FINANCE CLINIC: The Investment & Financial Flows Assessment and its application for LEDS & NAMAs

FINANCE CLINIC: The Investment & Financial Flows Assessment and its

application for LEDS & NAMAs

http://www.eea.europa.eu/eu-flag.gif

Presentation overview

Introduction (25 mins)• Context • I&FF methodology overview• Key results• Clarifications

I&FF Methodology: in depth (25 mins)• Key definitions• Approach• Example: Namibia electricity generation

Discussion (40 mins)

• $6M global project funded by Norway, Switzerland, Finland, UNDP, UNF

• Implemented against backdrop of Bali Road Map (2008-12)

Objectives• Increased national capacity to co-ordinate inter-ministerial

views & enhance participation in UNFCCC process• Support for long-term climate change planning and priority

setting, in order to provide a better understanding of the magnitude and intensity of national efforts required to tackle climate change

UNDP project: Capacity Development for Policy Makers to Address Climate Change

What does the I&FF assessment seek to answer?

From a development perspective, what does my country need to do to address climate change in selected key sectors, and what financial landscape will be required to achieve those needs?

Components of UNDP’s climate finance readiness framework

I&FF can support

I&FF applicability to LEDS & NAMA development

Methodological approach is scalable: Can be used to cost out a sectoral LEDS or a single NAMA

Provides sense of who are the core investors & what types of policy changes might be required to attract investment

• Chile and Costa Rica: I&FF results for transport sector provided inputs to underlying analysis for transport NAMAs

• Colombia: I&FF study on panela being scaled up to NAMA• Bangladesh: I&FF provided baseline information for climate

public expenditure & investment review • Niger: I&FF results incorporated into National Action Plan for

Climate Change and National Development Plan• Paraguay: I&FF results fed into national CC policy and national

mitigation plan





Methodology development: Investment & Financial Flows Assessment

Approach:•I&FF approach adapted from UNFCCC methodology used for estimating global flows bottom-up approach for national estimates•Sectoral guidance chapters elaborated by five regional centres•Extensive peer review process

Applied in: Bangladesh, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Gambia, Honduras, Liberia, Namibia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uruguay

WHAT?What does national I&FF assessment seek to answer?

The I&FF assessment considers: What are the adaptation/ mitigation options for key

sectors in the next 25 years? Who is currently investing in the sector? Who are the

major players & funding sources within government, private sector & households?

What shifts/increases in I&FF will be needed in the sector? What will be the overall needs for additional I&FF to

address climate change? What policies & incentives are suitable to induce the

necessary shifts & changes?

• For each sector, evaluate investments & financial flows for two policy scenarios:– Reference scenario– Adaptation or mitigation scenario

• Cost the additional flows needed to implement new adaptation or mitigation measures: that is, subtract the difference between the two scenarios

• Disaggregate by: • years • type of measures, • investment entities (government, private sector, households), • funding sources (domestic, ODA, …)

I&FF methodologyHOW?

WHO? I&FF assessment requires multi-disciplinary team

For each sector:Environmental/climate specialists to build scenarios Planning experts to:

Assess implications of the scenarios on existing development plans in chosen sectors & consider how mitigation or adaptation measures would be implemented

Finance/economics experts to cost the measuresRepresentatives from all relevant ministries

Academic, NGO, & private sector inputs also useful

Example: Costa Rica (biodiversity – adaptation)





Key sectors identified for I&FF assessments under UNDP project

Overview: Results by sector

SECTOR* COUNTRY MEASURESANNUAL

INCREMENTAL COST(MILLION US$)

Energy (M) Bangladesh, Dominican

Rep. Gambia, Liberia,

Namibia, Togo,

Turkmenistan, Uruguay

Renewable energy, energy efficiency,

transmission & distribution, modernizing

power plants…

20 (Gambia) –

950 (Bangladesh)

Transport

(M)

Ecuador, Honduras Transportation plan, filters in engines,

emission control centres…

60 (Honduras) – 120

(Ecuador)

Forestry

(M)

