ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ABB
ASCB
AC/DC
APR-PIR
BEE
BS
CAGR
CDM
CFL
COFMOW
CO
CO2
COE
CP
CPAP
DEA
DSM
E&M
EC
EE
EECP
EMS
ESCO
EMU
ESMON
FY
FYP
GDP
GEF
GOI
GHG
GPS
GPSDAS
GTKM
HOG
IEA
IEP
IGBT
INR
IR
IREDA
IRIEEN
IRS
KMS
kWh
LED
LRDSS
ASEA, Brown and Boveri & Cie
Automatic-switched capacitor bank
Alternating Current (AC) Electricity
Annual Project Report - Project Implementation Review
Bureau of Energy Efficiency
Building Services
Compound annual growth rate
Clean Development Mechanism
Compact Fluorescent Lamp
Central Organisation for Modernisation of Workshops
UNDP Country Office
Carbon Dioxide
Centre of Excellence
Country Programme
Country Programme Action Plan
Department of Economic Affairs
Demand-side management
Energy and Management
Energy Conservation
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Programme
Energy management system
Energy service company
Electric Multiple Unit
Energy-cum-speed monitoring system
Fiscal Year
Five-Year Plan
Gross Domestic Product
Global Environment Facility
Government of India
Greenhouse gas
Global Positioning System
GPS-based Driver Advice System
Gross Tonne-Kilometre (including tare weight)
Head-on Generation
International Energy Agency
Integrated Energy Policy
Insulated-gate bipolar transistor
Indian Rupee
Indian Railways
Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency
Indian Railways Institute of Electrical Engineering
Indian Railways System
Knowledge Management and Sharing
kilowatt hour
Light-Emitting Diode
Long-range decision support system
2
M&W
MCAS
MEPS
MOEF
MNRE
MOP
Mtoe
NAPCC
NGO
NPC
NPD
NT
NTKM
PIMS
PMU
PMW
PPG
PSC
PU
PV
R&D
RCU
RDSO
RS
SERC
SME
SNCF
tCO2
TEMS
TIRFAD
TOR
TPES
TR
TRD
TSS
UIC
UN
UNDAF
UNFCCC
UNDP
USD
VVVF
WDI
ZTC
Material and workmanship
Microprocessor-controlled air-conditioning system
Minimum Energy Performance Standard
Ministry of Environment and Forests
Ministry of New and Renewable Energy
Ministry of Power
Million tonnes of oil equivalent
National Action Plan on Climate Change
Non-governmental organization
National Project Coordinator
National Project Director
Non-Traction
Net tonne-kilometre (net: excluding tare weight)
UNDP/GEF Project Information Management System
Project Management Unit
Pulse-Width Modulated
Project Preparatory Grant (GEF)
Project Steering Committee
Production Unit
Photovoltaic
Research and Development
UNDP Regional Coordination Unit
Research, Designs and Standards Organization
Rolling Stock
State Electricity Regulatory Commission
Small and Medium-sized Enterprise
French National Railways
Tonne of Carbon Dioxide
Traction Energy Management System
Technology Information Resource and Facilitation Desk
Terms of Reference
Total primary energy supply
Traction
Traction power distribution
Traction substation
International Union of Railways
United Nations
UN Development Assistance Framework
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
UN Development Programme
United States dollar (= 47 Indian Rupee)
Variable voltage variable frequency
World Development Indicators
Zonal Training Centre
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART A.
1.
2.
3.
Context and global significance: environmental, policy and instititional setup ............................... 5
Stakeholder analysis ......................................................................................................................... 9
Baseline, energy efficiency solutions and barrier analysis............................................................. 12
PART B.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
SITUATION ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 5
PROJECT STRATEGY ....................................................................................................... 17
Project rationale, design principles and strategic considerations ................................................... 17
Country eligibility, policy conformity and country ownership ...................................................... 22
Project objectives, outcomes and outputs....................................................................................... 23
Key indicators and assumptions ..................................................................................................... 32
GEF incremental reasoning and cost-effectiveness........................................................................ 35
Sustainability and replicability ....................................................................................................... 37
Project results framework............................................................................................................... 39
Total budget and work plan ............................................................................................................ 45
Management Arrangements ........................................................................................................... 50
Monitoring framework and evaluation ......................................................................................... 555
Legal context and other agreements ............................................................................................... 59
PART C.
ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................. 60
ANNEX A. RISK ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 61
ANNEX B. AGREEMENTS .................................................................................................................... 64
ANNEX C. TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................................. 65
ANNEX D. EMISSION REDUCTION CALCULATION .................................................................... 67
ANNEX E. ORGANISATIONAL SETUP OF INDIAN RAILWAYS ................................................ 78
ANNEX F. TRAINING & CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES .................................................... 81
ANNEX G. PROJECT ANNUAL TARGETS ........................................................................................ 81
4
Part A.
SITUATION ANALYSIS
1.
CONTEXT AND GLOBAL SIGNIFICANCE: ENVIRONMENTAL, POLICY AND
INSTITITIONAL SETUP
1.1
Energy consumption growth in India and climate change
1.
Energy consumption in India is growing and is expected to continue to grow. India has the world’s
second largest population with more than 1.1 billion people and continues to grow at 1.4% per year (WDI,
2008)1. India’s economy has grown with a sustained GDP growth rate of more than 9% during the past
years, and is expected to continue to grow at high GDP growth rates in the future. To sustain its economic
growth and to respond to the needs of its growing population, India’s total primary energy consumption
(measured using the Total Primary Energy Supply as a proxy) growing at a compound average annual
growth rate of about 9% in the past years (IEA, 2009)2 and is expected to continue to grow at similar pace.
Similarly, India’s electricity consumption has also increased at an annual rate of about 8-9% in the past
years and, according to the India’s Planning Commission (IEP, 2006)3, is expected to continue to grow at
similar rates for the next 20 years (see Figure 1 below) at a GDP growth rate of 9%.
6,000
Billion kWh
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
2011-12
2016-17
2021-22
2026-27
2031-32
Year
Figure 1: Projections for electricity requirements (2011-32)
Source: IEP (2006)
2.
A direct consequence of the increase in energy consumption, India CO2 emission has been rising in
the past years and because of the predominant use of coal and other fossil fuels in the energy sector, is
expected to continue to grow. It is estimated that the level of CO2 emission grew from about 1,250 million
tonnes in 2006 to 1,324 million in 2007 (i.e. 5.9% increase), contributing significantly to climate change.
1
World Bank (2008), World Development Indicators (WDI) online.
IEA (International Energy Agency) (2009), World Energy Outlook 2009, OECD/IEA, Paris.
3
Integrated Energy Policy (August 2006), Planning Commission, Government of India.
2
5
1.2
Government policies, strategies and institutional set-up
3.
India’ strategy is to overcome these challenges, as described in the Integrated Energy Policy (IEP)
and the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC), the two major documents outlines the
Government strategy with regard to energy and climate change. The Integrated Energy Policy (IEP, 2006)
puts emphasis on the need to increase energy security by reducing the import dependence to avoid price
fluctuations. It outlines a number of strategic directions to achieve this objective, including increasing
local coal production, improving energy efficiency and energy conservation in use and demand side
management to reduce electricity demand, shifting freight traffic to railways, and expanding
electrification of railways to reduce diesel needs. The National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC,
2008) defines the key strategies and actions to address the causes of climate change and reduce the impact
of climate change on India. The NAPCC is organized along eight priority programs, or ‘national
missions’, which include the National Solar Mission, the National Mission for Energy Efficiency, the
National Mission on Sustainable Habitat, among others. It is worth noticing that both the IEP and the
NAPCC put at the centre of their strategies an increased use of energy efficiency and energy conservation
measures.
Box 1
India strategies and institutional set-up to promote energy efficiency.
The main targets and strategies with regard to energy efficiency are set in the Five-Year Plans of the
Government of India. The Ninth Five-Year Plan (1999-2003) provided the basis for the issuance of the
Energy Conservation (EC) Act in 2001 and the establishment of the Bureau of Energy Efficiency as
central institution for the implementation of an energy conservation program (see below). The Tenth FiveYear Plan (2003-2007) focused on the need for an efficient use of energy sources to achieve sustainable
development, and provided the basis for the establishment of an appropriate institutional set-up for the
provision of energy efficiency services, including the authorization of the Ministry of Power (MOP) to
develop energy efficiency programs. The Eleventh Five-Year Plan (2007-2012) aims at enhancing rural
energy access, and to this purpose it targets savings of 5% of energy consumption levels through the
implementation of a set of energy efficiency interventions in all sectors, including the establishment of an
appropriate set of incentives; the creation of an enabling institutional framework; the promotion of energy
service companies (ESCOs); and the promotion of energy efficient technologies, including energy
efficient lighting; mandatory audits of facilities with loads above 1 MW, etc.
The Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) was established under the MOP to implement the EC Act 2001
and is responsible for implementation of energy efficiency and energy conservation measures in the
country. The EC Act 2001 further mandates BEE to work with designated consumers and other agencies
to enforce the provisions of the Act. Currently, there are no provisions in the budget of the central
government to enforce checks and compliance to the EC Act besides limited capacity and experience to
implement energy efficiency programmes at large scale.
1.3
Rationale for improving energy efficiency in the Indian Railways (IR)
4.
Indian Railway (IR) is the single largest organization with the highest electricity consumption in
India. It consumes about 2.4% of India’s total electricity consumption. In the fiscal year (FY) 2007-08,
Indian Railways consumed 14.1 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh), of which 11.7 billion (about 83%) for
traction usages and 2.4 billion (17%) in non-traction usages (IR Year Book 2007-08).
5.
It is estimated that the demand of electricity in this industry will grow in the coming years. First, in
compliance with the Integrated Energy Policy, India plans to progressively shift freight traffic to railways.
Passenger traffic is also expected to increase. Overall, it is estimated that the railway sector will have a
growth in the total traffic (freight and passengers) of 8-9% in the next decade. Second, Indian Railways
6
has initiated an ambitious Electrification Plan to increase the electrification of its routes4 converting
diesel-fuelled traffic (which represented 36% and 53% of the freight and passenger traffic respectively in
fiscal year 2007-08) into electric traffic, because electric traction is more efficient than diesel traction.
According to this Plan, 80% of rail freight and 60% of passenger traffic will run on electric energy by
2031-32. It is estimated that the total demand of electricity in the railways sector will grow at a rate of
more than 9% annually. The electricity consumption is projected to be about 100.5 billion kWh by 203132 with the electrification dominant scenario. Therefore, an enormous energy saving potential exists in the
Indian Railways (IR) sector for implementing energy efficiency measures and energy conservation
technologies.
6.
In addition, the annual electricity bill of Indian Railways in FY2007-08 was about USD 1.272
billion (of which USD 1.071 billion for traction and about USD 0.201 billion for non-traction5). The
operating costs represented 76% of the total costs. In FY 2007-08, energy cost represented about 24% of
the ordinary working expenses of Indian Railways (electricity accounts for 14.6% of the total ordinary
working expenses). Thus, the possibility of savings on electricity would have a positive effect on the
operating margins of Indian Railways.
Box 2
Indian Railways
Indian Railways (IR) has a total state monopoly on India’s rail transport. It is one of the largest and busiest rail
networks in the world. It has a vast rail network, covering 6,909 stations over a total route length of more than
63,327 km, transporting more than 18 million passengers daily (6.52 billion passengers annually) and more than 2.2
million tonnes of freight daily. IR is the world's largest utility employer with more than 1.4 million employees. IR is
managed through 16 Zones which are subdivided into 68 Divisions. There are six production units engaged in
manufacturing rolling stock, wheels and axles and other ancillary components to meet IR requirements. In addition,
a number of specialized units like the Research, Design and Standards Organisation (RDSO), training institutes and
corporations have been set up that provide special services. IR is managed by the Railway Board6 under the Ministry
of Railways (an organizational chart of IR is reported in Annex E).
1.4 Assistance by UNDP in the area of environment and energy
7.
The United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) provides the overall
framework and sets the objectives of the assistance of the United Nations to the Government of India for
the period 2008-2012. The overarching objective of the UNDAF is “promoting social, economic and
political inclusion for the most disadvantaged, especially women and girls”. These objectives are in line
with the national priorities of the Government of India’s Eleventh Five Year Plan. Specifically on
environmental sustainability, UNDAF states that “by 2012 the most vulnerable people, including women
and girls and government at all levels have enhanced abilities to prepare, respond, and adapt/recover from
sudden and slow onset disasters and environmental challenges” (Outcome 4).
8.
UNDP is a key partner in the development and implementation of the UNDAF. UNDP is also the
lead UN agency for the coordination of UN support in several thematic areas, including sustainable
environmental management. Specifically in this area, UNDP supports government’s efforts towards
meeting commitments under multilateral agreements through a two-pronged approach involving
leveraging of additional environmental finance and supporting activities on the ground that seek to
safeguard environmental resources. A special focus of UNDP support is placed on energy efficiency as a
means to contribute to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in energy intensive industries, transport and
commercial sectors.
4
5
6
Currently only 30% of the total route kilometres are electrified.
Non-traction purposes include workshops, stations, service buildings, colonies, street lighting, water pumping
installations, and residential buildings.
Shared by a Chairman and with 6 Members (Electrical, Engineering, Traffic, Staff, Mechanical and Finance).
7
9.
The Government of India, through its designated nodal department, the Department of Economic
Affairs (DEA), ensures national ownership and provides direction of UNDP programme activities by
approving and signing the Country Programme Action Plans (CPAP), the document that provides the
overall cooperation framework for UNDP in India. The CPAP 2008-2012 emphasizes the need to ensure
that growth is resource efficient and environmentally sustainable in sectors such as industry, infrastructure
and agriculture, in line with the Government’s Eleventh Five-Year Plan, and acknowledges that the
multilateral environmental agreements to which India is a signatory - climate change, biodiversity,
desertification, chemical management and ozone depleting substances - offer an enormous opportunity to
address global environmental concerns through action at national and local levels. Particularly, the CPAP
states that, within the framework of the UNFCCC, the Government of India and UNDP would work
together to identify collaborative areas to address climate change.
10. In the area of climate change, UNDP has been supporting Government of India for the last several
years by building capacities to increase energy efficiency and promote the use of renewable energy
sources. Some of the most recent UNDP supported energy efficiency and renewable energy projects are
described in the Table 1 below.
Table 1: Most recent UNDP supported energy efficiency and renewable energy projects in India
Title
Objectives
Duration
Source of
Funding
Energy Efficiency Improvements in the
Brick Industry
To reduce energy consumption by
promoting the production and use of
resource-efficient bricks
2009-13
GEF
Achieving reduction in GHG emissions
through advanced energy efficiency
technology in electric motors
To achieve energy savings through the
introduction of energy efficiency
technology in the motor industry
2008-11
GEF
Energy Conservation in Small Sector
Tea Processing Units in Southern India
To reduce energy consumption from tea
processing units
2008-12
GEF
Mokshda Green Cremation System for
Energy and Environment Conservation
To remove barriers in the extension of
energy efficient cremation systems
2009-12
GEF
Global Solar Water Heating Market
Transformation Strengthening Initiative
To accelerate and strengthen the growth
of solar water heater market demand and
strengthen the supply chain
200-12
GEF
Removal of barriers to Biomass Power
Generation - Phase I
To support the adoption of sustainable
biomass power co-generation
technologies
2007-10
GEF
Biomass Energy for Rural India
To build capacity among rural
communities, NGOs, entrepreneurs,
manufactures, financing institutions and
policy-makers to promote bio-energy
technologies
2002-10
GEF
Access to Clean Energy
To enhance access to clean and
renewable energy in remote unelectrified villages
2009
Core
8
2.
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
11. The Project stake-holders identified, brief description and their role in the GEF project is given
below:
Table 2: List of stakeholders involved in project
Stakeholder
Main role
Government entities
Planning Commission, The Planning Commission was set up by a resolution of the Government of India in March
Government of India 1950 in pursuance of declared objectives of the Government to promote a rapid rise in the
standard of living of the people by efficient exploitation of the resources of the country,
increasing production and offering opportunities to all for employment in the service of the
community. The Planning Commission has the responsibility of making assessment of all
resources of the country, augmenting deficient resources, formulating plans for the most
effective and balanced utilization of resources and determining priorities. Five Year Plans
are formulated by Planning Commission.
Inclusion of appropriate outcome of the project in the policy formulation such as Five Year
Plans, etc. may be best affected through the Planning Commission. Therefore Planning
Commission is an invited member to the Project Steering Committee (PSC) during the
project implementation and their role will be like the other members of the PSC under the
project.
Ministry of
Environment and
Forestry (MOEF)
MOEF is the nodal agency in the administrative structure of the Central Govt. for the
planning, promotion, co-ordination and overseeing the implementation of India's
environmental and forestry policies and programmes. MOEF is also GEF focal point for
GEF projects in India and thus liaise for overall coordination of the project.
Bureau of Energy
Efficiency (BEE),
MoP
BEE is a statutory body under Ministry of Power, Government of India. It was set up in set
up in 2002, it is responsible for implementation of the Energy Conservation Act 2001 with
the primary objective of promoting energy saving measures and in turn reducing energy
intensity. BEE co-ordinates with designated consumers7, designated agencies and other
organizations and recognize, identify and utilize the existing resources and infrastructure,
in performing the functions assigned to it under the Energy Conservation Act. The Energy
Conservation Act provides for regulatory and promotional functions.
BEE is the coordinator of umbrella programme on “Programmatic Framework Project for
EE” under which the Improving EE in Indian Railways System is one of the projects. BEE
is one of the PSC members during the project implementation (see Section 4.5). BEE will
play a key role in risk mitigation, particularly in mitigating the risks to project
implementation due to lack of manufacturers’ interest in investing in EE products (see
Annex A). BEE will also play a key facilitation role among partners.
Ministry of Power
(MOP)
MOP is responsible for perspective planning, policy formulation, processing of projects for
investment decision, monitoring of the implementation of power projects, the
administration and enactment of legislation in regard to thermal, hydro power generation,
transmission and distribution, rural electrification and energy efficiency and conservation.
MoP will ultimately serve as central authority and guide BEE in meeting program
objectives and in implementation of programmes listed in EC Act 2001.
MoP will be informed on the project progress during the implementation so that the EE
7
The Central Government identified nine energy intensive industries in 2007 as designated consumers under the
Energy Conservation Act 2001: (1) Thermal Power Stations, (2) Fertilizer producers, (3) Cement producers, (4) Iron
and Steel producers, (5) Chlor-Alkali, (6) Aluminum, (7) Railways, (8) Textile, and (9) Pulp and Paper.
9
Stakeholder
Main role
efforts in Indian Railways are noted in their plans.
Ministry of Railways
The Ministry of Railways in India is in charge of the Indian Railways, the state-owned
company that enjoys a monopoly in Rail transport in India.
Indian Railways (IR)
Indian Railways (IR)
Indian Railways is the state-owned railway company of India, which owns and operates
most of the country's rail transport. It is overseen by the Ministry of Railways of the
Government of India. It is governed by the Railway Board, which is headed by Chairman
Railway Board.
IR has been appointed as the project implementing agency of this project. IR would be
responsible for implementing the project, achieving the results outlined in the proposal. IR
would be in addition responsible to liaise with UNDP, BEE, MoEF, DEA and other
agencies as required to achieve the expected outcome of the project. IR would be finally
responsible to implement the policy formulation activity under the project and also work on
the advocacy and lobbying efforts that would ultimately secure the approval and
enforcement of the formulated policies and associated implementing rules and regulations.
IR Board and
Directorates
The Indian Railway Board is the apex body of the Indian Railways. It reports to the Indian
Ministry of Railways. It has the following members currently; Chairman Railway Board:
Member Electrical, Member Staff, Member Mechanical, Member Traffic, and Finance
Commissioner. Important Directorates as related to EE are: Long-Range Decision Support
Systems (LRDSS), Electrical Engineering, Planning, Tracks, Mechanical Engineering
(Production Units) and Workshops.
These directorates of Railway Board would provide logistical and technical support for the
implementation of the project.
Zonal Railways
Indian Railways is divided into zones, which are further sub-divided into divisions. The
number of zones in Indian Railways increased from six to eight in 1951, nine in 1952, and
finally 16 in 2003. Each zonal railway is made up of a certain number of divisions, each
having a divisional headquarters. There are a total of sixty-eight divisions. These 16 Zonal
Railways manages Indian Railway operations within zone boundaries. Each Zone has zonal
training centres (ZTCs) to impart training to the staff and a workshop where to repair and
maintain their assets and rolling stock.
Under this project, such zonal field units will function as implementer as well as develop
training capacity and skills.
Indian Railway
Production Units
Indian Railway production units take care of production of parts and are integral part of
proper functioning of railway system in India. They are categorized (located in) as;
locomotives (Chittaranjan, Patiala, Varanasi); coaching stock (Kapurtala and Chennai);
axles and wheels (Bengaluru).
Under this project, these units will function as project implementing partners.
RDSO (Research,
Designs and
Standards
Organisation)
RDSO is the organization of Indian Railways (IR) responsible for research and design. It
serves as the technical advisor to the Railway Board, Zonal Railways and Production
Units. It is responsible for the development of new and improved designs, adoption,
absorption of new technologies, development of standards and specifications for materials
and equipment, technical investigation, statutory clearances, testing and providing
consultancy services. IR procurement is based on the specifications that are released by
RDSO.
Under this project, RDSO would assist in framing/updating the technical requirements and
specifications of the equipment.
10
Stakeholder
RITES Ltd
Main role
RITES, a Government of India Enterprise, provide comprehensive engineering,
consultancy and project management services in the transport infrastructure sector.
Export/leasing maintenance and rehabilitation of railway rolling stock, operation and
maintenance of railway systems under concession agreements and BOT, BOOT and PPP
projects that are specific to Railways. RITES have over 600 on-going projects in India
besides over 30 projects overseas. RITES Ltd employ over 2000 staff including over 1200
specialists in the fields of engineering, management and planning. Besides full time
professionals, RITES also has on its panel a large number of experts.
Under this project, RITES Ltd will be one of the Responsible Party. RITES will assist the
Project Management Unit at IR. They will provide the consultancy and Project
Management support as requested by IR.
Central Organisation
for Modernisation of
Workshops
(COFMOW)
COFMOW was established under the Ministry of Railways by the Govt. of India for
modernizing Indian Railway workshops in 1979. The modernization project was funded
through World Bank credits. COFMOW provides professional advice and a single window
service in planning and procurement of machine tools and allied equipment.
Under this project, COFMOW would assist in vendor development and absorption of EE
technologies.
Central Training
Institutes, Indian
Railways
The Indian Railways employ approximately 1.4 million people (largest civilian employer in
the world). The training of all the cadres is entrusted and shared between six Centralized
Training Institutes namely (i) the Indian Railway Institute of Transportation Management
(IRTM) in Lucknow for officers of the Traffic department, (ii) the Indian Railway Institute
of Civil Engineering (RICEN) in Pune for civil engineers, (iii) the Indian Railway Institute
of Signal and Telecommunications Engineering (IRISAT) in Secunderabad for engineers of
S&T department, (iv) the Indian Railway Institute of Mechanical and Electrical
Engineering & Jamalpur Gymkhana (IRIME) in Jamalpur for mechanical engineers; (v) the
Indian Railway Institute of Electrical Engineering (IRIEEN) in Nasik for Electrical
Engineers, (vi) the RPF Academy (IRT) in Lucknow for officers of the Railway Protection
Force, and (vii) the Railway Staff College in Vadodara which functions as the apex training
institute for the officers of all departments in general and Accounts, Personnel, Stores and
Medical departments in particular.
Under this project, these training institutions, primarily IRIEEN, will be involved in
training their trainers through the project and further train the trainees. It is expected that
the training content developed under the project will be suitably integrated in the regular
training course.
Indian Railway
Finance Corporation
Limited (IRFC).
IRFC is a dedicated financing arm of the Ministry of Railways. Its objective is to raise
money from the market to part finance the plan outlay of Indian Railways. The money
made available will be used for acquisition of rolling stock assets and for meeting other
developmental needs of the Indian Railways.
IRFC will be informed of the project for possible future requirement in raising finance for
EE measures.
Central Organization
for Railway
Electrification
(CORE)
Central Organization for Railway Electrification (CORE) was set up in 1979 under the
Ministry of Railways, at Allahabad. Its prime responsibility is to take up the electrification
of the Indian Railways network.
Under this project, CORE will absorb the EE technologies and assist in developing the
technical requirement and relevant specifications.
Other organizations
Manufactures and
The companies like Siemens, ABB, Bombardier, SNCF, Balfour Beatty etc. are in the
11
Stakeholder
their associations
Main role
business of manufacturing and supply equipments including energy appliances to IR.
Under this project these companies are expected to produce and supply the energy efficient
devices decided for intervention. They will also develop indigenous EE products developed
through piloting them under the project.
International
agencies: UIC,
SNCF, etc.
Leading Centres of Excellence in industrialized countries, international agencies like
International Union of Railways (UIC) or at country level (e.g., SNCF/ France) provide
assistance on energy efficiency.
Under this project, interaction with these centres will be held to obtain the know-how on
EE technologies for railway systems and identify suitable options for India.
3.
BASELINE, ENERGY EFFICIENCY SOLUTIONS AND BARRIER ANALYSIS
3.1
Baseline
12. Indian Railways (IR) is developing a long-term Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program
(EECP) (2010-2032). The Program aims at progressively introducing a number of energy efficiency
technologies and measures in the railways system (more details in par. 3.2). The objective of this Program
is to save 10% of the electricity consumption in absolute terms by 2032, in line with the targets of national
initiatives on energy conservation and climate change8.
13. These figures represent the baseline of the project, against which the GEF alternative will be
compared (see Section 8).
2009-10
Baseline
scenario
(i.e. with
EECP)
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
2012-13
2022-23
2031-32
Cumulative
2010/112022/23
Cumulative
2010/112031/32
15.65
19.90
45.77
100.51
377.75
1,030.20
12.83
16.32
37.53
82.41
309.75
844.77
Assumptions:
-
8
Total energy consumption growing at 8.82% CGAR/year due to increased traffic and progressing electrification
routes
Forecast of electricity consumption growth for traction operation and general services on base of 2007-08 at
4.5% CAGR per year
Energy saving rate: 0.5% per year according to Internal Policy on Energy Saving i.e. EECP (i.e. 10%
cumulatively by 2031-32)
Key strategic elements of the Program included the following: (1) the development of a long-term vision,
internal policies, directives, regulations, procedures and manuals on energy efficiency; (2) the establishment of
an autonomous Center of Excellence within IR responsible for assessing and identifying specific EE
technologies and measures, standards, performance criteria, material standards and specifications, etc., and
promoting and monitoring the implementation of EE measures; (3) the preparation of annual plans for energy
efficiency with specific targets and allocated budget; (4) the development and institutionalization of a
monitoring and verification and audit system; (5) the development and institutionalization of an internal
incentive system to promote and reward energy efficiency behaviors; (6) the institutionalization of energy
efficiency and conservation awareness programs within the organization.
12
14. More specifically, due to the implementation of EECP, India is expected to move from the current9
15.7 billion kWh of electricity consumption in the railways sector to 100.5 billion kWh in 2031-32 (about
1,030 billion kWh cumulatively for the period 2010-2032). These figures are equivalent to about 12.8,
82.4 and 844 million tonnes of CO2 respectively, assuming a 0.82 kg CO2/kWh emission factor10.
15. These figures represent the baseline of the project, against which the GEF alternative will be
compared (see Section 8).
3.2 Energy efficiency solutions
16. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program (EECP) aims at progressively introducing or
expanding the adoption of a number of traction and non-traction energy efficiency technologies and
measures in the railways system to reduce energy consumption.
17. During project preparation phase, a number of energy efficiency technologies and measures that
could potentially be introduced through the Program, or whose adoption can be widened, have been
identified and vetted during stakeholder consultations. These technologies and measures have been
divided into two categories each for traction (including rolling stock) and non-traction (see Table 3):
(1) Technologies and measures that have already been tested in India (in the railways sector or in
other sectors) and proven to be successful, but have not been adopted on a large scale
(traction and non-traction);
(2) Technologies and measures that have proven to be successful abroad, but have not yet been
tested in India (traction and non-traction).
18. A list of the technologies identified is reported in the table below. A full list of these technologies
and of their technical details is reported in Annex D.
Table 3: List of main technologies for energy efficiency improvement11
EE technologies and measures
already proven in India
EE technologies and measures that have proven to be
successful abroad, but have not yet been tested in India
•
•
•
Traction
Installation of Automatic
Switched Capacitor Bank
(ASCB) to reduce electrical
losses in Traction Sub Stations
(TSS)
Installation of LED (lightemitting diode) lights in
coaches
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Installation of GPS-based ‘driver advice system’
(GPSDAS) and Energy Management System (EMS) to
ensure safe and energy efficient driving
Installation of microprocessor controlled airconditioning systems for AC couches
Installation of roof solar panels in coaches to generate
electricity
Conduction of energy audits of rolling stock
(locomotives) and coaches*
Introduction of HOG to provide on-board power
through traction winding
Use of regeneration of electric locomotives energy
during train operation by using braking energy
Adoption of 3-phase IGBT-based technology with
regenerative features for EMUs and locomotives
Adoption of design improvement measures on rolling
9
2009-10, estimated.
Central Electricity Authority (2009)
11
Whenever labeled products exist, public procurement of energy efficient goods (appliances/equipments) would
include star labeled products.
10
13
EE technologies and measures
already proven in India
EE technologies and measures that have proven to be
successful abroad, but have not yet been tested in India
stock units to improve payload-to-tare weight ratio
• Adoption of design improvement measures on rolling
stock units such as air-friction reduction measures on
sides, top bogies, under-gear and aerodynamic features
• Introduction of IGBT-based PWM static converters for
auxiliary supply to coaches
• Introduction of a traction-effort metering system to
ascertain the brake binding
• Replacement of fluorescent
• Installation of Energy Management System (EMS) for
tube lights with low energy
pumping installations
consumption lights (T5
• Installation of Building Management Systems (BMS)
fluorescent tubes in place of
for stations, workshops and railway offices
T12 tubes for lighting for
• Energy audits of stations, workshops and railway
stations, workshops and railway
offices, etc.*
offices)
• Support to energy testing laboratories*
• Replacement of incandescent
• Introduction of renewable energy systems (e.g. solar
bulbs with CFLs bulbs for
water heating systems)
Non-traction
service buildings and railway
• Introduction of solar photovoltaic modules to electrify
quarters
level crossing gates & gang huts
• Installation of VVVF (Variable • Installation of small wind mills electrify level crossing
Voltage Variable Frequency)
gates and gang huts
drives for machine
• Introduction of LED lighting systems for general
illumination
• Introduction of energy consumption and life-cycle cost
among the criteria for procurement
(*) Even if these activities cannot be properly considered technologies, they have been included as key critical
activities to assess energy consumptions and promote energy efficiency measures.
19. Among the identified technologies and measures, only few are selected during the project
preparation stage (i.e., PPG exercise) for implementation and to demonstrate how successfully these
technologies and measures can be applied and implemented cost-effectively during the project duration.
The list of the selected technologies and measures and of the criteria used for the selection is described in
Section 4, par. 4.3.
3.1 Barrier analysis
20. Although there is a generally favourable tilt towards energy efficiency actions in India, evidence
shows that the introduction and adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures in the railways
sector has been rather slow in the past years. On the basis of past trends, it is therefore possible that the
implementation of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program in Indian Railways can be
undermined or slowed down. Table 4 provides a detailed overview of the barriers identified.
Table 4: Overview of barriers to energy efficiency in Railways
(1)
-
Institutional barriers
Lack of an EE Corporate Policy
IR has issued directives on EE, but there is no clear corporate policy on
this subject.
The implementation of EE measures is confined to individual initiatives
of those individuals sensitive to the issue, rather than reflecting a
14
-
Lack of institutional set-up to
promote and monitor EE measures
corporate strategy.
There is no office/unit/division within IR that has the institutional
responsibility to identify, promote, and monitor the adoption and
implementation of EE technologies and measures, collect and
disseminate relevant information, and provide technical back-up.
Existing training and testing facilities do not have the proper equipment
nor the technical capacity to test EE technologies and train IR staff
The existing standard specifications for the procurement of material and
equipment do not take into consideration the latest EE measures and
energy conservation practices as a requirement
Lack of adequate capacity within
training and testing facilities
Lack of consideration for EE
measures and energy conservation
practices in standard specifications
for the purchase of material and
equipment
(2)
Information and capacity barriers
-
-
Insufficient information/awareness
among IR officials and staff about
existing EE measures
-
Lack of proper technical skills and
capacity among IR staff to assess,
test and implement EE technologies
and measures
(3)
-
Incentive barriers
Lack of incentives to staff to
implement EE measures
Lack of incentives to vendors and
manufacturers to develop/retail EE
products
(4)
Technology barriers
-
Limited adoption of proven EE
technologies abroad
Lack of specific R&D focused on
EE
(5)
Financial barriers
-
-
Implementing field units do not have sufficient information/
documentation on EE technologies, cost-benefit-analyses, life-cycle-cost
to make informed decisions with regard to the adoption of EE
technologies and measures.
