-level sectoral replication plans (Year replicated and documented 3) RE – rural livelihood 1.4.2 Implement district level sectoral replication plans through application packages to other cluster support units/CLIAs (Year 4 & 5) districts / states and applied 1.4.3 Document replication implementation activities’ results, uptake to 28,500 household and impacts throughout the project (Year 4 & 5) enterprises
47 Each cluster may have more than one RE technology – rural livelihood application package demonstrated. A cluster can consist of up to 30 villages in a particular geographical area, and of no more than 25 km radius to reduce travelling distances from a given base or common facility. 48 Cluster Level Implementation Agencies 49 For selected cluster level implementing and other relevant agencies personnel 50 E.g. dairy, poultry, irrigation, MFP processing, agro-processing, fisheries, small scale textiles 51 Covering technologies, financing, risk mitigation and implementation issues
53 1.4.4 Develop scale-up plans for each sector / technology application in each state (Year 4 & 5)
Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost-effective RE technology packages developed for rural livelihood (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications
(GEF Grant US$ 278,399 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 6,000 and Others US$ 0)
131. As described in section 2.3, a set of RETPRLs has been identified during the project design phase. The identification of the RETPRLs during the project design phase has been based on information collected through desk research, interactions with technology suppliers and other stakeholders, and through field visits. No field performance monitoring studies have been carried out during the project design phase and the analysis of technologies is based purely on secondary data. During year 1 and 2, a detailed assessment of the proposed RETPRLs will be carried out (Activity 1.1.1). This assessment will also include collection of field performance data on the relevant RETPRLs. Several of the RETPRLs e.g. solar PV based cold rooms or milk chilling systems are still under development at the time of the project design phase. It is expected that these RETPRLs would have evolved during the intervening period i.e. in the period between project design and initiation of the implementation of the GEF project. The assessment will take into account the technology development and, apart from monitoring and analysing technical performance of RETPRLs, will also cover cost-benefit analysis. The cost-benefit analysis will include analysis of investment required; operational costs; returns, payback period, etc. Some of the field performance data collection is also likely to take place at the clusters selected for the demonstration projects.
132. An assessment of the market for the relevant RETPRLs will be carried out during year 2 (Activity 1.1.2). The work will initially involve carrying out a market survey. The assessment will then take into account an understanding of demand (existing and potential) for the package, willingness and ability to pay, and the existence of suitable supply chains. The market assessment exercise will be undertaken after the results of Activity 1.1.1 are available as technical performance and cost-benefit analysis for RETPRLs will be the inputs required for carrying out the market study.
133. After the completion of Activity 1.1.1 i.e. assessment of performance of existing RETPRLs has been completed; detailed technical specifications of RETPRLs and compliance testing guidelines to test the performance of RETPRLs will be developed (Activity 1.1.3). These would cover the following: (a) a brief description and performance specifications for the system; (b) a brief description of technical details and specifications of individual components e.g. SPV panel, battery, pump, etc. The specifications would refer to relevant India/international/MNRE standards for specifications of components. In case standard specifications are not available, a set of specifications will be developed. Implementation mechanisms for ensuring compliance with specific quality standards will be developed (Activity 1.1.4). This would also involve the identification of suitable testing centres / laboratories. The test standards and compliance testing guidelines/mechanisms would be developed in partnership with these testing centres / laboratories, end-users and manufacturers. In some cases, capacity development of testing laboratories, users and suppliers may be required for the adequate testing / compliance of specific RETPRLs. Detailed technical specifications and a fully functional compliance testing mechanism will ensure that the RETPRLs procured/implemented during the project are of a suitable high quality, and meet the required specifications.
Output 1.2: Demonstrated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages in 15 clusters and benefitting 1,500 household enterprises
(GEF Grant US$ 733,650 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 860,768 and Others US$ 694,580)
54 134. To ensure a reasonable degree of success, the demonstration of the identified RETPRLs needs to be carried out in clusters based on the following initial criteria:
The applicable livelihoods sector is of sufficient size for significant numbers of potential replications;
The applicable livelihoods sector has a clear need for improved access to clean and reliable energy for specific applications;
End users are likely to adopt the packages and likely to derive significant economic and/or other benefits;
The RETPRL is sufficiently user friendly and the need for regular O&M for continued viable operation is in line with the capacity of the proposed and potential users52; and,
The area for RETPRL deployment has suitable facilitation agencies that are comfortable with technology adoption and have a strong community connection.
The identification of the initial 15 clusters has been carefully undertaken taking these initial criteria as above, and in consultation with relevant local government officials as well as NGOs during the project design phase. However, at the time of actual project site implementation, a further round of verification of ground realities in these clusters is highly desirable. Thus, a review of the suitability of clusters identified during the project design phase will be carried out (Activity 1.2.1). A framework of indicators will be developed for the suitability of locations to various RETPRLs focusing on the likelihood of success. Data on these indicators will be collected through secondary sources and primary surveys of the clusters. At this stage, it is expected that most of the clusters identified during the project design phase will be found suitable for undertaking demonstration activities, however, if project management is not sure about the suitability of some of the clusters, they will be able to replace these clusters with new more suitable clusters. Finally, a list of the most suitable 15 clusters for undertaking demonstration projects will be prepared (Activity 1.2.2)
135. The choice of Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIA) is critical to the success of the demonstration projects. The qualifications and roles envisaged for a CLIA is outlined in Annexure C. A CLIA needs to demonstrate the following key characteristics:
Last mile contact with the relevant community (mobilization, follow-up, coordination etc.) Project Management experience and capacity at the cluster level Livelihoods sectoral expertise, including backward-forward linkages for specific businesses Coordinate training of end-users and beneficiaries in sustained operation and maintenance of devices/technologies disseminated in a cluster through technology supplier/technical expert. UNDP and MNRE have empanelled/ short-listed potential CLIAs during the project design phase (refer to Annex B 3.2). Once activity 1.2.2 is complete, the activity to finalise and contract CLIAs will be undertaken. State coordinators will be hired who will coordinate the activities at state level and provide support to CLIAs (Activity 1.2.3).
136. Detailed project implementation plans will be prepared by the CLIA in consultation with the PMU (Project Management Unit) for each cluster (Activity 1.2.4). The implementation of cluster level demonstration projects in the various clusters will be led by “cluster level implementation agencies” (CLIAs). CLIAs will be responsible for: consultations with target groups, identification of end-users, providing assistance in mobilising /accessing financing, assistance in the identification of the most appropriate technology supplier, supervision of the implementation, training of end-users, providing
52 For example gasifiers for thermal uses have lower ongoing O&M and operator skill level requirements than gasifiers used for electricity generation operating through the use of a gas engine
55 handholding support post-installation, reporting and documenting the demonstration project progress, etc. (Activity 1.2.5). Concurrent to the implementation of the demonstration projects in the 15 clusters, the CLIAs with the support from the PMU, will be documenting implementation activities (Activity 1.2.7) and undertaking assessment of RETPRLs and implementation mechanisms for replication and scale up (Activity 1.2.6)
137. In the course of implementation of cluster-level demonstration projects that will be led by the CLIA, appropriate working level Cluster Support Units (CSUs) will be developed with the help of CLIAs to take forward the replication and scale-up of the RETPRLs in more clusters across the state(s). However, a completely different CSU can be selected depending on the situation e.g. if a CLIA has not been able to perform or if the capabilities required to replicate is different to piloting.
138. The CSU, to be housed within the CLIA during the project implementation period and with a dotted line reporting to the PMU (refer to Figure 4), is to be set up comprising two staff of CLIA dedicated to the project for the implementation of demos and replications plus about 3 “barefoot practitioners” to be identified from among the locals. The main criterion for selection of this team is not only exposure to livelihoods activities and some technical expertise but also importantly business or entrepreneurial orientation. Eventually, the CSU would be spun off as an independent enterprise with a practical implementation focus for the replication and scale up phase, first within the applicable state and then in other states as relevant. It is suggested that the CSU team’s remuneration be based on a mix of fixed and variable remuneration with the ratio skewing towards variable remuneration in the course of the project.
Output 1.3: Completed training programmes and training of trainers activities for replication and scale up of RE – rural livelihood application packages
(GEF Grant US$ 236,500 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 0 and Others US$ 0)
139. In some sectors the use of RE may be entirely new, and in others the use of RE may be new in a specific application; hence the need for training and handholding programmes for providers and users / adopters of the RETPRLs at the sector-level. Suitable sector-level institutions/ academic institutions (governmental or non-governmental) will be identified for the design and execution of such training and handholding programmes. These institutions will be given the task of preparing seven (7) sectoral53 master training packages (Activity 1.3.1). In order to ensure the smooth replication and post-project end scale up activities, extensive training programmes based on the master training packages will be conducted for technology providers, users, facilitators and implementers as well as relevant local government officials (Activity 1.3.2). These training programmes will be conducted during Year 3 for replication (14 training programmes54) and in Year 5 for post-project end scale up activities (14 training programmes).
Output 1.4: Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages to other districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises
(GEF Grant US$ 1,471,400 Investment; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 8,890,232 and Others US$ 7,922,801)
140. Based on the demonstration project results in which 1,500 end-users are expected to be benefitted directly through RETPRLs, activities will be undertaken to replicate RETPRLs in other similar clusters within the project implementation period, so as to benefit a total of 28,500 end-users. State-level
53 E.g. dairy, poultry, irrigation, MFP processing, agro-processing, fisheries, small scale textiles 54 2 training programmes each for 7 livelihood sectors
56 replication plans will be prepared towards facilitating sector-wide state wide adoption of the packages developed (Activity 1.4.1). During the preparation of these plans, other similar clusters will be identified and a survey of these identified clusters will be undertaken. Discussions with both state-level government and non-government agencies that are engaged with these clusters will be held and cross- linkages with ongoing development programmes will be established. The replication plan will be implemented through the relevant CSUs (Activity 1.4.2). The replications will take place in Year 4 and 5. It is expected that by the end of Year 3 there will be substantial progress made on expanding the base of technology and service providers (through activities undertaken under Outcome 2.1) and development of more conducive policy environment for RE- rural livelihood applications (through activities undertaken in Outcome 3.1 and 3.2). The facilitation and handholding support required from the project for replications is expected to be lower compared to the level of support required for the demonstration projects.
141. The replication projects will be evaluated and documented and this analysis will be used for developing scale-up plans beyond the project period (Activity 1.4.2 and 1.4.3). The important thing in the documentation is not just the process followed, but also the feedback and iterations that led to any modifications in implementation details. The focus will be on information and knowledge management and not just on simple documentation. The documentation of the replication project results will be actively disseminated through appropriate and regular regional, state and local meetings, exhibitions and trade shows, through print and other media, site visits and so forth. The impact of the dissemination activities will be tracked and refined in a continuous improvement process.
7.2.2 Component 2: Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers for enhancing rural livelihoods
Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE technology and service providers for rural livelihoods applications
142. The outputs and activities foreseen under this outcome are outlined in Table 26 as below. This outcome is focused on ensuring that a suitable supply chain for RE technology packages is established. A reliable and user-centric supply chain will be a critical success factor.
Table 26: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 2
Outputs Activities 2. Business 2.1. Identify suitable RE technology supply and service providers (Year development aspects55 1 & 3) supported for 100 RE 2.2. Develop business plans (at the state or cluster level) with technical technology supply and experts in RE, livelihoods sectors, and finance and management (Year service providers for 2 & 4) rural livelihoods 2.3. Facilitate access to business finance for RE technology and service applications suppliers (Year 2 & 4) 2.4. Conduct of site visits, study tours, and training56 to enhance replication and scale up phase marketing, sales and after sales service provision (Year 3)
55 Business development includes: business plan development; support in development of business financing; the provision of site visits, study tours, and training to enhance replication and scale up phase marketing; and sales and after sales service provision 56 To selected personnel from technology supply and service providers
57 Output 2: Business development aspects supported for 100 RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods applications
(GEF Grant US$ 301,000 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 0 and Others US$ 416,386)
143. During year 1, around 20 suitable RE technology supply and service providers will be selected to be involved in the demonstration projects; another set of around 80 RE technology supply and service providers will be selected in Year 3 & 4 for undertaking replication activities (Activity 2.1). The selection of RE technology supply and service providers will be undertaken through a suitable EOI process. The RE technology supply and service providers could be equipment manufacturers, dealers, local entrepreneurs from clusters, spun-off entities of CLIAs, etc. The initial 20 RE technology supply and service provider can be provided a grant support of up to US $ 7,500 each57 to help them in establishing their supply and service chain around the identified clusters. The remaining investment amount would be contributed by the technology supply and service providers as equity or loan. Building on this supply chain network from the demonstration phase of the project, and the results of existing RE applications such as off-grid electricity supply pilot projects from other project initiatives, a network of 80 additional RE technology suppliers / service providers will be set up during the replication and planning for the scale-up phase of the project. This expanded network will need to handle the required equipment supply, service delivery and maintenance of the RETPRLs.
144. This expanded network of RE enterprises will be provided with critical inputs in the form of support in preparation of business plans, technical training, linkages with potential markets in livelihoods sectors, access to finance from the various central and state level support schemes, as well as from Banks and other financial institutions, and improving the access to existing financial risk sharing mechanisms such as partial credit guarantees (Activities 2.2 & 2.3). To provide critical inputs and to build capacities of the RETPRL providers, the services of suitable consultants specialising in entrepreneurship, financing and business development will be contracted. Training programmes, site and study tours will also be used to enhance the exposure of RE technology suppliers and enable them to develop technology packages that are in line with livelihoods user requirements (Activity 2.4). This is an important aspect of supply chain development as the technology packages are likely to require some degree of customisation to enhance rural livelihoods user acceptance.
7.2.3 Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for RE – rural livelihood applications
Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE applications in national and state level rural livelihoods policies for key livelihood sectors in rural areas
145. The project focuses of decentralised RE solutions for various applications in key rural livelihoods sectors. Some of the applications identified include: water pumping; cooling of milk; cold storage of fruits and vegetables; processing of spices; drying of fish, spices, mushrooms; aeration of fish ponds; etc. The demonstration projects referred to in Outcome 1 indicate the interventions that are seen as having a strong potential in addressing energy needs and in improving the productivity of livelihoods activities. While the demonstration projects may provide leads on the existing policy barriers / incentives for larger scale adoption of these packages, the user sectors themselves as well as the livelihoods
57 It is assumed that a capital investment of around US $ 20,000 to 50,000 would be required from a RE technology supply and service provider to establish its sales and service network around a cluster. It is expected that the entrepreneur will invest in the basic infrastructure and hiring of staff. It is proposed that a technology and service provider will be provided a grant up to US$ 7500 to ensure good quality installations and service support (e.g. technical training of staff, purchase of special equipment/tools, etc.) and for the development of its business (targeted advertisements, participation in local events, etc.). The financial support can be spread over 2 years. This grant support will be available only to the 20 technology supply and service providers during the demonstration phase. For availing this grant support, the technology supply and service providers will have to submit a short proposal to the PMU.
58 initiatives in the state need to explicitly recognise the potential of these interventions. Work on the facilitation of the inclusion of these packages in appropriate policy statements / documents of the national and state livelihoods missions as well as for relevant sectors will be carried out. Going a step further, specific new support mechanisms, including but not limited to subsidies, may be needed for some packages to be viable.
Table 27: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.1
Outputs Activities 3.1.1 National and 3.1.1.1 Assess National and State level rural livelihoods mission State level rural statements / documents for mention of energy and/or RE as a critical livelihoods mission success factor (Year 2 & 3) statements / documents 3.1.1.2 Develop suitable RE guidelines / statements for the National and emphasising the use of State level rural livelihoods mission statements and documents (Year 2 & 58 RE 3) 3.1.1.3 Hold workshops and high level meetings to assist relevant Ministries/Departments to officially adopt mission statements explicitly mentioning RE as a critical success factor (Year 3) 3.1.2.1 Assess National and State level rural livelihoods policies for 3.1.2 National and mention of energy and/or RE as a critical success factor (Year 2 & 3) State level policies that 3.1.2.2 Develop suitable National and State level draft RE for rural support the use of RE livelihoods policies / circulars (Year 2 & 3) for key rural livelihoods 3.1.2.3 Hold workshops to assist relevant ministries / departments to sectors officially adopt supportive policy statements / circulars mentioning RE as a critical success factor in rural livelihoods (Year 2 & 3) 3.1.3 Documented 3.1.3.1 Document and share experiences regarding RE and rural experiences and livelihoods via a suitable project website and other communications lessons on RE mechanisms (Year 1 to 5) applications for rural 3.1.3.2 PMU participate and make presentation in relevant national, livelihoods at suitable regional and international conferences and fora focusing on RE and rural regional and livelihoods (Year 1 to 5) international fora
Output 3.1.1: National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements/documents emphasizing the use of RE
(GEF Grant US$ 16,800 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 8,000 and Others US$ 0)
146. In some cases, RE technologies already find a place in some policy documents and some even have governmental incentive schemes. For instance, there is already a government initiative for dissemination of solar pumps in some states. The National Cold Chain Development recognises the potential for Solar PV interactive cold chains and the use of phase change materials59. The National Fisheries Development Board supports the setting up of solar fish dryers with LPG back up. However, these examples are few and have not yet resulted in much activity in the field. This project seeks to promote the adoption of specific RE-based applications at the national and state levels. To achieve this objective, an assessment of the National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements / documents for mention of energy and/or RE as a critical success factor will be carried out (Activity 3.1.1.1). The assessment would
58 This will draw on the RE – rural livelihoods packages developed in Output 1.1.1
59 Materials that can store thermal energy
59 be followed by the development of RE guidelines / statements (based on the feasibility and potential for RE integration) for the National and State level rural livelihoods mission statements and documents (Activity 3.1.1.2). Meetings and workshops with the senior officials who are in-charge of National and State level rural livelihood missions will be conducted for the promotion of the adoption of RE guidelines (Activity 3.1.1.3).
Output 3.1.2: National and State level policies that support the use of RE for key rural livelihood sectors
(GEF Grant US$ 101,800 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 28,000 and Others US$ 0)
147. Inclusion of RE guidelines in the mission statements and documents may not still lead to the adoption of RE technologies. For this to happen, the next step would be to include RE technologies in the National and State level rural livelihoods policies, programmes and schemes. For example, the recently announced Odisha Fisheries Policy60 identifies setting-up of cold storages, ice plants, as well as hygienic post-harvesting facilities as priority areas for fisheries development. For post-harvesting facilities, the Odisha Fisheries Policy states: “Use of low cost energy sources in fish processing, particularly nonconventional energy sources will be considered and promoted”. However, for ice plants and cold storage plants where again renewable energy solutions can be utilised, the policy does not mention such possibilities. All such National and State level rural livelihoods policies and schemes related to the seven sectors (Activity 3.1.2.1) will be assessed. Appropriate modifications in the policies (Activity 3.1.2.2) will be suggested and would reach out to the concerned Ministries and Departments to ensure inclusion of suitable RE possibilities in their relevant polices and schemes (Activity 3.1.2.3).
Output 3.1.3: Documented experiences and lessons on RE applications for rural livelihoods at suitable regional and international fora
(GEF Grant US$ 78,100 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 17,900 and Others US$ 0)
148. The documentation of the experiences of RE applications for rural livelihoods (please refer to activity 1.1.1, activity 1.2.7, activity 1.4.3, etc.) will be carried out. This documentation will be made available to the public through a suitable project web site and through printed case studies. Given the increasing importance of the Internet for communications, it is proposed that the project web site would become functional by the end of year 1. The website and case studies will be continuously updated during the project lifetime of 5 years (Activity 3.1.3.1). It is also important that these packages and schemes for their promotion are widely publicised at appropriate national-level fora. Information on these initiatives would also be shared in relevant regional (Asian) and international fora. Thus the PMU staff and experts will participate in relevant national, regional and international conferences and fora focusing on RE and rural livelihoods (Activity 3.1.3.2).
Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE programs also cater to actions towards enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods
Table 28: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.2
Outputs Activities 3.2.1 Developed MNRE- 3.2.1.1 Assess the extent and effectiveness of MNRE support of RE for supported programme for rural livelihoods applications (Year 1)
60http://www.orissafisheries.com/File/comprehansive-REVISED-DRAFT-ODISHA- FISHERIES%20POLICY%202014.pdf last accessed on 08 July 2014.
60 enhanced RE utilisation in 3.2.1.2 Develop a new MNRE programme focused on RE used to rural livelihoods develop rural livelihoods (Year 2) 3.2.1.3 Conduct workshops to design and implement the new MNRE RE – rural livelihoods programme (Year 2)
Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-supported programme for enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods
(GEF Grant US$ 46,600 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 14,000 and Others US$ 0)
149. Closely connected with the inclusion of RE packages in sectoral and livelihoods policy documents, is the mainstreaming of these packages within MNRE and in state-level RE programmes. An analysis of existing MNRE and state level schemes targeted at specific livelihoods sector applications (e.g. solar pumps) and field level assessments conducted during the demonstration projects outlined in Outcome 1.1 will provide the necessary background to develop and launch a separate programme within MNRE on RE for rural livelihoods. A review of application/ sector-specific schemes at MNRE and state level agencies such as the use of solar pumps for irrigation, distributed RE for stand-alone and grid connected applications, gasifiers for thermal and electricity generation purposes, and so forth will also provide useful insights (Activity 3.2.1.1).
150. The design of a programmatic approach will be done in close consultation with stakeholders to improve the acceptance and effectiveness of the initiative (Activity 3.2.1.2). The relevant stakeholder consultations and workshops for this purpose will be carried out (Activity 3.2.1.3).
Outcome 3.3 Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralised61 RE
151. Tariff setting for RE-based micro grids is currently largely ad hoc, and RE-based micro grids are typically much more expensive than (the unreliable) grid power. Tariff-setting guidelines will considerably improve the sustainability of decentralised electricity generation from renewables. RE-based micro grids are in direct competition with the electricity grid, which is intrinsically cheaper (primarily through cross – subsidies) even though the grid is generally low on availability (hours per day) and reliability. Grid- compatible micro grids will benefit enormously from a suitable regulatory framework that facilitates and guides grid interconnection. The scale-up of several of the proposed RETPRLs will significantly benefit from clear guidelines on tariff setting and grid-interconnection. This project though not directly involved in regulatory reform, will facilitate creation of a knowledge base to help develop appropriate tariff-setting and grid-interconnection policy and regulatory frameworks.
Table 29: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 3.3
Outputs Activities 3.3.1 Completed roadmap 3.3.1.1 Assess existing tariff structures and rules/regulations for and workshops for small scale captive and off-grid RE (Year 2) supporting improved tariff 3.3.1.2 Develop improved tariff structures for decentralised RE (Year structures for small scale 2) captive and off-grid RE 3.3.1.3 Facilitate adoption of improved tariff structures for decentralised RE (Year 4)
61 Decentralised RE includes both fully captive applications and also grid connected applications where the grid connection sales are not the primary purpose of the RE installation
61 3.3.2 Developed and 3.3.2.1 Assess existing arrangements and barriers for implemented regulatory, captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection (Year 2) technical and tariff 3.3.2.2 Develop recommendations for improved captive/decentralised guidelines for RE based RE grid access mechanisms (Year 2) captive/decentralised 3.3.2.3 Approval and implementation of improved systems’ grid captive/decentralised RE grid access mechanisms interconnection
Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap and workshops for supporting improved tariff structures for small scale captive and off-grid RE
(GEF Grant US$ 49,500 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 19,200 and Others US$ 0)
152. Activity 3.3.1.1 will involve carrying out an assessment of the existing tariff structures and rules/regulations for small-scale captive and off-grid RE applications. This review will include the current norms and practices of tariff setting for RE-based micro grids; comparison of current tariff levels with tariffs for grid power, willingness and ability of users to pay for reliable and clean power; and, review of previous work on guidelines for tariff-setting for off-grid electricity from renewable. Activity 3.3.1.2 will recommend guidelines for tariff setting for captive and off-grid RE applications. The recommendations will also take into account the field-level data collected from the demonstration projects.
Output 3.3.2: Developed and implemented regulatory, technical and tariff guidelines for RE based captive/decentralised systems’ grid interconnection
(GEF Grant US$ 20,000 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 9,600 and Others US$ 0)
153. Activity 3.3.2.1 will involve carrying out an assessment of existing arrangements and barriers for captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection. The review will include current norms and practices for grid- connection of RE-based micro grids; review of technical and regulatory requirements for grid-compatible and grid-interactive micro grids; and the review of grid interaction norms in various countries. Activity 3.3.2.2.will entail the development of recommendations for technical and regulatory guidelines for grid interaction of off-grid RE.
7.2.4 Component 4: Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihood applications
Outcome 4.1: Improved decentralised RE subsidies and support for rural livelihoods
154. Like the rest of the energy sector in India, decentralised RE has also enjoyed large subsidies, largely in the form of upfront capital subsidies. However, high upfront capital subsidies (of up to 90%) generally mean that the beneficiary’s interest is short-lived and the subsidy is viewed merely as a discount on the RE equipment cost. There is generally no subsidy linkage with the actual in-use performance of the RE equipment, and therefore the subsidy is limited as a long-term sustained RE support mechanism. There are also generally operational issues in the way the subsidies have been disbursed. The RE subsidy regime is reportedly often characterised by significant delays, and inefficiencies in the disbursal of subsidy.
62 Table 30: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.1
Outputs Activities 4.1.1. Assessed RE subsidy and support 4.1.1.1 Evaluate the effectiveness of existing RE models62 for increased effectiveness63 of subsidy schemes and other support models (Year 1) decentralised RE 4.1.2 Improved RE subsidy and support 4.1.2.1 Develop improved decentralised RE subsidy models for increased effectiveness of and support models (Year 1) decentralised RE for rural livelihoods funding 4.1.2.2 Conduct workshops and outreach activities to promote increased effectiveness RE subsidy and support models for rural livelihoods (Year 2)
Output 4.1.1 and Output 4.1.2
(GEF Grant US$ 25,200 investment and US$ 39,600 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 22,000; and Others: US$ 0)
155. In line with views expressed in the pre-project stakeholder consultations, an evaluation of the existing subsidy schemes in terms of their effectiveness, reach and efficiency will be carried out (Activity 4.1.1.1). Alternate RE subsidy and support models, e.g. performance based subsidy models will be reviewed, and improved decentralised RE subsidy and support models will be developed (Activity 4.1.2.1). These recommended new and improved financial models will be shared widely through workshops and other outreach modes (Activity 4.1.2.2).
Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision of financial support for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications
156. This outcome focuses on better meeting the actual financing needs of RETPRL users, technology and service providers. It is important to flag here that distributed and renewable energy (DRE) financing needs are quite different from other energy financing needs. DRE financing is characterized by: (i) small and geographically scattered requirements; (ii) high risks resulting from a sometimes low ability to repay loans and high level of uncertainty around DRE policy; (iii) uncertainty around approval and price aspects of possible carbon savings; and, (iv) over estimation of risks and undervaluation of savings / benefits. These characteristics have been recognized and highlighted by the financial and DRE sectors in some quarters, but gaps remain in the sensitization of the financial sector to the fact that environmental, social and frequently economic benefits from DRE often far outweigh their financial costs. Keeping in mind these issues, the existing DRE financial support mechanisms to improve their reach and relevance will be reviewed, while also devising new mechanisms.
Table 31: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.2
Outputs Activities
62 Capital and/or ‘soft cost’ grants, MNRE et al interest rate subsidies, low or no interest loans, import / sales / VAT tax exemptions, performance-linked payments, free / subsidised DPR (detailed project report) development, project or portfolio oriented (partial) risk guarantees, O&M subsidies, tax support for leasing, mobilization of CSR and international multilateral and bilateral development bank concessional funds, subsidised interest rates via national development banks, commercial lending through banks such as YES Bank, etc. 63 Effectiveness includes update, impact, predictability, accessibility, flexibility, and sustainability
63 4.2.1 Implemented financial 4.2.1.1 Develop financial support packages for RE technology support packages for RE and for service providers meeting updated technical technology – rural livelihoods specifications and compliance testing guidelines64 (Year 3) applications 4.2.1.2 Develop financial support packages for RE technology users / adapters (Year 3) 4.2.2 Pooled available financial 4.2.2.1 Identify existing financial models and resources available resources for supporting viable for financial pooling for RE - rural livelihoods (Year 2) livelihood business models and 4.2.2.2 Determine mechanisms by which financial resources can 65 enhanced market linkages be better pooled / bundled together (Year 2) 4.2.2.3 Develop guidelines for pooling financial resources for RE – rural livelihoods (Year 2) 4.2.2.4 Communicate financial pooling opportunities through reports, leaflets, workshops and meetings with sectoral partners (Year 2)
Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial support packages for RE technology – rural livelihoods applications
(GEF Grant US$ 39,000 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 12,000 and Others US$ 0)
157. As explained earlier, under Outcome 2.1, assistance will be provided to RE technology and service providers in drawing-up or improving their business plans. These business plans will also cover the financing needs of the RE technology and service providers. Based on these financing needs identified in the business plans and in consultation with financial institutions/experts, financial support packages for RE technology and service providers will be developed (Activity 4.2.1.1).
158. Financial support packages for RE technology users will be developed. The aim will be to pool financial resources available in the form of subsidies, soft loans, etc. from both renewable energy and livelihoods sectors (drawing from the work done under output 4.2.2). Simplified processes will be suggested so that these financial resources available from different sources can be accessed through a single window by the RE technology users (Activity 4.2.1.2).
Output 4.2.2: Pooled available financial resources for supporting viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages
(GEF Grant US$ 80,900 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 20,000 and Others US$ 0)
159. This project has a unique feature in that it can potentially pool renewable energy subsidies as well as for a number of livelihoods sectors. While this widens the pool of financial resources available, it raises cross-institutional issues that need to be identified and resolved. The first step will be the identification of existing financial models and resources available for financial pooling for RE - rural livelihoods (Activity 4.2.2.1). Some of the potential sources of financial resources at the national level could be National Rural
64 Decentralised RE includes both fully captive applications and also grid connected applications where the grid connection sales are not the primary purpose of the RE installation 64 Capital and/or ‘soft cost’ grants, MNRE et al interest rate subsidies, low or no interest loans, import / sales / VAT tax exemptions, performance-linked payments, free / subsidised DPR (detailed project report) development, project or portfolio oriented (partial) risk guarantees, O&M subsidies, tax support for leasing, mobilization of CSR and international multilateral and bilateral development bank concessional funds, subsidised interest rates via national development banks, commercial lending through banks such as YES Bank, etc. 64 Effectiveness includes update, impact, predictability, accessibility, flexibility, and sustainability 65 Through NRLM, SRLM, NABARD, KVIC, National Mission on Horticulture (NMH), rural livelihood sector support ministries / departments and central / state funding agencies, etc.
64 Livelihood Mission; Khadi & Village Commission; National Horticulture Board; Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, etc. Similarly there are other financial assistance sources available at the state-level. After identifying these financial assistance resources, suitable mechanisms by which financial resources can be better pooled / bundled together will be determined (Activity 4.2.2.2). In several cases, pooling of financial resources is not allowed i.e. if the end-user is getting a subsidy from one department then he/she is debarred from accessing any other subsidy. Work towards reaching out to senior officials in the relevant ministries/departments of livelihoods sectors to resolve these issues will be carried out. Resolution of these issues will lead to the development of guidelines for pooling financial resources for RE – rural livelihoods (Activity 4.2.2.3). Financial pooling opportunities through reports, leaflets, workshops and meetings with sectoral partners will be communicated to the relevant stakeholders (Activity 4.2.2.4).
Outcome 4.3: Improved investment risk mitigation for decentralised RE in rural livelihood applications
160. As mentioned above, financial risks around DRE tend to be poorly understood and in many cases are over-stated. This is true not just of financial risks but also of the technical and institutional risks that also need to be better understood. In this project, several factors add to potential risks, viz-a-viz, application of RE in several cases to relatively new applications, dealing with first-time users of DRE, working in clusters that have a low familiarity with RE or have a low capacity to pay. Nevertheless, there are mechanisms to mitigate these risks and these will be evaluated closely and facilitate the employment of suitable mechanisms in the demonstration, replication and scale-up activities. Training workshops will help demystify risks around DRE and generate awareness about various risk mitigation mechanisms and their suitability to various DRE applications and situations.
Table 32: Outputs and Activities Contributing to the Achievement of Outcome 4.3
Outputs Activities 4.3.1 Enhanced risk mitigation 4.3.1.1 Undertake comparative assessment of key methods and mechanisms66 designed and mechanisms for providing investment risk guarantees (Year 2) supported for RE enterprises 4.3.1.2 Assess risks and their mitigation in the RE - rural livelihoods and RE technology adopters / context (Year 3) end-users in rural livelihoods 4.3.1.3 Design suitable risk guarantee mechanisms (Year 3) applications 4.3.1.4 Undertake training workshops to share the improved risk guarantee mechanism findings (Year 3) 4.3.1.5 Establishment of a fund to provide implementation support to RE technology supply and service providers as well as livelihood enterprises (Year 3)
Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk mitigation mechanisms designed and supported for RE enterprises and RE technology adopters / end-users in rural livelihoods applications
(GEF Grant US$ 298,900 TA; Co-financing: MNRE US$ 29,300 and Others US$ 0)
161. A comparative assessment of key methods and mechanisms for providing investment risk guarantees e.g. grants, subsidies, loan guarantees, concessional/flexible loan terms, insurance, etc. for RE enterprises and RE end-users will be carried out (Activity 4.3.1.1). As there are a variety of risks e.g. risks related with policy, technology, macroeconomic and capacity; these risks and their mitigation in the RE- rural livelihoods context will be assessed (Activity 4.3.1.2). Based on the work done during Activities 4.3.1.1 and 4.3.1.2, improvements of existing risk guarantee mechanisms for RE enterprises and RE end-users
66 Including but not limited to project or portfolio level partial risk guarantees to reduce loan collateral requirements and reduce perceived lender repayment risks
65 will be designed (Activity 4.3.1.3). Training workshops to share the improved risk guarantee mechanism findings will be implemented (Activity 4.3.1.4) and established a fund, with around US$ 0.3 million to provide implementation support to RE technology supply and service providers as well as livelihood enterprises (Activity 4.3.1.5). This fund will be utilized as per the mechanism(s) developed under activity 4.3.1.3. This activity will link with activities 2.2 and 2.3 where RE technology and service providers are developing their business plans and obtaining the necessary business finance for their companies.
8 KEY INDICATORS, RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS
8.1 Indicators
162. Overarching key indicators of the project’s success include:
i. At least ten (10) RE – rural livelihoods application packages are designed, technical quality specifications and compliance testing guidelines developed, packages utilised, and packages available for ongoing RE – rural livelihoods technology and market refinement, policy support, and funding support at the end of the project implementation period.
ii. At least 1,500 household enterprises in 15 clusters benefit from the direct demonstration of RE – rural livelihood application packages, and the results are documented.
iii. At least 28,500 household enterprises benefit from the replication of the RE – rural livelihood application packages, and the results are documented.
iv. Cumulative CO2 emission reductions achieved from start to end of project (EOP) will be 69,115 tCO2e.
v. Seven (7) sectoral master training packages training programmes are developed and training of trainers activities are undertaken for replication and scale up of the applicable RE – rural livelihood application packages.
vi. A new programme / scheme(s) is (are) developed and supported by MNRE for enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihood applications.
vii. Appropriate national and State level statements / documents /guidelines of the relevant rural livelihoods missions and of relevant livelihoods sectors emphasise the use of RE.
viii. 100 RE technology supply and service providers are supported in their business development aspects for RE - rural livelihoods applications.
ix. Enhanced risk mitigation mechanisms are designed and supported for RE enterprises and RE technology adopters / end-users in rural livelihoods applications.
163. The project results framework outlined in section 11 below provides a detailed list of project progress indicators for the various outputs of the project.
8.2 Risks
164. The project can be considered to face two categories of risks: external (political / policy / India / international events related) and internal (risks that are inherent to the project implementation where the risk can be substantially controlled by the project’s management or in the project’s implementation):
165. The key external risks include:
66 a) Failure to secure the necessary effective ongoing policy, management or financial support from MNRE, which will be the main project implementing agency and is the provider of most of the project’s co-financing – for example due to adverse impact changes in MNRE’s management, or from reduced MNRE funding, or if the proposed MNRE new programme focus on RE for rural livelihoods does not eventuate. b) Current levels of funding available to support the development of rural livelihoods such as NRLM, National Horticulture Mission, or National Fisheries Mission etc. at the central and state government level are reduced and hence there is less funding support available to be accessed by the project for the rural livelihoods aspects of project activities. c) (Decentralised) RE does not remain an important item on the relevant central and/or state political agendas. d) Large and ongoing subsidies for certain favoured RE technologies or REPTL applications (e.g. solar water pumping for agriculture) leads to significant and unavoidable market distortions. e) Supporting rural livelihoods does not remain a high central or relevant state government priority. This is somewhat unlikely, though the design of the livelihoods initiatives could undergo significant changes in the project’s 5-year implementation timeframe. f) Civil, political or communal disorder or natural disasters (e.g. delayed or weak monsoon or other rains, cyclonic storms, disease outbreaks in monoculture crops, an outbreak of insect plagues like locusts, major outbreak of animal or human diseases, major forest fires, etc.) negatively impact on the project’s remote rural areas and their ability to export the relevant commercial goods. g) Grid electricity supply is significantly extended to remote household enterprises instead of just some government facilities and some centrally located households in rural villages - and/or the hours per day, predictability, or quality (e.g. voltage regulation) of rural grid electricity supply improves significantly in the applicable project districts. This would make decentralised renewable electricity less attractive for rural livelihoods applications. h) There is a sustained reduction in the international oil price, or large subsidies are re-introduced and sustained for diesel used for captive power generation, or funds available for LPG subsidies is significantly increased, or the price of electricity for rural livelihoods end uses falls – hence significantly undermining the economics of RE for rural livelihoods in India. i) Prices of relevant rural livelihoods sector outputs (e.g. dairy products or fish or broiler chicken meat or eggs) collapse and stay down for a significant period during the project’s implementation, or market linkages of the relevant livelihoods sector outputs (e.g. high quality dried fish) are weaker than anticipated. j) Applicable rural enterprises are unable to fund the necessary minimum level of equity (20%) of their RE technology cost to ensure strong enough beneficiary ownership of the RE – rural livelihoods applications. k) Major adverse economic or political conditions significantly force up interest rates and/or curtail bank lending for a significant period in India during the project’s implementation, hence reducing the affordability of the bank loans that beneficiaries need to take out to cover part of their RE capital costs.
67 166. The internal risks include:
a) The project is not able to find or to motivate additional RE technology and/or service providers to enter the market and to grow their businesses in rural livelihoods applications areas.
b) The project is not able to foster the more effective pooling and access of the multiple RE and rural livelihood capital subsidies in a timely fashion without excessive transaction costs or excessive time delays - to grow the number of RE–rural livelihoods applications through demonstrations, replications and scale up project activities.
c) The project is not able to get MNRE, NRLM, national livelihoods missions, and relevant state based RE, SRLM and other sectoral livelihoods efforts to remain engaged or to effectively work together to support the growth of RE for rural livelihoods.
d) The project is not able to mobilise the necessary 30-50% debt financing from banks or microfinance institutions for the replication and scale up projects in the relevant RE – rural livelihoods applications.
e) Project Co-financers such as KVIC or IREDA or NTPC are unable to keep to their commitments to financially support the project.
f) Relevant RE – rural livelihoods projects are successfully demonstrated, but then do not get replicated by a factor of nineteen for a variety of internal or external factors. This could lead to a negative circular effect in terms of credibility around the project.
g) There is a significantly slow start of on-the-ground project activities.
h) There is significant RE technology underperformance or failure in project activities (technical risk).
i) There is a lack of necessary leadership and/or slow or low quality decision-making in the PMU.
j) There are significant delays in completing the recruitment process for Cluster Level Implementing Agencies (CLIAs) and other India GEF ACE project consultancy assignments.
k) The project is unable to hire competent consultants in a timely fashion because of MNRE or UNDP administrative or management constraints in the process of selection and/or recruitment.