Ecuador, Gambia,

Honduras, Liberia, Niger,

Paraguay

CO2 capture through afforestation &

reforestation, institutional strengthening…

5 (Paraguay) –

150 (Honduras)

Agricultur

e (A/M)

Bangladesh, Colombia,

Ecuador, Gambia,

Liberia, Namibia, Niger,

Paraguay, Peru, Togo,

Uruguay

Resistant livestock species & crops, early

warning systems, restoration of soil

quality, capacity building…

0.6 (Gambia) –

1890 (Bangladesh)

* M = mitigation; A = adaptation

SECTOR* COUNTRY MEASURESANNUAL

INCREMENTAL COST(MILLION US$)

Water (A) Bangladesh, Costa

Rica, Dominican Rep.

Gambia, Honduras,

Peru, Turkmenistan

Water supply & sanitation, efficient irrigation,

erosion & flood control, implementing water

law, rainwater harvesting…

-0.1 (a net saving!)

(Gambia) – 230

(Bangladesh)

Health (A) Paraguay Fighting dengue, malaria, respiratory &

diarrheal diseases

7 (Paraguay)

Tourism

(A)

Dominican Republic Beach management, hurricane management

by insurance

40 (Dominican

Republic)

Biodiversit

y (A)

Costa Rica Conservation of ecosystems 60 (Costa Rica)

Fisheries

(A)

Peru Awareness raising, infrastructure for fish

production

13 (Peru)

* A = adaptation

Overview: Results by sector (2)

Key takeaways: view I&FF results in context

• The I&FF assessments are not a mere costing exercise, but an analysis of the whole financial landscape of a sector

• All countries used same I&FF methodology, but decided individually what sectors to select & what measures to analyze within each sector scope (& discount rate) has impact on the results

• Results comparable with those of World Bank (Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change) & UNFCCC (National Economic, Environment & Development Study (NEEDS))

Takeaways: Sectoral considerations

• Additional costs may seem large, but must be considered within context of planned baseline expenditures, e.g. in Peru, baseline for agriculture was US$5,435 M, while adaptation scenario was US$ 5,759 M additional cost US$324 M (↑ 6%)

• In many cases, the assessments show shifts in investments are necessary, e.g. from one technology to another, or one subsector to another policies are key

• Savings from implementing measures possible: esp. in energy mitigation due to increased energy efficiency, however those savings cannot always be shifted on to other measures in the scenarios because of the “owner” of the savings may differ

Examples

• Some measures result in net savings, e.g. in Namibia, replacing diesel generators with solar power in off-grid communities would generate $US 1,124 M in savings (due to low O&M), but solar has higher upfront cost

• In Dominican Republic, selected mitigation measures in electricity subsector require $5.82 billion of investments, but generate $16.12 billion in savings (from O&M)

what policy/ incentive mix would encourage uptake of these mitigation measures?

Lessons learned

• Creating BAU and climate change scenarios involves complex set of decisions and remains a challenge for many countries – additionally, policy makers may not always agree with proposed measures in the scenarios

• It is necessary to define very concrete measures for the scenarios so that they can be adequately costed and prioritized

• The separation of Operation & Maintenance costs from other investment costs (flows) was found to be very useful

All I&FF results online

More information on the I&FF methodology, country results, & an extensive database: www.undpcc.org Methodology in 4 languages: English, French, Spanish, Russian

Q&A CLARIFICATIONS

??

?

?

?

?

? ??





An investment flow (IF) is the capital cost of a new physical asset with a lifetime of more than 1 year, e.g. capital cost of a new power plant, a new automobile, a new household appliance, or a new agricultural irrigation system.

Investment flows are limited to new physical assets because we are considering the climate change implications for the duration of the operating lives of the facilities and equipment purchased.

Key definitions: Investment Flow

A financial flow (FF) is an ongoing expenditure on programmatic measures.

Financial flows encompass expenditures other than those for expansion or installation of physical assets, e.g., agricultural extension program for farmers, a malaria prevention program to distribute mosquito nets.