Existing capacity among staff to assess, test and implement EE
technologies and measures is weak. Several EE technology upgrades are
complex and innovative. There are no specific training programs on EE.
There are no frameworks or mechanisms to systematically transfer
technologies, best practices, etc. within the organization.
Lack of targeted budget to support
the implementation of EE measures
The existing regulatory framework within IR does not provide financial
or non-financial incentives to staff to implement EE measures that
already exist.
There are no linkages between investment decisions and operational
costs. The budget for investment costs (which includes costs for the
introduction of EE technologies and measures) is different from the
budget for the operational costs (e.g. recurrent expenses, electricity bills,
etc.). As such, there is no incentive to contain operational costs through
appropriate investment decisions.
There is no mechanism to plough back the savings that result from the
implementation of EE measures.
Procurement decisions are mainly based on the price rather than on
energy efficiency considerations.
Vendors and manufacturers tend to stick to the business of standard
product line unless they are assured by a business potential or receive an
incentive to develop/retail EE products
The applicability of several existing proven EE technologies abroad has
not been tested in India, and therefore their adoption has been limited.
There is no specific R&D unit on EE. IR heavily depends on imported
technology.
The budget is allocated centrally by IR. There is no Head of Allocation
for EE.
In the preparation of the budget, priority is given to infrastructure
(traction and non-traction) and maintenance costs, rather than on EE.
Resources for the implementation of EE measures are therefore residual
and not firmed.
15
-
-
-
Lack of enabling framework to
redirect the savings from EE
measures implementation
High capital intensive non-EE
technologies with substantial
residual life
High investment costs of certain
new EE technologies
In a context in which the total budget allocation to IR is diminishing
because of other Government priorities, the resources available for the
implementation of EE measures are also diminishing.
The savings from the implementation of EE measures are not spent back
for further implementation of EE measures.
Replacement of those non-EE technologies with new EE technologies is
not economically justifiable until replacement is due.
High investment costs of certain new EE technologies coupled with the
limited availability of resources may slow down the adoption rate of
these technologies.
21. A number of factors or barriers have been identified during project preparation (including through a
broad stakeholder consultation) as responsible for low absorption rate of energy efficiency technologies
and measures. These barriers can be summarised in five broad categories:
(1) Institutional barriers: weak institutional arrangements and institutional capacity to promote and
implement energy efficiency technologies and measures;
(2) Information and capacity barriers: lack of in-house information on existing energy efficiency
options and opportunities, and of technical skills and capacity to implement them;
(3) Incentive barriers: lack of proper incentives to favour the adoption and implementation of
energy efficiency measures;
(4) Technology barriers: limited number of energy efficiency technologies and measures tested and
available in India vis-à-vis energy efficiency technologies and energy efficiency measures proven
and adopted worldwide;
(5) Financial barriers: lack of adequate resources to adopt and implement energy efficiency
technologies and measures or replace obsolete technologies and high investment costs.
16
Part B.
4.
4.1
PROJECT STRATEGY
PROJECT RATIONALE, DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIC
CONSIDERATIONS
Project rationale and design principles
22. Indian Railways (IR) is intended to develop a long-term Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Program (EECP) which aims at saving around 10% of the total energy consumption by 2032 by
progressively introducing energy saving technologies and measures in both the traction and non-traction
systems. However, the achievement of the Program objective may be undermined or slowed-down by the
barriers described in Section 3.
23. The proposed GEF-supported project aims at supporting the implementation of the Indian
Railways’ Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program (EECP) by removing some of the key barriers
identified above. More specifically, the proposed project plans to:
(1) Address ‘institutional’ and ‘capacity’ barriers by supporting institutional capacity
development and technical training.
(2) Facilitate the adoption on a large scale of already proven energy efficiency technologies and
measures by facilitating the dissemination of relevant information on existing technologies
and measures, and implementing an appropriate incentive system.
(3) Address ‘technology’ barriers by piloting and testing energy efficiency technologies and
measures (i.e. technologies and measures that have proven to be successful abroad), but have
not yet been tested in India, to check their applicability in India.
(4) Facilitate the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge and lessons learnt.
24.
The project will not address financial barriers.
25. Table 5 summarizes how the barriers identified in Section 3 will be specifically addressed through
the project is reported below.
4.2
Strategic considerations: ‘training of trainers’ to address capacity gaps, and the role
of TIRFAD in addressing information and awareness gaps
26. One of the key elements of the proposed project will be the capacity building component. The
project will support a broad technical assistance program aiming at (i) raising awareness and building
confidence among Indian Railways staff on energy efficiency measures, international benchmarks and
best practices, and (ii) strengthening the capacity of IR staff, testing and training facilities/institutes, and
vendors and manufactures in implementing energy efficiency technologies and measures. The capacity
building component will include practical demonstrations in workshops, field technical visits, and
trainings in the three major disciplines (rolling stock, traction power distribution, and building and general
electrical services)12. It is estimated that about 2,000 staff (managers, supervisors and technical staff13)
will benefit from the capacity building activities supported by the project.
12
An example of the proposed training modules is reported in Annex F.
17
Table 5: Overview of barriers and options supported by the project
Barrier
Measures supported by the project to address the identified
barriers
(1) Institutional barriers
The project will support the creation of a Centre of Excellence
(COE) within IR which will be responsible for (i) promoting and
coordinating EE activities within IR; (ii) providing technical
support and advice on EE technologies and measures, including
trainings; and (iii) collecting and disseminating information on
EE technologies and measures (Output 1.2).
-
Lack of an EE Corporate Policy
-
Lack of institutional set-up to promote and
monitor EE measures
-
Lack of adequate capacity within training
and testing facilities
The project will support existing training institutes in
upgrading/strengthening their capacity for delivering trainings
and conducting tests on EE (Output 1.3).
-
Lack of consideration for EE measures
and energy conservation practices in
standard specifications for the purchase of
material and equipment
The project will support the creation of a Centre of Excellence
(COE) which will be responsible, among other tasks, to collect
and disseminate information on EE technologies. One of the tasks
of the COE will be the review and development of improved EE
specifications for technologies, installation, testing, and operation
and maintenance procedures, and of audit manuals/guidelines on
EE for specific railway operations (Output 1.2).
Within the COE, a Technology Information Resource and
Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD) will be established to disseminate
information on EE technologies and measures to equipment
vendors (Output 1.2).
(2) Information and capacity barriers
-
Insufficient information/awareness among
IR officials and staff about existing EE
measures
The project will support the creation of a Centre of Excellence
(COE) which will be responsible, among other tasks, to collect
and disseminate information on EE technologies and measures
(Output 1.2).
One of the tasks of COE will be to assess the existing EE
technologies adopted by different units of the IR, and come-up
with a list of priority technologies to be implemented in IR
(Output 2.1).
The COE will also develop and implement energy audit
procedures for each railway operation to identify energy intensive
departments and benchmarks for EE, and produce audit manuals
for IR staff to monitor the key parameters of EE (Output 2.2).
Finally, some of the activities that the project will support are the
creation of a web-based portal for the dissemination of
information of EE technologies and measures, benchmarks,
training material and best practices to IR staff (Output 1.2), and
the production of publications, leaflets, reports, and newsletters to
disseminate the information and lessons learnt through the
implementation of the project (Output 4.1).
13
Even if the number of the people that are proposed to be trained may appear significant, in fact it represents
only a small percentage of the entire 1.4 million staff of Indian Railways. A detailed list of the proposed
participants is reported in Annex F.
18
-
Lack of proper technical skills and capacity
among IR staff to assess, test and
implement EE technologies and measures
The project will support existing training institutes in developing
and delivering trainings on EE technologies and best practices
(Output 1.3).
The project will in addition support the implementation of already
proven EE technologies and measures to build confidence and
capacity among IR staff to adopt and implement EE technologies
(Output 2.3).
(3) Incentive barriers
-
Lack of incentives to staff to implement
EE measures
The project will support (i) the review of existing incentive and
award schemes, both within and outside India, (ii) the
development of suitable incentive schemes to encourage the
adoption and implementation of EE measures, and (iii) the
institutionalization of the incentive schemes, if successful (Output
2.4).
-
Lack of incentives to vendors and
manufacturers to develop/retail EE
products
The project will indirectly provide incentives to vendors and
manufactures to develop/retail EE products by (a) providing
technical assistance to manufactures, vendors, importers, and new
entrepreneurs to design and produce EE equipments (Output 2.3),
and (b) supporting the implementation of already proven EE
technologies and measures (Output 2.3).
(4) Technology barriers
-
Limited adoption of proven EE
technologies abroad
The project will support (a) the interaction of IR staff with ‘units
of excellence’ of railways systems of other countries to
identify/familiarize with other countries’ EE best practices
(Output 1.1); (b) the development and implementation of training
plans on EE best practices (Output 1.3); and (c) the piloting and
testing of selected energy efficiency technologies and measures
that have proven to be successful abroad, but have not yet been
tested in India, to check their applicability in India (Output 3.1).
-
Lack of specific R&D focused on EE
The project will not directly support activities aiming at
addressing this specific barrier.
27. The trained staff will become trainers or resource persons on energy efficiency for Indian Railways
in their respective Units or Departments. The main idea behind this approach is that these trained staff
would contribute to progressively train and awareness raising among the whole Indian Railways staff. It is
estimated that about 5,000 local level staff will benefit from training and awareness raising activities on
energy efficiency within the three years of the project (see Annex F for details).
28. Part of the capacity building activities (i.e. field technical visits) will be conducted abroad as some
of the energy efficiency technologies and measures that are proposed to be implemented in India are
currently available only abroad. Therefore it is important that staff have a ‘first-hand’ experience to assess
their efficiency and feasibility, and build their confidence.
29. To address the issue of lack of information and awareness on energy efficiency technologies and
measures among IR staff and third-parties (e.g. vendors, equipment suppliers, etc.), a critical role will be
played by the Technology Information Resource and Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD). TIRFAD will be
established through the project to disseminate information on EE technologies and measures to all key
stakeholders, both from the public (i.e. Indian Railways) and private sector (i.e. small and medium
enterprises, vendors, etc.). TIRFAD will make available and easily accessible a wide range of knowledge
19
products on EE practices, which include information on their technical, environmental and economic
parameters.
Table 6: Selection of technologies and measures for the project
EE technologies and measures already
proven in India
•
•
Traction and
Rolling Stock
•
Non-traction
•
•
Installation of Automatic Switched
Capacitor Bank (ASCB) to reduce electrical
losses in Traction Sub Stations (TSS)
Installation of LED (light-emitting diode)
lights in coaches
Replacement of fluorescent tube lights with
low energy consumption lights (T5
fluorescent tubes in place of T12 tubes for
lighting stations, workshops and railway
offices)
Replacement of incandescent bulbs with
CFLs bulbs for service buildings and
railway quarters
Introduction of VVVF (Variable Voltage
Variable Frequency) drives for machine
EE technologies and measures that have
proven to be successful abroad, but have not
yet been tested in India
• Installation of GPS-based ‘driver advice
system’ (GPSDAS) and Energy
Management System (EMS) to ensure safe
and energy efficient driving
• Installation of microprocessor controlled
air-conditioning systems for AC couches
• Introduction of roof solar panels in coaches
to generate electricity
• Conduct energy audits of rolling stock
(locomotives) and coaches*
• Installation of Energy Management System
(EMS) for pumping installations
• Installation of Building Management
Systems (BMS) for stations, workshops and
railway offices
• Energy audits of stations, workshops and
railway offices, etc.*
• Support to energy testing laboratories*
(*) Even if these activities cannot be properly considered technologies, they have been included as key critical
activities to assess energy consumptions and promote energy efficiency measures.
4.3
Strategic considerations: rationale and criteria for selection of energy efficiency
technologies and measures to be implemented or tested through the project
30. After stakeholder consultations, a limited number of energy efficiency technologies and measures
have been selected to be implemented or tested through the project (see Table 6). The criteria used for
selecting these technologies are the following (see Table 7):
(a) For energy efficiency technologies and measures already technically proven in India
(although not widespread due to before-mentioned barriers): priority was given to
technologies and measures that:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Have high rate of return
Are easy to implement
Require a single department intervention (vs. multi-department intervention)
Are complementary to existing knowledge within IR
Have already proven to be successful in India
Have high potential for absorption/replicability
(b) For pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures (i.e. technologies and
measures that have proven to be successful abroad, but that have not yet been tested in India):
priority was given to technologies and measures that:
•
Have high rate of return
20
•
•
•
•
•
Are easy to implement
Require a single department intervention (vs. multi-department intervention)
Are complementary to existing knowledge within IR
Have already proven to be successful abroad/ are recommended by international bodies
Have high potential for absorption/replicability
31. All the other energy efficiency technologies identified during project preparation (ref. par. 3.2)
(including those that have high potential, but do not fulfil the other criteria, e.g. have high initial capital
cost and/or low-medium rate of return, require long time for implementation, etc.) will not be tested or
implemented during the course of the project.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Non-traction
•
•
•
•
Potential for
Absorption/
Replicability
Traction
Provenness
•
Intervention type
•
Installation of ASCB to reduce electrical
losses in Traction Sub Stations (TSS)
Installation of LED (light-emitting diode)
lights in coaches
Installation of GPSDAS and EMS to
ensure safe and energy efficient driving
Installation of microprocessor controlled
air-conditioning systems for AC couches
Installation of roof solar panels in coaches
to generate electricity
Conduction of energy audits of rolling
stock (locomotives) and coaches*
Replacement of fluorescent tube lights
with low energy consumption lights
Replacement of incandescent bulbs with
CFLs bulbs for service buildings, etc.
Installation of VVVF (Variable Voltage
Variable Frequency) drives for machine
Installation of Energy Management System
(EMS) for pumping installations
Installation of BMS for stations,
workshops and railway offices
Energy audits of stations, workshops and
railway offices, etc.*
Support to energy testing laboratories*
N. of
Departments
•
Implementability
Technology
Rate of return
Table 7: Criteria for technology selection
H
E
S
C
PI
H
H
E
S
C
PI
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PI
H
H
E
S
C
PI
H
H
E
S
C
PI
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
H
E
S
C
PA
H
(*) Even if these activities cannot be properly considered technologies, they have been included as key critical
activities to assess energy consumptions and promote energy efficiency measures. See also Annex D for more details
Legend:
Rate of return: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L)
Implementability: Easy (E), Medium (M), Difficult (D)
Number of Departments necessary for implementation: Single (S), Multi-Department (MD)
Complementary to existing knowledge within IR (C)
21
-
Provenness: Proven in India (PI), Proven in abroad/Recommended by international bodies (PA), NotProven (NP)
Potential for Absorption/ Replicability: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L)
4.4
Strategic considerations: consistency with GEF strategies and strategic programs
32. The proposed project is in line with the GEF objective of the Operational Program 5, i.e. “to
promote energy-efficient technologies and practices in industrial production and manufacturing
processes” and the related Strategic Program 2 (SP-2), i.e. “promoting energy efficiency in the industrial
sector”.
4.5
Strategic considerations: consistency with UNDAF and UNDP Country Programme
33.
The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the UNDAF (2008-2012), the planning
framework for UN support to the Government of India, and particularly to the objectives set in Outcome
4, i.e. “the most vulnerable people […] have the abilities to prepare, adapt/recover from […]
environmental changes”.
34.
The proposed project is in addition consistent with the objectives set in the UNDP Country
Programme Action Plan (CPAP) 2008-2012, the planning framework for the specific UNDP support to
the Government of India. The CPAP 2008-2012 states that a special focus will be placed on energy
efficiency in order to contribute to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in energy intensive industries,
transport and commercial sectors, and that under this Program actions aiming at identifying and
facilitating access to clean energy and piloting energy efficiency technologies to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions will be supported. Specifically, the proposed project is consistent with the CPAP Outcome 4.3,
i.e. “Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements”, and
Output 4.3.3, partnerships and capacities developed to meet national commitments under multilateral
environmental agreements”.
4.6
Strategic considerations: consistency with other national initiatives
35.
The proposed project is one of the five projects under the “Programmatic Framework Project for
Energy Efficiency in India” (GEF project 3538). The other four energy efficiency projects under this
programme include: (i) the “Energy Efficiency Improvements in Commercial Buildings” project (UNDP);
(ii) the “Chillers Energy Efficiency” project (World Bank); (iii) the “Financing Energy Efficiency in
Small and Medium Enterprises” project (World Bank); and (iv) the “Promoting Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy in selected SME clusters in India” project (UNIDO). The proposed project will
establish the necessary communication and coordination mechanisms through its project board and
management to ensure a proper coordination with this programme on energy efficiency. UNDP India will
also take the lead ensuring adequate coordination and exchange of experiences.
5.
COUNTRY
ELIGIBILITY,
OWNERSHIP
5.1
Country eligibility
POLICY
CONFORMITY
AND
COUNTRY
36. India ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 1
November 1993. India has completed and submitted its First National Communication and is currently
preparing its Second National Communication.
22
5.2
Policy conformity and country ownership
37. The proposed project supports the objectives and targets on energy efficiency set in the Eleventh
Five-Year Plan (2007-12), i.e. reducing energy intensity per unit of GDP by 20% over the 11th FYP
period; savings of 5% energy consumption levels through the implementation of a set of energy efficiency
interventions, including the establishment of an appropriate set of incentives; the creation of an enabling
institutional framework; the promotion of energy service companies (ESCOs); and the promotion of
energy efficient technologies.
38. The proposed project is in addition consistent with the actions envisaged in the Integrated Energy
Policy (2006), i.e. improving energy efficiency and energy conservation in use and demand side
management, shifting freight traffic to railways, and expanding electrification of railways to reduce diesel
needs.
39. Finally, the proposed project is consistent with the National Action Plan on Climate Change (2008),
and particularly with the National Mission for Energy Efficiency, which calls for strengthening the legal
mandate of Energy Conservation Act of 2001; promoting market based mechanisms to enhance cost
effective investments in energy efficiency in energy-intensive large industries and facilities; accelerating
the shift to energy efficient equipments; creating mechanisms to finance demand side management energy
saving programmes; and developing fiscal instruments to promote energy efficiency.
6.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES, OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS
6.1
Project goal, objective and expected results
40. The project goal is the reduction of GHG emissions from the Indian Railway system. The proposed
project aims at improving energy efficiency in the Indian Railways system (and thereby reducing
greenhouse gas emissions) by removing some of the key barriers that prevent the wide adoption of energy
efficiency technologies and measures in the Indian Railways system. Emission reduction estimates are
quantified in Section 8.
6.2 Project components, outcomes, outputs and activities
41.
The project is organized along four components:
(1)
Institutional capacity development and technical training
(2)
Implementation of proven energy efficiency technologies and measures
(3)
Pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures
(4)
Information and knowledge sharing
23
Component 1
Institutional capacity development and technical training
Expected Outcome:
(1.1) Strengthened IR institutional capacity; (1.2) Improved EE management
and technical capacity of IR staff
Output
1.1
Documented energy
efficiency (EE) best practices
(measures and technologies)
and defined EE benchmarks
for railway systems
Activities
1.1.1
Review of available information and collection of technical data on
energy efficiency technologies in railway operation in India.
1.1.2
Gap analysis to define focus areas for the implementation of EE
technologies and measures.
1.1.3
Interaction with industrialized countries (such as Japan, Germany,
France, UK), including visits to their ‘units of excellence’, to assess
the efficacy of their EE technologies and measures and define
benchmarks.
1.1.4
Based on activities 1.1.1 and 1.1.2, identification and documentation
of ‘best practices’, and efficiency benchmarks and assessment of
their applicability in the context of Indian Railways.
1.1.5
Definition and establishment of specific EE benchmarks for the
Indian Railways System (IRS)
42. The activities to be carried out to deliver Output 1.1 are aimed at identifying a set of energy
efficiency technologies and measures with application potential in the Indian Railways, and at defining
specific energy efficiency benchmarks for the Indian Railways.
43. The activities include a comparative analysis between the existing energy efficiency technologies
and measures in India and the pilot demonstration of technologies proved to be successfully demonstrated
in developed countries. Best practices and energy efficiency benchmarks in industrialised countries will
be analysed and assessed on applicability in the Indian context. A key activity for the achievement of this
output will be the interaction with the units of excellence that have expertise in EE technology
applications in railway systems in industrialized countries, including limited technical field visits to them
to familiarize and directly assess the efficacy and the compatibility of energy efficiency technologies
applied abroad to the Indian context.
44. The information on energy efficiency technologies, measures, and benchmarks will be documented
and disseminated to the Indian Railway divisions and production units, suppliers and the various
associations in the operating zones and divisions of the company through the web portal and the
Technology Information Resource Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD) which will be established during the
project (ref. Activities 1.2.3, 1.2.4, and 4.1.2).
Output
1.2 Established and supported
Centre of Excellence (COE)
Activities
1.2.1 Development of a business plan for the COE
1.2.2 Establishment of the COE
1.2.3 Development of a web- portal for the dissemination of information
on EE technologies and measures
1.2.4 Establishment of a Technology Information Resource and
Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD) to disseminate information to
equipment vendors for product development
45. The activities that will be implemented to deliver Output 1.2 aim at establishing and supporting a
Centre of Excellence (COE) for energy efficiency within Indian Railways.
24
Box 3
The Centre of Excellence (COE)
To strengthen the institutional capacity of Indian Railways, the establishment of a Centre of Excellence (COE) is
planned. The COE will be as an autonomous body within Indian Railways, reporting directly to the Railways Board
(ref. Annex E). The COE will act as resource centre for technical support and advice on energy efficiency
technologies and measures, dissemination of the information to the staff and to stakeholders. The COE will support
the implementation of EE measures and technologies in the various zonal institutions and zonal units by promoting,
coordinating, and providing technical back-up on EE activities. It will also be charged with the responsibility to monitor and
evaluate the uptake of various EE technologies in terms of the number of projects employing these technologies but also the
performance of the technology applications.
The COE will be responsible for:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Data collection, review and assessment of existing energy efficiency technologies and measures (in the
country and abroad);
Gap analysis, i.e. identification of gaps between existing energy efficiency technologies and energy
efficiency technologies adopted by IR;
Cost-benefit analysis and prioritization of existing energy efficiency technologies and measures;
Development of procurement and material & workmanship (M&W) specifications14;
Development of audit manuals and guidelines on energy efficiency for railways operations;
Development of testing procedures for energy efficiency technologies and measures and provision of
guidance to testing houses on measurement, testing and calibration of energy efficiency equipment;
Development of training modules on energy efficiency technologies and measures;
Provision of technical support for the implementation of energy efficiency technologies and measures;
Promotion and coordination of energy efficiency activities;
Dissemination of information and knowledge sharing on energy efficiency technologies and measures,
benchmarks, and specifications,
Coordination with the Knowledge Management and Sharing (KMS) system established at BEE to manage
information sharing among the projects under the “Programmatic Framework Project for Energy Efficiency
in India” (e.g. common knowledge information portal).
The functions and functioning of the COE are summarized in the figure below.
Figure 2: Functions and functioning of COE
14
Whenever labeled products exist, public procurement of energy efficient goods (appliances/equipments) would
include star labeled products.
25
The COE is not meant to duplicate the functions of existing units/divisions within IR. On the contrary, it will
strengthen the capacity and rely on the functions already in place in the railways system. For example, while draft
proposals will be developed by the experts of COE, they will be reviewed by the existing testing units (e.g. RDSO and
other training institutes of IR). (See Annex E for more details).
The functions of the COE will be initially carried out by the Project Management Unit (PMU) for the duration of the
project. As an exit strategy, it is foreseen that staff of the PMU may be absorbed in the COE at the completion of the
project, so as to retain the capacity and expertise developed during project implementation.
46. To deliver this output, the activities that will be conducted include the development of a business
plan for the COE, which describes organizational set-up, functions, and activities of the Centre; the
establishment of the COE, including physical infrastructures and equipment; the development of a webportal for the collection and dissemination of relevant information on energy efficiency technologies and
measures, including benchmarks, training material, etc.; and the establishment of a Technology
Information Resource Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD) within COE for the dissemination of information to all
key stakeholders, both from the public (i.e. Indian Railways) and private sector (i.e. small and medium
enterprises, vendors, etc.). TIRFAD will make available and easily accessible a wide range of knowledge
products on EE practices, which include information on their technical, environmental and economic
parameters. TIRFAD will function as an interface between the COE and the industry, manufacturers,
entrepreneurs and vendors. It will help promoting EE measures among these stakeholders, thus facilitating
the development of specific EE equipment in India.
Output
1.3
Trained and qualified staff
members of the relevant IR
departments capable of
implementing EE
technologies, measures, and
best practices
Activities
1.3.1 Detailed capacity need assessment of IR (IR staff skills and expertise
in EE, and capacity of training and testing institutes to conduct EE
tests and trainings)
1.3.2 Development of a training plan, program and training modules
1.3.3 Conduct of training of trainers and awareness raising workshops
1.3.4
Conducting training courses at divisional level
1.3.5 Capacity building for training and testing units to ensure effective
implementation and monitoring of EE technologies and measures,
and maintenance of EE assets
47. The activities that will be carried out to deliver Output 1.3 aim at strengthening the capacity of
Indian Railways (i.e. competences and expertise of IR staff, and facilities and equipment of IR training
and testing institutions) to adopt and replicate energy efficiency technologies, measures and best practices.
48. Such activities include: a review and assessment of the expertise/technical skills available within IR
staff (at both managerial and technical level) in relevant fields (i.e. rolling stock, traction and distribution,
etc.) and the capacity of testing and training institutes and units to conduct energy efficiency tests and
trainings; identification of the training needs and support to training institutes and units in developing a
training plan and training modules; conduct training of trainers and awareness raising workshops among
IR staff (ref. section 4.2 and Annex F for more details on the training and awareness raising activities) and
training courses at divisional level; and capacity building for training and testing institutes/units, including
accredited test-houses, by providing testing, measurement and calibration facilities, and training facilities
to ensure effective implementation and monitoring of energy efficiency technologies and measures, and
maintenance of energy efficiency assets.
26
Component 2
Expected Outcome:
Implementation of proven15 energy efficiency technologies and measures
Proven EE technologies and measures in traction and non-traction
operations are implemented and energy savings realized
Output
2.1
Documented detailed
information on available EE
technologies and measures
Activities
2.1.1 Review and assessment of existing energy efficiency technologies
and measures that have proven to be successful in India (either in IR
or in other sectors) and definition of EE benchmarks
2.1.2 Cost-benefit analysis of identified EE technologies
2.1.3 Prioritization of energy efficiency technologies and measures to be
implemented
2.1.4 Documentation of EE technologies (e.g. standards, code of practices,
M&W specifications, test procedures, installations & testing check
lists, etc.)
49. The activities that will be implemented to deliver Output 2.1 aim at assessing and compiling
detailed information on existing energy efficiency technologies and measures in both the electric traction
(TR) and non-traction (NT) fields.
50. These activities include: assessment of the proven energy efficiency technologies and measures (i.e.
technologies and measures that have proven to be successful in India, either in the IR or in other sectors),
a cost-benefit analysis of the identified technologies; the prioritization of energy efficiency technologies
and measures to be implemented based on their cost-benefit, readiness and timeframe for implementation,
risks, etc.); and a definition of energy benchmarks (based also on the analysis of Activity 1.1.3).
Information on technologies (e.g. standards, code of practices, M&W specifications, test procedures,
installations & testing check lists, etc.) and benchmarks will be collected and documented.
51.
The collected information will be disseminated to the Indian Railway divisions and production
units, suppliers and the various associations within the operating zones and divisions of the company
through the web portal and the Technology Information Resource Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD), which
will be established during the course of project implementation.
Output
2.2
Developed and implemented
energy audit procedures
Activities
2.2.1 Identification of energy intensive departments, segments, and units
2.2.2 Development of energy audit guidelines, manuals, and procedures
for each railway operation (e.g. production units, traction
substations, workshops, production units, maintenance depots and
buildings etc.)
2.2.3 Conduct of energy audits and definition of benchmarks
2.2.4 Development of contract procedures for energy audits, procurement
and implementation16
52. The activities that will be carried out to produce Output 2.2 aim at developing and implementing
energy audit procedures for railways operation.
15
That is, energy efficiency technologies and measures that have already proven to be successful in India (either in
IR or in other sectors). The project demonstrates how successfully these technologies and measures can be applied
and implemented cost-effectively as these have not yet been widely adopted.
16
Whenever labeled products exist, public procurement of energy efficient goods (appliances/equipments) would
include star labeled products.
27
53. The activities include: identification of energy intensive departments, segments and units (e.g. substations, work centres, traction sub-stations, etc.); development of audit guidelines, procedures and
manuals for each railway operation (e.g. production units, traction substations, workshops, production
units, maintenance depots and buildings etc.); conduct of demonstrative energy audits (in about 20
different utilities) to promote energy audit procedures and demonstrate the benefits of energy audits to
improve energy efficiency, and the definition of energy efficiency benchmarks17.
54. The PMU will provide support in developing the contract and procurement procedures for energy
audits.
Output
2.3
Completed implementation of
ready and proven
technologies and measures
Activities
2.3.1 Preparation of standards (both technical and financial) for EE
services while inviting tenders.
2.3.2
Implementation of ready and proven energy efficiency technologies
and good housekeeping measures as identified during project
preparation and under the audits to build confidence and promote EE
2.3.3 Development of the guidelines and standards that needs to be met by
the manufacturers, vendors, importers, new entrepreneurs,
indigenous entrepreneurs to replicate and produce EE technologies
locally and reduce the costs of production.
2.3.4
Capacity building for manufacturers of energy efficient equipment
on the design, production and testing of energy efficient equipment.
55. The activities that will be carried out to produce Output 2.3 aim at supporting the implementation of
energy efficiency technologies and measures that have already proven to be successful in India (either in
IR or in other sectors) but have not been yet widely adopted. In favouring the implementation of these
technologies and measures, the project expects to build capacity and confidence among IR staff on energy
efficiency measures, thus favouring the replication of these technologies and measures on a larger scale.
56. Box 4 below summarizes the proven technologies and measures that have been identified during
project preparation phase that will be implemented during project implementation, including their
investment cost, estimated energy saving, and estimated annual CO2 reduction. A detailed description of
the technologies/measures, electricity consumption with the present method, estimated electricity
consumption with the intervention, estimated electricity saved, estimated amount saved, payback period
and estimated annual emission reduction are reported in Annex D and Table 18.
57. The EE measures identified above will be implemented in each Zonal Railways and field unit to
showcase their effectiveness and benefits thereby building and/or enhancing the confidence of zonal
railway managers in investing resources in EE.
58. The GEF contribution to the implementation of the above EE technologies and measures will
amount at about 10-15% of the total costs. GEF resources will be primarily used for capacity
development, training, awareness creation and information dissemination, which practically are the
incremental activities that are needed to ensure the effective demonstration of the selected EE
technologies, techniques and measures. IR will contribute with investments in equipment and
infrastructure.
59. In delivering this output, technical support will be provided to manufacturers, vendors, importers,
new entrepreneurs, etc. to upgrade the design, testing and technical characteristics of EE equipment and
products, to indigenous entrepreneurs to replicate and produce EE technologies locally and reduce the
17
The best energy efficiency achieved at any of the field units will be considered as EE benchmarks.
28
costs of production. Manufacturers of equipment will receive further guidance regarding the design,
production and testing of energy efficient equipment.
Output
2.4 Developed and implemented
incentive schemes
Activities
2.4.1 Review of existing incentive and award schemes, both within and
outside India
2.4.2 Development of suitable incentive schemes to encourage the
adoption and implementation of EE measures
2.4.3 Institutionalization of the proven successful incentive schemes
2.4.4 Mobilization of financial support for the implementation of the
incentive schemes
60. Output 2.4 will be delivered through the implementation of activities aimed at developing and
implementing an incentive scheme to provide incentives to IR staff to adopt and implement energy
efficiency technologies and measures.
61. Such activities include: review of existing incentive and award schemes, both within and outside
India, development of suitable incentive schemes to encourage the adoption and implementation of EE
measures, and the institutionalization of the proven successful incentive schemes. In order to support the
effective implementation of incentive scheme, funds need to be mobilized for an effective implementation
of incentive scheme from the respective authority.
Box 4
Proven interventions and impact estimate (Outcome 2)18
(A) Traction
1.
2.
Automatic Switched Capacitor Bank to reduce electrical losses in Traction Sub Stations (ASCB for TSS)
LED (Light Emitting Diode) lights in coaches
(B) Non Traction
3.
4.
5.
#
T5 tubes in place of T12 tubes for lighting for stations, workshops and railway offices
CFLs replacing incandescent bulbs for service buildings and railway quarters
VVVF (Variable Voltage Variable Frequency) drives for machines
Technology/Device/Measure description
Investment
cost (USD)
Estimated
annual
energy
savings
(million
kWh per
year)
Estimated
annual CO2
reduction
(tonnes/year)
(A) Traction
1
Installation and operation of Automatic Switched Capacitor
Bank to reduce electrical losses in Traction Sub Stations
(ASCB for TSS)
425,532
0.38
308
2
Installation and use of LED (Light Emitting Diode) lights in
coaches
1,276,596
1.21
992
(B) Non-traction
18
See Annex D for more details.