167. A detailed risk-analysis table is available in Annexure A. This also includes suggestions for countermeasures to deal with outlined risks to ensure successful implementation of this GEF project.
8.3 Assumptions
168. The key assumptions for this project revolve around expectations from both the government and the market sides of RE and its use in rural livelihoods.
169. All the feedback received during the project preparatory phase is that the Indian government (through MNRE and other relevant ministries / departments) will continue to support RE for rural livelihoods development through ongoing capital subsidies and other supports, and that MNRE is prepared in principle to set up a dedicated new programme focused on the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods applications.
170. The feedback received during the project preparatory phase is also that the Indian central and state governments (led through NRLM and relevant central rural livelihoods missions at the centre) will continue to support the development of relevant rural livelihoods through ongoing capital subsidies and other supports.
68 171. The project also depends on a positive response from the market consisting of the applicable RE technology and service providers and rural livelihood support organisations (including but not limited to the project supported CLIAs) and of course the rural livelihood focused household enterprises. The assumption is that both the number and focus of the RE suppliers and the interest of the rural livelihoods related household enterprises will grow from the current levels with the interventions provide by this India GEF ACE project.
172. The RE solutions envisaged offer distinct advantages with reasonable payback on investment and entrepreneurs would be ready to make investments. Sometimes, the RE products did not match with the exact requirement or stopped working after first few months. The project assumes that the RE products are matured and the matching is appropriate and the RE product will operate for duration as claimed.
9 COST-EFFECTIVENESS; GEF INCREMENTAL REASONING
173. This UNDP/MNRE India GEF ACE project has been designed as an integrated and suitably co- funded series of components and activities to remove the multiple barriers facing the widespread adoption of key RE for rural livelihoods application in three specific states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha) in India, with a possible extension into the neighbouring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya. A specific new MNRE RE for rural livelihoods programme, and the enhanced utilisation of applicable existing state level RE programmes and interventions will support the project. The project will also be supported by central and a state level rural livelihood programmes, and will be supported by appropriate NGOs, financial institutions, industrial companies, and academic institutions. The project will directly support rural livelihoods, and hence directly provide socioeconomic poverty reduction efforts. Women head many rural livelihoods enterprises, or work on or are employed by rural livelihoods enterprises, so the project will have a very positive overall gender impact as well.
174. In the absence of the project’s interventions: the market for RE for rural livelihoods will be subject to continued ad-hoc and hence inefficient central and state government funding for RE for rural livelihoods applications; and it will continue to be difficult for RE technology and service providers and household enterprises to access and pool the myriad central and state government RE and rural livelihoods capital grants and other supports that are available. Key RE technology and rural livelihoods application packages will remain poorly specified in terms of their performance and there will continue to be a lack of quality compliance testing. There will be an inadequate number and limited capacity of RE technology and service providers. There will continue to be significant constraints for RE for rural livelihoods providers in setting suitable tariffs and in accessing the electricity grid to export any surplus RE generated electricity.
175. The GEF contribution of USD 4,006,849 will result in direct GHG emission reductions of 69,115 tonnes CO2 from the 1,500 demonstrations and 28,500 replication RE – rural livelihoods projects implemented during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct emission reduction will be 662,742 tonnes CO2. If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the direct project emission reductions, this gives a corresponding GHG unit abatement cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD 6.05 US$/tonne CO2.
10 SUSTAINABILITY AND REPLICABILITY
10.1 Sustainability
176. After completion of the proposed GEF project, it is expected that the impetus for developing the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods will continue in India. The post project-end sustainability of this GEF-supported project will be ensured by:
69 Emergence of a stronger and more diverse RE for rural livelihoods technology and service provider industry in India, with stronger supply chains and improved quality RE-livelihoods technology and service offerings that meet defined standards, and improved delivery mechanisms for RE for rural livelihoods. A significantly increased proportion of successful RE for rural livelihoods projects working at the defined performance levels that are specified in government funding supports and that work as expected by the rural livelihoods household enterprise end users. Availability of suitably documented demonstrations and replications of key RE for rural livelihoods applications in real-world operating environments in India. A higher level of awareness of the value of well-designed and suitably specified RE for rural livelihoods technologies and services amongst the potential household enterprises and their key intermediaries in India. A more supportive policy and regulatory framework that fosters the supply and adoption of RE for rural livelihoods activities
10.2 Replicability
177. The implementation and documentation of the application of RE for rural livelihoods in 1,500 rural enterprises, followed by replication in a further 28,500 household enterprises, will showcase the relevance, usefulness and cost-effectiveness of RE technologies and services in real-world rural livelihoods applications in India. The availability of ten (10) well developed and integrated RE – rural livelihoods application packages in a range of key rural livelihoods sectors will form the basis for a further scaling up of RE for rural livelihoods projects post project-end.
70 11 PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK
This project will contribute to achieving the following Country Programme Outcome as defined in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017 and the UNDP India CPAP 2013-2017: Project: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive67 Uses (India ACE Project) Outcome: Expanded access to clean energy. Output: Support for initiatives that increase access to clean energy for productive uses in off-grid, underserved rural regions. Output indicators: number of REPTRL packages developed and trialled, number of RE for rural livelihoods applications fostered by project. Country Programme Outcome Indicators: Outcome: Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements Output: Supporting national development objectives with co-benefits of mitigating climate change Output indicators: (a) Annual reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in India; (b) million USD flowing annually to India from GEF through UNDP for this programme; (c) number of additional UNDP initiatives for achieving global and national targets under multilateral environmental agreements.
Primary applicable Key Environment and Sustainable Development Key Result Area): Strengthened national capacities to mainstream environment and energy concerns into national development plans.
Expanding access to environmental and energy services for the poor. Applicable GEF Strategic Objective and Program: Strategic Objective: Climate Change Objective 3: Promote investment in renewable energy technologies Applicable GEF Expected Outcomes: Increased market uptake of RE systems for rural livelihoods Applicable GEF Outcome Indicators: a. Extent to which EE policies and regulations are adopted and enforced b. Volume of investment mobilized c. Tonnes of CO2 equivalent avoided
Table 33 Project Planning Matrix
Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Project goal: Reduced GHG Cumulative CO2 emission 0 69,115 M&E reports of the Continued support and participation from emissions achieved through reduced from start of project to demonstration and co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs renewable energy systems in rural End-Of-Project (EOP), (tCO2e) replication projects and other stakeholders livelihood sectors
67 The original PIF and documentation referred to “and Domestic (Uses)” but in the PPG phase the feedback and analysis firmly supported a narrowing of the project scope to be limited to productive uses. In a country of over 1.2 billion people (India) even just focusing on productive uses in three states is very ambitious with only a GEF $4 million budget. Adding domestic uses would increase project implementation complexity and risks as domestic users expect low cost (subsidised) electricity supply and it would also make the project scope and ambition too great. This reduction in scope to just productive uses will also address GEF STAP and Council comments at the PIF stage of the project scope being too ambitious and that the original project was too unfocussed. 71 Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Project Objective: Enhancing Total energy savings achieved M&E reports of the Selected end users for demos and reliable and affordable clean energy from implemented RETPRLs by demonstration and replications have sufficient finance and access for rural livelihoods in un- EOP MWhe 0 112,737 replication projects favourable business environment served and underserved areas MWhth 0 1,376,631 Component 1: Development and deployment of key RE-rural livelihood application packages Outcome 1: Deployment of RE- No. of household enterprises 0 30,000 M&E reports of the Sufficient finance is available for the rural livelihood application adopting RETPRLs through demonstration and implementation of developed packages for packages demonstrations and replications replication projects RE-rural livelihood in the targeted states by the EOP Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost- No. of RETPRLs developed by 0 10 Performance assessment RE technology suppliers willing to provide effective RE technology packages Year 2 reports on RETPRLs services as required for technology developed for rural livelihood packages in rural areas (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications Output 1.2: Demonstrated and No. of demonstration project 0 15 Reports from CLIAs Household enterprises are convinced with documented RE – rural livelihood clusters by EoP RE application benefits in livelihood application packages in 15 clusters M&E reports of the activities and benefitting 1,500 household demonstration enterprises No. of household enterprises 0 1,500 Reports from CLIAs End-users are interested and have the adopting RETPRLs in the sufficient finance demonstration clusters by Year M&E reports of the 3 demonstration Output 1.3: Completed training No. of training programmes 0 14 Report of training Continued support and participation from programmes and training of trainers conducted by EoP programmes co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs activities for replication and scale up and other stakeholders of RE – rural livelihood application No. of training packages 0 7 Training package material Continued support and participation from packages developed by Year 2 co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders No. of persons trained by EoP 0 280 Report of training Continued support and participation from programmes co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders Output 1.4: Completed promotion of No. of household enterprises 1,500 30,000 M&E reports of the Implementing agencies and end-users are replicated and documented RE – rural adopting RETPRLS through (at the end replication projects interested, accept RETPRLs and are livelihood application packages replications by EoP of equipped to implement the project promoted to other districts / states and demonstra applied to 28,500 household tion) enterprises Component 2: Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers for enhancing rural livelihoods Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE No. of RE technology supply 0 100 M&E of supply chain There is sufficient demand for RETPRLs technology and service providers and service providers for rural development activity amongst existing and new RE technology for rural livelihood applications livelihood applications by EoP and service providers Enterprises have sufficient technical and financial capacity
72 Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Output 2: Business development No. of RE technology supply 0 100 M&E of supply chain aspects supported for 100 RE and service providers for rural development activity technology supply and service livelihoods applications by EoP providers for rural livelihoods No. of business plans developed 0 20 M&E of supply chain applications for RE technology supply and development activity/ service providers by Year 2 business plan reports No. of financial mechanism to 0 1 M&E of supply chain access finance for RE development activity technology supply and service suppliers by Year 2 Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for RE - rural livelihood applications Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE No. of states enforcing policies 0 4 NRLM (1) and SRLMs (3 NRLM and SRLMs that support RE applications in national and state level on the RE applications as part of states) policy documents applications for rural livelihoods is rural livelihoods policies for key their SRLM and in line with the sustained livelihood sectors in rural areas same policies at the national level by year 3 Output 3.1.1: National and State level No. of Ministries/Departments 0 4 Policy documents of rural livelihood mission statements / that officially adopt mission NRLM and SRLM, documents emphasising the use of RE statements that support RE meeting/ workshop reports applications for rural livelihoods by Year 3 Output 3.1.2: National and State level No. of livelihood sectors where 0 20 Central (e.g. KVIC) and Continued support and participation from policies that support the use of RE for RE is promoted in 3 targeted state livelihoods sectors co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs key rural livelihood sectors states by year 3 /departments policy and other stakeholders documents
Output 3.1.3: Documented No. of peer reviewed 0 7 Published reports experiences and lessons on RE publications sharing experiences applications for rural livelihoods at regarding RE and rural suitable regional and international livelihoods by EoP fora Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE No. of MNRE programs that 0 1 MNRE policy document Continued support and participation from programs also cater to actions espouse RE applications for co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs towards enhanced RE utilisation in rural livelihoods programme by Documentation of MNRE- and other stakeholders rural livelihoods Year 3 supported RET operated 0 28,500 rural livelihood projects Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE- No. of replication projects supported programme for enhanced implemented by MNRE in new RE utilisation in rural livelihoods programme using RETPRLs by EoP Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff and No. of state regulatory 0 3 Continued support and participation of grid interconnection regulations for commissions (SRCs) implement SRCs decentralised RE policy guidelines of improved
73 Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target tariff structure for decentralised RE by year 3 Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap No. of state level workshops to 0 3 Workshop reports Continued support and participation from and workshops for supporting implement the revised tariff co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs improved tariff structures for small structures by Year 3 and other stakeholders especially SRCs scale captive and off-grid RE Output 3.3.2: Developed and No. of SRCs implement policy 0 3 National level study report Continued support and participation from implemented regulatory, technical guidelines for co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and tariff guidelines for RE based captive/decentralised RE grid and other stakeholders especially SRCs, captive/decentralised systems’ grid interconnection by year 3 where SRCs see RE grid interconnection interconnection as an important issue. Component 4: Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihood applications Outcome 4.1: Improved No. of developed improved 0 1 Review report decentralised RE subsidies and overall subsidy and support support for rural livelihoods models by Year 2 Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE subsidy No. of completed study on 0 1 Review report Continued support and participation from and support models for increased existing subsidies and supports co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs effectiveness of decentralised RE by Year 1 and other stakeholders in subsidising and supporting decentralised RE Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy No. of RE subsidy and support 0 3 Report on and support models for increased models for rural livelihoods recommendations effectiveness of decentralised RE for available by year 1 rural livelihoods funding Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision No. of financial institutions 0 3 Report on new financial Continued interest, and participation from of financial support for supporting RETPRL by Year 3 support packages co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs decentralised RE in rural livelihood developed and other stakeholders such as IREDA applications Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial No. of household enterprises 0 28,500 support packages for RE technology – adopting RETPRLs that were rural livelihood applications funded by the established financial support packages by EOP Output 4.2.2: Pooled available No. of completed studies on 0 1 Study report Institutions are willing to continuously financial resources for supporting inter-institutional linkages for pool their financial resources and other viable livelihood business models and finance pooling to support financing institutions continued to provide enhanced market linkages viable livelihood business support models and enhanced market linkages covering three states and centre by Year 2 Outcome 4.3: Improved investment Number of states implement 0 3 Communication by the risk mitigation for decentralised designed suitable risk state governments / RE in rural livelihood applications guarantee/mitigation Review report mechanisms by Year 3
74 Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk No. of completed studies on risk 0 1 Study report Continued interest, and participation from mitigation mechanisms designed and assessment and risk mitigation co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs supported for RE enterprises and RE in applicable sectors by Year 3 and other stakeholders such as IREDA technology adopters / end-users in No. of designed suitable risk 0 1 Study report rural livelihoods applications guarantee/mitigation mechanisms by Year 3
75 12 TOTAL BUDGET AND WORK- PLAN
Award ID: 00080379 Project ID(s): 00090089
Award Title: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India ACE Project) Business Unit: IND10 Project Title: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses PIMS no. 4605 Implementing Partner Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India (Executing Agency)
Table 34: Outcome wise detailed budget
Responsible GEF Outcome Party Budget ERP/ATLAS Budget Annual Expenses (USD) Total / Atlas Source # (Implementing Code Description/Input (USD) Activity Agency) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 71200 International Consultants 12,000 24,000 0 0 0 36,000 1 71300 Local Consultants 191,500 213,500 147,500 117,500 141,500 811,500 2 Outcome 1: 71600 Travel 77,400 97,400 77,000 81,400 84,200 417,400 16 Deployment of Contractual services - RE-rural GEF MNRE 72100 companies 36,000 142,000 153,000 504,000 567,000 1,402,000 3 livelihood 62000 72500 Supplies 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 17 application packages 74200 Audio Visual and Printing 2,000 4,000 4,000 0 0 10,000 4 74500 Miscellaneous 700 4,900 2,100 5,550 4,799 18,049 18 Total Outcome 1.1 324,600 490,800 388,600 713,450 802,499 2,719,949 Total Component 1 324,600 490,800 388,600 713,450 802,499 2,719,949 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outcome 2: Increased 71300 Local Consultants 5,000 0 15,000 42,000 0 62,000 5 supply of RE 71600 Travel 3,000 14,000 12,000 8,400 0 37,400 22 technology and GEF Contractual services - MNRE service 62000 72100 companies 0 0 45,000 0 0 45,000 23 providers for 72600 Grants 0 150,000 0 0 0 150,000 6 rural livelihood 74500 Miscellaneous 500 2,500 2,100 1,500 0 6,600 18 applications Total Outcome 2.1 8,500 166,500 74,100 51,900 0 301,000 Total Component 2 8,500 166,500 74,100 51,900 0 301,000 MNRE 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 Responsible GEF Outcome Party Budget ERP/ATLAS Budget Annual Expenses (USD) Total / Atlas Source # (Implementing Code Description/Input (USD) Activity Agency) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Outcome 3.1: 71300 Local Consultants 0 32,000 32,000 0 0 64,000 7 Inclusion of RE 71600 Travel 3,600 15,700 17,700 3,600 3,600 44,200 22 applications in Contractual services - national and 72100 companies 11,420 21,920 24,920 11,420 11,420 81,100 24 state level rural GEF livelihoods 62000 74500 Miscellaneous 600 2,700 2,900 600 600 7,400 18 policies for key livelihood sectors in rural areas Total Outcome 3.1 15,620 72,320 77,520 15,620 15,620 196,700 Outcome 3.2: 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future MNRE 71300 Local Consultants 6,000 8,000 0 0 0 14,000 8 programs also cater to actions 71600 Travel 2,400 7,400 0 0 0 9,800 22 GEF towards MNRE Contractual services - 62000 enhanced RE 72100 companies 0 21,000 0 0 0 21,000 25 utilization in 74500 Miscellaneous 400 1,400 0 0 0 1,800 18 rural livelihoods Total Outcome 3.2 8,800 37,800 0 0 0 46,600 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff 71300 Local Consultants 0 43,200 0 0 0 43,200 9 and grid GEF 71600 Travel 0 14,400 0 0 0 14,400 22 interconnection MNRE 62000 Contractual services - regulations for 72100 companies 0 0 9,000 0 0 9,000 26 decentralized 74500 Miscellaneous 0 2,600 300 0 0 2,900 18 RE Total Outcome 3.3 0 60,200 9,300 0 0 69,500 Total Component 3 24,420 170,320 86,820 15,620 15,620 312,800 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outcome 4.1: Improved 71300 Local Consultants 22,000 0 0 0 0 22,000 10 decentralized GEF 71600 Travel 8,800 0 0 0 0 8,800 22 RE subsidies MNRE 62000 Contractual services - and support for 72100 companies 4,500 27,000 0 0 0 31,500 27 rural 74500 Miscellaneous 1,700 800 0 0 0 2,500 18 livelihoods Total Outcome 4.1 37,000 27,800 0 0 0 64,800 Outcome 4.2: 71200 International Consultants 0 0 16,000 0 0 16,000 11 GEF Enhanced 62000 71300 Local Consultants 0 30,000 12,000 0 0 42,000 12 provision of 71600 Travel 0 10,000 9,600 0 0 19,600 22
77 Responsible GEF Outcome Party Budget ERP/ATLAS Budget Annual Expenses (USD) Total / Atlas Source # (Implementing Code Description/Input (USD) Activity Agency) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 financial Contractual services - support for 72100 companies 0 38,000 0 0 0 38,000 28 decentralized 74500 Miscellaneous 0 2,900 1,400 0 0 4,300 18 RE in rural livelihoods MNRE applications Total Outcome 4.2 0 80,900 39,000 0 0 119,900 71200 International Consultants 0 8,000 8,000 0 0 16,000 13 Outcome 4.3: Improved 71300 Local Consultants 0 6,000 34,200 0 0 40,200 14 investment risk 71600 Travel 0 4,800 13,800 0 0 18,600 22 mitigation for GEF Contractual services - MNRE decentralized 62000 72100 companies 0 0 21,000 0 0 21,000 29 RE in rural 72600 Grants 0 0 50,000 100,000 50,000 200,000 15 livelihoods 74500 Miscellaneous 0 700 2,400 0 0 3,100 18 applications Total Outcome 4.3 0 19,500 129,400 100,000 50,000 298,900 Total Component 4 37,000 128,200 168,400 100,000 50,000 483,600 71200 International Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contractual Services- 71400 Individual 27,100 27,100 27,100 27,100 27,100 135,500 20 71600 Travel 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 30 Project GEF 72200 Equipment and Furniture 200 200 200 200 200 1,000 31 UNDP Management 62000 72500 Supplies 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 32 72800 Info Tech Equipment 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,000 33 74100 Professional Services - Audits 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15,000 21 74599 Direct Project Services 7,000 7,000 3,500 4,000 500 22,000 19 Total Project Management 41,300 40,300 36,800 37,300 33,800 189,500 Project Total 435,820 996,120 754,720 918,270 901,919 4,006,849
General notes to the budget:
- International consultants are budgeted at $ 4,000 per week and short-term national consultants at $ 1,000 per week - Travel cost (DSA and ticket) is budgeted at 30% of international consultant’s fee and 15% of national consultant’s fee as a general rule-of thumb - The cost of workshops has been divided in various budget lines as per UNDP ATLAS budget which does not have a separate budget line for training / workshops. For example, budget line 'international consultant' will have a % allocation for international experts to support workshops. The number of workshops for each output is given in the 'results framework'. A workshop having more than 20 participants will cost about USD 3,000 per day; workshop
78 having less than 20 participants will cost about USD 1,500 per day. A half-day high-level meeting with about 10 participants will cost around USD 750 per day. - Miscellaneous is for unforeseen expenses that are difficult to anticipate. It is budgeted at 3% of the total cost as a general rule-of-thumb.
Specific notes (the numbers correspond to the last column of Error! Reference source not found.):
1. 9 person-weeks of international expertise to support development of technology packages, its demonstration and scaling up. 2. 591 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for technology package development, market assessment, and demonstration and scale up of technology packages. 3. Cost against hiring and contracting of CLIAs and CSUs for implementation of demonstration and replication projects is budgeted under the ‘subcontract’ head. A part of this cost, as mentioned in above table, will be borne by GEF trust fund and the remaining part will be contributed by UNDP CORE project. 4. Printing and reproduction cost of technology application packages and knowledge dissemination documents 5. 62 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for identifying suitable technology suppliers, developing their business plans and facilitating access to finance. 6. A grant support of US $ 7,500 will be provided to initial 20 RE technology supplier and service providers to support them in expanding/establishing their supply and service network. 7. 64 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for assessment of existing livelihoods policies, drafting policies supporting use of RE and providing support for its adoption in the mainstream livelihoods policies. 8. 14 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for providing support to MNRE in developing specific programmes focused on RE for rural livelihoods. 9. 43 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for developing improved tariff structure for off-grid RE and improved regulatory support for decentralised RE – grid interconnection. 10. 22 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for evaluating the effectiveness of existing subsidy schemes, developing improved subsidy and support models and providing support to MNRE for its adoption.. 11. 4 person-weeks of international expertise to support development of financial support packages and bringing in international success experiences. 12. 42 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for development of financial support packages for RE technology and service providers and end users. 13. 4 person-weeks of international expertise to support development of risk mitigation mechanism and bringing in international success experiences. 14. 40 person-weeks of local short-term consultancy for development of risk mitigation mechanisms for RE technology and service providers and end users. 15. US $ 0.2 million (from GEF grant) has been kept to support the relevant existing risk management mechanisms with some carefully targeted funding to help mitigating the risk of both RE technology supply and service providers as well as livelihood enterprises. 16. This includes travel to the focused states under the project. It was assessed based on the assumption that travel for international consultants will be at the cost of 30% of their fee, travel for local consultants is assessed at 20% of their consultant fee, and travel for CLIAs and CSUs will be at 10% of CLIA/CSU fee. International consultant fee is assumed in the calculation is US$ 4,000/week and local consultants is assumed to be US$ 1,000/week. 17. This is for office supplies and small communication expense. 18. Reserve for exchange loss & contingency expense. 19. UNDP recovery cost for recruitment of project consultant/staff, procurement of goods & services, financial payment and workshop. Breakdown of services provided in LOA, annexed to the Project Document. 20. Costs related to Inception Workshop & Report, and Consultants for Mid-Term review and Terminal Evaluation 21. Costs of consultants for Audits
79 Budget for travel reserved for local consultants and relevant stakeholders personnel for works related to: build capacities of RETPRL service providers personnel for works related to: develop suitable RE guidelines/statements for national and state level rural livelihoods, and hold workshop to adopt policy statement Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: hold workshop to adopt policy statement (follow up work from note 24) Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: Improved tariff and grid interconnection regulations for decentralized RE personnel for works related to: conduct workshops and outreach activities to promote increased effectiveness RE subsidies (outcome 4.1) Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: conduct workshops and outreach activities to promote increased effectiveness RE subsidies (outcome 4.2) Costs for hiring personnel for works related to: share improved risk guarantee mechanism findings Travel budget reserved for Project Management Unit Budget reserved for equipment to be used in Project Management Unit Budget reserved for office supplies/stationery Budget reserved for IT rentals
financing contribution: financing contribution of US $ 10 million has been allocated as explained in the table below:
Table 35: Allocation of MNRE's co-financing contribution
Expenditure head Amount (US $) Subsidies for RETPRLs (activities 1.2.5 and 1.4.2) 8,997,000 A fund of US $ 400,000 (US $ 100,000 each in years 2, 3, 4 and 5) has been kept for providing 400,000 additional financial support (in addition to the existing MNRE subsidy) for selected RE interventions on a case-by-case basis (activities 1.2.5 and 1.4.2) Salary of the three state coordinators will be provided from MNRE’s fund for the whole project 360,000 duration (five years) Activities under component 3 and 4 will be partly supported by MNRE’s fund 180,000 Project Management Component 63,000 Total 10,000,000 Table 36: Summary of Funds68:
Donor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total GEF 435,820 996,120 754,720 918,270 901,919 4,006,849 MNRE 116,180 494,364 466,864 4,461,296 4,461,296 10,000,000 Others 59,374 423,628 319,531 4,115,617 4,115,617 9,033,767 Total 611,374 1,914,112 1,541,115 9,495,183 9,478,832 23,040,616
68 Summary table should include all financing of all kinds: GEF financing, co-financing, cash, in-kind, etc...
81 13 MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS
Project Organization Structure
178. The project is co-financed with funding from GEF, and UNDP acts as the GEF Executing Agency. The project will be implemented by MNRE, who will assume the overall responsibility for the achievement of project results as the Implementing Partner (GEF Local Executing Agency). UNDP will provide overall management and guidance from its New Delhi Country Office (CO) and from the Bangkok Regional Hub (BRH) in Bangkok. UNDP will be responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the project as per standard GEF and UNDP requirements.
179. The India MNRE-UNDP-GEF ACE (GEF ACE) project institutional structure has been developed to provide an effective and integrated means to oversee and manage the multiple cluster-level projects that are specified in the Project Document. Effective project management of the India GEF ACE project will require a combined mix of expertise in renewable energy, rural livelihoods, project administration, and project management. It is critically important that all key project financial contributors and stakeholders have a strong ownership in the project design and execution at the strategic level. At the operational level on the ground, day-to-day activities will be carried out by cluster level agencies (CLIAs/CSUs) with their activities co-ordinated at the state-level by co-ordinators for each state. All activities at the cluster and state-levels will be supported and guided by a central Project Management Unit (PMU) located in MNRE.
180. Based on this overall project structure, the broad institutional arrangement for this project is shown below. Annexure C contains details of the TORs for the key PMU positions. The Project Operations Manual provides details of the key project roles, positions and proposed assignments that are required to undertake and manage the project’s main activities.
181. An EoI to shortlist potential suitable CLIAs was advertised on the UNDP India website, through UN solution exchange- climate change community with an aim to receive expression of interest from the interested agencies in becoming CLIAs and to shortlist a maximum of five agencies per cluster/district. To increase the response from grass root level and local agencies, pre-EOI meetings were conducted at state headquarters namely Guwahati, Bhubaneswar and Bhopal in the states of Assam, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh. UNDP representatives from programme and procurement divisions in the all the three locations and Ministry representative in Guwahati were present to respond to the queries on EOI by the interested agencies. 79 people participated in these pre-EOI meetings. 45 applications have been received. A short list is under progress at the time of finalising this full-sized project document finalisation.
82 Project Steering Committee
Project Executive Committee
Project Management Unit
1. National Project Director (1) 2. National Project Manager (1) 3. Renewable Energy Expert (1) 4. Rural Livelihoods Expert (1) 5. Finance and Administration Manager (1)
State Coordinator – 1 State Coordinator – 2 State Coordinator – 3
CLIAs CLIAs CLIAs 1a,…1n 2a,…2n 3a,…3n
CSUs CSUs CSUs 1a,…1n 2a,…2n 3a,…3n
Figure 4: Project Management Structure69
182. At the strategic level, a Project Steering Committee (PSC) will provide strategic guidance for the project, while a Project Executive Committee (PEC) will oversee operational project aspects. The Project Management Unit (PMU) will constitute the core team for the project’s implementation. The PMU will supervise, co-ordinate and provide the integrated coherence of all project activities. At the District level, project activities will be led by Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIAs). The CLIAs will form Cluster Support Units (CSUs) that will provide the day-to-day practical on the ground support at the village and rural household enterprise level. At the state level, there will be a State Level Coordinator mechanism to co-ordinate activities. More detailed descriptions follow in subsequent sections. A brief description of the different levels of project implementation is given below.
183. Project Steering Committee: The PSC is an oversight and governance focused high-level group that will be constituted by organisations that are core supporters and/or significant co-financiers of the project. Besides MNRE, UNDP and GEF (through MOEF), this Committee is also expected to include NRLM, IREDA, KVIC, NABARD, NTPC, DEA (Dept. of Economic Affairs) as well as representatives of
69 Normally, the PMU will communicate with the CLIAs through the respective state coordinators. However, the dotted line in the above organization structure represents that depending on the requirement, the PMU is free to directly communicate with the CLIAs.
83 state-level agencies that bring a significant contribution to the project. The Secretary MNRE will chair the PSC meetings. The Committee will meet at least once a year for a two-to-four hour duration review meeting focusing on the Annual Project Report/Project Implementation Report (APR/PIR) for the last year, and the review and formal endorsement of the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the upcoming year of project operations.
184. Project Executive Committee: The PEC will comprise all major stakeholders who are actively involved in project activities and who are interested in the project’s results. The PEC will include representatives of MNRE, UNDP, NRLM and State representatives. The Joint Secretary, MNRE, will chair the PEC meetings. This group will meet at least four times a year for a two-to-four hour duration meeting on each occasion. The PEC will review the Quarterly Progress Report (QPR) for the past quarter, and review what practical project implementation steps are needed to maximise the project activity success in the upcoming quarter. The group is also expected to act as the forum for resolving major implementation level issues that may arise between different government departments or other key stakeholders. It is recommended that each quarterly meeting be held in a different state, so that PEC meetings are held in each participating state at least once a year. The rotating PEC meetings will give an opportunity for local project partners and project staff in each state to interact with the Committee. It is recommended that the opportunity be provided for interested PEC members to review nearby project activities on site, in conjunction with the quarterly PEC meetings.
185. Project Management Unit: The PMU is the core team for managing the operations of the project. The PMU will meet at least once a month in a formal structured meeting (with comprehensive meeting minutes taken and promptly distributed to all PEC members). The PMU will be headed by a high-level MNRE official (Director) acting as the part-time primarily oversight focused National Project Director (NPD). The PMU will also comprise a full-time operational level National Project Manager (NPM) and three staff members (working full time, and with part of their salary being paid under administration and the rest being paid under technical components - keeping in mind the GEF funding limit on allowable project management costs). The three members of the unit will represent three different types of expertise, i.e., Renewable Energy (technical expert); Rural Livelihoods (social expert) and Finance & Administration. Additionally, the PMU may hire technical experts for inputs on particular technical and rural livelihoods interventions and sectors as required. Thus the PMU will comprise the following five members.
a. National Project Director (head of PMU) b. National Project Manager c. PMU Member – Renewable Energy Expert d. PMU Member – Rural Livelihoods Expert e. PMU Member – Finance and Administration Manager
While the NPD’s services will be provided as an in-kind project contribution by MNRE, the professional costs for full-time engagement of the NPM and for the three other members will be primarily borne by GEF.
186. Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIAs): During the initial demonstration phase (please refer to output 1.1.2 in the Project Document), the project will be implemented in around 15 clusters across the three states. Relevant focal agencies identified in each cluster will lead the project. Funds are expected to flow directly from the PMU to implementation agencies / enterprises. CLIAs are likely to be paid a fee in the form of grant to be paid in instalments over the first three years of the project70. The CLIAs will be tasked to liaise closely with relevant RE equipment suppliers and to provide the required handholding to rural household enterprises towards building their preparedness for RE adoption in their rural livelihoods applications. Proposal development and verification is another important role of the CLIAs. Supervision and monitoring on a day-to-day basis is one of the key roles of the CLIAs, this will feed into the larger more macro-level monitoring and verification task of the PMU.
187. Cluster Support Units (CSUs): After completion of the demonstration phase, state level replication plans will be completed and replication activities will be undertaken in the selected states (please
70 It is assumed that the task of implementation of the demonstration in 15 clusters will be completed by year 3.
84 refer to output 1.1.4). The Cluster Support Units will facilitate the replication and scale-up activities. In a normal case, a state would have one CSU for each livelihood sector e.g. Madhya Pradesh would have 1 CSU for the 2-3 poultry clusters identified for implementation under the implementation phase in the state. As explained later, CSUs are likely to be entities that are spun off from the CLIAs.
188. State-level coordinators: While the CLIAs will report and engage with the PMU, it is felt, given the complexity of the project and the multiplicity of agencies involved, that a mechanism for coordination of activities at the state-level would strengthen project management arrangements. State level coordinators are primarily extended arms of Project Management Unit. SLC will monitor the project on behalf of PMC, liaise and provide support to CLIA. SLC can be an individual or an agency hired by PMU. The PMU will engage/ communicate with the CLIAs both directly as well as through the state co-ordinators.
189. The following table highlights the essential differences between CLIAs and CSUs, as follows:
CLIA CSU The main task of CLIAs is to facilitate The main task of CSUs is to facilitate implementation of cluster level projects during implementation of replication activities (output the demonstration phase (output 1.1.2) 1.1.4) It is expected that for each of the 15 clusters, A state would normally have one CSU for each there would be one CLIA per cluster i.e. there livelihood sector e.g. Madhya Pradesh would would be 15 CLIAs in total for the project have 1 CSU for its poultry clusters The CLIAs are expected to work at the district The CSUs are expected to work in several level for a single cluster clusters of a particular livelihood sector across a state e.g. a CSU in Madhya Pradesh would be responsible for undertaking replication activities in 3 poultry clusters The role of CLIAs are expected to end by year The CSU will normally be active during years 4 & 3 5
General
UNDP support services
190. MNRE may enter into an agreement with UNDP for direct project support services in the form of procurement of goods and services during the project implementation process. In such a case, appropriate cost recovery will be charged as per UNDP rules and regulations. The support services will be outlined in the form of Letter of Agreement signed between MNRE and UNDP. The table below indicates the cost of UNDP direct project services (DPS) anticipated over the project implementation period of five years.
Table 37: Estimate of direct project services (DPS) (US$)
Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total (US$) ISS (support for recruitments, procurement, selection & awarding of 7,000 7,000 3,500 4,000 500 22,000 sub-contracts, approvals, etc.) Total (US$) 7,000 7,000 3,500 4,000 500 22,000
Prior obligations and prerequisites
191. No prior obligations or prerequisites have been identified.
85 Audit Arrangements
192. The project will be audited in accordance with UNDP Financial Regulations and Rules and Audit policies. The Government of India will provide the UNDP Resident Representative with certified periodic financial statements, and with an annual audit of the financial statements relating to the status of UNDP (including GEF) funds expended on the project according to the established procedures set out in the appropriate UNDP programming and finance manuals. The audit will be conducted by the legally recognized auditor of the Government of India, or by a commercial auditor engaged by the Government.
Agreement on the intellectual property rights and use of logo on the project’s deliverables
193. In order to accord proper acknowledgement to GEF for providing funding, a GEF logo will appear on all relevant GEF-supported project publications, including among others, project hardware, if any, purchased with GEF funds. Any citation on publications regarding projects funded by GEF should also accord proper acknowledgement to GEF. The UNDP logo should be prominent – and separated from the GEF logo. Alongside GEF and UNDP logo, the MNRE logo may also feature as the Implementing Partner of the project.
Assets
194. The ownership of the assets procured under the project from GEF grant money lies with the UNDP Resident Representative until the end of the project. At the end of the project, the assets would be transferred to the implementing ministry of the Indian government (MNRE in this case) following UNDP applicable rules and regulations.
14 MONITORING FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION
195. The project will be monitored through the following M&E activities. The M&E budget is provided in the Error! Reference source not found. as below.
Project start:
196. A formal Project Inception Workshop will be held within 2 months of the project’s start. The Inception Workshop must include the active participation of:
The responsible MNRE Director and other relevant MNRE staff Relevant UNDP India Country Office Environment and Energy branch staff, and where feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors
Representatives from the key project livelihoods “Missions” CLIA staff from the prior India MNRE-UNDP ACE project
Relevant target state (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha71) government officials and key stakeholders Other stakeholders such as (but not limited to) relevant RE equipment and service suppliers.
71 And from Jharkhand and Meghalaya as appropriate
86 The Inception Workshop will be a crucial formal step to building the necessary strong local ownership for the project’s focus, scope and ultimate results, and to confirm (and where required refine) the project’s first year Annual Work Plan (AWP).
197. The Inception Workshop will address a number of key issues including:
a) Assist all project partners to fully understand and take ownership of the project. Detail the roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of UNDP CO and BRH staff vis-à-vis MNRE, the PSC, the project team, and the project’s CLIAs. Discuss the roles, functions, and responsibilities within the project's relevant decision-making structures, including reporting and communication lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms of Reference for project staff will be discussed as required and as relevant. b) Based on the project results framework and the relevant GEF Tracking Tool, finalize the project’s first annual work plan. Review and agree on the indicators, targets and their means of verification, and recheck the project’s assumptions and risks. c) Provide a detailed overview of reporting, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements. The M&E work plan and budget should be agreed and M&E activities should be scheduled. d) Discuss financial reporting procedures and obligations, and arrangements for, annual project audits. e) Plan and schedule PSC (Board) meetings. The roles and responsibilities of project organisation structures should be clarified and the schedule for PSC meetings should be planned. The first PSC meeting should be planned for and held within the first 12 months following the Inception Workshop.
198. A detailed Inception Workshop report is a key reference document and must be prepared and shared with participants to formalize the agreements, plans and next steps decided during the Inception Workshop.
Quarterly review:
199. The quarterly monitoring will involve:
Project progress shall be monitored in the UNDP Enhanced Results Based Management Platform. Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, the project risk log shall be regularly updated in ATLAS. Risks become particularly critical when their impact and probability are high72. Based on the information recorded in ATLAS, a Project Progress Report (PPR) can be generated in the Executive Snapshot. Other ATLAS logs can be used to monitor issues, lessons learned etc. The use of these functions is a key indicator in the UNDP Executive Balanced Scorecard.
Annual Review:
200. Annual Project Review/Project Implementation Reports (APR/PIR): This key report is prepared to monitor progress made since project start and in particular for the previous reporting period (30 June to 1 July). The APR/PIR combines both UNDP and GEF reporting requirements.
The APR/PIR includes, but is not limited to, reporting on the following:
72 Note that the project does not have the high financial risks associated with financial instruments such as revolving funds, microfinance schemes, or capitalization of ESCOs – which are automatically classified as critical on the basis of their innovative nature (high impact and uncertainty due to no previous experience justifies classification as critical).
87 Progress made towards project objective and project outcomes - each with indicators, baseline data and end-of-project targets (cumulative) Project outputs delivered per project outcome (annual) Lesson learned/good practices AWP and other expenditure reports Risk and adaptive management ATLAS Project Progress Report (PPR) Portfolio level indicators (i.e. GEF focal area tracking tools) are used on an annual basis as well
Periodic Monitoring through site visits:
201. The UNDP CO and the UNDP BRH will conduct visits to project sites based on the agreed schedule in the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Other members of the PSC may also join these visits. A Field Visit Report/Back to Office Report (BTOR) will be prepared by the CO and UNDP BRH and will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and PSC members.