Key definitions: Financial Flow

Physical assets purchased with investment flows will have operation & maintenance (O&M) costs associated with them, i.e., ongoing fixed and variable costs such as salaries and raw materials

O&M costs need to be included because they can vary considerably among investment flow types & have a significant effect on the total cost of an investment

Key definitions: operation & maintenance (O&M)

Example: mitigation measures

Sector Investment Type Investment Flows Financial Flows

Energy

Construction of new high efficiency, fossil-fuel fired, power plant

Capital costs of construction

Equipment retrofit and education program for the commercial sector on energy end-use efficiency improvements

Capital costs of equipment retrofits or replacements in commercial sector (e.g., retrofit of HVAC systems)

Program implementation costs for government and commercial sector (e.g., audit of HVAC systems to determine leaks)

Forestry

Implementation of reduced impact logging operations

Capital costs of new equipment to implement reduced impact logging techniques

Agriculture Implementation of improved livestock feeding program

Implementation costs, including raw materials and training

Key definitions: investment entities & financial sources

Investment Entity Source of I&FF Funds

Households Domestic Equity and debt

Corporations

Domestic Domestic equity (including internal cash flow)Domestic borrowing (bonds and loans)

ForeignForeign direct investment (FDI)Foreign borrowing (loans)Foreign aid (ODA)B

Government

Domestic Domestic funds (budgetary)

ForeignForeign borrowing (bonds and loans)Bilateral foreign aid (bilateral ODA)Multilateral foreign aid (multilateral ODA)

B ODA (official development assistance) provided to private corporations is primarily foreign aid that is given to non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Identification of the entities responsible for the investment decisions, and the sources of the funds that are invested, is an important component of an I&FF assessment because this information is the starting point for the evaluation of policies to change those decisions.





Steps in the Sectoral Assessments of I&FF to Address Climate Change

• Define detailed scope of the sector• Identify preliminary mitigation (or adaptation)

measures• I&FF does not quantify co-benefits, however qualitative assessment

is recommended

• Specify assessment period & base year• Base year 2005 recommended (or latest available)• Assessment period of 2005-2030 recommended

• Select analytical approach

1. Establish key parameters of assessment

• Compile annual I&FF data, disaggregated by investment entity, source, & investment flow versus financial flow

• Compile annual historical O&M data, disaggregated by investment entity & source

• Compile other input data for scenarios

Compile historical annual data on investments, financial flows, and operation & maintenance costs

•At least 3 to 10 years of historical data should be collected•I&FF data should be

– Compiled for each investment type– Annual– Disaggregated by investment entity & source– Divided into investment & financial flows

•Compile information about the expected lifetimes of the assets in operation during the historical period

2. Compile historical I&FF data and other input data

for scenarios

Cost accounting issues• Constant 2005 US$ are recommended• Costs for assets should be reported in the year in which

they are expected to be incurred• Discounting of costs should be done – it is

recommended to apply one public discount rate and one private discount rate

2. Compile historical I&FF data and other input data

for scenarios

Describe: Socioeconomic trendsTechnological change/advancesBusiness-as-usual investmentsDefine model/approach to be used for the assessment

Derive annual IF & FF estimates, disaggregated by investment entity (households, corporations, government) and source (domestic or external)

Derive annual O&M estimates, disaggregated by investment entity & source

Sector is selected for Adaptation A baseline scenario & an adaptation scenario

will be developed for that sector

Sector is selected for Mitigation A baseline scenario & a mitigation scenario

will be developed for that sector

Derive annual IF & FF estimates, disaggregated by investment entity (households, corporations, government) and source (domestic or external)

Derive annual O&M estimates, disaggregated by investment entity & source

Estimate the changes in I&FF needed to implement the mitigation (or adaptation) measures in the sector in order to determine:

How cumulative incremental I&FF will change How annual investments will change

Calculating how the cumulative changes in IF & FF between the baseline scenario & the climate change scenario will change:

1. First, estimate the total IF & FF needed to implement each investment type in the sector

2. Second, sum all the values from the first calculation to estimate the total IF & FF needed to implement all the investment types in the sector