29
3
Installation and use of T5 fluorescent tubes in place of T12
tubes for lighting for stations, workshops and railway offices
8,510,638
27.6
22,632
4
CFLs replacing incandescent bulbs for service buildings and
railway quarters
1,382,979
79.56
65,239
5
Installation and operation of VVVF (Variable Voltage
Variable Frequency) drives for machines
1,063,830
3.24
2,657
Total (proven technologies/devices/measures)
12,659,574
112
91,827
Component 3:
Expected Outcome:
Pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures
Increased confidence in the application of EE technologies and practices
piloted in the IRS
Output
3.1
Completed
demonstration of EE
technologies and
measures
Activities
3.1.1
Design of EE demonstration projects in relevant fields of Railways like
rolling stock (RS), traction distribution (TRD) and building sector (BS),
including testing facilities, workshops and production facilities
3.1.2
Implementation of pilot demonstration projects in relevant fields of
Railways i.e. EE rolling stock, TRD, BS and E&M for testing house,
static installation, work shop and production facilities
3.1.3
Technical evaluation and auditing of the pilot projects and documentation
of lessons learned (linked with activity 4.1.3)
62. Within this component, the project will support the pilot demonstration of advanced energy
efficiency technologies, devices and measures that have proven to be successful abroad. Those
technologies and measures will be taken up for further replication, if their suitability to the Indian context
is demonstrated. Pilot projects would involve demonstrations in both traction and non-traction segments
(including testing houses, rolling stock, static installation, and workshop and production facilities).
63. The box below summarizes the technologies and measures that have been identified during project
preparation to be piloted during project implementation, including their investment cost, estimated energy
saving, and estimated annual CO2 reduction. A detailed description of the technologies/measures,
electricity consumption with the present method, estimated electricity consumption with the intervention,
estimated electricity saved, estimated amount saved, payback period and estimated annual emission
reduction are reported in Annex F.
Pilot interventions and impact estimate (Outcome 3)19
Box 5
(A) Traction
1.
2.
3.
4.
Energy audit of rolling stock
GPS based train Driver Advice System (GPSDAS) and Traction Energy Management System (TEMS)
Microprocessor controlled air-conditioning systems for AC coaches
Roof mounted SPV for electricity generation for passenger trains
(B) Non Traction
5.
6.
19
Energy audit of stations, workshops and railway offices
Building Management Systems for stations, workshops and railway offices
See Annex D for more details.
30
7.
8.
Energy Management System (EMS) for pumping installations
Energy Testing and Resource Centres
Technology description (pilot demonstration)
#
Investment
cost (USD)
Estimated
annual
energy
savings
(million
kWh per
year)
Estimated
annual CO2
reduction
(tonnes/year)
212,766
1.02
835
(A) Traction
1a/1b
Energy audit of rolling stock (locomotives)
Energy audit of coaches
Implementation of selected energy conservation
opportunities (ECOs) and EE improvements (EEIs)
identified and recommended by the energy audits.
2
GPS based Driver Advice System (GPSDAS) and Energy
Management System
244,681
2.11
1,733
3
Microprocessor controlled air-conditioning systems for
AC couches
255,319
1.04
850
4
Roof mounted SPV for electricity generation for
passenger trains
223,404
0.05
37
531,915
12.0
9,840
(B) Non Traction
5
Energy audit of stations, workshops and railway offices
Implementation of selected energy conservation
opportunities (ECOs) and EE improvements (EEIs)
identified and recommended by the energy audits.
6
Building Management Systems (BMS) for stations,
workshops and railway offices
1,063,830
12.0
9,840
7
Energy Management System (EMS) for pumping
installations
638,298
2.19
1,796
8
Energy Testing and Resource Centres
2,127,660
Total (pilot technologies/devices/measures)
5,297,872
30
24,931
64. The PMU/COE will identify the pilot projects after the efficacy assessment under activity 1.1.2, in
consultation with other the IR units. Zonal railways and other field units will design the demonstration
projects, procure, install and commission the necessary hardware with suitable external engineering
support. Where and when necessary, the PMU/COE will provide support in reviewing the design and
monitor the procurement and installation process as well as providing advice during procurement (e.g.,
identification of suppliers, preparation of bids). The results of the pilot projects will be evaluated, and the
lesson learnt and knowledge gained will be shared to support decision making processes.
31
Component 4:
Expected Outcome:
Information and knowledge sharing
Information and knowledge on EE technologies and measures are widely
available and accessible for IRS divisions and their affiliates
Output
4.1
4.2
Collected lessons learned and
developed knowledge sharing
products
Developed post-project action
plan for COE
Activities
4.1.1
Collection and documentation of information on EE technologies,
measures, best practices, and lessons learnt
4.1.2
Dissemination of collected information through the web portal and
TIRFAD
4.1.3
Production of documentation, publications; leaflets; reports, and of
a regular (project) newsletter
4.1.4
Conduct of awareness campaigns at divisional level
4.2.1
Synthesis of project results and development of an action plan for
the post-project functioning of the COE
4.2.2
Conduct of closing workshop
65. The activities that will be carried out under this component are aimed at supporting the sharing of
information and knowledge regarding energy efficiency technologies, measures and best practices through
the activities of the project.
66. Such activities include: collection and documentation of information on EE technologies, measures,
best practices, and lessons learnt; activities to favour information dissemination and knowledge sharing
such as dissemination of collected information through the web portal and Technology Information
Resource and Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD); production of documentation, publications; leaflets; reports,
and of a regular (project) newsletter; and, the conduct of awareness campaigns at the divisional level
within the IRS.
67. Under this component, a post-project action plan for the COE will be developed. A synthesis of all
project results will be done, and used as basis for the post-project action plan. Such plan will be presented
in a workshop, along with the synthesis of the project results.
68. A key role for the dissemination of information and knowledge will be played by the TIRFAD,
established under output 1.2. TIRFAD will disseminate information on EE technologies and measures to
all key stakeholders, both from the public (i.e. Indian Railways) and private sector (i.e. small and medium
enterprises, vendors, etc.). TIRFAD will make available and easily accessible a wide range of knowledge
products on EE practices, which include information on their technical, environmental and economic
parameters.
69. This component will, in addition, favour and support knowledge sharing from the other projects
under the “Programmatic Framework Project for Energy Efficiency in India” (GEF project 3538),
coordinated by BEE.
7.
7.1
KEY INDICATORS AND ASSUMPTIONS
Indicators
70. Progress towards and attainment of the project goal and objective will be measured through the
following outcome indicators:
32
Project objective
Outcome indicators
Improvement of the energy utilization efficiency in the
Indian Railways system (and thereby reducing
greenhouse gas emissions) through the removal of some
of the key barriers that prevents the wide adoption of
energy efficiency technologies and measures in the
Indian Railways system.
(1) Total direct energy savings by EOP
(2) Total direct CO2 emission reductions achieved in
the IRS by EOP
71. Progress and achievements within the single components are measured through the following
intermediate-outcome and output indicators (details are presented in Section 10):
Table 8: Project outcome and output indicators
Project component/ outcome
Component output
1.1. Documented energy
efficiency (EE) best
practices (measures and
technologies) and defined
EE benchmarks for
railways systems
(1) Institutional capacity
development and technical
training
Expected outcomes: (1.1)
strengthened IR
institutional capacity (1.2)
improved EE management
and technical capacity of
IR staff
1.2. Established and supported
Centre of Excellence
(COE)
Intermediate-outcome/ output indicators
•
Status report of targeted EE technologies /
measures, its availability in India/abroad
and gap analysis for its implementation
•
Established and functioning of EE Centre
of Excellence (COE) in IRS by EOP
TIRFAD established and functioning by
EOP
COE website established and operational
by EOP
Number of training courses conducted by
the training institutes each year starting
from year 3
Number of managers and staff members
trained on EE best practices and
technologies by EOP
Number of training and testing institutes
with capacity to provide trainings and test
EE measures/equipment by year 3
Number of successful EE projects
implemented by the trained managers and
staff members by EOP
•
•
•
1.3. Trained and qualified
staff members of the
relevant IR departments
capable of implementing
EE technologies,
measures, and best
practices
•
•
•
33
Project component/ outcome
(2) Implementation of proven
energy efficiency
technologies and measures
Expected outcome: Proven EE
technologies and measures
in traction and nontraction operations are
implemented and energy
savings realized
(3) Pilot demonstration of
energy efficiency
technologies and measures
Expected outcome: Increased
confidence in the
application of piloted EE
technologies and practices
in the IRS
Component output
2.1 Documented detailed
information on available
EE technologies and
measures
2.2 Developed and
implemented energy audit
procedures
2.3 Completed
implementation of ready
and proven technologies
and measures
2.4 Developed and
implemented incentive
schemes
Intermediate-outcome/ output indicators
•
Number of project proposals (technical and
financial) prepared by EOP for EE
technology / measure application projects
•
Potential energy savings from the
implementation of EE technologies and/or
measures by year 3
•
Percentage of savings derived from EE
measures implemented allocated as
incentives to EE implementers by EOP
Number of energy audits conducted in IRS
units above 0.5 MW load by year 3
Number of pilot demonstrations designed
and implemented by year 3
Total energy savings achieved from pilot
projects by EOP, million kWh
Percentage of successful pilot
demonstrations adopted by IRS for
replication by EOP
Based on energy audits, number of EE
technologies and measures identified as
feasible for implementation (planned and
budgeted) by year 3
Average number of visitors visiting the
web portal each year starting year 2
Number of sets of knowledge sharing
products (KSPs) developed and
disseminated by EOP
Number of awareness campaigns
conducted per division per year starting
year 3
Number of IRS divisions that are actively
participating in IRS EE programs by EOP
Number of vendors registering with
TIRFAD each year starting year 3(i.e. from
2013)
Cumulative number of vendors attending
TIRFAD campaigns by the EOP
•
•
3.1 Completed pilot
demonstration of EE
technologies and
measures
•
•
•
•
•
(4) Information and
knowledge sharing
Expected outcome: Information
and knowledge on EE
technologies and measures
are widely available and
accessible for IRS
divisions and their
affiliates
4.1 Collected lessons learned
and developed
knowledge sharing
products
•
•
•
•
7.2
72.
Assumptions
General assumptions are (see Section 10 for more details):
• The commitment on energy efficiency by the Indian Railways’ decision-makers;
• Existing organizations within IR, such as RDSO and IRIEEN, do not feel threatened by the new
COE, but see it as support centre for mobilising internal institutional support for promotion of
EE technologies and measures and coordination;
34
• The support by RDSO and training institutions to review the technical documentation on EE
technologies and measures, testing and training modules and to assist in implementation;
• Required contributions from UNDP and Railways are available;
• The field units facilitate the implementation and pilot demonstrations;
• The COE will be institutionalised to function independently under the IR Board.
7.3
Risks
73. The main risks to the effective implementation of the proposed GEF project are related to the
following:
• Failure to secure continuous support to the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Programme
(EECP) from planners in Indian Railways zonal production and other units;
• Lack of manufacturers’ interest in investing for EE products, thus leading to initiatives failure;
• Failure to trigger a positive response from technical staff on initiatives supporting EECP;
• Lack of effective coordination between IR units on initiatives supporting the EECP;
• Willingness of IR managers to give proper priority to EE in investment decisions;
• Competition from inefficient and cheap technologies and high cost of advanced (monopolistic)
technologies;
• Fast changing technologies in particular in the electronics segment.
74.
Details on measures that will be undertaken to mitigate the risks are reported in Annex A.
8.
8.1
GEF INCREMENTAL REASONING AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS
Baseline scenario
75. Indian Railways has in the past carried out some initiatives on energy efficiency in accordance with
the Energy Conservation Act, and policy directives are periodically issued to promote the adoption of
energy efficiency measures. However, the implementation of such initiatives and measures has been
rather ad-hoc (i.e. based on the good will of sensitive officers) and uncoordinated. In general, the uptake
of energy efficiency technologies and measures has been rather slow.
76. To promote the adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures in a more comprehensive
and effective way, Indian Railways is developing a long-term Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Program (EECP) (2010/11-2031/32) with the objective of saving 10% of the total electricity consumption
in absolute terms by 2032.
77. However, considering the pace with which energy efficiency measures have been implemented in
the past, there is an inherent risk that the implementation of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Program (EECP) would also be slow. During project preparation a number of barriers have been identified
as being responsible for low absorption rate of energy efficiency technologies and measures (ref. Section
3.3 for more details). Unless these barriers are addressed, it is likely that the implementation of the EECP
would also be slow.
78. Without GEF intervention (i.e. baseline scenario), Indian Railways is expected to move from the
current (2009-10) estimate of 15.7 billion kWh of electricity consumption in the railways sector to 100.5
billion kWh in 2031-32 (about 1,030 billion kWh cumulatively for the period 2010/11-2031/32). These
figures are equivalent to the emission of about 12.8 and 82.4 million tonnes of CO2 respectively. Details
on the baseline scenario are provided in Annex D.
35
8.2
GEF alternative scenario
79. With GEF intervention (i.e. GEF alternative), it is assumed that, thanks to improved institutional
set-up, improved capacity, confidence and awareness, improved incentive system, etc., energy efficiency
technologies and measures will be adopted and implemented at a faster pace and on a wider scale.
80. As a result of the GEF intervention, the adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures
will be faster in the Indian Railways’ Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program (EECP) thereby
reduction in energy consumption and related CO2 emissions when compared to baseline scenario. It is
estimated that due to GEF intervention, total CO2 emissions during the period 2031-32 will be about 75.4
million tCO2, which is less than the estimated emissions under the baseline scenario for the same period.
Table 19 in Annex D compares total energy consumption (per year and cumulative), energy savings (per
year and cumulative), and CO2 emissions (per year and cumulative) under the baseline and GEF scenarios
for the years 2010-11 (beginning of the project) up to 2031-32, however considering up to the year 202021 is advised on a conservative basis.
81. Annual direct CO2 emission savings are estimated at 0.117 million tCO2 (ref. Box 4 and 5).
Cumulative direct CO2 emission reductions over 10-year investment lifetime (average) are estimated at
1.17 million tonnes of CO2 (tCO2). Considering the total avoided GHG emission reductions that are
attributable to the project, which amounts to 1.17 million tCO2, the corresponding unit abatement cost
(UAC20) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) is USD 4.45/tCO2.
82. After the project’s completion, investments will be affected by the long-term outcomes of the
barrier-removal activities, e.g. capacity building and institutional strengthening. The corresponding CO2
emissions reduction is referred to as indirect emission reduction. A replication factor of “3” has been
chosen as a conservative estimate for Indian Railways based on the market transformation and
demonstration approach of the project. Thus, indirect emission reductions (bottom-up) over 10-year
investment lifetime are estimated at 1.17 million tCO2 * 3 = 3.50 million tCO2.
83. In the alternative scenario the cumulative amount of 4.16 MtCO2 would be reduced over the period
2011/12-2020/21 (that is, a total duration of 10 years during and after the project’s lifetime). Of course,
this potential cannot be fully attributed to the GEF intervention alone as other projects may have an
influence over the entire IR system. Uptake of EE technologies would also take place to some extent due
to ongoing (and future) national efforts and future donor-funded initiatives. We propose to apply
conservatively a ‘causality factor’ 4 of 80%. This gives indirect emission reduction (top-down) 4.16
MtCO2 * 80% = 3.32 MtCO2.
Box 6
Summary of the emission reduction impacts of the project
(a) Direct savings
Alternative scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP with GEF
support)
Energy Savings
CO2 emission savings
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 emission savings
(million tonnes)
2010-13
0.142
0.117
1.168 (cumulatively for 10 years)
Savings directly due to the specific energy saving technologies and measures implemented during the project (i.e.
implementation of proven technologies and measures and pilot demonstrations - ref. Box 4 and 5). Cumulative
emissions over 10-years are 1.168 million tCO2, assuming a 10 year lifetime of equipment on average.
20
Only direct emission reductions are considered for 10 years of economic lifetime as per GEF guidelines. There are
no direct post-project emissions pertain to the project. Therefore, GEF finance of USD 5,200,000/1,167,581 tCO2.
36
(b) Indirect savings (bottom-up)
During 10 years of lifetime
Alternative scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP with GEF
support)
CO2 emission savings
(million tonnes)
3.503
Based on direct emissions reduction, applying replication factor of 3.
(c) Indirect savings (top-down)
Baseline scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP without GEF
support)
Alternative scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP with GEF
support)
Energy Savings
CO2 Savings
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
2009-10
2012-13
Cumulative
2010/1112/13
2020-21
Cumulative
2011/1220/21
15.65
19.90
55.21
38.60
273.00
12.83
16.32
45.27
31.66
223.86
15.65
19.82
55.07
37.21
267.93
12.83
16.25
45.16
30.52
219.71
0.14
5.07
0.11
4.16
Savings due to the progressive uptake of energy efficiency technologies and measures indirectly induced by the
activities of the project (e.g. awareness raising, capacity building, etc.).
Applying a causality factor of 80%, indirect (top-down) emission reduction is estimated at 3.32 million tCO2
9.
SUSTAINABILITY AND REPLICABILITY
9.1
Sustainability
84. After completion of the proposed GEF project, the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program
(EECP) will continue. The improved institutional environment and implementation and evaluation
structures, to be developed with support from the proposed GEF project, are expected to be maintained by
the Indian Railways (IR) Board upon completion of the project. Since the proposed GEF project has a
strong capacity-building element, its outputs will foster institutional capacities to effectively maintain and
expand the EE programme through its EE Centre of Excellence (COE) as a resource centre that provides
advisory and technical support to other IR units in the implementation of EE technology and measures.
The project places high priority on active participation by all Indian Railways stakeholders, i.e. staff of the
various zonal units, testing houses, RDSO, training institutes, workshops, etc., ensuring ownership and
sustainability of the EE programme.
85. The proposed project will establish an enabling framework and promote and strategic partnerships
between Indian Railways, equipment manufacturers and importers and international EE agencies like
UIC, SNCF etc. Such capacities and partnerships are expected to remain in place and facilitate the
continuation of the EECP. Since the proposed GEF project has a strong capacity-building element, its
outputs will foster institutional capacities to effectively maintain and revise the EE programme through
Centre of Excellence.
37
9.2
Replicability
86. It is expected that the proposed project will demonstrate an effective model for the implementation
of EE applicable to a wide-range of equipments and departments within Indian Railways. The outcomes
of the project will support the accelerated transformation of Railways towards energy efficient
Organisation. The enabling environment and the enhanced institutional capacities will facilitate the
effective implementation of EE and the awareness campaign on EE under the proposed GEF project will
motivate the Indian Railway implementing agencies, test houses and other users. The successful
implementation of demonstration pilot projects along with effective dissemination and capacity building
measures are expected to enhance replication potential. This process will be accelerated through adoption
of 4-step replication strategy as follows:
• Step 1: A Project Management Unit will be set up and institutional capacity within IR will be
strengthened by creating a Centre of Excellence (COE) to monitor and implement the EE
initiatives. Experts and consultancy agencies as engaged under PMU will undertake detailed
studies, efficacy assessment of various technologies, gap assessments and identify areas for
improvement in technology and skills including the training modules as required.
• Step 2: Indian Railways will initiate implementation of EE measures and pilot demonstration
projects in its various zonal and other units, assisted and monitored by COE.
• Step 3: Systems will be developed by COE for sharing information within each zone on
technical skills, availability of technical support services, cost effectiveness and characteristics
of EE technologies and measures (as well as internal and external sources of finance). The
documentation and dissemination of ‘best practices’ through a web portal, monitoring of energy
consumption patterns and profile as well as the development of progress indicators for
assimilation and absorption of technologies together with training and deployment of energy
mangers in each zone would lead to a large-scale development of energy efficiency projects in
the Railways.
• Step 4: Case studies of financial returns on investment and demonstration of cost recovery of EE
projects would lead to development of a culture of ‘willingness to finance’ amongst financial
institutes and ESCOs (currently non-existent in India). The capacity building activity for all
stakeholders at Zone and Headquarters level and other technical support through the TIRFAD
will facilitate fast replication of pilot technologies. This would be further strengthened in
cooperation with the potential equipment vendors, i.e. a group of entrepreneurs will be
developed for cooperative procurement of services for hedging the transaction costs, postinstallation assistance and after-sales services.
38
10.
PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK
This project will contribute to achieving the following Country Programme Outcomes (as defined in CPD):
Outcome: Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements (CP, Outcome 4.3)
Output: Strengthened capacity for low carbon development and sustainable management of natural resources (CP, Output 4.3)
Output indicators: Number of clean technologies / mechanisms piloted
CPAP Outcomes and Indicators
Outcome: Progress towards meeting national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements (CPAP, Outcome 4.3)
Output: Partnerships and capacities developed to meet national commitments under multilateral environmental agreements
Output indicators: (a) Million USD received as funding from GEF and Montreal Protocol through UNDP; (b) 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: Mainstreaming environment and energy
Applicable GEF Strategic Objective and Program: Strategic Programme 2 (SP-2): Promoting Energy Efficiency in the Industrial sector
Applicable GEF Expected Outcomes: Increased deployment of energy efficient technologies and practices
Applicable GEF Outcome Indicators: (a) amount of energy saved (b) tonnes of CO2 avoided, (c) number of energy efficient technologies and measures promoted
Table 9: Project Planning Matrix (PPM)
Strategy
Project Goal:
Reduction of GHG
emissions in the Indian
Railways System (IRS)
21
22
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline
Cumulative emission reductions21 achieved
in the IRS by EOP22 (million t CO2)
• 0
Targets
• 0.117
Means of Gauging Success
• M&E reports of the
pilot/model projects and
documents available with
IRS.
Total direct emission reductions (from year 3 of the project i.e. final year)
The use of words “End of Project (EOP)” and “Year 3” are interchangeably used, which means the same
Assumptions
• Timely execution of planned
activities planned with adequate
resource mobilization
• Efficient and quality
measurement & recording
systems are available
• Field units of IR extend the
support in desired manner and
effectively implement the
identified EE measures
Strategy
Project Objective
Removal of key barriers
that prevent the wide
adoption of energy
efficiency technologies
and measures in the IRS
23
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline
Total direct energy savings23 by EOP
(billion kWh)
• 0
Targets
• 0.142
Means of Gauging Success
• See Annex D
• Energy bills verified by
IR and technical reports
Assumptions
•
•
Timely implementation of all
identified measures
IR zonal, division and other unit
managers give EE importance in
their investment decisions
Total direct energy savings (from year 3 of the project i.e. final year)
40
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Strategy
Indicator
Baseline
Component 1: Institutional capacity development and technical training24
Status report of targeted EE technologies /
Outcome 1.1:
• 0
measures, its availability in India/abroad and
Strengthened IR
institutional capacity gap analysis for its implementation
Established and functioning of EE Centre of
• 0
Excellence (COE) in IRS by EOP
TIRFAD established and functioning by EOP • 0
Outcome 1.2:
Improved EE
management &
technical capacity of
IR staff
Targets
1
• 125
• 1
COE website established and operational by
EOP
Number of training and testing institutes with
capacity to provide trainings and test EE
measures/equipment respectively by year 3
Number of training courses conducted by the
training institutes each year starting from
year 3
Number of managers and staff members
trained on EE best practices and technologies
by EOP
• 0
• 1
• 0
• At least 826
• At least 227
• 0
• 6428
• 0
Number of successful EE projects
implemented by the trained managers and
staff members by EOP
• 0
• At least 325
managers
and 675
staff
• 4529
Means of Gauging
Success/Source of
verification
• Status report
• Letter of appointment of
head and staff
• Office space allocated
• APR/PIR and other
progress reports
produced
• URL domain
• List of training modules
of training institutes
• Inventory list of testing
institutes
Assumptions
•
•
•
•
Managers and technical staff are
willing to benefit from training
and supporting materials
Subjected to the availability of
the funds
Identified training and testing
institutes are competent and
capable staff are retained on
long-term
Competent website
administrator appointed
• Training attendance
sheets
• APR/PIR and other
progress reports
produced
24
The objective and all outcomes monitored annually in the APR/PIR, according to the suggested list of indicators.
Centre of Excellence established with full staff completed by year 3
26
Training institutes with the capacity (i.e. equipment and trained staff) to provide trainings on EE
27
Testing institutes with the capacity (i.e. test benches, calibration) to test EE measures
28
At least one training program conducted quarterly in each of the 16 divisions starting from the third year of the project.
29
A Project is defined as the implementation of defined technology in a specific location. The target is given assuming that all the 5 identified technologies (ref. Box 4)
are implemented across the 9 Railway zones
25
41
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Strategy
Indicator
Baseline
Targets
Component 2: Implementation of proven energy efficiency technologies and measures
Potential energy savings from the
Outcome 2
• 0
• 1.58 (for
Proven EE
implementation of EE technologies and/or
traction)
technologies and
measures by Year 3, million kWh/yr
• 110.40 (for
measures in traction
nonand non-traction
traction)
operations are
implemented and
Percentage of savings derived from EE
• NA
• At least
energy savings
measures implemented allocated as
10%
realized.
incentives to EE implementers by EOP
Number of project proposals (technical and
• 0
• 4530
financial) prepared by EOP for EE
technology / measure application projects
Component 3: Pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures
Number of energy audits conducted in IRS
50
Outcome 3
• NA
Increased confidence
units above 0.5 MW load by year 3
in the application of
Number of pilot demonstrations designed
• NA
• At least 831
piloted EE
and implemented by year 3
technologies and
Total energy savings achieved from pilot
• 0
• 30.40
practices in the IRS
projects by EOP, million kWh
Means of Gauging
Success/Source of
verification
• Project progress reports
• Energy audit reports
• Project reports on
implemented EE
measures
• Energy bills
• Cash outflow report
• IRS Project progress
reports
• Prepared detailed project
proposals (technical and
financial)
• Energy audit reports
• Project progress reports
• Project reports on
implemented EE
measures
• Energy bills
• Documentation on
demonstration project
design and financial
closure and/or budget
allocation
• Project progress reports
Assumptions
•
•
•
•
Relevant details are shared by
the respective field units.
Standard tools/ methods/
procedures of evaluations are
used
Criterion & significant factors
considered for prioritization.
Prioritization is identified by a
competent team/ energy
managers/ auditors
• The developed countries agree to
share the information on
technology
• Transfer of technology is
negotiated.
• Prioritization is identified by a
competent team / energy
managers / auditors
• An interaction is established with
developed countries to absorb the
technologies on IR
• Resources are mobilized in time
30
A Project is defined as the implementation of defined technology in a specific location. The target is given assuming that all the 5 identified technologies (ref. Box 4)
are implemented across the 9 Railway zones
31
Pilot/demo activities implemented and audited per selected technology (as in indicated in Box 5 and Annex D)
42
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Strategy
32
33
Indicator
Baseline
Targets
Percentage of successful pilot
demonstrations adopted by IRS for
replication by EOP, %
• NA
• At least
25%32
Based on energy audits, number of EE
technologies and measures identified as
feasible for implementation (planned and
budgeted) by year 3
• NA
• At least 533
Means of Gauging
Success/Source of
verification
• Budget report to verify
funds allocated for
implementation of
successful projects
• Documentation on
demonstration project
design and financial
closure and/or budget
allocation
• Project implementation
progress reports
Assumptions
• Efficient and quality
measurement & recording
systems are available for
measurement
For replication by the end of the project and initiated
Pilots design for implementation as per selected technology and/or measure (as in indicated in Box 4 and Annex D)
43
Component 4: Information and knowledge sharing
Average number of visitors visiting the web
Outcome 4
portal each year starting year 2
Information and
knowledge on EE
Number of sets of knowledge sharing
technologies and
products (KSPs) developed and disseminated
measures are widely
by EOP
available and
Number of awareness campaigns conducted
accessible for IRS
per division per year starting year 3
divisions and their
Number of IRS divisions that are actively
affiliates
participating in IRS EE programs by EOP
Number of vendors registering with TIRFAD
each year starting year 3 (i.e. from 2013)
Cumulative number of vendors attending
TIRFAD campaigns by the EOP
• NA
• 24,000
• Web portal counter
• NA
• 1334
• Annual report
•
• 0
• 55235
• Annual report
• 0
• 68
• NA
• About 336
• Annual report at the
divisional level
• TIRFAD registration log
• 0
• At least
3937
•
•
Captured all the information,
updated knowledge and
documented the results
The web portal is created and
operational
TIRFAD is created and
operational
34
At least one leaflet/booklet for each technology or a measure that will be demonstrated will be produced. This information is included in a regular (project) newsletter
and also uploaded onto the web.
35
At least 2 campaigns per division per year conducted by the end of the project (i.e. 68 divisions + 16 zonal headquarters + 1 railways + IRIEEN + IDSO + 5
production units x 3 years) over 16 zonal headquarters
36
Per successful pilot technology register with TIRFAD
37
At least three vendors per technology (13 numbers)
44
11.
TOTAL BUDGET AND WORK PLAN
Annual Budget and Work Plan (ABWP)
Table 10: Project Annual Budget and Work Plan (ABWP)
Award ID:
00060440
Project ID:
00076108
Award Title:
PIMS 4044 CC FSP Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railway System
Business Unit:
IND10
Project Title:
PIMS 4044 CC FSP Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railway System
Implementing Partner (Executing Agency):
Indian Railways (IR); Ministry of Railways
GEF
Outcome /
Atlas Activity
Outcome 1
Responsible
Party
(Implementing
Agency)
UNDP
Source
GEF
62000
Budget
Code
ERP/ATLAS Budget
Description/Input
71200
International Consultants
71300
Local Consultants
71600
Travel
72100
Subcontracts
72200
Equipment and furniture
72500
Annual Expenses (USD)
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Total (USD)
#
80,000
50,000
36,500
166,500
1
110,000
90,000
40,600
240,600
2
75,000
50,000
39,010
164,010
3
100,000
100,000
158,250
358,250
4
10,000
5,000
75,000
90,000
5
Supplies
7,000
2,000
2,000
11,000
5
72800
Info Tech Equipment
2,000
2,500
20,000
24,500
6
73100
Rental and Main Premises
2,000
1,500
1,500
5,000
5
73400
Rental and Main Equip
2,000
2,000
1,000
5,000
5
74200
Audio visual & Printing Prod. costs
10,900
7,000
3,000
20,900
11
74500
subtotal
Miscellaneous
3,230
3,230
2,780
9,240
12
402,130
313,230
379,640
1,095,000
45
GEF
Outcome /
Atlas Activity
Outcome 2
Outcome 3:
Outcome 4:
Responsible
Party
(Implementing
Agency)
UNDP
UNDP
UNDP
Source
GEF
62000
GEF
62000
GEF
62000
Annual Expenses (USD)
Budget
Code
ERP/ATLAS Budget
Description/Input
71200
International Consultants
75,000
200,000
88,000
363,000
7
71300
Local Consultants
90,000
275,000
103,500
468,500
8
71600
Travel
35,000
90,000
30,750
155,750
3
72100
Subcontracts
35,000
75,000
171,250
281,250
9
72200
Equipment and furniture
100,000
100,000
83,000
283,000
10
72500
Supplies
2,000
1,750
7,000
10,750
5
72800
Info Tech Equipment
1,000
750
250
2,000
6
73100
Rental and Main Premises
250
500
250
1,000
5
73400
Rental and Main Equip
400
400
450
1,250
5
74200
Audio visual & Printing Prod. costs
1,000
2,000
1,100
4,100
11
74500
subtotal
71200
Miscellaneous
1,000
1,000
900
2,900
12
340,650
746,400
486,450
1,573,500
International Consultants
20,000
100,000
67,500
187,500
13
71300
Local Consultants
30,000
140,000
147,025
317,025
14
71600
Travel
10,000
50,000
27,952
87,952
3
72100
Subcontracts
250,000
374,250
624,250
15
72200
Equipment and furniture
10,000
20,000
20,000
50,000
16
72500
Supplies
5,000
3,000
4,000
12,000
5
73100
Rental and Main Premises
1,000
1,000
1,000
3,000
5
74200
Audio visual & Printing Prod. costs
500
1,500
2,100
4,100
5
74500
subtotal
71200
Miscellaneous
2,000
1,500
673
4,173
12
78,500
567,000
644,500
1,290,000
90,000
45,000
64,500
199,500
17
71300
Local Consultants
100,000
64,525
100,000
264,525
18
International Consultants
Year 1
Year 2
Total (USD)
Year 3
#
46
GEF
Outcome /
Atlas Activity
Project
Management
Unit
Responsible
Party
(Implementing
Agency)
UNDP
TOTAL
Source
GEF
62000
Annual Expenses (USD)
Budget
Code
ERP/ATLAS Budget
Description/Input
71600
Travel
38,853
25,000
47,449
111,302
3
72100
Subcontracts
85,000
100,000
143,500
328,500
19
72200
Equipment and furniture
5,000
2,500
2,500
10,000
5
72500
Supplies
500
250
250
1,000
5
73100
Rental and Main Premises
1,000
500
500
2,000
5
73400
Rental and Main Equip
2,000
1,000
2,000
5,000
5
74100
Professional Services
4,000
4,000
4,000
12,000
20
74200
Audio visual & Printing Prod. costs
3,500
2,000
3,700
9,200
11
74500
subtotal
71400
Miscellaneous
4,000
2,000
973
6,973
12
333,853
246,775
369,372
950,000
Contractual Services-Individuals
81,083
81,083
81,084
243,250
71600
Travel
10,000
7,500
4,372
21,872
72200
Equipment and furniture
5,000
5,000
3,000
13,000
72500
Supplies
2,000
2,000
2,000
6,000
74200
Printing and audiovisuals
3,285
2,500
1,593
7,378
74500
Subtotal
Miscellaneous
-
-
-
-
101,368
98,083
92,049
291,500
1,256,501
1,971,488
1,972,011
5,200,000
Year 1
Year 2
Total (USD)
Year 3
#
General notes to the budget:
•
•
International consultants (IC) are budgeted at USD 3,000 per week, senior national consultants (NC) are budgeted at USD 550 per week and junior consultants at
USD 375 per week
The cost of workshops has been divided of 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 will cost about USD 2,500 per day.