Mid-term of project cycle:
202. The project will undergo an independent Mid-Term Review (MTR) at the mid-point of project implementation (scheduled for 2017). The MTR will determine the project’s progress being made toward the achievement of its outcomes and will identify any recommended project mid-course corrections. The MTR will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, timeliness and impact of the project’s implementation to date; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation, and management. The findings of the MTR will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s term. The organization, terms of reference and timing of the MTR will be decided after consultation between the parties to the project document. The TOR for this MTR will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the UNDP BRH and UNDP-GEF. The management response and the evaluation will be uploaded to UNDP corporate systems, in particular the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Center (ERC). The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the MTR.
End of Project:
203. An independent Terminal Evaluation (TE) will take place three months prior to the final PSC meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance policies. The TE will focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the MTR, if any such correction took place). The TE will look at the impact and sustainability of the project’s results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global environmental benefits/goals. The TOR for this TE will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the relevant UNDP RSC and UNDP- GEF. The TE should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities and requires a management response, which should be uploaded to PIMS and to the UNDP ERC. The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the Final Evaluation.
204. During the last three months of the project’s implementation, the project team will prepare the Project Terminal Report. This comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs), lessons learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved. It will also include recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure the sustainability and replicability of the project’s results.
88 Learning and knowledge sharing:
205. Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through existing information sharing networks and forums The project will identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks, which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will identify, analyse, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar future projects. Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information between this project and other projects of a similar focus.
Communications and visibility requirements:
206. Full compliance will be undertaken with UNDP’s Branding Guidelines. These can be accessed at http://intra.undp.org/coa/branding.shtml, and specific guidelines on UNDP logo use can be accessed at: http://intra.undp.org/branding/useOfLogo.html. Amongst other things, these guidelines describe when and how the UNDP logo needs to be used, as well as how the logos of donors to UNDP projects should be used. For the avoidance of any doubt, when logo use is required, the UNDP logo needs to be used alongside the GEF logo. The GEF logo can be accessed at: http://www.thegef.org/gef/GEF_logo. The UNDP logo can be accessed at http://intra.undp.org/coa/branding.shtml.
207. Full compliance is also required with the GEF’s Communication and Visibility Guidelines (the “GEF Guidelines”). The GEF Guidelines can be accessed at: http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/C.40.08_Branding_the_GEF%20final_0.pdf. Amongst other things, the GEF Guidelines describe when and how the GEF logo needs to be used in project publications, vehicles, supplies and other project equipment. The GEF Guidelines also describe other GEF promotional requirements regarding press releases, press conferences, press visits, visits by Government officials, productions and other promotional items.
208. Where other agencies and project partners have provided support through co-financing, their branding policies and requirements should be similarly applied.
89 Table 38: M & E work-plan and budget
Budget US$ Type of M&E Responsible Parties Time frame activity Excluding project team staff time Within first two Inception Workshop . Project Manager Indicative cost: months of project and Report 10,000 . UNDP CO, UNDP GEF start up Measurement of . UNDP GEF RTA/Project Indicative cost: Start, mid and end of Means of Verification Manager will oversee the hiring 60,000 project (during of project results. of specific studies and evaluation cycle) institutions, and delegate and annually when responsibilities to relevant team required. members. Measurement of . Oversight by Project Manager Indicative cost: Annually prior to Means of Verification . Project team 5,000 ARR/PIR and to the for Project Progress (to be determined as definition of annual on output and part of the Annual work plans implementation Work Plan's preparation) ARR/PIR . Project manager and team None Annually . UNDP CO . UNDP RTA . UNDP EEG Periodic status/ . Project manager and team None Quarterly progress reports Mid-term Evaluation . Project manager and team Indicative cost: At the mid-point of . UNDP CO 30,000 the project’s . UNDP BRH implementation. . Independent External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team) Terminal Evaluation . Project manager and team, Indicative cost: At least three . UNDP CO 30,000 months before the . UNDP BRH end of the project’s implementation . Independent External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team) Project Terminal . Project manager and team At least three Report . UNDP CO 0 months before the . Local consultant end of the project Audit . UNDP CO Indicative cost per Yearly . Project manager and team year: 3,000 Visits to field sites . UNDP CO For GEF supported Yearly projects, paid from IA . UNDP BRH (as appropriate) fees and operational . Government representatives budget TOTAL indicative COST US$ 150,000 Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel (+/- 5% of total expenses budget)
90 15 LEGAL CONTEXT
209. It is understood that the Government of India has signed the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA) with UNDP on 19 December 1994, and that therefore the following standard text has been quoted:
This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government of India and UNDP, which is incorporated by reference, constitute together a Project Document, and all CPAP provisions apply to this document.
Consistent with the Article III of the SBAA, the primary responsibility for the safety and security of the implementing partner (MNRE) and its personnel and property, and of UNDP’s property in the MNRE’s custody, rests with MNRE. MNRE shall therefore: o Put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account the security situation in India; and,
o Assume all risks and liabilities related to MNRE’s security, and the full implementation of the security plan.
UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and to suggest modifications to the plan when necessary. Failure to maintain and implement an appropriate security plan as required hereunder shall be deemed a breach of this agreement.
210. MNRE agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project Document.
91 PART C. ANNEXES
ANNEXURE – A: RISK ANALYSIS
Level of Risk73 Mitigating Actions Risk The multiple key central and state level M The use of multiple subsidies reduces the project rural energy and rural livelihoods capital risks arising from changes to any single subsidy. The subsidies do not remain fully available use of beneficiary equity investments and bank or during the project’s implementation microfinance loans also reduces the project risk from period. any changes to individual subsidy levels or eligibility rules. The Demonstration, Replication and M A high-level Project Steering Committee (PSC) Scale-Up RE - rural livelihoods projects project oversight and governance focussed meeting are not able to pool and/or access the will be held at least once a year in Delhi. A Project available capital subsidies in a timely Executive Committee (PEC) meeting comprising all fashion without excessive transaction major project stakeholders will be held four times a costs and/or time delays. year on a rotational basis in the 3 applicable project states and in Delhi. Site visits will be held back-to- back with state level PEC meetings to highlight project successes and challenges. The PSC and PEC structures will together facilitate the necessary ongoing high-level ownership of the project to facilitate ongoing access to available capital subsidies. In addition, strong project engagement and ownership will already start in 2014 with the initial UNDP-MNRE Core ACE project’s pilot phase activities. To ensure that both RE and rural livelihoods capital subsidies are fully considered and mobilised, the PMU and CLIs/CSUs will contain equal level staff from both the RE and livelihood sides to ensure that both sources of subsidies are equally considered in the project’s implementation. The duration, scope and/or funding of L The project will work with basic livelihood focussed key National or State Rural livelihoods missions that are highly likely to have durable ‘Missions’ like NRLM, horticulture, or mandates and funding into the future. fisheries are significantly curtailed during the project’s implementation period. Decentralised Renewable Energy (DRE) L The scale of the electricity supply deficit, and the does not remain an important item on the inarguable paramount importance of the rural relevant central or state political livelihoods sector in India for rural employment, is agendas. highly likely to ensure that there will be a suitable ongoing central and local commitment to decentralise rural RE. Grid electricity supply is significantly M While India has made strong progress with extended and/or the reliability of rural extending grid electricity to an increasing number of grid electricity supply improves villages in rural India, the under-pricing of this rural grid electricity for populist political gain, the size of
73 Applicable to 2019/20 end of GEF funded 5-year FSP (Full Scale Project) 92 Level of Risk73 Mitigating Actions Risk significantly in the project period in the the electricity supply sector’s accumulated past applicable states and districts. financial debts, and the size of the electricity sector’s ongoing supply and financial deficits are such that reliable 24/7 local grid electricity is highly unlikely to be available for rural livelihood applications in all relevant districts of the 3 applicable states during the project’s duration. The price of grid electricity in applicable L The price of grid electricity for rural livelihood uses districts goes down significantly. can hardly go down significantly, as in many cases it is already sold at very low tariffs or the grid electricity for rural likelihoods is not even metered at all. The world price of diesel goes down L As in the 2008 GFC, even a strong global financial significantly and/or subsidies on diesel crisis is unlikely to lead to sustained lower world significantly increase in India crude oil prices as lower oil prices would lead directly to a lower global new oil field development rate and hence would be quickly self-correcting as occurred in 2009. An increase in diesel subsidies in India is unlikely as here is a strong political consensus and momentum towards reducing the remaining diesel subsidies in India. The many relevant Central Government H The project will: establish a strong Central-level PSC Ministries do not cooperate and/or do not and a strong Central/State-level PEC; hold frequent remain engaged for the project period (annual PSC and quarterly PEC) meetings that through changes in Central Government, involve key ministries; and engage and retain the Ministers and bureaucrats (institutional strong interest and ownership of suitable high level risk). champions in key central Ministries, in particular MNRE, NRLM, and in Ministries covering key rural livelihoods. The many relevant State, Local and H The quarterly PEC meetings will be rotated around District level agencies do not co-operate the applicable states to ensure that each state hosts and do not remain engaged for the at least one PEC meeting a year for ongoing local project period through changes in State project engagement and ownership. Governments, Ministers and bureaucrats (institutional risk). The project is not able to mobilise a M The project’s RE - rural livelihoods applications will minimum level (20%) of equity financing focus on livelihoods sectors with well-established from beneficiaries to ensure strong existing commercial sales channels to maximise the enough ownership and hence ensure the chances of obtaining the necessary beneficiary sustained the use of the project equity financing. supported or influenced RE – rural livelihoods applications. The project is not able to mobilise the M The project’s RE – rural livelihoods applications will necessary 30-50% debt financing from be targeted at RE suppliers and rural livelihoods banks or microfinance institutions for the users with strong existing commercial business replication and scale up projects in the models that utilise established marketing and relevant RE – rural livelihoods commercial sales channels - to maximise the applications. chances of obtaining the necessary debt financing. The project is not able to mobilise grants L The project will utilise where available, but not rely from other (e.g. CSR) sources. on, CSR funding.
93 Level of Risk73 Mitigating Actions Risk Major adverse economic conditions L The Indian economy has strong internal growth force up interest rates and/or curtail bank drivers and has a low risk of significant domestically lending for a significant period during the led major adverse economic conditions. The Indian project’s implementation. economy is significantly nationally self-contained and is only weakly linked to potential international financial crises and events. Development of RE – rural livelihood applications is therefore not greatly at risk of major interest rate rises or significant bank lending restrictions. Prices of relevant rural livelihoods M The project’s rural livelihoods sectors cater to basic sector74 outputs collapse and stay down needs of domestic food supply and nutrition and for a significant period during the hence demand and prices have a low risk of project’s implementation. sustained major reductions. Market linkages of the relevant M The project will focus on rural livelihoods sectors that livelihoods sector outputs are weaker have well-established and strong existing market than anticipated. linkages. Relevant RE – rural livelihoods projects M The project will take a strongly pro-active approach are successfully demonstrated but then to publicising demo project results and to actively do not get replicated by a scale of ten supporting subsequent replication projects with and do not then get further increased by suitable project information and support activities. a further factor of ten at the scale up The scale up phase will be closely monitored will be stage. actively supported. There is a significantly slow start to on- H In 2014 a RE-Rural Livelihoods PMU will be the-ground project activities. established in MNRE and local CLIs will be recruited under the already approved and already funded UNDP-MNRE ACE Core Project. This will ensure that once all the necessary UNDP-MNRE GEF project approvals are obtained that the project can then be implemented with the least possible delays. Significant RE supply chain weaknesses L Most of the RE technology packages are either arise during the project’s implementation proven plug-and-play RE technologies or are only phase. modest risk rural application extensions of conventional RE technologies. There is significant risk of RE technology L The project’s mix of RE – rural livelihood technology underperformance or failure in project packages is carefully balanced between well proven activities (technical risk). RE- rural livelihoods applications and the extension of proven RE technologies into new rural livelihoods applications. There is a lack of necessary leadership M A detailed Project Operations Manual has already and slow decision making in the project’s been developed to define key accountabilities, implementation. management responsibilities, and operational procedures for all levels of the project’s implementation. A strong PSC and PEC structure will be established and will be given strong support to ensure the ongoing effectiveness and efficiency in the project’s implementation.
74 E.g. fresh or dried fish, tomatoes, raw milk, eggs, chicken, khadi, etc. 94 Level of Risk73 Mitigating Actions Risk Users lose interest in decentralised RE L The project will focus on using only well-established solutions. RE technologies and to locations where there are clear links to already well-established rural livelihoods. Geographical locations have already been chosen for project implementation that have significant underserved or unserved areas for grid electricity supply where diesel captive power or LPG would be the only reliable energy alternative for the applicable rural livelihoods energy end uses.
Overall risk rating is Medium.
95 ANNEXURE – B: AGREEMENTS
B.1 GEF OFP endorsement letter
96 B.2 Co-financing letter from MNRE
97 98 B.3 Co-financing letter from UNDP
B.3.1 UNDP co-financing letter
99 B.3.2 UNDP confirming co-financing letters received from potential Cluster Level Implementing Agencies (CLIAs)
100 ------
101 ANNEXURE – C: TERMS OF REFERENCES
Project Management Unit (PMU)
National Project Director (NPD)
The NPD will lead and provide strategic direction to the PMU while also actively providing the necessary linkages and co-ordination with PSC and PEC members as well as with other high-level state and central level government officials.
Scope of work
The following is the proposed scope of activities for the NPD:
Organize/convene PEC and PSC meetings as per UNDP and MNRE procedures. Facilitate interaction and communication with other Ministries and Governmental departments, and agencies and missions, at both the central and state levels. Provide overall guidance to the Project Management Unit (PMU). Approve Terms of Reference for PMU staff. Review project budget revisions, annual progress reports, quarterly progress reports, FACE (Fund Authorisation and Certification of Expenditures) annual work plan, facilitate audits, and facilitate any other administrative arrangements as required by MNRE and/or UNDP. Ensure that the independent mid-term and terminal evaluations occur at appropriate times in the project cycle, and have overall responsibility for the consideration and implementation of the evaluations’ recommendations. Ensure timely progress of activities and project implementation as per the ProDoc. Ensure that all required changes to the ProDoc take place, are based on changing project circumstances or on lessons learned during project implementation, and all significant changes are fully documented and justified, and are formally signed off by the NPD/PEC/PSC. Ensure that the necessary central and state government and key NGO and other stakeholder support required is mobilised to achieve the project’s milestones, and to ensure the high quality and relevance of project outputs.
Guide the preparation of Annual Work Plans and adhering to physical and financial progress; timely submission of QPR [Quarterly Progress Reports], FACE [Fund Authorisation and Certificate of Expenditure] and APR/PIR [Annual Progress Reports/Project Information Report].
National Project Manager (NPM)
The NPM will oversee all aspects of the implementation of the project. The NPM will also have to effectively co-ordinate all activities of the project and interact closely with the CLIAs, reporting progress and problems if any to the NPD on a regular basis.
Scope of work
The scope of activities envisaged for the NPM is as follows:
102 As co-ordinator of the project and with inputs from other PMU members and CLIAs Oversee the day-to-day planning, implementation and monitoring of all project activities. Coordinate and manage the project’s Inception Workshop and the timely preparation of a comprehensive Inception Report.
Prepare project work plans, including technical requirements, their timing, and their budgets. Facilitate the work of project consultants, and CLI’s, and their CSUs. Monitor project progress towards project results by maintaining a hands-on overall knowledge of, and personal involvement with, all project activities. Identify any gaps in project activities and pro-actively make any required adjustments. Prepare progress reports (quarterly and annual), FACE, annual work plans and budgets, facilitate audits, and be responsible for any other necessary documentation required by UNDP, MNRE and the PSC, and report recommendations to the PEC/PSC and implement PEC/PSU recommendations as appropriate.
Manage the day-to-day timely progress of activities and project implementation as per the ProDoc or any agreed changes to the ProDoc. Ensure that any significant changes as per the ProDoc are fully documented and formally signed off by both the NPD and the PEC/PSC. Manage and support the undertaking and elaboration of project monitoring and evaluation reports (midterm, terminal etc.) to MNRE and UNDP/GEF. Prepare and approve the Terms of Reference for consultants and subcontracts and for any equipment procurement. Manage disbursement of funds, maintenance of accounts as per requirements of UNDP, and provide inputs to internal and external audits. Liaise with counterparts and main stakeholders to ensure their roles are appropriately integrated into the project as envisaged, or as agreed as the project progresses. Manage the day-to-day work priorities, workload and outputs of the PMU members (Renewable Energy, Rural Livelihoods) and Administration & Finance). Be responsible for the recruitment, coordination, and outputs and funding of the CLIAs and their CSUs.
Supervise the performance of the project team members to ensure that all tasks are executed in a sound and timely manner, in order to meet the objectives of the project. Manage procurement, including supervision of contracts and staffing requirements of the project, to comply with UNDP and MNRE/Indian Government rules and regulations.
Ensure the project’s coordination and coherence with other programs, projects and activities on energy, climate change and environment carried out by other UN Agencies, other international organizations, the private sector, NGOs, Academia and the Government in India - and regionally and worldwide as relevant. Prepare and present timely and accurate project status reports to the PEC/PSC.
103 Preparation of Annual Work Plans, ensuring physical and financial progress as per AWP; timely submission of QPR [Quarterly Progress Reports], FACE [Fund Authorisation and Certificate of Expenditure] and APR/PIR [Annual Progress Report/Project Information Report].
Renewable Energy Expert (PMU member)
Scope of Work
Coordinate the Renewable Energy (RE) aspects of all project activities. Maintain an ongoing updated knowledge and interaction with the key RE technology and service providers whose activities are relevant to the project activities. Organize the selection of consultants for carrying out the RE aspects of project activities. Coordinate the RE aspects of the RETPRL applications packages’ development and deployment in the project including close coordination with CLIAs.
Closely coordinate with rural livelihood expert while finalising RETPRLs. Coordinate the RE aspects of the RETPRL supply and service providers involved in the project. Coordinate the conduct of the RE aspects of RE policy and regulatory project aspects of the project RETPRL aspects. Coordinate the assessment, development and deployment of the RE aspects of the financial and other support for project RETPRL applications. Organize the RE aspects of the development, launch and management of the project website, publications, communications and knowledge management under the project. Oversee the design, delivery and evaluation of the RE aspects of awareness and training programmes. Network with all RE stakeholders to strengthen the awareness, capacity building and dissemination work under the project.
Rural Livelihoods Expert (PMU Member)
Scope of work
Coordination the livelihoods aspects of all project activities. Maintain an ongoing updated knowledge and interaction with the key livelihoods counterparts whose activities are relevant to project activities.
Organize the selection of consultants for carrying out the livelihoods aspects of project activities. Coordinate the livelihoods aspects of the RETPRL applications packages development and deployment in the project including close coordination with CLIAs.
Closely coordinate with renewable energy expert while finalising RETPRLs
104 Coordinate the livelihoods aspects of the RETPRL supply and service providers involved in the project. Coordinate the conduct of the livelihoods aspects of policy and regulatory project aspects of the project RETPRL aspects. Coordinate the assessment, development and deployment of the livelihoods aspects of the financial and other support for project RETPRL applications. Organize the livelihoods aspects of the development, launch and management of the project website, publications, communications and knowledge management under the project. Oversee the design, delivery and evaluation of the livelihoods aspects of awareness and training programmes.
Finance and Administration Manager (PMU Member)
Scope of work
Responsible for processing all payments Produce the required financial statements as needed, keep sound checks and balances in place to ensure proper use of finances under appropriate headings, and report on financial expenditure and commitments. Coordinate timely completion of annual audit. Prepare quarterly expenditure reports and ensure their timely submission to UNDP. Be responsible for administrative and secretarial matters. Arrange logistics, including travel and organization of meetings/workshops etc. Assist in the processing and reporting of all project co-financing and expenditures.
State Coordinators
The state coordinators will coordinate with state level agencies, provide need-based support to CLIAs, monitor the implementation of activities and report the field level issues to the PMU.
Scope of work
Co-ordinate project activities within the state in co-ordination with the CLIAs/CSUs operating in the state
Collate information and documentation for the clusters in the state and report on progress and / or problems to the NPM
Co-ordinate with state-level agencies to ensure participation and co-operation as required and solicit advice through the NPM from the state representatives on the PEC if required
Dialogue with the NPM and other state-level co-ordinators on a regular basis (informally at least once a month and formally at least once a quarter through the quarterly reporting process) to facilitate cross pollination of ideas and learnings
105 Provide relevant state-level information and contacts to facilitate consultancy assignments Field visits and monitoring of the given set of clusters.
Cluster Level Implementation Agencies (CLIAs)
The implementation of RETPRLs under the project during demonstration phase will be led by the “cluster level implementation agencies (CLIAs)”.
Scope of work
The activities envisaged for a CLIA is broadly as follows:
For the development and implementation of demonstration projects (to be guided and structured by the PMU)
o Consultations with target groups: The CLIA will carry out ongoing consultations with the target groups in the selected clusters to create awareness about the proposed initiative and get feedback.
o Preparation of the Detailed Project Report (DPR) for demonstration projects in line with PMU templates: The CLIA will carry out survey/field work to prepare a DPR for the demonstration project in the selected clusters. The DPR will give details of the number of potential demonstration, replication and scale up installations, applicable financing mechanisms, implementation schedule, cost-benefit analysis, etc.
o Preparing a plan and providing assistance in mobilising /accessing financing for the demonstration projects: The capital expenditure on renewable energy-livelihood interventions are likely to be met through a combination of grants/subsidies, equity investment by the end-users, and bank loans. The CLIA will prepare a financing plan, which will include the pooling of grants/subsidies/ loans available under various government programmes and will assist the end-user(s) in accessing this finance.
o Assistance in identification of technology supplier: The CLIA will assist the PMU in identifying/short-listing one or more technology /service suppliers for the applicable cluster.
o Facilitating and supervising the implementation phase: While the physical implementation will be undertaken by the relevant technology/service providers, the CLIA on behalf of the PMU will facilitate and supervise the implementation by closely involving Renewable Energy and Rural Livelihoods experts at PMU.
o Training of beneficiaries: The CLIA will coordinate the training of beneficiaries in the appropriate and optimal utilisation of the technology. The technical experts for conducting the training will be provided by technology suppliers and/or by the PMU.
o Handholding support post-installation: The CLIA will provide handholding support to the user/beneficiary after the installation of the relevant RE – rural livelihoods systems. The CLIA will ensure that appropriate after-sales and servicing support is made available to the end user/ beneficiary by the technology supplier(s).
106 Reporting on progress of implementation – to the PMU: The CLIA will send monthly progress reports to the PMU as per the format supplied by the PMU.
Documentation of experience and lessons: The CLIA will document the progress and results of the demonstration project(s). The documentation will follow the template(s) provided by the PMU.
Facilitation of study tours and training towards replication and scaling up: Post-installation, the CLIA will provide local facilitation to study tours by potential end-users from other clusters as well as helping conduct trainings for the replication and scaling-up phases.
Facilitate/nurture the formation of CSUs
Cluster Support Units (CSUs)
The development and implementation of a replication and scale-up plan is foreseen through the establishment of a Cluster Support Unit (CSU) by a CLIA. While each CSU may not strictly correspond to a specific CLIA, the broad arrangement for replication and scale up will be as follows. Specific details will be worked out by the applicable CLIA(s), in consultation with the PMU.
The evolution of a CSU is expected to be as follows:
Each CLIA would provide at least 2 dedicated staff with RE technical and livelihoods backgrounds (from within their current cadre or from others within the local area) to constitute the CSU75. During the course of the implementation of the demonstration project, an additional 1-2 local persons will be identified to act as “barefoot” practitioners (to be chosen from among the beneficiaries, technology suppliers, service technicians, etc.) to join the CSU. In this regard, there are lessons from the livelihoods sector where there has been considerable focus and investment in developing community resource practitioners who act as resource persons and facilitate replications.
The idea of a CSU is based on lessons learned from successful livelihoods sector projects, which recognise the need for development of a suitable cadre of trained and experienced people for replication and scale up activities. The CSU members would not only have significant exposure to livelihoods activities and some technical expertise but critically will also have a clear business or entrepreneurial orientation. The CSU team will be responsible for implementation and knowledge management of the demo project(s) as well as planning for subsequent replication and scale up activities. Eventually, the CSU will spinoff as an independent enterprise with implementation and / or focal mentoring point for the replication first within the relevant state and then in other states as relevant.
75 Cluster support unit will be set up the CLIA within 6-9 months of project Initialization. To begin with, the CSU will be housed within the CLIA and have a dotted line reporting to the PMU. The CSU will initially be an integral part of the project, then it will gradually become independent of the project, then after the project-end it will work totally independently. The CSU will initially lead the implementation and knowledge management for the demo project. The CSU will also later on be responsible for and incentivized to take up replication and scale up activities across the state and to other states as far as possible. 107 ANNEXURE – D: EMISSION REDUCTIONS CALCULATION
Emission Reductions Direct Emissions Reductions
The 1,500 demonstration and 28,500 replication RE-rural livelihood projects implemented through support from India ACE project will result in direct greenhouse gas emission reductions of 69,115 tonnes of CO2 equivalent during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct greenhouse gas emission reduction will be 662,742 tonnes CO2 over the lifetime of the investments.
Direct Post-Project Emission Reductions
The project does not explicitly include the establishment of financial mechanisms that will continue to operate post-project end. Although some risk mitigation mechanism will be developed during the project which may continue to operate post-project end, however the project is not putting any fund for its continuance. These mechanisms may be continued to operate on financial support from MNRE or any other agency. Therefore, as a conservative assumption, no direct post-project greenhouse gas emission reductions are claimed.
Indirect emissions reductions
The India ACE project has several elements for addressing the barriers in implementation of RE-rural livelihood technology packages. These elements include developing policy and regulatory support, capacity building, strengthening supply and service chain, etc. This will have significant impact on post project replication and consequently on the indirect emission reductions. However, it is also taken into the consideration that the majority of the users of these RE-rural livelihood technology packages are the marginalised section of society and a conservative approach is followed while estimating the indirect emission reduction.
As per the GEF manual76, using the bottom-top methodology, the indirect emission reductions attributable to the project is estimated to be 1,325,485 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. This is calculated by using the replication factor of 2 as per the GEF guidelines for rural electrification type of projects (see para 43(a), GEF/ C.33/ Inf.18, April 16, 2008).
In the alternative scenario (top-down methodology), it is assumed that 10,000 RE-rural livelihood projects may be implemented per year after completion of the India ACE project. The RE-rural livelihood projects that will be implemented in the 10 years duration after the completion of this project will result in cumulative reduction in emission of 2,103,944 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. On the conservative side, using the GEF causality factor of 60%, the indirect emission reduction that can be attributed to India ACE project is 1,262,366 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (see para 47(c), GEF/ C.33/ Inf.18, April 16, 2008).
The indirect emission reductions that can be attributed to the India ACE project is in the range of 1,262,366 – 1,325,485 (average of 1,293,925.5) tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
76 Manual for calculating GHG benefits of GEF projects: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. GEF/ C.33/ Inf.18, April 16, 2008. 108 Cost effectiveness
If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the direct emission reductions of 662,742 tonnes CO2 equivalent, this then gives a corresponding direct CO2 unit abatement cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD 6.05/tCO2.
Detailed Calculation of Direct Emission Reductions Several types of RE technology interventions have been proposed depending upon the livelihood sector requirements. Reduction in emission is calculated by taking into account the emission reduction corresponding to each RE technology. Table 39 below provides the calculation for emission reduction per year from the demonstration projects.
Table 39: Emission reduction from demonstration projects
No of units of Unit Net reduction proposed technology S. Proposed capacity of Reference/ baseline in GHG to be commissioned No. technology proposed technology emission during demonstration technology (tCO2/year) phase Solar home lighting 2 lighting 1 Kerosene lamp 1,000 269.20 system units Solar power pack 2 1 kWp Grid electricity 19.5 25.23 for CFCs 3 Solar garment unit 1.24 kWp Grid electricity 4 6.42 4 Biomass gasifier 10 kWp Grid electricity 3 48.51 5 Solar aerators 1 hp Diesel generator 20 22.40 200 W 6 Micro solar pump Diesel pump 75 25.20 /household 1 hp 7 Solar pump Diesel pump 175 294.00 /household Improved cook- Traditional cook- 8 1 unit 50 869.92 stoves stoves
Biogas based power 9 400 kWh Grid electricity 1 117.60 plant in poultry farm
Waste biomass 10 briquetting plant in 800 t/year Diesel /furnace oil 2 1,361.30 poultry cooperative Solar based cold 11 5 MT Diesel generator 6 53.76 rooms 12 Solar dryers Open Sun drying 80 0.00 Solar based milk 13 1000 l/d Grid electricity 2 8.58 chiller Solar power pack 14 for milk collection 100 W Grid electricity 1 0.14 centre
Biogas based power 15 150 kWh Grid electricity 1 53.66 plant in dairy farm
Total GHG emission reduction from demonstration projects (tCO2/year) 3,155.92
109 The ratio of number of RE-rural livelihood projects to be implemented in replication phase to the demonstration phase is 28,500/1,500 = 19. So it is assumed that the reduction in emission per year from the implementation of replication projects would be 19 times the reduction in emission per year from demonstration projects.
Table 40 below provides the year-wise and cumulative emission reduction during the 5-year of project duration and the net direct emission reduction over the average economic lifetime of the RE technologies.
Table 40: Year wise and cumulative emission reduction
Emission Cumulative reduction emission Assumption on implementation status of RETPRLs at the end of per year reduction each year and explanation for calculation (tCO2/year) (tCO2) Year 1 - - No installations in year 1
40% of the demonstrations projects implemented in year 2. As the projects get commissioned at different points of the year, only 50% of the Year 2 631 631 CO2 reduction is accounted in the year in which they are implemented. From next year onwards, full CO2 reduction will be accounted. Remaining 60% of the demonstration projects implemented in year 3. Year 3 2,209 2,840 CO2 reduction in year 3 = (Full CO2 reduction from 40% of demonstration projects) + (50% of CO2 reduction from 60% of demonstration projects)
50% of the replication projects implemented in year 4. CO2 reduction in Year 4 18,147 20,987 year 4 = (Full CO2 reduction from 100% of demonstration projects) + (50% of CO2 reduction from 50% of replication projects)
Remaining 50% of the replication projects implemented in year 5. CO2 reduction in year 5 = (Full CO2 reduction from 100% of demonstration Year 5 48,128 69,115 projects) + (Full CO2 reduction from 50% of replication projects) + (50% of CO2 reduction from 50% of replication projects) Assuming an average lifetime of RE systems as 10 years, the RETPRLs will continue to function and mitigate emission till 7 – 9 years after the project completion. =69,115 + (0.4*3155.92*7+0.6*3155.92*8+0.5*19*3155.92*9+0.5*19*3155.92*10) 0.4*3155.92*7: 40% of the demonstration projects will be installed in year 2. As the GHG emission reduction from these installations for 3 years (year 3, 4 & 5) has already been accounted in the calculation of cumulative emission reduction for the project period (which is 69,115 Net direct emission tCO 2 ), so for calculation of lifetime emission reduction, 7 years of the reduction over the 662,742 post project duration is considered (=0.4*3155.92*7). lifetime of investment 0.6*3155.92*8: Similarly for the installations in year 3 (60% of the demonstration projects), 8 years of the post project duration is considered (=0.6*3155.92*8). 0.5*19*3155.92*9 & 0.5*19*3155.92*10: In replication phase, the number of installations are 19 times the installations in demonstration phase. Assumed that 50% of these will be installed in year 4 and rest in year 5. For installations in year 4, for calculation of lifetime emission reduction 9 years of post-project duration is considered [=0.5*(19*3155.92)*9]. Similarly for the installations in year 5 [=0.5*(19*3155.92)*10].
110 ANNEXURE – E: RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY COMPENDIUM
Provided as a separate document, which is part of this Project Document.
111 ANNEXURE – F: SUMMARY INFORMATION ON IDENTIFIED CLUSTERS FOR DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
Brief descriptions of the clusters which are identified for the implementation of RETPRLs during the demonstration phase of the project are provided below:
1. Barpeta, Assam
Livelihood sector : Khadi, silk and village industries (bamboo cluster)
Location : Chakchaka block in Barpeta district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 3,000 artisan families in this cluster who depends upon bamboo and cane processing activities for their livelihoods. The main products manufactured at the cluster are furniture and decorative and utility items. The cluster is spread over 5 villages within a radius of 5 km. The artisanal work is mainly done at individual houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) is providing support to the artisans of this cluster in the form of technical training, access to finance and market linkages. KVIC has also provided grant for setting-up of a common facility centre (CFC) which provides the artisans a common work- shed equipped with some necessary equipment for bamboo splitting, cutting, etc. The power requirement of these equipment ranges from 700 W to 1,500 W. The electricity supply situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for artisan’s houses: Productivity of the artisans can be increased by providing them with solar lighting systems at their houses which can improve the lighting conditions during morning and evening hours.
(ii) Biomass gasifier based on bamboo waste for power generation at CFC: A large amount of bamboo and cane waste is generated which can be used for power generation to power the equipment and lights at the CFC.
2. Nalbari and Kamrup Rural, Assam
Livelihood sector : Khadi, silk and village industries (khadi and silk cluster)
Location : Mukalmua and Dhamdhama blocks in Nalbari district and Rangia block in Kamrup Rural district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 2,000 artisan families in the cluster involved in garment making (spinning, weaving and stitching) for their livelihoods. The cluster is spread over 2 adjacent districts. All the spinning work and to some extent weaving work is being done by the artisans at their houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) has set- up common facility centres to provide them a common work shed with handlooms, sewing machines and other equipment. KVIC is also helping them through training, access to finance and establishing market linkages. The spinning and weaving work are being done by manual charkhas and hand-looms, however, for stitching, normally powered sewing machines are being used. The electricity supply situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.
112 Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for artisan’s houses: Productivity of the artisans can be increased by providing them with solar lighting systems at their houses which can improve the lighting conditions during morning and evening hours.
(ii) Solar PV power pack at CFC: Solar PV power packs can be installed at CFCs to power lights, fans, sewing machines and other equipment at the CFC.
(iii) Solar charkha/loom: Solar charkhas and solar looms can be introduced to reduce drudgery and improve productivity.
3. Darrang, Assam
Livelihood sector : Horticulture
Location : Pachim Mangaldai block in Darrang district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are around 15,000 families spread over 30 villages, who are dependent upon horticulture for their livelihoods. Typical land holding per family for horticulture is around 70 square meters. The main crops in the cluster are tomato, pumpkin, assamese lemon and papaya. Farming is done throughout the year. During monsoon, majority of the water requirement for irrigation is fulfilled through rains and the main requirement for the irrigation pumps is during the winter crops. Usually, diesel pumps are being used to draw water from bore wells for irrigation. The pump is usually owned by a user and rented out to others.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar pumps: The diesel pumps presently being used in the cluster can be replaced by solar pumps.
4. Udalguri, Assam
Livelihood sector : Biomass fuel based small businesses
Location : Around the tea gardens in Udalguri district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: Udalguri district in Assam has large spread of tea gardens and forests. There are around 50-60 dhabas (road side small restaurants) and tea shops on the highways/roads around the tea gardens. These dhabas and tea shops use fuel wood from the nearby forest for cooking in traditional and inefficient stoves. Typical usage of fuel wood is around 70-75 kg per day per dhaba.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Improved cook-stoves: The traditional stoves being presently used can be replaced by the improved cook-stoves which are efficient and less polluting.
113 5. Goalpara, Assam
Livelihood sector : Fisheries
Location : Matia, Jaleswar and Lakhipur blocks of Goalpara district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: The cluster is spread over 20-30 villages with more than 100 families are involved in fisheries for their livelihoods. This cluster has large number of rain fed tanks, wet lands and ponds. Usually the ponds (0.1 – 3 hectare) are owned by individual fishermen family while the large wetlands are owned by group of fishermen or fishermen cooperative. The fishing activity is carried out round the year and typical production is around 50,000 kg per hectare per year. The main fish species produced are Indian major carps, freshwater prawn, air breathing fish, feather back, etc. Electric/diesel motor based paddle type aerators developed by IIT Guwahati, are being introduced in the cluster to maintain the oxygen level in eater and improve the productivity.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar aerators: The aerators can be run on solar PV power.
6. Hoshangabad, Madhya Pradesh
Livelihood sector : Poultry
Location : Kesla block in Hoshangabad district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 1,000 families in the cluster involved in the poultry farming activity. Usually each family has a backyard poultry farm with 300-800 birds in each farm. These families are associated in the form of a cooperative society. The cooperative owns and operates a centralised layer farm with hatchery (with around 40,000 parent birds) and feed preparation units (prepares 30-40 tonnes of feed per day). The annual turnover of the cooperative is around INR 300 million. Net income per family from poultry ranges from INR 30,000 to 80,000 per year. Not all these backyard farms have electricity connection and these usually use kerosene lamps for lighting of the farms. These farms use saw-dust/rice husk as bedding material which are replaced every rearing cycle.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for back yard poultry farms.
(ii) Poultry litter based biogas plant for power generation for captive use in centralized layer farm.
(iii) Biomass briquetting machine for briquetting of waste saw-dust/rice husk which can bring in additional income to the cooperative from the selling of briquettes.
7. Betul and Hoshangabad, Madhya Pradesh
Livelihood sector : Horticulture
Location : Shahpur block in Betul district and Kesla block in Hoshangabad district
114 Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: This cluster is located around the border of two districts – Betul and Hoshangabad. In Betul, there are around 600 families spread across 30 villages who are engaged in vegetable farming. Their main produce are tomato, okra and cauliflower. Presently these farmers are using diesel pumps for irrigation purpose. They do not have cold storage facilities, due to which some part of their produce gets wasted. In the Kesla block of Hoshangabad districts, there are around 200 families involved in oyster mushroom growing. This variety of mushroom is required to be dried before selling in the market. Presently the farmers are drying their produce in open Sun. In the cluster the farmers are organized in the form of cooperatives.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar pumps for irrigation in vegetable farms.
(ii) Solar power based small cold rooms for storage of vegetables
(iii) Solar conduction dryers for mushroom drying
8. Raisen, Madhya Pradesh
Livelihood sector : Dairy
Location : Bareli block in Raisen district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are around 1,500 milk producer families in the cluster. The surplus milk produced by small producers is collected at the local milk collection centre, tested, weighed and then transported to the milk chilling centres. Milk is transported to the chilling centres twice a day – morning and evening. The milk collection centres are run and managed by small cooperatives and the milk producers are members of the appropriate cooperative. There are around 50 such milk collection centres in the cluster.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for lighting of collection centre.
(ii) Solar powered milk chillers for collection centre: It will reduce the frequency of transportation of milk to the chilling plant.
9. Balaghat, Madhya Pradesh
Livelihood sector : Khadi, silk and village industries (bamboo cluster)
Location : Waraseoni block in Balaghat district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 600 artisan families in this cluster who depends upon bamboo and cane processing activities for their livelihoods. These artisans are associated through 24 SHGs (self-help group). The main products manufactured at the cluster are furniture and decorative and utility items. The artisanal work is mainly done at individual houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) is providing support to the artisans of this cluster in the form of technical training, access to finance and market linkages. KVIC has also provided grant for setting-up of a common facility centre (CFC) which provides the artisans a common work-shed equipped with some necessary equipment for bamboo splitting, cutting, etc. The electricity supply 115 situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for artisan’s houses: Productivity of the artisans can be increased by providing them with solar lighting systems at their houses which can improve the lighting conditions during morning and evening hours.
(ii) Biomass gasifier based on bamboo waste for power generation at CFC: A large amount of bamboo and cane waste is generated which can be used for power generation to power the equipment and lights at the CFC.
10. Dhindori, Madhya Pradesh
Livelihood sector : Horticulture
Location : Mehadwani block in Dhindori district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: This cluster has around 1,000 farmer families. The main crops in the cluster are cereals (wheat, paddy, maize, etc.), oil producing seeds (mustard, soyabean, flaxseed, etc.) and pulses. The farmers are organized in the form of water user groups which uses a common irrigation facility among them. Usually diesel pumps of capacities 3-5 HP are being used.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar pumps for irrigation.