Examples from Costa Rica

Total cumulative sum of investments (2010-2030) in biodiversity sector,

by investment type

Baseline Adaptation scenario Difference

Total cumulative sum of investments (2010-2030) in each

sector, by funding source

Calculating how annual investments between the baseline scenario & the climate change scenario will change

First, estimate the IF & FF needed to implement each investment type in the sector -- shows how investments in individual investment types would change over time

Second, estimate the IF & FF needed to implement all investment types in the sector, for each source/ investment entity -- shows how investments by each source/investment entity change over time

Third, estimate IF & FF for all investment types in the sector, & for all sources -- shows how total investments in the sector change over time

Biodiversity

Water

Costa Rica: Annual additional cost of investments (2010-2030) for biodiversity & water sectors

Determine policy instruments & measures to encourage changes in I&FF

Identify the entities that are responsible for the significant incremental changes in I&FF

Determine the predominant sources of their funds, important to distinguish between public & private sources of finance

Integrate I&FF results, & evaluation of policy instruments & measures, across sectors, & across mitigation & adaptation

Summarize objectives of study, methodology, inputs, & results in report

Complete reporting templates

Investment & financial flows example: Namibia (2011)

Sub-sector: electricity generationScope: national

• Total electricity demand far exceeds local electricity supplies -- total installed electricity generation capacity in mid-2008 was 387 MW, while the peak demand exceeds 500 MW

• In 2005, some 50% imported from neighbouring countries such as South Africa and Zimbabwe

• Electricity demand expected to triple to about 10 TWh by 2030• Small population (2 million) over large land area (800,000 km²)

• High total annual per capita energy consumption due to:• Energy-dependent sectors of mining and agriculture• Long transport routes• high reliance on imports of fuels, consumer goods and

manufactured products

Namibia context

Electricity Base Year IF & FF Data, By Investment Type, Investment Entity, and Funding Source (million 2005 US$)

Electricity generation – historical IF, FF and O&M (base year 2005)

Hydro Diesel Coal

Investment Entity Category/Source of FundsIF FF O&M

Costs IF FF O&M Costs IF FF O&M

CostsHouseholds Domestic Equity & debt Total Household Funds 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00Corporations Domestic Domestic equity Domestic borrowing Total Domestic Sources 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Foreign FDI Foreign borrowing ODA Total Foreign Sources 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Total Corporation Funds 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00Government Domestic Domestic funds 0,00 11,52 0,00 0,11 0,00 0,25 Foreign Foreign borrowing 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Bilateral ODA 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Multilateral ODA 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Total Foreign Sources 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Total Government Funds 0,00 0,00 11,52 0,00 0,00 0,11 0,00 0,00 0,25Total Funds 0,00 0,00 11,52 0,00 0,00 0,11 0,00 0,00 0,25Data Sources: Based on model calculations using data from various sources

• According to 2005 Rural Electrification Master Plan, only 1/3 of Namibia’s population had access to electricity (67% of urban areas and 10% of rural areas)

• Under the baseline scenario, assumed provision of power to supply electricity to all households is through off-grid diesel generation

• Total cost of investments estimated at US$1,147 million between 2005 to 2030 (NPV $US 2005)

• BAU based on new hydropower, coal and diesel investments

• Hydropower plants in 2012, 2013, 2017 and 2019• Coal plant in 2015• Diesel – rural electrification

Namibia baseline scenario: electricity generation

Baseline Scenario: IF, FF, O&M CostsCumulative Discounted IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type, Investment Entity and Funding Source (million 2005 US$)