47
21
Specific notes (the numbers correspond to the last column of Table 10):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
56 person/weeks of international expertise for capacity assessment analysis, development of training and imparting training and other events (workshops, seminars)
483 person/weeks of local short-term consultancy on traction, non-traction and energy efficiency for institutional capacity development and training
Travel cost (DSA and ticket) is budgeted at 30% of international consultant’s fee and 10% of national consultant’s fee as a general rule-of thumb
Subcontracts with companies for organization of workshops training events and study tours as well as website design
Equipment, rental premises, rental equipment for workshop and event organization;
Info tech equipment, includes software acquisition for training purposes
121 person/weeks of international expertise) for assessment of technology status and implementation of EE technology in measures in traction and non-traction
864 person/weeks of local short-term consultancy for assessment of technology status and implementation of EE technology in measures in traction and nontraction as well as related on-the-job training
Subcontracts with companies for energy audits, and technical assistance during assessment and implementation of EE measures in traction and on-traction (see Box
4)
Equipment, rental premises, rental equipment for workshop and event organization; and instrumentation for EE measures assessment
Printing and reproduction cost of workshop papers and proceedings and training materials as well as printing of project technical reports (assessments, feasibility
analysis, investment proposals, technical studies, etc.)
Miscellaneous is for unforeseen expenses that are difficult to anticipate
63 person/weeks of international expertise) for assessment and implementation of pilot demonstration activities
617 person/weeks of local short-term consultancy to assist in the implementation of EE pilot projects
Subcontracts for technical assistance in the implementation of pilot projects as detailed in Box 5
Equipment, rental premises, rental equipment for workshop and event organization; and instrumentation for EE measures assessment
67 person/weeks of international expertise) to support baseline, end-of-project impact and evaluation studies
551 person/weeks of to support baseline, end-of-project impact and evaluation studies as well as supporting TIRFAD in info dissemination
Subcontracts to conduct baseline and end-of-project impact study
Professional services for annual financial auditing
Project management, as detailed in Table 14
48
Table 11: Summary of Funds (GEF and co-financing)
Donor
GEF
Indian Railways
Total
Year 1
1,256,501
7,000,000
Year 2
1,971,488
7,000,000
Year 3
1,972,011
7,000,000
Total
5,200,000
21,000,000
8,256,501
8,971,488
8,972,011
26,200,000
Table 12: Budget per Project Component and Major Budget Items
Components
Category
USD
1
2
3
4
5
International experts
916,500
166,500
363,000
187,500
199,500
-
National consultants
1,533,900
240,600
468,500
317,025
264,525
243,250
540,886
164,010
155,750
87,952
111,302
21,872
1,592,250
358,250
281,250
624,250
328,500
-
446,000
90,000
283,000
50,000
10,000
13,000
89,500
45,500
15,000
15,000
8,000
6,000
Printing and audiovisuals
45,678
20,900
4,100
4,100
9,200
7,378
Professional services
12,000
-
-
-
12,000
-
23,286
5,200,000
9,240
1,095,000
2,900
1,573,000
4,173
1,290,000
6,973
950,000
291,500
Travel
Subcontracts
Equipment
Supplies and rental premises
and equipment
Miscellaneous
Total
Table 13A: Co-financing Details
Outcome
1
2
3
4
5
Institutional capacity
development and
technical training
Implementation of
proven EE technologies
and measures
Pilot demonstration of
EE technologies and
measure38
Knowledge sharing and
learning
Project management
Total
Cash
(USD)
In-kind
(USED)
GEF (USD)
Co-fin (USD)
Total (USD)
1,095,000
600,000
500,000
100,000
1,695,000
1,573,500
12,835,750
12,700,000
135,750
14,409,250
1,290,000
6,035,750
5,800,000
235,750
7,325,750
950,000
350,000
250,000
100,000
1,300,000
291,500
5,200,000
1,178,500
21,000,000
750,000
20,000,000
428,500
1,000,000
1,470,000
26,200,000
Note: Co-financing of Outcome 2 includes investment in ‘proven’ EE technologies and measures of USD 12,659,574. Cofinancing of Outcome 3 includes investment in pilot and demonstrations of USD 5,297,872
38
This includes conducting energy audit and implementing energy audit recommendations. The recommendations
(ECO/EEI) will be coming from the energy audits which are not known yet. Therefore the budget allocated
tentatively is US$ 212,766.
Table 13.B shows the breakdown of the project management costs for this project.
Table 13.B: Project Management Costs
GEF
Amount
($)
243,250
Cofinancing
($)
861,650
Office facilities, equipment
26,378
131,197
157,575
Travel
21,872
185,653
207,525
291,500
1,178,500
1,470,000
Budget Items
Local consultants and staff
Person
weeks
275
Total
12.
MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS
12.1
Project organization structure
Project
Total ($)
1,104,900
87. The project will be implemented by the Indian Railways under the Ministry of Railways. IR will
assume the overall responsibility for the achievement of the project results as the Implementing Partner.
The project is co-financed with funding from the GEF fund and UNDP acts as the GEF Executing Agency.
UNDP provides overall management and guidance from its New Delhi Country Office and the Asia
Pacific Regional Centre (APRC) in Bangkok, and is responsible for monitoring and evaluation of the
project as per normal GEF and UNDP requirements. Indian Railways (IR) will designate a senior official
as the National Project Director (NPD) for the project (usually an official with the rank of ‘Joint
Secretary’ level or above). The NPD will be responsible for overall guidance to project management,
including adherence to the work plan and achievement of planned results, and for the use of UNDP funds
through effective management and well established project review and oversight mechanisms. The NPD
also will ensure coordination with various government ministries and agencies provide guidance to the
project team, to coordinate with UNDP, to review reports and to look after administrative arrangements
required under the Government of India and UNDP.
88. A Project Management unit (PMU) shall be established to implement the project. Under the overall
responsibility of the NPD, the PMU shall be responsible for implementing day-to-day activities headed by
the National Project Coordinator (NPC). Efforts shall be made to mobilise the project team for the full
project tenure to ensure the availability of experts and consultants until the end of project. The project
manager (PM) will be supported by administration and finance staff, and Project Managers for Traction
(TR), Non-Traction (NT) and Energy Efficiency (EE). As needed, adequate numbers of technical experts
in different disciplines and project management consultants with expertise in project, finance, legal
matters, etc. will be associated on both longer-term and short-term time basis depending upon the work
load. The job description and ToRs for the PMU positions and assignments are enclosed in Annex C.
Rites Ltd has entered in agreement with IR to provide support for the preparation of the project during the
PPG stage with provisions to extend the support for project management and provision of consultancy
services during the FSP stage, but only if ratified by the PSC.
89. The Project Steering Committee (PSC) is responsible for making management decisions for a
project in particular when guidance is required by the NPC. The PSC plays a critical role in project
monitoring and evaluations by quality assuring these processes and products, and using evaluations for
performance improvement, accountability and learning. It ensures that required resources are committed
and arbitrates on any conflicts within the project or negotiates a solution to any problems with external
bodies. Indian Railways will sign the budgeted Annual Work Plan (AWP) with UNDP on an annual basis,
as per UNDP rules and regulations. Based on the approved AWP, the PSC will consider and approve the
quarterly plans and also approve any essential deviations from the original plans.
50
90. PSC will be composed of the Indian Railways39, Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF),
Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE)40, Ministry of Environment and Forests (GEF OFP office),
Department of Economic Affairs (DEA), as well as UNDP41. Other members (e.g. manufacturers’ and
suppliers’ associations, research institutes)42 can be invited by the decision of the PSC on as-needed basis,
however, by taking care that the PSC remains operational by its size.
91. Where needed, PMU will work with various (ad-hoc) Advisory Committees of experts and
stakeholders including representatives from industry, manufacturer / supplier organisations, industrial
associations, and the user Railway units etc. to discuss thematic issues and also to seek inputs from other
organisations (besides the institutions involved in the project) on how the programme should be
implemented on a product-by-product basis.
Figure 3: Project management structure
39
40
41
42
Executive: in this case the NPD, representing the project ownership by Indian Railways and chair.
Supplier: parties concerned which provide funding for specific cost sharing projects and/or technical expertise
to the project.
Assurance: supports the PSC and PMU by carrying out objective and independent project oversight and
monitoring (in this case done by UNDP India).
Beneficiary: individual or group of individuals representing the interests of those who will ultimately benefit
from the project
51
12.2
UNDP support service
92. Railways may enter into an agreement with UNDP for support services in the form of procurement
of goods and services during the project implementation process43. 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 IR and UNDP. UNDP India may assume the role of project
assurance, providing independent project oversight, carrying out monitoring functions and ensuring
project implementation. It will support project implementation by disbursing project funds on a regular
basis. It will also monitor project implementation through Project Implementation Reports (PIRs) and
mid-term and final evaluations.
12.3
Collaborative arrangements with related projects
93. The proposed project is closely related to the framework programme of “Supporting National
Development Objectives with Co-Benefits of Mitigation Climate Change” with the following specific
outputs:
•
•
•
•
Energy efficiency improvements in selected energy-intensive sectors
Framework developed for inclusive planning and delivery of clean energy services
Strategic partnerships to leverage environmental financing
Knowledge sharing and inputs provided for environmental and climate policy regimes
94. The indicative GEF budget is USD 5.2 million for the period 2011-2014 (three-year period) with
expected co-financing of USD 21 million. Regarding the energy efficiency output, co-financing is sought
from the GEF, and for this purpose and overall “Programmatic Framework Project for Energy Efficiency
in India” (GEF project 3538). Five projects on energy efficiency are proposed under this programme: (i)
Energy Efficiency Improvements in commercial Buildings (UNDP); (ii) Chillers Energy Efficiency
Project (World Bank); (iii) Financing Energy Efficiency in Small and Medium Enterprises (World Bank);
(iv) Promoting Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Selected SME Clusters in India (UNIDO);
and, (v) Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railways System (UNDP).
95. The proposed project will establish the necessary communication and coordination mechanisms
through its PMU and PSC with the Project Management Board of the “before-mentioned framework
programmes to ensure proper coordination between the various projects under the GEF “Programmatic
Framework for EE” umbrella programme on energy efficiency. UNDP India will also take the lead
ensuring adequate coordination and exchange of experiences. In addition, the project will seek to
coordinate its actions with other UNDP energy and climate change activities in India. Similarities in the
strategy of the proposed project may extend an opportunity to share lessons and exploit synergies, in
particular in the areas of harmonization and mutual recognition.
12.4
96.
There are no prior obligations or prerequisites that been identified
12.5
97.
Prior obligations and prerequisites
Brief description of inputs to be provided
The tentative GEF-supported budget of the Project Management Unit (PMU) is given below:
Table 14: GEF-supported budget of the Project Management Unit (PMU)
43
Whenever labeled products exist, public procurement of energy efficient goods (appliances/equipments) would
include star labeled products.
52
PM Budget Item
GEF
Budget
(USD)
National Project
Coordinator (NPC)
with a total of 93
person weeks (pw) @
USD 950/pw
88,350
Project Manager, TR
with a total of 37
person weeks (pw) @
USD 950/pw
35,150
Project Manager, NT
with a total of 37
person weeks (pw) @
USD 950/pw
35,150
Project Manager, EE
with a total of 63
person weeks (pw) @
USD 950/pw
59,850
Office manager (F&A)
with a total of 45
person weeks (pw) @
USD 550/pw
24,750
Travel (in-country)
21,872
Office facilities,
equipment
26,378
Total
Remarks
• Assist NPD in the preparation of the project execution scheme/work plan;
• Support the NPD, in the provision of guidance in the organization and
implementation of all activities specified in the project document and ensuring
timely completion;
• Responsible for day-to-day planning, operation and monitoring project activities;
• Provision of substantive inputs on project implementation results and issues to the
NPD, consultants and stakeholders;
• Organization and coordination of project meetings (across Division and Zones),
workshops and other expected deliverables from the Project;
• Responsibility for the monitoring of overall project implementation, project
review and facilitate independent project mid-term and terminal review;
• Coordination of financial auditing of the project according to the standards and
rules established by UNDP and prepare work plans, reports, budgets, and terms of
reference for sub-contractors and consultants;
• Liaison with Indian Railways units, equipment and technology providers, national
R&D institutions, test laboratories and technology institutes of the project and
promote exchanges of information among project participants;
• Review of drafts of any working documents to be submitted to meetings or
emanating from project activities, and communicate comments to consultants;
• Represent the project at forums and meetings.
• Support the planning and monitoring of “rolling stock” and “Traction
distribution” related railway operation activities;
• Review and provide comments on outputs pertain to traction;
• Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity descriptions where needed;
• Provision of substantive inputs on project activity implementation to the expert
consultants and stakeholders.
• Support the planning and monitoring of non-traction related activities & services;
• Review and provide comments on outputs pertain to non-traction;
• Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity descriptions where needed;
• Provision of substantive inputs on project activity implementation to the expert
consultants and stakeholders.
• Support for the planning, implementation, monitoring and reporting of energy
efficiency related activities such as energy audits, awareness creation, training and
capacity building;
• Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity descriptions where needed
• Responsible for administrative and secretarial matters;
• Perform project-related communication and liaison work: arrangement of
logistics, including travel and organization of meetings/workshops;
• Make annual budget and review its implementation, making adjustment
correspondingly;
• Carry out and manage the project contract payments;
• Conduct annual financial audit of the project in line with the UNDP, produce the
required statements as needed, keep checks and balances in place to ensure proper
use of finances under various heads and report the financial progress;
• Assist processing and reporting project incomes and expenditures.
• Travel expenses of the Project Coordinator and the project managers for their
project monitoring work in the different project sites under the various Zones and
Divisions of IR.
• Cost of office space rental for the PMO.
• Equipment such as computers and their peripherals, document reproduction
equipment as well as office supplies (e.g., stationeries)
• Purchase and use of telecommunication equipment and the monthly payment for
the communication costs (e.g., phone bills, internet service fees, etc.).
291,500
53
98. Indian Railway (IR) is the single largest organization with the highest electricity consumption in
India. With the aim of realizing the project objective, the project specifically targets traction and nontraction activities of IR. To realize the project objective, the PMU will have an enormous task of properly
managing and coordinating the project activities. The PMU shall coordinate with IR’s six production units
that are engaged in the manufacturing of rolling stock, wheels and axles and other ancillary components to
properly direct and manage the project activities. In this regard, the PMU must have specific skill set of
project managers and office staff that will oversee the implementation of these specific project activities
in 16 Zones of Indian Railways and are further subdivided into 68 Divisions. These Zones and Divisions
are spread across India and needs extensive travelling of PMU staff in order to coordinate and manage the
project activities. Considering the required additional project management personnel and PMU
officers/staff members, and based on the estimated person-weeks for each type of PMU staff, the
estimated cost for such local consultants and staff is US$ 243,250. IR will provide the other staff members
that will be assigned to carry out project management tasks in the various Zones and Divisions of Indian
Railways. The cost for such personnel amounts to US$ 861,650.
99. As part of the PM work, office facilities such as computers and their peripherals, document
reproduction equipment as well as office supplies (e.g., stationeries) are required. The proposed budget for
office facilities and equipment also includes the purchase and use of telecommunication equipment and
the monthly payment for the communication costs (e.g., phone bills, internet service fees, etc.). The cost
of office space rental for the PMO is also part of this PM budget line item. The co-financing for this
budget line item, which is about the same as the GEF contribution, includes the in-kind contribution for
office space and office equipment, as well as testing facilities, for project activities that will be hosted by
the various Zones and Divisions of Indian Railways.
100. The travel budget to be paid for by GEF funds, which is about 11% of the total travel budget for
project management, is for the travel expenses of the Project Coordinator and the project managers for
their project monitoring work in the different project sites under the various Zones and Divisions of
Indian Railways. The counterpart financing for the travel budget, includes the travel costs of various IR
staff members who will be involved in the project implementation, including in-kind contribution for the
utilization of Indian Railways transport services during monitoring missions.
101. The management of the proposed project will entail the deployment of personnel and office
facilities, equipment and supplies described above, as well as travel for the project management staff.
With the abovementioned project management requirements, a total of about US$ 291,500 is needed and
is being requested from the GEF. This is 6% of the total GEF contribution to the proposed project. The
total co-financing for the PM activities amounts to US$ 1,178,500, which is about 80% of the estimated
total PM cost of US$ 1.47 million.
12.6
Audit arrangements
102. The Government will provide the 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 according to the established procedures set out in the programming and finance manuals. The
audit will be conducted by the legally recognized auditor of the Government, or by a commercial auditor
engaged by the Government.
54
12.7
Agreement on the intellectual property rights and use of logo on the project’s
deliverables
103. In order to accord proper acknowledgement to GEF for providing funding, a GEF logo should
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. Alongside GEF and UNDP logo, Government of India or
the Ministry of Railways logo may also feature as the Implementing Partner of the proposed project.
13.
MONITORING FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION
13.1
Project start
104. A Project Inception Workshop will be held within the first two months of project start with those
with assigned roles in the project organization structure, UNDP country office (CO) and where
appropriate/feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors as well as other stakeholders. The
Inception Workshop is crucial to building ownership for the project results and to plan the first year
annual work plan. The Inception Workshop should address a number of key issues including:
• Understand objectives & other outputs and activities
• Assist all partners to fully understand and take ownership of the project. Detail the roles, support
services and complementary responsibilities of UNDP CO and Asia Pacific Regional Centre
(APRC) staff vis-à-vis the project team. Discuss the roles, functions, and responsibilities within
the project's decision-making structures, including reporting and communication lines, and
conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms of Reference for project staff will be discussed again
as needed.
• Based on the project results framework and the relevant GEF tracking tools, if appropriate,
finalize the first Annual Work Plan (AWP). Review and agree on the indicators, targets and their
means of verification, and recheck assumptions and risks.
• Provide a detailed overview of reporting, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements. The
Monitoring and Evaluation work plan and budget should be agreed and scheduled.
• Discuss financial reporting procedures and obligations, and arrangements for annual audit.
• Plan and schedule meetings of the Project Steering Committee (PSC). Roles and responsibilities
of all project organization structures should be clarified and meetings planned. The first Project
Board meeting should be held within the first 12 months following the inception workshop.
105. An Inception Workshop report is a key reference document and must be prepared and shared with
participants to formalize various agreements and plans decided during the meeting.
13.2
Quarterly review
106. Will consist of:
• Progress made shall be monitored in the UNDP Enhanced Results Based Management Platform.
• Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, the risk log shall be regularly updated in ATLAS.
Risks become critical when the impact and probability are high. Based on the information
recorded in Atlas, a Project Progress Reports (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.
55
13.3
Annual review
107. Annual Project Review/Project Implementation Reports (APR/PIR): These key reports are 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:
• Progress made toward 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 practice;
• AWP and other expenditure reports;
• Risk and adaptive management;
• ATLAS quarterly progress reports (QPR);
• Portfolio level indicators (i.e. GEF focal area tracking tools) are used by most focal areas on an
annual basis as well.
108. UNDP CO and the UNDP APRC 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 will be prepared by the CO and UNDP APRC and
will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and Project Board members.
Table 15: Elements and cost of monitoring and evaluation (M&E)
Type of M&E activity
Responsible Parties
Measurement of Means of
Verification for Project
Progress on output and
implementation
Implementing Partner
(National Project Director and
National Project Coordinator)
UNDP CO
UNDP GEF RTA/ NPC will
oversee the hiring of specific
studies and institutions, and
delegate responsibilities to
relevant team members.
Oversight by National Project
Coordinator
Project team
APR/PIR
NPD, NPC and Project team
UNDP CO
UNDP RTA
UNDP EEG
NPD, NPC and Project team
NPD, NPC
UNDP CO
UNDP RCU
External Consultants (i.e.
evaluation team)
NPD, NPC
Inception Workshop and
Report
Measurement of Means of
Verification of project
results (baseline and endof-project impact studies)
Periodic status/ progress
reports
Mid-term Evaluation
Final Evaluation
Budget USD
Excluding project
team staff time
Indicative cost:
$10,000
Time frame
Within first two months
of project start up
Indicative cost:
$120,000
Start, mid and end of
project (during
evaluation cycle) and
annually when required.
Indicative cost:
$8,000
(To be determined
more precisely) as
part of the Annual
Work Plan's
preparation.
Already included in
the PMU cost
Annually prior to
ARR/PIR and to the
definition of annual work
plans
Already included in
the PMU cost
Indicative cost:
$25,000
Quarterly
Indicative cost :
At least three months
Annually
At the mid-point of
project implementation.
56
Type of M&E activity
Responsible Parties
Project Terminal Report
Audit
Visits to field sites
UNDP CO
UNDP RCU
External Consultants (i.e.
evaluation team)
NPD, NPC
UNDP CO
Consultant
UNDP CO
NPD, NPC and Project team
UNDP CO
UNDP RCU (as appropriate)
Government representatives
TOTAL indicative COST
Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel
expenses
13.4
Budget USD
Excluding project
team staff time
$25,000
None
Indicative cost per
year: $4,000
from IA fees and
operational budget
Time frame
before the end of project
implementation
At least three months
before the end of the
project
Yearly
Yearly
US$ 200,000
(3.8% of total GEF
budget)
Mid-term of project cycle:
109. The project will undergo an independent Mid-Term Evaluation at the mid-point of project
implementation. The Mid-Term Evaluation will determine progress being made toward the achievement
of outcomes and will identify course correction, if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency
and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will
present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation and management. Findings of this
review 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 mid-term evaluation will be decided
after consultation between the parties to the project document. The Terms of Reference for this Mid-term
evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the APRC and UNDP-GEF. The
management response and the evaluation will be uploaded to UNDP corporate systems, in particular the
UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Centre (ERC).
13.5
End of project:
110. An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the final Project Board
meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance. The final evaluation will
focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the mid-term
evaluation, if any such correction took place). The final evaluation will look at impact and sustainability
of results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global
environmental benefits/goals. The Terms of Reference for this evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP
CO based on guidance from the APRC and UNDP-GEF.
111. The Terminal Evaluation should also provide recommendations for follow-up activities and
requires a management response which should be uploaded to PIMS and to the UNDP Evaluation Office
Evaluation Resource Centre (ERC).
112. During the last three months, 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 lay out
recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability and replicability
of the project’s results.
57
13.6
Learning and knowledge sharing
113. Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone
through existing information sharing networks, forums and Information web portals including the
TIRFAD.
114. 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, analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and
implementation of similar future projects.
115. Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information between this project and other projects of a
similar focus.
58
14.
LEGAL CONTEXT AND OTHER AGREEMENTS
116. This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government and UNDP, which is
incorporated by reference, constitute together the instrument envisaged in the Supplemental Provisions to
the Project Document. Consistent with the above Supplemental Provisions, the responsibility for the
safety and security of the implementing partner and its personnel and property, and of UNDP’s property
in the implementing partner’s custody, rests with the implementing partner.
117. The implementing partner shall:
• Put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account the
security situation in the country where the project is being carried;
• Assume all risks and liabilities related to the implementing partner’s security, and the full
implementation of the security plan.
118. 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.
119. The implementing partner 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). This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under
this Project Document. The list can be accessed via:
http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm.
59
Part C.
ANNEXES
ANNEX A: RISK ANALYSIS
ANNEX B: AGREEMENTS
ANNEX C: TERMS OF REFERENCE
ANNEX D: EMISSION REDUCTION CALCULATION
ANNEX E: ORGANISATIONAL SETUP OF RAILWAYS AND WEBSITES
ANNEX F: TRAINING AND CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES
ANNEX G: PROJECT ANNUAL TARGETS
60
ANNEX A. RISK ANALYSIS
Table 16: Summary of Risk Log and counter measures
Project Title:
#
1
Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railways System
Description
Failure to secure continuous support
from planners in Indian Railways
zonal, production and other units to
the EE programme
Date
identified
30 April
2010
Type
Operational
Impact & Probability
- on a scale of 1 (low)
to 5 (high)
Probability = 1
Impact = 5
Award ID:00057084
Date: April 2010
Owner
Submitted,
updated by
UNDP
UNDP CO
UNDP
UNDP CO
UNDP
UNDP CO
• PSC is chaired by senior official from IR and the PSC
meetings are held at regular intervals. This helps in
getting adequate support from different divisions.
UNDP
UNDP CO
• A directive will be prepared and approved by the IR
Board to support the project activities.
UNDP
UNDP CO
Countermeasures / Management response
• Zonal Railway and production units are governed by
Indian Railways under the Ministry of Railways.
The PMU is housed in IR and the PSC is headed by
senior official in IR. Hence any non lack in
commitment will be addressed through PSC and
other channels.
• Commitment of stake holders IR, zonal / production
Field units will be established during inception
workshop and project implementation.
2
Lack of manufacturers’ interest in
investing for EE products
30 April
2010
Strategic
Probability = 1
Impact = 5
• Project offers significant number of devices to create
an interest in manufacturers.
• IR showcase the intent for larger scale replications of
devices trailed through the project.
• BEE will play a key role in stimulating
manufacturers’ interest in investing in EE
products.
3
4
5
Failure to trigger a positive response
from technical staff on initiatives
supporting EE programme
30 April
2010
Operational
Lack of effective coordination
between IR units on initiatives
supporting the EE programme
30 April
2010
Operational
Willingness of IR managers to give
priority to EE in investment decisions
30 April
2010
Strategic
Probability = 3
Impact = 4
Probability = 2
Impact = 4
Probability = 2
Impact = 5
• The incentive programmes designed helps create
adequate interest.
• IR being the Implementing Agency of the project will
also make it obligatory to support the project
activities
#
6
Description
Competition from inefficient & cheap
EE devices
Date
identified
30 April
2010
Type
Financial
Impact & Probability
- on a scale of 1 (low)
to 5 (high)
Probability = 1
Impact = 2
Owner
Submitted,
updated by
UNDP
UNDP CO
UNDP
UNDP CO
• IR has well structured top down system to carry out
its operations. PMU is hosted in IR and the PSC is
chaired by a senior official from IR. These systems
are expected to ensure timely implementation of
measures.
UNDP
UNDP CO
• The institutionalisation of COE will start from year
2 itself to learn its adaptability in IR system. In Year
3, the same will be reviewed by PSC and steps to
institutionalise it are strengthened.
UNDP
UNDP CO
• Different training institutes and IR units are
governed through IR, Ministry of Railways. The
project PMU is hosted at IR which has organic
linkages. Regular PSC will help coordinating the IR
units and training to effectively carry out the project
activities.
UNDP
UNDP CO
• Analyses made on most (except few) of the
technologies/devices/measures indicate fast
payback. Hence PMU will impress upon IR to get
these testing and certification first as voluntary and
UNDP
UNDP CO
Countermeasures / Management response
• IR has committed co-financing for hardware
interventions. Hence the project implementation is
not likely to get affected.
• Minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) and
energy benchmarking would be made basis for
selecting the devices. This would be propagated
through IR channels to the divisions.
7
Devices chosen may become obsolete
(particularly electronics segment
devices)
30 April
2010
Strategic
Probability = 2
Impact =4
• Firstly, Annual Maintenance Contract and other spare
part supply guarantees will be carefully considered by
the PMU with manufacturer so that the devices
installed can run for a reasonable time.
• Secondly, PSC will take stock of the situation and
recommend mid course correction (in choosing an
alternate device to what has been proposed in the
project) without changing the overall framework of
project.
8
9
10
11
Delays in implementing the measures
30 April
2010
Operational
Failure to get Centre of Excellence
(COE) institutionalised with proper
mandate
30 April
2010
Strategic
Lack of effective coordination
between IR units and training
institutes
30 April
2010
Operational
Test laboratories do not find EE
testing and certification sufficiently
attractive
30 April
2010
Probability = 4
Impact = 3
Probability = 4
Impact = 4
Probability = 2
Impact =4
Operational
Probability = 1
Impact = 4
62
#
Description
Date
identified
Type
Impact & Probability
- on a scale of 1 (low)
to 5 (high)
Countermeasures / Management response
Owner
Submitted,
updated by
then as mandatory based on project results.
63
ANNEX B. AGREEMENTS
GEF PIF and GEF OFP Endorsement Letter
Will be attached in a separate electronic file
Co-financing letter (Indian Railways)
ANNEX C. TERMS OF REFERENCE
Draft Terms of Reference (TORs) for the key project personnel
A. National Project Director (NPD)
The National Project Director (NPD) will be appointed by Indian Railways in consultation with UNDP for
overall supervision of the project. NPD will act as Member Secretary to the Project Steering Committee
(PSC) and shall be responsible for overall implementation of the project.
Scope of work:
1. To organize/convene Project Steering Committee meetings as per UNDP procedures
2. To facilitate interaction and communication with other Ministries and Governmental
departments
3. To establish the Energy Efficiency Centre of Excellence (COE) within Indian Railways
4. To provide guidance to the National Project Coordinator and the Project Management Unit
(PMU)
5. Approve Terms of Reference for PMU staff
6. Review monitoring, evaluation and audit reports to Executing Agency (EA) and UNDP/GEF
and facilitate their timely submission.
7. General administration of Centre of Excellence.
B. National Project Coordinator (NPC)
Scope of work:
1. Assist NPD in management and implementation of the project and achievement of the objective
of GHG reduction
2. To prepare reports and recommendation to the Project Steering Committee
3. Coordination with zonal and other units within Indian Railways as well as other government
agencies
4. Establishment of Centre of Excellence
5. Day-to-day planning, implementation and monitoring of project activities
6. Carry out managerial and organization tasks for the timely achievement of project outcomes and
outputs
7. Liaison with Indian Railways units, equipment and technology providers, national R&D
institutions, test laboratories and technology institutes
8. Preparation of Annual Work Plan (AWP) and project budget revisions
9. Delegate responsibilities to the Project Managers TR, NT, EE and Office Manager (A&F)
10. Formulate quarterly and annual progress reports to IR and GEF-UNDP and their timely
submission
11. Coordination with international and national consultants Prepare and approve Terms of
Reference for consultants and subcontracts and for equipment procurement
12. Disbursement of funds, maintenance of accounts as per requirements of UNDP and internal
audits
13. Review consultants’ reports, project budget revisions, annual progress reports, annual work
plan, and other administrative arrangements as required by IR and UNDP.
C. Project Manager, Traction (TR)
Scope of Work:
1. Overall responsibility of implementing interventions identified for traction
65
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Participate in preparation of AWP and prepare quarterly plan
Provide inputs to prepare quarterly and annual reports
Plan, implement, monitor and report project activities related to ‘rolling stock’ and ‘Traction
distribution’ identified in the project
Benchmark performance parameters, monitor energy savings and report on quarterly basis
Carryout cost-benefit analysis, economic, and environmental (benefits due to carbon dioxide
reduction) as outlined in indicators
Report to NPC and extend support to other managers as and when required.
D. Project Manager, Non-Traction Services (NT)
Scope of work:
1. Overall responsibility of implementing interventions in non traction
2. Participate in preparation of AWP and quarterly work plans
3. Provide inputs to prepare quarterly and annual reports
4. Plan, implement, monitor and report project activities related to non traction related
interventions
a. Benchmark performance parameters, monitor energy savings and report it quarterly basis
b. Carryout cost benefit analysis, economic and environmental (benefits due to carbon dioxide
reduction) as outlined in indicators
5. Report to NPC and extend support to other managers as and when required in consultation with
NPC.
E. Project Manager, Energy Efficiency and Training
Scope of work:
1. Overall responsibility of implementing energy efficiency related activities such as energy audits,
awareness creation, training and capacity building
2. Participate in preparation of AWP and quarterly work plans
3. Provide inputs to prepare quarterly and annual progress reports
4. Plan, implement, monitor and report project activities as outlined in point 1.
5. Synergise the implementation of EE in Indian Railways in BAU with the project activities
6. Liaise the awareness, training and capacity building activities for different target groups of IR
7. Identify the technologies to be learnt from abroad and implemented in IR
8. Benchmark the energy performance
9. Report overall benefits of energy savings and CO2 emission.
F. Office Manager, Administration & Finance
Scope of work:
1. Maintenance of accounts, inventory, assets register, and other requirements of GEF-UNDP and
IR
2. Timely preparation and submission of quarterly FACE (Funding Authorisation and Certificate
of Expenditure) to account for expenditure GEF-UNDP and as required by IR,
3. Facilitate annual financial audit of the project, prepare management responses to audit
observations and carry out follow up action for GEF-UNDP and IR
4. Exercise financial due diligence in expenditure
5. Arrange logistics for travel (national and international), meetings, workshops
A detailed list of International and National Consultants for Technical Assistance activities is annexed to
the GEF CEO Endorsement Request sheet.