11. Koraput, Odisha
Livelihood sector : Horticulture
Location : Jeypore block in Koraput district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: In this cluster there are about 450-500 families spread across 30 villages involved in horticulture for their livelihoods. Farming is done year round and the main produce are grains (maize, paddy, ragi, etc.), vegetables (tomato, potato, brinjal, cabbage, cauliflower, beans, lady finger, etc.) and spices (mustard, garlic, chilly, ginger, turmeric, etc.). Koraput is the largest producer of vegetables in Odisha. Presently irrigation is mainly done through diesel pumps. Diesel pumps of 2-5 HP capacities are being used to draw using water from bore wells. Typical land holding size is around 2,000 square meters.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar pumps for irrigation
(ii) Solar power based small cold rooms for storage of vegetables
(iii) Solar dryers for drying of spices, etc. 116 12. Puri, Odisha
Livelihood sector : Fisheries
Location : Nimapara (near Chandrabhaga) block in Puri district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: The coastal area near Chandrabhaga in the Puri district has been leased to a cooperative society. This society is working for developing livelihoods around fisheries and establishing market linkages with support from the Directorate of Fisheries, Govt. of Odisha. There is good demand of dried fish in the market and presently the fish are being dried in open Sun.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar dryers for drying of fish.
13. Kalahandi, Odisha
Livelihood sector : Dairy
Location : Kokasara block in Kalahandi district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: This cluster has around 10 milk collection centres. Each collection centre is being managed by a society which has 30-50 small milk producer members located across 3-4 villages (within 2 km radius). Usually 50 -100 litres of milk is collected at a centre at a time. Electronic milk testing and weighing machines are being used at the collection centres. Milk collection is not done from several villages as milk collection is low and transportation of milk to the chilling plant is not economically viable. There are also few large milk producers having 50- 100 cattle in their dairy farms.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar power pack for lighting and powering equipment at milk collection centre.
(ii) Solar powered milk chillers for collection centre: It will reduce the frequency of transportation of milk to the chilling plant.
(iii) Biogas plant based on cow dung for power generation for captive use in dairy farms of 50-100 cattle.
14. Keonjhar, Odisha
Livelihood sector : Poultry
Location : Kokasara block in Kalahandi district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 200 families in the cluster involved in the poultry farming activity. Usually each family has a backyard poultry farm with around 117 600 birds in each farm. These families are associated in the form of a cooperative society. The cooperative owns and operates a centralised layer farm with hatchery and feed preparation units. Not all these backyard farms have electricity connection and these usually use LPG lamps for lighting of the farms. These farms use saw-dust/rice husk as bedding material which are replaced every rearing cycle.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for back yard poultry farms.
(ii) Biomass briquetting machine for briquetting of waste saw-dust/rice husk which can bring in additional income to the cooperative from the selling of briquettes.
15. Khurda, Odisha
Livelihood sector : Khadi, silk and village industries (bamboo cluster)
Location : Bolagarh (Arikama) block in Khurda district
Brief description of livelihood activity in the cluster: There are about 600 artisan families in this cluster who depends upon bamboo and cane processing activities for their livelihoods. These artisans are associated through 24 SHGs (self-help group). The main products manufactured at the cluster are furniture and decorative and utility items. The artisanal work is mainly done at individual houses. Khadi and Village Industry Commission of India (KVIC) is providing support to the artisans of this cluster in the form of technical training, access to finance and market linkages. KVIC has also provided grant for setting-up of a common facility centre (CFC) which provides the artisans a common work-shed equipped with some necessary equipment for bamboo splitting, cutting, etc. The electricity supply situation in the cluster is poor which affects the productivity of artisans due to inadequate lights during morning and evening hours and under-utilisation of the equipment at CFC.
Potential renewable energy interventions:
(i) Solar lighting systems for artisan’s houses: Productivity of the artisans can be increased by providing them with solar lighting systems at their houses which can improve the lighting conditions during morning and evening hours.
(ii) Biomass gasifier based on bamboo waste for power generation at CFC: A large amount of bamboo and cane waste is generated which can be used for power generation to power the equipment and lights at the CFC.
118 ANNEXURE – G: SUMMARY REPORT ON STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATIONS
Five stakeholder consultation workshops have been organised in two phases. The first phase of workshops was focused on consultations with stakeholders at state level and were organised at the state capitals of the three targeted states. In the second phase consultation workshop with potential partners and the LFA workshop were organised at New Delhi. The highlights of the workshops are provided in Table 41 below:
Table 41: Summary details of stakeholders' workshops
Phase – I (State level workshops) Participation Bhubaneswar (January 17, 2014) Around 60 participants from NGOs, governments, academics, technical experts and private sector. Majority belonging to Odisha and a few from Jharkhand and West Bengal. Bhopal (January 21, 2014) Around 30 participants from NGOs, governments, technical experts and private sector. Majority from Madhya Pradesh, a few technology suppliers from other states. Guwahati (January 24, 2014) Around 40 participants from NGOs, governments, academics, technical experts and private sector. Majority from Assam, a few from Meghalaya Phase – II New Delhi (February 14, 2014) – Around 30 participants representing manufacturers/vendors of Round table meeting of potential clean technology, CSR representatives from PSUs, banks, and partners NGOs New Delhi (February 17 and 18, Around 10 participants including UNDP, MNRE and international 2014) – LFA workshop and national consultant team
As the project team sought to evolve and detail the project through the initial listing of major livelihoods activities / productive uses and RETPRLs, the stakeholder consultations in the states were geared towards not just sharing initial thoughts of the project team but importantly to also harvest local knowledge and views, particularly of those working on rural livelihoods, renewable energy industry and implementation of government programmes. These discussions were seen as critical in shaping implementation aspects and institutional framework for the proposed project.
Broadly, the questions posed to stakeholders in the various state-level consultations were as follows:
What are the key livelihood activities (existing/potential) that can benefit from energy linkages?
In which districts such projects will have high potential of success and impact?
Who could be the potential partners (Govt agencies, NGOs, Community based organisations or CBOs, private and public sector institutions) for undertaking cluster level projects?
What specific ideas do potential partners have to offer in terms of cluster level projects to provide RE energy services for livelihood activities?
Similar in tenor were the questions posed to participants at the multi-stakeholder consultation in New Delhi where the project team sought to garner inputs and support from potential partners. At the LFA workshop, these project ideas took more clear shape in terms of implementation aspects and recognition of the need for more detailed information to be gathered from the proposed project sites and partners. 119 Major Conclusions of Stakeholders’ Workshops
The major conclusions of the state level and the multi-stakeholders national partner workshops are summarised below:
Electricity grid extension: The participants noted that steady progress is taking place in grid extension. In some states, particularly MP, the situation of grid electricity supply has improved significantly in last 2-3 years. In this context, the project design needed to factor in the possibility of grid extension to currently unserved areas and improvements in grid electricity supply to currently underserved areas, during the project period. While some participants see availability of cheaper grid electricity as a threat to off-grid renewable electricity as well as see technical and regulatory barriers to integration of decentralised renewable electricity systems to the electricity grid; some other participants felt that there is no significant threat from the grid once regulatory issues related with decentralised electricity generation are sorted out
Challenges to off-grid renewable based rural electrification: Regulatory challenges with regard to tariff- setting as well as financing of off-grid rural electrification projects based on renewable electricity were seen as important challenges. Operators pointed out to the problems in the collection of tariffs. In the past, a typical approach has been to build off-grid renewable energy based rural electrification projects in remote villages and then make some efforts to develop livelihoods activities around them; this approach requires interventions spread over long period of time as the villages selected are usually small and remote and are not connected with the markets. While sharing experiences, the participants pointed out to a number of dysfunctional off-grid small biomass gasifier power plants and the problems in continued functioning of off- grid Solar PV power plants once the battery replacement becomes due.
Need to focus on captive energy needs of livelihoods activities: Overall, it was felt that the project should focus on catering primarily to the captive energy needs in livelihood activities, where the renewable energy systems displace electricity generated from a costly fuel like diesel or is used for thermal applications such as drying or cooking.
All the states have mature livelihood initiatives and institutions: A large amount of work is taking place in all the states on livelihood promotion in rural areas. Several government departments are involved – notably rural development, panchayati raj, fisheries, animal husbandry, agriculture, tribal development, etc. In addition, all the three states have several credible NGO led initiatives to promote rural livelihoods, which are focussed on certain specific livelihood sectors and specific districts. In most of the programmes the end-users are organised in the form of self-help groups, producer companies or cooperatives. One of the major issues in the past has been providing market access to the products produced by the rural households. In this context, during last two decades, most of the states now have specialised marketing federations; also cooperatives and producer companies are involved which are helping in marketing of the products.
Rural livelihoods can benefit from access to reliable energy and some examples exist of renewable energy use in rural livelihoods activities: Several critical rural livelihoods activities – notably dairy and poultry farming, storage and processing of several types of agri-produce, farming /irrigation – were observed to potentially benefit from access to reliable energy. All of the states have considerable interest and some experience in employing renewable energy services in various livelihoods activities. Some specific examples were given in the workshops e.g. solar drying of fish in Odisha, solar lighting for poultry in MP, solar aerators for in-land fisheries in Assam, use of solar lights by weavers in Assam, use of solar dryers for spices in MP and Assam, etc.
Challenges to use of renewable energy in rural livelihood activities: High capital cost was often identified as an important barrier in scaling-up of renewable energy use for rural livelihoods. The importance of pooling up of MNRE subsidies with the subsidies/ grants available for rural livelihoods activities was highlighted. In general, technology suppliers and project developers find the rural market unattractive due its dispersed nature and generally lower ability and / or willingness to pay. There are also challenges in
120 servicing and maintenance of devices due to lack of skilled manpower. The devices and parts also suffer from poor quality and low reliability. Due to several of these reasons, decentralised renewable energy has not been seen as attractive by financing institutions. Community or joint ownership of RE-devices / technologies was seen as an approach, but accountability was seen as a challenge in this approach where ownership is vague or joint.
Seasonality of energy demand: The energy demand side of rural livelihoods must also be assessed thoroughly. Seasonality of sectors and specific energy end-use demands must be factored in. For instance, fruit and vegetable production, drying of certain spices or eco-tourism activities will have distinct seasonal patterns which must be factored into the business models. The project must also explore other uses of RE devices to improve utilization.
Need for systematic RE resource assessment: Some renewable energy resource-specific issues were highlighted as points to bear in mind that in several areas small hydro potential exists but streams are rain- fed and dry up for 2-3 months. Similarly, in high rainfall areas of the North East, biomass is available, but it is wet for most of the year. Also typical in the North East is the problem of watery dung with low calorific value though livestock population is promising in terms of numbers. These insights underscore the importance of systematic RE resource assessment to assess suitability and ensure sustainability of RETPRLs.
Need for careful selection of state/local level implementers: State-level interest, financial resources and capacity and interest of State Nodal Agencies (SNAs) vary from state to state. This must be assessed and borne in mind while developing state-level activities and identifying project partners. Also important to understand at the local-level is the manner in which various livelihoods activities are organised in various locations. This is well-understood by local community-based organisations, cooperatives and NGOs and they could become important partners in project conceptualisation and in some cases execution.
121 ANNEXURE – H: COUNTRY OFFICE SUPPORT SERVICE (COSS) AGREEMENT
STANDARD LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNDP AND THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES
HOW TO USE THIS LETTER OF AGREEMENT This agreement is used to provide appropriate legal coverage when the UNDP country office provides support services under national execution. This agreement must be signed by a governmental body or official authorised to confer full legal coverage on UNDP. (This is usually the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Prime Minister /or Head of State.) The UNDP country office must verify that the government signatory has been properly authorised to confer immunities and privileges. A copy of the signed standard letter will be attached to each PSD and project document requiring such support services. When doing this, the UNDP country office completes the attachment to the standard letter on the nature and scope of the services and the responsibilities of the parties involved for that specific PSD/project document. The UNDP country office prepares the letter of agreement and consults with the regional bureau in case either of the parties wishes to modify the standard text. After signature by the authority authorised to confer immunities and privileges to UNDP, the government keeps one original and the UNDP country office the other original. A copy of the agreement should be provided to UNDP headquarters (BOM/OLPS) and the regional bureau.
Dear [name of government official],
1. Reference is made to consultations between officials of the Government of India (hereinafter referred to as “the Government”) and officials of UNDP with respect to the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for nationally managed programmes and projects. UNDP and the Government hereby agree that the UNDP country office may provide such support services at the request of the Government through its institution designated in the relevant programme support document or project document, as described below.
2. The UNDP country office may provide support services for assistance with reporting requirements and direct payment. In providing such support services, the UNDP country office shall ensure that the capacity of the Government- designated institution is strengthened to enable it to carry out such activities directly. The costs incurred by the UNDP country office in providing such support services shall be recovered from the administrative budget of the office.
3. The UNDP country office may provide, at the request of the designated institution, the following support services for the activities of the programme/project: (a) Identification and/or recruitment of project and programme personnel; (b) Identification and facilitation of training activities; (c) Procurement of goods and services;
4. The procurement of goods and services and the recruitment of project and programme personnel by the UNDP country office shall be in accordance with the UNDP regulations, rules, policies and procedures. Support services described in paragraph 3 above shall be detailed in an annex to the programme support document or project document, in the form provided in the Attachment hereto. If the requirements for support services by the country office change during the life of a programme or project, the annex to the programme support document or project document is revised with the mutual agreement of the UNDP resident representative and the designated institution.
5. The relevant provisions of the [Insert title and date of the UNDP standard basic assistance agreement with the Government] (the “SBAA”), including the provisions on liability and privileges and immunities, shall apply to the provision of such support services. The Government shall retain overall responsibility for the nationally managed programme or project through its designated institution. The responsibility of the UNDP country office for the provision of the support services described herein shall be limited to the provision of such support services detailed in the annex to the programme support document or project document.
122 6. Any claim or dispute arising under or in connection with the provision of support services by the UNDP country office in accordance with this letter shall be handled pursuant to the relevant provisions of the SBAA.
7. The manner and method of cost-recovery by the UNDP country office in providing the support services described in paragraph 3 above shall be specified in the annex to the programme support document or project document.
8. The UNDP country office shall submit progress reports on the support services provided and shall report on the costs reimbursed in providing such services, as may be required.
9. Any modification of the present arrangements shall be effected by mutual written agreement of the parties hereto.
10. If you are in agreement with the provisions set forth above, please sign and return to this office two signed copies of this letter. Upon your signature, this letter shall constitute an agreement between your Government and UNDP on the terms and conditions for the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for nationally managed programmes and projects.
Yours sincerely,
______Signed on behalf of UNDP [Name] [Title: Resident Representative]
______For the Government [Name/title] [Date]
123 Attachment
DESCRIPTION OF UNDP COUNTRY OFFICE SUPPORT SERVICES
1. Reference is made to consultations between [insert name of Designated institution], the institution designated by the Government of India and officials of UNDP with respect to the provision of support services by the UNDP country office for the nationally managed programme or project [insert programme or project number and title], “the Programme” [or “the Project”].
2. In accordance with the provisions of the letter of agreement signed on [insert date of agreement] and the programme support document [or project document], the UNDP country office shall provide support services for the Programme [or Project] as described below.
3. Support services to be provided: Cost to UNDP of Amount and method Schedule for the Support services providing such of reimbursement of provision of the (insert description) support services UNDP (where support services (where appropriate) appropriate) 1. Recruitment of Project Staff To be recruited as 5,500 ATLAS billing per AWP 2. Recruitment of Consultants To be recruited as 7,000 ATLAS billing (i.e. Climate Experts, GIS per AWP Specialist, Innovative Finance Specialist, M&E Activities, etc.) 3. Contractual service - To be engaged as 4,000 ATLAS billing Companies (i.e. procurement of per AWP equipment, annual audit) 4. Payments To be arranged as 2,500 ATLAS billing per AWP 5. Workshops and training events To be organized as 3,000 ATLAS billing per AWP
4. Description of functions and responsibilities of the parties involved:
124 ANNEXURE – I: PROJECT ANNUAL TARGETS
Table 42: Project Annual Targets
Annual Targets Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators Target Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Project goal: Reduced GHG emissions achieved Cumulative CO2 emissions reduced through renewable energy from start of project to End-Of-Project 69,115 0 631 2,209 18,147 48,128 systems in rural livelihood (EOP), (tCO2e) sectors Project Objective: Total energy savings achieved from Enhancing reliable and implemented RETPRLs by EOP affordable clean energy MWhe 112,737 0 1,127 37,203 37,203 37,203 access for rural livelihoods in MWhth 1,376,631 0 13,766 454,288 454,288 454,288 un-served and underserved areas Component 1: Development and deployment of key RE-rural livelihood application packages Number of household enterprises Outcome 1: Deployment of adopting RETPRLs through RE-rural livelihood 30,000 0 600 900 14,250 14,250 demonstrations and replications in application packages the targeted states by the EOP Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost-effective RE technology packages developed for No. of RETPRLs developed by year 2 10 5 5 0 0 0 rural livelihoods (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications Output 1.2: Demonstrated No. of demonstration project clusters 15 0 15 0 0 and documented RE – rural by EoP livelihood application packages in 15 clusters and No. of household enterprises benefitting 1,500 household adopting RETPRLs in the 1,500 0 600 900 0 0 enterprises demonstration clusters by year 3 No. of training programmes Output 1.3: Completed 14 0 0 7 0 7 training programmes and conducted by EoP training of trainers activities No. of training packages developed 7 0 7 0 0 0 for replication and scale up by year 2
125 Annual Targets Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators Target Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 of RE – rural livelihood application packages No. of persons trained by EoP 280 0 140 0 0 140
Output 1.4: Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural No. of household enterprises livelihood application adopting RETPRLs through 28,500 0 0 0 14,250 14,250 packages promoted to other replications by EoP districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises Component 2: Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers for enhancing rural livelihoods Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE technology No. of RE technology supply and and service providers for service providers for rural livelihood 100 0 20 0 40 40 rural livelihood applications by EoP applications No. of RE technology supply and service providers for rural livelihoods 100 0 20 0 40 40 Output 2.1: Business applications by EoP development aspects No. of business plans developed for supported for 100 RE RE technology supply and service 20 0 20 0 0 0 technology supply and providers by year 2 service providers for rural livelihoods applications No. of financial mechanism to access finance for RE technology supply and 1 0 1 0 0 0 service suppliers by Year 2 Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for RE - rural livelihood applications Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of No. of states enforcing policies on the RE applications in national RE applications as part of their SRLM and state level rural and in line with the same policies at 4 0 0 4 0 0 livelihoods policies for key the national level by year 3 livelihood sectors in rural areas
126 Annual Targets Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators Target Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Output 3.1.1: National and No. of Ministries/Departments that State level rural livelihood officially adopt mission statements mission statements / 4 0 0 4 0 0 that support RE applications for rural documents emphasise the livelihoods by year 3 use of RE Output 3.1.2: National and No. of livelihood sectors where RE is State level policies that promoted in 3 targeted states by year 20 0 10 10 0 0 support the use of RE for 3 key rural livelihood sectors Output 3.1.3: Documented experiences and lessons on No. of peer reviewed publications RE applications for rural sharing experiences regarding RE 7 0 1 2 2 2 livelihoods at suitable and rural livelihoods by EoP regional and international fora Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE programs also cater No. of MNRE programs that espouse to actions towards RE applications for rural livelihoods 1 0 0 1 0 0 enhanced RE utilisation in programme by Year 3 rural livelihoods Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE-supported No. of replication projects programme for enhanced implemented by MNRE in new 28,500 0 0 0 14,250 14,250 RE utilisation in rural programme using RETPRLs by EoP livelihoods Outcome 3.3: Improved No. of state regulatory commissions tariff and grid (SRCs) implement policy guidelines interconnection 3 0 0 3 0 0 of improved tariff structure for regulations for decentralised RE by year 3 decentralised RE Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap and workshops for No. of state level workshops to supporting improved tariff implement the revised tariff structures 3 0 0 3 0 0 structures for small scale by year 3 captive and off-grid RE
127 Annual Targets Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators Target Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Output 3.3.2: Developed and implemented regulatory, technical and tariff No. of SRCs implement policy guidelines for RE based guidelines for captive/decentralised 3 0 0 3 0 0 captive/decentralised RE grid interconnection by year 3 systems’ grid interconnection Component 4: Financial support for decentralised RE - rural livelihood applications Outcome 4.1: Improved No. of developed improved overall decentralised RE subsidy and support models by Year 1 0 1 0 0 0 subsidies and support for 2 rural livelihoods Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE subsidy and support models No. of completed study on existing 1 1 0 0 0 0 for increased effectiveness subsidies and supports by Year 1 of decentralised RE Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy and support models No. of RE subsidy and support for increased effectiveness models for rural livelihoods available 1 1 0 0 0 0 of decentralised RE for rural by year 1 livelihoods funding Outcome 4.2: Enhanced 1 0 0 1 0 0 provision of financial No. of financial institutions supporting support for decentralised RETPRL by Year 3 RE in rural livelihood applications No. of household enterprises 28,500 0 0 0 14,250 14,250 Output 4.2.1: Implemented adopting RETPRLs that were funded financial support packages by the established financial support for RE technology – rural packages by EOP livelihood applications Output 4.2.2: Pooled No. of completed studies on inter- available financial resources institutional linkages for finance for supporting viable pooling to support viable livelihood 1 0 1 0 0 0 livelihood business models business models and enhanced and enhanced market market linkages covering three states linkages and centre by year 2
128 Annual Targets Strategy Objectively Verifiable Indicators Target Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Outcome 4.3: Improved Number of states implement investment risk mitigation designed suitable risk for decentralised RE in 3 0 0 3 0 0 guarantee/mitigation mechanisms by rural livelihoods year 3 applications Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk No. of completed studies on risk mitigation mechanisms assessment and risk mitigation in 1 0 0 1 0 0 designed and supported for applicable sectors by year 3 RE enterprises and RE technology adopters / end- No. of designed suitable risk users in rural livelihoods guarantee/mitigation mechanism by 1 0 0 1 0 0 applications year 3
129 REQUEST FOR CEO ENDORSEMENT PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project TYPE OF TRUST FUND:GEF Trust Fund
For more information about GEF, visit TheGEF.org
PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India GEF ACE Project) Country(ies): India GEF Project ID:1 4900 GEF Agency(ies): UNDP GEF Agency Project ID: 4605 Other Executing Partner(s): Ministry of New and Submission Date: 21 Oct 2014 Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India GEF Focal Area (s): Climate Change Project Duration 60 (Months) Name of Parent Program (if Project Agency Fee ($): 380,651 applicable): For SFM/REDD+ For SGP For PPP
A. FOCAL AREA STRATEGY FRAMEWORK2
Focal Trust Grant Co- Area Expected FA Fund Amount ($) Expected FA Outputs financing Objectiv Outcomes ($) es CCM-3 Outcome 3.1: Output 3.1: Renewable GEF TF 844,870 196,114 Favorable policy energy policy and and regulatory regulation in place environment created for renewable energy investments3 CCM-3 Outcome 3.2: Output 3.2: Renewable GEF TF 3,161,979 18,837,653 Investment in energy capacity installed renewable energy technologies Output 3.3: Electricity increased and heat produced from renewable sources Total project costs 4,006,849 19,033,767
B. PROJECT FRAMEWORK
1 Project ID number will be assigned by GEFSEC. 2 Refer to the Focal Area Results Framework and LDCF/SCCF Framework when completing Table A. 3 Comprising Components 3 and 4 in the project GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 1
Project Objective: Enhancing reliable and affordable clean energy access for rural livelihoods in un-served and underserved areas Trust Grant Grant Fund Amount Confirme Project Expected Type Expected Outputs ($) d Co- Component Outcomes financing ($) Component 1: TA Outcome 1: 1.1. At least ten (10) GEF TF 2,719,94 18,374,380 Development Deployment of cost-effective RE 9 and deployment RE-rural technology packages of key RE-rural livelihood developed for rural livelihood application livelihood (RETPRL) application packages applications and packages established technical specifications 1.2 Demonstrated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages in 15 clusters and benefitting 1,500 household enterprises 1.3 Completed training programmes and training of trainers activities for replication and scale up of RE – rural livelihood application packages 1.4 Completed promotion of replicated and documented RE – rural livelihood application packages to other districts / states and applied to 28,500 household enterprises Component 2: TA Outcome 2: Output 2.1: Business GEF TF 301,000 416,387 Supply chain for Increased supply development aspects RE technology of RE technology supported for 100 RE supply and and service technology supply and service providers providers for service providers for for enhancing rural livelihood rural livelihoods rural livelihoods applications applications Component 3: TA Outcome 3.1: 3.1.1 National and GEF TF 196,700 53,900 Policy and Inclusion of RE State level rural regulatory applications in livelihoods mission support for RE - national and state statements / documents rural livelihood level rural emphasizing the use of applications livelihoods RE policies for key 3.1.2 National and livelihood sectors State level policies that in rural areas support the use of RE
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 2
for key rural livelihoods sectors 3.1.3 Documented experiences and lessons on RE applications for rural livelihoods at suitable regional and international fora TA Outcome 3.2: Output 3.2.1: GEF TF 46,600 14,000 Future MNRE Developed MNRE- programs also supported programme cater to actions for enhanced RE towards utilization in rural enhanced RE livelihoods utilization in rural livelihoods TA Outcome 3.3: Output 3.3.1: GEF TF 69,500 28,800 Improved tariff Completed roadmap and grid and workshops for interconnection supporting improved regulations for tariff structures for decentralized RE small scale captive and off-grid RE Output 3.3.2: Developed and implemented regulatory, technical and tariff guidelines for RE based captive/decentralized systems’ grid interconnection Component 4: TA Outcome 4.1: Output 4.1.1: Assessed GEF TF 64,800 22,000 Financial Improved RE subsidy and support for decentralized RE support models for decentralized RE subsidies and increased effectiveness - rural livelihood support for rural of decentralized RE applications livelihoods Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy and support models for increased effectiveness of decentralized RE for rural livelihoods funding TA Outcome 4.2: Output 4.2.1: GEF TF 119,900 32,000 Enhanced Implemented financial provision of support packages for financial support RE technology – rural for decentralized livelihood applications RE in rural Output 4.2.2: Pooled livelihood available financial applications resources for
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 3
supporting viable livelihood business models and enhanced market linkages TA Outcome 4.3: Output 4.3.1: GEF TF 298,900 29,300 Improved Enhanced risk investment risk mitigation mechanisms mitigation for designed and supported decentralized RE for RE enterprises and in rural RE technology livelihood adopters / end-users in applications rural livelihoods applications Subtotal 3,817,34 18,970,767 9 Project management Cost (PMC)4 GEF TF 189,500 63,000 Total project costs 4,006,84 19,033,767 9
C. SOURCES OF CONFIRMED CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY SOURCE AND BY NAME ($)
Type of Co- Co-financing Sources of Co-financing Name of Co-financier (source) financing Amount ($) National Government Ministry of New and Renewable Cash 10,000,000 Energy (MNRE) GEF Agency UNDP Cash 800,000 Others Cluster Level Implementing Agencies Cash 8,233,767 (CLIAs) – 15 nos. Total Co-financing 19,033,767
D. TRUST FUND RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY, FOCAL AREA AND COUNTRY1: N.A. 1In case of a single focal area, single country, single GEF Agency project, and single trust fund project, no need to provide information for this table. PMC amount from Table B should be included proportionately to the focal area amount in this table. 2 Indicate fees related to this project.
E. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENTS:
Grant Amount Co-financing Project Total Component ($) ($) ($) International Consultants 68,000 0 68,000 National/Local Consultants 1,098,9 601,600 1,700,500 00
F. DOES THE PROJECT INCLUDE A “NON-GRANT” INSTRUMENT? No (If non-grant instruments are used, provide in Annex D an indicative calendar of expected reflows to your Agency and to the GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF Trust Fund).
4 PMC should be charged proportionately to focal areas based on focal area project grant amount in Table D below.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 4
PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
A. DESCRIBE ANY CHANGES IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE PROJECT DESIGN OF THE ORIGINAL PIF5
A.1 National strategies and plans or reports and assessments under relevant conventions, if applicable, i.e. NAPAS, NAPs, NBSAPs, national communications, TNAs, NCSA, NIPs, PRSPs, NPFE, Biennial Update Reports, etc.
The applicable national strategies and plans (or reports or assessments under relevant conventions) build on those described at the project’s PIF stage. Key Government of India (GoI) policies and schemes6 that have sought to support the expansion of renewable energy are as follows:
Electricity Act 2003: Mandates that each State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC) must establish minimum renewable power purchases; allows for the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) to set a preferential tariff for electricity generated from renewable energy technologies; and provides open access of the electricity transmission and distribution system to licensed renewable power generators. National Electricity Policy 2005: Allows SERCs to establish preferential tariffs for electricity generated from renewable sources. National Tariff Policy 2006: Mandates that each SERC must specify a renewable purchase obligation (RPO) with distribution companies in a time-bound manner with purchases to be made through a competitive bidding process. Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY) 2005: Supports extension of electricity to all rural and below poverty line (BPL) households through a 90% subsidy of capital equipment costs for renewable and non-renewable energy systems. Eleventh Plan 2007–2012: Established a target that 10% of power generating capacity should be based on renewable sources by 2012 (a goal that has already been reached); it also supported the phasing out of investment-related subsidies in favor of performance-oriented incentives.
In June 2008, India’s first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) was released. It outlined existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation and adaptation. The plan identified eight core “National Missions” running through 2017. The eight missions under India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) are the: National Solar Mission; National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency; National Mission on Sustainable Habitat; National Water Mission; National Mission for Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystems; National Mission for a Green India; National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture; and National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change. The NAPCC’s relevance relating to this project includes:
Achieving national economic growth objectives through a qualitative change in direction that enhances ecological sustainability, leading to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions;
5 For questions A.1 –A.7 in Part II, if there are no changes since PIF and if not specifically requested in the review sheet at PIF stage, then no need to respond, please enter “NA” after the respective question. 6 Indian Renewable Energy Status Report, background paper for DIREC 2010. NREL/TP-6A20-48948 October 2010
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 5
Devising efficient and cost-effective strategies for end-use demand-side management; Developing new and innovative forms of market, regulatory and voluntary mechanisms to promote sustainable development.
The Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) is also part of the NAPCC. JNNSM has a target for the deployment of 20,000 MW of solar power, 20 million m2 of solar thermal collector area and 20 million solar lighting systems by 2022. The objective of JNNSM is to create a policy and regulatory environment that provides a predictable and effective incentive structure that enables rapid and large-scale capital investment in solar energy applications and encourages strong technical innovation and the lowering of costs. The Mission adopted a 3-phased approach, spanning the remaining period of the 11th Plan and first year of the 12th Plan (up to 2012-13) as Phase 1, the remaining 4 years of the 12th Plan (2013-17) as Phase 2 and the 13th Plan (2017-22) as Phase 3. At the end of each plan, and mid-term during the 12th and 13th Plans, there will be an evaluation of progress and a review of capacity and targets for subsequent phases – to be based on emerging cost and technology trends, both domestic and global.
1. Many states have introduced state-level renewable energy policies with their own schemes and tax incentives for renewable energy. Various states have implemented provisional measures such as concessional open access charges for captive renewable energy projects and waivers on cross-subsidy surcharges. These measures are meant to reduce the burden resulting from the generally lower plant load factors of renewable energy projects. 2. SERCs also set state-specific targets for distribution companies to purchase a certain percentage of their total power requirement from renewable energy sources through targets set in the form of Renewable Purchase Obligations (RPOs). As part of its policy to promote renewable energy, India launched the Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) Mechanism in 2010. Under this scheme, generators of renewable energy are granted an REC per unit of green energy that they contribute to the grid. RECs have begun to be traded on the power exchanges, with the RECs being purchased by states / agencies that are otherwise unable to meet their RPOs.
The National Clean Energy Fund was created in 2011 as a funding mechanism for research and development in the field of clean energy technologies. The fund is created by levying a nominal cost on coal. Though the fund is large (expected to grow to INR 100 billion) the guidelines for utilization of this Fund have been found to be very broad-based with the result that the Fund is now being used for routine energy projects including those in the new and renewable energy sector.
One notable national strategy change in the energy access area from the PIF is that the inter- ministerial Global Energy Access Centre (GEAC) is now almost certainly not going ahead (see A.4 as below for more details). Key Government of India (GoI) policies and schemes7 that have sought to support the expansion of rural livelihoods were not mentioned in detail at the PIF stage, and are therefore detailed as follows:
Agriculture was the predominant livelihood interventions in India until the 1960s, with irrigation through large dams and canal systems, followed by the introduction of high yielding crop varieties during the Green Revolution, impacting the livelihoods of over 40 million farmers and a similar number of landless laborers. India has added over 40 million hectares of irrigation since independence in 1947; the largest increase in irrigated land in human history. This has generated or stabilized the livelihoods of millions of people.
7 Indian Renewable Energy Status Report. Background paper for DIREC 2010. NREL/TP-6A20-48948 October 2010
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 6
Originally called the National Rural Employment Program (NREP), and later the Sampoorna Gram Samriddhi Yojana (SGSY), wage-employment was generated in the lean season through public works such as road building. In 2006, this approach was substantially revised with the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, which guaranteed 100 days of employment to any citizen wanting to work. The resulting Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme has generated over 16 billion days of work and generated rural incomes to the range of INR 2.48 trillion since its inception. In the field of self-employment, the interventions from Government started with the Integrated Rural Development Programme in 1980, later re-fashioned into the Swarna Jayanti Grameen Swarozgar Yojana (SJGSY), to promote self-employment among the poor through acquisition of an income-generating asset with the help of a bank loan and a government subsidy. The National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) was launched in 2012; taking the SGSY idea forward by creating institutions of the poor that would anchor rural livelihoods development in a sustainable manner. In addition, there are a number of programmes run by sectoral institutions such as the National Dairy Development Board, the Central Silk Board, the Coir Board, the National Horticultural Board, the National Fisheries Development Board, the Khadi and Village Industries Commission and the Development Commissioners for Handloom and Handicrafts, focusing on specific sectors of the economy that provide livelihoods.
A.2. GEF focal area and/or fund(s) strategies, eligibility criteria and priorities.
The project has an applicable GEF Strategic Objective of Climate Change Objective 3 of “Promote investment in renewable energy technologies”. The applicable GEF Expected Outcomes are Outcome 3.1: favorable policy and regulatory environment created for renewable energy investments can be gauged by monitoring the extent to which energy access policies and regulations are adopted and enforced (assessed over a score of 1 to 5). The achievement of Outcome 3.2: Investment in renewable energy technologies increased can be determined by tracking the volume of investments mobilized in clean and modern energy technologies and services. The applicable GEF Outcome Indicators are: a. Extent to which EE policies and regulations are adopted and enforced b. Volume of investment mobilized c. Tonnes of CO2 equivalent avoided
A.3 The GEF Agency’s comparative advantage:
UNDP has been successfully implementing climate change mitigation renewable energy and energy efficiency projects in India for many years, including with MNRE. Notable UNDP-MNRE GEF projects include the successfully completed Global Solar Water Heating Market Transformation and Strengthening Initiative (India GSWH) project and the currently very successfully underway India: Market Development and Promotion of Solar Concentrators based Process Heat Applications in India (India CSH) project.
UNDP has leveraged its long and successful collaboration with MNRE to obtain early funding for this GEF ACE project. The India GEF ACE project will accordingly make an early implementation start (even before GEF project funding approval) with the India UNDP-MNRE ACE $2.4 million project, where $0.8 million will be provided from UNDP core funding sources, and no GEF funds will be utilized. The India MNRE-UNDP ACE project will establish: the PSC (Project Steering Committee); the PEC (Project Executive Committee) and UNDP-MNRE implementation arrangements; the project’s PMU (Project Management Unit); suitable CLIA’s (Cluster Level Implementing Agencies); and will enable early development of some of the RE – Rural Livelihoods applications. The India UNDP-MNRE ACE project will integrate with the India GEF ACE project at its time of inception, and GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 7
the UNDP-MNRE ACE project implementation arrangements will then transition into the GEF ACE project (this project).
The India GEF ACE project is also closely aligned with the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) global initiative led by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon to achieve universal energy access, double the rate of improvement in energy efficiency, and double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix by 2030. This initiative was launched in September 2011 and United Nations General Assembly unanimously declared the decade 2014‑2024 as the Decade of Sustainable Energy for All.
A.4. The baseline project and the problem that it seeks to address:
Government of India initiatives to improve rural energy access as stated in original PIF, such as Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY), Decentralized Distributed Generation (DDG), and Remote Village Electrification (RVE) are similar to the key initiatives that are currently in place in India. The focus on electrifying all feasible villages with grid electricity connections has continued, with limited supply of electricity for rural areas at 4 - 6 hours per day with generally poor voltage regulation.
This narrowing of the project focus to just RE for rural livelihoods applications also serves to provide the narrower project focus sought in the STAP Review and by GEF Council members with regards to the original PIF. The other key reason to narrow the project focus to rural livelihoods is that these users need reliable energy for their livelihoods activities to take place, and their alternative is generally high cost captive diesel generators. In contrast, domestic users just generally do without an electricity supply when electricity is not available from the grid. So unserved and underserved rural livelihoods applications are much more likely to pay for RE solutions compared to domestic users who continue to expect low cost reliable electricity supply, but will generally not spend any extra money to obtain such reliable alternative energy supplies when a grid electricity supply is not available. A positive baseline change is that the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) is now underway in India to lead rural livelihoods support activities. The basic concept of NRLM is to organize the rural poor into SHG (Self Help Groups) and make them capable of generating self-employment. NRLM is now available to provide the necessary rural livelihoods coordination framework to complement the RE coordination role that will be provided by MNRE. Table 1 as below provides an overview of changes from the PIF stage to the ProDoc stage.
Table 1: Overview of Changes from PIF to ProDoc
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc Project title: Scale Up of Project title: Scale Up of Access The main baseline project change from the PIF Access to Clean Energy to Clean Energy for Rural stage is that the assumed baseline MNRE for Rural Productive and Productive Uses (India GEF ACE activity to set up an inter-ministerial Global Domestic Uses Project) Energy Access Centre (GEAC) has not eventuated, and seems highly unlikely to occur in the foreseeable future. So, the inter- Ministerial coordination role envisaged to be undertaken by GEAC is not feasible in the project.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 8
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc As GEAC will not be realized, and the strong feedback received from the stakeholder meetings to focus the project more tightly, the problem that the project seeks to address has therefore been narrowed down from enhanced energy access to both domestic and livelihoods applications (as stated in the PIF) to just focusing on promoting the enhanced use of RE for rural livelihoods applications.
The India GEF ACE project will not explicitly deal with domestic uses of RE as there are fundamental differences between the domestic uses of energy and the productive uses of energy in India as follows: (1) even when villages in India are “electrified”8, many productive uses will not be connected as they are located away from the village electrified area; (2) households in unconnected villages or households that are not connected in an “electrified” village just generally do without an electricity supply rather than make use of captive diesel generator sets as is the case for many productive uses where an available and reliable electricity supply is a prerequisite of the livelihoods activity being viable at all; (3) households have an expectation of low cost (actually below full supply cost) electricity and would rather do without an available or reliable supply rather than pay the full cost of electricity supply, whereas productive uses are often prepared to pay the high cost of diesel generator sets if the alternative is no electricity supply at all.