Hydro Diesel CoalInvestment Entity Category/Source of Funds

IF FF O&M Costs IF FF O&M

Costs IF FF O&M Costs

Households Domestic Equity & debt 97.69 0.00 1,024.82 Total Household Funds 0.00 0.00 0.00 97.69 0.00 1,024.82 0.00 0.00 0.00Corporations Domestic Domestic equity Domestic borrowing Total Domestic Sources 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Foreign FDI Foreign borrowing ODA Total Foreign Sources 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Corporation Funds 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Government Domestic Domestic funds 550.26 204.65 22.29 11.21 162.12 98.94 Foreign Foreign borrowing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bilateral ODA 235.82 0.00 9.55 0.00 69.48 0.00 Multilateral ODA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Foreign Sources 235.82 0.00 0.00 9.55 0.00 0.00 69.48 0.00 0.00 Total Government Funds 786.08 0.00 204.65 31.84 0.00 11.21 231.60 0.00 98.94Total Funds 786.08 0.00 204.65 129.53 0.00 1,036.02 231.60 0.00 98.94

Baseline Scenario: IF, FF, O&M CostsAnnual IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type (million 2005 US$)

Hydro Diesel Coal All investments

Year IF FF O&M Costs IF FF O&M


Costs2005 0 11.52 - 0.11 - 0.25 - 11.88 2006 0 9.74 - 1.04 - 6.49 - 17.28 2007 0 9.20 - 0.29 - 2.22 - 11.71 2008 0 7.70 - 0.89 - 11.07 - 19.67 2009 0 7.21 - 0.25 - 4.79 - 12.24 2010 0 7.23 3.40 7.84 - 4.18 3.40 19.25 2011 0 6.69 32.64 9.41 - 3.87 32.64 19.98 2012 214.72 8.49 0.93 10.75 - 2.69 215.65 21.93 2013 113.46 9.07 1.08 12.32 - 2.49 114.54 23.88 2014 0 8.40 1.26 14.16 - 1.54 1.26 24.09 2015 0 7.78 1.46 16.30 231.60 7.35 233.05 31.43 2016 0 7.20 1.69 18.81 - 6.15 1.69 32.15 2017 83.39 7.56 1.97 21.72 - 5.69 85.36 34.97 2018 0 7.00 2.29 25.12 - 4.71 2.29 36.82 2019 374.51 11.04 2.66 29.08 - 4.36 377.16 44.48 2020 0 10.22 3.09 33.68 - 4.03 3.09 47.94 2021 0 9.47 3.58 39.04 - 3.74 3.58 52.24 2022 0 8.77 4.16 45.26 - 3.46 4.16 57.49 2023 0 8.12 4.84 52.51 - 3.20 4.84 63.83 2024 0 7.52 5.62 60.92 - 2.97 5.62 71.41 2025 0 6.96 6.53 70.71 - 2.75 6.53 80.42 2026 0 6.44 7.59 82.08 - 2.54 7.59 91.07 2027 0 5.97 8.81 95.30 - 2.35 8.81 103.62 2028 0 5.52 10.24 110.66 - 2.18 10.24 118.37 2029 0 5.11 11.89 128.51 - 2.02 11.89 135.64 2030 0 4.74 13.82 149.25 - 1.87 13.82 155.85

Planned investments

• National Development Plan (NDP), Vision 2030 and the White Paper on Energy Policy all commit to shift to renewable energy

• Significant investments in solar power and wind power (high propensity for both types of energy)

• Energy efficiency programme to address 5% growth in energy demand per year (simplifying assumption, the cost of the measures are assumed to be half the value of the saving in energy consumption )

• Reduction of energy imports from 50% to 30%

Namibia mitigation scenario: electricity generation

Mitigation Scenario: IF, FF, O&M costs

Cumulative Discounted IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type, Investment Entity and Funding Source (million 2005 US$)

Hydro Diesel Coal Solar Wind Energy Efficiency

Investment Entity Category/Source of Funds

IF FF O&M Costs IF FF O&M



Costs

Households Domestic Equity & debt 1.099 4 618 11

Total Household Funds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.099 0 4 0 0 0 618 0 11Corporations Domestic Domestic equity 28 6 256 12 Domestic borrowing 21 0 192 0 Total Domestic Sources 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 0 6 448 0 12 Foreign FDI 0 0 0 0 Foreign borrowing 21 0 192 0 ODA 0 0 0 0