66
ANNEX D. EMISSION REDUCTION CALCULATION
120. This Annex presents the assessment of the CO2 emissions that are avoided as a consequence of the
project’s interventions. The assessment has been done in accordance with the GEF Manual for calculating
CO2 emission reduction44. It describes the calculation of direct and indirect emission reduction.
D.1
Direct emission reduction
121. As indicated in the Boxes 4 and 5 (in Section 6.2), IR will make investments during the project’s
supervised implementation period (3 years) as part of the Outcomes 2 and 3.
122. Several energy efficiency technologies and measures that could potentially be introduced through
the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program, or whose adoption can be widened, have been
identified during project preparation. These technologies and measures have been divided into four
(traction and non-traction wise) categories:
(1) Technologies and measures that have already been tested in India (in the railways sector or in
other sectors) but need a more widespread dissemination (traction and non-traction);
(2) Technologies and measures that have proven to be successful abroad, but have not yet been
tested in India (traction and non-traction).
123. In order to select the energy efficiency technologies and measures to be implemented or tested
through the project, each identified technology has been assessed against the following criteria (see Table
7 in Section 4.3)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rate of return
Easiness to implement
Number of departments involved for the implementation
Complementarity to existing knowledge within IR
Provenness in India or abroad/recommended by international bodies
Potential for absorption/replicability
The direct emission reduction is calculated based on the following formula and assumptions:
CO2 direct = E * L * C; where
• C – CO2 emission factor: grid emission factors of 0.82 tCO2/MWh for grid
• L – average useful lifetime of equipment: considering the fact that a range of technologies will be
demonstrated, which may have varying lifetimes, an average of 10 years has been assumed for the
calculation; and
• E – annual energy saved, 142 million kWh in electrical energy is estimated to be saved annually
through the implementation of measures (Outcome 2) and project demonstrations (Outcome 3), as
detailed in the Tables 17 and 18 (and summarized in the Boxes 4 and 5)
Thus, applying the above formula separately to electricity and thermal energy savings, cumulative direct
CO2 emission reductions over 10-year investment lifetime are estimate at:
44
Manual for Calculating GHG Benefits of GEF Projects: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects,
GEF/C.33/Inf.18
67
142 million kWh * 0.82 kgCO2/kWh * 10 years = 1.17 million tCO2
Cost effectiveness
If we divide the GEF contribution (USD 5.2 million) by the combined direct and direct post-project
emission reductions gives the corresponding unit abatement cost (UAC45) (i.e. GEF$ per tCO2) of USD
4.45/tCO2.
Table 17: Estimates of energy savings and direct emission reduction
(a) Traction and Rolling Stock
Technology/Device/Measure description
Investment
cost USD
Est. annual
energy
savings
(million
kWh per
year)
Est.
annual
CO2
reduction
(tonnes/
year)
425,532
0.38
308
1,276,596
1.21
992
Already proven in India
Installation and operation of Automatic Switched Capacitor Bank to reduce
electrical losses in Traction Sub Stations (ASCB for TSS)
Provision for Automatic switched Capacitors help correcting the power factor1 of
electrical loads at Traction Sub Stations (TSS). All TSS at present have fixed
capacitor banks to compensate Power Factor (PF) to save electricity losses in
line. Due to fluctuating nature of traction demand, they are unable to optimally
compensate the losses. Modern Automatic switched Capacitor Banks can
compensate PF to 0.98 compared to PF of 0.85 achieved at TSS with older
capacitor banks. (PF of 1 has minimum losses.)
(The power factor of an AC (alternating current) has relation to drawing of
current and thereby electrical losses. Electrical load with low power factor draws
more current than a load with high power factor for the same amount of useful
power transferred. The higher currents increase the energy lost in the distribution
system, and require higher size conductors, cables and other equipment. An
Automatic switched capacitor corrects the Power Factor optimally based on the
sensed power transfer and adjusts the power factor on real time to the required
quantum, thereby reducing the electrical losses.)
It is assumed that the line losses presently at 5% of traction energy will reduce by
25% (of the line losses) on introduction of Intelligent Capacitor Banks and the
device is expected to have a life of 20 years.
There are 400 TSS in Indian Railways. These TSS supply traction power
estimated to total about 12 BU of electricity annually. Intelligent Capacitor Bank
will be implemented in one TSS initially. The measure is estimated to cost USD
425,532 and the payback on investment is rather low i.e. 10.7 years (@ electricity
cost 0.106 USD/kWh). State electricity agencies also provide incentives to end
user having higher power factor. This co-benefit also helps reducing the payback
period further.
Installation and use of LED (Light Emitting Diode) lights in coaches
Light emitting diodes, commonly called LEDs, basically, are just tiny light bulbs
45
Only direct emission reductions are considered for 10 years of economic lifetime as per GEF guidelines. There are
no direct post-project emissions pertain to the project. Therefore, GEF finance of USD 5,200,000/1,167,581 tCO2.
68
that fit easily into an electrical circuit. They are illuminated solely by the
movement of electrons in a semiconductor material, and they last just as long as a
standard transistor. Their efficiency of conversion of electricity to light is about 4
times more that of incandescent lamps (lumens per watt).
At present train coaches have 20 Watt lamps each of which consume 28 Watts
including 8 Watts for choke. It is envisaged that LED replacement lights will
require only 12 Watts that gives better light and save approximately 60% of
electricity. While this is a direct saving, there are indirect savings in lesser
electricity generation by axle powered coach low efficiency generating units and
reducing the frictional burden of coaches46. The present lamps last for about 5,000
hours while the LED light is expected to last for 50,000 hours.
Indian Railways has about 36,100 coaches (5,800 AC coaches and 30,300 Non
AC normal coaches). It is envisaged to replace the lamps in 200 AC coaches with
LED lights. One coach requires 70 lights nos. The present cost of lights in a coach
is about USD 1,489 while the replacement of LED lights would cost about USD
6,383. However, the electricity consumption reduces by about 6048 kWh per
coach annually. The payback on investment is 2.5 years (@ electricity cost 0.426
USD per kWh – on locomotive it costs higher).
Proven abroad
Energy audit of rolling stock and implementation of recommendations
212,766
1.02
835
244,681
2.11
1,733
Energy audit of locomotive and AC coaches to measure the energy used by each
system and subsystem. It will analyse the present duty cycles and consumption
levels and provide the means to assess the scope for improvements in the system
to reduce the energy consumption.
There are about 3600 electric locomotives and about 5,800 AC Coaches in IR.
Energy audit will be carried out in two locomotives and 8 AC coaches of different
classes namely, First class AC, AC Two tier, AC Three tier, Chair Car. In
addition there are 30,300 non AC coaches which consume much less electricity
and will be tackled separately.
A locomotive is estimated to consume about 4.23 MU of electricity annually. And
uses about 10% in Auxiliaries Most energy audits give at least scope for 10%
savings. Assuming this reduction if recommendations are incorporated, the new
electricity consumption would be reduced by 1% of annual traction energy
consumed by the locomotive, about 42,300 kWh per locomotive. The cost of audit
is USD 85106 per locomotive and the payback is expected to be 0.5 year (@
0.426 USD/kWh) if the recommendations are implemented. It is proposed to carry
out energy audits in two locomotives. Low cost and high return measures
recommended will be implemented.
In AC coaches a saving potential of 10% is also (21,600kWh) is also expected per
coach. The cost of audit is USD 5,319; the payback is expected to be 0.6 years (@
0.426 USD/kWh).
Installation and operation of GPS based Driver Advice System (GPSDAS)
and Energy Management System
GPS based ‘Driver Advice System’ guides the driver on route conditions, traffic
ahead on the line, speed optimisation, coasting47 guidance ensuring safe and
energy-efficient driving. The system would include integration with onboard
46
Self generation, frictional burden, low capacity wiring network:
Coasting: It is defined as a free-running operational timing mode in which continuous or periodic movement is not
made
47
69
energy management system, digital energy meters to monitor energy used,
regenerated energy and specific energy consumption (SEC) achieved for the trip
against the best norm possible. GPSDAS will assist the driver through a console
showing, location of the train and the route, will furnish on line information and
advise the driver of optimum speed to be maintained and monitor his
performance. This will be interfaced for EE management at the Central Control
office, which will have real time train running information.
The GPSDAS system will be a complement to the existing to the Railways
Traction Supervisory control & Data acquisition system (SCADA) providing a
tool for an intelligent Energy Management system (EMS) with Demand
Controllers to monitor real time trends of traction energy These systems would
minimize energy demand from the Power Utility network and also help verify
energy consumption profile of driver, type of train (passenger or goods), traction
substation loads and ascertain losses under various components. It is expected that
the life of the system would be 15 years.
On board GPSDAS system along with EMS support will cost about USD 48,936
(INR 2,300,000). Centralised Control centre support systems include work
stations, communication support etc. A locomotive approximately consumes 4.23
MU per year without GPSDAS. With the introduction of GPSDAS it is expected
to derive 10% reduction (0.42 MU per year) in energy consumption.
Installation and operation of Microprocessor controlled air-conditioning
systems for AC couches
255,319
1.04
223,404
0.05
Investment
cost USD
Estimated
annual
energy
savings
(million
850
Microprocessor Controlled Air-conditioning system (MCAS) involves adding
sensors in different parts of the coach to optimally provide the air-conditioning
and ventilation through intelligent control of output to the actual need depending
upon number of persons and the weather conditions. At present only a thermostat
at one location governs the temperature control.
It is expected that this measure can save 20% of electricity over conventional
controllers. Electricity consumption in an AC coach consumes 0.065 MU per
annum that would get reduced to 0.052 MU per annum with MCAC. This
measure is estimated to cost USD 3,191 (INR 150,000) per coach. It is expected
that the life of MCAS would be about 15 years.
IR has about 5,800 AC coaches. It is planned to pilot this measure in 80 coaches.
Installation and operation of Roof mounted SPV for electricity generation
for passenger trains
37
Generally coaches are illuminated by electricity of self-generating coaches which
have axle hung generators. These are very inefficient and the cost of electricity is
about USD 0.426 per kWh (INR 20). Part of electricity can be provided by solar
cells located on the roof of the coaches.
It is proposed to install 2 kW modules in 15 coaches. Each coach would be able to
generate about 3,000 kWh electricity annually. This is assuming generation of
electricity will occur in 5 day light hours and the system runs for 300 days per
year. The life of the SPV system is about 25 years. The estimated cost for SPV
system per coach is USD 14,894 (INR 700,000).
(b) Non-Traction
Technology/Device/Measure description
Est.
annual
CO2
reduction
(tonnes/
70
kWh per
year)
year)
8,510,636
27.6
22,632
1,382,979
79.56
65,239
1,063,830
3.24
2,657
Proven in India, but not widespread applied
Installation and use of T5 Fluorescent tubes in place of T12 tubes for
lighting for stations, workshops and railway offices
T5 lights provide better light, than the T12. T5 provide 104 lumen/ Watt whereas
T 12 provides 60.
T12 consumes about 55 Watts, (40-Watt per tube and 15 Watt for choke). This is
proposed to be replaced by T5 tubes. T5 tube light has electronic ballast, power
factor corrected, instant soft start, tri-phosphor coatings having better
performance and consumes 32 Watts (28 W tube per tube light and 4 Watt for
choke). Approximately, 42% reduction in electricity consumption is expected
with this replacement.
T5’s life is approximately 20,000 hours as compared with the T-12’s 5,000 hours.
IR has about 500,000 houses and 500,000 service buildings. It is proposed to
replace 500,000 T12 with T5. The cost increase per light unit is from 12.8 USD
for T12 to 17 USD for T5. However, the annual electricity consumption reduces
from 66 MU for 500,000 T12 to 38.4 MU for T5. The payback on investment is
2.9 years (electricity cost @ 0.106 USD per kWh).
CFLs replacing incandescent bulbs for service buildings and railway
quarters
Recently introduced Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) can fit into existing
incandescent light fixtures. They consume much less power for the same light
output. It is proposed to replace 60 Watt incandescent bulbs with 9 Watt CFL.
The estimated electricity savings due to this replacement is 80%. An
incandescent bulb has an average life of just 1000 hours whereas a CFL can last
for 8,000 hours. CFL lamps, however, cost more. The cost of CFL is 2.13 USD
while an incandescent bulb is 0.21 USD per piece.
IR has about 650,000 houses for employees which are mostly fitted with
incandescent bulb for lighting. It is estimated that each household has about 6
bulbs totalling to about 3.9 million bulbs which will be replaced. Initially It is
envisaged that 650,000 incandescent bulbs used in these houses will first be
replaced by CFLs.
Electricity consumption per lamp reduces from 144 kWh in incandescent bulb to
21.6 kWh per annum in CFL. The payback on investment is just 0.2 years
(electricity cost @ 0.106 per kWh).
Installation and operation of VVVF (Variable Voltage Variable Frequency)
drives for machines
VVVF drives for electric motors are more versatile and draw minimum energy
from source for the duty-cycle and have minimum losses in starting. These drives
will be installed on machines with frequent starts and stop, and variable load
duties, like lifts, compressors, lathes, pumps etc.
It is proposed to install VVVF drives on 1,000 machines in IR. It is expected to
save about 30% in energy demand due to this. .For an average motor Electricity
consumption without VVVF drive is about 10,800 kWh per drive per annum
while machine with VVVF drive would consume be 7,560 kWh per annum (a
reduction of 30% electricity). The cost of a VVVF drive is about 1,064 USD per
device. It is expected that the life of such drive is about 20 years. The payback on
71
investment is 3.1 years (electricity cost @ 0.106 USD per kWh)
Proven in abroad
Energy audit of stations, workshops and railway offices
531,915
12.0
9,840
1,063,830
12.0
9,840
638,298
2.19
1,796
IR has about 8,200 building facilities namely; 8,000 stations, 100 workshops and
100 railway offices. Average connected load of these facilities is 500 MW.
It is proposed to carry out Energy Audits of 50 stations, workshops and railway
offices (40 stations, 5 workshops and 5 railway offices). It is expected that the
recommendations can lead to energy saving of at least 20%.
Energy Audit helps in putting a plan for implementation of measures that can
reduce the energy consumption in these facilities. Building Management System
may be one of the follow up action of Energy audit in these facilities.
It is estimated that Energy audit of each facility will cost about USD 10,638 (INR
0.5 million).
Installation and operation of Building Management Systems (BMS) for
stations, workshops and railway offices
ECBC (Energy Conservation Building Codes) to bring Energy Efficiency in
buildings is currently voluntary. It is likely to become mandatory in a few years,
especially for buildings with connected load of 500 kW.
As already explained in the previous section, railways have about 8,200 facilities
that have an average load of 500 kW.
The BMS helps establish benchmarks. It helps energy monitoring, control and
efficient management. The system helps identifying predictive maintenance
through monitoring power consumption profile of machinery & equipment.
It is estimated that each facility consumes about 1.2 MU of electricity annually.
This is estimated to get reduced to 0.96 MU annually (saving of 20%). The
expected life of the system is about 15 years.
It is envisaged that 50 facilities will be brought under BMS. It is expected to cost
about USD 21,277 per facility (INR 1.0 million).
Installation and operation of Energy Management System (EMS) for
pumping installations
Pumping installations: Provision of Discharge meters at pumping installations
can control waste. The discharge meters at pump delivery sides monitor the
pumping performance, water discharge and collection to regulate the use of water
through SCADA based monitoring & control system.
Following parameters will be looked into to bring EMS at pumping installations;
(i) Redesign the system with most efficient piping and pump and motor size
providing optimum pumping with minimum energy consumption, whenever due
for replacement, (ii) controlling the flow rate by speed variation, (iii) eliminating
flow control valve; (iv) eliminating by-pass control; and (v) start/stop control of
pump.
IR has about 6800 installations across 68 divisions, approximately 100
installations per division. The project aims to put up EMS in about 100 pumping
installations.
On an average the pump rating per installation is 25 kW. The present electricity
consumption is about 0.073 MU per installation. The EMS is expected to save
30% (0.0219 MU/year) of the electricity consumption. Thus the electricity
consumption is expected to be 0.0511 MU/year. The cost of EMS per installation
is about USD 6,383 (INR 0.3 million).
Energy Testing and Resource Centres
2,127,660
RDSO (Lucknow, UP) will develop facilities to test energy efficiency parameters
of Energy Efficiency measures. Energy Resource Centre at Indian Institution of
72
Electrical Engineers at Nasik (Maharashtra) will be developed to demonstrate and
teach the means of Energy Efficiency measures.
73
Table 18: Direct emission reduction: annual electricity consumption, saving and cost benefits (payback) and annual emission reduction of different
technologies and measures proposed in Outcomes 2 and 3
#
A
1
2
3
4
5
B
1(a)
1(b)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Technology/Device/ Measure
Proposed
number of
devices
under the
project (#)
Present
Present
Cost of EE
cost of
total cost of
device/
device/
device/
measure
measure
measure
per unit
(USD per
(USD)
(USD)
unit)
Technologies/measures for implementation (Outcome 2)
Traction
Installation and operation of
1
Intelligent Capacitor Bank for TSS
Installation and use of LED in
200
1,489
coaches
Non Traction
Installation and use of T5 tubes for
stations, workshops & railway
500,000
12.77
offices
CFL replacing Incandescent bulbs
for railway houses, service buildings
650,000
0.21
Total cost of
devices/
measures
(USD)
Present
electricity
consumed
(million
kWh/year)
Estimated
annual
Estimated annual
electricity
electricity saved
consumed with
due to the
Saving %
the new device/
measure/device
measure
(million kWh/year)
(million
kWh/year)
Cost of
electricity
(USD/kWh)
Annual amount
saved
(USD/year)
Payback
period
(years)
Annual CO2
emission
reduction
(tonnes)
425,532
425,532
30
0.38
29.63
1.3%
0.106
39,894
10.7
308
6,383
1,276,596
2.12
1.21
0.907
57.1%
0.426
514,723
2.5
992
6,382,979
17.02
8,510,638
66
27.60
38.4
41.8%
0.106
2,936,170
2.9
22,632
138,298
2.13
1,382,979
93.6
79.56
14.04
85.0%
0.106
8,463,830
0.2
65,239
30.0%
0.106
297,872
Installation and operation of VVVF
1,000
controls for machines
Total
Pilot technologies/ devices/ measures (Outcome 3)
Traction
Energy audit on Rolling stock
2
(Locomotives)
Energy audit on Rolling stock
8
(Coaches)
Installation and operation of GPS
based Driver Advice System
5
(GPSDAS) and Energy
Management System
Installation and operation of
Microprocessor controlled Air80
conditioning system for AC
coaches
Installation and operation of Roof
mounted SPV for electricity
15
generation in coaches
Non Traction
Energy audit of Stations,
50
Workshops and Railway Offices
Installation and operation of
Building Management System
50
(BMS) for Stations, Workshops and
Railway Offices
Installation and operation of Energy
Management System (EMS) for
100
pumping systems
Energy testing Laboratory
1
Total-pilot technology/measures
Total A and B
Assumptions:
USD 1 = INR 47; Grid emission factor = 0.82 kgCO2 per kWh
1,064
1,063,830
10.8
3.24
7.56
12,659,574
203
112
91
344,681
3.1
2,657
12,299,298
1.03
91,827
85,106
170,213
8.45
0.85
7.61
10.0%
0.426
359,719
0.5
693
5,319
42,553
1.73
0.17
1.56
10.0%
0.426
73,532
0.6
142
48,936
244,681
21.13
2.11
19.02
10.0%
0.426
899,298
0.3
1,733
3,191
255,319
5.18
1.04
4.15
20.0%
0.426
441,191
0.6
850
14,894
223,404
0.426
19,149
11.7
37
10,638
531,915
60
12.00
48
20.0%
0.106
1,276,596
0.4
9,840
21,277
1,063,830
60
12.00
48
20.0%
0.106
1,276,596
0.8
9,840
6,383
638,298
7.30
2.19
5.11
30.0%
0.106
232,979
2.7
1,796
2,127,660
2,127,660
0.05
5,297,872
164
30
133
4579060
1.16
24931
17,957,447
366
142
224
16878357
1.06
116758
D.2
Indirect emission reduction
124. After the project’s completion, investments will be affected by the long-term outcomes of the
barrier-removal activities, e.g. capacity building and institutional strengthening. The corresponding CO2
emissions reduction is referred to as indirect emission reduction. Following the GEF Manual for
calculating CO2 emission reduction48, these are estimated as described below.
Bottom-up approach
125.
The GEF bottom-up approach implies the replication of the project demonstration investments to
other Zonal Railways with Indian Railways over the GEF project influence period of 10 years and the
CO2 emission reductions are calculated using the following formula:
Indirect CO2 emission reductions (billion kWh) = CO2 direct * RF, where
CO2 direct = estimate for total direct emission reductions
RF = replication factor
For RF, the value of “3” has been chosen as a conservative estimate for Indian Railways based on the
market transformation and demonstration approach of the project. Thus, applying the above formula,
indirect emission reductions (bottom-up) are estimated as 1.17 million tCO2 * 3 = 3.50 million tCO2.
Top-down approach
126. The ‘top-down’ approach provides an ‘upper limit’ by looking at the potential leverage of the
project of the market for the EE technology for Indian Railways as a whole. In this approach the market
potential for technology within 10 years during and after the project’s lifetime is looked at (2011/122020/21). Table 19 provides a baseline scenario and an alternative scenario, based on energy growth
figures provided by Indian Railways, taking fiscal year 2009/10 as the base year for electricity
consumption estimate.
127. In the baseline scenario it is estimated that the total demand of electricity in the railways sector will
grow at a rate of more than 9% annually (see also Section 1.3 for a description). The electricity
consumption is projected to be about 100.5 billion kWh by 2031-32. The rapid growth is due to ambitious
electrification plans, in which 80% of rail freight and 60% of passenger traffic will run on electric energy
by 2031-32.
128. Indian Railways (IR) is developing a long-term Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program
(EECP) (2010-2032). The Program aims at progressively introducing a number of energy efficiency
technologies and measures in the railways system). The objective of this Program is to save 10% of the
electricity consumption in absolute terms by 2032, in line with the targets of national initiatives on energy
conservation and climate change.
48
Manual for Calculating GHG Benefits of GEF Projects: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects,
GEF/C.33/Inf.18
Table 19: Indirect emission reductions analysis
Baseline scenario (BAU)
Impl. EECP of IR without
GEF Support
Year
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
2018-19
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2024-25
2025-26
2026-27
2027-28
2028-29
2029-30
2030-31
2031-32
Total
2010-32
Elect
CO2
consumption Production
(million kWh) tonnes (1000)
14,096
11,558
14,731
12,079
15,651
12,834
16,947
13,897
18,360
15,056
19,902
16,319
21,583
17,698
23,419
19,203
25,423
20,847
27,612
22,642
30,004
24,603
32,618
26,747
35,477
29,091
38,604
31,656
42,026
34,461
45,771
37,532
49,871
40,894
54,362
44,577
59,281
48,610
64,672
53,031
70,580
57,876
77,059
63,188
84,164
69,014
91,958
75,406
100,511
82,419
1,030,203
Alternate scenario
Implement EECP of IR with GEF
Support (final 85%penetration of 10% saving in 20
Penetration
years)
Elect
CO2
consumption Production
(million kWh) tonnes (1000)
0
0
3
4
6
8
12
16
20
25
30
36
42
47
53
59
65
70
75
80
80
80
85
844,767
Cumulative
Energy Saving
Elect consumption Elect
Saved (million
consumption
kWh)
(million kWh)
15,651
16,947
18,305
19,822
21,454
23,231
25,118
27,170
29,404
31,803
34,413
37,215
40,261
43,620
47,228
51,154
55,428
60,145
65,287
70,894
77,431
84,602
91,967
12,834
13,897
15,010
16,254
17,592
19,050
20,596
22,279
24,111
26,078
28,219
30,516
33,014
35,768
38,727
41,946
45,451
49,318
53,535
58,133
63,493
69,373
75,413
55
80
129
187
305
442
600
815
1,064
1,390
1,765
2,151
2,643
3,207
3,853
4,527
5,294
6,165
6,733
7,357
8,543
972,897
797,775
57,307
55
135
264
452
757
1,198
1,798
2,614
3,678
5,068
6,833
8,984
11,627
14,835
18,688
23,215
28,509
34,673
41,406
48,763
57,307
Cumulative
CO2 Saving
CO2 Prod.
Saved tonnes
(1000)
45
110
217
370
620
983
1,475
2,143
3,016
4,156
5,603
7,367
9,535
12,165
15,324
19,036
23,377
28,432
33,953
39,986
46,991
129. The alternative scenario (with full EECP implementation) India is expected to reduce the expected
electricity consumption in the railways sector from 100.5 billion kWh in 2031-32 (up from the current49
15.7 billion kWh, based on 9% growth per year) to 92.0 billion kWh by 2031-32. Correspondingly, the
CO2 emission reduction figures would be reduced by the year 2031-32 in the EECP scenario to 75.4
million tCO2 from 82.4 million tCO2 (up from 12.8 million tCO2 in 2009-10).
130. In the alternative scenario the cumulative amount of 4.16 million tCO2 would be reduced over the
period 2011/12-2020/21 (that is, over the 10 years of project’s lifetime).
131. Of course, this potential cannot be fully attributed to the GEF intervention. Uptake of EE
technologies would take place to some extent due to ongoing (and future) national efforts and future
donor-funded initiatives. We propose to apply conservatively a “causality factor” 4 of 80%, which implies
that the impact of the GEF intervention is dominant (justifiable, as this would be one of first IR-wide
projects to be implemented by Indian Railways, including institutionalization of energy efficiency in the
Centre of Excellence). Some indirect emission reductions can be attributed to changes in the baseline over
time as some EE measures would be implemented anyhow.
132. Thus, an upper limit to indirect emission reduction impacts can be calculated as:
CO2 indirect TD = CO2TM * CF, where
49
2009-10, estimated.
76
CO2TM = total market potential for CO2 emission reductions
CF = causality factor
4.16 MtCO2 * 80% = 3.32 million tCO2
77
ANNEX E. ORGANISATIONAL SETUP OF INDIAN RAILWAYS
Table 20: Organisational setup of Indian Railways
ZONAL RAILWAYS
PRODUCTION UNITS
OTHERS
OTHERS
Central Railway
Chittaranjan Loco Works
Central Organization for Railway Electrification
East Central Railway
Diesel-Loco Modernization Works
Dargeeling Himalayan Railways
East Coast Railway
Diesel Locomotive Works
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation
Metro Railway Kolkata
Eastern Railway
Integral Coach Factory
National Rail Museum sites
North Central Railway
Rail Coach Factory, Kapurthala
Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India
Limited (DFCC)
Federation of Railway Officers Associations
North Eastern Railway
Rail Coach Factory, Raebareli
General Rules Review Committee
Railway Claims Tribunal
North Western Railway
Rail Wheel Factory
Indian Railway Accounting
Rail Land Development Authority
Indian Railway Accounts Service Association
Railway Recruitment Boards
Indian Railway Central Organization for Telecom
Railway Staff College, Baroda
South Central Railway
Central Organization For Modernization of
Workshops
Centre for Railway Information System
Indian Railways Institute of Electrical Engineering
Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd.
South East Central Railway
Container Corporation of India Ltd.
Indian Railways Institute of Mechanical and
Electrical Engineering
Research Design and Standards
Organization
South Eastern Railway
Indian Railway Catering and Tourism
Corporation Ltd.
Indian Railways Institute of Signal Engineering
and Telecommunications
Secret Ballot Committee
South Western Railway
Indian Railway Finance Corporation
Indian Railways Service of Mechanical Engineers
Southern Railway
IRCON International Ltd.
Indian Railway Traffic Service Association
West Central Railway
Konkan Railway Corporation's
Institute of Rail transport
Western Railway
Pipavav Railway Corporation Limited
Indian Railways Institute of Transport
Management
Northeast Frontier Railway
Northern Railway
CORPORATION SITES
Mumbai Railway Vikas Corporation
RAILTEL Corporation of India Ltd.
RITES Ltd.
IT Projects under CAO/FOIS
ORGANISATION
Palace on Wheels
Figure 4: Organisational Structure and Roles & Functions for EE:
Please note that within the pink-coloured frame, only NPC and will be funded with GEF resources
79
Figure 5: Indian Railways’ Organisational Chart (including COE)
The above chart is adapted from Annual Report & Accounts 2007-08. It indicates the position of the proposed CEO
within the IR hierarchy
ANNEX F. TRAINING & CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES
F.1
Proposed participants to capacity building activities
Table 21: Top managers
PMU/COE
Railways
Board
Zonal
Railways
(32)
Zonal
Divisional
Units
(68)
Production
Units
RDSO
IRIEEN
(5)
Staff
Training
Institute
(16)
Others
(e.g.
technical
staff)
(16)
Planners
and policy
makers
2
2
2
2
Rolling
stock
2
2
2
2
Traction
distribution
2
2
2
2
Building
services
2
2
2
2
Energy
Managers
2
2
5
2
2
Total
10
10
10
10
10
32
32
Training
Institutes
Staff
Training
Institute
Others
(e.g.
technical
staff)
64
122
Total: 300
Table 22: Middle-managers
PMU/COE
Railways
Board
Zonal
Railways
(16)
Planners
and policy
makers
Zonal
Divisional
Units
(68)
Production
Units
RDSO
(5)
(16)
3
2
Rolling
stock
2
2
2
Traction
distribution
2
2
2
Building
services
2
2
2
Energy
Managers
2
4
2
Total
8
13
32
122
10
10
1
(16)
2
1
2
32
32
Total: 261
81
Table 23: Supervisors and technical staff
PMU/COE
Railways
Board
Zonal
Railways
Zonal
Divisional
Units
(16)
(68)
Production
Units
RDSO
Training
Institutes
(5)
Planners
and policy
makers
Staff
Training
Institute
Others
(e.g.
technical
staff)
(16)
(16)
2
Rolling
stock
2
2
2
2
2
1
Traction
distribution
2
2
2
2
2
1
Building
services
2
2
2
2
2
1
Energy
Managers
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
Total
8
8
696
10
20
16
102
48
264
Total: 1,172
F.2
Examples of training modules and activities
Table 24: Training program for pilot demonstrations
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Day 5
Session 1
Presentation on the
setup and Brief on
best practices
pursued Structure,
functions & focus
areas of COE
Energy Efficiency
bench marks of pilot
demonstration
technologies/measur
es & comparison
Designs capabilities
& simulations
Efficacy
assessment,
verification of
performance, &
records
Energy audit
procedures
Session 2
Evolution of best
practices on EE
Testing facilities &
conducting tests
Training facilities &
training modules
Reliability,
Availability,
Maintainability,
Safety assessment
of the best practices
Implementation
strategies, Transfer
of technology
Session 3
Contemporary
technologies
Site visit/working
technology & model
demonstration
Site visit/working
technology & model
demonstration
Site visit/working
technology & model
demonstration
Customization
potential
Session 4
Site visit/ working
technology & model
demonstration of
pilot demonstration
technologies/measur
es
Interaction with the
users and sharing
knowledge with
experts
Interaction with the
users and sharing
knowledge with
experts
Interaction with the
users and sharing
knowledge with
experts
Development of
strategy for
replication in India
Table 25: Training program on Proven Technologies (i.e. technologies that have already been tested in
India and proven to be technically successful, but not widespread disseminated yet)
82
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Day 5
Session 1
Presentation on the
setup and Brief on
best practices
pursued Structure,
functions & focus
areas of COE
Energy Efficiency
bench marks of pilot
demonstration
technologies/measur
es & comparison
Designs capabilities
& simulations
Efficacy
assessment,
verification of
performance, &
records
Energy audit
procedures
Session 2
Evolution of best
practices on EE
Testing facilities &
conducting tests
Training facilities &
training modules
Reliability,
Availability,
Maintainability,
Safety assessment
of the best practices
Implementation
strategies, Transfer
of technology
Session 3
Contemporary
technologies
Site visit/working
technology & model
demonstration
Site visit/working
technology & model
demonstration
Site visit/working
technology & model
demonstration
Customization
potential
Session 4
Site visit/ working
technology & model
demonstration of
proven technologies
Interaction with the
users and sharing
knowledge with
experts
Interaction with the
users and sharing
knowledge with
experts
Interaction with the
users and sharing
knowledge with
experts
Development of
strategy for
replication in India
(a) Training activities for local level staff
The managers, supervisors and technical staff that will initially benefit from the above described training programs
on energy efficiency will become trainers or resource persons for the IR system and will contribute to train or raise
awareness among the whole IR staff.
Trainings for local level staff will be regularly organized in the appropriate training institutes benefiting from the
competences of the trained staff.
At least 100 local staff in each of the 16 zone will annually be trained on energy efficiency in their respective service
of competence (i.e. rolling stock, traction power distribution, and building services). A total of 4,800 (100x16x3)
staff is therefore expected to be trained annually.
In addition, at least four courses of 25 officials each will be conducted separately.
Finally, one module on energy efficiency will be added in each refresh course on rolling stock, traction power
distribution, and building services (to which about 2,000 staff participate annually).
