12.07.2015 Views

The Challenge of Low-Carbon Development - World Bank Internet ...

The Challenge of Low-Carbon Development - World Bank Internet ...

The Challenge of Low-Carbon Development - World Bank Internet ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 3.1 Energy Efficiency Interventions by Type in the <strong>Low</strong>-<strong>Carbon</strong> Investment Portfolio 2003–08(with overlap)Type <strong>of</strong> energy efficiencyComponent cost(millions)Percent <strong>of</strong>low carbonNumber <strong>of</strong>componentsDistrict heating and combined heat and power $573 7.2 25End user energy efficiency, government and municipal $484 6.1 22End user efficiency: industrial energy efficiency $1,128 14.1 47End user energy efficiency residential and commercial $572 7.2 40End user efficiency: multiple or unspecified user types $370 4.6 19Supply side efficiency: thermal power rehabilitation $656 8.2 15Supply side efficiency: Reduced transmission, distribution or system losses $916 11.5 37Supply side efficiency: other or unspecified $340 4.3 12Energy efficiency in transport $23 0.3 2Energy efficiency multiple, unspecified, or unknown $449 5.6 24Source: <strong>World</strong> <strong>Bank</strong>.Note: Individual components may appear in multiple categories, so column totals are not meaningful.IFC and the <strong>World</strong> <strong>Bank</strong> arrived at different prescriptions.Both hoped for a transformative impact (see table 3.2). IFCfocused on the presumed risk aversion and inexperience <strong>of</strong>commercial banks and therefore prescribed a combination<strong>of</strong> technical assistance and loan guarantees. Technical assistancewould train banks to appraise and structure energyefficiency loans and to fill a pipeline <strong>of</strong> future projects.GEF-subsidized loan guarantees would act like trainingwheels. Once the banks realized that risks were low, theguarantees could be removed. Success <strong>of</strong> the participatingbanks would spark emulation, and energy efficiency lendingwould spread.In China, the <strong>World</strong> <strong>Bank</strong> prescribed energy servicecompanies (ESCOs) to overcome these barriers. ESCOswould provide both finance and technical know-how totheir clients (box 3.1). Because ESCOs were unknownin China and therefore highly risky, the Energy ConservationProject used GEF funds to help capitalize threecompanies to test and popularize the idea, which wasexpected to provoke spontaneous replication. Later, the<strong>Bank</strong> used GEF- supported loan guarantees to back ESCOfinancing, again with the presumption that this would bea temporary measure to overcome banks’ unfamiliaritywith energy efficiency finance. In Romania and Bulgaria,the <strong>Bank</strong> used GEF grants to set up dedicated, revolvingenergy efficiency funds as an alternative to banks anda complement to ESCOs, which had already arrived inEurope.Table 3.2IFC and <strong>World</strong> <strong>Bank</strong> Approaches to Energy Efficiency FinancialIntermediation in China and Eastern EuropeIFC<strong>World</strong> <strong>Bank</strong>China GuaranteesTechnical assistance for banksESCO demonstrationTechnical assistance for ESCOsGuarantees for ESCOsEastern EuropeGuaranteesTechnical assistance for banksOn-lending (Russia)Dedicated energy fundsTechnical assistance for fundsSource: IEG.Note: ESCO = energy service company.Energy Efficiency | 35

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!