Total Foreign Sources 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 192 0 0

Total Corporation Funds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 6 639 0 12Government Domestic Domestic funds 550 205 22 10 0 42 57 1 Foreign Foreign borrowing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bilateral ODA 236 0 10 0 0 0 25 0 Multilateral ODA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Foreign Sources 236 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0

Total Government Funds 786 0 205 32 0 10 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 0 1Total Funds 786 0 205 32 0 10 0 0 42 1.099 0 4 70 0 6 1.339 0 24

Mitigation Scenario: IF, FF, O&M costs

Hydro Diesel Coal Solar Wind Energy Efficiency All investments

YearIF FF O&M Costs IF FF O&M



Costs IF FF O&M Costs

2005 - 11.52 - 0.11 - 0.25 - - - - - - - 11.88

2006 - 9.74 - 1.04 - 6.49 - - - - - - - 17.28

2007 - 9.20 - 0.29 - 2.22 - - - - - - - 11.71

2008 - 7.70 - 0.89 - 11.07 - - - - - - - 19.67

2009 - 7.21 - 0.25 - 4.79 - - - - - - - 12.24

2010 - 7.23 - 0.40 - 4.18 38.20 0.03 - - 123.76 0.27 161.96 12.11

2011 - 6.69 31.84 0.77 - 3.87 9.01 0.03 - - 114.60 0.50 155.44 11.88

2012 214.72 8.49 - 0.72 - 2.69 10.46 0.04 - - 106.11 0.70 331.30 12.63

2013 113.46 9.07 - 0.66 - 2.49 12.16 0.05 - - 98.25 0.86 223.86 13.13

2014 - 8.40 - 0.61 - 1.54 14.12 0.05 - - 90.97 1.00 105.09 11.60

2015 - 7.78 - 0.57 - 1.42 16.41 0.06 69.99 0.61 84.23 1.11 170.63 11.55

2016 - 7.20 - 0.53 - 0.66 19.06 0.07 - 0.57 77.99 1.20 97.05 10.22

2017 83.39 7.56 - 0.49 - 0.61 22.14 0.08 - 0.53 72.22 1.27 177.75 10.53

2018 - 7.00 - 0.45 - - 25.72 0.10 - 0.49 66.87 1.32 92.59 9.35

2019 374.51 11.04 - 0.42 - - 29.88 0.11 - 0.45 61.91 1.36 466.30 13.38

2020 - 10.22 - 0.20 - - 34.71 0.13 - 0.42 57.33 1.38 92.04 12.36

2021 - 9.47 - 0.19 - - 40.33 0.15 - 0.39 53.08 1.39 93.41 11.59

2022 - 8.77 - 0.17 - - 46.85 0.18 - 0.36 49.15 1.40 96.00 10.87

2023 - 8.12 - 0.16 - - 54.43 0.21 - 0.33 45.51 1.40 99.93 10.21

2024 - 7.52 - 0.15 - - 63.23 0.24 - 0.31 42.14 1.38 105.36 9.60

2025 - 6.96 - 0.14 - - 73.45 0.28 - 0.28 39.02 1.37 112.47 9.03

2026 - 6.44 - 0.13 - - 85.33 0.33 - 0.26 36.13 1.34 121.46 8.51

2027 - 5.97 - 0.12 - - 99.13 0.38 - 0.24 33.45 1.32 132.58 8.03

2028 - 5.52 - 0.11 - - 115.17 0.44 - 0.23 30.97 1.29 146.14 7.59

2029 - 5.11 - 0.10 - - 133.79 0.51 - 0.21 28.68 1.26 162.47 7.19

2030 - 4.74 - 0.09 - - 155.43 0.60 - 0.19 26.55 1.22 181.98 6.84

Annual IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type (million 2005 US$)

Cumulative Discounted IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type, Investment Entity and Funding Source (million 2005 US$)