So adding domestic uses of energy, as an explicit focus of the project, would result in a project that tried to address two fundamentally different energy supply markets. Finally, even just focusing on productive uses in three large states in India (having a combined population of about 148 million) in the project is already very
8 In India a village is considered to be “electrified” when the government buildings (school, health clinic etc.) are electrified and 10% of the houses are connected. However electricity supply can be as little as four to six hours per day GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 9
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc ambitious with only a GEF $ 4,006,849 budget. Component 1. Investment Component 1. Development and The ProDoc Component 1 scope and budget is financing for rural energy deployment of key RE-rural now the major project activity in the ProDoc. technology enterprises, livelihood application packages The ProDoc Component 1 includes, in a and for end- users that (GEF grant $2,719,949) suitably modified fashion, the PIF Outcome 3.1 promote productive activities. applications (GEF grant $1,600,000) The PIF Component 1 activities have been reduced in scope and budget and the remaining activities, in a suitably modified fashion, are now included in the ProDoc Component 4.
A strong feedback received from the stakeholder meetings to focus the project more tightly, the problem that the project seeks to address has been narrowed down from enhanced energy access to both domestic and livelihoods applications to just focusing on promoting the enhanced use of RE for specific rural livelihoods applications as mentioned above. Some of the RE-rural livelihoods packages have been tested and are commercially available; however, several of them are at a concept and demonstration stage.
Further, in the ProDoc, the activities that will bring about the deployment of RE-rural livelihood application packages have been placed in Component 1 - as these now make up the core of the project. The key focus now is on the development and deployment of selected RE – rural livelihoods packages. Outcome 1.1. Improved Outcome 1: Deployment of RE- The revised Component 1 now consist of enabling environment rural livelihood application interventions focusing on first developing that spur and enhance packages suitable REPTRL packages, and then on interest among deploying the RETPRL packages, which can be technology developers, Output 1.1. At least ten (10) cost- closely linked with PIF Output 3.1.3. None of investors and service effective RE technology packages the other PIF level Outputs are directly enterprises in investing developed for rural livelihood comparable to the ProDoc outputs under this on energy access (RETPRL) applications and component. The Component 1 outputs are initiatives established technical therefore largely new outputs (compared to the specifications PIF stage) resulted from extensive consultations Expected Outputs: during PPG phase that set project emphasis on 1.1.1. Developed and Output 1.2 Demonstrated and developing and deploying suitable RETPRL approved State Action documented RE – rural livelihood packages. Plan for Access to Clean application packages in 15 Energy (SAPACE) in a
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 10
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc maximum of five states clusters and benefitting 1,500 1.1.2. Approved and household enterprises implemented access to clean and modern energy Output 1.3 Completed training plans in at least three programmes and training of districts, and 4 villages trainers activities for replication per state and scale up of RE – rural 1.1.3. Prepared business livelihood application packages proposals by appropriate rural energy technology Output 1.4 Completed promotion suppliers and service of replicated and documented RE enterprises – rural livelihood application 1.1.4. Completed packages to other districts / states financial viability and applied to 28,500 household assessments of the enterprises prepared proposals 1.1.5. Established enterprises that produce rural energy technologies and provide energy services as per the local energy needs
Outcome 1.2. Availability of financing options for enterprises that provides access to clean energy and promote productive applications
Outputs 1.2 1. Designed financial schemes that are output based for enterprises that provide access to clean energy and promote productive applications 1.2.2. Established agreements with financing institutions (lead banks, IREDA, SIDBI, NABARD, etc.), micro financing institutions to invest in access to clean and modern energy
Outcome 1.3. Improved
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 11
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc financial support for community and household productive use projects
Outputs 1.3.1. Completed financial viability assessments of the developed applicable technology packages 1.3.2. Identified financing institutions that can provide financing for the end-users such as (a) loans, (b) micro- finance/micro-credit etc. 1.3.3. Funded productive use of energy initiatives at community level and household level through financing such as (a) retailer financing, and, (b) smart subsidies (production based incentives) Outcome 1.4. Increased access to finance for rural enterprise development
Outputs 1.4.1. Prepared business proposals by selected rural enterprises 1.4.2. Completed financial viability assessments of the prepared rural enterprise proposals for productive applications of energy 1.4.3. Installed energy systems in established rural enterprises that make use of the energy services Component 2. Policy and Component 2: Supply chain for The Policy and Institutional support focus of the institutional support for RE technology supply and service PIF Component 2 has now been transferred to the promotion of access the ProDoc Component 3.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 12
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc to modern and clean providers for enhancing rural energy services (GEF livelihoods (GEF grant $301,000) The PIF Component 2 activities have been grant $350,000) refocused and reduced in scope and budget in the absence of GEAC and with the ProDoc now no longer focusing on district-level committees to achieve project results. The other PIF Component 2 activities, in a modified fashion, are now included in the ProDoc Component 3.
The ProDoc has placed the enhanced supply chain for RE suppliers as the 2nd Component in numerical order as it is a logical progression that once RETPRLs are developed, then and only then can RE technology supply and service providers be supported in the deployment of the RETPRL packages. Outcome 2.1. Energy Outcome 2: Increased supply of The ProDoc Outcome 2.1 and its Output 2.1.1 access efforts are RE technology and service replaces the PIF Outcome 3.2 and the PIF coordinated at the providers for rural livelihood Outputs 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 national/central level applications
Outputs Output 2.1: Business development 2.1.1. Established aspects supported for 100 RE collaboration with technology supply and service Integrated Rural Energy providers for rural livelihoods Programme (IREP) applications training centers, other institutions (IISc, IITs, Technical Back Up units (TBUs), ITIs), private sector and NGOs through GEAC which function as one-stop-service provider.
Outcome 2.2. Energy access projects are implemented in line with the institutionalized Rural Electrification Policy
Outputs 2.2.1. Institutionalized and enforced implementation of Decentralized Distributed Generation (DDG) scheme and Remote
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 13
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc Village Electrification (RVE) programme through GEAC 2.2.2. Developed plans by the district-level committees involving local communities / vulnerable groups at sub- national / district level
Outcome 2.3. Wider availability of quality modern and clean energy technologies and services for rural communities
Outputs 2.3.1. Improved and expanded standards for the modern and clean energy technologies 2.3.2. Established testing facilities to test the performance of modern and clean energy technologies in at least 5 locations; 2.3.3. Established certification process and certified enterprises that provide quality modern and clean energy technologies and services in rural communities. Component 3. Scale up Component 3: Policy and The ProDoc Component 3 covers some of the and replicate access to regulatory support for RE - rural activities of the PIF Component 2 Policy and clean and modern energy livelihood applications (GEF Institutional support focus. services in un- served and grant $312,800) underserved regions The main change from the PIF is the baseline (GEF grant $1,400,000) MNRE activity to set up an inter-ministerial Global Energy Access Centre (GEAC), which will not happen. So, the inter-Ministerial coordination role envisaged by GEAC need to be taken out and adjusted. Therefore, The PIF Component 3 activities have been refocused and reduced in scope and budget as clean and modern energy access plans are now no longer being developed or implemented in the ProDoc
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 14
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc approach. The PIF Component 3 residual activities, in a modified fashion, are now included in the ProDoc Component 1.
The ProDoc has placed policy and regulatory support as the 3rd Component in numerical order and allocated a smaller GEF funding budget than in the PIF stage. This change is again mainly attributed to GEAC. As GEAC will not be established in India, during PPG phase it was decided that the project focus specifically on NRLM and SRLM to influence their mission statements and policies. Outcome 3.1. Increased Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE At the PIF-stage, it was assumed that there will flow of investments in application in national and state be an emphasis on GEAC which will be able to energy access projects level rural livelihoods policies for coordinate on the policy and institutional through increased number key livelihood sectors, such as, support structure. Now it is clear that GEAC of rural energy poultry, horticulture, fisheries, will not be established in India. Therefore the technology enterprises dairies, Khadi and village ProDoc now includes a more tightly focused set and service providers industries of outputs and outcomes that can be more assuredly delivered by the project than at the Outputs Output 3.1.1 National and State PIF stage, that will work towards RE being 3.1.1. Implemented clean level rural livelihoods mission specifically mentioned in relevant central and and modern energy statements / documents state rural livelihood mission statements and access plans involving emphasizing the use of RE policies, and that the development of a specific energy technology Output 3.1.2 National and State new MNRE RE and rural livelihoods enterprises serving un- level policies that support the use programme is supported. served and underserved of RE for key rural livelihoods regions and individual sectors households Output 3.1.3 Shared experiences 3.1.2. Clustered dispersed and lessons at suitable regional markets for energy and international fora for RE and service delivery by rural livelihoods energy technology enterprises and service Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE providers programs also cater to actions 3.1.3. Implemented towards enhanced RE utilization technology packages in in rural livelihoods 30 un-served villages and 30 underserved villages Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE- at the individual supported programme for household, and enhanced RE utilization in rural community levels that livelihoods linked modern and clean energy services with Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff productive applications and grid interconnection regulations for decentralized RE Outcome 3.2. Increased
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 15
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc number of energy access Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap service providers and workshops for supporting improved tariff structures for Outputs small scale captive and off-grid 3.2.1. 500 trained RE entrepreneurs under Output 3.3.2: Developed and entrepreneurship implemented regulatory, technical development programs and tariff guidelines for RE based 3.2.2 RESCOs (25 nos.) captive/decentralized systems’ and ESDEs (35 nos.) that grid interconnection were assisted to provide access to clean and modern energy solutions Component 4. Awareness Component 4: Financial support The ProDoc Component 4 covers the and institutional capacity for decentralized RE - rural identification and improvement of available RE development (GEF grant livelihood applications (GEF and rural livelihoods subsidies and supports, the $676,849) grant $483,600) development and support of the enhanced Outcome 4.1. Outcome 4.1: Improved pooling of available subsidies and supports, and Strengthened institutional decentralized RE subsidies and the development of improved risk mitigation capacities at various supports for rural livelihoods mechanisms. levels on the implementation of energy Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE The district level committee awareness and access projects subsidy and support models institutional capacity focus of the PIF assessed for increased Component 4, and its Outcome 4.1 has not been Outputs effectiveness of decentralized RE carried over in the ProDoc as the district 4.1.1. Established and committee focus is no longer viable due to the operational district-level Output 4.1.2: Improved RE absence of GEAC. This institutional structure committees under local subsidy and support models for was anticipated under GEAC at subnational administration for increased effectiveness of level. Therefore, it was revised in the ProDoc implementing energy decentralized RE for rural design to Cluster Level Implementation access projects (gender livelihoods funding Agencies (CLIAs) which are expected to work balanced as well as equal at the district level in promoting rural role for vulnerable Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision livelihoods and CLIA act as a main groups) in pilot districts of financial support for implementation partner. The knowledge of five states decentralized RE in rural products of the PIF Outcome 4.2 are now 4.1.2. Trained members livelihoods applications captured by the documentation aspects of the of district-level various Outputs in the ProDoc, as well as the committees capable of Output 4.2.1: Implemented Output 3.1.3 Knowledge transfer supported at involving local financial support packages for RE suitable regional and international fora for RE communities in the technology – rural livelihoods and rural livelihoods. planning and designing applications energy access projects The PIF Component 4 activities have been 4.1.3. Trained member of Output 4.2.2: Pooled available refocused and reduced in scope and budget in district-level committees financial resources for supporting the ProDoc. on the evaluation and viable livelihood business models selection of appropriate and enhanced market linkages The ProDoc has placed the financial support for modern and clean energy decentralized RE - rural livelihood applications technologies and services as the 4th Component in numerical order as it is
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 16
Expected Outputs Rationale for Changes in PIF GEF-Approved PIF Project Document Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc Outcome 4.3: Improved a logical progression from the ProDoc’s Outcome 4.2. Improved investment risk mitigation for Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for accessibility of decentralized RE in rural RE - rural livelihood applications. information and enhanced livelihoods applications understanding and The GEF budget for financial support activities knowledge about clean Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk in the ProDoc is greatly reduced from the PIF and modern energy mitigation mechanisms designed investment financing’s Component 1 – as the services and technologies and supported for RE enterprises ProDoc stage found that considerable RE and in the rural communities and RE technology adopters / rural livelihoods subsidies and grants were end-users in rural livelihoods available and that a reduced budget for financial Outputs applications support would be adequate to support the 4.2.1. Developed and renewed focus on mobilizing and pooling published knowledge existing subsides and supports, and facilitating products (guidance risk mitigation approaches such as partial risk manual, toolkit etc.) for guarantees. specific target groups to design and implement energy access projects 4.2.2. Disseminated knowledge products informing about local availability of modern energy services, technologies and available financing options
A. 5. Incremental /Additional cost reasoning: describe the incremental (GEF Trust Fund/NPIF) or additional (LDCF/SCCF) activities requested for GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF financing and the associated global environmental benefits (GEF Trust Fund) or associated adaptation benefits (LDCF/SCCF) to be delivered by the project:
The UNDP/MNRE India GEF ACE project has been designed as an integrated and suitably co-funded series of components and activities to remove the multiple barriers facing the widespread adoption of key RE for rural livelihoods application in three specific states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odissa) in India, with a possible extension into the neighboring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya. A specific new MNRE RE for rural livelihoods programme, and the enhanced utilization of applicable existing central and state level RE programmes and interventions will support the project. The project will also be supported by central and a state level rural livelihoods programmes, and will also be supported by appropriate NGOs, financial institutions, industrial companies, and academic institutions.
In the absence of the project’s interventions: the market of RE for rural livelihoods will be subject to continued ad-hoc and hence inefficient central and state government funding for RE for rural livelihoods applications; and it will continue to be difficult for RE technology and service providers, and also for household enterprises, to access and pool the myriad ad-hoc central and state government RE and rural livelihoods capital grants and other supports that are available. Key RE technology and rural livelihoods application packages will remain poorly specified in terms of their performance and
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 17
there will continue to be a lack of quality compliance testing. There will continue to be an inadequate number and limited capacity of RE technology and service providers. There will also continue to be significant constraints for RE for rural livelihoods providers in setting suitable tariffs and in accessing the electricity grid to export any surplus RE generated electricity.
The GEF contribution of USD 4,006,849 will result in direct GHG emission reductions of 69,115 tonnes CO2 from the 1,500 demonstrations and 28,500 replication RE – rural livelihoods projects implemented during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct emission reduction will be 662,742 tonnes CO2. The indirect emission reductions that can be attributed to the India ACE project are in the range of 1,262,366 – 1,325,485 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the direct emission reductions, this gives a corresponding GEF GHG unit abatement cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD 6.05 US$/tonne CO2.
The availability of ten (10) well developed and integrated RE – rural livelihoods application packages in a range of key rural livelihoods sectors will form the basis for a further scaling up of RE for rural livelihoods projects post project-end.
A.6 Risks, including climate change, potential social and environmental risks that might prevent the project objectives from being achieved, and measures that address these risks: The main risks and the mitigating actions of the proposed project are described in the table below:
Level of Risk9 Mitigating Actions Risk The multiple key central and state level M The use of multiple subsidies reduces the project rural energy and rural livelihoods risks arising from changes to any single subsidy. capital subsidies do not remain fully The use of beneficiary equity investments and bank available during the project’s or microfinance loans also reduces the project risk implementation period. from any changes to individual subsidy levels or eligibility rules. The Demonstration, Replication and M A high-level Project Steering Committee (PSC) Scale-Up RE - rural livelihoods projects project oversight and governance focused meeting are not able to pool and/or access the will be held at least once a year in Delhi. A Project available capital subsidies in a timely Executive Committee (PEC) meeting comprising all fashion without excessive transaction major project stakeholders will be held four times a costs and/or time delays. year on a rotational basis in the 3 applicable project states and in Delhi. Site visits will be held back-to- back with state level PEC meetings to highlight project successes and challenges. The PSC and PEC structures will together facilitate the necessary ongoing high-level ownership of the project to facilitate ongoing access to available capital subsidies. In addition, strong project engagement and ownership will already start in 2014 with the initial UNDP-MNRE Core ACE project’s pilot phase activities. To ensure that both RE and rural livelihoods capital subsidies are fully considered and mobilized, the PMU and CLIs/CSUs will contain equal level staff from both the RE and
9 Applicable to 2019/20 end of GEF funded 5-year FSP (Full Scale Project) GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 18
Level of Risk9 Mitigating Actions Risk livelihood sides to ensure that both sources of subsidies are equally considered in the project’s implementation. The duration, scope and/or funding of L The project will work with basic livelihood focused key National or State Rural livelihoods missions that are highly likely to have durable ‘Missions’ like NRLM, horticulture, or mandates and funding into the future. fisheries are significantly curtailed during the project’s implementation period. Decentralized Renewable Energy L The scale of the electricity supply deficit, and the (DRE) does not remain an important inarguable paramount importance of the rural item on the relevant central or state livelihoods sector in India for rural employment, is political agendas. highly likely to ensure that there will be a suitable ongoing central and local commitment to decentralize rural RE. Grid electricity supply is significantly M While India has made strong progress with extended and/or the reliability of rural extending grid electricity to an increasing number grid electricity supply improves of villages in rural India, the underpricing of this significantly in the project period in the rural grid electricity for populist political gain, the applicable states and districts. size of the electricity supply sector’s accumulated past financial debts, and the size of the electricity sector’s ongoing supply and financial deficits are such that reliable 24/7 local grid electricity is highly unlikely to be available for rural livelihood applications in all relevant districts of the 3 applicable states during the project’s duration. The price of grid electricity in L The price of grid electricity for rural livelihood uses applicable districts goes down can hardly go down significantly, as in many cases significantly. it is already sold at very low tariffs or the grid electricity for rural likelihoods is not even metered at all. The world price of diesel goes down L As in the 2008 GFC, even a strong global financial significantly and/or subsidies on diesel crisis is unlikely to lead to sustained lower world significantly increase in India crude oil prices as lower oil prices would lead directly to a lower global new oil field development rate and hence would be quickly self-correcting as occurred in 2009. An increase in diesel subsidies in India is unlikely as here is a strong political consensus and momentum towards reducing the remaining diesel subsidies in India. The many relevant Central Government H The project will: establish a strong Central-level Ministries do not cooperate and/or do PSC and a strong Central/State-level PEC; hold not remain engaged for the project frequent (annual PSC and quarterly PEC) meetings period through changes in Central that involve key ministries; and engage and retain Government, Ministers and bureaucrats the strong interest and ownership of suitable high (institutional risk). level champions in key central Ministries, in particular MNRE, NRLM, and in Ministries covering key rural livelihoods.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 19
Level of Risk9 Mitigating Actions Risk The many relevant State, Local and H The quarterly PEC meetings will be rotated around District level agencies do not co-operate the applicable states to ensure that each state hosts and do not remain engaged for the at least one PEC meeting a year for ongoing local project period through changes in State project engagement and ownership. Governments, Ministers and bureaucrats (institutional risk). The project is not able to mobilize a M The project’s RE - rural livelihoods applications minimum level (20%) of equity will focus on livelihoods sectors with well- financing from beneficiaries to ensure established existing commercial sales channels to strong enough ownership and hence maximize the chances of obtaining the necessary ensure the sustained the use of the beneficiary equity financing. project supported or influenced RE – rural livelihoods applications. The project is not able to mobilize the M The project’s RE – rural livelihoods applications necessary 30-50% debt financing from will be targeted at RE suppliers and rural banks or microfinance institutions for livelihoods users with strong existing commercial the replication and scale up projects in business models that utilize established marketing the relevant RE – rural livelihoods and commercial sales channels - to maximize the applications. chances of obtaining the necessary debt financing. The project is not able to mobilize L The project will utilize where available, but not rely grants from other (e.g. CSR) sources. on, CSR funding. Major adverse economic conditions L The Indian economy has strong internal growth force up interest rates and/or curtail drivers and has a low risk of significant bank lending for a significant period domestically led major adverse economic during the project’s implementation. conditions. The Indian economy is significantly nationally self-contained and is only weakly linked to potential international financial crises and events. Development of RE – rural livelihood applications is therefore not greatly at risk of major interest rate rises or significant bank lending restrictions. Prices of relevant rural livelihoods M The project’s rural livelihoods sectors cater to basic sector10 outputs collapse and stay down needs of domestic food supply and nutrition and for a significant period during the hence demand and prices have a low risk of project’s implementation. sustained major reductions. Market linkages of the relevant M The project will focus on rural livelihoods sectors livelihoods sector outputs are weaker that have well-established and strong existing than anticipated. market linkages. Relevant RE – rural livelihoods projects M The project will take a strongly pro-active approach are successfully demonstrated but then to publicizing demo project results and to actively do not get replicated by a scale of ten supporting subsequent replication projects with and do not then get further increased by suitable project information and support activities. a further factor of ten at the scale up The scale up phase will be closely monitored will stage. be actively supported. There is a significantly slow start to on- H In 2014 a RE-Rural Livelihoods PMU will be the-ground project activities. established in MNRE and local CLIs will be recruited under the already approved and already
10 E.g. fresh or dried fish, tomatoes, raw milk, eggs, chicken, khadi, etc. GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 20
Level of Risk9 Mitigating Actions Risk funded UNDP-MNRE ACE Core Project. This will ensure that once all the necessary UNDP-MNRE GEF project approvals are obtained that the project can then be implemented with the least possible delays. Significant RE supply chain weaknesses L Most of the RE technology packages are either arise during the project’s proven plug-and-play RE technologies or are only implementation phase. modest risk rural application extensions of conventional RE technologies. There is significant risk of RE L The project’s mix of RE – rural livelihood technology underperformance or failure technology packages is carefully balanced between in project activities (technical risk). well proven RE- rural livelihoods applications and the extension of proven RE technologies into new rural livelihoods applications. There is a lack of necessary leadership M A detailed Project Operations Manual has already and slow decision making in the been developed to define key accountabilities, project’s implementation. management responsibilities, and operational procedures for all levels of the project’s implementation. A strong PSC and PEC structure will be established and will be given strong support to ensure the ongoing effectiveness and efficiency in the project’s implementation. Users lose interest in decentralized RE L The project will focus on using only well- solutions. established RE technologies and to locations where there are clear links to already well-established rural livelihoods. Geographical locations have already been chosen for project implementation that have significant underserved or unserved areas for grid electricity supply where diesel captive power or LPG would be the only reliable energy alternative for the applicable rural livelihoods energy end uses.
A.7. Coordination with other relevant GEF financed initiatives The proposed project has already been sufficiently redesigned taking into account the results, experiences and lessons learnt from the past projects and the features and elements of on-going projects. The proposed GEF project aims to provide energy access to underserved and un-served villages through clean energy sources which is one of the mandates of National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC). The NAPCC encourages planning and coordination at different levels, especially state (sub-national) level. All states and Union Territories11 of India are preparing their State Level Action Plans on Climate Change (SAPCCs), which define state-level objectives and strategies that are aligned with the objectives of the NAPCC. UNDP with support from GEF is currently developing “Market Transformation and Removal of Barriers for Effective Implementation of the State-Level Climate Change Action Plans” project that will facilitate the implementation of climate change mitigation actions stated in the SAPCCs and maximize the benefits through exploring inter-state cooperation; showcase the actual implementation of SAPCCs; demonstrate institutional mechanisms for inter-state networking and cross-learning,
11 India has 28 States and 7 Union Territories. GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 21
including information sharing and technology dissemination; and develop and implement a common monitoring system to assess progress on the SAPCCs in the select states.
Another relevant ongoing GEF project is “Removal of Barriers for Biomass Power” (also called biomass power project) are relevant to this proposed project. The Biomass power project has identified the necessity of establishing biomass supply linkages to ensure good PLF [Plant Load Factor] and supported such fuel linkage mechanism. There are some interesting ongoing initiatives under this project to combine energy systems with productive applications of energy, and mini-grid support for domestic applications through biomass power.
The World Bank initiative on decentralized off-grid energy access, which was council approved in 2013 focuses of decentralized off-grid energy solutions in the states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. This project is currently in the design phase, but a close coordination with the World Bank will be maintained to ensure complementarity of interventions and avoid duplication of efforts.
Apart from GEF projects, UNDP TRAC funding is being used to develop rural market promotion of renewable energy; and few energy interventions on gap funding mode. UNDP-MNRE Access to Clean Energy (ACE) is a US$ 2.4 million project, where $0.8 million will be provided from UNDP core funding sources. The UNDP-MNRE ACE project will establish: the PSC (Project Steering Committee); the PEC (Project Executive Committee) and UNDP-MNRE implementation arrangements; the project’s PMU (Project Management Unit); suitable CLIA’s (Cluster Level Implementing Agencies); and will enable early development of some of the RE – Rural Livelihoods applications. The India UNDP-MNRE ACE project will integrate with the India GEF ACE project at its time of inception, and the UNDP-MNRE ACE project implementation arrangements will then transition into the GEF ACE project.
B. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT ADDRESSED AT PIF STAGE:
B.1 Describe how the stakeholders will be engaged in project implementation.
The strong participation of a large number of stakeholders from central government, state governments, NGOs, financial institutions, industry, and academic institutions, international organizations and financial institutions is required for the project’s interventions in the RE and rural livelihoods application area in India to be successful. A brief description and proposed role of the project’s key stakeholders is presented in the Table as below.
Stakeholder Role12 Government – Central Level Ministry of New and MNRE is responsible for framing policy and implementing programmes for the Renewable Energy development and promotion of new and renewable energy technologies in India. (MNRE) MNRE serves as the main client (Implementing Partner) in this project. MNRE will provide the strategic steering for the project, oversee the accomplishment of project objectives and tasks, lead co-funding requirements, initiate policy actions on its own and through other departments, and facilitate coordination with other key stakeholders including the Ministry of Rural Development (for NRLM), Ministry of Agriculture (for relevant agricultural sector Missions), Ministry of Power (for decentralized RE tariffs and grid interconnection), etc. Ministry of MoEF is the GEF focal point for GEF projects in India and thus will liaise with Environment and GEF and provide overall coordination of the project. Forests (MoEF)
12 This column describes the role of the stakeholder in implementation of this proposed project. GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 22
Ministry of MoA is the administrative ministry for several govt. agencies/missions Agriculture (MoA) including: Department of Agriculture and Cooperation; Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries; National Horticulture Mission; etc. which cover a wide spectrum of agriculture, horticulture, dairy, fisheries and animal husbandry livelihoods. These subordinate departments/missions have the mandate for formulation and implementation of policies/schemes for their corresponding livelihoods sectors. MoA will be a member of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and in particular will be responsible for facilitating and maintaining coordination linkages with its relevant programmes and support schemes. Ministry of Rural MoRD is involved in improving the socio-economic status of rural areas through Development various development and welfare activities. It will be a member of the PSC and (MoRD) will support the project through facilitating coordination with relevant rural development schemes/agencies. National Rural NRLM, a mission launched by MoRD, aims at creating efficient and effective Livelihood Mission institutional platforms of the rural poor enabling them to increase their (NRLM) household incomes through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to financial services. NRLM will be a member of the Project Executive Committee (PEC) and will provide crucial linkages with the relevant livelihoods sectors and local communities. Khadi and Village KVIC is a statutory government body under the Ministry of Micro, Small and Industry Commission Medium Enterprises. It has the mandate for planning and implementing (KVIC) programmes for the development of khadi (homespun garments) and other village industries in rural areas. KVIC will be a project co-financing partner and will be a member of the PSC. Rural Electrification REC has a mandate for the promotion and financing of the electrification of Corporation (REC) rural areas. It is also a nodal agency designated by the Ministry of Power for the Limited implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (RGGVY), a scheme to electrify all un-electrified villages / habitations and to provide access to electricity to all rural households in un-electrified and electrified villages in India. REC will be consulted on project issues related to rural electrification aspects. Ministry of Power MOP closely works with REC in meeting its targets under the RGGVY. MOP (MoP) will be a member of the PSC and will be responsible to facilitate close coordination and to avoid duplication of efforts when it comes to rural electrification. Government – State Level State Nodal Agencies The SNA’s are the state level agencies for the promotion of renewable energy (SNAs) for renewable and will have a role in the MNRE subsidy disbursement component for the energy various renewable energy technologies. State Departments for The State Departments for Rural Development are the key state level rural Rural Development livelihoods agencies, which are also involved in the implementation of the central government schemes/programmes related to rural development in their state. They also formulate and implement state specific schemes on rural development. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the renewable energy interventions for rural livelihoods applications in the three states. State Rural The State Rural Livelihood Missions are the implementing arms of NRLM in Livelihood Missions the respective states. They will be important stakeholders in the scaling-up of the renewable energy interventions for productive applications in the three states. State Departments for These state level Departments have the mandate for the implementation of Agriculture/ central government schemes and programmes in the respective sectors of their GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 23
Horticulture/ Animal states. These Departments also formulate and implement independent state level Husbandry/ Dairy/ programmes. They will be approached for the integration of renewable energy Fisheries in their on-going programmes and in accessing additional subsidies/assistance available under their programmes. State Electricity The SERCs have the responsibility for determining electricity tariffs and for Regulatory regulating power purchase and procurement processes within their state. SERCs Commissions will be key project partners as it is expected that tariff structures for off-grid (SERCs) electricity generation would ideally be updated through project activities. The SERCs are responsible for the guidelines for off-grid as well as small-scale on- grid solutions. Financial Institutions Indian Renewable IREDA is a Government Public Limited Company established in 1987 that Energy Development operates under the administrative control of MNRE. IREDA’s role is to Agency (IREDA) promote, develop and extend financial assistance for renewable energy and energy efficiency/conservation projects in India. IREDA will be a member of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) and is expected to play an important role in making finance available for the scaling-up of project interventions. National Bank for NABARD is an apex development bank in India. The mission of NABARD is to Agriculture and promote sustainable and equitable agriculture and rural prosperity through Development effective credit support, related services, institutional development and other (NABARD) innovative initiatives. NABARD is expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the renewable energy enterprises. YES Bank YES Bank is a private sector commercial bank in India, which is also involved in providing credit for livelihood activities. YES Bank can play an important role in providing credit support to the rural livelihood beneficiaries and to the renewable energy enterprises. Grameen/Regional Grameen/Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and micro finance institutions are Rural Banks (RRBs) expected to play an important role in providing credit support to the and micro finance beneficiaries and renewable energy enterprises. institutions Corporate Organizations for CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) National Thermal NTPC is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Madhya Power Corporation Pradesh and Odisha. It will be approached to provide support in the (NTPC) implementation of the pilot projects and for scaling-up activities, by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise. National Aluminium NALCO is a public sector enterprise, which has significant operations in Company Ltd. Odisha. NALCO will be approached to assist in the implementation of the pilot (NALCO) projects and in the scaling-up phase by contributing CSR funds and technical expertise. Oil and Natural Gas ONGC is a public sector enterprise that has significant operations in Assam. It Corporation Ltd. can be involved in implementation of the pilot projects and scaling-up by (ONGC) contributing CSR funds and technical expertise. Private sector enterprises involved in developing / delivering specific renewable energy solutions Bayer Material Bayer Material Science, under its Social Business Initiative is involved in the Science promotion of cold rooms and solar dryers, which are key project rural livelihood application areas. These technologies are proposed as part of the technology packages to be implemented in the project. Promethean Power Promethean Power Systems designs and manufactures rural refrigeration Systems systems for commercial cold-storage applications in both non-electrified and in partially electrified areas. The technology (based on a thermal battery concept) is enabling milk producers to reliably store and preserve milk. This concept can
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 24
also be used for the cool storage of fruits and vegetables. The thermal battery concept is part of the technology packages proposed in the project. Science for Society Science for Society (S4S) is a research and innovation based enterprise, which (S4S) has developed a low cost solar conduction dryer for individual use for the drying of agro products. The S4S dryers could be part of the technology packages to be implemented in the project. Claro Energy Pvt Ltd Claro Energy is a small energy service provider company formed in 2011 that offers solar powered water pumping solutions to meet the irrigation water needs of rural farmers in power‐deficit regions in India. Claro’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India. Jain Irrigation Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd (JISL) is a multinational organization based in Systems Ltd Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India with over 9,000 employees and 28 manufacturing plants. JISL manufactures a number of products, including drip and sprinkler irrigation systems and components, integrated irrigation automation systems, PVC and PE piping systems, plastic sheets, greenhouses, bio-fertilizers, solar water-heating systems, biogas plant on turnkey basis, wind hybrid energy and photovoltaic system. JISL’s solar water pumping systems could be part of the technology packages to be implemented by the project in rural regions of India. Shakti Pumps Shakti Pumps is a leading pump manufacturer in India and is also a manufacturer of Solar PV pumps. Solar PV pumps from Shakti Pumps could be part of the technology package. Perfect Gas Perfect Gas Generators Pvt Ltd is a specialist manufacturer of biogas engines Generators Pvt Ltd and also undertakes turnkey installation of biogas power generation systems in poultry farms and dairies. They could be one of the biogas systems technology providers. Jay Khodiyar Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting Machine Tools machines in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the briquetting systems. Infinite Energy Pvt Infinite Energy Pvt Ltd is one of the manufacturers of biomass briquetting Ltd machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems. Radhe Engineering The two companies belonging to the same group are manufacturers of biomass Company & Radhe briquetting machines and biomass gasifiers in India. They could be one of the Renewable Energy technology providers for the biomass briquetting and biomass gasifier systems. Development Pvt Ltd SELCO Solar Pvt. SELCO Solar Pvt. Ltd, a social enterprise that provides sustainable energy Ltd solutions and services to under-served households and businesses. They could be one of the technology providers for solar PV solutions in the project. Cold Chain Solutions Cold Chain Solutions are involved in setting-up of cold rooms for post-harvest management in Odisha. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar based cold room applications. Planters Energy Planters Energy Network (PEN) provides solar-based dryers for processing of Network (PEN) fruits, fish, vegetables, spices, etc. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar drying solutions. NRG Technologies NRG provides solar drying and solar hot air generation systems for drying of Pvt Ltd fruits & vegetables, fish, mushrooms, spirulena, etc. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar drying solutions. Sustaintech India Sustaintech India Private Limited is a social enterprise, which manufactures and Private Limited sells sustainable energy products, primarily fuel-efficient commercial cook stoves. They could be one of the solution providers for the commercial biomass cooking stove solutions.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 25
Ecozen Solutions Ecozen Solutions has developed an innovative micro-cold storage product that is powered by solar energy. They could be one of the solution providers for the Solar based cold room solutions. Ankur Scientific Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt Ltd are one of the leading Energy Technologies manufacturers of biomass gasifier systems in India. They could be one of the Pvt Ltd technology providers for biomass gasifier systems Fosera Solar systems Fosera Solar systems GmbH & Co is a manufacturer of pico solar lighting GmbH & Co. solutions. They could be one of the technology providers for solar lighting solutions. Supernova Supernova Technologies Pvt Ltd has developed mobile solar energy based Technologies Pvt Ltd aeration system as well as wind-solar aeration system to be used for the aeration of fisheries ponds. They could be one of the solution providers for the renewable energy based aeration systems for fisheries. Sun Edison They are a large manufacturing firm in solar solutions. They were the first company to install the 1 MW canal top solar power plant in Mehsana, Gujarat. They not only sell products, but are involved providing financing to dealers. Hence, they may be useful partners in piloting innovative markets with solar solutions. Academic/Research Institutions: IIT Guwahati, Assam The Department of Design and Rural Technology Action Group at IIT Guwahati have been working on research and development of innovative technological solutions and the improvement of existing technologies for rural livelihoods. They are also providing training support to the rural enterprises. In the proposed project, IIT Guwahati could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. Tezpur University, The Department of Energy at Tezpur University is involved in research and Assam technology development and training work on various renewable energy technologies. In the proposed project, Tezpur University could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. National Institute of NIST is an academic institute and some of its faculty members are involved in Science and the development and implementation of innovative renewable energy solutions Technology (NIST), and business models for rural enterprises. In the proposed project, NIST could Berhampur, Odisha assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. The Energy and TERI is a not for profit research institute. The institute is involved in Resources Institute development of renewable energy based technological solutions for (TERI) decentralized applications. In the proposed project, TERI could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs. Entrepreneurship The Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDI), an autonomous Development body and not-for-profit institution. EDI runs regular academic programmes and Institute of India a variety of training programmes aimed at developing entrepreneurship. In the (EDI) proposed project, EDI could assist in Component 2 - i.e. in the development of the supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers. Mahatma Gandhi MGIRI is an institute promoted by the Ministry of Micro Small and Medium Institute for Rural Enterprises (MSME). MGIRI is involved in developing new technologies for Industrialization rural entrepreneurs, enterprises and industries related to their products. In the (MGIRI) proposed project, MGIRI could assist in the performance assessment, development of specifications, technological improvements and technical training for RETPRLs Civil Society Organizations/NGOs GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 26
Action for Food AFPRO strives for the enhancement of livelihoods and the quality of life of the Production (AFPRO) rural poor and marginalized communities through the management of natural resources (land, water and forests); with the main supported economic activities revolving around agriculture, livestock, fishery and forestry. AFPRO is active in Assam, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. AFPRO could be a potential CLIA in the project Rashtriya Gramin RGVN is a national level multi-state development and support organization Vikas Nidhi (RGVN) working in the states of Assam, Jharkhand, Meghalaya and Odisha. RGVN aims for the development of sustainable livelihoods of the rural poor with a priority for women in the agri and allied sectors through financial, institution building and capacity building support activities. RGVN could be a potential CLIA in the project Ajagar Social Circle Ajagar Social Circle is an initiative to bring about a change in the socio- economic condition of the people of India’s north eastern region through increasing livelihood opportunities and through providing social and economic security. The organization, at present, is engaged in a number of farming, allied and non-farming activities with communities living in the Assam-Meghalaya belt. Ajagar Social Circle could be a potential CLIA in the project Green Valley Forest GVFWPS is primarily working with the communities in and around wildlife rich and Wildlife areas of Assam. The majority of these communities are dependent on forest- Protection Society based livelihoods such as firewood and timber businesses. GVFWPS aims at (GVFWPS) reducing human-animal conflict, saving flora and fauna and conserving natural resources by providing alternative livelihoods and encouraging efficient use of natural resources. GVFWPS could be a potential CLIA in the project Bethany Society Bethany Society is a NGO based in the state of Meghalaya. The key areas of their work include capacity building and livelihood enhancement, institution building (development of SHGs) and improving access to finance with a special focus on the disabled. Bethany Society could be a potential CLIA in the project NB Institute for Rural NBIRT works for the development of rural communities through development, Technology (NBIRT) promotion and implementation of innovative renewable energy technologies for rural applications, training and development of human resources and creating green jobs. NBIRT is based in Guwahati in Assam. NBIRT could be a potential CLIA in the project PRADAN PRADAN has significant and wide-ranging experience in promoting improved livelihoods with the rural poor. The key areas of PRADAN’s work are forest- based livelihoods, natural resource (land and water) management, livestock development, promotion of SHGs and micro enterprises. PRADAN has an active presence in Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. PRADAN could be a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training activities. Action for Social ASA is working for the livelihood improvement of the rural poor mainly in the Advancement (ASA) agriculture and allied sector in the state of Madhya Pradesh. The main areas of ASA’s work are land and water resource management, enhancement of agriculture productivity, agribusiness promotion for small holders, and micro credits for agriculture and research and training. ASA could be a potential CLIA in the project. Samaj Pragati SPS, a NGO based in Madhya Pradesh, is working towards the improvement of Sahayog (SPS) the socio-economic conditions of the tribal and marginalized rural poor through technical and financial support to the communities and policy advocacy. The main sectors of their work are water resource management, agriculture, livestock development and handicrafts. SPS could be a potential CLIA in the project. Mahila Chetna MCM is an NGO with a focus towards the empowerment of women so as to Manch (MCM) enable them to take a lead role in the social, economic and political spheres. GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 27
MCM is providing support to women and communities in establishing suitable institutions (SHGs, cooperatives, producer companies, etc.), improved institutional management, the development of livelihoods (in particular agriculture, horticulture and dairy) and establishing forward and backward linkages. MCM is based in Madhya Pradesh. MCM could be a potential CLIA in the project Centre for Advanced CARD has been established to promote action research and to apply its findings Research and for the protection and development of society and the environment. The focus Development areas of their work are research studies, monitoring and evaluation of (CARD) development programmes, capacity building and policy advocacy. CARD could be a potential CLIA in the project ACCESS ADS is a national level livelihoods promotion organization with a focus on Development incubating innovations and sustainable models for the livelihoods promotion of Services (ADS) the poor. It offers specialized technical assistance in the microfinance and livelihoods areas. ADS have a significant presence in Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. ADS could be a potential CLIA in the project Rural Development RUDSETI has been established to train, support and promote self-employment and Self Employment entrepreneurial ventures in the field of rural development. RUDSETI offers Training Institute several entrepreneurship development programmes of 1-4 weeks duration in (RUDSETI) agriculture, and in allied and non-farm based livelihood sectors. RUDSETI could be a potential CLIA in the project Agragamee Agragamee is working with the marginalized and underprivileged communities in the tribal districts of Odisha. Agragamee are focusing on policy advocacy and formulation of people centered development programmes, food security, water resource management, and the development of women’s organization and training programmes. Agragamee could be a potential CLIA in the project Samvedna Samvedna, an NGO based in Odisha, is working for the fishing communities and marginalized farmers. Samvedna are involved in the implementation of various government programmes/schemes and in strengthening livelihoods through providing technical support and access to finance. Samvedna could be a potential CLIA in the project Development Development Alternatives (DA) is both a research and an action-oriented Alternatives organization, involved in designing and delivering eco-solutions for the poor and the marginalized. Development Alternatives could be a potential CLIA in the project. They could also be involved in training activities.