Training modules will be developed by the PMU/COE.
83
ANNEX G. PROJECT ANNUAL TARGETS
Table 26: “Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railways System” Project Annual Targets
Indicator
Project Goal:
Cumulative emission reductions
Reduction of GHG emissions in
achieved in the IRS by EOP (million
the Indian Railways System
t CO2)
(IRS)
Project Objective
Removal of key barriers that
Total direct energy savings by EOP
prevent the wide adoption of
(billion kWh)
energy efficiency technologies
and measures in the IRS
Component 1: Institutional capacity development and technical training
Status report of targeted EE
Outcome 1.1: Strengthened
technologies / measures, its
IR institutional capacity
availability in India/abroad and gap
analysis for its implementation
Established and functioning of EE
Centre of Excellence (COE) in IRS
by EOP
TIRFAD established and functioning
by EOP
COE website established and
operational by EOP
Number of training and testing
institutes with capacity to provide
trainings and test EE
measures/equipment respectively by
year 3
Number of training courses
conducted by the training institutes
each year starting from year 3
Number of managers and staff
Outcome 1.2
Improved EE management &
members trained on EE best practices
technical capacity of IR staff
and technologies by EOP
Number of successful EE projects
implemented by the trained managers
and staff members by EOP
Target
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
0.117
0
0
0.117
0.142
0
0
0.142
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
At least 8
At least 2
0
0
2
0
6
2
64
0
0
64
200/75
75/200
50/400
0
20
25
At least 325
managers and 675
staff
45
Indicator
Target
Component 2: Implementation of proven energy efficiency technologies and measures
Potential energy savings from the
Outcome 2
• 1.58 million
implementation of EE technologies
Proven EE technologies and
kWh/y (for
and/or measures by year 3
measures in traction and nontraction)
traction operations are
• 110.40 million
implemented and energy
kWh/y (for nonsavings realized.
traction) from 3rd
year onwards
Percentage of savings derived from
EE measures implemented allocated
At least 10%
as incentives to EE implementers by
EOP
Number of project proposals
(technical and financial) prepared by
45
EOP for EE technology / measure
application projects
Component 3: Pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures
Number of energy audits conducted
50
Outcome 3
Increased confidence in the
in IRS units above 0.5 MW load by
application of EE technologies
year 3
and practices in the IRS
Number of pilot demonstrations
At least 8
designed and implemented by year 3
Total energy savings achieved from
30.40
pilot projects by EOP, million kWh
Percentage of successful pilot
At least 25% of
demonstrations adopted by IRS for
successful pilot
replication by EOP
projects are adopted
by IR for replication
by the EOP and
initiated
Based on energy audits, number of
At least 5
EE technologies and measures
identified as feasible for
implementation (planned and
budgeted) by year 3
Component 4: Information and knowledge sharing
Number of visitors visiting the web
24,000
Outcome 4
Information and knowledge on
portal each year starting year 2
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
0/0
0/0
1.58/110.40
10%
10%
10%
0
20
25
0
20
30
0
0
8
0
0
30.40
0
0
25%
0
0
5
0
12,000
12,000
85
EE technologies and measures
are widely available and
accessible for IRS divisions and
their affiliates
Indicator
Number of sets of knowledge sharing
products (KSPs) developed and
disseminated by EOP
Number of awareness campaigns
conducted per year starting year 3
Number of IRS divisions that are
actively participating in IRS EE
programs by EOP
Number of vendors registering with
TIRFAD each year starting year 3
(i.e. from 2013)
Cumulative number of vendors
attending TIRFAD campaigns by the
EOP
Target
13
Year 1
0
Year 2
0
Year 3
13
552
184
184
184
68
0
0
68
About 3 vendors per
successful pilot
technology register
with TIRFAD
At least 39
0
0
3
0
0
39
86
MONIQUE BARBUT
Chief Executive Officer and Chairperson
1818 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20433 USA
Tel: 202.473.3202
Fax: 202.522.3240/3245
E-mail: mbarbut@TheGEF.org
March 22, 2011
Dear Council Member:
The UNDP as the Implementing Agency for the project entitled: India: IND Improving
Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railway System - under the Programmatic Framework for
Energy Efficiency in India, has submitted the attached proposed project document for CEO
endorsement prior to final Agency approval of the project document in accordance with the
UNDP procedures.
The Secretariat has reviewed the project document. It is consistent with the project
concept approved by the Council in January 2009 and the proposed project remains consistent
with the Instrument and GEF policies and procedures. The attached explanation prepared by the
UNDP satisfactorily details how Council’s comments and those of the STAP have been
addressed.
We have today posted the proposed project document on the GEF website at
www.TheGEF.org for your information. We would welcome any comments you may wish to
provide by April 19, 2011 before I endorse the project. You may send your comments to
gcoordination@TheGEF.org .
If you do not have access to the Web, you may request the local field office of UNDP or
the World Bank to download the document for you. Alternatively, you may request a copy of the
document from the Secretariat. If you make such a request, please confirm for us your current
mailing address.
Sincerely,
Attachment:
Project Document
Copy to:
Country Operational Focal Point
GEF Agencies
STAP
Trustee
REQUEST FOR CEO ENDORSEMENT/APPROVAL
PROJECT TYPE: FULL-SIZED PROJECT
THE GEF TRUST FUND
Date of submission: 31st August 2010
Date of resubmission: 28th February 2011
PART I: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
INDICATIVE CALENDAR
GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 3554
Milestones
Expected Dates
GEF AGENCY PROJECT ID: 4044
Work Program (for FSP)
Nov. 2008
COUNTRY(IES): India
CEO Endorsement/Approval
March 2011
PROJECT TITLE: Improving Energy Efficiency in the
GEF Agency Approval
April 2011
Indian Railways system
Implementation Start
May 2011
GEF AGENCY(IES): UNDP
Mid-term Review
October 2012
OTHER EXECUTING PARTNERS: INDIAN RAILWAYS (IR);
Implementation Completion
June 2014
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
GEF FOCAL AREAS: Climate Change
GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM(S): CC-SP2 - Promote market transformation for energy efficiency in industry and
the building sector
NAME OF PARENT PROGRAM/ UMBRELLA PROJECT:
PROGRAMMATIC FRAMEWORK FOR EE IN INDIA
A. PROJECT FRAMEWORK
Project Objective: To improve energy efficiency in the Indian Railways system (and thereby reducing greenhouse gas
emissions) by removing some of the key barriers that prevent the wide adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures
in the Indian Railways system
Indicate
whether
Project
Components Inv.,TA2
or STA
1. Institutional TA
Capacity
Development
and Technical
Training
Expected
Outcomes
Expected Outputs
1.1: Strengthened
IR institutional
capacity
1.2: Improved EE
management &
technical capacity
of IR staff
1.1.1 Documented energy efficiency
(EE) best practices (measures and
technologies) and defined EE
benchmarks for railways systems
1.1.2 Established and supported
Centre of Excellence (COE)
1.2.1 Trained and qualified staff
members of the relevent IR
departments capable of implementing
EE technologies, measures, and best
practices
2.1 Documented detailed information
on available EE technologies and
measures
2.2 Developed and implemented
energy audit procedures
2.3 Completed implementation of
ready and proven technologies and
measures
2.4 Developed and implemented
incentive schemes
GEF
Financing1
($) a
2. ImpleTA/Inv. Proven EE
mentation of
technologies and
proven EE
measures in
technologies
traction and nonand measures
traction
operations are
implemented and
energy savings
realized
%
1,095,000 65%
Co-Financing1 Total ($)
c=a+ b
($) b
%
600,000 35%
1,695,000
1,573,500 11% 12,835,750 89% 14,409,250
1
3. Pilot
TA/Inv. Increased
demonstration
confidence in the
of EE
application of EE
technologies
technologies and
and measures
practices piloted
in the IRS
4. Information TA
Information and
and
knowledge on EE
knowledge
technologies and
sharing;
measures are
widely available
and accessible for
IRS divisions and
their affiliates
5. Project management
Total project costs
1
2
3.1 Completed demonstration of EE
technologies and measures
1,290,000 18%
6,035,750 82%
7,325,750
950,000 73%
350,000 27%
1,300,000
4.1 Collected lessons learned and
developed knowledge sharing
products
4.2 Developed post-project action
plan for DOE
291,500 20% 1,178,500 80% 1,470,000
5,200,000
21,000,000
26,200,000
List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively of the total amount for the component.
Inv. = Investments, TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & Technical Analysis.
B. SOURCES OF CONFIRMED CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT (expand the table line items as necessary)
Name of Co-financier
(source)
Indian Railway
Classification
Government
Project
%*
Cash
20,000,000
95%
Kind
1,000,000
5%
Type
21,000,000
* Percentage of each co-financier’s contribution at CEO endorsement to total co-financing.
C. FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY FOR THE PROJECT ($)
Project Preparation
a
GEF Grant
Co-financing
(Cash & Kind)
Total
Project
Total
b
c=a+b
For comparison (*)
Agency Fee
GEF and Cofinancing at PIF
100,000
5,200,000
5,300,000
530,000
5,200,000
150,000
21,000,000
21,150,000
21,000,000
250,000
26,200,000
26,450,000
26,200,000
(*) Excluding project preparation
D. GEF RESOURCES REQUESTED BY AGENCY(IES), FOCAL AREA(S) AND COUNTRY(IES)1
Not applicable, as this is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.
E. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENTS:
Estimated
person weeks
(GEF)
Local consultants*
2,515
International consultants*
306
2,821
Total
*Details to be provided in Annex C.
Component
GEF
amount($)
1,290,650
916,500
2,207,150
Co-financing
($)
300,000
300,000
Project total
($)
1,590,650
916,500
2,507,150
2
F. PROJECT MANAGEMENT BUDGET/COST
Cost Items
Local consultants*
International consultants*
Office facilities, equipment,
vehicles and communications*
Travel*
Total
Total Estimated
person weeks
(GEF)
275
0
275
GEF
amount
($)
243,250
0
26,378
Co-financing
($)
861,650
0
131,197
Project total
($)
1,104,900
0
157,575
21, 872
291,500
185,653
1,178,500
207,525
1,470,000
*Details to be provided in Annex C.
G. DOES THE PROJECT INCLUDE A “NON-GRANT” INSTRUMENT? yes
no
H. 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 external review; and, (8) Visits to field sites.
These activities have been included in the budget under project management.
Type of M&E activity
Responsible Parties

Measurement of Means of
Verification for Project
Progress on output and
implementation


Implementing Partner (National
Project Director and National
Project Coordinator)
UNDP CO
UNDP GEF RTA/ NPC will oversee
the hiring of specific studies and
institutions, and delegate
responsibilities to relevant team
members.
Oversight by National Project
Coordinator
Project team
APR/PIR





NPD, NPC and Project team
UNDP CO
UNDP RTA
UNDP EEG
NPD, NPC and Project team
Inception Workshop and
Report
Measurement of Means of
Verification of project results
(baseline and end-of-project
impact studies)
Periodic status/ progress
reports


Budget USD
Excluding project
team staff time
Indicative cost: $10,000
Time frame
Within first two months of
project start up
Indicative cost:
$120,000
Start, mid and end of project
(during evaluation cycle)
and annually when required.
Indicative cost: $8,000
(to be determined more
precisely) as part of the
Annual Work Plan's
preparation.
Already included in the
PMU cost
Annually prior to ARR/PIR
and to the definition of
annual work plans
Already included in the
PMU cost
Quarterly
Annually
3
Type of M&E activity
Responsible Parties
Mid-term Evaluation




Final Evaluation




Project Terminal Report








Audit
Visits to field sites
NPD, NPC
UNDP CO
UNDP RCU
External Consultants (i.e. evaluation
team)
NPD, NPC
UNDP CO
UNDP RCU
External Consultants (i.e. evaluation
team)
NPD, NPC
UNDP CO
Consultant
UNDP CO
NPD, NPC and Project team
UNDP CO
UNDP RCU (as appropriate)
Government representatives
TOTAL indicative COST
Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel expenses
Budget USD
Excluding project
team staff time
Time frame
Indicative cost:
$25,000
At the mid-point of project
implementation.
Indicative cost :
$25,000
At least three months before
the end of project
implementation
None
Indicative cost per year:
$4,000
From IA fees and
operational budget
At least three months before
the end of the project
Yearly
Yearly
US$200,000
(3.8% of total GEF
budget)
PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION:
A. STATE THE ISSUE, HOW THE PROJECT SEEKS TO ADDRESS IT, AND THE EXPECTED GLOBAL
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS TO BE DELIVERED:
Indian Railways has a total state monopoly on India's rail transport. It is one of the largest and busiest rail
networks in the world. It has a network of about 63,273 km transported 18 million passengers and 2.18 million
tonnes of freight daily in year 2007-08. The Indian Railway system is headed by the Indian Railways Board and
managed through 16 Zones with operating Divisions. There are six production units engaged in manufacturing
rolling stock, wheels and axles and other ancillary components to meet Railways requirements. Various IRowned organizations, such as the Research, Designs and Standards Organization (RDSO), Indian Railways
Institute of Electrical Engineering (IRIEEN) function as advisory, research and training centres for Indian
Railways
The electricity consumption of Indian Railways (IR) is around 2.2% of India’s total electricity consumption,
around 15.6 billion kWh in 2009/10. Due to rapid electrifiction (replacement of diesel-fuelled traffic), power
consumption might sore to 101 billion kWh by 2031/32. There is an enormous energy savings potential in the
Indian Railways system, which up to now hardly has been tapped. Therefore, IR is about to initiate an energy
efficient programme for traction and non-traction with a quantified target for non-traction of saving 10% of the
total consumption in absolute terms, called Energy Efficiency and Conservation Programme (EECP). A number
of initiatives has been planned, such as DC-to-AC conversion in selected zonal railways, energy-speed
monitoring systems and driver-advice systems in locomotives and training of loco pilots on energy-efficient
driving in traction operations, as well as replacing incandescent bulbs with CFLs and replacing inefficient
fluorescent lamps in non-traction (buildings services). While such initiatives have been initiated and policy
directives are issued, in general implementation faces a number of barriers, such as: (1) weak institutional
arrangement and institutional capacity to promote and implement energy efficiency (EE) technologies and
measures; (2) lack of in-house technical information on existing EE options and opportunities, and of technical
4
skills to implement them; (3) lack of proper incentives to favor the adoption and implementation of EE
measures; (4) limited number of EE technologies and measures tested and available in India, and (5) lack of
adequate resources to adopt and implement energy efficiency technologies and measures or replace obsolete
technologies and high investment costs among other barriers. For example, Zonal and Division managers tend to
focus on organizing the passenger and freight transport effectively, rather than on containing operational cost. In
fact, decision-making on capital cost (e.g. investment in EE equipment) is separated from the operational cost
account (i.e. paying recurrent expenses, such as the electricity bills). At central level, procurement decisions are
guided by the principle of competitiveness of primarily prices rather than energy efficiency considerations. There
is lack of awareness at unit manager level on EE; while technical staff members are aware but may lack
knowledge about the latest state-of-the art EE technologies.
The project will remove the identified barriers to energy efficiency in Indian Railways, through a comprehensive
and integrated approach that will focus on (detailed in the table below)
 Institutional capacity development and technical training;
 Implementation of already proven and low-risk EE technologies and measures;
 Pilot demonstration of EE technologies and measures;
 Monitoring and evaluation and knowledge dissemination.
Table 1: Overview of barriers to energy efficiency in Railways
5
Barrier
(1) Institutional barriers
Lack of an EE
Corporate Policy
Lack of institutional setup to promote and
monitor EE measures
Lack of adequate
capacity within training
and testing facilities
Lack of consideration
for EE measures and
energy conservation
practices in standard
specifications for the
purchase of material
and equipment
Measures supported by the project to address the identified barriers
The project will support the creation of a Centre of Excellence (COE) within IR
which will be responsible for (i) promoting and coordinating EE activities within IR;
(ii) providing technical support and advice on EE technologies and measures,
including trainings; and (iii) collecting and disseminating information on EE
technologies and measures (Output 1.2).
The project will support existing training institutes in upgrading/strengthening their
capacity for delivering trainings and conducting tests on EE (Output 1.3).
The project will support the creation of a Centre of Excellence (COE) which will be
responsible, among other tasks, to collect and disseminate information on EE
technologies. One of the tasks of the COE will be the review and development of
improved EE specifications for technologies, installation, testing, and operation and
maintenance procedures, and of audit manuals/guidelines on EE for specific railway
operations (Output 1.2).
Within the COE, a Technology Information Resource and Facilitation Desk
(TIRFAD) will be established to disseminate information on EE technologies and
measures to equipment vendors (Output 1.2).
Information and capacity barriers
The project will support the creation of a Centre of Excellence (COE) which will be
Insufficient
information/awareness
responsible, among other tasks, to collect and disseminate information on EE
among IR officials and
technologies and measures (Output 1.2).
One of the tasks of COE will be to assess the existing EE technologies adopted by
staff about existing EE
measures
different units of the IR, and come-up with a list of priority technologies to be
implemented in IR (Output 2.1).
The COE will also develop and implement energy audit procedures for each railway
operation to identify energy intensive departments and benchmarks for EE, and
produce audit manuals for IR staff to monitor the key parameters of EE (Output 2.2).
Finally, some of the activities that the project will support are the creation of a webbased portal for the dissemination of information of EE technologies and measures,
benchmarks, training material and best practices to IR staff (Output 1.2), and the
production of publications, leaflets, reports, and newsletters to disseminate the
information and lessons learnt through the implementation of the project (Output
4.1).
Lack of proper technical The project will support existing training institutes in developing and delivering
trainings on EE technologies and best practices (Output 1.3).
skills and capacity
among IR staff to
The project will in addition support the implementation of already proven EE
technologies and measures to build confidence and capacity among IR staff to adopt
assess, test and
implement EE
and implement EE technologies (Output 2.3).
technologies and
measures
(2) Incentive barriers
The project will support (i) the review of existing incentive and award schemes, both
Lack of incentives to
within and outside India, (ii) the development of suitable incentive schemes to
staff to implement EE
encourage the adoption and implementation of EE measures, and (iii) the
measures
institutionalization of the incentive schemes, if successful (Output 2.4).
The project will indirectly provide incentives to vendors and manufactures to
Lack of incentives to
develop/retail EE products by (a) providing technical assistance to manufactures,
vendors and
vendors, importers, and new entrepreneurs to design and produce EE equipments
manufacturers to
develop/retail EE
(Output 2.3), and (b) supporting the implementation of already proven EE
technologies and measures (Output 2.3).
products
(3) Technology barriers
The project will support (a) the interaction of IR staff with ‘units of excellence’ of
Limited adoption of
proven EE technologies railways systems of other countries to identify/familiarize with other countries’ EE
6
best practices (Output 1.1); (b) the development and implementation of training plans
abroad
on EE best practices (Output 1.3); and (c) the piloting and testing of selected energy
-
Lack of specific R&D
focused on EE
efficiency technologies and measures that have proven to be successful abroad, but
have not yet been tested in India, to check their applicability in India (Output 3.1).
The project will not directly support activities aiming at addressing this specific
barrier.
To strengthen the institutional capacity of IR system for mainstreaming EE issues, a Centre of Excellence (COE)
is planned under the Railways Board, as resource and support centre for the zonal and production units of IR and
various autonomous organizations. Activities of the COE will be to (a) identify and review the existing
technologies as compared to the leading technologies of the developed countries or elsewhere, (b) interact with
world’s leading institutions and manufacturers, (c) assess and identify gaps regarding EE technologies and
measures application in IR, (d) take appropriate steps to develop improved EE-friendly ‘material &
workmanship’ (M&W) specifications to induct the technologies, installation, testing and maintenance
procedures, (e) to develop audit manuals for all railway operations (traction and non-traction), (f) assist existing
training institutions (within and outside Indian Railways) in providing training to staff at various levels on EE
techniques and measures, and (g) provide guidance to various Zonal production and other IR units on the
implementation and cost-effectiveness of EE measures and technologies.
The project will support the establishment of the COE. Initially, the Project Management Unit will function as
proto-COE (PMU-COE), which will be institutionalized within IR during the course of the project to ensure
sustainability. The project will furthermore support the PMU-COE in providing guidance to trainers to develop
requisite training module and to in-house and external testing houses on measurement and calibration of EE
equipment of Indian Railways. Information on EE measures will be disseminated through an EE-dedicated web
portal to IR staff and for general awareness. COE’s Technology Information Resource & Facilitation Desk
(TIRFAD) will disseminate the information to industry sector for vendor development, adaptation and
implementation interaction with equipment and product providers in India.
The project will facilitate pilot implementation and demonstration of EE technology and measures in various
units of IR. Being implemented monitored and promoted, these would then be replicated through IR’s own
operations. Thus, knowledge sharing and learning is an important component of the project. International and
national best practices on specific railway operations will be documented, while the project’s experiences and
lesson learned will be documented and disseminated within IR and to other stakeholders. The international best
practices will be shared with relevant IR staff through regular training courses.
Once the EE programme is underway within IR, specific incentive schemes will be institutionalized to encourage
measures and initiatives that lead to energy conservation. These incentives could be either in cash or in kind and
would be instituted across different levels. Incentive scheme will be enhanced to include awards/rewards to
individual employees (i.e. rolling trophy and public recognition) for identifying innovative ideas that result in
energy efficiency. Details of such a scheme will be developed at the beginning of the project.
B. DESCRIBE
THE CONSISTENCY
PRIORITIES/PLANS:
OF
THE
PROJECT
WITH
NATIONAL
AND/OR
REGIONAL
With the introduction of the Energy Conservation (EC) Act 2001, the Government of India in recent years has
been promoting energy efficiency in different industrial sectors. Under the EC Act, Indian Railways (IR) has
been listed as a so-called ‘designated consumer’, which implies that IR needs to initiate an energy efficiency
programme. Therefore Indian Railways (IR) is developing a long-term Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Program (EECP) (2010-2032). The Program aims at progressively introducing a number of energy efficiency
technologies and measures in the railways system.
The objective of this Program is to save 10% of the electricity consumption in absolute terms by 2032, in line
with the targets of national initiatives on energy conservation and climate change. The Railways Minister has
committed to energy efficiency and GHG reduction in the railways system and this commitment has been
extended to this project by means of a USD 21 million co-financing letter.
7
C. DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH GEF STRATEGIES AND STRATEGIC PROGRAMS:
The proposed project is in line with the GEF objective of the Operational Program 5, i.e. “to promote energyefficient technologies and practices in industrial production and manufacturing processes” and the related
Strategic Program 2 (SP-2) “Promoting energy efficiency in the industrial sector”.
D. JUSTIFY THE TYPE OF FINANCING SUPPORT PROVIDED WITH THE GEF RESOURCES:
Without the support from GEF, Indian Railways would continue implementing some EE initiatives in accordance
with the Energy Conservation Act and IR’s EECP, but in practice at quite a low pace due to the prevailing
barriers mentioned in the previous section. In the absence of the project’s interventions, the EECP will not be
fully implemented. Consequently the level of energy consumption per passenger or freight per kilometre will
remain the same as in the baseline scenario due to the slow or no uptake of new of emerging technologies and
practices. Division managers will remain ignorant of the potential of EE and information dissemination on EE
practices will remain hampered, if no well-structured demonstration of best practices and monitoring of energy
and financial savings. Institutional capacity to implement innovative EE measures will remain limited and
fragmented over the various zones and division of Indian Railways. As in a vicious circle, this will also fail to
provide incentives for equipment vendors in India to adopt more energy-efficient designs and products for the
railways sector.
E. OUTLINE THE COORDINATION WITH OTHER RELATED INITIATIVES:
This project has been selected under the ‘umbrella EE programme’ Programmatic Framework Project for
Energy Efficiency in India (GEF project 3538) and has thus been prioritized by India’s Bureau of Energy
Efficiency (BEE) and Department of Economic Affairs (DEA). Five projects on energy efficiency are proposed
under this program: (i) Energy Efficiency Improvements in commercial Buildings (UNDP); (ii) Chillers Energy
Efficiency Project (World Bank); (iii) Financing Energy Efficiency in Small and Medium Enterprises (World
Bank); (iv) Promoting Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Selected SME Clusters in India (UNIDO);
and, (v) Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railways System (UNDP).
F. DISCUSS THE VALUE-ADDED OF GEF INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROJECT
INCREMENTAL REASONING :
DEMONSTRATED THROUGH
Baseline scenario
Indian Railways has in the past carried out few initiatives on energy efficiency in accordance with the Energy
Conservation Act, and policy directives are periodically issued to promote the adoption of energy efficiency
measures. However, the implementation of such initiatives and measures has been rather ad-hoc (i.e. based on
the good will of sensitive officers) and uncoordinated. In general, the uptake of energy efficiency technologies
and measures has been rather slow.
To promote the adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures in a more comprehensive and effective
way, Indian Railways is developing a long-term Energy Efficiency and Conservation Program (EECP) (2010/112031/32) with the objective of saving 10% of the total electricity consumption in absolute terms by 2032.
However, considering the pace with which energy efficiency measures have been implemented in the past, there
is an inherent risk that the implementation of the EECP would also be slow. During project preparation a number
of barriers have been identified as being responsible for low absorption rate of energy efficiency technologies
and measures (ref. Section 3.3 of UNDP ProDoc for more details). Unless these barriers are addressed, it is
likely that the implementation of the EECP would also be slow.
8
Without GEF intervention (i.e. baseline scenario), Indian Railways is expected to move from the current (200910) estimate of 15.7 billion kWh of electricity consumption in the railways sector to 100.5 billion kWh in 203132 (about 1,030 billion kWh cumulatively for the period 2010/11-2031/32). These figures are equivalent to the
emission of about 12.8 and 82.4 million tonnes of CO2 respectively. Details on the baseline scenario are
provided in Annex D of the UNDP Project Document.
GEF-supported alternative scenario
With GEF intervention (i.e. GEF alternative), it is assumed that, thanks to improved institutional set-up,
improved capacity, confidence and awareness, improved incentive system, etc., energy efficiency technologies
and measures will be adopted and implemented at a faster pace and on a wider scale.
As a result of the GEF intervention, the adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures will be faster in
the Indian Railways’ EECP thereby reduction in energy consumption and related CO2 emissions when compared
to baseline scenario. It is estimated that due to GEF intervention, total CO2 emissions during the period 2031-32
will be about 75.4 million tCO2, which is less than the estimated emissions under the baseline scenario for the
same period. Table 19 in Annex D of UNDP ProDoc compares total energy consumption (per year and
cumulative), energy savings (per year and cumulative), and CO2 emissions (per year and cumulative) under the
baseline and GEF scenarios for the years 2010-11 (beginning of the project) up to 2031-32, however considering
up to the year 2020-21 is advised on a conservative basis.
Annual direct CO2 emission savings are estimated at 0.117 million tCO2 (ref. Box 4 and 5 of UNDP ProDoc).
Cumulative direct CO2 emission reductions over 10-year investment lifetime (average) are estimated at 1.17
million tonnes of CO2 (tCO2). Considering the total avoided GHG emission reductions that are attributable to the
project, which amounts to 1.17 million tCO2, the corresponding unit abatement cost (UAC1) (i.e. GEF$ per
tCO2) is USD 4.45/tCO2.
After the project’s completion, investments will be affected by the long-term outcomes of the barrier-removal
activities, e.g. capacity building and institutional strengthening. The corresponding CO2 emissions reduction is
referred to as indirect emission reduction. A replication factor of “3” has been chosen as a conservative estimate
for Indian Railways based on the market transformation and demonstration approach of the project. Thus,
indirect emission reductions (bottom-up) over 10-year investment lifetime are estimated at 1.17 million tCO2 * 3
= 3.50 million tCO2.
In the alternative scenario the cumulative amount of 4.16 MtCO2 would be reduced over the period 2011/122020/21 (that is, a total duration of 10 years during and after the project’s lifetime). Of course, this potential
cannot be fully attributed to the GEF intervention as the project may have an influence over the entire IR system.
Uptake of EE technologies would also take place to some extent due to ongoing (and future) national efforts and
future donor-funded initiatives. Therefore applying a ‘causality factor’ 4 of 80% on a conservative basis will
give an indirect emission reduction of (top-down) 4.16 MtCO2 * 80% = 3.32 MtCO2.
SUMMARY OF THE EMISSION REDUCTION IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT
(a) Direct savings
2010-13
Alternative scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP with GEF support)
Energy Savings
CO2 emission savings
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 emission savings
(million tonnes)
0.142
0.117
1.168 (cumulatively for 10 years)
Savings directly due to the specific energy saving technologies and measures implemented during the project (i.e.
1
Only direct emission reductions are considered for 10 years of economic lifetime as per GEF guidelines. There are no direct postproject emissions pertain to the project. Therefore, GEF finance of USD 5,200,000/1,167,581 tCO2.
9
implementation of proven technologies and measures and pilot demonstrations - ref. Box 4 and 5 of UNDP ProDoc).
Cumulative emissions over 10-years are 1.168 million tCO2, assuming a 10 year lifetime of equipment on average.
(b) Indirect savings (bottom-up)
During 10 years of lifetime
Alternative scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP with GEF
support)
CO2 emission savings
(million tonnes)
3.503
Based on direct emissions reduction, applying replication factor of 3.
(c) Indirect savings (top-down)
Baseline scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP without GEF
support)
Alternative scenario
(i.e. implementation of
EECP with GEF
support)
Energy Savings
CO2 Savings
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
Electricity consumption
(billion kWh)
CO2 Production
(million tonnes)
2009-10
2012-13
Cumulative
2010/1112/13
2020-21
Cumulative
2011/1220/21
15.65
19.90
55.21
38.60
273.00
12.83
16.32
45.27
31.66
223.86
15.65
19.82
55.07
37.21
267.93
12.83
16.25
45.16
30.52
219.71
0.14
5.07
0.11
4.16
Savings due to the progressive uptake of energy efficiency technologies and measures indirectly induced by the activities
of the project (e.g. awareness raising, capacity building, etc.).
Applying a causality factor of 80%, indirect (top-down) emission reduction is estimated at 3.32 million tCO2
G. INDICATE RISKS, INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS, THAT MIGHT PREVENT THE PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S)
FROM BEING ACHIEVED AND OUTLINE RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES:
Risks are mainly related to institutional inefficiencies of IR to successfully implement the EE programme and
carry out the political and institutional mandate to conserve electricity. As part of this project institutional
capacity of IR, its proposed Energy Efficiency and Conservation Programme (EECP) will be strengthened to
mitigate this risk. The failure of obtaining support from stakeholders within and outside IR is a main risk. A
summary of risks and ways to address them is given in the UNDP ProDoc in Section 7.3 and its Annex A.
H. EXPLAIN HOW COST-EFFECTIVENESS IS REFLECTED IN THE PROJECT DESIGN:
The project aims to use EE technology with an average service life of EE equipment of 10 years. Assuming that
the equipment will function over this period, the cumulative GHG reduction is considered over 10 years.
The GEF support is expected to result in (details are presented in Annex D of the ProDoc):
 Direct emission reduction (cumulative emissions due to project-related investment, assuming an average
lifetime of 10 years):
o 1.167 million tCO2
10
o Considering the total avoided GHG emission reductions that are attributable to the project,
which amounts to 1.17 million tCO2, the corresponding unit abatement cost (UAC2) (i.e. GEF$
per tCO2) is USD 4.45/tCO2.
 Indirect emission reduction, estimated at ranging from:
o 3.50 million tCO2 (bottom-up)
o 3.32 million tCO2 (top-down)
PART III: INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION AND SUPPORT
A. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS:
No other GEF agencies are involved in the proposed project . The project will be coordinated with other projects
overall “Programmatic Framework Project for Energy Efficiency in India” (GEF project 3538). Five projects on
energy efficiency are proposed under this programme: (i) Energy Efficiency Improvements in commercial
Buildings (UNDP); (ii) Chillers Energy Efficiency Project (World Bank); (iii) Financing Energy Efficiency in
Small and Medium Enterprises (World Bank); (iv) Promoting Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in
Selected SME Clusters in India (UNIDO); and, (v) Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railways System
(UNDP).
B. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS:
Indian Railways is the Implementing Partner for the project. Project is planned to be implemented through a
Project Management Unit which will transform into a Centre of Excellence (COE). Later institutionalized within
IR to identify the needs of EE on Indian Railways, promote best practices and EE technologies to the various IR
zonal, production and other units. Also develop specifications and code of practices for implementation of EE
measures. Details on project management as well as project monitoring and evaluation are provided in Sections
12 and 13 of the accompanying UNDP ProDoc.
PART IV: EXPLAIN THE ALIGNMENT OF PROJECT DESIGN WITH THE ORIGINAL PIF:
During the PPG phase, consultations with the different Railway divisions, more clarity was obtained of the energy
efficiency technologies and measures. A detailed cost analysis was also performed for the implementation of proven
and pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures. This had subsequently led to a change in
related outputs and related budget allocation. The overall contribution of GEF and co-financing will remain the
same. Apart from these changes re-positioning, re-budgeting and editing the text of the various outputs in the
project framework, there is no major re-alignment from the original project design as presented in the PIF.