Investment Entity/ Source of Funds

Hydro Diesel Coal Solar Wind Energy Efficiency All investment types

ΔIF ΔFF ΔOM ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M

Households 0 0 -98 -1025 0 0 1,099 4 0 0 618 11 1,619 -493Corporations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 6 639 12 709 18Government 0 0 0 -1 -232 -57 0 0 0 0 82 2 -150 -57Total Funds 0 0 -98 -1026 -232 -57 1,099 4 70 6 1,339 24 2,179 -532

To achieve the mitigation scenario with lower CO2 emissions (from 1,927,270 CO2e/t to 6,780 CO2e/t) and increased energy self-sufficiency, Namibia will need an additional US$1,649 million over 2005-30

Incremental Annual IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type (million 2005 US$)

Hydro Diesel Coal Solar Wind Energy Efficiency All investments

YearΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M ΔIF ΔFF ΔO&M

2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2010 - - -3.40 -7.44 - - 38.20 0.03 - - 123.76 0.27 158.57 -7.13

2011 - - -0.80 -8.64 - - 9.01 0.03 - - 114.60 0.50 122.80 -8.10

2012 - - -0.93 -10.04 - - 10.46 0.04 - - 106.11 0.70 115.64 -9.30

2013 - - -1.08 -11.66 - - 12.16 0.05 - - 98.25 0.86 109.32 -10.75

2014 - - -1.26 -13.54 - - 14.12 0.05 - - 90.97 1.00 103.84 -12.49

2015 - - -1.46 -15.73 -231.60 -5.93 16.41 0.06 69.99 0.61 84.23 1.11 -62.43 -19.88

2016 - - -1.69 -18.28 - -5.49 19.06 0.07 - 0.57 77.99 1.20 95.36 -21.93

2017 - - -1.97 -21.23 - -5.08 22.14 0.08 - 0.53 72.22 1.27 92.39 -24.44

2018 - - -2.29 -24.67 - -4.71 25.72 0.10 - 0.49 66.87 1.32 90.30 -27.47

2019 - - -2.66 -28.66 - -4.36 29.88 0.11 - 0.45 61.91 1.36 89.14 -31.09

2020 - - -3.09 -33.48 - -4.03 34.71 0.13 - 0.42 57.33 1.38 88.95 -35.58

2021 - - -3.58 -38.85 - -3.74 40.33 0.15 - 0.39 53.08 1.39 89.82 -40.65

2022 - - -4.16 -45.09 - -3.46 46.85 0.18 - 0.36 49.15 1.40 91.83 -46.61

2023 - - -4.84 -52.35 - -3.20 54.43 0.21 - 0.33 45.51 1.40 95.10 -53.61

2024 - - -5.62 -60.78 - -2.97 63.23 0.24 - 0.31 42.14 1.38 99.74 -61.81

2025 - - -6.53 -70.57 - -2.75 73.45 0.28 - 0.28 39.02 1.37 105.94 -71.39

2026 - - -7.59 -81.96 - -2.54 85.33 0.33 - 0.26 36.13 1.34 113.87 -82.57

2027 - - -8.81 -95.18 - -2.35 99.13 0.38 - 0.24 33.45 1.32 123.77 -95.60

2028 - - -10.24 -110.55 - -2.18 115.17 0.44 - 0.23 30.97 1.29 135.90 -110.78

2029 - - -11.89 -128.41 - -2.02 133.79 0.51 - 0.21 28.68 1.26 150.58 -128.45

2030 - - -13.82 -149.15 - -1.87 155.43 0.60 - 0.19 26.55 1.22 168.16 -149.01

Discussion

• What do you think of the applicability of the I&FF methodology as a tool for supporting development of NAMAs and LEDS?

• Do you think the I&FF methodology yields useful results for policy makers? If not, why not?

• What do you anticipate would be the main challenges that you would face in your country in applying the methodology (e.g., scenario development, specific types of data)? How would you proposed to overcome these challenges?

• Who would be most difficult to engage if you conducted an I&FF assessment at home (e.g., the Ministry of Finance, planners from key line Ministries, etc)?

Documents

FINANCE CLINIC: The Investment & Financial Flows Assessment and its application for LEDS & NAMAs