B.2 Describe the socioeconomic benefits to be delivered by the Project at the national and local levels, including consideration of gender dimensions, and how these will support the achievement of global environment benefits (GEF Trust Fund/NPIF) or adaptation benefits (LDCF/SCCF):
The project is explicitly focused on supporting rural livelihoods at the individual household enterprise level, and therefore the project will make a direct positive socio-economic impact on rural livelihoods at the local level. At the national level, the project will directly and tangibly support the emphasis on supporting rural livelihoods through the NRLM self-help group approach that has been proven to be successful in the Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes. The project will directly support rural livelihoods, and there is a clear realization that supporting rural livelihoods is a critical element of any poverty reduction efforts in India. Many self-help groups (SHG) are domestic enterprise based such as leaf plate making, sewing, etc. and priority is given to women as they lead livelihood enterprises. Such SHGs are even headed by women. Overall, the project will have a very positive gender impact as well.
B.3. Explain how cost-effectiveness is reflected in the project design:
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 28
This UNDP/MNRE India GEF ACE project has been designed as an integrated and suitably co-funded series of components and activities to remove the multiple barriers facing the widespread adoption of key RE for rural livelihoods application in three specific states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha) in India, with a possible extension into the neighboring states of Jharkhand and Meghalaya. A specific new MNRE RE for rural livelihoods programme, and the enhanced utilization of applicable existing state level RE programmes and interventions will support the project. The project will also be supported by central and a state level rural livelihood programmes, and will also be supported by appropriate NGOs, financial institutions, industrial companies, and academic institutions.
In the absence of the project’s interventions: the market for RE for rural livelihoods will be subject to continued ad-hoc and hence inefficient central and state government funding for RE for rural livelihoods applications; and it will continue to be difficult for RE technology and service providers and household enterprises to access and pool the myriad central and state government RE and rural livelihoods capital grants and other supports that are available. Key RE technology and rural livelihoods application packages will remain poorly specified in terms of their performance and there will continue to be a lack of quality compliance testing. There will be an inadequate number and limited capacity of RE technology and service providers. There will continue to be significant constraints for RE for rural livelihoods providers in setting suitable tariffs and in accessing the electricity grid to export any surplus RE generated electricity.
The project's design is highly cost effective as it maximizes the enhanced mobilization and the effective pooling of existing but still underutilized RE and rural livelihoods funding and other support mechanisms that are already available at the applicable central and state levels in India. In addition, the India GEF ACE project (this project) will follow on from and utilize the operational knowledge, management arrangements, and institutional structures established by the MNRE and UNDP Core funded “Increasing access to Renewable Energy for micro-enterprises in Rural India” project (the Core project) that is now being established and that will be fully operational in late 2014. The India GEF ACE project will focus on the use of established RE technologies that will be systematically demonstrated in established rural livelihoods sectors where the necessary transport, market intermediary and market linkages are already well established. The project focus is on developing, demonstrating, replicating and then scaling up 15 Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods (RETPRLs) packages in 3 states (Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Odissa) in India.
The GEF contribution of USD 4,006,849 will result in direct GHG emission reductions of 69,115tonnes CO2 from the 1,500 demonstrations and 28,500 replication RE – rural livelihoods projects implemented during the 5-year lifetime of the project. Assuming an average economic lifetime of the RE systems (used to support rural livelihoods) as 10 years, the cumulative direct emission reduction will be 662,742 tonnes CO2. If the GEF contribution (USD 4,006,849) is divided by the combined direct and indirect post-project emission reductions, this gives a corresponding direct GHG unit abatement . cost (UAC) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of 6.05 US$/tonne CO2
C. DESCRIBE THE BUDGETED M &E PLAN:
The following main project monitoring and evaluation activities will be carried out: (1) Measurement of means of verification for project progress and performance (baseline and impact analysis); (2) Annual project reporting, including project implementation review (PIR); (3) Tripartite review meetings; (4) Periodic status reporting; (5) Audits; (6) Mid-term external review; (7) Final (Terminal) external review; and, (8) Visits to field sites. These activities have been included in the budget under project management.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 29
Type of M&E Responsible Parties Budget US$ Time frame activity Excluding project team staff time
Inception . Project Manager Indicative cost: Within first two Workshop and . UNDP CO, UNDP GEF 10,000 months of project Report start up Measurement of . UNDP GEF RTA/Project Indicative cost: Start, mid and end of Means of Manager will oversee the 60,000 project (during Verification of hiring of specific studies and evaluation cycle) and project results. institutions, and delegate annually when responsibilities to relevant required. team members. Measurement of . Oversight by Project Indicative cost: 5,000 Annually prior to Means of Manager (To be determined as ARR/PIR and to the Verification for . Project team part of the Annual definition of annual Project Progress Work Plan's work plans on output and preparation.) implementation ARR/PIR . Project manager and team None Annually . UNDP CO . UNDP RTA . UNDP EEG Periodic status/ . Project manager and team None Quarterly progress reports Mid-term . Project manager and team Indicative cost: At the mid-point of Evaluation . UNDP CO 30,000 the project’s . UNDP BRH implementation. . Independent External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team) Terminal . Project manager and team, Indicative cost: At least three months Evaluation . UNDP CO 30,000 before the end of the . UNDP BRH project’s . Independent External implementation Consultants (i.e. evaluation team) Project Terminal . Project manager and team 0 At least three months Report . UNDP CO before the end of the . Local consultant project Audit . UNDP CO Indicative cost per Yearly . Project manager and team year: 3,000 Visits to field . UNDP CO For GEF supported Yearly sites . UNDP BRH (as appropriate) projects, paid from . Government representatives IA fees and operational budget TOTAL indicative COST US$ 150,000 Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff (+/- 5% of total and travel expenses budget)
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 30
PART III: APPROVAL/ENDORSEMENT BY GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S) AND GEF AGENCY(IES)
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 31
A. RECORD OF ENDORSEMENT OF GEF OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT(S) ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT(S): ): (Please attach the Operational Focal Point endorsement letter(s) with this form. For SGP, use this OFP endorsement letter).
NAME POSITION MINISTRY DATE Mr. Shashi Shekhar GEF Operational Focal Ministry of Environment 09/05/2014 Point and forests, Government of India
B. GEF AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION
This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF policies and procedures and meets the GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF criteria for CEO endorsement/approval of project.
Agency Date Project Coordinator, Signature (Month, day, Contact Telephone Email Address Agency Name year) Person Adriana Dinu, 10/21/2014 Butchaiah +66 2304 butchaiah.gadde Executive Gadde, 9100 ext @undp.org Coordinator, GEF Regional 5048 Technical Specialist
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 32
ANNEX A: PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK (either copy and paste here the framework from the Agency document, or provide reference to the page in the project document where the framework could be found).
This project will contribute to achieving the following Country Programme Outcome as defined in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017 and the UNDP India CPAP 2013-2017: Project: Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive13 Uses (India ACE Project) Outcome: Expanded access to clean energy. Output: Support for initiatives that increase access to clean energy for productive uses in off-grid, underserved rural regions. Output indicators: number of REPTRL packages developed and trialed, number of RE for rural livelihoods applications fostered by project. Country Programme Outcome Indicators: Outcome: Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements Output: Supporting national development objectives with co-benefits of mitigating climate change Output indicators: (a) Annual reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in India; (b) million USD flowing annually to India from GEF through UNDP for this programme; (c) number of additional UNDP initiatives for achieving global and national targets under multilateral environmental agreements.
Primary applicable Key Environment and Sustainable Development Key Result Area): Strengthened national capacities to mainstream environment and energy concerns into national development plans.
Expanding access to environmental and energy services for the poor. Applicable GEF Strategic Objective and Program: Strategic Objective: Climate Change Objective 3: Promote investment in renewable energy technologies Applicable GEF Expected Outcomes: Increased market uptake of RE systems for rural livelihoods Applicable GEF Outcome Indicators: a. Extent to which EE policies and regulations are adopted and enforced d. Volume of investment mobilized e. Tonnes of CO2 equivalent avoided
Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Project goal: Reduced GHG Cumulative CO2 emission 0 69,115 M&E reports of the Continued support and participation from emissions achieved through reduced from start of project to demonstration and co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs renewable energy systems in rural End-Of-Project (EOP), (tCO2e) replication projects and other stakeholders livelihood sectors
13 The original PIF and documentation referred to “and Domestic (Uses)” but in the PPG phase the feedback and analysis firmly supported a narrowing of the project scope to be limited to productive uses. In a country of over 1.2 billion people (India) even just focusing on productive uses in three states is very ambitious with only a GEF $4 million budget. Adding domestic uses would increase project implementation complexity and risks as domestic users expect low cost (subsidised) electricity supply and it would also make the project scope and ambition too great. This reduction in scope to just productive uses will also address GEF STAP and Council comments at the PIF stage of the project scope being too ambitious and that the original project was too unfocussed.
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 33
Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Project Objective: Enhancing Total energy savings achieved M&E reports of the Selected end users for demos and reliable and affordable clean energy from implemented RETPRLs by demonstration and replications have sufficient finance and access for rural livelihoods in un- EOP MWhe 0 112,737 replication projects favorable business environment served and underserved areas MWhth 0 1,376,631 Component 1: Development and deployment of key RE-rural livelihood application packages Outcome 1: Deployment of RE- No. of household enterprises 0 30,000 M&E reports of the Sufficient finance is available for the rural livelihood application adopting RETPRLs through demonstration and implementation of developed packages for packages demonstrations and replications replication projects RE-rural livelihood in the targeted states by the EOP Output 1.1: At least ten (10) cost- No. of RETPRLs developed by 0 10 Performance assessment RE technology suppliers willing to provide effective RE technology packages Year 2 reports on RETPRLs services as required for technology developed for rural livelihood packages in rural areas (RETPRL) applications and established technical specifications Output 1.2: Demonstrated and No. of demonstration project 0 15 Reports from CLIAs Household enterprises are convinced with documented RE – rural livelihood clusters by EoP RE application benefits in livelihood application packages in 15 clusters M&E reports of the activities and benefitting 1,500 household demonstration enterprises No. of household enterprises 0 1,500 Reports from CLIAs End-users are interested and have the adopting RETPRLs in the sufficient finance demonstration clusters by Year M&E reports of the 3 demonstration Output 1.3: Completed training No. of training programmes 0 14 Report of training Continued support and participation from programmes and training of trainers conducted by EoP programmes co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs activities for replication and scale up and other stakeholders of RE – rural livelihood application No. of training packages 0 7 Training package material Continued support and participation from packages developed by Year 2 co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders No. of persons trained by EoP 0 280 Report of training Continued support and participation from programmes co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and other stakeholders Output 1.4: Completed promotion of No. of household enterprises 1,500 30,000 M&E reports of the Implementing agencies and end-users are replicated and documented RE – rural adopting RETPRLS through (at the end replication projects interested, accept RETPRLs and are livelihood application packages replications by EoP of equipped to implement the project promoted to other districts / states and demonstra applied to 28,500 household tion) enterprises Component 2: Supply chain for RE technology supply and service providers for enhancing rural livelihoods
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 34
Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Outcome 2: Increased supply of RE No. of RE technology supply 0 100 M&E of supply chain There is sufficient demand for RETPRLs technology and service providers and service providers for rural development activity amongst existing and new RE technology for rural livelihood applications livelihood applications by EoP and service providers Enterprises have sufficient technical and financial capacity Output 2: Business development No. of RE technology supply 0 100 M&E of supply chain aspects supported for 100 RE and service providers for rural development activity technology supply and service livelihoods applications by EoP providers for rural livelihoods No. of business plans developed 0 20 M&E of supply chain applications for RE technology supply and development activity/ service providers by Year 2 business plan reports No. of financial mechanism to 0 1 M&E of supply chain access finance for RE development activity technology supply and service suppliers by Year 2 Component 3: Policy and regulatory support for RE - rural livelihood applications Outcome 3.1: Inclusion of RE No. of states enforcing policies 0 4 NRLM (1) and SRLMs (3 NRLM and SRLMs that support RE applications in national and state level on the RE applications as part of states) policy documents applications for rural livelihoods is rural livelihoods policies for key their SRLM and in line with the sustained livelihood sectors in rural areas same policies at the national level by year 3 Output 3.1.1: National and State level No. of Ministries/Departments 0 4 Policy documents of rural livelihood mission statements / that officially adopt mission NRLM and SRLM, documents emphasizing the use of RE statements that support RE meeting/ workshop reports applications for rural livelihoods by Year 3 Output 3.1.2: National and State level No. of livelihood sectors where 0 20 Central (e.g. KVIC) and Continued support and participation from policies that support the use of RE for RE is promoted in 3 targeted state livelihoods sectors co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs key rural livelihood sectors states by year 3 /departments policy and other stakeholders documents
Output 3.1.3: Documented No. of peer reviewed 0 7 Published reports experiences and lessons on RE publications sharing experiences applications for rural livelihoods at regarding RE and rural suitable regional and international livelihoods by EoP fora Outcome 3.2: Future MNRE No. of MNRE programs that 0 1 MNRE policy document Continued support and participation from programs also cater to actions espouse RE applications for co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs towards enhanced RE utilization in rural livelihoods programme by and other stakeholders rural livelihoods Year 3
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 35
Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target 0 28,500 Documentation of MNRE- Output 3.2.1: Developed MNRE- No. of replication projects supported RET operated supported programme for enhanced implemented by MNRE in new rural livelihood projects RE utilization in rural livelihoods programme using RETPRLs by EoP Outcome 3.3: Improved tariff and No. of state regulatory 0 3 Continued support and participation of grid interconnection regulations for commissions (SRCs) implement SRCs decentralized RE policy guidelines of improved tariff structure for decentralized RE by year 3 Output 3.3.1: Completed roadmap No. of state level workshops to 0 3 Workshop reports Continued support and participation from and workshops for supporting implement the revised tariff co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs improved tariff structures for small structures by Year 3 and other stakeholders especially SRCs scale captive and off-grid RE Output 3.3.2: Developed and No. of SRCs implement policy 0 3 National level study report Continued support and participation from implemented regulatory, technical guidelines for co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs and tariff guidelines for RE based captive/decentralized RE grid and other stakeholders especially SRCs, captive/decentralized systems’ grid interconnection by year 3 where SRCs see RE grid interconnection interconnection as an important issue. Component 4: Financial support for decentralized RE - rural livelihood applications Outcome 4.1: Improved No. of developed improved 0 1 Review report decentralized RE subsidies and overall subsidy and support support for rural livelihoods models by Year 2 Output 4.1.1: Assessed RE subsidy No. of completed study on 0 1 Review report Continued support and participation from and support models for increased existing subsidies and supports co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs effectiveness of decentralized RE by Year 1 and other stakeholders in subsidizing and supporting decentralized RE Output 4.1.2: Improved RE subsidy No. of RE subsidy and support 0 3 Report on and support models for increased models for rural livelihoods recommendations effectiveness of decentralized RE for available by year 1 rural livelihoods funding Outcome 4.2: Enhanced provision No. of financial institutions 0 3 Report on new financial Continued interest, and participation from of financial support for supporting RETPRL by Year 3 support packages co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs decentralized RE in rural developed and other stakeholders such as IREDA livelihood applications Output 4.2.1: Implemented financial No. of household enterprises 0 28,500 support packages for RE technology – adopting RETPRLs that were rural livelihood applications funded by the established financial support packages by EOP
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 36
Objectively Verifiable Indicators Strategy Means of Verification Critical Assumptions Description Baseline Target Output 4.2.2: Pooled available No. of completed studies on 0 1 Study report Institutions are willing to continuously financial resources for supporting inter-institutional linkages for pool their financial resources and other viable livelihood business models and finance pooling to support financing institutions continued to provide enhanced market linkages viable livelihood business support models and enhanced market linkages covering three states and center by Year 2 Outcome 4.3: Improved investment Number of states implement 0 3 Communication by the risk mitigation for decentralized designed suitable risk state governments / RE in rural livelihood applications guarantee/mitigation Review report mechanisms by Year 3 Output 4.3.1: Enhanced risk No. of completed studies on risk 0 1 Study report Continued interest, and participation from mitigation mechanisms designed and assessment and risk mitigation co-financing institutions, MNRE, CLIAs supported for RE enterprises and RE in applicable sectors by Year 3 and other stakeholders such as IREDA technology adopters / end-users in No. of designed suitable risk 0 1 Study report rural livelihoods applications guarantee/mitigation mechanisms by Year 3
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 37
ANNEX B: 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).
GEF Sec comments at the clearance of the PIF
Comments and Responses Reference Please address the following items at the CEO Endorsement stage if it is included in a Work Program: a) Articulate which technology packages are proposed to be implemented in which villages with rationales. b) Justify the cost-effectiveness of the project with more detailed methodologies and assumptions; c) Elaborate the originality of the project, including demonstration of different aspects (e.g. geographic priorities) and different tools from the World Bank's rural renewable energy project proposal; d) Elaborate key stakeholders to implement the project in an efficient and effective way. For example, it is inconsistent to include the Petroleum Conservation Research Association as one of the key stakeholders while the project will not consider any fossil fuel related activities. In addition, identify private companies to join the project and explain their specific role in sustaining the activities of the project; e) Ensure the visibility of the GEF financing, including use the GEF logo on all material, publications, leaflets, brochures and newsletters, websites etc.
Response: ProDoc a) The relevant RE Technology Packages for Rural Livelihoods (RETPRLs) Annexure F, p for specific districts is detailed, with rationales, in the ProDoc’s “Annexure 113. – F: Summary information on identified clusters for demonstration projects”. The project as detailed in the ProDoc does not deal with village level interventions as was the case at the PIF stage, the project instead deals with specific RETPRLs and the district level. ProDoc b) The cost effectiveness of the project has been recalculated taking into Annexure D, p account the threefold demonstration-replication-scale up methodology with 109. suitable documentation to be undertaken at all levels. Detailed assumptions have been stated in the relevant ProDoc “Annexure – D: Emission Reductions Calculation”. ProDoc c) The project is based on extensive consultations and research conducted Section 5, p during PPG phase to identify a new specific approach (development and 47. deployment of multiple RETPRL packages) of combined suitable RE technologies and a specific limited set of rural livelihoods with strong connections to well-established existing markets. No new mechanisms or policies are required for project success. The proposed project takes a very different approach to that taken in the World Bank’s rural renewable energy project proposal. CEO ER, Section B.1, p d) The project stakeholders have been elaborated in an efficient and effective 20. way in Section B.1. ProDoc, para 194, p 89 & GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 38
Comments and Responses Reference para 207 and e) The visibility of GEF financing has been specified in the ProDoc’s 208, p 90. Communications and visibility requirements 2nd para under section 14 Monitoring framework and evaluation.
GEF COUNCIL COMMENTS
Comments from Germany (April 2013)
Comments and Responses Reference Germany requests that the following requirements are taken into account during the design of the final project proposal:
The project objective seems very ambitious, e.g. the outputs 1.3.3 to 1.4.3. The planned clustering of dispersed markets as well as the focus on productive applications of energy is welcomed. However, the PIF completely lacks an assessment of the target group’s ability to pay, although this stands at the core of the proposal. For this reason, we recommend:
An assessment of the ability to pay of the rural population. Depending on the result the priority areas may require modification, e.g. targeting first areas where local industries/ production are most likely to flourish with improved energy services. In this context, we ask for a definition of “productive applications”, too (e.g. does it include cook stoves); Regarding cooking stoves, collaboration with current and previous programs (e.g. also by the German cooperation, GIZ) beyond the mentioned DFID-TERI program is recommended as well as collaboration with local manufacturers. In the final document, a clearer definition of the indicators and the size of the (direct) target group shall be provided. Please clarify in the final document on the feasibility of the expected scale- up potential in view of diversity of villages and surrounding conditions. Please indicate the number of systems applied and the related emission reductions. In case of cook stoves, it is unclear whether the emission reduction potential per unit accounts for renewable biomass use in the baseline.
Response: The ability for RETPRL users to pay for their proposed RE systems is ensured by targeting rural livelihoods that are unserved or underserved by ProDoc grid electricity or LPG for thermal uses and whose only real viable option Section 2.3, p for their required reliable energy supply is expensive operating cost diesel 25 and Section gen sets. Coupled with the multiple subsidies and supports available which 5.1, p 47. will be pooled by the project. This ensures that the relevant rural household enterprises will have a generally suitable ability to pay for their part of their RE systems. A detailed analysis on RETPRLs is presented in the ProDoc.
Regarding cook-stoves, the project will work through MNRE who are aware of, and involved in, all relevant cook-stove programs in India. Biomass fuel based small businesses around the tea gardens in Udalguri district of Assam
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 39
Comments and Responses Reference is identified as one of the interventions for improved cook-stoves and going ProDoc to work closely with MNRE Annexure F, p More detailed indicators and the size of the relevant direct target market are 114. provided in the ProDoc.
ProDoc The feasibility of the expected scale up potential of relevant districts is Section 11, p detailed in the ProDoc “Annexure – E: Renewable Energy Technology 71. Compendium” (attached as a separate document to ProDoc). ProDoc The number of systems applied and their related emission reductions are Annexure E, p detailed in the ProDoc Annex D. A conservative methodology is used for 112. cook stoves, but in any case cook stoves only account for a small fraction of project emission reductions. ProDoc Annexure D, p 109.
STAP Screening of the PIF (29 March 2013) STAP expresses its consent for this project focused mainly on energy access for all in India. Several initiatives are already in place in India so it will be challenging to determine what specific impact this GEF project would have on the rate of clean-energy technology deployment by overcoming the barriers as identified. Targeting specific districts and rural village communities that are currently under-served as demonstrations is the way to overcome this. However, the selection of those should be based on a set of predefined criteria. One of the criteria could be willingness by the residents to become involved in the project for example, possibly coupled with having a strong leader to act as “champion”. Other could include feasibility of particular RE resource, cost-effectiveness and others.
Comments and Responses Reference 1. The PIF is not clear on how the renewable energy resources in a given location will be assessed as a first step into planning which technologies to invest in. For example, one site in a valley may have mean annual wind speeds less than half of another site in the nearby hills, so wind turbines in the valley would generate much lower levels of electricity per year and not be a viable option. For biomass gasification, assessing the available biomass supply on an all-year- round basis, and securing sufficient supplies is imperative. STAP recommends conducting detailed renewable resource assessment which is now seems to be a gap in this proposal.
2. The total costs of mitigation for 0.6 MtCO2-eq are relatively high (around $50/t including all co-finance) but the co-benefits of energy access etc. should also be considered and estimated as far as feasible to help assure sustainability of project results.
3. STAP recommends undertaking risk assessment for this project. Its success depends significantly on a number of factors such as practical feasibility of a particular RE resource and supplies (in case of biomass residues), its societal
GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 40
Comments and Responses Reference acceptance, cost-effectiveness, provision of regulatory and financial incentives and other factors.
Response: The project has been refocused to target specific RE for rural livelihoods ProDoc demonstration applications in specific targeted districts. The districts chosen for the Section 2.3, p demonstrations have been based on a set of predefined criteria, as detailed in the 25 and ProDoc. The project has also been refocused to cover a more realistic Annexure E, demonstration, replication and scale up approach in only 3 states, with a replication p 112. and scale up potential in two adjoining states. The issue of willingness to pay for (RETPRL energy services has been addressed by tightly focusing on rural livelihood activities Compendium) where the baseline option for the applicable household enterprises to get their necessary reliable energy services is primarily captive diesel generators, which is now an expensive option in India as diesel subsidies have now been largely removed and hence the price of diesel is substantially set by international oil markets working through a generally freely floating Indian currency. The champion for the particular rural livelihoods that RE will be provided for under the project will come from the Cluster Level Implementing Agency/Cluster Support Units (CLIAs/CSUs) that will be engaged by the project to undertake this role at the necessary district level. The issue of adequate local RE resources availability has been carefully reviewed in the case of non-solar RE applications, and where thermal uses are involved the required bioenergy is available on site as a low value waste product from the relevant livelihoods processes - e.g. poultry litter for poultry applications and bamboo waste at bamboo processing Common Facility Centers. ProDoc 1. The PPG stage has looked at the issue of RE resource availability. Most of Section 2.3 the RE that is to be used in the project is PV, where resource availability is and Annex E not much of an issue. Where biomass is to be used, the biomass in question - RETPRL is an integral by product of the process that will use the biomass. The RE to Compendium be used is now driven by the rural livelihoods applications concerned, not the other way around as in the original PIF. The provision of RE is now a means to an end (energy services for rural livelihoods) - rather than rural livelihoods being secondary to project supported new RE energy supplies to be followed (or not) by livelihoods that might or might not want to or be able to pay for the RE energy service, as was the case in the original PIF. CEO ER, 2. The costs to GEF of mitigation have been substantially reduced in the Section B.3, p refocused project. With the redesigned project the costs of mitigation14 are 22 & ProDoc . now 6.05 US$/tonne CO2 Annex D, p 109
CEO ER, 3. A detailed risk assessment and means of risk mitigation has been undertaken Section A.6, p and is detailed in Section A.6 16 & ProDoc, Annex A, p 93.
14 Based on the $4 million GEF contribution and the combined direct and indirect post-project emission reductions GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 41
ANNEX C: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND THE USE OF FUNDS15
A. PROVIDE DETAILED FUNDING AMOUNT OF THE PPG ACTIVITIES FINANCING STATUS IN THE TABLE BELOW:
PPG Grant Approved at PIF: US$ 102,740
Project Preparation Activities Implemented GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF Amount ($)
Budgeted Amount Amount Spent To Amount date Committed
1. Revalidate Barriers and Baseline Projects/Activities 20,000 15,794 4,206
2. Identification, evaluation and selection of 42,500 33,563 8,937 demonstrations 3. Conduct of Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) with the 15,000 11,846 3,154 project stakeholders 4. Detailed Design of Project Components & Activities 17,500 13,820 3,680
5. Establishment of institutional framework for project 7,740 6,112 1,628 partners/co-financiers in the project implementation and to ensure close coordination with co-financed baseline activities Total 102,740 81,135 21,605
ANNEX D: CALENDAR OF EXPECTED REFLOWS (if non-grant instrument is used)
Provide a calendar of expected reflows to the GEF/LDCF/SCCF/NPIF Trust Fund or to your Agency (and/or revolving fund that will be set up)
N/A
15 If at CEO Endorsement, the PPG activities have not been completed and there is a balance of unspent fund, Agencies can continue undertake the activities up to one year of project start. No later than one year from start of project implementation, Agencies should report this table to the GEF Secretariat on the completion of PPG activities and the amount spent for the activities. GEF5 CEO Endorsement Template-February 2013.doc 42
Tracking Tool for Climate Change Mitigation Projects (For CEO Endorsement)
Special Notes: reporting on lifetime emissions avoided Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided: Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made during the project's supervised implementation period, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided: Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made outside the project's supervised implementation period, but supported by financial facilities put in place by the GEF project, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. These financial facilities will still be operational after the project ends, such as partial credit guarantee facilities, risk mitigation facilities, or revolving funds. Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down and bottom-up): indirect emissions reductions are those attributable to the long-term outcomes of the GEF activities that remove barriers, such as capacity building, innovation, catalytic action for replication. Please refer to the Manual for Calculating GHG Benefits of GEF Projects.
Manual for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects Manual for Transportation Projects For LULUCF projects, the definitions of "lifetime direct and indirect" apply. Lifetime length is defined to be 20 years, unless a different number of years is deemed appropriate. For emission or removal factors (tonnes of CO2eq per hectare per year), use IPCC defaults or country specific factors.
General Data Target Notes at CEO Endorsement Project Title Scale Up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India GEF ACE Project) GEF ID 4900 Agency Project ID 4605 Country India Region EAP GEF Agency UNDP Date of Council/CEO Approval Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010) GEF Grant (US$) 4,006,849 Date of submission of the tracking tool Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)
Is the project consistent with the priorities identified in National Communications, 1 Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC? Yes = 1, No = 0 Is the project linked to carbon finance? 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Cofinancing expected (US$) 19,033,767
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 Yes = 1, No = 0 North-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0 Intellectual property rights (IPR) Yes = 1, No = 0 Information dissemination Yes = 1, No = 0 Institutional and technical capacity building Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)
Number of innovative technologies demonstrated or deployed Please specify three key technologies for demonstration or deployment Area of technology 1 Type of technology 1 specify type of technology Area of technology 2 Type of technology 2 specify type of technology Area of technology 3 Type of technology 3 specify type of technology 0: no suitable technologies are in place 1: technologies have been identified and assessed 2: technologies have been demonstrated on a pilot basis Status of technology demonstration/deployment 3: technologies have been deployed 4: technologies have been diffused widely with investments 5: technologies have reached market potential
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 1 Objective 2: Energy Efficiency
Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas Lighting Yes = 1, No = 0 Appliances (white goods) Yes = 1, No = 0 Equipment Yes = 1, No = 0 Cook stoves Yes = 1, No = 0 Existing building Yes = 1, No = 0 New building Yes = 1, No = 0 Industrial processes Yes = 1, No = 0 Synergy with phase-out of ozone depleting substances Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
MJ (Million Joule, IEA unit converter: http://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp) Fuel savings should be converted to energy savings by using the net Lifetime energy saved calorific value of the specific fuel. End-use electricity savings should be converted to energy savings by using the conversion factor for the specific supply and distribution system. These energy savings are then totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 2 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 1 Yes = 1, No = 0
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 4 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 5 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
Installed capacity per technology directly resulting from the project Wind - MW Biomass 1.80 MW el (for electricity production) Biomass 91.34 MW th (for thermal energy production) Geothermal - MW el (for electricity production) Geothermal - MW th (for thermal energy production) Hydro - MW Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) 6.010 MW Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) 11.20 MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW) 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 44,850.00 MWh el (for electricity production) Biomass 1,296,630.73 MWh th (for thermal energy production) Geothermal - MWh el (for electricity production) Geothermal - MWh th (for thermal energy production) Hydro - MWh Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) 67,886.640 MWh Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) 80,000.00 MWh th (for thermal energy production) Solar thermal power - MWh el (for electricity production) Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) - MWh
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided 662,742 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) 1,325,485 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) 2,103,944 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 3 Objective 4: Transport and Urban Systems
Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas Bus rapid transit Yes = 1, No = 0 Other mass transit (e.g., light rail, heavy rail, water or other mass transit; excluding regular bus or minibus) Yes = 1, No = 0 Logistics management Yes = 1, No = 0 Transport efficiency (e.g., vehicle, fuel, network efficiency) Yes = 1, No = 0 Non-motorized transport (NMT) Yes = 1, No = 0 Travel demand management Yes = 1, No = 0 Comprehensive transport initiatives (Involving the coordination of multiple strategies from different transportation sub-sectors) Yes = 1, No = 0 Sustainable urban initiatives Yes = 1, No = 0
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
Length of public rapid transit (PRT) km Length of non-motorized transport (NMT) km Number of lower GHG emission vehicles Number of people benefiting from the improved transport and urban systems
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
Objective 5: LULUCF
Area of activity directly resulting from the project Conservation and enhancement of carbon in forests, including agroforestry ha Conservation and enhancement of carbon in nonforest lands, including peat land ha Avoided deforestation and forest degradation ha Afforestation/reforestation ha
0: not an objective/component 1: no action 2: developing prescriptions for sustainable management Good management practices developed and adopted 3: development of national standards for certification 4: some of area in project certified 5: over 80% of area in project certified 0: not an objective/component 1: no action 2: mapping of forests and other land areas Carbon stock monitoring system established 3: compilation and analysis of carbon stock information 4: implementation of science based inventory/monitoring system 5: monitoring information database publicly available
Lifetime direct GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
Objective 6: Enabling Activities
Please specify the number of Enabling Activities for the project (for a multiple country project, please put the number of countries/assessments) National Communication Technology Needs Assessment Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions Other Does the project include Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) activities? Yes = 1, No = 0
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 4 Tracking Tool for Climate Change Mitigation Projects (For Mid-term Evaluation)
Special Notes: reporting on lifetime emissions avoided Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided: Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made until the mid-term evaluation, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Please refer to the Manual for Calculating GHG Benefits of GEF Projects. Manual for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects Manual for Transportation Projects For LULUCF projects, the definition of "lifetime direct" applies. Lifetime length is defined to be 20 years, unless a different number of years is deemed appropriate. For emission or removal factors (tonnes of CO2eq per hectare per year), use IPCC defaults or country specific factors.
General Data Results Notes at Mid-term Evaluation Project Title GEF ID Agency Project ID Country Region GEF Agency Date of Council/CEO Approval Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010) GEF Grant (US$) Date of submission of the tracking tool Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)
Is the project consistent with the priorities identified in National Communications, Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC? Yes = 1, No = 0 Is the project linked to carbon finance? Yes = 1, No = 0 Cumulative cofinancing realized (US$) additional resources means beyond the cofinancing committed at Cumulative additional resources mobilized (US$) CEO endorsement
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 Yes = 1, No = 0 North-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0 Intellectual property rights (IPR) Yes = 1, No = 0 Information dissemination Yes = 1, No = 0 Institutional and technical capacity building Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)
Number of innovative technologies demonstrated or deployed Please specify three key technologies for demonstration or deployment Area of technology 1 Type of technology 1 specify type of technology Area of technology 2 Type of technology 2 specify type of technology Area of technology 3 Type of technology 3 specify type of technology 0: no suitable technologies are in place 1: technologies have been identified and assessed 2: technologies have been demonstrated on a pilot basis Status of technology demonstration/deployment 3: technologies have been deployed 4: technologies have been diffused widely with investments 5: technologies have reached market potential
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 1 Objective 2: Energy Efficiency
Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas Lighting Yes = 1, No = 0 Appliances (white goods) Yes = 1, No = 0 Equipment Yes = 1, No = 0 Cook stoves Yes = 1, No = 0 Existing building Yes = 1, No = 0 New building Yes = 1, No = 0 Industrial processes Yes = 1, No = 0 Synergy with phase-out of ozone depleting substances Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place Policy and regulatory framework 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
MJ (Million Joule, IEA unit converter: http://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp) Fuel savings should be converted to energy savings by using the net Lifetime energy saved calorific value of the specific fuel. End-use electricity savings should be converted to energy savings by using the conversion factor for the specific supply and distribution system. These energy savings are then totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 2 Objective 3: Renewable Energy
Please specify if the project includes any of the following areas Heat/thermal energy production Yes = 1, No = 0 On-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0 Off-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
Installed capacity per technology directly resulting from the project Wind MW Biomass MW el (for electricity production) Biomass MW th (for thermal energy production) Geothermal MW el (for electricity production) Geothermal MW th (for thermal energy production) Hydro MW Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MW Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW) 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 production) Geothermal MWh el (for electricity production) Geothermal MWh th (for thermal energy production) Hydro MWh Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MWh Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MWh th (for thermal energy production) Solar thermal power MWh el (for electricity production) Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MWh
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 3 Objective 4: Transport and Urban Systems
Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas Bus rapid transit Yes = 1, No = 0 Other mass transit (e.g., light rail, heavy rail, water or other mass transit; excluding regular bus or minibus) Yes = 1, No = 0 Logistics management Yes = 1, No = 0 Transport efficiency (e.g., vehicle, fuel, network efficiency) Yes = 1, No = 0 Non-motorized transport (NMT) Yes = 1, No = 0 Travel demand management Yes = 1, No = 0 Comprehensive transport initiatives (Involving the coordination of multiple strategies from different transportation sub-sectors) Yes = 1, No = 0 Sustainable urban initiatives Yes = 1, No = 0
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
Length of public rapid transit (PRT) km Length of non-motorized transport (NMT) km Number of lower GHG emission vehicles Number of people benefiting from the improved transport and urban systems
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
Objective 5: LULUCF
Area of activity directly resulting from the project Conservation and enhancement of carbon in forests, including agroforestry ha Conservation and enhancement of carbon in nonforest lands, including peat land ha Avoided deforestation and forest degradation ha Afforestation/reforestation ha
0: not an objective/component 1: no action 2: developing prescriptions for sustainable management Good management practices developed and adopted 3: development of national standards for certification 4: some of area in project certified 5: over 80% of area in project certified 0: not an objective/component 1: no action 2: mapping of forests and other land areas Carbon stock monitoring system established 3: compilation and analysis of carbon stock information 4: implementation of science based inventory/monitoring system 5: monitoring information database publicly available
Lifetime direct GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq Lifetime direct carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq
Objective 6: Enabling Activities
Please specify the number of Enabling Activities for the project (for a multiple country project, please put the number of countries/assessments) National Communication Technology Needs Assessment Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions Other Does the project include Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) activities? Yes = 1, No = 0
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 4 Tracking Tool for Climate Change Mitigation Projects (For Terminal Evaluation)
Special Notes: reporting on lifetime emissions avoided Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided: Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made during the project's supervised implementation period, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided: Lifetime direct post-project emissions avoided are the emissions reductions attributable to the investments made outside the project's supervised implementation period, but supported by financial facilities put in place by the GEF project, totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. These financial facilities will still be operational after the project ends, such as partial credit guarantee facilities, risk mitigation facilities, or revolving funds. Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down and bottom-up): indirect emissions reductions are those attributable to the long-term outcomes of the GEF activities that remove barriers, such as capacity building, innovation, catalytic action for replication. Please refer to the Manual for Calculating GHG Benefits of GEF Projects.
Manual for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects Manual for Transportation Projects For LULUCF projects, the definitions of "lifetime direct and indirect" apply. Lifetime length is defined to be 20 years, unless a different number of years is deemed appropriate. For emission or removal factors (tonnes of CO2eq per hectare per year), use IPCC defaults or country specific factors.