Table 2: Overview of changes from PIF to ProDoc
Expected Outputs
GEF-Approved PIF
Project Document
Component 1. Institutional Capacity
Component 1. Institutional
Development and Technical Training
capacity development and
technical training
1.1 At least 1000 Railway technical
1.1 Documented energy
staff (officers, supervisors, engineers)
efficiency (EE) best practices
trained
(measures and technologies) and
1.2 Testing House staff trained for
defined EE benchmarks for
2
Rationale for Changes in PIF
Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc
No change
Reorganized the outputs in a sequential
manner and rephrased the outputs.
Change in budget: There is a slight reduction
Only direct emission reductions are considered for 10 years of economic lifetime as per GEF guidelines. There are no direct postproject emissions pertain to the project. Therefore, GEF finance of USD 5,200,000/1,167,581 tCO2.
11
Expected Outputs
GEF-Approved PIF
Project Document
measurement and calibration of the
railways systems
equipments used in railways
1.2 Established and supported
1.3 Support the Center of Excellence
Centre of Excellence (COE)
1.3 Trained and qualified staff
members of the relevant IR
departments capable of
implementing EE technologies,
measures, and best practices
Component 2. Implement. of EE
Component 2. Implementation of
technologies and measures
proven energy efficiency
technologies and measures
2.1 Information on technology status
and best operating practices compiled
for Lighting, EE Pump, Power
Devices, Green Building, HVAC, DG
Set, Sensors and Automatic Metering
of Energy
2.2 Prepare and implement energy
audit procedures for each railway
operation e.g., production unit, traction
Substations, Workshop, Production
Unit, Maintenance depot and Buildings
2.3 Cost/ benefit’ analyses for priority
technologies/ measures conducted
2.4 Railway’s internal incentives
scheme for implementing EE tech/
measures created and implemented
2.1 Documented detailed
information on available EE
technologies and measures
2.2 Developed and implemented
energy audit procedures
2.3 Completed implementation of
ready and proven technologies
and measures
2.4 Developed and implemented
incentive schemes
Component 3. Pilot demonstration of
EE technologies and measures
Component 3. Pilot demonstration
of energy efficiency technologies
and measures
3.1 Completed demonstration of
EE technologies and measures
3.1 Piloting and Demonstrating tech./
measures in Testing House, EE
Rolling Stock, Static installation,
Workshop and Production Facilities
Component 4. Knowledge sharing and
learning
4.1 Identify international best practice
from Japan, Germany France and
others
4.2 Facilitate dissemination of
knowledge between the Center of
Excellence and similar institutes
abroad
Rationale for Changes in PIF
Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc
in the total budget for this component when
compared to the amount mentioned in PIF.
Rephrased based on the clarity obtained
during the PPG phase. Now priority is given
for the implementation of proven energy
efficiency technologies and measures.
During the PPG phase, extensive
consultations were conducted with different
divisions of Indian Railways for selecting the
energy efficiency technologies and measures.
Based on the analysis, ready and proven
energy efficiency technologies and measures
are selected. Then a detailed analysis was
conducted on the cost details of these
technologies and measures.
Therefore based on the clarity of
interventions, changed the outputs
accordingly under this component in the
ProDoc.
Component 4. Information and
knowledge sharing
4.1 Collected lessons learned and
developed knowledge sharing
products
4.2 Developed post-project action
plan for DOE
Change in budget: Subsequently to reflect the
above changes (more clarity on the cost
details of the interventions); there is an
increase in total budget. GEF funds allocated
in the ProDoc are slightly higher than
previously anticipated in the PIF.
Rephrased
Based on the clarity obtained during PPG
phase, some of these of technologies and/or
measures changed.
Change in budget: Some of this budget
mentioned in the PIF is now shifted to
implement the ready and proven technologies.
Thus the funds allocated in ProDoc are nearly
half when compared to the amount
anticipated in the PIF.
Rephrased
Change in the output: As most of these best
practices are, to certain extent, sourced
through secondary information. More
focus/attention is given in the ProDoc
towards collecting and dissemination of the
lessons learned from the implementation of
ready and proven technologies and/or
12
Expected Outputs
GEF-Approved PIF
Project Document
Rationale for Changes in PIF
Outputs/Activities in the ProDoc
measures.
Change in budget: A slight decrease in the
GEF funds allocation.
OTHERS
Project Management:
Project Management:
Overall Budget
Overall Budget
Change in budget: In order to reflect the
above changes, there is a slight increase in the
GEF funds allocation.
PART V: AGENCY(IES) CERTIFICATION
This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF criteria for
CEO Endorsement.
Agency
Coordinator,
Agency name
Yannick
Glemarec
UNDP/GEF
Executive
Coordinator
Signature
Date
(Month, day,
year)
August 31,
2010
Project
Contact
Person
Martin
Krause,
UNDP RCB,
Bangkok
Telephone
Email Address
+66-2288-2722
Martin.krause@undp.org
13
ANNEX A: PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK
Applicable GEF Strategic Objective and Program: Strategic Programme 2 (SP-2): Promoting Energy Efficiency in the Industrial sector
Applicable GEF Expected Outcomes: Increased deployment of energy efficient technologies and practices
Applicable GEF Outcome Indicators: (a) amount of energy saved (b) tonnes of CO2 avoided, (c) number of energy efficient technologies and measures promoted
Table 3: Project Planning Matrix (PPM)
Strategy
Project Goal:
Reduction of GHG
emissions in the Indian
Railways System (IRS)
Project Objective
Removal of key barriers
that prevent the wide
adoption of energy
efficiency technologies
and measures in the IRS
Strategy
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline Targets
Cumulative emission
 0
 0.117
reductions3 achieved in the
IRS by EOP4 (million t CO2)
Total direct energy savings5
by EOP (billion kWh)
 0
 0.142
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline Targets
Component 1: Institutional capacity development and technical training6
1
Status report of targeted EE
Outcome 1.1:
 0
technologies / measures, its
Strengthened IR
availability in India/abroad
institutional capacity
and gap analysis for its
implementation
Means of Gauging Success/Source
of verification
 M&E reports of the pilot/model
projects and documents available
with IRS.
 See Annex D
 Energy bills verified by IR and
technical reports
Assumptions
 Timely execution of planned activities
planned with adequate resource
mobilization
 Efficient and quality measurement &
recording systems are available
 Field units of IR extend the support in
desired manner and effectively
implement the identified EE measures
 Timely implementation of all identified
measures
 IR zonal, division and other unit
managers are willing to give EE
importance in their investment decisions
Means of Gauging Success/Source
of verification
Assumptions
 Status report
 Letter of appointment of head and
staff
 Office space allocated


Managers and technical staff are willing
to benefit from training and supporting
materials
Subjected to the availability of the funds
3
Total direct emission reductions (from year 3 of the project i.e. final year)
The use of words “End of Project (EOP)” and “Year 3” are interchangeably used, which means the same
5
Total direct energy savings (from year 3 of the project i.e. final year)
6
The objective and all outcomes monitored annually in the APR/PIR, according to the suggested list of indicators.
4
14
Strategy
Outcome 1.2: Improved
EE management &
technical capacity of IR
staff
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline
Established and functioning of  0
EE Centre of Excellence
(COE) in IRS by EOP
TIRFAD established and
 0
functioning by EOP
Targets
 17
Means of Gauging Success/Source
of verification
Assumptions
 APR/PIR and other progress
reports produced

 1

COE website established and
operational by EOP
 0
 1
 URL domain
Number of training and testing
institutes with capacity to
provide trainings and test EE
measures/equipment
respectively by year 3
 0
 At
least
88
 At
least
29
 List of training modules of
training institutes
 Inventory list of testing institutes
Number of training courses
conducted by the training
institutes each year starting
from year 3
Number of managers and staff
members trained on EE best
practices and technologies by
EOP
 0
 6410
 0
Number of successful EE
projects implemented by the
trained managers and staff
members by EOP
 0
 At
least
325
mana
gers
and
675
staff
 4511
Identified training and testing institutes
are competent and capable staff are
retained on long-term
Competent website administrator
appointed
 Training attendance sheets
 APR/PIR and other progress
reports produced
Component 2: Implementation of proven energy efficiency technologies and measures
7
Centre of Excellence established with full staff completed by year 3
Training institutes with the capacity (i.e. equipment and trained staff) to provide trainings on EE
9
Testing institutes with the capacity (i.e. test benches, calibration) to test EE measures
10
At least one training program conducted quarterly in each of the 16 divisions starting from the third year of the project.
11
A Project is defined as the implementation of defined technology in a specific location. The target is given assuming that all the 5 identified technologies (ref. Box 4 in
ProDoc) are implemented across the 9 Railway zones
8
15
Strategy
Outcome 2
Proven EE technologies
and measures in traction
and non-traction
operations are
implemented and energy
savings realized.
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline
Potential energy savings from
 0
the implementation of EE
technologies and/or measures
by year 3, million kWh/yr
Traction
Non-Traction
Percentage of savings derived
 NA
from EE measures
implemented allocated as
incentives to EE implementers
by EOP
Targets
 1.58
 110.4
 At
least
10%
Number of project proposals
 0
 4512
(technical and financial)
prepared by EOP for EE
technology / measure
application projects
Component 3: Pilot demonstration of energy efficiency technologies and measures
50
Number of energy audits
Outcome 3
 NA
Increased confidence in
conducted in IRS units above
the application of piloted
0.5 MW load by year 3
EE technologies and
Number of pilot
 NA
 At
practices in the IRS
demonstrations designed and
least
implemented by year 3
813
Total energy savings achieved  0
 30.40
from pilot projects by EOP,
million kWh
Percentage of successful pilot
 NA
 At
demonstrations adopted by
least
IRS for replication by EOP
25%
Means of Gauging Success/Source
of verification
Assumptions
 Project progress reports
 Energy audit reports
 Project reports on implemented
EE measures
 Energy bills


 Cash outflow report
 IRS Project progress reports


Relevant details are shared by the
respective field units.
Standard tools/ methods/ procedures of
evaluations are used
Criterion & significant factors
considered for prioritization.
Prioritization is identified by a
competent team/ energy managers/
auditors
 Prepared detailed project
proposals (technical and
financial)
 Energy audit reports
 Project progress reports
 Project reports on implemented
EE measures
 Energy bills
 Documentation on demonstration
project design and financial
closure and/or budget allocation
 Project progress reports
 Budget report to verify funds
allocated for implementation of
successful projects
 The developed countries agree to share
the information on technology
 Transfer of technology is negotiated.
 Prioritization is identified by a competent
team / energy managers / auditors
 An interaction is established with
developed countries to absorb the
technologies on IR
 Resources are mobilized in time
 Efficient and quality measurement &
recording systems are available for
measurement
14
12
A Project is defined as the implementation of defined technology in a specific location. The target is given assuming that all the 5 identified technologies (ref. Box 4 of
ProDoc) are implemented across the 9 Railway zones
13
Pilot/demo activities implemented and audited per selected technology (as in indicated in Box 5 and Annex D of ProDoc)
14
For replication by the end of the project and initiated
16
Strategy
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Indicator
Baseline
Based on energy audits,
 NA
number of EE technologies
and measures identified as
feasible for implementation
(planned and budgeted) by
year 3
Component 4: Information and knowledge sharing
Average number of visitors
Outcome 4
Information and
visiting the web portal each
knowledge on EE
year starting year 2
technologies and
Number of sets of knowledge
measures are widely
sharing products (KSPs)
available and accessible
developed and disseminated
for IRS divisions and their by EOP
affiliates
Number of awareness
campaigns conducted per
division per year starting year
3
Number of IRS divisions that
are actively participating in
IRS EE programs by EOP
Number of vendors registering
with TIRFAD each year
starting year 3 (i.e. from 2013)
Cumulative number of vendors
attending TIRFAD campaigns
by the EOP
15
Targets
 At
least
515
Means of Gauging Success/Source
of verification
Assumptions
 Documentation on demonstration
project design and financial
closure and/or budget allocation
 Project implementation progress
reports
 NA
 24,00
0
 Web portal counter
 NA
 1316
 Annual report
 0
 55217
 Annual report


 0
 68
 Annual report at the divisional
level
 NA
 Abou
t 318
 TIRFAD registration log
 0
 At
least
3919

Captured all the information, updated
knowledge and documented the results
The web portal is created and
operational
TIRFAD is created and operational
Pilots design for implementation as per selected technology and/or measure (as in indicated in Box 4 and Annex D of ProDoc)
At least one leaflet/booklet for each technology or a measure that will be demonstrated will be produced. This information is included in a regular (project) newsletter and
also uploaded onto the web.
17
At least 2 campaigns per division per year conducted by the end of the project (i.e. 68 divisions + 16 zonal headquarters + 1 railways + IRIEEN + IDSO + 5 production
units x 3 years) over 16 zonal headquarters
18
Per successful pilot technology register with TIRFAD
19
At least three vendors per technology (13 numbers)
17
16
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)
RESPONSES TO GEFSEC COMMENTS (16 FEBRUARY 2011)
Comments and Responses
COMMENTS ON CEO ENDORSEMENT (FSP)
Question 19:
Reference
[08- Feb-11] The issue is not yet properly addressed. It was explained that
"based on a detailed analysis of the anticipated cost for the management of the
project, a total amount of roundabout US$1,470,000 was estimated." Hence
"US $1,470,000 can be maintained in total. However as GEF funding and
cofinancing for the whole project is $5,200,000 and $21,000,000 respectively,
GEF funding for project management should be round $ 290,000(= 1,470,000
x 5,200,000/26,200,000).
Response:
[08-Feb-11] As suggested, the GEF funding for project management has
been adjusted. Accordingly, the co-financing share of the project
management cost has been increased to balance the required total project
management cost of US$ 1,470,000. The revised details could be seen from
the table below.
Budget Items
Local consultants
and staff
Office facilities,
equipment
Travel
Total
Person
weeks
275
GEF
Amount
($)
Cofinancing
($)
Project
management
Total ($)
243,250
861,650
1,104,900
26,378
131,197
157,575
21,872
291,500
185,653
1,178,500
207,525
1,470,000
CER, Part I,
Table A, p 2
& Table F, p
3.
and
ProDoc,
section 11,
Table 13B, p
50
RESPONSES TO GEFSEC COMMENTS (20 JANUARY 2011)
Comments and Responses
COMMENTS ON CEO ENDORSEMENT (FSP)
Question 19:
Reference
[19- Nov-10]The total amount for the project management was significantly increased from the
budget originally proposed (from $1.47 million to $2.62 million), which is not acceptable. Please
keep the same level of the total amount as originally proposed ($1,470,000) and revise the GEF
amount instead of cofinancing. The resources remaining can be used for the other components.
18
Comments and Responses
Response:
[19-Nov-10] As suggested, the co-financing share of the project management cost has been
adjusted. However, the proposed GEF contribution to the PM cost is retained as can be gleaned
and explained in the paragraphs below.
Person
weeks
Budget Items
Local consultants and staff
Office facilities, equipment
Travel
Total
459
GEF
Amount
($)
406,050
77,470
36,480
520,000
Cofinancing
($)
698,850
80,105
171,045
950,000
Project
Total ($)
1,104,900
157,575
207,525
1,470,000
Indian Railway (IR) is the single largest organization with the highest electricity consumption in
India. With the aim of realizing the project objective, the project specifically targets traction and
non-traction activities of IR. To realize the project objective, the PMU will have an enormous task
of properly managing and coordinating the project activities. The PMU shall coordinate with IR’s
six production units that are engaged in the manufacturing of rolling stock, wheels and axles and
other ancillary components to properly direct and manage the project activities. In this regard, the
PMU must have specific skill set of project managers and office staff that will oversee the
implementation of these specific project activities in 16 Zones of Indian Railways and are further
subdivided into 68 Divisions. These Zones and Divisions are spread across India and needs
extensive travelling of PMU staff in order to coordinate and manage the project activities.
Considering the required additional project management personnel and PMU officers/staff
members, and based on the estimated person-weeks for each type of PMU staff, the estimated cost
for such local consultants and staff is US$ 406,050. IR will provide the other staff members that
will be assigned to carry out project management tasks in the various Zones and Divisions of
Indian Railways. The cost for such personnel amounts to US$ 698,850.
PM Budget Item
National Project
Coordinator
(NPC) with a total
of 156 person
weeks (pw) @
USD 950/pw
GEF
Budget
(USD)
148,200
Remarks
• Assist NPD in the preparation of the project execution
scheme/work plan;
• Support the NPD, in the provision of guidance in the
organization and implementation of all activities specified
in the project document and ensuring timely completion;
• Responsible for day-to-day planning, operation and
monitoring project activities;
• Provision of substantive inputs on project implementation
results and issues to the NPD, consultants and
stakeholders;
• Organization and coordination of project meetings (across
Division and Zones), workshops and other expected
deliverables from the Project;
• Responsibility for the monitoring of overall project
implementation, project review and facilitate independent
project mid-term and terminal review;
• Coordination of financial auditing of the project according
to the standards and rules established by UNDP and
Reference
CER, Part
I, Table A,
p2
& Table F,
p 3.
and
ProDoc,
section 11,
Table 13B,
p 50
ProDoc,
section 12,
para 98, p
54
ProDoc,
section 12,
Table 14, p
53
and
CER,
Annex C, p
28.
19
Project Manager,
TR with a total of
62 person weeks
(pw) @ USD
950/pw
58,900
Project Manager,
NT with a total of
62 person weeks
(pw) @ USD
950/pw
58,900
Project Manager,
EE with a total of
104 person weeks
(pw) @ USD
950/pw
98,800
Office manager
(F&A) with a total
of 75 person
weeks (pw) @
USD 550/pw
41,250
Travel (incountry)
36,480
Comments and Responses
prepare work plans, reports, budgets, and terms of
reference for sub-contractors and consultants;
• Liaison with Indian Railways units, equipment and
technology providers, national R&D institutions, test
laboratories and technology institutes of the project and
promote exchanges of information among project
participants;
• Review of drafts of any working documents to be
submitted to meetings or emanating from project activities,
and communicate comments to consultants;
• Represent the project at forums and meetings.
• Support the planning and monitoring of “rolling stock” and
“Traction distribution” related railway operation activities;
• Review and provide comments on outputs pertain to
traction;
• Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity
descriptions where appropriate;
• Provision of substantive inputs on project activity
implementation to the expert consultants and stakeholders.
• Support the planning and monitoring of non-traction
related activities and services;
• Review and provide comments on outputs pertain to nontraction;
• Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity
descriptions where appropriate;
• Provision of substantive inputs on project activity
implementation to the expert consultants and stakeholders.
• Support for the planning, implementation, monitoring and
reporting of energy efficiency related activities such as
energy audits, awareness creation, training and capacity
building;
• Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity
descriptions where appropriate.
• Responsible for administrative and secretarial matters;
• Perform project-related communication and liaison work:
arrangement of logistics, including travel and organization
of meetings/workshops;
• Make annual budget and review its implementation,
making adjustment correspondingly;
• Carry out and manage the project contract payments;
• Conduct annual financial audit of the project in line with
the UNDP, produce the required statements as needed,
keep checks and balances in place to ensure proper use of
finances under various heads and report the financial
progress;
• Assist processing and reporting project incomes and
expenditures.
• Travel expenses of the Project Coordinator and the project
managers for their project monitoring work in the different
project sites under the various Zones and Divisions of IR.
Reference
20
Office facilities,
equipment
Total
77,470
Comments and Responses
• Cost of office space rental for the PMO.
• Equipment such as computers and their peripherals,
document reproduction equipment as well as office
supplies (e.g., stationeries)
• Purchase and use of telecommunication equipment and the
monthly payment for the communication costs (e.g., phone
bills, internet service fees, etc.).
520,000
As part of the PM work, office facilities such as computers and their peripherals, document
reproduction equipment as well as office supplies (e.g., stationeries) are required. The proposed
budget for office facilities and equipment also includes the purchase and use of telecommunication
equipment and the monthly payment for the communication costs (e.g., phone bills, internet
service fees, etc.). The cost of office space rental for the PMO is also part of this PM budget line
item. The co-financing for this budget line item, which is about the same as the GEF contribution,
includes the in-kind contribution for office space and office equipment, as well as testing facilities,
for project activities that will be hosted by the various Zones and Divisions of Indian Railways.
The travel budget to be paid for by GEF funds, which is about 18% of the total travel budget for
project management, is for the travel expenses of the Project Coordinator and the project managers
for their project monitoring work in the different project sites under the various Zones and
Divisions of Indian Railways. The counterpart financing for the travel budget, includes the travel
costs of various IR staff members who will be involved in the project implementation, including
in-kind contribution for the utilization of Indian Railways transport services during monitoring
missions.
The management of the proposed project will entail the deployment of personnel and office
facilities, equipment and supplies described above, as well as travel for the project management
staff. With the abovementioned project management requirements, a total of about US$ 520,000 is
needed and is being requested from the GEF. This amount represents 10% of the total GEF
contribution to the proposed project. The total co-financing for the PM activities amounts to USS
950,000, which is about 65% of the estimated total PM cost of US$ 1.47 million.
Reference
ProDoc,
section 12,
para 99, p
54
ProDoc,
section 12,
para 100, p
54
ProDoc,
section 12,
para 101, p
54
RESPONSES TO THE GEF REVIEW COMMENTS ON CEO ENDORSEMENT (20 SEPTEMBER 2010)
Comments and Responses
COMMENTS ON CEO ENDORSEMENT (FSP)
Component 1
Reference
Question 9.1: As appreciable EE technologies have already been identified and
will be implemented in Component 2 and Component 3, it is not clear what would
be the objective in conducting comparative analysis between technologies etc. The
relationship between these efforts needs to be clarified.
Response:
- There is a difference between interventions mentioned in Component 2
and Component 3. Component 2 focuses on “Implementation of proven
energy efficiency technologies and measures in India”, whereas
Component 3 focuses on “Pilot demonstration of energy efficiency
technologies and measures that have already been successfully applied in
ProDoc, section
6, para 43, p 24
21
Comments and Responses
developed countries but have not yet been successfully demonstrated in
India”. The objective of conducting a comparative analysis is to assess the
efficacy and the compatibility of energy efficiency technologies applied
and practiced in developed countries to the Indian context. This also helps
to achieve interaction with entities in industrialized countries that have
expertise in EE technology applications in railway systems.
Reference
Question 9.2: As EE benchmark will be defined, it needs to be applied in certain
situations and monitored.
Response:
- Agree. The defined EE benchmarks will certainly be applied and the
Technology Information Resource Facilitation Desk (TIRFAD) that will
be established during the project implementation will play a key role. EE
benchmark will be applied first within different divisions of the Indian
Railways Systems (IRS). The information on energy efficiency
technologies, measures, and benchmarks will then be documented and
disseminated to the Indian Railway divisions and production units,
suppliers and the various associations within each operating zones and
divisions of the company through the web portal. The established
benchmarks will be monitored through the conduct of energy audits and
revised based on the best energy efficiency achieved in the field units.
Component 2 and Component 3
ProDoc, section
6, para 44, p 24
&
ProDoc, section
6, para 53 and
57, p 28
Question 9.3: Please specify that both Component 2 and Component 3 have
investment component in table A
Response:
- Corrected as suggested.
Question 9.4: As for the Component 2 will implement proven technologies, the key
is how to disseminate and deploy these technologies in wider scale in IR context
rather than just demonstrating these technologies. Specific strategies need to be
developed and implemented for each technology for that purpose. Audit
procedures and incentive schemes should have close linkage to these technologies
to be deployed. (Audits procedures needs to be designed to lead to proper actions.)
In addition, it needs to be secured that regulatory/ policy frameworks will be put in
place if it is found necessary to enforce them.
Response:
- As mentioned above, TIRFAD will play a key role in the information
dissemination of proven energy efficiency technologies, measures, and
benchmarks to the Indian Railway divisions and production units,
suppliers and the various associations within each operating zones and
divisions of the company. Also, information gathered and processed will
be placed in the web portal for effective dissemination. Having recognized
the importance of energy audits, the activities that will be carried out to
produce Output 2.2 are geared towards developing and implementing
energy audit procedures for railways operation. Similarly, the activities
that are designed to deliver Output 2.4 are meant to develop and
implement an incentive scheme to provide incentives to Indian Railways
CER, Table A,
p1
ProDoc, section
6, para 51 and
52, p 27
&
ProDoc, section
6, para 60, p 29
22
Comments and Responses
(IR) departments and their staff to adopt and implement energy efficiency
technologies and measures.
Reference
Concerning the regulatory and policy frameworks, IR is the single largest
organization in India that has a total state monopoly on the country’s rail
transport. IR is managed through its 16 Zones which are subdivided into 68
Divisions. The EC Act 2001 mandates the Bureau of Energy Efficiency
(BEE) to work with designated consumers such as IR and other agencies to
enforce the provisions of the Act, i.e. energy efficiency and energy
conservation measures. IR will be responsible for implementing the
project, achieving the results outlined in the project proposal. Moreover,
certainly IR will be finally responsible to implement the policy formulation
activity under the project and also work on the advocacy and lobbying
efforts that would ultimately secure the approval and enforcement of the
formulated policies and associated implementing rules and regulations.
ProDoc, Box 2,
p7
&
ProDoc, Box 1,
p6
&
CER, Part II,
section B, p 7
&
ProDoc, Table
2, p 10
The project is a part of the “Programmatic Framework for EE in India”,
which is implemented by the BEE. Thus, the learning from here has the
potential to get implemented not only in IR but in other energy consuming
sectors too and the above programmatic framework provides such a
platform.
ProDoc, section
4, para 35, p 22
Question 9.5: Diffusion of these technologies need to be monitored (not only the
number of projects proposed in general but the number of each technology put in
place).
Response:
- The Centre of Excellence (COE) that will be established through the
project will play a key role in monitoring and implementing the EE
initiatives. It will also be charged with the responsibility to monitor and
evaluate the uptake of various EE technologies in terms of the number of
projects employing these technologies but also the performance of the
technology applications. The COE not only implements and monitors the
present set of initiatives but is expected to evolve as a resource centre that
will, among others, set up guidelines on EE technology developments and
applications in the future. Capacity building targeted under activity 1.3.5
also ensures effective monitoring of energy efficiency technologies and
measures, and maintenance of energy efficiency project assets.
ProDoc, Box 3,
p 25
&
ProDoc, section
6, para 47 and
48, p 26
Question 9.6: Annex A looks like that the audit procedures are under Component
3, while in other places under Component 2.
Response:
- Indeed energy audits are conducted under Component 2 as well. The
activities that will be carried out to produce Output 2.2 are aimed at
developing energy audit procedures, as well as guidelines in the
implementation of energy audits using the developed energy audit
procedures.
ProDoc, section
6, para 53, p28
Concerning the Pilot interventions under Component 3 it is mentioned that
energy audits will be carried out, obviously applying the procedures
ProDoc, Box 5,
p 30
23
Comments and Responses
developed in Component 2, for traction (i.e. the energy audit of rolling
stock) and non-traction (i.e. energy audit of stations, workshops and
railway offices) activities. These activities are definitely different from the
energy audit-related activities mentioned under Component 2.
Reference
Energy audits per se will not bring about the energy savings. The energy
audits prompt or influence the actions to save energy. The actions that
were taken, as recommended by the energy audit, will lead to the energy
savings.
Question 9.7: Please explain how the technologies implemented in Component 2
and Component 3 will be maintained after the completion of the project
Response:
- As mentioned in the response to question 9.5, COE will play a key role in
the deployment and M&E of the EE technologies. In this regard, whatever
replications of the EE technology applications that were showcased in
Components 2 &3 will be monitored, evaluated and reported by COE. It
should be noted that its capacity is built towards maintenance of energy
efficiency assets. The functions of the COE will be initially carried out by
the Project Management Unit (PMU) for the duration of the project. As an
exit strategy, it is expected that staff of the PMU will be absorbed in the
COE at the completion of the project, so as to retain the capacity and
expertise developed during the project implementation. COE is expected
to continue EE measures by setting guidelines and monitoring compliance
even after the project period.
Component 4
Question 9.8: The distinction of the role of this component and the Center of
Excellence is not yet clear. Please explain.
Response:
- As mentioned above, the functions of COE will be initially carried out by
the PMU for the duration of the project. Under this component, a postproject action plan for the COE will be developed. As an exit strategy, it
is anticipated that staff of the PMU will be absorbed in the COE at the
completion of the project, so as to retain the capacity and expertise
developed during project implementation.
Question 19: Is the GEF funding level of project management budget
appropriate? The ratio between GEF funding and co-financing of project
management budget should be the same as that of project cost. The total amount
looks appropriate (reduced from the PIF stage).
Response:
- Based on a detailed analysis of the anticipated cost for the management of
the project, a total amount of roundabout US$ 1,470,000 was estimated.
Inasmuch as 10% of the total GEF funding has been in the past used as
benchmark for the maximum GEF contribution towards the project
management budget, the proposed GEF budget for project management
was set at US$ 520,000.
PMU
Person
GEF
Co-
ProDoc, Box 3,
p 26
ProDoc, Box 3,
p 26
&
CER, Part III,
section B, p 11
CER, Part I,
Table A, p 2
& Table F, p 3.
Project
24
Comments and Responses
weeks Amount financing
(GEF)
($)
($)
Local consultants and
459 406,050
698,850
staff
International
consultants
Office facilities,
77,470
1,230,105
equipment
36,480
171,045
Travel
520,000
2,100,000
Total
-
Reference
Total ($)
1,104,900
1,307,575
207,525
2,620,000
The corresponding co-financing share to the project management cost has
also been adjusted to US$ 2,100,000, in order to match the 10% of the
GEF. Bulk of this co-financing is from the project management costs of
the various co-financed EE technology application demonstrations that
have been subsumed into this project.
STAP Comments on PIF (30th November 2008) [STAP makes the following recommendations for
consideration during project development] and UNDP Response
Comment & Response
Comment 1:
Scientific Criteria for Technological Interventions:
There are a number of potential technological interventions available on the market,
some of which are referred to in the PIF, such as: mass reduction, aerodynamics and
friction modifications, space utilization, reduction of conversion losses, introduction
of direct injection technologies in diesel combustion engines, regenerative breaking,
high-speed passenger trains and etc. It is desirable to conduct an analysis using
scientific criteria, based on Energy Conservation Potential, Benefit-Cost Analysis,
Mitigation Potential (tCO2), Cost-Effectiveness ($/tCO2), etc., to identify and rank the
technological interventions.
Response:
Certainly it is necessary to conduct the analysis based on scientific criteria.
Indian Railways has done first hand analysis on energy conservation technologies and
measures which is identified based on national and international data e.g. such as
available from the International Union of Railways Companies (UIC). These are also
listed in the publication of Energy Conservation in Indian Railways by the Ministry of
Railways in March 2009.
Reference
ProDoc: Sec
3, Table 3,
Para 18, p 13
& Sec 4,
Table 6, p 20
& Table 7, p
21
However during the PPG phase a thorough analysis was conducted in selecting the
technologies and measures by involving all divisional staff and come up with all the
possible technologies and measures listed in the section 3.2 of UNDP ProDoc. Among
these identified technologies, only few technologies have been chosen based on the
criteria detailed in the section 4.3 of UNDP ProDoc. This criterion also includes the
25
Comment & Response
implementability of a technology and/or measure at the Zonal level as well.
Comment 2:
Barrier Analysis:
The project has identified three barriers namely; weak institutional arrangement, lack
of in-house technical skill and lack of economic incentives for promoting energy
efficiency in Railways. There could be other barriers as well. Thus, it is suggested to
carry out a scientific analysis of barriers to rank and prioritise the barriers, to enable
effective targeting of the measures to overcome the barriers.
Reference
Response:
ProDoc: Sec
During the PPG phase, the technology options and barriers to their implementation
3, Table 4,
were discussed during a one day workshop with representatives from various zonal,
production and R&D units of Indian Railways as well as by the national consultant in Para 20, p 14
private consultations. The barriers identified are mainly those relating to institutional,
information and capacity, as well as some incentive, technology, and financial
barriers. Based on this, the project proponents have included a detailed analysis of the
barriers which are now described in the UNDP ProDoc.
Comment 3:
Risks and Mitigation Measures:
A detailed analysis of the risks and potential mitigation measures would enable the
project authorities to be better prepared to overcome the risks. The financial / incremental
cost risks need to be addressed. The risks involved in scaling up energy efficiency
program beyond the pilot project needs to be assessed.
Response:
A list of risks and mitigation options are prepared and presented in the Annex A of the
ProDoc.
Without GEF intervention (i.e. baseline scenario), Indian Railways is expected to move
from the current (2009-10) estimate of 15.7 billion kWh of electricity consumption in the
railways sector to 100.5 billion kWh in 2031-32 (about 1,030 billion kWh cumulatively
for the period 2010/11-2031/32). However, with the GEF intervention, energy savings in
terms of reduced electricity consumption will be 142 million kWh per year.
ProDoc:
Annex A,
Table 16, p
61
ProDoc: Sec
8, p 35 and p
36
To promote the adoption of energy efficiency technologies and measures in a more
comprehensive and effective way, the project is supporting Indian Railways’ Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Program (EECP) (2010/11-2031/32). It is assumed that there
will be an improved capacity, confidence and awareness, improved incentive system, etc.
so that energy efficiency technologies and measures will be adopted and implemented at a
faster pace and on a wider scale.