General Data Results Notes at Terminal Evaluation Project Title GEF ID Agency Project ID Country Region GEF Agency Date of Council/CEO Approval Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010) GEF Grant (US$) Date of submission of the tracking tool Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)
Is the project consistent with the priorities identified in National Communications, Technology Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the UNFCCC? Yes = 1, No = 0 Is the project linked to carbon finance? Yes = 1, No = 0 Cumulative cofinancing realized (US$) additional resources means beyond the cofinancing committed at Cumulative additional resources mobilized (US$) CEO endorsement
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 Yes = 1, No = 0 North-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0 Intellectual property rights (IPR) Yes = 1, No = 0 Information dissemination Yes = 1, No = 0 Institutional and technical capacity building Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)
Number of innovative technologies demonstrated or deployed Please specify three key technologies for demonstration or deployment Area of technology 1 Type of technology 1 specify type of technology Area of technology 2 Type of technology 2 specify type of technology Area of technology 3 Type of technology 3 specify type of technology 0: no suitable technologies are in place 1: technologies have been identified and assessed 2: technologies have been demonstrated on a pilot basis Status of technology demonstration/deployment 3: technologies have been deployed 4: technologies have been diffused widely with investments 5: technologies have reached market potential
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 1 Objective 2: Energy Efficiency
Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas Lighting Yes = 1, No = 0 Appliances (white goods) Yes = 1, No = 0 Equipment Yes = 1, No = 0 Cook stoves Yes = 1, No = 0 Existing building Yes = 1, No = 0 New building Yes = 1, No = 0 Industrial processes Yes = 1, No = 0 Synergy with phase-out of ozone depleting substances Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place Policy and regulatory framework 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
MJ (Million Joule, IEA unit converter: http://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp) Fuel savings should be converted to energy savings by using the net Lifetime energy saved calorific value of the specific fuel. End-use electricity savings should be converted to energy savings by using the conversion factor for the specific supply and distribution system. These energy savings are then totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments. Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 2 Objective 3: Renewable Energy
Please specify if the project includes any of the following areas Heat/thermal energy production Yes = 1, No = 0 On-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0 Off-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
Installed capacity per technology directly resulting from the project Wind MW Biomass MW el (for electricity production) Biomass MW th (for thermal energy production) Geothermal MW el (for electricity production) Geothermal MW th (for thermal energy production) Hydro MW Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MW Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW) 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 production) Geothermal MWh el (for electricity production) Geothermal MWh th (for thermal energy production) Hydro MWh Photovoltaic (solar lighting included) MWh Solar thermal heat (heating, water, cooling, process) MWh th (for thermal energy production) Solar thermal power MWh el (for electricity production) Marine energy (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MWh
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 3 Objective 4: Transport and Urban Systems
Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas Bus rapid transit Yes = 1, No = 0 Other mass transit (e.g., light rail, heavy rail, water or other mass transit; excluding regular bus or minibus) Yes = 1, No = 0 Logistics management Yes = 1, No = 0 Transport efficiency (e.g., vehicle, fuel, network efficiency) Yes = 1, No = 0 Non-motorized transport (NMT) Yes = 1, No = 0 Travel demand management Yes = 1, No = 0 Comprehensive transport initiatives (Involving the coordination of multiple strategies from different transportation sub-sectors) Yes = 1, No = 0 Sustainable urban initiatives Yes = 1, No = 0
0: not an objective/component 1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place 2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed Policy and regulatory framework 3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted 4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced 5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced 0: not an objective/component 1: no facility in place 2: facilities discussed and proposed Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk guarantees, revolving funds) 3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded 4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand 5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand 0: not an objective/component 1: no capacity built 2: information disseminated/awareness raised Capacity building 3: training delivered 4: institutional/human capacity strengthened 5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained
Length of public rapid transit (PRT) km Length of non-motorized transport (NMT) km Number of lower GHG emission vehicles Number of people benefiting from the improved transport and urban systems
Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (bottom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
Objective 5: LULUCF
Area of activity directly resulting from the project Conservation and enhancement of carbon in forests, including agroforestry ha Conservation and enhancement of carbon in nonforest lands, including peat land ha Avoided deforestation and forest degradation ha Afforestation/reforestation ha
0: not an objective/component 1: no action 2: developing prescriptions for sustainable management Good management practices developed and adopted 3: development of national standards for certification 4: some of area in project certified 5: over 80% of area in project certified 0: not an objective/component 1: no action 2: mapping of forests and other land areas Carbon stock monitoring system established 3: compilation and analysis of carbon stock information 4: implementation of science based inventory/monitoring system 5: monitoring information database publicly available
Lifetime direct GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect GHG emission avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime direct carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above) Lifetime indirect carbon sequestration tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)
Objective 6: Enabling Activities
Please specify the number of Enabling Activities for the project (for a multiple country project, please put the number of countries/assessments) National Communication Technology Needs Assessment Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions Other Does the project include Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) activities? Yes = 1, No = 0
GEF Climate Change Mitigation Tracking Tool Version: 1.0 4 UNDP Environmental and Social Screening Template (December 2012)
QUESTION 1:
Has a combined environmental and social assessment/review that covers the proposed project already been completed by implementing partners or donor(s)?
Select answer below and follow instructions: NO: Continue to Question 2 (do not fill out Table 1.1)
YES: No further environmental and social review is required if the existing documentation meets UNDP’s quality assurance standards, and environmental and social management recommendations are integrated into the project. Therefore, you should undertake the following steps to complete the screening process: 1. Use Table 1.1 below to assess existing documentation. (It is recommended that this assessment be undertaken jointly by the Project Developer and other relevant Focal Points in the office or Bureau). 2. Ensure that the Project Document incorporates the recommendations made in the implementing partner’s environmental and social review. 3. Summarize the relevant information contained in the implementing partner’s environmental and social review in Annex A.2 of this Screening Template, selecting Category 1. 4. Submit Annex A to the PAC, along with other relevant documentation.
Note: Further guidance on the use of national systems for environmental and social assessment can be found in the UNDP ESSP Annex B.
TABLE 1.1: CHECKLIST FOR APPRAISING QUALITY ASSURANCE OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL AND Yes/No SOCIAL ASSESSMENT
1. Does the assessment/review meet its terms of reference, both procedurally and substantively?
2. Does the assessment/review provide a satisfactory assessment of the proposed project?
3. Does the assessment/review contain the information required for decision-making?
4. Does the assessment/review describe specific environmental and social management measures (e.g. mitigation, monitoring, advocacy, and capacity development measures)?
5. Does the assessment/review identify capacity needs of the institutions responsible for implementing environmental and social management issues?
6. Was the assessment/review developed through a consultative process with strong stakeholder engagement, including the view of men and women?
7. Does the assessment/review assess the adequacy of the cost of and financing arrangements for environmental and social management issues?
Page 1
Table 1.1 (continued) For any “no” answers, describe below how the issue has been or will be resolved (e.g. amendments made or supplemental review conducted).
Page 2
QUESTION 2:
Do all outputs and activities described in the Project Document fall within the following categories? Procurement (in which case UNDP’s Procurement Ethics and Environmental Procurement Guide need to be complied with) Report preparation Training Event/workshop/meeting/conference (refer to Green Meeting Guide) Communication and dissemination of results
Select answer below and follow instructions: NO Continue to Question 3 YES No further environmental and social review required. Complete Annex A.2, selecting Category 1, and submit the completed template (Annex A) to the PAC.
Page 3
QUESTION 3:
Does the proposed project include activities and outputs that support upstream planning processes that potentially pose environmental and social impacts or are vulnerable to environmental and social change (refer to Table 3.1 for examples)? (Note that upstream planning processes can occur at global, regional, national, local and sectoral levels)
Select the appropriate answer and follow instructions:
NO Continue to Question 4.
YES Conduct the following steps to complete the screening process: 1. Adjust the project design as needed to incorporate UNDP support to the country(ies), to ensure that environmental and social issues are appropriately considered during the upstream planning process. Refer to Section 7 of this Guidance for elaboration of environmental and social mainstreaming services, tools, guidance and approaches that may be used. 2. Summarize environmental and social mainstreaming support in Annex A.2, Section C of the Screening Template and select ”Category 2”. 3. If the proposed project ONLY includes upstream planning processes then screening is complete, and you should submit the completed Environmental and Social Screening Template (Annex A) to the PAC. If downstream implementation activities are also included in the project then continue to Question 4.
TABLE 3. 1 EXAMPLES OF UPSTREAM PLANNING PROCESSES WITH POTENTIAL Check appropriate DOWNSTREAM ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS box(es) below
1. Support for the elaboration or revision of global- level strategies, policies, plans, and programmes. For example, capacity development and support related to international negotiations and agreements. Other examples might include a global water governance project or a global MDG project.
2. Support for the elaboration or revision of regional-level strategies, policies and plans, and programmes. For example, capacity development and support related to transboundary programmes and planning (river basin management, migration, international waters, energy development and access, climate change adaptation etc.).
3. Support for the elaboration or revision of national-level strategies, policies, plans and programmes. For example, capacity development and support related to national development policies, plans, strategies and budgets, MDG-based plans and strategies (e.g. PRS/PRSPs, NAMAs), sector plans.
4. Support for the elaboration or revision of sub-national/local-level strategies, polices, plans and programmes. For example, capacity development and support for district and local level development plans and regulatory frameworks, urban plans, land use development plans, sector plans, provincial development plans, provision of services, investment funds, technical guidelines and methods, stakeholder engagement.
Page 4
QUESTION 4:
Does the proposed project include the implementation of downstream activities that potentially pose environmental and social impacts or are vulnerable to environmental and social change?
To answer this question, you should first complete Table 4.1 by selecting appropriate answers. If you answer “No” or “Not Applicable” to all questions in Table 4.1 then the answer to Question 4 is “NO.” If you answer “Yes” to any questions in Table 4.1 (even one “Yes” can indicated a significant issue that needs to be addressed through further review and management) then the answer to Question 4 is “YES”:
NO No further environmental and social review and management required for downstream activities. Complete Annex A.2 by selecting “Category 1”, and submit the Environmental and Social Screening Template to the PAC.
YES Conduct the following steps to complete the screening process: 1. Consult Section 8 of this Guidance, to determine the extent of further environmental and social review and management that might be required for the project. 2. Revise the Project Document to incorporate environmental and social management measures. Where further environmental and social review and management activity cannot be undertaken prior to the PAC, a plan for undertaking such review and management activity within an acceptable period of time, post-PAC approval (e.g. as the first phase of the project) should be outlined in Annex A.2. 3. Select “Category 3” in Annex A.2, and submit the completed Environmental and Social Screening Template (Annex A) and relevant documentation to the PAC.
TABLE 4.1: ADDITIONAL SCREENING QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE THE NEED AND POSSIBLE EXTENT OF FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT Answer 1. Biodiversity and Natural Resources (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)
1.1 Would the proposed project result in the conversion or degradation of modified habitat, No natural habitat or critical habitat? 1.2 Are any development activities proposed within a legally protected area (e.g. natural No reserve, national park) for the protection or conservation of biodiversity? 1.3 Would the proposed project pose a risk of introducing invasive alien species? No 1.4 Does the project involve natural forest harvesting or plantation development without an No independent forest certification system for sustainable forest management (e.g. PEFC, the Forest Stewardship Council certification systems, or processes established or accepted by the relevant National Environmental Authority)? 1.5 Does the project involve the production and harvesting of fish populations or other No aquatic species without an accepted system of independent certification to ensure sustainability (e.g. the Marine Stewardship Council certification system, or certifications, standards, or processes established or accepted by the relevant National Environmental Authority)? 1.6 Does the project involve significant extraction, diversion or containment of surface or No ground water?
Page 5
TABLE 4.1: ADDITIONAL SCREENING QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE THE NEED AND POSSIBLE EXTENT OF FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT For example, construction of dams, reservoirs, river basin developments, groundwater extraction. 1.7 Does the project pose a risk of degrading soils? No Answer 2. Pollution (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)
2.1 Would the proposed project result in the release of pollutants to the environment due to No routine or non-routine circumstances with the potential for adverse local, regional, and transboundary impacts? 2.2 Would the proposed project result in the generation of waste that cannot be recovered, No reused, or disposed of in an environmentally and socially sound manner? 2.3 Will the propose project involve the manufacture, trade, release, and/or use of chemicals No and hazardous materials subject to international action bans or phase-outs? For example, DDT, PCBs and other chemicals listed in international conventions such as the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, or the Montreal Protocol. 2.4 Is there a potential for the release, in the environment, of hazardous materials resulting No from their production, transportation, handling, storage and use for project activities? 2.5 Will the proposed project involve the application of pesticides that have a known No negative effect on the environment or human health? 3. Climate Change
3.1 Will the proposed project result in significant1 greenhouse gas emissions? No Annex E provides additional guidance for answering this question.
3.2 Is the proposed project likely to directly or indirectly increase environmental and social No vulnerability to climate change now or in the future (also known as maladaptive practices)? You can refer to the additional guidance in Annex C to help you answer this question. For example, a project that would involve indirectly removing mangroves from coastal zones or encouraging land use plans that would suggest building houses on floodplains could increase the surrounding population’s vulnerability to climate change, specifically flooding.
4. Social Equity and Equality Answer (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)
4.1 Would the proposed project have environmental and social impacts that could affect No indigenous people or other vulnerable groups? 4.2 Is the project likely to significantly impact gender equality and women’s empowerment2? No
1 Significant corresponds to CO2 emissions greater than 100,000 tons per year (from both direct and indirect sources). Annex E provides additional guidance on calculating potential amounts of CO2 emissions. 2 Women are often more vulnerable than men to environmental degradation and resource scarcity. They typically have weaker and insecure rights to the resources they manage (especially land), and spend longer hours on collection of water, firewood, etc. (OECD, 2006). Women are also more often excluded from other social, economic, and political development processes.
Page 6
TABLE 4.1: ADDITIONAL SCREENING QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE THE NEED AND POSSIBLE EXTENT OF FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT
4.3 Is the proposed project likely to directly or indirectly increase social inequalities now or in No the future? 4.4 Will the proposed project have variable impacts on women and men, different ethnic No groups, social classes? 4.5 Have there been challenges in engaging women and other certain key groups of No stakeholders in the project design process? 4.6 Will the project have specific human rights implications for vulnerable groups? No
5. Demographics 5.1 Is the project likely to result in a substantial influx of people into the affected No community(ies)? 5.2 Would the proposed project result in substantial voluntary or involuntary resettlement of No populations? For example, projects with environmental and social benefits (e.g. protected areas, climate change adaptation) that impact human settlements, and certain disadvantaged groups within these settlements in particular. 5.3 Would the proposed project lead to significant population density increase which could No affect the environmental and social sustainability of the project? For example, a project aiming at financing tourism infrastructure in a specific area (e.g. coastal zone, mountain) could lead to significant population density increase which could have serious environmental and social impacts (e.g. destruction of the area’s ecology, noise pollution, waste management problems, greater work burden on women). 1. Culture 6.1 Is the project likely to significantly affect the cultural traditions of affected communities, No including gender-based roles? 6.2 Will the proposed project result in physical interventions (during construction or No implementation) that would affect areas that have known physical or cultural significance to indigenous groups and other communities with settled recognized cultural claims? 6.3 Would the proposed project produce a physical “splintering” of a community? No For example, through the construction of a road, powerline, or dam that divides a community. 2. Health and Safety 7.1 Would the proposed project be susceptible to or lead to increased vulnerability to No earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion, flooding or extreme climatic conditions? For example, development projects located within a floodplain or landslide prone area. 7.2 Will the project result in increased health risks as a result of a change in living and working No conditions? In particular, will it have the potential to lead to an increase in HIV/AIDS infection? 7.3 Will the proposed project require additional health services including testing? No
3. Socio-Economics 8.1 Is the proposed project likely to have impacts that could affect women’s and men’s No ability to use, develop and protect natural resources and other natural capital assets?
Page 7
TABLE 4.1: ADDITIONAL SCREENING QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE THE NEED AND POSSIBLE EXTENT OF FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL REVIEW AND MANAGEMENT For example, activities that could lead to natural resources degradation or depletion in communities who depend on these resources for their development, livelihoods, and well- being? 8.2 Is the proposed project likely to significantly affect land tenure arrangements and/or No traditional cultural ownership patterns? 8.3 Is the proposed project likely to negatively affect the income levels or employment No opportunities of vulnerable groups?
9. Cumulative and/or Secondary Impacts Answer (Yes/No/ Not Applicable)
9.1 Is the proposed project location subject to currently approved land use plans (e.g. roads, No settlements) which could affect the environmental and social sustainability of the project? For example, future plans for urban growth, industrial development, transportation infrastructure, etc. 9.2 Would the proposed project result in secondary or consequential development which No could lead to environmental and social effects, or would it have potential to generate cumulative impacts with other known existing or planned activities in the area? For example, a new road through forested land will generate direct environmental and social impacts through the cutting of forest and earthworks associated with construction and potential relocation of inhabitants. These are direct impacts. In addition, however, the new road would likely also bring new commercial and domestic development (houses, shops, businesses). In turn, these will generate indirect impacts. (Sometimes these are termed “secondary” or “consequential” impacts). Or if there are similar developments planned in the same forested area then cumulative impacts need to be considered.
Page 8
ANNEX A.2: ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SCREENING SUMMARY (to be filled in after Annex A.1 has been completed)
Name of Proposed Project: India: Scale up of Access to Clean Energy for Rural Productive Uses (India ACE)
A. Environmental and Social Screening Outcome
Select from the following: Category 1. No further action is needed Category 2. Further review and management is needed. There are possible environmental and social benefits, impacts, and/or risks associated with the project (or specific project component), but these are predominantly indirect or very long-term and so extremely difficult or impossible to directly identify and assess. Category 3. Further review and management is needed, and it is possible to identify these with a reasonable degree of certainty. If Category 3, select one or more of the following sub-categories: Category 3a: Impacts and risks are limited in scale and can be identified with a reasonable degree of certainty and can often be handled through application of standard best practice, but require some minimal or targeted further review and assessment to identify and evaluate whether there is a need for a full environmental and social assessment (in which case the project would move to Category 3b). Category 3b: Impacts and risks may well be significant, and so full environmental and social assessment is required. In these cases, a scoping exercise will need to be conducted to identify the level and approach of assessment that is most appropriate.
B. Environmental and Social Issues (for projects requiring further environmental and social review and management)
In this section, you should list the key potential environmental and social issues raised by this project. This might include both environmental and social opportunities that could be seized on to strengthen the project, as well as risks that need to be managed. You should use the answers you provided in Table 4.1 as the basis for this summary, as well as any further review and management that is conducted. The project is explicitly focussed on supporting rural livelihoods at the individual household enterprise level, and therefore the project will make a direct positive socioeconomic impact on rural livelihoods at the local level. At the national level, the project will directly and tangibly support the emphasis on supporting rural livelihoods through the NRLM self-help group approach that has been proven to be sucessful in the Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) experiments of mass SHG programmes. The project will directly support rural livelihoods, and there is a clear realisation that supporting rural livelihoods is a critical element of any poverty reduction efforts in India. The project does not specifically focus on gender
Page 9 issues, but women head many rural livelihoods enterprises, or work on or are employed by them, so the project will have a very positive overall gender impact as well.
C. Next Steps (for projects requiring further environmental and social review and management):
In this section, you should summarize actions that will be taken to deal with the above-listed issues. If your project has Category 2 or 3 components, then appropriate next steps will likely involve further environmental and social review and management, and the outcomes of this work should also be summarized here. Relevant guidance should be obtained from Section 7 for Category 2, and Section 8 for Category 3.
The project will be implemented to maximise poverty reduction and maximise its positive gender contributions.
D. Sign Off
Project Manager Date
PAC Date
Programme Manager Date
Page 10
Compendium of Renewable Energy Technology Packages for Selected Rural Livelihood Sectors JUNE 2014
Acknowledgements Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective and Greentech Knowledge Solutions Private Limited are extremely grateful to all the stakeholders who provided useful inputs during the course of the studies undertaken when compiling this compendium. We specially thank all the organizations and their personnel who facilitated our field visits. A list of the organisations, companies and people we would like to thank is provided as an annexure to this document.
Disclaimer The present document is an attempt to put together relevant information on the status and potentials of some key renewable energy technologies in India that are suitable for application to improve rural livelihoods. This document is neither exhaustive nor complete on the topic. The information has been compiled from reliable references/resources, as cited in the publication. Mention of any company, association or product in this document is for informational purposes only and does not constitute a recommendation of any sort by UNDP/ MNRE/ Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective/ Greentech Knowledge Solutions Private Limited.
Contents
1. Poultry ...... 1
1.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ...... 1 1.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ...... 1
1.2.1 Lighting and ventilation of backyard poultry sheds ...... 1
1.2.1.1 Solar lanterns and Micro solar lighting solutions ...... 2
1.2.2 Biogas plant based on poultry litter for captive use in hatcheries and layer farms .. 5 1.2.3 Waste to energy generation from small poultry farms ...... 6
2. Dairy ...... 9
2.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ...... 9 2.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ...... 10
2.2.1 Solar lights/ power packs for lighting and powering small equipment at milk collection centres ...... 10 2.2.2 Solar PV powered milk chiller at milk collection centre ...... 11 2.2.3 Biogas plant for power generation for captive use in dairy farm ...... 12
3. Horticulture ...... 15
3.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ...... 15 3.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ...... 15
3.2.1 Micro Solar Pumps ...... 15 3.2.2 Solar Pumps ...... 16 3.3.3 Solar PV based farm level small Cold Storage ...... 18 3.3.4 Solar dryers for drying of spices, vegetables and fruits ...... 20 3.3.5 Other potential renewable energy applications ...... 22
4. Fisheries ...... 23
4.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ...... 23 4.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ...... 23
4.2.1 Solar Aerators ...... 23 4.2.2 Solar Fish Dryers ...... 25 5. Khadi and Village Industries ...... 27
5.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ...... 27 5.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ...... 29
5.2.1 Solar lighting for households ...... 29 5.2.2 Solar PV based power for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centres ...... 29 5.2.3 Solar powered charkha and loom ...... 30 5.2.4 Biomass gasifiers based on bamboo waste for power generation for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers of bamboo clusters ...... 32
6. Biomass Energy Based Informal Industries/ Small Business ...... 33
6.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods ...... 33 6.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications ...... 33
6.2.1 Improved biomass cook stoves ...... 33
Bibliography ...... 36 Acknowledgements ...... 39
List of Figures
Figure 1: Back-Yard Poultry Farms ...... 2 Figure 2: Solar lanterns ...... 4 Figure 3: Micro solar lighting system ...... 4 Figure 4: Biogas Plant in a poultry farm in Haryana ...... 6 Figure 5: Poultry Farm ...... 6 Figure 6: Biomass Briquetting ...... 8 Figure 7: Milk collection at the village level collection centre ...... 9 Figure 8: Milk chilling plant ...... 9 Figure 9: Milk testing machine ...... 11 Figure 10: Milk chilling plant ...... 12 Figure 11: Biogas based Power Generation at Dairy Farm ...... 13 Figure 12: Micro Solar Pump ...... 16 Figure 13: Solar Pump System ...... 18 Figure 14: Cold Storage implemented by Cold Chain Solutions ...... 20 Figure 15: Green house dryer ...... 21 Figure 16: Solar collector based dryer ...... 21 Figure 17: Natural convection based dryer ...... 21 Figure 18: Aerator IIT Guwahati Model ...... 24 Figure 19: Present Practice of Fish Drying (Open Sun) ...... 25 Figure 20: Solar Dryers ...... 26 Figure 21: Pictures from a Weaving Cluster in Assam ...... 27 Figure 22: Women making Bamboo Products in Barpeta, Assam ...... 28 Figure 23: Bamboo Products made at Barpeta Cane and Bamboo Cluster ...... 28 Figure 24: Common work-sheds with looms at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam ... 29 Figure 25: Sewing Machines at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam ...... 29 Figure 26: Solar charkha at Limbdi, Gujrat ...... 31 Figure 27: Improved biomass cook stove ...... 35 Figure 28: Biomass cook stoves using husks as fuel ...... 35
List of Tables
Table 1: Specifications and costs of solar lanterns, ...... 2 Table 2: Specifications and costs - Micro solar lighting systems ...... 3 Table 3: Specifications and costs of solar power packs ...... 4 Table 4: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 10,000 bird poultry farm ...... 5 Table 5: Ash content and calorific value of rice husk and saw dust ...... 7 Table 6: Specifications and costs for different models of biomass briquetting machines ...... 7 Table 7: Specifications and costs of solar PV system put up at the village level milk collection centre ...... 10 Table 8: Specifications and costs - Milk chilling plant ...... 12 Table 9: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 100 cattle dairy farm ...... 13 Table 10: Specifications and costs- Micro solar pumps ...... 15 Table 11: Specifications and costs- Solar pumps of 3 hp capacity ...... 17 Table 12: Specifications and costs of cold storages of different capacity ...... 19 Table 13: Specifications and costs of different types of dryers ...... 21 Table 14: Specifications and costs of IITG model aerator ...... 24 Table 15: Specifications and costs of solar collector based dryers ...... 25 Table 16: Specifications and costs - solar power packs for common facility centre ...... 30 Table 17: Specification and cost of solar charkha ...... 31 Table 18: Specification and cost of solar loom ...... 31 Table 19: Specifications and costs - Biomass gasifier ...... 32 Table 20: Stipulated performance parameters for MNRE approval ...... 34 Table 21: Specifications and costs – Improved biomass cook stoves ...... 34
Acronyms & Abbreviations Ah Ampere-Hour Asia Society for Social Improvement and Sustainable ASSIST Transformation CFL Compact fluorescent lamp CO Carbon Monoxide DC Direct Current GDP Gross Domestic Product hp Horse power kcal/kg Kilocalories per Kilogram kg/h Kilograms per hour km Kilometer kVA Kilo Volt-Ampere kW Kilo Watt kWh Kilo Watt Hour LED Light Emitting Diode m Meter m2 Square meter m3 Cubic meter Ministry of New and Renewable Energy MNRE (Government of India) NGO Non-Governmental Organisation oC Degree Celsius PEN Planters Energy Network PM Particulate Matter PV Photovoltaic INR Indian Rupee (around 60 INR = 1 USD in 2014) SHG Self Help Group V Volt Wp Watt peak
1. Poultry
1.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods
Poultry is one of the fastest growing segments of the agricultural sector in India; increasing at a rate of 8-12% annually. India is the 3rd largest global producer of eggs and the 4th largest global producer of broiler. Poultry provides a source of livelihood to more than 3 million families among which there is a high concentration of landless, marginal and small farmers. The number of families engaged in poultry is expected to reach 5 million by 2025.1 One of the models of broiler (meat) poultry development is a market-oriented backyard or small farm model. Under this model, poultry farmers (300-500 families spread over 20-50 villages in a radius of around 30 km) are organised in the form of a cooperative or producer company. Each family has a small backyard poultry farm which can accommodate 200 -800 birds. Through the cooperative, a family gets 1 day old chicks. The chicks are reared for 35- 40 days & then sold in the market for meat. After one cycle, the shed is sanitized and made ready for receiving the next batch of chicks. Usually 4 to 6 cycles are repeated in a year. The cooperative/producer company provides chicks (from own hatchery or purchased from a commercial hatchery), feed (usually from a self-owned feed production unit), medical and technical support, and market linkage. In some cases there is a buy-back arrangement with private companies. Market-oriented backyard poultry is being promoted by both NGOs as well as by Government livelihoods programmes.
1.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications
1.2.1 Lighting and ventilation of backyard poultry sheds
The birds are fed 24*7 and the poultry shed requires lighting during the night. In the areas having an available and reliable grid electricity supply, usually one or two incandescent bulbs are used for lighting of the poultry shed. In case of non-availability or unreliable grid electricity supply, kerosene2 lamps are often used. For the wellbeing and good growth of the birds, ventilation of the shed and temperature control (target temperatures between 20–35 oC) is required. In the areas having available and reliable grid electricity supply, the poultry
1 Presentation, Mr: Anish Kumar, Poultry, Available online at: http://sapplpp.org/files-repository/information- hub/presentations/rural-backyard-poultry-development, Last accessed on 14th May 2014 2 Kerosene is still subsidised in India and hence is still used for lighting in rural areas 1 sheds generally have electricity operated fan(s) for ventilation.
Figure 1: Back-Yard Poultry Farms The most promising renewable energy options for back-yard poultry farms are: 1.2.1.1 Solar lanterns and Micro solar lighting solutions Portable solar lights (solar lanterns) and micro solar lighting solutions can be used for lighting of the poultry shed. A large number and range of RE lighting products with various specifications are available in the market. The specifications of the products are determined by the end-user requirements. Specifications And Costs
Table 1: Specifications and costs of solar lanterns3,4 CFL- based Solar Lantern White LED based Solar Lantern Solar PV Module rating 10 Wp 5 Wp Sealed Maintenance Free Sealed Maintenance Free (SMF) Battery (SMF) lead acid battery or lead acid battery or NiMH battery NiMH battery or Lithium or Lithium Ion Battery Ion Battery White-LED luminaire of 160 lux CFL luminaire of 7 Watt Light Source luminous flux (at vertical at a power rating distance of 1 feet)* 3 days or 12 operating Autonomy 3 days or 12 operating hours hours Costs (Rs/ Wp) 270 450 Cost of the System 2700 2250
3 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 20th April 2014 4 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 20th April 2014 2
* LEDs often have their rating given in terms of light incident at the surface (luminous flux) and not in terms of their power rating.
Table 2: Specifications and costs - Micro solar lighting systems5
Model I Model II Model III Solar PV module 1.5 2.5 5 rating (Wp) System capacity 2.8 4.2 7 (Ah) System voltage (V) 3.25 3.25 3.25 Lighting Load* Lamps of 0.8W and One lamp of 1.5 W 2 lamps of 1.5W and (LED lamps) 0.4W and 2 lamps of 0.4W 2 lamps of 0.4 W Daily operation (in 7 6 12 hours) Approximate Cost of the system 3,500 4,000 5,500 (Including the cost of lamps) *Lamps of different rating can be used with the micro solar lighting systems.
Operation and maintenance costs: Solar systems have no operational costs; however there are replacement costs involved. Batteries of lanterns, lighting systems or power packs have to be replaced after about 4-6 years. LED lamps have a lifetime of about 50,000 hours (about 25 years for use of 5 hours daily). Solar panels have a lifetime of about 25 years. The inverter, if used to provide AC power, also often needs to be replaced after say 3-5 years.
5 Personal communication with Mr Richard Sequeira, Fosera (www.fosera.com) 3
Figure 3: Micro solar lighting system Figure 2: Solar lanterns
1.2.1.2 Solar Power Packs Solar PV power packs can be employed for providing both lighting as well as ventilation in the poultry farms. Specifications And Costs The specification and the cost of some of the models of power packs specified by MNRE, and that can be suitable for lighting and/or ventilation of backyard poultry farms, are provided in the table below:
Table 3: Specifications and costs of solar power packs Model I – 2 LED Model II - 2 LED Model III – 4 luminaires6 luminaires and 1 LED luminaires8 DC Fan7 Solar PV Module Rating 12 24 24 (Wp) 2 white LED 2 white LED 4 White LED Light Source luminaires luminaires Luminaires
Rating of DC fan (W) NIL 10 NIL
Battery rating 12V, 12Ah 12V, 20Ah 12V, 20Ah MNRE Benchmark Costs 450 450 450 (INR/ Wp) Approximate Cost of the System as per MNRE 5,400 10,800 10,800 benchmark Costs (INR)
6 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 3rd March 2014 7 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 3rd March 2014 8 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf Last accessed on 3rd March 2014 4
Operation and maintenance costs: Please refer to section 1.2.1.1 Status: Solar lanterns and PV packs for meeting lighting and ventilation requirements are now mature products. Example: During the field visits in Madhya Pradesh, some of the families were found to be using solar lanterns for the lighting of the poultry sheds. Pradan (an NGO involved in promoting poultry) has experience of using both solar lanterns and centralised SPV power plant for providing lighting of poultry sheds. Internationally, there are several examples of providing solar PV based electricity in large poultry farms by using the roof space available on the poultry sheds9. 1.2.2 Biogas plant based on poultry litter for captive use in hatcheries and layer farms
In a hatchery unit or in a large layer farm (egg production), where the birds are kept in large numbers, the poultry litter can be collected and utilised in a biogas plant. The biogas so produced can either be burned to provide heat and/or used in an engine to produce mechanical power or electricity for captive energy requirements. The biogas digestor residual slurry can be used as an organic fertilizer. Specifications And Costs The information collected from one of the biogas plant and engine suppliers indicates that
Biogas engines working on 100% biogas are available in capacities ranging from 3 kVA to 125 kVA. Floating drum type biogas digesters are employed for biogas generation. The construction cost of biogas plants is around Rs 17000/m3.
Table 4 shows the specifications and costs of a biogas plant for power generation in a 10,000 bird poultry farm.
Table 4: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 10,000 bird poultry farm10
Available Poultry Litter per day* (kg) 1,200 Biogas that can be generated per day (m3) 200 Electricity that can be generated (kWh)# 400 Required hours of electricity per day 16-17 kVA rating of biogas engine (kVA) 30
9 http://blogs.worldwatch.org/revolt/jamaican-poultry-producer-not-chicken-about-solar-investment/ Last accessed on 19th April 2014 10Personal communication with Perfect biogas generators, New Delhi 5
Capacity of the biogas digester (m3) 200
Cost of 30 kVA Biogas Engine (in INR) 3,70,000 Cost of 200 m3 biogas digester plant (in INR) 34,00,000 Total cost of the system (including cost of biogas 40,00,000 digester, biogas engine and accessories) (in INR)
*Droppings per bird per day are 100-150 g. #Assuming that 2 kWh of electricity can be produced from 1 m3 of biogas. Operation and maintenance costs: Three to four people would be required to operate this biogas plant. Other than the labour cost, there are also recurring expenses for biogas engine oil and oil filter changes, and top and bottom end engine rebuilds. The lifetime of the plant is typically around 15 years.
Figure 4: Biogas Plant in a poultry farm in Haryana Figure 5: Poultry Farm
Status: There are several poultry based biogas plants that are operational. Example: Several biogas plants based on poultry litter are functioning in India. A particular example of this is the biogas power generation plant setup in a poultry farm with 6000 birds located in Haryana (India). In this plant, a biogas power generator of 62.5 kVA/ 50kW capacity is producing electricity from a 85 m3 biogas digester based on poultry litter / poultry waste. The slurry coming out from the digester is being used as organic fertiliser in the nearby agriculture fields. A video film showing the poultry biogas plant is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l905W5Iz_es&feature=em-upload_owner
1.2.3 Waste to energy generation from small poultry farms
Saw dust or rice husk which is used as bedding material in poultry farms can be used for production of pellets or briquettes which can be used as a fuel. The poultry litter is periodically removed from the bedding material and is dispersed off; hence the bedding
6 material left at the end of rearing one batch has only a small percentage of poultry litter. Briquetting is a way to convert loose biomass residues, such as sawdust, straw or rice husk, into high density solid blocks that can be used as a fuel. Biomass briquettes (including pellets, which are very small briquettes) replace fossil fuels or wood for cooking and industrial processes. The best materials for high pressure briquetting are sawdust and other woody residues, because these contain a high proportion of lignin11 that serves to bind the briquettes together. The ash content and calorific value of rice husk and saw dust is listed below.
Table 5: Ash content and calorific value of rice husk and saw dust Ash Content (%) Calorific Value (kcal/kg) Rice husk 17.65 3950 Saw Dust 8.20 3898
Specifications and Costs
The details collected from a poultry cluster shows that about 400kg of saw dust/ rice husk is used per batch of poultry birds as bedding material. On average around 5 batches of birds are reared per year in back-yard poultry farms. There are about 300-500 families in such a cluster engaged in back yard poultry farming. The calculations show that there is the availability of used saw dust or rice husk of about 800 metric tonnes year. A significant portion of this can be collected and used to make biomass briquettes. To briquette this biomass a biomass briquetting machine with production capacity of approx. 500 – 1000 kg/h would be required. Below are listed some of the models available in the market which can be used for briquetting the saw dust and rice husk used in poultry farms. The selling price of briquettes is about INR 4,000- 6,000 per tonne (the price varies from region to region).
Table 6: Specifications and costs for different models of biomass briquetting machines12 Model I Model II Model III Production Capacity (kg/h) 550-880* 1000-1500 1200-1600# Briquette Size (Diameter in mm) 60 90 90 Connected Load (hp) 34.5 93 88.5 Maximum energy consumption per 20-23 40-50 40-50
11 http://www.ashden.org/briquettes Last Last accessed on 10th May 2014 12 Personal communication with biomass briquetting machine manufacturers- Jay Khodiyar Group, Infinite energy and Radhe group of energy 7 hour (kWh) Capital cost of machinery (in INR) 11,25,000 19,50,000 16,50,000
* The output is 550-850 kg/h on saw dust and 450-650 kg/h on rice husk # Production Capacity: Saw Dust : 1600 kg/h (Approx.) Rice Husk : 1200 kg/h (Approx.)
Optional items like biomass dryer and grinder will have to be used if the input has a moisture level above 12% or feed size > 8 mm. The construction cost for briquetting press shed, raw material shed and finished product shed is estimated to be about INR 5,00,000. Land required for construction would be about 300 – 500 square meters.
Operation and Maintenance costs: 4 – 6 people would be required for the operation of a briquetting machine (for loading and unloading, supervision, etc.). The lifetime of the plant is expected to be about 15 years. The energy costs would also add to the operating costs based on the electricity consumption (given in Table 6) and tariff in the region.
Figure 6: Biomass Briquetting Status: Although the concept of briquetting of the bedding material of poultry farm is new, biomass briquetting has been done for several years now. There are several suppliers in India providing biomass briquetting machines. The quantity of poultry litter present in the bedding material and the overall quality of the bedding material for briquetting will be important considerations. Example: A particular example of biomass briquetting of saw dust/ rice husk used in the poultry sector could not be found, but there are many examples of biomass briquetting being successfully used in other sectors.
8
2. Dairy
2.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods
The dairy sector contributes about 5.3% of India’s agricultural GDP. India is the world's largest milk producer with an annual output of 121.8 million tonnes in 2011-12, comprising about 13% of world’s total milk production. India is also the world’s largest consumer of dairy products. India ranks first in bovine population (cattle- 199.1 million and buffalo- 105.3 million; as in 2007) accounting for about 51% of Asia’s and about 19% of the world’s bovine population.13 As per estimates in 2004, the dairy sector is the major source of income for an estimated 27.6 million people in India. Among these, 65 to 70 per cent are small, marginal farmers and land-less laborers. The dairy sector also supports around 10 million members / farmers through 100,000 cooperative societies in India.14 The milk produced by small producers is collected at the local milk collection centre, tested, weighed and then transported to the milk chilling centres. Milk is transported to the chilling centres twice a day – morning and evening. The milk is chilled in the chilling plant and is then transported to the milk processing plant. The milk collection centres are run and managed by small cooperatives and the milk producers are members of the appropriate cooperative.
Figure 7: Milk collection at the village level collection Figure 8: Milk chilling plant centre
13 http://www.dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/Annual%20Report%202012-13%20EFG.pdf Last accessed on 5th April 2014 14 http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf, Last accessed on 14th May 2014 9
2.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications
2.2.1 Solar lights/ power packs for lighting and powering small equipment at milk collection centres
The energy requirement at a milk collection centre can be met by the use of solar powered lighting and solar powered testing and weighing machines. The use of solar PV technology can make the process of milk collection faster at the milk collection centre. Also a collection centre, which has an unreliable grid electricity supply, requires an additional reliable power supply - which solar PV can provide. Specifications and Costs15 The specifications and cost of the system put up by SELCO Foundation at the milk collection center are given below.
Table 7: Specifications and costs of solar PV system put up at the village level milk collection centre
Solar System Solar PV Module (Wp) 100 Battery 12V, 110Ah Total Costs (INR) 22,000 – 28,000 Load Details Milk Analyzer (W) 85 Weighing Machine (W) 6 LED Light (W) 3.6 LED Light (W) 2.4 Hours of operation per day (hour) 3 Battery autonomy 3 days
Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs of the solar PV system are given in section 1.2.1.1
15 Personal communication with Mr: Ananth Aravamudan, SELCO Foundation 10
Figure 9: Milk testing machine Status: The technology of powering equipment and providing lighting using solar is mature one and can be applied in the sector. Example: SELCO Foundation has implemented a project for Karnataka Milk Federation (KMF), the country’s second largest milk producer. Presently 522 milk cooperatives (milk collection centres) in Karnataka are using solar power to run electronic weighing and testing machines.16 The specifications of the solar systems are provided in the table given above.