GEFSEC Review Sheet Comments on PIF and UNDP Response (February 4, 2008)
2. Has the operational focal point endorsed the project?
The OFP endorsed the Programmatic Framework for EE in India, which includes this PIF, for a total of $40m.
It does not specify the amount for this PIF. The total amount associated with this PIF is unclear and
inconsistent. Table A indicates $6m for the project, but Table B gives $5.3m for the project, $100k for PPG,
and $600k for the agency fee. The figures in Table B simply do not add up (to $6m), and the agency fee was
calculated incorrectly
26
UNDP Response: This has been corrected in tables A and B. In line with the EE Programmatic framework the
requested amounts are 5,200,000 + 100,000 for project preparation. The agency fee is 530,000 which makes a total of
5,830,000.
4. Does the Agency have a comparative advantage for the project?
It is not known that UNDP has any comparative advantage in this field. There is no discussion in Section H.
UNDP Response: The project supports institutional strengthening of Indian Railways and a suite of technical assistance
activities to implement IR’s energy efficiency programme. UNDP’s comparative advantage is that it has adequate
experience in technical assistance, capacity building and institutional strengthening on energy efficiency issues at
various levels and of different stakeholders both in India and globally.
8. Is the project design sound, its framework consistent sufficiently clear
The project objective is to introduce EE technologies and measures in the India Railways system. Given this
objective, the basic project framework appears reasonable. The substantive components are:
1. Institutional CB and technical training
2. Implementation of EE technologies and measures
3. Knowledge sharing and learning
Component 1 mentions project support for the Centre of Excellence. Please provide more information on what
this entails.
UNDP Response: To strengthen the institutional system within IR for addressing EE issues, a Centre of Excellence is
planned. The role of this Centre will be to develop energy audit manuals for all railway operations, provide training to
staff at various levels on EE techniques and measures, provide guidance to testing houses on measurement and
calibration of equipments used in IR, etc. The project will focus on institutional capacity development and technical
training to develop and operate the Centre of Excellence.
Component 2 involves both TA and demonstration (i.e., investment -- please indicate both in Table A). It
would be helpful to better define the scope of each, especially the demonstration part, including the budget
(GEF and cofinancing). It may be helfpful to break them down into two separate components.
UNDP Response: This component has been split in two separate components defining the scope of each in response to
this comment.
Activity 2.4 involves internal incentives scheme for implementing EE measures. This seems critical in the
Indian IR context. It may be useful to look into this issue in a broader context under institutional development
of Component 1.
UNDP Response: A paragraph has been inserted in Part A as follows: Once the Energy Efficiency programme is
underway within IR, specific incentive schemes would be institutionalized to encourage measures and initiatives that
lead to energy conservation. These incentives could be either in cash or kind and would be instituted across different
levels, viz, Zonal level to individual employee level. Details of such a scheme will be developed at the beginning of the
project.
Component 3 mentions identification of international best practices from Japan, Germany, and France. Are
there not any within the IR system? The two activities identified under this component focus only on
international cooperation, instead of internal dissemination. Please clarify. If internal dissemination will be
considered, what will be its scope, beyond the demonstration and TA activities mentioned in Components 1
and 2?
27
UNDP Response: Energy Efficiency is a relatively new concept for IR. No good practice is available from within the
company hence the need to learn from other railway operators. The Centre of Excellence will be the liaison with
oversees partners (to learn and share lessons) but will also lead in disseminating successful EE measures and
technologies internally within IR.
11. Is the proposed project likely to be cost-effective?
Section E mentions, under incremental reasoning, estimated energy savings of 374m KWh or 314,813 tons of
CO2. What is the time frame? What is the basis for this estimate? Section G states that the project will reduce
approximately 95k tons of CO2 a year. What is the basis for this estimate? From the above numbers, the
potential for energy savings and CO2 emission reduction does not appear to be very significant.
UNDP Response: Estimation of emission reductions has been revised in line with the new methodology. Based on IR
projections total electricity consumption of IR will be 15,6 billion kwh in 2009 (of which 12,5b is from traction
operations and 3,1b from non-traction). With a successful implementation of GEF supported EE measures and
technologies the energy saving potential is estimated at approx. 15m kwh/year which results in direct CO2 reductions of
14,850 t/CO2 in the first year (15,000 MWh x 0,99 = 14,850). Considering a time span of 20 years calculations are as
follows: an annual growth of electricity consumption of 5,5% and a penetration rate that increases from 2% in the first
year to 80% by year 16 the cumulative energy savings are 15,6m MWh which results in savings of 15,444,000 t/CO2.
17. Is the GEF funding level of project management budget appropriate?
The GEF funding for PM in Table A is $600k, or 10% of $6m. This seems too high for this type of project. In
fact, if the GEF amount for the project is $5.3m as indicated in Table B, this would even exceed 10%. The
amount of co-financing for PM seems to be set at 10% or $3m. Is this realistic?
UNDP Response: The management budget has been reduced to 460k which is less than 9% of the GEF budget. Cofinancing amounts have also been revised. Total co-financing is USD 21,150,000 million of which approx. 2 million is
set aside for the EE Centre of Excellence which is managing this project as a part of managing the EE programme of IR
.
19. Is the indicative co-financing adequate for the project?
Indicative co-financing includes $20m cash and $10m inkind contribution from the government (IR). If these
numbers are realistic, it begs the question on the costeffectiveness of this project, given the limited scope of
energy savings. How much energy/electricity can be expected from this project? Can they justify IR
committing $20-30m to this project?
UNDP Response: IR is committing USD 21,150,000 million to this project which is a co-financing ratio of approx. 1:4.
The scope of energy savings have been revised according to the new methodology and savings are significant (please
see response to previous comment #11).
28
ANNEX C: CONSULTANTS TO BE HIRED FOR THE PROJECT USING GEF RESOURCES
USD per Estimated
person person*
per week weeks
Project Management Unit (PMU) – national consultants
#
Position Titles
1
National Project
Coordinator (NPC)
950
93
2
Project Manager,
Traction (TR)
950
37
3
Project Manager,
Non Traction (NT)
Services
950
37
4
Project Manager
Energy Efficiency
(EE)
950
63
5
Office Manager(s),
Administration and
Finance
550
45
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
 Assist NPD in the preparation of the project execution scheme/work
plan;
 Support the NPD, in the provision of guidance in the organization
and implementation of all activities specified in the project document
and ensuring timely completion;
 Responsible for day-to-day planning, operation and monitoring
project activities;
 Provision of substantive inputs on project implementation results and
issues to the NPD, consultants and stakeholders;
 Organization and coordination of project meetings (across Division
and Zones), workshops and other expected deliverables from the
Project;
 Responsibility for the monitoring of overall project implementation,
project review and facilitate independent project mid-term and
terminal review;
 Coordination of financial auditing of the project according to the
standards and rules established by UNDP and prepare work plans,
reports, budgets, and terms of reference for sub-contractors and
consultants;
 Liaison with Indian Railways units, equipment and technology
providers, national R&D institutions, test laboratories and
technology institutes of the project and promote exchanges of
information among project participants;
 Review of drafts of any working documents to be submitted to
meetings or emanating from project activities, and communicate
comments to consultants;
 Represent the project at forums and meetings.
 Support the planning and monitoring of “rolling stock” and “Traction
distribution” related railway operation activities;
 Review and provide comments on outputs pertain to traction;
 Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity descriptions
where appropriate;
 Provision of substantive inputs on project activity implementation to
the expert consultants and stakeholders.
 Support the planning and monitoring of non-traction related activities
and services;
 Review and provide comments on outputs pertain to non-traction;
 Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity descriptions
where appropriate;
 Provision of substantive inputs on project activity implementation to
the expert consultants and stakeholders.
 Support for the planning, implementation, monitoring and reporting
of energy efficiency related activities such as energy audits,
awareness creation, training and capacity building;
 Assistance in the formulation of TORs and activity descriptions
where appropriate.
 Responsible for administrative and secretarial matters;
 Perform project-related communication and liaison work:
arrangement of logistics, including travel and organization of
29
meetings/workshops;
 Make annual budget and review its implementation, making
adjustment correspondingly;
 Carry out and manage the project contract payments;
 Conduct annual financial audit of the project in line with the UNDP,
produce the required statements as needed, keep checks and balances
in place to ensure proper use of finances under various heads and
report the financial progress;
 Assist processing and reporting project incomes and expenditures.
Total
275
USD per Estimated
person person*
per week weeks
Technical Assistance – national consultants
#
1
2
3
Position Titles
Railway Operation
expert(s) on Rolling
Stock (RS/TRD),
Railway Operation
expert(s), Buildings
Services (BS),
Energy Efficiency in
Railways
Operations, expert(s)
950
94.00
950
93.50
950
58.50
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
 Support PMU:
o Capacity assessment, & technical Training-related EE measures
and technologies. Capacity & Training gap analysis,
identification of potential technology & measure related with RS
&TRD operations (Outcome 1)
o Implementation of RS-related EE measures and technologies. gap
analysis, benchmarking, development of M&W specifications for
potential technology & measure related with RS operations
o Implementation of Traction & Distribution operations related EE
measures and technologies. Gap analysis, benchmarking,
development of M&W specifications for potential technology &
measure related with Traction & Distribution operations
(Outcome 2)
o Implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities (Outcome 3)
o Knowledge sharing of EE measures and technologies related
with RS &TRD operations
 Support PMU:
o Capacity assessment, & technical Training-related EE measures
and technologies. Capacity & Training gap analysis,
identification of potential technology & measure related with BS
operations (Outcome 1)
o Implementation of BS operations related EE measures and
technologies; gap analysis, benchmarking, development of M&W
specifications for potential technology & measure related with
BS operations (Outcome 2)
o Implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities (Outcome 3)
o Knowledge sharing of EE measures and technologies related
with BS operations (Outcome 4)
 Support to PMU:
o Capacity assessment, & technical Training-related EE measures
and technologies. Capacity & Training gap analysis,
identification of potential technology & measure. Identification
and evaluation of alternatives for the for sustainable EE program
(Outcome 1)
o Identification and evaluation of alternatives for the harmonization
and mutual recognition of the Indian EE program and similar
international programs (in particular in Asian countries); Support
GOI in the implementation of harmonization activities; Collect
and analyze Railways policies and regulations; consulting with
local stakeholders; Gap analysis, benchmarking for Energy
efficiency and performance criterion for M&W specifications for
30
#
4
5
6
Position Titles
Experts – RS,
Experts- TRD,
Experts - BS,
USD per Estimated
person person*
per week weeks
550
195.00
550
253.50
550
195.00
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
potential technology & measure (Outcome 2);
o Implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities (Outcome 3)
o Knowledge sharing of EE measures and technologies related
with BS operations (Outcome 4)
 Evaluation of options & recommendation on EE; Collect and analyze
Railways policies and regulations; consulting with local stakeholders;
Gap analysis, identification of capacity development needs for energy
efficiency and performance criterion for potential technology &
measure; Identification of training need, Documentation &
dissemination of Information (Outcome 1);
 Evaluation of options & recommendation on incentives for EE;
Collect and analyze Railways policies and regulations; consulting
with local stakeholders; Gap analysis, benchmarking for energy
efficiency and performance criterion for M&W specifications for
potential technology & measure; Documentation & dissemination of
Information (Outcome 2);
 Implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities; Organizing,
implementation of pilot projects and evaluation thereof related with
Rolling stock operation (Outcome 3);
 Identification of EE technologies, Learning, knowledge sharing and
dissemination of Information on potential EE technology & measures
with Railway personnel, Manufacturer & vendors for development
and implementation on sustainable basis and setting a road map for
post functioning for RS (Outputs 4.1 and 4.2)
 Evaluation of options & recommendation on EE; Collect and analyze
Railways policies and regulations; consulting with local stakeholders;
Gap analysis, identification of capacity development & Training
needs for energy efficiency and performance criterion for potential
technology & measure; Identification of training need,
Documentation & dissemination of Information (Outcome 1);
 Evaluation of options & recommendation of incentives for EE;
Collect and analyze Indian Railways policies and regulations;
consulting with local stakeholders; Gap analysis, benchmarking for
energy efficiency and performance criterion for M&W specifications
for potential technology & measure
 Implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities Organizing,
implementation of pilot projects and evaluation thereof related with
Traction & Distribution (Output 3.1)
 Identification of EE technologies, Learning, knowledge sharing and
dissemination of Information on potential EE technology & measures
with Railway personnel, Manufacturer & vendors for development
and implementation on sustainable basis and setting a road map for
post functioning for TRD (Outcome 4)
 Evaluation of options & recommendation on EE; Collect and analyze
Railways policies and regulations; consulting with local stakeholders;
Gap analysis, identification of capacity development & Training
needs for energy efficiency and performance criterion for potential
technology & measure; Identification of training need,
Documentation & dissemination of Information (Outcome 1);
 Evaluation of options & recommendation of incentives for EE;
Collect and analyze Railways policies and regulations; consulting
with local stakeholders; Gap analysis, benchmarking for Energy
efficiency and performance criterion for M&W specifications for
potential technology & measure (Outcome 2);
31
#
7
Position Titles
Experts, EE, Energy
management and
audits
USD per Estimated
person person*
per week weeks
550
214.50
8
Expert, facilitation
and capacity
development
550
156.00
9
Experts, finance and
implementation
550
195.00
10
Expert, technology
and documentation
550
49.50
Experts, climate
11 change and
evaluation
550
13.00
Expert, human
12 resources and
institutional
development
375
52.00
13 Training consultant
375
124.00
Quality Assurance,
14 instrumentation,
testing & calibration
375
78.00
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
 Implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities Organizing,
implementation of pilot projects and evaluation thereof related with
Building services (Outcome 3);
 Identification of EE technologies, Learning, knowledge sharing and
dissemination of Information on potential EE technology & measures
with Railway personnel, Manufacturer & vendors for development
and implementation on sustainable basis and setting a road map for
post functioning for BS (Outcome 4);
 Evaluation of existing EE measures, options & recommendation on
EE; Collect and analyze Railways policies and regulations;
consulting with local stakeholders; d, Documentation &
dissemination of Information (Outcome 1);
 Preparation of audit procedures; Cost-benefit analysis and evaluation
of options & recommendation of EE technologies and measures
(Outputs 2.1 and 2.2);
 Organization of audit support for pilot projects and evaluation thereof
related (Outputs 3.1)
 Identification of EE technologies, Learning, knowledge sharing and
dissemination of Information on potential EE technology & measures
with Railway personnel, (Outcome 4)
 Advice on financing and logistical arrangements for energy capacity
development & Training needs for efficient technologies equipments
as well as learning and knowledge activities (Outcomes 1 and 4);
Support technology implementation and contact with equipment
providers and financiers (Outcome 2 and 3)
 Advice on financing arrangements for efficient technologies
equipments;
 Conduct of discussions with local financing institutions on financing
arrangements for energy efficient equipments;
 Technical advice to manufactures on negotiating financing
arrangements for energy efficient equipments; as well as on preparing
project proposals and business plans for the improvement of
appliance designs and production processes;
 Organize external financial support for implementation of Pilot
project and evaluation thereof;
 Documentation of proven technologies, successful demonstrated pilot
projects; cost-benefits analysis; lessons learned;
 Information on website and for TIRFAD dissemination
 Review of EE potential, measures and technologies and organizing
carbon & Energy profiling of project and evaluation thereof;
Assessment on climate change mitigation due to EE initiatives and
documentation thereof; (Outcome 4; Outputs 1.1 and 2.1)
 Review the profile of the staff, evaluate the training needs,
developing training module, and suggest / strengthen the incentive
schemes for implementation of EE measures; Review the capacity
and provide guidance on capacity development
(Outputs 1.2, 1.3, 2.4 and outcome 4)
 Review and analyses the training needs, facilities available and
needed as necessary for implementation of EE technologies and
measures (Outputs 1.1, 1.3, and 4.1)
 Conduct of survey on testing & calibration facilities; Collection of
information on energy performance of existing products; Evaluation
of existing designs and production processes, and identification of
32
#
Position Titles
USD per Estimated
person person*
per week weeks
consultant
15
Procurement and
implementation
375
52.00
16
IT & infrastructure;
web portal
375
104.00
Energy metering and
17 auditing; energy and
GHG estimation
375
65.00
18 Other consultants
550
130.00
19 Office assistants
275
392.73
Total
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
opportunities for improvements; Provision of technical guidance for
the improvement of testing and calibration facilities (Outputs 1.3 2.2,
2.3, 3.1)
 Review of existing procurement policies and regulations.
Identification and analysis of legal and financial issues regarding an
eventual scheme for the procurement of energy efficient equipments
by Railways ; Assistance to vendors and manufacturers
 Development of Information web portal for sharing of knowledge;
Development of technology information resource and facilitation
Desk(TIRFAD), Dissemination of information to the manufacturers
and vendors (Outputs 1.1, 1.3, 2.3, 4.1)
 Conduct of survey on metering & monitoring facilities;
 Provision of technical guidance for the improvement of metering &
monitoring facilities
 Provide complementary support for and/or actual implementation of
the projects public outreach, workshops and seminars presenters,
market monitoring and other related activities
 Arrangement of logistics, including travel and organization of
meetings/workshops on-site and in the various zones; translation
services
2,515.23
33
USD per Estimated
person person* TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
per week weeks
Technical Assistance – international consultants
Senior technical
 Review the training gap analysis, develop strategy and draw the
advisor (STA), EE
training program to implement the EE measures; Assist at selected
1 training &
3,000
19.5
trainings
Institutional support
COE
 Guidance on EE implementation in Traction (TR) in general
STA, Traction and
2
3,000
58.5
support for implementation of EE pilot demonstration activities
EE
related with Rolling stock & Traction power distribution
 Guidance on EE implementation in Non-Traction (NT), in
STA, Non-traction
3,000
58.5
3
particular building services, and support for implementation of EE
and EE
pilot demonstration activities
 Guidance on EE implementation, monitoring and verification of EE
STA, EE
performance;
3,000
58.5
4
implementation
 Evaluation and assessment of technologies and measures
implemented in Outcomes 2 and 3
 Preparing a knowledge sharing & learning module for imparting
training to Railway staff, and for qualitative information on web
info portal as well for TIRFAD related with activities of Traction,
Experts,
5
non-traction utilities and services, as well as for with energy
communication and
3,000
39.0
efficiency, interaction with leading centers of Excellence of
knowledge sharing
developed countries; Preparing a knowledge sharing & learning
module for imparting training to Railway staff, and for qualitative
information on web info portal as well for TIRFAD related
 Mid-term and final evaluation
Experts, project
6 evaluation and
3,000
19.5
 Evaluation and assessment of project Climate change mitigation
impact analysis
outcome and compilation of learning and project closure.
 Provide complementary support for and/or actual implementation
Other consultants
3,000
52.0
of the projects public outreach, workshops and seminars
presenters, market monitoring and other related activities
#
Position
Titles
Total
3,000
306.0
34
ANNEX D: STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT PREPARATION ACTIVITIES AND THE USE OF FUNDS
A. EXPLAIN IF THE PPG OBJECTIVE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED THROUGH THE PPG ACTIVITIES
UNDERTAKEN.
In January 2008, UNDP submitted the PIF and PPG request to the GEF Secretariat, which was cleared by the
GEF CEO in October 2008. In 2009, the services of an international and national consultant were hired,
supported by the PPG grant, to advise on the development of the project and elaborate the necessary
documentation for GEF submission through UNDP.
As a main achievement of the PPG phase, the final versions of the Request for the CEO Endorsement/Approval
and the UNDP/EF Project Document are submitted in July 2010 to the GEF Secretariat. Overall the PPG
Exercise has achieved this objective.
B.
DESCRIBE IF ANY FINDINGS THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE PROJECT DESIGN OR ANY CONCERNS ON
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION.
N/A
C.
PROVIDE DETAILED FUNDING AMOUNT OF THE PPG ACTIVITIES AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS IN THE TABLE BELOW:
Project Preparation
Activities Approved
Collection and analysis
of information on the
energy consumption
within various operations
in IR
Consultation with
international experts on
various aspects including
best practices in energy
conservation measures in
railway operations
Discussion with railways
staff at various levels on
their training needs and
trainers at COE
Developing project
proposal
Total
Implementation
Status
Amount
Approved
GEF Amount ($)
Amount
Amount
Spent
Committed
To-date
35,500
Completed
25,000
Completed
30,000
2,920
Completed
25,000
11,219
Completed
20,000
100,000
49,639
-
Cofinancing
($)
40,000
16,580
-
60,000
13,781
-
50,000
20,000
-
50,361
-
Uncommitted
Amount*
150,000
* Uncommitted amount should be returned to the GEF Trust Fund. Please indicate expected date of refund transaction to Trustee.
35
GEF SECRETARIAT REVIEW FOR FULL/MEDIUM-SIZED PROJECTS1
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Country/Region:
India
Project Title: India: IND Improving Energy Efficiency in the Indian Railway System - under the Programmatic Framework for Energy Efficiency
GEFSEC Project ID: 3554
GEF Agency Project ID:
4044 (UNDP)
GEF Agency: UNDP
GEF Focal Area (s):
Climate Change
GEF-4 Strategic Program (s): CC-2;
Anticipated Project Financing ($): PPG: $100,000
GEF Project Allocation: $5,200,000
Co-financing:$21,000,000
Total Project Cost:$26,300,000
PIF Approval Date:
October 08, 2008
Anticipated Work Program Inclusion: January 27, 2009
Program Manager:
Osamu Mizuno
GEF Agency Contact Person:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Review Criteria
Questions
1. Is the participating country eligible?
2. If there is a non-grant instrument in the
project, check if project document
includes a calendar of reflows and
provide comments, if any.
3. Has the operational focal point
endorsed the project?
Eligibility
Secretariat Comment at PIF/Work
Program Inclusion 2
Secretariat Comment At CEO
Endorsement(FSP)/Approval (MSP)
Yes.
The OFP endorsed the Programmatic
Framework for EE in India, which includes
this PIF, for a total of $40m. It does not
specify the amount for this PIF.
A new endorsement letter of OFP dated as
of August 30, 2010 was attached with
specific amount of $5.83million for this
project.
The total amount associated with this PIF is
unclear and inconsistent. Table A indicates
$6m for the project, but Table B gives $5.3m
for the project, $100k for PPG, and $600k for
the agency fee. The figures in Table B simply
do not add up (to $6m), and the agency fee
was calculated incorrectly.
OM, 10/06
The OFP endorsement letter was resent and
1
2
Some questions here are to be answered only at PIF or CEO endorsement. Please do not answer if the field is blocked with gray.
Work Program Inclusion (WPI) applies to FSPs only. Submission of PIF of FSPs will simultaneously be considered for WPI. For MSPs, once the PIF is approved by CEO,
next step will be to continue project preparation until the project is ready for CEO approval.
Review date: February 07, 2011
1
4. Which GEF Strategic Objective/
Program does the project fit into?
5. Does the Agency have a comparative
advantage for the project?
now the total is $33. Still no specific amount
provided.
Table A was revised appropriately and there is
no inconsistency found in the revised PIF.
CC-SP2: Industrial EE
It is not known that UNDP has any
comparative advantage in this field. There is
no discussion in Section H.
OM, 10/06
Short explanations are given.
6. Is the proposed GEF Grant (including
the Agency fee) within the resources
available for (if appropriate):
 The RAF allocation?
Resource
Availability
 The focal areas?
 Strategic objectives?
 Strategic program?
7. Will the project deliver tangible global
environmental benefits?
8. Is the global environmental benefit
measurable?
9. Is the project design sound, its
framework consistent & sufficiently
clear (in particular for the outputs)?
Project Design
The PIFs being submitted under the EE
Program would exceed 50% of India's RAF.
OM, 10/06
The PIF is now under review during the
second half of GEF-4.
Yes.
NA
NA
Likely.
Yes. It is explained.
The project objective is to introduce EE
technologies and measures in the India
Railways system. Given this objective, the
basic project framework appears reasonable.
The substantive components are:
1. Institutional CB and technical training
2. Implementation of EE technologies and
measures
3. Knowledge sharing and learning
Basically yes. But the following questions
need to be addressed.
Component 1
(1) As appreciable EE technologies have
already been identified and will be
implemented in Component 2 and
Component 3, it is not clear what would be
the objective in conducting comparative
analysis between technologies etc. The
Review date: February 07, 2011
2
Component 1 mentions project support for the
Center of Excellence. Please provide more
information on what this entails.
Component 2 involves both TA and
demonstration (i.e., investment -- please
indicate both in Table A). It would be helpful
to better define the scope of each, especially
the demonstration part, including the budget
(GEF and co-financing). It may be helpful to
break them down into two separate
components.
Activity 2.4 involves internal incentives
scheme for implementing EE measures. This
seems critical in the Indian IR context. It may
be useful to look into this issue in a broader
context under institutional development of
Component 1.
Component 3 mentions identification of
international best practices from Japan,
Germany, and France. Are there not any
within the IR system? The two activities
identified under this component focus only on
international cooperation, instead of internal
dissemination. Please clarify. If internal
dissemination will be considered, what will be
its scope, beyond the demonstration and TA
activities mentioned in Components 1 and 2?
OM, 10/06
The issues identified are addressed properly.
Component 2 was spited into two
components.
relationship between these efforts need to
be clarified.
(2) As EE benchmark will be defined, it
needs to be applied in certain situations and
monitored.
Component 2 and Component 3
(3) Please specify that both Component 2
and Component 3 have investment
component in table A
(4) As for the Component 2 will implement
proven technologies, the key is how to
disseminate and deploy these technologies
in wider scale in IR context rather than just
demonstrating these technologies. Specific
strategies need to be developed and
implemented for each technology for that
purpose. Audit procedures and incentive
schemes should have close linkage to these
technologies to be deployed. (Audits
procedures needs to be designed to lead to
proper actions.) In addition, it need to be
secured that regulatory/ policy frameworks
will be put in place if it is found necessary
to enforce them.
(5) Diffusion of these technologies need to
be monitored (not only the number of
projects proposed in general but the number
of each technology put in place).
(6) Annex A looks like that the audit
procedures are under Component 3, while in
other places under Component 2.
(7) Please explain how the technologies
implemented in Component 2 and
Component 3 will be maintained after the
completion of the project
Component 4
(8) The distinction of the role of this
component and the Center of Excellence is
Review date: February 07, 2011
3
not yet clear. Please explain.
10.Is the project consistent with the
recipient country’s national priorities
and policies?
11.Is the project consistent and properly
coordinated with other related
initiatives in the country or in the
region?
12.Is the proposed project likely to be
cost-effective?
Yes. Under the Energy Conservation Action,
IR has been listed as a "designated consumer".
Both IR and the Ministry of Railways are
committed to EE.
This is the first program to support the IR EE
program in rail operations.
11/19/2010
All the issues pointed out are addressed or
well explained.
Yes.
The coordination under the Programmatic
Framework for Energy Efficiency is
explained.
OM, 10/06
This project is under the Programmatic
Framework for Energy Efficiency. The
coordination under the Framework needs to be
explained by the time of CEO endorsement.
Section E mentions, under incremental
reasoning, estimated energy savings of 374m
KWh or 314,813 tons of CO2. What is the
time frame? What is the basis for this
estimate?
Section G states that the project will reduce
approximately 95k tons of CO2 a year. What
is the basis for this estimate?
From the above numbers, the potential for
energy savings and CO2 emission reduction
does not appear to be very significant.
OM, 10/06
Estimation of emission reductions has been
revised in lie with the new methodology. In
the new calculation, it is about 15.4million
CO2 savings. It can be acceptable as a costeffective project.
13.Has the cost-effectiveness sufficiently
been demonstrated in project design?
Yes.
Review date: February 07, 2011
4
14.Is the project structure sufficiently
close to what was presented at PIF?
15.Does the project take into account
potential major risks, including the
consequences of climate change and
includes sufficient risk mitigation
measures?
Justification for
GEF Grant
16.Is the value-added of GEF
involvement in the project clearly
demonstrated through incremental
reasoning?
17.Is the type of financing provided by
GEF, as well as its level of
concessionality, appropriate?
18.How would the proposed project
outcomes and global environmental
benefits be affected if GEF does not
invest?
19.Is the GEF funding level of project
management budget appropriate?
Yes.
The key risk identified is institutional
inefficiencies of IR. It is important that the
project look into specific mitigation measures
and institute them as part of the project
intervention strategy and activities. This is
expected by CEO endorsement.
OM, 10/06
Risks to implement this project itself
successfully also need to be identified and
addressed by the time of CEO endorsement.
Discussed.
Yes.
Discussed.
It is clearly explained.
The GEF funding for PM in Table A is $600k,
or 10% of $6m. This seems too high for this
type of project. In fact, if the GEF amount for
the project is $5.3m as indicated in Table B,
this would even exceed 10%.
The amount of co-financing for PM seems to
be set at 10% or $3m. Is this realistic?
OM, 10/06
The management budget has been reduced to
460k which is less than 9% of the GEF
budget. Co- financing amount was also
revised.
No.
the ratio between GEF funding and
cofinancing of project management budget
should be the same as that of project cost.
The total amount looks appropriate (reduced
from the PIF stage).
11/19/2010
The total amount for the project
management was significantly increased
from the budget originally proposed (from
$1.47 million to $2.62 million), which is not
acceptable. Please keep the same level of
the total amount as originally proposed
($1,470,000) and revise the GEF amount
Review date: February 07, 2011
5
instead of cofinancing. the resources
remaining can be used for the other
components.
2/8/2011
The issue is not yet properly addressed. It
was explained that "based on a detailed
analysis of the anticipated cost for the
management of the project, a total amount
of roundabout US$1,470,000 was
estimated." Hence "US $1,470,000 can be
maintained in total. However as GEF
funding and cofinancing for the whole
project is $5,200,000 and $21,000,000
respectively, GEF funding for project
management should be round $ 290,000(=
1,470,000 x 5,200,000/26,200,000).
20.Is the GEF funding level of other cost
items (consultants, travel, etc.)
appropriate?
21.Is the indicative co-financing adequate
for the project?
Indicative co-financing includes $20m cash
and $10m in-kind contribution from the
government (IR). If these numbers are
realistic, it begs the question on the costeffectiveness of this project, given the limited
scope of energy savings. How much
energy/electricity can be expected from this
project? Can they justify IR committing $2030m to this project?
OM, 10/06
The total cost and CO2 savings are revised
properly. It is now acceptable.
22.Are the confirmed co-financing
amounts adequate for each project
component?
Yes.
Review date: February 07, 2011
6
23.Has the Tracking Tool3 been included
with information for all relevant
indicators?
Yes.
But see comments on item 9 as well.
11/19/2010
The comments on item 9 were addressed.
See comments on item 9 as well.
24.Does the proposal include a budgeted
M&E Plan that monitors and measures
results with indicators and targets?
11/19/2010
The comments on item 9 were addressed.
The comments from STAP were properly
addressed.
STAP
Secretariat’s
Response to various
comments from:
Convention Secretariat
Agencies’ response to GEFSEC
comments
Agencies’ response to Council comments
Secretariat Decisions
Recommendation at
PIF
25. Is PIF clearance being
recommended?
PIF clearance is not recommended for the
April 2008 WP.
PIF clearance may be considered for future
WPs if/after the issues raised in this review
have been adequately addressed.
OM, 10/06
PM recommends CEO PIF clearance for WPI.
26.Items worth noting at CEO
Endorsement.
27. Is CEO Endorsement being
recommended?
Recommendation at
CEO Endorsement
3
Please address the issues identified before
resubmission.
11/19/2010
Not at this stage. Please revise the
budgetary arrangement (project
At present, Tracking Tools apply to Biodiversity projects only. Tracking Tools for other focal areas are currently being developed.
Review date: February 07, 2011
7
management cost) and resubmit the
documents.
2/8/2011
Not yet. Please revise the budgetary
arrangement (project management cost) and
resubmit the documents.
Review Date
1st review
2nd review
3rd review
REQUEST FOR PPG APPROVAL
Review Criteria
Decision Points
1. Are the proposed activities for project
preparation appropriate?
2. Is itemized budget justified?
PPG Budget
3. Is the proposed GEF PPG Grant
(including the Agency fee) within the
resources available under the RAF/Focal
Area allocation?
4. Is the consultant cost reasonable?
5. Is PPG being recommended?
Recommendation
Program Manager Comments
The proposed PPG activities include data collection and analysis, consultations with
international experts, and discussion with railway staff and trainers. They appear
appropriate.
The budget from GEF is $100k and from co-finaicng $150k. The itemized budget appears
reasonable.
xxPPGResorcesxx
Consultant costs seem reasonable. The rates for local consultants are $750 PW and for
international consultants $2500 PW.
PPG will be recommended once the PIF is cleared by the CEO.
OM, 10/08
PM recommends PPG approval.
Other comments
Review Date
1st review
2nd review
3rd review
Review date: February 07, 2011
8
wb21049
C:\Users\wb21049\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\WebSites\WebSite9\LetterTemplates\ReviewSheetforGEFProject.rtf
8/28/2009 4:16:00 PM
Review date: February 07, 2011
9