2.2.2 Solar PV powered milk chiller at milk collection centre Milk from all the collection centres has to be transported to the chilling centres twice daily. A thermal battery concept based chiller has been developed by Promethean Power Systems and these are now being used at a few milk collection centres. This thermal battery is enabling them to cool and then store the milk for 1-2 days at the collection centres themselves, and thus both reduce transportation costs and expand the reach of the milk collection centres. These milk chillers can also be used at milk chilling centres that require reliable power - as milk has to be chilled immediately as soon as it arrives at the chilling plant. The charging of the thermal batteries requires electricity which can be provided through solar PV. More information can be found at the Promethean website http://www.coolectrica.com/.
16 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/ Solar-power-comes-to-milk-coops- rescue/articleshow/31500722.cms Last Accessed on 19th May 2014
11
Specifications and costs17
Table 8: Specifications and costs - Milk chilling plant Capacity (liters per day) 1000 Electricity consumption per day (kWh) 12 Cost in INR (without solar integration) 5,80,000
Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs for the solar PV system are given in section 1.2.1.1. O&M cost for the thermal battery based milk chillers is around INR 0.07/liter.
Figure 10: Milk chilling plant18
Status: The integration of the chilling plant with solar system is in the implementation stage. Example: There is no experience of powering these milk chillers with renewables; however, it is being planned by Promethean Power to power milk chillers with solar PV, and most likely by the end of 2014 there would be some real operational experience on this.
2.2.3 Biogas plant for power generation for captive use in dairy farm Power can be generated by the combustion of biogas in gas engines. The biogas required for this type of generation is produced by anaerobic digestion of dung.
17 Personal communication with Promethean Power Systems, Mumbai 18 Photo courtesy: Promethean Power Systems. 12
Specifications And Costs19 The information collected from one of the biogas plant and engine suppliers indicates that
Biogas engines working on 100% biogas are available in capacities ranging from 3 kVA to 125 kVA. Floating drum type biogas digesters are employed for biogas generation. The construction cost of biogas plants is around INR 17,000/m3.
The table below shows the specifications and costs of a biogas plant for a dairy farm having 100 cattle heads.
Table 9: Specifications and costs of biogas plant in a 100 cattle dairy farm
1500 Available cow dung per day (kg) Biogas that can be generated per day (m3) 75 Electricity that can be generated (kWh)* 150 Capacity of the biogas digester (m3) 85 Cost of 30 kVA Biogas Engine (in INR) 3,70,000 Cost of 85 m3 biogas digester plant (in INR) 14,50,000 Total Cost of the System (in INR)# 20,00,000
*Assuming 2kWh of electricity can be produced from 1m3 of biogas.
# including cost of biogas digester, biogas engine and accessories Operation and maintenance costs: O & M costs of this plant would be similar to that of biogas plants mentioned in section 1.2.2.
Figure 11: Biogas based Power Generation at Dairy Farm20
19 Personal communication with Perfect Biogas Generators, New Delhi 20 Picture Courtesy: Perfect Biogas Generators, New Delhi 13
Status: This technology is an established one with several private companies that have successfully implemented biogas plants in dairy farms. The limitation of this technology is that it is only viable for dairy farms with a certain minimum capacity. Example: A number of projects have been implemented by several biogas companies in several dairy farms. Perfect Biogas Generators has implemented a biogas plant for power generation in Vrindavan dairy farm having 145 cattle in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. It has a 140m3 biogas digester and a 30 kVA generator. Daily electricity generation is about 240-280 kWh/day. The generator is operated for about 10-12 hours a day.21 A video film of this biogas plant is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fTrX3gCg8Q
21 Personal communication with Perfect Biogas Generators, New Delhi 14
3. Horticulture
3.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods
Horticulture accounts for about 30% of India’s agricultural GDP - from 13.08% of cropped area. Horticulture also provides about 37% of the total exports of agricultural commodities. Presently, India is the 2nd largest producer of fruits and vegetables in the world. India produces nearly 11% of all the world’s vegetables and 15% of all fruits. The annual average growth rate of Indian Horticulture was about 5% in the 11th five year plan period (2007- 12).22 A large number of the farmers involved in horticulture have small land holdings. Diesel pumps are the main source of irrigation water for horticulture in India.
3.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications
3.2.1 Micro Solar Pumps Electricity generated using solar PV panels can be used by the solar pump to draw water that can be used for irrigation of horticulture crops. In such a system, the electricity is not stored and is used for lifting water directly. The micro solar pumps as the name suggests are designed with much lower rating than the conventional solar PV pumps. This helps the solar PV pump technology to be used by small and marginal farmers and reduces the initial investment costs.23 The capacities of these pumps can range from 200 Wp to 500 Wp. The specifications and cost of a 200 Wp system is given in the table below. Specifications and Costs24
Table 10: Specifications and costs- Micro solar pumps
Solar PV module rating (Wp) 200 Pump rating 100W, 12V Discharge (Liter/ day) 2500 Cost of the Solar PV pump system (INR) 20,000
22http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/agri/wg_horti1512.pdf Last accessed on 20th May 2014 23http://rwsnforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/8_andrea_vezzini-ennos_solar_water_pump_drive.pdf Last accessed on 20th May 2014 24 Personal communication with Dr. S.P.Gon Chaudhuri, Ashden (data provided from a project on micro solar pumps implemented in Sundarban, West Bengal) 15
Total cost of installation in INR (including construction cost of a 5000 liter storage tank & 50,000 distribution system)
Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs of the solar PV system are given in section 1.2.1. MNRE has specified that the whole system including submersible/ surface pumps shall be warrantied for 5 years 25
Figure 12: Micro Solar Pump26 Status: The solar PV pump technology has been there for many years now and downsizing of the system has made it more affordable and appropriate for the needs of a smallholder family and portable (so that it can be protected from theft). Example: Six micro solar pumps have been installed in Sundarbans, West Bengal. The pumps are being used to lift water from a small pond. The rating of the pumps installed is provided in the table.27
3.2.2 Solar Pumps
Solar PV pumps of 3-5 hp capacities have been used in India for several years now. They are used for drawing the water for irrigation and have no electrical storage as already explained in the section for micro solar pumps. These systems are usually owned by a group of farmers or by a single larger farmer.
25 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf. Last accessed on 3rd June 2014 26 http://www.bfh.ch/fileadmin/docs/newsmeldungen/2013/Brochure_SolarWaterPump_BFH_2013.pdf Last accessed on 19th May 2014 27 Personal communication with Dr. S.P.Gon Chaudhuri, Ashden
16
Specifications and Costs The specification and cost of some of the solar PV selected models specified by MNRE are provided in the table below.28,29
Table 11: Specifications and costs- Solar pumps of 3 hp capacity Model I (Shallow well Model II (Deep well
pumping system) pumping system ) Solar PV Module rating (Wp) 2700 3000 Motor Capacity (hp) 3 Not Specified Motor Pump set type DC surface pumps DC submersible pumps Max. Total Dynamic Head (m) 25 80 Required shadow free Area (m2) 120 120 148,000 liters per 63,000 liters per day Water Output day from a total head from a total head of 50 of 20 meters meters MNRE Benchmark Cost (INR/Wp) 190 190 Approximate Cost of System as per 5,13,000 5,70,000 MNRE benchmark costs (INR)
* The above specifications are for D.C. motor pumps; if A.C. induction motors are used the water output would decrease by around 10%. Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs of the solar PV system are given in section 1.2.1.1. MNRE has specified that the whole system including submersible/ surface pumps shall be warrantied for 5 years.30
28 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf Last accessed on 20th March 2014 29 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 20th March 2014 30 http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf Last accessed on 9th June 2014 17
Figure 13: Solar Pump System31 Status: Solar pumping is now a proven technology with numerous private solar pump supply companies already operating, and with large-scale government schemes coming up in the area. Example: States like Punjab, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Chattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh lead the way in installation of solar PV pumps. The number of pumps installed in each of these states (statistics as of 2013) is as follows: Punjab – 1850, Karnataka – 700, Tamil Nadu – 285, Chattisgarh -130, Andhra Pradesh – 70.32 MNRE has recently proposed to install 17,500 solar photovoltaic pumps with funding from the National Clean Energy Fund.33
3.3.3 Solar PV based farm level small Cold Storage Cold storage is a prime infrastructural component for storing perishable commodities. The temperatures inside cold storages are kept low to prevent commodities from spoiling. Traditionally, cold storage units have large capacities and run on grid electricity. Farm based cold storage units have already been developed by companies like Cold Chain Solutions, Bayer Material Science and Ecozen Solutions. The integration of solar energy to the farm based cold storages is underway, and working prototypes have already been implemented. Cold Chain Solutions based at Bhubaneswar has developed small cold rooms with capacities
31 Picture Courtesy: Claro Energy 32 http://www.igen-re.in/files/giz__2013__report_solar_water_pumping_for_irrigation_in_bihar.pdf Last accessed on 14th May 2014 33 http://www.pv- tech.org/news/india_to_provide_thousands_of_solar_pv_water_pumps_with_rd_help_from_sunedi. Last accessed on 16th March 2014
18 ranging from 2 to 10 metric tonnes. These cold rooms have split air-conditioning units (vapour compression systems) for providing the necessary refrigeration.34
Specifications and Costs35,36,37 The specifications and costs (cold chain solutions) are listed below.
Table 12: Specifications and costs of cold storages of different capacity Model I Model II Model III
Capacity (in metric tonnes of produce that can be 2 5 10 stored) Dimension (W x L x H) (in feet) 6x8x6 8x10x8 10x14x10 Air-conditioner Capacity (in Refrigeration 2 3 4 Tonnes) Rating of diesel generator (in kVA) 2.8 5 5 Electricity consumption (running: 15-16 h/day) 16-17 50 80 (kWh/day) Total costs (INR)* 2,50,000 7,90,000 11,70,000 *The cost also includes the cost of diesel generators which are provided for backup, insurance and civil construction costs.
Operation and maintenance costs: O&M costs of the solar PV system are given in section 1.2.1.1. The warranty provided for cold storage is five years (including annual maintenance contract). Manufacturers provide 10 year warranties for PV panels.38
Bayer Material Science has also developed small cold storages with capacity up to 10 metric tonnes. The 8 metric tonne cold storage (10ft x12ft x 10ft) costs around Rs 3,00,000.39 Bayer Material Science is in the process of testing these cold storage units running on solar PV. Ecozen solutions has been working on solar cold storage units of capacities in the range of 5 to 15 metric tonnes using thermal back-up and has implemented two prototypes. More information can be found on their website (http://ecozensolutions.com/innovation/micro-cold- storage)
34 Personal communication with Cold Chain Solutions, Odisha 35 http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/2MT-Cold-Room.pdf Last accessed on 26th March 2014 36 http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/5MT-Cold-Room.pdf Last accessed on 26th March 2014 37 http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/10MT-Cold-Room.pdf Last accessed on 26th March 2014 38 http://ecozensolutions.com/downloads/Brochure.pdf Last accessed on 6th June 2014 39 Personal communication with the Social Business Initiative team of Bayer Material Science
19
Figure 14: Cold Storage implemented by Cold Chain Solutions Status: The technology has been tried out in different parts of India over the past year and the results are quite positive. The uniqueness of this technology is the capacity it provides, which is 2-10 metric tonnes, which is ideal for small rural farms. Although commercialization of solar farm cold storage units has not been done, pilot efforts going on in the field suggests that it is likely to happen in the near future. Example: The Directorate of Horticulture, Government of Odisha has been promoting these cold rooms with an additional subsidy (20% for non-tribal and 35% for tribal) and around 200 cold storages have already been installed in the state. The subsidy is in addition to the central government subsidy of 40% available under the National Horticulture Mission. The cold rooms are used for storage of fruits, vegetables, mushrooms, etc.
3.3.4 Solar dryers for drying of spices, vegetables and fruits
Drying is done to preserve spices, vegetables and fruits for a longer duration. The traditional method of open sun drying can be replaced by solar drying in the drying of horticulture produce. Solar drying has several advantages compared to open sun drying. Drying is 30- 40% faster in solar drying and drying is possible in all days, including cloudy and rainy days with electrical backup. The advantage of using solar dryers for spices, vegetables and fruits include retaining the aroma and flavour of the dried product. Three types of solar dryers based on different drying technologies and suitable for different capacities are listed below.
20
i) Green house dryer ii) Solar air heaters with drying chambers iii) Natural convection based solar dryer
Specifications and Costs40 The specifications and costs for the three types of dryers are given below.
Table 13: Specifications and costs of different types of dryers Solar air heaters Natural convection Dryer Type Green house dryer with drying based solar dryer chambers Natural convection Technology Green house effect Solar collector based based 300, 600 and 1000 Capacity 70 to 1000 kg 10 to 100 kg kg 7,00,000 for 300 kg 1,80,000 for 70 kg 21,000 for 10 kg Cost (in INR) dryer dryer dryer.
Operation and maintenance costs: The O&M costs associated with dryers are nominal. The lifetime of the dryers is up to 15 years.41
Figure 15: Green house dryer Figure 16: Solar collector based dryer Figure 17: Natural convection based dryer Status: The technology is mature, but useful innovations are still occurring at a fast pace with several companies and persons actively involved in improving the technology. The technology has the flexibility with scale which makes it a very good candidate for renewable energy intervention in rural areas.
40 Personal communication with the Social Business Initiative team of Bayer Material Science 41 http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf Last accessed on 6th June 2014 21
Example: Solar dryers have been used in India for several years. M/s. Eastern Condiments (P) Ltd. Theni, Tamil Nadu have been using solar dryers since 1994 for drying of spices.42 13 Solar collector based dryers are being used for apricot drying in Jammu and Kashmir. Also, green house dryers (for drying chilies and bananas) have been used in Tamil Nadu, in cooperation with ASSIST. 43
3.3.5 Other potential renewable energy applications
Renewable energy can be used for powering machines used in the post-harvesting stage of horticulture produce. The use could be for processing the produce or for value addition. Machines developed by Indian Institute of Horticulture Research for the purpose can be found at http://www.iihr.res.in/section-of-agricultural-engineering. The electricity requirement of these machines can be met by solar energy or by electricity generated from other renewable energy sources. The technology of electricity generation using renewable energy is mature,and hence a technology that can be used to power the machines.
42 MNRE Handbook of Solar Air Heating for Drying and Space Heating 43 Personal communication with the Social Business Initiative team of Bayer material Science
22
4. Fisheries
4.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods
India is the third largest producer of fish in the world and second in inland fish production (FAO 1998). India’s share in the world production of fish has increased from 3.2% in 1981 to 4.5% at present. Constituting about 4.4% of the global fish production, the sector contributes to 4.7% of the agricultural GDP. The total fish production of 6.57 million metric tonnes now has a nearly 55% contribution from the inland sector 44 Indian fisheries can be classified into
i) Inland/ freshwater fisheries ii) Marine fisheries iii) Brackish water fisheries
In India, aquaculture has emerged as an important farming activity transforming aquaculture from a traditional livelihood-support rural activity to a profit oriented production system. The fisheries sector has been recognised as a powerful income and employment generator as it stimulates growth of a number of subsidiary industries and is a source of cheap and nutritious food, at the same time it is an instrument of livelihood for a large section of the economically backward population of India. More than 6 million people in India depend on fisheries and aquaculture for their livelihood.45
4.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications
4.2.1 Solar Aerators
Any procedure by which oxygen is added to water can be considered as a type of water aeration. Aeration is required to maintain a minimum amount of Dissolved Oxygen (DO) in the water. The minimum benchmark of DO for aquatic life is 4mg/lit. Aeration is required in inland fisheries to keep the minimum benchmark of DO for fish to survive. Aeration is usually provided by aerators powered by diesel generators.
IIT Guwahati had developed a paddle type aerator system for fish ponds. Trials are ongoing to operate this aerator using solar energy. This is used to maintain DO level in fresh or
44 http://nfdb.ap.nic.in/html/aboutus.htm Last accessed on 29th March 2014 45 http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp/fishery.pdf Last accessed on 29th March 2014 23 brackish water ponds. Aeration is more effective when done during morning hours in sunshine. Paddle type aerators are more effective, less costly and require lower maintenance as compared with other type of aerators.46 Specifications and Costs
Table 14: Specifications and costs of IITG model aerator
Power rating of the motor used (hp)* 1 Hours of Operation (per day) 4-5 Costs (excluding the cost of solar panel) in INR 60,000 – 65,000
*Efforts are ongoing to reduce the power requirement to 0.75 hp.
Figure 18: Aerator IIT Guwahati Model Another aerator system, Hybrid wind-solar aerator system has been developed by S N Jha, Department of Physics, Sardar Patel University, Gujarat. The technology was commercialized by Supernova Technologies, Gujarat. More information of this technology can be found on the WWF report ‘Renewables beyond Electricity’ (Available at: http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf) or in the website of Supernova Technologies http://www.supernovawindsolar.com/
Status: The technology has potential for large scale dissemination. With the demand driven research taking place in the field, it is likely to be commercially available soon.
Example: IIT Guwahati model aerator has been demonstrated at Agia in Goalpara district of Assam where there are large number of fish ponds. Now it is being planned to run this aerator using electricity from Solar PV. The main issue they foresee with solar is the high cost of the
46 Personal communication with Prof. A K Das, IIT Guwahati 24 system47.
4.2.2 Solar Fish Dryers
Fish drying is done to avoid spoilage of the fish to preserve the fish for a longer duration. Drying is usually done for salt water fish where the catch is quite high. The traditional way of fish drying is through open sun drying. Fish is presently being dried in the open by laying the fish on sand beds. This practice is unhygienic and cannot be considered as a good food manufacturing practice. Open sun drying also has chances of contamination and delay in drying as drying is only possible in sunny days.
Figure 19: Present Practice of Fish Drying (Open Sun)
Solar dryers basically make the two processes faster that happen during drying (mass transfer of moisture from product to surrounding air and heat transfer to the product). The dryers increase the temperature in the drying area and may also use convection methods to move out the humidity. The most common type of solar dryer being used in fish drying is solar air heaters with drying chambers. This type of dryer is available in the market from several manufacturers.
Specifications and Costs
Table 15: Specifications and costs of solar collector based dryers48
Dryer Type Solar Air Heaters with Drying Chambers Technology Solar Collector Based Manufacturers, PEN, ATR, NRG Capacity 70 to 1000 kg
47 Personal communication with Prof A K Das, IIT Guwahati 48 Personal communication, Social Business Initiative team, Bayer Material Science
25
Cost (INR) 556,000 for 100 kg dryer (with installation cost, training and AMC)
Operation and maintenance costs: Lifetime of these types of dryers is up to 15 years.49
Figure 20: Solar Dryers
Status: Solar dryers have been tried for fish drying at several locations across the country. However, different varieties of fish have different drying requirements viz. drying time, drying rate, etc. and there is a varying mix of different fish species in the catch caught daily by fishermen. Designing an appropriate solar dryer with this flexibility remains a challenge. Example: In Odisha, under the Integrated Coastal Zone management project50, 115 SHGs have been developed for solar fish drying, focusing in two coastal belts – Paradeep to Dhamra and Gopalpur to Chilka. 50 Solar dryers have already been purchased and distributed to SHGs. The project is providing 100% financial support as a grant. Solar dryers were procured from ATR Solar, Madurai at a cost of INR 556,000 each.
49 http://ceew.in/pdf/CEEW-WWF-RE+Renewables-Beyond-Electricity-Dec13.pdf last accessed on 6th June 2014 50 Integrated Coastal Zone management is a World Bank assisted project, being implemented in India through MoEF, [five year pilot project (already completed 3 years)] implemented in 3 coastal states (Odisha, Gujarat and West Bengal), focused on strengthening livelihoods, being implemented by govt. agencies of corresponding sectors.
26
5. Khadi and Village Industries
5.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods
The term Khadi is used for hand-spun and hand-woven fabric. A significant part of the rural population in India is dependent on garment making (spinning, weaving, stitching) and other small village industries like processing of minor forest produce, oil mills, spice processing, etc. The hand-loom weaving sector was promoted in India as a gainful economic activity because of the fact that it required little investment, provided individuals with gainful employment and was seen as a means of ensuring self-sufficiency and the survival of country’s traditional crafts and industry. The handloom sector is the largest economic activity after agriculture, providing employment to about 3.47 million weavers. Of this, 47.5% were full time weavers and others part-time. The Joint Handloom and Power loom Census conducted in 1995-96 showed that a large population of weaver households belong to the disadvantaged strata of society and 60.6% of total weavers being women weavers. The number of handlooms in India at the time was estimated at 3.5 million.51
Figure 21: Pictures from a Weaving Cluster in Assam
The bamboo processing sector also offers enormous scope for improvement of rural and tribal livelihoods. Bamboo is among the most important resources to be leveraged towards the alleviation of rural poverty and empowerment of women. According to the Planning Commission’s 10th plan document, an estimated 8.6 million Indians depend upon Bamboo
51 http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/upsdr/vol-2/Chap_b3.pdf Last accessed on 4th April 2014 27 for their livelihoods. The rural livelihood opportunities are for bamboo cultivation and aggregation.
Figure 22: Women making Bamboo Products in Figure 23: Bamboo Products made at Barpeta Cane and Barpeta, Assam Bamboo Cluster
Most of the activities in these sectors are carried out by artisans at household level with labour contributed by the entire family. It is dispersed and spread across thousands of villages. Khadi and Village Industries Commission (KVIC) under the Scheme of Fund for Regeneration of Traditional Industries (SFURTI) has selected several khadi and bamboo processing clusters for implementation of the scheme. One of the components of the scheme is to set-up a common facility centre to provide the artisans with a common work-shed with equipment for mechanized and specialized work.52 Common facility centres of khadi clusters are provided with looms, stitching machines and some other equipment.
52 http://www.kviconline.gov.in/sfurti/ Last accessed on 11th May 2014 28
5.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications
5.2.1 Solar lighting for households Insufficient lighting due to poor access to, and reliability of, electricity during early morning and evening hours is affecting the artisan’s work. Providing them with solar lanterns or solar home lighting systems will help in increasing their productivity. The specifications and costs of solar lanterns and home lighting systems are provided in table 1 and table 2 in chapter 1.
5.2.2 Solar PV based power for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centres The electricity needs for lighting and powering small machines in common facility centre can be met by the use of solar energy. In the khadi sector, activities like weaving and stitching are usually done at common facility centres. There is also a requirement to power lights and for a fan for providing comfortable working condition.
Figure 24: Common work-sheds with looms at common facility Figure 25: Sewing Machines at common facility centre in Nalbari, Assam centre in Nalbari, Assam
Specifications and costs Some of the silk and khadi common facility centres have the requirement of solar power pack of 3-5 kWp to meet their electricity need. Solar PV systems without a battery also can be used if the load is mostly during the day. If power is required during other times of the day, then solar PV systems with a battery can be used.
29
Table 16: Specifications and costs - solar power packs for common facility centre Solar PV systems Solar PV systems
(without battery) (with battery)
Capacity (kWp) 3 4 5 3 4 5
Cost of the system (in INR) as per 3,00,000 4,00,000 5,00,000 5,70,000 7,60,000 9,50,000 MNRE benchmark cost
Status: Solar PV packs for generating electricity to meet various needs are now mature products. Example: The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) has installed Solar PV packs in the village level centres. The electricity generated is used to power machines like bamboo cross- cutting and splitting machine, bamboo slivering machine, etc.53. More details of the project can be found on the link: http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_ongoing&task=about_project&pcode=2008D G07
5.2.3 Solar powered charkha54 and loom Manually operated charkha and loom can be operated using solar power. Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialisation (MGIRI), Wardha has developed several technologies such as solar sewing machine, solar charkha, solar power loom which are now in the stage of ‘technology transfer’. Solar powered charkha and looms can help in reducing the hardship involved in manual operation and increasing the production rate. Specifications and costs55: Solar charkha is developed by incorporating a specially designed 12 volt PMDC (permanent magnet direct current) motor and pulleys which can be directly mounted on the charkha. The specifications and costs of solar charkha is provided below:
53 http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_ongoing&task=about_project&pcode=2008DG07 Last accessed on 12th may 2014 54 Charkha or spinning wheel is a device for spinning thread or yarn from natural or synthetic fibres 55 Business Plan for Decentralised Solar Technology Based Garment Manufacturing Units in Vidarbha Region of Maharashtra, August 2012, GIZ. 30
Table 17: Specification and cost of solar charkha Solar PV Motor Drive Battery Production Cost module capacity (INR) 8 Spindle charkha 60 Wp 12 V DC, 30 W 12 V, 26 A-h 1 kg/day 30,000 24 Spindle charkha 200 Wp NA NA 3 kg/day 60,000
The specification and cost of solar loom is provided below:
Table 18: Specification and cost of solar loom Solar PV module Production capacity Cost (INR) Solar powered loom 160 Wp 15 meter fabric/day 150,000
Figure 26: Solar charkha at Limbdi, Gujrat56 Status: The field trials of solar charkha have been conducted in different parts of the country, the results of which are available at http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf . Example: Governments of Uttarakhand and Gujarat have schemes for promoting solar charkha in khadi industries. The details of the schemes can be found at http://www.ureda.uk.gov.in/pages/display/125-solar-charkha (Uttarakhand) and http://www.khadigujarat.in/solar-charkha-scheme.html (Gujarat).
56 http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf Last accessed on 3rd June 2014 31
5.2.4 Biomass gasifiers based on bamboo waste for power generation for lighting and powering equipment at common facility centers of bamboo clusters The bamboo common facility centres are usually equipped with machines for bamboo cutting, splitting, nailing, etc. Typical power requirement of these machines varies from 700 W to 1.5 kW. Large amount of bamboo and cane waste are generated during the processing of bamboo for manufacturing various products like furniture, decorative and utility items. These wastes can be utilized in a suitable gasifier for power generation to power the equipment, lights and fans at the common facility centres. Specifications and costs The specifications and costs of a biomass gasifier system which can meet the requirements at a common facility centre are given below.
Table 19: Specifications and costs - Biomass gasifier57 Power rating of gasifier (kWe) 10 Raw material input (kg/h) * 16-18 Cost (INR) 10,00,000
*raw material in this case would be bamboo or cane waste
Status: Bamboo based biomass gasification has been promoted by the National Bamboo Mission and the technology has been implemented in several places of India. More information can be found on the website of the National Mission on Bamboo Applications (http://www.bambootech.org/) Example: Under the National Mission on Bamboo Applications, a 25 kWe bamboo based gasifier was successfully commissioned and demonstrated at Bashistha, Assam. Daily operation of the gasifier is being done by the Assam Forest Division. The gasifier has been trial tested for over 50 hours and engine run at different loads for more than 25 hours. Around 10 hours of testing has been done at a load in excess of 20 kWe. The biomass consumption at 22 kWe load has found to be 1.05 kg/kWh.58 Several other examples can also be found from the website National Mission on Bamboo Applications. (http://www.bambootech.org/)
57 Personal communication with Infinite Energy, New Delhi 58http://www.bambootech.org/tslink.asp?subsubid=60&subid=6&sname=PROJECTS&subname=ACTIVITIES &lid=373 Last accessed on 14th May 2014 32
6. Biomass Energy Based Informal Industries/ Small Business
6.1 Introduction and Relevance to Rural Livelihoods
Biomass energy sources account for 34 - 41 percent of total primary energy requirements in India. Rural populations in India rely on biomass for most of their domestic and industrial energy needs, using traditional low-efficiency wood-burning technologies. In the year 2000, it was estimated that South India alone had about 8 million people directly or indirectly employed in micro-, small and artisanal industries where fuel wood is the major energy source.59
6.2 Potential Renewable Energy Technologies Applications
6.2.1 Improved biomass cook stoves
An improved biomass cook stove is a combustion device which burns biomass fuel more efficiently with reduced emissions and offers cleaner cooking energy solutions. Biomass cook stoves are of two types; fixed type and portable type. The portable cook stoves are also of two types; natural draft and forced draft. Advanced cook stoves utilizing fans are more efficient than natural draft ones. Improved biomass cook stoves can be applied in several unorganized small industries/businesses operating in rural areas like commercial cooking, arecanut (betel nut) boiling and drying, jaggery and khova production, rubber-band vulcanizing, ayurvedic medicine production, silk reeling, textile bleaching and drying, cashew processing and the making of snacks. Different types of improved biomass cook stoves are being developed and promoted by various organizations, NGOs, entrepreneurs and industries in India. MNRE launched its National Biomass Cook stoves Initiative (NBCI) in 2009 with the primary aim to enhance the use of improved biomass cook stoves. As part of NBCI, MNRE came up with the following performance parameters on compliance of which the approval is given.
59 http://www.snap-undp.org/elibrary/Publications/Case15-TIDE_India.pdf. Last accessed on 19th May 2014 33
Table 20: Stipulated performance parameters for MNRE approval60
Sl. Type of Biomass Standard performance parameters No. Cook stove Thermal efficiency (%) CO (g/MJd)* PM (mg/MJd)# 1 Natural draft type Not less than 25 2. Forced draft type Not less than 35
* g/MJd is grams per mega joule delivered to the pot # mg/MJd is milligrams per mega joule delivered to the pot
A list of approved models of portable improved biomass cook stoves by various suppliers can be found at the MNRE website (link: http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/decentralized- systems/national-biomass-cookstoves-initiative/ ) Specifications and costs The following table gives the key information on different types of biomass cook stoves and using different fuels.
Table 21: Specifications and costs – Improved biomass cook stoves61
Type of Other Fuel Fuel consumption Cost of the stove specifications (kg/h) stove (INR) (1 m length and Tava Firewood 4 – 5 24,500 0.7 m diameter) Firewood 2.5 9,000 Multiuse Stove diameter Briquette 1 – 1.5 11,000 Stove of 0.3 m Charcoal 0.7 10,250 Cashew shells, Loose Stove diameter wood shavings, biofuel 4 – 5 18,000 of 0.7 m tamarind shells, stove coconut shells, etc.
Operation and maintenance costs: The biomass cook stoves use locally available biomass as fuel, so O&M costs are minimal. MNRE has specified that the cook stoves supplier should give a warranty for a two year period, and should ensure that the life of the cook stoves is at least five years.
60 http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/decentralized-systems/national-biomass-cookstoves-initiative/ Last accessed on 19th May 2014 61 Personal communication with Ms. Svati Bhogle, Sustaintech India Private limited, Karnataka 34
Figure 27: Improved biomass cook stove62 Figure 28: Biomass cook stoves using husks as fuel
Status: Improved biomass cook stoves have been developed and promoted by various companies, organizations and MNRE has had national programmes on cook stoves and has put in place suitable standards. The technology is being constantly being researched and improved. Example: Technology Informatics Design Endeavour (TIDE), an NGO based in Banglore, has been working in improving biomass cook stoves. By the year 2009, TIDE had supplied 11,840 small business stoves and 7,000 domestic stoves, benefitting about 121,000 people. TIDE has developed stoves specific to the relevant sector of use, based on a survey of need and current usage. Stoves like silk-reeling stove, ayurvedic medicine stove, areca stove and improved tava cook stove (for dosa, rotis, omelettes) were developed.62
62 http://www.ashden.org/files/TIDE%20full_0.pdf. Last accessed on 19th May 2014 35
Bibliography
Poultry
1) Kumar, A. (2014) Indian Poultry Sector - Integrating Poor & Small-holders: Opportunities & Challenges South Asia Pro-poor Livestock Policy Programme. Available from: http://sapplpp.org/files-repository/information-hub/presentations/rural-backyard-poultry-development [Accessed on 14th may 2014] 2) MNRE (2013) Technical specifications for white led (w-led) based solar photovoltaic lighting systems. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/led_spls_2013_14.pdf [Accessed on 20th April 2014] 3) MNRE (2013) Technical specifications for Compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) based solar photovoltaic lighting systems. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/cfl_spls_2013_14.pdf [Accessed on 20th April 2014] 4) MNRE (2013) Amendment in the bench mark cost for “Off-grid and Decentralized Solar Applications Programme” being implemented under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) during 2013-14. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends-benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm- 2013-14.pdf [Accessed on 3rd March 2014] 5) Makhijani, S. (2013) Jamaican poultry producer not chicken about solar investment Worldwatch Institute. Available from: http://blogs.worldwatch.org/revolt/jamaican-poultry-producer-not-chicken- about-solar-investment/ [Accessed on 19th April 2014] 6) Ashden (n.d.) Biomass briquettes and pellets. Available from: http://www.ashden.org/briquettes [Accessed on 10th May 2014]
Dairy
1. Government of India. Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries (2013) Annual report 2012-13. Available from: http://www.dahd.nic.in/dahd/WriteReadData/Annual%20Report%202012-13%20EFG.pdf [Accessed on 5th April 2014] 2. NIRD (n.d.) A study on improvement in rural livelihoods through dairy farming. Available from: http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf [Accessed on 14th May 2014] 3. Pavan, M.V. (2014) Solar power comes to milk coops' rescue. The Times of India, 6th Mar. retrieved from: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ 4. Promethean power systems (2014). Available from: http://www.coolectrica.com/ [Accessed on 14th April 2014]
36
Horticulture
1) Planning Commission (2011) Report of the working group on horticulture and plantation crops. Available from: http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/agri/wg_horti1512.pdf [Accessed on 20th May 2014] 2) RWSN (n.d.) Swiss solar water pump drive. Available from: http://rwsnforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/8_andrea_vezzini-ennos_solar_water_pump_drive.pdf [Accessed on 20th May 2014] 3) Bern University of Applied Sciences (n.d.) The low power solar water pump. Available from: http://www.bfh.ch/fileadmin/docs/newsmeldungen/2013/Brochure_SolarWaterPump_BFH_2013.pdf [Accessed on 19th May 2014] 4) MNRE (2013) Amendment in the bench mark cost for “Off-grid and Decentralized Solar Applications Programme” being implemented under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) during 2013-14. Available from:http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/amendmends- benchmarkcost-aa-jnnsm-2013-14.pdf [Accessed on 20th March 2014] 5) MNRE (2013) Solar photovoltaic water pumping systems. Available from: http://mnre.gov.in/file- manager/UserFiles/technical-specification_spwps_2013_14.pdf [Accessed on 20th March 2014] 6) GIZ (2013) Solar water pumping for irrigation. Available from: http://www.igen- re.in/files/giz__2013__report_solar_water_pumping_for_irrigation_in_bihar.pdf [Accessed on 14th May 2014] 7) PVTECH (2014) India launches US$163 million PV water pump programme . Available from: http://www.pv- tech.org/news/india_to_provide_thousands_of_solar_pv_water_pumps_with_rd_help_from_sunedi. [Accessed on 16th March 2014] 8) Government of Odisha, Directorate of horticulture (2014) Project report on 2 MT cool chamber. Available from: http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/2MT-Cold-Room.pdf [Accessed on 26th March 2014] 9) Government of Odisha, Directorate of horticulture (2014) ) Project report on 5 MT cool chamber. Available from:http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/5MT-Cold-Room.pdf [Accessed on 26th March 2014] 10) Government of Odisha, Directorate of horticulture (2014) Project report on 10 MT cool chamber. Available from:http://www.orissa.gov.in/dhc/Download/10MT-Cold-Room.pdf [accessed on 26th March 2014] 11) MNRE (n.d.) MNRE Handbook of Solar Air Heating for Drying and Space Heating. Available from: http://www.pen.net.in/website/Handbook%20on%20solar%20drying.pdf [ Accessed on: 25th April 2014]
37
Fisheries
1) Government of India, National Fisheries Development Board (2014) About Indian fisheries. Available from: http://nfdb.ap.nic.in/html/aboutus.htm [Accessed on 29th March 2014] 2) Planning Commission (2001) Report of the working group on Fisheries for the tenth five year plan Available from: http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp/fishery.pdf [Accessed on 29th March 2014] 3) Planning Commission (n.d.) Handloom. Available from: http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/upsdr/vol-2/Chap_b3.pdf [Accessed on 4th April 2014]
Khadi and Village Industries
1) KVIC (2014) About SFURTI. Available from: http://www.kviconline.gov.in/sfurti/ [Accessed on 11th May 2014] 2) TERI (2012) Solar Multi Utility for Assam. Available from: http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_ongoing&task=about_project&pcode=2008DG07 [Accessed on 12th may 2014] 3) National Mission on Bamboo Applications (2014) Available from: http://www.bambootech.org/tslink.asp?subsubid=60&subid=6&sname=PROJECTS&subname=ACTI VITIES&lid=373 [Accessed on 14th May 2014] 4) International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (2013) Report on Technology Transfer of Solar Charkha in Khadi Sector. Available from: http://www.ijmer.com/papers/Vol3_Issue4/AR3419651979.pdf. [Accessed on 3rd June 2014]
Biomass Energy Based Informal Industries
1) UNDP (2012) Entrepreneurship at grassroots: Diffusion of biomass devices in informal industries in India. Available from: http://www.snap-undp.org/elibrary/Publications/Case15-TIDE_India.pdf [Accessed on 19th May 2014] 2) MNRE (2011) National Biomass Cook stoves Programme Available from: http://www.mnre.gov.in/schemes/decentralized-systems/national-biomass-cookstoves-initiative/ [Accessed on 19th May 2014] 3) Ashden (2009) Case study summary Technology, Infomatics, Design, Endeavour (TIDE), India. Available from: http://www.ashden.org/files/TIDE%20full_0.pdf. [Accessed on 19th May 2014]
38
Acknowledgements
1) Mr. Anish Kumar, PRADAN (NGO), Delhi 2) Mr Arvindra Singh, Perfect Biogas Generators, Delhi 3) Kirloskar Integrated Technologies Ltd, Maharashtra 4) Jay Khodiyar Machine Tools, Gujarat 5) Radhe Engineering Co., Gujarat 6) Mr. Ananth Aravamudan, SELCO Foundation, Karnataka 7) Promethean Power systems, Maharashtra 8) Bayer Material Science, Delhi 9) Dr. S.P. Gon Chaudhuri, Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective 10) Ecozen Solutions, Maharashtra 11) Prof. A K Das, IIT Guwahati, Assam 12) Ms. Svati Bhogle, Sustaintech India private limited, Karnataka 13) Supernova Technologies, Gujarat 14) Ms Rashmi Saraswat, Mahila Chetna Manch, Madhya Pradesh 15) Mr Somnath Roy, Action for Social Advancement (ASA), Madhya Pradesh 16) Mr. P.C. Das, Director, KVIC 17) Mr. A. Malik, Anchalik Gram Unnayan Parishad, Barpeta, Assam 18) Mr. Mukul Chandra Medhi, Barkhetri Unnayan Samity, Mukalmua, Nalbari, Assam 19) Mr. Pankaj Bezbaruah, AFPRO, Assam 20) Mr. Loknath Mohanty ,AFPRO, Odisha 21) Mr. Swayam Bikash Das, Dy. Director (Horticulture), Odisha 22) Mr. Bishnupada Sethi, Commissioner & Secretary, Fisheries & Animal Resource Development Department, Odisha 23) Mr. Suvendu Roy, Sambedna, Odisha 24) Mr. P.R. Raut, Deputy Director (marine), Odisha 25) Mr. J K Biswal, Addl. Fisheries Officer (marine), Odisha 26) Mr. Kirti Bhushna Pani, PRADAN, Odisha 27) Mr. P.G. Dora, OSD, OMFED, Odisha 28) Dr. R.N. Pradhan, Poultry Consultant 29) Mr. Ramakanta Panda, Freedom(NGO), Odisha 30) Mr. Deb Kumar Patra, Cold Chain Solutions, Odisha 31) Dr. N.C. Biswal, Fishery Expert, Odisha
39
32) Mr. Smruti Ranjan Das, Rural Development Expert, Integrated Coastal Zone Management Project, Odisha 33) Mr. Hemant Lamba, Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective 34) Mr. Naresh Joshi, Ashden India Renewable Energy Collective 35) Mr Amiya Sharma, Rashtriya Gramin Vikas Nidhi (RGVN), Assam 36) Mr Richard Sequeira, Fosera, Delhi.
40